did belong to them rather as eminently-Religious than as Authorized Persons as it was to collect from their being called to freedom by the Gospel that therefore they ought no Duty to any of their Secular Superiors And this the rather in the first disturbed times of the Gospel before there was any setled establishment of Government and when the gifts of the Spirit were thought sufficient to Authorize the Person so gifted to use them till the disorders of that course seems to have put them on a necessity of providing otherwise § VI And accordingly where-ever the Genius of this Philosophy has prevailed their Men have been inclinable to make this use of it to think themselves by eminent measures of Perfection to be capable of being improved beyond the benefit of the Sacraments It is very well known how much that Philosophy had to do in forming the whole establishment of the Primitive Monks and it is observable that they according to the Notions they had framed concerning Spiritual Life allowed of this very thing Anastas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Men might at length out-grow the Sacraments The like might have been observed concerning the Popish Mystical Divinity which is no other than an improvement of the Pseudo-Areopagites Doctrine as that it self is no other than an application of the Philosophy I am speaking of to the Practice of Christianity And these do also teach the same thing that Persons eminent for Perfection may at length arrive to that pitch as not to need the Sacraments And even in our Modern Euthusiasts and Superordinancers I am very inclinable to impute it to the same Original It is indeed somewhat surprizing to observe but he who shall be pleased to observe will find it true that the Enthusiastick style of Jacob Behmen Henry Nicholas and the Quakers and such other Enemies of Learning such strangers to Antiquity and to the tongues they wrote in should so agree with the Platonism of the elective Philosophy I am speaking of However it comes to pass whether by likeness of temper or likeness of Spirit or the Hypocrisie of the first Masters of these Sects who possibly feigned themselves to be more unlearned than they were that what knowledg they might have occasion to shew might look more like to Inspiration or that they might have light on some neglected Translations of some little things of that kind which might have given them those little hints which might have been sufficient for a warm brain to work upon yet it cannot be admired that they who had by any means light upon those Principles should also light on a mistake so obvious and so very popular and into which unwary Persons have been always so apt to fall pursuant to these Principles § VII Now the Inferences I would make from my foregoing Discourse are these 1. That our Adversaries may not think their Doctrine so singular but may see that as their Principles were known and as the Consequences they draw from them very obvious even to the Persons of those Ages themselves so they have reason to believe that what the Apostles did resolve on in this particular they did resolve with a particular design upon our Adversaries Case And therefore they are not to allow themselves the liberty of making conjectures from the reason of the thing and by that means both guessing what the Apostles would have done if their circumstances and pretences had been pleaded to them and avoding all Arguments deduced from their Authority whilst they may think they can pretend any disparity in their case and circumstances which the Apostles were not obliged to take notice of in fitting their establishments for the Age they lived in And this observation will make the Apostles establishment Argumentative in this Case though we suppose them conducted therein by no higher measures than those of ordinary Humane Prudence as we have reason to believe they were not in some of their Ecclesiastical constitutions which they made not as Apostles providing for all future Ages and all possible circumstances but as the Governours of the Church in that present Age and so concerned no further than for their then present Circumstances In what they were immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost and in what was desired for all Circumstances we have reason to believe that the Holy Ghost himself foreseeing all Cases what was so constitueed must have been fitted to all circumstances that should ever happen and therefore that whatever can be pretended now was then foreseen and provided for if ever it should be likely to be of general concernment for such things only are in Prudence fit to be provided for in general Constitutions But in Prudential Constitutions made by the Apostles as Ordinary present Governours of the Church in that present Age there is not that reason to expect that they should have been assisted with higher influences of the Spirit than ordinary Governours are And therefore they must have acquitted themselves well in such things if what they did was fitted to the circumstances of that Age those of them at least that the Apostles were acquainted with though the constitutions themselves had not been otherwise more infallible than those are which are made by Ordinary Governours § VIII But however if we will allow what is very reasonable to believe that even in such constitutions as these were the very Prudence of the Apostles to have been so assisted though not to discover any Truth which had not been discoverable by them in the use of their natural reasonings yet at least to secure them from error in those reasonings that they should judg nothing to be true but what really was so and was capable of appearing to be so by virtue of those Arguments which they were capable of discovering by their natural faculties we may then at least conclude that if this pretence of Perfection for excusing the Persons so pretending from the Ordinances was a Case with which the Apostles were then acquainted it is reasonable to believe that in making their constitutions though only of present concernment they did ordain what they thought fit to be ordained even in this case also because on this supposition this Case also was of present concernment And then supposing further that their very Prudential Constitutions were yet Infallibly prudent that is Infallibly fitted to the Cases then foreseen it will follow that if the Apostles did not then think it fit to make any allowances for such Persons pretending Perfection the reason must have been because it was really unfit that any allowances should have been made for such Pretenders And if so this at least will follow that this pretence alone is not even a just excuse from the Ordinances And yet though the Apostles had not had any greater assistance than that of their natural Prudence yet certainly every truly-Pious humble Christian who will not so far presume as to think himself more perfect than he were cannot choose but pay a
Being by this concatenation of Spiritual Beings in the several parts of the World so that the several influences are to be taken for God's because it is from him that they originally proceed by which means also the contempt of them will also reflect on God himself How they are thus contrived that this may follow may be seen in Apuleius and in Philo's Explication of Jacob's Ladder Apul. de Deo Socratis Philo. Hierocl de Provident Fragm apud Phot. Biblioth num 251. And indeed there are who make the very Notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be properly taken from the care of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 within us rather than from that whereby the World is governed in general But the passage of Seneca an Author of the Apostles Age is very considerable to our purpose where he tells us that a holy Spirit which he calls a God is in us and that he deals with us as we deal with him if we deal ill with exactly as the Psalmist with the perfect man thou shalt be perfect Psal. xviii 26 2 Sam. xxii 27 but with the froward thou shalt learn frowardness Besides this there is also another way according to the Platonical Hypothesis how this participation of the Spirit may intitle us to the special Providence of God And that is that as long as men were good God kept the Government of the World in his own hands but as they degenerated so he was thought to leave it to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if he then took no further notice of it I might have shewn how this Notion seems also to have been taken up by the Primitive Christians See Hackw Apol. for Provid Act. xvii 30 Act. xiv 16 Luk. i. 68 78. that this was the reason why they thought the World to have decayed that for the time past 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he took no notice of the mannes of men but suffered them to walk on in their own ways that he had now looked down from Heaven and visited his People And possibly this might have been the reason why they expected the end of the World that is of that Iron Age of it and waited for a new heaven 2 Pet. iii. 13 and a new Earth wherein righteousness was to dwell For the Golden Age was immediately to succeed the Iron And the reason that made the Golden Age so happy was that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epinomid apu Euseb. Pr. Eu. L.xi. c. 16 as Plato calls him was to take the Government into his own hand And therefore seeing Christ whom they took for this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had the Government of all things now committed to him by his Father it was very reasonable for them suddenly to expect those happy times which according to this Hypothesis were consequent to such a Government This seems to have bâ—â—n really the thoughts of the Author of the Sibylline Oracles and the Emperour Constantine in expounding the Eclogue of Virgil to this purpose And this must also make the sins committed under the Government of Christ to reflect upon him and would consequently concern him more particularly to take care to see them punished according to their desert § XVIII AND if the violation of particular Laws by this constitution of things be so great a sin and in which the Spirit is so concerned to see them punished who are guilty of that violation what shall we say of casting off the Legislative Power it self and disowning the Power which necessarily requires Subjection to Subordinate Governours as well as to the Supreme What of not only neglecting to perform the Conditions of it but casting off their Baptismal Covenant it self by which they were obliged to perform those Conditions What of dispossessing the Spirit of his interest in them not only by frequent grieving and provoking him in acting contrary to his Suggestions but also by a wilful neglect of those means which himself had appointed for continuing his possession of them These are certainly Crimes of the highest nature and most severely punishable by the Principles of Government And yet of these they were certainly guilty who in the Apostles times at least deserted the external Communion of the visible Church This will more particularly appear if we consider § XIX 4. That the whole Constitution even of the Government of the Church in that Age was Theocratical All the Officers of the Church were invested in their Office by the Holy Ghost himself He it was who qualified them for their Offices by his extraordinary supernatural gifts Eph. iv 11 He gave some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers And he it was who empowered them to exercise those Gifts by noting the very particular Persons who were to be empowered to them who had the Authority of committing that Power to them either by giving their Ordainers the Gift of discerning Spirits or by signifying his pleasure to them either by appointments as when he was consulted by Lots or without appointment by some sensible appearance relating to them as he did also afterwards in the Cases of Alexander Bishop of Hierusalem and Fabian of Rome It was he therefore that made the Bishops of the Church And so for all the Ecclesiastical Offices they were then generally performed by peculiar Inspirations 1 Cor. 14. their Praying their Prophesying their celebrating the office of the Eucharist their Spiritual Songs and Hymns their very Interpretation of what had been by others delivered in strange tongues In the very Prudential management of their affairs they had also particular directions from the Spirit Act. xiii 2.4 viii 29 x. 19 xi 28 29. xvi 6 7 10. xviii 9 xix 21 xx 23 xxi 4 11. xxvii 22 24. He usually told them where they should Preach and where they should not who were particularly to be chosen out for the employment he had for them and what should be the success of their undertaking And if in this regard it had been a fighting * Act. v. 38 against God for even the Pharisies themselves to venture to oppose themselves to the Apostles how could it have been less than a rebelling against the same God the Spirit for their own followers to have deserted them This I take notice of that none may think that the Author to the Hebrews should speak so severely against the desertors of their publick Assemblies And though indeed the extraordinary manifestations of the Spirit be now ceased nay and several also of those extraordinary qualifications which were necessary for that Age peculiarly and could not then be gotten by the Persons who wanted them for the discharge of their Office in the use of ordinary means yet as long as the Holy Ghost is the Governour of the Church that is indeed as long as Christ himself is so who governs by the Holy Ghost as the Shechinah of his Throne
they are said neither to have been of men nor by men Gal. i. 1 Eph. iv 11 2 Cor. v. 20 They are reckoned among the gifts of Christ upon his ascending up on high They are called Embassadors for God and in Christs stead And it has always been reckoned among the Prerogatives of Majesty to have the sending of his own Embassadors Nay it was counted so peculiar a property of an Apostle to be sent by God himself as that St. Paul insists on it as an Argument to vindicate his own Apostleship against the false Apostles who quarelled at it Gal. i. 11 12. 1 Cor. ix 1 that he had received nothing from the other Apostles themselves and that himself had seen our Lord that he might receive his Authority from him Thus far therefore there appears no Precedent of any Authority either received from the Multitude or given to the Multitude by Christ himself who as yet alone had power to give it § XVI NOR do I think that our Adversaries themselves will pretend that the Apostles received their Authority from the People Yet so unwary they are in their arguing for the Authority of the People as that they produce such Proofs as must conclude this if any thing If the Peoples Expostulation with St. Peter concerning his baptizing of Cornelius had been an Act of proper Jurisdiction it must have been an exercise of Jurisdiction over St. Peter himself And if so they must in reason be supposed to have had some power of punishing him either by deposing him from his office or by suspending him from the exercise of it or at least by Authoritative withdrawing from him yet so as still to continue in the same good condition wherein they were before which can hardly be understood without a weakening of his Apostolical office For no proper Jurisdiction can be understood without a proportionably proper power of inflicting punishment in case of misdemeanour And if they will not own this that the People had a Power over the Apostles they must at least let go all their proofs which prove this if they prove any thing Which will extremely streighten them in their pretended Scripture Precedents For where-ever they find the People doing any thing without the Apostles which is the only Case wherein they could shew the proper extent of their own Authority they will find the Apostles themselves concerned which must therefore oblige them to understand such actings not to have been by way of Jurisdiction but of Expostulation § XVII WHEN was it therefore that this Authority was given to the Multitude By whom was it given to them who had a just Power of giving it them Was it afterwards given them by the Apostles who had hitherto held it independently of them If so it were well our Brethren would remember to insist only on such Proofs as are later than the date wherein they think it was given them and on such Proofs which speak more home to their design than those which are antienter than those times wherein themselves conceive this conveyance to have been made and which they must therefore acknowledg unconclusive But so far were the Apostles from giving away that Power to the Multitude which they had never received from them as that we find generally the Ordinations mentioned in the Scriptures performed either by themselves or by Persons Authorized as themselves were either by God himself or by them not by the People Tit. i. 5 Act. xiv 23 Act. vi They ordeined Elders in every City By them the order of Deacons was instituted and the Persons promoted to the Order They visited whole Countries and settled and confirmed the Churches they constituted what Officers and gave them what degrees and prescribed what Rules of Government they pleased according to their own Prudence and the suggestions of the Holy Ghost without consulting the Authority of any others which they could not have done if they had either acknowledged any self originated Power in the People or immediately given them that power which themselves had received immediately from God It cannot possibly be understood how the Rules of a Democratical Government could ever have permitted them to act so arbitrarily as it is plain they did in those first beginnings of Christianity § XVIII THERE were indeed many prudent reasons proper for those times which might prevail with the Apostles to desire the Peoples consent in the administration of their Government though the obliging validity of what was done had not depended on their Authority The Church was then a Body linked together only by an awe of Conscience not by any other external coercion And though now that the truth of Christianity and the Authority of the Apostles are sufficiently confirmed all are obliged to submit to the Rules prescribed by them as they would secure their happiness which will not leave them to that Liberty nor consequently intitle them to that right in the Government before they submit to it as our Brethren fancy yet before this conviction had prevailed on the minds of men it could not have been prudent for them to exercise the utmost extent of that Authority which did really belong to them Our Adversaries themselves will at least acknowledg the Apostles to have been infallible whence it will follow that their word alone ought to have been taken in Controversies then started at least where there appeared not evident reason to the contrary But we plainly find that even themselves durst not venture their Authority on so hard a tryal Even in probable things we do not find that they required their Auditors assent without such reasons as the matter would afford that is at least without probable ones And generally we find them so laying the stress of their persuasion on those reasons as if their Authority had been no reason at all Therefore in the Controversie concerning Circumcision Act. xv the Elders and the Multitude convened together with the Apostles to give their judgment concerning it and that in a Case which was to be decided by the Holy Ghost But what need had there been of all that trouble if the Apostles Authority alone had been sufficient for this decision The Holy Ghost spoke by the Apostles alone And could the whole Synod after all their diligence in enquiring and debating the Truth in that matter pretend to any greater Authority Was it likely that the ordinary Presbyters much more that the Laity themselves should have had any thing revealed to them which had been concealed from the very Apostles But we find the whole matter debated by reasons and rational applications of the Mystical sense of the Old Testament as if no new revelation had been pretended § XIX THE like might have been observed from the debates with St. Peter concerning his Preaching to Cornelius and with St. Paul concerning his Preaching against the obligation of the Ceremonial Law The lawfulness of Preaching to the Gentiles and of forbearing the externals of the Law were
by any one before he could be qualifyed for judging concerning them he must in the same prudence think it the safest course to relie on the judgment of such as were skilful And when he must in pursuance of this discourse find himself obliged to trust some guide there are peculiar reasons why he should in prudence submit himself to the guidance of his Ecclesiastical Superiors rather than any others Besides the equal skilfulness of such Superiors with any others who might pretend to guide him besides the peculiar obligation of providence to direct them who as Superiors have so many presumptions in favour of them to oblige others to acquiesce in their determinations and therefore whose errors must in this regard prove of so fatal consequence to the prejudice of Multitudes of good and well-meaning Persons I say besides these things he will hereby secure himself the use of the ordinary means of Salvation which must needs be acknowledged to be a very prudent and affecting consideration to sway a doubtful practice He who were truâ—â— sensible how much he must be a loser by living out of all 〈◊〉 so as to want those ordinary Assistances to which Communicants are intitled and which a daily experience of his own frailties would make him very unwilling to want and were withal sensible how not only fruitless but mischievous it would be to gain the external Elements in an unwarrantable Communion would find that within him which would never suffer him to forfeit the external Communion of the Church but upon reasons extremely weighty and considerable As nothing under sin would be judged a sufficient reason so neither would any evidence concerning the sinfulness of a condition of Communion be judged sufficient but such as were drawn from the nature of the thing not from any contrary Humane Authority nor even any such evidence from the nature of the thing which were not of greater importance and more convictive than those which recommend the credibility of Ecclesiastical Authority Which will yet further diminish the number of the doubts of this kind Which might be supposed incident to candid though illiterate persons § XVII BUT let us suppose them advanced yet higher to be convinced by reasons intrinsick to the thing of its sinfulness and suppose we those reasons stronger than the reasons of credibility of their Ecclesiastical Superiors all that would follow even so would be that it ought not to be done for the credit of any Humane Authority that should call it lawful But may it not be sometimes done when it cannot be omitted without a greater sin Will it not in such a case cease to be a sin when both are unavoidable Undoubtedly it will if its sinfulness depend on circumstances which is the most our Adversaries can pretend concerning our conditions of Communion For from our Principles it has appeared that the sins of disobedience to Ecclesiastical Superiors and of dividing the Church or separating from it are of a higher guilt than can be pretended to be in those sinful conditions even according to them who believe the conditions sinful They will not pretend the sin of wearing a Surplice c. equal to the sin unto death to that against the Holy Ghost or those spoken of Heb. VI. or X. § XVIII BUT if the real sinfulness of such a condition be yet further supposed not to be circumstantial but in the nature of the thing absolutely considered then I confess the thing is by no means to be done not that it is at any hand lawful to avoid it by flying into a greater sin but because there is no necessity of doing either He that cannot communicate but on conditions which he believes sinful may forbear the Communion which he cannot keep but on such conditions But such forbearance would be no sin as separation would be even in such a case For still dividing of the Church disrespect to Superiors usurpation of a Sacred Power or abetting such an usurpation would be as essentially and unalterably sinful as such conditions of Communion could be pretended to be And therefore even in such a case he would continue as much obliged to avoid separation as to avoid the Communion which could not be had without such sinful compliances Nay by so much the more as the sinfulness of such a separation must be supposed greater than the sinfulness of such a Communion Which will let even the ignorant Person I am speaking of see his obligation to passive obedience where he cannot pay active to his Ecclesiastical Superiors and that this duty of his passive obedience will oblige him to forbear opposite Communions even where he cannot by any lawful compliances enjoy the lawful one This does at least reach the case of Laicks and with regard to Communions destitute of sufficient Authority for which I am at present concerned § XIX BUT besides this general suitableness of our Hypothesis for practice It is particularly considerable 2. That it is peculiarly suited to the practice of a Society of such a nature as the Church for preserving Vnity and a due respect to Authority in it For the Church as a Body Politick must always preserve a coercive power over her own Subjects And that 1. As well in persecution as prosperity For persecution was indeed the principal let she had reason to expect when her Government was first established and for which it is therefore most credible that her Government then was peculiarly fitted and therefore she must have been enabled to maintein this Authority independently on the favour of the secular Magistrate And therefore 2. She must have been enabled for this purpose without any title to the Bodies or Fortunes of her Subjects and so without any power of using coercive means of these kinds whether by employing her obedient Subjects to inflict such penalties on her disobedient ones or by moving the secular Magistrate to it Because these are things to which as she can pretend no right as a Spiritual Society so she cannot expect to have them actually in her power in such a time of persecution § XX NOW for mainteining such a coercive power in a Society under such disadvantages It is plain 1. That the Authority must be purely Spiritual and coercive only over the consciences of its Subjects It must be Spiritual because Christ has given his Officers by vertue of their being Officers of his Church no title to any temporals at all And therefore they cannot by virtue of their being his Officers have so much as a good title to dispossess their Subjects of their Lives or Fortunes It can only be over their Subjects consciences because by want of their title to externals they can have no coercive power over their Bodies And therefore what coercive power they have must be over their consciences or they can have none at all Whence it will follow that they must needs destroy all coercive power in the Church who pretend that Ecclesiastical Laws do not oblige the
§ I Separation of Churches FROM EPISCOPAL GOVERNMENT As practised by the present Non-Conformists PROVED SCHISMATICAL From such Principles as are least controverted and do withal most popularly explain The Sinfulness and Mischief OF SCHISM In this Treatise The Sin against the Holy Ghost the Sin unto Death and other difficult Scriptures are occasionally discoursed of and some useful Rules are given for EXPLICATION of SCRIPTVRE By HENRY DODWELL M.A. and sometimes Fellow of Trinity-College near Dublin in Ireland 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ign. Ep. ad Ephes. p. 20. Edit Voss. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Ep. ad Corinth §. 30. LONDON Printed for Benjamin Tooke at the Ship in S. Paul's Church-Yard MDCLXXIX THE PREFACE THE interests of those many parties which at present keep up the Divisions of Christendom are so highly concerned in the consequences of my present undertaking And the generality of men are so visibly partial in disputes wherein interest is concerned so much more inclinable to resent the severity of a conclusion that charges them with dangerous mistakes than to think how much indeed it is their interest rather to beware of errors that may prove dangerous than to stand out in the defence of what they have once undertaken to defend and how much it is therefore their interest to examine the premises with all possible accurateness and candor from whence such conclusions are deduced as that I cannot but expect some indications of the resentment of concerned Persons though I have endeavoured that the way of management might be as unoffensive as was possible Though my design be Peace yet that it self is enough to alarm the Spirits of many in the contentious Age we live in who when they are spoken to of peace will make them ready to battle And therefore I cannot but think my self concerned to foresee and prevent such prejudices as may hinder such who most need the informations given in the present Work either from reading them or from benefiting by them § II I MUST therefore warn my Reader in the first place that when he finds the Title promise him a Discourse concerning SCHISM he do not understand it in the same sense as it has been considered in so many modern discourses upon that Subject between us and the Romanists SCHISM not here considered as between Churches but as between particular Members and their own Churches I do not here consider the question of Schism between Churches but between Subjects separating from particular Churches and the Churches from which they separate This is all for which my present design does concern me and if my reasons prove that Subjects separating from their own particular Churches for unsinful Impositions are Schismaticks I shall perform what I intended But the same reasons will not prove a Church Schismatical for refusing impositions though unsinful from another Church For I suppose all Churches originally equal and that they have since submitted to prudential compacts which though they may oblige them as long as the reason of those compacts last and as far as the equity of those compacts may hold as to the true design of those that made them and as far as those compacts have meddled only with the alienable rights of particular Churches yet where any of these conditions fail there the particular Churches are at liberty to resume their antient rights And I suppose the power of judging when these condititions fail to be an unalienable right of particular Churches and not only to judg with the judgment of private discretion but such a judgment as may be an authentick measure of her own practice § III I DO not undertake to prove that these things are so in this discourse I only mention them that the Reader may understand on how different Principles these two questions are to be stated The Romanists can make no advantage of the Principles of this discourse to charge our Church with SCHISM and therefore how far it is from following that if the Non-Conformists be Schismaticks for separating from the Church of England therefore the Church of England must be Schismatical for refusing Communion with the Church of Rome and how far the reasons which I have here used for proving the Non-Conformists Schismatical are from being applicable to such a case of the Church of England I do not now insist upon those reasons which might have been produced to prove that the impositions of the Church of Rome are not unsinful no nor innocent of so high a degree of sin as might be greater than that of a particular Church's refusing correspondence with another The things which I have suggested plainly shew that the case will prove extremely different though we consider them barely as impositions not as sinful impositions And to let our Romish Adversaries know that I have already foreseen the use they would be likely to make of a discourse of this nature and how wary I have therefore been of using any reasons that might prove more than I intended or might hinder us from Principles sufficient for our own defence against them I shall desire them to consult my two short Discourses published with a design to prepare the way for this Work There they will find such principles of defence of our Church against them which will not clash with any thing said here which I verily believe true and which being supposed true I also conceive very sufficient to vindicate our Church from their imputation of SCHISM for our not communicating with them And I know not what they can desire more who will desire no more than what is equal § IV BUT as to the main mischief of SCHISM insisted on in this discourse the Nullity of Orders and Sacraments in the Persons guilty of separation and the consequent Sacriledg of those who shall presume in such a case to administer the Sacraments without sufficient Authority That they cannot charge us with even by their own Principles purely on the account of the separation They cannot deny but that Bishops even according to the design and practice of their own Church when we began our Reformation had all that power given them by them who made them Bishops which was requisite not only for mainteining a Church at present but also for mainteining a Succession in it through all succeeding generations They had the power not only of making other Priests who might administer the Sacraments during their own lives but also of making other Bishops who might convey this power to others Whoever they were that nominated the Persons whether the People or the Clergy or the Prince or the Pope yet still they were the Bishops who performed the office of Consecration which was that which was then thought immediately to confer the power It was then also believed that the Orders given and the Sacraments administred out of the Church by Persons duly Authorized by such as had power to authorize them were valid as to the substance of the things though
which the Spirit gave him by miracles § IX How our Saviours threatning was fulfilled § X. The sin against the Holy Ghost a resisting of the Gospel-Dispensation § XI 2. Murdering of the Prophets a sin against the Holy Ghost as he is particularly a Spirit of Prophesie § XII This particularly applied to our Saviour and the state of the Gospel § XIII 3. Resisting the influences of the Holy Ghost in us Applied to the Jews § XIV to the Christians § XV. According to the Hellenistical Philosophy § XVI XVII XVIII 4. Resisting the Government of the Church which was then ordered by the Spirit § XIX Separation from the Canonical Assemblies of the Church a sin against the Holy Ghost § XX. Concerning the punishment of this sin against the Holy Ghost and the way of arguing used by the Writers of the New-Testament from Old-Testament precedents § XXI XXII p. 294. CHAP. XV. 2. Directly That Salvation is not ordinarily to be expected without Sacraments § I. This proved 1. concerning Baptism 1. By those Texts which imply the dependence of our Salvation on Baptism 1. Such as speak of the Graces of Baptism § II. 1. The Spirit of God is said to be given in Baptism and so given as that he who is not baptized cannot be supposed to have it § III. The Spirit it self is absolutely necessary to Salvation as to his actual influences § IV. as to his constant presence as a living and abiding Principle § V. That the Spirit is first given in Baptism This proved from our new Birth 's being ascribed to our Baptism § VI. It is safe to argue from Metaphorical expressions in a matter of this nature St. Joh. iii. 5 considered § VII Water to be understood in this place Literally § VIII These words might relate to our Saviours Baptism § IX The Objection concerning the supposed parallel place of baptizing with the Holy Ghost and with fire § X. The fire here spoken of a material fire and contradistinct to the Holy Ghost § XI Our Saviours baptizing with the Holy Ghost and with fire as well applicable to our Saviours ordinary baptism as to that of the Apostles at Pentecost § XII The true reason why this descent of the Holy Ghost in Pentecost is called a Baptism was because it was a consummation of their former Baptism by Water § XIII The reason why this part of their Baptism was deferred so long § XIV Other instances wherein the Holy Ghost was given distinctly from the Baptism by Water § XV XVI XVII Our Saviour alluded herein to the Jewish Notions concerning Baptismal Regeneration § XVIII What the Rabbinical Notions are § XIX How agreeable to the Doctrine of the New-Testament § XX. The Notions of the Hellenistical Jews and of the Philosophers § XXI XXII XXIII How imitated by our Saviour § XXIV An Objection § XXV Answered § XXVI XXVII 2. Grace of Baptism forgiveness of sins § XXVIII XXIX XXX That unbaptized Persons cannot be supposed to have received the benefits of the washing of the blood of Christ or of the Mystical Baptism proved from two things 1. That all who would be Christians are obliged to receive even the Baptism by Water § XXXI 2. That every one who comes to Baptism is supposed to continue till then under the guilt of his sins § XXXII XXXIII XXXIV XXXV 2. The same dependence of Salvation on Baptism proved from those Texts which speak of the Priviledges of Baptism § XXXVI The same thing proved 2. from those Texts which expresly ascribe our Salvation to our Baptism § XXXVII A sum of the Argument from 1 Pet. iii. 21 § XXXVIII from other Texts § XXXIX The Application § XL. p. 321. CHAP. XVI Things to be premised § I. 1. That this dependence on the Episcopal Communion for a valid Baptism will alone suffice so far for my purpose as to discourage the perpetuating any opposite Communion § II III IV. Inference 1. That if this were granted even the absteining of pious Persons from the lawful Communion would be very rare § V. Inf. 2. That even those few pious Persons who after all diligence used to inform themselves and all lawful condescensions could not submit to the terms of the lawful Communion would yet never perpetuate so much as their Non-Communion § VI VII 2. Premisal That it cannot be expected that this Sacrament of the Lords Supper should be as necessary as that of Baptism § VIII The necessity of the Lords Supper to Salvation proved from the Mystical style by which this whole matter is expressed in the Scripture And that by these degrees 1. The Life of particular Members of the Mystical Body of Christ is in the Scripture supposed to depend on a constant repetition of vital influences from the common vital Principle as the Life of particular Members in the Natural Body does § X. 2. The Scripture also supposes the Life of particular Members to depend as much on their conjunction with the whole Mystical Body in order to their receiving these repeated influences as the Life of particular Members in the natural Body depends on their conjunction with the whole natural Body § X. 3. The Church with which it was supposed so necessary for particular Members to be united in order to their participation of this Spiritual Life is plainly supposed to be the Church in this World and that visible Society of them which joyned in the same publick exercises of Religion in that Age when these things were written § XI XII 4. The Reasons used by the Sacred Writers for this purpose are such as concern the Church as a Church and so as suitable to the later Ages of the Church as those earlier ones wherein they were used first § XIII 5. In order to this Mystical Union with the Church it is absolutely necessary as far as an ordinary means can be so that we partake of the Lords Supper This proved from 1 Cor. x. 17 § XIV The same thing proved from the true design of the Eucharist rightly explained This done by these degrees 1. The design of our Saviour seems to have been the Mystical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so much spoken of in the Philosophy then received as the peculiar Office of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. In this Union the reason of our being in Christ is his being in us 3. Two things according to the Scripture to be distinguished in Christ his Flesh and Spirit and in both regards we are concerned that he be united to us § XV. 4. There are very material reasons why our Saviour should require this bodily Union in contradistinction to the Spiritual viz. the benefits which our Bodies in contradistinction to our Spirits may receive by it 1. That by this Corporal Union with Christ we may be made sensible of the interest he has in our Bodies and of our Obligation to serve him with our Bodies and to abstein from those sins which are seated in the Body The great necessity
Apostles were not permitted to the Judgment of Church Officers only as they were able to inform themselves out of the Scriptures but were as undoubtedly settled by the Apostles themselves Personally where themselves had propagated their Doctrine and therefore as agreeably to their minds as if it had been expressed in the Scripture it self and accordingly those Primitive Authors on whose Credit alone we can be rationally assured of the Books of the Scriptures themselves were as confident that what they could thus make out from such Practices instituted by the Apostles was as agreeable to the Apostles mind as what was written by them and were as confident that several of these Practices were indeed derived from the Apostles as they were that several of these Books which they have recommended to us were written by them And because the usefullness of Arguments deduced from Scripture-Consequences is generally owned by that sort of Adversaries with whom I am at present dealing But yet I do not intend to make use of any other Arguments for clearing the design of the Scriptures in these Particulars but such as are in Prudence most proper for discovering it and such as were in all likelyhood made use of by those then living for whose use the Scripture was Primarily written either plain Consequences or plain Correspondencies to those Patterns from which they were Originally derived and Notorious and Vniversally-received Practices then prevailing And certainly if the Holy Ghost had any design to be understood by them he must have expressed himself so as that the Sense which he saw them inclinable to conclude from the use of those Means they were likely to Judge most Prudent must have been that which was intended by himself and it cannot be reasonable for us to fear that We should be misguided by those means now by which they were securely conducted then The distinct Proof of these Particulars I shall endeavour as they fall in with the principal design of my following Discourse not being willing to be more tedious than my Subject will necessarily Oblige me § LII BUT as that Noble Society which has intitled our Nation to the Honour of being the first that has carried on a Publick design for the Reformation of Natural Philosophy and rendring it useful for material purposes in Humane Conversation have now unanimously agreed on it as the most Prudent Course for erecting a rational solid Hypothesis first to inform themselves accurately of the Phaenomena by a Natural History Prudently collected and Credibly attested so the like Method of adjoyning Historical Experiments to our other Informations in Order to our passing an accurate Judgment of the whole must needs be of Universal use in all kind of knowledge which is only Probable and Conjectural and a posteriori but more especially in matters of Practice and even among them yet more especially in such as depend on Arbitrary Institution as matters of Government generally do Nor will it only be a pleasing entertainment to the Reader in affairs of this nature to find the Principles so exactly agreeable to Practice and Experience and the Reasons so illustrated by all the stages and Periods of History even where there could be nothing to reconcile them but the intrinsical agreeableness of their natures but a very solid Argument for mutually proving both the Reason and the History For as it will appear that the Practice of that Power cannot be excepted against as unfit to be proposed to us as a Precedent when it is found agreeable to the Principles of the Government so it must needs be a very strong Conviction that those Principles of the Government are genuine and natural which exactly are found Answerable to all its justifiable Practices It is certain that the true Hypothesis whatever that be must necessarily be supposed agreeable with all its Iustifiable Practices and though it may be possible that a false one may be so too yet neither is it likely that it should be false which is found to do so and if it were yet it will serve our purpose for the direction of our Practices which is all for which we are concerned in its Truth so well as that our mistake cannot prove Prejudicial to us and we may therefore as confidently rely on it as ordinarily Astronomers do on their Hypotheses of the Heavens in their Calculations for which they have no better security Besides this way of Proceeding will mutually supply each others defectiveness For as there are some things so clear in Reason and express Testimony as that by them we may be able to Judge concerning Practices whose allowableness or unlawfullness is not so clear from the Histories by which they are delivered to us so on the other side there are some Practices of whose allowableness we may be better assured from their Histories than by the Antecedent Evidence of those Principles on which they are immediately grounded so that from both a much more intire account may be expected concerning this whole affair than from either singly This is the reason that has induced me to divide my Discourse accordingly into two Parts the Rational and Historical For I conceived it more convenient thus to consider them distinctly than to mix them together both that I might thus confine them within more Legible limits and because in a Discourse of this nature wherein a Series of Principles is indeavoured the very Interruption which must have been occasioned by so frequent Digressions must needs hinder the Reader from discerning the closeness of the Discourse In this former Part I keep close to my Method and am more solicitous to prove my Assertions and to prevent any Adversaries Exceptions than to make formal Answers to every one particularly which will be very easy to any who has understood my Principles but I do not intend to neglect any thing that I conceive considerable and to multiply words concerning such things as upon my stating of the Question appear to be plain misunderstandings of it I cannot conceive likely to prove grateful to the Intelligent Reader In the later I intend not only to shew that by the Notion of Shism which was condemned for such in the first and purest Ages our Separating Brethren cannot be excused from its Guilt but also that the several Principles on which I ground it were owned by them and are certainly agreeable to the sense of the Apostles Separation of Churches from EPISCOPAL Government as Practised by the NON-CONFORMISTS Proved Schismatical c. CHAP. I. Less security of Salvation out of the Episcopal Communion than in it sufficient to oblige to submit to all unsinful Conditions of continuing in it THE CONTENTS 1. That for proving our Obligation to enter into the Communion of the visible Church it is not requisite to prove that we must otherwise be excluded from all hopes of Salvation but it is abundantly sufficient to make it appear that we cannot be otherwise so well assured of it This proved as to
our Judgments were always so uncorrupt as that we might always be sensible of our own interests or all our Duties were accommodated not only to our greater and more solid Interests but to our humours also and we were likely always to continue in the same humour or at least secure from a frequent change there might then be some pretence that our Duty might generally be secured without contradiction of our humours But seeing none of these can be presumed certain and constant nay seeing all of them do most frequently fall out otherwise than it is requisite they should for securing the performance of our Duty that we are frequently either prejudiced against our Duty or changed from our former humours therefore it is necessary for securing performance that we do our Duty on constant and immutable reasons such as may not be obnoxious to the changes and vicissitudes of our humours And such is that and only that of doing our Duty with regard to the Authority of him who has required it § XIV NOW for discovering this whether Duty be performed on account of the Authority requiring it a visible Body Politick wherein Men may be invested with the Divine Authority and may therefore be allowed for Authentical Expositors of the Divine Will that so our Obedience to God may be known by our Obedience to Persons thus empowered by him is much better accommodated than if we confine the Divine Authority in matters of this nature to the Scriptures and allow the exposition of the Scriptures to the Consciences of particular Subjects as the measure of their Practice For as the Scriptures are now managed by them who reject all prudent use of Ecclesiastical Tradition for expounding them it is easy for them who will take their own fancies for the sense of the Scripture and then concern themselves not so much to prove what they have so presumed as to evade what may be objected against them to evade all possible confutation how false soever the Errors may be which on these terms they shall undertake to maintein For it is impossible on these terms so to assure any one sense of the Scripture in favour of any one side of a Controversy newly raised to be the true sense of the Holy Ghost as to exclude all other senses inconsistent with it especially in matters of Practice of a Temporary Obligation and such are the particulars controverted by our dissenting Brethren wherein whatever is pretended it can never appear that the Sacred Writers themselves designed to be so accurate and particular as our dissenting Brethren conceive And it is least of all credible that they should rightly understand the sense of the Scriptures in matters of this nature or assure any thing that may prevent licentious and dangerous expositions of others who wave the History of the Practice of the Church at or near those Ages wherein these Books were Written which must certainly be of most use for explaining the sense of the Sacred Writers in such matters § XV BESIDES though there had been even on their Principles better means for assuring a particular sense of the Holy Ghost in such particulars as these that might not be evaded by a Person desirous to practice otherwise yet how can we be assured that Persons act sincerely in following their convictions How shall we know that Persons of a violent temper and Seditious may not pretend the commands of God to be contrary to those of their ordinary Ecclesiastical Governours not that either they themselves believe them to be so or that they are at all solicitous for doing Gods will but meerly that so they may make use of a plausible pretence for gratifying their Seditious humours without the infamy of being thought Seditious It is certain many may do so who may either not be guilty of any inclination to any of those scandalous vices which are of ill repute with the Vulgar or if they be yet they may count it politick not only to conceal them but also to make an open solemn profession for the contrary in order to the gaining of a reputation to their ill designs And these are Cases which considering the humour of the Age and the haughty behaviour of many who are deeply engaged in the several Parties may without any uncharitableness be supposed likely to prove ordinary Now when we find Persons exceedingly pretending to be Religious impatient of all restraints that we can judg of either to be likely to proceed from God or to be thought by them to do so and only pretending to Subjection to God in such instances which may be as likely to be designed for their own gratification as for the service of God where we can either not be satisfied of their Sincerity that they do in earnest believe their own Practices to be warranted by Divine Authority or where though they were sincere yet the Evidence on which they proceed is of so ambiguous Interpretation as to be very capable of a compliance with their own desires whatever they be and so never likely to impose any thing on them contrary to their own Inclinations which is the only Case wherein we can conclude that what is performed by them is performed with regard to the Divine Authority how can we conclude that they have any real reverence for the Injunctions themselves or for the Authority by which they are imposed But further § XVI 2. HE is also as a Governour concerned to oblige us to the performance of our Duty by such Means as may prove most effectual with us for that purpose and certainly the external Solemnity of undertaking them is such a means and most likely to prove successful That he is as a Governour concerned to oblige us to the performance of our Duty by such means as may prove most likely to prevail with us for its actual performance will appear if it be considered that he is as a Governour concerned for such things as may make for the advantage of the Society in general And that withal it is much for the reputation of the goodness and Prudence of his Government to reconcile this publick benefit with the least prejudice to particular members of the Society And it is much more for its repute if it may prove advantageous to the interests of most of the particular Members And for both these purposes the performance of Duty by the particular Persons obliged is very useful § XVII IT is useful for the Publick For this is indeed to the commendation of the Prudence of any Government in general and particularly of the Divine Government to make the Duties of particular Subjects subservient to the good of the whole Community Nor is this only true of the Duty of Subordinate Ecclesiastical Governours whose peculiar Province it is to take care of the Publick though it be indeed most obviously and eminently true concerning them and God is as peculiarly concerned as a Governour to take care that such means may be used
may have leave to urge the Allegory further as the Apostle shews us a Precedent in other the like Arguments from and applications of the same Allegory that the dependence of other Members on the Governours of the Church must be as great as that of the Members of the natural Body on their Head this will both shew how extremely dangerous it must be for them to be cut off from the Communion of their Governours on any account That it must be in an ordinary way as impossible for such Members to live as it is for Members of the natural Body when they are deprived of those influences which they receive from their Head and how necessary it must be for them rather to submit to any Conditions short of Sin than to suffer themselves to be reduced to so dangerous a Condition § XIX I KNOW there is another notion of the word Head not for a Head of influence and Authority but of eminency and dignity only and I know that this is a Notion used in the Scripture also where the (b) Is. IX 14 15. Head and Tail are taken for the most worthy and unworthy places as here the Head and Feet may be taken for the same with the more noble and baser Members in the next verse and I know that this Notion is suitable enough to the Ebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Syriack Idiome But withal when I consider how much (c) Numb XXV 15 Judg. X. 18 XI 8 9 11. 1 Sam. XV. 17 Ps. XVIII 43 Is. VII 8 9. Hos. I. 11 oftener it is used even in that stile it self for a Head of influence and Authority than of dignity only how much more natural it is in this particular Allegory where all things in this Mystical Body of Christ are so exactly parallelled with the like things in the natural Body nay where they are parallelled in this very instance of the derivation of influences from Member to Member by which mutual communication the whole Body Mystical is supposed to be mainteined the same way as the Body natural is When I consider that this communication of influences is that which is absolutely necessary to the Apostles design in this place to shew the mutual need that the Members have of each other and that a bare Priority and Posteriority of dignity would be utterly impertinent to this purpose and of the two would rather seem to prove the contrary When I consider further that according to the customes of those times it seems very probable that according to the greatness of their Gifts they were usually intitled to their several Offices that as their Gifts were generally given them for the service of the Publick not for themselves so they who were found to have the greatest Gifts were generally preferred to the most eminent Offices Nay when I consider that at first before the settlement of an ordinary Government in the Christian Societies that is while they concorporated themselves with the Jews and met together with them in their Synagogues and as to any external coercion depended also on the Government of the Synagogue and before there was an ordinary course taken for deriving Authority regularly to Posterity which was not so necessary at first till they were put upon it either by the gradual decay of these Gifts or at least of the Evidences of them and the multitude of false pretenders to them or by the disorderliness of the administration of them in their publick Assemblies the very Gifts themselves seem immediately without any further approbation of Man to have intitled them to the several Offices and accordingly the Offices themselves are reckoned as (d) 1 Cor. XII 28 Gifts as indeed the Case now described seems really to have been the Case of the Corinthians when this Epistle was written that they were not as yet under any settled establishment for Government and St. Paul proves his Apostleship among other things from his Gifts on which supposition this latter exposition that the Head and Feet signifying higher and inferior dignity of Gifts must infer the former that the same Persons who were so qualified for their Gifts were accordingly ranked in their Offices in the Church and the interest they had in the Government yet still with this advantage for the former Exposition that that does more immediately comply with the Apostles design in shewing the mutual necessity and usefulness of the Members to each other I say all these things being considered whatever may be thought of this latter Exposition otherwise yet it can hardly be thought so peculiar to the Apostles meaning as to exclude the former on which I have grounded my Argument § XX BUT supposing this were true as we have proved it false that some Men might be so perfect even in this Life as not to need the Society of others in regard of any advantage themselves were capable of receiving by such a Society yet still they might be obliged to it and to submit to all unsinful Conditions of being admitted into it on account of the benefit that others might be capable of receiving from them Even the Principles of that Philosophy which generally inclines Men to these Enthusiastick fancies I mean the Platonical would have taught them that they are (a) Tull. Somn. Scipion. not born for themselves and that all the good which they are able to do they are also bound to do by the great design of Societies and of God himself if he design the maintenance of them whose principal advantage is this that they who of themselves are weak may there expect the benefit of all the gifts of those which are more able But the Christian Religion does further assure us that all our Gifts are (b) S. Matth. xxv 15 Talents which we are bound to improve for the good of others as well as our Selves and that accordingly we must at length be accountable not only for the Principal it self which we have received but also for the (c) v. 27 improvements we might have made if we had used our utmost diligence in improving them and for those Gifts whose nature is rather to be useful for others than for the Possessor they are such wherein Men are principally obliged to use this diligence that all Men have some of these but that they who are perfect must be supposed to enjoy them in a more plentiful measure And indeed none are more capable of doing good to others than they who are perfect themselves They must be supposed to be best experienced their Examples would be more securely imitated and in matters of this nature Examples are more instructive than the most accurate Notions there would be that pretence which the vulgar are too apt to make use of to recommend the very failings of great Persons by the Authority of the Persons who are guilty of them These would approve the Practicableness of Virtue even in our present Age and circumstances and the very reverence which
Men would have for such Persons must needs go far to recommend their advices and Instructions And yet all these usefulnesses would be in a great measure lost if this Perfection were practiced any where else than in the visible Communion of the Church where all Men might observe it And particularly how very useful would they prove to the Publick who had attained to the Perfection of Prayer How generous and noble how free from corruption and base designs must those excellent Souls prove who had by this exercise raised themselves above the World and temporal considerations With what a vigorous Zeal with what courage and confidence must they be animated both to undertake and dispatch their great designs when they undertook them purely for the sake of God and the love of Goodness and when they might therefore confidently expect his irresistible assistance Who could have the confidence to oppose them when they might justly fear least they should oppose God himself in doing so This is an obligation to the Publick from which Perfect Persons are so unlikely to be excused on account of their Perfection as that indeed their being supposed Perfect is a stronger Argument to prove them obnoxious to it CHAP. XI Prayers for Persons out of the Church have no encouragement that they shall be accepted THE CONTENTS 7. The Scripture gives us no encouragement to believe that any Prayers shall be heard which are made out of the Communion of the Church or even in the behalf of those that are so excepting those which are for their conversion This proved from St. John who was the only Apostle who lived to see the Case of Separation § I. St. John xvii 9 § II. Where by being given to Christ is meant a being given by external Profession § III. By the World all they are meant who were out of the visible Society of the Professors of the Christian Doctrine § IV.V. They are said to be in the World purely for this reason because they did not keep to the Society of the Church § VI. The same thing proved from 1 St. John v. concerning the Sin unto Death The Argument according to the Alexandrian Ms. § VII According to the Vulgar Reading The Sin unto Death is leaving the Oxthodox Party § VIII IX.X.XI The same thing proved from 2. St. John 10 11. § XII Pardon possible for Persons out of the Church's Communion upon their admission into it according to the Doctrine of those times but much more difficult for Relapsers than others The latter part proved from 2 Pet. II. 21 § XIII and from Heb. X. 25 26 27. § XIV.XV. and from Heb. XII 15 17. 1 Joh. V. 16 § XVI and from other Arguments § XVII XVIII The actual practice of the Primitive Church not to pray for Spiritual benefits for those who were not actual Members of the Churches Communion § XIX.XX. An application of what has been said § XXI Object That these things are spoken of a total relapse from Christianity not from one Party of Christians to another § XXII That Life was properly ascribed to the true Christ as the Messias according to the Notions of the Ordinary Jews § XXIII and according to the sense of the generality of the first Converts to Christianity That the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was thought to be the proper Principle of Life § XXIV That the Messias as Messias was to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also § XXV Answ. 1. It were well our Brethren would allow the same Candor in expounding other Texts produced by them as they do in these produced against them § XXVI 2. It is not likely that the Antichrists of those times did generally deny the true Christ to be so § XXVII XXVIII.XXIX 3. Whatever the occasion was yet the reasoning used in those Disputes is to prove their being separated from Christ from their being separated from the External Communion of the Visible Church § XXX § I BUT to speak yet more closely to the Case of Prayer I consider further 7. That the Scriptures give us no encouragement to believe that any Prayers shall be heard which are made out of the Communion of the Church or even in the behalf of those who are so excepting those which are for their conversion And no Prayers can be thought to supply the want of the Sacarments but only such concerning which the Person who makes them may be confident that they shall find acceptance I know this will look like a Paradox to them who have been accustomed to believe otherwise But I shall intreat them to consider what I shall say concerning it impartially because they are very highly concerned if they should prove mistaken concerning it Of all the Apostles St. John is the only Person concerning whom we have reason to be confident that he lived to see the open separation of the Hereticks from the Church's Communion at least so as to convene in opposite Assemblies Hegesippus assures us that till Trajans time the Church of Hierusalem at least Apud Eus. L. III. Hist. Eccl. C. 32. L. IV. 22 continued a pure Virgin So far he says that if there were any of them they did yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lurk in dark dens a Metaphor taken from hurtful Beasts But that after the Apostles were all gone by different sorts of deaths and that that generation was past of them who had had the honour to hear the Divine wisdome with their own ears then began the conspiracy of Atheistical Error by the deceit of other Masters who when none of the Apostles were now left to confront them had then the confidence to preach up their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in opposition to the Preaching of the Truth Though the Case be here mentioned only of Hierusalem yet the reason extends to all other places whilest any Member of the Apostles were living And it is very probable that it was in memory of these happy times of Unity as far as he was capable of remembring them which was not very far that St. (a) Ep. ad Florin apud Eus. L. v. c. 20. Irenaeus tells us that Polycarp when he saw the multitude of Heresies in the second Century used to cry out O God to what times hast thou reserved us From St. John therefore we have reason to expect that he should speak more distinctly to our Case than any of the rest because he lived to see more of it than they did § II AND in him we have our Saviours Intercession on Earth no doubt a pattern of what we have reason to believe is continued by him in Heaven only for Members of the Church I (b) John XVII 9 pray for them I pray not for the World but for them whom thou hast given me And least we should understand this Intercession to have been proper for the Age wherein it was made he afterwards expressly adds (c) v. 20 I pray not for them only but for all those who shall hereafter
in this sense are said to have known him are they who whatever their works were yet at least joyned with others in an external Profession of a belief that Christ was the Son of God and the true Messias and a Prophet sent by God And this is the rather credible to have been St. Johns meaning because we find it to have been the pretence of the Seducers alluded to by him that they also pretended to (h) 1 Joh. ii 4 know him in owning the Antichrists which they received in his stead Therefore it is that in opposition to this pretended knowledg of theirs he does also so frequently make use of the same word though in a more justifiable sense Nor does he observe this only in his Epistle but in his (i) 1 Joh. iii. 14 16. v. 13 16. v. 15 18 19 20. Joh. xix 35 xxi 24 Gospel also As whoever will accurately observe will find that most of his peculiar terms which he seems so much pleased with and which he therefore does repeat so frequently were such as were taken from the pretences of the adversaries and by him challenged as justly due only to the Orthodox Communion and that this is observed in his Gospel as well as in his Epistle § V This is an observation though little taken notice of yet of great consequence for rightly understanding all this Apostles writings and particularly to our present design and therefore I desire the Reader that he would be the more mindful of it For on this supposition the controversie will appear plainly so have been between the Society of the Church and all those opposite visible Societies of deceivers who had departed from the Church As therefore these Deceivers did pretend only to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if this be that from whence the Gnosticks received their name who seem to have appeared more publickly about these times and consequently held all that were not visibly of their parties to be * § VI So Irenaus concerning Simon Magus Iren. adv haeres l. 1. c. 20. ib. c. 21. c. 22. Quapropter solvi mundum liberari eos qui sunt ejus ab imperio eorum qui mundum fecerunt repromisit Concerning Menander Dare quoque per eam quae a se doceatur magiam scientiam addidit ut ipsos qui mundum fecerunt vincat Angelos So Saturninus pretended that the World was made by the seven Angels among whom he reckoned the God of the Jews for one and that the design of Christs coming was for the overthrow of him and the other evil Daemons and for the Salvation of them who believed him that was of them who had scintillam vitae ejus that is of Christ as he was the Principle of Life So Basilides c. 23. Innatum autem innominatum Patrem videntem perditionem ipsorum misisse primogenitum Num suum hunc esse qui dicitur Christus in libertatem credentium ei a potestate eorum qui mundum fabricaverunt And afterwards Et liberatos igitur eos qui haec sciant a mundi fabricatoribus Principibus that is by their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And again Siquis igitur confitetur Crucifixum adhuc hic servus est sub potestate eorum qui corpora secerunt qui autem negaverit liberatus est quidem ab iis Cognoscit autem dispositionem innati Patris And again Igitur qui haec didicerit Angelos omnes cognoverit causas eorum invisibilem incomprehensibilem eum Angelis potestatibus universis fieri quemadmodum Calaucau so they called the Redeemer himself sicut filium incognitum omnibus esse sic ipsos à nemine oportere cognosci sed cù ◠sciant ipsi omnes per omnes transeant ipsos omnibus invisibiles incognitos esse Tu enim aiunt omnes cognosce c. 24. te autem nemo cognoscat So Carpocrates thought that the Soul of our Saviour himself was herein like the Souls of other men and that it was only by its Parity and contempt of these Angels the makers of the world that he had that vertue sent him by which he was enabled to escape them Ea igitur quae similiter atque illa Jesu anima potest contemnere mandi fabricatores Archontas similiter accipere virtutes ad operandum similia And accordingly they thought it possible for them who could despise these makers of the World more than our Saviour himself did to be more perfect and better than he was Si quis autem plus quà m ille contempserit ea quae sunt hìc posse meliorem quà m illum esse And to this purpose they made use of Magical Superstitions pretending hereby to have potestatem ad dominandum jam Principibus fabricatoribus mundi hujus Non solùm autem sed his omnibus quae in eo sunt facta More may be seen to this purpose in that same place concerning their Exposition of the passage in St. Matthew Matt. v. 25 Agree with thine Adversary quickly while thou art in the way with him which they understand of one of these Angels of the World as also the Manichees afterwards Iren. L.i. c. 29. The same thing also was pretended by Marcion that the design of Christs coming was to dissolve the Law and the Prophets and all the works of the God that made the World whom he also called the Cosmocrator Many more things might have been produced to this purpose if it had been necessary For it seems indeed to have been the general sense of the Hereticks of those times Thence the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the mater was to put upon their heads to make them invisible to the Daemons of the World Thence their forms of Baptism Iren. L.i. c. 18. wherein the Baptised Person was to make this Profession 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thence their forms of Prayers and addresses to be made to every one of these seven Angels of the World Orig. c. Cels. L. iv Porphyr de Abst. L.ii. p. 157. Poem c. 1. which may be seen in Origen not unlike that Form translated as it should seem out of the Aegyptian Heathen Ritual of Hermes by Euphantus in Porphyry that they might gain their good will for a passage through their respective Jurisdictions So also the Author of Poemander under the name of Trismegistus gives a particular account what the soul was to leave behind it at each of the seven Planets of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And that Author in all likelihood was one of those early Aegyptian Hereticks Nor was there any thing in this whole Hypothesis but what agreed exactly with the Notions Vid. Macrob in som. Scipion Porph. de Ant. Nymph alios and generally with the very language of the Platonists and Pythagoraeans of that Age. They also made it the great design of their Philosophy to endeavour the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Regressus Animae as St. Augustine translates
had told them before that (d) Chap. iii. 9 he that is born of God sinneth not nay cannot sin he therefore adds that every unrighteousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the Hellenistical style is frequently taken for that eminent degree of Righteousness which the (e) Cicer. Off. L.i. Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is every failure of an eminent degree of Righteousness which might be very capable of befalling even Righteous Persons themselves but Righteous in an inferiour degree was sin and that by this means it came to be very possible that there might be a sin not unto Death Which exactly agrees with what he had said (f) Chap. i. 7 8 9 10. ii 1 2. before concerning these sins even of such Persons but especially where he said If any man sin we have an advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the righteous And he is the propitiation for our sins For that is certainly the ground of the * 1 Joh. v. 14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned here For Christ is by his Office an Advocate for all his Church but not for those who are out of it especially as their case stood then with them who maintained other false Christs in opposition to him § XI And so on the contrary considering also that (g) Chap. v. 12 he who has not the Son has not Life and he who has not Life is certainly in a state of Death therefore whatever sin does deprive of this Communion with the Son that must consequently be a sin unto Death It must be unto Death both as it self deprives of the principle of Life and as it makes all the other sins and lapses such a person may be guilty of unpardonable though he should amend them without a change of his state by depriving him of the benefit of Christs Intercession for him by vertue whereof alone he can expect that any Prayers himself can make for pardon can prove acceptable Now that such a Person cannot expect the Benefit of the Intercession of Christ I have already proved from the Doctrine of the same Apostle in his Gospel § XII And that they did not then think it lawful to pray for Persons out of the Churches Communion especially for such as had separated themselves from it for concerning such only the Apostle speaks and concerning such alone I desire to be understood nay that they thought such Prayers to be sins and so disagreeable to the will of God as was implied in the passage already mentioned appears plainly from the second Epistle where the Author charges them to whom he wrote that (h) 2 Joh. x. 11 if any came unto them and did not bring with him the Doctrine of the true Christ they should not receive him into their houses not give him the jus Hospitii which was then a part of Communion nay more than so should not bid him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the usual Greek form of civil Salutation at their first meeting to which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was answerable at their parting And that for this reason because he that should bid him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should thereby make himself a partaker of his evil deeds By which it appears that he who used only this civil Salutation to such a Person sinned in doing so and yet of all Prayers this seems to have had the least of a Prayer in it § XIII I dare not indeed altogether deny a possibility of pardon to be obtained for such Persons as are out of the Churches Communion upon their coming over to it and their prayers for Pardon For the same Apostle expresly tells us that Christ is the (a) 1 Joh. ii 1 Propitiation not for our sins only but for the sins of the whole world Where certainly the whole World opposed to us must imply those who are at present out of the Communion of the Church And seeing Christ is the Propitiation even for their sins also they also may expect to have their Prayers for pardon heard on his account upon condition of their repentance and entring into the Churches Communion And accordingly they are also mentioned in our Saviours Intercession where he also prays for them who should afterwards (b) Joh. xvii 20 believe on him on the Apostles Preaching And therefore also St. Paul exhorts that (c) 1 Tim. ii 1 Prayers c. should be offered for all men and says it is good and acceptable to God to do so for this reason because he wills (d) Ver. 3 4. that all men should be saved and come unto the knowledg of the Truth and that Christ has therefore also given himself (e) Ver. 6. a ransome for all So Cornelius's Prayers were heard (f) Act. x. 4 before his Baptism But all this might be true though all men were allowed only once the liberty of being admitted into the Church And it is certain that the case of Desertors is described in the Scriptures as much more desperate than it would have been if they had never been of the Communion deserted by them As all Persons who were out of the Communion of the Church were supposed to be under the power of the Devil and accordingly casting out of the Church is the same thing with (g) 1 Cor. v. 5 delivering over to Satan so our Saviour himself describes the condition of a Desertor to be so much worse than it was at his first reception and his last end to be so much worse than the first that if he had one Devil at his first reception he has (h) Matt. xii 43 44 45. Luk. xi 24 25 26. seven which is usually the number used in Scripture for perfection at his Desertion and those more wicked than that which first possessed him So also St. Peter (i) 2 Pet. ii 21 It had been better for them that they had not known the way of Righteousness than having known it to turn from the holy commandment which had been given them For it is happened to them according to the true Proverb The dog is returned to his own vomit and the sow that is washed to her wallowing in the mire § XIV And particularly the Doctrine of the Epistle to the Hebrews is very severe in this case especially that passage in the tenth Chapter where having perswaded them not to (k) Heb. x. 25 forsake the assembling of themselves together as the manner of some was He immediately gives this reason why they should not do so (l) V. 26 27. For if we sin wilfully after we have received the knowledg of the Truth there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin but a certain fearful looking for of Judgment and fiery indignation which should devour the adversaries Here by the connexion it is very plain that the forsaking of the Assemblies the visible Communion of the Church is the sin here spoken of which will also give light to other
Apostles Epistles so it is never used but to those who were in the Church's Communion nay frequently this limitation is expressly inserted St. Paul prays for Peace but it is only to the (c) Rom. i. 7 1 Cor. i. 2 3. 2 Cor. i. 1 2. Eph. i. v.2 Phil. i. 1 2. Col. i. 1 2. Saints to them that (d) Eph. vi 24 loved the Lord Jesus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without following any of his Rivals to the (e) Gal. i. 2 3. 1 Thess. i. 1 2 Thess. i. 1 2. Eph. vi 23 Churches and the Brethren to them that walk according to the (f) Gal. vi 16 Rule and at the utmost extends his wish no further than to the whole (g) Ib. Israel of God and to them that (h) 1 Cor. i. 2 every where call on the name of the Lord Jesus St. John (i) 2 Joh. i. 2.3 the Elder does so too but it is only for such as are in the Truth and for this very cause because they were so I mention not other places in their writings where the particularity of their address required this limitation § XX As for the Jews they did so appropriate Spiritual favours to themselves Sanhedr cap. 10 as that they did not allow any Nations a portion in the World to come how excellent lives soever they might lead whilest yet they continued in their National distinction And therefore it must have been extremely vain to have prayed for any such thing for them that I may not now take notice of that contempt and hatred of all other Nations but themselves which we see plainy possessed them by the Histories of the first times of Christianity And it is very observable that the great design of the Apostles and that which no doubt very much facilitated the progress of their Doctrine with many others in that Age who had hardly ever been induced to have received it otherwise being not to overthrow the confinement of these Promises which are the foundation of the Prayers we are speaking of to Israel but only the confinement to the carnal Israel to the seed of Abrahams flesh rather than of his faith we have very great reason to believe that those great multitudes of them who came over to the Christian Religion on these terms and who would not have done so on any other must still have believed this confinement of the Promises to the Spiritual Israel And considering withall that of the three Ceremonies of initiation even of the carnal-Israelites only two were disliked by those first Preachers of the Christian Religion viz. those of Circumcision and Sacrifice but that of Baptism was so well approved by them as that they did not only receive it from the Jews as they had found it but also endeavoured to prove that it had been prefigured and prophesied of even in the Old Testament as the proper way of distinguishing the Spiritual Israelite from others as it had been formerly of the carnal Israelite they must on these Principles have been inclinable to believe that herein the carnal and the Spiritual Israelite agreed and therefore that still the Promises were confined though not to Circumcised yet at least to Baptised Persons And this being an errour if indeed it had been one so obviously following from the Principles by which the generality of them were then made Christians and being so likely to be taken up by those who had been made Christians on those Principles as recommended to them with the same Authority which had made their Christianity it self seem credible to them it had highly concerned them who had used such Principles to them to have warned them of the error of such a consequence § XXI And now if these things be so they will deserve to be seriously laid to heart by our Brethren who shall find themselves concerned in them If whilest they are out of the true Communion they have no interest in the Intercession of Christ no Interest in that one perfect Sacrifice of his nor hopes of any other If they have no Title even to the Prayers of good Christians for any Spiritual favours for them whilest they continue in that condition excepting only that one for their Conversion If such Prayers as should be offered for them cannot be offered with any confidence of being heard because they are not agreeable to the Divine Will nay if they be so far from any hopes of acceptance as that they rather provoke God against them who offer them by making them partakers of the sins of those for whom they are offered If at least neither they nor the Persons who need the relief of such Prayers have any Promise of being heard in them and therefore must at length be left to the extraordinary uncovenanted mercies of God Chap. 2◠which we have already shewn how very weak and uncertain a support it is to them who have no better confidence nay if it should prove true that Desertors of the Church's Communion on any pretence whatsoever though it be that of Perfection have not the very hopes of being heard in such Prayers as should be offered by themselves or others even for their Conversion it self which I only propose as a thing too much at least in danger of being the sense of the places produced for it I say if these things should prove true or even prove so much as probable to be so it will concern them all to be at least more solicitous for finding out the true Communion than as yet they seem to be when their error is like to prove of so fatal consequence if they should prove to be mistaken concerning it At least it will follow what I am at present only concerned for that no pretence of Closet-Prayer without the Sacraments can supply the use of the Sacraments when they are so far from being heard for those great and necessary Spiritual favours which are procured in the Sacraments as that they have no hopes of being heard at all if the Sacraments be neglected for them But the reasons given by St. John through the current of his whole Epistle why such Prayers should not be heard are yet more formidable that they who are not in the true Communion are in a state of Death that they are in the World how much soever they pretend to have escaped out of it that they are really in darkness what Light soever they pretend to which comes more immediately home to the case of these Enthusiastick Persons with whom I am at present dealing § XXII All that I can foresee as capable of being Objected for avoiding these consequences is only this that forsaking the Christian Assemblies then was a forsaking at least of the external Profession of the Christian Religion it self whether upon the forsaking them they went over to the Heathen Idolatries or to the Jewish Law or kept themselves from all external Profession of any Religion whatsoever so to avoid the Persecutions which attended the
Law from their great complaints in time of exile and their hard opinion of the state of excommunicated Persons and from that general Popular Notion then prevailing among them whereby they ascribed more to the punctual observance of these external Sanctifications than to real Holiness it self Phil. iii. 6.9 These things were accounted the very Righteousness of the Law and these were the vulgar measures of Popular Holiness But though this be abundantly sufficient to shew that this use of this Priviledg cannot be justified in the Mystical Israel on account of their being Israel which was never challenged by the carnal Israel themselves nor ever intended for them yet to give all possible satisfaction in this Case it is further observable § XII 4. That the whole contrivance of things by the Apostles plainly supposes that they also did not allow of this plea for excusing any from the publick Ordinances They plainly suppose that the most perfect as well as others stood in need of Church-Society They plainly formed the Church into a Body Politick and obliged all the most perfect as well as others to observe their respective Duties which was not done by the Philosophers who maintained our Adversaries Notions They plainly confine the Graces of God to the Sacraments that so no Persons might on any pretence of Perfection think they did not need the Sacraments unless they were withall so perfect as not to need the Graces also conferred in the Sacraments They make the influences of the Spirit derived from Christ the Head to particular Members by the mediation of other Members the same way as the vital influences are derived in the Body Natural They confine his influences to his Body and make the Sacraments to be the only ordinary means of joyning or continuing a Member in that Body They make the casting-out of the Churches Communion the same thing as a delivering over unto Satan 1 Cor. v. 5 1 Tim. i. 20 Vid. cap. xi §. 4 5 6. and describe the condition of such Persons as very sad that they are in the World in Darkness nay in a state of Death it self These are all of them other contrivances of things than they would ever have settled if they had allowed any Plea of Perfection whatsoever as sufficient to excuse the pretender to it from the External Communion of the visible Church § XIII And further 5. It is very considerable in this whole matter that even those Philosophers themselves who allowed this Notion of Perfection as sufficient to excuse Persons who were indued with it from the Sacrifices and some of those grosser ways of Worship of their Deities which were more suitable to popular capacities who thought a wise man might Sacrifice as acceptably with a little meal as others with a Hecatomb nay that his Prayers might be more acceptable than the Sacrifices of others yet never thought of extending it to the Mysteries and forms of initiation into the more familiar acquaintance with their Deities These they were so far from thinking meanly of as that indeed they were the most perfect sort of Persons for whom they thought them most proper Especially the greater Mysteries or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were purposely so contrived that meaner spirited Persons might never have the courage to undertake them Therefore the Aegyptian initiations were so extremely severe that they thought to have terrified Pythagoras himself from his curiosity to be acquainted with them and Appion Joseph cont Appion Nonn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazianz. the Jews great Adversary died of his Circumcision which was only one of them Therefore the preparatory tryals of Mithras were so many and so rigorous that very many perished under them To this end were their frightful shapes their shewing their Images only with Torches not by day-light their tedious and solemn preparations only to advance the horrour of the Spectacle Therefore they were first expiated by all the Purgations proper in the respective Cases that so they might approach the Idol it self with the most exquisite Purity Thence the Proclamation before the Orphaicks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to warn all impure Persons to beware how they ventured to approach them And therefore they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and they are principally recommended by the Pythagoreans for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they make the highest pitch of Philosophy and oppose to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Purgation of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they conceived proper for Beginners § XIV And to these the Primitive Christians thought the Lords supper answerable and accordingly spoke of it in all that sacred style which the Philosophers had used concerning these greater Mysteries as may be seen punctually observed among very many others by the Pseudo-Areopagite And yet even the lesser Purgative Mysteries were not so neglected as that any Person how perfect soever durst presume immediately to venture on the greater without these preliminary expiations No Moral Purity whatsoever was thought so great as to make these ritual Purgatious needless to him who was desirous to initiate himself in any of their particular Religions The most Perfect Persons among them and they who were thought to approach nearest to the Purity of the gods themselves nay who were often themselves called gods in such a sense as the name required when it was communicated to inferiour Beings As they often thought it necessary to initiate themselves so when they were admitted they were not admitted on other terms than the Ordinary Lustrations Such were the a Hercules in the Eleusin Scholiast Aristoph in Plut. Schol. in Homer Il. Theta in Tzetzes Lycophr Alex. Argonauts in the Samothraclan Apollon Rhod. Argon Castor and Pollux Plutarch Thes. Heroes the b Demetrius Policrates Plutarch Demetr Adrian Spartian Antoninus Capitolin Emperours and the c Pythagoras Jamblich de vita Pyth. Ch. 16. Philosophers Of all which sorts there are several instances of Persons who were initiated and initiated in the common way but I believe no one Precedent can be given of any who were thought too Perfect either to need the initiation it self or any one external Rite with which it was ordinarily performed At least they were so extremely few as that no modest man can in initiation of such Precedents find in his heart to reckon himself in the number No wise man who throughly considers and understands his own interest can venture the loss he may suffer if he should neglect them on confidence of a thing wherein he may so easily prove mistaken Which will again assert the necessity of Baptism which in the Christian Institution was answerable to these lesser Mysteries But I shall not now enlarge further to shew that their Sacraments were rather thought to hold proportion to the Heathen Mysteries than their Sacrifices because I may possibly take an occasion to insist more largely on it on another occasion
desertion it self Can they shew any thing peculiar in the Christian Religion why Lapsers to Judaism should not be received again into the Christian Communion rather than the Lapsers into any other Sect Nay is not Baptism equally denyed to the Penitents who return from other Sects as from them and are they not received and reconciled upon their Repentance by the Absolution of the Church as familiarly as other Sectaries And if it were only on account of the general establishment of one only Baptism that they were then discouraged to hope for a reconciliation Why should not our present Adversaries think themselves as much concerned in that as the Primitive Apostates to Judaism CHAP. XIV Separation from the Church proved to be a sin against the Holy Ghost THE CONTENTS § I The danger of the sin of Separation and the difficulty of its pardonableness are very prudent and lawful reasons for bearing with a lesser sin that is more easily pardonable § I II. What is meant by grieving God's Spirit and how it comes to be unpardonable § III IV. Two influences of the Spirit resisted by the Israelites § V. This applyed to the state of the Gospel How the Christians were likely to understand these things according to the Mystical way of expounding the Old Testament which prevailed among them § VI. Our Saviour used herein a way of speaking notorious to the Jews § VII Grieving the Spirit the same with the grieving of Christ. § VIII 1. As to the Testimony which the Spirit gave him by Miracles § IX How our Saviour's threatning was fulfilled § X. The sin against the Holy Ghost a resisting of the Gospel Dispensation § XI 2. Murdering of the Prophets a sin against the Holy Ghost as he is particularly a Spirit of Prophesy § XII This particularly applyed to our Saviour and the state of the Gospel § XIII 3. Resisting the influences of the Holy Ghost in us Applyed to the Jews § XIV To the Christians § XV. According to the Hellenistical Philosophy § XVI XVII XVIII 4. Resisting the Government of the Church which was then ordered by the Spirit § XIX Separation from the Canonical Assemblies of the Church a sin against the Holy Ghost § XX. Concerning the Punishment of this sin against the Holy Ghost and the way of arguing used by the Writers of the New Testament from Old Testament Precedents § XXI XXII ANOTHER sin that our Brethren are usually troubled with when they are under any anguish of Conscience is that against the Holy Ghost concerning the irremissibility whereof the expressions are indeed very dreadful If therefore they be in danger of the guilt of this by their falling away from the Communion of the Church this I presume themselves will account such as ought not to he ventured on but on very great and very real necessity not on so mean accounts and so little probabilities as those are whereby they usually defend their Separation And if the fear of a little sin in obeying their Superiors be taken for so just a reason to excuse their disobedience to their Superiors and not only their disobedience but their resistance and Separation from them they certainly when they shall find that by their suffering themselves to be cut off from the Church and much more by their voluntary separating themselves from their Superiors rather than they will pay them the obedience which is due unto them they shall bring themselves into the danger of being guilty of a sin incomparably greater in it self and more difficultly pardonable than that is which themselves can fear they should prove guilty of by their obedience this will certainly oblige them in all Prudence when they find themselves put upon the necessity of a venture to venture on a lesser evil rather than a greater and to account that evil no evil at all at least not such as shall be imputed to them as an evil when they find themselves forced upon it by the unhappy necessity of so hard a choice I know it is a Plea of late much insisted on by them that even the appearance of a sin nay the suspicion of it is sufficient to excuse them from the otherwise lawful commands of their Superiors as long as their private Consciences cannot free themselves from that Suspicion And this pretence would have indeed a greater appearance of Truth if their Obedience to their Superiors were indeed as indifferent a thing as they suppose it to be when they make this pretence to excuse themselves from it No doubt a suspicion of sins especially if that suspicion be thought probable by the Person who is under the suspicion is sufficient to excuse him from a performance otherwise indifferent § II BUT if our dissenting Brethren would state the Case right they should suppose a sin in both Cases on the one side the sin of doing the things required from them and on the other the sin of disobedience to their Superiors and dividing the Church of Christ. And then no doubt they would not scruple but the securest resolutions of their Consciences in such a Case would be to choose that which were likely to prove less sinful and more pardonable Nay when themselves say that in this Case of probable evidence or at least of the appearance of such probable evidence their disobedience can be no sin it can only be on this account that they can pretend it that their Duty to obey God in such an instance is greater than their Duty of obedience to their Superiors if indeed they own them as Superiors and acknowledg any Duty to them If therefore it may appear on the contrary that the sin they are in danger of by dividing themselves from the Church is greater and less pardonable than the sin they would incur by submitting or at least by paying passive Obedience to a seemingly sinful imposition if they may be convinced that the sin of setting up or countenancing opposite Conventicles is greater and more difficulty pardonable than the sin of wearing a Surplice or kneeling at the Sacrament c. Then by the Rules of their own reasoning it will follow that these instances which otherwise had been sinful are notwithstanding in this Case no sins at all and therefore can be no sufficient reason to excuse their Separation from being sinful And that this is so as I have proved already so I now proceed to shew particularly from this Topick of the sin against the Holy Ghost which I presume themselves will not deny to be a sin both greater and more difficultly pardonable than any of those which they pretend to excuse their Separation from being sinful § III NOW for clearing this sin which seems hitherto to have been so little understood I consider that it is usual in the Old Testament when it is to express a provocation of God of the highest kind to express it by a commotion of mind suitable to that which is in men when they are extremely angry And therefore
and quickened in the Spirit that is did not die as to his Divinity for so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to save alive as well as to make alive Which exactly agrees with what we have elsewhere observed that the Spirit is it self called Christ. And what can be more agreeable to the design of these places where this sin is mentioned by our Saviour than this all things being considered As in the places now produced the flesh and Spirit are joyned together and opposed so in these places the Son of man and the Holy Ghost are the same way opposed Not that I think that our Blessed Saviour took his own Divinity for granted in dealing with the Jews or that he proceeded on the supposition of his being anointed with the Spirit and with the fulness of it any otherwise than as it was capable of appearing to them that he was so the same way as the Holy Ghost appeared to them in the Wilderness as an assistant of Moses that is by as stupendous Miracles as had ever been performed by Moses himself § IX AND so the Argument would hold exactly that as on account of the Miracles performed by Moses their obstinate refusal of conviction by those Miracles was not taken only for a contempt of Moses who was a frail man like themselves as Moses himself had often told them Who are we that ye murmur against us Your murmuring is not against us but against God Exod. xvi 7 And if the Lord make a new thing c. then shall ye know that these men have offended not us but the Lord and was accordingly resented by God himself Numb xvi 30 and punished as a contempt of his Holy Spirit by whom those Miracles had been performed so our Saviour giving the same evidence of his Mission as Moses had done they had reason to expect that God would also resent the contempt of those Miracles not as an affront offered only to the Son of man as he seemed to them but as an affront to the Holy Ghost by whose power alone his Miracles were performable as well as those of Moses And as it was not every lighter affront to the Holy Ghost himself that had been thus punished in the Israelites in the Wilderness with an irrevocable sentence but a high degree of provocation of him so our Saviour had particular reason to warn them to beware of that high degree For what could be a greater provocation to the Holy Spirit than to call him an evil one Yet this was the thing the Jews were likely to be guilty of in ascribing the Miracles themselves that were performed by our Saviour to Belzebub the Prince of the Devils if they still persisted in it after our Saviour had warned them that the Holy Ghost would resent such injuries as offered to himself And therefore though their affronts against our Saviour as the Son of Man had been no more severely punishable than those against Moses had been considering only his Person as a Man though an excellent and good one which had never brought those capital Punishments upon their Fore-fathers in the Wilderness as Moses himself had often warned them who suffered under them yet their hard Speeches against the Holy Ghost for that is the meaning of blaspheming him might expect not only a capital Punishment in this World like that of their Fore-fathers in the Wilderness but also in the World to come which was a thing they had not formerly been so generally acquainted with but was a Revelation reserved for the coming of the Messias who was the Prince of the World to come and proper to the times of the Gospel as the Author to the Hebrews tells them So that if the Gospel which he preached to them should prove true as the Miracles he did in confirmation of it proved it true they must expect to suffer for sins committed against this Dispensation not only in this but in the other World because these sufferings in the other World were a principal Discovery of the Gospel § X AND indeed this threatning of our Saviour was punctually executed on them who persisted in their obstinacy notwithstanding his warning by a Punishment not only in the other World but even in this every way as remarkable as that was of the destruction of their Fore-fathers in the Wilderness that is in the destruction of their Temple and City and soon after in the dispersion and exile of their whole Nation from that beloved Canaan which their Fore-fathers in the Wilderness thought themselves so unhappy for because they did not live to see and enjoy it And if it were necessary to make a Notion of a Punishment in the other World which might also be National as their Punishment in this World now mentioned was and as that was also of that generation of their Fore-fathers which perished in the Wilderness I should take it to be the depriving them of the Priviledges they had formerly enjoyed on account of Gods Covenant with them that they should be no more Gods People that they should have no more interest in the Promises of God and that special Providence of his which on that account had been formerly so watchful over them that they should lose their interest in the true Messiah which was the principal Promise without which the performance of all other Promises as they expected them had been little significant to them These were Punishments of the other World as it was expected by them under the Messias And these things they afterwards suffered for this very fault of resisting and blaspheming those mighty influences of the Spirit whereby the Gospel was recommended to them by the Apostles as they now did on the same way of recommendation of it used by our Lord himself This I take for a clear and easie and intelligible account of what the Evangelists tell us concerning this whole matter § XI NOW by this it appears that this sin against the Holy Ghost is a resisting the Gospel Dispensation for which the Holy Ghost is pleased so eminently to concern himself For this is that which has peculiar to it self the concerns of the other World of which the Messias was expected to be the Prince And accordingly resisting this Dispensation is elsewhere usually characterized as a resisting of the Holy Ghost So in the Case of Ananius and Sapphira who had consecrated a Possession to the service of the Church Act. v 3.9 but kept back part of it St. Peter charges them with lying to the Holy Ghost and agreeing to tempt the Spirit of the Lord. Act. vii 51 So St. Stephen Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears ye do always resist the Holy Ghost as your Fore-fathers did so do you How their Fore-fathers had resisted the Holy Ghost he had before shewn in the whole Chapter exactly agreeably with the account I have given of it concerning their frequent Lapses in the Wilderness and elsewhere notwithstanding the many Miracles
of Glory by which he is pleased to presentiate himself so long even the subordinate Governours must be presumed to be Authorized by him For it is an inseparable Royalty of the supreme Governour to have the nomination of subordinate Governours either by himself or by his Laws And where the nomination is made of the Persons by the Laws it is always to be presumed as much the Act of the supreme Governour as if it had been performed by him in his own Person and will as strictly oblige Subjects to Obedience to them and will make their resistance as properly a disowning of the supreme Authority The King does not concern himself in Person in the nomination of every inferior Officer nay many times knows not what is done by others in his name Yet the resisting of such Persons who are Legally invested in their Office the Law looks on as a resistance to the Royal Authority it self And though it may be lawful in some instances to deny them active Obedience when they require it in Cases wherein the Law who gave them their Power gave them no power to require it yet even in those Cases to gather Parties against them and to disown dependence on them and to separate from them would also be taken for a Rebellion against the supreme Authority where-ever it is Passive Obedience must be paid to them where Active cannot and upon no pretence of recourse to the supreme Prince can be denyed them without a violation of the Authority of that Prince to whom they pretend to have recourse Nor is this only necessary by the Principles of secular Government much less of that only which is proper to our Kingdom It is absolutely necessary by the Principles of Government as it relates to a visible Society without this no external Society can be maintained And even in the reason of the thing what a man does by his substitute is the same thing in Law as if it had been done by his own Person If therefore the supreme Authority delegate his Power by Legal Rules settled by him as such a Delegation is properly his Act and therefore properly obliges him so the Power so delegated is his also and the resistance made against it does properly affront him in his own Authority This I note to shew that our Adversaries present opposition to Persons Legally Authorized by the Holy Ghost according to the Rules settled by him for maintaining a Succession must be a Rebellion against the Holy Ghost himself though such subordinate Governours should prove mistaken and though they received no other gifts by their Ordination for the discharge of their Office but their bare Office alone And yet the Church has always thought that even such Gifts were given them at their Ordination But that not being necessary for my present design I shall not now enlarge on it § XX IN all these instances it appears that all sins against the Gospel-Dispensation are very properly sins against the Holy Ghost If were easie now to shew further that a separation from the Canonical Assemblies of the Church is a sin against the Gospel-Dispensation I say against the Dispensation it self and not only against particular Provisions of it It is an interpretative disowning Christ for our Master when we leave his School and his Chair It is a disowning his Royal Authority when we resist his subordinate Governours who have succeeded Canonically according to the Rules by him established for Succession It is a violation of that Peace which it was the great design of his Death to settle among us and of that Vnity of the Spirit which I have shewn to be necessary for deriving the influences of the Spirit to particular Members It is a violation of our Baptismal Promise and Covenant when we cut our selves off from being Members of that Society of which we professed our selves Members in our Baptism Most of these Arguments I have shewn to have been made use of by the Apostles themselves And undoubtedly the charges if true will strike at the Gospel-Dispensation § XXI AND for the Punishment assigned by the sacred Writers for this great sin And the way of reasoning used by them in applying the instances of the Old Testament to this purpose I consider that the Authors who were then for the Mystical Expositions of the Old Testament as we have seen that the Christians both by their Genius and their interest were for these Mystical Expositions those Authors I say supposed that even the Historical parts of it were not delivered by the sacred Writers purely for the sake of the Histories themselves but with relation to future Ages wherein they might be useful and yet more especially with relation to the times of the Messiah Now on this supposition it was not proper for them to mention any Histories but such as were designed for Precedents even to Posterity when Circumstances should prove exactly the same Nor was this only supposed to have been designed by the sacred Writers themselves but also by the Holy Ghost by whom they were inspired nay by him rather than by the Writers and these Mystical secondary applications were thought more principally disigned by him than the concernment of the Original History as to the Persons who were at first concerned in it So that on this supposition it was as rational even to ground Arguments for present Expectations on those past Histories how Personal soever they might otherwise seem in their Original design as no man doubts but it is rational to plead Precedents in our ordinary Courts because they were at first designed for that very purpose But more especially this was rational in the â—imes of the Messiah because the whole Old Testament was thought to have a pecular regard to those times Thus it was as rational for the Author to the Hebrews to apply the Promise made to Joshua Heb. xiii 5 I will never leave thee nor forsake thee to the Christian Hebrews to whom he wrote as it was for Jushua to whom it was made to apply if to himself because according to this supposition it was more principally designed by God himself for them than for him and indeed for him no otherwise than as his was to be a leading Case And this will give an account of the reasonableness and Prudence of many of the like reasonings from the Histories of the Old Testament thus applyed in the New And that they did really proceed on this supposition St. Paul himself assures us when after he had reckoned up several of the Judgments that befell Apostates in those times he tells us 1 Cor. x. 11 All these things happened to them as examples and were written for our instruction upon whom the ends of the Worlds are come And though all the New Testament Writers use this way of reasoning yet none more frequently than St. Paul § XXII And as this Observation cleares the reason and the Prudence of such reasonings at least ad homines in regard of the
Practice be worth taking notice of and because it is by our Saviour himself expounded of his sending the Holy Ghost on his Disciples on Pentecost Act. i. 5 where at least the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them is called a Baptism though it was without material Water § XI THIS I take to be the uttermost that can be said for this Exposition And yet how little is this uttermost I confess the name of fire may be given to the Holy Ghost both for the reason here mentioned and for others which I have mentioned elsewhere Joh. iii. 5 But why must it be meant of the Holy Ghost here where it is expresly joyned with him by a Copulative as a thing distinct from him Is it because the substantive joyned with a Copulative may be resolved by an Hendiadis into an Adjective as pateris libamus auro in Virgil for pateris aureis This will indeed shew it possible that the words may bear such a sence where the connexion requires that they should do so But how does that prove that that is their sense here It is certainly no very natural sense to understand them in and there should be the same exigency proved from the coherence as there in Virgil before Virgil's instance can be made a Precedent But they will appear plainly distinct if we refer them to our Saviours own exposition of them in the Acts. Act. i. 5 There we plainly find the Fire mentioned to have been distinct from the Holy Ghost and to have been no Mystical but a material one 2.3 4. such as spectators were able to discern And why then should not the Water which is here joyned with the Holy Ghost be material too And what other material Water is there of which we can so conveniently understand it as of that of which we are now discoursing § XII BUT if their meaning be to confine our Saviours meaning only to the descent of the Holy Ghost in Pentecost in opposition to his ordinary descent in the ordinary administration of Baptism with material Water that is certainly a confinement very far from our Saviours mind Act. xix 2 3 4 5. St. Paul who undoubtedly knew his mind incomparably better than we do does plainly expound these words of St. John the Baptist of the Holy Ghost which was to be expected in our Saviour's ordinary Baptism And the same way St. Peter understood them in the Case of Cornelius Act. x. 44 45 46 47. when from their having the Baptism of the Holy Ghost he presently infers their Title to our Saviour's ordinary Baptism by material Water And in this latter Case they of the Circumcision were amazed to see the Holy Ghost poured out upon them before their Baptism by material Water Ver. 45. a sign that it was a very rare Case and such as had never been observed in all the Baptisms they had hitherto been acquainted with and yet those had been at several times and of several Thousands And I am apt to think that their ordinary Baptisms were as much by Fire as the Holy Ghost in regard to the lightsome Shechinah which overshadowed the Persons then baptized as that was of the Apostles themselves at Pentecost My reasons I have else where mentioned and shall not now repeat them § XIII BUT what if this very instance of their Baptism by the Holy Ghost on Pentecost be therefore only called a Baptism because it was only a consummation of that Baptism which they had formerly received at their first admission into their Discipleship to our Saviour by material Water Then certainly the consequence will not hold either that the infusion of the Holy Ghost is alone called Baptism but only to imply that it had relation to the water Baptism formerly received by them and much less that it is called water in regard of that Mystical Analogy which it has to water And that this was really the Case it is very reasonable to believe Where-ever the Water Baptism is mentioned elsewhere in conjunction with the Spirit it is never so mentioned as to exclude material water but plainly to include it and that even where this Mystical quality it self is also mentioned So in the Epistle to the Hebrew Heb. x. 22 23. Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith having our hearts sprinkled from an evil Conscience and our Bodies washed with clean water So in St. Peter 1 Pet. iii. 21 The like figure whereunto Baptism also now saveth us not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience towards God So in the Epistle to the Ephesians Eph. v. 26 That he might sanctifie it the Church purifying it with the washing of water in the word § XIV AND there was a particular reason why this part of the Apostles Baptism should be deferred to this Assembly of theirs on Pentecost because the Holy Ghost was not to be given till our Saviours Resurrection So our Saviour himself expressly tells us It is expedient for you that I go away If I go not away the Comforter will not come unto you but if I go away Joh. xvi 7 I will send him unto you And when he had else-where said Joh. vii 38 He that believeth on me as the Scripture hath said out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water The Evangelist does thereupon remark This spake he of the Spirit which they that believe should receive for the Holy Spirit was not yet given v. 39 because Jesus was not glorified Possibly the reason why he was deferred till then might be because the Spirit was to succeed Christ in his Office of a Master as I have elsewhere discoursed which could not so properly be done according to the Laws of Succession in Schools then obteining till the Chair was empty by the removal or decease of the former Master And if the Holy Ghost was not given them on their believing before then their having it at Pentecost was absolutely necessary for compleating their Baptism according to the Notion of our Saviours Baptism whose Property it was to give the Holy Ghost And then even that Baptism it self adequately taken did include the Baptism with material water if not when the Holy Ghost was given yet before which amounts to the same purpose § XV AND that this maybe thought the less strange it is very observable that not only in this Case which did particularly require it for the reason now mentioned but also in several others the Holy Ghost it self was given at some distance after Baptism Act. viii 12 So in the conversion of the Samaritans by St. Philip he himself baptized them who had converted them But St. Peter and St. John were afterwards sent to them to pray for them v. 14 15 16 17. and to lay their hands upon them that they might receive the Holy Ghost And the reason is expressly given Ver.
contrived the matter that none of them were driven to this exigence Only Judas died within that period and he had forfeited the interest which his Baptism by water had given him in this Promise of his Spirit by his misdemeanours after his Baptism However the matter was it is certain that their Case was not so advantagious to them then as it was after they had received the Spirit when our Saviour tells them that it was expedient for them that he should go away from them St. Joh. xvi 7 thereby implying plainly how more advantagious the Spirit should be which they were to receive upon his departure than his own presence it self and besides was singular and such as cannot be made a Precedent by our present Brethren They cannot pretend any such resolution of our Saviour not to give the Spirit constantly with his Baptism which might oblige him to make other provisions for those who receive his Baptism when their failing of it is not imputable to any neglect on their part but to his own resolution Nor can they pretend any such supplement of it as the presence of our Saviour was which when it was withdrawn our Saviour himself then thought it necessary immediately to fulfil the Promise he had made to them offending the Spirit to them Our Brethren live at present under actual and settled establishments and where they can come by them by any diligence or unsinful condescensions on their own part they have reason to expect either to stand or fall by them § XXVIII THE second Grace of our Saviours Baptism is forgiveness of sins And this is also frequently ascribed to it in the Scripture So Annanias to St. Paul Arise and be baptized Act. xxii 16 and wash away thy sins 1 Cor. vi 11 So St. Paul himself to the Corinthians after having mentioned several sins he adds Such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified So St. Peter Repent Act. ii 38 and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins Ver. 37. of that sin particularly for which they had been pricked to the heart Ver. 23 36. Eph. v. 26 27. their crucifying of our Saviour So Christ is said to sanctifie and cleanse his Church with the washing of water by the word That he might present it to himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing but that it should be holy and without blemish So in the forementioned passage to the Hebrews both those effects of Baptism are joyned together Heb. x. 22 the sprinkling of our hearts from an evil conscience that is from a consciousness of sin as well as that of washing our bodies with pure water § XXIX NOW for applying this Argument I suppose it will not be doubted but that he who lies under the guilt of his sins is in an unsalvable condition and therefore that this Grace is such as is absolutely necessary for Salvation and consequently that all those means must be also necessary without which this Grace cannot be obtained For the Scripture plainly supposes that all have sinned Rom. iii. 23.iv.6 7. and fallen short of the glory of God And therefore there can be no hopes at present of recovering that glory by innocence but by forgiveness of those sins of which the Scripture supposes us all guilty If therefore it may appear that all Persons unbaptised are under the guilt of sin till they be baptised it will plainly follow that they are relievable from that guilt by any other means but Baptism For if there were any other means antecedent to Baptism whereby sin might be remitted then such Persons as might make use of those means might be freed from their sins antecedently to Baptism and so could not when they come to be baptized be supposed under any such guilt This will bring the proof home to the Negative for which I am at present principally concerned For my design at present is not hereby to prove that Baptism is a means of obtaining forgiveness of sins but that it is the only ordinary means of obtaining that forgiveness For from hence alone it will clearly follow that it will be necessary for every one to be baptized who desires that forgiveness § XXX AND this will also prevent those Objections which our dissenting Brethren are apt to make from those Scriptures which ascribe our washing from our sins either to the blood of Christ or to the Spiritual Mystical part of the Sacrament I do not at present doubt but that it is the blood of Jesus which cleanses us from all sins 1 Joh. i. 7 1 Pet. iii. 21 and that it is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience which saves us Our present concernment is only to know whether the merit of this blood be not applied by Baptism or whether this Mystical influence of Baptism on the Spirit be not ordinarily confined to this external Baptism by water If this be the truth in both Cases then it will plainly follow that he who continues unbaptized cannot whilest he continues so expect any relief either from the blood of Christ or from this Spiritual Mystical part of Baptism that may encourage them to defer this Baptism by water Though indeed the ill consequence of the contrary suppositions to the destroying all rational obligation to Baptism were enough to convince our Brethren who would throughly and impartially consider it of the falshood of these Suppositions For if on the only moral Duties of faith and repentance the blood of Christ might be expected to wash us from our sins what need could there be of Baptism For with these they suppose the blood of Christ will do it alone without Baptism And without them Baptism it self will never do it And the same consequence will follow from the other supposition For who would ever desire the Baptism of water if without it he might be secured of this Mystical Baptism of the Spirit § XXXI NOW that this is so that is that unbaptized Persons cannot be supposed to have received the benefit of this washing of the blood of Christ or of this Mystical Baptism will appear from these two Considerations that all who would be Christians are obliged to receive even the Baptism of water and that all who come to this Baptism are supposed under the guilt of sin From both these put together it will plainly appear that no unbaptized Persons can be supposed to have had their sins remitted to them by any other provision antecedent to Baptism That all that would be Christians are obliged to receive this Baptism even by water may appear from hence that it is indeed by this that they are made Christians as the name Christian signifies any thing of priviledg that it is by this that they are admitted to the Covenant of Christ that it is by this they become Disciples
so far from thinking the greater Mysteries absolutely necessary for him who had already been initiated in the lesser as that they usually prescribed a certain time before he who had received the less was capable of the greater Five years is commonly supposed to have been the Period prefixed for that purpose at least to the making an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for which a years space was requisite even after their receiving the greater Mysteries And it was taken for a great irregularity in the Case of Demetrius Poliorcetes that he was permitted to partake of both Mysteries at one time Plutarch Demetr And the Lord's Supper wherein Christ's suffering is so represented to our eyes and which was professedly instituted by Christ for that purpose that it might perform the office of the Heathen Images as the opposers of Images argued against the Patrons of them seems at once to exhibit all the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Christian Religion could admit of as well as the greater Mysteries themselves For my purpose it is sufficient that it be necessary for continuing the Salvability of Adults who have lost their Baptismal strength and Purity if they would continue and grow strong and ripe in that new Life which they have received in their Baptism None who survives his Baptism for any considerable while can think himself unconcerned in this Case as thus stated And therefore if this may be proved that it is necessary for the Salvation of such Persons as these are this will as much oblige such Persons to receive the Lords Supper often and consequently to submit to all unsinful Impositions that may be required from them as Conditions on which they may be admitted to receive it as they were at first obliged to get themselves baptized and to submit to all such unsinful conditions required by them who had alone the power of baptizing them § IX THIS will appear if our Brethren will be pleased to consider the importance of that Mystical stile wherein this whole matter is expressed in the Scripture that is if they will be pleased to continue the Allegory of Life and the Analogy between the natural Body and the Mystical Body of Christ so far at least as the sacred Writers themselves are pleased to continue it And sure that cannot be thought presumptuous To this purpose it is observable 1. That this Analogy between the Natural Body and the Mystical Body of Christ is continued in this that no Member in the Mystical Body can continue in that Spiritual Life of which it partakes by being a Member of that Mystical Body without a constant repetition of those vital influences by which it was first enlivened any more than a Member of the Natural Body can continue its Natural Life without a continual new supply of those vital influences from the head by which this Natural Life is maintained And therefore as it is certain that that Member which wants this continuation of vital influences does certainly decay and by degrees lose that Natural Life which is maintained by those influences though it be impossible to determine the certain Period wherein it shall die so it is by the same proportion of reasoning as certain that he who has not new influences from Christ continued to him is in a dying condition notwithstanding the Principle of new Life received by him in his Baptism If therefore the Eucharist be the same way an ordinary means of continuing this new Life as Baptism was of receiving it that is of communicating those new vital supplies from Christ the Head of this Mystical Body as Baptism was of the first infusion of this vital Principle it will be as necessary for those Adults of whom we are speaking who survive their Baptism as Baptism it self was to them when they first received it § X AND 2. The Scripture does further prosecute this likeness between the Natural Body and the Mystical Body of Christ that as it is impossible for any particular Member in the Natural Body to derive any vital influences from the Head unless it continue in conjunction with the whole Body so it is as impossible for any particular Member in the Mystical Body of Christ to derive the influences of Spiritual Life from Christ who is the Head of that Mystical Body any longer than it is united with the whole Mystical Body This appears plainly from that particular of this comparison that as in the Natural Body Members have their distinct situation some of them at a distance from the Head and they who are so receive their vital influences though from the Head yet not immediately but by the vessels through which they are communicated and by the influence of the nearer parts so that these vital influences are maintained and continued in the particular Members as well by their mutual influences on each other as by the common influences which they all receive from the Head so there are also supposed the like conveyances in the Mystical Body and the like distinction of offices in the Members of it by which they become necessary to each other as the Head is necessary to them all And this argument is purposely urged by the Apostle himself to let particular Christians understand their obligation to keep united with one another in order to their receiving vital influences from the Head And by the nature of the comparison here used it is plainly supposed that the advantage which the Members may expect from the mutual intercourse of each others gifts whilest they are united to each other in external Communion is not only extrinsecal by moving and exercising the good Principle within them but necessary intrinsecally for the preservation of that Spiritual Life which they are already supposed to enjoy as the Members in the Natural Body do not only lose the advantage of a sprightful vigorous Life but of Life it self by an interruption of their communication with each other And this is implyed in the similitude of the Vine where our Saviour expressly warns his Apostles Joh. xv 4 that as a branch cannot bear fruit of it self except it continue in the Vine so neither could they except they abided in him Where it is plain that Christ is not understood Personally but Mystically when they are supposed capable of abiding in him And this Mystical way of speaking is so familiar with St. John as well as our Saviour as that it cannot be thought strange that he should thus express himself § XI 3. THEREFORE the Church with which it was supposed so necessary for particular Members to be united in order to their participation of the influences of Spiritual Life is plainly supposed to be the Church in this World and that visible Society of them which joyned in the same publick exercises of Religion in that Age when these things were written This appears plainly from all the Apostle says concerning this Church of which he there speaks They were plainly an organized Body consisting
of Governours as well as Governed which were all qualified for their offices by Gifts of the Spirit a 1 Cor. xii 28 29. Eph. iv 11 Apostles Evangelists Prophets Pastors and Teachers which were all only useful for the Church in this World and only for their benefit as united in Assemblies these Gifts being generally of that nature as that others were more concerned in them than they who had them Their Gifts were also of the same kind and many of them more principally designed for the edification of Believers than the conviction of Infidels Such were the gifts of b 1 Cor. xiii 2.xiv.2 knowing Mysteries Interpretation c 1 Cor. xii 10.xiv.26 of Tongues of d 1 Cor. xi 4 5 xiii.9.xiv.1 3 4 5.22 24 31 39. Rom. xii 6 1 Thes. v. 20 Prophesying and e 1 Cor. xiv 14 15. Praying especially of that office of the Eucharist f 1 Cor. xiv 16 where the Idiot had his set part assigned him and was to answer Amen These were the very employments of the Synaxes in that Age. And therefore certainly the Church thus united by such Gifts and Offices of the Spirit must needs have been that Body of them which joyned in the celebration of their publick Assemblies and considered under that very Notion as they were united in those Assemblies for which alone these Gifts and Offices were useful And plainly the Apostles design being as I have elsewhere observed in all these Discourses to prevent the falling away of the Persons to whom he writes either to Judaism or Gentilism or any of the Heresies which then began to appear there could be nothing more apposite to this purpose than to perswade them to keep to this external Body as united by the celebration of the same publick Assemblies whereby they were visibly and notoriously distinguished from those erroneous Societies and nothing more disagreeable than our Adversaries Notion of a multitude not a body of Elect not distinguishable from others by such notorious Characters as might be prudently useful by way of Argument § XII BESIDES the similitude of a Vine used by our Saviour was the same which had been used concerning the carnal Israel in the Old Testament Psal. lxxx 8 14 15. Isa. v. 1 7 xxvii.2 Jer. ii 21 Ezek. xix 10 Hos. x. 1 and therefore very fitly applyed to the Spiritual and Mystical Israel in the New according to that way of arguing which is so universally observed by the sacred Writers of the New Testament And then considering that the Christians made the Spiritual Israel a Society in the same sence wherein the carnal Israel had been so before nay allowed of something suitable to those very means by which they were confederated into a Society Instead of Circumcision they continued not only the Mystical Circumcision of the heart but Baptism which had been a means taken up by the Jews before the Preaching of the Christian Religion and which they thought more countenanced by the Prophets who had foretold the state of Christianity than Circumcision it self was and withal thought it more agreeable to the more Spiritual nature of the Christian Religion in comparison of the Jewish And so for Sacrifices though they rejected the bloody ones which they also thought discountenanced by those same Prophesies which had predicted the state of Mystical Judaism yet they allowed a Mystical Melchisedechian Sacrifice not only of the Morals of Religion but also under those very Elements and Symbols which they supposed predicted and Typified in those fame Writers who had spoken so disparagingly of the bloody Sacrifices Yet still these means of confederation though they were indeed more agreeable to the nature of a Spiritual Religion than those among the Jews were still external and therefore as proper for confederating an external Society as those were in the room of which they succeeded § XIII AND 4. It is further observable that though the immediate design of the Sacred Writers seems to have been to secure the Persons to whom they wrote in the external Communion of the Church in that Age wherein they wrote yet the reasons used by them for this purpose are such as concern the Church as a Church and so as suitable to the later Ages of the Church as those earlier ones wherein they were first used Indeed if the Argument used to prove their obligation to continue in the external Communion of the Church had been this that they could not otherwise partake of the miraculous 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and manifestations of the Spirit than as those Gifts and manifestations were proper to that Age so the Argument would lose its force in succeeding Ages which could not pretend to those Gifts and manifestations But when I consider that those Gifts and manifestations in that Age did generally accompany the Graces of the Spirit and that therefore it is no good Argument to conclude that the Spirit was only given for extraordinary purposes because he was pleased to manifest himself by Gifts and Appearances that were indeed extraordinary when I consider that it is the Spirit as a Principle of Spiritual Life of which they are supposed to be deprived by falling away from that external Communion nay as a Principle of Spiritual Life to themselves when I consider that the Church being called Christ they are supposed to lose their interest in Christ and all his saving Graces by separating from the Communion of the Church to lose their interest in his Redemption to lose their interest in him by losing his Spirit which whosoever has not is none of his when I consider that by falling away from their Baptismal Obligations they are supposed to have forfeited all the advantages of their Baptism their illumination their tasting of the heavenly gift their participation of the Holy Ghost their tasting of the good Word of God and of the Powers of the World to come and so to have forfeited them as to need Renovation as intire as if they never had enjoyed them nay to have forfeited their whole interest in the New Covenant which sure respects the Graces of the Spirit more principally than his Gifts I say when I consider these things I cannot but think that the Graces here spoken of on these occasions are as well the Graces properly so called as the Gifts of the Spirit those of them which are to be ordinarily expected in all Ages as those which were proper to that those of them which are absolutely necessary for Salvation as well as those which were only more convenient for the more advantagious procurement of Salvation And sure we have reason to expect as that these ordinary necessary Graces of the Spirit should be continued to these later Ages wherein they are still as necessary as they were at first so that they should be continued in the same means of conveyance by which they were communicated at first And we have the rather reason to expect that they should be continued by the
Cant. Abstinentiâ where he also charges some Barbarians as he calls them with taking a liberty of eating all sorts of meats on this pretence as he expresses it in the words himself had heard from them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wherein he afterwards intimates that they defended themselves by pretending to g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Liberty These are almost the words for certain the sence and Arguments used by the sacred h St. Matt. xv 18 Mark vii 18 20. Writers themselves in this very matter Which I the rather mark that it may appear with what Adversaries Porphyry had to do in that undertaking And if it were necessary to multiply testimonies to this purpose many more might have been produced from the Adversaries and Patrons of the Christians in that Age wherein Laertius wrote from St. Justin Martyr Tatianus Clemens Alexandrinus Theophilus Antiochenus and Celsus from all those who writing against the Heathens call them Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cels. apud Orig. L. i. p. 5. and who defend themselves by Patronizing the cause of the Barbarians and shewing that the Greeks themselves were beholden to the Barbarians for all useful kinds of knowledg What imaginable reason is there that they should so eagerly concern themselves in this cause if themselves had not been upbraided with this name § XXVIII AND indeed it seems to have been one of the first things that was resented by the learned Heathens to see their Greek Ancestors robbed of the glory of their Antiquity and their Inventions and to see the despised Barbarians adorned with their spoils This seems in earnest to have been one of the greatest provocations of Plutarch against Herodotus that Herodotus had been too ingenuous in his acknowledgments in this matter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And possibly that great Reader might have seen the Apologies of Quadratus and Aristides to the Emperor Adrian Euseb. Eccl. Hist. iv 3 who might very probably have insisted on this Argument which we find so very ordinary in the later Apologists not now to mention what he might have seen upon this Subject in Josephus against Appion and others of the Hellenistical Jews Nay the design of Laertius himself in his Preface seems to have been directly levelled against what the Christian Apologists had produced in this Argument There he endeavours though very weak 〈◊〉 to assert the Invention of Philosophy to the Greeks He endeavours to weaken the challenge made for Orpheus the Thracian on acaccount of the wickedness of his Fables concerning the gods which he could not think worthy the name of Philosophy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 2. En Pugionem verè plumbeum Casaub. in loc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ib. Orat. adv Graec. Jos. cont Appion In Aristotele And he is an instance frequently given by the Apologists So he also magnifies the Antiquity and Philosophy of Musaeus and Linus which are two of those who are mentioned by Tatianus as Writers among the Greeks before Homer though it should seem that in Josephus's time Homer was thought the ancientest Which will the rather make it suspicious that this was a pretence invented in the time of Laertius against the later Apologists of the Christians only So that it cannot be thought strange that Laertius should call the Christians Barbarians against whom he was so eagerly concerned in this very dispute wherein the Christians opposed the Barbarians against them And though the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do not prove him a Christian yet sure it must at least prove him conversant in Hellenistical Writers it is so peculiar an idiom of his style And his last words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seem to give a clear account why the Assemblies of the Primitive Christians were called Synaxes because their meeting together in those times is usually expressed to be for the breaking of this Bread It is certain that this was then the principal employment of those Assemblies And it is very observable that as it was the principal design of those sacred Assemblies to effect as well as signifie this Mystical Vnion between the Members of their Assemblies so this was the word by which the Greeks signified this Vnion That the Pythagoraeans used it concerning their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are here assured by Laertius That the Jews also used it the same way seems plain from the name of Synagogue as their Assemblies are called by the Hellenists And for the Christians besides the name of Synaxes Christ himself expresses the Vnion he was to make by this very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. John xi 52 § XXXIX BESIDES these there are also other instances by which it may appear how suitable a Symbol of Vnity Bread was reputed among the Ancients Particularly it is observable in the way of Marriage by Confarreation which is the more remarkable to our purpose because this Matrimonial Vnity is by the Apostle himself compared to the Vnity between Christ and his Church In Fragm Titulor ex ejus corpore Excerptor Now this Marriage by Confarreation is thus described by Vlpian Farre convenitur in manum certis verbis testibus decem praesentibus solenni sacrificio facto in quo panis farreu◠adhibetur I do not know whether the Bridal Cake may not have risen from this very ancient custom For that it was not observed among the Romans only we are assured from Curtius who makes Alexander the Great observe this custom in marrying Roxana and that patrio more bread being reputed among the Macedonians for the sanctissimum coeuntium pignus And as by Confarreation this Matrimonial Vnity was made L. iv so by Diffarreation it was dissolved So we are taught by Festus Diffarreatio genus erat Sacrificii quo inter virum mulierem fiebat dissolutio dicta diffarreatio quòd fieret farreo libo adhibito And though this way of Marriage by Confarreation was by degrees growing out of use in the time of Tiberius Tacit. L. iv yet it plainly appears to have been the most formal solemn way of Marriage and most creditable to them who had used it For only they were permitted to stand Candidates for the Office of the Flamen Dialis who were begotten of such Marriages By which it appears to have been a sacred as well as a civil Symbol of Vnity which made it more suitable to the design to which it was applied in the Christian Religion Nor was it only made use of for Marriages but also in Leagues among Enemies whom it was specially designed to reconcile and Vnite The mola salsa from whence the name of Immolation and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as they were the most ancient kinds of Sacrifice so in Homer they are particularly used in Truces And as upon this account of uniting Enemies Bread is a very suitable Symbol for the design of the Eucharist so among all the Sacrifices made use of for this purpose Ex Theophrasto ut
from the provisional constitutions of the standing Government especially where they confirmed their Mission by signs as these generally did but also from most of the commands of the Law it self I do not know whether any command was excepted save that of Idolatry and the perpetual obligation of their Law and every precept of it Otherwise a Prophet might require the breach of any one precept that of Idolatry excepted so it were but for a time and this seems to have been the sense of the Jews of that Age if we may trust the modern Jews for the sense of their Ancestors Maimonid Fund Leg. c. 9. And I need not warn how much the new Converts to Christianity were then generally possessed with the Notions of the Jews whom they had deserted § XXIII ACCORDINGLY we find those strange disorders intimated in the first Epistle to the Corinthians which the Apostles were at length necessitated to reform by the exercise of Government but it was late before they attempted it not till the disorders grew intolerable and then they proceeded by slow degrees so hard it was to prevail on the contrary pretensions When St. Pauls first Epistle to the Corinthians was written many of the Prophets spoke at the same time as it should seem the Apostles and their companions did on the day of Pentecost the Women also prophesied and that publickly in the Church and they who had the gift of Tongues exercised it in the publick also without Interpeters and behaved themselves so extravagantly as that the Apostle himself tells them that an unbeliever coming among them would think them all mad These notorious and great disorders in their Synaxes make me apt to think that at that time at least they had no visible Government at all among them Which conjecture seems methinks the more likely because the Apostle in the address of this Epistle takes no notice of the Bishops and Deacons as he does elsewhere where there were any and as it was the general custom of those times in writing to Bodies to make their address particularly to the heads of the Bodies where there were such and because he blames the Corinthians for not mourning that the incestuous Person might be taken from among them which they needed not to have done if themselves had power of exercising Discipline upon him and because he expresly empowers them to meet together with his Spirit both for the Excommunication and Absolution of the incestuous Corinthian and ratifies their proceedings in that matter with his own approbation that to whomsoever they forgave any thing he forgave it also § XXIV AND therefore when the celebration of the Eucharist is mentioned among them I am to suspect that it was not performed by ordinary Presbyters but by Persons extraordinarily inspired who undertook that part of the Ecclesiastical Office as they did others also by vertue of this extraordinary Call This I take to be the meaning of the Apostle in the xivth Chapter 1 Cor. xiv 16 Otherwise when thou blessest with the Spirit how shall he that supplieth the place of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks Apol. 2. Matt. xxv◠26 Mark xiv 22 Luk. xxii 19 1 Cor. xi 24 Matt. xxvi 27 Mark xiv 23 1 Cor. x. 16 The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was in Justin Martyrs time a term of Art for this Sacrament and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or blessing is used Synonymously with it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Matthew and St. Mark is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Luke and St. Paul and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Matthew and St. Mark is expressed by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Paul And in Justins time Amen was answered in that Office by the People just as we here find that it was answered by him that supplied the place of the unlearned And by the expectation of this answer of the People to it and by the other offices with which it was joyned it seems rather to have been a part of the Ecclesiastical office than otherwise If it had not been part of the Ecclesiastical Office how had the unlearned been obliged to say Amen to it How had he been obliged to use an Interpreter in it for the edification of the Church For that the Apostle seems plainly to mean in that whole Chapter by doing any thing in the Spirit the doing the same thing in an unknown tongue which they who were supposed to do it without the Spirit did in a tongue commonly understood Thus it is most accurately opposed to the doing a thing with understanding § XXV NOR did this reason hold only for hindring the exercise of Government where there was no other settlement but these occasional extraordinary Dictates of the Spirit to uncertain Members but even after the settlement of certain known Ecclesiastical Officers It is certain that this same Church of Corinth had such Officers when St. Clement wrote his Epistle to them And yet even then they who were guilty of the Schism which occasioned his writing that Epistle were encouraged to resist their Superiors by their pretensions to these gifts and that notwithstanding the Apostle himself had so long before warned them of the obligation of such Persons themselves to submit to order and the constitution of Officers among them had plainly enough signified his mind that he intended them for Judges of those Rules which were requisite for order At least this reason of condescension lasted so long if not as these gifts lasted yet till the Apostles Authority was generally received without control and till the Apostles had declared their judgments expresly in this matter that even these extraordinary gifts should be under the restraint of the ordinary Governours of the Church and till this their declaration had reached the cognizance of the whole Church universally and till men had withal some respite given them for wearing out gradually their preconceived opinions to the contrary as we find that Rule of Prudence generally observed by the Apostles to allow them respit in such Cases These reasons will at least concern those times of which the Scripture History gives us an account and will therefore concern all the Text by them insisted on in those times § XXVI I HAVE the rather particularized all these reasons of condescension in those times that our Brethren may understand the unreasonableness of the way they have hitherto insisted on for knowing the original extent of Ecclesiastical Authority For if the Apostles were of themselves so careful to condescend to the weaknesses of their new Converts if withal there were then so many reasonble inducements to perswade them to this condescension it must then be reasonable to expect that their actual practice must have fallen short of their just right and therefore that their way of arguing from the non-appearance of a precedent then to deny a right now is in it self extremely weak though we had all the Records
of that Age which we have lost which would certainly have acquainted us with many precedents which have now miscarried for want of them Especially considering withal that it is purely matter of fact which they here insist on no express approbation of that power of the People not the least conveyance of any power to them but only such a conuivance at it as we might very reasonably expect that the exigency of their affairs might have extorted from them without any direct approbation This is most certainly the way to deprive Successors of all those branches of power the exercise whereof they then thought fit to forbear And certainly it is not ingenuous to make condescension an Argument against right Themselves do not think it equal to make St. Pauls precedent of serving the Corinthians without any contribution of theirs 1 Cor. ix 12 18. nay labouring with his hands for a livelihood an argument against either his or his Successors titles to a competent maintenance And what if the commands of those times may indeed give Rules to all succeeding generations Does it therefore follow that their Histories must do so too Were there no peculiar circumstances proper to that Age no accommodations suited to those peculiar circumstances no Prudential Provisions of the Apostles as Ecclesiastical Governours as well as Revelations by them as Apostles Our Adversaries themselves when they consider it cannot be so mistaken as to think they were not And why then should they make the very actions of that Age precedents for all succeeding ones in all variety of circumstances § XXVII THIS is indeed so far from being true as that it has plainly appear'd that there were indeed circumstances extraordinary which might hinder the practice of Government in that Age which yet because they were indeed extraordinary and have long since failed can be no Arguments against the right or the exercise of those same branches of Government in ours Then Officers were sent extraordinarily from God without the Ministry or mediation of men and together with their extraordinary Call had their extraordinary Credentials too But now none are called immediately but by the Ministry of those who have derived their Call from God in a Succession And sure they cannot think but that they who have no other title to a Divine Call but what they derive from men Authorized by God to call them must needs be obliged to a more intire dependence on those Superiors from whom they receive their Call than they who were never beholden to them for their Authority And while some had really this extraordinary Call more were at liberty to pretend to it and could not easily or suddenly be discovered all their Credentials not being of equal evidence which doubtfulness alone must weaken the exercise of Authority Then ordinary Superiors knew not but that their Prudential restraints might clash with Divine Inspiration For the Spirit was free as to choose what Persons he pleased for Prophets so to reveal what he pleased to Persons chosen by him and sometimes he revealed to one Prophet that which he concealed from another 1 Cor. xiv 30 though otherwise greater than him to whom he revealed it And is there any reason to confine our present Superiors now when there are either no pretences to these extraordinary Inspirations of their Subjects or at least no plausible pretences to any extraordinary Credentials which might convince Superiors of the truth of their pretences to other things Their extraordinary Calls then seem to have extended even to the Sacraments themselves if that conjecture hold true which I now proposed concerning the state of the Corinthians when St. Paul wrote his first Epistle to them And if so Superiors could have no curb over them though they had thought fit to exercise their Authority upon them But what is that to our modern Separatists who can pretend no gifts and Personal qualifications that may be taken for so much as a Providential Call to administer the Sacraments whatever they pretend for those other offices of Preaching and Prayer If the Sacraments alone be exempted from these extraordinary pretences this alone will be sufficient to oblige them to Subjection by our Principles § XXVIII BUT though this Negative way of arguing be upon all these accounts extremely weak yet the positive is very solid that whatsoever Power was exercised by the Apostles or any other ordinary Governours empowered by them and was challenged in any Case that was certainly their rights how rare soever the precedents were wherein they were pleased to exercise or challenge it This is thought equal even in humane right where prescription it self is thought sufficient to make a right One exercise of right is sufficient to confirm the right and to overthrow the Legal force of a prescription But how much more must it hold in Divine Right wherein I have shewn how little reason there is to ascribe any thing to Prescription If they will allow any equal means for judging between right and condescension I do not know any way more equal than this is to judg of right by positive Rules by the nature of the Government it self and by avowed practices and to conclude all practices soever that are different from these how numerous soever to be only connivances and condescensions And certainly they will not deal more irrationally than disingenuously if they will allow of no equal means to distinguish them if they will needs make condescension an Argument against right § XXIX NOW though the reason of these condescensions was never any pretence of any right of Government to be derived from the People whether on account of any original inherent right in them or of any new conveyance to them from the Apostles but purely on such accounts as might have been expected though the right of this Government had been as absolutely derived from God as I suppose it to have been as absolutely as that Power they had of proposing new Revelations and of obliging all to believe them on their own Authority which none can think derived from any concession or compact of the People to be governed by them for still this right of the People could neither have obliged Persons extraordinarily gifted to Subjection nor the People themselves till they were satisfied of that Authority the Apostles had to oblige them yet even these Persons were at length made subject to the Government of the Church as soon as ever the Authority of the Apostles was intirely acknowledged and as soon as any certain provision was made for Government and as soon as the inconveniences of this other state grew to be of that moment as to deserve a diversion of their thoughts from those other more important employments which at first took up their whole care § XXX AND that was certainly as soon as could in reason be expected And it is observable that as this Subjection of Persons extraordinarily inspired was a thing too great for any inherent right of the
Civil Governours both before and after the Captivity I think never by the People at least not near the Apostles times And the customs of the Literal Israelites then were they which the Mystical Israelites the Christians generally followed as far as they were suitable to the Mystical senses of the Old Testament and their present circumstances § XXXIV AND it was really the Ambition of most of the established Religious then received to have every particular Sacred performance done by a particular injunction of the God they worshipped Therefore their gods signified by lots or some such other way the particular Person by whom they would be served on particular occasions so far they were from leaving any thing to the disposal of the People And if this were in any thing observed punctually yet hardly in any thing more punctually than in Mysteries Metam xi Accordingly when Apuleius was desirous of being initiated in the Rites of Isis though he were already a consecrated Person and though the Hierophanta was his friend yet he durst do nothing in it till the Goddess had signified her pleasure concerning it whether she would be pleased to admit him at all and at what time and by what particular Hierophanta For though her choice was out of Persons already consecrated to her service yet no particular Person durst obtrude himself on the office without her particular appointment Nay they thought it as much as their Lives were worth to venture it and were under as much terror for the least transgressions of this kind as they were who officiated in the Jewish ministrations And can we think that a Power so sacred as this was could have been derived from the People But in this matter of Mysteries the Case is most undoubted that the giving of the Mysteries it self and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the communication of the ritual Books which none but those Sacred Persons had in their custody were parts of the Ceremonies of investing such Persons in their office And therefore as none but they had the Power of these things so none but they could have the Power of Authorizing their Successors § XXXV AND as in the now-mentioned Rites of Isis the Goddess alone had the nomination of the Person who was to perform her particular Solemnities so among the Jews themselves this was the way of determining the Person where it had not been determined by particular provisions In that Case the Priests cast lots for it which was a way used in that Nation for consulting God not the People Thus it was that Achan and Jonathan were discovered Luk. i. 9 And it was by lot that Zacharias was chosen out of the rest of the Priests of his Order of Abia to perform the Solemnities of his course Now this seems to have been the most antient way of empowering the Church Officers Thus St. Matthias was chosen into the Apostleship in the room of Judas And possibly this might be the meaning of that famous passage of Clemens Alexandrinus Ex lib. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where giving an account of what St. John did for restoring the Churches of Asia after his return from his exile at Patmos he tells us that he did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Valesius reads it I suppose his meaning was that St. John consulted God in the case to know who should be intrusted with that that Sacred Office Which consultation might be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether it were performed by lots or otherwise as it is usual to signifie a whole kind by an instance that is most eminent in it and it is known that the way of consulting their gods by lots was then generally practised by most Nations that mainteined any commerce with them The reason that makes me think that this was at first the ordinary way of empowering Church Officers is the very name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being confined to them and used ordinarily to signifie the Office it self Thus the Office of Judas is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. i. 17 25. not because it was given by the particular way of consulting God by lots as certainly it was not in Judas's Case but for this general reason now mentioned at least because he was chosen by Divine appointment And thus the Office seems to be called in Clement as most certainly it was afterwards And to this it very well agrees that St. Paul tells the ordinary Governours of the Asiatick Churches that the Holy Ghost had made them Bishops and the Prophesies concerning St. Timothy Act. xx 28 1 Tim. i. 18 and the tryal by the Spirit in the other St. Clement as well as the signification by they Sstirit in this § XXXVI AND possibly the several interests of the several sorts of Persons concerned in this business of Ordination might thus be accommodated according to the practice of those times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Rom. Ep. ad Corinth It was requisite not for the Authority it self but for the success of the exercise of it that the Persons to be Authorized should have a good esteem among the Persons with whom they were to officiate Whether deserved or undeserved yet their actual having it is very considerable in order to their actual success And therefore they were always careful that Persons chosen should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as should have creditable Testimonies of their good behaviour Now of their publick repute who could in prudence be accepted for more competent witnesses than the Multitude They were therefore allowed either to chuse out the number of Persons to be Authorized as the Apostles prescribed them the number of seven to be ordeined Deacons or else a greater number out of which a new choice was to made as in the Case of St. Matthias Yet this good repute of the Persons was not the thing that could Authorize them alone This plainly appears in both instances In the institution of the Deacons the Apostles did not only prescribe the number to be chosen which was plainly an act of Authority over the Multitude but even after the choice had been made they still reserve the Power of placing the Persons in the office to themselves It was only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. vi 3 that they might give them not only the investiture but the Authority it self But when a further Election was to be made that was a plain Argument that the first Election was only to a Candidateship not to the Office it self And therefore if this Authority of the Multitude extended no further than to this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it could not in reason be expounded to give the Authority it self For after this nomination of the Multitude followed the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in those extraordinary times which continued beyond the Apostles times was a consulting God himself in the Case whether by the custom of lots a That of Matthias or by inspirations of the
any farther than our circumstances are the same as those were which were foreseen at their settlement If our circumstances be not the same they might have been very prudent in their provisions for settlement and yet we very imprudent in following their precedent in those provisions All that I infer from their settlement is only this that it is no way likely that they did believe that the People had any such inherent right in the Ecclesiastical Government as our Brethren conceive them to have and which the reasons and Authorities produced by them in this Argument prove if they prove any thing For it is not likely that they would have deprived them of any thing which was their right considering of how dangerous consequence it might have been to the progress of the Gospel it self for them to have done so and considering withal how much their Authority was questioned in those times But rather from the great silence with which these Rules were settled we have reason to conclude not only that the Apostles did not intend to deprive them of any right but also that the Multitude themselves who were concerned in them did not think themselves deprived of any And the very actual judgment of those times are much better assurances of the truth of this matter than our Adversaries present conjectures and much more than any of those reasons on which they are capable of grounding their conjectures They cannot think themselves at this distance better qualified for understanding the Scriptures than they were who wrote the Scriptures or than they for whose immediate use and in accommodation to whose language and circumstances they were written § XL AS for the reasons they made use of for informing themselves in this matter besides that the utmost they can make of them is only conjectural and the conjectures they make by them are not so probable as the motives of credibility of those Ages I say besides this there are other prudent inducements which might in reason make one more confident of the judgment of those Ages than of those Reasons We know no reasons which they could not know as well as we but they knew many of which we now are ignorant and besides were much better able to judg of the same reasons which we both know than we are We know none which they could not know For the reasons from the nature of Government in general and peculiarly of Government as Ecclesiastical are not proper to any one Age. But for bringing these reasonings down to determine the rights of any particular Government many particular matters of fact are requisite to be known of which they were undoubtedly better Judges than we are They better knew the actual design of the Sacraments what benefits were intended by them and how they would oblige men to a dependence on them who had the power of administring them They better knew the precedents from whence they were taken and the actual state how those precedents were observed by them from whom they were taken And they who knew these things could much better judg whether they were such as would allow the people any right in the Government They certainly knew the actual challenges of the people and the actual condescensions that were made to them they knew what was quietly received and what was either not received at all or received with contradiction And they who knew these things much better than we do must also have known much better what either was or was then thought to be the Peoples right in this matter of Government I only now mention those advantages they had above us in regard of the times they lived in not in regard of those many Prophets and other inspired Persons whom they could then consult and by whose assistance they might know many things certainly which without them we can only know conjecturally though we had the best information that reason is able to afford us § XLI A SECOND thing I could wish observed in relation to this Argument is this That though the People had this inherent right of Government originally as our Brethren pretend them to have had yet it cannot exclude a right of God who can when he pleases take the right into his own hands Which when he would be pleased to do Subjects were as much obliged to submit to his disposal of them as if they never had any right of disposing of themselves I have already given my reasons elsewhere and shall not now repeat them I only observe at present how much safer it is on this account also to acquiesce in Gods actual establishment than to trust to our reasonings from the nature of the thing which are much more uncertain and unsecure as to our Duty For supposing that by the reason of the thing we should find that the People might by their internal right pretend a title to dispose of the Government this might indeed take them off from making any further enquiry into Gods actual establishment but could not in the mean time secure their practice For if by his actual establishment he had reserved the right of Government wholly in his own hand and had actually subjected us to his own Rules he that should insist on that right of the People for defending himself against these actual impositions could not be excused by that pretence for his disobedience For though the People might have had a right if God had left them to themselves to prescribe or abrogate Rules for the Government of themselves yet in case God has made use of his own Prerogative they cannot then pretend to such a right because God has prevented it And he who in that Case should refuse obedience would be a rebel against God though he broke no compacts made by the People whether with or without his particular consent This will shew that how conclusive soever the reasons be yet for security of practice all must be obliged to depend on Gods actual establishment Which may let our Brethren see their obligation to enquire into this for the security of their Practice § XLII A THIRD Observation is this that if the People ever had any such original right yet all has been done for alienating it that could be done Whatever could be done by the Rule left by the Apostles for Succession by whatever Authority they are supposed to have acted whether as Apostles of Jesus Christ or as Apostles of the Churches whatever could be done by the act of the Multitudes themselves submitting to and owning the exercise of Authority in the Officers and never pretending any power afterwards to resume their own right if it had been so nor to practise any branch of it in calling Officers to an account for mal-administration how notoriously soever they were guilty of it whatever could be done by their own disowning any such right for many Ages and Successions and confirming the sentences of their Superiors against such Persons as challenged such rights in their
present concerned to prove § II THIS therefore I shall endeavour to convince our Brethren of by two Topicks 1. That it is in reason and by the Principles of Government in general requisite that this Negative be granted in order to the conviction of false pretenders to a Power received from God immediately And 2. That our Brethren must be obliged in equity to grant it because they cannot pitch upon a more certain way of tryal 1. It is in reason and by the Principles of visible Government as such requisite that this Negative be granted in order to the conviction of false pretenders to a power received from God For 1. It is against the interest of all visible Government and of all visible Societies as such that pretenders be permitted to enjoy the benefit of their pretences without means of conviction nor is it to be presumed that any prudent Legislator could ever contrive things so as that there should be no notorious means of convicting such Persons And they cannot be convinced but by recourse to such positive means of tryal by which if they cannot justifie themselves they must immediately be supposed convicted of the falshood of their claim To permit such Persons to pass without conviction would not only prove a grievance to Subjects intolerable by the Principles of equal Government but would also make the Government unpracticable in the hands of those who were undoubtedly intitled to it § III IT would be a grievance to the Subjects intolerable by the Principles of equal Government and therefore unlikely to be intended by an equal Legislator that his Subjects should be imposed on at the pleasure of pretenders that by this means many more and heavier burdens should be imposed on them than the Legislator himself would ever have imposed that there should be no end of these Imposers or their Impositions as there can be none if they be not reduced to some certain Rules that the worst and basest part of Mankind such as false pretenders certainly would be should at least in this World be permitted to tyrannize over their betters that the highest Criminals against Majesty in the very practice of their Crimes should be permitted to abuse the dutifulness and obedience of their Fellow-Subjects who are more loyal § IV AND it must needs obstruct the exercise of all visible Government in this Life If particular Governours be obtruded on the supreme without their consent they cannot prevent what mischief may follow in case of their miscarriage and therefore cannot in Justice be responsible for them they cannot secure the unanimous persecution of the same designs and the very want of Vnanimity alone is of so great importance in these matters as that they must extremely prejudice the success of the designs themselves But when withal private Persons are encouraged not only to act independently on the ordinary visible supreme Governours of the Church on such pretences as these are but also to contradict them and control them when upon pretence of Authority received from God they may be permitted to exempt themselves or any others from their duty to ordinary Governours when though the ordinary supreme visible Governours of the Church must be supposed to have received whatever Authority they have received from God himself as well as these Pretenders yet these Pretenders may still be rather thought credible in their pretences of a Mission from God nay may also be supposed to have a higher degree of Authority committed to them than their ordinary Superiors for none but a higher degree can suffice to control the Authority of their Superiors only because their Mission is extraordinary As these things must be great encouragements to ill-designing Persons to make these pretences so no exercise of Government can hold if the Persons interested in such Pretences can be confident enough to make them They cannot control them at least in this Life and that is enough to make the Government in this life insignificant It is therefore most reasonable to suppose that God has granted us means of convicting such offenders as these are § V 2. THEREFORE it is also further reasonable to believe that these means of convicting Pretenders be notorious to all and notorious even to ordinary capacities If People do not know their Governours how is it possible that they can think themselves obliged to pay any Duty to them And if these means be not notorious to all it will be as impossible for them to know their Governours In the Case I am speaking of it comes to the same purpose whether they have no Authority at all or whether they cannot be known to have it For if they cannot be known to have it all who think they have it not must take all they do for Vsurpation and a perfect Nullity and therefore as they cannot think it antecedently obligatory so neither can they think themselves obliged in any equity to ratifie the acts of those whom they take for Enemies and Vsurpers Nay the very non-appearance of such a right is a very just reason to suspect them of falsly pretending to it considering by the Principles of all Government how insignificant any right is supposed to be without means of notoriety and considering therefore how very careful all Governours are to provide such means and not to impute disobedience as a crime till these means may be presumed notorious to them who are concerned in them and considering how much more equal God is than the most equal Governours and how impossible it is that he should forget any thing which he ought in equity to have foreseen § VI AND that this notoriety ought to be so great as to be sufficient to give satisfaction to the generality even of the meanest capacities besides that it is the common sentiment of all Governours the very reason of the thing and the concernment even such Persons have in Government whatever they may have in Doctrines that all must be guided by their Governours in their Practice which cannot be unless they know them nay the Multitude consisting principally of such Persons and Government being principally calculated for the Multitude and a knowledg of their Governours being the foundation of all Duties to be paid to them all these things I say being laid together do methinks make it very little capable of being doubted § VII 3. THEREFORE when we speak of these notorious means for convicting Pretenders ordinarily in future Ages for ever we must not suppose that the Apostles left the Church only to those extraordinary means of discovery which were only proper to their own Age which by the confession of all are long since ceased whose credentials at least are undeniably ceased without which it is impossible that they should be notorious to the Multitude And therefore it is not likely that we should now be left to the gift of discerning of Spirits or of Prophesie or of consulting God by lots not to speak now of the extraordinary manifestations of God
qualifications whatever proportion be requisite for publick service they must admit all those whom they judg qualified and admit none but such if the qualifications alone be supposed to intitle to the Authority But if any may be rejected whom they think qualified or any admitted whom they do not judg qualified either of these are sufficient to shew that qualifications alone cannot be conceived sufficient to intitle to Authority And yet this is all that can be thought of how the Scriptures can be thought to design particular Persons for Authority that they may indeed describe and particularize those qualifications which may fit a Person when he is known to have them for Authority CHAP. XXI Ecclesiastical Authority cannot be derived to this Age without a continued Succession THE CONTENTS 3. This Ecclesiastical Authority cannot be derived from those men to whom it was at first committed to the age we live in without a continued Succession of Persons orderly receiving Authority from those who had Authority to give it them § I. 1. This Authority could not be derived from the Apostles themselves to any beyond their own time Neither by them in their own Persons nor by their Deed of Gift nor by their Writings § II. 2. It hence follows that the only way they could use for conveying this Authority to others after their decease must be by appointing sufficient substitutes who might act for them after their departure § III. 3. The same reasons which prove it impossible for the Apostles to convey this Power to any who did not live in their own Age do also prove it impossible for any of their Successors to do so § IV V. 4. This Negative Argument will only hold concerning the only substitutes of the Apostles and concerning them it will hold That they who have not received Power from them who are alone substituted by the Apostles to convey their Power to others cannot at all receive any Power from the Apostles § VI VII VIII IX 5. That this Negative Argument applied to any particular Age will hold concerning the only substitutes remaining in that particular Age. Bishops were the only substitutes of the Apostles then remaining when our Brethren began their innovations § X. § I 3. THIS Ecclesiastical Authority cannot be derived in this Age we live in from those men to whom it was at first committed that is from the Apostles without a continued succession of Persons orderly receiving Authority from those who had Authority to give it them from those first times of the Apostles to ours at present § II FOR it is plain 1. That this Authority cannot be derived from the Apostles themselves to any beyond their own time There are but three ways conceivable how this might be possible that they themselves might convey Authority to others either by their Persons or by their Deed of Gift or by their Writings But by none of these means are they capable of receiving Authority from them who did not live in their time Not from them in their own Persons because they were dead before the Persons of whom we speak were born or were capable of receiving Authority from them For it is impossible to understand by the nature of any Humane contracts how a personal right can be devolved to another without a personal act or how any personal act can be between Persons who are not supposed coexistent at the same time Not by their Deed of Gift because this also could only convey their Power to Persons of their own Age. Especially considering that Power is that which is the original security of all other Gifts Indeed where a standing Power is supposed and a constant orderly Succession into that Power there a Gift may be made to future Persons which may both be determined by Persons so empowered and the Gift secured to Persons so determined by them But all are so sensible of the unpracticableness of a Gift to future Persons without a Power both to determine the Persons and secure the Gift to them as that it is ordinary in Wills to appoint Executors who may secure the performance where the standing Power cannot descend minutely to take care of the performance in particular cases And it were certainly in vain to make Testaments if none were empowered to determine the Controversies which rise in execution of them and if the publick Authority did not confirm the Act of the Testator in nominating an Executor and the Power of the Executor for performing the trust committed to him It is therefore absolutely necessary that a Power be first established by which the Will may be performed and a Succession in that Power ascertained for so long at least as any particular of the will remains unperformed before any one can in prudence think such a will performable And therefore the Power of the Apostles being the Supreme and only Power by which the Church as a Body Politick does subsist must be first secured and secured in a regular constant Succession so that none ought to be supposed in future Ages to receive any Power from them but they who receive it in that Succession by the hands of Persons empowered to give it them And because their Legacies are not confined to any certain Age therefore the Power of their Executors must not expire for ever and so much the rather because there is no superior Power to take care of the execution in case the Persons should fail who are immediately intrusted with the Execution Not by their Writings though they indeed continued extant after the decease of the Writers for what has been said in the future Chapter § III HENCE it follows 2. That if they would convey any Power to Persons not living in their own Age seeing they could not do it by themselves they must do it by appointing sufficient substitutes to act in their name after their decease that is they must give such Persons whom they would substitute the same Power themselves had received from Christ I mean as to these ordinary exercises of Power for which I am at present concerned and not only so but the same Power also which themselves had received of communicating this Power to others Where both of these were present the act of such substitutes was to be taken for the Act of the Apostles themselves and as validly obliging them as if it had been performed by themselves in their own Persons by all the Laws then received concerning Delegation and substitution And the want of either of them was sufficient by the same Laws to invalidate a conveyance from the Apostles by so imperfectly-Authorized substitutes And I have already shewn that the Laws then received were punctually observed by the Apostles in these their Legal conveyances I cannot foresee what other means our Adversaries can think of to avoid this consequence Chap. iii. §. 5 6 7 8. When they shall think of any it will then be time enough to consider it § IV AND 3. The very same reasons
of men must involve their Records in a greater danger of miscarriage than others Besides that this dependence on Records must in the natural course of things make the Government weakest in the later Ages when we are warned to expect the vices of men most outragious and most needing a restraint which makes it very unlikely to have been Gods pleasure that it should depend on them Which will weaken all our Adversaries Arguments either from the less or from the obscurity of those Primitive Records § IX AND that way of tryal must needs be less popular because it resolves it into more Ancient Histories and greater variety of Learning than can reasonably be supposed in popular capacities If therefore Episcopacy alone and Episcopacy in the modern sense be the only Succession of the Apostles which has been kept uninterrupted to our present times the consequence must then be certain that there can be no Apostolical Power in our present Age which is not derived even from our modern Episcopacy § X FOR it is further observable 5. That even for this Negative consequence it is sufficient that the Argument be deduced from the only substitutes that are extant in the Age to which it is applied that whatever is not done by them cannot be supposed to be done by the Apostles themselves For what if the Presbyterian Government had lasted as long as our Adversaries pretend it did What if the Apostles had lest the form of Government different in several places in some Episcopal in some Presbyterian as a very learned Person does conjecture Dr. Stillingfleet Iren. And what if the Presbyteries of those times had indeed the power of Ordination and intended to give that Power to all the particular Presbyters that were ordeined by them then All this would only prove that the Presbyters so ordeined in those times had indeed the Power of Ordination and that all who were then ordeined by them were validly ordeined But it does not therefore follow that the present Ordinations by simple Presbyters is valid also unless it can be still proved that such a Succession of Presbyterian Government has been continued down to our present times and that the Power of Ordination is now also conferred by them on simple Presbyters as they conceive it to have been then If all the Successions of those Presbyterian Governments be long since extinct as most certainly they are now if they ever were in being then it is as vain to revive a title from them now which is impossible to be received from them as it would be to revive the title of the Julian Family to the Roman Empire And therefore they being uncapable of having Successors on this supposition it must follow that the Episcopal Successions are the only Successions now remaining of the Apostolical Power so that neither Presbyters nor Presbyteries can now have any more of the Power of the Apostles than what they can derive from the Episcopal Successions CHAP. XXII The Authority of administring the Sacraments is not now to be expected any where but in the Episcopal Communion THE CONTENTS 4. This Authority of administring the Sacraments is not now to be expected any where but in the Episcopal Communion § I. Hence it follows that all the Authority which can be pretended in any other form of Government now must be derived from the Episcopal Government of that Age wherein that form first began § II. The first dividers of the several parties had never a power given them of ordeining others by them who made them Presbyters § III IV. 1. They have actually received no more power from God than they have received from their Ordeiners § V. 2. They have actually received no more from their Ordeiners than what their Ordeiners did actually intend to give them according to their presumable intention § VI. 3. That is to be presumed likely to be the intention of their Ordeiners which may be presumed likely to be thought becoming by Persons in their Circumstances § VII 4. The securest way of judging what the Bishops who first Ordeined these Dividers thought becoming must be by the Notions then prevailing when these first Dividers were Ordeined § VIII § I 4. THIS Authority is not now to be expected any where but in the Episcopal Communion This is a plain Corollary from the former Propositions For from thence it has appeared that no Authority can be expected in this present Age but in that Communion where the Succession of Apostolical Power has been continued to this present And that this Succession has been continued to our days in no other but the Episcopal Communion I conceive to be a thing so notorious as that I think our Adversaries themselves will not deny it They do not that I know of pretend the like uninterrupted Succession in any other form of Government § II HENCE it plainly follows that all the Authority which can be pretended in any other form of Government or in any other Communion at present must be derived from the Episcopal especially of that Age wherein the several parties began I suppose therefore that within less than two hundred years since that there was no Church in the world wherein a visible Succession was mainteined from the Apostles times to ours which was not Episcopally governed I suppose also that the first Inventers of the several Sects were at first Members of these Episcopal Churches and received both their Baptism in them and all the Orders they received I need not use that Argument here that they must therefore have received their Authority in the Episcopal Communion because there was then no other Communion that could give this Authority I think our Adversaries themselves as many of them as pretend to a regular Ordination or a valid Succession will not deny but that what Orders were received by them were actually received by their Forefathers in the Episcopal Communion and by Episcopal Authority Let us therefore see whether the Orders so received can make valid what they now do in their several Separations that is whether they can ratifie their Ordinances or their Sacraments or any thing else that concerns them as a Church that is as a Society priviledged with Spiritual Priviledges § III AND here I do not intend to take the advantage I might against the exercise of that Power by these Persons in their separate condition which they had before really and validly received from a just Authority which was able to give it them I make no exceptions as to the validity of that exercise of it much less as to the Canonicalness of it which I know our Adversaries will much less regard The uttermost that can be made of that is only this that such Persons did receive a Power for their own Lives which must expire with their Lives which this present Generation is not concerned for If therefore I can shew that they of this Generation have nothing from them by which they can justifie the validity of their
Damasus wherein he so extols the See of Rome seems to have recommended him to the counterfeiter of the Roman Council under the name of Gelasius not long before the time of Isidore Mercator as the Authority of that Council in Isidore's Collection might recommend him downwards as soon as that bundle of Forgeries had once prevailed universally All the use that I make at present of these insinuations is that if it be suspicious whether the men who then followed these Principles did embrace them out of a sincere sense of their Truth then they cannot be presumed to have been Principles of Conscience Which if they were not this is sufficient to shew that they are not fit measures of the Power that was actually given by the Bishops of that Age. § VI AND though they had been received more universally than it appears they were among the Multitude yet how is it likely that it was so received among the Bishops themselves Is it likely that they would be generally so partial to an Opinion so destructive of their common rights as Bishops Is it likely that they would be so partial when there was no evident prevailing consideration in point of Conscience that might induce them to it when it was a matter of dispute even among disinterested Persons and debated by Arguments and Authorities at least as considerable on their side as on the others If any particular Bishops had been so strangely partial against themselves and thought themselves obliged in Conscience to be so yet sure there is no reason to make use of it as a presumption to judg of the minds of them who had not otherwise declared their minds expresly and to judg of them universally And yet it has appeared that the whole use of this opinion for judging what Power was actually given is only as a presumption and even this presumption is useless concerning others than the Bishops None but they pretended to the Power of giving Orders at least not to the exercise of that Power And therefore whatever any else thought besides the Bishops is very impertinent to our present purpose because it can give us no assurance what was actually intended by the Bishops and it is only their intention by which we can in prudence judg what Power was actually given by them § VII BUT let us suppose that which in prudence can never be supposed that the Bishops of those Ages were universally of this opinion that their own Order was the same with that of Presbyters yet it does not thence follow that they must have given Presbyters the Power of Ordination It neither follows from the Notions of those times nor from the reason of the thing And sure we cannot better judg of a matter of this nature than by one of these two ways It does not follow from the Notions of those times For even they who thought them to be the same Order yet made them different degrees and that not only from the custom of the Church but by Divine Right also But it could not have appeared how they could distinguish them even in degree but by allowing something in practice to the Superior degree as a peculiar Prerogative and there was nothing thought so a So Epiphanius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hâ—res lxxv 4 And again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ib. And St. Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 init Hom. ii in 1. ad Tim. p. 289. peculiar to the Episcopal degree as this power of Ordination This was the very particular excepted by St. Hierome b Quid enim facit exceptâ Ordinatione Episcopus quod Presbyter non faciat Ep. 85. ad Euagr. himself even where he most of all pleads for parity in other things I know there are of our Brethren who understand St. Hierome's words not of the original right of appropriating ordination to them as left to them by the Apostles but of a priviledg actually allowed them by the practice of the Church in that Age wherein he wrote which I shall not now dispute It suffices that he made no mention of Ordination among the instances of their parity nay that he expresly excepts this particular among his other proofs of the identity of their Office without telling expresly on what right it was that he made the exception which were very fair occasions to induce them to believe that he did not intend to give them the power of Ordination especially when it was withal notorious and confessed by himself that he lived in the Communion of a Church wherein Presbyters were debarred from the exercise of this Power It suffices that they who in that Age followed his Authority were not obliged by any of their designs in promoting his opinion to understand him of a parity in the power of Ordination nay never seem actually to have understood him so whatever other sense has been applied to him by those who have more subtilly considered him in our present Age. It is not St. Hierome's true opinion that I am now concerned for but that of those who might then have followed him If they never understood him of a parity between Bishops and Presbyters in the power of ordination If they did not really believe them equal in this particular if they actually believed that this distinction of degree was from the Apostles and that this power of ordination was the peculiar Prerogative of the Superior degree then certainly they who then followed St. Hierome might notwithstanding if they maintained these things also together with his opinion thinks themselves obliged never to give the power of ordination to the Presbyters that were then ordeined by them So far our Brethren are from any solid ground of a presumption that such a thing was ever intended for them § VIII AND as this consequence was far from being owned in the actual sense of those times so neither will it indeed follow from the opinion of these Persons that simple Presbyters had any right to a power of Ordination Though they believed Episcopacy to be the same Order with Presbytery yet their acknowledging a difference in degree was enough to hinder them from confounding the peculiar rights of the several degrees and this we see was taken for the peculiar right of Episcopacy Though they conceived no new Character to have been imprinted in the Consecration of a Bishop yet withal they confessed that the Character of his Presbytery was extended And why may not this extension extend his Power also at least to some Acts to which he had not Power before Nay certainly this very thing was intended by them that it should actually do so And if so then certainly this extended Power must have implied an addition of Power above what was in it before it was so extended Whence it will plainly follow that this Power of Ordination to which the Episcopal Character was extended was wanting in them whilest they were simple Presbyters that is before it was so extended And therefore they who were of
intend to follow the Doctrines I do not say of the Aerians who had been reckoned in the Catalogues of Hereticks S. Augustini Epiphanli long before their own times but even of the Wiclevists and Waldenses who had been more lately censured for mainteining the equality of Bishops and Presbyters They who know how odious the name of Heretick was in those days and how express condemnations of them were required from Persons who were to be admitted to preferments and how these Catalogues and Councils who had censured these Persons were the Standards whereby such Persons were obliged to judg who were Hereticks they I say cannot believe that the Bishops of that Age could have kept either their Communion or their Preferments if they had been of our Adversaries mind in asserting the Order and Character of Episcopacy to have been the same with that of Priesthood And they must still remember that it is by what was mainteined by them with a good conscience that we must judg what Power was actually designed for the Presbyters ordeined by them We must not therefore understand these Opinions so as to think that the Persons who mainteined them in the Ages we are speaking of intended to exclude all difference between the two Offices And if any difference were acknowledged it must have been this of Ordination which St. Hierome himself the principal Author of this Opinion had acknowledged for such an inseparable peculiar Prerogative of Episcopacy And therefore we have all the reason we can desire to presume that even Persons of this Perswasion in that Age did intend to reserve this Power from the Presbyters that were ordeined by them § XVI FOR it is particularly considerable that this case of theirs is not capable of that Apology for submitting to an unjust Government which is usually and I think very justly made use of to excuse St. Hierome He indeed seems to have thought that in the Apostles Age the Presbyters had a greater interest in the Government of the Church than was allowed them in his own But this did not hinder his submission to the Government even of his own time though it had not been so just nay did not hinder him from thinking that it might then have a very just though an only humane right It was his sense not of the Government in the Apostles times but of the Government of his own times that concerned his present practice But that which these Persons taught who made Bishops and Presbyteries of the same Order concerned not only the Apostles Age but their own They thought them still to be not only de Jure but de Facto of the same Order and therefore could not think themselves under any higher Duty to their Bishops than what was consistent with their being of the same Order And therefore if this had allowed them a Power of Ordeining others why did they not challenge that Power why did they suffer the Bishops to ingross it to themselves and to secure their present Vsurpations to posterity for ever by an unquestioned peaceable prescription Could not any one bold Spirit be found who would stand up for the honour of his Order Could neither interest nor conscience neither animate some to give a preâ—edent of contradicting it they do not seem in those Ages to have been generally so meâ—k and so fearful of disturbing the publick Peace for what they thought to be their right Mighty quarrels were then engaged on for matters of incomparably more trivial concernment and where withal they had less interest either to provoke or animate them than here And if indeed they had thought of any such consequences as they must have thought if their meaning in this Assertion were such as our Adversaries are apt to understand it to have been how came it to pass that it escaped the censures of their then present Superiors Is it likely that it could have escaped those censures in such an Age wherein policy was their principal study and the principal employment of their zeal was the maintenance of their present establishments Did none of these Persons who mainteined these Opinions ever come themselves to be Governours And if their Opinions altered with their Interests must they not then have been conscious of the ill consequence and mischievousness of what they had mainteined formerly If none of them had been conscious of these things from their own experience yet sure their jealousie and the momentousness of the thing would have made them suspicious though they wanted solid grounds if they had only likelihoods And these suspicions were sufficient to have awakened all their diligence for suppressing them When I consider these things I cannot but think that the Persons who then mainteined this Opinion concerning the identity of the Order of Bishops and Presbyters must needs have been very far from thinking of any consequence prejudicial to their present establishments much less from attempting any thing in practice till pure necessity as well as opportunity forced them upon it They did not therefore pretend to excuse Presbyters from the least instance of their Canonical Obedience to their Ordinary even of that Obedience which was prescribed by the Canons of those times So far it is from being probable that they intended to give them the peculiar prerogative of the Bishop the Power of ordeining others nay so far do they seem from so much as judging it fit in Conscience that this Power should be given to them who were then ordeined Presbyters And yet from what has been already said it appears sufficiently that nothing short of their actual intentions to give them this Power can suffice to legitimate our Brethrens present Ordinations CHAP. XXIV The Nullity of the Ordinations of the Non-Conformists proved from the Power of the Bishops even as Presidents over the Presbyteries THE CONTENTS § I This Supposition That the Bishops had the right of presiding over Ecclesiastical Assemblies sufficient for our purpose § I. 1. In regard of that Power which must be granted due to him even as President This proved by these degrees 1. Even by the Principles of Aristocratical Government no Power can be given but by the act of that Body wherein the right of Government is originally seated § II. 2. No act can be presumed to be the act of that Body but what has passed them in their publick Assemblies § III. 3. No Assemblies can dispose of the right of such Societies but such as are lawful ones according to the constitutions of the Societies § IV V. 4. The indiction of the Assembly by the President is a right consequent to the Office of a President as a President and a circumstance requisite to make the Assembly it self lawful § VI VII 5. The Bishops have always been the Presidents of Ecclesiastical Assemblies even as high as our Adversaries themselves do grant the Practice of Presiding Presbyters § VIII IX This invalidates the Orders of our Adversaries § X. This was a right which no
and therefore cannot agree to any but the President whose Authority alone can be antecedent to the meeting of the Assembly so that if it be the right of any it must be his because none besides him is capable of it And this is more certainly true of him who has a right to preside in Assemblies when they are convened by vertue of his general right to preside over the whole Society as well when Assemblies are not convened as when they are than of him who is chosen by the particular Assemblies for their particular occasions And he who has his Presidency not by vertue of any particular Election distinct from that whereby he received his Office if his Office be not arbitrary or confined within a certain time but given him for term of Life must have such a Presidency as I am speaking of Concerning such a President as this the Negative Argument will hold for which I am at present concerned not only that the Assemblies convened by him are in that regard lawful as they are convened by him but also that no Assemblies are lawful but what are called by him because there is no other way of making them lawful but the lawfulness of their Call nor any power to call them distinct from that of such a President § VIII 5. THE Bishop was not only in the more modern Ages of which I have been discoursing the President of their Ecclesiastical Assemblies and that not arbitrarily or by vertue of particular Elections but constant and for term of Life I say not only then but as high as our Adversaries themselves do grant the practice of presiding Presbyters Which as they among them who understand any thing of Antiquity do not deny to have been very early after the Apostles days so truly I do not understand how they can deny it to have been practised even then without destroying the very Historical Faith of the Primitive Church without weakening that testimony on which we receive the Canon of the New Testament in a matter as notorious to them as that Canon it self Not to mention the testimony of Ignatius though truly I think they who question it since the late excellent a In vindic Ignat cont Dallaeum defence of it performed with as great evidence as a matter of that Antiquity after the miscarriage of so many Primitive Records is capable of might as well have questioned several Books of the New Testament it self which notwithstanding they receive on lesser evidence I say not to mention this What can they say to the Angels in the Revelations What to the testimony of St. Irenaeus b Iren. L.iii. adv Haer. apud Eus. Hist. iv 14 concerning St. Polycarp who seems to have been one of them whom he makes to have been ordeined Bishop of Smyrna by the Apostles themselves What to the testimony of Clemens c Clem. Al. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Eus. Hist. iii. 23 Alexandrinus who mentions Bishops among other Offices of the Church settled by St. John What to the testimony of Hegesippus d Eus. L.iii. Hist. Eccl. c. 20. who makes the Kinsmen of our Saviour to have been made Bishops from Domitians time to that of Trajan What to those who mention St. James e Eus. Hist. ii 1 to have been made Bishop of Hierusalem by the Apostles themselves What of the seven Polycrates f Eus. Hist. v. 24 mentions as Bishops in his own See before himself the first of which seems in all likelihood to have begun in the Apostles times Nay what to all those Catalogues of Bishops succeeding in the four Patriarchal Sees particularly the fifteen in g Eus. Hist. iv 5 Hierusalem from St. James to the destruction of the Jews under Adrian Nay what to the Succession of all the h Tertull. Praescr Iren. adv Haer. Apostolical Sees to which the Fathers of the second Century do so solemnly appeal to prove their own Doctrine Apostolical in opposition to the contrary pretences of the Hereticks § IX CAN they think them all to have been either wilful forgeries or general mistakes in a matter of Fact so near their own time without so much as any likely ground in History How will they then assure us that they were not mistaken in delivering to us the Books of the Apostles which were not more notorious to them than their Government And what could have been a more likely occasion of their mistake of the Bishops being the Governours of their respective Dioceses than this that they were at least the ordinary Presidents of their Ecclesiastical Assemblies They will not when they consider it find it so easie to avoid this Presidency of Bishops even in the Apostles times whatever they may think of their absolute Monarchy They will not find their Arguments concerning the confusion of the names of Bishops and Presbyters in those first times to proceed so firmly against this Though both these names had belonged to the same Office yet it does not follow but that one of that same rank might have been first and by his priviledg of being so might have had the power of their Ecclesiastical Assemblies though he had no further Jurisdiction over the particular Members of such Assemblies when they were once convened And without granting thus much at least they will not find it so easie as they may think before they try it to solve the Phaenomena now objected The most learned of our Adversaries do themselves grant as much as I am concerned to infer from them The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which they account for these things amount to as much as I desire at present And * Speaking of the Offices of the first Presbyter in his first Period before the Year 136. he says they did publice in collectis sedulis universam fraternitatem hortamentis ad bonum Pietatis certamen fidaque charitatis obsequia excitare eandem precibus excitare ordinis consessus cogere c. Praef. ad Apol. pro S. Hieronym p. 6. Blondell does expresly grant that these earlier Bishops who lived before the deviation as he thinks it from the Rule of the Apostles had this power of calling the Ecclesiastical Assemblies § X BY all which it appears that though we judg of the rightful possessions of those times by a recourse to the Primitive establishment of the Apostles yet it will be impossible for our Adversaries to convict the Bishops of the Ages I am speaking of of usurping this right at least of presiding in the Ecclesiastical Assemblies and that even for term of Life And therefore if by this concession the Orders of our Adversaries may be convicted of a perfect Nullity it will then very nearly concern them to consider how they can clear themselves of the Sacriledg of such exercising such Orders how they can expect any blessing or comfort in such Administrations Now that this is so will appear clearly from the Principles now
belong to him as a Presbyter though he were not also a President of the Presbytery and therefore cannot take it for a Prerogative of his Office as President That it is therefore from some such a Presbytery as this that they must derive the validity of their Orders appears from the Principles already premised that no other Presbyteries can make out their Succession from the Apostles that particular Members of even these Presbyteries cannot do it alone in a separation from them that Multitudes of such particular Persons though meeting together cannot make up such a Church among them as were requisite to attest the Orders of Persons ordeined to the rest of the Catholick Church who maintein correspondence with them § XIII CONSIDERING therefore these Episcopal Presbyteries only as Presbyters and the Bishop himself as acting herein by no higher a power than that of an ordinary Presbyter yet even so no Orders can be valid but those which were conferred by the prevailing vote of even such a Presbytery at least those are invalid which are given by the votes of a smaller over voted part of them Even by the Principles of Aristocratical Government though it were doubtful whether the greater part might dispose a right common to them all without the consent of every particular yet it hardly can be doubtful whether a smaller part can dispose of such a common right though over-voted by a greater number of suffrages than their own Though it may be thought reasonable that some reserved cases of that nature wherein the whole Society were deeply concernâ—d should not pass without the unanimous suffrages of every individual Member yet as there is no Justice antecedently to compacts that any individuals should dispose of the rights of others though less considerable than themselves till by the general acts and compacts of all whereby Polyarchical Societies are most naturally settled such general rules are agreed on by which some particular Members may for peaces sake be allowed to dispose of the common rights of their Fellow-members without their express consent in the particular but by vertue of their general consent once given to such general rules so neither is there any reason in prudence that where unanimous consent cannot be had and it is therefore necessary that one part yield to the other the greater should be swayed by the smaller part The fundamental rule of all this publick justice is that where there is a necessity of a choice the publick be preferred before private interests that therefore it is very just to bear with injuries to private Persons when they cannot be avoided without injuries to the publick Which will in generosity oblige a smaller part to yield to a greater but can on no terms oblige the greater to yield to the smaller because indeed the interest of the greater part is more the publick interest than that of the smaller § XIV BESIDES the reason of all compacts of this kind of referring their differences to a publick decision is the presumed equality of the decision above what would be among the interessed Persons themselves and the power to execute what is resolved on beyond the resistance of those against whom the cause is decided And therefore if we should again suppose men free as they were before these compacts I am speaking of we have reason to presume that they would settle this power of deciding their differences in such hands where there might be presumed less danger of corruption and where there were the greatest power to execute their own decrees And both these reasons give the preference to these major votes above the smaller part It is to be presumed that it is not so easie to corrupt a greater as it is to corrupt a smaller part And when it is necessary that the decree be executed the power of the greater is greater than that of the smaller part where the particular Subjects of power are supposed equal as they are in our present case And though it be very possible in after cases that it may so fall out that the greatest right may sometimes belong to that side where there is the smallest power yet we have reason to believe that the only reason why it comes to be so is the unexpectedness of revolutions to which humane affairs are obnoxious which could not be so much as probably foreseen when the rules of such Societies were first agreed on Otherwise it is reasonable to presume that at the first constitution of those rules they would chuse the greatest power and interest for the fittest seat of Authority because they would by that be best secured of the execution of the Sentences given by them And therefore where we may presume the greater power lay at the passing of those compacts and where they who made those compacts had reason to see the greatest power would always be there we have also reason to presume that they would intend to place the greatest Authority § XV AND this is a reason which might in all probability induce them to resolve that the major vote should prevail through all succeeding generations because the major vote in the case I am speaking of must inseparably carry with it the greatest power And this is a reason that alike concerns all by whom the Government were at first settled whether it were by compacts of the Parties themselves who were to be governed or whether the Government were placed over them by a power who had a Jurisdiction over them antecedently to their own consent There is the same reason why such a power should decree that the smaller number of suffrages in opposition to a greater number should be null in Societies to be established by him as that the Parties themselves should at first agree that it should be so The reasons now mentioned proceed alike in both cases Which I therefore observe that our Adversaries may perceive that as to the case of which I am now speaking it will come to the same event whether the power of the Presbyteries do come from the consent of the particular Presbyters or whether it proceed immediately from the Divine institution Still it is to be presumed that things are to be decided by the vote of the greater part where nothing is otherwise expresly determined because this way of determination is so certainly for the publick interest for which we have as much reason to presume that God would be solicitous as that the Presbyters themselves would be so § XVI BY this it appears even from the Principles of Aristocratical Government how invalid as well as how irregular it must be for a smaller over-voted number of the Presbyters to undertake to dispose of the common rights of the whole Presbyteries whether as acting by themselves or as acting in Presbyteries made up of multitudes of such Presbyters as had been severally over-voted in the Presbyteries to which each of them did at first belong Now that the power given in the Ordination of a Presbyter
it And it is not only an excusing presumption to presume that to be true concerning God which is most worthy of him where either there are no Arguments at all or where the Arguments appear in other regards equal but it is also a great Argument of the Truth of an Hypothesis when all things answer it so as they would or must have done if God himself had been the Author of it § V NOW that the Hypothesis here given is indeed thus fitted for practice will appear if it be considered that general cases are those which all prudent contrivers of Government do take themselves to be obliged to foresee If these things be sufficiently provided for they will not think their reputation concerned if things fall out hard in particular cases Not only the impossibility for humane prudence to foresee all particulars which will concern men but the nature of the things which will reach even God himself will make such inconveniences as those are impossible to be avoided But where these general cases are not provided for that is a certain disrepute to the whole contrivance and therefore a certain conviction of a contrivance pretending to come from God and where they are best provided for that ought to be a prevailing presumption that such a particular Hypothesis came from God where it is certain and supposed that some did so § VI BUT the general cases relating to Government are they which concern the Multitude of those who are to be governed and therefore those of mean and ordinary capacities and unimproved by learned Education because indeed these are the most considerable ingredient in the Multitude And therefore it is certain that a Government contrived by Divine Wisdom must needs be such as that even they proceeding on those general presumptions which they are capable of in their other affairs may be capable of knowing their duty even where they are sensible of their own incapacity of judging concerning the merit of the things And that Hypothesis which gives the best account in this regard and most suitable to such capacities must therefore be presumed most agreeable to the Divine Wisdom And this will appear in both those particulars which are of principal importance for making duty practicable in regard of the Superiors to whom this duty is to be performed where many competitors pretend to the title of Superiors and in regard of the extent of that duty which they are to perform to those true Superiors § VII 1. IT will be most easie by these Principles even for such capacities to distinguish their true Superiors from the multitude of false pretenders to that name These ordinary Persons I am speaking of need not trouble themselves with those disputes of our Brethren concerning the form of Government settled in that part of the Apostles Age whereof the Scriptures do inform us no nor in the Histories of those Ages which immediately succeeded the Apostles either for clearing the sence of those Scriptures or for shewing what was introduced by the Apostles in that later end of their Age wherein the Church was more ripe for settling a succession of Government and whereof the Scripture History does not pretend to give us any account nor for discovering what was introduced by the unanimous consent of the Church of parties concerned as well as others and which was morally impossible to have been without the knowledg or approbation of the Apostles and much more impossible that it should have obteined so suddenly and universally if the Apostles had known and disapproved it These disputes besides that they are not so certain in such a loss and obscurity of Primitive Monuments by which they ought to be decided are withal matters of Learning beyond the reach of the Persons I am now discoursing of But they way of judging which is the true Church in opposition to other Schismatical ones by Succession as it is more certain in it self so its proof depends on things much more capable of being judged of by these Persons For § VIII 1. IT is plain and plain even to such illiterate Persons who do but understand what it is to reason that granting the Principles of our present discourse there must be such a succession owned somewhere unless we will question the validity of all the Sacraments of the World which were indeed to question the continuance of the Church it self at least as it is a Body Politick And this being certain will be a rational presumption of the falshood of any Arguments produced to the contrary though they could not tell how to answer them Especially if they depend on things of which such Persons find themselves less competent Judges than they are of this Whence it will also follow that such Arguments cannot in reason expect a bearing from such Persons till they be first convinced of the insolidity of these Principles § IX AND 2. It may even to such Persons be also notorious by the unanimous consent of all Persons skilled in the Histories of those Ages that for many Centuries before the Reformation Succession from the Apostles was not mainteined so much as in any one individual Church in the World by any Government but Episcopal This is not a thing controverted even by them who do indeed dispute the right of Episcopal Government And therefore here unskilful Persons may securely trust the testimony of the skilful because they are unanimous on the same account of prudence whereby they find themselves obliged in other cases wherein they have no skill to trust them who are skilful Now from this unanimous acknowledgment of this matter of Fact in our present case it will follow both that the Succession was then mainteined in the Episcopal Government even as then administred seeing it must otherwise have been perfectly lost and that all pretences to this Succession in any Person now must be derived from that Episcopal Government which immediately preceded the contrary Innovations because no other could then pretend to such a Succession § X AND 3. Upon these terms of tryal the same common prudence which enables even such illiterate Persons for managing their worldly concernments wherein they have equal occasion for knowing something not done within their own cognizance and wherein they must consequently be obliged to relie on the testimony of other credible Persons and the same industry which even that common prudence will dictate to be necessary for so great and near concernments as those are of eternity These I say will enable these same Persons to judg which of these different pretenders are really invested with Authority and consequently to which of them they are bound as Subjects to pay Obedience For § XI 1. THE Innovations are so late and of so clear and remarkable an Original as that it needs no great Learning even for such a Person to inform himself when they began and what Government then prevailed universally He may be assured it was Episcopacy if he should distrust his own enquiry