Children of God Ch. 3.26 27. or by way of distinction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sons of God under great external priviledges of Christian freedom and also inwardly Sons and Heirs of life if they live as becometh the profession of Christianity whilst they who were under the Law were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Children under age being in bondage under the Elements of the World Gal. 4.1 3. And since all those who by Baptism do enter upon Christianity are entituled Sons of God which Sonship proceedeth not from their natural Generation but from their entrance into the Covenant of God persons baptized may according to the same sense be hence called regenerate and born again and such expressions also are sufficiently allowed and defended from the Scripture speaking of being born again of Water and of the Spirit Joh. 3.5 and calling Baptism the washing of regeneration Tit. 3.5 9. 4. Concerning baptized persons being called Heirs of Everlasting Salvation we may observe that those Members of the Church visible who shall be cast into outer darkness are yet called Children of the Kingdom Mat. 8.12 And they may well be called Heirs to whom the promise referring to the inheritance is confirmed and who are by Baptism received under the Seal of the Covenant of Grace which alone giveth right of inheriting Gal. 4.30 On this account the Gentile Church and every Member embracing the Christian Faith are called Fellow-Heirs and Members of the same body Eph. 3.6 they also being now by the Gospel grace received to be the Children of the Covenant And S. Peter exhorteth Husbands and Wives embracing Christianity to mind their duties as being Heirs together of the grace of life 1 Pet. 3.7 And when S. Paul exhorteth the Thessalonians to walk worthy of him who hath called them unto his Kingdom and Glory it is manifest that he speaketh to them all and even to them who were most negligent of the Christian life to whom such titles of dignity do belong from their Christian profession and being under the Gospel Grace though the inward priviledges exhibited under those Titles are only the portion of those who do perform the Conditions of the Gospel Covenant And upon the same account that baptized persons may be called the Sons of God they may be also thence concluded Heirs of Salvation 10. 5. On the same manner may Christians by Baptism be acknowledged to be regenerated by the Holy Ghost because the entrance into the body of Christ by Baptism is a priviledge obtained by the Grace of God or by the Holy Spirit For in Baptism the Minister acteth in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and therefore as Calvin asserteth Baptism is to be received as from the hand of God Baptismus accipiendus est quasi ex manu Dei Wherefore in like manner as Baptism which is performed in the name of the Holy Ghost hath been shewed to regenerate persons may be properly said to be therein regenerated by the Holy Spirit to which agreeth that Phrase of being born of Water and of the Spirit Joh. 3.5 And as all gifts and diversities of operations in the Christian Church are derived from the Holy Spirit 1 Cor. 12.4 11. So particularly this gift or priviledge of being baptized and received into Membership with the body of Christ is acknowledged by the Apostle to flow from the holy Spirit unto whom all benefits of Divine Grace and favour are ascribed For the Apostle saith concerning every visible member of the Church of Corinth as is manifest from the design of that Chapter 1 Cor. 12.13 By one Spirit we are all baptized into one body to which place Zanchy referring saith Vi Spiritus Sancti baptizamur c. De Trib. Eloh Par. 1. l. 7. c. 5. Sect. 6. By the power of the Holy Ghost we are baptized of the Father into one body of Christ and thereby regenerated as well by the Spirit as by the Father and the Son And again Haec regeneratio seu insitio in Christum fit à patre sed per Spiritum Sanctum And this is agreeable to our Book of Articles Artic. 27. expressing that in Baptism the promise of forgiveness of sins and of adoption to be the Sons of God by the Holy Ghost are visibly signed and sealed 11. Besides these expressions the Scriptures speak of persons baptized being buried with Christ Col. 2.12 and being dead unto sin and buried with Christ by Baptism unto death and being planted together in the likeness of his death Rom. 6.2 4 5. And as Zanchy at large observed Tom. 7. de Persever c. 2. p. 118. 137 138. Notanda est Scripturarum consuetudo c. The usual way of the Scriptures is to be observed they call as many as give up their names to Christ and are baptized into his name persons justified sanctified and the Sons of God And in another place he saith All who are baptized are sealed unto Christ Tom 8. de Relig. Christ Fides De. Baptismo Sect. 1. as being now incorporated into him by the Holy Ghost that they may not be under their own power but under his by whom they are said to be taken into the fellowship of his Covenant and to be made one body with him and all Saints and to be partakers of all spiritual and heavenly good And in his next Paragraph he saith All who are baptized tales esse fieri Sacramentaliter vere dicuntur Sect. 2. are sacramentally and truly said to be such and to be made such 12. But it may be said that according to this sense these expressions of being regenerated born again members of Christ c. have but a low signification not suitable to the excellency and dignity of those names Ans 1. These expressions even as they are used at the Baptism of the adult do enclude a considerable hope and evidence of true spiritual Communion and Membership with Christ and of inward regeneration and a right to Eternal Life which are benefits certainly attained in Baptism by persons duly qualified for the receiving them 2. They declare the very high priviledge of the Christian calling the entrance into which is the way to the Communion with Christ and to the highest enjoyment of the priviledges of the Children and Heirs of God which those persons do enjoy who do neglect the Christian life And the Scriptures usually mention those who are under the tenders of Salvation by terms of great priviledge and dignity not to make them secure in the disregarding true piety but partly to amplify and exalt the Gospel grace and goodness of God whereby so great benefits are set before us partly to manifest our great engagements to exemplary Piety and Obedience from so great encouragements partly to testifie that if we perish by willful neglect of God and disobedience to the Gospel this will be to fall into dreadful misery out of that state which encluded excellent means and great opportunities of obtaining Eternal
Baptism engaged them to acknowledge and worship the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Baxt. Disp of Gerem c. 2. Sect. 58. And whereas it is objected against the use of any such external signs that this is to set up something to work Grace in the same manner that the Sacraments do which do only objectively teach remember and excite and thereby work on the understanding will memory and affections all this is grounded upon manifest misapprehensions For the holy Sacraments do not only stir us up to the exercise of Grace already received but do tender to us a Communion with Christ and a Communication of further Grace from him which no humane Rites can do Artic. 25. Whence our Articles declare them to be effectual signs of Grace and Gods good will towards us by the which he doth work invisibly in us and doth not only quicken but also strengthen and confirm our Faith in him In Sect. and agreeably hereunto is the Doctrine of all the Protestant Writers above-mentioned But to condemn all objective incitements to the exercise of Grace as humane Sacraments where there is no pretence of their being direct means of conveying further Grace from God would enclude a censuring any particular becoming actions gravity and due expression of affectionateness in the Minister or people in Christian Assemblies because it is a means to excite others to the greater reverence and Religious devotion and would condemn any actions as sinful and evil meerly from their being useful to promote good And for example hereupon he who looking into a Register Book where his Baptism is recorded shall only take notice of his Age should be commended but he who upon the sight of his name in that Book is put in memory concerning his Baptismal Covenant and excited to a care of answering that Covenant by a Christian and pious life should be guilty of grievous sin as if this was to make that Book to be a kind of Sacrament And they who reject all exciting signs as being Sacramental may find almost all the same pretences to dislike all words not instituted of God which do excite men to Religious Piety especially when they are accompanied with any outward action though it be but a gesture because not only Sacramental signs but Sacramental words in their Sacramental Use as in Baptism I baptize thee in the name c. do both exhibit and excite Grace as an essential part of that Sacrament and there is not much more reason to conclude all exciting signs to be Sacramental signs than to account all exciting words to be Sacramental words 15. Sixthly Other external things in Gods worship are properly significant of reverence towards him and of high esteem of him and his Ordinances Such are a humble and devout behaviour and gesture which are Hypocritical actions where no such signification is intended but when designed to this end they are truly religious but far from being Sacramental O◠this nature are the preparing and preserving decent structures and other things comely as Communion Table Cup c. which are set apart for Religious service And to this sixth head belongeth the use of the Ministerial Garments appointed in our Church as the use of the Cross in the Office of Baptism is of the nature of a memorative and exciting sign under the former head And to dislike these things solely because of such signification is to account the actions of man who in Gods worship acts as a reasonable Creature to be the worse meerly because he is able to give a good and rational account why he doth perform them SECT II. Of Ecclesiastical appointments considered as imposed and enjoined 1. Having proved in the former Chapter the lawfulness of some external Rites and having shewed in this Chapter that they do not become unlawful by being significant we may hence infer that nothing can be said against the enjoining some such lawful Rites but what will equally oppose all Ecclesiastical Injunctions and Constitutions in things indifferent For if these things be in themselves both lawful and in their due circumstances useful as I have above shewed and if there be a power in the Church of enjoining lawful things to useful purposes then cannot the establishing these things thus directed be disallowed But to deny the lawfulness of Ecclesiastical Sanctions and Constitutions is to charge all the ancient famous known parts of the Church of Christ with a sinful usurpation of Authority in the Church for that they enjoined what they judged useful both in General and Provincial Synods is manifest from the Canons of the Code of the Universal Church and of the Roman and African Churches and from the more ancient Canons among those called the Apostles and from other Ecciesiastical Rules of Discipline frequently mentioned in Tertullian S. Cyprian and other ancient Writers And that this practice of the Church was used ever since the Apostles is not only manifest from the instances given in the former Chapter Sect. 3. but is also evident from the Synod at Jerusalem and its decisions concerning somethings indifferent mentioned Act. 15. 2. Concerning the Decrees of that Council at Jerusalem I shall Observe 1. That some part of the matter of them was not contained under the Divine Precepts of perpetual obligation but was enjoined only as Ecclesiastical laws of mutable Constitution I should willingly acknowledge that not only that part of the Apostolical Decree which concerned Fornication but that also which concerned things offered unto Idols did contain an immutable Law to all Christians and that what S. Paul writeth upon this subject in his first Epistle to the Corinthians did not at all invalidate or dispense with the Decree of the Apostolical Synod as divers worthy men have judged but only declareth how far that Decree intended to oblige That which renders this opinion probable is because it is evident by comparing Act. 15.20 with Act. 15.29 that the Apostles in commanding to abstain from meats offered to Idols designed only to prohibit the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pollutions of Idols and because after the writing the Epistles to the Corinthians it was still in as general terms as that Synod did express it accounted a duty to abstain from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or things sacrificed to Idols not only by divers particular ancient Writers but by one of the Canons of the Greek Code Conc. Gangr Can. 2. and even by S. John in the Revelations Rev. 2.14 But that that Decree concerning things strangled and bloud was no perpetually binding Law of God may be evinced from the general judgment of the Church of God Aug. cont Faust l. 32. c. 13. Binius in 4. Syn. Apost de Immolatis which doth not now account it binding some very few persons excepted from such general expressions of holy Scripture as that nothing is unclean in it self and to the pure all things are pure and from the Apostles expressing their Decree to be
the holy Sacrament contrary to Christs institution or otherwise then he had delivered it Just 〈◊〉 Justin Martyr declareth that after the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the chief person in Ecclesiastical Office had given thinks those who are called Deacons and Ministers did distribute to every one that was present Bread and Wine mixed with Water Tert. de Cor. Mil. c. 3. and Tertullian very clearly declarâ—th that they received the Eucharist 〈◊〉 de aliorum manibus quam praesidentium from the hands of none other persons than those who presided in the Church And thus far we have plain evidence that in these ancient times the Lords Supper was particularly distributed to every Communicant by the Ministers of the Church 5. But the words of Clemens Alexandrinus are produced Commis pap ubi sup as a testimony that in his time which was the same with Tertullians the Church Officers did not distribute this Sacrament to the faithful but only suffered every one of them to take a part thereof according to his own choice he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strom. l 1. The sense of whose words is this that some persons to wit Church Officers or Ministers being here opposed to the people and supposed to have the power of the Keys in admitting to the Eucharist distributing the Eucharist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here not properly signifying dividing as the Latin Translation rendreth it for the Minister can in no proper sense be said to divide the Wine into parts of which every one may take one but it signifieth distributing or delivering to every one the Sacrament do suffer every one of the people to take part thereof Now it seemeth a strange acuteness from hence to conclude that the Ministers did not particularly distribute this Sacrament because the people were suffered to take or receive as if one mans receiving was wholly inconsistent with anothers delivering Whereas indeed the particular distribution of the Elements is encluded in the true sense of this place of Clemens and is no ways opposed thereby And this is sufficient to clear the ancient practice of the Church herein and to shew that so far as we can judge thereby or by the Jewish Customs or the most probable expressions of Scripture our blessed Lord at his institution of this Sacrament did deliver it particularly to every one of his Disciples and even in that respect was also amongst them as one that serveth 6. I proceed now more briefly to the consideration of the words which our Saviour spoke at the distribution of this Sacrament Now these words of command Take eat in S. Matthew and Mark drink ye all of it in S. Mat. and do this in remembrance of me in S. Luke and S. Paul as also these words this is my body which is given for you and my bloud which is shed for you are all expressed in the plural number as being directed to more persons than one Yet considering that these holy Pen-men did in short relate the institution of Christ sufficiently delivering what was necessary for us but not confining themselves to the very words he spake but to the sense thereof which is manifest because they all four relate his words spoken at the distribution differently from one another the Evangelists expressions may well consist with his speaking particularly to every person because what is spoken to every one may be briefly and succinctly related as spoken to them all And though this be not certain which yet is the more probable from the evidence above given of the particular distribution of the Sacramental Elements to every Communicant let them who manage this Objection consider with themselves whether they would grant that in other Cases which they plead for in this We read that when our Lord gave full Commission to his Apostles he said to them Jo. 20.21 22 23. As my Father hath sent me even so send I you Receive ye the Holy Ghost Whose sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whose sins ye retain they are are retained and yet I suppose no sober spirited man will from hence infer that where divers persons are at one time to receive Orders that no solemn words of ordination may lawfully be expressed to each person particularly and distinctly but that they ought to be spoken to them all together generally and jointly Our Saviour also commanded his Disciples Mat. 28.19 to teach all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost but will any Christian think it hence deducible that where divers persons or great numbers are to be baptized together the solemn words of baptizing them in the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost may not lawfully be expressed severally to every person And if the baptismal form of words may be solemnly and suitably to that Sacrament applyed to every person baptized by the general acknowledgment of all Christians there can be no reason why the like may not be allowed in the Lords Supper Wherefore the practice of our Church herein is no way unsuitable to the institution of Christ or the nature of this Sacrament and the alteration of it would be for the worse and to the abating the solemnity of its Administration 7. Concerning the Communion I shall only further consider that Rubrick which directeth that if any of the Bread and Wine that was consecrated do remain it shall not be carried out of the Church but the Priest and such other Communicants as he shall then call unto him shall immediately after the blessing reverently eat and drink the same Now this is supposed by some to give too high an honour to the Sacramental Elements even after the Communion is ended to which I answer 1. That all superstitious or other sinful honour of the Elements must be founded in the embracing those false apprehensions and corrupt Doctrines which our Church rejecteth and he who nourisheth such corrupt opinions which none can do unless he forsake the truth and the Doctrine of our Church might have more opportunity for such corrupt practices by the Elements being carried out of the Church than by their being eaten and drunk in it 2. That our Church doth sufficiently distinguish the eating and drinking the undistributed Elements from the Communion it self both by the formerly allowed use of them and by the appointing them to be eaten and drunk after the blessing which endeth the office of the Communion and by expressing them under the name of Bread and Wine whichh was consecrated Such remaining Elements have been variously disposed of Hist Eccles l. 4. c. 35. Evagrius relateth it as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an ancient custom at Constantinople that they were sent to the Children at School to be received by them as an acknowledgment of the Christian Religion before the Council of Laodicea Conc. Laod. c. 14. they were sometimes sent to other Churches as Enlogiae and tokens of Communion with
longer Lessons sitting while this particular reverence is expressed only at the reading some shorter portion of the Scripture De Eccl. Offic. l. 3. c. 11. is very allowable because it is well observed by Amalarius that the Apostles themselves did sometimes hear the Scriptures read in the Jewish Synagogue sitting as is evident from Act. 13.14 15 16. Where they entred into the Synagogue and sat down and after the reading the Law and the Prophets Paul stood up 5. Obs 3. Standing at a short portion of the Gospel rather than at any other portion of the Scripture is reasonably chosen to express reverence to the holy word of God because the actions and words of our blessed Saviour are for the most part therein contained In the Primitive Church while the servour of true devotion did continue they heard the Writings of the Apostles read with that high esteem and veneration as if they had then seen the Apostles faces and received those words from their mouths which Tertullian thus expresseth Tertul. de Praescrip c. 36. Authenticae literae eorum sc Apostolorum recitantur sonantes vocem representantes faciem uniuscujusque eorum And in like manner they heard the words of the Gospel as if they had seen Christ himself and received these words from his mouth And though all divine truth be therefore highly valuable because it is from God yet so far as concerneth the deliverer it was requisite and warranted by the Scriptures Mat. 21.37 Heb. 2.1 2 3. Ch. 3.3 that those who lived when Christ was in the flesh should shew the higher respect of the two to Christ himself speaking whose words are ordinarily in the Gospel than to his Apostles who were sent by him Ign. Ep. ad Philadelph Wherefore Ignatius accounteth the Gospel to have this excellency in it viz. the presence of our Saviour Jesus Christ and his suffering and resurrection And out of special respect to our Lord and Saviour it was the Custom of the ancient Greek Church to stand up when ever the Book of the four Evangelists was opened Chrysost de Circo Const Apost l. 2. c. 57. or any Lesson read from thence though the gesture of sitting was allowed at the hearing any other Books of Scripture so that the liberty of sitting even at any Lessons from the Gospel was not there indulged the practice of divers Churches being in these things not alway the same where the same liberty was allowed concerning the other Scriptures 6. Wherefore to shew that outward respect to the holy Scriptures which both the Jewish and Christian Churches have owned and wherein our blessed Lord hath given us an example to stand up at the reading them is reasonable and unblameable And the liberty allowed for sitting at the other Scriptures which for order sake is sit to be used doth not countenance any want of high respect to all Divine truth which is expressed by manifesting this respect to a particular short part thereof and that part is to this purpose chosen wherein the words and actions of our Lord and Master do frequently occur SECT III. Of the fitness of kneeling at the Communion and the gesture at the institution of that Sacrament considered 1. To kneel at the receiving the holy Communion hath been judged a gesture very expedient and commendable upon divers respects 1. Because this Sacrament doth in a special manner exhibit a mystical and spiritual Communion with Christ or the Communion of his body and bloud and the greatest reverence and most humble gesture is very convenient for so solemn an Ordinance and so near an approach to Jesus Christ especially since in this great Ordinance there ought to be a devout religious worship performed unto Christ himself Kneeling therefore is a fit gesture of adoration performed in this Ordinance unto God and Jesus Christ which is the more inoffensively performed because our Church hath openly declared against any adoration either of the Sacramental Bread and Wine Rubr. after Communion or of any corporal presence of Christs natural flesh and bloud therein 2. Because of the greatness of the benefits conveyed in this Ordinance to the worthy receiver such as the Grace of God and remission of sins in the bloud of Christ and if he who receiveth some great gift or some great pardon from his Prince doth fitly receive it kneeling and the Poenitentes in the ancient Church always received Ecclesiastical absolution from the Rulers of the Church upon their knees in token of their submissive humility much more he who cometh unto Christ in this Sacrament to receive from him the remission of his sins tendred in his bloud of the New Testament should appear before him with humility Ibidem To this purpose Kneeling at the Sacrament is in our Liturgy declared to be for a signification of an humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy receivers and Mr. Hooker saith very well coming as receivers of inestimable Grace at the hand of God Eccles Pol. l. 5. c. 68. what doth better beseem our bodies at that hour than to be sensible witnesses of minds unfeignedly humbled 2. 3. Kneeling is a suitable gesture for solemn Prayer and humble thanksgiving both which may be sitly exercised at the receiving this Sacrament For religious Prayer becometh him who there affectionately desireth to be made partaker of the benefits of Christs Passion and therefore the Communicant should devoutly join in and in heart say Amen to those Petitions at the delivery of the Elements which peculiarly refer to himself The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy Body and Soul to everlasting life and The bloud of our Lord Jesus Christ c. And humble thanksgiving at the holy Eucharist for the benefits of the New Testament there tendred the love of Christ in his sufferings here remembred and for the means of Communion with the Father and the Son in this Ordinance encluded with reflexion on our own guilt Ans to Admenit Tr. 15. c. 1. div 11. pollution and infirmity is a fit exercise for this Ordinance And upon this consideration Bishop Whitgift declared the kneeling gesture to be very meet for the receiving this Sacrament 3. But against the lawfulness of this gesture divers things are objected 1. That Kneeling is no Table gesture as sitting is nor doth it so properly express our fellowship with Christ Rutherf Divine Right of Ch. Gov. p. 196. and the honour and priviledge of Communion with him as Coheirs Ans 1. As the Lords Supper is no common Feast but a Heavenly Banquet prepared by Jesus Christ which principally consisteth of spiritual graces and benefits and Communion with Christ signified by and tendred under the outward Elements so the administration and participation of this great Ordinance ought not to be guided by the Rules of common Table fellowship but by more religious considerations At other Tables the attendants
asserted by Isidorous Hispalonsis That the Lords Prayer was delivered as a form is so manifest that was it not for the violent force offered to mens minds by prejudice and contentious opposition it could never have been questioned And it may be sufficiently proved 1. From the command given by our Saviour Luk. 11.2 When ye pray say Our Father c. and the expression in S. Matthew Mat 6.9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pray sc or on this manner is the same with that when the form of Aaronical benediction was enjoined Numb 6.23 On this wise in the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall ye bless But the blessing there directed hath been generally acknowledged to be a constant invariable form of Benediction under the law Luth. Tom. 3. f. 10. Prec Eccles Form Genev. and as such was used in the German Reformation by Luther and in that also of Geneva 2. From the ground of the Disciples request Luk. 11.1 Lord teach us to pray as John also taught his Disciples That it was ordinary for the Jewish Teachers to compose forms for their Disciples is observed by Dr. Lightfoot on Mat. 6.9 and the frequent yea constant use of forms in the Jewish Church shall be hereafter manifested and if this be referred to the words of S. Luke now mentioned it is not to be doubted but that John the Baptist according to the custom of the Jews delivered a form of Prayer to his Disciples and that what John did herein was both approved and the like practised by our Saviour who directed the use of the Lords Prayer to his Disciples at two different times 5. 3. From the manner of the composure of the Lords Prayer which is not propounded as a general direction to pray that Gods name may be hallowed and that his Kingdom should come but it is dictated by Christ as it should be expressed by us in our persons Our father hallowed be thy name c. 4. The ancient Christian Church near the times of Christ did acknowledge and use it as a form S. Cyprian is very large to this purpose Cyp. de Orat Domin saith he Christ consulting the salvation of his people etiam orandi formam ipse dedit himself delivered them a form of prayer and then exhorteth that we pray as our master taught us that the father when we pray may owne the words of his Son and saith he when we have Christ an advocate let us express the words of our advocate and how much more effectually shall we obtain what we ask in Christs name if we ask by his Frayer Tertullian before him declared Tertul. de Orat. c. 1. c. 9. Christus novam orationis formam determinavit Christ appointed a new form of prayer and he saith that whilst the Christians used other Prayers this was not omitted praemissa legitima ordinaria oratione quasi fundamento And before both these the words of Lucian in Trajan's time Lucian in Philopat about reciting the Prayer beginning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth intimate the ordinary use of this Prayer among Christians From these testimonies I suppose it evident that the Lords Prayer was used as a form in the ancient Christian Assemblies and that we have good reason thus far to receive what some hundred years after was delivered by S. Gregory Gr. Ep. l. 7. c. 63. and from him by divers other Writers that the Apostles themselves did always at the Consecration of the Eucharist make use of the Lords Prayer Wherefore the Lords Prayer being thus delivered as a form doth enclude an approbation of the like composures of Prayers among the Jews and an allowance of the same among Christians for whom this was intended And that path where we follow our Saviours steps cannot be the way of errour 6. The other argument from example is from the ordinary practice of the Church both Jewish and Christian Concerning the Jewish Church I might instance in the eighteen Prayers composed for its ordinary use from the time of the Captivity which are oft mentioned by the Jewish Writers and in their forms of Prayer for the Passover De Emendar Tempor l. 6. p. 573. of which Scaliger thinketh that there is as much reason to be confident that the particular Prayers recorded in the Talmud which he calleth their Digests were the ancient forms used by the Jews as that the Roman Digests exhibit to us the true determination of the Roman Lawyers But I shall rather insist on the Jewish Church making use of set forms of Prayer from the very times of Moses and so downwards which is no new opinion but is ordinarily received and it hath been observed by divers learned men that the Samaritan Chronicle speaketh of a Book of Prayers used by the Jews at their Sacrifices from the time of their Legate Moses until that day And besides the testimony of that Author which I urge no further than other proof may be made let these two things be considered 7. First That it is certain from the Scriptures and oft expressed by Philo Judaeus that the Jews did use Prayers with their Sacrifices and oblations The whole multitude were praying without at the time of incense Luk. 1.10 and the Apostles themselves went up to the Temple at the hour of Prayer which was the ninth hour Act. 3.1 Which was the time of the evening Sacrifice Mr. Mede Disc on Ezr. 6.10 and Mr. Mede hath well proved that Sacrifice if self is a rite of supplication And that the use of such Prayers was as ancient as Moses is manifest from Lev. 16.21 Where Aaron was commanded to confess over the live Goat the iniquities of the Children of Israel Secondly That there are plain evidences in the Old Testament of such forms used upon many occasions Besides the forms of Prayers and praises in the Book of Psalms enjoined for constant use unto the Levites by Hezekiah and the Princes 1 Chr. 29 30. and besides divers other Hymns and Songs and such commands for a form of words as Joel 2.17 Hos 14.2 there is an express form of Prayer appointed by God to be used at the Offering the Heifer for expiation of uncertain murder Deut. 8.21 and a form of confession at the offering up their first fruits Deut. 26.3 4 5 6 7. and a form of Prayer at the presenting the third years Tithe Deut. 26.13 14 c. and some other such like Whence it is evident that forms of Prayer were by Gods appointment used from the beginning of the Jewish Church Yet if no such thing could have been proved and if their original had been from John the Baptist and the direction of our Saviour this alone might be sufficient to recommend them unto Christians 8. In considering the general practice of the Christian Church it must be acknowledged that in that extraordinary case which reacheth not the ordinary condition of the Church when the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost were communicated both
c. which is so much disliked by some is sufficiently vindicated from Battology or a vain and superstitious multiplying of words in the foregoing Section N. 11. To which I shall here add these considerations 1. That it seemeth unreasonable and partial that they who allowed themselves in the conclusion of their own Prayers to use that Doxology To whom Christ with the Father and the Holy Ghost be Glory frequently four or five times in the same Assembly should undertake to determine Except of Presbyt p. 16. that this other Doxology more expresly acknowledging divine glory eternally due to all the three persons of the Trinity is unsit to be used more than once in the Morning and once in the Evening 2. That since in all our Christian service and especially in Hymns and Psalms of praise it is our duty to give glory to the holy Trinity it cannot be blamable to express that with our mouths which is at that time the most fit and proper exercise of our minds 3. That it is manifest from divers passages of the Psalms and other Scriptures as 2. Chr. 5.13 Ch. 7.3 Ch. 20.21 Ezr. 3.11 Jer. 33.11 That with their Hymns or Psalms the Jews ordinarily used some such Doxology as this Hallelujah or praise ye the Lord for he is good for his mercy endureth for ever Delph Phoenic c. 6. Hence it is probably conjectured that preparation to the Paeanism among the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had its original being the corruption of Hallelujah And from this use of the Jews the Arabian Church their Neighbours did probably derive their practice of expressing Hallelujah at the end of every Psalm as appeareth in the Arabick version of the psalms who also make use of this Doxology to the three persons distinctly which is expressed in the Arabickversion at the end of every tenth Psalm but was probably in practice at the end of every Psalm And that the Western Church used this Doxology Glory be to the Father Cassian Col. l. 1. c. 8. and at the end of every Psalm we have the testimony of Cassian for about thirteen hundred years since Wherefore since this is of so ancient original in the Christian Church so agreeable to the practice of the Jewish Church approved by the Holy Scriptures and a practice so reasonable in it self it may be piously used but not justly blamed in our Liturgy 2. The reading the Athanasian Creed to some though not the generality of Non-Conformists who heartily owne the doctrine of the Trinity hath been thought a matter not free from difficulty For that Creed expressing what must be believed of every one who would be saved doth contain deep mysteries as for instance that the Son is not made nor created but begotten and that the Holy Ghost is neither made nor created nor begotten but proceeding Now since believing things as necessary to Salvation is not an assent to the use of Phrases and expressions but to the sense contained in them it must enclude that there is some difference understood between what is affirmed and what is denied But the difference between the Eternal Generation and Eternal Procession being a Mystery where the greatest Divines see but darkly they are justly affraid to condemn all persons as uncapable of Salvation who cannot reach to so high a pitch 3. But here it is to be considered that in that Creed commonly called the Athanasian there are some things contained and expressed as necessary points of Faith and other things for a more clear and useful explication of the truth though they be not of equal necessity to be understood adn believed even by the meanest capacities Thus if we first consider the contexture of that Creed the Faith declared necessary concerning the Trinity is thus expressed in the begining thereof The Catholick Faith is this that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Vnity neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance After this followeth an explication useful to set forth the true Christian Doctrine which beginneth For there is one person of the Father c. after which explication the same necessary doctine to be known and believed is thus again expressed pressed and distinguished from that explication in these words So that in all things as is aforesaid the Vnity in Trinity and Trinity in Vnity is to be worshipped he therefore who will be saved must thus think of the Trinity So that the acknowledging and worshipping the Trinity of persons and Vnity of Godhead is that which only is declared necessary in the former part of that Creed and this must be acknowledged necessary since we are baptized into the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost and we must believe and worship according as we are baptized 4. What is contained in this consideration is the more clear both with reference to the instance mentioned and to the Vnion of the two natures in Christ by this following observation viz. That our Church doth both here and in her Articles evidently receive the Athanasian Creed and yet from the manner of using the Apostles Creed in the form of Baptisin as containing the profession of that Faith into which we are baptized in the Catechism as containing all the Articles of the Christian Faith and in the Visitation of the sick as being a rule to try whether he believe as a Christian man should or not it is manifest that no more is esteemed in our Church of necessity to salvation for all men to believe than that only which is contained and expressed in the Apostles Creed 5. I proceed to consider some expressions in the Litany In the way to which I shall only reflect upon that objection which if it had not been mistaken had been very inconsiderable framed by Mr. Cartwright against the Litany in General That it being chiefly a deprecatory Prayer against evils was framed by Mamertus Bishop of Vienna or rather Vienne in France upon a special occasion of the calamities of that Country This was a very strange and gross mistake for the Litaniae which were ordered by Mamertus were days of supplication in Rogation Week which days were called Litania minor triduanae Litaniae and by some Litania major Alcuin de Div. offic Tit. dieb Rogat Amal. de Eccl. Offic. l. 1. c. 37. Stra. de Reb. Eccl. c. 28. Mur. c. 57. as is manifest from Aleuinus Amalarius Strabo Mictologus Rupertus Tintiensis Johannes Beleth besides other latter ritualists and the French Historians especially Gregorius Turonensis who all mention what Mamertus did in appointing days of Prayer which were called Litaniae to be yearly observed for the obtaining Gods mercy in their distress occasioned by wild Beasts and frequent Earthquakes But that deprecatory Prayers which are called Litanies also and were so called by S. Basil and were of so great use in the stationary days of the ancient Church should have their original from Mimertus
8. whence the Targum mentioning the expedition against Antiochus speaketh of him under th ename of Alexander and the Prophet speaketh to the Jews under the stile of the Rulers of Sodom and the Elders of Gomorrha 2. And secondly the Objection is not sufficient to disprove the Historical truth of these Books if we consider 1. That the fixed time of the life of Job and the time to which divers Prophecies refer is not easily determined which yet is no good argument against the truth of either as it is a bad argument against the credit of ancient History either of our own or other Nations that it is hard to fix the scituation of divets ancient places mentioned by names now unknown 2. That both Josephus and other Historians do make no mention of divers considerable things which were certainly true as for Josephus some of the Prophets and the matter of divers Canonical Books and some remarkable Histories as particularly all that referred to the framing the Golden Calf are omitted by him 3. That the ancient Christians who had the use of divers ancient Jewish Writers and other Histonary now lost and had thereby greater opportunity of searching into the Historical truth of these things did esteem them to be true Relations Bel and the Dragon is cited as a true Narration containing an example for Martyrdom and an instance of the sureness of Gods provision for them that trust in him by Irenaeus Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus S. Cyprian and Gr. Nazianzen and divers others V. Lit. African in Crit. Sacr. Tom. 8. p. 46 47. And Origen particularly undertook the defence of the truth of the History of Susanna in answer to the Letter of Africanus which containeth the sum of all the Objections against it Eus Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which were fully and manifestly satisfied by Origen saith Eusebius S. Hierome also wrote a Comment upon Susanna and upon Bel and declareth Origen to have written upon the same And S. Hierome calling these fabulaes useth that word here as he doth elsewhere V. Epist ad Castrutium for true Narrations which we also sometimes call stories and these very things he particularly acknowledgeth for truths Apol. 2. ad Ruff. Proleg in Habbacuc ad Chromatium And Judith is propounded as a true Narration and example of love to her people or courage by Hierome Origen Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus Clem. Ep. ad Corinth p. 70. and even by Clemens Romanus the Companion of St. Paul in that his undoubted Epistle to the Corinthians And these testimonies are the more considerable because several of these Writers and particularly Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus Origen and Hierome were men of great knowledge in all ancient learning Wherefore there is very considerable evidence that these relations are true Histories though it would be inconsiderable matter of Objection if they were acknowledged to be only Parables 3. Obj. 2. Judith approveth the fact of Simeon against the Sichemites by desiring the like assistance from God Ch. 9. and spake things untrue Ch. 10. v. 12 13 14. and Ch. 11. and yet she was commended highly and blessed by Joacim and the Elders Ans Both in these Books and even in the Canonical Scriptures we must distinguish between things Historically related which are many times evil and the matters of precept and command which are always good The main design of this Book of Judith being to shew Gods wonderful Providence in preserving his Church divers things are mentioned in the carriage of Judith which are neither to be allowed in her nor imitated by us And in the Canonical Scriptures we read of good men uttering expressions in Prayer which were unadvised and blamerble such were Elijahs intercession against Israel and both his and JOnah's passionate desire of Death We also read of Jacob by false speaches procuring his Fathers blessing which were allowed by Rebecca and of the contrivance of Jacobs other Sons against Joseph with their lying devices to paliate their own sin and of the like wiles which Jehu used to destroy the Worshippers of Baal and in some things both Jehu and Judith deserved commendation but in other things their practices as the other now mentioned and divers more are not examples for our imitation but rather warnings to us to take heed of the like miscarriages 4. Obj. 3. From Tobit there are divers things objected Of what is said against any thing contained in the fifth Chapter which is purposely left out of our Kalendar I shall take no notice But Ch. 6.9 10. The using the heart and liver of a Fish is declared as from an Angel to be a Cure for one vexed with an evil Spirit and the Gall thereof to be a remedy for the whiteness of the eyes Concerning which place two ways of interpretation are propounded by Drusius Drâ—â—â— Tob. theone that these words concern a Disease or distemper of body occasioned by the operation or influence of an evil spirit which yet may be healed by natural remedies which the Angel did direct and he sheweth that some parts of fishes are reputed to have medicinal vertue and it is ordinarily acknowledged that some distempers curable by Medicine may be promoted by evil spirits But the other which I chiefly embrace is to this purpose that it is no ways improbable that God who more frequently manifested himself by Angels before the coming of Christ should by the Ministry of one of them vouchsafe an extraordinary help and cure to one who religiously served him though by the use of means otherwise inconsiderable that his mercy and mighty power should be manifested by the effecting such a Cure By washing in Jordan according to the Prophets direction the Leprosie of Naaman was miraculously cleansed by washing in Siloam at our Saviours command the blind man obtained a wonderful Cure So small a thing as Moses his râ—d ordered by Gods power was an instrument of working divers miracles and by Elijah's Mantle smiting the Waters they were twice divided 2. Kin. 2.8 14. and in Egypt at the sprinkling of bloud the destroying Angel passed over Now can any man think it either impossible or altogether incredible that God should produce great effects by small appearances at the direction of an Angel who had oft done the like at the direction of a Prophet And this direction of the Angel is manifestly designed for a particular preservation to Tobit and a Cure to his Father and the following Chapters declare the effect of both nor ought it to be doubted but that our great and eternal God hath done many great things besides what was thought necessary to be expressed in the Canonical Scriptures 5. Obj. 4. In the sixth seventh and ninth Chapters of Tobit the Angel who is said to Accompany him is spoken to under the name of Azarias viz. the Son of Ananias and seemeth to owne that name whereas it could not be true that the Angel was this Azarias But here it must
calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be sanctified without any sense or apprehension thereof Wherefore S. Aug. did truly assert De peccat Mer. Remis l. 3. c. 5. that of old the whole Church did firmly hold parvulos fideles originalis peccati remissionem per Christi baptismum consecutos esse that little Children of the Church of Christ do obtain remission of original sin by the Baptism of Christ 3. Among the publick Writings of the Protestants the first Augustan Confession asserteth Conf. Aug. 1530. Art 9. that Children being offered to God in Baptism are received into the favour of God and condemneth the Anabaptists who say that Children may be saved i. e. ordinarily without Baptism to which the larger Confession 1540. addeth that concerning Children baptized in the Church of God Christ said Mat. 18. It is not the will of your Father which is in Heaven that one of these little ones should perish Conf. Saxon de Baptism The Saxon Confession fully expresseth the saving regeneration of baptized Infants and that these words I baptize thee c. are as much as to say By this mersion I testifie thee to be washed from thy sins and to be now received by the true God who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ who hath redeemed thee by his Son Jesus Christ and sanctifieth thee by the Holy Ghost and it declareth that at that time Infants are truly received of God and sanctified and to the same purpose is the Confession of Frederick the third the Prince Palatine Conf. Helv. c. 20. And the general expressions of the efficacious saving vertue of Baptism Conf. Gal. c. 35. in the Helvetick French and Scotish Confessions Conf. Scot. Sect. 21. are such that the state of Infants cannot be excluded therefrom And the Geneva Catechism declareth that By baptism we are Cloathed with Christ and receive his Spirit unless by rejecting the promises which are there tendered to us we render them unfruitful to our selves 4. To give an account of the particular judgments of Protestant Writers would be a needless difficult and endless undertaking Divers of them manifestly assert the saving regeneration of all baptized Infants others do embrace another notion of baptismal regeneration which I shall afterward mention and some from the use of different ways of expression and from what they speak with just earnestness against the errors of the Church of Rome are sometimes misunderstood Cath. Orthod Tr. 3. qu. 3. Sect. 1. Rivet averreth that there is no true Protestant who doth not approve that of Aquinas 12ae q. 81. Art 3. That Original sin is done away in Baptism as to the guilt thereof and he there saith that it is most false that Calvin and Beza ever said that some baptized Infants are damned Ibid. Sect. 9. dying in their infancy before they commit any actual sin unrepented of Absters Cal. Calum 7. and the same thing is with much passionate earnestness asserted by Beza himself writing against Tilemannus Heshushius Whit. ad Rat. 8 m Camp And Dr. Whitaker against Campian undertaking herein to declare the Protestant Doctrine saith In baptism we receive remission of sins we are entred into Christs Family we have the Holy Ghost given us we are raised to certain hope of eternal life what hath your Baptism saith he to Campian that ours hath not hath it grace hath it the merits of Christ hath it salvation all these hath ours And against Duraeus in defense of his answer to Campian he saith To the adult Faith is necessary Cont. Duraeum l. 8. that Baptism may be a saving Sacrament but to little ones because they are the Children of believing Parents and are encluded in the Covenant it is the Sacrament of Salvation though they by reason of their age cannot believe where by the Children of believing Parents his foregoing words declare him to mean Children born within the Church in distinction from Turks Jews and Ethnicks These words do express an actual regeneration of baptized Infants by the grace of God and the application of the merits of Christ for remission and Salvation but they are very hardly reconcileable with divers passages in the posthumous Writings of that learned man especially his Praelections de Sacram. Qu. 4. c. 2 3. SECT V. The Objections against the saving regeneration of Infants in Baptism considered 1. Against all baptized Infants being savingly regenerated by their Baptism it may be first objected That the Scriptures declare the general necessity of Faith in order to Salvation and therefore Infants unless they believe cannot be saved by being baptized In answer to this it being a matter of obscurity I shall relate different ways of solution Aug. de pec Mer. rem l. 3. c. 2. 1. Many account Faith the condition for adult persons Aug. Ep. 23. but not for Infants but this is discarded by others both ancient and modern Kemait Exam. Part. 2. de Baptism partly because by the general practice of the Church at Infant-Baptism of which S. Aug. taketh notice it was declared in the Infants name as it is in our Liturgy Credo or I believe and partly because the condition of Faith seemeth so generally expressed in the Gospel that they judge that Infants cannot be thence excluded though the Faith for the infant state cannot be the same with what is required from the adult 2. Divers others as Augustine Bede Hugo de Victore Amalanus and Walafridus Strabo think baptized Infants to be saved by the Faith of the Church into which they are baptized or by the Faith of them who offer them unto Baptism or as many Protestants and also the Catechismus Romanus express it credunt parentum fide by the faith of their Parents as the Syrophaenician Womans Daughter was healed by her Mothers Faith Mat. 15.28 and the sick of the Palsie was Cured by the Faith of them who brought him to Christ Mat. 9.2 But this doth not satisfie Kemnitius and some others partly because it is every ones one Faith which is the Gospel condition for his Salvation though anothers Faith may be instrumental for the procuring of divers blessings and partly because this answer giveth no good account of the Ecclesiastical usage of owning or professing the Creed in the Infants name at the time of his Baptism 3. Others assert that there is some Faith wrought in Infants Inst lib. 4. c. 16. Cath. Orth. Tr. 3. qu. 1. Sect. 12. which Calvin and Rivet say is not the act but the seed of Faith by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and Kemnitius asserteth this operation of the Holy Ghost in Infants to be that they call Faith though they know not what kind of operation it is 2. 4. To these I shall add what I conceive most probable That since Infants are not capable of the Faith of adult persons which cometh by hearing and consisteth in the knowledge and assent of the mind
speak or declare they believe are baptized alio protestante with another persons making the profession on their behalf and this usage hath been also embraced by divers Protestant Churches Rat. Discip c. 3. Sect. 2. herein following the Bohemian which was the first reformed 5. That the true intent and benefit hereof may be understood we must consider 1. That every person baptized thereby undertaketh to renounce the Devil to embrace the Christian Faith and to become the Servant of God and Disciple of Jesus Christ This is evident from that Command of Christ mat 28.19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make them Disciples by baptizing them and from the form of of Baptism in or into the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost and from such expressions as these concerning them who have undertaken Baptism That they are dead unto sin so as that they should not live any longer therein that they are baptized into Christ and into the likeness of his death and that they have put on Christ 2. That Infants are capable of being engaged to God and may stand obliged to believe in God and serve him and to reject the ways of sin and wickedness This is manifest from the Circumcision of Children under the Law and from their little ones entring into Covenant with God Deut. 29.11 12 c. and is encluded in the Baptism of Infants which is a dedicating them unto God and layeth an obligation upon them to entertain and persevere in the Christian Life and Faith whether they have any Sureties or no and he that owneth not this obligation from his Baptism doth go far toward the renouncing of Christianity 3. That when the Sureties answer in the Childs name I believe I renounce c. this is a more solemn representation or declaration of what the Child undertaken by his Baptism and hereby as the Master of the sentences determineth Sent. l. 4. Dist 6. g. parvulus hac sponsione tenebitur non sponsor the Child and not the surety standeth bound by this engagement only the Surety is obliged to be careful of admonishing him This explicite Declaration of what the baptized Infant undertaketh is fitly used in Baptism conformably to Antiquity because it tendeth to express clearly a considerable part of the design and end of Christian Baptism and to put all other baptized persons in mind of their engagement that they may live answerably thereto And the matter of this baptismal vow being expressed in the publick Congregation in the Childs name where all who are present may bear witness thereto may be a considerable argument to be urged upon him when he cometh to Age to induce him to the greater diligence in the Christian life And these words of the Sureties I believe c. are not directly words of promise of what they undertake shall be performed but words expressing contract and engagement in the baptismal vow and declaring in what profession and practice this Infant by his Baptism standeth obliged to live and die 6. There is a further advantage by the the use of sureties in that they are as is expressed in the exhortation to them to see that the Child be taught what a solemn vow promise and profession he made in Baptism that he be vertuously brought up And that he be instructed in those points of Christianity which a Christian ought to know and believe to his Souls health and to call upon him to hear Sermons All this which is in our Church required may well be performed by the Surety and imposeth no heavy burden upon him and besides the Parents care which may hereby be quickned it may be of great advantage to the Religious life of the Child The ancient Church either did require more than this from the Sureties Tert. de bapt c. 18. Dionys ubi supra De Cons Dist 4. Vos ante omnia touching their particular ordinary care of the Childs Education or else their sense was over-severely expressed by several particular Writers as Tertullian the Author de Ecclesiastica Hierarchia and some others 7. Having thus far discoursed of the use of Sureties and the intent of the Interrogatories referring to the baptismal engagement it may be further observed that when they are asked Wilt thou be baptized into this Faith and they answer in the Childs name That is my desire the plain meaning thereof is to express that the intent of the Childs being present is to receive Baptism which upon its account and in its right and name they desire for it And when in the Catechism there are these Questions and Answers Q. What is required of persons to be baptized A. Repentance whereby they forsake sin and Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the promises of God made to them in that Sacrament Q. Why then are Infants baptized when by reason of their tender age they cannot perform them A. Because they promise them both by their Sureties which promise when they come to age themselves are bound to perform the sense of the former answer is that he who cometh to Christian Baptism is not left at liberty to lead a loose life but he ought to practise faith and repentance as a previous qualification unto Baptism in the adult and as a consequent duty upon Baptism both in them who are baptized in their Infancy and at riper years And the sense of the latter Question and Answer is That though Infants be not capable of the particular acts of faith and repentance in their present state yet by those expressions of contract whereby their Sureties in their name only declare what their Baptism obligeth them unto it is manifested that they do undertake faith and repentance as much as is possible for the infant state and do stand engaged from their Baptism more particularly to act Faith and Repentance when they come to Age. 8. Another expression in the baptismal Office hath been misunderstood viz. Who by the Baptism of thy wel-beloved Son Jesus Christ didst sanctifie water to the mystical washing away of sin Now we may well say that water is sanctified for Baptism when by divine authority water is selected from all other things and determined to be the proper matter or outward Element of Baptism and that is sanctified which is set apart or determined to such a sacred use to which other common things are not admitted And Christs Commission to his Disciples to baptize all Nations in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost is an Authoritative determination of the form of Baptism or the Sacramental words and of the extent of its use And both from thence and from our Saviours passion doth it receive an efficacious vertue But water was the matter of Christian Baptism for the remission of sins and admission into the number of Christs Disciples before either that Commission or our Saviours Passion And as water was appointed for the Disciples of John by Gods commanding him to baptize with Water so that
doth also add to the honour of that holy estate and therefore it may well be mentioned as a further excellency of that holy relation that God hath consecrated it to such an excellent mystery that in it is signified and repented the spiritual Marriage and Vnity between Christ and his Church SECT IX Of the Communion of the sick and the Office for Burial 1. The Communion of the sick is very allowable because the dying state may need the best supports of Christian Faith the highest encouragements of Divine Grace and the chief means to strengthen hope all which is encluded in this Ordinance of the Lords Supper it being a pledge and assurance yea a tender from Christ of mercy and forgiveness to them who truly repent and believe And though the celebrating this holy Communion in private places Conc. Laod. c. 58. standeth condemned in ordinary cases by the ancient Canons Conc. Nic. c. 13. yet in this extraordinary Case sick or dying persons were ordinarily allowed to receive it and the Council of Nice doth well approve of the sick persons desire thereof And though it be sufficiently proved by Albaspinus that the Viaticum frequently given to dying Penitents did not always enclude the Eucharist yet it is manifest that they did frequently partake thereof 4. Conc. Carth. c. 76 78. as is expressed not only in the Canons of the fourth Council of Carthage but in the more ancient testimony of Dionysius Alexandrinus Eus Hist Eccles l. 6. c. 36. 2. Divers Protestant Churches besides our own Rat. Disc c. 3. have retained the use thereof and amongst them the Bohaemian Syn. Petric Sect. 5. the Polonian with the consent of the Ministry of the three several Confessions Form Visit Aegr in Bucer and that of Strasburgh as it was in Bucers time And though this was not practised at Geneva Calv. de quibusd Ritib Aug. 12. 1561. Calv. Oleviano Cal. Dec. 1563. yet Calvin did in several places and even towards the end of his life testifie his allowance thereof and also that there were divers weighty causes which constrained him to judge that it ought not to be denied 3. But against this it is objected that some persons who have led vitious lives may earnestly desire the Communion in their sickness and yet not be truly penitent for their sins and therefore cannot worthily partake of those holy Mysteries To which I answer that even in this Case Christian Charity must encline to the more favourable part and since man hath no certain evidences to judge of sincere repentance the infallible discerning thereof must be reserved to the judgment of God And if this person hath lived vainly and exorbitantly the Minister may acquaint him with the nature if need be of true Faith and Repentance and the necessity thereof both to a dying Man and to a Communicant and if he appear so far as is in him desirous to practise and exercise those Christian Graces and to obtain the help of Jesus Christ and his Grace to deny him this Sacrament would be to deny him a testimony in Gods name that he will upon these conditions bestow grace and remission of sins and to shut up the means of Grace and remission from a Sinner who seeketh after it and certainly it cannot agree with the Ministers Office to reject those persons who in a dying state declare they would come to Christ And in the strict times of Primitive Discipline he was thought worthy to be deposed from his Ministry who either rejected or did not receive any Sinner upon his return and a peculiar Charity towards dying persons was expressed in divers ancient Canons 4. In the Office for Burial several expressions are misliked as being thought unmeet to be spoken of every person dying in the Churches Communion Where a first expression to be considered is That Almighty God of his great mercy hath taken to himself the Soul of the person departed When yet we cannot assert that every person dying in our Communion is eternally saved Ans Besides what may be said of the judgment of Charity the wise man telleth us Eccl. 12.7 that the Spirits of dying men return to God who gave them that is to be disposed of according to his righteousness and our Church in this place acknowledgeth the mercy of God through the grace of Christ who now hath the Keys of Hell and Death that dying persons do not forthwith go into the power of the Devil who had the power of Death Heb. 2.14 but do immediately go into the hands of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ to be disposed of by him according to the promises and conditions of the Gospel Covenant This is that which all Christians must acknowledge to flow from the great mercy of God towards man and that this is the sense intended in this place I am induced to believe because in the ancient Offices of Burial they magnified the Divine Power whereby the unjust and tyrannous power of the Devil was overcome and our Lord receiveth us Dioniss de Eccles Hier. c. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto his peculiar and most righteous judgment Yet even this sense doth express a general and firm confidence of the future happy state of all them who heartily embrace the Christian Faith and life as being consequent upon the gracious mediation and Soveraign Dominion of Jesus our Saviour 5. And whereas this Office calleth the deceased person Our Brother and Our dear Brother these Phrases may undoubtedly be applyed to every person who professing Christianity dyeth in the Churches Communion And that extensive sense of those words is sufficiently warranted by the use thereof in Scripture when it commands us to love our Brother not to put a stumbling block before our Brother not to defraud our Brother 1. Thes 4.6 to forgive our Brother Mat. 18.34 and when it speaketh of the Brother that walketh disorderly 2. Thes 3.6 and of admonishing him as a Brother v. 14. and of thy Brother trespassing against thee and if he hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother Chrys in Heb. 11. Hom. 25. Mat. 18.15 and if any man that is called a Brother be a Fornicator 1. Cor. 5.11 from which place S. Chrysostom observeth that every Christian man baptized by the laver of regeneration is there called a Brother Tertullian in a general sense as they are men alloweth even the Heathen to be accounted Brethren Apol. c. 39. though they be Mali fratres evil Brethren but in a more special sense he so esteemeth of all Christians Praep. Evang l. 1. c. 4. who acknowledge one God the Father and much to the same purpose writeth Eusebius Cyr. Hier. Praef. And Cyril telleth all those who gave up their names to Christianity that they become the Sons and Daughters of one Mother V. Albasp Obs l. 1. c. 19. So that this manner of expression in this Office is the same which the Scriptures and
Amalarius de Eccles Offic. l. 4. c. 3. solemus stare but when they were sometimes sung by one person alone the usage of the Church in such indifferent things not being always the same in the Western Church Cassian Inst l. 2. c. 8. in the time of Cassian they all stood up at the end of the Psalms with joint voices to render glory to God 4. Standing at the Creed is a visible sign or token of the profession of the Faith therein contained which profession is a duty much required in the holy Scripture and is one part of our glorifying God for which Religious Assemblies of Divine Worship are intended In the Creed we professedly acknowledge the three persons in the glorious Trinity to be the only true God and our only Lord and a standing posture well becometh a Servant in his professed owning and attending upon his Master we openly declare every one for our selves I believe c. the ground of our Christian hope and comfort that believing in the Father who made the World in the Son who died rose again ascended and shall judge all men and in the Holy ghost we have expectation in the Church of God and the Communion of Saints of obtaining forgiveness of sins resurrection and everlasting life and do also acknowledge all these Articles of the Christian Faith and a standing gesture is very suitable to any solemn Declaration of our minds in matters of moment and concernment And as the profession of Faith encludeth a stedfast resolution to continue firm in the acknowledgment of the Christian Doctrine this is so properly signified by the standing gesture according to the general apprehensions of the World that both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek which are words expressing the standing gesture are in the holy Scripture used to signifie an asserting with resolution Deut. 25.8 1 Chr. 34.32 1 Cor. 16.13 2 Thes 2.15 and the like Idioms of speech are in some other languages as well as our own designing to express what we resolve to stand to SECT II. Of standing up at the Gospel 1. Standing at the Gospel is appointed in our Liturgy of which a very reasonable true and good account may be given Some Ritualists have told us that the Western Church stood up at the Gospel and not at the Epistle because the Gospel containeth matters of Faith and belief the Epistle consisteth of Rules of life and practice and that the Gospel and not the Epistle expresseth the very words spoken by Christ But I account not these reasons sufficient partly because the Gospels for some days do not contain and the Epistles for some days do contain the points of Christian Faith and the express words of Christ and partly because by insisting on these things alone we can have no reason antecedent to the appointment why standing at the Gospel should be required with us and not at the second Lesson in the Morning Service 2. Wherefore I observe 1. That in the devouter times both of the Jewish and Christian Church it was frequently observed by the people to manifest their reverence unto the holy Scriptures by standing up at the reading thereof When Ezra opened the Book of the Law Salian Annal. Eccles A. M. 3447. n. 16. all the people stood up Neh. 8.5 and the Children of Israel stood up in their places to read the Law of the Lord Neh. 9.3 and our blessed Saviour who according to the Custom of the Jewish Doctors taught sitting stood up to read the words of the Prophet Ecclesiastici lib. 1. c. 4. Luke 4.16 20. Junius observeth this as one thing wherein the practice of the Jewish Synagogue and the Christian Church did agree si verbum Dei ipsum legitur stat erecta Auditorum corona that when the word of God was read the whole Assembly stood up which observation was true concerning sometimes of the Jewish Church and of the principal parts of the Christian Church Sozom. l. 7. c. 19. Wherefore though Sozomen relateth that the Alexandrian Bishop did not stand up at the reading the Gospel yet he noteth it as such a peculiar usage that he had not seen nor heard the like any where else 3. And though in the Jewish Church the people and among them our Saviour Luk. 2.46 usually sat to hear their Doctors and the ancient Christians sometimes heard their Sermons and Exhortations in the same gesture as may be collected from Justin Martyrs second Apology Euseb de Vit. Const l. 4. c. 33. yet Eusebius acquainteth us that Constantine that famous Emperour whose practice doubtless was not singular would not hear a Sermon or Treatise about divine things in a sitting but only in a standing posture as judging it not allowable to do otherwise And that in the African Churches they did even until S. Austens days generally stand Aug. Hom. 26. both at Sermons and all Lessons out of the Scriptures is manifest from what he expresseth to that purpose And such respect was shewed even among barbarous Nations to what was dictated from God that Eglon King of Moab when Ehud told him he had a message from God unto him did arise out of his seat Jud. 3.20 4. Obs 2. Out of tenderness to the weakness and infirmity of many Christians liberty was granted to them that they might hear the longer Lessons or portions of holy Scripture sitting Aug. ibidem but as a testimony of their honour to the whole they were required at the reading other portions of Scripture to stand up S. Austen telleth us how he gave Counsel and in some sort made supplication that those who were infirm and not well able to stand might humbly and attentively hear the longer Lessons sitting but in the same place he maketh complaint that this liberty granted only to the infirm in those African Churches was taken by others more generally than was intended or allowed And to somewhat a like liberty the words of Amalarius in the ninth Century seem to refer Amalar. de Eccles Offic. l. 4. c. 3. who saith in recitatione lectionis sedere solemus aut silendo stare it is our Custom either to sit or to stand with silence when the Lesson is read And whereas in the Christian Church the Law and Prophets with some of the Apocrypha and the Gospels and Epistles were publickly read in their Assemblies as is manifest both from Councils Fathers and Ritual Writers the Latin Church enjoined standing up at the Gospel only which was ordinarily short for many hundred years past Microl. c. 9. the Greek Church as Micrologus relateth stood up also at the Epistle which was likewise short Cassand Liturg. c. 5. and so did also the Churches of Russia as Cassander observeth from the History of Sigismundus Liberus For though a posture of reverent respect to the word of God is very suitable whensoever it is read yet that the Church should allow a liberty to hear the
Declaration of its true intent and end which is therewith expressed 11. I know that some persons have asserted as from Irenaeus Iren. adv Haer. l. 1. c. 1. that the Original use of the sign of the Cross was received in the Church from the Valentinians who used it as the fan of Christ to purge away sin but these things are much misrepresented there being nothing at all in Irenaeus to this purpose Only concerning the Valentinians who indeed were no Christians but by a strange medley from names used in Christianity and Gentilisme and from their own fancies they framed a Theogonia of Aeones which they called their Pleroma Irenaeus with whom Tertullian agreeth Tertul. adv Valentin c. 9. saith that the Keeper of this Pleroma was Horus who among other names was also called Stauros or Crux Lytrotes or Redemptor and of him they interpreted those words of S. Matthew his fan is in his hand So that all this referred not to the sign of the Cross but to an imaginary person who was an Idol of Valentinus his brain 12. But though the true original of the Christian use of this sign be above expressed Justin Apol. 2. adv Tryphon Tertul. de Bapt. c 8. Adv. Jud. c. 10. Barnab Ep. p. 136. what is produced by the ancient Writers of this sign being prefigured in the Old Testament by the roasting the Paschal Lamb the Serpent upon the Pole the form of the hands of Jacob in blessing the Sons of Joseph and of Moses hands being lifted up which Barnabas expresseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is far more considerable than the mistaken matter of this objection And whereas the mark upon the forehead Ezek. 9.4 was accounted by Theodotion and by Aquila as Origen relateth by the Vulgar Latin and the ancient latin Version used by Tertullian to be the mark of the Letter Thau which is the word there used in the Hebrew both S. Hierom who himself understood the Samaritan Character which was anciently used by the Jews and Origen from the relation of a converted Jew declare that the old form of 〈…〉 Thau was in the figure of a 〈◊〉 And though Scaliger in his learned â—â—â—â—dversions upon Eusebius averreth Animad v. p. 117. that this was their mistake concerning the Samaritan Character yet the truth of what they asserted may appear from the old Alphabet collected out of their ancient Medals by Bishop Walton which is different from the Vulgar Characters And I may add that the Aaronical Priesthood under the Law which prefigured Christ Kerith f. 5. in Buxt Lex Rab. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 received their Vnction in the form of a Cross or the Greek Chi as both the Talmud and all the Jewish Rabbins do declare those Rabbins who seem to dissent being reconciled to this assertion by the reasonable interpretation of Simeon de Muis. S. de Muis Var. Sacr. in Abarb. in Ex. 30. Sozom. l. 7. c. 15. Baron an 389. n. 99. Just Mart. Apol. 2. Sylburg ibidem And the form or sign of a Cross was an Hieroglyphick of the life to come among the Aegyptians and a character of wisdom among the Platonists And all these things speaking an honourable use of this sign before the time of Christ though they were not chief reasons of the Christians usage might well be providentially ordered for the advantage of Christianity it being particularly related by Sozomen that the Conversion of divers Pagans was occasioned thereby 13. Obj. 2 As for them who would charge this Rite because of its signification with being a new Sacrament I have sufficiently discovered the palpable erroneousness of that conceit in a former Chapter Ch. 2. Se. 1. 14. And whereas some disapprove this sign because it hath been abused by the Church of Rome I have given a sufficient answer to this in the fourth Section of the same Chapter And he who would censure an useful and piously ordered sign of admonition and memorial because a superstitious operative use of the same transient sign is not allowable must condemn things greatly different as if they were the same As if because Gideons Ephod was abused when it was made an Idol the use of an Ephod by Samuel and David for the decent service of God must be also insufferable and because the image of Caesar set up to be worshipped is abominable therefore his image stamped upon the Coin must not be tolerated And there is as much reason to condemn wholesom and profitable words from some persons making an ill use thereof as to condemn useful actions and gestures for the same cause 15. They who censure this Rite because it is used so soon after Baptism it self as an attendant thereupon supposing that no significative rite may be lawfully received so nearly attending upon any Sacrament they also build upon a very false and groundless supposition as if the Love-kiss and the Agapae were not so used in the Apostolical times with reference to the Lords Supper and the trinal mersion in Baptism both in the Primitive and most reformed Churches Yea I would appeal to every indifferent mans Conscience whether if a Father being solicitously careful of the eternal welfare of his Son and having nurtured him in the fear of God and lived to see him receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper should give his Son some token so soon as be cometh from that Sacrament requiring him to keep the same as a memorial of his Fathers charge upon him to mind the service of God and the Christian life and Unity to which he is further obliged by the receiving that Sacrament I say I would appeal to such a man whether he durst condemn this action as sinful meerly because this charge and token hath some reference to the Sacrament And this rite of our Church hath many advantages above this instance both in the higher authority of the Church the greater simplicity of the rite it self and the relation it beareth to the pattern and example of Primitive Christianity 16. Among the Protestants the Lutheran Churches retain not only this but some other Rites in the office of Baptism which are not received in the Church of England And though many other Reformed Churches do not use this sign yet they condemn it not nor do they herein censure either the Church of England or those of the Augustane Confession It hath been observed partly by Mr. Hooker and partly by Mr. Durel Goulart in Ep. 56. Cypr. c. 7. that Goulartius declared this Ceremony to be indifferent in its nature but said it was not necessary now for all Christians to observe it by those words rather modestly defending the practice of Geneva as Mr. Hooker expresseth it in a way of excuse than expressing any dislike of them who without superstition do retain it Exercit. in Bar. 13. n. 33. Isaac Casaubone when he wrote his exercitations expresseth an approbation of this Rite in the Church of England Buc.
Scripture to be a Gospel-Sacrament 14. The latter clause of those words of the Article do manifestly alike deny Confirmation and Ordination to have any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God or that God hath not appointed in them any such properly Sacramental sign as Baptism and the Lords Supper hath For in both these the Imposition of hands is immediately a representation of a benediction and of being thereby received into a higher degree among Christians by the ministerial power of the Church and though further grace from God is needful in this higher degree and humble and devout persons may receive grace from God suitable to whatsoever state he calleth them yet grace is in these cases to be expected in the use of Prayer and from the Promises of Gods assistance to and presence with his people and his Ministry but not immediately from God by the use of Imposition of hands as an outward sign whereby that grace is directly exhibited and conveyed and moreover proper Sacraments are seals of Gods whole Covenant and means whereby he conveyeth both pardoning and satisfying grace And I further add that the acknowledging the sign of Imposition of hands in Confirmation not to have any divine institution or immediate command hindreth not its being of Apostolical practice and that in the use thereof we may both follow the example of the Apostles and certifie Gods favour and gracious goodness to persons confirmed according as is above expressed SECT IV. Of the Ring in Marriage And the Conclusion 1. The Ring was by the old Nonconformists called a Sacramental Sign and a new Sacrament and others since have expressed some fear lest the use of these words with the delivery of the Ring In Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost should favour them who account Marriage a Sacrament But if this was an intimation of a Sacrament a last Will and Testament beginning In the Name of God c. and being signed and sealed must be accounted a Sacrament And even among the Romanists who esteem Marriage for a Sacrament the Ring is not fixed upon for the sign or matter thereof but some fix upon the persons contracting others upon all those words and actions whereby consent is signified others as Estius speaketh doubt which of these to close with Bellarm. de Matrim Sacr. c. 6. and Bellarmine admitteth them both 2. Now though Marriage be in some sense a Religious Constitution as having its original institution from God yet both the nature of this society and the end of it speak it a civil state of Gods appointment even as the state of Government and Subjection is and therefore as other civil contracts are established by words of consent ordinarily attended with real signs or tokens as with us some Livery and Seisin is used in the passing over an Estate and by the general consent of the World an Earnest attendeth ordinary Bargains so by a large consent of Nations hath a Ring been thought fit to establish the Matrimonial contract as a pledge or earnest thereof Whence it was an ordinary custom among the Jews to use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ring of Espousing the manner of its use among the modern Jews is expressed by Buxtorfe in his Synagogua Judaica Syn. Jud. c. 28. and the ancient practice thereof is mentioned in the Talmud in Kiddushin Buxt Lex Radbin in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Among the ancient and laudable customs of the Roman Empire Tertul. Apol c. 6. Tertullian reckoneth this for one that women then wore gold only on that one finger quem sponsus oppignorasset annulo pronubo where the Bridegroom had put the pledge of the Matrimonial Ring Baron An. 57. n. 51. and Pamelius upon that place of Tertullian and Baronius also observeth the like use of the Ring to be expressed by Pliny to which purpose also are the words of Juvenal who describing Marriage saith Et digitis pignus fortasse dedisti Juven Sat. 6. and Theosebius in Photius calleth the Ring 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the conjoyner of conjugal society But though the use of this Rite in Marriage was very ancient Tertul. de Idolatr c. 16. even among the Pagan Nations Tertullian assureth us it was no part of their Paganism saith he Neque annulus neque conjunctio maritalis de alicujus idoli honore descendit but this pledge and other common earnests were prudently used long before the time of Christ and are still continued under Christianity 3. And that the principal use of this Rite is under the Christian state continued to be an earnest of this Matrimonial Contract is not only manifest from those ancient ritual words mentioned by Durantus Durandus and many others Annulo suo subarravit me sibi Dominus but from S. Augustin Aug. Tr. 2. in 1. Ep. Johan who calleth it arram sponsi the pledge or earnest of the Husband and the same intent hereof is expressed in several testimonies cited in Gratians Decretum c. 30. q. 5. c. nostrates Foeminae V. Gloss in c. 27. q. 2. si quis And in our Liturgy the giving and receiving a Ring is declared to be a pledge of the Vow and Covenant made between the persons who enter upon this state of Marriage And whereas these words In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost have some relation to the pledge of Wedlock by the Ring in our Office of Marriage as it is a testimony of consent to the Covenant of Marriage the sense and design thereof is to express thus much That this Contract of Marriage in the Church is undertaken with respect to the Rules of the Christian Doctrine and the Institution of God concerning Marriage and by Authority therefrom and in Subjection thereunto and that by reason of this institution the expressed consent of the persons contracting must stand firm and inviolable and therefore it is fitly and solemnly declared to be In the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost in that being now joyned together by God no man can put them asunder 4. But besides this principal end of the Ring the delivery thereof did also include a giving authority to the Wife to command and take care of the goods of the house and the provisions which the ancient Romans usually sealed and hence the Ring given in Marriage was a Seal-ring Paed. l. 3. c. 11. Thus Clemens Alexandrinus calleth it a Ring of Gold given to the Woman but not for ornament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but to set a seal upon what requireth safe custody and in the same Chapter he saith that the care of the house is fitly committed to the Wife and those who have no wives may use the Seal-ring themselves So he expresseth this ancient usage of giving a Seal-ring which may also not improbably be designed in the comprehensiveness of Tertullians language Tertull. ad Vxor l. 2. c 9. by his Phrase of