only to signifie how Christ was lifted up on the Cross but as practised in the Roman Church to the intent direct and divine Worship be given it 7. Wicked men eat not the Body of Christ Sure enough in a proper sense not denominatively only as the consecrated Elements are called the Body of Christ very often and currently 8. That they who communicate not are to be put out of the Church This is such an Error as the Ancient Church was guilty of as well as we as your own Vicecomes sheweth at large Vicecomes Vol. 3. l. 1. c. 18. 9. The Keys of the Church consist only in opening the Word of God No such thing is held by us 10. Private Confession is to be taken away Not so much as Sectaries say this absolutely 11. The Ceremonies of the Church are to be abrogated Simply and falsly said and directly contrary to the Articles of our Artic. 20. Church 12. Prayers in the Latin Tongue are barbarous and against St. Pauls Precept Very true where they are at first so instituted and understood by very few or none and so are they in the English Tongue or any other 13. No man can fulfill the Law This is true or false as it may be taken 14. More Masses then one cannot be said in one day in one Church Here our Accuser saith he knows not what For neither doth our Church inhibit more then once to officiate Liturgically neither did the Ancient Church practise if permit it for above four hundred years after Christ as appears from Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria consulting with Leo the first Bishop of Rome what he should Leo 1 Epist 79 or as some So. See also Grecian consecr Dist c. 51. do when Christians were so numerous that they could not all be received into the Church at once who answered In such cases he might safely reiterate the office And the Council of Antisiodorum or Auxere held about the Year 578 decreed that but one Mass should be said upon one Altar in one day which is as much observed by the Church of Rome now-a-days as other Canons of Councils which lye in their way thrown out And where in the Ancient Church do you read of above one Altar in one Church 15. Unity is no Note of the Church Discords and Divisions are certain signs of Errors but Unity is no certain sign of Truth nor so much as of a Church how then can it be of a true Church 16. Universal Councils may be repeal'd by Particular This See Petrus Gregorius Syntagm l. 15. c 3. is nothing he might have said by particular persons as the Popes who may according to that Church null Acts of Councils Oecumenical But we only hold that in things mutable according to the condition Article 34. of Time Place and other Circumstances rendring some Decrees prejudicial to some Churches contrary to the intention of the first Ordainers of them a Provincial Church may make alterations 17. The Church may erre in Faith And what of that meaning any one Individual single Church as the Roman hath according to our Articles 18. The Precepts of the Church concerning set Fasts are A Doctrine of Devils It is rather a Doctrine of Devils to teach so 19. Peter was not the Prince of the Apostles Peter was A or if you will The Principal Apostle but he was not the Prince of any one of them much less of all 20. The Bishop of Rome is Antichrist We are not so much agreed about this point as to give in a full verdict but we agree he is Antichristian 21. The difference concerning Leaven and Easter is inconsiderable Where no danger of Schisms or confusions may alter the case it is true 22. It is Heathenish to invoke Saints that reign with Christ Whether heathenish or no may be doubted they never worshipping any relating to Christ But for all that it may be and is superstitious and idolatrous in the sense very current in the Roman Church 23. The Reliques of Saints are not to be worshipped We hold so indeed though we hold they are to be respected relatively 24. The Saints in Heaven have no merits It is true taken strictly and properly 25. Indulgences of the Church are vain They are not only vain but wicked and generally blasphemous and ridiculous as mangâ—ed by the Church of Rome contrary or at least without all Precedents of the Christian Church for many hundred years viz. in remitting Sins or Punishments after this life and that divers times before they are committed Is not this fine and wonderful ancient and Catholick 26. Nothing is to be read in the Church besides Canonical Scripture This is rank Puritanism contradicted by themselves in their practise who read their Sermons as well as others and pray which is aequivalent to reading in this case out of their own heads rather than Scripture 27. In Oecumenical Councils and Private for the explaining of the Doctrine of Faith the consent of Lay-Princes is necessary It is necessary for the orderly assembling of such Councils It is necessary for the giving any Secular enforcement unto them 28. That it is lawful for Lay-men alone the Clergy opposing to introduce the Ancient Religion This is true no farther then that of Gerson which is alledged to this purpose A Lay-man with Scripture on his side is to be preferred before a Council without it Supposing a monstrous Proposition no wonder if a monstrous conclusion follows 29. He is no Bishop that teacheth not This is also a Puritan strain It being only true that he is no faithful conscientious Pastor but either proud or treacherous or sloathful or basely prudent who doth not in person discharge his Office so far as he is able without turning the care of his flock over to others using that for an argument of keeping close in his Cabin which is rather an argument of appearing in his charge viz. storms on the Church Opposition the Faith and Orders of the Church meet withal and difficulties obstructing the truth It being both shameful and ridiculous both in Bishop and Priest to censure others for enemies to the Church and for them so to wast it in all mens esteem in deserting it and delivering it up to the care of others themselves seeking little else then their temporal Harvest and case These men are over the Church indeed but 't is as the Extinguisher is over the Candle to put it out They pretend for themselves they have been sufferers for the Church and so it should seem indeed by their carriage to it in that through their scandalous negligence as to their charge they take a course to revenge themselves of it by making it suffer as much or more for them 30. Faith alone justifies How this is held we have even now as also we shall hereafter more fully explain 31. There are no Merits in Good works There are none properly so called 32. Priests and Monks may marry 'T is true where the
and for ought appears the Schismatical may be in greater unity within it self than the Catholick how can any man discern from unity which is the Catholick or true Church The Unity therefore which may any wise describe or distinguish the sounder part of Christs Church from the heretical must not be taken from that which it holdeth within it self but with some other which is acknowledged for Catholick wherein comes the use of Antiquity again because the Ancient Churches of Christ were saved by the same Faith and Worship that all succeeding Churches must be therefore if it may appear that a Church doth not agree in all necessary or considerable points of Faith Worship and Government with them of former ages supposed to be truly Catholick it self cannot be Catholick or a true Christian Church But they who look no higher than one Age or two and no farther then one place or two and finding convenient agreement amongst themselves do characterise themselves for Christs Church fall into the censure of St. Paul to the Corinthians who measuring themselves by themselves and comparing 2 Cor. 10. 12. themselves among themselves are not wise And in the Revelation of St. John we read of some Nations into whose heart God hath put to fulfill Revel 17. 7. his will and to agree and give their Kingdom unto the Beast until the word of God should be fulfilled I hope this unity of consent will not be taken for any argument of the faithfulness of their consent or Catholickness But more we shall have occasion to speak of Unity in the treating of Schism In the mean time I see no force at all in the places alleadged out of the Old Testament to prove so much as may be well allowed to the unity of the Church as where it is said My Beloved is but one and to the Cantic like purpose For such places taken in relation to Fact and not to Precept and counsel rather that Gods Church should be so and endeavour to keep the Spirit of Unity in the bond of peace as the Apostle speaks can Ephes 4. 3. be understood strictly only of that single Nation of the Jews which was alone chosen so peculiarly to himself Or of the future Coalition of Jew and Gentile into one Body as the same Apostle in the same Epistle speaketh of Christs Passion That he might reconcile both unto God in one Chap. 2. 16. Body by the Cross having slain the enmity thereby i. e. between Jew and Gentile These difficulties and uncertainties in this Note of Unity have constrained the Patrons of the Roman Cause to find out such an Unity which indeed is more apparent and certain to him that commits his Faith to be guided by some outward sign but so much repugnant to all ancient Churches so wholly strange to them and unheard of that it may seem to do them much more mischief than advantage as that which excludes all Antiquity from having any suffrage in this cause And this their Note is Unity Bellarm. de Notis Eccles lib. 4. cap. 10. init with the Bishop of Rome as boldly said and as weakly proved as their enemies could wish St. Hierom indeed saith to Damasus he is resolved to hold as He and that See believed in one particular of the Trinity and used not simply and abstractly consider'd this as a probable argument of Orthodoxness and preserving the peace of the Church but with the concurrence of other Circumstances rendring his Opinion probable But doth he or any ancient Author deserving with themselves the name of a Father teach as they would perswade indefinitely That to hold communion with the Bishop of Rome is to be assured you are of the true Catholick Church Christs Charter much stood upon to St. Peter and the Rhetorical flourishes many times of the Holy Fathers extolling St. Peter and his Successors but never categorically affirming or soberly determining so will not amount to this Hence they proceed to Universality too as a sign of the true Church and an help to Unity it self For it profitteth nothing that there be some one Church and that in one Age and Place which is at unity with it self if it be not universal Christs Church is said to be universal but so many senses are given of Universality it self that it is hard to apply it positively to any pretending to it For nothing so plain as that the Christian Faith doth not and never did possess all Nations nor all the persons of those Nations where it hath flourished No man therefore can know the true Church by that which is not true of it And therefore I make no doubt but the most anciently genuine and proper sense of that expression in the Apostles Creed where it is said I believe the Catholick Church Vide Augustinum Epistolâ— 50. aimed at no more than to cause us to believe that Christs Church was from that time forward no longer to be of one Nation or one Denomination as it was before Christs Incarnation but Catholick that is Universal and indifferently to extend to all People For at that time when the Creed was composed the secondary sense wherein Catholick and sound Believer signified the same thing was scarce at all heard of no not before the Councel of Nice under Constantine Afterwards it was applyed to particular Sees as well Alexandrian Antiochian and some others as Roman In Theodosius the second his dayes which above 400 years after Christ a Sozomenus Ecclesiast Hist lib. 7. cap. 4. Law was made that none should call themselves Catholicks but such as believed aright concerning the Holy Trinity the rest should be termed Hereticks Afterward notwithstanding every Sect and Heresie usurped that name as may appear from that very place corruptly cited out of Austin August Epist ad Epistolam Fundamenti by some to prove the true Church from the Title of Catholick it self For saith he however all Hereticks desire to be called Catholicks yet if any enquired for a Catholick Church they were directed to the Orthodox and not Heretical Churches But if we take the word Catholick in a more restrained sense not for that which is all over the world actually but so far as it doth extend passeth generally through all and that not Places but Ages too where shall we find a Catholick Church Christians never for fourteen or fifteen hundred yeers not conspiring into one belief no not in things held very important to Faith and I mean not only single persons but Societies of Christians Therefore neither from hence can we conclude directly of the true Church in opposition to Heretical And therefore the Patrons of this opinion of the Universality finding themselves harder pursued with difficulties than they can evade being taken in their own snares are forced according to their very vain custom to leave off the tryal of the truth from matter of Fact which is most plain and ready and proceed to say It ought so
purpose or to their advantage to say for instance sake as the more sober especially when they would gain upon the good opinion of men That Images may be worshipped relatively and as instruments to devotion and helps but when there are found and generally known to be such doctrines as teach a veneration of Images for their own sakes and directly and that with the same sort of worship that the things they represent are capable of though perhaps they upon a pinch can insert a distinction which neither can be understood nor profit such a doctrine as this known to be delivered by the Principal Doctors of their Churches and maintain'd not being condemned by that Church however not generally embraced may subject a Church to a censure of Heresie and Idolatry of both and so in other things whereof tolerable senses are given in the Church of Rome or else they could not be said so much as to be a Church at all but intolerable and Heretical are also uncondemned and so are no true Church and so may be separated from without Schism but not without peril of damnation united to And do not our brethren for such they were before they professed Schism and I hope may be after they have renounced it see now plainly enough the vaniâ—y and spitefulness of their Evasion Are not the Cases infinitely different and that in their own eyes Hear they what Perkins saith to our and their purpose So long as a Church Perkins on Gal. C. 5. V. 20. or people do not Separate from Christ we may not separate from them 2 Pro. 24. 21. Fear the King and meddle not with them that vary i. e make alterations against the Laws of God and the King Indeed Subjects may signifie what is good for the State and what is amiss but to make any alteration in the State either Civil or Ecclesiastical belongs to the Supream Magistrate And â—n another place the same Author hath these words Great therefore is the rashness Id. Galat 1. V. 2. and want of moderation in many that have been of us that condemn our Church for no Church without sufficient conviction going before If they say we have been admonished by books published I say again these be grosser faults in some of those books than any of the faults that they reprove in the Church of England and therefore the books are not â—it to convince especially a Church Thus we see how the cases in the matter difier And no less may we see the difference in the manner For 't is apparent that Schismaticks against the Church of England never had any Legal autority to warrant their vile and Scandalous practices but were forced to give names to things uncapable of them to excuse themselves or else by an unnatural course to entitle the People to a Power Supream who have none at all but what is given them from another fountain neither did the people concurr with such misdemeaners as was pretended they did But thirdly another difference is to be noted from the Rights of a Patriarchal Power over a Provincial Church not properly of its Diocess and that of a Metropolitan with his Suffragans over the members of the Church which they altogether make For according to the constitutions of the Church though a Patriarchs Power was Intensively equal to Episcopal over his proper and immediate Diocess and Extensively much greater than the Metropolitans or Bishops in relation to other Diocesses yet was it never so Intensive i. e. so particular and great in those Bishops Diocesses over which he had only an Order of Unity rather than Intrinsick power to dispose matters therein though in process of time this also was invaded much by him and might be recovered to the proper Bishop by the Laws of the Church But the Bishops of this Church had the sole and immediate disposing of the affairs of it and nothing could be concluded without obligation of obedience out of Conscience without their Concurrence as desparately as Schismaticks then did and still do rage at this truth But then as Hinderson saith with others They would never reform themselves It is very likely so meaning as they would have them but that not to the better Rule of the Ancient Churches and the Scriptures is more than they knew or would acknowledg when they saw because still they would have done otherwise and invented a new Rule of their own But seeing the grounds and Cause of separation are they upon which the Guilt of Schism is avoided or contracted according to the nature of them and obscure and difficult and tedious is the method leading to the tryal of the sufficiency of them to justifie a Separation therefore it were well contrived if as in the search of a true Church they may being very long and uncertain and grievous to most proceeding upon the points of Faith and Parts of worship themselves certain infaâ—lible obvious and plain Characters could be produced to convince the Schism and distinguish it from simple and innocent Separation A Fair attempt to which hath been made by Austin who dispuâ—ing against the Donatists denies that any man can separate from the Universal Church innocently So that although it should be doubtful as most things are managed by Learned Partisans whether considering the grounds of Separation in themselves the Separation be Schismatical or lawful and laudable yet by such an outward Characteristick it might be competently discerned And so farmust I needs comply with that Judicious and Holy Father and such as urge this out of him against us as to yield it a most probable outward Note of Schism for any man or number of men not a Church but in Fieri as they speak only and in breeding to divide from the Universal Church not only as comprehending all Ages but of any one Age the weight and evidence of which Concession will appear from the esteem of the Church Catholick and the wrath and extent of Christs promises to preserve it in All truth For this is certain That Christ directed his promises and restrained them to no one time or Age. And it is not probable there should be such an Intercession or intermission of Faith or Christianity that the universal Church should mortally err in any one thing necessary to salvation nay though we take it not in such a large sense as sometimes it is wont to be used for all individual persons in it as well as Churches of which the whole is constituted And therefore to desert the communion of all Churches not of persons for this is scarce to be supposed to happen at any time doth argue shrewdly That the separation hath much of Schism in it without examination of particular grounds which are pretended sufficient For it will be said That it ought not to be supposed that Christ should deliver over his whole Church to such heretical errours which only can exempt a Separation from Schism From such notorious suspicions as these we
but I said that Cook reports them as heard from Diodates own mouth and I there give him the very Page where those words are to be found and this simple Quarreller and Vindicator of Puritans hath no other way to evade this then by a bold and sensless denial of the thing so apparent Now to that excellently learned person Bochartus what is it I say against him but that he would needs be medling where it concerns him not as the too common practise hath constantly been both of French and Dutch Divines What have they to do to interpose so often and uncharitably in behalf of Puritans as they have Is it not sufficient that they are not disquieted by us in their singularities and inconformities to the perpetual constitution and orders of Christs Universal Church but they must needs seek all occasions pragmatically to animate Sectaries to give them counsel and assistance to give them Communicatory Nisi me mea fallat opinio afhâ— mare auâ—â—â— quamum familtaris congress is gratiâ lâ—pâ—re vâ—nour à Duâ—â—llor antua illum à me superari crationis scriptae nitâ—re utilitate cun ejus scriptio â—â—ta prolixitate ariditate pariat fastidium taedium lectori hand dubium mea etiam ad aperturam libri detmebit cum amaena fincifera voluptate capietque desiderio alteriora legendi nullis offuciis Strephis paralogismis imprimis diverticulis cum à proposiio tum à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cardine litis quaestioniquâ— quae inter Hiâ— raâ—chic â—â— Puritanos vertitur deterritus conâ—â—â—sâ—â— ad aljiciendas chartas ut in lectione vindiciarum Durellianarum Lud. Molin ante Durel Patroni p. 2. 3. Letters in the height of their Seditions and Schisms to write Apologies and Vindications for them as Bochartus hath In which besides this I think he was in an error to suppose that that great Truth he defends of Subjects not to take up Arms against their Soveraign can be made good from the Cabbalistical and Talmudical sayings of the Rabbies upon which that Thesis is chiefly built and may be as easily pull'd down by rejecting such Ornaments rather then Arguments of Speech And this is all he objects against me in that bold Work of his saving several reproachful tearms which I will not trouble any body with Only concerning the Canina facundia i. e. Dogged Eloquence he taxeth me with I may tell him I am not fit to be his or his Brethrens Scholar in such Speeches And yet as * Turpe est contra ardenter perversa assâ—rentes 〈◊〉 pra veritaâ—â— frgidi res inveno i. Rusâ—ic Diac. Advers Acephâ—l Rusticus Diaconus hath it against the Acephali or headless Schismaticks in his days It 's very absurd for us to be found more cool for the Truth when we write against such as vehemently assert the contrary And concerning the barbarousness and unevenness of my stile though I want not matter of defense from several heads I shall pass them over and also his most polite and elegant stile for which he praises himself so worthily and wisely and only refer the Reader to that one instance which he may find Page 2 and 3 of his Patronus against Monsieur Durell where this great and vain-glorious Latinst while he magnifies his singular Talent of Elegance in the Latin Tongue offends in his tedious and ill-joynted Period against the Rules of Rhetorick and in worse concordance against the common Rules of Grammar So unluckie is this man and that in more ways then I will object to him And now I must touch a farther occasion of my present undertaking and that was the many errors vented by dissenting persons in our Church with which our Adversaries commonly revil'd us as shall be seen by and by in the mean time least any should suppose I go out Perkinsius qui in Aâ—li◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—he legiae 〈◊〉 â—xiulâ—â— â—ujus 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 Vortius Biâ—lioth l. 2 c. 3. of the common road of forreign Reformers so much trod by many Dissenters amongst us because I was not well skill'd in Calvins Bezas and Ursins Works I must tell them they were the Authors first of all recommended unto me and read by me more then those of our own Church And because I knew well of what great account as well abroad as at home Mr. Perkins his works were I would be no stranger in them but finding in them a servile and credulous spirit so far addicted to such Modern Divines that scarce any thing so new harsh or inconsistent with the judgment of Antiquity fell from them but Perkins presently took it up for Scripture and Catholick Doctrine and transcribed the same into his Works I have here collected in brief what I observed as Heterodox in his Works apt to corrupt young and injudicious Readers But here I shall say nothing of his known monstrous sense of Gods Decrees and Predestination but what a Learned Person his great friend and defender hath said before me Bishop * Abbot in Thompson Diâ—â— c. 1. Perkinsius vir alt quin eruditur pius 〈…〉 quam ille centra 〈◊〉 câ—ntra veteris Ecclesiae fidâ—m cura lâ—psâ—â— Alani absoluâ—â— dâ—cretam 〈…〉 non levem erravit Perkins on Gal. 3. v. 12. Abbot Perkins saith he otherwise a very learned and godly man in describing Divine Predestination which contrary to our and the Ancient Church he hath determined to be decreed without the fall of Adam hath committed no small Error 1. The first I observe is his sense of Justification by Faith thus expressed The Gospel promiseth life to him that doth nothing in the cause of his Salvation but only believeth in Christ and promiseth Salvation to him that believeth yet not for his Faith nor for any Works but for the Merits of Christ The Law then requires doing unto Salvation and the Gospel believing and nothing else Both ends of this sentence are utterly false and scandalous to Christianity it self and most of all as he there explains Non apprehendi potest quod promittitur nisi custoditu a fucrit 〈◊〉 jubetur Leo M. Ser. 9. ad jejun 7. Mensis V. 18. himself thus Believing and doing are opposed in the Article of Justification in our good conversation they agree Faith goeth before and Doing follows but in the work of our Justification they are as fire and water To the same effect he speaketh afterward All which we have refuted shewing that in no place of Scripture are the works of Faith opposed to Faith in Christ in any consideration but only the works of the Law as opposite to or not done in Christ nor in Faith 2. Secondly he saith A third benefit to them that believe in Id. ib. cap. 3. p. 320. Christ is That they have liberty to live and serve God without fear of damnation or any other evil 3. Thirdly God never gave to any man power to effect a Chap. 3. 5. Miracle
not so much enquired into how absolutely one man may be known from another nor how one Church may be distinguished from another as the Roman from the Greek or the English from the French Church for this thought it be very easie is scarce worth the labour but the doubt and material difficulty is How to know which of these are Catholick and true Churches of Christ and which are Heretical or Erroneous in any degree I say the Enquiry is not which is which Church as a man might be known to be such an one by name from his stature his hair or the like but which of these are true and orthodox Churches This can be by no other notes infallibly but such as are truly and constantly proper to true Churches and are no less found in other true Churches than in this And therefore it is most true what is commonly said That the true Church is known by the true Faith professed right Discipline administred and the holy Sacraments duly used but not before it be certainly known that all these are actually so observed and really not pretendedly only And so is it as true That it being known certainly which is the true Church it must be known likewise by necessary consequence that all these three are faithfully observed in that Church which could not be true without them Now if we first must judge of Churches by the three General Instances and Indications we must first judge of these Ingredients into its Nature and before we can do so must run through a whole body of Divinity and that with fallible judgment in the search of it On the other side if we would know which is the true Religion from the true Church to know the true Church first we must pass through infinite Disputes and Controversies with the like uncertainty of judging aright as before and in doing both these we forsake the pretended method of judging by Notes for we are hereby immers'd in the indagation of the thing it self without consideration of Notes which if they could be had apparently and infallibly would prevent that long and tedious labour of examining the matter it self But such as I have said I know none positive the neerest we can come to the point is Negatively when there is apparently wanting such things as declare at least the unsoundness and imperfection of the whole Body so defective CHAP. XXX Of the Notes of the true Church in Particular Of Antiquity Succession Vnity Vniversality Sanctity How far they are Notes of the true Church THE four principal Notes of the true or rather false Church not found in it are Antiquity Unity Succession Universality and as moderner Controverters in England especially the name of Catholick it self To the first of these we say That her Antiquity is not to be compared with things of quite another nature but with things of the same nature and comprehended in some eminent Period of time For the Natural worship was more ancient than the Mosaical and the Mosaical than the Christian in such things wherein they differed For we have before shown That Christian Religion according to the material and natural Part of it which was that connatural light and reason shining cleerly in the heart of man and directing him to the belief and worship of one God exceeded in time the Jewish worship yet was not to be preferred before it and the like may be said of the Jewish and Christian But the enquiry is chiefly about those of the same Oeconomy the same profession and denomination As if it should be demanded which of the natural Religions were the truest answer might well be made That which was most ancient and agreeable to prime Institution And in like manner That must be the purest of the Jewish or Mosaical which agrees most exactly with the most ancient and first instituted of that kind and so of the Christian undoubtedly that which retained most of the divine Truths and Worship ought to be preferred as the best of that kind as is plain from the Prophet Jeremiah advising that degenerous people and Church thus Stand ye in the wayes and see and ask for the old paths where is the good way and walk therein and ye shall find rest for your souls Nay we may extend this to the Mahometan Religion thus far truly viz. to be informed from antiquity which of all the several Sects are most truly Mahometan weighing their agreement to or discrepancie from the Institutions of the first Author of that Superstition But here it will be necessary to distinguish between things agreeable to the institution things instituted and things contrary to institution and that as well for our better satisfaction in the following notes as this present though I confess all this is overthrown if that be taken for granted which some mischievously would obtrude upon the Christian Church in these last dayes That nothing whether intrinsick or extrinsick to Religion it self in the substance must be instituted but by Christ and such as were divinely inspired by him But this at present I shall take for groundless sensless and unpracticable by the Assertours and Defenders of it some other place being more proper for its confutation But this diversity being allowed as all reason requires the resolution of this case will be much facilitated For surely that Church have it never so many and fair advantages otherwise to commend it to the world which shall either have lost any material Article of Christian Faith or notably corrupted and perverted or introduced any Tenet which is contrary to the first Institution and for which no good ground or reason can be alledged out of the all-sufficient Rule of Faith must needs be false and that no such warrant can be there had the total silence or contrary Doctrine of the Ages next under the Date of Scriptures which we here make the Rule do prove For where neither the Scriptures most ancient expresses or necessarily infers any Doctrine of Faith nor Tradition hath never so understood the Scriptures there no greater evidence can be found upon earth to discern truth from falshood and consequently the Catholick and Apostolick Faith from the Spurious and Heretical And from this head it was that we find the ancient Fathers to oppose and confute the Heretical Inventions and Innovations of men contrary to sound Faith For supposing that Christ was the first founder and dispenser of Christian Doctrine and that he delivered this to the Apostles to be farther propagated in the world what could be said more effectually against perverters of the same than to shew that such fond and impous tenets as Hereticks obtruded upon the world could never have Christ for their Author because those who immediately drew from that Fountain never taught any such thing but the contrary rather And that they did not they proved from instances in all the principal Sees of the Apostles and their immediate and following Successors who never delivered any such Doctrine
to be for certain reasons they draw at their pleasure out of Scripture and the necessity of our knowledge of it which is as solid a way of proceeding as if I finding my self by natural sense cold another should attempt to demonstrate the contrary because it is Midsommer But this use we may yet make of Universality to jude of Catholickness of Faith taking it for the most constant for time place and persons according as all humane account requires to ascribe that to the more numerous and eminent which is strictly proper only to the whole entire Body as a Councel or Senate is said to decree a thing when the chiefest do so some dissenting surely this is a very probable argument of the Catholickness of that Faith and consequently that Church so believing But what we before observed must not be forgotten here viz. That in all such enquiries as these the Estimate must be taken from the whole Church passed as well as Present and that there is as well an Eminency of Ages as Persons to preponderate in this Case Lastly the advantage Negative from Universality is very considerable to discern the true Faith and Church from false because it is most certain if any Doctrine or Discipline shall be obtruded on the Church which cannot be made evident to have been actually received in the Church and not by colourable and probable conjectures and new senses of Scripture invented to that purpose in some former Age that is Heretical and Schismatical and in no good sense Catholick The last Note which we shall mention is Sanctity which we hold very proper to this end taken abstractedly from all Persons as considered in Doctrine and Principles For if any Church doth teach contrary to the Law of nature of moral vertues of Justice or the like we may well conclude that to be a false Church though it keeps it self never so strictly to the Rule of Scriptures in many or most other things For it is in the power of mans wit and may be in the power of his hands to devise certain Religious Acts and impose them on others which shall carry a greater shew of severity and sanctity than there is any grounds for in Scripture or Presidents in the best approved Churches and yet this is not true Holiness of Believers For to this is principally required that it be regulated and warranted by Gods holy Word Yet neither so directly and expresly as if it were unlawful to act any thing in order to Holiness without special precept from thence For I see no cause at all to reject the ancient distinction found frequently with the Fathers of the Church of duties of Precept and duties of Councel For there ever was and ought to be in Christs Church several ranks of Professours of Christs Religion whereof for instance some live more contemplative some more active lives But if all commendable and profitable States were under Precept then should all sin that do not observe the same but God hath taken a mean course in not commanding some things of singular use to the promoting of Piety in true Believers but commending the same unto us Such are Virginal chastity Monastick life Travelling painfully not only towards the salvatian of a mans own soul but of others likewise and certain degrees uncommanded of Duties commanded as of charity towards our Christian neighbours Watchings unto Prayer and spiritual Devotion which being prescribed no man can determine to what degree they are by God required of us precisely some therefore are left to the Freewill-offerings of devouter persons who thereby endeavour either to assure themselves more fully of their salvation or increase of the glory afterward to be received For as Christ tells us in the Gospel Much was forgiven to Mary because she loved much so shall much be given upon the same reason They therefore that teach contrary to such wholesome and useful means of Holiness as these or the like under perhaps vain suspicion of too great opinion may be had of their worthiness incur at least with me the censure of being enemies to the holiness of Christs Church and render their Churches more suspected for the opposing of them than others for approving or practising them The Holiness then of the Church commending it to the eye and admiration of the World doth consist in the divineness and spiritualness of its Doctrine and Ecclesiastical discipline in use in it exceeding moral civility For it may be that such a severe hand of civil Justice may be held over a people that they may live more orderly and inoffensively to the world than some true Christian Churches but if this be done as often it is out of civil Prudence natural Gravity or a disposition inclined rather to get an estate than riotously and vainly to spend on which brings such scandal to Religion then is not this a sign of a true Church or Christian because it proceedeth not from principles proper to Christian Religion but secular interest how specious soever it may appear to the World CHAP. XXXI Of the Power and Acts of the Church Where they are properly posited Of the Fountain of the Power denyed to the Church Neither Prince nor People Authour of the Churches Power But Christ the true Head of the Church The manner how Christs Church was founded Four Conclusions upon the Premisses 1. That there was alwayes distinction of Persons in the Church of Christ 2. The Church was alwayes administred principally by the Clergy 3. The Rites generally received in the Church necessary to the conferring Clerical Power and Office 4. All are Vsurpers of Ecclesiastical Power who have not thus received it In what sense Kings may be said to be Heads of the Church AFter the Church found and founded as abovesaid the special Acts thereof claim due consideration and the Power or Right of so acting And this Power we make two-fold in General Political and Mystical or Sacramental Of both which we must first enquire after the proper Subject before we treat of the proper Acts thereof That all Power which is given by Christ doth reside in the Church as its subject no man can or doth question But because the Church it self being as is said a Society united in one Faith and administred outwardly by Christian Discipline according to Christs mind admitteth of several senses and acceptations therefore it must be first understood which and in what sense is according to Christs intention the proper seat of this power And before we come to Scriptural grounds we take no small help in this Enquiry from the common state of all Government which we have already shown to be such as is not ascending but descending It cometh not originally nor can from the multitude or people who are the object of this power i. e. the Persons properly to be governed and not governing all the Examples of former Ages confirming not only the unnaturalness and unreasonableness but impossibility of the People governing
are we to mutiny against the Constitutions of Eastern and Western Churches which in progress of time added some inferiour Orders to those most anciently received in the Church viz. of Bishop Priest and Deacon For I take it to be no invasion of Christs Right to call to the assistance of such as he had constituted such as he did not ordain to that end but to retrench of the number to dissolve that Order which he appointed that is sacrilegious What then may we call Orders but The Collation of an Ecclesiastical Faculty or Power to serve God and the Church by such as are authorized by God using the necessary Forms of Words and Rites thereunto required according to his order of Ministration Now we have already shewed That as no man can create himself a secular neither can he an Ecclesiastical Officer and as no man in that Politv can be created but by one in Authority rightly derived to him so can none in Spiritual matters be ordained to Ecclesiastical Ministration but he that is thereunto called by some in Lawful or at least real Power And therefore such who are chosen and appointed by the common people are but common people after such vainly affected callings and they who are of an inferiour Order were never acknowledged to have power to create one of a Superiour to them As it was never endured in the Church till of late dayes that Priests should appoint Bishops or Priests because though Power of the Keys were communicated to them in reference to the two Principal and necessary Sacraments yet never as to the whole complex notion of the same which consists of Jurisdiction as well as Knowledge and Intercession And the School argument which at least hath given occasion to confound the Order of Bishop and Priest is very false and frivolous supposing all Ecclesiastical Orders to be so denominated in or dine ad consecrandum from their relation to the Power of Consecrating the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist because they suppose that to be the supream Mystery and End of Priestly Office but the distinction of Power Political and Mystical in the Church quite overthrows that For the Power of Jurisdiction is greater in its kind than that of celebrating and therefore not so vainly to be taken Again the Orders of the Church are so called from the Relation they have to the Body Ecclesiastical or outward Form and Constitution of it which is made up of all of them by a gradual ascent from the lowest to the highest which make that Hierarchy without which a Church has but very little to show that it is a Church but is forc'd to shroud it self under the obscure priviledges of being an invisible Church though not visible Orders therefore thus duly administred though they be not a Sacrament for then must there be seven Sacraments subordinate to the other famous seven because generally seven sorts of Orders are administred in the Church yet are they Sacramental things that is Sacred and no less necessary to the constituting a Visible Body of Christ than are the others to the Invisible And though that cannot presently be concluded to be a true Church of Christ which hath them I do not see how that can be a true Church which hath them not And for that which is commonly called Extream Unction being the Anointing of the Infirm of Body or such as are despaired of as to this Life I see no great matter to be objected against it no more did Luther nor Bucer nor some other eminent Reformers for a good while after they left Rome provided it be done with that solemnity and soundness of invocation of God and Benediction of the deceasing Party as may comfort and strengthen him in his last Agonies It being ancient though not so old as is pretended nor ministred in the same manner as now For in the beginning not one but many Presbyters of the Church were called according to the advice of St. James to pray over the sick and to anoint James 1. 14 15 him with common not compounded or artificial Oyl and that not without a miraculous event But because the Miracle is now ceased it is no good reason the thing it self should be detested For Primitively a Miracle did accompany Baptism too which ceasing no man will declare the Sacrament it self ought to cease likewise The Superstitions of Prayer and some other Rites added of late whereby the simplicity of it hath been corrupted is a more reasonable ground of laying it down Neither is the want thereof in that formality to be charged upon a Church where there is commanded and continued due Ministration to the Sick answerable to the necessities of Body and Soul But though the use hereof be ancient yet the name Sacrament hath not so anciently been ascribed to it in the sense at this day Current And Innocent the first who is reported to have so called it doth permit others besides Priests to minister the same to the Sick the Chrism or Oyl being made by the Bishop CHAP. XXXVII Of Confirmation What it is The Reasons of it The Proper Minister of it Of Vnction threefold in Confirmation Of Sacramental Repentance and Penance The Effects thereof BUT of Confirmation much greater esteem hath ever been and ought still to be had though not so much as some of the Ancients and divers Modern Schoolmen would exalt it to unless a favourable interpretation be made of their judgments delivered concerning it For they make it more useful than Baptism it self and impute the efficacy of Baptism in great part unto this Sacrament To judge the better of which Opinion it is to be consider'd what this Confirmation is Confirmation may be said to be a solemn Act of Invocation of God and Benediction of a Person upon his publick Profession of that Christian Faith into which he was before baptized First It was required that the Person capable of this Ceremony should have first been baptized For he was not hereby made a Christian but as the word importeth confirmed in that Faith into which he had been baptized And the Reasons hereof were such then as do to this day commend exceedingly the use of it viz. Because some were baptized in their minority or infancy when wanting common judgment they could not discern the nature use and end of Baptism and therefore very requisite it was that they should after due and sober information in the mysteries and principles of Christian Religion make in their own person such a publick Profession of the same as they were bound to do at the time of their baptism according Catechismus Argentoratensis p. 36. D. Cum nos pueri instituti sumus in fide Christiana debemus eam palam aperte profiteri c. as the Church Catechism of Strasburgh since the Reformation well thus expresses it by Scholar and Master Schol. We that are children and instructed in the Faith of Christ ought to profess the
same in publick and clearly in the Church seeing we could not do this when we were baptized Mast How are ye confirmed Schol. By publick blessing intercession of the Church with imposition of hands Mast But how art thou assured of this Schol. We have Word of God when he sayes Let little Children come unto me c. Thus that Catechise Another reason may be the danger from the multitude of Hereticks which possibly might have corrupted such young beginners in the Faith therefore as well for the better securing such persons as for the satisfaction of the Church that they who were once enter'd into communion with it did so persevere inviolate in the same this excellent Rite was instituted And surely because it notably discriminates Schismaticks and Erroneous persons from sober and faithful Members of Christ and his Church it is by vain ignorant and ungodly persons scoffed at railed at and contemned A third Reason respecteth the time to come wherein a man foreseeing the many and great temptations of the World Flesh and Devil which he had renounced in Baptism to increase upon him as he converses more with the World doth thereby fortifie himself by a renewed profession of his Faith and Obedience to Christ Fourthly to this conduceth very much the Benediction of his Ghostly Father the Bishop and the joynt prayers of all the Congregation which ought devoutly to be put up to God for the descent of his Grace to preserve the persons so confirmed in that holy profession which should be most earnestly desired by every pious heart that likes his Religion and fears his own frailties And it is to me an infallible argument of desperate unchristian prophaneness or a new superstition instilled into men alienating them from the truth of that Religion in which they were educated who carp at this so godly Constitution their best ground being that which is to all their frivolous reasonings Because no express place of Scripture commands it directly and because it is possible to be saved without it It is possible that we may be saved without many things which we daily use in Religion and yet they contemptuously and wilfully omitted may be a just and certain cause of our condemnation the Scriptures having not limited God to those means of saving us which they have if we would be saved And yet again they have not so particularized our duties that there should be nothing accepted by God from us which they have not expressed I find it disputed on both sides whether this Rite be of Divine Institution or not and shall not determine it but in this both Ancient and Modern Eastern and Western Churches are agreed that it is of Divine use and therefore I may determine it to be pious and profitable and them who oppose it to speak evil 2 Pet. 2. of the things they understand not for which they may utterly perish in their own corruption But I suppose the proper Minister of this Solemnity who alwayes was the Bishop of the Church hath much turned the stomach of those who very unhappily have none or most wickedly endeavour to have none against it For considering how little is to be said against it how much for it the principle ground why they are bent against it must be to defend themselves from notorious defects To understand this as likewise the manner of performing this Sacramental Rite it is to be noted there was a threefold use of Unction called also Chrism in the ancient Church whereof one pertained to the Presbyter or Priest who in the time of Baptism was wont to anoint the party baptized on the crown of the Head The other two were properly belonging to the Bishop the one being done presently Hieremias Patr. Cap 7. Censure O. rieâ—tal after Baptism on the forehead after the Priest had anointed him on the crown of the Head which custom the Greek Church retain to this day as their Patriarch Hieremias witnesseth and when this was done I suppose there followed no other Confirmation but after the deferring of Baptism ceased and the appointed times of Easter and Pentecost for that Sacrament were laid aside and children and that at all times and in all places of Divine worship were admitted to Baptism and not alwayes as most anciently in the presence of the Bishop then it became necessary that a peculiar time and proper services should be appointed to this Solemnity wherein the Party to be confirmed was signed in the forehead by the Bishop only as before in substance but with variation of circumstances In Gregory Gregor M. Epist Lib 3. 9. the Great 's days it should seem the brest was anointed by the Priest What need we trouble ourselvs in such things aswere alterable in that unalterable solemnity our Churches moderation endeavouring to prevail upon the modesty of some dissatisfied persons in it have incurred the censurre of other Churches in paring that Ordinance to the Quick from unnecessary excrescencies without any effect upon her own undutiful children but pertinacy and petulancy in their private morosities which at length may teach us how vain such charms of Charity are used upon such deaf Adders and unnatural Vipers whom nothing will satisfie but the tearing to pieces the womb that conceived them And that they may do with it what they list they make the Church speak what they list many times And therefore though it hath wisely declared and plainly but for two Sacraments ordinarily necessary to salvation they are wont to exclaim against it thereby inferring contumeliously that she holds more though not so necessary which had been no slander if they at the same time had used that candour which became them in stating the mind of the Church as they might and ought but to do this here or in other cases were to do themselves or Cause wrong and to be just to us were to be cruel to themselves A fifth pretended Sacrament is that of Repentance sometimes also called Penance with us For so I read Mr. Bradford in his Sermon on the Fourth of Matthew and the seventeenth to speak saying Penance is a sorrowing or forethinking of our sins past an earnest purpose to amend or turning to God with a trust of pardon Which description may suffice us at present For the first thing in Repentance is a sound judgment of the evil of the Facts committed or omitted the next is a belief and sense of the evil of punishment incurred by such enormities A third degree or act of the mind is a change of the resolution for the time to come to act more reasonably and faithfully A fourth is an apprehension of the Grace and Mercy of God towards him upon his humiliation and return A fifth the real execution and putting in outward practise the good purposes of heart in effects proper to Repentance A sixth is not to repent of Repentance or return to the offenses for which he was so grieved and which he renounced A seventh is the
confession to the Priest or Minister Some indeed very ignorant and no less superstitious persons are offended at the word Auricular from the common use of it amongst them whose Doctrine and Practice have corrupted it But the ancient use thereof was quite otherwise than now adayes it is as it is thus expressed by Bishop Jewel It is learnedly noted by Bishop Rhenanus the Sinner when he began to mislike Jewell Defence p. 156. himself and to be penitent for his wicked life for that he had offended God and his Church came first unto the Bishop and Priest as unto the mouths of the Church and opened unto him the whole burden of his heart Afterward he was by them brought into the Congregation and there made the same confession openly before his brethren and farther was appointed to make satisfaction by open Penance which being duly and humbly done he was restored again openly unto the Church by laying on of the hands of Priests and Elders Perkins on the Galatians speaketh thus This must farther admonish Perkins on Gal. 5. 19 20. us never to hide or excuse our sins but freely to confess them before God and before men also when need requires Whether we confess them or not they are manifest and the ingenuous confession of them is the way to cover them Psal 32. 1 4. Luther in his Colloquies delivers his opinion of Confession in these words â—â—ther Coll. Com. p. 257. English The chiefest Cause why we hold the Confession is this that the Catechism may be rehearsed and heard particularly to the end they may learn and understand the same However I for my part will never advise Confession to be intermitted for it is not a man that absolveth me from my sins but God himself And see pag. 258. How sins are to be confessed Another of our Church speaketh thus No kind of Confession either publick Archbishop 〈◊〉 Ansâ—â—â— to the 〈◊〉 p. â—â— or private is disallowed by us that is any ways requisite for the due execution of that ancient power of the Keys which Christ bestowed on his Church the thing that we reject is that new Pick-lock of Sacramental Confession obtruded upon mens consciences as a matter necessary to salvation by the Canons of the late Council of Trent Sess 14. c. 6. The Canon here intended I suppose is the Fifth of the Fourth Session under Julius the Third Mr. Perkins again in another place saith In troubles of conscience it is Cases of Conscience lib. 1. cap. 1. meet and convenient that there should be always used private Consession For James saith ch 5. v. 16. Confess yoou faults one to another and pray one for another c. For in all reason the Physician must first know the Disease before he can apply the remedy and the grief of the heart will not be discerned unless it be manifested by the confession of the Party diseased In private Consessions these Caveats must be observed First It must not be urged as a thing absolutely necessary without which there can be no satisfaction Again It is not fit that Confession should be of all sins but only of the Scruple it self Here Perkins's assertion is meerly of his own pleasure and against his own rule which requireth that the Spiritual as well as Corporal Physician should understand all Diseases and are not all sins diseases and of all diseases that the greatest which we are not sensible of 3. Though yet it is specially to be made to the Prophets Ministers of the Gospel Lastly He must be a person of fidelity able to keep secret things that are revealed Many more suffrages for the usefulness of Confession might be alledged of men of unquestioned authority in such cases as this but now I shall come briefly to declare what is to be received and what rejected in this Confession 1. In speaking of the Original or Institution 2. The Necessity 3. The Tradition concerning it 4. The due Practise of it And the Church of Rome however the Council of Trent hath determined it of Divine institution to whose servile Canons we ascribe not so much as to the less servile judgment of some of the Learned Doctors of that Church being divided in its opinion concerning the institution of it the ancienter of them generally denying any such Divine Precept and they who come after the Council being obliged to hold up its Credit affirming we may without great danger or difficulty affirm that Christ hath not in particular and precisely required any such Sacramental Confession but by general Rules of Piety and Prudence inferring so much as a Council and holy direction to assure our Salvation which possibly may be obtained without and more possibly be lost for want of it For the Priest under the Gospel being the same to the uncleanness of the Soul as was the Levitical Priest to the uncleanness and leprosie of the Body it agreeth exactly with the Analogy between the Old and New Testament that the like power be allowed to him in his Sphere as was to the other in his and the like real though not formal and express command Yea I could shew were it a place Scholastically to handle this matter here how according to the opinion of the Learned ancient Jews the people under the Law did practise this Confession and that upon opinion of a Precept in their Law But I do not rest upon any other than what the Gospel affords either in Letter or Inclusively under those duties which it prescribes a Christian Yet what Solomon hath in the Proverbs I take not to be so much Legal as Evangelical He that covereth his sins shall not prosper Prov. 28. 13. but who so confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy And that of Job cleering himself from the concealing of his sins as a great crime commends the revealing them as a necessary act If I covered my transgression Job 31. 33. as Adam by hiding mine iniquity in my bosom seem to be counsel in common with the Gospeâ— as having nothing ceremonial in them And though that of Leviticus was truly Legal as concerning outward absolutions and Levit cap. 13. 14. pollutions yet I see not how they who allow any weight in the Type to infer the thing signified under the Gospel can deny the like obligation in spiritual matters upon us as was on the Jews in respect of matters carnal By that Law the polluted and diseased person was to appear before the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys in c. 1. ad Rom v. 26. Levit. 5. v. 6. Prâ—eâ—t he was to be examined by him judged and sentenced for clean or unclean whole or unsound Sin is certainly the Leprosie of the soul and 't is because men are led more by Sense than Faith or by a monstrous Faith rather than truly Evangelical which dispatches compendiously more than safely all duties of Religion in a word or single act that they apprehend not the like
of Christ also Must not they be necessitated here to slee to an unknown Concomitance the one of the other and not a coexistence And if thus the blood hath the flesh of Christ concomitantly as well as the â—lesh the blood and so for this reason might the Cup be received without the Bread But we positively deny both such Carnal Capernaitical Coexistence as is here presumed and such necessary Concomitance too that with the receiving of one alone the other should be necessarily taken also but hold rather where both are not Present both are absent and no Sacramental Receiving of Christ can possibly be hoped for And though I have been long of this opinion before I found any authority express to this purpose besides the very intrinsique nature of the Sacrament it self now touched Yet am I not alone For thus speaks a Reverent and Learned Father of our Church In all compounded things the moiety of the matter is the moiety of substance Bishop Whites Reply to c. pag. 483. And whatsoever Jesuited Romanists teach I see not how their Laicks can truly say that they have at any time in all their Lives been partakers of this Sacrament for if half a man be not a man then likewise half a Communion is not a Communion But were there more colour for nothing of reality do we find in their Offers to vindicate themselves in what is said for the possibility of a Sacrament in one Kind received What can be said for their gross abuse of their and our Lords Institution and their Relinquishing the unanimous practice of the Catholick Church for so many Ages together Did not Christ equally institute both Did he not equally communicate both to his Disciples Or supposing that they were then all Priests which may be well doubted of seeing they were not compleatly consecrated then by the descent of the Holy Ghost nor commissioned to Go teach and Baptise all nations until after this doth this give any likelihood that therefore it is the sole Right for Priests to receive in both Kinds Did Christ any where make two Institutions One For Priests and another for Laicks If but one Who should presume to alteâ— or adulterate his Prescriptions He said Drink ye all of Mat. 26. 27. this which is more than we find he said of the Bread And the shift is sad and pitiful which some who have nothing better to say yet must say something adde that Christ said This do as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of 1 Cor. 11. 25. Fisher against White me As if he excepted sometimes from drinking when he commanded to eat Ridiculous The meaning of Christ being as plain as any thing need be that there should so often be had a devout remembrance of him as we communicate and not imply as is most boldly insinuated that sometimes we may not communicate in the Sacramental bloud of Christ For it followeth As Often as ye eat this bread and drink this cupp ye do shew the Lords death 1 Cor. 11. 26. till he come Never are they separated in the Scripture No ground at all for the omitting of one rather than the other The Church hath power to denie one as much as the other The Church hath no power to denie either or any thing else of such divine Institution The Church of God for above 1200 years did constantly and universally practise both And until the Council of Constance about the year 1415 many in the Roman Church so received but then it was violently taken away But to this very day all Churches not subdued to the Roman continue the Ancient form And do a companie of paltry reasons drawn from possible inconveniences in Lay-mens taking the Cup countervail so great a cloud of witnesses and so strong arguments to the contrary What if sometimes the Ancients did permitt the exportation of the one without the other to such as were sick or unable to receive in Publique Does this come home to the Case which requireth that the Publique Ministration should be changed also And how doth it appear I am sure not by their demonstrations that such Persons so receiving in half were ever reputed to have Sacramentally received Christ Nay not half of the Autorities or Instances commonâ—y given of such Communications do concern this subject for most are to be understood of the Panis Benedictus or the Bread blessed by the â—riâ—â—â— upon 〈◊〉 offering of it by the People which was not all consecrated Sacramentally and so given unto Christians to be imparted to such as were of the same Communion in token that they were in Communion with them though absent This I grant was sometimes performed by the sending to such the Consecrated Element of Bread in the Eucharist Not with an opinion of the Fathers of the Church however possibly same vulgar and ignorant Christians might have too high a conceit of it that such receiving was tantamount to the receiving in both Kinds Sacramentally But to their inconveniences which are many of them more fit to make sport than to sway in so grave a Controversie we shall only reply that all they can alleadg was no newes to their and our Predecessours and yet never could it enter into their hearts to attempt so monstâ—ous a change upon such frivolous pretences But the truth is the Errour of transubstantiation being throughly received occasioned this by way of common prudence as well as Christian devotion For it being firmly and clearly believed the Consecrated Elements became Christs Bodie and Blood forsaking wholely their own Nature Common Reason required that all possible respect and Care should be taken as far as the wit of man could reach that no detriment or indignity should be done to them and that then became indecent and prophane which before was not To have the Least Crum fall aside must be accounted a grand prophanation though in voluntary and therefore humane wit invented Wafers and preferred them before bread according as Christ used it In breaking of the Host some possible waste might happen therefore though Christ and following Christians communicated of 1 Cor. 10. 17. one Bread according to St Paul For we are one Bread and one bodie and we are all partakers of one Bread undoubtedly literally meaning the participation by many of the same Loaf in the Sacrament now superstition hath better instructed us than the holy Spirit St Paul and there must be no more breaking of bread amongst Christians of which the Scripture speakes so often though I confess not alwayes meaning the Eucharist but yet that too many times and which is so lively and proper a Ceremony and signification of Christs passion lest somewhat should fall out amiss toward the supposed Body of Christ in their sense To give Respect to use reverence to it to take all convenient and devout Care about it is verie reasonable and pious for the Relation it hath to Christ and his Proper Bodie and the Virtue to
it implies as much as to say Give us but our demands and then we will be quiet by which Rule no man should defend his own right in lesser matters which to part with perhaps would not utterly undo him but he must be lookt on as accessary to and guilty of his own destruction if the Invader shall have power enough to bring it upon him because he will not peaceably satisfie his unjust desires A man may be and our Saviour in the Gospel saith expresly Luk. 16. 10. is unjust in the least as well as in much And so undoubtedly are they who having no Autority but what they frame to themselves shall by violence and aggressions attempt to extort the least thing belonging of right to another though haply better spar'd than kept For it is a Case of Justice rather than Christianity In justice and common equity the inferiour members of a Church and state owe obedience to their Superiours in all things not contrary to the Law of God the Church or the Nation but at most they can claim such things that are as they say indifferent to be granted them out of Courtesie or Charity only And whoever was so wilfully stupid as not to perceive that Injustice is much more a sin than Uncharitableness and so whatever mischief or guilt shall fall out in such contentions must necessarily light upon the heads of the unjust Aggressour and not indiscreet Resister were it indiscretion to withstand to deny such bold and insolent demanders or uncharitableness both which are denied in the present Case For there can be nothing more unjust on the one side and unwise on the other than so rudely and unrighteously to require of another all that may be granted or to grant all such things as are so demanded And if they urge still The peace of the Church to require such concessions I shall answer Let them first as all good Christians ought to do observe the Peace of Nature and the Peace of Nations which is not to offer violence nor to be unjust nor to go out of their Rank and Order but with good Autority and then take care for the Peace of the Church But what can be more absurd than that men should break the Peace of Nations and Nature it self yea the Law of God and Scriptures which require to obey all that are in autority over us as well Ecclesiastically as Civilly and then so much as to mention the Peace of the Church especially calling that only the Peace of the Church which puts them into quiet possession of their desires But to this we add that it is also very false which is here supposed to be true For there is nothing more manifest than that with diverse things of indifferent nature they mix many things of indispensable use to a Church and such is that so much reproached and derided Hierarchie which all the earth sees they have made it their business to Destroy utterly And when we plainly see as we do that those things in nature indifferent are demanded chiefly as an introduction to a farther abolition of things we hold necessary we hold them no longer indifferent nor can we in common prudence or Christianity part with them to such person any more than we can in a neighbourly manner lend away an Ax or Hammer when we are assured they will be made use of to break open our houses and spoil us though we know they may possibly be made use of to other purposes The Second Obstacle rather than Objection cast in our way is the parity of their Case with the Church of England with that of the Church of England with the Roman wherein whether they show more Spite or Policy may be a question Their Policy imitates them who finding the war to lie heavy upon them at their own doors contrive by all means possible to translate it into another Country as was particularly seen in Hindersons Letter to his late Sacred Majesty who finding the ability of his pen and weight of his discourses advised him rather to turn himself against the common enemy the Papist And thus these men would needs oblige us to make our quarrel good against the Romanists that they may be the les molested in the pursuance of their most Schismatical designs against the Church in which they were educated And this being discovered we might well excuse ourselves from such a task as they would set us But this we have before resolved in good part and had we not might and shall in a very few words dispatch as somewhat out of its proper place We grant then there is a Schism between us and the Romanists And we grant that there can be no cause to be Schismaticks though for a Separation there may and that they are truly Schismaticks who have ministred just Cause of Separation Some we know out of an ancient Father have urged against us That there can be no cause to divide the Church which is true in two senses only First when that Church is not before really divided from other Churches of unquestion'd integrity Realy I say by deserting some considerable point of Faith or introducing some unchristian manner of worship though not Openly and Formally as hath been said Again it is true only in such junctures as the Father spake those words in which was an apt and orthodox agreement within itself both in Faith and manners in such Cases there can be no cause to divide the Church as did the Novatians and Donatists But it was never his purpose to say that no case could happen in which it was not lawful for one Church to leave the Communion of another when it was so often done So still the point is wholly whether cause was given or not and not whether such outward and wilful Separation was made For undoubtedly however some would mince the matter Separate we did and that wilfully from the Church of Rome and chose rather than were forced to go out And upon those very grounds we still stand out and refuse to return The gross corruptions there maintained and not lurking and the fear of the loss of our souls in there continuing and much more thither returning What those are hath been even now touched and we here add that notwithstanding 't is confessed such senses are found of their doctrine and superstitious worship in some private authors amongst them which they offer at first to them they would seduce which may put persons into a possibility of their continuing without incurring damnation yet the Publick autority of that Church which I suppose they will call their Church having evermore of late years censur'd purged and expunged such more tollerable constructions and appeared for the most harsh and uncatholick there can be no great regard had to the fairer opinions Again it is not sufficient that a Church hath a true sense of Christian Faith if it alloweth and commendeth a false and a wicked sense 'T is little to the
may clear our selves thus First by putting a difference between the Church so united as is here supposed to rightly denominate it the Catholick or Universal Church and the Church disunited and divided long before any Reformation came to be so much as called for in these western Parts with attempts to put such desires into practice The division or Schism between the Western and Eastern Churches happened about the years 860 and 870 under Nicholas the first of Constantinople and Adrian the Second Bishop of Rome Where the guilt was is of another subject But the Schism rested not here but infested the Greek Church also subdividing the Armenian from the Constantinopolitan Now in such Case as this which is as much different from that of the Donatists who divided from all these entirely united together as may be who can conclude a Division from the Church so divided long before a Schism ipso facto because a Division was made from one Part of it calling itself indeed the Catholick Church Had therefore Reformers so divided from the Catholick Church united as did the Donatists it were more than probable that their division might from thence be known to be Schism without any more ado but it is certain it was quite otherwise And therefore some other Conviction must be expected besides that Characteristick And what must that be The Infallibility of any one Eminent Church which like a City on a Mountain a Beacon on a Hill a Pharus or Lighttower to such as are like to shipwrack their Faith may certainly direct them to a safe Station and Haven And all this to be the Church or See of Rome But alas though this were as desirable as admirable yet we have nothing to induce us to receive it for such but certain prudent inferences that such there is because such there ought to be for the ascertaining dubious minds in the truth and therefore so say they actually it is and lest humane reason should seem too malapert to teach what divine Autority ought to do therefore must the Scripture be canvas'd and brought against the best Presidents in Antiquity to the Contrary to Patronize such necessary Dogms The matter then returns to what we at first propounded viz. the Judging of Schism from the Causes and of the Causes from the Scriptures and the more Genuine and ancient Traditions of Christs Church before such Schism distracted the same These two things therefore we leave to be made Good by Romanists in which they are very defective First that there is any One Notorious infallible Judge actually constituted whereby we may certainly discern the Schismaticalness or Hereticalness of any one Church varying from the truth and this because It were to be wish'd a Judg were somewhere extant Secondly that what ever Security or Safety of Communion is to be found in the Visible Church properly and inseparably belongs to the Roman Church because some of the Ancients tell the time when it did not actually err But if our proofs be much more strong and apparent which declare that actually it doth err and wherein it doth err what an empty and bootless presumption must it needs be to invite to its communion upon her immunity from Erring or to condemn men of Schism for this only That they communicate not with it which is the bold method of Roman Champions THE Second BOOK OF THE FIRST PART CHAP. I. Of the Formal Object of Christian Faith Christ An Entrance to the treating of the Objects of Faith in Particular AND Thus far have we treated of Religion in General and specially of Christian Religion or Faith in its Rule the Scriptures Its Causes its Effects its Contraries its Subject the Church in its several Capacities Now we are briefly to treat of the Particular Object Christian Faith That as God is the true and proper Author of Christian Faith he is also the principal Object is most certain and apparent and is therefore by the Schools called the Formal Object that is either that which it immediately and most properly treats of or for whose sake other things spoken of besides God and Christ are there treated of For other Religions as well as Christian treat of God and the works of God but none treat of God or his works as consider'd in Christ his Son but the Christian For the two Greatest Acts which have any knowledge of of God being Creation and Redemption both these are described unto us in Holy Writ to be wrought by God through Christ Jesus as the Book of Proverbs and of Wisdom intimate to us when they shew how God in Wisdom made the Worlds Christ being the true Wisdom of the Father And more expresly in the entrance into the Gospel of St. John Joh. 1. 2 â— the Word of God being Christ is said to be in the beginning with God and All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made And St. Paul to the Ephesians affirmeth All things to be created by God Eph. 3. 9. Col. 1. 15 16. by Jesus Christ And to the Colossians speaking of Christ the Image of the Invisible God addeth For by him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in the Earth Visible and Invisible c. This therefore discriminates the treating of things natural in Christian Theologie from all other Sciences and Theologies that all is spoken of in relation to Christ Jesus Therefore having in the beginning of this Tract spoken of God in General as supposed rather than to be proved in Divinity viz. of his absolute Being his Unity being but one His Infiniteness being all things in Perfection and Power we are here to resume that matter and continue it by a more particular enquiry into the Nature Attributes Acts and Works of God here supposing what before we have spoken of the First notion of Gods Being and those immediately joined with them His Unity and Infiniteness which Infiniteness necessarily inferreth all other Attributes proper to him as of Power Prefence in all places and all times and Omniscience and therefore here we shall speak only of the Nature or Being of God in the more peculiar sense to Christians that is being distinct in Persons as well as One in Nature CHAP. II. Of the special consideration of God as the object of Christian Faith in the Vnity of the Divine Nature and Trinity of Person FROM the Unity or singularity of Gods nature as to number doth flow an Unity and Simplicity of that one Individual Nature in it self For as the Nature of God cannot be found in several and separate Persons subsisting by themselves as may the nature of man so neither ought we to imagin that there is multiplicity of natures constituting the same God For as there are not many Gods differing Generically as there are Bodies Celestial and Podies Terrestial and again of Terrestial some Bodies Elemental and uncompounded naturally Other Mixt and compounded and such are Fish Foul
amongst themselves as to have nothing more than a blind presumption and credulity that all is or will be well But what should we protract an argument of this nature any longer against them who are arrived to such an unnatural height of admiring fresh phrases inverted numbers of words when the matter is much the same that their own uttered conceptions to day affecting themselves and others wonderfully and lookt on as spiritual and divine tomorrow nay on the afternoon nay next hour shall be sentenced by themselves and auditors as an humane invention and injurious to God and Man Nay which is yet more The form which Christ gave his Disciples and left to all to be practised who would be his Disciples hath met with such hard entertainment amongst these illuminated ones that 't is well it escapes a reproach when it is rehearsed Tell them here how the ancient and eminent Saints and Servants of Christ did use it in terms and that daily and that frequently every day and that often in the service of the Church in publick you make the matter worse for them Tell them how diverse of our own holy Martyrs blessed God for what they saw that day wherein they were redeemed not only from blind obedience but worship had the comfortable opportunity of worshipping God according to this manner so contemned they stick a little and premise some small respect to such good men as would dye against Popery but for such devout and constant adherence to the Liturgy of the Church they have no good words for them But it must be either their unhappiness that they knew no better their weakness they were so fond of that their want of zeal for a thorow reformation and of light to see what they did so clearly as they at this day And many such pieces of tattle have they in readiness having neither truth nor judgment nor charity in them but declare plainly they who thus discourse and practise to the contrary are not of the same Religion with them as to speak what I hold my self bound to profess I am not of theirs who refuse such publick communion with our Church and hold it utterly unlawful to give so much as ear to them in their will-worship and especially such as use that way in dislike of opposition to the established And so let this end CHAP. IX A third abuse of the Worship of God by Sectaries in neglecting publick Prayers without Sermons censured That Prayer in a publick Place appointed for Gods Worship ought at all times to be offered to God Scripture and Vniversal Tradition require it above that in private Places The frivolousness of such Reasons as are used against it The Reasons for it WE come now to take notice of another instance of their injuriousness to the Glory of God in their vile and low opinion of publick Prayer in Gods House Whither it should seem they would scarce ever invite Christian people but for the Sermons sake And this they may do for their own sakes because they love to be encouraged as who doth not by a full appearance of Auditors For whoever saw a Sectary at prayers alone in the Church as was the manner and ought to be the practise at this day of devout Christians even upon all occasions to visit Gods house of Prayer to pour out their hearts before him to put up the private requests of their soul to God there as the properest place I am ashamed to hear and much more to utter what they have to say against this excellent practice 'T is out of one of their Common-places which fights against most of what they approve not amongst us and there 's an end of it It makes I am sure ten times more for the reputation of them whom they bitterly enough hate then they are aware of Shall all Jews be not only permitted but excited to frequent Gods house even at those hours of Prayer in which the publick Sacrifice was not offered Shall the Apostles of Christ after the Resurrection as did Peter and John Acts 3. 1. in express manner and without all peradventure the rest who are not expressed observe the publick place as well as common time of prayer Shall our Saviour Christ himself often resort to the Temple and that of the corrupt Jews to pray Nay shall this end be especially mention'd as to which the Temple was ordained by Solomon that men in private may offer 1 Kings 8. 38 39 c. up their Prayers to God And shall it not become Christians much more We know not of any publick prayers the Jews had in their Temple at all but he that shall prove they had any even at their offering Sacrifice which I neither positively deny nor know of but should gladly learn from others must I am confident prove it a Set form But every man likely pray'd for himself as his own heart and occasions moved him but commonly in a Set form For when I doubted of prayer in the Temple it was of any which was common publick or general as with Christians So that the principal end of Gods house then next to sacrificing was that particular men might come and worship God and pray to him And to this end the Temple doors were not then only opened when the Sacrifice was made and that ended clap'd to again presently to shut men out from praying there at any time of the day Nay the doors of the Gentile Temples were not shut up against commers in to worship And much less they of the ancient Christians when a publick and peculiar place was appointed for their worship whatever they were before If it were so that in the infant and extreamly persecuted state of the Church before Christian Religion dar'd to show its face abroad the doors of places appointed for Gods worship were shut from the time the service was over nay and at the very time of assembling will John 20. 19. they bring us back to that again We find it indeed to be their Negative use of Antiquity and Prescriptions That if it cannot be prov'd that such a thing was in use from the first beginning of Christians they hold themselves sufficiently exempted from the same but if it can they will not hold themselves bound to do it One of their fair dealings But we think it altogether sufficient in unquestionable Presidents to alledge them as imitable and binding that such were so early and general as could well consist with the safety and advantage of Christianity it self and its Professours And this we have beyond all doubt to favour and commend to us an open Church even when there were no publick prayers though that was daily and much less a Sermon which was rarely and yet God serv'd I speak modestly as well as any where since the Reformation and free and frequent access was had to the House of God to pray in This was continued in all Ages and all Christian Countries
from an hearty and diligent answer and reply to the Minister and thank themselves if ever they be denied the understanding the publique worship of God For is there not much reason that the service should forsake them who forsake that And that they who will not concern themselves reverently and devoutly as they ought to do in it should be made uncapable of so doing by such an invention as this I know they of the Sectaries as their writings testifie can be content the Common people should say Amen at the last as if St. Paul had indeed intended no more than that one word whereas in all probability he intended not that word at all in terms but such a constant and general suffrage as might be implied in that word and yet that word very laudably used in the conclusion of several prayers It may I should think put them to the blush to consider how herein they vary from the whole practice of ancient Churches as I could particularly show and give us no reason why they presume so sacrilegiously to defraud the People I have I confess met in some of their writings such an one as can scarce be wondred at enough coming from them For they say it may give some occasion Account of the Conference at c. to the Laity to invade the Office of the Minister Priest they would have said if they dar'd to speak so in Publique And is not this wonderful and ridiculous both that they who have by their own Principles quite destroyed the ancient Hierarchy of the Church so far as power would enable them and by their practice opened a way for all comers into the Ministry by defending Extraordinariness of Vocation should be more zealous than any Hierarchical persons in either Ancient or Modern days for the Dues and Rights of the Ministry This surely can have no good meaning as it hath no good reason seeing all that the Laity doth in such cases is only to follow and not to lead as Pastours do and to answer the call of others and not to give any law or word to any Is there any fear that the common people should ascend to the throne when they give their approbation by shout and applause to the Oration of their King made from thence There ciprocation of the people was never looked upon otherwise than a suffrage and an â—â—â—â—ance and argument of the inward affection born by them to the worship of God performed by the Priest and a proof of their communion with him So that very early in the Church it was constituted that no such publick Service should be performed in the Church where Consecrat Dist 1. there were not two at least to make answer to the Priest And as there was never before these prevaricating Sectaries any fear that the Deacon should invade the Priests office because he made answer to him so neither that the people should usurp either because they replyed to both as innumerable instances may prove take this amongst many which I could add to them already collected by Vicecomes In the Aethiopian Mass which bears the name of Joseph Vicecom Observ Eccl. Tom. 3. l. 1. c. 14. the Universal Canon thus speaks the Deacon Bow the knee People Before thee O Lord we bow it and praise thee The Assistent to the Priest saith as followeth Lord Lord c. The People replyes the same Then the Assistent of the Priest or rather Bishop for so the word Sacerdos and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly used signifies follow the Prayer Lord c. The Deacon says Arise to Prayer The People Lord have mercy upon us c. Thus and much more anciently Now for the credit of the Roman Church and much more for the Puritan who agrees with it herein hear what follows in Vicecomes This custom is long since antiquitated in the Latin Church a custom being brought in that some one of the number of Clerks should answer to the Priest in the sacred ministration of the Mass Which when it first began may well be doubted by reason of the scarcity of Writers who treat of it But if I may use my conjecture it was but a little before Beroaldus his dayes which Beroaldus I take to be him who lived about the year 1480 because he is the first that I can find who makes mention thereof in a Manuscript of Ceremonies which is extant in the Library of the Canons of the great Church c. By which it may be seen which are most popish the Church of England in its publick Liturgy commending and prescribing this ancient custom and laudable or Sectaries who have conspired with Papists to abolish it and exclude it out of their Service CHAP. XI Of the Circumstances of Divine Worship and first of the proper Place of Divine Worship called the Church the manner of worshipping there Of the Dedication of Churches to God their Consecration and the Effects of the same That no man can convert any part of the Church to his private use without profanation of it and Sacriledge Against the abuse of Churches in the Burial of dead Bodies erecting Tombs and enclosing them in Churches or Chancels Rich men have no more right to any part of the Church than the Poor The Common Law can give no Right in such Cases THERE are two very considerable circumstances in most Moral and Divine Actions Place and Time which have great influence upon the goodness and evil of an action And we have already so far touched the former as to assert the Excellencie of a Place Publick above the Private Closet or Domestick Rooms Now it is requisite we should enquire into the condition of such publick places as we call Temples or Churches omitting here Sic ergo appellamus Ecclesiam Basilicam quâ continetur populus c. Aug. Ep. 157. the various names and significations and acceptations as more proper for larger and learneder Treatises And yet we must not omit the distinction of Church into Proper and Improper as Austin doth thus use it For so saith he we call the Temple Basilica the Church wherein is contained the people which are truly called the Church as that by the name Church that is The place is called Gods Temple or Church because the company and congregation of Gods people which is properly called the Church doth there assemble themselves on the days appointed Homil. Ch. of Engl. Of the place c. p. 126. the people contained in the Church we should signifie the place which contains c. And to prevent all mistakes we confess we here mean that opprobriously called The Steeple-house as no bodies house but as we believe the House of God by institution and designation however it proves many times by Hereticks and Schismaticks intrusion and usurpation the House of the Enemy to God But the Kings Palace is still the Kings though Rebels and Usurpers possess themselves by violence and injustice of the same And that
a good while after So that the same difficulty is in reference to the Sabbath and it and is thus solved by Calvin himself That there were certain previous injunctions given Calvin Harmon in Pent. particularly and more rudely by God concerning the observation of certain Rites before that more exact delivery of them by God to Moses on Mount Sinai And as alwayes a day or time was allotted so likewise some special place separated from common uses as that called here the Tabernacle to the service of God For had there been any proper weakly day appointed by God before Moses surely we should have found some little mention thereof in the History of Moses from the Creation to his days but not a word of any such thing do we find to that purpose CHAP. XIII Of the Institution of the Lords Day That it was in part of Apostolical and partly Ecclesiastical Tradition Festival Days and Fasting derived unto us from the same Fountain and accordingly to be observed upon the like grounds Private Prayers in Families to the neglect of the Publique Worship unacceptable to God Of the Obligation all Priests have to pray daily according to their Office Of the Abuse of Holy days in the Number and unjustifiable occasions of them Of the Seven Hours of Prayer approved by the Ancient Church and our First Reformers Mr. Prinne's Cavils against Canonical Hours refuted THAT the Institution of the Lords day hath no known foundation from the Command of God or Christ may be collected from what is said But that the Apostles and Church Apostolical did by their example and practice commend it to following generations of Christians I acknowledge most true But still there remains a knot to be untied about the force of that Constitution whether it was only of Custom or Precept or all the Obligation proceeded from the decrees of the Church after the Apostles For direct Precept we find little or no Grounds in Scripture For Practice Apostolical and Custom upon that descending to posterity also the accession of the Laws Ecclesiastical and Imperial we make no scruple to acknowledge them to be very solemn and obligatory upon all good Christians But seeing all things practis'd by the Apostles are not Obligatory it will be worth the enquiry under what Capacity they so acted whether as Apostles or as Governors of the Church in such a large sense as might be communicable to their successours That it was not meerly and precisely an Apostolical Act to establish such a Festival seems to appear from the grounds found in the Law of Nature moving men to celebrate a day to God again that the first day of the week being the day of our Lord and Saviours Resurrection seems to be no other than Common Ecclesiastical Prudence as that which agreeth most with the End it self viz. The due commemoration of Christs resurrection on that day but that Christ should be so Commemorated and God so glorified seems to me to be specially Apostolical and so Divine that it is not alterable by the Counsel or Decrees of the Church any time after from whence may conveniently be reconciled the opposite opinions of both School-men and Canonists some of whom have asserted the divine Right of the Lords day and others the Ecclesiastical or Canonical only For that a day be Festivally observed to God is Natural that on such a Festival or Thanksgiving day Christ should be magnified and God praised is Apostolical but that on the First day of the week Christian Prudence and the necessary power of the Church may seem to suffice Which appeareth from the manner of celebrating the Christian Sabbath which hath been always left to the Authority and wisdom of the Church varying according to occasions given For that Christians very anciently met to treat of divine matters to communicate to celebrate the Eucharist and to sing Psalms Hymns and Spiritual Songs Justine Justin Apol. 2. Tertul. Apologer Martyr and Tertullian and the famous Epistle of Pliny witness And to this end they had a vacation from all worldly servile matters as many proofs of Antiquity demonstrate And for the dignity of this day it was that on it and none other Bishops were to be consecrated by the constitution of Leo 1. And what are the Prerogatives of this First Leo 1. Distinct 75. c. 1. Quod die c. day of the week are explained at large by the Ancient Fathers and Councils here not to be rehearsed From this Fountain of Ecclesiastical power resident in the Church springeth the Act of instituting other days to the Glory and Praise of God of two sorts viz. days of Humiliation and Exultation or joy For it is certain that after it was agreed upon that Christs Resurrection should be weekly celebrated it was consented to also that a Yearly Thanksgiving should be kept for the same which was the Christians Passover and our Easter day is immemorially practised and without interruption derived to this present age And therefore as well because it is the greatest matter of joy that at any time befell the Church of Christ as because it regulateth other principal Feasts and Fasts of the Church as lastly because thence is plainly inferred a power in the Church of ordaining Feasts and Fasts to the worship of God it is called by the Ancient The Mother of Feasts And surely upon this the Fathers of the Church produced many other Daughter-Feasts not all in a year nor an age but according to their power to maintain and defend them which was very difficult for them to do as becomed under Gentile persecution who were most severe against such Celebrities instituted by Christians to the overthrow and contempt of Gentile worship which according to the Light of nature consisted much in this as Seneca Legum Conditores Festùm instruerunt dies ut ad hilaritatem homines cogerent c. Seneca de Tranquil Aninai c. 15. hath said in these words The Founders of Laws ordained Festival days to the end that men might meet publiquely in Jollity puting some moderation to Labours as necessary for them These Gentile Institutions prevailing not only to Idololatrical service but corruption of manners contrary to nature it self The Ancient Fathers of the Church knew no better Antidote against such poison than to introduce Christian Festivals whereby all the natural and Civil benefit of Vacation from Labours friendly conversation and such like might be enjoyed and due worship and praise be given unto God in Christ Jesus And therefore Theodoret. Serm. 7. de Sacrificiis Theodoret with other Fathers is not ashamed to profess as a very laudable and religious occasion of Christian Feasts That they succeeded the Idolatrous and lewd Feasts of the Gentiles which some but in vain would turn against the use of them But they stand upon surer foundations than to be blown down with the wind of vain doctrines blustering against them For First as is said Nature it self directs to them
not Composito viz. before some one place be determined and dedicated especially to his worship and not after or from the contempt of Gods house or from dislike of the Publique worship or from admiration of our own Gifts and a delight to show them or lastly a design to breed a faction in private against the publique profession I know likewise and grant that several just Impediments there are to the publique service and in such Cases most necessary it is that Gods service should be performed within doors But it is not necessary that this should be performed as the affected manner is in a service quite distinct from the publique yea often quite contrary What men speak in prayer and spiritual devotion between God and their own souls privately they are the only proper judges of and Christian not Liberty only but piety requires they should so be But surely when Men speak before others as well as God and there is nothing so much as the Place which diversifies the worship in a Family from that in the Church that of the Church is most proper And not to say any thing of the Laity no Priest or Minister of our Church ought upon common occasions to officiate in Prayers in Private Families any otherwise than he is bound to do in Publique especially if they to whom he officiates and himself have not performed their duties in that manner before in Publique which when they have then only is the proper place for another free-will offering unprescribed I shall not here insist on the obligation all Priests have to recite their Office as I could but only give this general reason That every Priest is ordained of God by man as a constant intercessour between God and Man in behalf of the People and especially them of whom he hath a Pastoral charge and not only the nature of his Office but condition of his Benefice requires that this he doth constantly or daily twice the old rule being very reasonable viz. Beneficium requirit officium the temporal benefits received by the Clergy require spiritual office The first is daily and so should the second also be And this is no such innovation as the contrary that the Priest should have nothing to do but when he preaches or that he should pray and offer to God as liketh best every single Christian which is impossible and ridiculous and an intolerable presumption in any man to prescribe to their Minister how he should minister to them when he is lawfully prescribed his duty before and if he were not he ought to prescribe to others not of the same order with himself and not take Laws from them which is the corruptest and modernest of all Innovations But the Recitation of the Office by the Priest is a constitution of above a thousand years standing according Barthol Gavantus in Rubricam Brev. Tom. 2. Sect. 2. c. 5. Tit. 1. Compilatio Chronolog ad An. 490. to the account of them who set it Jowest Sigebert in his Chronicle affirmeth it began in the year 540 as Gavantus out of him But I find another Chronologer to place it in the year 490 saying Anastasius the fifty second Pope ordained that no Clergyman should omit his Divine Office the office of the Mass or Eucharist only excepted And therefore with excellent wisdom and advice it is in these words prescribed by the Church before the Liturgy All Priests and Deacons are to say daily the Morning and Evening Prayer either privately or openly not being let by sickness or some other urgent cause And surely as there is an Obligation upon Priests to use these prayers there must be implied an obligation in all the true sons of the Church to be present at them and to joyn with the Priest Which because it cannot be expected that all men well inclin'd should be always in a capacity to do the Priest doubtless may comply with the exigencies of others so it be not to the pre judice of the Publique And now considering also the many extraordinary days of Festivals and ordinary days of Fasting wherein especial obligation lies upon all Good Christians so far as they can without justifiable impediment to appear in the house of God and worship him not omitting their personal and private devotions at home and comparing the same with the practice of Puritans who are so strangely deluded with the great vertue of a Sermon and extemporary prayers at home that it goes quite against the hair if not conscience of them to visit Gods house upon the account of prayers and adoration only let it be fairly judged whether they have such cause to insult over our Religion and not be ashamed of their gross defects and dissonancy from all that ever professed Christianity before their days Will their bold pretences to Giftedness think they in their rare way of worship cover these foul blemishes from God when they do not from men But this upon the occasion of the contrary abuse of times in order to Religion wherein the Româ—n Church hath exceeded and departed from the practice of the Ancient Church which indeed had some other solemn times of worship before the fourth Century besides Sundays and Easter day but very Erasinus in Matth. 11. v. 30. Id. in Romanos cap. 14. 5. few Truly and learnedly saith Erasmus upon Matthew The Age of Hieromne knew very few Feasts except the Lords day And in another place he writes thus With the Jews some days were prophane and some days holy but with the Christians every day is equally this he speaks according to the sense of Origen not excepting the Lords day holy Not that Festivals are not to be observed which the holy Fathers instituted afterward to the more commodious assembling of Christian People and to the worship of God but that they were very few to wit The Lords day Easter and Pentecost and some such like reckoned up by Hieromne But I know not whether it be expedient to add Feast upon Feast especially since we see the manners of Christians to come to that pass that so much reason as there was of old to institute them for pieties sake so great seems there to be to antiquitate them Thus he And this hath been the opinion of the Church of England and the course taken in the Reforming the abuse in the number of them And a second abuse hath been pared off by us seen in the end of them which is rather to the honour of Saints than of God or Christ among Papists I know at the long run as we may so speak they ascribe in their doctrine all to God but not half of them have this sense and little or nothing many times comes from them but what is directed to the Saint they then worship Bishop Whitgift doth distinguish ours from theirs many ways This one shall suffice at present out of him Neither Whit gifts Answer to the admonition pag. 175. are they Holy days called by the name
it was not here cannot be exercised but according to that Light and that Rule given them which is the will of God which perceiving so fully and in which being so absolutely satisfied they cannot be said to pray that it might be done so much as admire and continually adore the doing of it without interposing by way of particular intercession as we out of ignorance do here on earth for the inclining or averting of God from any thing they see in him future or rather present They have therefore indeed greater Charity as to the purity and intenseness of it which is Charity Triumphant but not Militant according to which last only they are said to assist us by their prayers And yet this I may add That as the intercession of Saints in Heaven for us is no wayes to be allowed to be vocal or proper as on earth nor by any special act direct to God on the behalf of their Friends and Fellow-members on earth for the reason now given so may they not be denyed all influence upon God in his dispensation of grace and benefits to us on earth as God doth please to consider their Labor of Love not only for themselves but fellow-members here below And whereas one of the best testimonies alledged to prove special offices of Angels done before God in behalf of the Militant Members of Christ here is taken out of the Revelation where S. John prayeth or saluteth Rev. 4. rather with a Pastoral and Apostolical benediction the seven Churches of Asia saying Grace be unto you and peace from him which is and which was and which is to come and from the seven spirits which are before Tobit 12. 15. his Throne It may sufficiently be answered with that of Tobit c. 12 15. where mention is made of Seven Angels before the Throne were this autority greater with us than it is That we doubt not but God doth make use of the Ministry of Angels to impart his blessings to men on Gen. 48. 16. earth For this implys the benediction of Jacob given to Joseph The Angel which redeemed me from all evil bless the Lads but this infers not either that Jacob did then or we should now address our selves to Angels but as he certainly there so ought we to seek of God only that he would by his servants the holy Angels preserve and bless us Nevertheless I according to my former Rule interpret the seven spirits in the Revelation to be none other than the seven Governors or Bishops of the seven Churches of which St. John speaks immediately before whom in a Vision St. John saw to stand before the golden Altar or proper place of worship and from thence blessing the people But no more of this Agreeable to this is the doctrine of making Images and Reliques of Azorius ubi sâ—p Saints objects of divine worship too and that though not for their own sakes yet for Gods sake to which I need say no more than is already spoken of so worshiping Saints But for their sakes who can be content with less honor done unto Cassan Consult them it may suffice to say in few words what Cassander hath observed before me It is certain that at the beginning of the preaching of the Gospel for a good time especially in Churches there was no use of Images at all as Clemens and Arnobius witness And this was above two hundred years after Christ Afterward Pictures were admitted into Churches with great simplicity and innocency yea benefit to the vulgar Christian whose book Gregory not unfitly called them as expressing the historical part of Christian Faith and no more worshipped then than Papists worship their Bibles now And that Images should be erected at all or being constituted that they should be worshipped at all or brought into Temples there was never any admirer or adorer of them could pretend to show out of Scripture But the second commandment against all Images in order to worship or reverence hath prov'd such a bone that it hath broke the teeth of all that would break it Erasmus in his Catechism stateth the cause thus Before the coming of Christ when the Israelites were very rude and dull all Imagery was prohibited them for fear of Idolatry But now since all Paganism is extinguished by the Light of the Gospel the danger is not the same and if any superstition should lurk still in the minds of Christians it may easily be driven thence by holy Doctrine Until the age of St. Hierom were certain men of sound Religion which would endure no Images at all in Churches either painted or graven or wrought no not of Christ I suppose by reason of the Anthropomorphites yet by little and little Where are they then that with so much importunity and little reason call for the very time precisely wherein corruptions entered into the Church or else will not be satisfied the use of Images entred into Churches And perhaps there would be no undecency if in such places as God is served in solemnly no images should be placed saving the Image of Christ crucified But Pictures if they were duly used besides the honest pleasure they bring conduce very much to memory and understanding of history Yea the learned many times see more in Pictures than Letters and are more vehemently affected And as the Ancient Church prohibited all books not canonical to be used in Churches so perhaps were it not amiss if all kinds of Pictures of things not contained in Holy Scripture were excluded To this effect and almost in these very words he To which we must so far assent as to yield a possible good effect of Information and Devotion arising from such outward occasions as Pictures yet considering God hath no where laid any obligation upon us to profit by such helps as he hath to advance our selves in knowledg and Christian vertues by consulting Holy Scriptures and how great and manifest peril of falling into Idolatry by them there is it were more pious and safe to interdict the falling down before as well as to them man being naturally as prone to Idolatry as to unlawful carnal copulation But whereas Erasmus proceedeth to defend Images because God in the Old Law commanded to make Cherubins and Seraphins about the Ark Tertullian answereth That so may we too when we have the like command For though God ties us up strictly to his Laws he doth not so tye himself but when he pleases he may give us a dispensation But besides Vid. Phil. Judaeum Legat. ad Caium p. 801. Gen. this such Images were altogether hid from the peoples eyes and much more use being in the Holiest of Holies and we speak now of such as are exposed to view and reverence And as common as this instance is amongst the great Doctors of Rome it makes little to their purpose Again Erasmus That which is before God meaning that Thou shalt have no other God before me is made equal to God
of St. Paul that 1 Cor. 14. 35. women should ask their husbands and learn at home And St. Chrysostom often exhorts his hearers to consider of what they hear in publique at home and meditate of the Scriptures at home which was either privately with every mans self or to such as could not have access to the Publique And this publique way of Preaching had for a long time no prescribed subject but what the Bishop thought proper or seasonable for instruction or Exhortation was uttered by him But in Saint Bafils Nazianzens Chrysostoms and Augustines Sermons we find mention made of the Scriptures read before and Sermons made by way of Exposition of them after the manner that Epistles and Gospels are in use with us and commended as proper subjects to instruct Christian People the one giving us matter of Instruction from the history of the Life Doctrine Miracles and Death of our only Saviour Christ and the other principally moving us to the exercise of all Christians Graces and Vertues conformable to our calling and knowledg of God and Christ Far were our Christian Ancestors and well they might from the modern perswasion of Erratick Christians that the Sermon was more necessary than the Scriptures or that reading of the Scriptures was not Preaching or that Catechizing and instructing Novices in Christian Religion was not Preaching I confess I am of opinion that there is a distinction to be made between a Preaching and a Sermon taking here a Sermon for an Oration made by un-Christian as well as Christian Orators to inform and perswade to what they aimed at in such speeches And no instance can be given of any Orator Gentile or Christian for many hundred years that presumed to speak to the People out of his own writings rehearsed to them Poets were wont in Publique to recite their verses in Publique out of their book by reading and therefore could never in my judgment comply with the very modern practise of it there being no reason why it should be more tolerated in Divine than Humane Orations or why setting the custome of the place aside which must needs be corrupt and absurd as it is singular and new it is less ridiculous to rehearse a Divine Oration which we call a Sermon by reading than Humane I am sure the ancient Fathers whom we pretend to imitate and all modern Churches without exception of any but our own abhor it And are not at all sensible of the vulgar arguments weight to justifie it viz. because the matter is the same And what difference is there between a Sermon deliver'd without reading and with it if the hearer sees him not or looks not on him that Preaches But it is very expedient the Hearers eye should be attent as well as his ear and yet that is not all might be said neither but all I will here say But undoubtedly they erregregiously on the other hand who imagine such sermoning as we now speak of is only Preaching according to the mind of the Apostle and that which is the only proper means of Salvation We are not saved but by Faith we cannot believe but by hearing we cannot hear without a Preacher as the Apostle most undeniably concluding from thence the absolute necessity of Preaching But what Preaching When I said Recitation of a Speech concerning divine matters and our Salvation was not properly a Sermon or Oration unless pronounced after the universal Law of all Orators which is to denominate things aright I said not that it was not Preaching taking preaching from the end of it and not so much from the form The end is undoubtedly knowledg first of the Christian Faith The next end is Assent to that Doctrine of Faith The third end is Obedience to the Faith The last end is the Salvation of such a true believer Now all these may without doubt be obtained without the Forms of Oratory and by so many wayes as we are made capable of these great ends so many wayes are we preacht to And therefore reading to and writing to another as the Apostles did their their Epistles to several Churches or any communication may be called the word of God and Preaching as really as the most Oratorical Sermon Though still considering the nature of man and the ordinary course of perswading settled all the world over I cannot grant that such wayes are so effectual or operative upon the partakers of the same instructions By what is said may be gathered what I propounded at first viz. in what sense Preaching and Hearing may be reduced to the Worshipping of God and become part of his Service For taking the service of God strictly and properly neither of both of them are such but they are a necessary foundation to build our worship of God on They have of late dayes amongst Sectaries been called The Means in so high and signal sense as if they need say no more and they comprehended all Religious acts eminently which is nothing so They are indeed The Means and that of Faith worship and Salvation But worshipping of God in prayer and praises c. and obeying his will and living godly and soberly in this present world are much more effectual and excellent Means of our Salvation than they They are but Means to the more excellent means of Salvation as Faith Hope and Charity and therefore must know their place and keep their distance and Mr. Thorndyck Epilog l. 3. c. 25. their limits too For as an excellent person hath at large showed the vain abuse of this preaching by Presbyterians which shall cause me to contract here Preaching is not so much as the Means of Salvation unless it contains it self within the limits of the doctrine of the Church To the confirmation of whose opinion I shall here give St. Austins Judgment Nobis autem ad certam regulam loqui fas est ne verbâ—rum licentia etiam rebus quae his significantur impiam gignat opinicnem Aug. Civit. Dei l. 10. c. 23. who would have not only limits set to the matter but manner of preaching too by obliging to the phrase of the Church saying We Christians must speak by certain Rule lest by a License taken of wording it a wicked opinion be begot of the things themselves signified thereby And concerning this we know St. Paul hath thus provided in his directions to Timothy Hold fast the Form of sound words which thou hast heard of me in Faith and Love which is in Christ Jesus It was very well known to the ancient Church that if Preachers kept not themselves in the compass of sober words and phrases to which faithful ears had been accustomed though their new Forms and phantastique phrases might possibly admit of a fair construction yet naturally they tended to the dissetling of mens minds from the truth and drawing them to novelty of doctrine and worship By which means as also by affected postures gestures pronunciation and such like carrying with them an
to them not only because it is a Liturgy prescribed but because it is too long and painful or that which prayes what it pleases and as long and short as it pleases and with what lazy crude matter it pleases never more troubling themselves or being sollicitous what or how they shall pray extemporary than he is or needs be that reads all out of the book And surely it is less trouble thus to pray without book than with it to any man that will give his mind to it or will boldly enough offer at it And for their Sermons what have they in them to commend them for elaborate or the Speaker of them for laborious Have they not fallen into admiration of one kind of order and method in preaching and which with so much Superstition they cleave to as neither to care nor dare to vary that half their Sermons are made before they begin For the Form they have constantly by them and that shall serve for all texts and occasions whatever and that brings the matter in naturally almost and so neither their invention nor memory are so pained or hard put to it that they should need to boast much of their painful Preaching Surely then it must be their preaching twice a day that they have to trust to for being accounted deservedly painful Preachers But if we consider how they that preach twice spread and beat out their metal and so slip it into two pieces we shall perceive we have but two Six pences for a Shilling which may make more noise and number but weigh no more than one And in truth upon tryal considering likewise what constant Repetitions and Introductions they make to their second Sermon it will be found that to pass to a new subject on Afternoons by Catechizing and treating for half an hour on the principal heads of Christian doctrine and worship as it is more profitable and to the edification of the Generality who are not puff'd up in their fleshly mind with the name of preaching and the place from whence it comes the Pulpit which is their High Altar so is it more difficult to the Performer of it Now these things being so that there is as much work cut out by order of the Church for Ministers to finish as ordinarily one mans strength of Body and Spirit can go through with not prejudicing the health of him which God no ways requires how spiteful and groundless is that charge viz. That we have a lazy Ministry which they promise to out do when they are uppermost If these Rules and Prescriptions of the Church which will certainly keep him from Idleness that observes them more than their Discipline will be not practised as becometh themselves that accuse are in fault chiefly who have shamefully traduced and opposed the same and to gratifie whom negligence hath been countenanced too far in these things And so are they whoever they be that can content themselves with the titles dignitys and profits of Governors of the Church and withdraw themselves from their bounden duty and service to it in seeing better execution done I know their Apology is the strong hand of the Adversary opposing their endeavors in that behalf which would have justifyed and vindicated them much more than now it doth if they had not given evidence of their little sincerity and zeal for Religion in those things which were free and easie for them to do and for which they might have thanks on all sides But Prudence forsooth hath been so infinitely cryed up and magnified and that consisting chiefly in doing nothing and offending no body but God Almighty that Piety and zeal are no better then incivility and Pragmatiqueness the Rule most sacredly observed by them being this We do not do it therefore it ought not or need not be done And thus while we are doubting what Government we should have and how we should be ruled are we made subject to the Triumvirate of Pride Folly and Laziness nothing being done without their consent and approbation But this belongs more properly to the next place CHAP. XVII The Fifth General head wherein the Exercise of the Worship of God doth consist Obedience That Obedience is the end of the Law and Gospel both That the service of God principally consisteth therein Of Obedience to God and the Church The Reasons and Necessity of Obedience to our Spiritual as well as Civil Governors The frivolous cavills of Sectaries noted The Severity of the ancient and latter Greek Church in requiring Obedience The Folly of Pretenders to Obedience to the Church and wilfully slight her Canons and Laws more material than are Ceremonies THE Third and last General head wherein consisteth the proper worship of God is Obedience The distinction of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristot the Philosopher of Practise into Acts and Facts holdeth very good in Religion as well as Nature or Morality For besides the Contemplative part which imploies it self in the knowledg and consideration of the doctrine of Faith there must of necessity be a Practical or Operative Part which is the end of the former as is apparent out of holy Scriptures as well as books of Philosophers For we read in Deuteronomy how that Obedience was the end of the Deut. 4. 5. Commandments given to the Israelites Behold I have taught you Statutes and judgments even as the Lord my God commanded me that ye should do so in the Land whither ye go to possess it Keep therefore and do them for this 6. is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of all Nations And in the beginning of the fifth Chapter propounding the Law and Commandements given them by God it followeth That thou mightest fear the Lord Chap. 6. 1 2. thy God and keep all his Statutes and Commandements which I command thee Thou and thy Son and thy Sons Son all the dayes of thy life and that thy dayes may be prolonged Hear therefore O Israel and observe to do it that it may be well with thee Which condition and injunction is constantly annexed unto the Promises of Life and Salvation in the Gospel We read indeed frequently of being justifyed by Faith and saved by Faith and in what sense we have explained in its proper place viz. as it implies the works and fruits of Faith together with the acts of believing and no otherwise which is plainly affirmed by the Apostle to the Hebrews speaking Heb. 5. 9. of Christ our High Priest who being made perfect he became the author of Salvation to all them that obey him Sometimes Obedience is in Scripture put for believing it self because Faith is a principal act of the will bowing and yielding to God assent as in the Acts of the Apostles We are his witnesses of these things and so is also the Holy Ghost whom God Acts. 5. 32. hath given to them that obey him That is surely to them that did believe that testimony
A Course of Divinity OR AN INTRODUCTION To the Knowledge of the True Catholick Religion Especially as Professed by the CHURCH OF ENGLAND In two Parts The one containing The Doctrine of Faith The other The Form of Worship By MATTHEW SCRIVENER LONDON Printed by Tho. Roycroft for Robert Clavil in Little Brittain MDCLXXIV THE ENTRANCE FOR the better conceiving and judging of this ensuing Treatise I have held it necessary Christian Reader to premise and propound to thy consideration these two things principally viz. The Occasions me thereunto moving and the manner of proceeding in it One Occasion given me was the multitude and variety of the like Books set forth by other Churches whereby not only the persons under them were trained up in the Knowledge and Faith professed there but the minds of many of our Church were prepossessed and their manners swayed by such Doctrines which seemed to me as forreign in nature as place to those of our Church and the Ancient I could have here given the Reader the names of above fourty Tractates of this nature many of which have been translated into the English Tongue to the corrupting of weaker judgments And not so much as the Christians of New-England have been wanting to the Interest of their Religion so far as to â—mit so advantagious a Work but by John Norton Teacher as he calls himself of the Church at Ipswich in New-England have collected certain Principal Heads of Divinity into a Body called The Orthodox Evangelist And as the great number of forreign Books have incited me so the Paucity of the like in and from our Church hath no less emboldened me to undertake this I am prevented by Industrious Mr. Baxter in giving any account of such who have made attempts this way and what hath been done by them without bringing their design to desired issue Only that excellently Learned Person Mr. Thorndyck passed over by him in his declining years hath given greater demonstrations of his zeal and learning in behalf of the English Church than any extant before him in one continued Body purposing a Review in the Latin Tongue wherein he intended to have more clearly expressed his meaning in some things of which it might be said as of St. Pauls writings they were hard to be understood and he himself saw to be wrested to evil ends and senses but his declining body and years would not suffer him to accomplish so good a Work What Mr. Baxer himself hath performed in his late large Volume I shall not give my censure but how well he is qualified for such a Work I may presume to give the Reader in the words of Esâ— Baxterus câ—â—is desiinatis sententiâ—s minimè omnium hominun addictus ut qui non plus faveat Presbyteriants quam Independentibus nec est infensus Hierarchicis sed medius dubiusque partibus nisi in causa Dei sanctitatis vitae Ludovicus Molinaeus Patroni p. 12. a great admirer of him Baxter saith he is of all men least addicted to any resolute opinions being one that favoureth not more the Presbyterians than the Independents neither is he sharp against the Episcopal Party but between them and doubtful what side to take except in the cause of God and holiness of Life The greatest part of which Character is but too true being as much with me as if he had said He were of no Religion at all For however Beza and Cartwrights opinions of a certain and definite Discipline Essentially requisite to a Church as a Church is to Christian Religion be by Puritans laid aside for the present and like embers buried up in the Ash-heap till they shall rise again next day and kindle a new fire and now nothing but Get Christ Purity of Ordinances is notorious amongst them to the Vulgar yet when people are deceived by that they call Pure and Powerful Preaching of Christ into new Societies of their own Manufacture then presently doth most apparent Reason and inevitable Necessity constrain them to invent and impose new Covenants and Bonds to conserve them in their new Fraternities contrary altogether to that General Liberty before propounded and promised them No more than doth the charm of Christian Liberty sound in their ears No more of the free use of Indifferent things so contrary to the Decrees and Practise of a Church but then come into credit again such sayings as these There must be Order There must be Government There must be unity in the Church dealing herein with poor simple Christians as men do with their horse they would take up carrying in one hand provender which they show him and make a great noise with and behind them in the other hand a bridle to hold him fast to them and ride him as they please And if Mr. Baxter be of no regulated determinate Society or Church adheres to no particular Communion submits to no Government nor Governours in special but to all or any as it should seem be must bear it as well as he can when he bears himself not out of passion or envie at his new and singular device of going to heaven but justice and reason censur'd for a man of no Religion at all or if any of his own making which teaches him to persevere in that fond and haughty design he once had when he took upon him to top his Brethren of the Ministery in the Western Parts and to frame Grounds and Aphorisms for both Civil and Ecclesiastical Politie of his own with as little judgment and humility as safety to the Church and State as if he had aim'd at nothing so much as to be according to forreign Phrase and Presidents an Extraordinary Pastor without any Original or Rule but from himself but failing of this he now thinks it best to become an Extraordinary Sheep of all and no fold writing Books as uncertain and contrary as himself on all sides and for all Palates as if he had found out the Universal Character for Religions like to that of Languages in which all men doing as he wou'd have them shou'd agree in going to Heaven And now all that lately and most officious and serviceable method of mounting our selves and crushing and trampling on the necks of others and them our Governours by most unjust and cruel acts most false and bitter language must be laid aside and thrown overboard as the Turks did their Cemiters when they lost the day at the battle of Lepanto not because they liked them not but because they could do them no more service and least they should come into the Christians hands and be used against them So indeed Sectaries now-a-dayes call for modesty and moderation on all hands casting away that unchristian language which stood them in so much stead against them they resolved to destroy not without horrible Success And yet we see while they call so charitably for moderation and would have no revilings of them that differ in opinions only their churlish nature and
to P. 14â— which they have no just title themselves being out of Christ This is gross enough and dangerous 19. In the Article of our Creed Sitting at the right hand P. 174. of God signifieth the inferiority of the Mediator in respect of the Father This wants a lusty grain of Salt 20. The vow of single Life is a snare or as the noose in the On Gal. 1. v. 7. haltar to strangle the Soul 21. The third Succession is of Doctrine alone and thus our Ministers succeed the Apostles and this is sufficient It is sufficient for the Peoples not Gods Ministers 22. If in Turkie or America or elsewhere the Gospel should be Id Gal p. 196 197. received by the counsel and perswasion of private persons they shall not need to send into Europe for Consecrated Ministers but they have power to choose their own Ministers from within themselves Because where God giveth the word he giveth the power also 23. The Child of God falling into persecution and denying Id. Gal. 1. v. 22. Christ is not guilty to condemnation because c. 24. If as Eusebius saith in his Chronicle Peter sate Bishop of Rome twenty five years then Peter lived in breach of the express commandment of God for so long time because the Jews were his special charge Absurd and untrue 25. We are born Christians if our Parents believe and not P. 235. made so in Baptism 26. The Sacraments are said to apply Christ in that P. 242. they serve to confirm Faith whose office it is to apply c. 27. All the works of Regenerate men are sinful and in the P. 381. rigor of justice deserve damnation Well therefore may he say this of unregenerate men but neither is it true so far of one or other but the not doing of such good works is much more damnable It is true properly that they do not of themselves save but not so that they damn 28. There be three parts of Penance Contrition of heart Id. Papist cannot go beyond a reprobate p. 396. Confession of the mouth Satisfaction in the deed All these three Judas performed 29. As long as a man hath his Conscience to accuse him of Ibid. sin before God he is in a state of Damnation as St. John saith 1 Ep. 2. 10. St. John saith not so 30. The Church of Rome teacheth that Original Sin is done Ib. p. 397. Advertisement to the Roman Church p. 622. Vol. 1. away in Baptism This is called a damnable Error as if only the Ch. of Rome held so and it were not unanimously held by the Fathers 31. That we believe the Catholick Church it follows that the Catholick Church is invisible 32. We esteem of Repentance only as a fruit of Faith and Reform Catholick p. 615. the effect or efficacy of it is to testifie the Remission of our sins and our reconciliation before God 33. There is a twofold conversion Passive and Active Ib. p. 613. 614. Passive is an Action of God whereby he converteth man being yet unconverted These are the Heterodox Dogmes which Mr. Perkins suckt in from Calvins Divinity upon whose sleeve he seem'd to have pin'd his faith notwithstanding Scripture is so vehemently pretended which will warrant none of them And by these credulously assented to and preached contrary to the mind of our Church by vulgar and lazie Divines who would take no care or pains to look into the Scriptures or the Doctrine of the Ancient Church but through such mens Spectacles have diversity of opinions been bred in the common peoples mind to their dislike of their Governours and at last such a rupture as hath wasted and almost consumed us But here I am to give the curious Reader notice least I may seem to mis-report any thing quoted out of Mr. Perkins according to the pages that upon examining them and comparing them on this occasion I find what I took no notice of at first reading of his Works that I followed two several Editions of his Works in Folio the one of the year 1626 and the other of the year 1631 which not having by me I could not rectifie but doubt not but they are to be found in one of them And now because I perceive the Papists triumph when they can find such blemishes in our Church and charge it with all these and such like which they may find among dissenters I shall set down likewise their principal accusations as I find them collected and summ'd up by Fitz-Simons Henricus Fitzsimon Brittannomachia minist l. 2 c. 3. and the rather because he professes to have taken them out of a much more wise and learned Adversary to us then himself Alanus Copus otherwise called Nicolas Harpsfield and they are these following 1. The first Error he layes to our charge is that we hold There are only two Sacraments This we stand to as commonly explained by our Church 2. Infants belong to the people of God before they are Baptized This indeed is the opinion of Sectaries which Perkins before cited might have led them into but not of our Church nor the Ancient Church as may appear most evidently from the testimony of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. Haerer Fab. l. 5. c. 28. Theodoret who in the behalf of the Catholick Church absolutely disowns unbaptized persons as Sons of God though they believed and embraced the Catholick Doctrine telling us that the Church would by no means suffer such to say the Lords Prayer accounting it an horrible thing for any to call God Father before he was baptized speaking thus This Prayer we teach not such who are not initiated but such as are partakers of that Mystery For none that are not initiated into that Mystery dares say Our Father which art in Heaven c. not having received that Grace of Adoption 3. The true Body of Christ is not in the Eucharist nor any thing but the substance of Bread Sure this fierce Accuser forgets himself Do we not also hold the substance of Wine remains in the Eucharist as well as that of bread Nay do we not profess * Christs Church Câ—techism Body and Bloud are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lords Supper And can they there be received unless they be there but the art of such rampant ignorant and malicious Factors for the Roman Church ever consisted principally in wilful bungling and by false stating of the differences between us and them to beguile the weak and unwary 4. That the Communion under both kinds is necessary It is as necessary under both as under one The contrary is the Sacrilegious Error of the Romanists 5. A Priest may not communicate alone Another grievous Error that we cannot indure Non-sense nor to see Christs institution bafled by such a ridiculous Communion unknown to Antiquity 6. It is unlawful to reserve or elevate the Eucharist Not simply as the Ancient Church did
Church hath not denyed that Liberty and where they have made no Vow to the contrary bereaving themselves of that Liberty 33. There is no Purgatory 'T is little less then Heretical to Artic. Chur Eng. 22. affirm there is in the Roman sense 34. There is no external Sacrifice Most true in a strict proper sense 35. Devils cannot be driven away by Holy Water and the Sign of the Cross By these alone we have few or none Instances in the Ancient Church that Devils were cast out of the Possessed But many we find and those most authentique and undeniable whereby it appears that the ancient Christians even to St. Chrysostoms dayes did exorcise or cast out Devils by Prayers and Humiliation with which were used the sign of the Cross but not so ancient was Holy Water to that purpose And though we look on this as the Gift of Miracles formerly more general and effectual then now-a-days it is any where honestly to be found yet neither do we deny such power absolutely nor hold such unnecessary Rites utterly unlawful to be used 36. It is unlawful and an horrible wickedness for a man to erect the Image of Christ in Christian Temples No such matter The wickedness consists in giving it the accustomed Worship in the Church of Rome And thus have I given certain Instances of the injurious dealings of both extreams against us as by themselves stated it being my design in the ensuing Treatise to state rather then largely dispute matters more equally and thereby to discover the frauds and falsities current against us I shall now requite their pains in collecting falsly and fraudulently the opinions of our Church by a sincere and faithful proposing of the Heretical and pestilent Dogmes of the Roman Church as I find them laid down and maintain'd by Bellarmine that so even common reason if not sense of indifferent Christians may judge which Church holds most contrary Doctrines to Gods and Mans Laws 1. The Books by us called Apocryphal and so proved by Bellarm. De Verho Dei l. 1. c. 7. the general Consent of the Church in all Ages are Canonical and properly Divine 2. It is neither convenient nor profitable that the Scriptures L. 2. c. 15. 16. or Prayers of the Church should be in the Vulgar Tongue 3. All things necessary to Faith and Holy Life are not contain'd L. 4. c. 3. in the Scriptures but Traditions also 4. Scriptures without Tradition are not simply necessary C. 4. nor sufficient 5. The Apostles applyed not their minds to write by God's C. 4. command but as they were constrained by a certain necessity 6. Scriptures are not Rules of Faith but as a certain C. 12. Monitorie to conserve and nourish the Doctrine received 7. Hereticks deny but Catholicks affirm Peter to be the De Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 2. Head of the Universal Church and made a Prince in Christs stead 8. When Christ said Simon son of John so the Vulgar L. 4. c. 1. Translation in Bellarmine corruptly for Jonas Feed my Sheep he spake only to Peter and gave him his Sheep to feed not exempting the Apostles 9. Whether the Pope may be an Heretick or not it is to be L. 4. c. 2. believed of the whole Church that he can no ways determine that which is Heretical 10. Neither the Pope nor the particular Roman Church C. 4. can erre in Faith 11. The Pope cannot only not erre in Faith but neither C. 5. in Precepts of Manners which are prescribed the whole Church and which are concerning things necessary to Salvation or things in themselves good or evil 12. The Pope alone hath his Jurisdiction immediately from C. 24. Christ but all other Bishops their ordinary Jurisdiction immediately from the Pope 13. The Pope hath Supream power indirectly in all Temporal L. 5. c. 1. 6. matters by reason of his Spiritual power This is the opinion of all Catholick Divines 14. The Pope as Pope may not ordinarily depose Temporal Ibid c. 6. Princes though there be just cause as he may Bishops yet he may change Kingdoms and take them away and give them to another as the highest Spiritual Prince if it be needful to the Salvation of Souls 15. As to Lawes the Pope as Pope cannot ordinarily make a Ibid. Civil Law or establish or make void Lawes of Princes because he is not the Political Prince of the Church yet he may do all these if any Civil Law be necessary to the Salvation of Souls and Kings will not make them and so if Laws be pernicious to Souls and Kings will not abolish them 16. Though the Pope translated the Empire and gave a De Translat Imp. l. 3 c 4. Right to choose a Prince yet he transferred not nor gave that power Supream and most ample which himself had of Christ over all the Church And therefore as when the Cause of the Church required he could translate the Empire from the Greeks to the Germans in like manner might he translate it from the Germans to another Nation upon the like reason c. 17. No obedience is due to a Prince from the Church Câ—â— Berâ—â—â— c. 31. Tom. 7. when he is excommunicated by publick Authority The Pope and his Predecessors never forbad Subjects to obey their Princes for being once deposed by them they were no longer lawful Princes This is it we teach 18. To call General Councils belongs properly to the Tom. 2. de Concil l. 1. c. 12. Pope yet so that the Emperor may do it with his consent 19. Particular Councils confirmed by the Pope cannot erre L. 2. c 5. in Faith and Manners 20. The Pope is simply and absolutely above the whole C. 17. Church and above a General Council so that he may not acknowledge any Judicature on earth above him 21. The Church is a Company of men professing the L. 3. c. 2. same Christian Faith joyned together in the Communion of the same Sacraments under the Government of lawful Pastors and especially One Vicar of Christ on earth the Bishop of Rome 22. Purgatory may be proved out of the Old and New De Purgaâ— 1. c. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. Testament 23. Purgatory is a Doctrine of Faith so that he who believeth Cap. 15. not Purgatory shall never come there but shall be tormented in Hell in everlasting burning 24. Invocation of Saints may be proved from Scripture De Sanct. Beaâ—â—â—d l. 1. c. 19. 25. It 's lawful to make the Image of God the Father in De Reliq c. 8. the form of an Old Man and of the Holy Spirit in the form of a Dove 26. The Images of Christ and of Saints are to be worshipped L. 2. c. 21. De Imag. not only by accident and improperly but also by themselves properly so that they may terminate Worship as considered in themselves and not only as they
bear the place of the Example 27. It may be granted that Images may be worshipped C. 23. improperly and by accident with the same kind of worship C. 24. with which the Exemplar but not for their own sakes and properly and therefore Latria is not properly and for themselves to be given for them 28. A Vow is an Act of Religion due to God only like L. 3. c. 9. De cultu sanctor as an Oath and Sacrifice as appears from the Scriptures whose Vowes are constantly said to be made to God Yet it is most certain that in some manner Vowes may be made to Saints 29. It is not probable that Christ in these words this is De Eucharist l. 1. c. 9. my Body would speak figuratively 30. One Body may be in divers places at once L. 3. c. 3. 31. That the Elements in the Eucharist are turned into L. 3. per. tot Christs Body 32. It is a truth necessary to be believed that whole L. 4. c. 21. 22. Christ is in the kind of Bread and whole Christ is in the kind of Wine 33. No more Grace is contain'd in one kind then in C. 23. both 34. Worshipping the Host excuses from Idolatry because C. 29. they believe there is no Bread remaining and no Catholick holds that Divine Worship is to be given to Bread 35. Our Sacrifice is truly and properly called a Sacrifice L. 2. de missa c. 2. no less than the ancient Sacrifices as is shown in the former Book 36. The Rite of Reconciling Sinners after Baptism which De Paenit lib. consists of Repentance discovered by external signs and the word of Absolution Catholicks affirm to be a true and proper Sacrament 37. There is a treasure of superfluous Merits in the Church De Indulg l. c. 2 3 11. which may by the Pope be applyed to the benefit of other persons by Indulgences 38. The Catholick Church doth openly affirm Extream Unction De Extrem Unct. c. 1. to be truly and properly a Sacrament 39. Orders are a Sacrament truly and properly so called De Ord. c. 1. 40. Matrimony of Believers is a proper Sacrament De Matrim c. 1. To these innumerable other might be added of strange nature to the Word of God and belief and practise of the ancient Church but these are more then sufficient to confront those vainly objected to us by them whereof some are most false others most true others false or true as they may be taken And now the manner of proceeding in this Discourse being propounded to be touched in the second place here must not be forgotten In which I confess I have not a little varied from my first intention and resolution which were in a plain compendious way to set down the Principal Doctrine of Faith and Worship agreeable to God's Holy Word and to the mind of the best Ancient Churches as well as our Own and that without Passion or particular Reflexions on any Party or Person by name knowing that of Synesius to be most true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes Ep 57. That Soul which would be a Vessel to receive God must be void of all Passions But finding some things both approved and disproved by me would scarce be credited without such instances I held my self obliged to forsake that resolution in the process of my Discourse and a little in the beginning where I was forced by ill Paper and Ink to write somewhat over the second time to make it legible Otherwise I determined to avoid Names and Testimonies of Authors after the manner of them who before me have written Institutions and Sums of this nature Yet have I not taken upon me in an imperious way to multiply Canons and Axioms and impose them with expectation of greater faith in them then such men will allow to the Decrees of the Holy Councils so called And this with a perswasion I know not how or why wrought into credulous persons that now-a-dayes only Scripture is understood and they only speak Scripture but others humane Inventions Which most bold demand 't is a wonder how many prone naturally to superstitious novelties do without the least suspicion of vanity and falsity readily receive for a most certain and fundamental Truth but is indeed a fundamental Error and the root of all Heresie towards the Faith and of all Schism towards the Church I remember how some years since enquiring of one very near to me what Divinity his Tutor grounded him in he answered me Wollebius And farther inquiring what Wollebius said of a certain point he replyed as he there found it against which when I put in my exception he wondered at me and indeavored to silence me by telling me It was a Canon I have not here proceeded so Canonically as others nor yet so Polemically but considering according to St. Johns distinction that there are Children in Christ 1 John 2. 13. and Young men and Old men commonly call'd Incipientes Prosicientes and perfecti i. e. Beginners Proficients and Perfect men I have here pitched upon the mean sort of these to whom to direct my Labors knowing there were but too many Catechises amongst us for the former and too few Treatises or none for the second And that to write Polemically for the satisfaction of the third required another more proper language and a more Scholastical Person and much more large Volumes then this one though this Book hath increased under my hands well nigh thrice as much as I at first intended And in truth it is to be lamented and blushed at that none of the Learned men of our Church have yet appeared in so noble and necessary a Work as the fuller and more entire managing of the Elenctical part of Divinity to the preventing daily mischiefs arising from the necessity of repairing to our Enemies of both sides to perfect Theological Studies without the due ballance on our side to prevent prejudice I hope God will stir up the spirits of some to set their hands to and enable them to go through so good a Work Voetius of Utrecht than whom I think none of this Age hath Certum autorem ejus qui solidè compendiosè accommodatè ad nestra tempora hee â—gat hâ—ctenus non vidi expectandum est ergo c. Voetius Bibl. l. 2. c. 5. been acquainted with more modern Authors much complains for want of some compendious Body of Elenctical Divinitie which to that day he had not seen And therefore expected that long defired Piece of Famous Altingius should at length come forth which was only in the hands of his Scholars in writing Yet I find this Work of Henricus Altingius to have been published the same year with Voetius his Bibliotheca viz. Anno 1654. and called Theologia Elenctica Nova viz. New Elenctical Divinitie which in truth hath not its name New for nothing in that manner of handling Divinity as none before
of it And first of Prayer the chiefest act of Gods worship contrary to Sectaries who are enemies to it in three respects And first by their vain conceit of Preaching wherein consisteth not the proper worship of God as in Prayer Chap. VIII A second Corruption of the worship of God not especially in Prayer by opposing Setforms of publick worship Reasons against extemporary Prayers in publick The places of Scripture and Reasons and Antiquity for Extemporary Prayers answered Chap. IX A third abuse of the worship of God by Sectaries in neglecting publick Prayers without Sermons censured That Prayer in a publick place appointed for Gods worship ought at all times to be offered to God Scripture and Universal Tradition require it above that in private places The frivolousness of such reasons as are used against it The Reasons for it Chap. X. A fourth Corruption of the worship of God by confining it to an unknown Tongue Scripture and Tradition against that custom A fifth abuse of Prayer in denying the People their Suffrage contrary to the ancient practise of the Church Chap. XI Of the Circumstances of Divine worship and first of the proper place of Divine worship called the Church the manner of worshipping there Of the Dedication of Churches to God their Consecration and the effects of the same That no man can convert any part of the Church to his private use without profanation of it and Sacriledge Against the abuse of Churches in the burial of dead bodies erecting Tombs and enclosing them in Churches or Chancels Rich men have no more Right to any part of the Church than the Poor The Common Law can give no Right in such Cases Chap. XII Of the second Circumstance of Gods worship Appointed times Of the Sabbath or Seventh-day how it was appointed of God to the Jews but not by the same Law appointed to Christians Nor that one day in Seven should be observed The Decalogue contains not all moral duties directly Gentiles observed not a Seventh day The New Testament no where commands a Seventh day to be kept holy Chap. XIII Of the Institution of the Lords Day That it was in part of Apostolical and partly Ecclesiastical Tradition Festival dayes and Fasting derived unto us from the same fountain and accordingly to be observed upon the like grounds Private Prayers in Families to the neglect of the publick worship unacceptable to God Of the Obligation all Priests have to pray daily according to their Office Of the abuse of Holy-dayes in the Number and unjustifiable occasions of them Of the seven Hours of Prayer approved by the Ancient Church and our first Reformers Mr. Prins Cavils against Canonical Hours refuted Chap. XIV The third thing to be considered in the worship of God viz. The true object which is God only That it is Idolatry to misapply this Divine worship What is Divine worship properly called Of the multitude and mischiefs of New distinctions of worship Dulia and Latria though distinct of no use in this Controversie What is an Idol Origen s criticism of an Idol vainly rested on What an Image What Idolatry The distinction of Formal and Material Idolatry upon divers reasons rejected The Papists really Idolatrous notwithstanding their good Intentions pretended Intention and Resolution to worship the true God excuses not from Idolatry Spalato Forbes and others excusing the Romanists from thence disproved That Idolatry is not always joyned with Polytheism or worshipping more Gods than one How the Roman Church may be a true Church and yet Idolatrous Chap. XV. Of Idolatry in the Romish Church particularly viz. In worshipping Saints Angels Reliques and especially the supposed Bloud of Christ No good foundation in Antiquity or the Scriptures for the said worship Chap. XVI Of the fourth thing wherein the worship of God consisteth viz. Preaching How far it is necessary to the Service of God What is true Preaching Of the Preaching of Christ wherein it consisteth Of painful Preaching That the Ministery according to the Church of England is much more painful then that of Sectaries The negligence of some in their duty contrary to the rule and mind of the Church not to be imputed to the Church but to particular Persons in Authority Chap. XVII The fifth general Head wherein the exercise of the worship of God doth consist Obedience That Obedience is the end of the Law and Gospel both That the Service of God principally consisteth therein Of Obedience to God and the Church The Reasons and Necessity of Obedience to our Spiritual as well as Civil Governours The frivolous cavils of Sectaries noted The severity of the Ancient and Latter Greek Church in requiring obedience The folly of Pretenders to obedience to the Church and wilfully slight her Canons and Laws more material than are Ceremonies Chap. XVIII Of Obedience to the Church in particular in the five Precepts of the Church common to all viz. 1. Observation of Festival dayes 2. Observation of the Fasts of the Church Of the Times Manner and Grounds of them Exceptions against them answered 3. Of the Customs and Ceremonies of the Church 4. Frequentation of the publick worship 5. Frequent Communicating and the due preparation thereunto Chap. XIX A Preparation to the Explication of the Decalogue by treating of Laws in General What is a Law Several kinds of Laws Of the obligation of Laws from Justice not Force only Three Conditions required to obliging Of the Ten Commandments in special Their Authour Nature and Use Chap. XX. Of the Ten Commandments in Particular and their several sense and importance Chap. XXI Of Superstition contrary to the true Worship of God and Christian Obedience AN INTRODUCTION TO THE Knowledge of the true Catholick Religion Part the First Book the First CHAP. 1. Of the Nature and Grounds of Religion in general Which are not so much Power as the Goodness of God and Justice in the Creature And that Nature it self teaches to be Religious RELIGION is the supream act of the Rational Creature springing from the natural and necessary Relation it beareth to the Creatour of all things God Almighty Or a due Recognition of the Cause of all Causes and Retribution of service and worship made to the same as the fountain of all Goodness derived to inferiour Creatures For there being a most excellent order or rather subordination of Causes in the Universe there is a necessary and constant dependance one upon another not by choice but natural inclination And the Perfection of all Creatures doth consist in observing that station and serving those ends and acting according to those Laws imposed by God on all things Thus the Heavenly Bodies moving in a perpetual and regular order and Psal 148. the Earth being fruitful in its seasons and the course of the Waters observing the Laws given them by God may be said to worship and obey him Which worship being performed according to that more perfect state of the Rational Creature and the prescriptions given to it may
Traditions It is as seldome found That a tale should be reported in the very same phrase or words it was at first told as it is that things transcribed with any common honesty or diligence should fail considerably so much as in the Letter And if they say in Tradition forms of words are not so much to be stood upon doth it not altogether hold as good when this Tradition is written How then do not men blush to argue so boldly and at the same time so weakly There is therefore a twofold Infallibility to be distinguished as well in Relation to unwritten Doctrines as written the one consisting in the Matter delivered the other in the manner so delivering And truly as to this later it cannot be said without some strong Presumption to the contrary the written Traditions which are the Scriptures have been so preciseâ—y and absolutely defended from either the common injuries of time or special miscarriages incident to humane frailty or perhaps as some conjecture the studious mischiefs of sacrilegious hands laid on them as not one title one word one period should not have been damnified thereby The Providence of God granting some such minuter defections from the Original Copies hath been singular in preserving them in that degree of perfection and entireness we now enjoy them So that infinite is the disparity in this case between them and unwritten Traditions which none have been so audacious positively to affirm though indeed their large and loose reasons seem to tend that way that any one unwritten doctrine hath been conserved unto us in the same form of words it was at first delivered to the Church And the like though not so great advantage is to be acknowledged on the Scriptures part compared with the pretended unwritten word of God in reference to the matter and that in these three respects 1. The Evidence 2. The Importance and 3. The Influence that the doctrine of the Scriptures have and ought to have over all Traditions And for the first It is impossible taking traditions as they are distinguished from Scripture that the like grounds of Faith should be offered to us as we have above shown are to be found proving the Scriptures to be the word of God For are all or some only Gods word All cannot be because Traditions in several Places of the world have been diverse and even contrary Because some are acknowledged to have been the Constitutions of Men or the Church since the Apostolical Age. Because many are acknowledged to have been quite lost Because many have been confessed to be changed of them which remain Now if the Church hath failed in the due Custodie of such treasures committed to her How can any man be assured sufficiently of the integrity of the remainer How can the Church be esteemed an Infallible Witness of traditions And who can but admire the Confidence of such Patrons of the Churches fidelity or rather felicity for I would not nor need I call in question its good will and Honesty in her Office of Preserving the Monuments of our Religion untouch'd by errors who by reasons would demonstrate that that cannot be which we see done before our eyes For at other times the same Party if not the same persons stick not to profess that divers Antienter Traditions are perished and more modern have succeeded them They say that some Traditions are as 〈◊〉 as sense can make them The Tradition that there were such famous Cities as Nineve and Babylon and are such as Constantinople and Rome requires the same Faith as the beholding them with our Eyes But first It should have been said in the argument They are as evident as those things we are informed of by our senses but this is far from truth All the testimonies of Past and present persons affirming that to be so which I have no sense of immediately being abundantly sufficient to beget a belief but not equalling in evidence the testimonie of any mans well-disposed senses For does not this so general testimonie it self depend upon a mans senses receiving the same Or can any man be so well assured upon the Credit of any persons whatever that the Apostles delivered such things to be believed and observed by the Church as if he himself immediately received the same from them If it be said that the case of Ecclesiastical Tradition is far different from humane in that the Church is divinely assisted to such ends supposing this at present still we are no less intregued then before For as is said The truth of a thing and the Evidence whereby it appears to be true are very much different And here it will be no less difficult to make such a supposed Assistance appear then the tradition it self which it commends to the World upon such pretences And therefore they who have sifted this matter more narrowly and stated it most rationally have thought it best to forsake such topicks at present as Extraordinarie Assistances and Hen. Holdeni Analysis Fid. tell us plainly that what the Church doth in this case she doth it not as divinely directed but as so many Men delivering their testimonie which is true but then what becomes of Infallibility all men singly and conjointly as men being fallible Well therefore they proved to tell us That to a jugde of Controversies Credible Testimonie or moral infallibilitie may suffice and to this I agree in the main though the term Moral Certainty and Moral Infallibilitie seems to me as vain and improper as it is modern it upon enquirie amounting to no more then the old Probabilitie well and reasonably grounded The next thing in Holy Writ is the much greater importance the things therein contained are of above unwritten doctrines For who of all the Ancients but such as are by tradition stigmatized for Heretiques for such their Basil Ma. de spiritu sancto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opinions did constitute any rule of Faith distinct from the Scriptures or bring any to stand in competition therewith Some 't is true have distinguished between Dogmes of Traditions and doctrines of the Scripture and haveaffirmed That as well the one as the other ought to be received by a good Christian All this we agree to how we shall show by and by more fully and here by comparing this by the words of St. John saying This Joh. 4. 21. Commandment have we from him that he that loveth God love his brother also By which it is not required that any Christian should with the same kind or degree of Love love his neighbour with which he loveth God For we must love God only for his own sake and our brother for Gods sake Nay when God sayes we must love our neighbour as our selves he does not exclude difference in degrees of love In like manner when it is said That we ought to believe and receive the unwritten as well as written traditions it was never intended by that excellent Father that we should admit
them in equal veneration For most things there by him instanced in are apparently extrinsical to Faith Therefore the true meaning is That no good Son of the Catholick Church can or ought to refuse the customes or practices or forms of words concerning the doctrine of Christ because they are not so express'd or contain'd in Scripture as other matters are And if we mark we shall not find any one thing exacted of Christians in the purest and most flourishing state of the Church as points of Faith which only depended upon unwritten Tradition and were not thought to have the written word of God for their warrant and foundation And in this one thing were there no more doth the prerogative of the Scripture manifest it self sufficiently above Traditions distinct from it That whatever vertue or credit they have is first of all owing to the Scriptures For otherwise why should not the Traditions of the Jew or Mahometan be as credible to a Christian as they of the Church but that he suck'd in his principle with his Mothers milk That the written word of God hath given so fair testimonie of the Church and its traditions For the testimonie of the Church otherwise would certainly be no more to be valued than that of any other societie of like moral honestie So that the Scriptures must be the very First principle of all Christian belief But here steps in the old objection drawn from a most eminent Father of the Church which Extollers of tradition can as well forget their own names as leave out of their disputations on this subject though according to their Augustin custome they have a very bad memory to bear in mind what hath been sufficiently replied to it I should not saith that Father have believed the Scriptures but for the Church and yet we have said we should not have believed the Church but for the Scriptures How can these stand together Very well if we please to distinguish the several wayes of information for in the same there must be granted a repugnancie And the distinction is much the same with what we have before laid down viz. Of the Occasion and the direct Cause of Faith For though the Churches tradition be an Introduction to the belief of the Scriptures and such a necessary Cause without which no man ordinarily comes so much as to the knowledge of them yet it doth not at all follow that through the influence of that supposed Cause an effect of Faith is wrought in the Soul concerning them but from a superiour illumination and interiour power which has been generally Joh. 4. required to such praeternatural Acts. As the Woman of Samaria brought her fellow Citizens to Christ but was not the author of that faith which after they had in him as the true Messias or as the Horse I ride on carrying me from London to York is not the proper Cause that I see that City but mine own senses though I perhaps should never have seen it otherwise But another more Ancient and no less venerable Father of the Church is Irenaeus here brought in demanding What if nothing had been written must we not then have altogether depended on the Traditions To such as extend this quaerie too far I move the like question What if we had no Traditions at all must not then every man have shifted as well as he could and traded upon the finall stock of natural reason in him Or was it impossible that man should come to bliss without the superadded light outwardly exhibited That as the case stands man ordinarily cannot be saved without such received revelations as are dealt to us from the Church I believe But upon supposal that no such means were extant that there should be no other Ordinary way of Gods revealing himself to man in order to his salvation believe it who will for me I answer therefore directly No question but tradition would have sufficed if nothing had been committed to writing For either God would have remitted of that rigour as no man can doubt but he might have made the terms of the Covenant fewer and lighter with which we now stand obliged to him according to that most equal Law of the Gospel as well as Reason Unto whom much is given of him shall be much required and to Luk. 12. 48. Mat. 25. whom men have committed much of him they will ask the more Neither is it probable against the intent of Christs most excellent Parable in St. Mathew that of that Person or that People to whom he hath delivered but two or five Talents he should extort the Effect of ten Well therefore doth that Father argue against such as should dare to consine God only to Scripture and so superciliously or contemptuously look on the Traditions of their Christian Fathers as not worth the stooping to take up yea as necessarily warring against the Word written Whenas it is certain a thing is written because it is first declared and is the Word of him that speaketh no less before than after it is written and not so because it is written St. Paul therefore joyns them both together in his Epistle to the Thessalonians saying Therefore brethren stand stedfast and hold 2 Thes 2. 15. the Traditions which ye have been taught whether by word or our Epistle Here are plainly both written Traditions and unwritten and written Word of God and unwritten and they differ only in the several ways of promulgation and not in the Law of God And it is more then probable That those first principles of Christian Faith were not received of St. Paul in writing of which he speaks in his first Epistle to the Corinthians 1 Cor. 15. 1 2 3 4. concerning the Incarnation Passion and Resurrection of our Saviour nor delivered in writing at his first publication yet were no less the word of God then than afterward Yet as this sufficiently allayes the heat of hostility indiscreetly conceived against all Traditions even for the very names sake which is become odious to us so doth it not so much favour the contrary party as hath been phantasi'd For 't is observable That there is a very great difference between the Tradition now touched and that so commonly and passionately disputed of in the Church That was and may be called a Tradition as every thing expressed by Word or Writing whereby one man delivers his mind for so the English Phrase hath it not amiss to another transiently But the Tradition now under debate may be described A constant continuation of what is once delivered from Generation to Generation For No man can with any propriety of speech term what is not a year or two in standing Tradition Tradition is a long custom of believing The things which are so called in the Scriptures are not such and therefore can be no president for those of these dayes There being not the like reason that we should give the same respect or esteem so
they do not believe contrary to the Faith of the Church It may be said that Baptism alone is sufficient to distinguish such implicit believers from Heathens which I grant as to the Essence or nature of Christianity but not to the Life and exercise of a Christian for that as St. Paul hath by his word and example certified us is by the Faith Col. 2. 20. of the Son of God who loved us and gave himself for us Therefore as I am so charitable to all well-disposed Christians to be perswaded there is no necessity for all to have either the like measure or manifestation of Faith in any one point of Faith our Saviour Christ requiring Faith but as a grain Math. 17. 20. of Mustard-seed sometimes so am I to all Churches as to be perswaded That they all require and that in all a some measure of Faith explicite as necessary to Salvation and that besides this Believing as the Church believes For in truth this is nopoint of Faith in the Actus Signatus or general notion though to believe the Church Catholick may be For who sees not a vast difference between believing the Church it self and believing what the Church believes And that may be compleated in believing the Being and Extent of it which is much short of the body of Faith which it receives and professes CHAP. XIV Of the Effects of True Faith in General Good Works Good Works to be distinguished from Perfect Works Actions good four wayes THere is a great difference between Good works and Perfect works For the first hath respect unto the thing done and the other unto the manner of doing it agreeable to all due forms and Circumstances And every work that is good is not Perfect though every work that is perfect must of necessity be Good And to the doing of a Good work there seems to be no more absolutely Act. 17. 11. Rom. 10. 17. Si Fidelis fecerit opus bonum hic ei prodest liberans eum a malis in illo saeculo ad percipiendum regnum coelesto magis autem ibi quam hîc Si autem Infidelis fecerit bonum opus hîc ei prodest opus ipsius hîc ei reddit Deus pro opere su◠In illo autem saeculo nihil ei prodest opus ipsius Opus imperfectum in Math. Hom. 26. required than that a man should act according to well informed and regulated reason and true affection So that the works of natural men may be good though heathens such as are Visiting the sick and relieving the poor defending the Fatherless and widow oppressed and especially such outward moral Acts as may be done by natural men tending to their Conversion and Salvation as willing hearing and equal judging of the doctrine of Faith even before actual Faith conceived for which St. Paul esteemed the Bereans praise worthy* So that they are not absolutely Splendid Sins for were it so they were by no means to be done and no man did well who before his Conversion went to hear Christ preach or gave any attentive ear to what St. Paul wrote or taught for want of Faith whereas we are taught by common reason as well as by St. Paul that Faith it self cometh by hearing of the word of God For how can any man possibly believe what he never heard of So then some duties and Acts are laudable and acceptable to God without Faith though not arising to the perfection of Evangelical Goodness by which a man pleaseth God and is acceptable unto him even to his Justification and Salvation There may therefore be distinguished a fourfould goodness in Actions 1. Natural when a man acteth agreeable to the perfection of the Rule of natural Beings as a man acteth agreeable to the perfection of the Rule of natural Beings as a man is said to walk well when he goes according to the nature of man and limps not nor halts and to write a good hand when his letters and words do answer exactly a Perfect Rule or Copie This Religion taketh no notice of at all 2. A man is said to do a Good Act when it is so morally and in its kind as tending to the honour of his Creator whose Instruments meer Moral men are in exercising his Paternal providence and to the benefit of others For it being the proper Character of God which is spoken of him by the Psalmist viz. Thou art Good and thou doest Good They whom God Psal 119. 68. chooseth and stirreth up to minister under him in good and useful things to the Communitie or any particular do that which is good however not absolute 3. There is a Religious or divine goodness in Actions which are done agreeable to the Revealed Will of God passing natures sagacitie or search And this is twofold Legal and Evangelical both exceeding the former but the one exceeded of the other viz. Legal of Evangelical Vere enim quando declinamus d malo facimus bonum quantum ad comparationem caeterorum hominum nolentium declinare à malo facere bonum dicuntur bona quae agimus quantum autem ad Veritatem secundum quod dic itur in hoc loco Quia unus est bonus bonum nostrum non est bonum Orig. Hom. 8. in Matthaeum For as Natural Acts are good done according to natures intention and institution by themselves but are not good compared with moral duty performed and moral Acts are Good in themselves but not so in respect of a Superiour Order and end of working instituted of God in his holy Law So are Legal Acts wrought according to Gods word given to the Israelites under that dispensation or Covenant as required of God and serving to those ends God propounded to himself and his people Wherefore it is that the Children of Israel revolting from God and forsaking that instituted worship of his Law are thus censured by the Prophet * Hos 8. 3. Hosea Israel hath cast off the thing that is good the enemie shall pursue him And St. Paul than whom no divine writer more opposes the Law occasion being offered yet giveth his suffrage †1 Tim. 1. 8. The Law is good if a man useth it Lawfully And the Gospel it self is not good unless used Lawfully Therefore were the works of the Law also good works within their bounds but not so compared with the Perfection of the Gospel but displeasing to God and pernicious to men who being delivered in the fulness of time by the coming of Christ from the Pedagogie and beggerly Elements of the Mosaical Law should presume to retain that vail which was done away in Christ and embrace those shadows the body Christ being present Hence it is that St. Paul as in many other places writing to the Corinthians speaketh thus at large The Letter killeth i. e. the Literal sense and observation of the 2 Cor. 3. 6. Old Law after the New became of force destroyeth rather than
Gods Word already confirming this duty and to leave others to every ingenuous Christians diligent use of it to avoid prolixity And for the objections which may be made and are commonly found against what is above delivered for the same reason I pass them over as likewise because I intend not here Controversie but Positive Institutions CHAP. XXVII An Application of the former Discourse of Civil Government to Ecclesiastical How Christs Church is alwayes visible and how invisible Of the Communion of Christ and his Members The Church of Christ taken specially for the Elect who shall infallibly be saved never visible But taken for true Professours of the Faith must alwayes be visible though not Conspicuous in comparison of other Religions or Heresies THE Reasons moving me to insist a while upon Civil Government before I entred upon Ecclesiastical are First because I find Authors of the grounds of Christian Religion to treat of the same generally Secondly because where breaches have been made often in the Faith and Discipline of the Church there necessary provision ought to be made to secure them for the future but for want of due understanding of this Doctrine licencious zeal blinded with presumption hath transported very many into unchristian practises Thirdly because it is a necessary introduction to the more clear and compendious pursuing of our subject of the Spiritual Society of the Church of Christ and particularly its Form The Form of Christs Church may be distinguished according to the vulgar Notion into invisible and visible or inward and outward Invisible we here call that which doth not at all offer it self to our outward sense of seeing cannot be beholden with our eye Or that which may in some manner appear to our sight but not as a Church of Christ though in truth it so may be According to the first acceptation of invisible we understand the Body Mystical of Christ consisting of himself the only proper Head the Holy Spirit animating and influencing the same and the particular members of the holy most happy invisible Spirits in heaven and Saints on earth spiritually united to them by Christ in the divine band of holiness And hitherto do the words of the Apostle to the Ephesians seem to be applyed saying Having made known the mystery of his will That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather Ephes 1. 9 10. together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven and which are in earth even in him signifying hereby the mystical conjunction of Men and Angels in Christ Jesus although there are who not improbably and more literally do understand these words only of the collection and uniting of Jews who in respect of their peculiar exaltation to Gods service and favour are stiled in Scripture heavenly compared with the Gentiles and Gentiles into one Faith and Church of Christ which therefore divers times is called a Mystery as Romans the 16. 25 26. Ephes 3. v. 3 4 5. Col. 1. 26 27. 1 Tim. 3. 16. because as is there expressed it was an hidden and incredible thing to the Jews that the Gentiles should be taken into the like priviledges and rights of serving God as were once esteemed incommunicable to any so fully as to the Jews But whether the Scripture according to its most genuine and literal sense intendeth at any time to comprehend into one Society Angelical Peings and Humane as the Church of Christ as I do not find though the Ancients as well as Modern have held such an opinion so do I not oppose the Mystery of which we now speak being sufficiently verified in the preternatural and invisible conjunction of Christ and his Church in the indissoluble bands of his Spirit guiding the members thereof into all sufficiencie of Grace here and immortal absolute glory hereafter in heaven To understand this co-union or conjunction of Christ and his Members the better we are to call to mind a threefold union intimated in holy Writ unto us First a conjunction of Nature when more are of the same individual nature as the three Persons in the Holy Trinity are united in the same Divine Nature though in themselves distinct which is so proper to that mystery of the Trinity that it is not to be found elsewhere no not in that intimate communion we now speak of between Christ and his Members their natures continuing distinct Again another conjunction proper to Christian Religion is the union of two natures into one Person as in the Mystery of Christs incarnation when the humane and divine Nature become one so far as to constitute but one Person Christ Jesus So do not Christ and his Church But by a third way are Christ and his Church united into one aggregate Spiritual Body or Society which is effected by his Spirit which yet do not make properly a Part of that Body but by its manifold divine Graces do produce and conserve the same Christ thereby and his Church being as St. Paul saith One Spirit He that is joyned unto the Lord is one Spirit And 1 Cor. 6. 17. St. John likewise saith Hereby we know that we dwell in him and he in us because he hath given us of his Spirit This truly and only in a proper sense is invisible and that alwayes and hath two Parts the triumphant in Heaven which is a most perfect pure holy and blessed Society which have through the bloud of the Lamb and the power of his Spirit overcome the three grand Enemies Sin Death and the Devil and reaped the fruits of their sufferings and labours all tears being wiped from their eyes all sorrows being fled away all temptations for ever conquered and ceasing to molest them Now this part of Christ's Church remains alwayes invosible unto us here below And as for the other Part which is called Militant and are described to be A number of faithful and elect people living under the Cross and aspiring towards the perfection of Grace and Glory hereafter supposing at present what may hereafter be farther discussed viz. That such a peculiar number of holy persons there are within the visible Church of Christ which shall infallibly attain to everlasting bliss in heaven yet neither are these as such at any time visible or discernable to our common senses It being scarce if at all possible to judge infallibly who shall be saved and who shall not be saved it being much more difficult for any man to be assured of another mans salvation than of his own seeing that as is said hereunto an inward testimony of Gods Spirit is required which is the ground of that sound hope which is commonly called Assurance but the Promises of God in holy Scripture do not extend in like manner to the assuring of any man that another shall be saved as that he himself shall or that anothers faith shall not fail as that his own shall not but thus far only probably a truer and more certain sentence may
be pronounced by others who are ordained of God to be judges of our state of Grace upon the discovery of our consciences to them then can be by our selves which is sufficient but of the unalterableness of that state no man can certainly affirm any thing Which holdeth true likewise as to the contrary state of Damnation For though a more than probable judgment may be made of the state of Damnation of him who continues impenitently in notorious sins yet may no man pronounce a peremptory sentence against any such person that he inevitably shall be damn'd because he cannot see into the abstruse Counsels of Almighty God so far as to deny a Liberty left in him to confer such efficacious grace upon such a notorious offender as may reduce him to God no more than withdraw grace from him who at present standeth in all probable way of perseverance This being so it followeth from hence necessarily That the Church of Christ taken for the so faithful and elect that they shall without all peradventure attain the Crown of the Triumphant is evermore in its own nature invisible that is not to be distinguished by us nor known certainly and if so then in vain and to no purpose at all are such Disputations as are made about the invisible Church in that sense of invisibility which signifies that which can in no manner appear certainly to us The other sense of invisibleness according to which a thing is possible to be seen is an object of sense but actually is either not to be seen or with very great difficulty For as in Philosophy it is with Divisibility so may it be with Visibility in Divinity Every thing that hath Quantity according to the Philosopher is divisible or is capable of being divided into lesser parts even without end but yet so small may the parts so divided become at last that no Artist shall be able to cut them any more in pieces So may we understand a thing to be visible which is so small and inconsiderable that actually it can hardly if at all be perceived But visible and palpable being taken for things which not only affect the senses simply but with some more than common notoriety the usual question Whether the Church of Christ is alwayes visible ought to be understood of such a competence of perspicuity as may ordinarily be discerned by persons rightly disposed in their understandings taking here right disposition of our inward apprehensions in a proportionable manner to that which relates to our common outward senses which if it be called into doubt as it may no wonder that the other may be and that without remedy Now according to the most strict acceptation of Visible for whatsoever may possibly be discerned the reasolution will be easie That Christs Church is and must alwayes be visible For thus to be Invisible is as much as not to be at all For seeing the Parts of which it consists be they but two or three persons in the most rigorous sense are Visible the whole must needs be visible too of it self however it may in the more received sense be termed invisible because compared with the Church of Christ as prophesied of and promised in the Gospel it is so inconsiderable as may deserve rather to be accounted invisible it being out-shined and over-shadowed by other Pretenders But there being two things which constitute the Church one the association of many persons into outward communion one with another the other the inward communion in the true Faith of Christ and the former being common very often to Hereticks as well as true Christians it may be doubted whether the true Church of Christ as opposed to heretical Societies is at all visible For seeing the true and orthodox Faith together with its practical holiness do not occur plainly to our senses the true Faith cannot be discerned visibly from the false by any outward sense How can it possibly be said that the Church of Christ is at all visible or apparent to a man 'T is true a man may discern a real man from a painted man or from any other creature from the outward notices of his body though he cannot see his soul which doth primarily constitute the person of man but he cannot see whether he be a true and honest man in a moral sense from any thing appearing outwardly So may one discern the Faith professed in general to be Christian by the outward frame and fashion of the Church professing the same but the soundness of the same and sincerity according to Christs will and institution he cannot from thence conclude upon And therefore if the Catholick Faith as Catholick in the stricter sense can never be visible the Catholick Church so being and denominated from that Faith can never be said to be properly visible but only as a Society not as the true Society of Christians in opposition to the false For instance sense or common reason not informed from the word of God could never judge whether the Arrian or the Catholick Faith as it then began to be called were most truly Christian but they both might judge that they were Christian Societies and so at least outwardly made a true Church But because it is one thing to profess the true Faith and another quite distinct from that Truly to profess the Faith as it is one thing to profess Justice and Truth and Honesty and another truly to profess these and practise them therefore can there be no estimate taken of the true Catholick Church from the persons professing the Catholick Faith who are alwayes uncertain and mutable but judgement must be made from the outward constitution only which are Discipline or Government and not Doctrine or Faith For where the former is not rightly composed according to the mind and institution of Christ there cannot be said to be a true Church And where the second is wanting there must likewise be no Church the foundation of the Church and Rule failing viz. the true Faith But wherever these be inviolately and incorruptly preserved and publickly professed though we should suppose every particular Member of such a Society to be notorious Hypocrites yet the Church might be said to be a true Church because the Church doth not receive any more than its material subsistance from the persons believing but its formal and more distinct Being it hath from the true Regiment and Faith which it is possible though scarce probable may be sufficiently preserved under hypocritical and wicked members of the same This is not only true in it self but appears so to be from the necessity of having any knowledge of the true Church at all and its being visible at any time For it never being certainly visible who are the predestinate infallibly to Life and who are not who shall constantly stand and who shall fall who are inwardly hypocrites and who are faithful and sincere indeed seeing notwithstanding the exactest judgment and search of man there
be in them before and which doth more than countervail such antecedent liberty of simply teaching as was then in some manner fixed Thirdly there was in such cases as this added a Power and Right of instituting others as occasion offered which is unknown to have been in them as Evangelists From it follows that of all the forementioned kinds of Government that of the Church approached neerest to that call'd Monarchical which was only absolute and universal in Christ the Soveraign Head thereof but Ministerially under him and over the Church under their circuit Politically as proper Heads and Rulers and whatever power after extraordinary Callings by Revelation from God ceased any one dispartake of in the Church was ctrtainly at first derived from such single Persons alone however to the solemnity of such ordination others of an inferiour Order concurred thereto And as the Government of the civil World was originally without exception so far as search can be made by the most curious Antiquaries Monarchical though it were not governed by one man alone but by Civil Supream Princes of several Dominions into which the earth was parcelled So though no one Father or Bishop ever presided over all the Christian world yet several single Persons in their respective Provinces governing the Church as Principal the Government of the Church may rightly be termed Monarchical in Particular but Aristocratical as to the whole For as the Apostles were all Monarchs compared with their Proselites Converts and Churches by them founded but were but Peers compared one with another So was it with the Bishops and Patriarchs of the Church succeeding them whereby the Prophesie of Christ in St. Matthew was verified spoken not so much as some mistake it of his Heavenly Kingdome but earthly his Church and its ensuing glory Verily I say unto you that ye which M … â—â— have followed me in the regeneration when the son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve Tribes of Israel That when the Church of Christ should flourish then there should be such as in lieu of the twelve Tribes of Israel should Rule as in Thrones the Church of God under the Gospel They who object against this the words of Christ in Saint Matthew Ye know that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them and Mâ—tt 20 25. 26. they that are great exercise autority upon them But it shall not be so among you Do declare no less against Aristocratical then Monarchical Government yea all Government over the Church And their favourable gâ—osS in behalf of one will be as valid for that which they reject For as it was not at all the mind of Christ that there should be no Governours at all over his Church so doth it not at all appear that what was lawful for many to do was not lawful for one But here the old cheat again takes place to suppose that the Government of one is in it self tyrannical and of many free but neither Christ nor nature ever taught them how to prove this presumptuous imagination And to this may we add another such mistake from St. Peters words That men should not be Lords over Gods heritage And what then Must there be more 1 Pet. 5. 3. than one over a Church and not onely one May a company of Presbyters oblige Christians to do or believe such things and not Lord it but if by a principal Person bearing Rule this same thing be done then is the Precept violated Besides who sees not that hath not a mind to be blind That the Apostle speaks nothing at all in these words of the kind of Government but the exercise of it and abuse Surely if Episcopal Government could not choose but tyrannize and Presbyterial could do nothing but according to Scripture and equity this Objection were unanswerable otherwise not worth the mentioning much less answering as common as it is and as confidently urged And as to that Pretense intended to overthrow our prime ground of Christs institution taken from what was first actually found in the Church viz. That Imparity of Christs Ministers was not found in the Church till about an hundred and forty or fifty years after Christ when it is confessed by the Enemies of Ecclesiastical Hierarchies that it prevailed Let the Huggers of this Device First consider what a pitiful addition is made to their cause from hence seeing that it is undenyable there was a disparity all the Apostles dayes who in order excelled all Ecclesiastical Persons and that almost one hundred years were spent of the said tearm in their time So that about fifty or sixty years only this imaginary Government had its being and then was lost again for fourteen hundred and then was better lost then found and taken up again But a far worse inconvenience spoils this jest as being founded and raised only from conjecture and that conjecture upon the obscurity of those ages not so clearly known as afterwards CHAP. XXIX Of the necessity of holding visible Communion with Christs Church Knowledge of that visible Church necessary to that Communion Of the Notes to discern the true Church how far necessary Of the Nature or Condition of such Notes in General IT being so necessary as we have above shewed to be in communion with the visible Church of Christ and the Nature of things themselves being more intrinsick many times than to characterize sufficiently them to the Enquirer into them it hath been thought necessary to explain them farther by more apparent and observable notices given of them And in the Doctrine of the Church these seem to be of greatest consequence Visibility Universality or Catholickness Sanctity and Perpetuity Of all which we shall briefly speak in order yet first premising somewhat concerning Notes in General For seeing as we have said it is necessary to know the true Church from the false and the Natures of things are often-times so abstruse and hidden from us that we cannot discover them from their own Light therefore it hath been judged very reasonable to pitch upon certain outward Notes eading us unerringly to the knowledge of the thing it self And in truth I cannot wholly approve of that course chosen to certifie us and point out to us the-true Church taken from the very being of it such as are Faithful and sincere Doctrine taught therein Sacraments duly administred Worship purely performed and Discipline rightly constituted because these are rather of the very intrinsick nature and definition it self of the Church than notes and characters outward whereby the nature it self should be certainly known We all indeed without exception consent that that Church is the true Church which is thus qualified and affected believeth aright is governed aright administreth the Sacraments aright and worshippeth aright and in one word which followeth most exactly the Rules of Holy Scripture but in the Assumption and Application is all the doubt and infinite
to the world Upon this Innovating Hereticks were forced to seek subterfuge from revelations and extraordinary discoveries promised as they corruptly understood Scripture by Christ in St. John saying I have yet many things to say unto you but ye Joh. 16 12 13. cannot bear them now Howbeit when the Spirit of truth shall come he will guide you unto all truth c. Hence they collected That Christ communicated not all to his immediate Disciples but reserved diverse things to be imparted extraordinarily to them and the phansie of such extraordinary favours from God is such a bewitching device that few not soundly setled in Faith can chose but expect and thirst after and at last conceit that so God doth deal with them when there is no such matter And of this Sacrilegious and Heretical folly are those Churches no less than simple single persons guilty which under pretense of power in the Church which must not be denyed of declaring the sense of Scripture and Faith do in very deed invent and introduce new Articles of Faith and absurd Scholies unheard of before either in substance or form and say They do but explain only what was before implyed and included in holy Writ For all Articles of Faith all necessary and due Discipline all true Administration of Sacraments wherein the truth of Christian Churches are generally affirmed to consist must long since have been discovered from the Rule of all these or otherwise they who were ignorant of or defective in these could not lay any just claim to be true Churches of Christ So that in truth Antiquity thus understood is an excellent Note of the true Faith and the true Faith not contradicted in worship as is possible more than a Note or Sign of a true Church it is the very Being it self But where Antiquity it self is obscure the condition of a Note according to the Canvasers of this point being to be more cleer than that which is in question it cannot do this good office for us And to argue backward as too many do very incongruously endeavouring to prove that which should prove is to discover the fondness of their opinions and falsness of their cause at the same time For instance to say the Church cannot err in Doctrine therefore we must believe this to be most ancient And to affirm that no man can precisely declare the time and place when such a Doctrine entred the Church taxed for innovation is very absurd as commonly and confidently as it is used For St. Augustine on whose grounds they seem to build this supposition supposed that First no time could be instanced in when such an usance was not in the Church but many times this can be done against pretences to Apostolicalness though the direct time when it began may not be instanced in For whenas most Doctrines of Faith have some practical worship proper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristoteles Polit Lib 5. 8. 175. to them and evidencing them such as are the form the matter the rites of prayer none of which recorded in the Church insinuate any such opinions in that age of the Church especially of publick approbation is it not an argument more than conjectural there was then no such thing believed in the Church though we be not able to determine when it first sprung up Again it is very weak and frivolous which is presumed as unquestionable that all abuses and corruptions in the Church had some proper period wherein they must needs show themselves according to that formality as afterwards they appeared in and became notorious No doubt is to be made but points of Doctrine had their conceptions augmentations and progressions insensible as infinite other things in nature and manners have had and daily have A man may better demand the hour in which an Apple began first to rot or the week in which an old Groat began first to be defaced and loose its form than require a determinate point of time or perhaps the year in which such a Doctrine began to be corrupted into an heretical sense and practise But many of these are very exactly and faithfully set down and found short of immemorialness of Tradition as they term it For Succession another note of the Church I find it by some divided into Succession Doctrinal and Personal meaning better than they speak For I know nothing properly succeeding but where something is departed or lost Now the Doctrine of the Church being incessant and perpetual and not diverse from it self cannot be said so properly to succeed it self as to persevere in the Church But if we should pass that order and allow this language yet the thing it self seems here quite to be mistaken it being not at present enquired into the Faith of the Church which if it were granted to be sound and Catholick doth not of it self necessarily and fully infer a true Church and upon the reasons before agreed to viz. Due administration of Discipline to be essential to a true Church but into the Form constituting it a Visible and Formal Church to which is indispensably required proper Pastors and that by the appointment of Christ as St. Paul thus witnesseth speaking of Christ leaving Ephes 4. 11 12 the earth and ascending into heaven and deputing thereupon certain Officers in his stead in a visible ministration which he ceaseth now to exercise He gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers For the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ Now it is not necessary here to determine the quarrel about the kind of Officers here mentioned it sufficing to our purpose what is very evident that they who are Governours of the Church must be given to the Church by Christ But Christ acting no longer politically or visibly as hath been said and must be yielded but mystically he cannot be said to ordain any immediately in his own person but by the ministry of others Now how is it possible to distinguish them whom Christ hath appointed to constitute others in the Church from them to whom he hath given no such order but by this succession we now speak of namely a traduction of that faculty which is in one deriving it originally though by many intermediate hands from Christ himself to another succeeding him because as the Apostle to the Hebrews speaks the Priests are not suffered to continue by reason of Death This Hebr. 7. 23. surrogation then of Pastors and Priests is not to be at the pleasure or arbitrement of men to institute but must be by the will of Christ and this will of Christ must be revealed unto us either by the ordinary line and course from himself and Apostles or else must by some extraordinary and miraculous way be made known to men For though we deny it to be Christs practise to commission men to these ends we do not deny it to be
themselves For though infinite Instances may be given of Cities and Nations which have wrung the Civil Power out of the hands of their Princes and Magistrates and pretended they would be ruled by their own Counsels and power yet could they never effect this but were constrained after all devices used to no purpose to let go their hold if not Pretensions and suffer the assumed Power to return to a more capable subject Which incapacity of using such Power is no less then an unanswerable Demonstration to me that it was never there placed by any divine Will or Right but somewhere else Now though some eminent Reformers of the Late Age have been so superfluously and in truth superstitiously nice and as is pretended jealous for Christs honour and absolute Headship over his Church that would not so much as allow the name of Government to the Church or any in it least Christ should suffer loss but administration must be the Junius de Ecclesia name signifying power and Rule exercised in the Church yet in truth all this is no better then a Superstitious fear where there is no fear For they are not names but things that are so much to be heeded And if these men in their Charge had not acted the part of Governours as well as others we might have allowed this invention for tollerable but the truth is the honour pretended to Christ and the Gentle usage of the People have ended in the same thing which the other more openly and honestly professed to do the difference being only in the Hands so acting But 't is no new thing to beguile dissetled people with new words into new orders neither will it ever be left off as common a Stratagem as it is so long as the People are people and Craft and Ambition shall spurrmen of Fortune to currie and scratch that unruly beast to the end that when they find it convenient they may get up of them and ride them at their pleasure This incapacity of all Christians to rule themselves being the same with the other necessarily inferreth a more proper subject of that Power which not being assumed but delivered any more then the Faith it self founds a distinction of Christians and the Church as ancient as the Church it self not unknown to Civil Societies For as hath been said a Kingdom or Commonwealth is said to decree and act such a thing when not the thousand part thereof so much as know any thing of it till it be done so that clearly there is a Nation Real and Representative and Formal and proper This consisteth of all Persons in that Society and every member of that Political Bodie The other of such Principal Parts of that Bodie as are in Possession of autority and power to Rule the rest and whose Acts are interpreted to be the Acts of the whole State And that the Church consisting of infinite Persons uncapable of consulting or acting Decretorily must and alwayes had certain Select Persons representing the whole which it should conclude the thing it self together with Precedents of all Places and Ages do prove The greatest arguments and most colourable are taken from the Infancy of the Church to the contrary For both Hereticks and Schismaticks endeavour at contrary conclusions from the Scripture Patrons of the Popes absoluteness argue from a Superiority or Primacy of order in St. Peter when the Church consisted it may be of twenty persons to make good the Popes pretensions to supremacy over the universal Church when it consisteth of so many Nations But to this our answer is ready First that the like power was never in St. Peter over his fellow Apostles and the Rest that is claimed by the Present Bishop of Rome Secondly That if such a Power as is asserted to St. Peter for the Popes sakehad ever been in him really yet it could be no good ground of his Successors claiming the same over the Catholick Church And that First because there is no probability of the like Gifts and Graces requisite to such Autority in the Popes of Rome as were given by Christ to St. Peter yea there are more instances to be given of the Ignorance and horrible vitiousness of Persons possessing that Chaiâ— then in any other Patriarchal See in Christendom Secondly There is no Rule of Certainty setting aside the Personal incapacities and imperfections how far the Apostolical power was derived to their Successors but what may be taken from the end of such power which was to conserve the Church in due order of Government Devotion and Faith and this may as well and better be performed without one Persons engrossing to himself the Disposal of all things Primarily though not in the Execution Thirdly the difference is vast between the Church consisting of so few and contracted into so narrow a circuit as at the first founding of it when one man might have with great facility taken the whole management of the Church upon him and in following Ages when it was diffused into so many and far distant quarters of the Universe not to be inspected or managed by one man though an Apostle On the other side Persons of Democratical Principles and purposes finding in holy Writ that the whole Church without distinction of Persons were often assembled together and that during their such meeting matters concerning the due administration of the Church were treated of collect from thence that in right and not rather occasionally they concurred to Publick Acts of the Church but this likewise is a fallacy without any necessity of consequence as will appear from the original and orderly search made into the first Constitution and the gradual Progress of Ecclesiastical Persons and functions First then That Christ is the Head of the Church and under that General notion of Power life and motion doth communicate his influence unto his Body the Scripture is so manifest and it is so generally and willingly by all assented to that it were lost time to insist on it He is then by immediate consequence the fountain of all Power resting in that Body as doth appear from the several Appellations subordinate to that of Head attributed unto him in Scripture For Hebrews the third and first he is called The Apostle of our profession And in the Book of the Acts he is stiled that Prophet Heb. 3. 1. Acts. 3. 22. Deut. 18. 15. Luk. 4. 18. which was in Deuteronomie promised to the true Israel And an Evangelist he is made to us by his own words verifying the Prediction of Esaias upon himself Saying The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he hath anointed me to preach the Gospel And St. Peter calleth him our 1 Pet. 2. 25. Mat. 23. 10. Bishop Doctour or Master he claims as proper to himself in St. Mathew And to the Hebrews as before he is called a Priest an High priest yea lastly a Deacon or Minister for the words properly used signify the same Rom. 15. 8. thing
Eucharist and especially going upon the grounds of Luther Calvin Perkins and some others of Great note that all Sacerdotal they may call them if they please Ministerial Acts done by him who is no true Minister are really null and void Fourthly we conclude that seeing all Ecclesiastical power as Ecclesiastical doth proceed from Christ and his Successors and that by Ordinary and visible means they who have not received the same by such Ordinary Methods are usurpers of the same whether Political or Mystical And that to deny this to the Church is to deny that which Christ hath given them and such a Principle of the Churches well Being without which it cannot subsist and it not subsisting neither can the Faith it self And to the reason above given we may add Prescription beyond all memory For from Christs time to this day a perpetual and peculiar power hath ever been in the Clergy which hath constantly likewise born the name of the Church to assemble define and dispose matters of Religion And why should not Prescription under Unchristian as well as Christian Governours for so many Ages together be as valid sacred and binding to acknowledgment in the Case of Religion as Civil Matters will ever remain a question in Conscience and common Equity even after irresistible Power hath forced a Resolution otherwise It is true such is the more natural and Ancient Right Civil Power hath over the outward Persons of men than that which Religion hath over the Inward man that it may claim a dominion and disposal of the Persons of even Christian subjects contrary to the soft and infirm Laws of the Church because as hath been said Men are Men before they are Christians and Nature goeth before Grace And Civil society is the Basis and support to Ecclesiastical Yet the grounds of Christianity being once received for good and divine and that Religion cannot subsist nor the Church consist without being a Society and no Society without a Right of counsel and consultation and no consultation without a Right to assemble together the Right of assembling must needs be in trinsique to the Church it self Now if no man that is a Christian can take away the essential ingredient to the Church how can any deny this of Assembling For the practise of it constantly and confidently by the Apostles and brethren contrary to the express will of the Lawful Powers of the Jews and Romans and the reason given in the Acts of the Apostles of obeying God rather then man do imply certainly a Law and Charter from God so to do and if this be granted as it must who can deny by the same Rule necessity of Cause and constant Prescription that they may as well provide for the safety of the Faith by securing the state of the Church as for the truth and stability of the Church by securing the true Faith by doctrine and determination The Great question hath ever been Whether the Church should suffer loss of power and priviledges upon the Supream Powers becomming Christian Or the Supream power it self loose that dominion which it had before it became of the Church For if Christianity subjected Kings necessarily to the Laws of others not deriving from them then were not Kings in so good a Condition after they were Christians as before when they had no such pretences or restraints upon them and so should Christs Law destroy or maim at least the Law of God by which Kings reign But there may be somewhatsaid weakning this absurdity For Granting this That there is a God and that he is to be worshipped and that as he appointeth all which we must by nature believe it seems no less natural to have these observed than the Laws of natural Dominion Now granting that at present which if we be true to our Religion we must not deny viz. That Christian Religion is the true Religion and that God will be worshipped in such sort as is therein contained For any Prince absolute to submit to the essentials of that Religion is not to loose any thing of his Pristine Rights which he had before being an Heathen for he never had any Right to go against the Law of God more then to go against the Law of Nature but it doth restrain his Acts and the exercise of his Power And if the Supream after he hath embraced Christianity shall proceed to exert the same Authority over the Church as before yet the Church hath no power to resist or restrain him Civilly any more than when he was an Alien to it Now it being apparent that Christian Faith and Churches had their Forms of believing and Communion before Soveraign powers were converted and that he who is truly converted to a Religion doth embrace it upon the terms which he there finds not such as he brings with him or devises therefore there lies an Obligation upon such powers to preserve the same as they found it inviolate And truly for any secular Power to become Christian with a condition of inverting the orders of the Church and deluting the Faith is to take away much more than ordinary accrues unto it by such a change It is true the distinction is considerable between the Power of a Christian and unchristian King exerted in this manner because taking the Church in the Largest sense in which all Christians in Communion are of it what Christian Kings act with the Church may in some sense bear the name of the Church as it doth in the State acting according to their secular capacity but much more improperly there than here because there are no inferiour Officers or Magistrates in such a Commonwealth which are not of his founding and institution whatsoever they do referr to him and whatsoever almost he doth is executed by them But Christ as we have shewed having ordained special Officers of his own which derive not their Spiritual Power at all from the Civil and to this end that his Church might be duly taught and governed what is done without the concurrence of these can in no proper sense bear the name of the Church But many say the King is a Mixt person consisting partly of Ecclesiastical and partly Civil Authority but this taken in the ordinary latitude is to begg the Question and more a great deal than at first was demanded For who knows how far this Mixture extends and that it comprehends not the Mystical Power of the Church as well as the Political And how have they proved one more than the other by such a title It were reasonable therefore first to declare his Rights in Ecclesiastical matters as well as Civil and thence conclude he is a Mixt Person and not to affirm barely he is a Mixt Person and from thence inferr they know not what Ecclesiastical power themselves And if he hath such power whether it is immediately of God annexed to his Natural Right or by consent of the Church is attributed unto him For by taking this course we
may reconcile many otherwise contrary opinions found amongst the Ancient Fathers sometimes ascribing much of the Ecclesiastical Power to Christian Emperours and sometimes calling the same in question The Church of England so far as she hath declared herself herein seemeth to take the mean way and follow herein the Prescriptions of the Old Testament and the Precedents of Christian Emperors found in the Antient Church under the Gospel and doth profess to be the due of our Kings as much as ever any Kings upon earth to sway in Ecclesiastical matters In execution of which power as there was alwayes approbation moderated according to the customes of the Church so was there always Opposition when the bounds were exceeded And undoubtedly true is That we are taught by our Church to acknowledge That whatever in Church Constitutions and Canons Church of England Can. 2. matters was the Right of Jewish Kings or Christian Emperours of Old is so now the Right of our Kings But some not content herewith have out of the Title of Head given at the first attempts of Reformation to our King and made by acts of State Hereditary to his successors drawn an argument to prove all that power which rested in the Church to be devolved on the Kings of this Nation But this hath ever been disowned and disclaimed in such a large sense by themselves as appears by Queen Elizabeths Injunctions and an Act of Parliament in confirmation whereof I shall here only recite the opinion or testimony of Bishop Jewel in his view of Pius Quintus his seditious Bull Bishop Jewel against the Bull of Pius 5th against her in these his own word Where is the called Supream Head Peruse the Acts of Parliament the Records the Rolls and the Writs of Chancery or Exchequer which pass in her Graces name Where is she ever called Supream Head of the Church No No brethren she refuseth it she would not have it nor be so called Why then doth Christs Vicar blaze and spread abroad so gross an untruth c. This was her Judgement and modesty then when there was greatest cause to apprehend some such thing and what she thought of it I never could learn was ever otherwise interpreted by her Successors For notwithstanding that according to the most ancient and undoubted Rights of this Emperial Crown our Kings are supream Governors of the Church as well as State yet never was it expounded of the Church as they were Ecclesiastical but as they were of Civil capacity For herein differeth the Right of Kings according to our Reformation from that of Roman Perswasion That Clergy men becoming Sons of the Church in more especial manner than they of the Laity are not thereby exempted from the Civil Power either in matter of propertie or Criminalness But the Roman Church so far exalted and extended their Ecclesiastical Power as to withdraw such Persons and their Cases civil from Civil cognizance and judgement and assume it to themselves And this the Pope claiming very injuriously as Head of the Church To root up this usurpation Henry the eight null'd that his pretence and took the title to himself intending nothing more then to vindicate his Prerogative in that particular For though it cannot be denied that many and great Priviledges to this effect have been of Old granted by Christian Emperours to eminent Bishops to judge of their own Sons as they were called within themselves yet did they never claim this as a Native Right of the Church or Christianity but as an act of Grace from the Civil Power And though the Church following therein the Councel of St. Paul to go to Law rather before 1 Cor. 6. 1. the Just than unjust and that Christians should rather determine Causes of differences amongst themselves by arbitration than scandalously apply themselves to the Judgement Seat of Heathen did ever endeavour to determine business within it self and yet more especially the Clergy Yet they never denied a Right in Civil Autority to call them in question upon misdemeanours or to decide their Cases of Civil nature And for the other of Divine nature or purely Ecclesiastical Princes never expected or desired to intermeddle therewith This the Roman Deputy of Achaia Gallio understood not to concern his Juridical power when Act. 18. he refused to be a Judge of such matters as were esteemed Religious though in that violence was offered to the body of St. Paul before his face he might and ought to have shewn his Autority But when the Soveraign Power became Christian it was not thought unlawful at all nor scandalous to address themselves to it for decision of Controversies And this is it which is intended to be demanded now by our Kings in their Supremacy in Cases Ecclesiastical and Civil and acknowledged by the Clergy of this Church to be his due without that servile way of seeking leave from the Bishop of Rome or any under him Onely where it may be showed that Peculiar Grants of Exemptions from the common course of Justice have been made by Princes to the Clergy of the Church may it not seem equal that they should enjoy the benefit of them as well as others in other Cases But nothing is more unreasonable or intollerable then the impudence of those spitefully and malitiously bent against the Religion professed in our Church who argue from the Kings Supremacy over the Church such an absolute dominion there as they will by no means acknowledge due to him in the State If by Acts of Parliament a thing be confirmed to the Commonwealth it is lookt on as inviolable by the King and unalterable without the like solemn Revocation as was the Constitution But by vertue of the Ancient Right of the Crown they would have it believed the King may at his pleasure alter such solemn Acts made in behalf of the Church Without the concurrence of the Three Estates nothing is lookt upon as a standing Law to the Civil State but by vertue of this Supremacy Ecclesiastical they would have it believed that without any more ado without consent or counsel of the Church he may make what alteration of Religion he pleases which was never heard or dreamt of Yea and whereas not only his Civil but Ecclesiastical Power always acknowledged the Bounds of common benefit and extended not to destruction they would have it thought that he may when he pleaseth by vertue of such Headship destroy the Body of the Church and Religion and leave none at all so far at least as the withdrawing of all secular aid and advantage do hasten its ruine But they will not be of this opinion any longer than they have brought about their mischievous purposes Surely St. Paul who had 1 Cor. 5. 12. nothing to do at all with State matters and could not touch one that was without the Church by Ecclesiastical censure was as much the Head of the Church as ever any Prince in Christendom doth expressly declare that whatsoever
may possibly to them were this any more than to say They would be at peace and unity with them when they became of their mind did as they would have them and not differ from them But I have transgressed I fear on this subject here at present which yet is not impertinent altogether it proving that it is Lawful to Excommunicate such who agree with us in Faith And the summ of the reason is this viz. Because there are as hath been acknowledged on both sides yea is almost on all sides granted two things essential to the Church Doctrine and Government or Discipline as it is called to act any thing to the violation of either of these may justly subject a man to this Ecclesiastical Censure And however at first sight dissension and opposition to the Rites and practices of a Church may not appear of a mortal nature of themselves as being perhaps about things in nature alterable yet in the consequence making a breach in the wall of the City of God they let in certain ruine and destruction Thieves and Robers And this holds no less to the Justification of the Church in Excommunicating refractory and disobedient persons to the Church in her citations though in truth the ground of her citation be matter of small moment It were indeed much to be wish'd that such severe sentences might not be executed but on occasions of greatest moment not only for the persons sake so excluded but the Churches sake denouncing whose autority must needs be much weakened and her sentence much contemned when upon matters appearing meerly trivial and light it is inflicted And therefore most useful it seemeth That redress of pecuniary pretensions on persons relating to Ecclesiastical Courts should not be by Excommunication but from the Civil Power enabling the Ecclesiastical to exact their dues But where this is not in use and where no other means appears of obliging men to reverence and submit to Ecclesiastical Powers but the punishment Ecclesiastical I would fain have such persons who profess not the utter abolition of such autority and dissolution propound some other effectual way of keeping up the power and autority of those Courts besides Excommunication before they declare so smartly against the abuse of it Lastly whosoever doth by contempt and disobedience first deny the Churches power and in very deed sever himself from it can he or any man of Christian reason or modesty contradict the Churches Act in declaring and formally manifesting what was more closely but really before done by himself So far as a man disobeys and opposes the Church so far is he really separated from it And to be partly on and partly off as some men propound to themselves and please themselves in thinking it free to choose and leave at their pleasure what their private judgements shall lead them to is not at all to clear them from the guilt or imputation of Schismaticalness For all proper Schismaticks agree in many things with the Church which they trouble and divide And every Schismatick stands divided from the Church And may not the censure of the Church by Excommunication most reasonably at least follow a mans own Act and declare that to be so which himself hath made so especially not only thereby or so much punishing the Offendor as securing the innocent and sound by such notice from the like contagion Doth not St. Paul cleerly imply so much when Gal. 5. 12. he saith to the Gallatians I would they were even cut off that trouble you How did these intruders and seducers so trouble the Church as to deserve such Excision or Cutting off By two things principally one whereof follows in the next verse by a presumption of such Christian Liberty which was never intended by Christ for his Church Another was in point Gal. 1. 6 7. of doctrine innovating rather in form than words For it was not another doctrine of the Gospel that was offered to these green and unstable Christians but another Form the easier to prevail upon their Consciences and to alienate them from their true Pastors Such as these would the Apostle have Cut off and therefore very false and frivolous is that ground of Socinian Extract mentioned in the beginning viz. That nothing which in it self hinders not salvation can give just occasion of Excommunication I do not here as many insist much upon the words of Christ in St. Matthew whereby he warrants a man to account him as Heathen and publican Math. 18. 15 16 17. who shall refuse to hear the Church arbitrating and judging within it self because I am of their opinion who expound this not of excommunication from the Church but of a freedom granted to a man to go to the humane Civil Power for justice against such a brother as if he were no better than a Heathen and Publican who will not listen to the voice and judgement of the Church Yet surely this intimates a power in the Church to determine and a duty in the members of it to submit unto the Judgement of it and if a private man may treat one of his brethren as he would a heathen in some cases may not the Church This is the least we can honestly make of Christs Charter given to the Church by St. Peter in Mat. 16. 19. the same Gospel I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven But consideration and limitation of this grievous censure is not to be omitted according to diversity of Persons Relations and the Causes given from whence I suppose arose the distinction of Major and Minor or Greater and Lesser Excommunication of ancient use in the Church And Anathema and Excommunication according to the Ancient differ For Excommunication is nothing else but a denunciation of a person alienated from the Communion of the Church in the mysteries and worship proper to Christians And this we may take to be the Lesser Excommunication but Anathema or the Greater Excommunication besides excluding from Christian Communion added a Curse corporal which the Scripture calls properly a Delivering unto Satan as well for the destruction of Body as Soul Thus was that incestuous person excommunicated by St. Paul For the destruction of the flesh that the Spirit may be 1 Cor. 5â— 5. saved in the day of the Lord Jesus Christ For though we say that this Anathema was to the destruction of the flesh we mean only Actually as in that state but the end of that was rather the Salvation of it by such outward judgements reducing the offender to repentance This Anathema upon the body by plaguing it being miraculously inflicted hath ceased But yet not all bodily punishments with it taking here bodily punishments not only for bodily pains but bodily and outward losses Of this sort may be those separate men from all Civil Communion
thus spoken of the Political Power of the Church which we so call because it imitates that which is so more properly called in directing the visible Body of the Church to its proper end as the Pilot doth the ship to its proper Haven and hath both Visible Acts and Effects We are now to treat of that Power We in distinction to that other do call Mystical because the End and Effect thereof is not outward or visible but inward spiritual and Mysterious and therefore also call it Sacramental Sacrament and Mystery being the same in the Original Phrase of the New Testament For to the Church as they are more peculiarly called who are Officers in the same doth it of Right appertain to celebrate these Mysteries Wherefore first we shall speak of the Sacraments in General as the manner is and then in Particular The word Sacrament is rather of Gentile than Christian original there being no word in the New Testament proper to it but the vulgar Translation Sacramentum est invisibilis gratiae invisibilis forma ita ut ejus similitudinemgerat et causa existat Gulielmus Antissiodorensis Sum. Lib. 4. Cap. 1. thinking fit to render Mystery Sacrament in Latin the Antienter Latin Church hath made use of it to express certain Mysterious Rites of sacred and necessary use in the Church of God about which word so long since received no contention ought to be had The Nature Number Minister and Use of them deserving principal enquiry A Sacrament is defin'd as is commonly known by St. Augustine a Visible sign of an Invisible Grace which being taken rigorously seemeth not to comprehend the whole nature of it therefore Antissiodorensis would have its defect supplied thus A Sacrament is a visible form of an Invisible Grace whereof it is also the Cause But considering the many and sharp disputes upon this subject I suppose it may be more fully described to be A visible sign ordained by God to produce an invisible effect of Grace in the soul of Man This definition may be collected from the several parts of it contained in the word of God as first from St. Paul to the Romans speaking of Circumcision a prime Sacrament given by God to Abraham and his seed And he received the sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness Rom. 4. 11. of Faith which he had being yet uncircumcised For there are three special properties of a Sacrament commonly acknowledged To Signifie To Seal To Effect Grace but in strickness of speech these make but two Acts. For either a Thing doth barely signify and declare another or it concurreth to the being of another where things are Related one to another For seals are no more than signs binding more firmly to the fulfilling of the contents of an Instrument or Conveyance For as in such Cases the Free good will of the Donour is the only cause of an inheritance given the Instrument of Conveyance consisting of so many words are the signs of the inward will the seals are but signs of the signs of words that is an assurance that what was signified in the said Instrument should hold good And the Actual Delivery of this is the immediate Cause of entring into possession or enjoyment of this Gift In like manner The word of God promising his Graces to us signifies the will of God to that end The Sacraments superadded do likewise sensibly signifie unto us the earnest God is in when he made promises unto us as Seals And the actual exhibiting of these signs or seals on Gods Part by his Proxy or Ministers and the due receiving of them on our Part do put us into a fruition of those things which were so signified and promised First then They must be a sign that is a Representation of a thing and not the thing it self and that to add to our knowledge and Faith for if there were no agreement between the thing signifying and the thing signified the word of God alone had sufficed to that end Secondly they must be ordained of God For if no man in common justice can give away another mans estate but the true owner of it how should it be possible or equal or credible that any other besides God himself the Owner of his graces should by instruments of his own forging convey such heavenly benefits to mankind which properly belong to God This were supream folly and presumption to attempt Or can any man know Gods mind or methods of working before he hath revealed them Therefore it is said that God gave Abraham the Sign and Seal of Circumcision Thirdly they must rather be ordained Arbitrarily of God and by special Institution then Naturally least the Free Grace of God therein contained should suffer and the effect be ascribed rather to natural than supernatural Causes For though the cutting off of the foreskin of the flesh by explication intimate the cutting off of the filth of the Soul yet naturally it could not be so well understood And God might if he had pleased ordained the cutting off of the tip of the ear to serve the same ends And so in baptism Water doth naturally cleanse bodily filthiness but without notice given of Gods will and grace it could never have been believed possible to affect the soul and purify it Fourthly as there must be some agreement between the thing signifying and signified there must also be a real difference in their nature For nothing in nature or reason can signify it self because nothing can be clearer than it self For when a thing is obvious to our senses or otherwise apparent Sicut Signum et res ipsa aliquando possint esse diversa ita saepenumero et in multis eadem esse possunt Tunstal 9. de Eucharistia fol 16. we do not say we have a sign of such a thing but the thing it self Yet this most certain Rule is sought to be bafled and overthrown by Cavillers who would bring in their false doctrine of the Eucharist and would shew from bread on a Stall or Cloath which signifies bread and Cloath as well as is bread and Cloath that the same body of Christ may be a sign of it self But their attempts in their Instance fail them because that Bread which is exposed to be sold or that Cloath is not a sign of it self viz. That it is cloath or bread but is so only but it is only a sign that either it is to be sold which is quite another thing from Cloath it self or it is a sign of other cloath which doth not appear And so the body of Christ in the Eucharist is not a sign of that Body which doth appear but of that which doth not appear And therefore a Fifth condition of a Sacrament is That it should visibly signify something invisible and spiritual Lastly that Sacraments are to be not only significant or which comes to the same Sealing but efficacious in themselves upon the souls of men which may deserve further explication
according to the judgment of many of the Ancients it was Christs intention we should have but two Sacraments when he shed from his Divine side water and blood insinuating thereby Baptism and the Sacrament of his Blood And another argument intimating 1 Cor. 10. 1 2 3 4. that Christ ordained but two Sacraments in the New Testament is taken from the due conformity between the Shadows and Types of the Law and the Substance of the Gospel The Law had but two Sacraments proper Circumcision and the Passover and therefore that these two should prefigure only two in the Gospel is most probable But not only the Fathers of old but Schoolmen did alwayes acknowledge a due proportion to be observed between these And it makes nothing against this That the Fathers do often call some at least of the other five Sacraments because then they spoke at large as we said before A second general Reason may be That as they have no precept so have they no promise from Christ of Grace or favour Spiritual For Ordination indeed hath an ordinary Gift of Ecclesiastical Power but no assurance of special Grace belonging to it Confirmation hath a good and laudable end but no special Promise to it Repentance hath a promise but hath no outward visible sign upon which the word is built to make it a Sacrament for this is a Third Reason of the equality of Sacraments Because all true and proper Sacraments must consist as well of outward signs to which the word and Grace are annext as of the Grace it self therein given But all these Sacraments have not these Signs and they which have an appearance of visible signs have them not by Gods institution Fourthly The Sacraments of the Gospel are of concernment to all true Christians according to their Capacities but all Christians are not by the confession of the Patrons of seven Sacraments bound to marry or to be in Holy Orders Nay some are absolutely interdicted the use of some of the reputed Sacraments as are women from Holy Orders therefore whatever may possibly be said concerning the not circumcising of Women under the Law under the Gospel there being neither Male nor Female as St. Paul affirmeth that cannot be a Sacrament equal in sacredness or necessity of which Women are not capable Fifthly The general Nature of Sacraments is such as renders the due Partakers of them more holy than they are who receive them not but no man saies that marriage faithfully observed doth make any person more holy then Virginity therefore it cannot be a Sacrament If they here say That Marriage is not a Sacrament absolutely but only as it is Christian and a representation of Christs conjunction with his Church and as it is blessed by the Priest I answer First to this latter That blessing doth not alter the kind of the thing but only sanctifies the thing it self and therefore Marriage in Heathens and Christians is the same in nature but not in the circumstances of Holiness And whenas St. Paul saith in his Epistle to the Ephesians having before treated of solemn Marriage This Eph. 5. 31 32 is a great mystery from whence commonly is drawn an argument of a Sacramentalness in Marriage of Christians the reply is easie which quite nulls the conclusion First Because it is as manifest as a thing need be that St. Paul doth speak rather of Heathens marriage than Christian as appears from his citation of the first institution of Marriage which comprehends all and therefore according to themselves could not intend to make a Sacrament of it seeing it is no Sacrament but as Christian Secondly The word being Mystery doth not properly signifie a Sacrament however the Vulgar Translation might be allowed to translate it so but not men upon that tearm given at large to draw it into the number of Sacraments St. Paul saith to the Corinthians Behold I show you a mystery 1 Cor. 15. we shall not all dye but we shall all be changed Is this a Sacrament also But many of the Fathers have so called it It may be so in the sense before spoken of in which many more things may so be called But lastly The Apostle in that Place to the Ephesians doth expresly remove that tearm Mystery from the natural or civil conjunction of Man and Woman Eph. 5. 27 29. in Matrimony and restrain it to Christ and his Church and doth not so much as say that Marriage is a mystery For having drawn an Argument for the due observation of Wedlock and its Rights that seeing Christ loved his Church man should love his Church he addeth afterward This is a great mystery but I speak of Christ and the Church which is as 32. if it had been said Here is a great Mystery but this Mystery I mean not So much of external Marriage but internal between Christ and his Church But after all this seeing we grant with many of the Ancients That the name Sacrament is communicable to more than two it is not much worth the contending whether we make more or fewer than seven while we reserve a peculiar sacredness to these two above others Let us rather touch upon them in their nature than name as best worthy to be rightly understood And first of Orders briefly as having spoken thereof in treating of the Political Power of the Church and there shown the necessity of them according to Christs intention and institution which was to make a discrimination between Persons and the several Members of that Body the Church of which he is the Head as is also sufficiently insinuated by St. Paul to the Corinthians saying But now hath Göd set the Members every one of 1 Cor. 12. 18. them in the Body as it hath pleased him where he doth not speak of moral but Political excellency and order of Inferiour and Superiour From whence the name of the Function is taken For as St. Augustine defines it Order is Civ Dei Lib. 19. 13. the disposing or ranking of equal and unequal things in their proper places And therefore sometimes the Church is divided by the Ancients into Clergy and Laity as two Orders Again The Clergy by the Ancienter into three only Bishop Priest and Deacon as Optatus Afterwards some made Isidorus Hispalens Orig. Lib. 7. c. 12. six some seven some nine as Hispalensis who likewise subdivideth the Bishop into four Orders Patriarch Metropolitane Arch-Bishop and simple Bishop So that it were not worth the labour to strive about words here and especially in distinguishing Order from Degree in the Church For though the distinction in nature be manifest between the first importing a diversity in kind and the other in condition of the same kind yet the Church cannot be though to speak so circumspectly at all times and so precisely as not to use them promiscuously divers times so that because she sometimes speaks of Degrees they should deny the Order of the same thing Neither
and this is to our brethren whom we have wronged and scandalized And is either publick when we have done any thing against the Church in general by unchristian practises as Murders Sacriledge Uncleanness and such like It was constantly required that such should satisfie the will of the Church of which they were members and undergo penalties or penances judged meet for such offences and not be admitted into brotherly communion until they had suffered for their folly to the content of the Church A laudable necessary practise to be retained still as well that the offender being put to publick shame for publick sins might amend his life and the Church may be preserved from the like contagion of sin For notorious offenders being excluded from the Communion were not restored to it until such satisfaction as this was made Another satisfaction much of the same nature with this is that which ought to be made to the utmost of our power to them whom we have wronged by unjust words or deeds against them which is necessary for the obtaining of Gods mercy and pardon to us For if we must forgive the injuries done unto us if we would have God forgive us our trespasses ought we not much more to give every man his due in point of justice The first seems to be a Law purely Evangelical but the second Natural supposed to the Gospel as imperfect yet most necessary The Rule therefore amongst Divines is most certain The sin is not pardoned until the thing Non remittitur peccatum nisi restituatur ablatum cum restitui potest Aug. Epist 54 taken away be restored Now we take away a mans Good name and we take away his Estate unjustly and before we can say we have repented we must be careful to our utmost to make this Satisfaction or Restitution Where we take away a mans life we cannot indeed ever satisfie the Party no though we should dedicate our own lives to him yet so far as we can even outwardly humble our selves by afflicting our bodies and purses and especially endeavouring by extraordinary acts of bounty and Charity to preserve the lives of such who stand in need of our assistance and relief It was no satisfaction to him whose eye was put out or tooth broken to have the eye or tooth of his Adversary to be struck out for it Yet it shewed in the Moral sense thus much that our utmost indeavour must not be wanting to make satisfaction to them we have wilfully spoiled oppressed defrauded or otherwise injured For otherwise it doth not appear how a man dying conscious of such apparent injustices as these can escape the damnation of hell A new stupifying notion of Faith freely justifying may perhaps be so ministred to him as to quiet his Conscience but save his Soul it cannot where it is in a mans power to make recompence and satisfie injuries and injustices But because man is naturally so partial unto himself as for his ease and self-love to make the best construction of Gods mercy inconditionate to him and his sins against God It was never in open notorious scandalous sins permitted to the offender to judge for himself but his actions were subject to Ecclesiastical censures and proper punishments imposed upon him to bring him by those outward censures to inward remorse Which severe censures when they were observed to have a great effect upon the Penitent were divers times remitted in part lightened and shortened by the favour of the Church which were called therefore Indulgences Following herein the precept and example of St. Paul in the like case of the incestuous Corinthian excommunicated out of the Church who demonstrating sincere and extraordinary repentance for such his fact St. Paul with a 2 Cor. 2. 6 7. fatherly affection puts a stop to the utmost process of his Penance saying Sufficient to such a man is this punishment which was inflicted of many So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him and comfort him lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with over-much sorrow c. Lest the punishment imposed on grievous offenders meeting with a tender spirit should break the heart rather then humble it and cast him away whom they intended to save thereby a seasonable relaxation was alwayes at hand to the restauration of such an one But as for that sense and gross abuse of Indulgence whereby it is turned to remit sins aforehand without due humiliation passed and not only so but to reach the torments supposed to be inflicted on Christians after this life in Purgatory it is so absurd in it self so unknown to all ancient Christian ages so inconsistent with the doctrine of the Gospel and nature of Repentance that as it is impudence in that Church to pretend any of these to favour it so is it stupidity in any person to lend any credit to it or have any relvance upon it It is usually said That few souls going out of this life so pure and thorowly cleansed as to be fit presently to enter into the holy place of heaven where no unclean thing shall come it is requisite there should remain some place to perfect the purgation of the Soul begun here And that the power of the Church especially the reputed Universal Father of it extendeth in like manner to the mitigating and shortning of those purgative torments as to the penances inflicted upon Penitents on earth Truly if they could but prove what they as yet have not taken the boldness so much as to say that they or the Church inflicted the torments of Purgatory upon sinners there detained I should be apt to believe they could take off the Rod they laid on but never pretending to that I marvel they should pretend to this any more than they dare to the removal of a Fever by an indulgence only because they judged the Party so ill affected to have suffered and been sick long enough There being not the least ground in holy Scripture to enable them so far nor any argument out of Scripture to perswade themselves of this power so great as temporal gain and filthy cursed lucre more like to damn the pretenders to it then save the tormented out of misery But this is upon supposal made of such a Purgatory but that it is only supposed and no real existence appears from most ancient Tradition retained to this day in the Church of Greece which indeed taking occasion from Origen's singular opinion doth affirm a Purgation and that by fire at the last day of the general Resurrection when by an unknown manner God shall cause a purgation and change of the corruptible body of man into an incorruptible condition more fit for heaven and glory Austin sometimes Aug. Civ Dei lib. 21. c. 24. doubted whether any such place or state after death were wherein Souls were detained for their emendation and preparation for Heaven He grants it possible and that it is all but actually and positively so to
doth not distinguish there men ought not to distinguish or limit For if it be alleadged that Instruction and Faith ought to go before this Sacrament according to Christs Intention and institution in St. Matthew It is sufficiently answer'd that seeing the Law General by which baptism is made necessary to Salvation hath no exception or condition annexed to it which may concern Infants Infants are therein contained And this implies an exemption from that naturally impossible preparation of Instruction and Faith properly so called And as Calvin well notes Believing Calvin Institut to infant-Baptism is no more requisite than working to their eating and drinking by vertue of the Apostles precept If any will not work neither 2 Thes 3. 10. should he eat Faith and repentance both are required necessarily of such who are capable of them or able to oppose them but of them who are not capable and have no actual sin to be repented of the Act of them who have the Care of them and Tuition joyned with the passiveness or non-remitency of the Infants found a capacity in them But where a Personal power of Willing is found there is exacted a personal knowledge and consent to that Sacrament This will appear from those several reasons built upon the Scriptures First That the Primest antiquity ever so understood the Scripture and practised accordingly Not that Baptism was presently as now administred to Children at their coming into the world seeing Antiquity gives us many instances of such who were not baptized till they came to years of discretion though they were born of Christian Parents For some continued Catecheumenes together with them who were young and Converted from Heathenism unto Christianity Others of purpose and design protracted the time of their baptism upon an opinion that all their Actual as well as Original sins were washed away in Baptism and concluded they had the less to answer for if they were baptized towards the latter end of their dayes Yet though this abuse of Baptism prevailed not upon that opinion only but upon the occasion which was taken of educating and instructing Infidels in the Faith for some good time before they were baptized which custome divers born of Christian Parents imitated yet we find none that the Church wilfully suffered to die without Baptism who were descended of true believers or had been competently instructed in the Faith of Christ which was alwayes according to Christs words intended towards them who had None to resign them up to God and compromise for their due perseverance in the Faith So that there is not the least evidence of Autority ancient in the Church rejecting the baptism of children or denying them to be subjects capable of it And none opposed the same until the year 1030 when Guimund Bishop of Aversa in Campania accused Berengarius Deacon of Anjou for denying Infant-baptism though that opinion was not found directly to be Berengarius's But about the year 1130 this Heresie began to discover it self in France and Germany and was Headed by Peter Bruis and Henricus his Scholar From whom that Faction was called Petrobrusians and Henricians denying withal a Capacity of Childrens entring into the Kingdom of Heaven affirming That only they who were baptized and believed could enter into Heaven But the Waldenses who succeeded them in many of their opinions rejected this their Dogme and so the controversy ceased until the year 1522. when one Nicolas Stork and Thomas Muncer two desperately Phanatical men stirred Sleiden Comment up this opinion and other wicked fancies concerning Civil Government wherein this Latter perished miserably Yet this error was not so soon or easily suppressed but spread farther and continued by the great industry and zeal of Melchior Rinck and Balthazar Hebmaier until about the year 1532 it received its complement from the tongue and hand of Melchior Hofman a Leather-dresser of Germany and so hath been propagated to other places and to this day But not only did none of the ancients oppose Pedobaptism but have declared and proved the use of it As did Irenaus Tertullian Origen Cyprian Augustine and others downward were this a proper place to shew so much We shall rather proceed to those Scriptural reasons inferring this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. cont Arium pag. 147. Tom. â— Secondly either all Children must be damned dying unbaptized or they must have baptism The consequent is plain from that Principle in Christian Religion which Anabaptists have been constreined to deny to uphold their other That all sin not washed away or expiated exposes to damnation and the Principle in Christian Religion is That Children come into the world infected with Originalâ—sm and therefore if there be no remedy against that provided by God all Children of Christian Parents which St. Paul sayes are Holy are liable to eternal death without remedy Now there is no remedy but Christ and his death and Passion are not communicated unto any but by outward Signs and Sacraments And no other do we read of but this of Water in Baptism And the invitation of Christ of infants in St. Mathew doth imply a capacity in them of Grace For Mat. 19. when Christ saith Suffer little Children to come unto me and forbid them Mar. 13. 14. not for of such is the Kingdome of God he doth not mock meaning literally that Infants who are not able to go or stand should come unto him on their own leggs So neither doth he mean in the spiritual sense that Children who have neither reason nor Faith should come unto him by Faith before they be baptized but be brought to him by the Faith of others which may profit them who resist not though they seek not that Grace Thirdly They that are of the Covenant and of the Body of the Church really ought also to be formal partakers of that Body and this they only can obtain by being admitted solemnly into the congregation of Christs Faithful and Elect Church As the children of the Israelites were of necessity to be admitted into the number of that Church by circumcision Gen. 17. 14. or be cut off in wrath from them For St. Paul telleth us how the children of the Believers are sanctified by their Parents And how are they 1 Cor. â—7 14. holy but by being separated from unbelievers and solemnly dedicated to God by the Laver of Regeneration And as in the same place the Apostle saith to the Romans If the first fruit be holy the Lump is holy and if the root be holy so are the branches drawing this Literal to an Evangelical sense and meaning thereby that the Parent being of the Election the Child is so and being so ought to receive the sign of Evangelical circumcision Fourthly The Analogy and apt correspondence between the Sacrament of the Law called Circumcision and that of the Gospel warranteth this For that is not true which they say against this That the Precepts of the New Testament
when it retains its nature not otherwise but cannot determine possibly when the nature first begins to change to a destruction What infinite and grievous suspitions and scruples must evermore afflict the minds of Communicants upon conceit that the matter they so receive may have suffered such strange kind and degrees of composition that the nature of Wine is really lost and an artificial liquor not much to the eye or vulgar taste discernible taken in its stead to the nulling of the effects of the Sacrament and much worse where such a specifical Conversion of the Elements into Christs Body and Blood is maintained and received with answerable Faith and worship The distinction of Material and Formal Idolatry of which we may hereafter speak little redressing that monstrous evil And if we are not so indispensably and absolutely tied to the natures of things in this Action much less ought there to be such warm and uncharitable contentions about the condition form or qualities of those Elements which in no manner change the nature of them as Leavening or Unleavening or forming the bread after the common use or in such manner as may be thought least subject to prophanation in making the Bread into several Cakes or Wafers which though it nulleth not the Sacrament yet it corrupteth the Institution and End both in some measure For First it is certain Christ celebrated on solid usual bread and why should we upon private imaginations next to vain Superstition introduce another order than Christ pitched on and amend by fine contrivances what he but rudely laid down as we irreverently must suppose Again It doth seem more than an indifferent Ceremonie which according to St. Paul and after him the Fathers signified the Unity of Christ and his Members and of his members one with another by that one Sacramental Body visibly representing and exhibiting invisibly Christ in that One Bread And lastly That Ceremony of breaking Bread so much practised by Primitive Christians even in this Sacrament and thereby expressing Christs own proper Body broken for our sins a very Fruitful Reasonable and significant Action is altogether laid aside to the great injury of Christs institution and Christians edification Surely if any thing this is to make our selves wiser than Christ and to be subtiller and more zealous for his Majesty than he would have us which cannot be wiped off by that common refuge and reserve at pinching objections viz The Power of the Church For the Church has no Right what ever Power it may have to make alterations at pleasure upon no better grounds than were at the first known and neglected in Sacramental things though the nature of the Sacrament may remain inviolate For seeing the Sacramental Signs were ordained by Christ to call to remembrance the particulars as well as general of Christs Passion and the manner as well as the thing it self to the intent that the more deep and lively impression might be made thereof in our Souls to pare off out of presumption of the Churches Power and more reverent ministration and participation thereof the Ceremonies so immediately and significantly expressing the End of it and used by Christ himself and for ought doth appear for several Ages after is to invade the Rights and call in question the Wisdom of Christ himself And surely then The Breaking of Bread signifying the violence offered to Christs Body and the Powring out the Wine intimating the shedding of his Blood for us nothing can be more useful and therefore to abrogate these and invent and impose others upon pretences not unknown but rejected at the first Institution argues more superstitious presumption than sober Devotion CHAP. XLII Of the things signified in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the Body and Blood of Christ How they are present in the Eucharist Sacrament ally Present a vain invention All Presence either Corporal or Spiritual Of the Real Presence of the Signs ' and things signified The Real Presence of the Signs necessarily inferr the Presence of the Substance of Bread and Wine Signs and thing signified always distinct BUT thus far of the Signs The things internal and signified are yet of greater importance to our Faith and worship viz. the Body and Blood of Christ The several Disputes about which we shall reduce to these two General Heads briefly to be explained First the manner of Existence of them in the Eucharist And next the manner of Participation which two do mutually illustrate one another For as to the Real Presence it self I find no such real difference which may deserve discussion For surely If Christ or his Body and Blood be at all Present in this Sacrament they are really present For imaginary fictitious presence is no better than a Mockery unworthy of any Philosopher to admit and much more Divine Whatsoever is Really is or not all according to this account And therefore to say We All agree in the thing though we differ in the Manner of Christs Presence is to say no more and to draw no neerer at all to the composing of this difference than we may have any common Philosopher to joyn with us upon this granted that Christ is Present there for that must needs be really So that no Christian can deny the Real Presence absolutely but must presently interpret himself in some peculiar sense to himself And they that do so are wont to begin with a distinction of Sacramental and Corporal or as some Natural Presence For Sacramental Presence it being not at all heard of or known in Logick or Nature nor to be explained by any thing parallel to it out of this Mystery it self who can be the better for it Who can understand what is meant by it before he be resolved of the thing most of all question'd viz What is Sacramental Presence For unless we be cut off here and must not at all enquire What it is to be Sacramentally Present but take the notion at a venture and presume we know what in truth we do not we shall be as hard put to it as before For Sacramentally to be present doth not at all express the manner unless as some seem to mean by it such a Mystical presence that we know not what to make of and in this acceptation every unknown thing should create a new kind of being but imply all senses possible to a Sacrament So that if a man holds Christs body to be in the Sacrament Bodily and naturally this is certainly a Sacramentally and If he holds it to be there Spiritually it is likewise Sacramentally and so whatever other way we can reasonably conceive to be in the Sacrament it must be Sacramentally Sacramental Presence being as is said no one kind of Presence but common to all possible to the Eucharist if not to nature it self It will be more needful to distinguish between Christs Corporal Presence and Christ Corporally Present and there is good ground for to do so For if Presence be as Thomas
us but nothing could suffice to lay aside the proper cerimonies used at the Institution or form of it but such an opinion as that of Transubstantiation â—ellarmin It now sufficing according to moderner Judgments that the several Wafers now in use were all one when they came first from mill and are broken by the Teeth in actually receiving them whereas Christ represented the unity of his mystical Members and Fraction of his Natural Body by the Forms set before his Disciples the better to affect our hearts and quicken our devotion To the same end in Ancienter though not first dayes of Christianity there was an Elevation of the Mysteries made by the Priest to shew only how Christ was Lifted up on the Cross for our sins but upon the doctrine and perswasion of transubstantiation this was corrupted and perverted to the drawing people to a direct Adoration terminated in the Visible objects and not as was anciently used from that Action to take an occasion of worshipping Christ himself with a seqestration of their mind from their senses To this likewise pertains the Grosser devotion for many hundred years impractised and unknown to Christians that not only Adoration to God and Christ should be made by all who approched as Communicants to these Holy Mysteries but that the Host should be on purpose publickly exposed to the view of all enterers into the Church where it is with an injunction to exhibit all devout and divine worship to it which invention the Fathers and all Christian Churches were holy ignorant of for many hundred years and never was there so much as a Feast of Corpus Cristi till Urbane the Fourth instituted one about the year 1263. And the Adoration of the Host as Christ himself much later But if such an opinion had been of any tolerable Antiquity in the Church how could it be avoided but such direct and open Adoraâ—ion should have been given much more early it being a most ancient Principle of Christian Faith that Christ was God and of common humane reason that God is to be worshipped And yet no mention made of such Adorations as are of late introduced and required which is an argument they never believed as now the Romanists do for had they they must have necessarily done as they do But a stop must be put to this luxuriant Subject to keep our selves in the Limits presribed to our selves and here let it be Only having hitherto spoken of the Preparatories to Christian Faith the nature Kinds Acts effects and Lastly subject which is the Church and of this again in its Political and Mystical Capacity and Power which consists in the due Administration of the Sacraments as well Properly as Improperly and Equivocally so called It remains now to conclude and Crown the present doctrine of the Church with that which is most contrary of all things to the Nature of a Visible Church and that is Schism For by this unnatural state the true Nature of the Church is more illustrated and the Unitie of it by the explication of this Separation and Dis-union called Schism CHAP. XLVII The Conclusion of the Treatise of the subject of Christian Faith the Church by the treating of Schism contrary to the Visible Church Departure from the Faith real Schism not formal as to the outward form Of the state of Separation or Schism Of separation of Persons Coordinate and Subordinate Of Formal and Vertual Schism All Heresie vertually Schism not formally Separation from an Heretical Society no Schism From Societies not Heretical Schism Heretical Doctrine or Discipline justifie â—eparation How separation from a true Church is Schism and how not In what sense we call the Roman Church a true Church Some instances of Heretical Errours in the Roman Church Of the Guilt of Schism Of the notorious guilt of English Sectaries The folly of their Vindications That the Case of them and us is altogether different from that of us and the Church of Rome Not lawful to separate from the Vniversal Church VVHile we treat of the Church it must be alwaies remembred that we intend not to speak of the Invisible Church as it is taken for a select number supposed to belong intimately and inseparably to Christs invisible Body of which no knowledg or account can be had but by sensible outward things but we altogether enquire of the Visible Church which though it be not alwaies Actually seen or discerned from other Societies especially pretending to be Churches of Christ yet must alwaies be Visible though not conspicious And it would be a gross mistake in any so to judge of the Church Visible and Invisible as of distinct Churches or necessarily distinct parts of the same Church because the same persons may at the same time be of the Visible and Invisible Church This distinction then is to be allowed no farther than as it insinuates to us the Several States of the Members of the same Church the Church in nature being but One according to several testimonies of Holy-Writt and the very nature of all Communities and much more of the Church which is to be an Aggregate Body consisting of many parts by no natural Bond or influence united together but by divine Falsae Professionis Imagine utimur si cujus nomine gloriamur ejus instituta non sequimur Leo. Mag. Serm. 5. de Jejun 7. Mensis and Spiritual Which is manifested by certain outward Acts which renders and denominates such a society of Men Visible as a Church of Christ These Acts are principally two The profession and declaration in word or writing of the true Faith and the Exercise of those Graces and workes which that Faith requires in Religious worship and Obedience That and in what degree of necessitie this Church must be One as well as Visible is before declared and here only repeated to give light to the nature of Schisme now to be explained For to omit the Criticismes and various acceptations of the word Schism as not necessarie we shall proceed by degrees to shew these two things concerning it The Nature and Guilt of it For the Nature of Schism it doth appear from the Unitie and conjunction of Christs Body of the Church consisting in two things Communion with Christ the Head and mutual Communion of the members one with another the contrary to this must needs be Discommunion and Separation But there being two parts in Communion a Material or the things in which men communicate as faith it selfe and the substantial Part of Christian worship And a Formal the Actual outward exercise of this The First of these though it be really yet is not formally Schism as may appear more fully by and by because all Schism doth suppose some agreement with and Relation to that One Body the Church but where the foundation of such Relation is destroyed there the whole perishes And therefore a division from the Faith of Christs bodie the Church being either Total and that again either Negatively when
that communion which may detain any man of Christian modesty and Charity from pronouncing such an one to be infallibly damn'd or out of possibility to salvation And if it be hereupon demanded What difference we put between Infidels and such corrupt Christians seeing diverse have undertaken to assert a Possibility of salvation to them also living exactly to the Light and Rule of Nature in them I answer not absolutely at present dashing the argument a-pieces by denying the supposition and their colourable proofs thereof but demonstrating a vast discrimination between the one and other condition For commonly where Heresies which are so properly called and not Gentilism as they are which destroy the first Principles of Christianity are taught and maintained there are to be found all truths necessarie to salvation in a Christian sense For the Holy Scriptures we suppose are there received and submitted unto which are able to make a 2 Tim 3. 16 17. man wise unto salvation and thorowly to furnish him unto all good works And the Records of the Church and ancienter practise good guides against the rocks way-laying a man in his course to Heaven And the want of actual communion with a Church doth then only expose our souls to Perdition when it is wilfully and causelesly slighted and contemned And then only doth Separation visible 〈◊〉 less Visible alienation of mind and affection put on the nature of Schism And there are two general defects in a Church which justify Separation according to those two things we have shewed do constitute a Church Doctrine of Faith and Divine Regiment called commonly Discipline If a Church errs notoriously in the former no Separation can be called Schism oâ— if defective not in Government absolutely for without some Government it could not be so much as a Society but in the Government oâ—dained for it because then it should not be a Christian Society For the faith of Christians held do not make a Christian Society but the Christian Regiment Christian Regiment also I call that not whereby Christians are Governed for Civil Governments are common to Heathens and Christians but that which is Proper to Christians as Christians and was instituted by Christ for Christians and not invented out of mens wise brains and accommodated to the Church and perhaps called Divine to give it greater credit and place amongst Christians Of which we have alreadie spoken It being a common rule amongst the Ancients Clemens Alexand Stromal immutable with me There can be no true Flock without true Pastours And there can be no true Pastours where they are not set over the Flock according to Christs known and received will but some presumed tacit and extraordinary Vocation as they term it when there is an entrance by the Window and not by the Door From hence it doth appear how uncertain and confused their notion and position is who without any more adoe conclude all those to be Schismaticks and that upon their own Principles and Concessions who separate from a Christian Societie which they acknowledge to be a true Church For very great is the ambiguity both of Separation and True Church First Separation is as we have before noted either of Subordinates or Co-ordinates And of Subordinates either simply or with Restriction Simply subordinate I call them not comparitively with Christs Imperial Power but with all External power who by divine Right of Providence owe direct obedience to their Pastours in all things not inhibited by the Law of God to which all Spiritual Pastours are to be no â—ess subject than the sheep themselves And thus every Bishop is true Head and Governor of that Flock which under Christ is committed to his Care and Custodie But in like manner is not that Bishop subject to the Metropolitane and much less that Metropolitane to his Patriarch For these are but Ecclesiastical Constitutions and of no distinct Order though Degree According to which obligations of obeying the refusing to obey and dis-uniting ones self from the Governours of the Church doth aggravate or extenuate the Division and the guilt thereof And without all peradventure may one Church divide from another upon less grounds then the Members of one Church separate from the more immediate Head of the same How thick do instances stand in Ecclesiastical History of Churches who by vertue of their Respective Governours have been divided and yet both remain true Churches Again a True Church is said so to be more than one way viz. As to Being absolutely and Being perfectly We know that every Errour in Doctrine though great nay though heretical doth not presently destroy the nature of a Church absolutely though it takes away from the perfection of a Church How that opinion was delivered by the Fathers viz. That Heresie destroyes the Church we have Cyprianus Epistola 52. â— gat Novatianos eâ—â—e Christianosâ— shewed in part speaking of Heresie and now may add farther that the the same persons of old or their Co-equals denied an Heretique to be a Christian also and therefore they are to be understood of the such foul and unchristian Heresies which rased the foundation of faith it self as did the Valentinians the Gnosticks the Marcionites and such like For t is now agreed to That unless a man be a Christian he cannot be an Heretique Or if at any time they spake of more tolerable Heresies not wholly inconsistent with Christianity it self then they laid the burden of Damnation upon that accessorie but separable Aggravation Uncharitableness which alone and especially conjoined with such errours exposed to damnation But as it is with the Natural Man it is with the Spiritual There are some parts Essential and Vital which cannot be wanting or corrupted but the Whole must loose its nature and denomination and there are others not absolutely Essential which are called Integral without which the Body may possible subsist but not be perfect in its material Parts And so it is with the Body of Faith consisting of so many Articles or members as Parts some Vital and essential some necessarie to its perfections but not its Being absolutely And a Church may be called a true Church which is defective or Excessive in these though not in them And yet we need not betake our selves to that explication by some used of a True-man and a Thief to express how a Church may be a True Church and an erroneous one at the same time For the nature of this truth we ascribe unto the Church consisting only in Morality If the Church failes in that the Nature of it failes as it doth not in a man when he is corrupted with falsness and vice But this we say That although all Truths are equally true as to the nature of Truth it self they are not of equal importance and use to us or to a Church Therefore such a Latitude being in the notion of a True Church how can any man so confidently say that No Church can separate from the Church
of Rome but they must make themselves thereby Schismatiques before God though before the Church they cannot be condemned for such qualifying this hard saying with this Supposition only That the Church of Rome alwayes had and hath Salvation in it as a true Church though corrupted For that we may and do call a True Church wherein the principles of Christianity are kept intire as to the most fundamental of them but withal this hinders not but diverse things at the same time and by the same Church which are damnable may be found in it For in the same house saith St Paul there are Vessels to honour and dishonour which we may as well interpret of Tenets of faith as of the Professours of the Faith And in the same Dispensatorie are both Poisons and Cordials yea in the same dish may be found Food sufficient to nourish and destroy shall we therefore not be careful to avoid the whole because we do acknowledge the wholesomness of so many in it Who knowes not that there are monstrousnesses in Excess as well as defect And that it suffices not to keep a man in communion with a Church that all things necessary are therein contained when withal many things not only unnecessary but pernicious are shuffled together with them If we can therefore shew as we suppose we have and can that the Roman Church alloweth and propoundeth many heretical dogmes many Idololatrical practises what will it avail them to have it granted them that all truths are extant there in the Monuments of their Church It will here infallibly be replied by them That it cannot be that a Church at the same time can hold all things needful in Faith and worship and yet maintain such errours as are charged upon them To which I say and grant That 't is not possible they should hold the same things as contrary or appearing so unto them But really they may and actually doe First as Philosophers should of contraries In gradu remisso not Intenso In the remisser and lower degrees not the extremest Secondly They may hold contraries really though not formally and as contrary For instance They may hold this fundamental opinion That God alone is to be worshipped with that divine worship which is the supreamest of all And they may hold that such a thing for example the Host is very God which verily is not God and consequently may teach the worship of such a reputed God Their Churches faith if it teaches strictly that only the true God is to be worshipped is inviolate and sound in Thesis But their Perswasion that such this is is an errour in fact rather than in Faith which contradicts the former opinion really But we hold That it is necessary to salvation that we erre not in such gross facts though we abominate detest and renounce the sin never so solemnly And the like may we say in many points of difference between us and them when they hold the proposition in General sound and good but by help of infinite and unintelligible distinctions word it out and ware off the imputation but not the Guilt of Errour Of the number of which things hard to be understood is that consideration of Schism before God and Schism before the Church with an implication that Separation from a true Church makes men Schismaticks before God though not before men because for example The Church of Rome cannot oblige any body to stand to the Autority which it so abaseth namely by breaking the Canons of the Church It is true A Church or Man may be a Schismatick before God and not before the Church But it cannot possibly be imagined how a man can be a Schismatique before men and from men and not before God But if it could be were we not in a very fair way to hell if we had no more to answer for than our Schism before God Were not our whole Church Schismatical and as good as lost though men took no notice of it It doth not follow therefore neither is it confessed that all are Schismaticks who separate from a true Church unless the separation be from it As it is true For we have shown that a Church true in essentials may fail in Integrals And it is no hard matter to show that a Church Erring in doctrines constituting the body of Faith may be separated from without Schism And the reason proving this is because that such Churches are alreadie really Schismatical through the said errours and it is not only lawful but a duty to separate from Schismaticks For so saith St. Paul We command you brethern in the name of the 2 Thes 3. 6. Lord Jesus Christ that ye withdraw your selves from every brother that walketh disorderly and not after the tradition which he received of us And what Traditions do we think St Paul intendeth there Only Ecclesiastical Canons and decrees of Councils for the better Government of the Catholick Church That this he may mean I denie not but that no more I denie For he that offends against the Faith offends against the Traditions To the Church but he that breaks the Constitutions offends against the Traditions Of the Church only which are of far inferiour nature It may well be doubted whether breaking of the Canons of the Church only can justify a Separation from a Church because they are not so much the Traditions delivered To the Church by Christ and his Apostles as the Traditions Of the Church which in their nature are mutable But yet if any co-ordinate Church shall refuse to innovate but stick resolutely and firmly to the received Discipline and Lawes of the Church while others shall violate them and choose new Forms and impose new Conditions of communion with it not agreeable to the old upon which a schism followes surely the guilt of Schism is to fall only upon that Church which thus innovates For though I am apt to believe that such alterations may not be sufficient to justifie a renunciation of Communion with such an Innovating Church and much less in single persons and private members of the same Church yet doubtless it fully excuses from the guilt of Schism if it patiently and passively persists in the more ancient and conformable way to the Churches of Christ in past ages even with apparent peril of Schism provided that the said Traditional Laws and practices shall not by the more judicious and conspicious part of the Church assembled freely and Lawfully in Council be judged inconvenient and so according to the Right it hath to reverse or establish things in nature alterable declar'd void and introduce new For in such cases disowning of the Power and Autority of the Church and refusing the decrees thereof tending to the General unitie of it is of it self a Schismatical Act. But in notorious errours in Doctrine or Faith it is free for any particular Church to divide from another because such corruption is of selfe damnable And in such cases we need
not say to extenuate I know not what unkindness or perhaps incivility we were driven out from such communion and went not out of our selves but may declare Franckly We voluntarily chose to relinquish such communion so condition'd Now such errours we may well charge the Church of Rome with even while we hold it to be a true Church in the sense above expressed viz. Essentially true but not Integrally For so a Monstrous man may beget a truly natural son and out of the Loyns of the Corrupt Church of Rome may proceed a Perfect Church And he that holds that a man may even now when it is much more definitive and express in its errours then itwas about sevenscore years ago when it met first with that Opposition which it could never master as yet be saved in the Church of Rome may hold there are many damnable errours in it which in their nature do damn yet do not alwayes actually damn as is said And this doth altogether vindicate such Churches as directly leave them provided they leave such their errours only and not extravagantly hurry themselves into contrary errours out of detestation to theirs And this doth lay a necessity upon such as communicate with them to desert them and a much greater upon such as are at present alienated from them to preserve themselves from such imminent dangers though not infallibly destroying the soul Now if it be here demanded as I know necessarily it must and will be that to make this high charge probable we give some instances of such their errours and Schismaticalness though I might well decline that so great and Schismaticalness though I might well decline that so great and copious a subject in this transient and compendious discourse referring them to what hath been sufficiently written though some have I confess Est sâ—lus in Orle 〈◊〉 Chaâ—actâ—â—â—s Episcâ—â—us suique â—â—dimis pâ—incipium â—â—nis Anasiatius Germonius D Indultis Apesiolicis Praefat. §. Episeopus Vide etiam â—etrum Gregorium Syntagm L. 15. C. 3. quid tribuitur Popâ— supra Conciliis â—rincipilus weakely and inconsiderately over-acted to this purpose yet I shall not absolutely without this general touch leave the matter so reducing their Errours to these two Heads Schismatical Doctrines and Heretical And this alone I look on as a most Schismatical dogm next to heresie and which alone suffices to justifie the separation of all other Churches from that of Rome viz. That they maintain if not in express termes which somedo who perhaps will not be acknowledged when they are pinched hard to speak the sense of the Church in reallity That the Pope or See of Rome hath arbitrary power of himself to Judge and Censure all Churches and to institute or Cassate Lawes for the universal Church and that he cannot be a Schismatick There is nothing more fundamental in the Lawes and Traditions of the Catholick Church than that no one of the Patriarchs should presume to form or oblige the Catholick Church by their single and private Canons and Decrees without the consent and concurrence of his Brethren neither can any meeting deserve the name of a General Council wherein their sentence is not heard or received But there is nothing more notorious than the Bishop of Rome's invasion of a sole Right to Govern the whole Church of which he hath been often soundly charged by the eminentest of the Later of the Greek Bishops Nilus Thessalo nicensis though their complaint hath generally been received no otherwise than with a deafear or an insolent stomach and contempt of the Sacred Canons of the Church as might be made appear by several instances were this a proper opportunity so to do Neither do I know how they of Rome can exempt themselves from apparent Schisme upon the account which Balsome urgeth against them viz. That the Popes have separated and are divided Balsam Resp 1. Jurts Graeco Rom. L. 6. pag. 370. from the Four other Patriarchs Will they say they are Schismaticks and Hereticks It is no more then they will pay them with again And 't is no harder matter to prove one than the other But if Four of the Patriarchs of the Church may be Hereticks and Schismaticks and so continue for many hundered years together What becomes of that argument for the true Church taken from the Universality of its Profession For putting the Case that those of the Roman Communion were equal yea Superior in extent of Ground and number of professers which is hardly to be granted yet being apparently inferiour in the number of Patriarchs they cannot pretend universality unless they beg the question as too often and importunately they do that the Roman See is the only Standard to weigh and Conclude all Ecclesiastical controversies and quarrels This is as we said such a fundamental Errour in the outward Politie and Discipline of the Church that it alone might justifie a Separation from such a Monster I shall give but one instance and that of one Man expressing the sense of Vid. Aus Barbossam de Officio Potestate Episc Par. 3. Allegat 57. num 3 4 5 6 7. the Church of Rome though some will have it called The Court of Rome only concerning the Popes Power He the Pope is the Universal Bishop of the Church He hath the whole World for his Diocess He is the Bishop of Bishops The Ordinarie of Ordinaries In things concerning Benesices he hath free and absolute power All Benesices in respect of this Holy Prelate are manual and he may use absolute power in them But to this adding such to us manifest errours and corruptions in Faith and practise as have been introduced into that Church there can be no just Scruple made of Separating and to profess so much without mincing the matter by certain fine evasions which strictly enquired into will no more satisfie than down-right dealing which chargeth them with such heretical-Dogmes which contrary to Charity as well as Verity require Separation Of the many of which that of Transubstantiation may claim the first place together with its long Train of Gross abuses and Errours following upon and flowing from it For though I know diverse Learned men of our Church do look upon it as a very absurd falsity in matter of Fact rather then of Faith yet if it be considered as reduced to Propositions invented and strenuously asserted to maintain that Errour in fact it putteth on the nature of Heresie too To say that Christ had but one hand is not an Heresie of it self but a notorious non-truth in matter of Fact But so to defend this opinion as thereby to deny Christ to have been of the same nature with us amounts to Heresie Granting likewise that not only Christs Natural Body is in that Sacrament but it is that very thing which after Consecration appeares though not as it appears to our senses is but a fowl absurdity and errour in point of Fact Yet when it
is so defended as to call in question the truth of Christs divine nature and to commend and command the direct worship of those objects so mistaken then certainly it is Heresie and somewhat more And so their doctrine of Communicating in one Kind contrary to all the mention we have of celebrating the Eucharist in the Scriptures and those deserving the name of Fathers in the Church may rightly be termed Heretical when it shall be drawn into such a Proposition as this as of necessity it must viz. That it is of equal vertue and use to receive the Sacrament in one kind alone as both Kinds whereas only to deny the use of it is no more than an unjust and sacrilegious piece of Tyranny over the Laicks To these it were easie to add more of like natures as sufficient Grounds to leave such a Church as maintains them But for those who are not in Episcopal nor yet so much as Metropolitan subordination and subjection to that Church but only Patriarchal which obliges cheifly if not only to a recognition of a Remote Right of Order and Principle of unity when the Church is united in bringing them to Councels and keeping them to those Laws which are prescribed by General Consent of the Church and this not originally by first planting and forming a Christian Church in a Nation but restoring and augmenting it the case is yet more plain that it is free for such Churches to relinquish communion of any Church subject to less Errours than are properly called Heresies But for persons educated in a Church and thereby subject to it and owing Canonical obedience not only as they most weakly and wickedly imagine to the Rule of Faith therein asserted and maintained but to the Rule of Unity and Communion outward for such I say to divide from that Church which hath not by falling into notorious Heresies or Idolatrous practices first fallen from Christian Faith is to profess Schism For to alledg that they would incorporate with the Church if certain things which may possibly be parted with without destroying the Faith at least immediately were granted to them is to demand that their Superiors should bow to them rather than they to their Superiors and in effect to make the condition of their obedience and uniting with the Church to be this That first the Church should be of their Religion the difference between them consisting in things in their own nature mutable For though Faith consisteth in those things which are judged necessary in themselves to be received Yet Religion is made up as well of the manner of serving God as the material grounds of it And therefore it is according to the manner of their treaties of peace in other Cases to require the thing in debate to be granted them before they will bear of a commodation or reconciliation This senseless Charity is that of most Desperate Schismaticks Yet not absolutely to despair of reducing some few of them and much less of preventing the like ruine of souls in others we shall now conclude with a few words concerning the Second thing in the beginning of this Point viz. The guilt of Schism Supposing then what is above said that Schism is a Causeless Separation from the Church of Christ meaning by Causeless not want of all reasons or causes but Sufficient as are errours now mention'd in Faith we farther understand by Separation not that of the inward and hidden man but outward and Visible answerable to that we have called and acknowledged to be properly called a Church i. e. Visible For possible we grant it is what we do scarce believe to be actually true though we hear such things sometimes spoken that dissenters may have a tolerable good opinion of a Church as that it is a true Church in their private senses they may pretend some general kindness and Charity to the Members of it Nay they may hold it no grievous sin to communicate with it for some persons especially and yet for all this be rank Schismaticks For Schismatizing in its remoter Cause may spring from evil opinions and dispositions of the inward man but its formality is altogether in outward profession of averseness separation and opposition to a Church This is it which hath raised so much just clamour of the Ancient and even of those very modern Persons who stomach nothing more than to be reduced to their own general Rules and have worthily brandished their swords and pens to bring people to the unity of that Cause which never was the true Faith and to that Visible Company which never was a Church and yet cannot understand their own language nor receive their own reasons and arguments in Cases infinitely more capable of such vindications than the Party they created and asserted Herein surely they have exceeded all other Factions in immodesty and undauntedness that whereas those have been very scrupulous and sparing in delivering doctrines of coercion and constraint to unity and therefore may though with no reason with some little colour stand out against Unity and oppose all Coaction thereunto They of the Presbyterian Sect have preach'd spoken and written so much and expresly against Schism and the Liberty which tends necessarily to it that it is beyond not only reason but admiration they should neither be affected with what other men have said against them nor what they have unanswerably said against themselves but proceed no otherwise than brutishly to hold their Conclusion and stick to their invet eraâ—e errours as if they could find no Church to unite to or had no souls to save or did not even according to their own principles run the apparent hazard of loosing them by that sin which they confess is one of the Greatest Size viz unnecessary division And unnecessary division themselves call what is not for to avoid Idolatrous practises or Heretical errours and yet in their Apologies for themselves alledge none but frivolous instances tending as they judge to Superstition wherein they prove themselves much more superstitious by such religious opposition as they make against them and deeply concerning their best Consciences than they possibly can be who for order sake solemness of worship and conformity to the ancient Customs of Christs Church and to avoid offence unto other Churches sticking inseparably unto them retain rather than invent such adjuncts to Divine Religion It is hard to search out any new Topick from whence to draw out reasons against this hainous sin of Schismatizing wherein I am not prevented by them disputing upon the false suppositions that they at any time were a Church and if they had been that they who opposed them could be said to Divide Schismatically from them of whose communion they never were nor ever were obliged to be They are therefore with others to consider How solemn and severe a command of Christ they slight and contemn who divide from a Church without more weighty exceptions than hitherto have been offered by them or heard
doubt Eternal Life And that Eternal Life which to the Romans he calleth the Gift of God Rom. 6. ult 1 John 5. 11. Col. 3. 3 4. Of which Life St. John speaks thus This is the record that God hath given unto us eternal life and this life is in his Son And St. Paul more expresly to the Colossians For ye are dead and your life is hid with Christ When Christ who is our life shall appear shall ye also appear with him in glory So that nothing is more frequent in Scripture then that Christ is the Authour of Eternal Salvation to all them that obey him as it is in the Epistle to the Hebrews and that he is the Authour and finisher of our Faith Hebr. 5. 9. 12. 2. The Authour of it in Grace and Finisher of it in Glory the perfection and consummation of Grace Of the thing therefore no dispute can be justly raised but of the manner some differences there are and they principally about the possession of that bliss or the fruition of it or the time when it first entred into and when it is in its full perfection And as touching the latter it is with greatest probability affirmed That although there be such a free and full participation of the Divine Vision whereby the Spirits of the deceased and truly and abundantly happy yet there remains somewhat to be added thereunto from the conjunction of the body once companion to the soul in all good and evil of the passed Life For as at the general Resurrection the souls of the damned shall have their torments augmented upon the re-union of the body once combining with the soul in sin so at the same time there being a conjunction of the soul and body of the just there shall likewise be an increase of felicity and glory St. Paul intimateth thus much where he saith Knowing that whatever good Ephes 6. 8. thing a man doth the same shall he receive of the Lord whether he be bond or free And yet more particularly to the Corinthians For we must all appear 2 Cor. 5. 10. before the Judgment Seat of Christ that every one may receive the things done in his body according to that he hath done whether it be good or bad So that the body as well as the soul shall have the like proportion of reward or retribution as they had in sinning or doing well together Of which we forbear here to enlarge as not at all questioning the vertue and sufficiencie of Christs merits as the sonner seems to do For if the Grace of Gods Spirit the course of righteousness duly run by the servant of God the Merits of Christs Death and Passion be not efficacious to the throughly purging of the soul and conscience of the faithful in this life somewhat derogatory not to the person only of man but performance of Gods Spirits and Christs merit applyed certainly to the soul seems to be reflected The sufficiencie of Christs salvation is such that by confession of all it may avail to the acquitting from all the affections and circumstances of sin such as pollution guilt and punishment but it will not be granted that this actually is done in this life or were ordained to such an end generally For I suppose that they who have raised and maintained such an opinion do not deny the sufficiencie of Christs merits and Gods mercy to sanctifie every faithful person to the putting him into a capacity of heaven and that immediately after this life for they directly affirm that some eminent Saints and particularly Martyrs for Christ do forthwith pass from hence to absolute bliss but they deny that all that are in a state of Grace and are predestinated by God unto everlasting life are so fully cleansed from the contagion and impurities which even Venial sins taint them with that they need not another expurgation before they can be admitted into the presence of God The faith of the ancient Churches as in few words we shall shew and of all but such as profess subjection unto the Roman hold that though no man ordinarily lives without sin nor at the instant of his death is so absolutely pure as to be fit to behold the face of God who can endure no iniquity and with whom no unclean thing shall dwell yet by passing from this life into another so far is the evil remitted by Gods mercie in Christ so far accepted in Christ is that person that dyes in a state of Grace and reconciled to God that he passes immediately from this mortal and miserable state here to an immortal and less miserable yea blessed though not to the height yet far exceeding all happiness competible to the children of God during this life The demonstration of this our opinion though very true we must confess to be difficult by reason of an evasion and shift always at hand to elude our proofs For when we bring testimonies direct out of Scripture of the happiness of Gods servants after this life they answer presently that they are to be understood either of eminent Saints which are presently accepted into Gods presence or of their designation to bliss though they be not presently possessed of it which must be acknowledged to be a kind of happiness compared at least with the wickeds condition which after death is irreparable But these notwithstanding and certain others we shall take notice of by and by we declare positively that for this doctrine of Purgatory there is not any ground of Scriptures Reason or Antiquity but on the contrary all these are sufficient evidences to the contrary For if the thing be so material a point in our Religion as it is said to be we hold the Scripture to be so entire a Rule of our belief as that it must of necessity have been contained in it but there is no foundation in it for that as we shall see by and by And on the other side there are these arguments in it against it First saith Solomon Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do do it with thy Eccles 9. 16. might for there is no word or devise nor wisdom nor knowledge in the grave whether thou goest Doth not this place plainly speak of the fixt and immoveable estate of the life to come And can that be connted less than ridiculous which is answer'd at the best rate That there is nothing that a man can better himself in but others by their piety may better them Or that though in Purgatory they cannot help themselves yet by the good works done before they came there they may be benefitted Who denyes but the Faith and Good works of men in this life have singular influence upon mens future life to the encrease of happiness But all this we say takes effect immediately upon the change of this mortal into immortal state For who told them that to the application of the work to the wages are required the suffrages of the living or passions
their friends after their death supposing that by proxie a man might receive the benefit of Baptism And yet some of these denyed the Resurrection Now St. Paul argues thus If there be no Resurrection of the dead to what end do they baptize the living instead of the dead what can it avail them according to their own judgments and opinions And thus what becomes of Purgatory But lastly The words of Christ in St. Matthew and St. Luke agree Matth. 5. 25 26. Luke 1258. with c. Verily I say unto thee thou shalt by no means come out thence till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing are thought of no mean force to infer a Purgatory But alas such havock do men make who would so have it of the words such hooks and tenters do they apply to wring and draw them to their purpose so do they play fast and loose with Antiquity about them that a man had need be well setled in a perswasion of the thing it self before he can brook such a reason as this affords The plain and simple sense therefore shall suffice to ward off all force against it viz. That Christ meant no more than they who made not their peace and reconciliation with God before they go out of this world shall be cast into Hell from whence they shall never return until they have paid all the punishment they ow to God for their sins to a farthing that is absolutely satisfied which by a Periphrasis or in many words as much as to say in one Never Besides they that are such stout defenders of the Virgin Maries perpetual Virginity against the ill sense given by Helvidius and his followers of those words in St. Matthew Until she had brought forth her First-born know very well how to give another sense to Until then a certain inference of somewhat to ensue that Period so fix'd and that it implies not necessarily that ever such payment of the utmost Farthing shall be made but upon supposition that it be paid such event as is there mentioned should follow But Antiquity and that of both Eastern and Western Churches are is alledged in confirmation of the present Roman Purgatory To which we oppose this assertion That Purgatory as now defended was never heard of in the Latin Church for four hundred years together after Christ nor received into it with common approbation until six hundred years after Christ Austin began to doubt of it and is scarce constant to himself in it Gregory the Great set it up upon its leggs and advanced it far if so be that the Dialogues bearing his name were truly his as 't is most probable they are not or that they are corrupted For how could Gregory who flourished about the year of our Lord 590. and was succeeded by Boniface Greg. M. Dial. l. 3. c. 2. the third about the year 606. take notice of Justinian the elder as elder unless he had known Justinian the younger who was Emperour about the year 685. long after the true Gregory was dead But from about that time this erroneous opinion got footing and began to spread but was never thoroughly setled in the Church of Rome it self until the time of John the Seventeenth or as others compute it the Nineteenth about the year 1003 when he instituted the Feast of All-Souls in which men were enjoyned to pray for the deliverance of Souls out of Purgatory But the Council of Florence in the year 1439. put it out of all future dispute when it decreed it so to be But the Greeks who were there present refused that sense however they gave way to the Name Purgatory Neither do they admit it unto this day so vain and bold a task doth Bellarmine undertake with other Pontificians to bring and that of old the Greek Church to consent with the Latin herein upon whose attempts we find modern Assertours of the Roman Cause to call them to witness too and when diligent search proves prejudicial to them to bring Osiander a man of small judgment and no command of his passions in his free censures of Antiquity wherever his History leads him to observe any thing there which he likes not and many times understands not and Sir Edwin Sands a Gentleman of excellent abilities as an Historian but finding the word Purgatory among Grecian Authours of modern times concluded that it was the same with the Roman but was much mistaken For 't is well known some modern Greeks as Nilus Thessaloniensis have writ purposely against the Roman Purgatory And this will farther appear from the two general defects running through almost all the Arguments brought by Romanists to prove Purgatory from the ancient Fathers and Councils of both Churches which being noted may suffice for Answers to them in this point especially in this place For first they argue from the word Purgatory where-ever they find it in Greek and Latin Fathers But Purgatory fire with them was quite another thing from that now in credit amongst us Origen and he the first that we meet with invented a Purgative fire and divers Fathers catching at that discoursed dubiously upon that subject but with this Fivefold difference from Roman Flames First They exempted no man from this Purgation not Saints or Martyrs but supposed all should be purged before they entred entirely into Heaven the moderner Purgatory frees eminent Saints from that fiery tryal Secondly They held this purgation principally useful to the purification of the gross matter of the body to a finer substance before it could be meet to enter into heaven together with the soul but these make it to seize principally if not only on the soul separate from the body and to cleanse that Thirdly They never intended theirs to purge off the stain of sins or satisfie for what souls were behind in going out of this world but the Romanists affirm and defend it in this sense Fourthly They never maintained any immediate purgation or torments from the departure of the soul from the body but affirmed only a general and momentaneous transmutation by Fire at the Day of Judgment to be fitted the better for Heaven Fifthly They never imagined that the Prayers of Living did relieve the miseries of the afflicted in Purgatory as do these or that there was any such passing from that state to Heaven before the Day of Judgment And what need we travel on this subject when we have the testimony of chief men against them herein Roffensis Artic. 18. against Luther says directly Amongst the Ancient there is little or no mention made of Purgatory and that the Greek to this day hold it not The very same says Alphonsus de Castro contr Haeret. lib. 8. tit De Indulgentia But the second Argument of Romanists will clear this drawn out of many Fathers to prove they held Purgatory because they held Prayer for the dead of which Prayer none they suppose can be capable but such as are in this middle state between
Heaven and Hell But we deny not that the Ancients prayed for the Dead nor do we dissent much from them in that pious act our selves however there are quarrellers amongst us well known by their other affected and morose follies who oppose it because they have no express Scripture for it but we deny they ever prayed for the pardon of their sins or ease of torments so anciently but for an happy rest and restauration in a Resurrection So that we peremptorily deny and well may notwithstanding all proofs brought to the contrary that Prayer for the Dead necessarily infers Roman Purgatory And for the Consequence of this Opinion of Roman Purgatory Indulgences it is so rank a Corruption such a novel and impudent invention as the Church of Rome under that defection it now is never did so great a miracle as to get it any place in sober and knowing mens minds both thing it self and the abuse of it being such as alone may suffice to disgrace the Authours of it and make their pretenses to infallibility alwaies false very ridiculous We know indeed that scarce any thing was of ancienter use in the Church then some Indulgences but no more like these than Earth is like Purgatory Indulgences were made by such who were in autority in the Church towards Penitents who had their Penances allotted them for scandalous Crimes committed against the Faith and Church which Penances were often relaxed and mittigated by the favour and indulgences of the Fathers of the Church good cause appearing for to do so But that ever it was in the power of the Church to give ease to such as were punished in that other Life to come was never heard of for above a thousand years after Christ Alphonsus de Castro is worth the Alphonsus de Castro lib. 8. Adv. Haer. de Indulg reading upon this who is positive for Indulgences but going about to prove them prepares his Reader with a long Preface for such a short Discourse telling him that He ought not to expect for all points of Faith Antiquity or express Scripture For many things are known to the moderner which those ancient Writers were altogether ignorant of For seldome any mention is made in ancient Writers of the transubstantiation of the Bread into Christs Body of the Spirits proceeding from the Son much rarer of Purgatory almost none at all especially among Greek Writers for which reason Purgatory is not believed of the Greek to this day c. The ancient Church caused men to satisfie in this life and would leave nothing to be punished in the Life to come and therefore there is no mention of Indulgences Thus he But adds Amongst the Romans the use of them is said to be very ancient as may in some manner be collected from their stations And it is reported of Gregory the First of whom we even now spake that he granted some in his dayes It is said and reported by where and by whom he could not tell us But he tells us indeed how Innocent the Third that great Innovator and Corrupter of the Church constituted it in the Latherane Council and the Council of Constance after that much which was not before the Year 1200. Judge we from hence what great account is to be made of the many sayings of the Fathers pretended to approve this devise And judge we farther what great Reason or Scripture there is for the Popish faction to derogate so far as they do from the efficacy of Gods Holy Spirit of Grace in the repenting sinner though straitened of time in the exercise and demonstration of his true Conversion and from the fullness of Christs mediation and merits which are ordained for the remission of all sins upon true Repentance For the bloud of Christ cleanseth from all sin saith St. John and so say they understood as in this Life and the Life to come but St. John nor any other holy Writer of Scripture gives us the least intimation of any other season of pardon then that of this Life Therefore here to end this First Part with the end of Man in this world seeing Gods Promises are so liberally revealed unto penitent sinners in this Life without exceptions of matter time or place of venial or mortal sins Seeing Christs merits are absolutely sufficient to acquit the sinner and no limitation is to be found upon Faith and Repentance in Scripture Seeing lastly that Gods Spirit of Grace is of vertue sufficient to sanctifie to the washing away of all filthiness both of flesh and spirit and this life is only mentioned in Scripture for the exerting of this work and perfecting this cure of the soul Let us rather thankfully embrace so great salvation and work it out for St. Paul supposes we may with fear and trembling in this life that so as St. Peter hath 2 Pet. 1. 11. it An entrance may be ministred abundantly unto us into the everlasting Kingdem of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ The End of the First Part. THE Second Part OF THE INTRODUCTION To the Knowledge of the True Catholick Religion CHAP. I. Of the worship of God wherein the Second Part of Christian Religion consists Of the Necessity of worshipping God It is natural to worship God Socinus holding the contrary confuted Of the Name of Religion the Nature of religious worship wherein it consisteth REligion we have defined to be A due Recognition and Retribution made by the Creature to God the Fountain of all Being communicating himself freely to inferiour Beings And this description we have in substance given us by David in his last and most serious charge to Solomon his Son saying And thou Solomon my Son know thou the God of 1 Chron. 28. 9. thy Fathers and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind c. From whence we take the ground of our distinction of Religion into two Parts The true knowledge of God which is attained by the Doctrine of Faith revealed in Gods holy Word and the worship of him there in likewise contained Of the former having already spoken we now proceed more briefly to treat of the second The worship of God And that God is to be worshipped is such an inseparable notion from the acknowledgment of God as nothing can follow more necessarily then that doth from this And it were more reasonable though that be brutish for to deny God absolutely then to deny him worship and service And therefore Seneca saith well The first worshipping of God is to believe there is a God The next to yield to him his Majesty to yield him Sen. Epist 95. his Goodness to understand that he or they governs the world And afterward He sufficiently worships God who imitates him And Tully The Cicero de Natura Deor. lib. 2. worship of God ought to be most excellent and pure and holy and full of piety so that we may constantly worship him with a pure intire and uncorrupt mind and voice
his face which is one of those outward Acts we here mean I will worship God and report that God is in you of a truth 1 Cor. 14. 25. 2 Cor. 9. 12. And in his Second Epistle he saith Your zeal hath provoked very many Which zeal was manifested in external works And who may not observe not only an Influence of the inward affections moving the outward parts but a Refluence as one may say of such outward acts upon the inward faculties to the exciting them And that speaking cholericly doth not only proceed from a principle of Angriness but augments the passion inward and so in love and zeal in matters as well divine as prophane acting humility and devotion outwardly doth wonderfully excite those graces in the inward man I shall add but one more argument to beget a better opinion of external and bodily services in Gods worship than vulgarly prevails And that is The general practice of the ancientest and best Christians I say best Christians and purest and perfectest worship of God in open defiance of them of late times who insolently magnifie themselves and modern inventions to the contempt of their much superiours in piety and years They had many outward rites and ceremonies adorning the worship of God which I prefer infinitely before the sowre and severe nakedness of Gods service amongst them 'T is not to be denied that in process of time Ceremonies multiplied to the prejudice of Religion but I think scarce at any so much as the affected prophaneness hath on the other side damnified it And they that argue from the great opinion some have of Ceremonies to the total abolition of them put an argument into the mouths of others to renounce communion with them that hate them and detest them to that superstitious excess as to have none at all and by the same rule to love them because they detest them who have been so scandalous in their opposition to them Now this external Worship we here plead for is an Adoration of God An humiliation of the Body by external Acts and gestures upon the consideration and reverent esteem of the Divine Presence and the small and low esteem we have of our selves which is so necessary and natural that it is to be admired how the contrary carriage could ever be received as pleasing to God or man were it not that the Tempter to irreligion knoweth no shame nor they who are abused by him and his Instruments no mean in flying Extreams What is more frequent in Scripture than examples of such as thus humbled themselves before God Falling down in Scripture which necessarily is bodily Adoration hath been alwayes such an inseparable concomitant of Divine inward worship such an excellent part of it that by a current Synecdoche it is put for the worship of God entirely and absolutely For what else may we understand by that Prophetical speech of Christ All Kings shall fall down before him all nations shall worship And so in the Prophet Esay Shall I fall down to the stock of a tree That is Psal 77. 11. Esay 44. 19. And so in the Prophet Esay Shall I fall down to the stock of a tree That is worship it in this bodily manner And so in the next Chapter and the 46. Chapter They fall down yea they worship by which words the Prophet Es 45. 14. Es 46. 6. condemns the Idolatrous practise then in use And as hath been said if there were nothing good in such outward adoration which might be pleasing to God it could not displease him to have it given unto Idols or false Gods as every where in Scripture it doth What a piece of matter had it been for the three Children of God to have fallen down before Nebuchadnezar's Dan. 3. â— Image in Daniel if there were no account to be made of such outward Acts not so much surely as of disobedience to the Kings command Nay what hurt would there be to fall down to the Devil as Christ was tempted to do by that Evil and ambitious Spirit if it did not at all belong to Mat. 4. 9. God Or what good do they what glory do we understand given by the 24 Elders to God in the Revelation when they fall down before the throne Rev. 4. 10. of God if so be there is nothing in it Surely therefore it is a part of our duty and service thus to adore the Divine Majesty thus to humble our bodies in his presence And it is seen commonly in Bowing or inclining any part of the body and sometimes of the whole by casting it upon the earth as unworthy to stand before God and to beget the deeper sense of our own vileness and to move God to pitty our prostrated body and dejected mind Sometimes it may suffice to Luk. 18. 33. incline the head as it were blushing to lift it up with any confidence towards God and heaven Sometimes incurvation of the Body sometimes bending of the knee and sometimes constant and devout kneeling according as occasion and opportunity shall be offered and the spring of inward devotion move the outward parts of the body For all this while we urge not so necessarily any much less all these outward acts so as to require them simply to divine worship as if a Man could not be accepted without them Yet so far again we do that where just autority competent opportunity and means expect any of these from us wilfully and contemptuously to neglect them doth make me really believe that God will not hear or accept the pretended real devotion of the inward man as being corrupted with disobedience and irreverence and exclusive of part of his Right And an other rule for directing this manner of worship is this that we are not singly and of our own head in publick to put in use or act any such ceremonious devotion to the offence of the more general custom and warranted practise of the Churches of which we are Members For all Acts of Reverence are to be estimated not by private opinions but by publick and general approbation For seeing scarce any ceremony is natural but all by institution and reputation of men judged proper or indecent this Decency the Custom of places and Sentence of Superiours must determine lest the Church falls into that unhappy state of which Austin complains and be subjected to more burdensome and contrary Rites than the Jewish Church suffered while it is thought lawful under the Gospel which was not tolerated under the Law for every single man either to devise a form of worshipping God out of his own head or to bring those Rites into that Church in which he lives by his own will which he had observed to be in use in others whereof perhaps he hath read or which in his Travels he hath seen which the farther they have been and more strange always pass for the most commendable a thing which St. Austin in that Epistle condemns and
wonderful dangerous abuse of the Old Testaments Autority not to be content to admit an invalidity of proofs drawn from thence to confirm Evangelical Duties but to make it no small presumption against the Evangelicalness of any duty that it is first found in the Old Testament which is a gross abuse of Scripture especially by them who would be held enemies to Antimonians They ought therefore first of all to show that such things are purely Legal that is as the Law it self is Mosaical and Typical and Ceremonial before they can damn them there for no better reason but there they find them Add to this when we challenge them to the most ancient and manifold Presedents of the Christian Church who constantly made Vows of various natures to God they presently betake themselves to their common subterfuge pretence of appeal to the Word of God as a Rule and that without any respect to any not truly divine Guides otherwise directing And this they do as confidently as if it had been concluded out of Scripture to the contrary For in such cases indeed their appeal would be most just and reasonable but until that little better then ridiculous especially Scripture being before advised about and appearing not definitive in the case Antiquity and Holy precedents consulted with the better to know the mind of Scripture For instance that text of St. Paul to Timothy saith of young Widows They have damnation in themselves because 1 Tim. 5. 12. they have cast off their first Faith Many of late dayes interpret the Apostle to mean only the Faith of Christ in general Others understand him to speak of a Faith particularly made to Christ by the Order of Widows vowing singleness of life and in all reason this seems to be most favoured by the context But besides this appeal is made by the one party to the judgment of the ancient and holy Christians interpreting this both by their writings and practise as relating specially to the dedication of Widowhood to God After this fair dealing for men to declare they will be tryed by none but that which they know is the main thing in question is very vain and somewhat more They having no special text so interdicting such Vows as this is to commend them But the worst of it is this that if there were any way more perfect then that they have pitched on they should be sufferers in the good opinion of the world but that must by no means be endured And this at the end of all is the great absurdity they bring us to but surely not so great but both the Cause and Defenders of it may well show their face after all this granted and owned The second thing now in the third place to be touched is concerning the Nature of a Vow in it self viz. That so it is no proper act nor any proper part of Gods Service but the manner of it For to vow to God is an indifferent thing to Good or Evil. A man may as well vow to Gods dishonour as his glory It is therefore good or evil in relation to the matter about which the Vow is made For to vow Sacrifices under the Law and to vow Alms under the Gospel or Virginity or such like is no farther part of the Service of God then the thing it self tends to the worship of God and its nature and office is to bind to the true and due performance of a thing but not absolutely a duty in its self The principle doubt on the contrary may be that which is taken from that which a man devotes to God as an ingredient to all vows For when a man vows he of a free man makes himself servile and limited to one of those things to which formerly he was free And this we have shewed is an argument of some against vowing because it takes away the liberty God had given On the other side the contrary party may in my judgment turn it against them and make it an argument of worth and excellencie because it gives to God that which is to us most precious For when St. Paul saith If you may be free use it rather and stand fast in the liberty where with Christ hath made you free he undoubtedly means only in reference to man and then only when we really have and not presume only that we have such a liberty and when this liberty is that which pertaineth to the substance of the Gospel as most of those places alledged to found a liberty do aim at But do they think as it should seem that either Natural Civil or Evangelical Liberty is such a thing and so given unto us of God that we may not render it to him nor part with it again to him Is it too good or sacred to give him it from whom we received it Nay the more dear and precious it is to us the more acceptable it should be to him When we deny our selves the liberty he hath given us the better to serve him surely it is no less pleasing to God than to part with meat drink money and the time which he hath given us dedicating the same to him It is strange therefore next to monstrous that Christians should stumble so at the Scriptures and they especially who will scarce allow any man to be cunning in the Scriptures besides themselves or to be governed by them as they pretend to be as to make such fond conclusions from them the contrary to which is much the truer To give away our liberty to God is an excellent Sacrifice to him and they would prove out of Scripture we ought not to give it him at all For if they prove not this they prove nothing when they say we ought not to make vows to him because it takes away our liberty And therefore to the argument viz. that by this it should follow that vowing is in it self an act or part of Gods worship I answer That if any thing here be an act of worshipping God it is the giving up it self of our liberty and not the vowing to give it up for this is but the means and manner so to serve and worship God and not the worship it self And thus much Perkins Perkins Cases of Conscience Chap. 14. Lib. 2. acknowledges in vows about bodily exercises such as Fasting Prayers and Alms but likes not it so to be in other matters Indeed as he confusedly and crudely touches the point passing from the nature of a Vow in it self which was his question unto the matter he might very well write against some vows and prove them unlawful when the thing it self is unlawful to be done whether with or without a vow such as are ceremonial acts of the Law of Moses and moral evils against truth justice or piety it self And thus much of the form of vowing the lawfulness and uses in general CHAP. IV. Of the Matter of Vows in particular And first of the Virginal state that it is
till some extraordinary Pastours as they call'd themselves made the alteration much for the worse God knows and would have no man enter the proper place of worship unless it were to hear the Word that is their word This custome God be thanked was never quite laid down in our English Church and I trust in God never will but gain strength countenance and encouragement knowing that the Mother Churches or Cathedrals being Precedents to all inferiour Churches pertaining to them do by their example of daily prayers and a free access at all convenient times of the day granted for men to pray to God their private particular prayers not only approve but commend to and invite her daughter Churches to the like most godly practise All Eastern as well as Western Churches out of the Precincts of the Reformation herein very unhappy set us the like example And all Churches at first by great prudence and piety of the founders and promoters were there placed where they might be most convenient for the Parish to resort to at all times and also to the best advantage of Roads that so travellers passing by might have an opportunity to enter them and do the devotions to God But now a thing to be lamented such a godly custom would be censur'd for superstition as the Devil and the Enemies of God never want words to traduce where they want reason to disprove what is good and commendable And being born to an errour have a certain horrour of leaving it though no reason can possibly be picked up to retain it Besides Popish and Superstitious what have any man I would fain hear to say against private prayers in Churches And those tearms are now so bald and generally so boldly and ignorantly applyed that they prove nothing more many times than the profaneness of the user and have done the Church of Rome more credit and service in that many excellent things have been made proper and singular to that Church which in truth are not then all the franck language and most averse practises of such men have done them discredit or hurt But it were very strange if they could here find nothing in Scripture to colour their cause or credit this ungodly opinion Christ saith say they or at least may Thou when thou prayest enter into thy closet and when thou hast Matth. 6. 6. shut thy door pray to thy father which is in secret and thy father which is in secret shall reward thee openly But do they who turn these words thus to their purpose really think that Christ hereby advised men to pray rather at home than in the publick When I can believe it I will shew the contrary and before For Christ spake not against the publickness but the hypocrisie of this prayer It is not probable indeed that a man should be so hypocritical in private as he may in publick And therefore to obviate that mortal evil to all divine prayer our Saviour both confutes and redresses it shewing it is far better for such and more acceptable to God to be take themselves to their closets where no Man but God and their own Consciences can see them than with such vain ostentation to beg applause of men And if all the world were such Hypocrites as Christ reproved it were better no man should ever come to Church at any time But there is the contrary vice to be shun'd and that is Profaneness For that is no less scandalous yea much more and must be so accounted But they who out of undue reasons refuse the publick place of Gods worship are to be noted as Prophane It is most certain that they who keep to St. Pauls precept in his Epistle to Timothy That men pray every where lifting up holy hands c. cannot pray 1 Tim. 2. 8. Ephes 6. always in one place especially if we add that other precept of St. Paul Pray always for no man can be always in that most common place of prayer And therefore it may be inferred from hence that it is lawful and acceptable to God to pray privately but not that prayer in publick is not to be preferred before private For would it not as well hold against prayer in families which is not in the closet And if to every house there were a place dedicated specially to Gods worship as there is in every parish I should hold that prayers generally in the family and particularly of persons singly were more laudably performed in that publick place than in a private chamber But it is further to be noted That when St. Paul saith we should pray every where he never intended to equalize all places in fitness to Gods service he intended not to take off distinction of Christian places to that end but Judaical as the Temple of the Jews which diverse green Christians supposed was to be the special if not only place assigned of God for his worship St. Paul informs them better assures them that they should pray every where as well as at Jerusalem meaning nothing less then that where there were Christian Temples to which they might resort they should not need go to them but may keep at home as well being God is every where and they must pray every where but that a place of worship solemniz'd by Christians was altogether as proper as that Temple of the Jews Isidore saith indeed Prayer is most opportunely made in private places and is more pleasing to God viz. so qualified as before A sincere prayer at home is better many degrees than an hypocritical one in publick And the Gloss upon St. Pauls words â—â—ith In every place that is where ever you are and not only in the Church And the like it saith upon Christs words in St. John to the woman of Samaria That neither John 4. 21. on that mount nor yet at Jerusalem men should worship God But who sees not that it is to be understood signally and not so superstitiously as that a Temple might not be as pleasing to God in any other place as at Jerusalem or Mount Gerizzim And I know he addeth as divers other Fathers the Temple of the heart which is worthily said to encourage such persons to inward and chamber-devotion whose leisure or labours will not suffer them to repair to Church not to erect an alter in heart house equal to that in the Church And for my part I see no reason to except unclean places from Gods worship as some Casuists do when a more comely and convenient cannot be had For there is no place unclean in such Cases But we are now enquiring about the right a place hath to our Services other things being equal As if a man hath as good an heart as simple intention as pure charity as laudable matter petition'd for whether the place of Gods worship be not it he ought to offer his Sacrifice in rather than any other And whether publick is not required rather than private And here
home Thou mayest pray indeed but thy prayer not have the like efficacie as when it is made with the proper members as when the entire body of the Church sendeth up its Petition with one consent with one voice the Priests being present and offering up the prayers of the whole multitude Wouldst thou know of what great force the prayer that is made in the Church is Peter was bound in Prison c. Acts 12. 5. And is it not most strange to consider the bold ignorance of the common sort who dare to turn the words of Solomon and that even in that prayer of Dedication and signalizing the House of God above all places else for Gods worship against that and all other Houses to that holy intent and to make all places alike when there is nothing so manifest as that that place was only assigned by God with special injunctions and promises For when Acts 7. 48. c. 17. 24. 1 Kings 8. 27. they say God doth not dwell in Temples made with hands out of the Acts of the Apostles what do they say more than Solomon at the time of dedication But will God indeed dwell on the earth Behold the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee how much less this House which I have built Doth not the argument prove that God is no where to be worshipped because he is locally no where contain'd in a place Or does it prove that he is to be worshipped in private Houses or contained in them rather then in the publick The Gentiles as St. Pauls words intimate imagined that by certain Images they could bind their Gods to be present and limit them to certain places from whence they could not well stir And this is the reason that some ancient Fathers as Arnobius and Minutius Felix denyed the Christians had any Temples then meaning such charmed Images and Shrines to hold God fast to them The Jews imagined as appears by St. Stephens words that Gods promises and blessings were so precisely determined to that One Temple amongst them that he would by no means impart himself in like manner in any other place To this fond and superstitious conceit it was very proper to quote their own Prophets against them who imply what St. Paul expresses else where Is he the God of the Jews only Is he not Rom. 3. 29. also of the Gentiles Yes of the Gentiles also c. And by vertue hereof whatsoever the Scripture may seem to ruder readers of it to speak by way of disesteem of material and visible Temples implies no more than an equal right of the Gentile Temples dedicated to God under the Gospel with the Jewish under the Law But that even the publick places of Christians should be looked upon with no greater respect or religion then that which comes next to hand is no where to be found and far from being the purpose of Christs words out of which another exception is made viz. Where two or three are gathered together Matth. 18. 20. in my Name there am I in the midst of them For what I pray is it to meet in the Name of Christ Only to take his Name into our mouths To turn over the Scriptures and to turn them this way and that way and prosess great matters out of them By no means 'T is true this is somewhat towards it But notwithstanding this men may meet in the name of the Devil rather than of Christ and do the works of the Devil rather than of Christ For to do the will and work of either is to meet in the name of either And no men who in their very meeting it self as such are enemies unto Christ can be said to meet in the Name of Christ speak they never so gracious and glorious things of Christ and Religion But they who lightly vainly and causlesly affect separation and dismember themselves from the visible I say visible Body of Christ the Society of Saints by Election and Profession are thereby direct enemies to Christ and can never meet in Christs Name according to Christs intention though as the worshippers of Baal on Baal they call on Christ with never so much zeal and earnestness from morning to evening as we have already shewed where we treated of Schism And when at length will they who under such obscure and fond pretenses separate produce any one thing which may countervail the notoriousness of the evil of separation as a reason to warrant them so to do But this either the gross insensateness of the vulgar in such points or the desperate resolution to hold their own whatever may be said against them is little or nothing look't after till it be too late CHAP. X. A fourth corruption of the Worship of God by confining it to an unknown tongue Scripture and Tradition against that custom A fifth abuse of Prayer in denying the People their Suffrage contrary to the ancient practise of the Church BUT before we leave this publick worship we are to observe somewhat of the manner how it ought to be performed and that to rescue it from two abuses principally crept into it The first of the Papist and the other of the Puritan unluckily falling into the same condemnation with the other Two things are as evident as Tradition not to say Scripture can make any thing First that all publick and private prayers were instituted in a known tongue Secondly that there was a concurrence of the vulgar Christians with the publick Minister of such Offices Both these are now quite almost worn out of use amongst the Romanists and being disused a defense framed studiously against the practise of them The latter hath been practised and maintained by Puritans though first invented by Papists The authority of Scripture for the publick prayers to be made in a known tongue seems to us and not only to us but to our more ingenuous adversaries very express in St. Pauls Epistle to the Corinthians The subject 1 Cor. 14. of the fourteenth Chapter of the first Epistle is to redress the vanity of certain gifted persons who presumed to teach and pray in such a forreign tongue which no man understood but themselves For whereas it is commonly replyed by the Learned Romanists that the Apostle speaks of preaching chiefly and not of praying in publick It matters not much if he doth speak of preaching as certainly he doth so it be evident that he speaketh of prayer also nor that he principally teacheth of prophesying if he omitteth not publick prayer Is there any thing need be plainer than this on our side If I pray in an unknown tongue my spirit prayeth but v. 14 15. my understanding is unfruitful What is it then I pray with the Spirit and I will pray with the understanding also I will sing with the spirit I will sing with the understanding also Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned
say Amen at thy giving of thanks seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest These words are plain enough one would think to declare that the Apostle intended publick prayer as well as preaching or prophesying Therefore no arts are omitted to obscure and pervert his meaning but with such ill success that it is thereby much more illustrated and confirmed to the loss of such corrupters of Scripture to make it agree with their doctrine and practise For Bellarmine confesses 't is very hard to make it good that the Aposte means Bellarm. de Verbo D. lib. 2. cap. 16. only preaching and so in truth it must needs be but that there is nothing to necessity and a willing mind And therefore to mend the matter he says The Apostle there treateth not of Divine Offices but of Spiritual Songs which Christians were wont to compose to praise God and give him thanks And what if this were so For that they had any formed Liturgies in those early unsetled dayes of the Church while the gifts of the Spirit were so ordinary I much question excepting the Lords Prayer which was ever in publick use as well as private if it be not undoubtedly true what is affirmed by no mean Authors That St. Peter celebrated the Mass taking here Mass in the ancient and innocent signification with the Lords prayer only Doth not the argument of the Apostles hold altogether as valid in the ordinary as extraordinary Praises and Service But when the same Authour can bring scarce any ancienter than himself who are of his opinion and doth bring Haymo Primasius Lombard Thomas and others that he means the Ordinary service what worth can there be in such an evasion Hence it is that another is invented in the same Authour which acknowledges that there is meant Common worship But that the whole Congregation is not thereby to understand but only the Clerk of the Parish who is instead of the unlearned or Idiot to say Amen For Papists make no doubt but such an one there was who should in such manner answer for the rest of the people But I make no doubt but they are miserably mistaken For no records among the Jews from whom most customs of the ancientest Christians descended report any such thing No custom of the primitive Christians warrant this but the contrary whatever Ledesima the Jesuit saith For as shall by and by shewed the people in general without any such discrimination of persons made their solemn returns unto their Bishop or Priest who so celebrated in publick And therefore Bellarmine honestly and learnedly rejecteth this interpretation showing that the phrase of the Apostle which we render Supplyeth the place of the unlearned comprehendeth no less all the vulgar then the pretended Clerk And reason good he should so think because questionless by Unlearned is not there meant general ignorance of men but ignorance of that language which was spoken so extraordinarily For as Salmeron noteth upon the place of St. Paul by Place is meant the order of setting in such Assemblies where the Teachers had one place and the Hearers who for that were called Unlearned had another Hence it is that Salmeron would make clearer work affirming Salmer Com. in 1 Cor. 14. Disp 30. That it is not the end of Divine Service that the people should be instructed but the worshipping of God This Bellarmine approveth but betrays his cause in another point granting that of old prayers publick were for the instruction of the people but now is not this to own a forsaking of antitiquity the chief use of prayers is not the edification or consolation of the people but the worship of God And the Reason which Bellarmine gives is exactly the same which Sectaries amongst us give to silence the people in publick Devotion because The Minister speaketh not to man but unto God To both which we answer briefly and against both viz. The Priest speaketh unto God only in prayer as the proper object and to the people only in preaching as the proper object of that But he also in prayer speaks to the people instrumentally i. e. as to so many instruments or causes concurring to the same end and effect and therefore ought to understand what is petitioned for and obliged to concur with the principal Agent the Minister of God in such worship For though we are far from denying what the Papists and Puritans may say That any prayer is unfruitful or unnecessary which is not understood by the people in whose behalf it is put up for it may avail them who are many miles distant we all grant and consequently a prayer not heard may be useful as well not understood when heard Yet this holds only when inconveniencies or impossibilities obstruct the due exercise of prayer For as to such who are deaf and cannot hear yet come with general reverence to the publick place and so far as they can joyn with the prayers of the Church I make no question but considerable benefit to accrew so such as shall ignorantly scornfully or uncharitably neglect to give their general consent and suffrage to the publick communion in prayer I make no doubt but they bereave themselves of the benefit both of the publick service and their own private worship But this cometh not home to the purpose For of extraordinary acts in Religion as of particular things in Philosophy there is no knowledge and nothing can be determined but this may That generally and ordinarily publick prayers are more prevalent with God when understood and concurred to by publick devotion And herein doth consist the vulgar errour of the Romish Doctours that they suppose St. Paul should mean which I confess as I have said before our Translation too much favours that when he saith The understanding is unfruitful the understanding of the speaker in an unknown tongue whenas the context will certainly inform us he meant the understanding of the hearer who knew nothing of what was so delivered which some of their own Expositors agree to as also they do to the great expediencie as well as antiquity of that custom of the peoples bearing a share in the publick Worship To demonstrate which I shall here at large transcribe what I find in sober and learned Cassander It were to be wisht that according to the precept of the Cassand Defens Lib. De Officio Pii Viri p. 865. Op. Apostle and the ancient Rite of the Church that some consideration were had of the people in the publick prayers of the Church singings and lessons which are undertaken for the peoples sake and that the common sort of Believers should not wholly and constantly be driven from all communion of prayers and divine lessons St. Pauls words are manifest that what is said cannot be understood unless you express it by a tongue signifying your speech and that he who through ignorance understandeth not what is said can by no means answer Amen at the giving of thanks of another
And that Oraculum by notice whereof the Bishop of Rome with the Senate of Cardinals granted to the Sclavonian Nation that they should use the tongue of their Country in sacred actions seemeth to pertain to all Nations named Christians Omnis spiritus laudet Dominum omnis lingua confiteatur ei Let every spirit praise the Lord and every tongue confess to him And Thomas Cajetane a man doubtless most learned and acute wrote in a certain place It were better for the edification of the Church publick prayers to be said in the vulgar tongue in the Church which the people may hear than in the Latin tongue And when he was for this reproved by some he answered He built upon the foundation of the Apostles in his fourteenth Chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians c. Thus far and much more followeth out of that grave man to this purpose So that in one of those things which convince the Church of Rome of Innovation and obstinacie in novelties as nothing need more be said against it to that end nothing being said more for it in the upshot of all Disputes but that for some time it hath been in use there and the Trentine Convention hath Azorus Institut Mor. l. 8. c. 26. Salmer in 1 Cor. 16. Disp 30. made all sure according to their manner by decreeing it inconvenient that Divine Offices should commonly be in the vulgar tongue as Azorius writeth and as Salmeron It anathematizes such as will not be content with the three tongues in which the super scription was written upon the Cross of Christ Which is a fansie without any firmness at all it being certain no such thing was intended thereby and evident that the Hebrew tongue was scarce ever used in Christian services though the Syriack hath been And it is not agreed whether of the two was the Language but this we rest not on nor can the Romanists But when they have turned every stone to little purpose they come to that which will never fail them in this or any other point the determination of their Church and practise of the same which upon no accounts must be violated for that were to loose or hazard all as Azorius in the place fore-cited doth with little modesty and less advantage to his cause profess and answering this question Whether the vulgar tongue might not be indulged to Hereticks petitioning for it and for the peace of the Church saith I answer Councils and Fathers and the Church were never wont to yield to such like Hereticks demands But this he proves in matters quite of a different nature as if when the Fathers would hear of no accommodation with Arius Eutycheus Nestorius holding notorious heresies against Christ even when they would have introduced some verbal agreement they could be precedents to oppose that wherein if it were false can consist no heresie but is true and most generally was practised by all the Fathers and Churches at first and so continued for eight hundred years And therefore he speaks more to this purpose in these words following If it should be granted to Lutherans and Calvinists that they should celebrate Divine Service in their vulgar tongue they would afterward give out that they had got their wills yea that the Church had changed her opinion and left off her ancient custom as contrary to Scripture and so charge the Church with erring and would exult with incredible joy and gladness over it c. This is in truth the very same reason which our grave Puritans render why they conform not to the Church in her Service whenas they confess they have nothing of sin to object against the thing it self viz. They should be judged of mutability and levity should thereby weaken their Ministry in the esteem of their people which in all probability they borrowed from their Father Calvin one of whose reasons against the moderation Calvin Epist of Melancthon was that if they should make any correction in that Reformation which was so hastily hudled up they should weaken their Ministry The reasonableness of which I leave to others to judge of But rejecting the common reasons all of which we are not here to examine of Papists we shall freely oblige them to give better grounds of the Liturgies in unknown tongues than may be ordinarily found amongst them though no sufficient can be given And one is the great veneration had to the traditions of the Ancients in worshipping God not that anciently any instance can be given that may be a precedent to the corruptions of these times but that having with sober grave and holy advice framed a Liturgy in any one tongue they were very scrupulous how they made any alteration therein though of words only and therefore that which is vulgarly spoken altering daily and that which was written remaining altogether unchanged in words tract of time bred a diversity between the one and the other But this we demand of our Adversaries what one president for many hundred years together they can produce where at the first institution of publick Service it was so contriv'd that nothing of the vulgar language should be taken into it There is a vast difference between a passive and an active and purposed inconvenience The ancient predecessours of the Roman Church never intended that their Latin Service should be hid or unknown from the common people which many generations after followed yet so it must needs fall out in time But they who at this day plant Churches in both Indies and obtrude their Latine tongue upon the people there and who deny liberty to other Provincial Churches in Europe and elsewhere to celebrate in their known Language do purpose mischief unto such Christians and become Schismatical in not only not redressing themselves according to the Rule of their fore-fathers whom they should much more imitate in ordering their service so that the Common Christian might understand the same as primitively and for a long time they did than in sticking so severely to the bare Letters and Syllables they used not making conscience of far more scandalous practices in altering the service it self in matter by absurd additions and detractions but with denunciation of Excommunication against such Churches as shall presume to redress that evil of ignorance and render Christians intelligent of what they do But I have been of opinion that the vulgar have been no small cause of this great superstition and inconvenience to themselves In that in process of time their devotion slacking in timely repairing to the Church and in due demeanor in the Church neglecting to concur with the Minister of God and to reciprocate with him and almost deserting the Service by coldness sloth and indevotion the Priest was constrained perhaps with a Deacon or Clerk only to perform the service alone And truly let such people look to their modern teachers who have instilled such ungracious opinions into them as to take them off
certain Houses may become the houses of God in a peculiar manner no less than Houses and Lands may be the rights of Man will appear from the very same grounds which are generally three Donation Purchase Occupation Donation is the Transferring of the Right of one Man to another under which we reduce Inheritance which though now custom of Law has made to descend to the next heir without any act of the predecessour yet originally it was constantly by gift and the Law supposes now a gift of the deceased where no formal donation is mentioned to him that is to succeed nor any other Purchase is the transferring of the Right or Dominion one hath of any thing to another upon civil contract and consideration whereas the other seemed rather to be natural Occupation is the possession of a thing free from any proprietary and retaining the same unto his own proper use All these ways both Houses and Lands may be transferred unto God upon this farther supposition that to the acquiring of a Right of Dominion the act of the person to whom it is transferred is not immediately necessary but another in his name and right may assume it So that if any entring into uninhabited and unpossessed Countries to which no man layeth a claim shall take up such a quantity of ground in Gods name and declare it devoted to the use of Religion and the Service of God it as undoubtedly becomes the possessions of God as it would have belonged to himself had he retained to himself the right of the first Occupant as they call it Again when out of the revenues of such sacred Estate commonly called Church-Lands or Means there is purchase made to the same end and in the same nature But most known is that of Free Donation either of one or more to the Service and Honour of God which we call Dedication Which Dedication is an outward act or ceremony signifying the Alienation of the right formerly posited in others and Translation thereof to Gods Service which because God conversing not with us Civilly as we do one with another it cannot be put immediately into the hands of God is taken up in Gods name for his use by his more immediate Servants and by consequence is not to be wrested from him nor alienated to any prophane I mean common humane uses any more than is that which in right belongs unto one man to be granted to or usurped by another without concession or consent in some manner implyed if not expressed This ancient Rite of Dedicating Churches was at first very agreeable to the simplicity of Christian Religion it self yet like all passing of Estates from one to another in the more natural and rude condition of Humane Society where there was alwayes a change of the Propriety where was any propriety at all but very simple and rude without any formalities as are now in use in those called civilized Countries but with no less validity And so it was at first in the alienation of Houses from humane Proprietaries and devoting them to God For as Baronius hath observed As the Kings Baron Ann. 112. num 45 46. or Emperours Exchequer was wont at first to lay claim to any thing by casting over it the Emperours Mantle or putting his Image or Name upon it even so the Bishops were wont to consecrate Churches to God no otherwise than by marking them with the Title of the Cross or with its Banner Whence it was that the Emperour Theodosius Leg. ult de Paganis Cod. Theod. commanded that the Temples of the Gentiles should serve for Christian Religion by placing upon them the sign of the Venerable Cross Hence is that of Perkins concerning this matter who saith The ancient Consecration of Perkins Demonst Problem Churches was with meer words and prayers not with crossings or such like rites And dedication of Churches began about the year 300 after Christ is partly found true and partly erroneous For Funcius yields much more confessing Funcius Comment l. 2. ad Ann. 141. that Hyginus Bishop of Rome ordained that Temples should be dedicated to God with solemn Rites and Ceremonies which was about the year 141. And yet it is true what Perkins saith that very simple was the first form But we do not so much here enquire into the Antiquity or Form of Consecration as the reasonableness and effect of such consecration And the reasonableness doth appear from the common grounds already laid and the necessity of some outward visible form to be used in such Dedications as well to manifest to the world the renunciation of propriety in any that may otherwise pretend to reserve their right to themselves anciently enjoyed as also to declare to what end and upon what conditions they so part with that right and to whom it thenceforward belongs all which if it must be traduced with the opprobrious name of Superstition so pass as invalid or sinful I would pray such enemies as he did those that desired Aristocratical Government to settle it first in their own Families and then as experience should prompt to them to commend it to the Publick First to take up estates upon such simple unceremonial acts themselves and as they find the event to offer that as the most simple and sober way for Gods House to pass from others hands into Gods I know the haters of Superstition to far greater superstition are wont to say It suffices that such is the consent of Christians that a place should be allotted in convenient manner to Gods Service and that it is sufficiently consecrated if they dare speak such a bold word by concomitancie that is when such acts of Divine worship as their prayers and specially preaching are there exercised But this will no ways be accepted both because they do the same duties in places which they hold no wayes thereby alienated from their common uses And this is no more than for a man to lend another his house to keep a Feast in it and not so much as if a man should let out his house for one to keep his Shevalry or Majoralty in But that we require is that a place should so be made over to Gods use that it should be out of all mens power justly to reduce it to humane propriety and uses And this can only be done and is done by such acts of publick Dedication as we plead for and never could hear half a note of sense reason or religion against it though we hear too great and unchristian clamours to the contrary with wonted revilings Supposing then this we pass to the effect of such Dedications unto Almighty God one of which is contained and expressed in the formal abrenunciation made of all Civil Right to such a place and by consequence for any man to convert any part of it to his own use is sacrilegiously to prophane the same A thing which I take this occasion to note against the gross abuse of Churches
is nothing but Examples and they not peculiar to that day From whence I would conclude no more than this That the true ground of dedicating a day to the Service of God is to be fetch'd from the light of Nature in which all Nations religious consent but the ground of keeping the Seventh Day as Chrys Homil. 12. pag. 542. Antioch the Seventh was meerly Mosaical and Judaical as Chrysostome also hath well gathered from the reason annexed unto it For in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth and rested the Seventh day whereas saith he God hath given us no reason why we should not commit Murder or Adultery c. because the command is so agreeable to nature Again the ground of keeping that Seventh Day which we do is to be taken wholly from Christian Principles Thirdly the form or manner of observing that Day is to be taken from the Prescriptions of the Apostles so far as they stand recorded in the New Testament and from Apostolical practises shining successively in the following Ages of the Churches Yet not so as if it were not lawful for this Age of the Church to keep it more strictly and sacredly than did the very first Age of the Church and some following it and the rather because it is certain that the Primitive Christians did keep two days Festival in one week to the honour of God the ancient Seventh Day of the Jews and the newly instituted day of the Christians as might here be made apparent Centur. 1. l. 2. cap. 6. But I shall here only add the judgment of the Magdeburgenses concerning the first Century of years where they write thus Mention is made of the Lords Day Apocaâ— 1. 7. but at what time Christians separated themselves from the Jews and began to rest on the Lords Day is no where mentioned in Records but that some rested on the Lords Day and some on the Saturday in this Age the contentions in the following Age do witness Thus they And for the Translation they speak of to be made of the Service of God from the Saturday to the Sunday they speak altogether without the Book of God or of the ancient Historians of the Church For that had had little of Christianity in it and could serve to no end so much as to spite and reproach the Jews as Calvin hath noted For it had made indeed both against the Jews and Christians too Them to have the precise command of God to them so directly violated These to retain the same thing which could not consist with Christianity imposed upon them with the Circumstance of time only varied For they who speak of Translation of a thing cannot mean here the natural day it self translated or more properly adjourned to the First nor can they mean the worship of that day transmitted to this For that was Judaical and Antichristian And if neither of these can be allowed what mean they to talk of changing or translating of one day to another And why do they not speak the truth roundly and dare to say That Christians instituted the First Day of the week in commemoration of the Benefits they received by Christ without any consideration at all of any command in the Old Testament and that it was a cessation of the Jewish Sabbath and an introduction of a Christian quite of another nature And that so it is appeareth from the concessions made by the greatest defenders of a Sabbatical Lords Day which I shall here contract as necessary to satisfie the Scruples and Doubts bred by careless handlers of this subject Things temporary in the Sabbath are these saith Mr. Perkins First the Jew might not go forth on the Sabbath day or take any journey or do any Perkins Cases of Conscien lib. 2. cap. 16. other business of his own Exod. 16. 29. 2. He might not kindle a fire on the Sabbath day Exod. 25. 3. 3. Nor carry a burden Jerem. 13. 21. These things are temporary altogether and do not concern the times of the New Testament c. Secondly It was temporary and ceremonial as it was a special sign between God and his People of the blessings that were propounded and promised in the Covenant Exod. 31. 13. Thirdly The set Day namely the Seventh was temporary Deut. 5. 14. Numb 28. 9 10. Fourthly That it was to be observed in remembrance of their deliverance out of Egypt Deut. 5. 15. Thus he of things not moral in the Fifth Commandment Now hear we what he accounts Moral They are these three First a Day of Rest This we also account Moral but not so much by the Fourth Commandment as by a Superiour Law as we have said and so of the Second That it be sanctified and of the Third That a Seventh Day should be sanctified to an holy rest is meerly craved and believed before it be proved from any text of Scripture Yea in his following Discourse he granteth that St. Paul wrought with Aquila and Priscilla on the Sundays and observed the Jews Sabbath out of Acts 18. 3 4. but he adds That it was out of Charity and necessity of the Salvation of them with whom he so conversed and answereth secondly That though he did not keep the Sabbath he meaneth the Lords Day for he constantly calls the Lords Day The Sabbath and too many have imitated his phrase publickly he might privately He might indeed but such privacie of which we have no knowledge can be no Rule or Law to us It is said by Perkins in another place and by his blind Followers That Perkins his Digest or Harmony p. 766. Vol. 2. the Sabbath of the Old world is the Seventh Day from the Creation which was consecrated for Divine Service in Paradise before the Fall And from hence they have drawn an argument for the Morality and that worthily could it be proved what they presume But others that have sifted the matter more Curcelleus diatrib de Sabbato c. 6. narrowly and accurately deliver the contrary for a certain truth viz. That the first Sabbath observed by the Jews in the Desart was not reckoned from the beginning of the creation but from the day in which Manna was first rain'd down as may be seen out of Exod. 16. v. 4 5 13. which two are supposed to meet together but upon no good foundation But this is certain that we find a breach of the Sabbath and severe punishment executed upon the breakers of it before the promulgation of the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinah But to this the best argument I find for the Antiquity of it it is well answered That the same reason is for the Antiquity of the Tabernacle too which most certainly was not made till a long time after the first mention we have of it For Exod. 33. 7. Moses is said to take the Tabernacle and pitch it without the Camp whenas the history following relateth the particular materials and form and solemn erection of it to be
Secondly Religion of all sorts ever acknowledged Festival worship Thirdly Apostolical practice and Prescription commend them and Fourthly our Church Homilies one reason possibly they have suffered Homily of the time and place of Prayer pag. 125. so many reproaches of ungodly men tell us that Holy days were appointed by the same Authority that the Lords day was which as sorely as it may vex these dissenters to hear is most true For though it sayes with the same Authority it doth not from thence follow that they by that Authority were instituted with the same sacredness And Mr. Perkins is Perkins Preparat to Problem pag. 681. deceived who tells us Not a Feast except Easter can be proved for 300 years after Christ Indeed Socrates whom he quotes saith the Apostles did not much concern themselves in Feasts but his meaning plainly is not about such punctilio's or Circumstances of Feasts as gave him occasion to write about them such as were the Contentions between the Eastern and Western Church about the day of keeping Easter But that Easter was Apostolical can be no more doubted then that Sunday was so And that fifty days after Easter to Whitsuntide were kept Festivally Tertullian witnesseth And therefore Cartwright whom nothing Tertul. Advers Psychicos cap. 14. could hold but his own fansie and the Genevan Plat-form thought it safer to say being urged with Antiquity I appeal from the examples of the Ancient Church to the Scriptures There were other grosser Errors countenanced by Antiquity There were so or there were none at all But what greater errour did Antiquity generally assert to then this of Innovatours denying all Holy days lawful but the Lords day Do you appeal to Scripture to prove this So do we Show one place against them if ye can Or show that the Church where there is no precept of Scripture in particular may not ordain such times of Worship When will these Scriptures appear For the places commonly alledged against set days viz. Rom. 14. 5. I leave Mr. Perkins to answer sufficiently though not absolutely in his Cases of Conscience Lib. 2. cap. 16. And that of Galat. 4. 10. to his Comment on the words And that of Colos 2. 16. to the now quoted place of his Cases of Conscience intending here no formal disputation though this Author falls into many pitiful suspicions and imaginations of his own in these places As for instance on Galatians 4. 10. he saith Indeed the Church of England observes Holy days but the Popish superstition is cut off This is true but the reason he gives very false which is this For we are not bound in conscience to the Observation of those days For Conscience binds every good Christian from singularizing Conscience binds to embrace all convenient opportunities to praise and honor God Conscience likewise binds to faithful obedience to our Ecclesiastical Superiours in such pious exercises as these and against which no more then the rude Effects of their private opinions and passion hath been alledged notwithstanding I know how much Gelaspie and after him Voctius have travailed in this subject and notwithstanding his answers Davenant on Coloss 2. v. 16. I hold the Reasons of Bishop Davenant to be strong and Pious given us for the observation of Holy days in his Comment upon the Colossians to which I refer the Reader for brevity sake And for the same reason I reduce what may be said about Fasts to what is already said of the Feasts of the Church For there is the very same reason of Antiquity Apostolical for the observation of both power and Liberty of the Church just occasions offered Conformity to the Primitive state of the Church Advantages of such exercises Characteristicks of Christian from unchristian societies and professions which all equally infer the duty of Fasting on set days as of Feasting and the madness and wickedness of such Christians as dare open their mouths against them because no doubt but both one and other have been much abused by Roman superstition Yet not Fasting so much as Festival days The abuses may here be noted to be these 1. Multitude whereby works of Nature and Civil necessities should be so far impeded Origen Hom. 10. in Genes and retarded that no small prejudice should befall the Common-wealth thereby Indeed Origen saith Every day is to be a Festival to a Christian calling them Jews who observe some now and then but his meaning is not that every day a man should cease from his labour wholly and only wear his best cloaths walk about and do nothing but worship God but as there he expresses himself should go to Church daily and not content himself with his domestique devotion but appear before God in publique place though not in that publique manner as with the assembly of Christians This still binds as a Councill at least if not Command and that which as hath been shewed already is much better then that which is performed within the walls of our Bucerus de Regno Christ lib. 2. cap. 10. own house or Closets if we will take Bucers judgment who speaketh thus When as all that we have and are and our very lives we have received and do receive daily from the free bounty of God is it not very meet also that we should assemble daily also to render him thanks and to renew our devotion to him and our worship of him by his Word and Sacraments which he hath for this purpose appointed for us and by daily Prayers which he requireth of us Your Majesties therefore he speaketh to Edward the sixth Part it is to inforce the authority of the Divine Law against this so great abuse of God and unbridled profanation of Holy days And therefore if Sectaries Religion be examined duly which hath procured them so much credit and esteem amongst unknowing people it will be found to fall short by much of that which is approved and established by our Church They are said to be frequent and constant in duties as they call them of their Families meaning prayers perhaps morning and evening this is very good and laudable But consider we a little whence this practice hath arisen whither it tendeth and it is rather a defrauding God of that due which we plead for then out-doing others The Church the publique house of God is the proper place of Gods worship and that he is more glorified in than by home-made worship Therefore for them to translate the Service of God out of the Church at all times but when a Sermon calls them forth into their own houses and to offer the morning and evening sacrifice at home when it ought and may be offered in his own house is so far from deserving the name of extraordinary Pieties that it deserves rather the name of Sacriledge And this I speak meaning when this proceeds either from that brutish opinion that all places are alike to God which is only true in sensu diviso and
nor are charged by any understanding reasonable person so to do And what they affirm of all outward Reverence or Worship I see no reason but may be said of all inward Adoration too viz. that it is Equivocal and indifferent to Divine and Human Reverence unless it be determined and specificated by somewhat besides it self For Fear and Love and Reverence may be and that inwardly exhibited to the Creature and the degrees of all these may be greater and more intense towards our Prince whom we so reverence humble our selves before and Petition than when in this manner we address our selves to God and yet this not reputed Idolatrous worship Yea we openly profess we humbly earnestly and with all our hearts desire such a thing from man and so I doubt not but many do with greater affection and inward sense than they generally seek to God and yet no man charges them with Idolatry So that the inward acts of worship are equivocal no less than the outward and consequently no act in its self Idolatrous or of it self And thus have we brought the matter to that pass to relieve distressed Catholiques that ordinary Heathens may evade the charge of Idolatry though they never knew the true God And See Joannes de Palafox Epist de Jesuitar Societate Extinguenda c. ad Innocent 10. p. 23 24. apud S. Amour if they know and profess upon occasion to worship the true God yet may they perform all outward acts of Worship generally reputed Divine provided their Intention be sincere and their hearts upright before God which elusions and evasions the Jesuites have made great use of in their complyance with the grossest Idolatry Heathens are subject to in the East Indies as John de Palafox hath plainly and roundly charged them to Innocent the Tenth showing at large how under the favour of such new invented and minted distinctions never thought of without detestation by the Ancient Church they have presumed to converse with and in all outward appearance communicate with Idolatrous Heathens in their Temples and Idols And why not if all outward worship falls short of Divine and their intention inward be not to give Divine Worship to them For to define Idolatry as doth Azorius to be That whereby the worship Azorius Institut Moral To. 1. l. 9. c. 10. which is due to God is given to another and again Then is Idolatry committed when we ascribe Divine honor to created things for their own sakes what does all this signifie when it is not agreed upon What is properly Divine Worship but sometimes Divine Worship is defined to be that which is proper to God and what is proper to God is not plainly determined and sometimes that which is proper to God is called Divine Worship For to help us out with the distinction of Dulia and Latria is to give us hard words for easie and that is all and especially to add hereunto that unknown to ancient and uncircumscribed to modern Ages Hyperdoulia For though it doth not hold constantly true that those two words are so distinguished in Scripture or Ancient Greek Writers either Ecclesiastical or Prophane as not sometimes to be used promiscuously and interchangeably as might by instances be made undeniable yet cannot we not deny but generally they have their distinct significations and the things by them signified are very distinct and it is one of the easiest things in the world to put a difference between the Notions of servile Worship which is Dulia and Divine which is Latria yet in the exercise of these acts it is one of the difficultest things of all to distinguish which is which seeing it is hard to say whether the intention of the worshipper only or the Act it self precisely taken or the Object makes the worship Divine The Object cannot be it because there could be no Idolatry committed in such cases For as is said If the worship be not Divine the Act cannot be Idolatrous for all other worship say they may be exhibited to a Creature And it should not be Divine according to this opinion that maketh the Object to give the Divineness to the Act. Again there can instance be given in to one act that in it self is incommunicable to the Creature according to these mens Theology Therefore lastly all the specification of Idolatrous acts must consist in the Intention of the mind and that intention is seen in a profession of Religiously worshipping a thing for its own sake For so Azorius holdeth that even Latria which it any act with them be Properly Divine must needs be so it self may be given to Saints and to Images provided it be not given for their own sakes but for Gods sake Now it being impossible that any rational man should thus strictly give or intend to give Divine Worship to any thing for its own sake which he denies to be 〈◊〉 Imagi is 〈◊〉 culaus sâ—t Latria non continuâ— sequitur 〈◊〉 creâ—a trituatur quonian 〈…〉 Cor. Veum Id. 1. Quinto 1 Cor. 3. 4. God it follows that no man can commit Idolatry because every man gives that worship he gives in a divine manner either not for its sake to which it is immediately directed but for Gods sake whom he sufficiently understands or with an opinion that really such a thing as he so worships is God But to make the matter fairer and safer on their side they flee to Origens opinion or Criticism of an Idol as different from an Image An Idol saith he following St. Paul to the Corinthians is nothing in the world An Idol is a fiction made like to nothing in nature but an Image is the likeness of something and fain would they if they dare be so bold for as yet they touch the matter somewhat timorously and tenderly cut off all colour for accusation of them of Idolatry by defining Idolatry to be the worship of an Idol and an Idol to be that only which is not in nature nor like to any thing in the world But they worship only such things as either have natural being or represent somewhat natural therefore they are no Idolaters But I shall here demand bluntly of them Is it not then Idolatry to worship the Creature natural and visible for its own sake with Latria I will suppose their answer for shame It is Why then read we in their books Origens wit rather then judgment so vainly and idly abused Surely Origen there spake like a School-boy wittily rather than like a School man Theologically And they are worse then Children that draw his words to a solid definition of Idolatry For what says Gulielmus Parisiensis When such kind of worship Latria or obsequiousness is given Guliel Paris de Legib. c. 23. Cum 〈◊〉 cultus auâ— obsequium ad â—â—iuderans feratur sive illud sit 〈◊〉 non 〈◊〉 c. Acts 7. 4. 〈…〉 ref 60. pâ—lt Christ to another whether the thing be or whether it be not and what ever it
in that greatest of all sins and hardens our hearts against repentance and amendment because at the most and worst we are certified it is but Material Idolatry and material Idolatry is the least of all sins if we mean well And thus have we seen what havock is made with Idolatry and whereas my perhaps private opinion is this that God hath made that generally most easie and obvious unto us which is most necessary to be done or avoided by us and Idolatry is the greatest of all sins next to Atheism and therefore should be most easie to be judged of and apprehended such and so many have been of late the subtilâ—ies and devises of men that now it is one of the hardest things to know what is Idolatry and when it is committed and that amongst Christians too the first principle of whose Religion is the worship of the only true God in Christ Jesus True it is That it is assented unto generally by Christians on all sides almost that it is Idolatry to worship any thing as God which is not but we are little the nearer for this because it is made so doubtful and difficult to judg what is divine and proper worship And secondly when we intend such worship to a false God which happens to be given For upon supposal that we do worship a false Deity yet if we intend to worship only the true all is well and safe But then if it be doubted as well it may seeing all men naturally desire and intend to worship the true God how there should be any Idolaters in the world or any such sin as Idolatry This difficulty hath much perplexed the Patrons of Formal and Material Idolatry For the Heathens themselves could scarce if such a distinction may be allowed be convinced of the one and Christians may easily be convinced of the other For I see nothing of consequence replied to the instances of the learned amongst the reformed whereby it doth plainly appear That the wiser Heathens and if we go no further our turn is served did not ony as all men intend to worship the true God but in their writings and minds Gage Histor West Indies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod Hâ—retic Fab. l. 5. 3. dâ—d reduce all those various Gods to one And though they worshipped Images of Gods they declared they did it not for the Image sake but for Gods sake and for their own sake that they might by means of them obtain favor of the God they worshipped ultimately A modern instance we have in the Spaniards conversiâ—g with and converting the West Indians They were very zealous as a late rude Historian hath delivered against the mâ—â—â—trous worshipped Idols by the Indians and broke them to pieces as well they might with great indignation and severe menaces against the servers of them accusing them of gross Idolatry and stupidity in worshipping such foul objects to the contempt and dishonor of the true God To this some of the freest and wisest answered You worship Images as well as we do you not Yes said the Christians but we do not so worship the Image but we worship the true God besides knowing very well that those things before us are not God And so do we replied the Heathens We know very well that this we see is not God himself but we worship our God by this and have found by experience that he answers us by this as well as yours What those Christians did answer this is not said neither could they say any thing whereby they should excuse themselves and justly accuse others that shall so defend and explain themselves of Idolatry Therefore of late hath a very grave and learned person pitch'd upon an unheard of opinion concerning this to salve the reputation of Christians labouring under this grand imputation which is this That there is no Idolatry but where more Gods than one are worshipped The ground and motive to which opinion is this because he that worships more than one God must inevitably worship a false God because there is but one True God The inclusive part of which opinion and argument viz. That without all excuse such are Idolaters I readily grant but not the exclusive That only such and no others are And my reasons are these First because none of the Christian Fathers of old ever framed or received such a Restriction of Idolatry and that they did not I need no better argument than may be taken from the learned Author himself of this opinion For being so throughly verst in antiquity as he was some suffrage of the Fathers some record of the Church must needs have fallen into his hands and so undoubtedly would have fallen from his pen confirming his opinion but none we find produced Secondly I see no reason of departing without greater necessity than hath appeared as yet from the consonant judgment hitherto of the Church of England which though it hath not in a formal decree declared this point yet so far as her opinion doth appear in the writings of the Principal of the Church it is to the opposing of that sence of Idolatry as hath in part been shown by others and make no doubt but might further by the same hand as he affirmeth finding it not difficult to do it my self Thirdly They for relief of whom surely this opinion was chiefly thought of and asserted will not own the invention For though they like nothing more and alledg nothing oftner to retuod the force of our arguments proving them Idolatrous than the judgment of so learned a man as he against us and in defense of themselves yet they certainly disliking the Premises upon which such a conclusion is inferred and sticking only to the Conclusion viz. That they are not guilty of Idolatry can take no more shelter from thence or benefit than can he that denies the Conclusion and grants the Premises For I would thus expostulate first with the Author Whether if Intention directed rightly doth not excuse from Idolatry the Romanists may not be said to be Idolatrous I make no question but he that holds as he doth that there is no transubstantiation would grant they were upon such a supposition Again I would demand whether if this ground be false which is supposed as true by him That all Idolatry implys a plurality of Gods worshipped He that worships one false God may not be said to be an Idolater I see no reason to doubt but he that held there was any such thing in the world would and must yield to the Affirmative viz. That it is supposing that there is Idolatry not consisting in more Gods than one Now the Papists do certainly not only suppose but hold that Idolatry may be committed in worshiping one God who is falsly so called and therefore though according to his single Hypothesis they may defend themselves yet neither according to their own grounds nor ours Fourthly The ground of that his supposition is not to be allowed For this
oppressed truth they could in no tolerable sense be called a Church at all But by reason of that small struggling for Life in that Church they may be termed a Church out of Charity at least if not verity For Charity believeth all things CHAP. XV. Of Idolatry in the Romish Church in particular viz. In worshipping Saints Angels Reliques and especially the supposed blood of Christ No good foundation in Antiquity or the Scriptures for the said Worship FROM what hath passed may we with greater expedition conclude what remains of the Object of Worship and the superstition even to Idolatry committed in worshipping of Saints and Angels not only in themselves but Reliques For certainly Prayer to them or invocation of them is a proper Act of adoration no man doubts it And therefore see in what degree men pray to them they worship them as likewise what outward honor they give them or their Remains or Images And for the Spirits of just men made perfect as also their Reliques really such we allow due respect proper for such Objects But for the Images of Saints we know none proper to them as not at all belonging to them no part of them bearing no relation to them but as it shall please vain men to appoint it Yet though we hold no reverence at all is due to the Image of Saints or Angels for their own sakes or for the sakes of them they represent yet also hold we it unlawful to offer any indignity to them unless constrained from the abuses and superstitions used toward them which when they arrive at that height as to be made objects mediate or immediate of religious worship may lawfully suffer the same fate with the brazen Serpent in Hezechiah's dayes But first of Invocation of Saints in any sense How can we sufficiently wonder at the uncertainty yea contradiction of the greatest Patrons of it Whereof not only some affirm and some deny but the same Persons sometimes affirm and sometimes deny any such thing to be required or mentioned in Scripture Pighius and Cope give their reason why Saints were not worshipped under the Old Testament to be because they were not then partakers of the beautiful Vision as afterward Bellar. de Batitud Sanct. l. 1. c. 19. And this reason gives Bellarmin likewise yet for all that presums to alledg the words of Jacob Gen. 48. very ridiculously First because he confessed the Old Testament afforded no Presidents or Precepts for it Secondly because those words have quite another Sense than that he would draw them to I shall therefore cut off all that may be answered to the frivolous allegation of Scripture in that behalf as duly examined making more suspected of error than point than confirming it so very violent is the use of them And enquire rather first about the manner and then the reason and lastly the Authority or Tradition for this very briefly Of the three several distinct wayes wherein we are said to pray unto Saints one is not to pray to Saints at all but unto God For the first named by learned men which is to pray to God that upon intuition or consideration of Saints worth or prayers or intercession he would hear us doth not make Saints at all the Object of our prayers but the subject or matter of them which whether convenient to be used or not is besides our present question and belonging to another place and therefore may well be passed over and rather granted to be lawful and useful than disputed For certainly he that petitions a King to grant him any thing for such a Favorites sake who is about him and is his friend doth not thereby petition such a Courtier himself And this may be proved out of the ancient offices of the Church A second way is when we directly pray to them but not Particularly supposing they should either particularly understand all that we do or beg but by a general Petition desiring that they would pray for us A Third way is when we desire of Saints and Angels such things as are proper only to God to give us As if we should pray unto them to forgive us our sins to give us grace of mind and health of Body But these two do not seem to be distinct kinds but only differing in extent and matter For in the first a man doth make the matter of his request that they would promote that request which tendeth principally to God and ultimately In the second that they would procure to them the things prayed for which two differ in degrees not kind of Invocation Again they are wont here also to distinguish of Civil worship and religious And of Religious worship again into Divine proper and improper As for the former I see no reason how common soever it is to grant any such thing to Saints or Angels seeing all the ground of civil reverence given from one to another as in profession of our service honor and obedience to our Parent Masters or Governors wholly dependeth upon our civil and visible communion with them and civil Acts passing from one to another which communion or relation is extinguished quite by their natural death and departure out of this world as appeareth in the most intimate of all relations between men in this world which is that of Man and Wife which Nature Reason and the Scripture teach us to be as free as if they had never met together or known one another after the decease of either And surely all civil relations being founded on flesh and blood or Nature the foundation taken away must also cease and come to nothing Should a subject ask a Petition of his Soveraign that were alive but some hundred miles distant or out of hearing or of whose capacity to hear his prayers he had no competent assurance I cannot tell what more to call it but I am sure it were very absurd and ridiculous Now whether the communion of Saints and Angels which generally is no more than mystical and not at all civil or natural with us be such as doth not wholly render them unsensible of our Acts though directed to them here I at present determine not but this I may say that the bond of civil communion is quite broke between us and them and therefore are all Acts of that nature vain and groundless So that I may pray any Christian brother to pray for me here while we hold both civil and religious communion together but thiâ— being built upon that ceaseth together with that and becoms no longer of a mixt nature partly religious and partly natural or civil but purely Mystical and not to be exercised by such mixt acts as Invocation or outward veneration there being no known intercourse or reciprocation civil between us Therefore of necessity whoever maintains worship to be given to Saints must ascribe and defend divine worship to them and so in express terms we find them to do however they please to mollifie and extenuate
assaults by such arguments as above said are disown'd and rejected as inconsistent with all Order in Christs Church and more severe exactions of obedience maintained than they groaned under before Then are these texts of force which otherwise signifie nothing or are eluded with a sigh a wry look sad complaint and a profession that they would submit but that their Consciences will not suffer them their consciences being so stated as never to accept of any Rule but their own Christ saith He that heareth you heareth me and he that heareth me heareth him that sent Heb. 13. 17. me And to the Hebrews Obey them that have the Rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your souls as they that must give an account c. And our Saviour Christ in St. Matthew alloweth so much uncharitableness if we may so call it and not justice rather to them that shall not hear the Church which is certainly to stand to the determinations of the Church as to number them among Publicans and Heathens Mat. 18. 17. And this obedience is much illustrated by that required in civil Matters in the Scriptures Children obey your Parents in the Lord saith St. Paul And honor your Father and Mother saith the Decalogue which the Ephes 5. 1. greatest opposers of obedience in practise cannot choose in their expositions of that commandement to extend to Civil and Ecclesiastical as well as Natural Parents And St. Paul to the Colossians saith farther Children obey your Parents in all things And Servants obey your Masters in all things But the misery and mischief is that what St. Paul in his sixth Chapter to the Ephesians v. 1. used and intended as an argument to induce Col. 3. 20 21. men to obedience is with wonted boldness and violence perverted against obedience St. Paul saith Obey in the Lord that is for Gods sake and because God doth more require this of Christians as they have greater and sounder knowledg of God than have other men For thus St. Peters words corresponding with St. Pauls advise Submit your selves to 1 Pet. 2. 13. every ordinance of man for the Lordssake that is as we have shewed before Humane Creature in authority by God And the reason hereof is rendred presently after For so is the will of God These obligations 15. and enforcements of this duty of obedience are from this Restriction they are pleased to understand here In the Lord and for Gods sake quite nulled and baffled to nothing For every thing that comes into their mind contrarying the degrees and commands of their Superiors are presently made Canonical Scripture with them and so an absolute dispensation from all obligatoriness as to their persons at least of the Precepts of their Superiors And whereas we have heard the Law of God so general and express for honouring and obeying our Governors that very rarely and then only upon very weighty Causes and Grounds a good Christian fearing to displease God in one law of his as well as another would scruple nothing more than disobedience Now innumerable and those most empty and frivolous exceptions are framed to our selves for the qualifying us for disobedience For what can be more monstrous and ridiculous at the same time than when we are pressed so hard with the innocency at least of the thing lawfully required which was ever looked upon as sufficient ground of Obedience to lawful Powers that we have no more to oppose we shelter our selves under this umbrage My mind and conscience is set against it though it cannot be said why but only So it is therefore I cannot do it and therefore you may look for subjection and obedience where you can get it which is just no where and in nothing if this be good reason or religion But there is much worse and unbeseeming a tollerable heathen behind which out of Principles of disorder ruine and confusion professes that no Obedience is due to Ecclesiastical Superiors in such things as you cannot bring proofs of Scripture that God requires them So that they will obey God and who but they with a vengeance but man not at all For if you bring Scripture for what you require and they cannot pick a hole in it nor evade it which were very strange and unheard of in these dayes then they will most freely submit and obey but not you notwithstanding but God who requires it But if you come only with the general Rules and Precepts of Obedience and argue from the Power God hath given those in authority to order and dispose all things extrinsecal to the Faith for the more uniform and charitable walking with God in doctrine and worship then think they themselves absolved from any duty but that of resisting such attempts upon them And which was never in the heart of any Heathen Heretique or Schismatique before late dayes and much less in the mouth a Principle directly contrary to nature as well as Grace is wickedly taken up and impudently professed That because a thing is commanded and that by their lawful Superiors they must not do it otherwise possibly they might and would And now is the matter no longer a Mystery of iniquity but such Impudency as though the Devil be not ashamed to put these men upon such unnatural and un-Christian dogms yet I question whether he would not blush to profess so much himself openly For surely to him that hath any fear of God or reverence to men this is and ought to be a firm and constant principle To obey all that are in authority over him not usurping that Power in all things which are not expresly contrary to the word of God And the questions wherein these mens Religion and learning lye chiefly are quite from the purpose when to withdraw obedience they ask Whether such a thing is necessary to Salvation or not which is required thinking they are free if it be answered No. For though the thing it self be not necessary to Salvation the obedience may And disobedience may certainly damn those whom in such Cases Obedience would not certainly save Again we see no reason to lay aside that excellent and ancient distinction of things necessary and profitable to Salvation or if not absolutely to Salvation to Charity and Edification mentioned by Ivo Carnotensis And even these are to be observed and Vid. Ivonem Caâ—not Praef. ad Decret that for their own sake and Churches sake requiring them as well as the others though not in the same degree of obedience or necessity It is received as part of the Greek Churches Canon-Law what Nicephorus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Juris Graec. Rom. l. 5. P. 344. answered to the demand of Theodosius a Monk objecting that men generally could not endure so much as to hear of the Canonical Precepts of the Church This ill becomes your Vertue For they who will not admit of such are no wayes of the Party of Christians And it was of old
the opinion of Tertullian They who tranâ—gress the Rule of Discipline cease to be reckoned among Christians And as Clemens Alexandrinus saith As it behoveth a person of Equity to falsifie in nothing and to go back from Qui excedunt dâ— Reculâ— disciplinâ— dâ—sinunt hâ—berâ— Christiani Tertul. Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. p. 753 764. nothing that he hath promised although others should break Covenants so it becometh us to transgress the Ecclesiastical Canon in no manner And to convince any man of conscience or fear of God of this Balsamon's reasons may suffice demonstrating a greater reverence and respect to be due to the Constitutions of the Church than to the Laws of the State For saith he the Canons being explained and confirmed by Kings and Holy Fathers are received as the Scriptures But the Laws of the State were received and established by Kings alone and therefore do not prevail against See Photius's Nomocanon Tit. 1. c. 2. cum Palsamone p. 817 818. the Scriptures nor the Canons And this I rather instance in from the Greek than Latin Church because the ignorant and loud clamors of Sectaries have had nothing more to alledg against the Sacredness of Ecclesiastical Constitutions than that which serves their turns in all things Popishness of Canonical Obedience But may they judg what they please according as design and interest sway them this we constantly and confidently affirm that whoever despises the Rules of of Obedience and Laws of the Church cannot rise higher in that Part of Christian Religion which we call Worship of God than may meer Moral men Because that which chiefly distinguishes good Christians from good honest Heathens next to the doctrine of Faith is proportionable Obedience as well to those God hath substituted under him to ordain things omitted in the Scriptures for the security of the Faith regulating devotion and worship and peace of the Church none of which can long subsist without such a Power acknowledged and obeyed in the Governors of the Church And this â—pparently is at the bottom of the deceitful pretences of Christian Liberty and Conscience for disobedience of them who are designed thereby to ruine and overthrow as matter of fact hath demonstrated But it is not only the Puritans intollerable dogms against obedience but the contrary practise of no small persons of place and esteem in the Church who can heartily and with zeal even to indignation prosecute Sectaries inconformity to the Discipline and Rites of the Church glorying and boasting that they are Sons of the Church and yet do more mischief to the Church by their ill govern'd persons as to common honesty sobriety and gravity and more advance and bring into credit and reputation the enemies of the Church than all their fair and fallacious pretences could otherwise possibly do If such persons who have not attained to common Moral prudence or Philosophy bear such kindness as they flourish with to the Church let them shew it as that lewd Fellow in the Athenian Senate was advised who notwithstanding his vitious life had somewhat very beneficial to the Common-wealth to propound in the Senate and commend it by the mouth of another For what can be more absurd and ridiculous than for any such person to profess esteem to that Church which condemns him more than any other Society And whereas it supposes as a foundation natural justice continence and temperance and the like moral vertues to the divine Precepts and Institutions of Perfection what may turn the stomach and raise laughter more at a man then for such an one to discover his offense at an unceremonious Puritane the matter of whose Crime is nothing comparable to his If thou beest a Christian saith a holy Father either speak as thou livest or live as thou speakest What evil spirit hath set thee on first to abuse thy self with scandalous practises and then the Church by taking Sanctuary in it Can stupidity so far accompany vice as first to break the known and common Laws and Rules of good conversation which is affront enough to the Church and then to add to that affront by professing a special duty to that which thereby is destroyed There is no Sect or Schism whose Orders and Laws of Christian walking with God can be compared with those of the Church of England there being nothing amongst them besides Faith which an Heathen may not do that never heard of Christian Perfection accounting nothing needful to be done nothing unlawful to them which is not punishable by the Law of man or against the light of nature Christ they say hath purchased for them a liberty to do what they please in eating drinking sleepping and other matters so that they wrong not their own bodies nor injure their Neighbors And shall there be that protect themselves under this Churches shelter in such light loose foolish and vitious courses to the degrading of it beneath her inferiors Is this to be sons of the Church and not only so but to brag that such they are in open hostility to it I confess notwithstanding all this in comparing the enemies to the true Faith together we are to distinguish between the doers of evil simply and the teachers of men so to do And that though drunkenness and uncleaness be greater sins by far in their nature than is dissent from a ceremony or Rite not necessary in its nature Yet for any man with a spirit of opposition and contention to take upon him to declare against such an unnecessary order and teach men against the unity and peace of the Church otherwise than becomes him is no less criminal in the consequence before God yea probably much more than those other more scandalous before men and will more endanger his Soul But concerning such persons as are in profession really Sons and perhaps Fathers of the Church and yet wilfully and studiously violate the Laws Constitutions Rubricks or Canons of it no necessity compelling them no reason being to be alledged defending them but what is taken from their ease which otherwise would be much interrupted or their benefit and profit which would be much hindred I leave their own hearts and Consciences to condemn them until God himself doth which certainly without repentance he will and that out of their own consciences and mouths their consciences which witness that these are the true causes of their negligence and contempt of their Duty in their proper stations and their mouths and professions in that they pretend obedience and are much offended at the disobedience of Puritans as if God and the Church would be sufficiently satisfied with their Anger against them while they themselves regard it no farther than is for their turn Two vulgar apologies I shall here take notice of only For as for that which is also commonly said that evil times hinder them from their duty I shall say no more but humbly advise them to deal sincerely with God and their own consciences in such cases
Christians to such sort of Meats as are now allowed For it was rather her act of Grace and Lenity to remit the one half of that ancient Severity commonly submitted unto in the earlier days of Christian Religion And who but ignorant and ill natur'd and nurtur'd children could turn her Lenity into Tyranny and make her curtesie a matter of calumny Nay which hath more disingenuity and absurdity while they fret and complain grievously that the Yoke as it is lyes too heavy upon them and presses them too hard to invert their spite and malice against it by arguing from the lightness and contemptibleness of such Fastings as consists only in abstinence from flesh saying It is no Fast which abstains not absolutely from all Meat This were indeed somewhat to the purpose if so be that the Church did at the same time command any man to eat fish or so much as hearbs or bread when she forbids flesh to be eaten Or that they who were able and did wholly abstain from Meats at such seasons did not more fulfill the intention of the Church then they who took the liberty left them of eating in some manner What temper and spirit do these men discover to themselves to be of who are alwayes in readiness to charge their Superiours either with folly or tyranny or impiety upon the same occasion and never been able to prove any one them Scotus and Biel Scotus lib. 4. Distinct 8. Biel Lect. 8. in Canon Missae after him distinguish of a Fast of Nature which is a total abstinence from all eating and drinking and of a Fast of the Church when a man eats but once a day and that according to the precept and mind of the Church Now if the Church hath invented a favourable distinction and sense to gratifie murmurers at the rigour of her Laws do they not requite her ingenuously who turn that also to her reproach Nay if another distinction be found which makes a Fast a Toto a Tanto and a Tali from the Whole from the Quantity and from the Quality of the Meats eaten hereby willing to condescend and bring down her Rules so low that all men may have somewhat to exercise themselves in according to their ability in the graces of Abstinence and Obedience who but such whose Religion impels them to be the worse for good usage and resolve to hear of nothing but their own inventions would clamour against their Governours for such moderation But when they are disappointed in their arguments and expectations to reduce all men and things to their own model their last Effort is to humble this kind of Fasting into a civil Constitution only and for a civil End according as an Act of Parliament misconstrued as hath more plainly and fully been declared by others hath misled them conceiving that the Fastings of our Church tend only to the encrease of Navigation or are intended for the good of beasts not of men But what hinders that the Church may have one end in her decrees and the Common-wealth another and that which the Church designed for the exercise of Christian vertues may be embraced by Secular Politicians to promote Secular benefits to the Publick Nothing is so manifest to him that knows any thing in Church History as that such a reason was never dreamt of by the Propounders of such Fastings in our Church nor in any part of the Christian world before that Act. And if the words of that Act were intended for an ease to the tender Consciences as those of dissenters are mis-called and to draw them by little and little upon consideration of Civil ends which they less hated than the Ecclesiastical to some good order and submission this is not to be drawn to a perpetual Rule nor made the only universal end of such a Constitution For the Church still keeps to the most ancient and general sense received amongst Christians A third Precept of the Church is The Observation of the Ecclesiastical Canon 6. Preface of Ceremonies c. Customs and Ceremonies of the Church and that without frowardness and contradiction as appears from her Canons and the Preface before the Common-Prayer Of which obligation that which we have before spoken of the Power of the Church and even now of Fasting may here be applyed and suffice A fourth Precept is Constantly to repair to the Publick Service of the Preface to the Book of Common-Prayer Church for Mattens and Evening Song with other holy Offices at times appointed unless there be a just and unfeigned cause to the contrary And this we have before also treated of extending it to the worship of God in his House especially when there is an assembly of Christian people together to that purpose though there be no Sermon and also to the humbling a mans self and putting up his private Devotions there alone when occasion and opportunity shall be offered so to do according to the most ancient and godly custom of good Christians ever since there were Temples built for Gods Service For the disuse of which excellent acts not the least reason hath been or can be alledged by those that would be thought to be the only Rule of Reformation which we have not sufficiently refuted before Lastly To receive the blessed Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ Second Exhortation to be read before the Communion with frequent Devotion but at least Thrice a year whereof Easter is to be one And in order hereunto as occasion shall be to open our souls by due Confession and disburden and quiet our troubled Consciences by some learned and discreet Minister of God from whom Ghostly counsel and comfort may be received with the benefit of Absolution Of the use of which we have also before spoken where we shewed that such Confession was not of such absolute Divine Right either of Precept or Means that Salvation could not be otherwise obtain'd but as an Ecclesiastical Expedient very effectual as well for the bringing Impenitent sinners to repentance as for the due restoring of them that are Penitent to a comfortable assurance of Gods favour towards them and direction and encouragement in holy living which the foul abuses in those Churches where it is excessively magnified should by no means abolish For besides them above noted doubtless it is no mean abuse to make that which undoubtedly should be an act of Judgment in Gods Minister discerning between the hopeful state of some and desperate of others and accordingly suspending or applying the Free Grace of the Gospel and the Power left by Christ to his Church an act of custom formality and course or perhaps common civility which kind of rashness and profuseness the ancient Churches were altogether ignorant of When grievous offenders against God and the Church had fallen justly under the censures of the Church it was permitted to absolve them at the point of death so far as concerned their restitution to the Communion of
which is an endless and causeless pursuit of outward sensible acts and ceremonies to the corrupting of the more sound and necessary part of Religion starving this by bestowing all cost and care on that and seeking to quiet the restless and suspicious mind by new and vain inventions in which the Roman Church and especially the vulgar there knoweth no mean And that we term Negative Superstition which on the contrary thinks every small matter a load unsupportable which is imposed upon them thinking it no less necessary to salvation not to do such things than the other to observe them and imagining they cannot serve God in Spirit and in Truth with such things as the opposite party suppose they cannot serve God without when both are false and both vainly deceived We may first give an Instance of both in the Indians as a great Traveller hath reported The Indians saith he Vincent le Blanck Trav. Par. 1. adjacent to the River Ganges impute such Worth and Sanctity to it that they believed it washed them from all their sins and value it as the best water in the world for which reason the Portugals hate it extreamly and will not but upon great necessity make use of it a superstitious humor This is exactly the Case between the superstitious Papist and the superstitious Puritan The Papists have sundry Intolerable superstitions next to Idolatry of these we speak not They have likewise many ancient and laudable Rites and Ceremonies innocent in themselves and very useful to Christians being not extolled above their Nature and Office which are to be subservient to and not to domineer over the more material part of Religion to the extinguishing or oppressing of it But they being advanced to such an unreasonable and dangerous esteem with them the Puritans fearful Religion tells him he can never sufficiently quit himself of them nor detest the number and nature of them enough this is their superstitious humor too Calvin in the treatise even now mentioned disputing against the Anabaptists Calv. contra Anabapt p. 8. in 8o. who opposed Pedobaptism or Baptism of Children argueth from the antiquity of the practice against which because they were wont to put in an exception as not Scriptural but rather Popish he proceedeth to shew that It was not brought in under the raign of the Pope which Ut simpsiciores faciam hos Fanaticos impudenter calumniari c. saith he I thought good to touch for no other reason but because I would advertise the simpler sort that these Fanatiques do impudently slander when they would perswade men that this so eminent Observation is a new Superstition and fein it to proceed from the Pope whereas the universal Church held it before it understood what the Popes Kingdom meant or had heard any thing at all of it Thus he And how many Rites and Customs do the Fanatiques now-a-days detest and declaim against right loudly and ignorantly because they hear and that many times by most false and vain Relaters that Popish Churches do use them as if they were the Authors and inventors of them who received most of their ancientest Ceremonies as they did the Scriptures and Councils themselves from the Eastern Churches and that before the Roman Church ever so much as pretended to that Power or was infected with that Leaven it now is And this doth plainly appear to any unprejudiced eye able to read but a little way into the monuments of the Church And I remember to have been within hearing of a great Zealot but God knows of little knowledge preaching up his Directory and consenting and advising that the Three Creeds now in our Liturgy should be taken into the Body of the Directory to garnish it as his own word was But because they were not pure Scripture and were admitted into the impure Missal what should be here done He resolved this by saying there was no great danger herein because these were not made nor brought in by the Pope but they were in use before the Pope was Antichrist It were to be wished they would extend this somewhat farther and the greatest number of grievances and superstitious scruples would easily vanish But Seneca de Ira. l. 2. c. 12. truly said Sencca of such persons Vana vanis terrori sunt Vain men are soon scar'd with vain things especially where there shall be invented such a supream piece of Religion which shall perswade men that the more full of exceptions doubts scruples and fears the more godly and the more tender Conscienced men not distinguishing between a sore Conscience and a tender one nor a distemper'd one and a quick sens'd We know very well that they who are sick are soonest a waked and those parts that are inflam'd and swell'd with corruption are most tender of all And so is it with such Consciences which are no more nor so much moved as others in matters of undoubted Good or Evil such as are division disobedience and uncharitableness and scandal and on the contrary humility and study of unity but so sore and tender in lighter matters that the least touch offends them and enrages them Which Tully according to his natural Superstitio qua qui est imbutus quietus esse nunquamposset Cicero de Natur. D. l. 1. wit found to be most true when he said Superstition was such a thing that he who is affected with can never be quiet Every thing but what he devises to himself molests and confounds him And out of this unsetled and unsatisfied humor every man would very gladly have the constituting and modelling the worship of God to prevent all superstition but what he himself is full of and to avoid the imaginary Idolatry of others inventions fall into the subtile and pleasant idolizing of his own imaginations But if way should be given to this not only Religion but even the world it self would soon come to an end if we believe that wise and Learned Doctour of the Jews Maimonides writing thus For the judgment of man is small and Maimonides deIdol cap. 2. §. 4. weak neither can all mortal men attain the pure truth But if every man should yield to his own conceits we should find the world run to destruction through the weakness of his understanding There can therefore be no more deadly superstition than for a man to fear no man but him that flatters him and every thing but what pleases him and to require much more clear demonstrations for the satisfaction of his pretended and superstitious fears than possibly he can give to ground them and so become contumacious under such colours But to rip up this sore disease at the Core we shall see so little Religion in the tempers of these obstinately superstitious people that there will appear nothing of common reason justice or ingenuity at the bottom of all For striking into mens minds hearts the sparks of their dividing and factious principles as men do fire into a
answer by demanding Why they shorten and straiten Christian Liberty naturally stretching it self to the Positive as well as the Negative part of our Religious Acts This seems to me to be both Sacrilegious and Superstitious too And why they make it shorter then Jesus Christ hath made it But I return to a second Instance of precise Superstition by the same Author defended That it is unlawful to salute with a kiss a Matron at first meeting her or departing from her because it is the foretaste of Lust yea to kiss is a very ill custom And so after the English fashion to salute all women they meet with Thus the superstitious Precisian not distinguishing between a thing contrary to a sober mans Judgment and his Conscience Whatever is indecent or unprofitable may be against the Judgment of a sober man but it is not therefore against his Conscience for only that can be said to be against Conscience which either is or appears at least to be morally evil Doubtless a grave and sober person may abhor the endless and witless fashions refuse to follow them but not out out of conscience because they are of themselves unlawful but because vain useless indecent and perhaps incommodious and so out of judgment and if the consequents be apparently evil I shall conclude all with one instance more of the Superstition of Sectaries the great cryers out against Superstition taken from Thomas Cartwright They commonly describe Superstition to be a rigorous exacting that at the hands of Christians which is not necessary to be done which is likewise to take away Christian Liberty according to their estimation And with this Querie they suppose they come up so close to you as you shall not be able to deliver your self out of their hands Is it which you require necessary to Salvation If it be answered No then again they come upon you with another expostulation Why then do you enjoyn it Hath not God left us many and those difficult Laws and Precepts and do you make the way to heaven more strait and the yoke of Christ more heavy by multiplying Superstitious Inventions To the latter part we have already made answer in effect denying absolutely what is taken here for granted that by such moderate Ceremonies both for number and nature as are of force and in use in our Church fewer and clearer than any Church of Christ hath used for twelve hundred years before the Reformation lately made the way to heaven is not at all straitned or stopped or the Precepts of God rendred more difficult and burdensome and not rather more light and easie to be observed and the truly labouring Christian helped and defended by them in his rode to heaven but where ignorant heads and evil tongues have cast infinite snares and horrible stumbling blocks in their way and so it is not the superstitious Ceremonies but the Enemies to such Ceremonies which have no other Superstition in them but what they have with much study and art and ill will we thank them devised and traduced all things not of their own invention yet double guilt with the glorious pretexts of Gods Word and pure Spiritual Worship which if you chance to be so profane and incredulous as to call in question and bring to the Touch you spoil all presently Again farther it is as necessary to Salvation as abstaining from notorious sins can make it to obey those that are over us in the Lord in all things against which no more but general and foul language which are solid and godly proofs with the vulgar can be brought nor hath been But to come to our intended Instance Are all things not necessary to Salvation not only superstuous but superstitious What will these Objectours answer to Baptism of Infants which many of them I here aim at do hold useful indeed and profitable but not necessary to Salvation or to exempt from the pains of damnation yet they are due observers of it They say there is a special Precept of God for the same and therefore perhaps though the thing be not of it self so necessary it may become necessary by vertue of such a Precept Granting all this liberally which if we would contend with them we might put them harder to it than they will be known of But where will they find any such direct or positive Precept that these Infants ought to be brought necessarily to Church and be baptized in the publick Congregation We commend their zeal and much approve their resolution so to have Baptism administred that seeing one end of it is to enter and as it were matriculate them into Christs Visible as well as Invisible Body the Church assembled they severely require this But if nothing can be needful which is not absolutely necessary and nothing so expedient as to be commanded by Man which God hath not before required who can without trembling read their horrible Superstition who under such grievous Obligations endeavour to enforce this as Cartwright doth in these words And I will farther say that Cartwright against Whitgift page 14. though the Infants which dye without Baptism should be assuredly damned yet ought not the order which God hath set in his Church Publick Baptism be broken after this sort Now that the Order which he calls indeed Gods is but the Order of the Assemblies so decreeing is manifest from the impossibility of proving this out of Scripture and the easiness of proving the contrary out of Reason thus from his own speech For is it possible for any man to conceive that God should require any thing of any man the observing of which should damn him He therefore that supposes that the Infant or any other person to be baptized must by Gods severe command be brought to Church to be baptized if he be baptized at all cannot so much as suppose that God will damn him for not being baptized at home in private But this is here supposed by him though I know not granted that a child may be damned for want of baptism and yet this child must no where be baptized but in the solemnities of a Congregation What is Tyranny and Superstition in the height if this be not What is it to advance humane Constitutions and Orders to an equality with Divine Precepts if this be not to suffer a poor soul to be damn'd rather than the Orders of their Church should be broken and to threaten and terrifie with damnation them that shall observe conscienciously the Orders of other Churches Or how come the Orders of their Churches which have no Scripture to confirm them as this for instance hath not to be more of Gods setling than they of other Churches no less consonant thereunto than theirs Where is the Fear of God Reverence and Justice Equity and common Ingenuity wanting to Man if not here Such dealings as this do really deserve our pity and prayers for them as well as for our selves tormented by them That God of his great mercy to them and us would vouchsafe to open so their eyes and affect their hearts with such a sincere and sober fear of God that they may like lost sheep straying into wild Desarts and in untrodden paths at length be reduced to the Great Shepheard of their and our souls making one Flock and in one Fold of the Church to the Glory of God the Safety of themselves and the unspeakable joy of the Church here and the salvation of us all hereafter FINIS ERRATA PAg. io lin 33. â— next for neat p. 43. In the title of the Chapt. 1. Temporarie p. 44. 1. 36. r. supposing p. 48. l. 37. r. affectedly p. 60. l. 38. r. vulgar use p. 73. l. 14. dele not p. 74. l. 30. dele â—ere p. 82. l. 26. 1. sure p. 83. l. 33. 1. as p. 93. l. 12. r. lighter ib. l. 51. r. people p. 95. l 25. add poâ—â—er p. 104. l. 48. 1. Collatinus p. 114. l. 12. 1. Iudicrous p. 115. l. 6. straglers ib. l. 7. r. assent p. 117. l. 41. 1. we p. 130. l. 6. 1. over p. 136. l. 4. poiâ—â—â—lus after Political p. 139. l. 25. deie be p. 140. l. 2. dele of p. 147. l. 35. dele not p. 149. l. 12. r. relaxing p. 158. l. 44. r. there p. 161. l. 42. r. illimirable p. 167. l. 45. r. limitation p. 17â— l. 20. put in us after have p. 185. l. 2. r. is instead of being p. 198. l. 16. dele which sort of â—â—gnâ— are not distant from the thing signified p. 200. l. 4. dele it p. 219. l. 29. â— us p. 230. l. 14. r. leading p. 233. l. 28. r. hold ib. l. 43 r. ward ib. l. 49. r. abuseth p. 234. l. 16. make after Church p. 242. l. 5. r. or ib. l. 23. r. there ib. l. 45. r. with p. 243. l. 21. 1. worth p. 249. l. 2. add accordingly p. 253. l. 31. r. Pugio p. 265. l. 32. r. wild p. 269. l. 9. r. good p. 275. l. 39. â—â—â—nied p. 281. l. 19. r. concourse p. 296. l. 19. l. prevision p. 309 l. 19. l. Campian p. 321. l. 29. r. grieve p. 333. l. 20. r. Reformed p. 335. l. 29. r. Restriction p. 339. l. 31. r. comminations p. 341. l. 17. dele of after wills p. 343. l. 19. add intended p. 347. l. 3. r. immutable p. 352. l. 19. r. Christ for And. p. 355. l. 23. dele are p. 357. l. 30. r. â—ut â—here p. 389. l. 9. r. thou nor p. 392. l. 5. r. nothing but. p. 443. l. 40. dele not p. 446. l. 20. r. unintelligible p. 455. l. 47. dele no. p. 456. l. 16. r. that P. 485. l. 30. r. should not p. 493. l. 36. r. derided p. 503. l. 51. r. contradistinction