determined to any one Province or Nation is very groundless and injurious to the whole design Christ had in propagating the Faith For the said commission of Christ given to his Apostles was not Lex but Jus a Right to Act not a Precept indispensably enjoyning the execution according to the full extent of the Letter Again It was not said to each singly Go and teach all nations but to all conjoyntly So that to all it was a direct Precept which was fulfilled if all Nations were by all the Apostles not all by each of them instructed in Christ But the interpretation which taks All nations to be rather understood negatively in opposition to the Jewish Church which enviously denyed the like Priviledges of salvation to the Gentiles which they claimed proper to themselves rather then positively as if by virtue of Christs injunction they were necessitated to pass all the world over which it is certain that neither any one nor all ever did the intention of Christ being to open a wide door of Grace to all Nations so far as humane ability could ordinarily promote the work quite disables that argument As it was lawful therefore for all the Apostles and every one of them to pass into any Part of the world so was it not unlawful to make choise of some one considerable portion wherein to move and officiate according to his Place For otherwise how should it be lawful for them to continue in some one City two three or seven years as 't is as certain as any thing in History can be that some of them did taking a peculiar and pastoral care thereof and its Appendages Now because as their Presence was finite in reference to place so their lives were to time therefore when in any one large Province they could not manage immediately themselves every City of note and command they assigned certain Substitutes to continue and promote what they had begun even during their lives in many Countries And departing this life left them to succeed in a perpetual line to all ages not by intrusion and spontaneous invasion possessing themselves of Rule and Authority over others but according to the same form that themselves were sent by Christ For Christ not only sent his Apostles but enabled them to send others in the like Pastoral charge And these Apostolical Pastours together with that personal Power given them to be exercised by them had also a real paternal Power to constitute others of the like or inferiour order as necessary emergencies required upon the increase of the Professours of Christian Religion as may in due place be more cleerly proved From hence a reason may be rendred of the Opinion of some very sober Bilson and learned Defenders of Episcopal Government who seeing neither the Apostles alone to govern the Church nor Bishops alone have said It is very hard to determine what was the Discipline of the Church in the very Primitive times of all For surely while the Apostles lived the Government of the Church was Apostolical and not properly Episcopal because those Elders otherwise called Bishops said in Scripture to be set over Cities were themselves wholly at the beck and disposal of the Apostles ordaining them and governed and taught under them no otherwise than a Priest may be under a Bishop in all subjection But the Apostles dying and their intire power also with them part of it devolved unto that Person who before in their Right presided over such a Church the Apostolicalness excepted which consisted in an immediate Ordination to that Office by Christ and illimitedness as to the exercise thereof with other signal gifâ—s and graces not here to be insisted on and was properly Episcopal which consisted in an Authority derived from the Apostles and consequently from Christ to govern the Church and not only present for their dayes but because it was to continue to all Ages which it could not without Governours and Teachers to ordain such who should ordain others without interruption for ever And these not only such who should succeed them in the like Pastoral care but who might together with them though under them by their counsel and labours as the common Fathers of the Church take part of his charge upon them in teaching and governing such a portion of that Church as was allotted them And these were called Priests or Presbyters And as the Bishop was constrained Christians multiplying to ordain an assistent Presbyter to him so when the People under that Presbyter increased so far that it was too difficult for him to discharge all Offices of publick and private ministration it was found expedient to ordain an inferiour Officer in the Church to him for his assistance called a Deacon or Minister Not that these two last Orders themselves were of humane or moderner Institution than the Apostles dayes but that they might be likewise undetermined in the place of their Function to any particular Person until the consummation of the Apostolical age But in truth it is hard to determine what the Scripture intends speaking of Deacons and therefore I offer this mean opinion as not inconsistent with theirs who hold them of Apostolical Institution nor with theirs who make them much later For the first may be true as to the Office which was a degree Ecclesiastical as St. Paul intimateth and the other as to the manner of exercise in reference to one place and one presiding there And the like seems most probable concerning the Evangelists who were persons commissioned by the Apostles to preach the Gospel under them without any determination to a certain place or people and saving this large Licence were in no higher degree than simple Presbyters the Apostles themselves presiding in all such places as Pastours But when they were by their farther Authority fixt to one City and Country with a power to create Successours or Co-adjutors in the Government of that Church then they became formal and proper Bishops For the allegation of them is most frivolous who would elude the express testimonies of Scripture affirming that Timothy and Titus were Bishops by saysaying they were Evangelists For by the same reason they may deny they were Presbyters because probably they were Evangelists and so make them of no order in the Church or of another which is yet unknown to the world which whatever it may please men to call it certainly it must be founded on Priestly Power or else they could not have regularly acted as they did Neither was it as some may phansie to degrade such Evangelists whose faculty extended to all places to be confined to one afterward as Bishop First because such power was more truly indetermined to one than extending actually to all For it depended on the pleasure of the Apostles to send them to what place they thought fit Secondly this fixing of them to one place was not without the accession of power of Government as well as preaching which is no where found to
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
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
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
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 Chap. XXVIII Of the outward and visible Form of Christs Church Christ ordained One particularly What that was in the Apostles dayes and immediately after The vanity of such places of Scripture as are pretended against the Paternal Government of the Church 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 Chap. XXX Of the Notes of the true Church in particular Of Antiquity Succession Unity Universality Sanctity How far they are Notes of the true Church Chap. XXXI Of the Power and Acts of the Church Where they are properly posited Of the fountain of the Power derived to the Church Neither Prince nor People Author 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 administer'd principally by the Clergy 3. The Rites generally received in the Church necessary to the conferring Clerical power and office 4. All are Usurpers of Ecclesiastical power who have not thus received it In what sense Kings may be said to be Heads of the Church Chap. XXXII Of the exercise of political power of the Church in Excommunication The Grounds and Reasons of Excommunication More things than what is of Faith matter sufficient of Excommunication Two Objections answered Obedience due to commands not concerning Faith immediately Lay-men though Princes cannot Excommunicate Mr. Selden refuted Chap. XXXIII Of the second branch of Ecclesiastical Power which is Mystical or Sacramental Hence of the Nature of Sacraments in general Of the vertue of the Sacraments Of the sign and thing signified That they are alwayes necessarily distinct Intention how necessary to a Sacrament Sacraments effectual to Grace Chap. XXXIV Of the distinction of Sacraments into Legal and Evangelical Of the Covenants necessary to Sacraments The true difference between the Old and New Covenant The Agreement between Christ and Moses The Agreements and Differences between the Law and the Gospel Chap. XXXV Considerations on the Sacraments of the Law of Moses Of Circumcision Of the Reason Nature and Ends of it Of the Passover the Reason why it was instituted It s use Chap. XXXVI Of the Evangelical Sacraments Of the various application of the name Sacrament Two Sacraments univocally so called under the Gospel only The others equivocally Five conditions of a Sacrament Of the reputed Sacraments of Orders Matrimony and Extream Unction in particular Chap. XXXVII Of Confirmation What it is The Reasons of it The proper Minister of it Of Unction threefold in Confirmation Of Sacramental Repentance and Penance The effects thereof Chap. XXXVIII Of the proper Affections of Repentance Compunction Attrition and Contrition Attrition is an Evangelical Grace as well as Contrition Of Confession its Nature Grounds and Uses How it is abused The Reasons against it answered Chap. XXXIX Of Satisfaction an act of Repentance Several kinds of Satisfaction How Satisfaction upon Repentance agrees with Christs Satisfaction for us How Satisfaction of injuries necessary Against Indulgences and Purgatory Chap. XL. Of Baptism The Authour Form Matter and Manner of Administration of it The general necessity of it The efficacie in five things Of Rebaptization that it is a prophanation but no evacuation of the former Of the Character in Baptism Chap. XLI Of the second principal Sacrament of the Gospel the Eucharist Its names Its parts Internal and External It s Matter Eread and Wine and the necessity of them Of Leavened and Unleavened Bread Of breaking the Bread in the Sacrament Chap. XLII Of the things signified in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the Body and Bloud of Christ How they are present in the Eucharist How they are received by Communicants Sacramentally 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 infer the Presence of the Substance of Bread and Wine Signs and things signified alwayes distinct Chap. XLIII The principal Reasons for Transubstantiation answered Chap. XLIV Of the Sacrifice of the Altar What is a Sacrifice Conditions necessary to a Sacrament How and in what sense there is a Sacrifice in the Eucharist Chap. XLV Of the form of consecrating the Elements Wherein it consisteth Whether only Recitative or Supplicatory Chap. XLVI Of the participation of this Sacrament in both kinds The vanity of Papists allegations to the contrary No Sacramental receiving of Christ in one kind only How Antiquity is to be understood mentioning the receiving of one Element only The pretended inconveniences of partaking in both kinds insufficient Of adoration of the Eucharist 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 formally as to the outward Form Of the state of Separation or Schism Of Separation of Persons Co-ordinate and Subordinate Of Formal and Virtual Schism All Heresie virtually Schism not formally Separation from an Heretical Society no Schism From Societies not heretical Schism Heretical Doctrine or Discipline justifie Separation 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 Errors in the Roman Church Of the guilt of Schism Of the notorious guilt of English Sectaries The folly of their vindications That th Case of them and us is altogether different from that of us and the Church of Rome Not lawful to separate from the Universal Church The Contents of the Second Book of the First Part. Chap. 1. OF the formal Object of Christian Faith Christ An Entrance to the treating of the Objects of Faith in particular Chap. II. Of the special consideration of God as the object of Christian Faith in the Unity of the Divine Nature and Trinity of Persons in that Chap. III. Of the Unity of the Divine Nature as to the simplicity of it And how the Attributes of God are consistent with that simplicity Chap. IV. Of the Unity of the Divine Nature as to number and how the Trinity of Persons may consist with the Unity and Simplicity of the Deity Of the proper notions pertaining to the Mystery of the Trinity viz. Essence Substance Nature Person The distinction of the Persons in the Trinity Four enquiries moved How far the Gentiles and Jews understood the Trinity The Proof of the Doctrine of the Trinity from the New Testament and the explication of
than guide or promote men in the knowledge of Scripture it self which naked would be better understood and resolved on then with them Fifthly The seeming opposition and contradiction in Scripture are no little impediments to the setling of mens minds in the knowledg of them Sixthly a Sixth difficulty will be The distinguishing of things Judicial Ceremonial and Moral so far as to be assured How far it is lawful to use or necessary to refuse what is prescribed by Precept or example in the Old Testament Seventhly To name no more The several various Lections may much offend the simplicity of such who shall not be well inform'd concerning the substantial integrity of Divine writ And all these I recite to no other end than to flacken the precipitancy and cool the impetuous and presumptious heat of such who the less able they are to examine and judge the more confident they are to conclude out of Scriptures what they phansie and like best refusing the outward and ordinary means of receiving the true sense upon indeed a certain truth That Gods Spirit is the best interpreter of its own Laws and God is able to direct them in the sober use of them but a most unsound and unsafe inference from hence that God doth or will so assist them when they neglect those sober outward means he hath no less ordained to that end then the former Of which means we are in the next place here to treat CHAP. XI Of the Means of interpreting the Scripture That they who understand Scripture are not for that authorized to Interpret it decisively The Spirit not a Proper Judge of the Scriptures sense Reason no Judge of Scripture There is no Infallible Judge of Scripture nor no necessity of it absolute The grounds of an Infallible Judge examined THE Opinion That all things necessary to salvation are plainly enough delivered in Scripture is pious and reasonable enough taken with its due qualifications and limitations namely of Persons of Times of Places and such like For of things supposed to be necessary all are not to all men alike necessary no not to the same man at all times For there are some Articles of Faith that are sufficiently explained and propounded to him others are not so and therefore in relation to such a person not so necessary to be explicitly believed Again some points of Religion are necessary to be received for their own sakes after due proposal others are necessary to be received for the sake of others and so imediately only necessary The Articles in the Creed of the Apostles are most of the former sort to be for their own sakes believed But the Articles of the Church and its power and autority which I take not to be mentioned in the Creed as most do are necessary for the preservation of the true Faith it self For without the use and receiving of Discipline there can be no Church properly so called as may hereafter be prooved and without a Church there can be no long continuance of Faith Therefore from hence it is not difficult to null the pretensions of some ranck Disputants who lay it as a Principal foundation and so reasonable that it scarce needs any thing but clamours and out cries to make it take effect on them that shall dare to reject it That nothing is necessarily to be offered to the Faith of any or to be by him received which is not expressed in holy writ For in holy writ it is necessary to observe and obey such as are set over us in the Lord so far as we are not convinced that they determine or impose any thing contrary to the word of God And for ought doth appear it is as necessarily required that we should depend upon our Guides in the Church for the due meaning of the Scriptures as upon the suggestions of Gods Spirit which refuseth not but requireth such outward means concurring with its direction For nothing can be more absurd or vain than simply to depend upon divine intimations of Gods Spirit because it is all sufficient of it self to such purposes For it is not only sufficient to them but to all other as well divine as natural ends and yet to so rest on it as to neglect or pass over contemptuously other meanes is rather to provoke God to denie the ordinary assistance of it For God doth not act in the world according to his power but according to his Will and Promise made unto us It is true that Christ hath promised in St. Mathew Whatsoever ye ask in my name believing ye shall receive and Math. 21. 22. by St. Luke more expresly If ye then being evil know how to give good gifts Luk. 11. 13. unto your children how much more shall your heavenly Father give the holy Spirit to them that ask him These and such like promises of being invested with Gods blessed Spirit must not be so absolutely understood as that all who simply crave it should forthwith certainly be therewith endowed because St. James as other places of Scripture explains and restrains this large promise according to the Oeconomie or more general tenour of the Gospel i. e. That we ask aright and believing which whether we in prayer do duly observe may be well doubted of us though we doubt not of the Thesis it self or Rule That he that asketh aright shall receive And besides these are senses in which such promises are truly verified and Gods Spirit truly given and yet not a full importment of all the graces which flow from it For they who at first were called to the Faith of Christ and baptized were indued with the holy Spirit and yet not presently instated in the discerning of all the mysteries of Christian Faith but still depended upon the Prophets and Apostles and interpreters of Gods will for the attaining of his will even revealed in General For according to the known distinction there are spiritual Gifts signally so called and spiritual Graces And some men may receive the influence of Gods Spirit in the way of Grace which sanctifies the will and affections and not of Gifts which illuminates the mind and understanding and that not only to the use of things absolutely necessary to our Salvation but to the benefit of others Add hereunto That notwithstanding the Spirit is so sufficient of it self and God doth grant it to them who ask it of them We know that generally it is not granted to any but in the way which Christ ordained the same and that was that first it should descend as it also did immediately and primarily upon the Church representative or Ruling who were then his Apostles and holy Disciples and in like manner is it still to be expected soberly through the mediation of such as are by Christ set to govern the Church and rule under him herein succeeding the Apostles and not immediately and by a leap from the head to the lowest members which though it may be yet is so rarely
particularly assured of his being in Christ The whole Antecedent I grant viz. That every man believeth Christ when he receiveth him and that Christ is received by Faith And that every man is bound to apply Christ particularly and his Promises to himself But the consequence here made follows not from hence For by the former a man believes assuredly that the Promises of Grace made through Christ to the Church do particularly belong to him he hath a right to them being called to the Covenant Neither do we promise any other security of Salvation by only Faith but to those that labour in their calling and be fruitful of good Works Dr. Fulk on Rhem. Test Phil. 3. v. 11. And thus far a man is and ought to be sure of his Salvation But there being implyed in all Promises of Everlasting Salvation certain conditions of obeying and repenting as well as believing simply whether a man is to that degree proficient in these as to put him in actual possession of Christ this is no where revealed neither are we commanded to believe it And when St. Paul saith to the Romans * Rom. 8. 15 16. See likewise 1 John 5. 9 10 Ye have not received again the spirit of bondage to fear but ye have received the spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father What is more plain than that his meaning is to distinguish the general state of the Church of the Jews from the Church of the Gentiles and the spirit of Moses as I may so say which tender'd to bondage from the spirit of Christ which is that free Spirit For as it is elsewhere said If the Son make you free then shall you be free indeed And from hence no more can be concluded to any single person than to the whole Church of God in which there are many reprobates as all agree Neither is the matter helped out any whit by what follows The Spirit it self beareth witness with our Spirit that we are the Sons of God I presume few will be so severe and ignorant as to deny the large acceptation in Scripture of the Children of God and Sons of God and Saints viz. That generally they signifie no more than those who were elected outwardly to the Faith and Profession of Christ and to the means of becoming not only denominatively and of Right but really and effectually in Fact the heirs of Eternal Salvation To be then the Sons of God here with St. Paul signifies no more than by Faith to be the peculiar people and favorites of God above all such as were not thus brought home to Christs Fold Now that such singular Grace and Priviledges belonged to Christian St. Paul proves from the testimony of the Spirit namely That the Christian Religion is only the true Religion thus The Spirit beareth witness with our Spirit Our own Judgment our Consciences doth stedfastly assure us that we are the Children of God but this is not all this proves nothing to another to the convincing of him that we are the true Servants and Children of God but the Spirit of God bearing witness with our Spirit doth And the Spirit of God beareth witness with us sufficiently when it declareth openly by miracles signs and wonders wrought before the eyes of our Adversaries that what we preach and believe is the truth Which is the same with what St. Paul writes to the Corinthians 1 Cor. 2. 4. saying And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of mans wisdom but in demonstration of the Spirit and of Power That your faith might stand not in the wisdom of man but in the power of God In which words he plainly sheweth the ground of the Corinthians faith not to be taken from any fair or plausible Rhetorick or form of words whereby men are led oftentimes to believe against reason but on the more solid grounds of extraordinary miracles wrought by the power of God and which did demonstrate to all equal judges That it was the Spirit of God which both taught them such mysteries of Faith as they preached and confirmed the same by such signs and wonders as did appear generally at the publication of the Gospel Now what doth all or any of this concern the supposed particular inward tacit testimony whereby it is said a man is to be assured of his Salvation And no more do the words of the Apostle in the end of the same Chapter prove too long to be recited but this Rom. 8. 35 36 37 38 39. is briefly to be answered 1. That they speak not at all of any individual single Christian but of the Church of God and that indefinitely or at large viz. That God hath so determined to plant propagate and maintain that Religion into which divers were collected by the ministry of the Apostles that whatever or from whomsoever evils might befall the Church of God yet they should never prevail with such persecutions to separate the faithful from Christ no not all the Powers nor Principalities on Earth nor all the Angels of Heaven or of Hell But to secure these and the like testimonies the better to their opinions some much admired persons of the Reformation peradventure suspecting what might be answered have proceeded to say That what promises Calvin Inst Christ hath made to his Church do equally concern every Christian as well as the Church which I cannot yield to without these Exceptions First That it may be understood of a particular Church as well as particular Persons But as may hereafter appear God hath made no absolute promise to any particular Church so far that it can be any point of Faith to believe that Gods counsel decree are such to it as never to suffer it to Apostatize from him So that no individual Church can be sure of its perseverance in the truth and if not that how should any particular person claim so much But the Promises of Christ being taken as they ought of a Church indefinitely it is most agreeable to Gods word to maintain an infallible perpetuity of the same Again It is to be remembred that all this while we are speaking not so much of certainty before God according to which we may yield the Salvation of men to be infallible but certainty before men or to the party concerned immediately which we call Assurance or Evidence In the body of an Orthodox Church it is certain in it self that many men shall be saved but not certain to us that any one therein shall nor evident to any one that he shall To the reasons taken from the Power of God who is able to save and reveal this And the truth of God who is faithful in his Promise And the Knowledge of God that he knoweth who are his what need we make any answer besides showing the vanity of that inference which is drawn from the possibility of any thing to the Fact it self and of that presumption rather than faith which
without blame before him in love And it hath been shewed before how that when in the New Testament we read of Gods Calling and choosing and electing we are not so much to understand the eternal purpose or decree of God but the execution thereof in Gods actual calling and electing certain persons to the profession and belief of the Faith of Christ which he effected by the fulfilling of the Prophesie made by Christ in St. Matthews Gospel relating to the Matth. 24. 31. destruction of the Jewish Polity and Church and erecting of the Christian instead thereof viz. And he shall send his Angels that is his Messengers and Ministers with a great sound of a trumpet i. e. the Gospel preached and published and they shall gather together his elect i. e. such as he shall make choice of from the four winds i. e. from all quarters of the world from one end of heaven to the other Now these persons by Gods word and good-will called from such vanities ignorances and vices are in the Scripture called Saints not so much because they were all so throughly or absolutely sanctified from their former natural or moral impieties contracted in their state of Nature and Gentilism as that they should retain no sin and none of them should fail of heaven hereafter But first either from the better part the whole was denominated actually holy which is not unusual in all speech Or because having made renunciation of the World and Flesh and Devil in Baptism they were called and consecrated to Holiness Or lastly because they made open and solemn profession thereof however some so called might be and did appear to be reprobates And names and appellations are given not from any inward affection or quality which sense cannot judge of but from such things as are visible and apparent And thus in the Old Testament as well as New it is used As in the Psalmes Gather my Saints Psalm 50. 5. together unto me those that have made a Covenant with me by Sacrifice which imply the whole body of the people of Israel as the words going immediately before do also declare And wherever in the Book of Psalms which is in divers places we find the Congregation of the Saints is meant the Israelites in general And in Daniel Chap. 7. v. 8. 21 22 25 27. is the word necessary taken Now it being most customary with the Penmen of the New Testament to borrow the phrase of the Old this tearm Saints was translated from the Jewish Synagogue to the Christian Church by St. Paul expresly to the Romans saying To all that be in Rome beloved of Rom. 1 7. God called Saints so the original better then the insertion of to be made in the translation As likewise in his first Epistle to the Corinthians To the Church of God which is at Corinth to them that are sanctified in Christ 1 Cor. 1. v. 2. Jesus called to be Saints withall that in every place call upon the name Jesus Christ their Lord and ours And the like salutation we shall find in most of St. Pauls Epistles as also most frequently in the body of them as may be obvious to any reader though I deny not but sometimes in the New Testament it is taken in a more restrained sense signifying especially the victorious and triumphant not Militant Saints From all which it doth sufficiently appear in what sense the Church may and ought to be described a Society or Collection of Saints And withal how miserably and mischievously they err who giving that title to a Party hold themselves bound to gather a certain select number out of Christians not accusable of any notorious errour from the Faith of Christ as the Apostles of Christ did out of Heathens and Jews and to constitute and call them Saints Another thing requisite to the constitution of a Church is That it be a Communion of Saints it sufficing not that persons elected or selected as above-said be many in number but holy by nature or institution as God ordained of old in the forming of the Jewish Church Deut. 7. 6. Thou art Deut. 7. 6. 26 19. 18 9. an holy people unto the Lord thy God The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself above all the people that are upon the face of Earth Which words are with advantage applyed unto the Christian Church by St. Peter Whence it is that the same St. Peter maketh it an 1 Pet. 2. 9 10. 2 Pet. 1. 4. end of calling this company together That they may be partakers of the Divine Nature or as it is otherwise more plainly render'd Of a Divine Nature Holiness drawing us near unto the Nature of God himself As the Wiseman also writeth The giving heed unto her Laws is the assurance Wisdom 6. 18 19. of Incorruption and Incorruption maketh us near unto God And not only must they be holy but to that end must of necessity hold a twofold communion The one Invisible with one Head Christ The other Visible and external with one another For the Apostle tells us speaking of Christians The head of every man is Christ And to the Ephesians The 1 Cor. 11. 3. Ephes 5. 23. husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the Church and and he is the Saviour of the world There can therefore no question be made but it is most essential as well to the Church in general as every particular Christian or Member of the same that Christ be the Head of his Church as St. Paul yet more clearly expresseth it to the Colossians excepting against such Professors of Christian Religion as held not the Head from which all the Body by joynts and bands having nourishment ministred and knit 2 Col. 2. 19. together encreaseth with the increase of God Therefore leaving that as on all hands granted we come to the external communion of the Church CHAP. XXIV A Preparation to the knowledge of Ecclesiastical Society or of the Church from the consideration of humane Societies What is Society What Order What Government Of the Original of Government Reasons against the Peoples being the Original of Power and their Right to frame Governments Power not Revocable by the People IN the outward Communion of the Church two things are to be enquired into First the Nature of it wherein it consisteth Secondly the Adjuncts or Affections thereof First we shall treat Civitas à conversatione multorum dicta est pro eo quod plurimorum in unum constituat contineat vitas Origin Homil. 5. in Genesim briefly of the Nature of this Communion To understand which clearly it will be expedient to begin with the definition of Communion in General or Society humane For Communion is nothing else but Humane Society And Humane Society is nothing else but a conversation of men out of natural reason inclining and moving them thereunto for the mutual supply of the
may be a falling away It could never appear which is the true Church if judgment were to be made not from the outward Forms and Faith professed but from the affection and inclination of Persons or from the invisible decrees of God of granting or denying persevering Grace to persons in the Church So that it is manifest from hence how lurious frivolous vain and sophistical disquisitions must needs be which are founded and managed upon the ground of an invisible Church properly so called The improper acceptation then of Invisible can only occasion a just controversie i. e. as it is taken comparatively and in relation to a much more conspicuous and glorious Society and that either of Infidels who may by numbers much exceed in outward glory much out-shine it in power over-rule it and by persecution and oppression so far straiten lessen and crush it that it may be termed obscure and invisible Or otherwise compared with the Societies of much more publick and outwardly glorious Hereticks and Schismaticks pretending the Catholick Church And truly if acute and exact Geographers computing the several professions of Religion and their possessions of the earth deceive us not the Church of Christ may comparatively with other superstitions Mahometan Jewish and Gentile be not unaptly said to be invisible Christian Religion being allowed but Five parts of Thirty Mahometan six and Idolaters nineteen parts of the earth But if we shall divide Christian again into Catholick according to the Judgment of several See Brerewoods Inquiries Chap. 14. Writers there will not remain at present above two parts of all the Thirty parts of the earth to be possessed by the Catholicks and if so what will become of the visibility of the Church thus understood And if a moderate sense of visibility be admitted signifying a real and apparent being only of the Church though inferiour in pomp and number unto others how doth the great end and benefit for which chiefly the Church is to be maintained Catholick and Visible shrink up into little or nothing when it cannot commend it self for any such glory to the beholder nor signalize it self to the doubter of the true Faith in the Church as may hereafter appear more fully when we shall come to speak of the Notes of the Church It may suffice to conclude this Point with these two First That Christs Church is essentially and so long as it is at all must necessarily be a Society or a communion of many For so we are taught to believe out of the Apostles Creed which speaking of the Catholick Church exegetically interpreteth what we are to understand by that term viz. The Communion of Saints And therefore we are to distinguish between being of the Catholick Church and being Christians A man may be a Christian and yet not be of the Church For no man can be of the Church who doth not hold communion with it For to deceive himself and say though he be not of the visible Communion or visible Church he may be or is of the invisible and mystical is to take for granted that which he ought to prove but never can be able but from somewhat external and the ordinary method and most effectual means of being mystically united unto Christ is by being Politically united which must be visibly unto the Body of Christ the Church It hath been therefore ever matter of greatest wonder to me to hear and read how freely all struglers and Factions of Christians how inconsiderable soever do assert to and confidently to assert that common Rule Without the Church there is no salvation and are so obscure nice or absurd in their sense of it having very little or nothing to secure themselves from self-condemnation besides an ill grounded presumption that they are inwardly united to Christ and are of the invisible Church which in truth is no Church but a certain state wherein there is no administration or order that we can learn now all Society must necessarily have order and administrations for their regulating but none such do we read of to be in Christs invisible Body Christ himself being all in all and therefore improperly called a Church And therefore all such being infallibly saved who are so of Christs Body they that so abruptly and peremptorily assure themselves they are of that invisible State do in effect contradict themselves and mean they shall be saved without being of the Church For surely the Authour of that saying meant nothing else but that before one could be according to Gods ordinary dispensation revealed in his word of Christs mystical Body called abusively the Invisible Church he must belong to the visible communion of Christs Political Body or Church So that it is not sufficient to comfort our selves with an opinion that we are good Christians and hold the same Faith entirely and purely that is required of us unless we hold outward communion And therefore secondly as Christs Church must necessarily be a Society communicating so must it be a visible communion and outward For how is it possible that such communion which constitutes a Society should be entred into unless it be visible There shall therefore as well out of the very nature of the Design God and Christ had to establish a Church as from the many promises fortifying that Resolution and perfecting that Design be evermore an outward visible company of Professours of Christian Religion in the world which shall retain the Faith of Christ and the necessary effects of it in Worship to that degree of perfection which shall or may lead a Believer certainly to Salvation as will more plainly appear from what is now to succeed viz. the outward Form of the Church CHAP. XXVIII Of the Outward and Visible Form of Christs Church Christ ordained One particularly What that was in the Apostles dayes and immediately after The vanity of such places of Scripture as are pretended against the Paternal Government of the Church FOR the Church to be and to be visible or appear to be I reckon the same thing and therefore thought good to speak of that and premise it to what in order follows on this subject viz. The Visible Form 2. The Adjuncts or Affections And 3. the Power of the Church of Christ By the Form of the Church we mean that frame and outward constitution whereby the Society of Christian believers are not only united mystically and inwardly to Christ as their proper Head and universal nor as agreeing in the substance of one Faith and Worship but as conventing and consenting in one outward Discipline or Administration of this Body so collected So that Discipline otherwise called Government is by principal Sectaries themselves rightly affirmed to be an essential ingredient into the nature of a Church which will manifestly appear if we distinguish between the nature of a Christian or many Christians separate in themselves from any Jurisdiction and the nature of a Church For a Christian or a true Believer differeth from
the children and not the children before the Parents so is it as plain according to the course of Christs Church and the history of the Scriptures that the people at the first did no more make or appoint their Government or Governours in Christ than they did teach or instruct them For by the word of God were Christians at first begotten to 1 Cor. 4. 15. Philem. 10. a new and spiritual life The method which Christ used in procreating and prosecuting his Church is therefore thus made plain First he himself as the Father and Head of us all under God immediately according to that of St. Paul The 1 Cor 11. 3. Ephes 5. 23. Head of every man is Christ and the head of the woman is the man and the Head of Christ is God did by his divine Doctrine and Miracles beget unto himself his twelve Apostles his children these being first consummated by Christ unto a capacity of Fathers also and enabled to multiply into spiritual children of Grace when Christ ceased visibly and politically for he never ceases spiritually to assist and direct his Church were by him as so many Princes of his Ecclesiastical Monarchy commissioned and authorized to dilate the same and amplifie it according to the Power Prescriptions and Grace given them to that end And Christ foreseeing his Kingdom to be of that vast extent that it would surpass the strength and ability of any one man to administer the whole did not leave any Delegate so plenarily endued with Power Ecclesiastical as that all should derive from him as they did from himself For then it had appeared by some Act of Christ and some instance in them in their receiving subordinate power from that eminent Person during his abode on earth which could have been no more derogative from Christ than it is thought to be now by any But the Twelve were alike called by Christ immediately and not the least intimation of any prae-eminence unless in order which cannot be avoided where there is found never so great and just equality Now because they were rather inhabitude and Right than Act Rulers and Fathers of the Church and the whole Earth was to be their Diocess therefore it behoved and was most just that they should set in Common-councel together touching the general design of reducing the whole World to the knowledge and obedience of Christ as we read they did in the Second to the Acts and in the Fifteenth and elsewhere But being enjoyned to depart from Jerusalem and every one to betake himself to such peculiar Quarters of the World as fell to them by Gods Providence and Assignation it was no longer so absolutely necessary to hold assemblies for the special management of each ones proper Cure but full power resided in every Apostle of Christ and accordingly was by them exerted to ordain matters necessary to the Flock collected by them So that notwithstanding what was of publick concernment to the whole fell under the cognizance of all the Apostles as Peers of Christs Kingdom yet were limited Districts or Diocesses disposed of by the councel and authority of one presiding there And if there were called more to consult of that portion of the Church it was rather of humane reason than divine Institution For it was ever far from Gods intention in appointing extraordinary Methods and Rules for his Church utterly to extinguish or evacuate humane Reason which his own hand had planted in mans soul before but it was to be subject to the Superiour Law given by him and where that which was never intended to be of that unnecessary and immense latitude as to take in all contingencies prescribed not otherwise Gods will we may be sure it was that that other help of reason should not be denyed its office and right of ministring to our uses And what is more agreeable to reason then That In the multitude of counsels there is Prov. 11. 14. safety many being able to discern more than one alone and more willing and ready to execute when their head in determining goeth before their hand in executing And on the other side That For the transgression of a Prov. 28. 2. Land many are the Princes thereof Nature it self teacheth us that many Counsellers and few Commanders is the most rational and secure course to prevent discords and confusions But I am far from disputing or arguing this Question any farther than the ground I have laid already will allow and that is only to enquire after matter of Fact in the Government of Christs Church thinking it most reasonable and pious to conclude that to be the only Divine which Christ instituted and that Christ only instituted that which only appeared in the World at his being upon earth and his Apostles after him who though they brought not Ecclesiastical Government to that visible Form and Order as it afterwards shewed it self in to the world increasing with the number and magnificence of professours of Christ yet gave the Idea and Patern in all the main substantial parts of it For as the Father hath sent me even so send I you saith Christ Christ faith John 20. 21. not to any one of his Disciples So send I thee for then it might have been understood so as if he had endowed some single person with such a plenitude of power whereby he might succeed him in presiding over all his other Disciples and consequently over the universal Church but so send I you signifying the imparting of his absolute and entire power unto all his Apostles so far as might consist with the co-ordination founded amongst them and conduce to the benefit of the future Church Between Christ then and his Apostles there was a likeness but no parity or equality of power Between the Apostles themselves there was an equality But upon the raising of a Church and multiplying of Christians immediately sprang up discrimination of Persons and Officers in the Body of the Church Neither can any argue from the Parity of Christs Apostles that there ought to be a Parity also among all that succeed in the Ministerial Office any more than that this Parity should extend it self to the whole Body of the Church For so it was with the Church first of all not only all the Ministers but Members were equal And whether it were simple necessity or humane prudence or divine Inspiration that first moved the Apostles to limit that General Right which Christ had given them indefinitely to Go and teach all Nations and each of them to be universal Pastours in assuming to themselves the special care and tuition of some one place Province or Country it matters not much to enquire For the supposition which some make of an Obligation upon every Apostle to keep himself so strictly unto the commission of Christ empowring him to minister to all Nations that it was not lawful for him of himself nor by general and mutual counsel and consent amongst themselves to be
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
in his power so to do but that he hath so done actually to the fairest Pretenders we shall deny until better demonstrations than can be made from their own asseverations or appealings to the extraordinary effects of their Ministry Christ sayes in the Tenth of John Verily verily John 10â— 1. he that entreth not by the door into the sheep-fold but climbeth up some other way the same is a thief and a robber That the Sheep-fold is the Church that the door is the ordinary way of entring into office in that Church that the Shepheard is Presider over the Church I find none to doubt nor that climbing in at the windows is extraordinary thrusting ones self into Office in the Church nor that such as do so though they be never so conscionable painful and orthodox otherwise are not thieves and robbers if not shearing abusing the Flock yet taking that upon them without ordinary grant which belongs not to them This evil is only remedied by a successive and ordinary transmission of that Power which Christ left with certain peculiar persons he called Apostles with authority to communicate the same to others to the worlds end according to the several ranks and orders of his Ministers of which his Church consisteth So that succession not of Doctrine only but Officers in the Church is no less essential to a Church properly so called than Officers themselves or Discipline And as for the distinction invented without any precedent in antiquity without any warrant from Scripture without any justice or reason humane or divine to stop mens mouths and blind their eyes who are very simple of Vocation internal and external it is utterly rejected as a vain frivolous impertinent phansie For internal Vocation as they called it is nothing but an ability competently serving to such an end but this is no Vocation at all properly any more than it is for me to take anothers purse because God hath given me strength power and opportunity to do so It may be an exception will here be put in against the comparison from the unlawfulness of this latter and not of the former but I suppose as well an unlawfulness in the former though not so notorious as in the latter And adde That however considered in it self it be unlawful for me to spoil another yet if God calls me to it it is not and according to the new Doctrine of Vocation a man is then inwardly called when he is enabled to do a thing But an Outward call too is commended and that ordinary too when things are setled to our mind otherwise extraordinary calling must suffice And truly an extraordinary calling will suffice at any time but then very much better proofs are expected to make such extraordinary Vocation apparent to equal judges than we can any where find in the Apologies of them that rest wholly upon that as their safest Anchorage in this unhappy fluctuating Vocation By what therefore we can judge from the description the Scriptures give us of a formed Church and sentence of the Ancient no Society a Nibilâ—lind est quantum ego quidem intelligo Ordinaria Dei ad altquod munus vocatio quam ab his penes ques est plena legitima de ejusmodi rebus statuendi potestas personae ipsâ—rum judicio non in-idâ—nâ—ae nullo intercedente prava ambitione dolo malisve artibus designatio Sander sonus Praefat ad Tract de Juramento Church can be truly and formally called which wants lawful and ordinary Pastours and Priests and no ordinary Pastours or Priests without due Ordination and no due Ordination but from such who have that power in a right Line communicated unto them in a succession of mortal Persons to an immortal faculty in the Church as may hereafter in convenient place be farther proved So that it may well be admitted that Succession not when one steps up unappointed or illegally appointed into the place and office of another but thus explained is necessary to the Being of a true Church of Christ And yet I do not say it is necessary to Christianity or simply to salvation where it is not despised or scornfully rejected For we may well suppose that Gods promises will notso far fail as to leave a Christian people destitute of such ordinary means of becoming a Church without notorious forfeitures of his grace on their parts or will remit of the general rigor of his Laws requiring Unity of a Church as well as Unity of Faith to the being good Christians and true believers And for these who are most troublesome and loud in demanding Succession or rejecting all Churches defective therein as scarce in saveable condition though I hold it an high temptation of God and provocation of highest displeasure to flock to such Societies as are not known to have this succession of Pastors without such interruption that the Renewal and restitution thereof were meer Laical and consequently void yet where invincible ignorance through education or incapacity natural of judging hath subjected a Christian to that unhappiness who dares exclude him from salvation And the greatest boasters and magnifiers of succession should do well to consider how they can better than hitherto they have quit and secure themselves from the retort of want of succession For however a numerous a glorious Roll is shown of succeeders in their principal See yet we find unanswerable difficulties in their due succession and ordination of which these two will take them up more time and cost them more care and pains than their lives length may suffice to viz. The uncertainty of Succession from Intention necessary to that Sacrament of Ordination which can never be sufficiently known to have been present at that time no though the Ordainer should swear solemnly to it more than Morally which amounts to no moâ—e upon tryal than Probably And the more then probable suspicion of Simoniacal contracts in ascending the Pastoral throne which the common Law declareth nulling such indirect Invasions and voiding Ordinations For the third sign of the true Catholick Church Unity the more I look into it the less I find considerable in it It being necessary according to common Philosophy That every thing which hath a â—eing should be but one and not many and if the Catholick Church be so in this sense what great matter is acknowledged in it above other things For when a thing is divided into many parts it ceases to be what it was before but still there is unity in the Parts severally considered And so if we suppose the Universal Church divided schismaticaâ—ly into distinct and opposite societies it can scarce be supposed but the Parties so divided are though infinite yet in unity with themselves And how then can that which is common to so many be a specifick character of one especially By this separation therefore it may be concluded That one or perhaps both are in fault and guilty but agreeing within themselves equally as well they may
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
From all which we may gather both the Efficient and Exemplary cause of the several orders in Christ For first we read how he called unto himself twelve Apostles as well to minister under him during his abode upon earth as to Preside and inform his Church after his departure out of this World which according to St. Hierome were prefigured by the twelve fountains the twelve Patriarchs the twelve Tribes the twelve Princes of Exod. 15. 27. Mark 3. 14. the Tribes There he not only elected but ordained also as St. Mark testifieth that they should be with him and that he might send them out to preach naming them Apostles as St. Luke writeth After the choice and Luk. 6. 13. Mat. 10. 1. Luk. 9. 2. Math. 10. 1. Math. 10. 10. Ordination of them he gave them actual Mission as it appeareth by St. Mathew and Commission to preach and to work miracles to the confirmation of his Doctrine and to receive a reward for their pains And when the Harvest was too great for so few Labourers as twelve St. Luke tells us he added Adjutants to them seventy Disciples answerable to Luk. 10. 1. Numb 11. 10 the seventy Elders by Gods appointment set over the children of Israel and the seventy Souls that went with Jacob into Egypt These two orders Gen. 46. Eph. 3. 5. are thought to be intended by St. Paul to the Ephesians where he maketh mention of Apostles and Prophets by Prophets meaning such who bare that part of the Prophetical office which consisted in ordinary instruction of the People of which in other places likewise he speaketh Now adding to these the common sort of Christians or Disciples which were if not at the time of Christs abode upon earth yet afterward Christians as St. Paul intimateth where he affirmeth Christ was seen after his resurrection of 1 Cor. 15. 6. above five hundred brethren at once We have three distinct orders of Christians First Apostles secondly Evangelists or the seventy Thirdly simple Believers or Christians And it is most certain that as the Apostles did not so much as choose their Lord nor the Evangelists the Apostles so the Common sort did not then constitute or choose their Preachers or Evangelists but while Christ continued on earth he kept the power of Ordination of whom he pleased in his own hands and never is it so much as insinuated that upon his departure he left any power in their hands to dispose Ecclesiastical Affairs or Persons therein but that with his Apostles as succeeding him in visible Administration he deposited this power many arguments are offer'd us out of Scripture For in the Person of St. Peter he gave power to all the Apostles saying Feed my sheep And that this same power Joh. 21. 15 resting in them was by them transmitted unto others the very same form of words almost used by St. Peter himself to be the Governours of the 1 Pet. 5. 2. Church do prove where he saith Feed the Flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly And St. Paul in the Acts of the Apostles likewise And that the whole Ecclesiastical Acts. 20. 28. Jurisdiction was entirely in the Apostles and Apostolical Persons doth appear from the enumeration of the most principal parts of which such Jurisdiction doth consist which may be these as we find them in Scripture recorded 1. Power of determining Controversies of Religion as appeareth from the Question agitated about keeping the Law of Moses Acts. 15. and concluded by the Apostles and Elders which were of the second Order after the Apostles And in the eleventh of the Acts the same resolved Acts. 11. the doubt concerning the Conversing with Gentiles 2. Of imposing Laws and orders for the due and sober conversation in matters of Moral nature as may be gathered from St. Paul to the Thessalonians where he adviseth That Christians study to be quiet and to do their own business and to work with 1 Thes 4. 11. their own hands as we commanded you And so in the second Epistle he thus writeth Now we command you brethren in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ 2 Thes 3. 6. that ye withdraw your selves from every brother that walketh disorderly and not after the tradition which he received of us And so verse the twelfth of the same Chapter Thirdly Censurings and Punishments of the refractory and disorderly and that of two sorts First of suspension and interdicting as did the Disciples of Christ suspected Preachers of him in St. Luke John answered Luk. 9. 49. and said Master we saw one casting out Devils in thy name and we forbade him because he followeth not with us And so others they restrain who preached without their command or exceeded their commission as may be read in the acts of the Apostles by vertue of the same censuring Power St. Paul Acts. 15. 24 25. 1 Tim. 2. 12. interdicts women from preaching in the Church Secondly the Censure of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and separation of 〈◊〉 and notorious offendors in the Church from communion in the Church For St. Paul writing to the Corinthians in this manner What will ye shall I come unto you with a rod or in Love and in the spirit of meekness doth evidently distinguish a twofold 1 Cor. 4. 21. power resident in him of severity to chastise and meekness to comfort and support And this power is more plainly expressed in the exercise thereof upon the scandalous offendor in incestuous marriage As also 1 Cor. 5. 3 4 5. in the formidabâ—e proceedings against Hymeneus and Alexauder whom St. Paul delivered unto Satan that they might learn not to blaspheme and several other things more proper for some other place A Fourth instance of Jurisdiction is seen in the power of Ordination pertaining to the Apostles by imposition of hands For they did ordain those Deacons mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles And St. Paul to Timothy exhorting Acts. 6. 5 6. 2 Tim. 1. 6. him to Stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the putting on of his hands doth declare the Act of Ordination used by himself From alâ— which these four conclusions do necessarily follow First that by Christ and his Apostles intention there were alwayes in their dayes distinction of persons in the Church some having the power of Rule and some being subject according to the Comparison of St. Paul to the Corinthians of the natural order and superiority of and subjection of the 1 Cor. 12. Members in a natural Body to one another and coming to application v 28. be saith And God hath set some in the Church First Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers after that Miracles And by demanding and Questioning v. 29 30. doth vehemenâ—ly deny a Parity in the Church And this distinction of Persons was no otherwise known at first but by the common name of Brethren given to
such as were Christians without any autority in the Church and therefore we read often of the Apostles and their Party on the one side and Brethren on the other But the Officers and Rulers of the Acts. 11. 1 12 17 15 23 16. 2. Church are not found to have any general name distinguishing them from others but were by their particular charges and Offices known to men as Apostles Elders Bishops Evangelists Deacons But afterward compendiousness of speech general cemprehension of them so distinct requiring they received their several Names not as Socinus Salmasius and some such presumptuous traders for Anarchy in the Church would have it the things themselves or being For it is granted that at first all true believers Clerus dicimur quia sors Dei sumus Hieron Item Praefat. ad Enarrat August Psal 1 Pet. 5. 3. were called indifferently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Gods Portion or Clergy as we now speak For it is very probable that St. Peter using that word which we render Clergy doth intend to comprehend thereby all Christian People as well as they who as St. Hierome saith are the Lords portion more peculiarly But with good advice afterward they who were more especially dedicated to Gods service and attended his Altar were signally called the Clergy and the other the Laity or people very agreeably to the phrase of the Old Testament where we find not only a distinction in the things themselves but in the names of such as served any ways in Gods house and those who were only Israelites at large For these were called simply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sons of the People or the Laity as we now adayes speak 2 Chron. 35 7 12. Vid. Vatab. in Locum in opposition to the Levites which discrimination in terms was thought to be introduced in Josiah's time Secondly From what is said we may conclude that even before and after this distinction all the administration of Church affairs passed through the hands of these Persons of the Clergy or Ecclesiastical Functions and that their Votes and Acts ever went under the name of the Church it may be that in the beginning of the Church when Christians had not so many advantages as after they had and their convenience of assembling was not so great but they were constrained to teach and pray and determine controversies and ordain Laws for the Church that the Laity as we now call them were present at all these but that this fortuitous presence should inferr a right nothing appears A third Conclusion may be That observing the orderly Rites used to invest any person with a Clerical Power it must necessarily follow that they who wanted them never attained the thing it self For the Author to the Hebrews asserts plainly the sacredness of Evangelical Ministring Heb. 5. 4. from the Prescriptions and practise of the Levitical saying No man takes this office upon him but he that was called of God as was Aaron and least it might be presumed that this strickness concerned the Old Law only he proceedeth to that greatest of Precedents Christ himself who though he needed not any Institution being absolutely free to all such purposes of himself yet was called of God in signal manner to shew that all that exercise such Sacred function should much more be thereunto orderly called Now to understand what this ordinary and orderly call is the better it is worth the observing how Aaron was called for so in proportionable manner ought all under the Gospel be ordained to the Ministry And here first we may note there is not the least intimation given of such a Call as is Internal upon which many vainly rest But Aaron was called not only internally by certain proper and sufficient Gifts to that Office but externally and that not of himself but of another He was called by God Now least it should be here suspected that a bare and bold presumption of being called of God without some outward evidence prooving the same might suffice to justify an Intruder of himself into the Ministry the Scripture tells us how Aaron was called of God and that is not only of God and immediately but mediately by man that is by Moses Nay farther because many content themselves with such an Ordination as comes from another not examining much what power or Right such persons have so to ordain others the Scriptures tell us that Aaron was called by another and him appointed specially by God so to do as we read Exodus the 28. 1. where Exod. 2. ◠God commandeth Moses saying And take thou unto thee Aaron thy Brother and his sons with him from among the children of Israel that they may minister unto me in the Priests Office Here is their Election or Vocation Their consecration or ordination followeth afterward described particularly according to its several Ceremonies in the next chapter So that we see the great Example or Figure of Evangelical ordination directeth to such a form as ought to be of God by the hands of some who are thereunto appointed And if any should here interpose that Moses himself was no Priest properly himself though he were of the Tribe of Levi and yet he consecrated Priests being himself rather a Civil Magistrate and from hence argue a power in Lay-men especially Magistrates to do the same now adayes I answer here indeed doth Calvins defence of himself and such as are in like condition take place of an Ordinary call and an Extraordinary For before God had setled a Rule and Order in his Church the extraordinary and immediate hand of God did appoint persons to minister before It was therefore first of all an Extraordinary Act in God to call Moses rather than any others to direct and Rule his Church it was next an Extraordinary Act in him to separate the whole Tribe of Levi to Minister before him but from that time forward there was no such thing heard of as an Extraordinary Call Secondly I answer that God prescribing to us Rules and Precedents doth not thereby so tie his own hands as he doth ours but when he pleaseth he may create Persons in Extraordinary manner to what ends he will And his Autority infallibly granted to those we call now Lay-men is altogether sufficient to make a Priest of what Order or dignity soever he shall be But until such infallible Proofs of either Gods immediate Calling which is Extraordinary indeed or his immediate enabling or empowring any other Person not having in the ordinary Course established in his Church received such a power be given all such Extraordinary assuming of the Ministery on a mans self is more then one way Extraordinary and to be rejected as void And with such no good and conscientious Christian ought to Communicate as with Priests that is as Offering the Spiritual Sacrifice of Prayer and Praise unto God as a Legitimate and Publick Minister of God or Mediatour of the People or that Mistical Sacrifice in the
with Christians denying them all outward conversation as well as spiritual in matters of Religion Now this seems to be a branch of the Old Greater Excommunication and not in all places disusâ—d And sometimes is unlawful and otherwhile lawful according to the extent and application of them For to inflict the same to the dissolving of ties of nature is not agreeable to the simplicity of the Gospel And Natural Ties we call such as are between Subjects and Soveraign Parents and Children Husband and Wife which by no Ecclesiastical Excommunication can be broken or nulled The reason whereof besides the monstrous effects ensuing upon their evacuation not here to be treated of is this That Ecclesiastical Power can take away no more than it gave nor Christianity destroy what it never builded But Christianity did never simply confer such Rights on men but the Law of Nature only it regulated and directed the same therefore can it not null it It is therefore unchristian for any pretending Ecclesiastical Power to absolve subjects from obedience Civil or Children from natural and the like But every Christian in that he is adopted of God by baptism and admitted into the Society of Christians doth receive thereby certain Rights and power to communicate with it in all things which power may be forfeited and lost by breach of Covenant as well with the Body of the Church to live and believe according to the Received Faith and practice thereof as with the Head Christ And this being so judged by those who are over the Church in the Lord it is very consonant to Christian Religion to deny such of what order or rank soever they be the signs of outward communion Prayer and Communication of the Holy Sacraments of Christ The Church hath power to declare even soveraign Princes uncapable of such Communion and deny it them which we call the Lesser Excommunication Yet because as we said No natural Right can be extinguished upon unchristian misdemeanours If a Supream Prince of a Place should disdain to be denied or opposed in such cases and would make his entrance into the Church by vertue of his Civil Right to all places under his Dominion the most that the Church could do justly in such cases were to diswade him but by any force to resist his entrance into any Church were unlawful as it would be also to minister in a Christian manner in his presence for this cannot be commanded by him but in such cases suffering must be put in practice as for the Faith it self sought to be destroyed Some there are yet who call in question the peculiar and incommunicable Right of decreeing this Censure of Excommunication to those called the Clergy which is very strange seeing this Power is part of that of the Keys delivered by Christ himself to such only as he constituted Governors of the Church and that in Christs days their was a distinction between the Members of his Body as to Inferiority and Superiority Obedience and Command Teacher and Learner and much more in the Apostles days after Christs Assention and much more yet after their days according as the matter of the Church Christians encreasing and improving became more capable of a more convenient form and fashion For as it is in the production of natural things though the Form be certain and constant and the very same at the first production as in its perfection yet it doth not appear so fully and perfectly as afterward So was it with the Body of Christs Church It is certain therefore that from the beginning this Act of Excluding from the Communion was never executed but by the Rulers and Presidents of Congregations though the people might concurr thereto Now that these Rulers whom we may call Bishops or Presbyters were not created by the People nor by the Prince we have shewed already and therefore did nothing in their Right but in the Power of Christ whose Ministers alone they properly were And this being essential to right Administration of the Church how can it be supposed either to be separable from the Church in General or from those persons who are the proper Administrators of it For to say with some It is needless Selden de Jure Gentium apud Bibliander apud Erastum wholly where Christian Magistrates rule whose proper office it is to rebuke and punish vice and scandalous misdemeanors which say they can only be just cause of Excommunication is to destroy the subject of the question which supposes it needful and upon this enquires after the Persons which should Execute the same And spitefully to defeat the Church of all Authority from Christ doth indeed translate this Power to the Civil Magistrate And is not the absurdity the very same which endowes the Christian Governor with Civil Power and which endows the Civil Magistrate with Christian If it be not absurd for a King to be a Philosopher it is not absurd for a Philosopher to be a King If it be not absurd for a Civil Magistrate to have Priestly power it is not absurd for him that hath Priestly power to be a Magistrate There is certainly no inconsistency on either side For things of a far different nature and intention may easily meet in the same person though the things themselves can never be the same Here therefore the things differing so egregiously it is no more than nacessary that a different cause be acknowledged necessary which not appearing the Effect must be denied Now the Cause of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as Ecclesiastical must needs come from him from whom the Church it self hath its Original and being And it is a certain Rule that a man is born to nothing that comes from Christ as Head of his Church but is made and instituted Which whoever is not cannot lay any just claim to any Office under him I know it is objected that Preaching being an Ecclesiastical Act hath without contradiction been practised by diverse and to this day may be no ordination preceeding To which I thus answer by distinguishing first between doing a thing Ex Charitate and Ex Officio out of Charity and out of duty Preaching was ever permittedin the Church especially taken in the larger sense wherein it signifies all declaration of the Gospel out of Charity But the office of Preaching was never suffered but upon antecedent qualifications And these two differ yet farther For he that doth a thing out of Office doth it so that it is not lawful for him absolutely to omit it but he that doth it out of Charity and only by connivance not by commission may cease at his pleasure and as he made may suspend himself when he will Again he that teaches without Autority upon bare permission nay be silenced without any other cause renderd but the will of him that hath the Jurisdiction or if a reason be given because He hath no autority is sufficient But he that is orderly instituted to that end cannot without
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
by us For passing by that which we now believe they could wish themselves unsaid and are well content to lay aside Antichristianism Popery Baalism Idolatry and what not of most foul bitter and false slanders and reproaches unbecoming the mouth of any sober Christian with which notwithstanding they thriv'd so exceedingly at first into Power and estimation there remains nothing now but such starv'd allegations and pittiful exceptions as may call in question their discretion as well as conscience to urge them Will all the Prophecies and Prefigurations and descriptions of the Old Testament concerning the unity of Christs Church under the Gospel all the Predictions Injunctions Obtestations of Christ and his Apostles All the solemn and Sacred Acts and Endeavours of Apostolical Postours to keep up unity in the Church All the detestations of Discord and Disuniting All the Denunciations of the most severe Judgements of God against causeless breakers of the Churches peace be put off and made void upon such sorry grounds as are of late found out to countenance separation They are so well and generally known by frequent use that aiming at brevity here I hold it not necessary to enlarge upon them especially after so many who out of the Ancients have dissected this Monster to the horrour of any truly conscientious Yet one or two I shall instance in Dyonisius Bishop of Alexandria as Nicephorur Nicephor Calixt Lib. 6. Cap. 4. Calixtus relateth affirmeth it to be no less glory yea greater in his Judgement not to divide the Church than not to sacrâ—fice to Idols Which in plain terms is to say It is as great a sin to be a Schismatick as to be an Idolater or yet more home to our Case to be a Papist St. Augustine tells us that it is manifest that he who is not a member of Christ cannot have the DeVnitate Eccles C. 2. salvation of a Christian But the Members of Christ he goes on are conjoined together by the love or Charity of Unity and by the same do stick to their Head which Head is Christ Jesus Now if it be impossible that any man should be a member of Christ the Head who is not a member of his Body the Church also and that it is impossible a man should be a member of the Body from which he is divided and that Schism doth so divide a man from the Body How can a man that is a Schismatick be saved Will they say by being of the Mystical Body of Christ though not Visible In this excuse they fall into many dangerous absurdities First in conceiving of Christs Visible Church as not the Mystical Body of Christ For it is called Mystical not because it is internal and invisible but because it is not a Natural but a Spiritual Body It is not a Political as Political signifies Civil or Humane Society but a Divine Body It is not administerd so much by Lawes of humane and common Invention as Spiritual Secondly In that it is supposed here what we have before disproved that they are two distinct Bodies the Invisible and Mystical as they speak from the Visible So that a man may be of the one and not of the other which cannot be understood For though a man may not be Visibly of the outward Church yet he must be and may be of the Visible Church They are not Visibly of the Visible Church who by far distance of Place and time are involuntarily separated from the Communion of the Church but they who live within the communion of the Church and uncharitably divide from its communion are not of the Visible Church at all nor yet for ought can be made appear of that they call Invisible any more than an Heretick For as the same St Austin saith in another place Neither the Heretick pertains to the Lib. De side Symb. C. 3. Catholick Church because he loveth not God neither the Schismatick because he loveth not his neighbour And Luther in his Colloqules tells us that Colloquia Mensalia The Heathen sins against God the Father The Heretick against God the Son And the Schismatick against God the Holy Ghost Therefore if there be such notorious guilt on the part of him that sinneth against the Holy Ghost above that of him who sinneth against the Son what mercy can they expect who thus wilfully offend For who saith Austin sighteth with such evidence Aug. Exposit in Rom. inchâ—ata To. 4. against the Holy Ghost as he doth who rageth against the Church with such proud contentions Sectaries and Schismaticks have made way to their divisions and alienations of mens minds and affections from the Church by reproaching it with Antichristianism which if they could have many sober or tollerable manner have made good they needed nothing more to excuse them but alas they have the good Nature now to blush at such gross follies and give over such foul slanders though not the Grace to repent which they can never do without a recognition of their errour But now they have almost done with that wicked lye they must expect we should begin to tell them a manifest truth That the Antichristianism is on their sides upon many accounts of which this of Schismatizing is a principal proof as we and they both are taught by Cyril of Jerusalem thus Hatred of our Cyrril Hieron Catâ—c pa. 161. brethren doth open a Gap to Antichrist For the Devil doth preapre Schisms of the people or Laity that be who is to come may be more readily received These and such like intollerable if not unpardonable Evils of Schism made St. Hierome say plainly that Schism was worse than Heresie And so Hieron contra Luciferanos indeed it is in this respect that Heresie of itself and own nature ruineth only the person so infected but Schism sweepeth away many from the truth and Charity of the Church As therefore it is better for a City that one man in it should die of the plague than that through the infection of any one the whole City should be troubled with the Itch or some such disease which should make them all keep their beds though possibly they may at length recover so an Heretick in a Church not so divulging his errour as to infect the Church in general and thereby divide it from it self and others shall undoubtedly find an easier Judgement at Gods hands than the Schismatick who dissolves the members of it from the Head and one another and doth far less mischief And whereas two things are popularly alledged in their Vindication The one that they would have lived in peace might those things have been granted which might have been yielded them certain indifferent things acknowledged to be so And that they have done no otherwise than was done by the Church against the Church of Rome to reform against their consent The First of these is in part very ridiculous as we have shewed and in part very false Ridiculous it is because
in general concerned himself in the marriage of others And to declare how that state was not at all inconsistent with a state Clerical of twelve Disciples John 2. 1 2. which Christ chose to minister for him Eleven are supposed to be married persons or at least to have been married formerly To answer which by saying that after they were chosen they forsook their wives is to evade and not really to answer First because it had been as easie for Christ surely to have picked out a dozen persons free from the knowledge of women as to make choice of such as were wedded had he judged any incapacity in these to the Evangelical Ministery But secondly do we find any thing in special prescribed by Christ for such separation from wives more than for other Christians who were not Ministers of the Gospel For of all faithful Christians it is spoken in certain junctures that whoever forsaketh not Father and Mother and Brethren and Sisters and Wise and Children for Christs sake cannot be his Disciple And there is no rule but common necessity and prudence not Divine prescription which requires any man for the Gospels sake to forsake his Wife rather than his Father and Mother Yet that the Apostles did actually absent rather than separate themselves from their Wives and that others who enter'd into the ministration to the Church under the Apostles foreseeing what St. Paul expresseth the present distress of the Church as well in regard of the 1 Cor. 7. 26. persecutions of the Church as the paucity of Preachers the greatness of the Harvest and the small number of Labourers did decline the state of marriage is very probable because they were required by Christs Injunction to Go and teach all Nations which travelling life ill could consist with cohabitation with Wives And therefore it must be given them Gratis and not by the merits of any reason oâ— grounds they can show that that such relinquishing of their Wives was either total or upon conscience made of the thing it self Doth not St. Paul say expresly in the words before those now touched Concerning Virgins I have no commandment of the Lord If such as served at the Altar were to be excepted surely he 1 Cor. 7. 25. would not have left the Rule so general as we find speaking only according to humane prudence And though they search with their best eyes they shall not be able to find in any other writings of the Apostles one Text o Scripture obliging Bishops or Priests to singleness of life more than those of the Laity unless they argue from reason That Virginal Chastity is more severe more pure more spiritual than conjugal which is yielded and therefore more obliging the Clergy who should be more spiritual persons then others all which I deny not but say that this binds them no more from marriage than it doth from wine and strong drink which if none of the Clergy ever used they were the more to be commended unless in such cases as St. Paul advises Timothy For their stomachs sake and often infirmities And thus is Bellarmin's first proof laid Bellarm. de Clericis l. 1. c. 19. The sole grounds then of unmarried state of Priests must be fetch'd from Tradition and Reason of both which we shall presume to speak a word or two Apostolical Tradition is pretended but not trusting much to that recourse is had to the Old Testament from certain allegorical interpretations made of some Rites in Moses's Law which may do well in the Church where they used them to perswade but ill in the Schools to prove the same as a necessary duty The argument taken from the custom of the Priest abstaining from their Wives during the time of their ministration I do really 1 Chron. 24. believe to have had an influence upon Primitive Christians Judaizing in many other things of like nature to restrain them from the use of their Wives upon solemn ministrations But this was without Law or Canon freely undertaken and embraced as was Celebacie it self at first until about the year 385. Siricius Bishop of Rome made a constitution that it should and ought to be and that on that ground And that the inferiour Orders such as Ostiaries Readers Exorcists and Acolythites should only be permitted to marry But Alexander the third about the year 1160 proceeded according to the method of that Church to shut them also out the doors of Orders that should presume to marry But all that was done against those in greater or sacred Orders in the Church for more than three hundred years after Christ was to deny such as were married access to the Altar by way of ministration who from that time abstained not from their Wives as did the Council of Arles and some in Spain Only a custom prevailed very generally and anciently to suffer none who were in those called Sacred Orders such as were Bishops and Priests and Deacons to marry after they were so ordained for if they did they were dismissed of their Office or their Wives The Eastern Church ever accepted of married persons into the Clergy and at length understanding the Apostle Let the Bishops be the husbands of one wife as a Precept rather than a Caution that they should be husbands of no more then one which in all likelyhood the truest sense in the Sixth Council In Trullo decreed they only should be received into Priestly Orders who were married And therefore all antiquity for twelve hundred years together fails them in this that it was otherwise then voluntary that married Priests lived from their Wives who had before orders or that married Men might not be made Priests though 't is confessed they preferred unmarried Persons before them until that Sixth Council which for that reason amongst others Bellarmine calls a Profane Synod and Baronius impious such a great veneration have they for the Autority of the Church when it speaks not their sense Yet as we are far from giving an exact and full account of this long controversie here so are we so far as I can Divine at the judgment of our Church willing to accommodate the matter with others that can digest any thing but their own stout devises to acknowledge a Power in the Church to bind or loose her sons of the Clergy to an unmarried state or to leave them free For to aggravate matters to that height as to make it absolute tyranny or Antichristian and to be against the word of God which saith Marriage is honourable in all things and the like implyes more of the weakness of the Arguer than strength in the Argument more of spite and passion than ingenuity or soberness For 't is answered very sufficiently marriage is not condemned but virginity commended before it Marriage is not at all declared to be evil when Celebacie is said to be much better Marriage is not condemned when certain persons are condemned for marrying Doth a Father that should cast off
affirmeth that it is Desecrated by the interrment of Hereticks there But certainly the words in the Revelation expressing a Vision meant no such thing as they are alledged for but only that in that Vision the holy Apostle beheld the souls of Saints and Martyrs departed humbled before or at the foot of the Altar as the manner was anciently to pray especially at the time v. 10. of offering crying aloud and with great importunity for justice and revenge upon the Persecutors of the Church and Murderers of them for the Testimony of Christ Jesus But because such hath been and I fear ever will be the corruption of Christian Religion that he that hath power in his hands and money good store in his purse shall be Sainted so far as outward ceremonies and priviledges can advance him he that would be at the charge of breaking up of the ground hath not been denyed nor dare any that I know whatever they ought to do deny him the liberty of being buried in the Church This may be and must be passed over but the affectation or irreligious ambition of building stately Seats and making that which is common to all Christians peculiar to some house so as upon no occasion it must be used by others is wicked and sacrilegious and much more the taking in of any the least part of Gods ground as the Church is to the prophane uses of making Tombs and Sepulchres and no other They are wont to say There is room enough besides It may be so for they commonly who thus enclose or usurp Gods Land have thin'd the inhabitants of the place where they live by illegal enclosures of the Common belonging to the Parish and so almost dispeopled the place But what is that to them more than any body else And why may not any man upon the same reason violently or fraudulently take away certain Acres of Land from him and say in his defense He hath left him enough still And least such as are Patrons of Churches and have certain supposed Prerogatives over the Chancels above what can be pretended to by the common sort of people should conceive they may there do as they please they are to know That in right and conscience such fore-mention'd practises can least of all be done For as the Founder of the Church so likewise the Builders of Chancels from whence only they can pretend such priviledge and as the maintainers of it in repair do at the time of the consecration consent to a total alienation of all civil propriety from themselves they can neither build nor bury there nor incommodate the place more than any other man for they are only Guardians and not Owners of that place upon which they may and ought to exclude and refuse all such incommodations of others as may any way deface or straiten or empair the same but they have no more right to do any such things there themselves then he that is Trustee or Guardian to an Orphan to seize upon his estate or any part thereof to his own use And it is only civil custom which hath given him a peculiar right of burial there rather then any body else And this may seem sufficient if not too much to have said of the Negative force of Dedication of Churches against Usurpers of Gods and Christians Rights The positive effect which is a veneration and worship therein of God Almighty doth farther confirm this and is contained in the end expressed as well as in the form of Dedication used by Solomon as the constant practise of the Jews whose Tabernacle or Temple had nothing of constant preaching or instruction of the people but only Prayers and Sacrifices Afterward their Synagogues called also Proseuchae for convenience because Acts 13. 27. all people could not meet at the Temple were erected where as the Scripture tells us the Law was read and Moses preached every Sabbath day but they had their special denomination fâ—ouâ— the Office and Acts of Prayer Synagogue signifying no more than an Assembly in general From whence if not also from the consent of all Nations besides who had Temples to their Gods it may appear that the most principal end of Gods House was alwayes till an ignorant irregular Generation sprang up esteemed the House of Prayer and Worship and teaching and instruction of people very necessary indeed as the foundation upon which all worship must be built was not that main end as is pretended And this worship being in its proper place in the Church was always and ought to be performed in most publique manner and most solemn as to outward appearance as well as inward affection to which too many deluded by a gross and cheap piece of Sophistry would confine Gods worship It is time we have no direct precept in the New Testament that I can call to mind enjoyning any particular behaviour at the time of Gods service nor yet in the Law And why so were not that very necessary in case any outward carriage were necessary Yes truly if so be such a Religious manner of worship could be known to us no other way than by Revelation extraordinary For Gods word is very sparing in those things of which we may by the common light of Nature attain to the knowledge For who is there that knows there is a God that knoweth not also that he is to be worshipped Who is there that knoweth that God is to be worshipped thar knoweth not also that he is to worshipped in the most lowly and reverent manner And that reverence outward is mutable and various according to the opinion of several Countries and therefore no one general Rule could be made comprehending and obliging all people but this is laid down to us that what is accounted in any Nation most solemn humble and reverent is that which is required of us in the worship of God But surely kneeling bowing the body uncovering the head yea and prostration of the body in convenient time and place are acts of worship such as were in use among the Jews of old continued by the Apostles and successors in Faith and Devotion as innumerable places of Holy Writ in the Old and New Testament intimate unto us where falling low at Gods footstool bowing the knee and such like outward acts of reverence are put for prayer it self which they never would have been had not they been the known manner of worship And Salvian describes Salvian de Provid lib. 7. Ad domos statim dominicas 〈◊〉 c. to us the custom of Christians in his early days thus We presently haste to the Lords house we cast our bodies on the floor and pray with weeping and joy mixt together And I am not advis'd of more then one place which interdicts any one piece of irreverence as unnatural and that the superstition of Puritans hath cast them into and that is covering of mens faces in the time of publique prayer when the hat as an instance
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
virulent tongues cannot forget their wonted strains of dishonesty and extream spite and railings witness one for all the foresaid Ludovicus Molinaeus who as civilly and reverently as he carries himself towards Mr. Baxter for none of his vertues we may be sure as exorbitantly in the old Puritans language and on their Grounds flies in the face of the Greatest and Best of the Rulers of the Church and State too who have at any time resolutely opposed the designs and Schismatical devices of such unchristian Reformers as himself only I must confess he is favourable to his late Sacred Majesty whose invincible Piety and unparallel'd innocency of Life and Ignominious yet Glorious Death hath not only struck Sectaries dumb who once opened so loudly and perniciously against him but extorted cold commendations from them not much unlike that approbation given by that Parricide Antonius the Emperor who when he understood how the people of Rome magnified and even deâ—fied his virtuous Brother Geta whom he had wickedly murdered said Sit Divus modò non sit vivus i e. Let him be Divine so he be not living But whom doth he or his Fellows occasion serving spare Hath he not raked the stinking Canal of all â—ld lyes and feigned rumors invented to imbroyl the Church in Schism and Kingdome in Sedition and Bloud and indeavoured to put new life into them and Authentize them to other Countries as well as ours It was soberly and seasonably said by that excellent Arch-bishop Speech Delivered in the Star Chamber p. 2. whom he would traduce in basest manner were not his merits above the Calumnies of such wretched Fellows in his Speech in the Star-chamber at the Charge of Prin Burton and Bastwick viz. There were times when Persecutions were great in the Church even to exceed Barbarity it self Did any Martyr or Confessor in those times Libel their Governors Surely no not one of them to my best remembrance yet these complain of Persecution without all shew of cause and in the mean time libel and rail without all measure so little a kin are they to those who suffer for Christ or the least part of Christian Religion This witness is most true of these Cretians And it is my great glory not only to be named among such eminent persons as lately but at present are living in our Church whom this Molinaeus traduceth And why so because of my rude usage of Mr. Daillee whom I spit on if any will believe him Lud. Molin Antidure Epist p. 54. rather then dispute against That I spare not the memory of Diodate That I am no fairer to Mr. Bochartus And why doth be forget my railing too against his Brethren the Puritans This he might better say But neither he nor any man else can say that I imitate Puritans in railing against my Betters or Governors that 's their peculiar and inseparable virtue and hath been from the first founding of the Discipline by Penrie Whittingham Goodman and Cartwright with others to the confounding of the Church so far as lay in their power I ever was not only an approver but an admirer of the personal Gifts of Calvin and Beza of Monsieur Daillee and Monsieur Bochart c. but I owe them no more respect in the cause of Religion than they do me or any man else of our Church but I profess I owe more Reverence to the least of the Bishops and Fathers of the Church whom Puritans have so basely treated then to the greatest of them and so do Sectaries too as ill as they are galled to hear of it But what do I speak so irreverently after all against Mr. Daillee Not a word hath this Zelote found in my whole Book against him nor in that Action against our Schismaticks whom I confess to have severely treated in that I give them their own some mens dealings being so foul as theirs have been that the very bare recitation of them is lookt on as railing though never so faithfully done If any of them or their friends can tell me wherein I have done them wrong in misreporting their Facts I do here assure them I will make them all the satisfaction I am able in retracting and acknowledging my Error and that as publickly as I have injured them with the next opportunity Cyprian Optatus Hierom Austin Nazianzen and Chrysostom as holy and sober persons as they were in their Generations made no great scruple to paint Schismaticks out in their Colors with language which cuts where it goes and I am sure these upon no better grounds than they have or can possibly offer of departing from and dividing our Church are no better Nay in this hath the Puritan Sectary transcended all Hereticks and Schismaticks that ever went before them For though divers Factions were raised and fomented to a great height in the Church of God of old and Altar was erected against Altar and Chair against Chair i. e. Worship against Worship and Governor against Governor of the Church yet do we find none through all the Histories of the Church that ever became so presumptuous and desperate as to endeavour the total subversion of the Government of the Church in it self and to set up another in the room of it quite of another nature which we read not that Aerius himself ever attempted though he preacht up the equality of Bishops and Presbyters And so far am I from such a spirit of meekness I confess that I shall never smooth them or their cause over so civilly as to imply the contrary until they bethink themselves without their customary frauds and dissimulations of their duties and return to the Peace and Unitie of the Church which I shall not cease to pray for But one of the most material things charged on me is That I liked Dailee's Book the worse because it pleased the Puritans so much which says my Accuser is to be of the spirit of Maldonate the Jesuite But he is mistaken For Maldonate indeed rejected a sense of Scripture which otherwise he approved because it was Calvins If I disliked Dailees opinions only because they were Dailees or our Puritans he had been somewhat near the matter but no such thing hath fallen from me I disliked indeed his Book because it so far pleased the Puritans that they were thereby notably confirmed in their obstinate Opinions against the Authority of the Ancient and our Present Church Here were evil effects also to be disliked Next let us bear how I abuse Diodate of Geneva in that I rehearse this saying of him against King Charles the first viz. That Christ in the Gospel commands us to forgive our enemies but not our friends This he calls Crassum mendacium A gross lye in me whereas the lye if there be any must necessarily be in himself or his brother Puritan Cook the Sollicitor against King Charles the first at his Sentence in that monstrous Court. For I no where say of my self that Diodate said those words
be convicted of moral evil and so unconcernedly to omit the weightier matters of the Law as Judgment Mercy or Charity in Vnity and Faith what can Charity call this but meer Pharisaism and where must such Pharisaism end at length but in Sadducism even denying of the Blessings and Curses of a Future Life For as Drusius hath Si Patres nostri selvissent mâ—râ—â—â—s resurrecturâ— praemia manere â—ustos â—â—st hanc vitam nâ—n tantoperè râ—bellassent Drusius in Mat. c 3. v. 7. Item in c. 22 23. observed it was one Reason alledged by the Sadduces against the Resurrection If our Fathers had known the dead should rise again and rewards were prepared for the Righteous they would not have rebelled so often not conforming themselves to Gods Rule as is pretended by all but conforming the Rule of Sin and of Faith it self to the good Opinion they had of their own Persons and Actions which Pestilential Contagion now so Epidemical God of his great Mercy remove from us and cause health and soundness of Judgment Affection and Actions to return to us and continue with us to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. THE CONTENTS OF THE CHAPTERS Chap. I. 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 Chap. II. Of the constant and faithful assurance requisite to be had of a Deity The reasons of the necessity of a Divine Supream Power Socinus refuted holding the knowledge of a God not natural Chap. III. Of the Unity of the Divine Nature and the Infiniteness of God Chap. IV. Of the diversity of Religions in the World A brief censure of the Gentile and Mahumetan Religion Chap. V. Of the Jewish Religion The pretence of the Antiquity of it nulled The several erroneous grounds of the Jewish Religion discovered Chap. VI. The vanity of the Jewish Religion shewed from the proofs of the true Messias long since come which are many Chap. VII The Christian Religion described The general Ground thereof the revealed Will of God The necessity of Gods revealing himself Chap. VIII More special Proofs of the truth of Christian Religion and more particularly from the Scriptures being the Word of God which is proved by several reasons Chap. IX Of the several Senses and Meanings according to which the Scriptures may be understood Chap. X. Of the true Interpretation of Holy Scriptures The true meaning not the letter properly Scripture Of the difficulty of attaining the proper sense and the Reasons thereof Chap. XI Of the Means of interpreting the Scripture That they who understand Scripture are not for that authorized to interpret it decisively The Spirit not a proper Judge of the Scriptures sense Reason no Judge of Scripture There is no Infallible Judge of Scripture nor no necessity of it absolute The grounds of an Infallible Judge examined Chap. XII Of Tradition as a Means of understanding the Scriptures Of the certainty of unwritten Traditions that it is inferiour to Scripture or written Tradition No Tradition equal to Sense or Scripture in Evidence Of the proper use of Tradition Chap. XIII Of the nature of Faith What is Faith Of the two general grounds of Faith Faith divine in a twofold sense Revelation the formal reason of Faith Divine Of the several senses and acceptations of Faith That Historical Temporarie and Miraculous Faith are not in nature distinct from Divine and Justifying Faith Of Faith explicite and implicite Chap. XIV Of the effects of true Faith in General Good Works Good Works to be distinguish'd from Perfect Works Actions good four wayes Chap. XV. Of the effect of Good Works which is the effect of Faith How Works may be denominated Good How they dispose to Grace Of the Works of the Regenerate Of the proper conditions required to Good Works or Evangelical Chap. XVI Of Merit as an effect of Good Works The several acceptatations of the word Merit What is Merit properly In what sense Christians may be said to merit How far Good Works are efficacious unto the Reward promised by God Chap. XVII Of the two special effects of Faith and Good Works wrought in Faith Sanctification and Justification what they are Their agreements and differences In what manner Sanctification goes before Justification and how it follows Chap. XVIII Of Justification as an effect of Faith and Good Works Justification and Justice to be distinguished and how The several Causes of our Justification Being in Christ the principal cause What it is to be in Christ The means and manner of being in Christ Chap. XIX Of the efficient cause of Justification Chap. XX. Of the special Notion of Faith and the influence it hath on our Justification Of Faith solitary and only Of a particular and general Faith Particular Faith no more an Instrument of our justification by Christ than other co-ordinate Graces How some ancient Fathers affirm that Faith without Works justifie Chap. XXI A third effect of justifying Faith Assurance of our Salvation How far a man is bound to be sure of his Salvation and how far this assurance may be obtained The Reasons commonly drawn from Scripture proving the necessity of this assurance not sufficient c. Chap. XXII Of the contrary to true Faith Apostasie Heresie and Atheism Their Differences The difficulty of judging aright of Heresie Two things constituting Heresie the evil disposition of the mind and the falsness of the matter How far and when Heresie destroys Faith How far it destroys the Nature of a Church Chap. XXIII Of the proper subject of Faith the Church The distinction and description of the Church In what sense the Church is a Collection of Saints Communion visible as well as invisible necessary to the constituting a Church Chap. XXIV A preparation to the knowledge of Ecclesiastical Society or of the Church from the consideration of humane Societies What is Society What Order What Government Of the Original of Government Reasons against the peoples being the Original of Power and their Right to frame Governments Power not revocable by the people Chap. XXV Of the Form of Civil Government The several sorts of Government That Government in general is not so of Divine Right as that all Governments should be indifferently of Divine Institution but that One especially was instituted of God and that Monarchical The Reasons proving this Chap. XXVI Of the mutual Relations and Obligations of Soveraigns and Subjects No Right in Subjects to resist their Soveraigns tyrannizing over them What Tyranny is Of Tyrants with a Title and Tyrants without Title Of Magistrates Inferiour and Supream the vanity and mischief of that distinction The confusion of co-ordinate Governments in one State Possession or Invasion giveth no Right to Rulers The Reasons why 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
infinite reasons First from the Object of their worship generally directed to a multitude of Gods and patching up a plenitude of power out of the shreds of innumerable Demi-gods or pieces of Gods whereof one should have power and vertue in one thing and another in another but this is to deny God in effect who if he be not absolute is not at all and indeed all the arguments before used to prove there can be but one God do prove that to be a false and foolish Religion which alloweth and worshippeth more than one Neither can it suffice to excuse them to say that the wiser of the Heathens acknowledged but one God because it availeth nothing at all but to add to their condemnation for any persons to have a right sense and meaning reserved to themselves and to proceed directly contrary to such found judgment in their practice and worship it self And therefore the most absurd and abominable manner of worshipping their pretended Deities is sufficient conviction of the Religion it self For whereas modesty sobriety temperance chastity truth justice and the like moral vertues were such as the Light of Nature did commend to all men and all consented to be excellent and laudable All these were contemned by the admirers of these Gods yea the very Religion it self tempted and incited many to offend against all these and that which is most intolerable from the examples of the pretended gods so chusing to be worshipped from whence must needs follow what St. Paul affirmeth of the Gentiles Religion and gods The things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to Devils and not to God They were impure and wicked 1 Cor. 10. 20. spirits delighting in absurd and vitious practises And therefore upon this subject no more need be spoken at present The Neat pretender to true worship may be the Mahometan who worshipping the True God so far as may be discerned yet faileth egregiously in the manner of exhibiting the same the very grounds and end also being false and unreasonable For first that the Author and Coiner of that worship was an impostor and made pretences of Sanctity in the midst of impurities and infirmities he was subject unto is apparent out of Histories of those times and places where he by the assistance of a Fugitive Nestorian Monk laid the plot and whole design of his Religion and that among a people altogether rude ignorant barbarous easie to be deceived and cheated into a credulity of pretended Revelations Again the many absurdities and contradictions of their Law most sacred as misnaming of persons mistiming of Facts mistaking of Histories in the gross impossible prophane blasphemous opinions concerning the nature the will the Actions of God contrary to common philosophy and reason Ridiculous and foolish imaginations of Angels utterly false opinions of the nature of things and such like being duly and soberly weighed and examined do convince the whole Fabrick of that superstition of Idleness and foolish fictions And not to multiply more arguments here The way of propagating this Erroneous Fashion of serving God discovereth the Errour of the thing it self For it is a general and most rational Principle deserving admission and belief of all That Religion being the most excellent act of humane Creatures ought to have the most high and noble Faculty of the soul for its proper seat and fountain from whence it should proceed such as is the intellectual faculty of Man But this superstition is carried on by the ministery of the Senses chiefly And moreover It ought to have for its end the most sublime and divine of all But the Mahometan constituteth the low pleasures of the Senses as the sufficient and proper end of all their service making the beatitude of Heaven to consist in perpetual Licentiousness and fresh delights of senses And therefore no need of insisting on this subject here What is here spoken being for method sake rather then necessity or a formal confutation of those Errours CHAP. V. Of the Jewish Religion The Pretence of the Antiquity of it mulled Their several Erroneous grounds of the Jewish Religion discovered DUT the Religion of the Jew requireth more diligent examination as well because of a notable presumption from ancient Tradition and a certain preoccupation of divine truths and auctority of divine Constitution as because the consideration thereof is an introduction to Christian Religion and the disproof of that a proof of the Christian And if according to Christians own concessions and the eminentest Apostle St. Paul they were once the people and true Church of God To Rom. 3. 2. cap. 9. 4. them were committed the Oracles of God To them pertained the Adoption and the glorie and the Covenant and the giving of the Law and the service of God and the Promises Why not alwayes a Church If once Gods people Why not alwayes so If once confessed to be pure and Faithfull When did they cease to be so When first entred corruptions into their Church Under what High Priest And who brought such errours first in This is the sum of what they can say either for themselves or against the Christians of whose Religion which undoubtedly they do and will call Heresie they can give the time and place when and where it sprang up and the person who first founded and advanced the same And if any Church or Society of men in the world can lay claim to the Promises of perpetuity and infallibility surely the Jewish will pretend much more from the Prerogatives peculiar to them as do witness every where the Law and the Prophets To all this a sufficient answer shall be comprehended in the prosecution of the contrary Grounds which here follows which I reduce to these two whereof One concerns their Errour about their Law and the Other about their Messias The first general Errour concerning their Law is first that they suppose that the word of God given to Moses for their proper use was equally to oblige all Nations saving where certain priviledges were pretended to Jews by birth which they suppose no people were worthy or capable of except the stock of Abraham But that all nations could not be included in that Covenant which was made with Abraham nor were all obliged to the Rites and Ceremonies thereof appears from the ordinary impossibility of being observed by all People For how could people of the remotest parts of the earth appear thrice a year at Jerusalem as was commanded the Israelites by God who dwelt in the Land of Canaan How Levit. 12. 6. could all Nations at any time bring their Sacrifices to the door of the House of the Lord to be there received and offered by the Priests Another Errour concerning their Law received by Moses is that they say It was it whereby men should be justified Which is false and that First because the most ancient holy and renowned Patriarchs of the Jewish Line were not so Justified They were not justified by the
the several Senses and Meanings according to which the Scriptures may be understood IT being found what is the Letter of the Word of God It is necessary to know what is the true sense of it For this is only in truth the Word and not the Letters Syllables or Grammatical words To know this we must first distinguish a Sense Historical and Mystical The Historical Sense is the same as the Literal so called because it is that which is primarily signified and intended by such a form of words And this is twofold For either these words are to be taken in the proper and natural signification as I may call that which is in most vulgar use or in their borrowed and mataphorical Sense As when I call a thing hard and apply it to Iron or Stone I speak properly and according to the Natural sense but when I apply Hardness to the heart I speak improperly and Metaphorically and yet Literally too intending thereby to signifie not any natural but moral quality in the heart The Seven Ears saith Joseph in Genesis are seven years and the Seven fat Kine are Seven years And so Christ in the Gospel This is my Body and infinite others in Scripture are Metaphorical and Literal Senses both The Mystical Sense is that which is a translation not so much of words from one signification to another as of the entire Sense to a meaning not excluding the Historical or Literal Sense but built upon it and occasion'd by it And is commonly divided into the Tropological Allegorical and Anagogical which some as Origen make coordinate with the former saying The Scripture is a certain Intelligible world wherein are four Parts Origen Homil 2. In Diversos as four Elements The Earth is the Literal Sense The waters is the profound Moral Sense The Air is the Natural Sense or natural science therein found And above all the sublime sense which is Fire In another place he mentions only the Historical Moral and Mystical And generally Idem Homil. 5. in Leviticum the Fathers do acknowledg all these though with some variation not distinguishing them as we have as might be shown were it needful to enlarge here on that subject The Moral Sense is that which is drawn from the natural to signifie the manners and conditions of men The Allegorical is a sense under a continuation of tropes and figures The Anagogical a translation of the meaning of things said or done on earth to things proper to heaven The Oxe being suffered to eat while he trod out the Corn according to St. Paul in the Moral sense signified that the labourer was worthy of his hire Mount Sinah and Mount Sion as the same Gal. 2. 24 25. Apostle saith signified the two Cities of God Earthly and Heavenly Allegorically And the Church of God upon Earth the Church Triumphant in heaven It is therefore without reason and modesty both that some strickt Modern Divines have set themselves against the Antient in contracting all these senses into one so as to allow no more which is of very ill consequence to the Faith both of Jew and Christian For generally all the hopes of the Jews concerning the Messias to come and all the proofs of the Christian taken from the Old Testament That he is come would come to little or nothing seeing there is manifestly a Literal or Historical sense primarily intended upon which the Mistical is built So that the arguments of the Evangelists and St. Paul in his Epistles convincing that Christ was the true Messias must needs be invalid seeing their quotation to that purpose had certainly another Literal Sense And it is against the condition of the whole Law it self which as St. Paul Heb. 10. 1. saith was a Shadow of good things to come and not the very things themselves It is here replied commonly That all these are but one Literal Perkins on Galâ—â— 22. sense diversely expressed which is to grant all that is contended for but with a reservation of a peculiar way of speaking to themselves that having been so infortunate as to judge of things amiss they may in some manner solace themselves with variety of phrase too commonly found amongst such as resolve to say something new where there is no just cause at all And to that which seems a Difficultie That no Symbolical sense can be argumentative or prove any thing in Divinity we answer That it cannot indeed unless it be known first to be the true Mistical sense of the words alledged For neither is the Literal sense it self until it be known that such was the true intent of the Speaker But those things which were symbolically and Mystically delivered in the Law being well known to Christ and his Apostles as likewise to the Learnedest of the Jewish Doctors by a received current tradition amongst them were of force to the ends alledged by them But where such a Mystical sense is not received nothing can be inferred from thence which is conclusive CHAP. X. Of the true Interpretation of Holy Scriptures The true meaning not the letter properly Scripture Of the difficultie of attaining the proper sense and the Reasons thereof IT availeth a Christian as little to have the Letter of the word of God without the genuine sense as it doth a man to have the shell without the Kernel For the sense is the word of God not the Letter Wicked men yea the Devil himselfe maketh use of the Letter to contradict the truth it self as St. Hierome hath observed and other Fathers and constant experience certifieth not without the consent of the Scripture it self which saith of it self In it are some things hard to be understood which 2 Pet. 3. 16. they that are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do all other Scriptures to their own destruction Therefore because it is very necessarie to be informed of the difficulties and dangers in misinterpreting Scripture before we can throughly apply our selves to prevent and avoid them we will First shew briefly That many things are difficult in Scripture and the Reasons why and after proceed to the most probable means rightly to interpret the same And these obstacles in attaining the true sense of Gods word are either found in our selves or in Gods wisdome and Providence or lastly in the Word of God it self Some indeed piously but inconsiderately make all the reason of difficulties not denied by them altogether in the Scripture to be in Man supposing they hereby vindicate Gods Providence from that censure it might otherwise be liable unto if so be that God should deliver such a Law to man which could not well be understood but apt to mislead men into errour And therefore say they It is the darkness and perversness of mans understanding and will that make things in Scripture obscure and not the condition of the Scriptures themselves But this no ways doth attain its end For when did God deliver his written word unto Mankind
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
Apostolical that which now is so reputed and that which any mans memory might assure him was so in very deed the Apostles Doctrine This controversie then seems to come to this issue First in Reason Whether Oral and Memorial Tradition can be so secure as Scriptural The resolution of which doubt almost every man may make sufficiently of himself and hath been competently treated of above The other Question is about matter of Fact Whether the Church of God did ever so unanimously agree in the necessity validity or Sacredness of any Traditions not contained in the written Word of God as to equal them with this This we absolutely deny And upon the account of Tradition it self There being no such Tradition to be found in all the Records of the Church that Tradition is so highly to be valued Again there appearing consent sufficient in the Church for many ages That as to the Material parts of Christian doctrine the Scriptures do sufficiently instruct us as a Rule and Law of believing For If the Law of Moses as a Law was sufficient before the Prophets added to it for the People of God under that Dispensation And the Law and the Prophets were still sufficient till John and Christ is to believed That the Law of Christians delivered by Christs appointment should fall short of the same ends now It is truly affirmed That what St. Paul writeth in commendation of Scripture was intended chiefly if not only of the books of the Old Testament viz. That they were able to make a man wise unto Salvation through Faith that is in Christ Jesus and All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine for correction for instruction in Righteousness That the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished unto all good works Now if the Scriptures of the Old Testamant were sufficient to bring a man to the Faith of Christ and to instruct him to Salvation can any man reasonably doubt Whether the much clearer and fuller manifestation of the Doctrine of Christ and Salvation by the books of the New Testament are sufficient to the same end joyned to the obscurer of the Old I know there are that say expresly No and endeavour to make it good by several instances very material to Faith and yet not expressed in Scripture and yet again of force to be believed by all that would be good Christians As the Articles of the Trinity and of Christs Person consisting of humane and divine nature Of his being born of the blessed Virgin Some other are added hereunto but they are either such as are neither favoured by Scripture nor good Tradition as Invocation of Saints Purgatory c. or have only a general warrant from Scripture and Tradition and such are they which are of a mutable nature Rites and Ceremonies of the Church which ought not when confirmed by long consent and use in the Church lightly to be refused and cast off so when any Church having power over its own body shall think fit to alter is that Church to be refused as a true Church by others But to the first of these we stick not openly to profess That it suffices to believe so much only as is really contained in and soberly deducible from the Scriptures taking these articles of Faith separately from certain accessory obligations of all good Christians For instance It is not required to believe the doctrine now established in the Catholick Church concerning the Trinity in the forms at present received from the nature of the Articles themselves which may with safety sufficient be assented to as they are simply found in Scripture yet considering That Hereticks have stirred up most dangerous and sacrilegious doubts to the obviating them and securing the main stake which would be endangered if farther explications were not found out and imposed it is needful to receive them also or at least not to oppose and declare against them For 't is very well known there passed some ages before the Articles of the Trinity of Persons were so much stood on or so well setled as now they are and that Tradition was as much to seek as the written Word of God to bring things to that pass they now are in And for Christ's manner of birth I know no such Tradition either written or unwritten which required antiently any more than to believe barely That the eternal Son of God became man and was incarnate and born of a woman who was a pure Virgin but probable circumstances and reverence to the high Mystery of Christs Person obliged to the honorary part of that Article And the like answer may be made to another instance about Paedobaptism which some as occasion offers will say is required in Scripture and again it serving at other times their turn better to deny Bellarmin it will hold the contrary For Baptism of Infants as Infants is not indeed required by Scripture but as persons saveable it is the rule general in Scripture running thus Except a man be born of water and the Holy John 3. 5. Ghost he cannot be saved It is not said unless a man be born by water while he is an infant or Child but absolutely For had it been so expressed just doubt might have been made whether a man baptized at his full age were effectually baptized Neither is Baptism appointed signally and precisely for men in years though none but such at the first preaching of the Gospel who could profess their Faith could be capable of it but indefinitely is it spoken without any limitation and therefore sufficiently implied Other instances against the plenitude of Scripture as a Rule of Faith have either already been touched as that which tells us It is nowhere contained in Scripture that the Scriptures are the word of God neither can it be proved by it for no more can it be demonstrated by Tradition or may be easily brought to the same end To conclude this point having shewed what we mean by Tradition and what it serveth not to it were unreasonable to leave it slurr'd so and not to give it its due in shewing the great use thereof in the Church of Christ For however we make it not supream nor coequal with the written word of God it may without any offence or invasion of Divine Right or Autoritie claim the next place to it and as Joseph to Pharaoh be greater then all the the people besides but inferiour to Pharaoh in the Throne Of God it is said Thou satest in the Throne judging right God now judges by his Word Psalm 9. 4. written as by a Law and Rule of faith as is shewed Yet I see no reason for the injudicious zeal and reverence of such who think they cannot give enough unto the Scriptures unless in word and pretence for t is no more themselves constantly acting contrarie to their profession they ascribe all the Form of Judging unto the Scriptures and all things determinable to their
his Benefits before he be in some manner actually in Christ For if all our works are Sanctified by Gods Spirit and acceptable to God only as they are done in Christ how can any such Acts lead us unto Christ or make us capable of him seeing it is one of the greatest perfections and excellencie of good Works or Faith for unless it and we be in Christ it cannot be a saving Faith i. e. leading us to Salvation to make us effectual partakers of and one with him These difficulties constrain us to distinguish both Faith and being in Christ into I cannot say properly two kinds as two eminent Periods and Degrees of Faith and being in Christ The one is initial and preparatory as a foundation which is not a distinct building from the house finished and furnished but a part of it and material Cause thereof The other is consummate and formed yet not so but addition of perfection though not of Parts may be made all mens Faith being capable of farther degrees in this life And from hence that mystical sense of our Saviours words in St. Johns Gospel may both give and receive illustration For in the sixth of John Christ hath these words No man can come unto me except the Joh. 6. 44. Father which hath sent me draw him And in the fourteenth of John he saith I am the way and the truth and the life no man cometh unto the Father but by Joh. 14. 6. me Teaching us That notwithstanding God is the First cause to bring us to be in Christ and that by his Predestination before time and his Calling and Electing us in time to the knowledge and Faith in Christ yet he is not reconciled unto us he doth not pardon us nor justify us before Christ brings us unto him and offers us to him as a new lâ—mp and as capable of his grace and favour which obtained we are then truly justified by Christ And as there are two distinct acts of God the one of his good Providence in bringing us to the Covenant made with mankind in Christ and the other of his special Grace in accepting us through Christ being in the Covenant So are there two principal Periods as I said of being in Christ and the First is when we are taken within the Covenant of the Gospel of Grace by baptism whereby we are made members of Christs mystical Body and inheritours of the Kingdom of Heaven Not that immediately and necessarily All baptized persons are sure to go to heaven but all baptized persons are thereby put into a capacity and Right to heaven To this St. Paul Gal. 3. 27. to the Galatians gives us his fair suffrage saying For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ And the same is implied in this his salutation Salute Andronicus and Junias my kinsmen and my Rom. 16. 7. fellow Prisoners who are of note among the Apostles who also were in Christ before me Where doubtless these persons are said to be in Christ before St. Paul because they were baptized and made profession of Christ before St. Paul And so when he speaks of the Churches of Judea which are in Christ Gal. 1. 22. he meaneth no more than such who were become of Jews Christians in Judea not intending that every one who so professed Christ should be infallibly Justified and saved by Christ as they shall who are arrived to the more perfect state of being in Christ of which the Apostle thus speaketh to the Colossians Whom Christ we preach warning every man and teaching every Col. 1. 28. man in all wisdome that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus Now what is or wherein this perfection in Christ doth consist is I suppose past any mans apprehension or Judgement precisely to determine that is what degree of holiness in Christ God will accept to our Justification but in general these two States of a Christian are plainly deseribed thus by St. Paul to the Corinthians If any man be in Christ Jesus he is a new creature 2 Cor. 5. 17. Where being a new Creature and being in Christ are distinguished as Cause and Effect our being in Christ Jesus being the reason and cause of becoming New creatures So that we may well observe in this case a twofold Conversion requisite to make a man truly in Christ A conversion to Christ by renouncing false Religions and false opinions of a Deity and assenting to and embracing the doctrine according to Godliness This every man doth who takes on him the name profession and mitiating Sacrament of a Christian of this is to be understood what is spoken of the conversion of the Gentiles And this conversion is rather to speak properly Acts 15. 3. a conversion to the truth of Godliness than to true Godliness Or a conversion to the Truth of Faith rather then to the life of Faith of which St. Paul to the Galatians The life which I now live in the flesh I live by the Faith Gal. 2. 20. of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me The summ then of all this is this That to be in Christ effectually to our Justification and Salvation is so to be converted unto him as to believe the Faith of Christ and to Live the life of Christ This being cleared nearer access is made unto the solution of the prime Doubt which is What is that which so farr and fully enstateth us in Christ that thereupon God doth freely justifie us For it is now supposed and granted that our so being in Christ making us partakers of the merits mediation and Righteousness of Christ doth immediately and absolutely qualifie to Justification and secondarily that which brings us into Christ may properly enough be said to be it whereby we are Justified And here comes in the grand dispute about the vertue of Faith Whether that only and wholly performeth this For in what sense Faith may be said to bring us unto Christ or thus to lay hold as they say of Christ in the same may it be truly affirmed that next under God and Christ we are Justified by it This I know not how it can be effected better then by the help of a most obvious and necessary but most neglected distinction of the use and notion of Faith in holy Scripture omitting that threefold Faith above-mentioned and several others impertinently invented and ill imployed in this case For Faith is taken in Scripture either Complexly and Generally for the whole Body of Christian divinity and Graces contained in the New testament Or it is taken Simply and distinctly for a special Grace separate I mean in nature not in Operation from Hope and Charity which together constitute the three Theological Graces Instances of the former have been given already in the twelfth Chapter and need not here be repeated in particular For let any man of common equity and understanding weigh the subject and
prove the same they meaning no more then Gods Election to the state of Grace that is the Faith and Profession of the Gospel Whence it is that the persons so called and converted to Christ are by St. Paul called the Election as Rom. 9. 11. For the children being not yet born neither having done good Rom. 9. 11. or evil that the purpose of God according to Election might stand not of works but of him that calleth Here the purpose of God is distinguished from the election of God meaning That what God had before-time purposed and resolved on he in time executed in electing the younger and relinquishing the elder and that rather from his own Free-will then my difference in the Persons so elected inducing him thereunto And so Chapt. 11. v. 5. The remnant according to his election is the remnant elected Chap. 11. v. 5. 7. 28. And again verse 7. he saith The election hath obtained And verse 28. Touching the election they are beloved In which three places it is to me plain That by election St. Paul doth mean the Persons elected from Jewish Superstition to Christian Profession As St. Peter also useth the same word saying of the Jewish Converts Elected together with you And 1 Pet. 5. 13. 1 Pet. 1. 2. Matth. 24. 22 24 32. and several other places in which nothing more is intended by the Holy Ghost than they who were in outward communion of Faith So that being sure of a mans Election as every ordinary Christian is he becomes in proportionable manner surâ— of his Justification and Salvation that is sure that the Faith he professes is altogether sufficient to lead him infallibly to salvation which neither the Religion of the Jew or Gentile can assure him of Yet to the reapinâ— of the fruit hereof it must alwayes be supposed That such conditionâ— as God requires on the Party stipulating be not wanting Now of this sort of Assurance I make no doubt but the word of God is more genuinely interpreted and applyed than of that personal assurance peculiar to some who frame another notion of being elected which is of being signally chosen out of the former Elect to an infallible assurance of their Justification and Salvation which though I willingly grant o be true viz. That God hath his peculiar ones amongst Christians too as Christians amongst Heathen yet I find little or nothing spoken of under the said Appellations of Elect Elected Election in Scripture but of the first sense generally My appeal shall be to the indifferent judge by laying the testimonies before him which are principally these many coming nothing near the point St. Paul saith to the Romans of Abraham That he did not doubt of the promise of God through unbelief but was strong Rom. 4. 20 21. in saith giving glory to God And being fully perswaded that what he had promised he was able also to perform How far this is beside the matter every sober man will easily see that shall consider seriously That these Promises were made directly and expresly to Abrahams person and not in common with other persons And can any man be so unadvised as to conclude That because Abraham having such a particular and personal Promise made to him by God and indeed absolute and inconditionate that he should have a Son by Sarah his wife which he believed and without staggering was assured of therefore they who have no such personal assurances given of God but only general and alwayes conditional of their Justification and Life Everlasting can be in like manner assured of the same or ought to believe that they shall be saved as much as Abraham did that God would send him a Son as he promised The sum of Gods infallible Promise to Christians is this in St. Matthew He that believeth Matth. 16. 1â— and is baptized shall be saved where it must of necessity be granted that Believing is a very comprehensive word according to our distinction of Faith above given and consequently that it cannot be so evident to a man that he believeth according to the Tenour and intent of the Covenant of Grace as it was to Abraham that God himself made such a Promise to him and therefore hath not the like footing for his Faith assuring him that he believeth aright as that he should have a Son when his common sense told him that God had promised he should It is said that Faith is opposite to doubting For Christ said to Peter Matth. 14. 31. O thou of little Faith wherefore didst thou doubt This is very true and therefore we say It is no article or object of our Faith to believe that we shall be infallibly saved but it is rather an object of our Fear and more properly of our Hope For though it be said in the Apostles Creed I believe the remission or forgiveness of sgins it is not meant that any man should thereby stand obliged to believe as an Article of Faith the actual forgiveness of his own sins but that his own sins and all other Christian peoples are remissible and that in the Catholick Church there is forgiveness to all that repent and believe And this is no more then that General Assurance that by being baptized we are in a state of Salvation as is above-said To multiply many Texts to infer this from Gods faithfulness who promiseth and from his gifts being without repentance and such like are not worth their time that use them nor would it be worth mine to examine them any farther then to say That they are a great deal too large to have any particular relation to a mans personal state As if God must needs change if a man falls from his stedfast purpose Or God when he in his own counsel determines to save any man infallibly must inseparably annex thereunto this Evidence of his will to the Party any more then it is necessary that all men who leave others their Estates should tell them so much and require at their hands that they make no question of the same under the penalty of forfeiting all The surest grounds therefore for this seem to be taken from revelation which no Christian can absolutely oppose For not only may God but God hath revealed this to others by the testimony of his Spirit or other sufficient Evidence for to beget an assurance But two exceptions are made against this way the one That the dispute is only about the Ordinary dispensations common to all true believers The other That these places alledged prove no more than the common Justification of believers and their Adoption As for instance John 1. 12. As many as received him John 1. 12. to them gave he power to become the Sons of God even as many as believe in his name Here say they believing is put for receiving so that true faith receiveth Christ and this it doth by a particular application of general promises unto a mans self Therefore a man ought to be
drunkenness who putteth the bottle to his neighbours mouth provoking him to drink to excess or of Theft who will by no means steal himself but is aiding in his advice and putting advantages into his hands to take anothers Goods In like manner the necessary consequence of a light Errour being very notorious though a person be not formally an Heretick in the conclusion which he may protest against as not following from his erroneous proposition yet if in truth it doth so and is generally so reputed to the mis-leading of Christians such a man is really or virtually an Heretick and obnoxious to the guilt and punishment due unto such Errours which he denies For instance It is a notorious Heresie to hold it unnecessary there should be any Church of Christ and to affirm That it suffices that every good Christian hath the word of God and believes and lives by himself though the word of God contradicts this impiety sufficiently and to be a Christian at large If any person heretically inclined shall deny that this is his opinion or that thus he would have it yet if he preaches such Doctrine and publishes such Opinions which do necessarily infer thus much he is a notorious Heretick in reality though not in the formality As also if he should teach The Church hath no power to enjoyn any thing besides what the word of God requires This Errour taken simply and nakedly hath no such monstrousness as may not pass for tolerable but in the necessary consequence it is as pernicious to the community of Christians as to preach against Christ himself And therefore the argument of late Rationalists is very false founded upon this ground Socinus Chi. viz. That Christians are not to be obliged under pain of damnation such as Anathema's and Excommunications are to any thing which Christ hath not by his Law prescribed For this indeed taken strictly is true Christ for ought may appear doth not in Scripture command Rites in use with the Church but Christ under pain of his displeasure doth require that we should do all things not contrary to his injunctions for the keeping up Non sunt parva existimanda sine quibus magna consistere enim possint Hieron of the nature of a Church and Christian Society and therefore though the Errour be in it self light it falls in the event heavy upon Christianity it self and deserves no less rigour than is used towards the offender in Faith it self Lastly From hence we may reasonably judge of the frequent denunciations of alienation from the Faith and Church against them who erred heretically affirming in general That Heresie quite alienated from the Church and that Society could not be of the Church which maintained an Heresie For first we are to note that few or none before St. Cyprians time were so severely censured by the ancient Fathers but such as were offenders against the very principles of Christianity it self St. Cyprian indeed and others from him extended this censure to such as were less criminal For it is a very hard matter to instance in any one Article of Faith though I know some great Clerks have attempted it which Novations or Donatists rejected or offended against So that abating somewhat for the vehemence of the zeal conceived against such enemies to the Church in the writings of Fathers against Hereticks it will appear that it was matter of Fact rather than Faith or Heresie which exposed them to such censures For uncharitableness will as certainly damn as unfaithfulness And he that dies for Christ as divers Hereticks did in animosity groundless against his brother and especially against the Church of which he is or ought to be a member may notwithstanding loose his Life hereafter as well as here But of this more now we are to speak of the Church CHAP. XXIII Of the proper Subject of Faith the Church The distinction and description of the Church In what sense the Church is a Collection of Saints Communion Visible as well as Invisible necessary to the constituting a Church HAving spoken of the Nature Kinds Acts and Effects of Christian Faith we proceed now to speak of the proper Subject of Faith which is the Church Which word is commonly used as well for the Place where our Lord is publickly and solemnly worshipped as for the People of God serving and worshipping him But of this latter only we art to treat at present which we define to be A Calling and Collection of Saints from The Church is an universal Congregation or fellowship of Gods faithful People and Elect built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ being the head and corner stone Hom. Chur. of Engl. Part. 2. pa. 213. their vain Conversation in the world to the Faith and Worship of God according to the Rule and Laws of his Holy word and to visible communion with themselves which description I doubt not to be grounded in all its parts upon the Scriptures themselves And that God is the Author and only Institutor of such a Church if it needed any proof the Scripture would soon afford it St. Paul saith to the Corinthians Chap. 7. * 1 Cor. 7. 17. But as God hath distributed to every man as the Lord hath called every one so let him walk and so ordain I in all Churches And so exhorteth the Thessalonians to †1 Thess 2. 12 walk worthy of God who called them to his Kingdom and Glory And so in very many places else where as will appear farther now we consider the Term from whence God doth call and choose his faithful people and that is the World the world not taken in its natural sense signifying the Natural bodies of all sorts of which it consisteth nor absolutely from it in the more special sense in which Mankind is sometimes called the world for civil conversation and humane mutual Offices may be maintained and ought between Christians and Heathens or Infidels but rather in a moral sense that is unnatural unjust unrighteous communication with the wicked of the world as wicked as St. Paul explaineth himself to the 1 Cor. 5. 9 10. Corinthians I wrote unto you in an Epistle not to company with fornicatours Yet not altogether to refuse to converse with the fornicatours of this world or with the covetous or extortioners or with Idolaters for them must ye needs go out of the world but if any man that is called a brother be a fornicatour c. St. Peter takes most of the terms in our description speaking 1 Pet. 2. 9 10. of Converts to the Faith Ye are a chosen generation a Royal Priesthood an holy Nation a peculiar People that ye should shew forth the praises of God who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light c. And St. Paul to the Ephesians According as he hath chosen us in him before the Ephes 1. 4. foundation of the World that we should be holy and
reason together with their rejecting of so eminent a Servant of God as was Samuel that God 1 Sam. 8. 10. said of the People they had rejected him rather than Samuel From Saul to the Captivity it is manifest what their Government was and from thence it matters not as to our present purpose how they governed themselves seeing they were ruled by the Regal Power of Foreign Princes until shaking off that yoke they were brought under that form by their own Deliverers which was again extorted from them by usurping Tyrants So that when Philo-Judeus and Josephus seem to write of an Aristocratical Government instituted by Moses they can no otherwise be understood to write faithfully but in reference to Ecclesiastical Courts and Cases of Religion purely wherein the Counsel of many was to take place but not to the administration of Civil Justice unless as is above-said when they were themselves subject to Forrain Princes The Objections against this Form thus asserted I leave to be answered from the positive grounds thus laid down And commend the Reader to the learned Disputations of others which are many concerning the excellencie and benefits of one Form above another But as to Hereditary and Elective Governments what is convenient may be gathered from the general discourse now made Now we proceed to the Third thing in Government the mutual Obligation of Governour and Governed CHAP. XXVI Of the mutual Relations and Obligations of Soveraigns and Subjects No Right in Subjects to resist their Soveraigns tyrannizing over them What Tyranny is Of Tyrants with a Title and Tyrants without Title Of Magistrates Inferiour and Supream the vanity and mischief of that distinction The Confusion of Co-ordinate Governments in one State Possession or Invasion giveth no Right to Rulers The Reasons why THAT we read not in the New Testament of any Rules or Advice given to Kings and Princes how to govern the people under them the reason is plain viz. Because in those dayes there were none Christian and St. Paul says What 1 Cor. 5. 12. have I to do to judge them that are without the Church For doubtless had any been of the Society of Christians they had fallen under the Christian Discipline and Precepts of the Apostles But that occasion of instructing Kings in the due administration of their power failing we are to seek for satisfaction from the old Testament where not much is found besides general moral Precepts of Sobriety Temperance Justice and the like enjoyned Solomon by David his Father and left by Solomon in his Book of Proverbs for Rules to succeeding Princes Moses likewise not without Gods appointment hath drawn up some special Precepts for Kings to follow in the real and cordial embracing of Gods word and worship and taking the defense and protection thereof Of which to speak it little behoves us at present Neither purpose we out of Humane Arguments and Autority to prescribe to Supreams what they ought to do or how to govern any farther than the known Rules of Justice in common do require For no doubt there is a mutual Obligation between Soveraign and Subject and that he is tyed and circumscribed in the exercise of his power by God as really as this is in his Obedience to him and that upon the common duties expressed by St. Paul of Masters to Servants and Husbands to Wives and Parents to Children For it doth not at all follow That because Princes are not subject to their Subjects therefore they are free from all subjection Ephes 6. 8. No St. Paul's Rule holds good to Kings as well as to Masters viz. That they should know that their King and Master is in heaven and that Kings are to be subject as well to the Laws of God as their Subjects are to the Laws of Man And though Children ought to obey their Parents in all things yet there is tacitly understood certain Laws of Limitation restraining the boundless tyranny of both civil and natural Parents For Subjects and Children are to know that they have a higher Lord and a more powerful Father to whom in the first place obedience must be paid And we must withdraw our selves from the commands of our Earthly Soveraign when our Heavenly who is his Soveraign doth require it as all rational Kings do grant as well as People But neither ought we to restrain the will of Princes to the literal and express will of God only but even to the most just and reasonable Laws of Humane Authority but only we must distinguish the vast difference between the obligation of Subjects to the just and equal Laws prescribed and imposed on them and that of Princes in relation to those Laws concerning their governing For all Laws contain two special causalities in them The one Exemplary whereby a Form and Rule is prescribed directing such as are to be guided thereby to the observation of Justice Equity and Reason as well to the publick as private good And to this so far as it is reasonable Kings are no less bound than Subjects they ought to observe entirely and religiously these sound and profitable Laws and that under pain of Gods displeasure The other causality which Laws have is Efficient and Compulsive whereby a Civil penalty being denounced and impending over the head of the infringers thereof they are better guarded from transgressions by either loss of outward good or life it self according to the merit of the Offense It cannot either consist with the Law of God or Nations to inflict punishments on Princes Soveraign Not but that for instnace murder adultery unjust spoil and robbery of the Subjects may no less considering the nature of the Crime deserve such punishment of Princes as they do of People but because there is none in such cases that can or ought duly and regularly to execute such Laws because there can be no such execution without the power of the Sword and there can be but one proper subject of that power in any one Republick Every man must not put to death him that is a notorious offender no not though he be justly and legally condemned to dye but he or they only who are thereunto rightly impowred and authorized by the Supream And though every man may in his own mind and judgment sentence a malefactour whose crime is high and apparent to death yet cannot he in civil judicature render him obnoxious to it And the reason hereof is plain because Justice must be done justly or else there is incurred no less guilt than is sought and intended to be revenged And of all guilt I know not whether any be greater than the assuming of such a power which no wayes belongs to a man For better it were to take away ones horse or to ravish another mans wife or to extort unjustly anothers estate than to devest a Prince of his Right of Rule and usurp it to himself and that first because no mans estate or any thing that is his doth descend
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
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
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
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
autority he had it was for the edification and not destruction 2 Cor. 10. 8. of the Church The argument therefore taken from an Hereditary Right in the Crown of England of being Governour and Defendor of our Church to the apparent ruine and destruction of it we know very well from whence it proceedeth and whether it tendeth but where it will end as yet God only knows This we know that Papists are mad when that scoff and reproach which they have constantly put upon both King and Church from that Title upon due enquiry makes so little to their purpose And therefore they will fight with us with the name only CHAP. XXXII Of the Exercise of the Political power of the Church in Excommunication The grounds and Reasons of Excommunication More things than what is of Faith matter sufficient of Excommunication Two Objections answered Obedience due to Commands not concerning Faith immediately Lay-men though Princes cannot Excommunicate Mr. Selden refuted NAture in all Bodies that have Life casts out of it what ever corrupts afflicts or oppresseth the same and by Struglings and contentions endeavours to deliver it self from such noxious humors as would destroy it And this is the reason men take Vomits Purges and Sudorificks that the deadly humour being expelled the wholesome may prevail and the Whole be preserved There can then be nothing more reasonable or Christian than to put this in practice in Bodies Political or Ecclesiastical We see how Thieves Robbers Murderers and such like malefactors who are enemies to humane Society be denied and that justly the benefit of that Society against which they have so offended by confinement in Prison or deprivation of Life it self forfeited justly in seeking or acting the ruine of another And can any that grants the Communion of Christians to be a Body knit together by its several joints and nerves and consisting of several Members deny but the like Evil may befal in its kind to it what doth happen to others in another viz that some noxious humor of Heresie corrupting the Faith in which as the Scripture saith of the Blood is the life of a Christian and the Church it self may poison it And some violence of Schism may dissolve or dismember it And shall not it be allowed the like remedy or means of Cure which are held necessary in like cases No opinion how heretical or immoral so ever is more pernicious to Christian Society than that which absolutely denyes power to the Church to eject unsound and tainting members out of it and to provide for the security of the Body even by the abscission and destruction of any one Part infesting it For this opinion strikes not at one part of the Body but all neither at one point of Faith but all though not immediately and directly but indirectly and by consequence For as upon the fall of the House the persons within must needs be crusht to death so upon the dissolution of the outward Frame of the Church the Faith itself must of necessity in a short time perish and be reduced to nothing And therefore those men of reason as they would be accounted give us but little cause to think them better men than Christians who affirm rawly and loosely without qualification or due explication of their mind that no man is to be cast out of the Church but for something which is necessary to salvation or which Christ doth not require or forbid absolutely either denying or not considering a man can scarce tell which by their works hereby that Christ and St. Paul and our Creed it self require conservation of the unity of the Church both as a thing admirable in its self and necessary to the Faith it self For any man therefore to broach or publish such an opinion as this That every man may use what Ceremonies he pleases in the publick service of God or if he pleases he may use none and this That the Church hath no power to command or forbid any thing which is not expressed in the Scripture when as Rules general and several Examples in Scripture justify the contrary These I say being contrary not only to some one Church but all even those they would by no means have touched thereby do no less in their consequence mischief to the Church than the denial of the Mystery of the Trinity it self or of Christs incarnation however I grant they in their form are nothing so foul And therefore I presume to conclude them matter of Excommunication and so I judge St. Paul doth where he advises nay commands in the name of the Lord 2 Thes 3. 6. Jesus Christ the Thessalonians to withdraw themselves from every one that walketh disorderly and not after the tradition he received of us These traditions were as it is here implied concerning orders of the Church and manners of Worship which in all probability are most of them lost to us St. Paul therefore requiring that whoever did not walk according to those prescriptions delivered by him should be separated doth not warrant the like proceedings now For t is the very same thing whether the Church withdraws it self or whether it expells another When the Israelites warned by Moses departed from the tents of the wicked Corah Dathan Num. 16. 26 and Abiram who only walked disorderly not erroneously in the matter of worship that we read of and their complices and touched nothing of theirs they Anathematized them no less than if they had set them packing into remoter parts from the Congregation Nay if now-adayes as lately Sectaries should prevail so far as to possess themselves of all the Publick and Lawful places of Worship and eject the true Church they might stand no less legally and Really Excommunicate than if they were thrust formally from thence themselves For'tis not the place but the Cause and the Body from which they are cut that makes the Excommunication just and valid This we are confirmed in by the same Apostle afterward And if any man obey not our word by this Epistle note that man 2 Thes 3. 14. and have no company with him that he may be ashamed Now St. Paul in this Epistle had delivered many things not essential in themselves to salvation And where the company of Christians was not great and their society not formed and their outward power little or nothing as in the beginning of all Churches there it sufficed in liew of Formal excommunication to withdraw themselves from such troublers of the Church And this we read further of in St. Paul to the Romans saying Now I beseech Rom. 16. 17. you brethren mark them which cause Divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them St. Paul generally in his Epistles not only insists upon unity of Faith but unity of Charity and outward communion they therefore that were Authors of unnecessary divisions are they whom he would have noted and avoided which when it is done with Publick
consent and sentence is the same in effect with Excommunication and therefore breeders of separation and divisions are no less subject to excommunications than are Hereticks though they hold nothing directly contrary to the Faith But if men will say that What St. Paul did we may do and no more because he did no more this is invented only to destroy but will not hold strong enough because the examples of the Governours of the Church our Rules are not to be restrained to the very same Cases only but to them of like general nature St. Paul justifyes by his practice the excluding out of the communion of the Church such as bred causeless contentions and divisions and from hence the succeeding Governors are justified in doing the like For nothing can be said less to the question in hand than to recite many places out of St. Paul commanding to bear one anothers burdens and that we should not judge one another and that the strong should bear with the weak and such like For all these Texts speak either of Churches not Formed or constituted but rather breeding or of single persons amongst themselves coming to Christian Religion with the strong prepossessions of the Excellency of certain Rites before Religiously observed wherein all Reason Justice and Religion require that no man should impose his conceit upon another without autority But do we find in any place of the Holy Scriptures that St. Paul denied this Right of Judging censuring and commanding to the whole Church Nothing less yea nothing more than the contrary as may more fully appear when we are to speak of Rites and Ceremonies But it is commonly and as they think accutely said that they are the Authors of divisions and Schisms who will not do what they may to prevent them And therefore if Governours impose more then is necessary to salvation or Faith upon others they must answer for the divisions arising from this I may marvel who before late years I may say rather dayes ever understood the Scriptures in this manner but they will wonder perhaps again I should think they are no better interpreters and appliers of Scriptures than are to be found in times and societies of old Let that pass But so must not their mistake either of the power of the Church or the nature of Charity and common Justice The power of the Church being meerly ministerial and servile as to Christ and the Rule of all Christianity the Scripture but Magisterial in relation to inferiour members extendeth only to things of Christian Prudence and extrinsecal to Faith and the things uncommanded in Scripture properly For in other things it is determined without any power to vary from thence this done utterly destroyes all Right and Autority as to outward matters which they can never themselves approve of in the practise nor have done But this is not all for we say that those Governors are not the cause of Divisions and Schisms who do not suspend and withdraw all Injunctions extrinsecal to Faith or good life but they rather who do not receive and obey such as are not contrary to either This is the state of the controversie then between us supposing there is Order and Legitimate autority constituted amongst us whether this is more or so much bound for peace and unity sake to gratifie such as are in their rank subject in the Lord to them in all things possible according to the Scripture or these on the contrary are obliged to receive and observe all such decrees and constitutions which are indeed much accused and traduced but cannot be proved to be any wayes contrary to the word of God or any Analogy of Faith which is not devised by themselves And granting there were somewhat of Charity in reluxing of the rigour of Orders to be observed is there not much more of Charity to be expected from them in obeying How can they so vehemently urge that upon others which they are much more bound to keep and practise themselves but never reguard it Does not Charity much more bind them to obey their Superiours then their Superiours them Nay can they lay any claim to a thing upon the account of Charity who deny the same thing upon the account of Justice Justice and a debt of obedience flowing from subjection requires no less than Charity a compliance of the Wills of the Inferiour with that of the Superiour But only Charity can be pretended and that only pretended where there seems to be an indifference in the thing commanded For if they betake themselves to the inward temper and bent of particular consciences opposing or approving things they must needs come off Loosers by such trials For there will soon be found consciences on the contrary that will be as stiff and resolute for the defense as theirs are for the abrogations of such indifferent things No reason is possible to be given why one conscience may not think as well of them finding them not forbidden as another doth evil finding them not commanded For the too vulgar doctrine which teacheth That what is not commanded is forbidden in Scripture is as notorious a falsity as any thing can be pretended upon the Scripture But farther we absolutely declare against all such tryals of Publick Laws and Customes as Particular and especially private consciences as unjust and unreasonable and in trut intollerable in all Churches This is the Rule we maintain and hold to That nothing ought to be ordained or imposed which may justly offend the conscience and that is only evil If therefore the thing it self be acknowledged or may reasonably be proved to contain nothing sinfull which only may offend the conscience it is one of those evils which cannot be avoided and such of which Christ speaketh in the Gospel of St. Luk. 17. â—1 Luke It is impossible but that offences will come For either the dissenting or Assenting conscience must suffer and which should in such cases suffer who should determine but Autority Was ever that chosen for a Rule which is infinite in uncertainties So are mens consciences in particular But still they are Instant and say We grant such things may be left undone without prejudice to the Faith And to the same argument we return the same answer in effect as before viz And they grant they may be done without prejudice to the Faith But their Case is little less than ridiculous if it be truly considered what they lay down and what they crave at our hands For Peace sake say they we ought to yield what is not unlawful and all indifferent things As if they much more were not so bound to do But that we now add is That there being two Parties diversly constituted yet as 't is supposed differing only in things of a middle nature between Good and Evil. If the one Partie should come unto the other promising to have peace and be at unity with it on condition that it would yield all things that they
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
injustice and Tyranny be denied the exercise of that which pertains to him Now the Key of Knowledge and the Key of Jurisdiction of which the Power of the Keys delivered by Christ consists and into which it is commonly divided are very different For the first doth but open the door to the others and prepares and qualifies a person for the other but doth no more actually give power or autority than the great skill and experience of a Souldier makes him a Captain to command others or knowledge in the law makes a man a judge actually It is therefore the Key of Jurisdiction or a Right given by Christ to administer the Church and every member thereof that is principally to be acknowledged in this Case And which not being found to descend orderly from Christ no effect of that affected power can be acknowledged But as is said doth not descend naturally or by birth but Judicially from others In which manner who ever receives it not sacrilegiously murps what belongs not to him But they who would wring this power out of the hands of the Church Selden de Synedriis Lib 1. Cap. 9. do give us certain Presidents as well from the Jewish Church wherein there was it should seem a custom that one Person might excommunicate another when he pleased But the same Antiquaries tell us also that it was in use amongst them for a man to excommunicate himself And this I take to imply an answer to the former For it is in the power of any man to separate himself from the Church or any other Society materially and Really but Judicially and Formally he cannot neither can he separate another otherwise than by absenting himself from the Communion of the Church he may indeed as formally pronounce such a censure against himself or an other as the most Canonical Judge in the world but intrinsique power being wanting the outward Act turns to smoak as to others but as to himself has no other effect then he that is in a boat hath upon the earth against which he sets his oar and thrusts hard but puts himself off not the earth as our neighbouring Ministers did when with intollerable and incredible presumption they took upon them to Excommunicate their own Bishops and some of the transmarine Churches of the same Platform were so wise as to allow their Fact And to the Instances of some Princes whom Histories affirm to have Excommunicated Id. ibid. certain persons the Answer is That the word Excommunication hath deceived the reporters and appliers thereof to this Case For according to signification of that word both in the Latin and Greek language Excommunication or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the declaration by Publick Herauld Suidas in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Item 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of any guilty Person to be excluded or banished the Princes Court or Company or perhaps Dominions Thus many have been Excommunicated by Soveraign Princes But can any instances be given of such as without any further Act of the Church have been thereupon denied Communion with the Church And what we say of Excommunicating holds good likewise in the Power of Absolution which the same Persons allow to meer secular Powers and would prove from an Act of Constantine the Great his absolving Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia Constantine we all know had but little knowledge in the Rites of the Church at that time and might attempt he knew not what as soon as any other man whose affection to Christianity far exceeded his Judgement But what is affirmed of Constantines Act That he Restored that Excommunicated person to the Communion of the Church which only is properly Absolution No surely but he might restore him to his See and that is all Or if more were done he might be said to do it who caused by the interposition of his Power some Bishop of the Church to free him from those Eonds But questionless that is none of the least corruptions which the Church of Rome stands guilty of and which our Church hath but too much connived at that the Power of Excommunication should be in the hands of Lay men To mend this a little they of the Roman Law distinguish that which by no means should be separated curing one absurdity by another Anastafius Germbnius de Sacrorum Immunitat For they distinguish Episcopal Order from Episcopal Jurisdiction and say a man that hath not Episcopal Order but Episcopal Jurisdiction may Excommunicate a vile and corrupt imagination brought in on purpose to serve the turns of ambitious secular and sacrilegious Drones who would drive two trades of secular advantage and Ecclesiastical Profits For there is nothing so Essential unto Episcopacy as Jurisdiction I mean an Habitude and Right to Preside and Rule and there can be no Episcopal power without that nor that without Episcopal Charactar Officers indeed there may be under him void of that Charactar or any Priestly because though the Court be properly Ecclesiastical yet all things are not so which are acted therein Judicial Acts and Acts of Notaries and of Executions are competible to unordain'd persons because Gifts of nature and Learning may capacitate a man to them but that of Jurisdiction properly so called is the intrinsique Right of the Pastour of the Church and this of Excommunication annext thereunto or rather a part of it And therefore he is not a Bishop that hath it not and he that hath it is a Bishop It is not indeed necessary that this should be denounced by a Bishop but that this power which is likewise inherent in a Priest as a Priest be committed to him after the decree made by the Bishop For the Priest having a Jurisdiction within himself by vertue of his place and office but restrained by the Superiour Power to him the Jurisdiction and Autority of the Bishop is seen sufficiently in this that it enables a Priest to do that which of himself he ought not to do and this is rather exciting an old power in the Priest then infusing a new giving right to it to exert it self which before it had not But Lay-men having no Ecclesiastical Charactar inherent in them cannot by any such general commission given them from the Bishop act effectually to that end for want of the due Principle this Licence of the Bishop being nothing else but removing of that Obstacle which hinders it to work where it was For to deliberate debate and Judge of causes and persons subject to Excommunication may possibly be better performed by such who have attained to that science without any order in the Clergy but the fact it self is quite of another nature CHAP. XXXIII Of the second branch of Ecclesiastical Power which is Mystical or Sacramental Hence of the Nature of Sacraments in General Of the Vertue of the Sacraments Of the sign and thing signified That they are alwayes necessarily distinct Intention how necessarie to a Sacrament Sacraments Effectual to Grace HAving
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
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
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
danger or necessity in the case of their Souls as Bodies and therefore neglect the proper means conducing to their everlasting health And this is yet more expresly propounded to us in the fifth Chapter of Leviticus where we read of many Errors and Offences to be redressed and omitted And that by bringing a Trespass-offering for the sin that he hath committed a female from the flock a Lamb or a Kid of the Goats for a Sin-offering and the Priest shall make an attonement for him concerning his sin Now the manner how and the terms upon which this attonement was to be made are expressed in the words before viz. He shall confess that he hath sinned Ego ut efficacibus scripturae testimonus argumentis irrefutabilibus non pâ—ssum à 〈◊〉 vincere hanc confessionem hanc inquam qualis nune in usu est à Christo aut etiam ab Apostolis esse institutam ita piis omâ—ibus religiose observandam censâ—o veluti saltem ab Ecclesiae proceribus non sine afflatu Spiriâ—ûs Divini inductam Erasm in Exomologesi apud Gesnerum Tom. 5. in that thing And to whom to God privately or to the Priest also who was upon his Confession to make an attonement for him There can be no doubt of the latter And in the Gospel though I dare not nor Erasmus affirm any particular direct Procept purposely delivered to enjoyn this yet by consequence and implication it seems to be required especially in some cases of apparent and grievous errors committed against the Faith and Holiness of the Gospel For hither may the words of Christ well be drawn whereby he commissioned his Apostles to act in his stead himself leaving this world * John 20. 23. Whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosoever sins ye retain they are retained Which words some Modern Interpreters restraining to the power of preaching the Gospel though I confess that to be true must patiently suffer others to leave them as they have their Predecessours in that gloss For first the Gospel might be preached by others as well as the Apostles And next whatever Remission of sins attends the publication of the Gospel is to be imputed not simply and barely either to the Preaching or Hearing or Believing the same but to the admitting by an effectual Faith all the things the Gospel requireth to be done by us And as by the preaching of the Gospel in general and common a general remission is also published So by a particular application of the same unto the particular and private Case of some one Person is confirmed in particular the state of Grace or Impenitency to particular persons according to the judgment of the Priest And to this also pertaineth what Christ saith in the person of St. Peter to all bearing this Office I will give unto thee the Keys Matth. 16. 19. of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou bindest on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou loosest on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven Implying indeed a Power communicative of persons scandalous to the Faith and Church of Christ But of the same power it is a branch which is in every single Priest proceeding judiciously in the Court of Conscience to the binding that is declaring bound a sinner or loosening declaring him at least absolved from his sins upon his repentance manifested to him Now the Reasons obliging a man to this Confession upon Scripture grounds are these First That the Minister of God being according to his office not only to preach Christ and Repentance and Faith and remission of sins to all in general but to apply and accommodate himself to the particular exigencies of men receiving and diversly affected with the Gospel which cannot possibly be but by a particular revelation made to him either from heaven or the party to be judged So that although it should be a sufficient discharge of the Priests part and office to make a general promulgation of the Gospel and so declare that whosoever believeth and repenteth shall be saved but whosoever believeth not shall be damned Yet the hearer or receiver doth not thereby fully discharge his part unless he understands more satisfactorily than ordinarily men can of themselves their condition under the Gospel For secondly By this Confession to another a man comes better to understand and judge himself as to his Faith and Manners As no man can naturally without the help of Art see his own face nor those eyes which see all things see themselves but by looking stedfastly in the eye of another may So can no man so well at least no not by the glass of Gods word discern those things in himself which are to be seen by anothers eye and therefore it must needs be a means to bring the presumptuous to repentance and the distrustful to a comfortable serenity of mind and consolation Thirdly Confession is not only a sign or an act of Contrition but a proper means thereunto For some there are who come to confess their sins and have no true sense of them others have a real sense which is commonly called Attrition being well assured and convicted by their own Consciences they have done wickedly and broke Gods sacred Laws but there wanting the grace of ingenuous sorrow and an affection out of Charity or Love to God this sense will not avail to obtain pardon at Gods hands wherefore by the wise Ministry of the Confessour as he is called he is to be wrought to a sorrow of love and such as is conceived as well for the evil of sin in it self as the evil of punishment it subjects him unto Whence Chrysostome in a certain place speaketh thus I would have you have a sense of Chrys Tom. 1. pag. 139. your errors by Confession and shew your ingenuity of your selves For though it be a foul errror to hold as many of the Church of Rome do that the very coming to Confession or the customary sentence of the Priest turneth Attrition into Contrition i. e. imperfect and of it self unprofitable sorrow into saving yet the joynt exhortations not to be separated in such cases do tend naturally to the more sincere conversion of a sinner unto God upon the account of vertue it self and the love of Good and of God Fourthly Such Confession is a very notable aw and restraint upon the offender it being too common with us here to fear the eyes and ears of men more than of God And infinite sins we daily commit which if we were thoroughly perswaded should come to the knowledge of Man we would not dare to do though we be assured in general that they must be known to God And 't is an extream folly and direct untruth which some have entertained That we must do things only upon the most perfect principles to the most perfect ends For 't is better a man should abstain from drunkenness to save his purse than not at all And that a child
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
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
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
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
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
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
is exercised it may very properly and truly be said because of the good discerned and affected in the object But if it should be asked How the Will is moved and by vertue of what ability it so moves to that object there could be no greater incongruity than to affirm That the object was the cause of it For here the efficient cause is sought after As when a man goes to Church if doubt should be made why he goes to Church it were easily answered because he apprehends a spiritual good in that act this is the final cause but doth this give his leggs strength and his nerves and sinews power to walk Sure no man will say so This then is that we enquire concerning the wills inclination to and election of spiritual things not why or to what end for the end is the same to all mens wills but by what means it is fitted and enabled to move thitherward rather than the contrary ways The answer to this must if a man will speak appositely be taken from the efficient cause Now this sufficiencie or efficacie in the will is either natural and common to all which all modest Divines explode or adventitious and of free undeserved and undesired Grace and Gift of God Hence another ascent is made towards the Question of the manner of acceptation of grace and mercy objectively taken For as it is plain that God putteth a difference and not Man between the understanding of one man and another revealing that to one which he doth not to another And of those that know the truth putting a difference between the wills of men in that some that have known the saving truth have rejected it and others embraced it as is yet farther manifest from St. Paul to the Romans What Rom. 11. 7. then Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for but the Election hath obtained To some then who know the truth God gives Grace to some he doth not or scarce discernable A third step to this then must be about the degree and essicacie of this first Grace of God preventing and preparing the will to such noble ends which it could never of it self affect or desire And whether God doth give the like Grace at least in proportion to all he hath so far called illuminated and affected as to have spiritual principles of Life and Motion or not It were too curious to enquire here about the Arithmetical proportion or quantity because that all mens constitutions and dispositions are not alike and therefore like more even timber or plyant clay may be wrought into due form by less forcible means but Whether considering all disparities and disproportion in the matter the influence fashioning the same be of it self sufficient to any one called and outwardly elected to the truth Or whether there be any sufficient Grace which is not efficacious and consummative of the end which is the thing denyed by Jansenius against a stream of Adversaries But Thomas who next to Augustine ruled these Disputes most of all and that upon Austin's doctrine and grounds sayes no less and so do such as stick close to him notwithstanding the strong opposition made by a Modern Order who think to change the world and make it take all doctrines from them to the contempt of their Predecessors and the recalling the exil'd Tenets of Pelagians and such as serve though at a distance under him They profess against him and hold for him They deny his Conclusions but approve and justifie his Principles and Premisses from which they certainly follow Neither can they give St. Augustine a good word whom none openly before them ever presumed to confront in that manner Or if they do speak kindly of him yet they take their own course and speak their own upstart sense For do they not place God as an idle Spectatour yea a servile Attender of the wills self-determination first and then bring him in as Auxiliarie to its Actions This is rancide Divinity yea and Philosophy too Do they not fall directly into that Opinion of Origen confuted by Thomas against the Gentiles thus Certain men not understanding Thomas cent Gent. l. 3. c. 89. how God causeth the motion of the will in us without prejudice to the liberty of the will in us have endeavoured to expound these Autorities above-mentioned in his former Chapters amiss as to say God causeth in us To will and to do in that he giveth us power to will but not so as to cause us to do this or that as Origen expounds it in his Third Periarchon defending Free will against the foresaid Autorities And from hence the Opinion of some seemeth to have proceeded who said Providence was not concerned in those things which related to Free will that is Elections but external matters only who are confuted by that one place of Esay Thou Isaiah 26. 12. also hath wrought all our works in us Whether these words of the Prophet may not be eluded I will not dispute but they plainly declare that according to Thomas his mind All our inward motions as well as outward acts and effects are governed by God For the immediate concurse of God being generally granted by Philosophical Divines necessary to the Act of limited and necessary causes whose principle is more certain and operative then Free Agents are What honest or sober doubt can be made of the immediate hand of God in moving the will free and void of such natural Laws and Propentions as irrational Agents are compelled by There seems much less use of it here than there It may be they fear Gods hand should light so heavy upon the will of Man as to hurt the Freedome of it Which were to be feared indeed if God so concurred with Free Agents as with Natural and proportioned not his Influences agreeable to the subject but surely God worketh not so rudely Or if the Act of God being as natural to the Creature as its own yea unseparable from that of the Creature were not a Total cause together with the Creatures of such Elections But as Thomas saith It is apparent that not in the like 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. 70. manner an effect is ascribed to the Natural Cause and to the Divine Power as if it proceeded partly from God and partly from the Natural Agent but it is wholly from both in a diverse respect as the whole effect is attributed as well to the Principal Agent as the Instrument Thus he From whence we conclude the Grace of God is not given in a common manner or competently to leave the will still separately without particular excitations and prae-motions effectually and immutably as Thomas speaks inclining it to embrace Christ exhibited in the Means of Grace And that no man originally causes himself to differ from another in electing good But supposing the like proportion of Grace given to two persons equally otherwise qualified the reason why one refuses the Good and chooses the Evil is not
fishes some were taken in one haven and some in another and eaten of others And again these men that have eaten these fishes which devour'd the man happen to dye in other Countries and that perhaps devoured by wild beasts Such a confusion and dissipation being made how shall that man rise again Who is he that reduces the dust again But why O man dost thou thus speak and patches a long train of tales together and offerest it as insoluble For answer me What if that man doth not go to Sea and be not drownd If no fish eat him nor the fish be afterward eaten of infinite men but that he be laid decently in his Coffin and neither worms nor any thing else molest him How shall that dust and ashes be compacted together again Whence shall that body flourish again Is not this unanswerable If they be Greeks Heathens who doubt of these things We can answer a thousand things But what Because there are some amongst them who put souls into Plants and Fruit-trees and Doggs Tell me which is easier for a soul to recover its own body or another Again there are others who says that fire shall catch them that their garments shall arise and their shooes and no body laughs at them And some introduce Atomes But we have nothing to say to them But to Believers if we may call them believers who thus doubt we shall say with the Apostle All life is subject to corruption all plants all seeds Seest thou not c. Here that eloquent Father expatiates in the mysteries and subtilties of nature shewing how little we understand of them and concludes this point thus But these things humane reason is to seek in But when God works all things yield to him In another place he doubts whether he be an Infidel or Christian who calls in question the Resurrection and the reason hereof is because as the power of God is infinite so infinite wayes there are for his infinite wisdome to bring to pass his own pleasure and to make good his words in which he hath caused his servants to trust CHAP. XIX Of the most perfect effect of Christs Mediation in the Salvation of Man Several senses of Salvation noted That Salvation is immediately after death to them that truly dye in Christ And that there is no grounds in Antiquities or Scripture for that midde state called Purgatory the Proofs answered Of the Consequent of Roman Purgatory Indulgences the novelty groundlesness and gross abuse of them The Conclusion of the first Part of this Introduction SAint Paul where he disputes the manner of Gods free Election of his people to the grace of the Gospel doth also declare unto us the end of such Election to be another Election and that to glory as in these words That he might make known the riches of his glory Rom. 9. 23. of Grace on the vessels of mercy which he had before prepared unto glory This is yet more fully expressed by St. Peter in this order Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again to a lively hope by the Resurrection 1 Pet. 1. 3. of Jesus Christ from the dead To an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that fadeth not away reserved in heaven for you who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time But before we engage far in this subject of Salvation it is requisite we observe a twofold Salvation frequently mentioned and promised in Scripture A Temporal and Eternal For herein common mistakes have surprised many who willing to amplifie and extend all the promises of Gods deliverance equally to us of this last Age of the Church and to them of the former and Apostolical do willingly interpret many places of Scripture peculiar to them as concerning us to which cannot be literally done though figuratively it may For the Church of Christ being in those first Ages in continual conflicts with her enemies Jewish and Gentile and most violent persecntions harrassing and wasting the tender body of the Infant-Church many weak Christians were of desponding minds and looked upon the same as Job upon natural man as having a short time to live and full of sorrows Which moved the Apostolical Writers to confirm the Hope and Faith of them by the assurances of deliverances and salvation And none can deny this to be the literal meaning of St. Paul in his eighth Chapter to the Romans from whence so many draw an Argument to prove the innumerable purpose of God towards particular persons in predestinating and electing and glorifying them when upon faithful examination nothing more was primarily intended then assurance of Gods temporal preservation of the Church and making it outwardly glorious in despight of all its adversaries so that none should separate the flook of Christ so far from the love of Christ by persecution tribulation distress or famine or nakedness or peril or sword but that at length it should be more than conquerer through him that loved it And that neither death nor life nor angels nor principalities nor things present nor things to come c. should cause God to forsake it And no other is the meaning of the same Apostle in his thirteenth Chapter to the Romans where he saith And that knowing the time that now it is high Rom. 13. 11. time for us to awake out of sleep for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed i. e. having continued thus long in the faith the time now draweth near we should be secured and saved from our enemies And the Salvation to be revealed in the last times spoken of by St. Peter was the Deliverance which at last should be manifested to the Church in constant expectation of which they were kept by Faith and confidence of Gods mercy And if we shall consult the Apocalypse we shall scarce find the word Salvation used in any other sense then that of temporal deliverance Rev. 7. 10. 12 10. 19 1. of Gods Church But withal most certain it is that by Salvation is very often indended by Gods word the deliverance from the miseries of sin and suffering in this world into a state of such perfect bliss as man is capable of in which sense St. Paul saith The Gospel is the power of God unto Rom. 1. 16. salvation And that with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation which salvation was in those dayes the destruction of them that confessed Christ For St. Paul to animate the weak Believers to a stout and resolute profession of Christ against the terrors of death threatning those that were known to be Christians tells them that if they so boldly confessed Christ with their mouth as to dye in that profession they should be saved And when St. Paul advises the Philippians to work out their salvation Phil. 2. 12. with fear and trembling he means without
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
danger not much less as hath been shewed And the Devil most busily and eagerly seeks to impel to those sins which are most notorious How many have with little wit and great impudence professed they could love their own Wives above all women were it not for the reason that God and Nature requires they should prefer them so that they are their wives and that they are tyed to them their liberty is destroyed thereby And may not as good an argument be made from hence against all Votal Ties in marriage as from marriage And whereas it is said a Vow casts a man divers times into a greater temptation it is meerly accidental and personal according to the particular humour of some men who knowing their disease of contradiction and renitencie to what is imposed on them may with prudence avoid such a snare as they call it But we all know things are not to be estimated or concluded from such contingencies and personal irregularities but from the nature of the things themselves And none can deny but the nature of a Vow is to bind and not to loose and to prevent and not to lead into temptations or snares and withal he that Vows the thing or the effect doth implicitly vow the means conducing thereunto and against the occasions and temptations tending to the contrary It is farther objected against a Vow that it is taken to be part of the worship of God And this Being made part of the worship of God is a general Battering Ram whereby most ill Reforming Divines endeavour to beat down all things they like not For first they religiously hold that nothing must be part of Gods worship which he hath not commanded in his word which is not altogether true nor false no more then the contrary That every thing commanded in his Word is part of his worship And again they hold that every thing that is done in the worship of God is part of the worship of God and from hence set themselves with great animosity against all forms and actions and Ceremonies in order to the service of God as so many parts of the worship of God of humane invention and therefore to be utterly rejected And such say they are Vows Bellarm. de Monachis lib. 2. cap. 16. To. 2. The Popish writers do grant and go about to prove that they are Acts of Gods worship but very unluckily to themselves holding that they are Counsels and not Precepts The Puritan Writers that they are so far from that that they are unlawful but in those things that are commanded of God and therefore in the Instances before given of single and separate life unlawful But Peter Martyr it should seem goes by himself denying the use of all Vows under the New Testament but approving of them under the Old as commanded many times and being uncommanded worship under the New Testament And that with men of such principles is bad enough But I suppose a mean way is best in this case which holdeth Vows lawful even in uncommanded worship and Secondly that of themselves they are no part nor so much as act of Gods service but the manner only of his service And Thirdly that it is no less lawful and expedient to Vow under the state of the Gospel than under the Law And to begin with the last That which deceived Peter Martyr and divers others seems to be an erroneous supposition made by them that Vows were under precept and command under the Law in certain cases but it is not so For though many Rules and Precepts are found in Moses his Law about governing and regulating them that had freely made Vows there is no precept given that men should vow but that was left free Secondly those Precepts of paying Vows found in Scriptures do not at all concern the taking of Vows simply So David Vow and pay unto the Lord Psalm 76. 11. meaneth no more than Vowing pay unto the Lord which is the meaning of the Prophet Esay also saying The Egyptians shall vow a vow unto the Lord Esaiah 19. 21. and perform it And in no place of Scripture is there any injunction simply to vow And therefore the case being alike as to the Vow it self though different as to the matter if it were lawful for the Jews to do this uncommanded act as they call it it is also lawful for Christians whom they acknowledge to be no more but rather less bound up from uncommanded worship than the Jews And from hence are easily and better answered Peter Martyrs arguments against Vows of Christians then by Bellarmine For we deny that Vows were instituted Ceremonies under the Law which Martyr supposeth for they were not instituted at all And that he saith That we have no mention of Vows in the New Testament as there is in the Old is not altogether true as shall be seen afterward but if it were true as hath been said those things which we know by the light and law of nature the Scriptures are not so solicitous simply to institute as to prescribe Rules concerning the due execution of them But common reason hath instructed Gentile Jew and Christian upon occasion to vow to God and therefore whatever is peculiar to Christians is provided for by the New Testament in determining the matter consistent with Christian Faith and common equity and the manner First that it be made by a Person who hath power over himself For no man can make a lawful Vow to do any thing to the prejudice of the right of another And therefore children under the power of their Parents cannot bind themselves firmly in any such Vow which tendeth to the disobliging them from their known duty to their Parents neither can Subjects vow any thing to the disservice of their Soveraign or Country Nor can Clergy-men vow any thing contrary to the subjection and obedience of their Superiours or detriment of the Church in general unless it be ratified by them but all is void or may be made void by them in lawful power over them And the Arguments of Peter Martyr taken from Christian Liberty have been answered already Now to return to the first That Vows are lawful to Christians is shewed already from the natural reason of Vows And that it was not an invention of Moses or introduced by God first under him appears from the general consent of all religious persons who never knew any thing of the Law of Moses or if as in later times some nations did yet regarded it not And from the practise of Jacob long before Moses who we read vowed unto the Lord a vow It appears likewise from the many moral precepts in Genes 28. 20. the Psalms Proverbs Ecclesiastes which concern themselves very little in the Law of Moses And the Predictions in the Prophets of Vows to be made at the time of the Gospel are not well put off by saying the Prophets spake figuratively But it may be here noted as a
mend their hearts and bring them to conform to sound forms of words than to please them in their carnal appetites after novelties no new occasions requiring But this is not all We except much more against the matter and manner of their prayers in that they have quite lost and depraved the nature of prayer For that they give such loose rains unto their tongues generally that instead of Confession Petition and Thanksgiving of which prayer ought principally to consist they fly out into preaching and jumble and confound those duties so together that many times in preaching they mourn and pray and this is with the wondering multitude accounted the best Sermon They likewise in their prayers fall on preaching and this is the powerful praying But they are to consider that to convert men is not the office of prayer but of preaching I shall add but one of their Objections more the rest being easily solved out of the premises They say If a prescribed Form or Liturgy had been good or profitable for the Church Christ without question would have delivered one for his Church To which on the contrary I return If extemporary conceived prayer had been so necessary as is pretended surely Christ would some where or other have ordained that we should use extemporary prayers and conceive that Sacrifice just as we offer it But the misery of these Arguers is that whereas the Scripture commends and commands nothing so much as prayer not one the least precept have they been able to find through the whole Scripture requiring prayer extemporary And then is not this an humane invention Is it not Will-worship But that Christ hath prescribed a form and matter of prayer too we hold it proved out of the two Evangelists I know well they hold the contrary What more equal and just way to find out the truth than to hear both ancient and modern Interpreters upon that doubt to their dayes Do they find any that say the Lords Prayer is so a Rule or Form that it is not to be the very matter of our prayer too in terms If not Is not this another humane invention hammer'd out of the Crowns of perverse and unskilful men What would they say if this very Lords Prayer as we call it was by Christ himself drawn from some received forms amongst the Jews before Christs time This is affirmed by divers very learned men in Judaical Antiquities They were set against it enough and more than enough before this surely would turn their stomachs worse Yet shall we take leave here to recite that sober and most probable Judgment of the Magdeburgenses concerning the use of the Lords Prayer Without Magdeburgens Centur. 1. lib. 2. cap. 4. doubt the Apostles propounded the form of prayer delivered by Christ to the Churches and required all to pray after that manner although they themselves used other forms of prayers Much may be said in the defense and confirmation of the received forms of communicating in publick But what more than what answers the vain cavils against it which is done Or the general concurrence of Heathen Jewish and Christian practise all which where it can be shewed they had any common service show that it was constantly determined and of one form and never changed but by advice of Authority Which to prove because the Affirmative is insinite we here put in a challenge to give any one instance to the contrary viz. of any one Church Jewish or Christian where the publick Service was arbitrary and left to the private Priest or Minister to form or model as he pleased He that shall advise with Gennadius Massiliensis shall find that one solemn point in his Gennad Massil Eccles Dog cap. 30. dayes for the administration of the publick Worship was this to keep to the solemnities of Sacerdotal Prayers which from the Apostles were deliver'd to the whole world and were celebrated in all the Catholick Church uniformly that there might be an agreement between the Law or Rule of believing and praying And where there is a liberty to pray what men list in publick manner there will soon spring up a liberty to preach what men list and upon that for the common sort to believe what they list unless that Law of Arms which themselves have exclaimed against in Religion keep them in awe For if we should speak truly and properly they who have no publick known received form of Worship amongst them can have no Christian Communion one with another and therefore they desire they know not what and we should do we know not what if we should joyn with them I prove it thus All Communion properly so called is in prayer and administration of Sacraments therefore signally called the Communion and not at all or least of all in Faith or Sermons because a man may believe as much as any Church or Preacher requires of him and yet be a cursed Schismatick and Alien from the Church But he that communicates in Prayers and the Sacraments hath full conjunction with that Body with which he so communicates Now farther to the intent that men may agree in one they certainly must first know that one thing For what is Communion but a common union in One thing which is a bond so to unite them But where this is uncertain moveable and new as the day and hour in which it is produced how is it possible men should know it or agree to it And if not How can they be said to enjoy communion in it Communion is much mistaken if it be look't on as a thing transient or consisting only in the act and passing away with it and ending and coming again at the returning of the like act but it is a thing habitual and permanent So that if we should suppose a man hath heard and approved for no man but he that means to be guilty of worse than Popish implicit Faith can approve a thing meerly future as extemporary prayers are such prayers and thereupon freely assented to them How can this last longer than the very instant of having passed such a sentence for before he heard them he could by no means yield rational assent and after he hath heard them it can last little longer than the sound doth in his head for at the next meeting he is as far behind and to seek as before and suspends communion But in forms once heard judged and compared with the Rule of Faith and Worship a man holds constant real though not actual Communion exercised with that Body of which he is a member And upon common humane probability may with general devotion joyn with and in such service of God though he be out of hearing especially which is most easie being acquainted with the method of the Liturgy and the purport of the several Actions Postures and Gestures relating to the several parts thereof And can these men in consciscience require that we should joyn with them who are so ill set together
it may be noted that we make publick prayer of two sorts Publick in respect of manner and publick in respect of place The former when there is an unanimous and orderly concurrence of many members of Christs Body in one common service The other when one single person appears before God in his House and offers his bounden service and devotion alone Both these we hold to be better than domestick or private worship of the same nature and thus prove from reasons not easily to be distinguished but making for both generally First because the precepts of the Scripture much more often inculcate and more earnestly press this and more highly magnifie this office than the other O worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness saith the Psalmist This beauty Psalm 96. 9. Psalm 27. 4. of holiness was undoubtedly the Temple And again One thing have I desired of the Lord that will I seek after that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life to behold the beauty of the Lord and to enquire in his Temple And to what end was the Temple of God built and dedicated so solemnly but to receive the prayers of devout persons as well as sacrifices and the singers in order Is there any thing more frequently repeated in Solomons Oration than the use of prayer there especially And that they who 1 Kings 5. 8. could not enter into the Temple it self should direct and send their prayers thither The Jews it is well known turn'd to their Temple generally when they pray'd as Daniel Hezekiah when he was sick is said to turn his face Isaiah 38. 2. to the wall because his house standing with the Temple he thereby turned his face that way And I suppose upon this ground which will be censur'd I know as superstitious that they held opinion their prayers did not immediately ascend unto God but by entring first into the Temple which I gather from the prayer of Jonah who being in the belly of the Whale and the bottom of the Deep cryed unto the Lord thus I am cast out of thy sight Jonah 2. 4 7. yet I will look again towards thy holy Temple Again When my soul fainted within me I remembred the Lord and my prayer came unto thee into thy holy Temple So that wherever or in what condition soever they were they held themselves obliged to offer their prayers up there first as the properest place and means to have them ascend unto God and that Secondly because there were greater promises of audience of prayers made there than in any other place as it is well known from the prayer of Solomon and the promises of God thereupon in the Book of the Kings 1 Kings 8. Thirdly where there is a greater approbation and consent in the worship of God there is a greater confirmation of our Faith and Confidence that there we may offer up our prayers to God But in publick worship rather than private this is found Fourthly in publick Worship a greater increase of devotion towards God is ordinarily occasion'd at the consideration of the special place of Gods worship and the special presence God hath promised in that place in the hearing the prayer observing the postures and behaviours of all such as appear before him and in the dispensation of his graces there As likewise the eye and example of Men are of very great use and effect to the checking of light and vain actions which may fall from us and inviting us to a due veneration of God there and a decencie to prevent the just censure and offence of others which was the drift and force of St. Pauls argument to the Corinthians and the case of publick Assemblies of Christians and their behaviour there saying For this cause ought the woman to have 1 Cor. 11. 10. power over her head because of the Angels whether we understand it as doth Origen upon Luke Because the Angels are present in the Church which deserves Origâ—â— Hom 23. in Luc. so much to wit that only which is of Christ Therefore it is required that women should be covered because the Angels are there present assisting Photius Epist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the Saints and rejoycing in the Church Or as Photius understands it That women have power over their head that is saith he have such who have power over them and that for the Angels they ought to be covered who are beholders and witnesses of the production of women out of man and proceeding from him Or lastly if we understand the words as some others who take the Angels here to be no other than the Bishop of the Church or President of the Assembly of such Christians for whose sake women ought to cover themselves because according to the most ancient form and custom of such Assemblies the Bishop having a higher seat than the rest of the Congregation might easily over-look the actions and gestures of all the rest And 't is no strange thing for the President or Bishop to be tearmed an Angel as what ever Origen playing many times with the Scripture rather than interpreting it might phansie in the Revelation and in other places of Scripture Rev. 2. 1. Lastly The glory of God which as hath been said is principally relative is much more declared and celebrated by the publick than by private worship even in the single act of one when occasion is not offered for more in the publick place of Worship But to conclude this I shall hear give the reasonings of St. Chrysostome to this our purpose upon the occasion of the effect of the joynt prayers of the Faithful in the delivery of St. Paul from death mentioned in his Epistle to 2 Cor. 1. 10. Chrys Serm. 64. p. 662. 663 Tom. 6. the Corinthians If St. Paul saith he being in danger was delivered by the prayer of the multitude why should not we also expect great benefit from such assistance For seeing when we pray singly by our selves we are weak but when we are gathered together we become strong we more prevail with God by multitude and auxiliaries For so a King who often gives one over to death and yields not to one when he intreats for one condemned but yields to the importunity of an whole City pleading for him and upon the importunity of a multitude respites him that is lead to the Dungeon from condemnation and brings him forth to Life Such is the force of the supplication of a multitude For this reason we are here gathered together all of us that we might more powerfully draw God to commiseration For seeing as is said when we pray by our selves we are weak by conjunction of Charity we prevail with God to give us those things we crave But I speak not these things for mine own sake but that ye may daily hasten to the Assemblies that ye say not What is there that I cannot pray for at
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
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
by the Greater sort who commonly by building themselves large and stately Pews and inclosing what is every poor Christians Freehold as well as the richest and noblest of the parish make it more sacred to the common Christian than any other part of the Church besides For that must be kept under lock and key and if not yet the greatness and power of the person who hath laid that out for himself suffices to deter any ordinary man from making the like use of that as of any other part of the Church lest his secular hand lye heavier upon him than the Ecclesiastical power can or must upon him for such invasion of every parishioners right as well as his So that what it is not lawful for or just to do to the Common for beasts or Town-Green where he lives he makes no scruple at all to do to Gods Peculiar and the Common to Christians As if so be Churches now-a-dayes were of the same nature with new found and possessed Lands in the Indies every man may have what he can enclose and fense in for himself and his friends only Whereas this should be well understood by every good Christian that hath the fear of God as a Christian ought before his eyes that the poorest person that takes collection in the parish hath as much reason and right to erect places in the Church to themselves and to possess themselves of any part of it as the rich but that it is not so much in his power And doth any man think he hath a good Right because he can do it That we can do saith the Law which we can Idpossumus qued sure possumus lawfully do But that we can lawfully do which the Common Law doth not interdict alwayes For the Common Law whether because it concerns altogether men in their civil capacities and proprieties such as this is not or whether it hath not heretofore been such a Dragg to enclose all it could lay hold on without consideration of other Courts Ecclesiastical which were alwayes received in all Christian Commonwealths but left many things to the decision of the more peculiar Laws made in behalf of Churches and Ecclesiastical Cases hath made no provision at all for the securing of the Rights of the Church or Christians thereunto belonging I mean in their Capacities properly Ecclesiastical so that scarce any remedy can be obtain'd from thence if a man shall steal any thing off the very body of the Church it self And can any man that hath any sense of Religion take sanctuary or protection from that in defense of his violation of Christians Rights and think all well done that is not punishable by that Law and lawful that it doth not interdict For by the same reason a man may inclose to himself a third part or more of the Church But they will modestly say that were unreasonable and I will boldly say so is the other and especially where when the Authours of such Fabricks making no use of them themselves shall deny the use of them to others case so requiring But that which is yet more intolerable is That the power and purse of the Great man who is alwayes to remember that the poorest man in the parish hath as much Law and Right on his side to shut him out as he hath to exclude and over-top the poor in his building should enable and embolden him so far as to take a considerable part of Gods sanctuary and inclose that from all use and access to lay the bones of his Family in and wholly to alienate it from all Divine Services and dedicate it only to corruption and with impudent Sacriledge to erect many Monuments and Tombs in a Canton they have usurped to themselves which being as is said no less lawful for any man than for one man instead of Christians in time we should have a Church filled with Sepulchres of the dead And when this is once done to endeavour a redress of such sacrilegious invasions of Gods and good Christians Rights is to expose Gods servants to not only the obloquy power and mischief of too potent an Adversary but to the dammage of Common Law which though it can give no right so to do yet will certainly defend the wrong-doer if he can plead custom But I have often thought that God in this last Age hath done himself Justice against such Families as have been guilty of such prophane usurpations in that he hath stirred up a barbarous Sect of Christians of late and let them justly into Churches like Goths and Vandals to break to pieces pull down and raze the scandalous monuments of many Churches erected to the honour of Man and dishonour of God At first all dead Bodies were lookt upon by the Heathens themselves as unclean and unworthy to be buried within the walls of their City Lycurgus was the first that suffered Corps to be interr'd in the City and that Plutarch in vita Lycurg Eutropius Lib. 8. Cicero de Legibus l. 2. near the Temples in Lacaedemon saith Plutarch The first of all Roman Emperours and much more of the inferiour people that was buried within the City was Trajane the Emperour which was prohibited by a Law of the twelve Tables as Cicero witnesseth And St. Vedastus was wont to say That the dead should not be buried within the walls of a City which was a place for the living and not for the dead as Alcuinus in his life writes And it is certain no Christians at all were buried in Churches for many hundred years but certain proper Cemateries or Dormitories were allotted for that purpose remote from Churches Pope Nicholas the first about the year 867 was thought to be preferred to be buried before the Church doors of St. Peter saith Nauclere And the same Nauclere writeth how Nauclerus Vol. 3. p. 64. ibid. p. 94. that about the year 983 Otho the third Emperour was buried at the Threshold of St. Peter at Rome And when they had brought dead bodies to the Church door they soon presumed to bring them in and found a reason so to do because the bodies of true Believers and holy Servants of God were not to be looked on as unclean or unworthy of so sacred a place because they had been themselves Temples of the Holy Ghost and were to be rennited again to their blessed spirits in heaven And not only so but the nearer the Altar always the better mistaking that place in the Apocalypse I saw under the Altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God and Rev. 6. 9. for the testimony which they held collecting from hence that for Martyrs and holy persons that was the properest place to be buried in And the Cannon Law surely misguided by such a vain perswasion hath decreed it necessary to the Consecration of a Church that there be the body or at least some Relique of a Saint there posited But more reasonably doth it erre when it
of any Saint in any other respect then that the Scriptures which that day are read in the Church be concerning that Saint and contain either his calling preaching persecution martyrdom or such like A third and yet worse abuse in the Roman Church is that they celebrate the memory of some who have been no Saints and of others who have been no good Christians as their highly applauded Thomas a Becket who indeed was villanously slain and with gross Circumstances but by no better authority than a man may be murther'd upon the high-way and that for none of his vertues but for sticking closser to the usurping Pope than to Christ or his Prince to whom he was a much greater Rebel than was Cranmere which a very late impudent railer hath in print so termed to disgrace him and the Reformation so far as naked lies can prevail without the least instance against which of those Princes he lived under or in what he died an impenitent Traitor as he calls him This we know the Hall of the Jesuites Seminary in Rome is hung round almost with such Saints as have died convicted of treason against their Prince and Country as Judicially as ever any were But no more of this There yet remains somewhat to be said under this head of Times and Seasons of Prayer and that is concerning Hours of Prayers called Canonical which were retained and published by our Church at the beginning of the Reformation by the confession of that unsatisfied and unquiet Puritan Mr. Prinne himself who wrote against them and the Prinne against Consens pag. 32. excellent design of the Reverend Publisher of them with great wrath and bitterness and all the reason he could which was little enough God knows In the year saith he 1560 was printed Orarium or a Book of Prayers which mentioned Canonical Hours But in the second impression in the year 1564 these hours were quite obliterated and so in the Edition 1573. But if these things be so the First Edition is with me much more Authentique than the following unless it can be proved that such alterations were made with the like authority with the first For we have divers instances of Puritans busie zeal to make alterations in impressions of such books as offend their corrupt humor and that upon their private heads watching Presses that print any thing that troubles them and purging them Hath not the late Arch-bishop Laud in his Lauds speech in the Star-chamber An. 1637. pag. 64 65 66 67 c. solid and judicious refutations of their contumelies and scurrilous slanders against their Governors found out their falseness in contriving the expunging of that clause in the twentieth of the nine and thirtieth Articles of Queen Elizabeth viz. The Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and authority in matters of Faith And having caused the Article with this rasure to be printed to argue from that Copy and flie most boldly in the faces of the Prelates as forgers of Articles in latter Editions when there were so many ancienter Copies retaining that Clause as that of the year 1593 and 1563 and 1605 and in the publique Records of them And having so done to say the Article was never so printed before the year 1628 But the reason there given makes the matter more clear For many scrupling such Right in the Church refused to swear to the Articles so framed and thereupon made no scruple to purge them of such troublesom matter and having so done to cover their wickedness the better to begin to clamour loudly against the Bishops as if in their Edition they had foisted as they speak that into them of their private heads And what can be a greater or more bold presumption in them to attempt than in the Title of the Singing Psalms which never had the least approbation of either Civil or Ecclesiastical Authority to print these words Set forth and allowed to be sung in all Churches of all the people together before and after Morning and Evening prayer and also c whereas they could never yet produce the least colour of Authority more than gross connivance at that will-worship of their own heads For the Church never owned any other Psalms or Singing but what she warranted by her practice in Cathedrals which as it was much more ancient and solemn so much more easie also for common people to learn and more easie to be understood by those who are not able to joyn with them that so sing And yet what will not affectation of mens own invention and spite against others drive men to say they boldly argue against that manner of singing as not easily intelligible or to be learnt and also as a way most unfit to address ones self to a Prince in and much more to God as if their contrived Psalming of it were not much more obnoxious to these exceptions and more ridiculous to be used towards any man than the other The only advantage these have above the Churches grave plain and chearful way of Reciting the Psalms being that they are fallen into this their own way but cannot tell how or why and admire it infinitely But to return Can we knowing they have been guilty of such vile Artifices make any great scruple to think that they might play false with the said Orarium too of which Mr. Prinne speaks Such doings and the disuse of these might give occasion to the Rhemists in their Comments to affirm that The Church of England hath utterly rejected Canonical Hours of Prayers Which is not so Indeed she doth not impose them with that rigour as doth the Roman Church but commendeth the same as very godly and profitable And there is not one book in more esteem with her next to the Office of the Liturgy it self than that book to that end published by the late Reverend Bishop of Durham Dr. Cosens notwithstanding all the dirt cast in the face of it and him by Mr. Prinne And notwithstanding the three notable abuses noted amongst the Papists by Master Perkins in the use of the Canonical Hours First Perkins Cases of Conscience p. 79. in binding to them upon mortal sin This we acknowledge to be an abuse unless the persons have brought themselves under any Rule or Order which requires such services as such may lawfully be and wilfully neglect the same Secondly binding only to those hours whereas those hours differ not from others But here we are to distinguish first between binding to those hours only as if it were not permitted to use them at any other hours which I know none do and not binding them to any others but them only this is lawful secondly between binding to hours for the Hours sakes and for Orders sake Indeed Hours as is solidly and very philosophically argued differ not in nature one from another But emergencies and occasions may diversifie them and the devotions belonging to them without any just objection to be made to the
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
given of Christ by the Apostles and so St. Peter speaks 1 Pet. 3. 1. Likewise ye wives be in subjection unto your own Husbands that if any obey not the word i. e. believe and receive it not but continue in infidelity they also may be wun by c. So that it is one part of Obedience to believe the truth revealed by receiving it with an humble and ready mind But this is no more than the root to the Tree or the Tree to the Fruit which is the end and perfection of all Therefore our Saviour Christ Parabolically John 15. 1 2. or Metaphorically saith in St. John I am the true Vine and my Father is the Husbandman Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he purgeth it that it may bring forth more fruit By Faith every true believer is inserted into Christ and abides in his mystical body as the branches do in the stock of the Tree and this is the Act and Effect of Faith but every branch that thus abides in Christ is to proceed to Facts or Fruits of that Faith and this is meant by bearing more fruit the first no wayes John 6. 28 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Chrys Ser. 56. Tom. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. p. 380. Mar. 22. 36 37 38 39. sufficing And Christs disciples asked him What shall we do that we may work the work of God he answered This is the work of God that ye believe in him whom he hath sent That is The proper and effectual means to work the work of God is to believe in him whom he hath sent And infinite other places in holy writ are there which describe and require this obedience at our hands as believers For as Chrysostom well hath noted It is no benefit at all to us to be Orthodox so long as our lives are corrupt as there is no profit of an exact Conversation our Faith not being sound And Clemens Alexandrinus defines Piety to be a Practise following and waiting on God Now there are two Principal Branches or Parts of a Religious and Holy life according to our Church Catechism and consent of all good Christians Our Duty towards God and our Duty towards our Neighbour or as our Saviour in the Gospel expresseth it in reducing all the Commandments to two Our Love of God and Our Love of our Neighbour upon which hang all the Law and the Prophets Love being here put for such Acts of Love as justice service honor charity and obedience according to the place and capacity we are in as the Scripture requires at our hands And to attain to this we are to have before our Eyes the things wherein both do principally and more specially consist And secondly the means leading and moving us hereunto which because they are such copious subjects that they require a proper treatise to enlarge upon I shall not handle here any further than offering these few heads and grounds of our holy and obedient walking with God first and that as I find them without any great Art set down by Suidas who I suppose Suidas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 collected them as his manner was in other things from the Holy Servants of God before him Apostolical Conversation saith he consisteth in these Acts and hath these signs 1 Strictness over the Eyes 2 Government of the tongue 3 Subduing the body 4 An humble opinion 5 Purity of Mat. 5. 41. Mind 6 Exclusion of anger 7 Being compelled yield 8 Being smitten offer thy self farther 9 Being wronged avenge not thy self 10 Being hated love 11 Being persecuted endure it 12 Being reproached pray for him 13 Be dead unto Sin 14 Be crucified to Christ 15 Place all thy love on the Lord. Now the means to exercise these divine and Christian vertues and to practise them may be these amongst many other 1. To have a constant and clear eye of Faith in the presence of God believing and being throughly assured that he beholds and observes and notes and weighs our thoughts words and actions as surely had Enoch who walked with God 5. 24. And Abraham Gen. 17. 1. And more especially holy David Psal 139. v. 1 2 3 4 5 c. 2. A Recognition and owning of the Power Majesty Justice and Mercy of God 3. A free and total Resignation and submission of our selves to the will of God 4. Patience and silence under the Providence of God 5. Constant and servent Invocation of God as well for his helping as healing and pardoning Grace 6. A constant exerting and exercising of Gods Grace given unto us by the proper action of Faith Hope and Charity And these seven by having a constant regard to the commands and precepts of God To the Promises of God To the Threatnings of God to all To the Judgments of God executed upon others for their wickedness and disobedience To the Mercies of God singularly and plentifully conferred upon our selves and lastly to the Torments of Hell and Joyes of Heaven These are principally the things every good Christian is to attend that would add to his Faith vertue as St. Peter advises and devout walking with God to his sound knowledg of him 2 Pet. 1. 5. And as Christ hath taught us The second Part of our Obedience to him is like unto it consisting in Love of our Neighbour Which divideth it self into two Parts Doing him justice in all things for as St. Paul saith to the Romans Love worketh no ill to its Neighbour therefore Love is the Rom. 13. 10. fulfilling of the Law Secondly doing him all brotherly and truly Christian Offices either in respect of body soul or estate which Christian Faith obliges us unto But of all Justice that is principally to be attended to which ungodly hypocrites most contemn and violate and that is of Obedience to our Superiours For whereas Christian Religion obliges us to mutual offices Eph. 4 2. Eph. 4. 21. Rom. 15. 1. of Love and Charity one towards another to forbear one another in love with all lowliness and meekness and long suffering And again to submit our selves one to another in the fear of God And that the strong should bear the infirmities of the weak and not to please themselves certain Sectaries not having the Knowledg of God aright or understanding in the Scriptures in which they flatter themselves they know more than any other or the true fear of God before their eyes do so corrupt and pervert the sense of the Holy Ghost as indeed to destroy all that order of Government Christ hath established in his Church as necessary to the being of the true Faith it self though in some Formal language they would seem to allow of it But this is only kept by them as a reserve to relieve and fortifie themselves when the time shall happen that they shall get the Sceptre of power into their hands and the Face of Autority to shew to others For then all their petty
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
Thanksgiving to God do For first it seems to be so far natural to man as Religion it self is All people that worship a God having generally their vicissitudes of Feasting and Fasting according to occasions justly offered or the prudence of the first Founders and Administratours of that Religion Again By the Precepts and Precedents contained in the Scriptures is Fasting required so that no instances are needful to confirm the same And the true reason why the Precepts positive in the Old Testament are but few is because it was agreeable to the Law of Nature that it was not so needful to add multitude of positive Injunctions to confirm the same The most express if not only Law given concerning this in the Scriptures is that of Leviticus the 16th vers 29. where God ordains that on the Seventh Moneth they should afflict their souls for ever by a perpetual statute but in what manner is not expressed whether by abstaining from all meat or their ordinary dyet is not mentioned but the Tradition and Custom of the Jewish Church interpret it to be total Abstinence until the Evening that is the Sun going down And the reason why no express Precept is given in the Gospel to Fast where many Directions and Rules are given to Fast is because To Fast was a setled practise of old in the Church of God and needed nothing more then the accommodation thereof to the future state of the Gospel which was done partly by the said Advices and Instructions how to Fast and partly by the power and prudence of the Governours of the Church extending to such ends But they say against this That Fasting must be voluntary and not of constraint and necessity and therefore must not Authority impose such duties upon Christians but they must take them up freely or omit them according to their Christian Liberty But this miserable and contentious exception they are forced to recal again though they would not be seen in it to save themselves who being in Power however acquired propose and impose both Fasts and Feasts at their pleasures so that they plainly mean That such Fasts are only to be enjoyned by themselves who cannot as all others commanding contrary to them possibly injure Christians in their Liberty For so saith Thomas Cartwright mocking St. Paul We cannot do any thing against the truth but for the truth But farther we say Not only all Fastings but Prayer and Hearing of the Word of God yea all Moral Vertues as Justice and Temperance ought to be freely taken up of every good Christian but doth it therefore follow they may not be enjoyned Or lastly doth it follow that what is commanded and conditionally necessary may not be freely chosen if not according to the utmost extent of liberty of will according to Philosophy yet according to the Divine and Scriptural sense in which whatsoever is done readily chearfully and willingly in the Service of God is accepted of God who loveth a chearful giver as the 2 Cor. 9. 7. Scripture affirms not taking notice whether there be any incumbent necessity or not upon the person And may not what St. Peter advises and exhorts the Elders and Governours of the Church to viz. To feed the Flock of Christ among them taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly concern the governed equally May not there be a 1 Pet. 5. 2. constraint upon these as well as on them in their Ranks consisting with a laudable willingness Nay more than so and quite contrary to the Divinity of factious Pastours and Flocks should the laudableness of the thing it self fortified and enforced with the Commands of Superiours make men that have any just pretences to Christianity more willing and chearful in the performance of those duties This was ever wont to be so until pestilent tongues had corrupted the minds and hearts of simpler Christians to make them suspect hate and oppose whatever their Governours ordained and then to argue They can by no mean do so because they do not like it and this dislikes their Consciences St. Paul saith Do all things without murmuring or disputings these modern Doctours say Phil. 2. 14. Do nothing without murmurings and disputings Let therefore this be one motive and qualification to Fasting that it be done willingly and the rather because it is required A second reason is to excite to humiliation and to quicken our Devotions in Prayers and Repentance while we judge our selves unworthy of Gods common benefits otherwise appointed But not to excurr here on this subject as I might Let it suffice to relate here both the Description and Grounds of Fasting as we find them in our Churches Homilies Homilies Church of England 2. Part. p. 85. 78. Fasting is a witholding of meat and drink and all natural food from the body for the determinate time of Fasting Again There are three ends of Fasting 1. Chastizing the Flesh 2. Fervencie of Spirit 3. Sign of Humiliation But idle and ignorant persons give the same definition to Fasting as they do to Repentance For to abstain from sin is both Fasting and Repentance not considering as we have before shewed how that things when the end and effect of them is highly commended and magnified are vulgarly described by them yet remain in nature altogether distinct as in that remarkable place of Syracides He that keepeth the Law bringeth Eccles 35 1 2 offerings enough he that taketh heed to the commandment offereth a Peace-offering He that requiteth a good turn offereth fine flour and he that giveth alms sacrificeth praise Were not he think we an excellent Interpreter that should take these expressions in the strictest sense they are delivered And is not he the very same that shall define either Repentance or Fasting by abstinence from sin in a proper sense as all definition Hom. 84. To. 5. Tom. 1. Hom. 8. ought to be framed in St. Chrysostome who in a certain Sermon speaks as much as any in behalf of abstinence from sin as a Fast truly acceptable to God was never so mad or silly as to exclude thereupon outward and bodily Fasting but in very many Sermons of his upon Genesis which were delivered in the time of Lent as were St. Basils also upon the Six days work of God nothing occurs more frequently then that literal and outward Fasting commended to his hearers Infinite might be the citations to prove the Judgment of the holy Fathers and Martyrs and Monks in this particular but it is confessed by dissenters who know any thing above the Divinity of Ursin and Calvin and such like unhappy masters of Errours in this point And what are the other principal reasons against such Fastings as our Church by vertue of Canonical obedience injoyns Why A superstitious discrimination of Meats as if some were cleaner than other under the Gospel This they would needs bring it to because they can do nothing without this which is just nothing For they
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
undoubted Right of lawful Governours under God to propound and impose Laws serviceable to the common ends of such a Society as thereby is disposed and regulated And there are three things principally requisite to make a Law obligatory upon men The first is taken from the Person Giving or propounding this Law and that is Authority without which the best Laws that can be invented are directly tyrannical and unjust as well in respect of the Person whose Right is thereby invaded and usurped so that Conscience is so far from being obliged by it that rather it is bound to oppose and resist such Laws though in themselves very profitable and reasonable because they imply a wrong to another to whom only pertaineth the Legislative Power as of the persons to whom such goodly Laws are given because thereby is an unjust service and bondage brought upon them But no man can be bound to this double injury though peradventure such a Case may be put in which to decline a greater evil and mischief a man may be patient and passive under such usurpers A second thing is taken from the matter and nature of the Law it self which if it be not just and reasonable bindeth not the Conscience though enacted by Authority altogether lawful and unquestionable The reason whereof is that so often abused place of holy Writ which adviseth to obey God rather then men Gods eternal and indispensable Law Acts 5. 29. exacteth of man due observation and that chiefly upon account of his absolute Soveraignty and Dominion which no inferiour Power ought to controul or can make void But should any mortal man command contrary of God it could signifie nothing more then the folly of his own heart and the distemper of his mind and a foul revolt and defection in him that should suffer himself to be so abused But is there no difference think we between the Powers on earth acting quite contrary to God and such as only want special warrant for what they sometimes expect from their Subjects The ignorance or wilful negligence of this distinction or notion is it which hath hurried men into so many unchristian acts and made such havock especially in Religion A third principal ingredient into a Law is that taken from the Persons to whom it is made not that they must owe obedience unto the Lawgiver thought that be true for this is the very same with the first For wherever there is the first part of the Relation there must also of necessity be the second and so wherever there is Power and just Authority to command and rule there must necessarily be a duty of obedience in others but knowledge and manifestation of a Law before touched is absolutely requisite to bind people to the observation of it And yet I mean not actual and inevitable knowledge but possible and ordinarily attainable it being most certain that the same persons who stand generally obliged to observe a Law made and propounded are likewise bound to take notice of its promulgation and this neglecting subject themselves to the like penalties as the wilful Violators of it There may well be added unto these three a Fourth Condition to the validity of a Law and that is Power How Power and Authority differ is not unknown viz. that the first consists in sufficient strength and force to constrain obedience or inflict the punishment denounced against disobedience not necessarily inferring Right so to do And this is not intrinsecal to a Law because it is only to be exercised as a necessary instrument subservient to the ends of Right and Justice preceeding which is Authority properly so called which duly exercised doth oblige without force to submission and that out of Duty and Conscience as appeareth from what we have said already in the First Book of the First Part of this Treatise Now though this Power be not intrinsecal to the Obligation of a Law as some unnatural Philosophers have of late days imagined and boldly and basely endeavoured to maintain yet may it be essential to the Execution of the same Men being generally so unreasonable and averse to Order and Government and the publick Good when no special and immediate advantage accrues to their particular person that without the iron rod to constrain the Majesty of the Scepter will not sway them And but that I have found such prodigious tenets in the writings of late Politicians denying all Justice and Conscience and destroying them as far as their blind and pestilent wits will enable them which certainly they never shall any more than to destroy God himself and extinguish the notion of a Deity out of the minds of men I should have thought that for want of such a distinction between the Obligation and Execution of a Law they fell into such flat and portentous errours For what doth argue greater stupidity than to conclude there is no necessity of violence this should be done therefore it ought not to be done Or because that man is impious who because he is strong enough to be successful scruples not at all to invade and prey on another and he may become ridiculous that commandeth without any ability or probability of effecting what he requireth therefore no obligation lyes on the persons to whom he directs himself to obey Aristotle indeed Arist Politic. l. 3. c. 4. §. 78. tells us of a Law that the Hares should make in their solemn Assemblies that all beasts should share alike in the earth but at this said Antisthenes the Lyons laughed and well they might when such Laws proceeded from them who had neither Right to make nor Power to enforce them but where there is Right without Might the matter is more to be abhorred on the one side than decided on the other True it is that Marsilius Patavinus does make Coaction an ingredient into Lex propriè sumpta Praeceptum coactivum est de fiendis aut omittendis humanis actibus sub poena transgressoribus infligenda Marsilius Patavinus de Jurisdictione Matrimoniali the definition of a Law and that not amiss if we consider that definitions of things are to be made according to the Habitude of things rather than Actualness and so this his definition is very good A Law properly taken is a Coactive Precept of doing or omitting humane acts under punishment to be inflicted on transgressours For though a Prince deprived of Power makes Laws which he is not able to enforce or the Church yet while indelible Right to Power resides with him as an Habitude the Law is of force and is of a Coactive nature though not actuated And this being not unduly as we hope premised we now proceed to the explication of that particular Law of God called the Decalogue which though it branches it self into ten parts yet according to the Jews not amiss conceiving is but One Law as proceeding from one Fountain pronounced in one breath say they engraven or written as one Line or Word on
heart Not he that looketh on a woman but he that looketh on her to lust after her is condemned though all curious studious idle impertinent views of men or women upon which may follow ordinarily the sparks and then the flames of lust are forbidden Again not all lusting of the heart is to be compared to the acts of lusting inwardly with the act outward joyned to that Adultery of the heart our Saviour Christ doth not equal to the Adultery of act but makes it Adultery in a degree inferiour Secondly There is uncleanness of the Tongue too when it breaketh out into impure light foolish lascivious speeches tending to begetting evil thoughts and acts in others against which St. Paul declareth in his Epistle to the Ephesians Let no corrupt communication come out of your mouth but Coloss 4 29. that which is good to the use of edifying that it may minister grace to the hearers Coloss 3. 8. And to the Coâ—ossians But now ye also put off all these anger wrath malice blasphemy filthy communication out of your mouth Thirdly Actual uncleanness which is accomplished in the deeds of the flesh And â—aâ—h several degrees which may be distinguished into Unnatural and Natural Unnatural consisteth in the vile acts a man or woman may commit upon their own bodies perverting the course and end of nature instituting diversity of Sexes for sober and profitable propagation making that void in some manner at least At which St. Paul may seem to strike as Ephes 5. 12. far as modesty would permit when he says It is a shame to speak of those things which are done of them in secret meaning the impurities of Gnostick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret. Haret Fabul cap. 7. and Valentinian Conventicles to the reproach of Primitive Christianity Epiphanius relating how besides those called natural lusts between Sexes distinct they dishonoured and corrupted their own bodies in the highest acts of single uncleanness and made up some of their Mysteries thereby And however single persons do not so prodigiously abuse themselves as did those impure Hereticks pretending greater Sanctity and deeper Mysteries in their Religion then the Catholicks yet must it needs be a great offense to God so to corrupt a mans self in yielding to fleshly temptations condemned by Heathen Poets though themselves were immodest for a violation of the Law of Nature it self which therefore all Christians especially of weak reason strong passions and young years are most watchfully to beware of and resolutely to avoid Another sort of acted rather then actual Uncleanness here prohibited is the foul sin of Sodomie to which the wicked Citizens of Sodom destroyed Gen. 19. 4 5. Rom. 1. 26. by fire gave denomination as may appear in the Book of Genesis And of which St. Paul to the Romans speaketh when he saith that God delivered up the Gentiles to these unnatural Lusts as a punishment of their gross Idolatry For this cause God gave them up to vile affections For even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature And likewise the men leaving the natural use of the women burned in their lusts one towards another men with men working that which is unseemly and receiving in themselves that recompense of their errours which was meet A Third unnatural Lust is that called Bestiality or abusing or being abused Lev. 28. 23. by Beasts in lustful acts against which God hath in his Word as well as by the Light and Law of Nature declared The more natural but yet unchristian Lusts here forbidden are Adultery which is either simple viz. when a married person committeth uncleanness with an unmarried where some make two kinds the one when the man is married but the woman single which they commonly make the less and so indeed it is by reason that it brings no spurious brood to inherit or share the Goods of any other man but him that he knowingly and willingly bestows them on The other is when the woman is married and the man single which is besides the general sin subject to the foresaid mischief And therefore hereby the woman offends in these four respects Incredulity not believing or regarding the Law and Word of God to the contrary 2. Not reverencing the Laws of the Church 3. Treachery against her Faith and Troth given before God to her Husband whereby she delivered unto him 1 Cor. 7. 4. the power of her Body as St. Paul speaketh 1 Cor. 7. as likewise doth the Husband to his Wife upon the same occasion and therefore thus far the Man and Woman transgressing offend equally 4. They say the Woman in such cases is a Thief in that she spoileth her Husband of his goods and giveth them to a false Issue he would knowingly no wayes yield them to But yet saith Thomas the man sinneth no less than the woman however Thomas in decem Praecepta Opusc 3. he may flatter himself otherwise And the sum of his reason is this First Because that the man hath no more power over his Body than the woman over hers Secondly Because the man is stronger naturally than the woman and endued with more reason Thirdly Because the man is the Head of the woman and her teacher as St. Paul saith therefore as it is a greater sin for a Priest than a Layman to offend in that kind so is it for a man who is as it were Gods Minister even in spiritual matters to the woman And in truth we find little or no difference put by the Scripture between the fact James 4. 4. of the one and the other St. James joyning them thus together Ye Adulterers and Adulteresses know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with Levit. 20. 10. God Yet Moses his Law decreed the Adulteress to be put to death but not the Adulterer as offending more against the Civil capacity of Man And perhaps for the hardness of their hearts least they should do it themselves God would have it done in a more orderly and just way Some Laws of Christians at this day granting the man leave to kill his wife himself finding her in actual Adultery Fornication likewise which some calling Simple have legitimated in great measure is condemned by this Commandment St. Paul as it were foreseeing and intending to confound such modern Doctours saith Know ye not 1 Cor. 6 9 10. that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God be not deceived neither Fornicators nor Idolaters nor Adulterers nor Effeminate nor Abusers of themselves with mankind Nor Thieves nor Covetous nor Drunkards nor Revilers nor Extortioners shall inherit the Kingdom of God And to the Hebrews But Fornicators and Adulterers God shall judge And so likewise the Excusers or Extenuaters of them so far as to bring down the guilt of either of them to that of a venial sin only which is as much as nothing Est ergo heresis dicere Fornicationem simplicem
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