such a People for the neglect or change of it If ever God would have done this we might most reasonably expect it under the Jewish Oeconomy in which every minute Circumstance was so strictly commanded by God as having something Sacred and Typical in it and yet it does not appear that every deviation from their Rule though in some very material parts of it did provoke God to cast them off God had appointed a certain place where they should offer their Sacrifices to him and when this place was actually fixed and determined it was unlawful for them to offer Sacrifice in any other place And yet when the Temple at Jerusalem was built which was the only place God had appointed for Sacrifice the People continued to offer Sacrifice in their high places even in the Reign of very good Kings and though this practise was condemned yet it did not un-church them God had appointed Aarons Family for the Priesthood 1 Kings 12.31 and yet Jeroboam made Priests of other Tribes and Families and the Law which expresly appoints Aaron and his Sons for the Priests Office only threatens death against Usurpers Numb 3.10 Thou shalt appoint Aaron and his Sons and they shall wait on the Priests Office and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death God did not reject the Church of Israel for the irregularities of their Priests but owned them for his Church and People many years after this till they defiled themselves with the worship of Baal and other Heathen Gods And Josephus observes that after the death of Menelaus Joseph Antiq l. 12. cap. 14. Antiochus made Alchymus High-Priest who was not of the Family of the Priests and yet I should be loth to say that such an irregular promotion did un-church the Jewish Church and whoever considers in what manner the High-Priests were advanced and deposed even in the time of our Saviour possibly may think it as inconsistent with the first Institution of that Office as the irregular Ordinations of Presbyters 2. We ought especially to consider the force and power of necessity to dispence even with divine Institutions No necessity can dispence with the eternal Laws of good and evil because no necessity can be pleaded to justifie men in sin though in some cases it may extenuate the evil and guilt of it for the internal necessity in the nature of things is stronger than any external necessity can be no external force can compel men to sin which is an Act of their own will and choice and the obligations to Vertue remain in the most extreme necessity But in positive Institutions which depend upon the Will of God we find necessity has often dispensed and that with God's allowance and approbation As to give some few examples of it 1. The necessity of the divine Worship has dispensed with positive Institutions Thus in Hezekiah's Sacrifice the Priests being too few 2 Ch ron 29.34.35.11 the Levites assisted them in doing the Priests work in slaying the Sacrifices and the like we may see in Josiah's Passeover And by the same reason we may suppose that if the Family of Aaron had failed other Families of the Tribe of Levi might have succeeded into the Priest's Office though against a positive Law For the necessity of the divine Worship is much greater and more unalterable than the confinement of the Priesthood to a certain Family and where the divine Providence makes a necessity necessity will make a Priest And therefore I think a late learned and ingenious Author who disputes so earnestly that the Power of administring Sacraments must be derived from God and that this Power now is given only by Episcopal Ordination ought to have distinguished between the ordinary and extraordinary conveyance of Power Whoever administers in holy things must derive his Power from God because he acts in God's Name and when it may be done he must derive his Power in such a way as God hath appointed by a positive Law and whoever rejects this way without necessity can have no valid Power but whatever he does is null and void as I doubt not but all Ordinations of Presbyters are in opposition to and contempt of their Bishops as I think that learned man hath sufficiently proved But the case of necessity ought to be considered it being contrary to the Nature of all positive Institutions to oblige in case of necessity and I take that to be a case of necessity when Episcopal Orders cannot be had and yet the Church must sail without them Bishops are for the Church not the Church for Bishops and when the ordinary conveyance of this Authority fails necessity legitimates other extraordinary ways We have all the reason in the World to presume in such cases that God will confirm and ratifie the choice and designation of the People much more the Ordinations of the Presbytery where Episcopal Ordination cannot be had For I see no reason why Presbyters may not do the Bishops work in case of necessity as well as Levites do the work of Priests 2. The necessity of mens lives dispense with positive Laws Upon this account our Saviour justifies David's eating the Shew-Bread when he was an hungred which was not lawful for him to eat Mark 2.24 25 26. but for the Priests and his Disciples plucking the Ears of Corn on the Sabbath day Upon this Principle Matathias allowed the Jews to fight on the Sabbath-day Joseph antiq l. 12. cap. 7. in case they were assaulted by their Enemies and our Saviour resolves all such cases by that general Principle I will have mercy and not Sacrifice and certainly mercy to the Souls of men is as considerable as any temporal concernments 3. But we may further consider what force and Authority the presumptive allowance of the Church has in such cases The Christian Church in all Ages has thought fit to dispense with positive Institutions in case of necessity and by her own Approbation and Authority to supply the defects and irregularities of such Administrations and therefore certainly did believe she had Power to do it And indeed if there be not sufficient Authority in the Church to provide for cases of necessity the Power of the Church is more defective than of any other Society of men and cannot in many cases without a miracle preserve her own being and therefore if the Church may be presumed in cases of necessity to allow Persons to perform such religious Offices and Ministries as otherwise they are not qualified to perform this very allowance supplies the incapacity of the Person and does virtually confer that Authority on him which in other cases he had not Now it is not only highly reasonable to presume that the Catholick Church will rather allow the Ordinations of Presbyters though they are not regularly qualified for that Office where there are no Bishops to Ordain than that a considerable member of the Christian Church should want a succession of Pastors to
their Power should not be accountable to the rest for it i.e. to the Colledge of Bishops which last words are not mine but his own Comment though Printed in a different Character as if they were mine and this Colledge of Bishops he transforms presently into a general Council and thus I subject the Arch-bishop of Canterbury whom I first equal to other Bishops as I do indeed with respect to original Right and Power wherein all Bishops are equal not with respect to Church-constitutions to some Court above any in this Realm to a general Council a Colledge of Bishops and now I am in danger again of a Praemunire But this has been already sufficiently explained in what sense I deny the Independency of Bishops and how far this is from subjecting them to any Forraign Jurisdiction whether of Forraign Prelates or a general Council though I cannot well understand how a general Council of which they themselves are part can be properly called a Forraign Court or Forraign Jurisdiction unless the Treaty at Nimengen were a Forraign Jurisdiction to all those Princes and States who sent their Plenipotentiaries thither to act for them However to satisfie Mr. Lob I shall 1. freely declare my thoughts about a general Council 2. Consider the folly of that suggestion that to assert the Authority of a general Council subverts the Kings supremacy and incurs a Praemunire 1. As for a general Council my thoughts are these which I humbly submit to my Superiors 1. That there never was nor ever can be in a strict sense a general and oecumenical Council of the whole Church unless the Council of the Apostles at Jerusalem was such which yet was not general unless all the Apostles were there which I suppose will not be easily proved for it is not likely there ever should be a Convention on of Bishops from all parts of the Christian World nor if it were possible that there should be some few Bishops dispatcht from all Christian Churches all the World over can I see any reason why this should be called a general Council when it may be there are ten times as many Bishops who did not come to the Council as those who did and why should the less Number of Bishops assembled in Council judge for all the rest who so far exceed them in Numbers and it may be are not inferior to them in Piety and Wisdom Especially considering that every Bishop has the supreme Government of his own Church Neque enim quisquam nostrum Episcopum se esse Episcoporum constituit aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem collegas suos adigit quando habeat omnis episcopus pro licentia libertatis potestatis suae arbitrium proprium Cypr. praef ad Concil Carthag and his Liberty and Power to choose for himself as St. Cyprian tells us and must not be compelled to obedience by any of his Colleagues which overthrows the proper Jurisdiction of general Councils which can have no direct Authority over any Bishops who refuse to consent unless it be in such Matters as concern the purity of Faith and Manners or Catholick Unity in other Matters if St. Cyprians principle be true the major Number of Votes in Council cannot make a firm Decree much less can the Votes of three or four hundred Bishops give Laws to all the Bishops in the Christian Church which is a plain Demonstration that a general Council cannot be the supreme Constitutive Regent Head of the Catholick Church 2. Since every Bishop from the Unity of Episcopacy and his obligations to Catholick Communion is bound as far as he can to govern his particular Church by the mutual Counsel and Consent of his Colleagues we must acknowledg that both Provincial and General Councils are of very great use though they have no proper jurisdiction and whatever Bishop should wilfully refuse to observe the Decrees and Canons of such Councils without manifest necessity for not doing it would be guilty of such pride and obstinacy as would fall very little short of the Guilt of Schism when there is a just Reason for it we may say with St. Austin Non consertimus huic concilio salvo jure unitatis Aug. de haptismo l. 7. c. 25. we do not consent to this Council but yet keep the Peace and Unity of the Church intire and will not heighten every dissent into a Schism but where there is no such reason it is no better than Schismatical pride and peevishness for any Bishop to pursue his own humour in opposition to the Decrees and Constitutions of his Colleagues for the very Consent and Agreement of Bishops among themselves is so great a good to the Church of God that That alone is sufficient to determine a good man when there are not very weighty reasons against it St. Cyprian I am sure thought it a Matter of mighty Consequence to manage all the great Affairs of the Church by mutual Advice Et dilectio communis ratio exposcit fratres charislimi nihil conscientiae vestrae subtrahere de his quae apud nos geruntur ut sit nobis circa utilitatem ecclesiasticae administrationis commune consilium Cyp. ep 29. in his Letter to the Presbyters and Deacons at Rome written after the Death of Fabian during the vacancy of that See he tells them that both mutual Love and Charity and the reason of the thing required that he should conceal nothing from them of the Affairs of his Church that so they might advise and consult with each other concerning the most useful Rules of Ecclesiastical Administrations And therefore he tells us that he put off the Consideration of the State of the Lapsed and would not innovate any thing in the ancient Rules of Discipline till God should be pleased to restore Peace to the Church Cypr. ep 40. that they might meet together for common Advice And the Roman Presbyters in answer to another Letter of St. Cyprians approve of this resolution and add a very weighty Reason for it that it is impossible that Decree should be firm and obtain a general Complyance which is not made by the Consent of many ep 31. And therefore I observed in the Defence that though they had no such thing as a general Council before the times of Constantine yet they had frequent Provincial Councils and sent their Synodical Letters to Forraign Churches with an account of their Transactions and Decrees that they might either approve them in their Councils or give them an account of their Dissent and the Reasons of it Mr. Baxter asks me whether they sent these Letters all the World over Cam quo nobis totus orois commercio formatarum in una Communionis societate concordat Opt. lib. 2. and I answer I believe they did not because I suspect it is not to be done no more than a general Council can be convened from all parts of the World but yet it is evident this Communication by Letters
is this that the belief of all Fundamentals is necessary to Salvation and therefore whoever assigns a Catalogue of Fundamentals damns all those who are of a different Opinion which therefore is a work fit only for a daring and uncharitable man or haereticating Councils as Mr. Baxter calls them Now in the same manner I may argue against the necessity of the Christian Faith it self Whoever asserts it necessary to Salvation to believe in Christ damns all Jews Pagans Mahometans and all Infidels which seems at least as hard a thing as to damn all Hereticks who bear no proportion at all to the number of Infidels and yet if the Christian Faith it self be necessary to Salvation it must be necessary to Salvation to believe some Articles of the Christian Faith for we cannot believe Christianity without believing such Articles as contain the essentials of Christian Faith which do not alter with the Prejudices Prepossessions and Capacities of men no more than Christianity it self And yet neither I nor any man else have any thing to do to pass a final Sentence either upon Infidels or Hereticks but they must stand or fall to their own Master There may be a standing rule of Faith and Manners whereby men shall be judged but how far the soveraign and uncovenanted Grace of God may dispence with this rule in equitable Cases is not my business to determine But of this more hereafter 3. I observe there are some Doctrines which if they be true must be fundamental Truths if they be false must be fundamental Errors because they alter the very Foundations of Christianity and make two very different Religions of it as I shall shew in what follows There are indeed a great many erroneous Doctrines which make great alterations in the Scheme of Religion as all the Antinomian Doctrines do which yet I cannot call fundamental Errors because they make no essential difference in the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ which is the great Fundamental of Christianity as you shall see more presently every erroneous Doctrine does not make a new Religion though it may in a great measure observe the Glory or spoil the influence of it upon mens minds 4. I observe further that there are some Doctrines which are necessary to Catholick Communion because the denial of them makes an essential difference in Christian Worship Christian Communion is principally exercised in all the Offices of Christian Worship and those who cannot Worship God together cannot maintain Christian Communion with each other Thus the belief or denial of the sacred Trinity the incarnation of Christ the satisfaction of his death c. makes an essential alteration in most of the Acts of Christian Worship And we see to this day the very Gloria Patri is an effectual bar to the Socinians from joyning in our Communion Now that which I am principally concerned for at present is such an account of Fundamentals as is necessary to maintain Catholick Communion in the Christian World To state this matter then as plainly and briefly as I can I shall 1. endeavour to fix the plain notion of fundamental Doctrines and consequently of fundamental Errors 2. I shall consider the Case of those men who heartily believe all the fundamental Doctrines of Christianity and yet entertain such corrupt Doctrines as in their immediate and necessary Consequences overthrow Foundations and whether they may be said to err Fundamentally 3. How far and in what Cases we may Communicate with such men and Churches as believe all Fundamentals but yet profess such other erroneous Doctrines as seem to overthrow Foundations I think this is all that is necessary in order to clear this point of Catholick Communion as it respects Doctrines 1. To fix the plain notion of fundamental Doctrines now a fundamental Doctrine is such a Doctrine as is in a strict sence of the essence of Christianity A fundamental Doctrine without which the whole building and superstructure must fall The belief of which is necessary to the very being of Christianity like the first principles in any Art or Science which must be acknowledged or else there can be no such Science Now St. Paul tells us that this Foundation is Christ 1 Cor. 3.11 For other Foundation can no man lay than that is laid which is Jesus Christ That is no man can lay any other Foundation for the Christian Religion for you destroy the Christian Religion if you leave Christ out of it And therefore the Character the same Apostle gives of Apostates from Christianity is that they hold not the Head 2 Col. 19. that is Christ And St. John makes this the sum of Christian Faith These are written 22 Joh. 31. that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believing ye might have life through his Name And the necessary qualification of an Apostle was to be a Witness of the Resurrection 1 Act. 22. as the last great Confirmation which was given to our Saviours Authority and the sum of St. Paul's preaching at Athens was Jesus and the Resurrection which the Philosophers of the Epicureans and Stoicks mistake for strange Gods 17 Act. 18. And the Commission Christ gave his Apostles 24 Luk. 47. was to preach Repentance and remission of Sins in his Name So that Salvation by Christ is the general fundamental Doctrine of the Gospel Take away this and you destroy the essential Character of the Christian Religion whereby it is distinguish'd from all other Religions But then as for particular Doctrines and Articles of Faith those are Fundamental which are either necessarily included in or inseparably conjoyned with this general fundamental of Salvation by Christ For we must not think it enough to believe in general that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God without a more explicite understanding of the meaning of that Proposition who this Jesus is what it is to be the Christ and the Son of God and how we are saved by him and this we must learn from the Revelations of the Gospel the more necessary connexion there is between any particular Doctrine and that great fundamental of Salvation by Christ the more necessary and fundamental it is which seems to me to be the truest and easiest Character that can be given of a fundamental Doctrine Thus far I think I am safe but it may be thought a hazardous attempt to launch out any farther or particularly to define what those particular Doctrines of Christian Religion are without which we cannot rightly believe Salvation by Christ Though I cannot see but that this may be done safely enough if we use due caution in it and I shall venture to offer something of this nature both to satisfie inquisitive men why such and such Doctrines have always been accounted fundamental by the Catholick Church and to distinguish what is fundamental from some more nice and curious speculations which is of mighty use in the present dispute about Catholick
great Prophets by Miracles and when he was persecuted for it he owned the truth to the very death and set a great example of constancy and patience and submission to God in his sufferings as other great Prophets had done before him though not in so extraordinary a manner 3. This crucified Jesus was raised by God from the dead the third day though being but a Creature or a Man he was not able to raise himself and was advanced by God to great Power and Glory 4. Which Power consists in all those Acts which are specified in the opposite Scheme with this difference that his Power is not owing to his Priesthood or Sacrifice nor has any dependance on it but he is a Saviour forgives sins c. by a Soveraign Power given him by God not by Merit or Purchase or the expiation of his Sacrifice And there is this contradiction in it that a Creature is invested with Almighty Power and this riddle in it that God should make a Creature the Saviour of mankind and this Blasphemy that God should advance a Creature to be his own Rival or Partner in divine Honour This short account makes it very evident what a fundamental difference the belief or denial of the Divinity of our Saviour makes in the whole Doctrine of Salvation by Christ The first makes it an Act of stupendious love in God in giving his own Son to be a Propitiation for our sins the second is a great act of love in saving sinners but the manner is not so full of Wonder and mysterious Goodness The first makes it an act of infinite Love and Condescention in Christ to become Man a Minister and a Servant and to submit to an accursed death for our sakes That though he were rich yet for our sakes he became poor that we through his poverty might be rich But the second infers no such thing as I can see If he were nothing greater than a man it was no condescention in him to be made a man especially if he had no being before he was born of the Virgin Mary it was no more matter of his choice to become man than it is of any other man who is born into the World and therefore could be no Act of Love or Condescension Nay suppose that Christ were the most glorious and excellent Creature yet being a Creature there is not such a vast difference between the most perfect Creature and a perfect Man as there is between a God and the most perfect Creature it is no such mighty debasement for the most glorious Angels to appear in pure and untainted Flesh and Blood especially upon such a glorious design as the redemption of mankind Though the disguise and appearance may be thought below an Angelical Nature yet the Character with which he appears as the great Prophet and Saviour of the World is as much above it The meanest state and condition of humane nature a poor despised and laborious Life the most painful and ignominious death which makes the most excellent Creature the Saviour of mankind and advances him to be Lord and Judge of the World is so far from being an Act of condescending love in the most glorious Creature that it is above his Ambition and would be like the pride of Lucifer to be equal to God To become man to suffer and die for the redemption of the World and to be made the Lord and Judge both of the quick and of the dead can be an act of condescending love and goodness only in God So that to deny the Divinity of Christ alters the very foundations of Christianity and destroys all the powerful arguments of the Love Humility and Condescention of our Lord which are the peculiar motives of the Gospel Thus the belief of the Divinity of Christ makes God to be our Saviour the object of our Faith and Hope and Relyance the denial of it makes a Creature to be our Saviour and the object of a Religious Faith and Worship which I think differ as much as the Worship of God and of a Creature The first contains a visible union of our Nature to the Deity which is a visible demonstration of God's love and tender regard to mankind the second deprives us of this sensible Consolation The first exhibits to us a Saviour by Purchase and by Redemption which is both more endearing and a greater security to our guilty fears the second makes Christ a Saviour only as a Prophet or a King may be a Saviour who saves by wise instructions by preaching the way of Salvation or by Power The first respects the guilt of sin and the just Wrath and Displeasure of God which is the Object of our guilty fears It offers a Saviour to us who is a Mediator between God and man and powerfully intercedes for our Pardon in vertue of his meritorious Sacrifice The second has no respect to the atonement and reconciliation of God which is the only security to a guilty Conscience but only contains proposals of Peace and Reconciliation without a Sacrifice A thing which mankind will not easily believe when they are thorowly convinced of the evil of sin and the inflexible purity and holiness of the divine Nature not to take notice now how irreconcileable this is with all the ancient Types of the Law of Moses In a word he who believes Christ to be perfect God as well as perfect man is easily satisfied of his Power to save as well as of the Vertue of his Sacrifice For omnipotent Power is essential to the Notion of a God and when God becomes our Saviour he can exercise all that Power which is necessary to our Salvation but he who believes Christ to be but an exalted Creature can never understand how he can exercise omnipotent Power which is peculiar to God For I think it is somewhat harder to understand how a Creature can be made a God and be possest of divine Perfections such as omnipotent Power is than to believe that God can take a Creature into a personal union with himself This I think is sufficient to satisfie any man what a fundamental Change the denial of Christ's Divinity makes in the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ It makes a new Gospel and a new Religion and therefore the Divinity of Christ must be acknowledged to be a fundamental Doctrine because the denial of it subverts Foundations Thus to proceed our Salvation by Christ does not only consist in the expiation of our sins and the proposal of terms of Reconciliation and the promise of Pardon and a Reward but in the Communications of divine Grace and Power to renew and sanctifie us and this is every where in Scripture attributed to the holy Spirit as his peculiar Office in the Oeconomy of man's Salvation and it must make a fundamental change in the Doctrine of divine Grace and assistance to deny the Divinity of the holy Spirit For can a Creature be the universal Spring and Fountain of
St. Paul expresly tells us Being justified freely by his Grace Rom. 3.24 25. through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood For though Faith in Christ is very often used in a very large sence for the whole Gospel of our Saviour and to comprehend all Acts of Obedience and a holy Life as the Principle from whence they flow and no other is true justifying Faith but that which includes Obedience and a holy Life Yet sometimes Faith is distinguisht from Repentance and a holy Life and so has Christ and in a peculiar manner his Blood for its Object Thus the sum of St. Paul's preaching was Repentance towards God Act. 20.21 and Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ And the Commission Christ gave to his Apostles was Luke 24.47 to preach Repentance and Remission of sins in his Name that is through Faith in his Name So that Faith in Christ is distinguisht from Repentance in the work of Justification and so denotes a particular respect to the expiation of Christ's death as the meritorious Cause of Pardon Under the Law a Sacrifice was available only for those for whom it was offer'd but under the Gospel instead of offering a Sacrifice to God we must believe in that Sacrifice which is already offered which does particularly apply the merit and vertue of it to our selves as the Oblation of the Sacrifice did under the Law for if we would have Christ for our Saviour or have any interest in the expiation of his death we must choose him for our Saviour by Faith in his Blood For I cannot see but why Repentance may be as well accepted from us without a Sacrifice as without respect and relation to a Sacrifice and yet the only thing that can entitle our Repentance in particular to the vertue of Christ's Sacrifice is Faith in his Blood which I think is a plain argument that the atonement of Christ's death is a fundamental Doctrine of Christianity because it is essential to a justifying Faith But then there are a great many other opinions relating to the atonement and satisfaction of Christ's death which are true or false but not fundamental For as St. Paul observes the Foundation is Christ but yet men may build upon this Foundation either Gold and Silver or Hay and Stubble that is true or false Doctrines which are of great use in the Christian Life or of very dangerous consequence but yet while they retain the Foundation though their works perish i. e. the superstructure of their private Opinions be condemned and rejected yet they themselves may escape though with great difficulty so as by fire Thus while men heartily believe that Christ dyed for our sins and has made expiation for them by his Blood and expect the Pardon of their sins only in Christ's Name that is in vertue of his Sacrifice and Intercession they may fall into great mistakes about the Nature Extent and Application of this Sacrifice and yet not err Fundamentally though their Errors may be dangerous and always are so when they betray them to sin Of this Nature I reckon some of those unhappy Disputes which have torn and divided the Church in these late days of Liberty and Confusion Whether Christ bore our sins or only the punishment of sin whether he were the greatest sinner or only the greatest Sacrifice for sin Whether he suffered the same Punishments which all sinners should have suffered had they been damned for their sins or suffered that which was equivalent to it and which God accepted for a complete and perfect satisfaction Whether the expiation of Christ's death was so absolutely necessary to the Pardon of our sins that God could not forgive sin without it or whether God choose this way as most agreeable to the wise methods of Government and the most glorious Illustration of all his Attributes Whether the death of Christ made satisfaction to a natural vindictive Justice and was paid to God as the offended Party or as the Governor of the World Whether Christ made a general atonement for sin or satisfied only for the sins of the Elect whether all the sins of the Elect were actually laid upon Christ from Eternity and actually pardoned before they were committed or whether they are pardoned in time when we repent and believe Whether what Christ suffered for us is so imputed to us as if we our selves had done it which makes the greatest sinners perfectly Innocent and looked upon by God as never to have sinned or whether it be imputed to us only for our Pardon and Justification Whether the active as well as passive Obedience of Christ be imputed to us for Justification These and such like Doctrines some of which are of a very dangerous nature and a great state of temptation yet are not fundamental Errors because they do not destroy the Foundation the atonement and satisfaction of Christ's death is acknowledged on all hands though some of these Doctrines do greatly obscure the grace of God and his stupendious wisdom in the redemption of the World by Jesus Christ and therefore must be reckon'd as Hay and Stubble built upon the Foundation which will prove a great loss and dammage to such Builders when every man's work comes to be tryed But to proceed among the fundamental Doctrines of Salvation by Christ we must reckon not only the atonement and expiation of his death but the gift of his holy Spirit to renew and sanctifie us For this makes him a complete Saviour to deliver us from the punishment of our sins and from the power and dominion of them Now that it is fundamental to the Christian Religion and to the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ to believe the divine influences and assistances of the holy Spirit to work Faith and all other Christian graces in us appears from these considerations 1. The gift of the holy Spirit is the most glorious effect of Christ's Power and Intercession and therefore one of the principal fruits and benefits of his Sacrifice by which we may understand the value and necessity of it to deny the intercession of Christ whereby he daily dispenses and applyes the merits of his Sacrifice does as much alter the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ as to deny the atonement of his death and to deny the assistances of the divine Spirit is in effect to deny his Intercession of which the Communications of divine Life and Power is the principal part 2. To deny the assistances of the holy Spirit turns the Gospel into a meer external Ministration which makes as fundamental a difference in the Christian Religion as there is between the Ministration of the Letter and of the Spirit 3. This in a great measure takes away the Office of the holy Spirit in the Oeconomy of man's Salvation and consequently destroyes his Worship which is peculiar to the Christian Religion The light of nature directs us only to