Imperial Lawes could never be of force to void the Power of the Church Evidence for it 125 CHAP. XV. Another opinion admiâ—ting the ground of Lawfull Impediments What Impediments arise upon the Constitution of the Church generally as a Society or particularly as of Christians By what Law some degrees are prohibited Christians And of the Polygamy of the Patriarchs Mariage with the deceased wives Sister and with a Cousin Germane by what Law prohibited Of the Profession of Continence and the validity of clandestine Mariages The bound of Ecclesiastical Power in Mariage upon these grounds 134 CHAP. XVI Of the Power of making Governours and Ministers of the Church Vpon what ground the Hierarchy of Bishops Priests and Deacons standath in opposition to Presbyteries and Congregations Of the Power of Confirming and the evidence for the Hierarchy which it yeeldeth Of those Scriptures which seem â—o speake of Presbyteries or Congregations 145 CHAP. XVII The power given the XII under the Title of Apostles and the LXX Disciples That the VII were Deacons Of the first Presbyters at Jerusalem and the interest of the People Presbyters appropriated to Churches under the Apostles S. Pauls Deacons no Presbyters No ground for Lay Elders 152 CHAP. XVIII The Apostlet all of equall power S. Peter onely chiefe in managing it The ground for the pre-eminence of Churches before and over Churches Of Alexandria Antiochia Jerusalem and Rome Ground for the pre-eminence of the Church of Rome before all Churches The consequence of that Ground A summary of the evidence for it 161 CHAP. XIX Of the proceedings about Marcion and Montanus at Rome The business of Pope Victor about keeping Easter a peremptory instance The businesse of the Novatians evidenceth the same Of the businesses concerning the rebaptizing of Hereticks Dionysius of Alexandria Paulus Samosatenus S. Cypriane and of the Donatists under Constantine 168 CHAP. XX. Of the constitution and authority of Councils The ground of the pre-eminence of Churches in the Romane Empire The VI. Canon of the Council of Niâ—aea The pre-eminence of the Church of Rome and that of Constantinople Some instances against the Superiority of Bishops out of the records of the Church what offices every Order by Gods Law or by Canon Law ministreth 175 CHAP. XXI Of the times of Gods service By what Title of his Law the first day of the week is kept Holy How the Sabbath is to be sanctified by Moses Law The fourth Commandment the ground upon which the Apostles inacted it Vpon what ground the Church limiteth the times of Gods service Of Easter and the Lent Fast afore it Of the difference of mâ—ats and measure of Fasting Of keeping of our Lords Birth-day and other Festivals and the regular hours of the day for Gods service 190 CHAP. XXII The people of God tied to build Synâ—gogues though not by the leter of the Law The Church to provide Churches though the Scripture command it not Prescribing the form of Gods publick service is not quenching the Spirit The Psalter is prescribed the Church for Gods Praises The Scriptures prescribed to be read in the Church The order of reading them to be prescribed by the Church 203 CHAP. XXIII The consecration of the Eucharist prescribed by Tradition for the mater of it The Lords Prayer prescribed in all Services The mater of Prayers for all estates prescribed The form of Baptism necessary to be prescribed The same reason holdeth in the formes of other Offices 211 CHAP. XXIV The service of God prescribed to be in a known Language No pretense that the Latine is now understood The means to preserve Unity in the Church notwithstanding The true reason of a Sacrifice inforceth Communion in the Eucharist What occasions may dispense in it Communion in both kinds commanded the People Objections answered Who is chargeable with the abuse 217 CHAP. XXV Prayer the more principall Office of Gods service then Preaching Preaching neither Gods word nor the meanes of salvation unlesse limited to the Faith of Gods Church What the edification of the Church by preaching further requires The Order for divine service according to the course of the Church of England According to the custome of the universal Church 273 CHAP. XXV Idolatry presupposeth an imâ—gination that there is more Gods then one Objections out of the Scripture that it is the worship of the true God under an Image the Original of worshipping the elements of the world The Devill And Images Of the Idolatry of Magicians and of the Gnosticks What Idolatry the cases of Aaron and Jeroboam involve Of the Idolatries practised under the Kings and Judges in answer to objections 282 CHAP. XXVI The place or rather the State of happy and miserable Soules otherwise understood by Gods people before Christs ascension then after it What the Apocalypse what the rest of the Apostles declare Onely Martyrs before Gods Throne Of the sight of God 302 CHAP. XXVII The Souls of the Fathers were not in the Devils Power till Christ Though the Old Testament declare not their estate Of Samuels soul The soul of our Lord Christ parting from his body went with the Thiefe to Paradise Of his triumph over the powers of darknesse Prayer for the dead signifieth â—o delivering of souls out of Purgatory The Covenant of Grace requires imperfect happinesse before the generall judgement Of forgivenesse in the world to come and paying the utmost farthing 310 CHAP. XXVIII Ancient opinions in the Church of the place of souls before the day of judgement No Tradition that the Fathers were in the Vâ—rge of Hell under the Earth The reason of the difference in the expressions of the Fathers of the Church What Tradition of the Church for the place of Christs soul during his death The Saints soules in secret mansions according to the Tradition of the Church Prayer for the dead supposeth the same No Purgatory according to the Tradition of the Church 325 CHAP. XXIX The ground upon which Ceremonies are to be used in the service of the Church Instances out of the Scriptures and Tradition of the Apostles Of the equivocation of the word Sacrament in the Fathers The reason of a Sacrament in Baptism and the Eucharist In extream Unction In Mariage In Confirmation Ordination and Penance 340 CHAP. XXX To worship Christ in the Eucharist though believing transubstantiation is not Idolatry Ground for the honour of Saints and Martyrs The Saints and the Angels pray for us Three sorts of Prayers to Saints The first agreeable with Christianity The last may be Idolatry The second a step to it Of the Reliques of the Saints Bodies What the second Commandment prohibiteth or alloweth The second Council of Nicaea doth not decree Idolatry And yet there is no decree in the Church for the worshipping of Images 350 CHAP. XXXI The ground for Monastical life in the Scriptures And in the practice of the primitive Church The Church getteth no peculiar interest in them who professe it by their professing of it
it may be said in some regard that the Church was before the Scriptures when as in order of reason it is evident that the truth of Christianity is supposed to the being of it inasmuch as no man can be or be known to be of the Church but as hee is or is known to be a Christian And truly those that dispute the authority of the Church to be the the reason to believe the sentence of it in mater of Faith to be true are to consider what they will say to that opinion which utterly denies any such authority any such thing as a Church Understanding the Church to be a Society founded by Gods appointment giving publick authority to some persons so or so qualified by that appointment in behalf of the whole For this all must deny that admit Erastus his opinion of Excommunication to be true if they will admit the consequence of their own doctrine Which opinion I have therefore premised in staring this Question that it may appear to require such an answer as may not suppose the being of the Church in that nature but may be a means to demonstrate it But as it is not my intent to begg so great a thing in question by proceeding upon supposition of any authority in the Church before I can prove it to be a Corporation founded with such authority as the foundation of it requireth So is it as farre from my meaning to deny that authority which I do not suppose For hee that denieth the authority of the Church to be the reason why any thing is to be taken for truth or for the meaning of the Scripture may take the due and true authority of the Church to be a part of that truth which is more ancient than the authority of the Church Inasmuch as it must be believed that God hath founded a Society of them which professe Christianity by the name of the Church giving such authority to some members of it in behalf of the whole as hee pleased before it can be believed that this or that is within the authority of the Church For that there is a Church and a publick authority in it and for it and what things they are that fall under that authority if it be true is part of that truth which our Lord and his Apostles whose authority is more ancient than the Church have declared Indeed if it were true that the first truth which all Christians are to believe and for the reason of it to believe every thing else is the saying of persons so and so qualified in the Church then were it evident that the belief of that which is questioned in religion could not be resolved into any other principle But if it be manifest by the motives of Christianity that the authority of the Apostles is antecedent to it that all Scripture and the meaning of Scripture which signifies nothing beside it own meaning and Tradition of the Apostles if any such Tradition over and above Scripture may appear is true not supposing it as appeares by the premises then is the authority of the Church no ground of Faith and so not Infallible There are indeed sundry Objections made both out of Scripture and the Fathers to weaken and to shake such an evident truth which are not here to be related till wee have resolved as well what is the reason of believing in Controversies of Faith as what is not In the mean time if wee demand by what means any person that can pretend to give sentence in Controversies of Faith knowes his own sentence to be infallible or upon what ground hee gives sentence Hee that answers by Scripture or authority of Writers that professe to have learned from the Scriptures or reasons depending on the authority of our Lord and his Apostles acknowledges the authority of the Church not to be the reason of believing For what need wee all this if it were If hee say by the same means for which these are receivable that is by revelation from God It will be presently demanded to make evidence of such revelation the same evidence as wee have for the truth of the Scriptures Which because it cannot be done therefore is this plea laid aside even by them who neverthelesse professe to imbrace the Communion of the Church of Rome because they believe the Church to be Infallible But if it be destructive to all use of reason to deny the conclusion admitting the premises then let him never hope to prevaile in any dispute that holds the conclusion denying the premises For to hold the sentence of the Church Infallible when the means that depend upon the authority of our Lord and his Apostles proves whatsoever is to be believed without supposing any such thing when revelation independent upon their authority there is acknowledged to be none averreth Infallibility in the sentence of the Church denying the onely principle that can inferre it And therefore those that speak things so inconsequent so inconsistent I shall not grant that they speake those things which themselves think and believe but rather that like men upon the rack they speak things which themselves may and in some sort do know not to be true For whosoever holds an opinion which hee sees an argument against that hee cannot resolve is really and truly upon the rack and of necessity seeks to escape by contradicting what himself confesseth otherwise Which every man of necessity doth who acknowledging the reason of believing Christianity to lye in the authority of our Lord and his Apostles challengeth neverthelesse that Infallability which is the reason of believing to all sentences of the Church the mater of which sentence if it be true the reason of it must depend immediately upon the same authority upon which the authority of the Church which sentenceth dependeth But the consequence of this assertion deserves further consideration because all that followes depends upon it Suppose that the Scriptures prove themselves to be the Word of God by the reasons of believing contained in them witnessed by the common sense of all Christians For this admits no dispute If the same consent can evidence any thing belonging to the mater of Faith that will appear to oblige the Faith of all Christians upon the same reason as the Scriptures do whether contained in the Scriptures or not For who will undertake that God could not have preserved Christianity without either Scriptures or new revelations And therefore hee chose the way of writing not as of absolute necessity but as of incomparable advantage If therefore God might have obliged man to believe any thing not delivered by writing whether hee hath or not will remain questionable supposing the Scriptures to be the Word of God upon the ground aforesaid Besides there are many things so manifest in the Scriptures that they can indure no dispute supposing the Scriptures to be the Word of God Many things are every day cleared more and more by applying the knowledg
will divide the Church unlesse an end be put But I say that the Authority of the Church can be no reason obliging or warranting to believe that for truth which cannot be reasonably deduced from the motives of our common faith onely it shall be a reason obliging and warranting to keep the peace of the Church by not scandalizing such determinations thereof as are not destructive to the common faith Much more where the faith is not concerned onely the question is of determining the circumstances of those actions wherein the Communion of the Church is exercised which neither our Lord nor his Apostles have determined shall the disobeying of such determinations be the violating of that unity which all Christians professe that God hath ordained in his Church And now we have an easie account to give how the Prophets Haggai and Malachi send the Israelites to the Priest for resolution in those things which the practice of that people determined to belong to their office to resolve Because it cannot be doubted that their resolutions depended upon upon the acts of that authority which concluded that people by the Law aforesaid of Deut. XVII 8 -12 Which if not infallible and yet authorized by God to warrant the proceedings of his people it will be no marvail if those that act in dependance on them be authorized to warrant the people though further from being infallible To come now to those things that are alleadged to be said of the Apostles and of the Church having already limited the power of the Church not to extend to the faith of Christianity which it presupposeth it will be easie to distinguish it from the power of the Apostles Which though it presuppose the truth of Christianity preached by our Lord as that which they are imployed to introduce and establishâ— yet in order of nature and reason is before the very being of the Church as serving to evidence any truth of the Gospel to them that believe being convicted that they came from God to move them to believe For how can they stand obliged to believe the truth of our common Christianity to be that which God sent our Lord Christ to preach but by standing convict that the Apostles were sent by him to move them to accept of it and thereupon inabled with means to evidence this Commission and trust whereupon the world may safely repose themselves upon the credit of them whose act God owns by the witnesse he yields them for his own The true reason and ground upon which no act of theirs whither by word or writing is refusable by the Church Upon which the truth of things determined by their writings is no more determinable by the Church because the meaning of their words which is the truth sought for is in the words from the time they are said And is it then an unreasonable demand that their Charter He that heareth you heareth me extending to all that falls under their office should not be thought to descend upon the Church indefinitely but according to such limitations as the constitution thereof determineth That is to say not to the effect of creating faith but of preserving peace and unity in the Communion of the Church Not prejudicing neverthelesse that force of evidencing the truth of Christianity and the meaning of the Apostles writings which I have showed to be in the testimony of the Church not by any authority it hath from God but from that conviction which the testimony of such a body of men inferreth I shall not therefore deny that he who heareth or refuseth their successors heareth and refuseth God if that which they would be heard in be within the bounds of that power which God hath assigned them but is not the same that he assigned the Apostles But I shall utterly deny that it is by virtue of these words which were spoken by our Lord at such time as he had not declared whither they should have successors or not For there is very great appearance that they themselves after this expected to see the worlds end and the coming of Christ When the Apostles Mat. XXVI 3. inquire of our Lord When shall these things come to passe And what shall be the sign of thy coming and of the worlds end Though our Lord by this answer distinguisheth the time of the destruction of Jerusalem from the end of the world yet by the question there is no appearance that the Apostles did so distinguish before his answer And when his answer contains That this generation shall not be over till all these things come to passe and that not only after he had declared the destruction of Jerusalem but his coming and the end of the world Mat. XXIV 14 -23-29-34 it appeareth that those things which he declares shall forerun the worlds end were to begin before that generation were out when to end being not thought sit then to be said If this interpretation of Grotius which makes good the leter best suffer contradiction yet is it evident by S. Pauls Epistles 1 Cor. XV. 51 52. 2 Cor. V. 11-44 2 Thes IV. 15. 17. that he was not certificed but that the coming of Christ to judgement should be during his time In which S. Iohn by the Apocalypse was more fully informed If these things be true the obedience due to the Apostles successors cannot stand by virtue of this command given when it was not declared whither they were to have successors or not But by those Scriptures whereby it may appear so farre as in due place it shall appear whither or no and upon what terms the Apostles left their Authority with successors which when it appears then by consequence of reason it will be inferred from these words that who hears or refuses them hears or refuses God by whom the Apostles were inabled to leave such part of their power with successors Neither will it be strange that I allow not any Councill in which never so much of the authority of the present Church is united to say in the same sense and to the same effect as the Synode of the Apostles at Jerusalem It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Though I allow the overt act of their assembling to be a legall presumption that their acts are the acts of the Holy Ghost so farre as they appear not to transgresse those bounds upon which the assistance of the Holy Ghost is promised the Church For as for the Apostles I have showed before that they had the Holy Ghost given them not onely to preserve them in the truth of the common profession of Christians but to reveal unto them the true sense of the old Scriptures according to the Gospell which they preached though that grace was common to many more besides the Apostles not to all Christians upon which depended the resolution of the point then in debate Besides I do not intend to depart from that observation which I have made in another place that we find
guilty of those excesses which they are charged with by Epiphanius S. Jerome and others Of these particulars you may see in S. Augustine de Haeresibus and Sirmondus his Praedestinatus both of them Haeresi XXVI and LXXXVI But all the while the subject of this separation is the discipline of Penance received by the whole Church as from the Apostles the limitation of the practice thereof being the ground upon which the difference is stated And for the ground of this ground Whether it could then be pretended that the Keyes of the Church could do no more then cure the scandall of notorious sinne on the one side Or whether it could then be pretended on the other side that the Keyes of the Church import any Power to pardon sinne immediately not supposing that disposition which qualifieth for pardon visible to the Church and procured by those actions which the authority of the Church injoyneth All this I am content to referre to that common sense which is capable to understand these particulars I shall not need to say much of the Novatians at Rome and elsewhere the Donatists in Africk of the Meletians in Aegypt having said this of the Montanists all of them if we regard the subject of the separations which they made in severall parts of the Church being nothing else but branches of the same sect and forsaking the unity of the Church for their part of that cause which ingaged Montanus The Novatians because they would not indure that those who fell away from the Faith in the persecution of Decius should be readmitted to the communion of the Church upon demonstration of repentance The Meletians for the same cause in Aegypt under the persecution of Diocletiane The Donatists upon some appertenâ—nce of the same cause Onely they serve to evidence the discipline of Penance to have been as universall as the Church of Christ when no part of it is found free from debates about the terms liâ—iting the exercise of it They serve also to evidence the ground and the pretenâ—e of the Power of the Keyes in the discipline of Penance by the same reason which I alledged afore After these times when the customes of the Church which from the beginning was governed by un-written Law delivered by word of mouth of the Apostles but limited more and more by the Governours of several Churches began to be both reduced into writing and also more expresly determined by the Canons of severall Councils greater and lesse it were too vain to prove that by dicourse which of it selfe is as evident as it is evident that there are such Rules extant which in their time had the force of Law to those parts of the Church for which they were respectively made Onely I do observe the agreement that is found between the originall practice of the Church in this point and that order which I have showed you out of the Apostles writings evidencing that interpretation which I have given of them by that rule which common sense inforces that the meaning and intent of every Law is to be measured by the primitive practice of it For we see so much doubt made whether those three great crimes of Idolatry Murther and Adultery were to be reconciled by Penance that is by the visible and outward demonstration of inward repentance to the Church not onely by Montanus but partly by Novatianns that that great Church of Antiochia remained doubtfull a great while whether Cornelius or Novatians should be acknowledged the true Bishop of Rome We see the Eliberitane Canons which were unquestionably made divers years before the Council at Nicaea and therefore may be counted as ancient as any that the Church hath exclude some branches of those sinnes from reconciliation with the Church We see this vigor abated by the succeeding discipline of the Church It is indeed said in the Church of Rome at this time that the ground of the Heresie as without ground they call it of the Montanists and Novatians was this that acknowledging the Church to have power to forgive lesse sinnes they the Novatians denied it the Power to forgive Apostasy or Idolatry To which the Montanists added Murther and Adultery But I have showed in my Book of the Right of the Church p. 17-27 that within the Church also as well as among the Montanists and Novatians some of these sinnes were not admitted to communion no not at the point of death And that there never was any opinion in the ancient Church that the Church hath any Power to forgive sinne immediately but onely by the medicine of Penance which it injoyneth I referre my selfe to that which here followeth Now it is plain that neither those parts of the Church nor the Novatians did hold those sinnes desperate but exhorted them to Penance as their cure in Gods sight agreeing in not readmitting them whither for the maintenance of Discipline or for fear the Church warranting their pardon who might prove not qualified for it should become guilty of their sinnes according to S. Paul 1 Tim. V. 22. Lay hands suddenly on no man nor partake in other mens sinnes For S. John and the Apostle to the Hebrews had authorized the Church to make difficulty of it though S. Paul had readmitted a branch of one of them the incestuous person at Corinth whether for the unity of that Church then in danger to be divided upon that occasion or as reasonably satisfied of the truth of his repentance But when the zeal of Christianity decreased as the number of Christians increased within and persecution without withdrew so many that there was no means left to preserve the Body without abating this severity the number of Apostates in some persecutions being considerable to the number of Christians we need seek no other reason why the Montanists and Novatians should be Schismaticks not properly Hereticks then their separating from the Church rather then condescend to that which the Body of the Church found requisite to be granted Let us see what crimes they are which the Eliberitane Canons that is the Canons of the Council of Elvira in Spain exclude from the communion even in case of death As if a man at age after Baptism commit adultery in the Temple of an Idol cap. I. If an Idol Priest having been baptized shall sacrifice again II. If such a one after Penance shall have committed adultery III. If a Christian kill a man by Witchcraft wherein there is Idolatry VI. If a Christian commit adultery after Penance VII If a Woman leaving her Husband without cause mary another VIII If a Father or Mother sell a child into the Stews or a child it selfe XII If a professed Virgine shall live in uncleannesse XIII If a man marry his daughter to an Idol Priest XVII If a Clergy-man commit adultery XVIII If he who is admitted to communion upon adultery in danger of death shall commit adultery again XLVII If a Woman kill the childe which she hath conceived of adultery
in the one in the other to be grounded upon a sentence of absolution that supposes it not And yet it will not be acknowledged that there is any decay of discipline any fault any defect in the Laws and Customes for what is Law but Custome what rule is there for mens actions that custome inforceth not of the Church that cause so much difference in the proceedings of it Howsoever the custome of redeeming Penance came into the Church and how prejudiciall soever the voyage of the H. Land or the like may have been to the discipline of it the application of temporall good to some spirituall end was a poor cloke for such a corruption in comparison of that zeal to Christianity which fighting for Christians against Infidels pretendeth This is the most material occasion that I find alledged for that change which the discipline of the Church hath suffered in granting absolution before Penance To wit the indulgences granted them that undertook to fight for Christians against infidels And this is enough to render the abuse and the decay of discipline by the means thereof visible But when Indulgences are proposed for a small summe of Money pre-supposing indeed such qualifications as need not the Indulgences if rightly understood and had but as not being rightly understood and had render the Indulgences dangerous delusions whither poor people will not rather be induced by our common corruption to imbrace that sense which makes the pardon of their sinnes void as so had then that which makes them to be deceived of their money to no effect by the Church I leave to the conscience of discreet Christians to judge And whither this be not horribly to abuse the Keyes of the Church I leave to God and man to judge In the mean time I onely remind you of that difficulty which the ancient Church made in believing and admitting that those were saved who being admitted to the communion of the Eucharist in danger of death died before they could accomplish that Penance upon undertaking whereof they were admitted to it For is not the case of him that steddily purposeth to perform that Penance which the Church imposeth according to Rule if he survive much more hopeful for salvation dying afore then his that thinks his sinne purged by the sentence of absolution without undertaking or performing any Penance at all in order to the pardon of it And here I summon the Consciences of the Doctors of the Church of Rome Suppose a man take revenge upon himselfe according to a good conscience that is proportionably to the weight of his sinne according to the Rules that were in force in more uncorrupt times of the Church another according to the doctrine that is current in the Church of Rome professing himselfe truly sorry for his sinne and receiving absolution presumes of pardon for it intending to satisfie for temporall punishment that remains as he is directed whether of these is upon the better ground whether of them pretends to pardon upon the better title supposing the premises concerning the Covenant of Grace He who satisfying his conscience upon the original word of the Gospel and the primitive practice of the Church that he hath appeased the wrath of God by taking revenge upon himselfe and is thereby returned to his first resolution for Christianity Or he who being touched with sorrow for his sinne and submitting the same to the Keys of the Church hath done what the current practice thereof requires him to do for redeeming the temporall punishment of iâ— For it is evident in the doctrine of the Apostles and the primitive practice of the Church that the satisfaction of Penance appeaseth the wrath of God upon this ground because it evidenceth that resolution for Christianity to be restored which a man otherwise ought not to presume of in himselfe when he knows in himselfe that it hath been interrupted much lesse ought the Church to presume of it in him when the interruption thereof hath been visible to the Church He then who having conceived sorrow for his â—â—nne submits himselfe to the Keyes of the Church to be restored to Gods grace by the ministery thereof and does as he is injoyned to do if the Church and the person whom the Church trusts for him do their duty that is supposing the Laws of the Church to be good and sufficient and well and sufficiently exercised hath a good and sufficient presumption that he is restored But he who proceedeth upon the common faith of the Gospel and the primitive practice of the Church whereby all that is doubtful in Christianity must be resolved attaineth that assurance of his restoring to the state of salvation which I have showed is attainable But not supposing the Laws of the Church to be either sufficient or sufficiently executed that presumption of pardon which can be built upon it is neither good nor sufficient but rather peremtory to salvation by palliating the crime which it ought to cure Now for the ground which the Church of Rome gives a reasonable man to presume hereof it is not to be denied or dissembled that the Council of Trent Sess XIV cap. VIII declareth that it is the duty of all Confessors to injoyn wholsome and competent Penance upon all Penitents and that by virtue of S. Pauls charge 1 Tim. V. 22. upon which the Power of the Church in imposing Penance is truly grounded seeing the blessing of the Church signifieth by imposition of hands is as much granted in Penance as in ordaining least they become partakers of other mens sinnes declaring withall the intent which they ought to aim at in imposing them But we know also and see thereby that there is no effectuall course taken to see that this be done whither it be possible to take a course that may be effectuall to be done or not And we know besides how great vogue that opinion hath which maketh attrition with the Keyes of the Church that is the shame of declaring a mans sinne to his Confessor a sufficient disposition to forgivenesse And therefore it is justly to be questioned whither the Law of secret confession with these abusive opinions and scandalous practises under which it is now exercised in the Church of Rome is for the best or not That is to say whether the greatest part of them who submit to it do not unduly perswade themselves that their sinnes are cured by it when indeed they are not For considering the ground of all superstition and counterfeit religion to be this that man sensible of the wrath of God due to his sinne on the other side yet favourable to that concupiscence which sinne pleaseth on the otherâ—side desireth a colour to perswade himself that he is reconciled to God by such means as indeed serves not the turn I know not whether perswasion is the more catching supposing the present division between the Reformation and the Church of Rome that a man is justified by believing that he is
the Church according to the affirmation of S. Basil that this Prayer is a Tradition of the whole Church Many are the Lâ—â—urgies that is the formes of celebrating the Eucharist in the Eastern Churches under Constantinople Alexandria and Antiochia yet extant which show the substance of it after the Deacon had said Lift up your hearts the People answering Wee life them up to the Lord which evidently pointeth ouâ— that which S. Paul calls the Thanksgiving or Blessing wherein the Consecration of the Sacrament consisteth beginning there and ending with the Lords Prayer in all of them to be this Repeating the creation of all things and the fall of man to praise God that hee left him not helpless but called first the Fathers then gave the Law and when it appeared that all this would not serve to reclaim him to God sent his onely Son to redeem him by his Cross who instituted this remembrance of it Praising God therefore for all this but especially for the death and resurrection of Christ and praying that the Spirit promised may come upon the elements presently set forth and make them the Body and Bloud of Christ that they who receive them with living Faith may be filled with the Grace of it I acknowledg that the repetition of the creation and fall of man the calling of the Patriarchs and giving the Law is all silenced or left out in the Latine Canon that is that Canonical Prayer which this Sacrament is consecrated and communicated with neither can I say that it is extant in the Ambrosian or any form besides that may appear to have been anciently in use in any part of the Western Church Though I have reason enough to conceive that it was used from the beginning and afterwards cut off for the shortning of the service because of the great consent that is found among forms used in the Eastern parts and because wee see how the Psalms and Lessons retained in them are abridged of that length which by the Constitutions of the Apostles and other ancienter records of the Church may appear to have been used in former ages But there can be no reason to say that the leaving out of all this being so remote a ground of the present action makes any difference in the substance and effect of that prayer which it is done and performed with And the rest being the same in all forms that remain extant inables mee to conclude that the Prayers of the Church which the Eucharist is to be consecrated with were from the beginning prescribed not for so many words but for the substance of them not in writing but by silent custom and Tradition received by the Church from the Apostles and ought to continue the same to the end of the world in all Churches There is a little objection to be made against this from that which Walafridus Strabo and other Latine Writers concerning the Offices of the Church have reported from some passages of S. Jerome and S. Gregory the Great That S. Peter at the first did consecrate the Eucharist with the Lords Prayer onely Which if it all this falls to the ground and the form of consecrating the Eucharist hath proved so uniform meerly by the consent of after ages and will remain subject to be changed again seeing that the Lords Prayer may for the substance of it be rendred into other terms and conceptions as many wayes as a man pleases But there is I have showed you a mistake in the meaning of these passages intended onely in opposition to that variety of Psalms and Lessons and Hymns and Prayers which afterwards were brought in to make the celebration of the Sacrament more solemn in regard whereof they say that S. Peter consecrated onely with the Lords Prayer not with any of those additions for solemnities sake when hee consecrated by that Thanksgiving or Blessing which our Lord consecrated the Sacrament at his last Supper with adding onely in stead of all other solemnities the Lords Prayer which the Consecration is still concluded with in all ancient forms For when the Order and occasions of Assemblies were not setled but the Offices of Christianity were to be ministred upon such opportunities as they could finde out for themselves it is no mervail if S. Peter himself might be obliged to abare all but meerly what was requisite And truly I may here seasonably say that I conceive the Lords Prayer is justly called by Tertullian Oratio legitima or the Prayer which the Law that is the precept of our Lord in the Gospel When yee pray say thus prescribeth not as if hee would have them serve him with no other prayer but this But that they should alwayes use this as a set prayer whatever other occasions they might have of addressing themselves to God with other prayers For accordingly I do observe that in all prescribed forms upon what occasion soever not onely of celebrating the Eucharist which assemblies have therefore been called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Missae in Latine from the dismission of them as in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the gathering of them whereas the Latine word Collectae which answers it is extended to other assemblies but other more dayly and hourly occasions according to the premises concerning Five hours of Prayer in the day in S. Cyprians time which since have come to seven that there is alwayes a room for the Lords Prayer as if the service of God were not lawfull according to the precept When yee pray say thus unless it be used Which is that which I shall advise them of who either exclude it as unlawfull or forbear it as offensive that they may consider how they count themselves members of Christs Church waiving that which the whole Church hath practiced in obedience to his precept for conformity with the enemies of his Church There is yet another sort of Prayers which are offered to God at the celebration of the Eucharist according to S. Pauls command for all estates and orders of men whether in the world or in the Church and for all their necessities in regard whereof I showed you afore that the Eucharist is counted a Sacrifice for the Church or rather for all mankinde As the High Priest when hee went into the Holy of Holies according to Philo prayed for the whole world representing the intercession of Christ for the same now at the right hand of God which the Church in his name by celebrating this Sacrament executeth and commemorateth upon earth And the form hereof I can easily say by the same reason is for mater and substance though not for so many words and for the conceptions it is expressed with prescribed according to S. Pauls command by the custom of the Church received by Tradition from the Apostles For when I have once named the necessities of all Orders and Estates without or within the Church in general supposing what Christianity requires Christians to pray for as well in behalf of
ground upon which Ceremonies are to be used in the service of the Church Instances out of the Scriptures and Tradition of the Apostles Of the equivocation of the word Sacrament in the Fathers The reason of a Sacrament in Baptisme and the Eucharist In extreme Vnction In Marriage In Confirmation Ordination and Penance NOW to come to the reason for which Ceremonies are to be used in the publick service of God I must here rest in that which I have rendred in my Book of the service of God at the assemblies of the Church being satisfied that it pointeth at the very ground for the use of them from the beginning among Gods people Man is compounded of soule and body and the worship of God and prayer to God is an act of the soule which the body by the senses thereof may diverte the mind from but cannot help forwards it till by the motion and gesture of the body the soul be ingaged to attend on that which the mind proposeth Therefore the people of God in the Scripture pray alwaies either standing or kneeling unlesse some speciall cause move them to prostrate themselves That their ordinary posture was standing appeares by Mat. VI. 5. Mark XI 25. Luke XVIII 11. Neh. IX 5. Jerem. XV. 1. XVIII 19. Job XXX 20. And they have reason who derive the Stations of the primitive Christians and the use of not kneeling on Lords dayes and between Easter and Whitsontide from their custome But therefore they kneeled in Lent and ' Daniel kneeled when he fasted IX 20. and Moses fell prostrate before God Deut. IX 18 25. but Esdras upon his knees Esd IX 5. X. 1. as Daniel also VII 11. to what purpose but to cast down the mind by the posture of the body that being sensible of his wants a man may attend upon God with deep devotion and reverence The Publicane durst not lift up his eyes to heaven Luke XVIII 13. which showes that otherwise they did lift up their eyes and spread their hands to heaven as Lam. III. 41. 1 Kings VIII 54. 1 Tim. II. 8. But the Publicane smote upon his brest because he exacted Penance of himselfe He was a foole for his paines if that be Reformation which is pretended to claime familiarity with Almighty God by talking with him negligently to signify that we are sure of him having Faith that we are predestinate to life as of the number of those for whom Christ died exclusively to the rest of mankind Or if it be Reformation to sit and censure with how fit and pertinent conceptions in how proper and choice terms a man expresses his necessities and the necessities of his people to God But praying to God is something else than all this and not onely the ancient people of God but those who have no sense of religion but that which nature forceth them to show us by their practice that lowlinesse of the body stirreth as well as testâ—fieth reverence in the minde to God in his service All this holdeth taking a man by himselfe as a single Christiane But supposing the society of a Church and an assembly of Gods people for his service there is more to be said The people of God spoke much by visible signes not all by words Jeremy might have said to them of Jerusalem take example by the Rechabites who drink no wine upon the order of their Patriarch But that was not enough He must bringe them to the Temple and set wine before them that having formally refused it he might thereupon protest to his people The same Jeremy might have told the Jewes as Saint Paul doth the Romanes that men are as clay in the Potters hands without going down to the Potters and seeing him spoile a vessell that he was making that he might thereupon take his rise and say that God was framing evil against them whom he had made Jer. XVIII 1-5 without buying an earthen vessell and breaking it before the ancients of the People and of the Priests to tell them that God would break them likewise Jer. XIX 1 11 12. when he makes all that businesse on purpose he showes what force visible signes have to make impression upon the minde of that which words signify neverthelesse The Law would never have appointed to sit still on the Sabbath in remembrance of the creation of the world or the deliverance from Egypt to carry a bundle of branches in the hand and to dwell in booths in remembrance of the voiage through the wildernesse otherwise And is not this reason fit to be applied to the assemblies of Christians Witnesse the Prophet Joel Why must they weep and mourne with their fasting why must the children and sucklings assemble why must the joy of the bride chamber be superseded but to make impression of sorrow upon particulars from that which the publick expresseth Joel II. 13-16 The people of Niniveh and the King thereof put on sackcloth and sat in ashes nor man nor beast must tast foode or drinke water at the preaching of Jonas III. 5. 6. 7. On the contrary at the bringing of the Arke into the City of David Chron. XIII 8. XV. 28. They have seen thy goings O God even the goings of my God my King into the sanctuary The singers went before those that played on instruments followed amongst them were the damsels playing on timbrells And the solemnity which the wall of Jerusalem was dedicated with you may read in Nehem. XII 27-43 The Festival of our Lords Resurrection presupposeth the Fast of the Passion makes all the Lords dayes of the year festivall by renewing weekly that joy which it solemnizeth The Fast which goeth before it by the institution of the Apostles agreeing in it because not agreeing when it should end in Tertullians time was inlarged to those dayes on which the Bridegroome was not missing but by just use of the Churches Power is inlarged to fourty dayes Shall it be superstitious for the Church to professe solemn Penance and mourning for that time which gained the Ninivites that grace which the Gospel tendereth the Gentiles that repent according to their example If it be Reformation to abolish all ceremonies let it be Reformation for Gods people to understand any difference between an humiliation and a thanksgiving Saint Paul disputeth hard that the women of Corinth ought to be vailed the men unvailed Not for any consideration of reverence to God which the uncovering of the head did not signify in those times But to signify the humility and modesty of the sex which had he spoken of serving God in private he need not have stood upon and therefore in regard to the Church Which if it be true if consideration ought to be had of the Church in celebrating the service of God at the assemblies thereof then it is requisite that when the World is come into the Church and all assemble those ceremonies should be used which were not requisite when the numbers were small and the assemblies thereof
CHAP. IX The Keyes of the Church given to the Apostles and exercised by excommunication under the Apostles The ground thereof is that profession which all that are baptized are to make That Penance and abatâ—ment of Penance hath been in force ever since and under the Apostles In particular of excluding Hereticks CHAP. X. Evidence of the Apostles act from the effect of it in preserving the Vnity of the Church Of the businesse of Marcion and Montanus That about keeping Easter That of the Novatians of rebaptizing Hereticks of Paulus Samosatenus of Dionysius Alexandrinus and Arius Of communicatory leters and the intercourse of the Church under and after the Apostles CHAP. XI Upon what grounds the first book de Synedriis holds that the Church cannot excommunicate Before the law there was no such Power nor by it Christians went for Jewes under the Apostles His sense of some Scriptures What the Leviathan saith in generall concerning the Power of the Church Both suppose that Ecclesiasticall Power includeth Temporall which is not true Of the Oxford Doctors Paraenesis CHAP. XII That the Law expresly covenanted for the Land of Promise A great Objection against this from the Great precept of the Law The hope of the world to come under the Law and the obedience which it required was grounded upon reason from the true God the tradition of the Fathers and the Doctrine of the Prophets The Love of God above all by the Law extendeth no further than he precepts of the Law the lâ—ve of our Neighbor onely to Jews Of the Ceremonial Judicial and Moral Law CHAP. XIII That the Law tendereth no other promise but that of the Land of Canaan How the Resurrection is signified by the Prophets Expresse texts of the Apostles Their Arguments and the Arguments of our Lord do suppose the mystical sense of the Scriptures That this sense is to be made good throughout the Scripture wheresoever the ground of it takes place Christianity well grounded supposing this What parts of Scripture may be questionable whether they have a mysticall sense or not The sayings and doings of our Lord have it As also those passages of the Old Testament which are fulfilled by the same The sense of the Fathers CHAP. XIV The Leviathans opinion that Christ came to restore that Kingdome of God which the Jewes cast off when they rejected Sâ—muel It overthroweth the foundation of Christianity The true Government of Gods ancient people The name of the Church in the New Testament cannot signifie the Synagogue Nor any Christian State CHAP. XV. How the Power of the Church is founded upon the Law The Power of the Kingdome Priesthood Prophets and Rulers of that people all of divine right How farre these qualities and the powers of them are to continue in the Church The sense of the Fathers in this point That the acts of S. Paul and the rest of the Apostles were nâ—t of force by virtue of the Law What Ecclesiastical Power should have been among the Jewes in case they had received the Gospel and so the state had stood CHAP. XVI The Church founded upon the Power given the Apostles What is the subject mater of Church Lawes The Right of the Church to Tythes and Oblations is not grounded upon the Law though evidenced by it and by practice of the Patriarchs Evidence of the Apostles Order in the Scriptures The Church of Jerusalem held not community of Goods The original practice of the Church CHAP. XVII The Power of Excommunication in the Church is not founded in the Law What argument there is of it in the Old Testament The allegorical sense thereof is argumentative It was not necessary that the Christians should incurre persecution for using the Power of the Keyes and not by virtue of the Law CHAP. XVIII The difference between S. Pauls anathema and that of the Jews It is not necessary that the Christians anathema should signifie cursing That the incestuous person at Corinth was Excommunicated by S. Paul Jurisdiction of the Church Telling the Church binding and loosing holding him that is bound for a Heathen or a Publicanâ— signifie the same The coherence of our Lords discourse Of Excommunication and Indulgence by private persons in the Ancient Church That Excommunication and the Power of the Church could not come in force by the voluntary consent of the first Christians How it may be said to be voluntary Of the confederacy of the primitive Christians CHAP XIX That Power which was in Churches under the Apostles can never be in any Christian Soveraign The dâ—fference between the Church and the Synagogue in that regard The interest of Seculâ—r Power in determining maters of faith presuppâ—seâ—h the Socieâ—y of the Church and the act of it No man can be bound to profâ—sse tâ—e contrary of that which he believeth Every man is bound to professe thâ—t Christianity which hee believeth The Church is the chiefe Teacher of Christianity through Christendom as the Soveraign of Civil Peace thorough his Dominions Why the Church is to decide maters of Faith rather then the State neither being infallible 146 CHAP. XX. The rest of the Oxford Doctors pretense The Power of binding and loosing supposeth not onely the Preaching of the Gospel but the outward act of Faith Christians are not at liberty to cast themselves in what formes of Churches the Law of Nature alloweth They are Judges in chief for themselvss in mater of Religion supposing the Catholick Church not otherwise Secular Power cannâ—t punish for Relâ—gion but supposing the act of the Church nor do any act to inforce Religion unlâ—sse the Church determine the mater of it 151 CHAP. XXI How the Tradition of the Church limits the interpretation of Scriptures How the declaration of the Church becomes a reasonable marke of Heresie That which is not found in the Scriptures may have been delivered by the Apostles Some things delivered by the Apostles and recorded in the Scriptures may not oblige S. Austines Rule of Apostolical Traditions 159 CHAP. XXII The Authority of the Fathers is not grounded upon any presumption of their Learning or Holinesse How farr they challenge the credit of Historical truth The pre-eminence of the Primitive The presumption that is grounded upon their ranks and qualities in the Church Of Arnobius Lactantius Tertulliâ—n Origen Clemens and the approbation of Posterity 165 CHAP. XXIII Two iâ—stances against the premises besides the obâ—ection concerning the beginning of Antichrist under the Apostles The General answer to it The seven Trumpeâ—s in the Apocalypse fore-tell the destruction of the Jewes The seven Vials the plagues inflicted upon the Empire for the ten persecutions The correspondence of Daniels Prophesie inferreth the same Neither S. Pauls Prophesie nor S. Johns concerneth any Christian Neither the opinion of the Chiliasts nor the the giving of the Eucharist to Infants new Baptized Catholick 169 CHAP. XXIV Two sorts of means to resolve whatsoever is resolvable conceâ—rning the Scripture Vpon what terms the Church may or
supposeth that there is no means but the Gospel to save us But if wee be saved by believing the Gospel wee may be saved not believing that which the Church teacheth without it For that which the Gospel obligeth us to believe unto salvation it is agreed already that wee cannot be saved without believing it Suppose now the Church to continue till the last day not as one visible Body but broken into pieces as wee see it so that alwaies there remain a number of good Christians for whether or no they that communicate not with the Church of Rome may be good Christians is the thing in question not to be taken for truth without proving shall the gates of hell be said to prevail against the Church all that while Besides Grotius expounds those words to signifie no more but this That death and the grave which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hell in the stile of the Old Testament signifies shall never prevail over Christians That is that they shall rise again And I suppose it is not so evident that this exposition is false as that the Gospel is true As for the Keyes of Christs Kingdom let him that saith they argue Infallibility say also that they cannot be abused But hee will have more shame if not more sense than to say it The Thessalonians received the Gospel as the Word of God because they supposed it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word which God sent them newes of Would they therefore have received the decrees of the Church with the same reverence not supposing them the Word of God till some body prove it But suppose the promises made S. Peter to import as much as the power of the Apostles is it as evident that the present Pope succeeds S. Peter as that Christianity is from God That hee succeeds him in the full right of that Power which is given the Apostles Certainly wheresoever two or three are assembled in the name of Christ there is not the Infallibility of the Church Therefore it cannot be founded upon the promises made to all Assemblies of Christians as Christians It is very probable that the Council of the Apostles at Jerusalem had a revelation upon the place signifying how they should order the mater in question because there are many instances in the Scriptures of inspirations at the very Assemblies of Gods people as I have showed in the Right of the Church Therefore it is not evident that all Councils may say the like Therefore they cannot presume that the Holy Ghost will lead them into all truth whatsoever they take a humor to determine because it was promised that hee should lead the Apostles into all truth concerning our common Christianity But if the Church be the pillar and foundation that upholdeth the truth then must that truth first be evidenced for truth before the effect of the Churches office in upholding it as pillars uphold an house can appear The exhortations of the Apostles 1 Thess V. 14 15. Hebr. XIII 7 17. to yield obedience to the Rulers of the Church are certainly pertinent to this purpose But it is evident that this obedience is limitable by the grounds and substance of Christianity delivered afore as it is evident that all Power of the present Church presupposeth our common Christianity As for the obedience required in the Old Testament to the Governors of the Synagogue and Priests confirmed by our Lord Mat. XXIII 2. I am very willing to grant the Church all Power in decreeing for truth that can appear to have belonged to the Rulers of the Synagogue because I am secure that those who could put malefactors to death as they could were not therefore able to tye men to believe that which they say to be true But the great subtilty is the Prophesie of Caiaphas John XI 48-52 who because High Priest could not but truly determine that our Lord must die least the people should perish even in resolving to crucifie him Indeed at the beginning God was wont to conduct his people by Oracles of Urim and Tummim in the High Priests brest-plate And though this was ceased under the second Temple as wee have reason to believe the Jewes yet was it no marvail that God should use the High Priests tongue to declare that secret which himself understood not being the Person by whom hee had used to direct his people in former ages But hee that from hence concludes the Church infallible must first maintain that Caiaphas erred not in crucifying our Lord Christ Now if it be said that the consent of all Christians though not as members of the Church because as yet it appeareth not that the Church is a Corporation and hath members determines the sense of these Scriptures to signifie Infallibility which they may but do not necessarily signifie Let him consider the disputes that succeeded in the Church upon the decree of the Great Council at Nicaea the breaches that have succeeded upon the decrees of Ephesus and Chalcedon the division between the Greek and the Latine Church between the Reformation and the Church of Rome For is it imaginable that all Christians holding as firmly as their Christianity that the acts of the Pope and a Council that is the greater part of the present Church is to be believed as much as the Scriptures not onely the decree of Nicaea should be disputed again but breaches should succeed rather than admit their decrees retaining the common profession of Christianity What disputes there have been betwixt the Court of Rome and the Paris Doctors whether it be the act of the Pope or of a General Council that obligeth the belief of the Church is as notorious to the world as that they are not yet decided And yet the whole question is disputed onely concerning the Western Church The East which acknowledgeth not the Pope appeareth not in the claim of this Infallibility were both East and West joyned in one and the same Council Now among them that maintain the Pope it is not agreed what acts of the Pope they must be that shall oblige the Church to believe as it believes the Scriptures For it is argued that Popes have decreed Heresie Liberius Honorius Vigilius and perhaps others And though I stand not to prove I may presume that the contrary is not so evident as our common Christianity or the Scriptures And that some of them have held Heresie seems granted without dispute Is it then as evident as our common Christianity what act of the Pope obliges us to believe That hee cannot decree that error to be held by others which it is granted himself holdeth Besides how many things are requisite to make a true Pope whose Power unlesse it be conveyed by the 〈◊〉 act of those that are able to give it the acts thereof will be void which it does not appear that the present Pope is qualified with as it appeareth that the Scriptures are true And may not the same question be
are not clear And surely when they are commanded to stand to the determinations of their Judges in things questionable concerning the Law Deut. XVII 8-12 that which was questionable was not clear to all concerned in the Law and the determining of it was neither adding to nor taking from the Law In like maner hee that should adde to or take from the book of S. Johns Revelations take it if you please for the complement of the whole Bible and say as much either of the whole or of any part of it deserves the plagues written there to be added to him and his part taken away out of the book of Life For who doubteth that falsifying the Scriptures is a crime of a very high nature But so it will be whether all things necessary to salvation be clear in the Scriptures or not Nay falsifying the sense of the Scriptures not altering the words may deserve the very same because the true sense might and ought to have been cleared in the Scriptures as not clear to all that are concerned in it And may not S. Paul bid Anathema to whosoever shall preach another Gospel than that which hee had preached to the Galatians unlesse all things necessary to salvation be clear in the Scriptures First let it appear which cannot appear because it is not true that the Scriptures of the New Testament were written when he preached it Or if not that whatsoever is clear in the Scriptures which wee have is clear in the Scriptures which they had when S. Paul preached The Beraeans had reason to examine S. Pauls preaching by the Scriptures who alleged the Old Testament for it and demanded to be acknowledged an Apostle of Christ according as his preaching agreed therewith But what needed his preaching if the means of salvation which hee preached were clearly contained in the Old Scriptures The miracles related by S. Johns Gospel are written that believing wee may have life Why because there is nothing else requisite to salvation to be believed Or as I said to the Leviathan because hee that comes to believe shall be instructed in all things necessary to his salvation whether by the miracles there related or otherwise And cannot the Law be a light to the steps of them that walked by the Law can it not inlighten their eyes and give wisedom to the simple unlesse all things necessary to salvation be clear in the Scriptures I do maintain for a consequence of the grounds of Christianity that the New Testament is vailed in the Old that David and Solomon being Prophets and the doctrine of the Prophets tending to discover the New Testament under the Old by degrees more and more the Law is called by them a light because it taught them who discovered the secret of the Gospel in it and under it the way to that salvation which only the Gospel procureth And in this consideration it is said Psalm XXV 8 11 13. Them that be meek shall God guide in judgment and such as be gentle them shall hee teach his Law What man is hee that feareth the Lord Him shall hee teach in the way that hee shall chuse The secret of the Lord is among them that fear him and hee will snow them his Covenant And though I cannot here make this good yet will the exception be of force to infringe a voluntary presumption that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures because the Law forsooth is a light to the actions of him that lived under it Now to all those Scriptures whereby it is pretended that the Scriptures are clear to them that have Gods Spirit but obscure to them that have it not I conceive I have settled a peremptory exception by showing that the believing of all things necessary to salvation is a condition requisite to the attaining of the Grace or gift of Gods Spirit For if that be true then can no presumption of the right understanding of the Scriptures be granted upon supposition of Gods Spirit and the dictate of it If that exposition of the Scripture which any man pretendeth be not evidenced by those reasons which the motives of Faith create and justifie without supposing it to be made known by Gods Spirit to him that pretends it in vain will it be to allege that the Spirit of God is in him that sets it forth Neither do wee finde that they who pretend Gods Spirit do rest in that pretense least they should be laught at for their paines But do allege reasons for their pretense as much as they who pretend the Church to be Infallible do allege reasons whereby they know that which they decree to be true Which were a disparagement to the Spirit of God if the dictate thereof were to passe for evidence I grant therefore that true Christians have Gods Spirit and that thereby they do try and condemne all things that agree not with our common Christianity and that this is the Unction whereof S. John speaketh But not because the gift of the Holy Ghost importeth a promise of understanding the Scriptures in all Christians but because it supposeth the knowledge of that which is necessary to salvation which is our common Christianity and therefore inableth to condemne all that agreeth not with it If there were over and above a grace of understanding the Scriptures of discovering the Gospel in the Law extant in the Church under the Apostles to which our Lord opened their hearts Luke XXIV 45. and which Justine the Martyr Dial. cum Tryph. affirmeth that the Church of his time was indowed with first it was given in consideration of their professing Christianity Then it tended onely to discover those grounds upon which the Church now proceeds in the use of ordinary reason to exponnd the Old Testament according to the New As for Cartwrights argument I relate it not because I think it worth the answering but that you may see how prejudice is able to transport even learned men from their senses It had been easie for one lesse a Scholar than hee to have said that when Jeremy saith it never came in Gods minde to command their Idolatries hee meanta great deal more that hee had forbidden them under the greatest penalties of the Law Which all that know the Law know to be true When hee forgetteth such an obvious figure you may see hee had a minde to inferre more than the words of the Prophet will prove It is to be observed in this place that there is no mention of things necessary to salvation in all these Scriptures Nor can it be said that this limitation of the sufficience and clearnesse of the Scriptures is as clearly grounded upon the Scriptures as it were requisite that things necessary to salvation should be clear to all that seek to be saved And this shall serve for my answer if any man should be so confident as to undertake to prove the sufficience and clearnesse of them so limited by the consent of the
them hee is fain to argue very hard that their women ought their men ought not to be vailed at divine Service Concluding that if his reasons would not prevail the contentious must rest in this That wee have no such custome neither the Churches of God Why so if particular Churches be not tied to keep unity with the whole And by and by proposing another disorder in that they received not the Eucharist in commune poore and rich hee reproveth it as contrary to that which hee had delivered to them from the beginning Concluding that The rest will I set in order when I come So 2 Thess II. 25. Stand therefore brethren and hold fast the Traditions which yee have been taught either by word of mouth or by any letter of ours Neither can it be imagined that all Christians should be bound to heare the Apostles and not be bound to hold those things for Lawes to their conversation in maters of Religion which the Apostles should teach them to that purpose Of this nature is the decree at Jerusalem Acts XV. 20 28. that the then Churches of the Gentiles should abstain from things strangled and bloud as well as from fornication and the pollution of Idols For what is the ground or the purpose of it but to preserve them in unity with the Churches of Jews become Christians Of this nature is that blessing or Thanksgiving mentioned by S. Paul 1 Cor. XIV 16 17. 1 Tim. II. 1. being as I have showed in a Discourse of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church pag. 350-370 a form of Prayer or Thanksgiving delivered in substance by the Apostles for which the Sacrament of our Lords Supper hath been alwaies called the Eucharist because it is to be celebrated with it Of the same nature is tha order which S. James gives of praying for the sick anointing them with oile aswell for the forgivenesse of their sins as for the recovery of their bodily health James V. 14 15. Which I suppose no man will deny that it concernes all Churches alike If there be this evidence in the Scriptures for the beginnings of Church Law the practice of the Church from this beginning will afford much more Hee that would deny the Tradition of the Rule of Faith what will hee say to the Creed of the Apostles Not that I would have the words and syllables of it to containe whatsoever it is necessary for the salvation of a Christian to believe But because the Creed is not the words of the Creed but the sense and meaning of them together with that coherence and dependence of the parts thereof one upon and with another which the reasons and grounds of them inforce But first let it be understood that I make a difference between the Rule of Faith and the substance of Christianity Supposing Christianity to consist partly in mater of Faith partly in mater of maners Partly in things to be believed partly in things to be done though the Creed extend onely to mater of Faith There is nothing more evident in the practice of the whole Church before the world had admitted the profession of Christianity than this That there was a time allowed and required by the Church for those that professed themselves converted to believe the truth of Christianity to give trial of their conversation before they were admitted to Baptisme The Constitutions of the Apostles VIII 32. name three years but with this limitation that if any man demonstrate extraordinary zele to Christianity hee be received without so long trial Therefore if Clemens Alexandrinus require five it makes no difference For what marvail if several Churches at several times had several customes when as upon extraordinary occasions they were dispensable The Constitutions require extraordinary trial of those that had practised any sort of Magick judging by the experience of the times that it was hard to part with such superstitions It is enough for my purpose that during this time they might learn to behave themselves as Christians by conversing among Christians by coming to Church and bearing a part in the praises of God and hearing the Scriptures read and expounded And what is more notorious in the practice of the ancient Church than the difference between Missa Catechumenorum and Missa Fidelium Between that part of the Office of the Church which Pretenders to Christianity were admitted to or Hearers that is Scholars and Learners of it and that which was peculiar to Believers that is those that were Baptized and made Christians It is the designe of Clemens Alexandrinus his Paedagogus to show how the Word whether our Lord Christ or his Gospel is the Pedagogue of mankinde in bringing them to be Christians Not as wee mistake that word to signifie the Master of a School but as the fashion was then for men of quality to appoint a sonne a Governor to conduct him to School and home againe to attend on him at his exercises and upon all occasions to put him in minde how it might become him to behave himself and to report to his Father if hee proved untractable Thus hee maketh Pretenders to Christianity to be conducted by our Lord Christ and his Gospel in the conversation of Christians till they come to demand their Baptisme of the Church As it is manifest by the end of the Book where this Governor conducting his charge to the Church gives him up into his own hands so hee saith expresly as no more Governor of children but Master of men in the School of his Church Supposing then the point of maners and godly life to be part of the substance of Christianity it is evident that the Church alwaies acknowledged a certain Rule of Faith in that those who were thus prepared were alwaies taught their Creed that is required to repete it and heare it expounded by those whom the Church trusted for that purpose It is not my intent here to insist that the words of the Creed were delivered by the Apostles themselves or that the Rule of Baptisme delivered by our Lord in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is not a sufficient Symbole or cognizance for a Christian For what is there necessary to the salvation of all Christians that is not contained in the profession of him that desires to be baptized into this Faith But it is enough for my present purpose that it was alwaies requisite that whosoever is baptized should be instructed upon what termes hee is to expect to be saved by Christ and that which all were required to professe for that purpose to be the Rule of Faith For whether it may appeare that this or that is of that nature must come to trial though the question be only of the sense of the Creed supposing that the very words were delivered by the Apostles themselves For example It is not possible to render a reason of the coming of Christ not mentioning the fall of Adam nor of that not
mentioning the Devil and his Angels nor of that not mentioning the creation of Angels The knowledge then requisite to save a Christian containeth the Apostasy of the evil Angels whether it be in the Creed or not because neither the Creed as it is nor Baptisme in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost can be understood to have any sense without supposing it And therefore Irenaeus I. 2. could not deliver this Rule without mentioning the Devil and his Angels though I intend not thereupon to argue that it was contained in the words of the Creed at that time By S. Cyrils Catechises you shall understand that those who pretended to Baptisme at Easter were to be instructed in the sense and grounds of their Creed during the Lent And S. Augustine in his book de Catechizandis rudibus where hee acquaints his friend that had writ to him about something of that office with the form that hee was wont to use instructs him to begin with the beginning of Genesis and setting forth what course God had taken with mankinde before and under the Law to bring down his discourse to the coming of Christ and from thence to his second coming to Judgment Which is to the very same purpose onely taking opportunity to mixe the motives of Faith which the Old Testament containeth with the mater of Faith which the New Testament requireth Whatsoever then is said of the Rule of Faith in the writings of the Fathers is to be understood of the Creed Whereof though it be not maintained that the words which Pretenders were required to render by heart were the same yet the substance of it the reasons and grounds which make every point necessary to be believed were alwaies the same in all Churches and remaine unchangeable I would not have any hereupon to think that the mater of this Rule is not in my conceit contained in the Scriptures For I finde S. Cyril Catech. V. protesting that it containes nothing but that which concerned our salvation the most selected out of the Scriptures And therefore in other places he tenders his Scholars evidence out of the Scriptures and wishes them not to believe that whereof there is no such evidence And to the same effect Eucherius in Symb. Hom. I. Paschasius de Sp. S. in Praef. and after them Thomas Aquinas secunda II. Quest I. Art IX all agree that the form of the Creed was made up out of the Scriptures Giving such reasons as no reasonable Christian can refuse Not onely because all they whose salvation is concerned have not leisure to study the Scriptures but because they that have cannot easily or safely discern wherein the substance of Faith upon the profession whereof our salvation depends consisteth Supposing that they were able to discern between true and false in the meaning of the Scriptures To which I will adde onely that which Tâ—rtullian and others of the Fathers observe of the ancient Hereticks that their fashion was to take occasion upon one or two texts to overthrow and deny the main substance and scope of the whole Scriptures Which whether it be seen in the Sects of our time or not I will not say here because I will not take any thing for granted which I have not yet principles to prove but supposing it onely a thing possible I will think I give a sufficient reason why God should provide Tradition as well as Scripture to bound the sense of it As S. Cyril also cautioneth in the place aforenamed where hee so liberally acknowledgeth the Creed to be taken out of the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For saith hee the Faith was not framed as it pleased men but the most substantial maters collected out of the Scripture do make up one doctrine of the Faith For I beseech you what had they whosoever they were that first framed the Creed but Tradition whereby to distinguish that which is substantial from that which is not Heare Origen in the Preface to his books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cùm multi sum qui sentire se putent quae Christi sunt nonnulii eorum diversa à prioribus sentiant servetur verò Ecclesiastica praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens Illa sola credenda est veritas quae in nullo ab Ecclesiasticâ discordat traditione Illud tamen scire opor tet quoniam sancti Apostoli fidem Christi praedicantes de quibusdam quidem quaecunque necessaria crediderunt omnibus credentibus etiam his qui erga inquisitionem divinae scientiae pigriores videbantur manifestissimê tradiderunt Rationem scilicet assertionis relinquentes eis inquirendam qui Spiritûs dona excellentia praecipuè sermonis sapientiae scientiae per ipsum Spiritum Sanctum percipere merebantur De aliis verò dixerunt quidem quia sint quomodo autem aut unde sint siluerunt profectò ut studiosiores quoque l. quique ex posteris suis amatores sapientiae scientiae exercitium habere possent in quo ingenii sui fructum ostendere valerent Hi videlicet qui dignos se capaces sapientiae praepararent Species verò eorum quae per praedicationem Apostolicam manifestè traduntur hae sunt There being many that think their sense to be Christian and yet the sense of some differs from their predecessors But that which the Church preaches as delivered by order of succession from the Apostles being preserved and remaining the same in the Churches That onely is to be believed for truth which nothing differs from the Tradition of the Church This notwithstanding wee must know That the holy Apostles preaching the Faith of Christ delivered some things as many as they held necessary most manifestly to all believers even those whom they found the duller in the search of divine knowledge Leaving the reason why they affirmed them to the search of those that goe to receive the eminent gifts of the Holy Ghost especially of utterance wisedom and knowledge by the Holy Ghost Of other things they said that they are but how or whereupon they are they said not Forsooth that the more studious of their Successors loving wisedom and knowledge might have some exercise wherein to show the fruit of their wit To wit those that should prepare themselves to be worthy and capable of wisedom Now the particulars of that which is manifestly delivered by the preaching of the Apostles are these Which hee proceedeth to set down But Vincentius Lerinensis hath writ a Discourse on purpose to show that this Rule of Faith being delivered by succession to the principal as S. Paul requires Timothy to do and by them to those that were baptized was the ground upon which all Heresies attempting upon the Faith were condemned So that so many Heresies as historical truth will evidence to have been excluded the Church from the Apostles time for mater of belief so many convictions of this Rule Which
use till the Rescripts of the Pope took place and excluded the Canons of the whole Church The succession of which Law is so visible that hee that may say that the order presently in force can no way agree with that which was established by the Apostles shall not have the face to asfirm that there never was any order established by the Apostles instead of it so visible shall the impressions be of that corruption by which it declines from the order first established by the Apostles And therefore I allege here in the last place the consent of those of the Reformation who in answering this objection when it is argued that therefore Tradition is necessary as well as Scripture do not deny that there was a Rule of Faith that there were Orders delivered the Church by the Apostles to preserve the Unity of the Church But to answer for themselves why they stand not to the present Church of Rome in them do allege That the Rule of Faith delivered the Church by word of mouth is also delivered by writing and contained in the Scriptures Tnat the Rules of good order which the Apostles delivered were never intended to be unchangeable as you may heare Tertullian say de Velandis Virginibus cap. I. For in making this answer they do acknowledge that the Church had a Rule of Faith which it had received for a Law from the Apostles and therefore delivered for a Law to all that became Christians But whether this Rule be contained in the Scriptures or not concernes not my present purpose seeing it will be as much the cognizance of Christians and foundation of the Society and Corporation of the Church tending to maintain unity in the profession and exercise of Christianity whether so or otherwise Onely no man will deny that it may be not so easie to discern by the Scriptures alone what belongs to it what not as it may appear to be by the Churches delivering of it Nor do I pretend here that the orders delivered by the Apostles are all unchangeable For who knoweth not that the Lawes of every Common-wealth do change from age to age the state of Government remaining the same because those rights in which Soveraignty consisteth remain the same And therefore it is enough for my purpose that the Church had certain orders regulating the proceeding thereof in maters wherein it is to communicate as well under the Apostles as in succeeding ages Nor requiring that they should be alwaies the same but that they should come alway from the same power which they left in the Church that so the Body may appear to continue alwaies one and the same And that I proceed to prove by showing that the power of those publick persons which did alwaies act in behalf of the Church in admitting into and excluding out of the Church whereby those Laws were in force and wherein the Unity of the Church consisteth is derived from our Lord by the act of his Apostles CHAP. VIII That the Power of Governing the whole Church was in the Apostles and Disciples of Christ and those whom they took to assist them in the parts of it The Power of their Successors must needs be derived from those Why that Succession which appeares in one Church necessarily holdeth all Churches The holding of Councils evidenceth the Vnity of the Church FOr this I must presume of in the first place That as the Church is and was to be the true spiritual Israel of God when his ancient people departed from him by refusing the Gospel So to signifie this did our Lord chuse out XII Apostles and LXX Disciples answerable to the XII Princes of Tribes and the LXX Elders which with Moses were to govern Gods ancient people Neither do I mervail that wee finde in the Scriptures no further use made of these LXX no further power exercised by them under that title The difference between Gods ancient and new people appearing straight after our Lords Ascension and making that order uselesse for the future For Israel dwelling all in one Land might easily be governed by one Soveraign Court in maters of the Law answerable in power to that of Moses and his LXX Elders But Christianity being to be dispersed all over the world those LXX with our Lord chose for his present service could not serve for the like purpose in time to come It is therefore enough that the number of them signifies unto us the foresaid purpose their office for the time to come being swallowed up in the offices of the rest of our Lords Disciples besides the XII Apostles remaining alwaies the Judges of the XII Tribes of Israel here and in the world to come I am sensible that some both of our Presbyterians and Independents have been nibbling at this point as if they had a minde if they durst to say That the Apostles had no authority in the Church but as writers of Scriptures As for the Goverment of the Church that the people or their buckram Elders were to give them checkmate in it But having met with this pretense in another place and heard no man open his mouth to maintain it I shall at present rest content to have showed afore that their authority is the ground of the authority of their writings here that their Traditions were Law to the Church and that by their writings which mention not so much as what the Traditions were Whereby it appears that they took place as acts of their perpetual authority over the Church not as revelations of Gods will sent by those Epistles wherein sometimes they are not so much as named Besides the Apostles then at such time as the Church of Jerusalem contained all Christendome as I observed afore you have mention of the Elders at Jerusalem Acts XI 30. XV. 2 4 6 22 23. And again after the propagation of Christianity XXI 18. Of leading men also among the brethren who were also Prophets Doctors and Evangelists XV. 22 32 35. These then had not their commission from the Apostles because other disciples as well as the XII received at our Lords own hands the power of remitting sins by the Holy Ghost John XX. 18-23 But there was never yet any doubt made that their authority was limitable by the Apostles because of the eminence of the XII among the Disciples And therefore hee that would say that the LXX were contained in the number of those Elders and Leaders could no more be contradicted then some of the Ancient Fathers can be contradicted in reporting that some of them were of the number of the VII that were chosen to assist the Apostles Acts VI. S. Paul further rehearsing the graces that our Lord hath granted for the edification of his Church reckoneth Apostles Evangelists Prophets Pastors and Doctors Eph. IV. 11. 1 Cor. XII 28. Now it is the whole Church that the Apostle speaks of here as I observed afore and therefore the authority here mentioned extendeth to the whole Church But
the visibility of the Church and the assurance that every particular Christian might have during this intelligence and correspondence that holding communion with his own Pastor hee held the true Faith together with the Unity of the Catholick Church Neither putting trust in man which God curseth nor in his own understanding for the sense of the Scriptures but trusting his own common sense as well for the means of conveying to him the mater as the motives of Christianity For why is it enough for Irenaeus and Tertullian for S. Augustine and Optatus to allege the Church of Rome and the succession from the Apostles for evidence that the Faith of those Hereticks was contrived by themselves that the Donatists were out of communion with the Church Because supposing that the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord all communicated in the same Faith which they taught the Churches of their own founding other Churches founded and the Pastors of them constituted by the authority of those Churches must needs be founded and settled upon condition of maintaining and professing the same Faith So that if any Christian or Pastor should attempt the unsettling of any part thereof the people to stand bound rather to follow the original consent of the whole from whence they received their Christianity than any man that should forfeit his ingagement to the whole in the judgment of the whole This being the true ground for the authority of Councils might and did take effect without assembling of Councils S. Cyprian directs his leters to Steven Bishop of Rome to write to the Churches of Gaule to ordain a new Bishop in stead of Marcianus in the Church of Arles because hee had joyned with the Novatians To the Spanish Bishops owning the Deposing of Basilides and Martialis and the Ordaining of those whom they had put in their places notwithstanding that upon false suggestions they had gained Steven Bishop of Rome to maintain them Epist LXV LXVI Could any man in his right senses have attempted this had it not been received among Christians which hee alleges that the people of particular Churches are bound not to acknowledge those for their Pastors whom the communion of the Church disowneth whether assembled in Council or not The acts of Councils themselves such are the creation of a Bishop of Arles in stead of Marcianus of Spanish Bishops in stead of Basilides and Martialis depending upon the authority of the Churches of Rome and Carthage that concurred not to them in presence If this be imputed to any mistake of Gods appointment in the ancient Church it will be easie for mee to allege Tertullians reason to as good purpose against our Independent Congregations as hee used it against the Hereticks of his time For if the chief Power of the Church be vested in those that assemble to serve God at once without any obligation to the resolution of other Congregations then is the trust that a Christian can repose in the Church resolved into that confidence which hee hath of those seven with whom hee joyneth to make a Congregation that the ruling part of them cannot faile Or rathâ—r into that which hee hath of himself and of the Spirit of God guiding his choice to those that shall not faile They presuming themselves to have the Spirit of God without declaring what Christianity they professe for the condition upon which they obtain it need no provision of a Catholick Church to preserve that Faith which the Gift of the Holy Ghost supposeth God who requireth the profession of a true Faith in them upon whom hee bestoweth his Spirit hath provided the communion of his Church for a means to assure us of that which it preserveth That it is presumption in them to oversee this no imposture in the Church to challenge it Tertullians reason determines The Hereticks pleaded that the Churches had departed from the Faith which the Apostles had left them To this after other allegations hee sets his rest up on this one that error is infinite truth one and the same That no common sense will allow that to be a mistake in which all Christians agree They all agreed in the same Faith against those Hereticks because they all agreed in acknowledging the Catholick Church provided by God to preserve and propagate it against our Independent Congregations Thus Tertullian de Praescript XXVIII There have been some Disputers of Controversies that have claimed the benefit of Tertullians exception against the Hereticks of his time in behalf of the Church of Rome Hee pleadeth not that the Catholicks ought not but that they are not bound to admit them to dispute upon the Scriptures being able to condemne them without the Scriptures And they plead that the Reformation not standing to those Pastors whom they acknowledge to possesse the place of those that derived their authority by succession from the Apostles may be condemned without Scripture as not holding the truth who hold not that which is taught by the said Pastors Which is to demand of those of the Reformation for an end of all debates first to acknowledge those Pastors and that which they teach then to take that for the true meaning of the Scripture which that which they reach alloweth or requireth But this supposes the sentence of the Church to be an infallible ground for the truth of that which it determineth And therefore to be accepted with the same Faith as our common Christianity or the Scriptures Which I showed you already to be false It shall therefore suffice mee to say that those men consider not the difference between the plea of the Reformation and that of those Hereticks For they acknowledging our Lord Christ and his Apostles no otherwise than the Alcoran and Mahomet doth where they served their turn made no scruple to say when it was for their purpose that they knew not the depth of Gods minde which themselves by some secret way having attained to know were therefore called Gnosticks That they imparted not the utmost of their knowledge to all alike when that served their turne That therefore the Scriptures were unperfect and revealed not that secret whereby they promised their salvation but by incklings These things you shall finde in Tertullian de Praescript XXII and Irenaeus III. 1. as well as that plea which I mentioned afore that the Churches were fallen from that which they had received of the Apostles Whereas those of the Reformation allege against the Church of Rome that those Hereticks pretended Tradition as they do Without cause indeed For what is Tradition pretended to be delivered in secret to them and by them who tender no evidence for it to that which the visibility of Christianity and the grounds upon which it is settled justifieth But so as to make it appear that they no way disown the Apostles or their writings nor can expect salvation by any other meanes And therefore are manifestly to be tryed by the Scriptures acknowledged on both sides provided the trial
may have an issue which I pretend requires the Tradition of the Church and that the communion and Corporation of the Church as the onely meanes to maintain and propagate Tradition in it This our Independent Congregations cannot allow but must stand upon the other plea of those Hereticks that it came in beside if not against Gods appointment which the Donatists questioned not And therefore you shall finde S. Austine in the place aforenamed allege against them the Scriptures fore-telling the calling of all Nations which hee supposeth fulfilled in the Catholick Church then visible and therefore supposeth the communion to be ordained by God wherein the visibility thereof consisteth Otherwise it had been strange to tell the Donatists that they communicating with the Catholick Bishop of Rome communicated with all the Church that acknowledged him but the Donatists acknowledging the Donatist Bishop whom they had set up at Rome were therefore disowned by all the Church beside I do not deny that those of the Reformation are to give account of those things which the Donatists are charged with Nor do I imagine that their account cannot be sufficient because that of the Donatists was not But I say that the trial must be by the Scriptures which both parts acknowledge And I say further that the rest of the Reformation may and ought to admit the Unity of the Church in visible communion as the Donatists did because otherwise they cannot pretend that others are bound to bâ— what they are But our Independent Congregations cannot because if all were as they there could be no one Church obliged to that communion which makes it visible Now I must here caution that I intend not here to inferre that these Rulers succeeded the Apostles by a title of Divine Right as if it were Gods Law that this succession should alwaies continue For I demand for the present upon the exception of those of the Reformation that succession of Faith and doctrine is of more consequence than succession of persons And therefore that there can be no Law of God whereby the right which men hold by personal succession can or ought to hinder the Reformation of Faith and doctrine of Christianity if it may appear that the succession of persons hath not been effectual to preserve the succession of Faith That which I demand from the premises is this That no man in his right senses can imagine that all Christendome should agree in acknowledging those for lawfull Rulers of the Church in the times next the Apostles that had usurped their places contrary to the will of the Apostles and those Disciples which concurred to the work of the Apostles and those who derived their authority from either of both during the time of the Scriptures which I spoke of afore For those of the Reformation that make this exception by making it do acknowledge that there was such a visible succession of Pastors the correspondence of whom as here I argue maintained the unity of a visible Corporation in the Catholick Church And how many records of historical truth undeniable of all that would not be thought to renounce their common sense do testifie unto us visible acts of the Apostles giving power to them whom they left behinde them as those whom they gave it to have transmitted the like power to their successors But when it once appeares that they were owned by the consent of all Christians communicating with them in that quality which they held in their own Churches it can no more be imagined that they could attain those qualities by deceit or violence contrary to the will of their predecessors than it can be imagined that the common Christianity which wee all acknowledge could prevail over all by imposing upon their belief such motives to believe as never were seen because never done And therefore whatsoever change may have succeeded in those qualities from that which the Apostles instituted from the beginning or by abuse of the same in the Faith which they were trusted to propagate without adding or taking away which changes may be the subject of Reformation in the Church and the belief of it yet that this point is not of that nature That all lawfull authority in the Church is derived from that which was in the Apostles propagated by some visible act of theirs I will presume upon as proved by the premises CHAP. IX The Keyes of the Church given the Apostles and exercised by Excommunication under the Apostles The ground thereof is that profession which all that are baptized are to make That Penance and abatemeut of Penance hath been in force ever since and under the Apostles In particular of excluding Hereticks IN the last place the right of Excommunication consists in the power of remitting and retaining sins given by our Lord to his Church with the Keyes of it First to S. Peter alone our Lord saith Mat. XVI 19. I will give thee the Keyes of the kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed there But afterwards to the Body of his Disciples Mat. XVIII 17 18. If hee heare thee not tell the Church If he hear not the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publicane Verily I say unto you Whatsoever yet binde as afore And to the XII breathing upon them John XX. 22 23. Receive yee the Holy Ghost Whose sins soever yee remit they are remitted and whose sins soever yee retaine they are retained By virtue of this Commission S. Peter saith to Simon Magus discovered a counterfeit Christian Acts VIII 20-24 Thy money perish with thee because thou hast thought to purchase the gift of God with money Thou hast neither part nor lot in this Word for thy heart is not right before God Repent thorefore of this thy malice and pray God that if possible this device of thine heart may be forgiven thee For I see thou art in the gall of bitternesse and the bond of unrighteousnesse And Simon answering said Pray you to the Lord for mee that nothing come upon mee of that which you have said Where having excluded him from the benefit of Christianity what hee is to expect hee leaves to the trial of future time But most manifestly S. Paul 1 Cor. V. commandeth them to deliver the incestuous person to Satan adding directions and reasons why they are to abstaine from the conversation of such Christians And pursueth this discourse with a charge of ending the sutes of their Christians within the Church 1 Cor. VI. which either signifies nothing or inforces the power of Excommunication to oblige the parties to stand to the sentence But the case of the incestuous person is made still more manifest by the reason of the sentence in joyned upon his repentance and the sorrow testified by the Church 2 Cor. II. 4-11 VII 8-11 In the Epistle to the Ebrewes VI. 4-8 X. 26-29 the Apostle declaring that they
corrupted the truth As Paul also saith A man that is an Heretick after one reproof and a second avoid Knowing that such a one is perverted condemned by himself Where you see it is not I but Irenaeus that expoundeth those words of S. Paul to this purpose The same Irenaeus III. 4. Cerdon autem qui ante Marcionem hic sub Hygino qui fuit octavus Episcopus saepe in Ecclesiam veniens exomologesim faciens sic consummavit Modò quidem latenter docens modò verò exomologesim faciens modò verò ab aliquibus traductus in his quae docebat malè abstentus est religiosorum hominum conventu But this same Cerdon also that was before Marcion under Hyginus who was the eight Bishop many times addressing to the Church and confessing ended accordingly Sometimes covertly teaching his Heresie sometimes confessing And sometimes being detected by some in those bad things which hee taught was excluded the assembly of the Religious Tertullian de praescript cap. XXX informes us that Marcion though hee was at the first refused Penance by the Church of Rome as I shall show you out of Epiphanius yet afterwards was cast out of the Church there which supposeth him admitted afore with Valentinus the Father of another Heresie and having been received once again at the last for good and all For having obtained to be re-admitted upon this condition that hee should reduce with himself all that hee had seduced at length hee died before hee was able to accomplish the same These things coming to passe so soon after the Apostles as they did and the same course being held in separating those Heresies from the Church which sprung up in their several ages afterwards there is no room left for any pretense that the Church never had power to do that which there never was any time that shee did not do For it is to be noted that these Heads of Heresies being condemned and cast out of the Church in which they first appeared and which they attempted to divide were thenceforth disowned by all Churches being certified of the proceeding that had passed against them upon the place And therefore Vincentius Lerinensis Commentario I. expounding S. Pauls words Gal. I. 8 9. Let him be Anathema Anathema sit inquit id est separatui exclusus nè unius ovis dirum contagium innoxium gregem Christi venenatâ permistione contaminet That is saith hee let him be separated set aside shut out least the direfull contagion of one sheep with any mixture of poison stain the innocent flock of Christ And again afterwards handling the words of S. Paul 1 Tim. VI. 20. Keep that which is committed to thy trust avoiding profane novelties of words What is it to avoid With such one not so much as to eat What is avoid If any come to you saith hee and bringeth not this doctrine receive him not home nor bid him God speed Where you see these are none of my collections gathered out of the Apostles words but that exposition of them which the practice of the Catholick Church inferreth CHAP. X. Evidence of the Apostles act from the effect of it in preserving the Vnity of the Church Of the businesse of Marcion and Montanus That about keeping Easter That of the Novations of rebaptizing Hereticks of Paulus Samosatenus of Dionysius Alexandrinus and Arius Of communicatory leters and the intercourse of the Church under and after the Apostles THis is indeed the true demonstration and evidence from the effect that the will of God and not the consent of men is the ground upon which the Corporation of the Church subsisteth The whole number of Christians dispersed over all the Empire and beyond the bounds of it continued for divers hundred years in one communion and in the unity of one Church Those that indeavoured to alter the Rule of Faith or to impose such Lawes as were found by the greatest part not to stand with the end for which the Church was founded being by the consent of the whole excluded the communion of it for Hereticks and Schismaticks Hee that sayes this was not the work of God or the means of effecting it none of his declared will why should not hee say the like of Christianity Indeed since the Council of Ephesus the Churches of Mesopotamia and Assyria are fallen from the Unity of the whole since the Council of Chalcedon those of Aegypt and Aethiopia Since that the Eastern Churches under the Patriarch of Constantinople have been divided from the Western under the Pope of Rome And these from one another into so many parties since the Reformation that wee are now come to dispute whether they ought to be united or not That ever they will be is so hopelesse that no man would undertake to dispute that they should be were it possible to preserve that little of Christianity that remaines without re-uniting the Church I allege here the most eminent passages that fell out in the Church from the Apostles to Constantine to show that it is a question whether the evidence be more That by Gods appointment there was from the beginning and ought to be alwaies one Catholick Church Or the hope lesse that ever it will be so again I cannot begin with a better evidence than that of Irenaeus because it containes the effect of the aforesaid ordinances of the Apostles for the separating of the Heresies set on foot by Simon Magus and Cerinthus from the Communion of the Church that the Unity thereof might be preserved by remaining distinct from them Wee understand by reading his first book that Basilides at Alexandria Saturninus at Antiochia Valentinus first in Aegypt then in Cyprus afterwards at Rome Cerintbus in Asia and elsewhere others in several parts of the World indeavored to adulterate that Christianity which the Apostles had delivered That they were so unanimously rejected and excluded out of the society of the Church from East to West that hee is able to affirm I. 3. that though dispersed all over the world yet it preserves the doctrine once preached as if it dwelt all in one house believing the same faith as if it had the same soul and heart and preaching and teaching the same as if it had but one mouth And can common sense imagine that the remotest parts of the world could remaine united to one another separated from Heresies sprung in the remotest parts of it which they could not have intelligence of but by communication of it with those parts of it where they sprung without that continual correspondence wherein the actual communion of the Church consisteth But the words of Irenaeus are so vigorous that I cannot leave them out here as they stand in his original Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Unity therefore of the Church was visible Otherwise it had been senslesse for Irenaeus to assume it as an evidence of the truth of that Faith the unity whereof became visible by the
to have been a meer humane Law so did it no way concern the service of God which the Excommunicate among the Jewes were not excluded from by it But was a meer civil punishment tending to change and abate the estate and condition of him that was under it in his freedom and intercourse with his own peole By all this hee seemes to fortifie the argument which Erastus had made showing that there is no such thing as Excommunication commanded or established by that Law and therefore that there is no such power in the Church But further seeing that there was no other company of men extant in the world for the Apostles to understand by the name of the Church when our Lord commanded him that was offended among his Disciples Tell it to the Church Mat. XVIII 16-20 hee insists strongly that neither the Church of Christ nor any Consistory or Assembly of men or particular person claiming or acting in behalf and under the title of the Church can be understood by those words of our Lord But that the name of the Church must necessarily signifie the Body of Jewes as well as Christians as unbelievers or that Consistory which was able to act in behalf of them in their respective times and places such as wee must also understand the witnesses there mentioned to be For it is manifest that at the beginning of Christianity onely Jewes were admitted to be Christians in so much that the dispute was hot about Cornelius and his company Acts XI 1. being no Jewes in Religion but yet such as believed in the true God and had renounced the worship of Idols Whereby it seemes the command of our Lord to baptize all Nations Mat. XXVIII 19. was then understood to concern onely those of all Nations that had made themselves Jewes by being circumcised afore Accordingly wee see that by virtue of Claudius his Edict commanding all Jewes to depart from Rome Aquila and Priscilla being Christians came to Corinth Acts XVIII 2. to show that Christians at that time must needs use the Jewes fashions who were therefore reputed Jewes by the Law of the Romanes and injoyed the benefit of their Religion by the Jewes privileges granted or confirmed by the same Claudius in Josephus Antiq XIX 4. Whereupon it seems necessarily to follow that the Excommunication then in force was that which the Jewes had introduced by humane Law confirmed by the Law of the Empire Though it is to be thought that the Christians upon particular agreement among themselves such as wee finde they had by Pliny Epist X. 97. Tertul. Apolog. cap. II. Euseb Hist Eccles III. 33. S. Hierome Chron. 2123. Orig. contr Celsum I. pag. 4. had limited the use of it to such causes and termes as their profession required Therefore when our Lord in the next words commands that hee which will not heare the Church be accounted as an Heathen or a Publicane As it is manifest that hee gives the Church no power but onely prescribes what hee would have the party offended to do So neither Heathen nor Publicane being in the condition of an excommunicate person among the Jewes how can it be understood that our Lord would have him to be excommunicate whom hee commands to be held as a Heathen man or as a Publicane The effect then of this precept of our Lord will consist in limiting the precept of the Law Levit. XIX 17. to the publishing of those offenses between parties the private complaint whereof should be neglected So that if the opinion of Gods people should be no more esteemed by the osfeuder the party offended freely to return his scorn by avoiding his familiarity as Jewes were wont to avoid the familiarity of Heathen men and Publicanes Now when our Lord adds in the next words Whatsoever yee binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven The sense must either be general to signifie the obligation of all Law and the right and Power which one man may have by the act of his will to tye and limit another mans Or particular to the Law of Moses Whereby what was declared unlawfull by the Doctors and Professors of it was said in their language to be held or bound that which was permitted loose Which signification our Lord also uses Mat. XXIII 4. Luc. XI 46. This later sense concerning things and not persons will be farre from signifying that any man should be excommunicate And though Excommunication be a bond and was so among the Jewes yet how should wee understand that the Church is inabled to tye this bond by a commission the termes whereof containe all that superiors may do to oblige their inferiors This Author then acknowledges that S. Paul threatens Excommunication Gal. I. 8 9. 1 Cor. XVI 22. and that hee wishes himself that estate which it imports Rom. IX 3. Not as it hath been falsly imagined among Christians to be cut off from the communion of the Eucharist and other offices of Christianity But as it was used among the Jewes to inferre the abridgment of a mans freedome in publick conversation as vile and subject to the curses of the Church But when the same Apostle gives order that the incestuous person be delivered to Satan 1 Cor. V. 5. As also when hee saith that hee had delivered Hymenaeus and Philetus 1 Tim. I. 20. when hee ordereth them not to converse with such persons 1 Cor. V. 11. this hee takes no more to concerne Excommunication than those verses of the Psalms Blessed is the man that bath not walked in the counsail of the ungodly Or I have not sate with vain persons nor will have fellowship with the deceitfull That is to say that it is bad counsail towards God but neither ground nor signe of any commission to excommunicate in the body of the Church Whereas the Leviathan to show here out of order his sense of that place though hee acknowledge that both ancient and modern writers have understood it as if by the extraordinary graces which the Apostles then had to evidence the presence of God in his Church the excommunicate became subject to plagues and diseases inflicted by evil Angels to show that they came under the power of Satan when they were put out of the Church yet hee satisfies himself by saying that other learned men finde nothing like the excommunication of Christians in it pag. 209. and that it depended upon the singular privilege of the Apostles These are the grounds upon which the power of the Keyes and by consequence the charter and corporation of the Church and all Ecclesiastical right and power grounded thereupon are taken away in the first book de Synedriis to the same effect as in Erastus his positions But the Leviathan comes up close to the point in general and following the supposition which I have refuted That the Gospel or Christianity and the Scriptures that contain it are not Law till the secular Power that
allegorizing the Old Testament is used by our Lord and his Apostles not onely in the Ceremonial Law but in all that properly belongeth to the Old Testament I do conclude not that the Scriptures have two senses but that the Scriptures of the Old Testament have an obvious sense that was understood or might be understood by Jewes and a retired sense which could not be understood but by those under the Old Testament that belonged to the New as S. Austine many times distinguishes And by thus limiting my position I avoid a great inconvenience which Origen and those that go the same way with him though to several purposes have incurred Hee in his Exposition upon S. John notes it for the fashion of the Valentinians and other Gnosticks to draw their strange fantasies from some mystical sense which they fasten upon the Scriptures though they be not able to prosecute and make good the same sense throughout the text and thred of that Scripture which they allege for it as wee understand by Irenaeus in the later end of the first Chapter of his first book To avoid this inconvenience both Origen and many after him have sought for a mystical sense of the Scripture many times where it is not to be found that is to say where the reason and ground of the difference between the Leter and the Spirit reackes not For the ground thereof is the purpose of sending our Lord Christ in due time and in the meane time the Prophets to prepare the way for the Covenant of the Gospel which hee came to proclaime But first the Chief of them Moses was to treat and strike a Covenant between God and his people whereby they should hold their freedome in the Land of Promise upon condition of serving him and governing their own civil conversation by such Lawes as hee should give It will therefore be necessary to grant that those Scriptures which proceed not upon supposition of such a purpose but of the accomplishment of it have but one sense To wit that which was figured by the Old Testament But this being excepted the rest of the Scriptures which suppose this purpose not yet declared must by the same necessity have this twofold sense according as the subject of several parts of it shall be capable of or require both Here those that know what an allegory is must distinguish the vulgar use of it even in the Scriptures themselves from that which standeth upon this ground which is particular to the Scriptures Wherein even men of learning sometimes lay stumbling blocks before themselves For as an allegory is nothing but an ornament of Language it is plain that even the literal sense of the prophesies of the Old Testament and other parts both of the Old and New is set forth by allegories The sense whereof hee that should take to be the allegorical sense of the Scriptures would deceive himself too much For the allegorical sense which wee speak of here is seen as well in things done as said in the Old Testament as not contained in the sayings there recorded immediately but by the meanes of things done under the Old Testament wherein that which is written is true indeed But so that the things which come to passe in the outward and temporal estate of Gods people are intended to figure that which comes to passe in their spiritual estate under the Gospel or in their everlasting estate of the world to come The ground whereof being the purpose of making way for the coming of Christ and the Gospel which hee was to preach as all Christians against the Jews are bound to maintain The New Testament being figured by the Old must needs be the intent and meaning of all that which figured it This wee shall finde by the writings of the Apostles and the arguments which upon supposition of this truth they draw against those who having received Christianiâ—y and upon that account admitting it for a principle did neverthelesse by acknowledging the obligation of the Law seek thâ—ir salvation by it Thus S. Paul 1 Cor. XV. 45. And so is it written the first Adam was made a living soul The last Adam a quickning spirit Meaning that his being made a quickning spirit is in correspondence to the Scripture that saith Adam became a living soul Gen. II. 7. whereby hee establisheth this way of allegory which wee treat upon correspondence between corporal and spiritual from the beginning of the Bible For upon this ground that which wee reade in Genesis of the dominion of Adam upon living creatures is by the Apostle transferred to the subjection of all things to Christ being exalted to the right hand of God Heb. II. 6. 1 Cor. XV. 27. Eph. I. 22. Neither doth the Apostles arguing the duties of Wives and Husbands upon that which Christ performed to his Church Eph. II. 31 32. stand upon any other ground but this So when S. Peter argues that Christians are saved by Baptism as Noe by the floud 1 Pet. III 20 21. hee appropriates eternal salvation to the New Testament by finding it figured in the temporal deliverances of the Fathers Whose Faith manifestly tending to the Land of Promise the Apostle by allegory shewes the secret of Christianity tending to eternal life in it Heb. XI 13-16 For Abraham and his Successors died saith hee without receiving the promises but seeing and saluting them afarre off and confessing themselves strangers and pilgrims in the land whereof they had received the promise Which they that professe declare they have a Countrey which they seek For if they had thought of that which they had forsook they had time enough to return But now they desire a better that is an heavenly Wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God For prepared them a City Can this be understood without the correspondence between their inheritance of this world and that which was figured by it of the world to come So when S. Paul expounds those things which befell the children of Abraham and Isaac by the allegory of the Jewes and Christians Gal. IV. 22 Rom. IX 7-10 plainly hee maketh the promise of the life to come proper to the New Testament upon such termes as I have said And if this be the reason why and how those things that went before the Law shadowed and were to shadow the Gospel it could not but hold in the Covenant of the Law and the precepts of it This appears by the Apostles exhorting the converted Jewes to stick close to the Gospel from the Psal XCV 7 Heb. III. 12 where if the Israelites who having seen Gods works forty yeares in the Wildernesse tempting and provoking him entred not into his rest but left their carkasses in the Wildernesse Hee inferres thereupon Heb. IV. 1-11 that they are to beware least having received a promise of entring into Gods rest they also should come short by the example of the same disobedience Which all supposes this correspondence for the ground of such
it must be upon the terms of my position the practice of the Church giving bounds to the sense of the Scripture I can therefore safely agree with the Constitutions of the Apostles with S. Cyprian and Leo and whosoever else teaches that it is not safe for the people to assure their consciences upon the credit of their Pastors But it is because I suppose the Unity of the Church provided by God for a ground upon which the people may reasonably presume when they are to adhere to their Pastors when not To wit when they are owned not when they are disowned by the Unity of the Church For though this provision becomes uneffectual when this Unity is dissolved yet ought not that to be an argument that the goodnesse of God never made that provision which the malice of man may defeat But that whosoever concurrs to maintain the division concurrs to defeat that provision which God hath made As safely do I agree with all them who agree that whatsoever is taught in Christianity is to be proved by the Scriptures For if it belong to the Rule of Faith it is intended by the Scriptures though that intent is evidenced by the Tradition of the Church If to the Lawes of the Church the authority of it comes from the Scriptures though the evidence of it may depend upon common sense which the practice of the Church may convince If over and above both it is not receivable if not contained in the Scriptures And in this regard whosoever maintains the whole Scripture to be the Rule of Faith is throughly justified by all those testimonies that have been alleged to that purpose For though it be not necessary to the salvation of all Christians to understand the meaning of all the Scriptures yet what Scripture soever a man attains to understand is as much a Rule to his Faith as that which a man cannot be saved if hee understand not the sense of it whether in and by the Scripture or without it And though a man may be obliged to believe that which is not in the Scripture to have been instituted by the Apostles yet is he not obliged to observe it but upon that reason which the Scripture delivereth And upon these terms is the whole Scripture a Rule of Faith from which as nothing is to be taken away so is nothing to be added to it as the saying of S. Chrysostome in Phil. II. Hom. XII requireth And the saying of S. Basil in Esa II. and Ascet Reg. I. condemning all that is done without Scripture takes place upon no other terms than these Not as Cartwright and our Puritanes after him imagine that a man is to have a text of Scripture specifying every thing which hee doth for his warrant For as it is in it self ridiculous to imagine that all cases which fall out can be ruled by expresse text of Scripture our Christianity being concerned infinite wayes of which it is evident that the Scripture had no occasion to speak So if the words of the Scripture be lodged in a heart where the work of them dwelleth not a thing which wee see too possible to come to passe it is the ready way to make the Word of God a color for all unrighteousnesse not onely to others but to the very heart of him who hath that cloke for it It is therefore enough that the reason of every thing which a Christian doth is to be derived from that doctrine which the Scripture declaeth And where a man proceedeth to do that for which hee hath not such a reason so grounded as reasonable men use to go by then cometh that to passe which S. Basil chargeth Ascet Reg. LXXX That What is not of faith is sin It is true according to that sense which hitherto I have used after many Church Writers the Rule of Faith extendeth not to all the Scriptures but onely to that which it is necessary to salvation to believe and to know Which every man knowes that all the Scripture is not For though it be necessary to salvation to believe that all the Scripture is true yet is it not necessary to salvation to know all that the Scripture containeth And the reason why I use it in this sense is to distinguish those things contained in the Scriptures which Tradition extendeth to from those to which it extendeth not For upon these terms is the sense of them limitable to the common Faith But I quarel not therefore the opinion of them that maintaine the whole Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith acknowledging that whatsoever it containeth is necessarily to be believed by all that come to understand it And whatsoever it containeth not though the Scripture alone obligeth not to believe the truth of it is not necessarily to be observed for any other reason but that which the Scripture declareth As for S. Basil making it apostasy to bring that which is not written into the Faith It is a thing well known that the Arians were charged by the Church for bringing in words that were not in the Scriptures saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a time when Christ was not And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That hee was made of nothing On the other side after the Council of Nicaea the Arians charged the Church for bringing in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same substance Where then lay the difference between the Inndelity of the Arians and the Faith of the Church Theodoret showes it Hist Eccles I. 8. out of Athanasius de Actis Concil Niceni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith hee They were condemned by written words piously understood But how appears this piety For I suppose the Arians would not have granted it Hee addeth that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had been used by the Fathers which had it been inconsistent with the sense of the Church could not have been indured in a mater concerning the Rule of Faith whereas their terms were contrary to that which is found in the Scriptures Now S. Basil acknowledgeth that hee had elsewhere dealing with Hereticks used terms not found in the Scriptures to exclude their sense contrary to the Scriptures as you shall finde by the Authors alleged that the Council of Nicaea had done but to those who desired information with a single heart hee resolves to rest content with the Scriptures The terms whereof his meaning is that the Hereticks did not rest content with because they had a minde to depart from the Faith Upon the same terms Tertullian pronounces the Wo that belongs to them which adde to Gods Word upon Hermogenes because his error concerned the Article of our Creed that God made heaven and earth And S. Austine presumes the reason why there is no clear Scripture for the original of the soul to be because hee presumes that it concerns not the substance of Faith Besides these Observations some of those passages which are alleged may concern Christianity rather than the Scriptures
the sense of it For if the same Faith which first was preached was afterwards committed to writing by the Apostles and how should those Christians which had not the use of leters be saved otherwise then was it the authority of the Apostles acknowledged by them that found themselves tyed to be Christians which made the Faith to oblige whether delivered by writing or without it The consent of all Churches in the same Rule of Faith serving for evidence of the Apostles act in delivering the same to the Churches Nor can any further reason be demanded why that knowledg which the Gnosticks prerended to have received by secret wayes should be refuted than the want of this And therefore it is in vain to allege that as they scorned the Scripture so they alleged Tradition for this secret knowledge The Tradition which they alleged being secret and such as could not be made to appear But no lesse contradictory to the Tradition of the Church than to the Scriptures both infallibly witnessed by the consent of all Churches And hereupon I leave the sayings of S. Austine setting aside the authority of the Council of Nicaea and affirming that former General Councils may be corrected by later without answer As also the sayings of them who affirm the Faith which our Lord hath taught to be the rock upon which the Church is built For if no building can lay that foundation upon which it standeth then cannot the Church make mater of Faith being founded upon it And that authority which may be set aside or corrected can be no infallible ground of Faith It is true it is pleaded that though in the Church of Rome there be some that do believe that the Church is able to make new Articles of Faith that is to make such determinations in maters of Faith as shall oblige all men to believe them as much as they are obliged to believe all that which comes from our Lord by his Apostles Others that do believe onely that the Church is able to evidence what the Apostles delivered to the Church and that this evidence is the ground whereon particular persons are to rest that whatsoever is so evidenced was indeed so delivered by the Apostles yet both these agree in one and the same reason of believing both of them alleging the Tradition of the Apostles to the Church for the ground of their Faith But this is more than any man of reason can believe unlesse wee allow him that affirms contradictories to ground himself upon one part of the contradiction which the other part of it destroyes For seeing that there must be but one reason one ground upon which we believe all that we believe and that it is manifest that those Articles of Faith which the determination of the Church creates being not such by any thing which that determination supposes are believed to be such meerly in consideration of the authority of the Church that determines them By consequence the Scripture and whatsoever is held to be of Faith upon any ground which the authority of the Church createth is no mater of Faith but by the authority of the Church determining that it be held for such On the other side hee that allowes Tradition to be the reason why hee believes the Christian Faith necessarily allowes all that hee allowes to be mater of Faith not onely to be true but to be mater of Faith before ever the Church determine it So that allowing him to say that hee holds his Faith by Tradition hee must allow mee that hee contradicts himself whensoever hee takes upon him to maintain that the Church creates new Articles of Faith which were not so the instant before the determination of the Church CHAP. XXXII Answer to an Objection that choice of Religion becomes difficult upon these terms This resolution is for the Interest of the Reformation Those that make the Church Infallible cannot those that make the Scripture clear and sufficient may own Tradition for evidence to determine the meaning of the Scriptures and Controversies of Faith The Interest of the Church of England The pretense of Rushworthes Dialogues that wee have no unquestionable Scripture and that the Tradition of the Church never changes AS little shall I need to be troubled at any reason that may be framed against this resolution having answered the prejudice that seems to sway most men to apprehend that God must have been wanting to his Church if all things necessary to salvation be not clearly laid down in the Scriptures For it is very manifest that the very same presumption possesses the mindes of the adverse party that God must needs have provided a visible Judge infallible in deciding all Controversies of Faith Whether the Church or any person or persons authorized in behalf of the Church for the present all is one I shall therefore onely demand that it be considered first that God was no way tied either to send our Lord Christ or to give his Gospel which because it comes of Gods free grace is therefore called the Word of his Grace and the Covenant of Grace Then that hee hath not found himself obliged to provide effectual means to bring all mankinde to the knowledge of it resting content to have provided such as if men be not wanting to their own salvation and the salvation of the rest of mankinde may be sufficient to bring all men to the knowledg of it And when it is come to knowledg all discreet Christians notwithstanding must acknowledg that the motives thereof fully propounded though abundantly sufficient to reasonable persons yet do not constrain those that are convicted by them to proceed according to them as necessary reasons constrain all understandings that see them to judg by them For how should it be a trial of mens dispositions if there were no way to avoid the necessity of those motives that inforce it Now if any knowledg can be had of truth in maters of faith that become disputable it must all of necessity depend upon the sufficiency of those motives which convict men to imbrace the Christian Faith And if there be any such skill as that of a Divine among Christians of necessity all of it proceeds upon supposition of the said motives which not pretending to show the reason of things which they convict men to believe convict them notwithstanding to believe that they are revealed by God For what conviction can there be that this or that is true unlesse it may appear to fall under those motives as the means which God hath imployed so to recommend it Therefore can it not be reasonable to require a greater evidence to the truth of things disputable among Christians than God hath allowed Christianity it self which being supposed on all hands it remains questionable whether this or that be part of it Therefore can it not be presumed that God hath made the Scriptures clear in all points necessary to salvation to all understandings concerned or that hee hath
destructive to their particular salvation within that compasse neither will their fall be imputable to the Church but to themselves if they do But neither shall this difficulty be so great an inconvenience in our common Christianity nor so insuperable as it seems to those that are loth to be too much troubled about the world to come For I never found that God pretendeth to give or that it is reason hee should give those means for attaining that truth by which wee must be saved which it should not lye within the malice of man to render difficult for them to compasse whom they concern I finde it abundantly enough for his unspeakable goodness and exactly agreeable with those means whereby hee convicteth the world of the truth of Christianity that hee give those whom it concerns such means to discern the truth of things in debate as being duly applyed are of themselves sufficient to create a resolution as certain as the weight of the mater in debate shall require And such I maintain the Scripture to be containing the sense of it within those bounds which the Rule of Faith and the Lawes given the Church by our Lord and his Apostles do limit For what is more obvious than to discern what the whole Body of the Church hath agreed in what not what is manifestly consequent to the same what not what is agreeable to the ground and end of those Lawes which the Church first received from our Lord and his Apostles what not Let prejudice cast what mists of difficulties it can before the light which God hath given his Church to discover the truth hee that stands out of their way shall discern much more art used to obscure than to discern it Neither is there any reason why it is so hard to make it discernable to all that are concerned but the unreasonable prejudices either of the force of humane authority in mater of Faith and the extent of Tradition beyond the Rule of Faith or that the consent of the whole Church may as well come from Antichrist as from the Apostles If the records of the Church were handled without these prejudices lesse learning than this age shows in other maters might serve to evidence the consent of â— Church in more controversies than wee have to those that would be content to rest in the Scripture expounded according to the same But if the Church that is those that uave right in behalf of the Church being perswaded of a sacrilegious privilege of Infallibility shall take upon them to determine truths in debate to limit Lawes to the Church without respect to this Rule which if they respect they manifestly renounce the privilege of their Infallibility I mervail not that God suffers his people to be tried with such difficulties whose sins I doubt deserve this tryal But then I say further that it is not the providence of God that is the means which hee hath provided to resolve men in debates of Christianity but it is the malice of man that makes that means uneffectual which God hath made sufficient I must now answer an envious objection that this resolution is not according to the positions of those that professe the Reformation with us To which I will speak as freely as to the rest having profess'd my self utterly assoiled of all faction and respect of mens persons to way against the means of finding the truth and for that reason devested even the Fathers of the Church of all authority which their merits from Christianity have purchased to hear what their testimonies argue in point of Historical truth I say then first that may saying no way prejudices the intent and interest of the Reformation whatsoever insufficience it may charge the expressions of Reformers with I know the worst that can be alleged in this point is that Luther in appealing from the Pope and Council called by him to a Council that should judg meerly by the Scriptures first framed this Controversie between the Scriptures and the Church which since hath been alwaies in debate so that hee which will not be tried by the Scriptures alone plainly seems to quit the party and give up the game Who has this imagination though never to apparent let mee desire him to go a little higher to the first commencing of the plea about Indulgences For there can be nothing more manifest than this That when those that undertook that cause against Luther found that the present practice of the Church could not be derived from any thing recorded in the Scripture they were forced to betake themselves to the authority of the Church not that which consisteth in testifying the faith once delivered but in creating that which never was of force untill the exercice of it Here let all the world judg for I am confident the case is so plain that all the world may judg in it whether Luther had any Interest to demand that the Scripture alone should be heard in opposition to the Tradition received from the beginning by the Church tending as I have said to nothing but to limit the meaning of the Scripture Or that his Interest required him to protest that the truth for which hee stood was not to be liable to the Sentence of the present Church And therefore when afterwards hee appealed to a Council which should pronounce by the Scriptures alone if this tend to exclude those means which are subordinate to the attaining of the meaning of the Scriptures I do utterly deny that it can be understood so to be meant by any man that would not defeat his own enterprize And therefore that it must be understood to exclude onely the authority of the present Church so farre as it proceeds not upon supposition of those grounds whereupon the Church is to pronounce For what hinders the sentence of the Church to be infallible not of it self alone but as it proceeds upon those means which duely applied produce a sentence that is infallible And truly were not his plea so to be understood all his Followers Melancthan Chemnitius and others who have written Volumes to show how their profession agrees with that of the Catholick Church should have taken pains to commit a very great inconsequence For as I have argued that those who maintain the Infallibility of the present Church do contradict themselves whensoever they have recourse either to the Scripture or to any Records of the Church to evidence the sense of the Scripture in that which otherwise they professe the authority of the Church alone infallibly to determine So those that will have the Scripture alone to determine all Controversies of Faith and yet take the pains to bring evidence of the meaning thereof from that which hath been received in the Church may very well be said to take pains to contradict themselves Some of our Scottish Presbyterians have observed that the Church of England was reformed by those that had more esteem of Melancthon than of Calvin and
the imagination of them that do not the faults which it is probable all Copies carry from their makers cannot endanger the truth of the Scripture but in that one case which hee alloweth to abate his account that is when the same fault falls out in several Copies which is a rare chance For where diverse Copies agree in the same fault it behoveth that there should be some occasion of committing the mistake capable to induce several men into the same the consent of whose Copies may in time create a doubt what is true But to imagine that a fault committed at large by a Copyer which it is so great odds that none else shall fall into The truth being one errors infinite should indanger the true reading of any writing is not to appeal to common sense but to renounce it For neither in that one case where it is confest there may be danger are wee left without cure the consequence of the sense either alone or with the help of some Copy alwaies outwaying the credit of Copies liable to so many mistakes Hee that sees not what benefit all records of learning have received even from negligent Copies industriously handled to the preservation of all records may pretend ignorance in this point But for the Scriptures as common sense bears that there is more occasion of making faults than in other writings because more multiplying of Copiesl so common sense showing that there is so much more means of correcting them the danger of changing the text is vanished Which if all this were not common sense that sees the present text of Scripture make a sense so reasonable so agreeable will as much scorn as a reasonable man will scorn to admit that this beautifull order of the world comes from the casual interfering of atomes For is it not the same case when it is said that so constant sense arises from the contingence of errors And therefore I mervail that the varieties of readings recorded in Sixtus V his Bible should be alleged to this purpose Which though they are the records of errors yet they are the arguments of truth The true reading by the credit of them over-balancing all mistakes And truly hee that shall not up a just account of the hinderance which the variety of reading in the Scripture gives the resolution of truth shall finde three or four texts questionable for their reading by the enemies of the Trinity In other things though diverse readings questionable yet none of consequence to any point in debate And those I speak of so questionable that that either they make no consEquence there being evidence sufficient without them or there remains evidence enough to waigh the true reading down Now the ceasing of the Languages in which the Scripture was written is indeed a difficulty to the attaining of the sense of them as it is a difficulty to the attaining of the Language But either wee suppose the skill of the Language attained when it is not or being attained wee must suppose that which wee have upon record in it as well understood to wit as to the Language as men understand one another in their mother tongue And therefore the Ebrew and Greek have hard fortune to lye under contrary charges As to say that the Ebrew is obscure because it is scarce and the Greek is obscure because copious and the Scripture being written in the one and in the other is therefore obscure Certainly those that spoke Ebrew and those that spoke Greek had means to understand one anothers meaning or else those Languages were uselesse to the end of all Language And shall wee imagine that they determine not the meaning of the speaker in writing but when they are spoken well and good No. To them that know not the Language there is no sufficient mark to determine the meaning of what is said in it It is no mervail On Gods name let them learn a little further and they may discern the marks whereby the force of signifying is stamped upon the Languages And truly the scarcenesse of that Language lies rather in the sloth of learners who save a great deal of pains by perswading themselves that they know that Language when they have learned what is to be found in the Scriptures than in want of words to expresse all conceits It is an easie thing to imagine that the writings of later Jewes are not good Ebrew and indeed it may appear that after the Captivity the Vulgar did not speak it But by the Traditions whereby they determine the exercise of Moses Law which the Jews of Palestine resident at Tiberias agreed to put in writing about the Emperor Antoninus his time it appears plain enough that the Language was preserved alive among the Learned and extends farr further than that which is found onely in the Scripture though with some little difference Which that excellent Master of humane learning Joseph d'Escale seems to mee very properly to distinguish by the names of the Ebrew and Jewish Languages Because this difference may well seem to have begun from the times of Esdras when the Tribe of Judah with the apperrenances of it with the recovery of their ancient inheritance took upon them the study of their Law And I appeal to the common sense of all that have found by reading with what ease and property that Language serves to express all the conceits of their Philosophers and Divines how beggarly how unable to determine the meaning of mans minde wee are to account it As for the Greek be it never so defective in those expressions which the variety of Conjugations in Eastern Languages do produce hee that knows both the one and the other shall finde the force of those expressions signified by other means in the Greek and other Languages Be it never so copious otherwise hee that will husband his paines to the learning of the Scriptures shall finde means enough to attain the meaning of them without undertaking to overcome all that is written in that Language As for the figurative speech that is used especially by the Prophets and other writings of a Poetical stile as the Psalms Job the Canticle and the like if you reckon them not among the Prophets as it is not to be denyed that the stile of them is obscure by that means so when wee see the meaning of them determined by the writings of the Apostles wee must either grant that means to be sufficient for that effect or that the Apostles have alleged them upon no just ground to no just purpose Now that our Lords and the Apostles words are set down in such expressions as the Evangelists and S. Luke thought meetest I suppose hee that hath a due respect for them will not think to be any argument that hee who hath the meaning of the Pen-man hath not the meaning of him that spoke And if all these be difficulties to the attaining of the true meaning of the Scriptures sure the multiplicity of
to be in regard of the world to come what would he have Christians to be but Libertines and Rebels True it is God imposeth it not as upon his subjects but tendreth it as to his rebels for the condition upon which they may become his subjects instead of his rebels And that is a just reason why it is called a Covenant rather than a Law And that reason justly reproves the Leviathans imagination that it can oblige neither more nor less than the Law of Nature For being positive as tendred by the meer will of God and upon what terms he pleased as the Precepts thereof which are Gods Laws to his Church and the institution of the Church it selfe is meerly positive there is no reason at all to presume that the moral Precepts which are in force under it are bounded by the Law of Nature Though whether it be so or not I undertake not here to determine But we know what S. Paul saith Rom. III. 27. Where is boasting It is shut out By what Law Not by the Law of works but by the Law of Faith That is by the Gospel which requireth that Faith of which I am inquiring wherein it consists for the condition of obtaining the promises which it tendreth And S. James 11. 8. 12. If ye fulfill the Royall Law which saith Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self ye do well And So speak ye and so do ye as being to be judged by the Law of Libertie For the liberty of being Gods subjects and under Gods royall Law the Gospel giveth Neither is S. Paul otherwise to be understood when he saith Rom. VIII 2. The Law of the Spirit of Life which is in Christ Jesus hath freed me from the Law of sin and of death The imbracing of the Gospel being the Law that is the condition upon which we become partakers of the Holy Ghost free from sin and from death And truly I cannot but pity the blindness of error so oft as I remember that I have heard Antinomians alledge the words of the Prophet Jer. XXXI 31 -34. quoted by the Apostle to show the difference between the first and second Covenant Heb. VIII 8 -11. Behold the dayes come saith the Lord that I will settle with the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new Covenant not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers when I tooke them by the hand and brought them out of the Land of Aegypt for they abode not in my Covenant and I neglested them saith the Lord For this is the Covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those dayes saith the Lord Putting my Laws into their mind I will also write them upon their hearts and I will be to them for their God and tâ—ey to me for my people Neither shall they teach every man his neighbour and every man his Brother saying Know the Lord For they shall all know me from the least of them to the greatest I say I cannot but pity them that upon these words ground themselves that the Covenant of Grace is a meer free promise not onely freely made for so I say it is free for what but Gods goodness moved him to tender it but freely without condition contracted for at their hands For cannot God by his Prophet foretell the effect of the Covenant of Grace but he must be presumed to set down the terms of it And if he express them not there is he the less free to demand them when he tenders them Especially the Covenant it self being to remain a secret till Gods time to reveal it I say then that this Prophesie hath taken full effect in the lives of those who submitting themselves to the terms of Christianity have received of God the gift of the Holy Ghost to understand their profession that they might live according to it But that this gift of the Holy Ghost that is to say the habituall assistance thereof neither was due nor bestowed but upon supposition of Chnstianity professed by baptisme which God by our Lord Christ hath revealed to be the condition which he requireth of them that will injoy the same CHAP. IV. The consent of the whole Church evidenced by the custome of chatechising By the opinion thereof concerning the salvation of those that delayed their Baptism By the rites and Ceremonies of Baptism Why no penance for sins before but after Baptism The doctrine of the Church of England evident in this case BUT I am now come to the argument that is to be drawn from the practise of the universall Church to my purpose And truly he that shall consider for what reason the Apostles should require those whom they had converted to be baptized will find himselfe intangled in rendring it unless he settle the ground of it upon the obligation of professing true Christianity And the effect of it in admitting to the unity of the Church which may require the performance and maintain the exercise of it And the consequence thereof they that are or shall be imployed by the Church to preach to unbelievers will find to be such that either they must insist upon the terms which I hold with them or they shall make them but aequivocall Christians That is such as may wear the Cross of Christ to man for a cognizance but not in the obligation of their hearts to God rather to suffer death than either to profess or act against that which he hath taught The next point in the visible practice of the Catholick Church is the custome of catechizing The circumstances whereof for time and manner though no man can mantain to have been the same in all Churches yet it may be argued to have been generally a time of triall for them that had been wonne to believe the truth of Christianity how they were likely to apply themselves to live like Christians and what assurance or presumption the Church might conceive that they would not betray the profession thereof And therfore I appeal to the common sense of all men whether they that exercised this course did not admit men to Christianity and baptism upon the condition of professing and undertaking so to do Besides those things which I alledged in the first Book in the Constitutions of the Apostles in the most ancient Canons of the Church and generally in all Church writers we read of Missa Catechumenorum and Missa fidelium In English the dismission of Scholars and the dismission of Believers Because during the Psalms during the reading of the Scriptures expounding the same reason was that learners should be present as well for their instruction in Christianity as for discharge of their â—uty in the praises of God and prayers to God Though the same prayers were not to be offered to God for Learners as for believers but they were to be dismissed with peculiar prayers of the Church for their particular estate such as yet are extant in the ancient Offices of the
man for Communion with the Church by Baptisme but of that which the Church professeth to have received from our Lord and his Apostles And this is the true ground of the foundation of the Church and the Society thereof whereof so much hath been said To wit that God giving his Gospel for the salvation of mankind did think fit to trust the guard and exercise of it to men once instructed by those to whom at the first he had given immediate Commission to publish and establish Christianity Rather then leave them to expect at his hands every day new revelations and miracles for introducing that which had once been sufficiently declared And also rather then leave every man to his own head to make what he can of the Scriptures and think he hath salvation by living according to it For supposing that Christianity which is delivered by the Scriptures once subject to be misunderstood and corrupted of which we have but too much experience an effectual course to preserve it will be to found a Corporation or Society of the Church the members whereof each in his owne ranck should remaine intrusted by God but by the meanes of their predecessors from whom they received Christianity to preserve both the profession of Christian truth and the exercise of Gods service inviolable Nor is it effectuall to say that the unity of the Church may fail being divided by Heresies and Schismes insomuch that that Baptisme which is visibly valide and good shall be void of that invisible effect which it pretendeth For it is not requisite that God should provide such meanes of salvation as may be undefeisible It is enough that they are reasonable He that is Baptized into a profession destructive to that which all Christians are bound upon their salvation to believe perishes for want of Faith setting aside the unity of the Church which his Herisie violates over and above But if the unity of the Church be of such advantage to the maintenance of our common Christianity as it was before the dissolving of it it is no marvaile if the Baptisme of Schismaticks though valide and good for the visible forme become voide of effect to them who by receiving it make themselves parties to the breach of the unity of the Church We agree that the Power of the Church of Rome is the occasion of many abuses in the Church What they are it is my present businesse to enquire He that bounds the interpretation of the Scriptures within the sense of the Catholike Church shall not transgresse the Law of Gods truth in that inquiry He that accepts the bounds of his own fansy in stead of them is it not just with God if he die If once common Christianity and the maintenance thereof depend so much upon the unity of the Church is it not reason that the benefit of it should depend upon the same he who having attained the true Faith and according to the same seeking the unity of the Church faileth of it without any fault of his owne if he who so seeketh it can be supposed to faile of it hath the difficulty of overcoming his own ignorance to pleade for his excuse But for them who have the consent of all Christians from the beginning to oblige them to undertake the profession of Christianity by Baptisme but out of hatred to the present Church the abuses of it neglect baptisme upon presumption that they have the holy Ghost without it or that the reason why the Apostles Baptized is now ceased I say that for them I suppose there remaines no just plea seeing that by the unity of the Catholike Church they ought to have been guided in judging what is of the abuse of the present Church and what is not And thus that consideration which some seeme to be not without cause scandalized at when these effects of Christianity the power whereof must necessarily consist in an unfained heart are made to depend upon an outward ceremony of Baptisme which the Church gives is utterly voided by that reason which the Apostle insinuates when he sayes that Baptisme saves us not the laying down of the filth of the flesh but that profession to God which is made with a good and a sincere conscience Whereas those that distinguish that faith which alone justifieth from the profession thereof which baptisme executeth oblige themselves to make Baptisme a ceremony not whereon the promises of the Gospel depend but to signifie that they are had and obtained without it But to whom signifie not to God who giveth them Not to him that has them and by his faith knows he has them Not to the Church which can never be certified that he hath them indeed and demands onely to be certified that he wants nothing requisite to presume him to be such So that Baptisme being required onely to presume that a man is a Christian and that presumption being legally had by any act the Church or any that call themselves the Church can require as well as by being Baptized If that be all there is no reason to be given the Sociniant why Baptisme should be necessary to the salvation of Christians and therefore why it should not be in their power to use it or not to use it And truly I do much marvel to see the Socinians that have very well seen the truth concerning the twofold meaning of the Law literall and spirituall and the promise of the land of Canaan tied to the carnall observation thereof as that of everlasting life to the spirituall obedience of it I say I do marvel to see that in consequence hereunto they should not inferre that God hath appointed a spirituall people of the Christian Church answerable to Israel according to the flesh and that his spirituall promises should depend upon the visible imtiation of eveâ—â— Christian into the body of that people as the right of his temporal promises depended upon their initiation into the body of carnall Israelites not according to birth but according to promise Onely when I consider on the other side that without regard to the Article of the Catholick Church which Christians make a part of their Creed they rest in such a communion as their private perswasion of the sense of the Scriptures shall be of force to produce I do not marvail to see them not owne the consequence of their own principles when they see it not stand with other prejudices which they have imbraced I know there are two things will be objected here the one is a meer prejudice that by maintaining of free will by maintaining the Covenant of Grace to consist in an act of it we shall incurre the Heresie of Pelagius The other that if the condition of the Covenant of Grace be an expresse profession vow and promise to live as well as to believe according to what Christ hath taught and that without the use of reason no such promise can be of force or take place then infants cannot
having received the promises but having seen them afarre of and being perswaded and having saluted them and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims upon earth for they who say such things declare that they seek a country And had they been mindfull of that which they were come out from they might have had time to turn back But now they desire a better that is an heavenly Whereupon God is not ashamed to be called their God For he had prepared them a City And againe 39 40. These all being witnessed by faith received not the promises God having provided some better thing for us that they might not be perfected without us Where it is plaine that they according to the Apostle expected the kingdom of heaven by virtue of that promise which is now manifested and tendered and made good by the Gospell whereof our Saviour saith John VIII 98. Your father Abraham leaped to see my day and saw it and rejoyced And againe Mat. XIII 17. Verily I say unto you that many Prophets and righteous men have desired to see the things ye see and have not seen them and to hear the things ye hear and have not hard them CHAP. IX Of the Faith and Justification of Abraham and the Patriarkes according to the Apostles Of the Prophets and righteous men under the Law Abraham and Rahab the harlot justified by workes if justified by Faith The promises of the Gospel depend upon works which the Gospell injoyneth The Tradition of the Church HAving thus shewed that the interest of Christianity and the grounds whereupon it is to be maintained against the Jewes require this answer to be returned to the objection it remaines that I shew how the apostles disputations upon this point do signify the same Of Abraham then and of the Patriarches thus we read Heb. XI 8 10. By faith Abraham obeyed the calling to go forth unto the place he was to receive for inheritance and went forth not knowing whither he went By faith he sojourned in the land of promise as none of his own dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob heirs with him of the same promise For he expected a City having foundations the architect and builder whereof is God Is it not manifest here that both parts of the comparison are wrapped up in the same words which cannot be unfolded but by saying That as Abraham in confidence of Gods promise to give his posterity the land of Canaan left his country to live a stranger in it So while he was so doing he lived a pilgrim in this world out of the faith that he had conceived out of Gods promises that he should thereby obtaine the world to come And is not this the profession of Christians which the Apostle in the words alledged even now declareth to be signified by the pilgrimages of the Patriarchs And is not this a just account why they cannot be said to have attained the promises by the law but by faith Therefore that which followeth immediately of Sarah must needs be understood to the same purpose By faith Sarah also her self received force to give seed and bare beside the time of her age because she thought him faithfull that had promised Therefore of one and him mortified were born as the stars of heaven for multitude and as the sand that is by the sea shore innumerable For S. Paul declareth Gal. III. 16. IV. 22 Rom. IX 7 8 9. that the seed promised Abraham in which all the nations of the earth shall be blessed is Christ and the Church of true Spirituall Israelites that should impart the promise of everlasting life to all nations And this promise you saw even now that Abraham and the Patriarchs expected Sarah therefore being imbarked in Abrahams pilgrimage as by the same faith with him she brought forth all Israel according to the flesh so must it needs be understood that she was accepted of God as righteous in consideration of that faith wherewith she traveled to the world to come Neither can it be imagined that S. Pauls dispute of the righteousnesse of Abraham by faith can be understood upon any other ground or to any other effect then this What then shall we say that Abraham our father got according to the flesh saith he Rom. IV. 1-5 For if Abraham was justified by works he hath whereof to glory but not towards God For what saith the Scripture Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse But to him that worketh the reward is not reckoned according to grace but according to debt But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the wicked his faith is imputed for righteousnesse The question what Abraham found according to the flesh can signifie nothing but what got he by the Law which is called the flesh in opposition to the Gospel included in it which is called the Spirit Did he come by his righteousnesse through the Law or not For had Abraham been justified by works that should need none of that grace which the Gospel tendreth for remission of sinnes well might he glory of his own righteousnesse and not otherwise For he that acknowledges to stand in need of pardon and grace cannot stand upon his own righteousnesse Now Abraham cannot so glory towards God because the Scripture saith that his faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse which signifies Gods grace in accepting of it to his account not his claime as of debt Whereupon the Apostle inferreth immediately the testimony of David writing under the Law in these words As David also pronounceth the man blessed to whom God imputeth righteousnesse without works Blessed are they whose iniquities are remitted and whose sinnes are covered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne What can be more manifest to shew that the Apostle intends no more then that the Fathers pretended not to be justified by those workes which claimed no benefit of that Grace which the Gospel publisheth Especially the consequence of Davids words being this Psal XXXII 2. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne and in whose spirit there is no guile For the Prophet David including the spirituall righteousnesse of the heart in the quality of him to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works the Apostle must be thought to include it in the Faith of him to whom the Lord imputeth it for righteousnesse Now when S. Paul observeth in Moses that Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse Upon the promise of that posterity which he expected not Gen. XV. 6. It cannot be said that Abraham had not this faith afore Or that it was not imputed to him for righteousnesse till now Because the Apostle to the Hebrews hath said expresly that he had the same faith and to the like effect ever since he left his country to travail after Gods promises And certainly it was but an act of the same Faith to walk after the rest of those
figures hereof and read their bringing out of Egypt into the land of Promise and the maintainance of them in the inheritance thereof notwithstanding their enemies yea notwithstanding their frequent transgressing of it imputed to the Covenant with their Fathers believing with S. Paul that all Gods promises are yea and amen in Christ they cannot consequently make doubt to believe not onely that they are spiritually made good to Christians but also were spiâ—itually made good to them who lived the life of Christians under the faith of Christ to come during the Law in consideration of his merits and sufferings And therefore it is not for nothing that I insist upon this that not onely the giving of the Law but the ambassages by which God dealt with the Fathers and Prophets of old time were performed by the same Word of God which afterwards becoming incarnate is now our Lord Christ assuming for the time the ministery of an Angel that represented and bore the person of God in the likenesse of man As prefaces and preludes to his coming in our flesh not to leave it any more For if it pleased God to use this ministery in order to that which was to purchase of him that grace which should build the Church is it marvail if in consideration of his Sonne by whom this intercourse between God and man was managed he should grant those helps at that time which by the meanes of that knowledge which that intercourse maintained were effectuall to reduce them to that spirituall obedience to God which made them friends to God at that time And therefore I marvaile not that the ancient Church according to that which I said afore should make use of those bookes which now we call Apocrypha for the instruction of those whom by the name of Catechumeni they prepared for baptisme For in as much as we have in them those expresse testimonies which I have quoted of the Wisdome of God dealing with mankâ—nd from the fall of Adam to reduce them to the knowledge of God and to maintaine them in it insomuch it affordeth a necessary instruction to informe all that desire to be Christians by what means the world was saved before and after the Law and yet no salvation but by Christianity Which they that neglect will sooner betray the cause of our common Christianity then give a good account of so great a difficulty The Socinians for certaine will want footing against the Jews either in shewing how the Fathers were saved or why they are rejected It remaineth that I give a reason why the position of Socinus or of Pelagius in denying the grace of Christ as the cure of Originall sinne is not consistent with the grounds of Christianity which is to say that the account which they are able to give for the coming of our Lord Christ is not sufficient not reasonable because they deny this grace Socinus liberally granteth the grace of God in sending Christ to publish his Gospel and to assure all mankind that he is ready to pardon the sinnes of all that receive it and to give them eternall life living here as Christians undertake to do That having provided that our Lord Christ should be born of a Virgine by the holy Ghost of his free grace he hath exalted him to the power and honour of God under himself thereby both rewarding his undertaking and performing this ambassage above merit and assuring us both of the truth of the Gospel and of the performance of it to them that live conformable to Christs Crosse who have a man of our own kind indowed with Gods own power to deliver us from all enemies of our own free will believing his Gospel so tendered and living as it requireth But in all this neither he nor Pelagius who as I said in the beginning as freely acknowledgeth that grace of God which consisteth in giving the Gospel besides that free will which we come into the world with tenders us any account at all how it comes to passe that all mankind iâ— become enemy to God and subject to his wrath Which untill it be supposed to be true there is no cause why the Apostles and the Church after them should invite the world to undertake so much hardship as Christianity importeth And therefore S. Paul hath had care to set it forth as the ground of Christianity in the beginning of his Epistle to the Romanes For it will not serve the turn to have recourse to the examples of their predecessors and the nature of man apt to imitate them as a sufficient reason hereof seeing this reason can go no higher then Adam and that there is evidence that through the grace of God good examples of his posterity such as walked with God if not of himself as the book of Wisdome affirms X. 1. and we have no cause to doubt were performed before the eyes of them who notwithstanding imitated the apostasy which he disclaimed How then shall we imagine supposing a good and an evil branch in his posterity that the bad example should so be followed that all the world should runne after strange Gods Onely a few Fathers by that entercourse which God granted them of grace and the doctrine which came from their Fathers but to their Fathers by grace being preserved intire to God How comes the same to passe after the floud in the posterity of so just a man as Noe after such a horrible warning as the deluge Had the light of reason been such in discerning the difference between good and bad as the Law of Nature and by consequence the state of mans creation requireth had mans inclination been without any bias contrary to that which the light of reason such as it is shewes how could this have been How comes it to passe that the excellence of mans nature and the reason that he is endowed with serves for a reproach to all mankind that now follows it That those who see the difference of good and bad when they are alone without witnesse when they are under publick ingagements commit those oppressions upon men whereof they have no example even from beasts Doth not all the learning all the experience of the world thus farre give testimony to Christianity and shall we think fit to advantage our selves upon this plea against those that are not Christians and straight to deny the consequence of it to Christians Especially having the fall of Adam so evident a beginning of it set forth by Moses and the comming of Christ by S. Paul for the cure of it Thus farre then we plead from the motives of our common faith But when we come to measure the grace of Christ which is the cure by the person of Christ I suppose I have right to demand for true that which I have proved that he is God and man not by grace noâ— by reward but by birth And give notice to Pelagius that Socinus in a more cunning age of disputing found it requisite for
apprehend that the Scripture representing the friendship of God with his children according to his Gospel by the patern of that love which the best men show to those whom they intertaine friendship with doth intend to expresse him disobliged upon every offense But unlesse we thinke it commendable for God to love men more then righteousnesse for the love of Christ to whom the same righteousnesse is no lesse deare then to God will never thinke it agreeable to the honor of the Gospell to propose the reward of that righteousnesse which it requireth but upon supposition of performing of it Certainly Celsus had done the Christians no wrong in slandering them that they received all the wicked persons whom the world spued out into an assurance of everlasting happinesse nor could Zosimus be blamed for imputing the change of Constantine the Great to a desire of easing his conscience of the guilt of those sinnes which Paganisme could show him no means to expiate had the Christians of that time acknowledged that they tendred assurance of pardon to any man but upon supposition of conversion from his sinne These thinges supposed it will be easy to resolue that the assurance of salvation which the Gospell inables a good Christian to attaine is not the act of justifying Faith but the consequence of it Indeed if a man were justifyed by believing that he is justifyed so farre as a man hath the act of justifying Faith so farre he must necessarily rest assured not onely of his right to salvation at present but of his everlasting salvation in the world to come But neither is that opinion which maketh justifying Faith to consist in the trust and confidence which a Christian reposeth in God through Christ for the obtaining of his promises liable to the horrible and grosse consequence of the same To exclude all Christians from salvation that are not as sure that they shall be saved at they are of theire Creede is a consequence as desperate as it is grosse to make that assurance the act of justifying Faith The true act of justifying Faith which is constancy in Christianity the more lively and resolute it is the more assurance it createth of those consequences which the Gospell warranteth For no man is ignorant of his owne resolutions Nor can be lesse assured that it is Gods Spirit that creates this assurance then he is assured that his owne resolusions are not counterfeit And therefore his trust in God not as reconcileable but as reconciled must needes be answerable And the same trust may warrant the same assurance though not of it selfe but upon the conscience of that Christianity whereupon it is grounded And by those things which were disputed not onely during the Council of Trent but also since the deâ—ree thereof it is manifest that the Church of Rome doth not teach it to be the duty of a good Christian to be allwayes in doubt of Gods grace But alloweth that opinion to be maintained which maketh assurance of salvation attainable upon these termes and therefore incourageth good Christians to contend for it As for the assurance of future salvation which dependeth upon the assurance of preseverance till death or a mans departure in the state of Grace you see S. Paul involveth all Christians in it with himselfe by saying I am perswaded that neither life nor death shall bee able to separate us from the love of God which is in Jesus Christ our Lord And therefore I conceive is was a very great impertinence to dreame of any privilege of immediate revelation for the means by which he hadde it Whosoever is a Christian so farre as he is a Christian hath it Adouble minded man that is unconstant in all his wayes as S. James speakes that is who is not resolved to live and dy a good Christian cannot have it Whosoever hath that resolution in as much as he hath that resolution that is so firme as his resolution is so firme is his assurance For knowing his owne resolutions he knowes them not easily changeable in a water importing the end of a mans whole course And therefore knowing God unchangeable while he so continues is able to say full as much as Saint Paul saith I am perswaded that neither life nor death shall be able to separate â—e from the love of God in Christ Jesus As for the sense of the primitive and Catholick Church putting you in mind of that which I said before to show that it placeth justifying Faith in professing Christianity the effect whereof in justifying must needes fail so soon as a man faileth of performing that Christianity in the profession whereof his justification standeth I shall not need to allege the opinions of particulare Fathers to make evidence of it having Lawes of the Church to make evidence that those who were ruled by them must needs thinke the promises of the Gospell to depend upon the Covenant of our Baptisme and therefore that they become forfeit by transgressing the same The promise of persevering in the profession of the Faith untill death and of living like a Christian was allways expressely exacted of all that were baptized as now in the Church of England And upon this promise and not otherwise remission of sinne right to Gods kingdome and the Gift of his Spirit was to be expected As if it were not made with a serious intent at the present baptisme did nothing but damne him that received it So if it were transgressed by grosse sins not to be imputed to the surprizes of concupiscence For the condition failing that which dependeth upon the same must needs faile For the means by which they expected to recover the state of Grace thus forfeited we have the Penitentiall Canons which as they had the force of Law all over the Church all the better times of the Church So I show from the beginning that they had theire beginning from the Apostles themselves to assure us that all beleived that without which there could be no ground for that which all did practice Can any man imagine that the Church should appoint severall times and severall measures of Penance for severall sinnes to be debarred the Communion of the Eucharist and to demonstrate unto the Church by theire outward conversation the sincerity of theire conversion to theire first profession of Christianity had not all acknowledged that the promises of the Gospell forfeited by transgressing the profession of baptisme were not to be recovered otherwise And that the deeper the offense was the more difficulty was presumed in replanting the resolution of Christianity in that heart which was presumed to have deserted it according to the measure of the sinne whereby it had violated the same This is enough to prescribe unto reasonable men against such little consequences as now and then are made upon some passages of the Fathers which upon by occasions seeme to speake otherwise S. Augustine is the maine hope of the cause so farre as it hath any joy in
repaired but by the second coming of the second Adam and those helps of grace which by his obedience in the flesh he purchased to inable us to imbrace and undertake the condition proposed and to proceed in the performance of it to that which God accepteth In fine I have showed that the Sacrament of Baptism is that visible act which legally determineth and limiteth that profession of Christianity which intitleth to the Kingdom of God as consigning the profession of a Christian unto the hands of the Church by the means whereof Christianity is conveyed to us Therefore having showed these things I have no reason to think my selfe obliged to unty these Cobwebs thred by thred which I can sweep away at once with this besome Onely I will stand here so long as to admire whether the boldnesse or ignorance of these new dogmatists of new Religions be the greater when I see the baptism of John counted among the Ceremonies of the old Law for a foundation of this new doctrine of Baptisms never heard of by any Christian till this blessed Reformation was on foot which must be said à fortiori of that Baptism by water which our Lord Christ instituted by them that esteem it not the same Is it possible that any man that believes Christianity to be the Religion now in force to salvation by Gods appointment in opposition to Judaism should imagine that John the Baptist sent to declare our Lord to be the Christ that was sent of God to introduce it to the voiding of Moses Law should set on foot that Baptism whereby he prepared his Disciples for Christ or brought them to Christ by virtue of that Law which he intended to void Is it not essentiall to all the observations of the old Law that they be thought to be figurative of Christ to come at least supposing Christianity Can that Baptism figure Christ to come the intent whereof supposed him to be already come pretending to prepare his Disciples to receive him that was come But whether we say the Baptism of Christ was the same with Johns Baptism or another to say the Apostles of Christ when they baptize with water intended to figure that the Messias was coming from whom they had their commission to Baptize would be no lesse then a spice of madnesse I will also stay so long for Socinus as to answer that suspition which he draws from the words of S. Paul 1 Cor. I. 13 -17 to his purpose Is Christ divided was Paul crucified for you or were ye baptized into the name of Paul I thank God that I baptized none of you but Criâ—pus and Gaius that no man say that I baptize in my oâ—n name yet I baptized also the house of Stephans further whither I baptized any I know not For Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospel If there were any thing in these words to intimate that the precept of baptizing is not of peâ—emptory and perpetuall necessity then must they signifie more then that it was not necessary that it should be done by S. Pauls own hands which is all they contain For he that would say that which was not necessary to be done by S. Paul was not necessary to be done would deserve to be laught at for his pains The question is then was any of them whom S. Paul baptized not left unbaptized or not If not how is it inferred that a man need not be baptized now because then they were not baptized by S. Paul If so how comes Socinus to grant that those who were first converted to Christianity were to be baptized And therefore before Socinus or any man go about to teach a new Religion it were fit for him to learn from the custome and practice of the Church that there is a difference between authority in ordering and ministery in executing And from the custome of the world that what a man does by his minister or officer that he does himselfe in Law though another do it in point of nature Which being supposed a little reason will serve to inferre that the Apostles being principal in the commission of the Gospell were to be imployed in the principall part of it that is in reducing men to Christianity And therefore so farre as that required their attendance inferiour offices which depended upon their order were to be left to the execution of their Ministers But to both these Heresies I say at once in the last place that they belie the very ground which they professe to be Christians The reason why the motives of faith cannot be doubted for truth is because all that are Christians have taken upon them their Christianity for a Law and entred into a communion and body of the Church to live and communicate in the faith and service of God according to certain Laws upon evidence that they come indeed from God Therefore that which all this body hath taken upon it to observe for Law from the beginning and constantly observed till Socinus his or the Antinomians time that belonged to the matter of Christianity as evidently as it is evident that the motives of Christianity recorded in the Scriptures are true which are therefore evidently true because it is evident that they have moved the world to receive Christianity which could not have been done had they been false For if all Christians could be deceived to believe that their Christianity requireth them to be Baptized if they will be saved why might they not be deceived to believe that those things were truly one which the Scripture alledgeth to evidence the Gospell to come from God when as indeed they were not Which is to say that who so pretends to void that which the whole Church observeth for a Law must not think that he can do it by showing that it is not commanded in the Scriptures until he can show that it is come into the Church not according to right having been from the beginning otherwise He must therefore first refuse all that I have said in the first Book to demonstrate that the Church alwaies was from the beginning one body governed by certain Laws originally proceeding from the Apostles by whom power was left it to determine and limite further all that the future estate thereof should require to be further determined for the maintaining of unity in the communion of the Church For granting this it will be impossible to show how so great a body should agree to receive that for a Law and that necessary to salvation as Baptism hath alwayes been esteemed which they received not for such at the beginning from our Lord and his Apostles CHAP. VII The ground of baptizing Infants Originall sinne though not instituted till Christ rose again No other cure for it Infants of Christians may be Disciples are holy The effect of Circumcision under the Law inferreth the effect of Baptism under the Gospel ANd these same are the reasons that I must have recourse to now that
we find no other motive for that severity but never see any of the Church except that they concern not that purpose but well and good that they serve not to prove it In like maner you have seen S. Paul witnesse the order then in the Church to mourn for those that were excluded the communion of the Church You have seen S. John and S. James after our Saviour signifie that the means of procuring remission of sin by the Church is to be expected from the prayers of the Church You may see on the other side the primitive Church make great demonstration of sorrow at the discovery of those sinnes for which some body is shut out of the Church or reduced to Penance As you may see by the authorities alledged in Grotius upon 1 Cor. V. 2. and by Epiphanius his Exposition of 2. Cor. XII 21. Haer. LIX especially by that eminent example of Natalis in Eusebius Eccles Hist V. 28. And in the solemn service of the Church before the celebration of the Eucharist from the beginning you have seen a Prayer appointed to be made for those that were under Penance as well as for those that were not baptized and those that were vexed with evill Spirits that so they might be dimissed before the Eucharist to which they were not to be admitted I say therefore they who see this if they will see what they do see have evidence what the Apostles instituted in the Church as also upon what ground and to what purpose by what the Church immediately after them did practice A third thing there is which visibly derives not onely these Ordinances but the true intent and meaning of them from the institution of the Apostles and that is the indulgence which S. Paul useth in abating the Penance of that incestuous person whom I spoke of at Corinth Indulgence in Ammianus signifies the discharging of taxes imposed upon the Provinces of the Romane Empire by an act of Grace of the Emperours upon remonstrance of reasons wherefore this or that Province might deserve to be eased What can be more like this then the abatement of that hardship whereby those that were prescribed Penance were to demonstrate their inward repentance to the Church S. Paul we see upon representation of the submission of the Church and the guilty person both to the censure which he had ordered and of the real demonstration of sorrow made on his part and the intercession of the Church for his reconcilement thus condescends To whom you grant any thing I also grant it For if I have granted any thing it is for your sakes that I have granted it to him whom I have granted it in the person of Christ that Satan may have no advantage over us For we are not ignorant of his devices 2 Cor. II. 10. 11. I showed you before two reasons which S. Paul may be thought to point at by these words For he acknowledgeth by the premises â—â—ery considerable demonstration of conversion in the penitent sufficient to argue that S. Paul thought him really qualified for remission of sinne But in regard he declares here that it is for the Churches sake that he condesceâ—â—eth to prevent the advantage that Satan might have against them he intimaâ—â—â— a jealousie of some mutiny in the Church against his authority in case he condescended not For though he grant absolution in this regard yet he may well say he granteth it in the person of Christ though we suppose the party not really qualified for it supposing that he doth it to preserve the Unity of the Church chiefly concerning the common good of Christs flock For what S. Paul does by virtue of the office committed to him by Christ that he may well say he doth in the person of Christ as tending to the upright discharge of his office By the former of these reasons we evidently see the intent and effect of the Keyes of the Church in purging of sinne by the discipline of Penance For if indulgence be granted in consideration of evidence that appears to ground a presumption that the party is qualified for remission of sins in the judgement of the Church then is all the discipline of Penance to no other purpose but to oblige sinners to take that course whereby they may appear to the Church qualified for remission of sinne But that which S. Paul here doth is the very same that the primitive Church alwaies did from the beginning For whoso showed such zeal in taking revenge upon himself for his transgressions that the Church might be satisfied that God remained satisfied of his repentance to him the severity of this discipline was so fully released that those strict Canons that injoyned so many years Penance for divers great sinnes may seem to have been but threatnings inviting to show that zeal in conversion from sinne that the Church might have cause to be satisfied of their inward repentance And as often as there was fear of schism in any Church the practice of the primitive Church witnesseth how ready they were to receive those that would return abating the hardship of Penance The reason being this that what the Church condescended to for the avoiding of a greater mischief to the body thereof which is Schism in that she could not be understood to warrant forgivenesse of sins to those whom she received further then that disposition of mind which the parties themselves know that they returned with might warrant it For in as much as it was evident that the Church waved the rule by which they used to proceed for unities sake it remained also evident that the charge of making good that disposition which qualifieth before God for the communion of the Church devolves upon the conscience of them that impose the necessity of waving such wholesome rules upon the Church whatsoever the form were in which they were reconciled Let us now see whether the primitive practice of the Church will justifie the voluntary confession of secret sinnes to the Church as the means to obtain the pardon of them at Gods hands Tertullian in his Book de Poenitentiâ is very earnest in perswading not those that were fallen into notorious sinnes for what need he perswade them to undergo Penance who if they would continue Christians that is if they would injoy the communion of the Church could not avoid it but as it appears by his words those that could not be constrained to have recourse to that Penance which the Church required for the purging of their sinnes or for assurance that they were purged For when he pronounceth that sins of the will which no man but the party is guilty to are to be purged by this Penance as he doth in the third and fourth Chapters of that Book shall we imagine that he undertakes of his own head to bring in a thing that was not wont to be done in the Church Then might he have been rejected as well as his Master Montanus when he went
Congregations I do indeed acknowledge that there is difficulty in expounding those texts of the Apostles which speak to this purpose so as to agree them with the Originall and universal practice of the Church And therefore it is no marvail if learned men that have handled this point among us where without affectation I may say that it hath been most curiously and ingenuously disputed have gone several wayes upon severall grounds in assigning the reason why the degree of Deacons is mentioned next to the degree of Bishops in so many texts of the Apostles having the order of Priests between both as the original and perpetual custome of the Church required For it is well enough known that there is an opinion published and maintained by many learned observations in the primitive antiquity of the Church that during the time when those texts of the Apostles were written there were but two Orders of Bishops and Deacons established in the Church though Bishops also are called Presbyters the name not being yet appropriated to the midle order while it was not introduced as afterwards it came to be And this opinion allegeth Epiphanius very fitly confuting Aerius the Heretick or Schismatick objecting the same that at the beginning the multitude of believers in less places being so small that one Governour together with some Ministers to attend upon him in executing his Orders might well serve them it is no marvail if there be no mention of any more Orders in so many texts of the Apostles And it may be said that as there were Churches founded and governed by a certain order from the beginning that we read of them in the Apostles so no Bishop Priest or Deacon was appropriated to any particular Church till after that time by degrees they came to be selled to certain Churches by Ecclesiastical Law and Custome So that during the time of the Apostles themselves and their companions whom they associated to themselves for their assistance were in common the Governours of Churches then founded according as they fell out to be present in these Churches to whom they had the most relation by planting and watering the faith planted in them either by virtue of the agreement taken by the Apostles within themselves or by the appointment of some of them if we speak of their companions and assistances But afterwards when the faith came to be setled then as those which had been Governours of Churches in common before became chief Governours of particular Churches to whom by lawful consent they became appropriated so were they provided of Priests and Deacons to assist and attend them in the execution of their office towards the body of Christians then mulplyed in severall Churches I do confess to have declared an opinion something differing from both of these sayings about the reason here demanded As not being perswaded either that the Order of Presbyters was not yet introduced into the Church during the Apostles time or that chief Governours were not appropriated and setled in some Churches during the same though I have no need to undertake that in all they were believing and maintaining that the Apostles themselves in the Churches of their own planting and watering were acknowledged chief Governours in ordering notwithstanding their extraordinary both Power not confined to any one Church and graces and abilities porportionable In which regard and under which limitation visible to the common sense of all men of their own and the next ages I do maintain Bishops to be their successors Whereupon it follows that I allow the name of Bishops in the Apostles writings to comprehend Priests also because of the mater of their function common to both though with a chief Power in the Bishop in Priests so limited as to do nothing that is to say nothing of consequence to his Power over the whole Church without his consent and allowance But this variety of opinion in expounding these Scriptures draweth after it no further consequence to prejudice the primitive Law of Goverment in the Church then this That there are more waies then one to answer the seeming probabilities pretending to make the evidence of Catholick Tradition unreconcileable with the truth of the Scriptures in the agreement whereof the demonstration of this truth consisteth I conceive therefore I might very well referre my self to the Readers free judgement to compare the reasons which I have produced with those that since have been used Notwithstanding I shall not think much briefly according to the model of this design to express the sense I have of the most native meaning of the most texts alleged in this businesse that I may have opportunity to point out again the peremptory exceptions which â—re visible in them either to the imagination of mungrill Prâ—sbyteries compounded of Clergy and People during the time of the Apostles or of the chief Power of any such Presbyteries in their resepective Churches CHAP. XVII The Power given the XII under the Title of Apostles and the LXX Disciples That the VII were Deacons Of the first Presbyters at Jerusalem and the Interest of the People Presbyters appropriated to Churches under the Apostles S. Pauls Deacons no Presbyters No ground for Lay Flders FIrst then as the name of Apostle in the Originall meaning is very general to signifie any commissary Proxy delegate or Ambassador so the use of it in the Apostles writings is larger then to be confined to the twelve For when S. Paul saith That our Lord appeared to the twelve afterwards to all the Apostles 1 Cor. XV. 5. 7. He must needs understand other Apostles besides the twelve perhaps the same that he meant where he reckoned Andronicus and Junias remarkable among the Apostles Rom. XVI 7. And that in another â—ense then Paul and Barnabas are called Apostles Act. XIV 4. 14. For the name of Apostle intimating whose Apostle he is that is called an Apostle we have no reason to count Paul and Barnabas any mans Apostles but our Lord Christs though they were first sent with the blessing of such Doctors and Prophets as the Church of Antiochia then had Acts XIII 1. 2 3. whose authority cannot in any reason be thought to extend so farre as to constitute an Apostle parâ—llel to the Twelve which S. Paul so oft so expresly challenges For since we see their commission is immediately from the Holy Ghost that is from God we are not to value their right by the solemnity which it is visibly conferred upon them with Unlesse you will say that by virtue of that Imposition of Hands they were messengers and Commissaries of that Church and that they then appeared to be no more then so though afterwards God set on them marks of the same authority with the Twelve Truly those whom S. Paul calls false Apostles transferring themselves into the Apostles of Christ 1 Cor. XI 13. must neâ—ds be understood to have pretended commission from our Lord Christ himself For hereupon they stood upon it that they had
which is the whole Church These being the particulars that concern this point in the writings of the Apostles I am not solicitous for an answer to the Puritanes objections finding in them no ingredient of any of their designs but onely a number of Presbyters of the same rank in one and the same Church no wayes inconsistent with the superiority of Bishops no ways induring the Power of the Keys in the hands of Lay Elders But if the writings of the Apostles express not that form of Government by Bishops Priests and Deacons which it is manifest that the whole Church ever since their time hath used First neither can it be said to agree any thing so near with any of their designs And all the difference is reasonably imputable to the difference between the State of the Church in making and made the qualities of Apostles and Evangelists not being to be propagated to posterity any more then their persons but the uniformity of succeeding times not being imputable to any thing but their appointment As for the reason why the titles of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are so promiscuously used as well in the records of the primitive Church as in the writings of the Apostles I admit that of Epiphanius that at the beginning a Bishop with his Deacons might serve some Churches I admit the ordaining of Bishops for inferiour Churches to be framed and in the Churches of mother Cities according to Clemens I admit the ordaining of Clergy to no particular Churches But I cannot reject that which I learned from an author no wayes inconsiderable the supposed S. Ambrose upon S. Pauls Epistles He not onely in the words quoted in the first Book upon 1 Cor. XI but upon Rom. XVI and 1 Cor. I. alleges that when S. Paul writ Governours were not setled in all Churches acknowledging that Presbyters were Can he then be thought to make Presbyters and the Governours of Churches all one But Amalarius de officiis Eccles II. 13. quoting things out of these his Commentaries which now appear not and out of him Rabanus upon 1 Tim. IV. 14. and Titus I. sayes that they who under the Apostles had power to ordain and are now called Bishops were then set over whole Provinces by the name of Apostles agreeing herein with Theodoret upon 1 Tim. III. IV. and S. Hierome upon Gal. I. and many others of the Fathers that extend the name of Apostles far beyond the XII as Timothy in Asia Titus in Creete The Churches of particular Cities having their own Presbyters to govern them but expecting ordinations and the setling of the more weighty causes from these their superiours These were the Presbyters that ordained Timothy 1 Tim. IV. 14. saith Rabanus who certainly being ordained to so high a charge could not be ordained by the Presbyters of any particular Church Now the successors of these Apostles or Presbyters finding themselves inferior to their Predecessors saith he and the same title a burthen to them appropriated themselves the name of Bishops which imports care leaving to Priests that which imports dignity to wit that of Presbyters This Amalarius allegeth out of the said Commentaries Adding that in process of time through the bounty of those who had the power of ordaining these Bishops were setled two or three in a Province untill at length not onely over all Cities but in places that needed not Bishops This being partly the importance of this Authors words partly that which Amalarius and Rabanus gather from his meaning gives a clear answer to all that S. Jerome hath objected out of the writings of the Apostles to prove that Bishops and Presbyters are by their institution both one because they are called both by the same title And therefore cannot with any judgement be alleged to his purpose In fine the same Author upon Ephes IV. affirmeth that for the propagation of Christianity all were permitted at the first to preach the Gospel to Baptize and to expound the Scriptures in the Church But when Churches were setled and Governours appointed then order was taken that no man should presume to execute that office to which he was not ordained By whom I beseech you but by the same who had formerly allowed and trusted all Christians with all offices which the propagation of the common Christianity required Even the Apostles and Disciples and their companions and assistants in whom that part of power rested which the Apostles had indowed them with until Bishops being setled over all Churches they might truly be said to succeed the Apostles in the Government of their respective Churches though no body can pretend to succeed them in that power over all Churches that belonged to their care which the agreements passed between the Apostles must needs allow each one Nor need I deny that which sometimes the Fathers affirm that even Presbyters succeed the Apostles For in the Churches of Barnabas and Sauls founding Act. XIV 28. while they had no Governours but Aposâ—les and Presbyters it is manifest that the Presbyters did whatsoever they were able to do as Lieutenants of the Apostles and in their stead But shall any man inâ—â—rre thereupon that they who say this allow Presbyters to do whatsoever the Apostles could do seeing them limited as I have said by the Authors which I allege For what if my Author say upon Ephes IV. that at the first the Elders of the Presbyters succeeded upon the Bishops decease Shall thâ— rule of succession make any difference in the power to which he succeeds Or both acknowledge the Laws which they that order both shall have appointed even the Apostles Let S. Hierome then and whosoever prefers S. Hieroms arguments before that evidence which the practice of the Church creates have leave to dispute out of the Scriptures the beginning of Bishops from the authority of the Church which neither S. Hierome nor any man else could ever have brought the whole Church to agree in had not the Apostles order gone afore for the ground of it provided that the love of his opinion carry him not from the unity of the Church as it did Aerius For he that saith that this ought to be a Law to the Church need not say that every Christian is bound upon his salvation to believe that it ought to be a Law to the Church so long as the succession of the Apostles is upon record in the Church in the persons of single Bishops by whom the Tradition of faith was preserved according to Irenaeus and Tertullian the unity of the Church according to Optaâ—us and S. Austine What wilfullnesse can serve to make all Presbyters equal in that power which all the acts whereby the unity of the Church hath been really maintained evidently challenge to the preheminence of their Bishops above them in their respective Churches The constitution of the whole Church out of all Churches as members of the whole will necessarily argue a pre-eminence of Power in the
Bishop above his Presbyters not to be derived from any agreement of the Church but from the appointment of the Apostles In the mean time suppoâ—â—ng the whole Church to agree in that which God had inabled them to agree in having not tied them to the contrary but having tied them to live in viâ—â—ble unity and communion all Churches with all Churches they that depart from this Unity upon this account shall bee no less Schismaâ—â—cks then had the Superiority of Bishops been setled by the Apostles This is that which I come to in the next place CHAP. XVIII The Apostles all of oequall power S. Peter onely chiefe in managing it The ground for the pre-â—minence of Churches before and over Churches Of Alexandria Antiochia Jerusalem and Rome Ground for the pre-eminence of the Church of Rome before all Churches The consequence of that Ground A summary of the evidence for it SOme consideration I must now bestow upon that Position which derives a Monarchy over the Church from S. Peters priviledges For I make no scruple to grant that he was indeed the first and chief of the Apostles as he is reckoned in the Gospels Mat. X. 2. Mar. III. 16. Luk. VI. 14. and that in likelihood because he was the first in leaving all to adhere unto our Lord as the man to whom our Lords call is directed Luk. V. 4-11 though he was first brought to our Lord by bis brother Andrew as Philip once brought Nathanael that was not of the twelve John I. 41-46 so that this first call gave them acquaintance but made them not Apostles And from this beginning we may well draw the reason why S. Peter is alwaies the forwardest to answer our Lords demands and to speak in the name of his fellows Mat. XIV 28. XV. 25. XVI 16. XVII 24. XVIII 21. XIX 27. XXVI 33. Mar. VIII 29. X. 28. XI 21. XIV 29. Luk. VIII 45. IX 20. XII 41. XVIII 28. XXII 34. Joh. VI. 68. XIII 6. Act. I. 13. 15. II. 14. 37. IV. 8. which it would not become the reverence we owe the Apostles so impute to S. Peters sorwardnesse without acknowledging the ground of it being visible But these priviledges will not serve to make S. Peter Soveraign over the Apostles The stress lies upon Mat. XVI 16-19 And Simon Peter answered and said Thou arâ— the Christ the Son of the living God And Jesus answered and said to him Blessed art thou Simon Son of Jonas for flesh and blood hath not revealed this to thee but my Father in the heavens And I say to thee that thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it And I will give thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever thou loosest on earth shall be loose in the heaven And upon John XXI 15. 16 17. where S. Peter thrice professing to love Christ receives of him thrice the command of Feeding his sheep But will this serve the turn ever a whit more It must be either by virtue of the mater which our Lord sayes of or to S. Peter or by virtue of his saying it to S. Peter and to none else Against this later consideration I conceive I have provided by the premises For seeing there is a sufficient reason to be given otherwise why S. Peter answers before the rest when our Lord demand whom they acknowledge him to be the reply of our Lord addressed to him alone will give him no more then the precedence not the Soveraignty over the Apostles Which is still more evident in S. John because S. Peter having undertaken before the rest to stand to our Lord in the utmost of all his trialls had deserted him most shamefully of them all denying udder an oath to have any knowledge of him For it is not observed for nothing that he professes the love of Christ thrice Let S. Peter then be the Prince Apostle or the chiefe Apostle let him be if you please the Prince of the Apostles there will be found a wide distance between Princeps Apostolorum in Latine as some of the Fathers have called him and Soveraign over the Apostles When Augustus seized into â—is hand the soveraign Power of the Romane Empire nomine Principis as we read the beginning of Tacitus under the title of Prince He was well aware that the Title which he assumed did not necessarily proclaim him Soveraign which he deâ—â—red not to do As for the â—aâ—er of our Lords words those that fear where there is no fear wil have our Lord say that he buildeth his Church upon the Faith of S. Peter profâ—ssing our Lord to be Christ Or to point at himselfe when he saith Upon this Rock will I build my Church But what needs it Saith he any more to S. Peter then S. Paul saith to the Ephesians II. 20. Built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himselfe being the chief corner stone Or S. John of the new Jerusalem Revel XXI 14. And the wall of the City had twelve foundations upon which were the names of the XII Apostles of the Lambe How then shall S. Peter be Soverâ—ign by virtue of an attribute common to him with the rest of the Apostles Some conceive that when our Lord proceeds to tell him that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church He meanâ— no more but that he will rescue his from death by raising them again But raising from death implies raising from sinne in the Old Testament expresses it in the New And the City of God which is the Church in the New Testament referrs to the City of Satan that oppugneth it And therefore The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Cannot signifie lesse then a promise that the Church shall continue till our Lords second coming to judgement notwithstanding the malice of Satan and his complices But S. Peter is not the onely foundation of it though no body else be named here Again our Lord gives S. Peter the Keyes of his Church here as in S. John he commands him to feed his flock But is the office of feeding Christs flock S. Peters peculiar Have not the Apostles the charge of it even from our Lord do they do it by virtue of S. Peters commission or by his appointment How are they Christs Apostles otherwise As for the Keyes of the Church they are given to S. Peter here they are given to the Twelve by the power of remitting and retaining sinnes as I have shewed John XX. 21. 22 23. by the power of binding and loosing they are given to the Church Mat. XVIII 18. And can any man make S. Peter Soveraign over the Apostles and over the Church by virtue of that which is no priviledge of his the rest of the Apostles and the Church being all indowed with it Hear we not what S. Luke saith Act. VIII 14. The Apostles
at Jerusalem hearing that Samaria had received the word of God sent to them Peter and John Can S. Peter go upon commission from the Apostles who gives the Apostles the commission they have Those that preached circumcision at Antiochia had no commission for it from the Church at Jerusalem Act. XV. 24. It must have been from S. Peter if that Church had acted then by virtue of his Commission But he was present and is signified as one of them that writ these words Let any man stand upon it that will that the false Apostles whom S Paul writes against 2 Cor. XI 13. pretended commission from S. Peter because of the opposition which they made between him on the one side and S Paul and Apollos on the other side 2 Cor. I. 12. Though I showed you beter reason afore that they pretended that commission from the Apostles which they disowned Acts XV. 24. It is easie for me to say that they pretended not S. Peters name as Soveraign over the Apostles but as founder of the Church of Corinth as well as S. Paul which Dionysius of Corinth in Eusebius witnesseth Whereas when S. Paul pleads his Commission of Apostle from God and not from man Gal. I. 1. II. 6 9. and that in express opposition to S. James and S. John as well as to S. Peter it is manifest that they as well as S. Peter might have pretended to give it had he not been an Apostle but being an Apostle none but our Lord Christ And therefore when he resists S. Peter and reproves him to the face Gal. II. 11-14 understand this resistance and reproof as you please whither true or colourable had S. Peter been Monarch it had not been for an Apostle to colour his proceeding with a pretense inferring rebellion against his Soveraign Wherefore there may be lesand greater Apostles foâ— personâ—ble qualiâ—ies And S. Paul that is the least of them for his calling may be inferiour to none for his labours 1 Cor. XV. 9. 10. 2 Cor. XI 5. XII 11. 12. Nay S. Peter may have a standing pre-eminence of Head of the Bench to avoid confusion and to create order in their proceedings and yet their commission be immediate from our Lord and the mater of it and the power it creates the same for substance Having thus destroyed this ground upon which some people claim a Monarchy over the Church for the Pope by the scriptures without seeking for other exceptions to the pretense that may be made to the same purpose from the Tradition of the Catholick Church I proceed to setle the ground of that eminence and superiority which I conceive some Churches have over others for the unity of the whole Church Because of necessity the reason and ground upon which it stands must be the measure of it how farre it extends And the positive truth thereof will be negatively an exception to that Soveraignty which the Bishop of Rome by the succession of S. Peter pretendeth I say then that the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord Christ intending to convert the World to the Faith and to establish one Church of all that should be converted to it did agree and appoint that the Churches of the chiefe Cities should be the chief Churches and that the Churches of inferiour Cities should depend upon them and have recourse to them in all things that might concern the common Christianity whither in the Rule of Faith or in the Unity of the Church in the offices of Gods service reserving unto themselves the ordering of those things which being of lesse moment might concern their own peace and good order rather then the interesse of other Churches I do not pretend to produce any act under the Apostles hands in which this conclusion is signed but to proceed upon the principles premised to argue and to inferre that those things which I shall evidently show have passed in the Church could not otherwise have come to pass unlesse we could suppose that a constant order which hath wholly taken place in the Church ever since the Apostles could have prevailed over those infinite wayes which confusion might have imagined had there been no ground from whence this certain order should rise And here I do profess that if any man will needs be contentious and say that this order came not in by the appointment of the Apostles themselves because during their time the probability of converting the Romane Empire and other Nations to Christianity could not appear and that it doth not appear by any circumstance of Scripture that the Spirit of Prophesy was given them to such purposes I will rather grant all this then contend about those terms which I need not insist upon though I do firmly believe that before all the Apostles left the World the conversion of the Gentiles was their design and the design of their successors But I will provide on the other side that whither the Apostles themselves or their companions and successors in whom the power of governing the whole Church was as fully to all purposes as in the Apostles themselves for though they might be assisted by the Gift of Prophesy in those occasions as it is probable they were at the Council of Jerusalem Acts XV. yet must their authority proceed whether so assisted or not the obligation upon the Church must needs remain the same to cherish and maintain that Order which once might have been established by them the Unity of the Church which is the end of it not being otherwise attainable And upon this ground I maintain that the Churches of Rome Alexandria and Antiochia had from the beginning a priviledge of eminence above other Churches For Rome being the seat of the Empire Alexandria and Antiochia which had formerly been the Seates of the Successors of Ptolomee in Aegypt and Seleucus in Asia having from their first coming under the Romane Empire had their peâ—uliar Governours it is no marvail if the Churches founded in them held their peculiar priviledges and eminences over the Churches of their resorts from the very founding of Christianity in these mother Cities and the propagating of it from thence into inferiour Cities and thence over the confines And this is the onely reason that can be rendred why the Church of Jerusalem which in respect of the first abode of the Apostles and the propagation of Christianity is justly counted the mother of all Churches and which gave law to that of Antiochia and the rest that were concerned in the same dispute with it and during the Apostles time received oblations of maintenance from the Churches of the Gentiles became afterwards inferiour to these and in particular to that of Antiochia But he that shall compare these Cities and the greatnesse of them and eminence over their respective Territories with that of Rome not onely over the rest of the Empire but over those Cities with find it consequent to the ground of this design not that the Church of Rome should be
Soveraign over the Churches of these Cities For that were inconsequent to the power of the Apostles whence it proceedeth who as I have proved were equall among themselves and the authority of their companions and successors into whom it stood immediately divided But that it should have that eminence ovâ—r them and by consequence much more over the Churches of inferiour Cities as is requisite to the directing of such maters as might come to be of common interesse to the whole Church to such an agreement as might preserve the unity thereof with advantage to the common Christianity Now when I name these Churches of Antiochia and Alexandria for examples sake supposing that the Churches of the chief Cities of other Provinces of the Empire had also their eminence over the Churches of inferiour Cities within the said Provinces I suppose also that they accordingly approached to the dignity and priviledges of that at Rome the power of obliging the whole which for the State under God rested then in the Emperour alone within the Empire rosting for the Church in the successors of the Apostles according to this weight and greatnesse of their Churches For though Tertulliane de praescrip Haerct cap. XXXVI challengeth that the very Chairs which the Apostles sate in the very authentick leters which they sent to the Churches of Corinth Thessalonica Philippi and Ephesus were extant in his time in the said Churches yet doth it not therefore follow that the priviledges of those Churches should be all the same with all Churches wherein the Apostles sate which would necessarily follow if nothing were to come into consideration but that they were founded by the Apostles themselves For supposing that the Apostles themselves or their companions and successors indowed with the same Power as not confined by any act of the Apostles under whom they claimed to the contrary appointed that regard should be had to the priviledge of the Cities wherein they were planted it follows of reason that S. Peter for the Jews and S. Paul for the Gentiles at least principally should make it their businesse to plant Chistianity and to found the Church of Rome And that the eminence of these Apostles one chief by our Lords choice the other eminent for his labours may very well be alleged for the priviledges of that Church and yet the consequence not hold in other Churches for which it may be alleged that they were the seats of Apostles because the reason for which these Apostles bestowed their pains there hath a reason for it to wit the eminence of that City Here you easily see that deriving the pre-eminence of the Church of Rome not from S. Peters personall pre-eminence onely which it would be impossible to show how it comes intailed upon that Church the pre-eminence of the Apostles not resting in all their Churches but from an Order given out by the Apostles advancing the priviledges of Churches according the secular eminence of Cities I say you easily see that the concurrence of S. Paul with S. Peter to the founding of it is a confirmation of that ground whereupon the preeminence thereof standeth whereas that opinion which derives it onely from the personal eminence of S. Peter admits not the concurrence of S. Paul to the constitution of this pre-eminence Wheresoever therefore you find S. Peter and S. Paul acknowledged joynt founders thereof in the writings of the Fathers all that must be understood to setle the opinion which I here advance and to destroy that plea which derives it from the Soveraign power of S. Peter over the rest of the Apostles And Epiphanius is not the onely author where you find it the disputes of these times will afford you more then this abridgement can receive But I conceive I have made a fair way to the ground for it by observing some probabilities that S. Paul should be head of those that turned Christians of Jews as S. Peter of Gentiles at Rome Which I will here confirm by expounding the inscription of Ignatius his Epistle to the Romanes according to it othâ—rwise not to be understood It addresseth to the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which governeth in the place of the fields at Rome The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here used as many times besides speaking of those places which a man would neither call Cities nor Towns as Act. XXVII 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being to sail by the places of Asia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is plain signifies the Country 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then must necessarily signifie here the Vaticane lying in the fields as a suburbe to Rome and being the place where S. Peter was buried and where the Jews of Rome then dwelt as we learn by Philo Legatione ad Caium speaking of Augustus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He knew that great quarter of Rome which is beyond the River Tiber to be held and inhabitated by Jews most of whom were Romanes and Libertines For being brought captives into Italy they were set free by their Masters without constraining them to adulterate any of their Countrie Laws Hereupon the Synagogue of the Libertines Act. VI. 9. is the Synagogue of the Romane Jews Now S. Peters Church we know is to this day in the Vaticane as S. Pauls in the way to Ostia as from the beginning we understand by Caius in Eusebius Hist Eccles II. 25. the places of their burials were Which circumstance points them out Heads the one of the Jewish Christians at Rome the other of those that were converted being Gentiles For that the Vaticane was then the Jewry at Rome we learn also by Tully in his Oration pro Flacco where he complains that his cause was heard in the fields of M ars prope gradus Aurelios that the Jews who were offended at Flaccus for prohibiting them to send their oblations to Jerusalem when he was Governour of Asia might come in and discountenance the cause For plainly this was hard by the Bridge that passed out of those fields into the Vaticane where the Gate called Porta Aurelia stood hard by S. Peters Church to which Gate it seems there were steps to go up which he calleth there gradus Aurelios It is also easie to see that this supposition draweth the ground and reason of the Superiority of Churches originally from the act of Temporall Power which constituteth the eminence of Cities over other Cities But neverthelesse immediately from the act of the Church or of those that have authority to oblige the Church taking the Superiority of Cities as it is for the most reasonable ground of planting in them the most eminent Churches but by their own authority providing that so it be observed Therefore it is to be considered that the Church is by Gods command howsoever by his promise to continue one and the same till the coming of our Lord unto judgement But the dominion of this World upon which the greatnesse of Cities is founded changes as Gods providence appoints Besides that
in the visible communion of the same offices of Christianity if it be free for the parts of iâ— to withdraw themselves from the Lawes which have been received by the whole to limit the circumstances of their communion though not the conditions of it I have but one point more to mention before I leave this subject concerning what offices every degree is by Gods Law or by Canon Law able to minister in the Church necessary here to be mentioned where I have showed what persons are inabled to give Law to the Church and to do by consequence those acts wherein the execution of Law consisteth For by the premises the truth of that which I have proposed in the Right of the Church more clearly appears then it could appear there that the offices of Christianity which severall degrees are inabled to minister do argue the interest of those respective degrees in the Government of the Church Ordinations therefore wholly reserved to the Bishop as not to be made without his consent Saving such Ordinations of inferiour Ministers as not much concerning the state of his Church he may by way of delegation referre to his Presbyters or rurall Bishops Excommunications likewise as concerning the beeing of every Christian as a member of the Church As for the assistance concurrence and consent of the Presbyters of each Cathedrall Church in and to the Ordination of Presbyters and Deacons I referre my selfe to that which I have said elsewhere Seeing it were a thing ridiculous to require that all the Presbyters of each Diocese should concurre to all such Ordinances As for the ordaining of Bishops the rule is plain that being a part of the Provincial Synode no meere Bishop is to be ordained without the consent of the Synode the Bishop of the Mother City alwayes concurring Though all reason requiring that he who is to govern be taken out of the bosome of those whom he is to govern there is a right and priviledge of nomination due to the Clergy and of approbation or suffrage to the people of the Church For it is a thing most certain that the interest of the People in the Elections of Bishops in the ancient Church which is still more clear in the Election of Presbyters was grounded onely upon the knowledge which they must needs have of persons proposed either to approve them which was called their suffrage or otherwise Not that they had any right to go before their leaders the Clergy in nomination or to oblige the consent of the Synode of the Province Though it is true that many times they did prevent both and prevail and might without inconvenience so do when the eminence of some person was so discernable that their grosser judgements could noâ— mistake in the choice though transgressing their rank in demanding even the worthiest before their turn came The same rule holds in the ordaining of superiour Bishops seeing they have all their Church their People their Clergy and their Synode The difference that S. Austine Breviculo Collationis III. diei observes in the consecrating of the Pope that it is done by â—he Bishop of Ostia not by any Metropolitane is an exception to a rule So was Dionysâ—us ordained in the year CCLIX if we beliâ—ve the acts of S. Laurence And therefore that Pelagius I. was ordained by two Bishops and a Priest of Ostia as his life in Anastasius relateth by the strictness of the Nicâ—ne Canon voids it For how can he have caried the greater part of the Bishops The condescension of the Apostles Canon and consent ex postfacto might make it good and valid by the same reason as afore The state of particular Christians is not of such consequence to the Châ—rch that it should be regularly the businesse of a Synod though for the assistance concurâ—ence and consent of the Clergy of each Church I referre my self to that which I have said elsewhere â—nd which would be too particular to be debated in this abridgement As for the mater of Penance in things that come not to the knowledge of the Church I have no cause to repent me of thâ—t which I have said in the Right of the Church where I have showed that Pâ—nance and Absolution in the inward Court of the Conscience extends as farre as the Communion of the â—ucharist from which Penance excludes and to which Absolution restores That all Priests and none but Pâ—iests receive by their Ordination power of celebrating the Eucharist that is to say of consecrating and communicating the same and that it cannot be done by any other without very great Sacrilege And that for an argument of the Power of the Keys in the hand of every Priest though limitable by the rule and custome of the Church to the inward Court of the conscience That the offices of Preaching and Baptizing â—re regularly communicable to Deacons but in case of necessity even to thoâ—e of the people alwaies by delegation from their Superiors the Bishops In sign whereof neither was it the cusâ—ome that any man should consecrate the Eucharist Preach or Baptize in the Bishops prâ—sâ—nce but himself or by his appointment As for the reading of the Scriptures and the sâ—nging of Psalms in the Church it is so well known to have been the Deacons office in the ancient Church that there were severall ranks of Deacons appointed for those sâ—vâ—ral works Lectores Psâ—lâ—ae which now like those in the Church of Rome help to make the inferiour Orders the rule of the Church being grounded upon undeniable wisdome and the authority of S. Paul forbidding novâ—ces to be promoted that exercise in the inferiour offices of the Clergy might be a condition requisiâ— to advance unto superiour degrees in the Clergy Now for thâ— celebrating and blessing of Mariage by Priests only I must go no further at present because having showed that it is to be allowed by the Church I have not yet showed that it is to be solemnized by the blessing of the Church CHAP. XXI Of the times of God service By what Title of his Law the first day of the week is kept Holy How the Sabbath is to be sanctified by Moses Law The fourth Commandment the ground upon which the Apostles inacted it Vpon what ground the Church limiteth the times of Gods service Of Easter and the Lent Fast afore it Of the difference of meats and measure of Fasting Of the keeping o four Lords Birthday and other Festivals and the regular hours of the day for Gods service HAving thus showed first what are the Powers of the Church and then in whose hands they rest and having said before that the determining and limiting of all circumstances for the exercise of those offices of Gods service for the Communion whereof the Church stands and also of thoâ—e qualities which render men capable to communicate in that same is totally reserved to the Church so farr as Gods Law hath not prevented the determination of it We are now to consider the
if the fourth Commandment be in force they cannot be obliged to keep the Lords day Is it not an even wager that not doubting the fourth Commandment to be in force as they are told they shall keep the Saturday which if it be in force they ought to keep rather then the Lords day which finding no reason for it because they are told none they will presently imagine to be a Popish custome I know there is one argument which is very plausible to induce well meaning Christians into that zeal which we see they have for the strict keeping of the Lords day which they call the Sabbath Because this opinion will oblige the world to exercise more works of godlinesse and to abstain from more of those debauches which Festivals occasion in vulgar people then otherwse To which for the present I will say onely this That having showed the truth to be as it is I can oblige all Christians to believe that Gods glory and the advancement of his service cannot be grounded well but upon the truth And therefore I may well demand their patience till I come by and by to show the ground of the mistake which they are carried away with to think that Gods glory and service is not more plentifully provided for by the Laws and customes of the Catholick Church then by strict keeping the Sabbath upon a false ground which hindring the effect of those Laws by consequence hinders Gods service But now all this being setled what is there remaining to alledge why Christians should be bound to keep the Lords day but the act of the Apostles by virtue whereof it came into force among all Christians in all Churches For it would be too ridiculous to allege that it is grounded upon those Scriptures whereby it appeareth that it was kept under the Apostles either as a reason sufficient or as distinct from the authority of the Apostles For these Scriptures being the Scriptures of the Apostles we can derive no authority from them but that which we first suppose in the Apostles I suppose here that no man will say that our Lords appearing to his Disciples after his resurrection upon that day was enough to make it a Law or evidence that it was so made unlesse his Apostles could testifie that he appeared to that purpose As for the rest if it may by circumstance appear that under the Apostles they did assemble to the service of God upon the Lords day will it therefore follow that all Chistians are bound to do the same Or can any more then this appear by that which I alledged out of the Apostles writings If there could the writings of the Apostles being their act as much as any act whereby they could declare an intent to oblige the Church there will be nothing to bind it to keep the Lords day but the authority of the Apostles But he that will give his own common reason leave to speak shall hear it say that it is not their words that oblige us to it but the originall and universall custome of the Church evidencing that they used to celebrate that day with an intent to introduce the obligation of it into the Church For of this original and universal custome having as yet found no question made on any side I hold it superfluous to take pains to make evidence of that which no man questions When Justine the Martyr presenting to the Empire an Apology for all Christans declareth that their custome was to assemble on the Lords day to serve God with the offices of Christianity which there he describeth had it not been to abuse himself and the Empire to declare that for the custome of all Christians which was indeed the custom of some but of others not Whither Easter was to be kept upon the fifteenth day of the first Moon upon which our Lord suffered or upon the next Lords day upon which he rose again was a dispute in the Church as ancient as the Apostles The former custome having been delivered to the Churches of Asia by S. John the later to the West by S. Peter and S. Paul But what ground could there be for this dispute had not the first day of the week been honoured and observed above the rest in regard of our Lords rising again Certainly the Eâ—ionites were one of the ancientest sects thar rose up against the Church and they as Eusebius Eccles Hist III. 27. keeping the Sabbath as the Jews and because the Jews kept it observing also the Lords day because the Christians kept it It is true that among the Eastern Christians the Saturday was observed for the service of God many ages after condescension to the Jews in regard whereof the observation of Moses law was in use after Christ in some parts of the Church more in some lesse was quite out of date But that is no argument that the Lords day was not kept when the Sabbath was kept to them who see S. Paul keep the Lords day Act. XX. 7. within the time of compliance with the Jewes For the offices which God is served with by the Church are pleasing to him at all times as well as in all places whereas the keeping of the Sabbath upon any day but a Saturday would have been a breach of his Law For when the other Festivals of the Jews are called Sabbaths in the Law that is not to say that the Sabbath was kept upon them for I have showed you two severall measures of rest due upon them by the Law but that they participated much of the nature of the Sabbath and therefore may be called with an addition such or such Sabbaths but not absolutely the Sabbath Therefore when Christians afterwards continued the custome of serving God upon the Sabbath that is the Saturday it is to be understood that they served God with the offices of Christianity not with the rest of the Jews Sabbath If it be further demanded whither the obligation of the Lords day do not depend upon the precepâ— of the Sabbath so that it may be called with an addition the Sabbath of Christians though not absolutely the Sabbath because that nâ—me is possessed already by the Saturday in the language of all Christians as well as Jews till men affected an abuse in the name to bring their mistake into mens minds To this I answer that if the Lords day had no dependance upon the precept of the Sabbath we could not give a reason why one day of seven is observed For the choice of the number could not come by chance And I cautioned afore that the Resurrection of Christ was as sufficient a reason why the Church should serve God on the Sunday as the creation of the world was why the Synagogue should serve God on the Saturday But this dependance was not immediate because I showed also that this was not enough to introduce the obligation upon us The act of the Apostles intervening was the means to make the obligation necessary
presumption that they are so as God hath provided they should be they are not to be accepted for Gods word though they who preach them would make men believe it And this is now the condition of the people of England It is well enough knowne indeed that the Presbyterians have propounded a new forme of doctrine according to which had it been received there would have been reasonable persumption for plaine Christians that their sermons must needs procede But it is as well known that it is excepted against in every part of it by those who joined with them against the Church of England as he that wil take the paines to compare that which I write here with it may know what it is that I except against in every point of it How they satisfie their people to pay them for preaching upon a supposition which they know is contested on both these hands as well as by the Church of Rome let them see to it whom I have thus warned As for those that are not Presbyterians it is plaine that the people have no other ground to presume that they preach the word of God but onely that they maintain the Bible to containe Gods word and that they are taken by those that send them for godly persons The one whereof is common to all Hereticks The other requires a ground whereupon those that send them may be taken for godly persons themselves and then how they come to be satisfied of those whom they send Both liable to more peremtory difficulties then their life time will serve to void Whereupon I inferr that there is no ground to presume that it is Gods word that is preached where the authority of the Church interposeth not And therefore it is lamentable to see how this miserable people are intoxicated with the conceite that they want not the word of God nor the meanes of salvation so long as they can goe and heare a man preach in a Pulpit without consideration what he professeth to teach for Christianity One thing I desire here may be considered It hath been not onely commonly said â—ut maintained by the writings of sober and knowing persons that very many Jesuites have been are still imployed in preaching the extravagant positions of this time on purpose to gaine oportunity and meanes to infuse into mens minds what they find effectuall to make them their Proselytes I confesse it is none of my sense For I conceive I show the principle upon which all these extravagances have a naturall and reasonable dependence But I demand where is the provision for simple soules when wise men are not satisfied that Jesuits are not admitted to preach It is to be considered that preaching is necessarily an office that requires a facility in speaking which all the world knowes goes not alwaies along with a right understanding Where there is both good understanding and a faculty of speaking it is manifest if there be not a good intention they are both as a sword in a madmans hand instruments to doe mischeife with I will silence the mention of all that we have seen The warres of the league in France the troubles of the united Provinces in the businesse of Arminius who can deny that the Pulpit inflamed both Whatsoever the Apostle S. James in the third Chapter of his Epistle hath ascribed to the tongue for good or for bad belongs to it in the Pulpit as elsewhere And therefore it is in it selfe an institution of doubtfull effect to set men up to show their eloquence in the Pulpit though under pretense of making our common Christianity recommendable by the meanes of it And that supposing them to admit the sense of the Church for the bounds of that which they are to deliver for the sense of the Scripture But supposing no bounds utterly pernicious For seeing no caution can exclude controversies from rising neither is there any such mischiefe as division to the Church nor any such meanes as Preachers tongues to inflame it And will any common sense allow that all audiences of Christians can be provided of men of understanding and eloquence rightly informed of the whole interest of Christianity If any such thing could be supposed it would not be for the best The satisfaction indeed of the more civile audiences requires no lesse For to appoint men to goe to Church to heare a sermon by heareing whereof a man neither learnes that which he knew noâ— afore or can be moved by otherwise expressing that which he knew afore to delight in it more then he did afore what is it but that which the Sons of Eli did to make the offering of God stink in the nostrills of the people For the time of seduction and errour they may have such a stroke with their people as to perswade them that the lothing of bad sermons is a fruite of the corruption of our nature which opposes Gods truth But whom God gives Grace to consider what I pretend to be Gods truth they finding that to be true which I shall say by and by must find the name of God to be onely the pretense of faction and interest In the meane time the satisfaction of the more civile andiences will not stand with the edification of the maine body of Christians The condition of the world changeth not by mens being Christians There are idiots and there are civile men and men of learning among Christians as well as Divines and a waies will be That which satisfies the lesser part will not edifie the greater part And that is it the Church ought to aime at Better the more refined should want their curiosities then the whole body their necessaries The plaine sort of Christians who for number how much they exceede the rest I refer my self to common sense for weight their souls being as precious to God as the souls of Princes cannot edifie by that which satisfies the more learned They understand no deduction of reason no figures of language Tell them the grounds of Christianity they are convicted Tell them what these grounds oblige them to doe for the end which they evidence they are convicted Tell them that for the interest of our common Christianity they are to come to Church to heare the same said againe in more eloquent termes or more curious conceits they have no reason to be convicted of it they have reason to suspect that there is some interest besides the common interest of Christianity in it Tell them that which remaines that they are to come to Church for the grounding for the inlarging of their Christianity by the understanding of the scriptures Supposing that that they know what is necessary to save all Christians by the Church and by being made Christians by the Church well and good If they think not that they are to give eare to whatsoever instruction may advance them in the knowledg of our common Christianity I think them not good Christians This for the whole Bible And
of Christendome AND now I may make good that which might seem an excessive word when I said it that the Power which I demand for the Church is no more then the subsistence of every Corporation constituted by Soveraine Power requireth Onely that it stands by Gods Law these by mans For what Corporation subsisteth without publick persons to governe or to execute those things wherein it communicateth without any power to limit that which the Lawes of the foundation determine not to admit and to shut out whom the foundation thereof qualifieth without a stock to defray the charge of those offices for communion wherein it subsisteth That which renders the power of the Church considerable even in the Church that is by the originall constitution of it is the extent thereof comprising all Christians For by that meanes in what quality a man is owned by his own Church in the same he is owned by all Christians supposing the unity of the Church to take place and prevaile That which renders it considerable in the world is the professing of Christianity by the Soveraine Powers of the World that is of those States which Christendome containeth For supposing that which hath been made to appear that the Church being a Society formed by the act whereby God constituteth it dissolveth not into the state when by professing Christianity it becoms obliged to protect the Church The rights and Powers thereof and the qualities of persons ministring the same necessarily remaine distinct from those which the State wherein it subsisteth either involveth or produceth And the Protection of the state signifieth further that allowance or that maintenance of the rights that concurre to the acts thereof which a Christian State needs must afford that Christianity which it professeth The Power of ministering the immediate instruments of Grace the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Eucharist The power of the Keyes in exacting that profession which qualifieth for them the meanes subordinate to the ministring of them The power of solemnizing those Offices with the Prayers of the Church which the Promise of Grace implied in the foundation of the Church attendeth all these make the act of the Church meerly ministeriall the blessing that attendeth the meer effect of Gods grace onely limited to the communion of his Church When the Church determineth the times the places the persons the occasions the formes the circumstances the maner of celebrating any of those offices which qualify for Communion in the service of God with the Church of those which provide for the celebration thereof of those wherein it consisteth the acts whereby it determineth that which God hath not determined done within the Sphere of Gods Law oblige all to conformity by Gods Law as the acts of Corporations oblige the members by the act of the State upon which they stand Not as if this conformity were the worship of God but that wich prepareth and maketh way for it The Lawes of the Apostles though recorded in Scripture are necessarily by the subject matter of them of this nature Therefore I maintaine them subject to change upon the same account as the Lawes of all visible Corporations are necessarily subject to change He that should think the observing of them pleasing to God for the thing which they injoyne and determine not for that act of Gods service the circumstance whereof they limit might commit superstition in observing the Lawes given by the Apostles as well as by the Church There may be ground for a presumption in reason that there is superstition in doing that which for the nature and kind of it may lawfully be done when there is so much businesse about the circumstance that there is no appearance to reason how it can stand and be done in order to the principall which it pretendeth For example Pilgrimage to the holy Land hath in it a pretense of extraordinary devotion to which a man sequestreth his time from his attendance upon this world and the advantages of it But if in effect the exercise of devotion appear not the principall is there not ground in reason for a construction that a man hopes to bribe God with his bodily exercise to grant those effects of Grace which he cannot be obliged to but by the condition which the Gospel importeth This is superstition and will-worship in the badde sense or the vaine worship of God by doctrines delivered by men which our Lord and the Prophet Esay charge the Jewes with When a man stands upon the circumstances tending to limit the order and uniformity of that worship of God in Spirit and Truth wherein Christianity consisteth as if the observation of them were the substance of it And yet that uniformity which the Lawes of the Church procure so necessary to the maintenance of Gods service for which it standeth that there is no lesse superstition in standing upon the not doing of them Which cannot be stood upon so farre beyond the sphere of their kind and nature without appearance of an imagination that a man becomes acceptable to God by refusing them But to proceed to violate the unity of the Church upon such a cause is nothing else then to place the worship of God as much in committing sacriledge as in abhorring of Idols This being the utmost of what the Church is able to do by the originall constitution thereof it will not be prejudiciall to that service of God which Christianity injoyneth that the acts thereof should take hold upon the conscience Because it is easily understood by that interruption of Gods service which the disorders of this time have made visible how every Christian is bound in conscience to concurre to that uniformity which as it procureth the service of God so is procured by the Lawes of the Church But this effect is invisible between God and the conscieuce The visible effect of the originall power of the Church is considerable in regard of the greatnesse of that Body which is the whole Church and ownes the act of every Church done within the within the true sphere by giving effect to it But it becomes considerable to the world by that accessory force which the protection of the Church by the power of the World necessarily insuing upon the profession of Christianity so long as the acknowledgement of one Catholick Church is a part of it addeth to the acts of the Church by owning them for the acts of a Corporation which the State protecteth Before I come to limit this effect I must acknowledge one part of the Church-right to have ceased and become voide by the coming of the world into the Church and the conversion of the Romane Empire to the Faith That is the power of ending all sutes between Christians within the Church Saint Paul is expresse in it And the generality of our Saviours command to resort to the Church if thy brother offend thee can never be satisfied with any other sense The Synagogue had the same order upon the
you say something more to limit the ground upon which they may be no lesse What limitation I would adde is plain by the premises The preaching of that Word and that ministring of the Sacraments which the Tradition of the whole Church confineth the sense of the Scriptures to intend is the onely mark of the Church that can be visible For I suppose preaching twice a Sunday is not if a man be left free to preach what he will onely professing to beleeve the Bible which what Heresy disowneth and to make what he thinks good of it And yet how is the generality of people provided for otherwise unlesse it be because they have preachers that are counted godly men by those whom what warrants to be godly men themselves In the mean time is it not evident that Preachers and people are overspread with a damnable heresy of Antinomians and Enthusiasts formerly when Puritanes were not divided from the Church of England called Etonists and Grindeltons according to severall Countries These believe so to be saved by the free Grace of God by which our Lord died for the Elect that by the revelation thereof which is justifying Faith all their sinnes past present and to come are remitted So that to repent of sinne or to contend against it is the renouncing of Gods free Grace and saving Faith How much might be alledged to show how all is now overspread with it The Book called Animadversions upon a Petition out of Wales shall serve to speak the sense of them who call themselves the godly party as speaking to them in Body Thus it speaks pag. 36. Look through your vail of duties profession and ordinances and try your heart with what spirit of love obedience and truth you are in your work And whether will you stand to this judgement Or rather that God should judge you according to grace to the name and nature of Christ written upon you and in you Sure the great Judge will thus judge us at last by his great judgement or last judgement Not by the outward conversation nor inward intention but finally by his eternall Election according to the Book of Life This just afore he calleth the seed of Christ and his righteousnesse in a Christian And pag. 38. When we are inraged we let fly at mens principles being not satisfied to rebuke mens actions opinions and workes but would be avenged of their Principles too As if we would kill them at the very hart pull them up by the Rootes and leave them in an uncurable condition rotten in their Principles But Principles ly deeper then the heart and are indeed Christ who is the Principle and beginning of all things who though heart fail and flesh faile yet he abides the root of all Shall he pretend to be a Christian that professes this Shall any pretend to be a Church that spue it not out Let heaven and earth judge whether poor soules are otherwise to be secured of the Word then by two sermons a Sunday when the sense of the Godly is claimed to consist in a position so peremptorily destructive to salvation as this It will be said perhaps that now the Ministers of the Congregations have subscribed the confession of the Assembly But alas the covering is too short When a Bishop in the Catholick Church subscribed a Councile there was just presumption that no man under his authority could be seduced from the Faith subscribed Because no man communicated with the Catholick Church but by communicating with him that had subscribed it Who shall warrant that the godly who have this sense not liable to any authority in the Church shall stand to the subscriptions of those Ministers or to the authority of the Assembly pretended by the Presbyteries If they would declare themselves tied so to do who shall warrant that there is not a salvo for it in the Confession which they subscribe If there were not why should any difficulty be made to spue out that position which is the seed of it That justifying Faith consisteth in believing that a man is of the number of the Elect for whom Christ died excluding others Why that which is the fruit of it That they who transgresse the Covenant of Baptisme come not under the state of sin and damnation come not from under the state of Grace Why but because a back-door must be left for them that draw the true conclusion from their own premises reserving themselves the liberty to deny the conclusion admitting the premises It is not then a confession of faith that will make the Word that is preached a mark of the Church without some mark visible to common sense warranting that confession of Faith As for the Sacraments no Church no Sacraments If they suppose that ground upon which that intent to which the whole Church hath used them there is no further cause of division in the Church for that secures the rule of Faith If not they are no Sacraments but by equivocation of words they are sacriledges in profaning Gods Ordinances The Sacrament of Baptisme because the necessary meanes of salvation is admitted for good when ministred by those who are not of the Church but alwaies void of the effect of grace To which it reviveth so soone as the true Faith is professed in the unity of the Church If a Sacrament be a visible signe of invisible grace that baptisme is no baptisme which signifieth the grace it should effect but indeed effecteth not Such is that Baptisme which is used to seale a Covenant of Grace without the condition of Christianity a Covenant that is not the Covenant of two parties but the promise of one Whence comes the humor of rebaptizing but to be discharged of that Christianity which the baptisme of the Church of England exacteth Why do they refuse Baptisme in New England to all that refuse to enter into the Covenant of Congregations How comes it more necessary to salvation to be of a Congregation then to be Baptized and made a Christian Is it not because it is thought that salvation is to be had without that profession of Christianity which the Sacrament of Baptisme sealeth That it is not to be had without renouncing it Upon these termes those that are denied Baptisme by the Congregations because they are not of the Congregations are denied salvation as much as in them lies but not indeed and in truth For the necessity of baptisme supposing a profession of the Catholicke Church they perish not by refusing it who will not have it by renouncing the Catholicke Church that is by covenanting themselves into Congregations They that are so affected must know that they have authority of themselves to baptize to effect which no Congregation in New England is able to do If the Sacrament of the Eucharist seale that Covenant of Grace which conditioneth not for Christianity it is no sacrament but by equivocation of words Where that conditionall is doubtfull or voide there is no security
inward witness of Gods Spirit dictating to his Spirit that they are the word of God it will be utterly impertinent to our purpose For seeking as wee do the means to resolve one another it will be impertinent to allege that which though a man is inwardly satisfied with yet outwardly to another cannot appear And certainly if there be no reason to satisfie another man of the truth of the whole that is of Christianity or of the Scriptures It cannot be expected that there should be satisfaction why this or that should belong to the truth of Christianity or the intent and meaning of the Scriptures For of necessity whatsoever evidence can be made for this or that truth contained in the Scriptures must depend upon the reason for which Christianity is received as Gods truth In fine the reason why controversies in Religion may and are to be ended by dispute of reason is this as hath been premised because that the Holy Ghost which effectually moveth us to believe supposeth sufficient reason moving in the nature of an object proposed to believe Therefore neither the truth of Christianity nor the Scripture is admitted upon the dictate of Gods Spirit but supposing the reasons which convict us that they are to be admitted And correspondently the gift of the Holy Ghost that inableth to continue in the profession and exercise of Christianity supposeth the belief of that Christianity which a man from his heart professes And by consequence the reason why hee is to believe which will not fail to inferre the truth of the Scriptures But if it be said That any person or persons as Rulers of the Church have the promise of inspiration or revelation from God for a ground upon which others are to believe It hath been showed that all such grace supposeth the profession of Christianity and the truth of the Scriptures and therefore the grounds of the same If any man should say as I perceive some have a minde to say that the gift of Infallibility in the Church supposes no such inspiration or revelation but onely the qualities of such persons as have power to conclude the Church and that they do visibly proceed to determine It will be evident that they can no more challenge this right not supposing Christianity and the foundation of the Church than the High Priest of the Jewes could proceed to give answer by Uâ—im and Tummim not supposing that God had given the Law and appointed the Priest so to do The resolution of this Question may make it appear that Christians falling out among themselves maintain themselves upon such grounds as would leave no room for the truth of that Christianity which both suppose Had wee to do with the enemies of it it would easily appear wee must allege such reasons for the truth of Gods Word as might convince the enemies of it and not suppose the truth of it when the question is how it may appear to be true It were therefore fit to consider whether a man can reasonably be a Christian and yet question the truth of the Scriptures or rather not fit to consider that which there can be no doubt in The whole content of the Scripture is either the motives or the mater of Christianity They that professe Christianity suppose the motives of it true which they admit to be sufficient Supposing them true they cannot question the Scriptures that record them Supposing those Scriptures they cannot question those motives for true Whether sufficient is resolved by admitting Christianity Alwaies the same reason that moves a man to be a Christian resolves him to believe the Scripture neither would hee allege any other had hee to do with the enemies of Christianity What those motives are concernes not us proceeding upon supposition of common Christianity to determine differences within it Yet that I may be the better understood my meaning is That the miracles done by those from whom wee have the Scriptures is the onely motive to shew that they came from God and therefore that wee are obliged to receive what they preached and by consequence the Scriptures that containe it Not intending hereby to quit the advantage which the Law hath of Heathenism and the Gospel of the Law in regard of the reasonablenesse and holinesse of the mater of each above other respectively justified by the light of nature But because the businesse is at present onely to shew the evidence wee have that God did send whatsoever reason may be given why hee would send which without other evidence had remained unknown though never so probable or reasonable Not intending hereby to balk that witnesse which the Scriptures of the Old Testament yield to the truth of the New But because that witnesse depends upon the miracles done by Moses and the Prophets to evidence their Commission from God And so the credit which the New Testament hath from the Old is resolved into those miracles which evidenced the sending of Moses and the Prophets and consists in the miracle of fore-telling those things by the one which by the other are fullfilled I know the Jewes expresly deny the credit of the Law to depend upon any miracles done by Moses and the Prophets but onely upon the appearance of God at giving the Law to all that people and speaking to them mouth to mouth The like whereof not having been done nor to be done in giving Christianity belonging to all nations who could not meet at once to receive it they think themselves grounded thereupon that the Law is not nor could be reversed by it Thus are they content that God sending Moses on his ambussage with the miracles which hee gave him for his letters of credit shall be thought not to have convicted Pharao That the Law provided no legal tryal God no evidence to the conscience of his servants distinguishing true and false Prophets which cannot be imagined but by their sayings and doings predictions and other miracles Well may the delivering of the Law have circumstances which no other miraculous action recorded in the Scriptures can compare with Shall that obscure the glory of Christs resurrection fore-told by him expresse to witnesse the truth of his message Shall it make an Ocean of miracles done by him and his Apostles to stand for nothing Shall it disable God himself to do any thing competent to make faith of a message the nature whereof bore not those circumstances which hee had used afore Now if the reason why wee believe the Scriptures to come from God as they pretend be the motives of Christianity strange it is that a man should be troubled how to answer the difficulty that may be made how wee know the truth of those motives speaking onely to Christians which have admitted them to be true But I am sure neither the witnesse of the Church nor the dictate of the Spirit can be alleged to Infidels but by them that would have themselves and this Gospel laught at both at once Seeing
because all agreed that they transgressed therefore they were excluded the Church But Vincentius besides this advanceth another mark to discern what belongs to the Rule that is what the ground and scope of our Creed requires For it might be said that perhaps something may come in question whether consistent with the Rule of Faith or not in which there hath passed no decree of the primitive Church because never questioned by that time Wherein therefore wee shall be to seek notwithstanding the decrees past by the Church upon ancient Heresies Which to meet with Vincentius saith further that whatsoever hath been unanimously taught in the Church by writing that is alwaies by all every where to that no contradiction is ever to be admitted in the Church Here the stile changes For whereas Irenaeus Tertullian and others of former time appeal onely to that which was visible in the practice of all Churches By the time of the Council at Ephesus the dare of Vincentius his book so much had been written upon all points of Faith and upon the Scriptures that hee presumeth evidence may be made of it all what may stand with that which the whole Church had taught what may not I know this proposition satisfieth not now because I know Vincentius proceedeth upon supposition that the Church was and ought to be alwaies one Body in which that which agreeth with the Faith might be taught that which agreeth not might not Which is the question now in dispute For upon other termes it had been madnesse in him to allege and maintain the Council of Ephesus condemning Nestorius as infringing the Rule of Faith upon this presumption because ten received Doctors of the Church had formerly delivered the contrary of his doctrine It is well enough known that there are many questions in which though there may be ten Fathers alleged on one side yet there may be more alleged on the other side And it were a piteous case if Vincentius or I could tell you no wiser a way for the ending of Controversies in Religion than by counting noses The presumption lies in this That the witnesles that depose being of such credit in the Church as the quality which they beare in it presupposeth it cannot reasonably be imagined that they could teach that for truth which is inconsistent with Christianity but they must be contradicted in it and their quality and degree in the Church questioned upon it And that the Church having been alwaies one and the same Body from Christ whosoever should undertake to teach that for the Christian Faith which from the beginning had been counted false hee would have been questioned for contradicting that profession which qualified him for that rank which hee held in the Church It is the case of Nestorius who venting his Heresie in the Church gave the people occasion to check at it and the Council of Ephesus to condemn it Now Vincentius his discourse presupposeth that the doctrine of those ten whom hee allegeth had not been contradicted A thing which must needs be presupposed by him that supposed the Great Council of Nicaea had decreed no more than that which had alwaies been taught in the Church For it is plain that without questioning the Faith setled at Nicaea there is no room for the opinion of Nestorius But otherwise should ten of that quality which hee allegeth be so considerably contradicted that it must be presumed their doctrine was suffered to passe not as not taken notice of but as not contradicting the common profession of Christians it will appear a presumption that neither part is of the substance of Faith but both allowed to be taught in the Church And if it appear further that the fewer in number and the lesse in rank and quality in the Church hold that which dependeth more necessarily upon the Rule of Faith which containeth the substance of the Scriptures it will be no way prejudicial to the Unity and authority of the Church as a Corporation founded by God that a private man as I am should conclude it for truth against the greater authority in maters depending upon the foundation of the Church If it be said that this evidence supposeth the necessity of Baptisme to the making of a Christian Which not onely the Leviathaâ— is farr from granting who professeth himself bound to renounce Christ at the command of his Soveraign But the Socinians also and some of our Sectaries hold indifferent to salvation whether baptized or not I answer That the question here is not what belongs or belongs not to the Rule of Faith and Christian conversation necessary to the salvation of all Christians but whether there be any such Rule or not That the original and universal custome of Carechizing all Christians evidenceth such a Rule by the consent of all Christians as you have seen it evidenced by the frequent mention thereof in Scriptures That therefore it stands recommended to us by the same means and upon the same grounds for which wee receive the holy Scriptures And that though when the World was come into the Church and many more were baptized infants then afore it cannot be said that this order of Catechizing was so substantially performed as afore Yet the mater and theme of it remaining in the Tradition of the Creed and the sense of it in the writings of the Fathers and the decrees of the Church against Hereticks it remains still visible what belongs to it what not as I shall make appear in that which is questioned within the subject of this book Onely this is the place where I am to allege against the Leviathan why the profession of Christianity is necessary to the salvation of all Christians Whereupon it will follow without further proof that it is necessary to salvation to believe more than that Jesus is the Christ To wit whatsoever this Rule of Christianity containeth the profession whereof is requisite to Christianity Heare our Lord Mat. X. 32 33. Luke XII 8 9. Whosoever shall renounce mee before men him will I renounce before my Father which is in heaven And whosoever shall acknowledge mee before men him will I acknowledge before my Father which is in heaven And S. Paul Rom. X. 9 10. If thou confesse with thy mouth that Jesus is the Lard and believe with thy heaâ—t that God raised him from the dead that shalt be saved For with the heart a man believes to righteousnesse and with the mouth hee professeth to salvation And a Tim. II. 12. If wee deny him hee will deny us Our Lords Commission to his Apostles is Mat. XXVIII 19. Go make disciples all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Who are then Christs Disciples That wee may know what the Apostles are to make them whom they make Christs Disciples Yâ—e are my Disciples saith our Lord if yee do whatsoever I command you And John XV. 8. Herein is my Father glorified that yee heart 〈◊〉 fruit
which under the Gospel is expresly required yet when it is said of the precepts of the Law which who so shall do shall live by them Levit. XVIII 5. Ezek. XX. 11 21. it is not to be granted that everlasting life is necessarily signified but onely a prosperous estate which vivere in the Ebrew as well as in the Greek and Latine elegantly signifies And yet there is good reason why these are counted by our Lord the chief precepts of the Law though as for the immediate intent thereof they reach no further than the over act which other Lawes determine as well as they Because more apt to signifie the general extent of that inward and spiritual obedience which being preached and taught by the Fathers was first to be translated out of their doctrine into the Law of Moses that the Prophets who being authorized by the Law Deut. XVIII 18. were raised by God to prepare the way for our Lord Christ and his Gospel might have as it were a Text in the Law upon which they might ground their Sermons of spiritual obedience which the Gospel of Christ whose coming they preached should expresly require And this is that secret of Gods Law and of his Covenant which the Prophet David declares to be revealed to those that keep Covenant with God and prayes that his eyes may be opened to see it in the Law the study whereof inlightens a man to discover it Psal XXV 13 15 XIX 9 10. CXIX 18. if wee adde hereunto the secret of Christ his coming which this obedience or at the least the tender of a Covenant which should condition for it presupposeth As for the division of the Precepts of the Law into Ceremonial Moral and Judicial it will very fitly fall in with the truth which I insist upon in case those that advance or maintaine that division be content to receive this truth For it will be very proper to say that the Ceremonial and Judicial Precepts are those that depend upon the expresse and immediate intent of the Law as it containeth the condition on their part upon which God on his part covenants to give them the civil happinesse of the Land of Promise But the Moral precepts such as might be counted Civil Lawes being observed civilly out of respect to that happinesse and might be counted spiritual Lawes as the offices of them might be done out of obedience to God in respect to his service Which sense the light of Nature stirred up by that measure of revelation which God was pleased to grant the Fathers before and the Prophets under the Law having prevailed to bring into force before the Law was translated out of unwritten custome into the Law of Moses to give the Prophets a ground of their doctrine of the love of God above all and a mans neighbor as himself so to make way for that spiritual obedience which under the Gospel was expresly to be required But if they refuse to admit this division so as to comply with the sense I pretend then will it be easie for mee to refuse the division as not contained in the Scripture but the conceit of Divines that neither do understand the true difference between the Law and the Gospel not can be content to be showed it For neither doth any Scripture of the Old or New Testament expresse this division to come from the first and immediate and expresse intent of the Law nor is there any Tradition in the Church of it which are the two onely means that hitherto remain in question whether mater of Faith can be grounded upon both of them or onely upon the one And to have recourse to any opinion of the Jewes since the separation of them from the Church of God in a point concerning that difference must needs be an affront to Christianity CHAP. XIII That the Law tendreth no other promise but that of the Land of Canaan How the Resurrection is signified by the Prophets Expresse texts of the Apostles Their arguments and the arguments of our Lord do suppose the mystical sense of the Scriptures That this sense is to be made good throughout the Scripture wheresoever the ground of it takes place Christianity well grounded supposing this What parts of Scripture may be questionable whether they have a mystical sense or not The sayings and doings of our Lord have it As also those passages of the Old Testament which are fulfilled by the same The sense of the Fathers HAving showed by removing this block that there is no appearance of inconvenience in admitting this truth I am now to show what appearance of necessary consequences from the Scriptures there is to inforce it Beginning then with the first proposition of the Covenant of the Law in Marah Exod. XVI 27 28. wee reade that at Marah God appointed them a Statute and a Judgment The Jews say that there hee gave them the precepts of the Sabbath and Honoring parents Whether so or not something God propounds them to do For to show what hee bids them expect doing it hee inferres And there hee tried him and said If thou wilt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God and do that which is right in his eyes and wilt receive his precepts and do all his Statutes I will bring upon thee none of the griefs that I brought upon Aegypt For I am the Lord thy God that heal thee It will be hard to say how the Law could be established upon any other condition than first it was propounded on and here is nothing but an earthly promise Come wee to the giving and receiving of the Law Exod. XIX 5 6. And now if you will hear my voice and keep my Covenant yee shall be to mee whose all the earth is a Jewell above all Nations of the earth a kingdome of Priests an holy people All Nations being at this time polluted by offering sacrifices to devils and enemies to God the Israelites redeemed by God out of Aegypt to be free under his government and to offer sacrifices to him alone might well be a kingdome of Priests a holy people Gods Jewel above all Nations of the earth without any Covenant for the happiness of the world to come After the giving of the Decalogue and other Precepts by the mediation of Moses Exod. XXIII 25 And you shall serve the Lord your God and hee shall blesse thy bread and waters And I will take sickness from amid thee There shall no woman miscarry or be barren in thy Land I will make full the number of thy dayes I will send my terror before thee and the rest that followes there to assure them how and by what means hee will bring them into the Land of Promise Hitherto in treating in contracting this Covenant no mention of the world to come What shall wee finde at renewing it Deut. XXIX 1. These are the words that is the termes of the Contract which Moses struck with the Israelites in the plain of Moab besides that
as the Evangelist and our Lord both affirm that these things were prophesied concerning the cures which our Lord did upon their bodies so can it not be doubted that the cure of our soules is spiritually signified by the same whether you consider the promises whereby the ground of this correspondence is settled or the expresse words of the Apostle 1 Pet. II. 24. where that which S. Matthew expoundeth of the cures which our Lord did upon their bodies is referred to the taking away of sâ—nne by the sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse Which if it cannot be denied I shall make no difficulty to inferre that the words of the Prophet Esay VII 14. Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and yee shall call his name Emmanuel which the Evangelists referreth to our Lord Mat. I. 22. and by the premises were fulfilled when they were first said as in the figure are still accomplished in the children which by Gods grace are still â—orn of the holy faith of his Church by grace Nor that the words of the Prophet Osee XI 1. Out of Egypt have I called my Son which being manifestly said of the Israelites coming out of Egypt the same Evangelist II. 15. affirmeth to be fulfilled in our Lords coming back out of Egypt are still accomplished in those which out of the darknesse of this world are brought to Gods Church which is spiritually the Land of Promise Nor that the words of the Prophet Jeremy XXXI 15. which the same Evangelist expoundeth of the Innocents which were slaine by Herod at Bethlehem but the correspondence hitherto established requireth us to understand of the captive Jewes at Ramah in that Prophets time are still fulfilled in all that suffer persecution and death for Christianity Nor lasâ—ly that the words of the Psalmes XXII 8 18. Hee trusted in God that hee would deliver him let him save him seeing hee loveth him They pierced my hands and my feet And They part my garments among them and cast lots upon my vesture XLI 9. Hee which did eat of my bread hath lift up the heel against mee XLIX 9 21. The zeale of thine house hath eaten mee up And They gave mee gall to eat and in my thirst they gave mee vineger to drink VIII 2. Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise CIX 8. His Office let another take XVI 10. Thou shalt not leave my soul in Hell nor suffer thine holy One to see corruption which the New Testament will have to be fulfilled in those things that befell our Lord Christ in the flesh in his crucifying Maâ— XXVIII 18 35 43. Mark XV. 22 23 24. John XIX 17 29. in Judas betraying him John XIII 18. in his purging the Temple John II. 17. in the children that praised him Mat. XXI 16. in Matthias chosen in Judas stead Acts I. 20. in the resurrection of Christ Acts II. 31. XIII 35. But the correspondence premised and the reason of it require us first to understand of those things which befell David and Gods ancient people are still spiritually verified and accomplished in those things which befall the children of God and his Church under the state of Grace Neither shall I make any question that the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel which wee have settled being supposed it will not follow neverthelesse that all the Old Testament ought by virtue thereof to be so fulfilled in the life of our Lord Christ But that the Spirit of God in the Evangelists showeth that the Spirit in the Prophets so directed their words that they were intended to be farre more properly fulfilled in our Lord Christ than in those whom they were spoke of in the literal sense For wee do not finde that the Text that is to say that which went before and that which followes after those words which the Gospels say were fulfilled in our Lord Christ is answered by any thing which wee reade to have befallen him in the flesh And the general correspondence between Israel according to the flesh in the Old Testament and Israel according to the Spirit in the New being sufficient to justifie our Lord to be the Christ whom they expected and by consequence that twofold sense of the Old Testament which here wee maintaine there is no cause why they should be said to be impertinently alleged though by ordinary reason supposing this correspondence that could not be proved from those Texts which the Gospels say that they signifie Indeed such of them as are used by our Lord and his Apostles to prove him to be the Christ must be said and well may be maintainâ—d to do it by the perpectual correspondence of Gods earthly promises made good to his carnal people through the meanes of their Kings Priests and Prophets with the promises of the world to come made good by the means of our Lord Christ to the Church Therâ— is yet another kinde of our Lord Christs sayings and of things that befell him in the flesh in which there appears at the first view that difference of literal and mystical sense which hath been settled between the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments The Parable of the Prodigal childe for example seems not onely to contain a plain song of Gods earnest desire to be reconciled with penitent sinnerâ— but also a descant of the rejection of the Jewes and the calling of the Gentiles figured by it In like maner the Parable of him that fell among theeves as hee went down to Jericho Luke XI seemeth not onely to instruct who is the neighbor that wee are to love as our selves but also to figure the fall of man and the sending of our Lord for the restoring of him intimated as the ground of it So the acclamations of them that went afore and them that came after our Lord at his entrance into Jerusalem Mat. XXI agreeing in the same note of Hosanna to the Son of David I cannot tell whether any Christian could be so moroâ—e as to doubt but that it fell out on purpose to signifie the agreement of the Old and New Testament concentring in our Lord Christ But as it cannot be reasonably denied that these Parables and the like are mystical significations of the purpose of God in sending Christ or the event of it in the rejection of the Jewes and calling of the Gentiles So is all this nothing to the two senses of the Old Testament in which it is twice fulfilled once according to the Leter and again according to the Spirit I have thus farre inlarged this point concerning the correspondence and difference between the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament between the Ancient and New people of God to show how I conceive the scruples are to be resolved which may be made against an assumption of more efficacy and consequence than any other wheresoever any point of Christianity is to be showed from the Old Testament Yet so much more protection I owe the
it smelled so ranck that I conceived my self bound to cry out upon the venene that may be so closely couched under the words But to those that believe the truth of Christianity arguments from the mystical sense of the Old Testament must not seem contemptible those of our Lord Christ and his Apostles being such provided that the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel be preserved upon the right ground and in the right grain Provided also that no more waight be laid upon them than they are able to bear To wit no more than wee can lay upon the Law of Moses in proving the truth of Christianity Which if wee premise not the miracles of our Lord Christ and his Apostles done to witnesse their commission from God together with the excellence of Christianity above Judaisme even in the ballance of reason If wee make not good and constant correspondence between both wheresoever the ground of that correspondence takes place wee allege a reason that needs a reason to defend it But if wee do that wee imprest all the miracles done by Moses to introduce the Law to depose for the truth of the Gospel Wee furnish our selves of a magazine of argument in all points of Christianity to convince those who have received it what the conâ—â—itution of Gods ancient people and the truth then on foot will inferre upon the correspondence which they are supposed to hold with Christianity and with the Church I do then freely grant that Excommunication stood not immediately by Gods Law among Gods ancient people though by that Power which Gods Law had vested on them that first introduced it Were it Esdras by commission from the King of Persia as to the Power that inforced it with means to constraine though by the Law as to his Title before and against other men by the Law or whosoever it were besides But I will allege evidence for it after the return from Captivity which to my knowledge hath not hitherto been alleged Namely that which is called in the Greek Bible the third Book of Maccabees where it is râ—lated that when some of the Jewes at Alexandria had obeyed the Edict of Ptolomee Philometor commanâ—ing to worship an Idol which hee had set up the rest of the people 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abhorred those of them that had turned Aposâ—â—â—es and condeâ—ned â—â—em as enemies to the Nation depriving them of mutual conversation and the henefit of it III. 25. Upon the consideration of which passage I easâ—ly conclude that of 1 Macc. XIV 38. not to be well understood nâ—â— translâ—ted where it is said that Razias 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying indeed that in the â—orâ—er times under Antiochus Epiphanes when so many Jewes departed from their Law hee had brought in the decree of not mixing Judaisme That is to say that hee had been the means of passing a decree that those who stuck to their profession should not commâ—nicate with the Apoâ—â—ates These things were done by virtue of the Law against the will of their Soveraignes and therefore Philometor complaines of them for it 3 Macc. III. 16. but it is by virtue of his decree being his subjects that they put them to death aftâ—rwards VII 8 9 10. I do also grant that the putting of a man out of the Synagogue which I admit to have come in by the act of those men who nâ—verthâ—lesse had their authority originally from that act of God which made them a people under those Lawes imported a great abatement of the temporal privilege of each Jewes estate in as much as it is evident that whosoever was banished the conversation of Jewes in whole or in part was at the same rate abated the privilege of a Jew which they held by the declaration of their Soveraignes to maintain them in the use of their own Lawes For the privilege which a man holdeth among his people whereof hee is a native will appeare of what consequence it is when hee comes to live among strangers But I do not therefore yield that to be excommunicate out of the Church by the original constitution thereof and the Law of God imports the abatement of any secular privilege Because of the difference between the Synagogue and the Church which God appointed to be gathered out of all Nations under the condition of bearing Christs Crosse For such a company refusing their Communion to such as they exclude can neither prejudice their persons goods nor fame which being doubtfull to the world so long as they professe the Religion which the world owns not returns by consequence when they quit that Religion to return to the Religion of the State Rather as the Leviathan truly sayes they make themselves liable to all the persecution that may be brought upon them by such as think they have had ill measure by being put out of the Church Now to that which is argued That because the Christians went for Jewes among the Gentiles at the beginning of Christianity injoying Jewes privileges and thereby the exercise of their Religion therefore the Excommunications used by them must needs be such as were in force among the Jewes according to Moses Law that is by the Power which it establisheth The answer is by denying the consequence The reason this The Christians at the beginning communicated with the Jewes in that service of God which they used as well in the Temple as in the Synagogue How should they have opportunity to make them acquainted with the Gospel otherwise But as sometimes they assembled secretly among themselves for fear of the Jewes Acts XII 12. John XIX 38. so also besides those Offices which they served God with among the Jewes in the Temple or in the Synagogue they acknowledged others which they held themselves bound to and for which they retired themselves from the Jewes Acts I. 13. II. 42 46. III. 23. V. 42. VI. 2. The ground of their Communion with the Jewes Christians know to have been the hope of winning them to be Christians lasting while that hope should continue the ground of serving God in their own Assemblies the obligation of Christianity for ever to continue In regard of the conversation and communion which they held with the Jewes whether Civil or Religious they were subject to be excommunicated by the Jewes That is part of our Lords Prophesie John XVI 2. They shall put you out of their Synagogues Nay the time cometh that whoso killeth you shall think that hee doth God service But whatsoever the effect of these Excommunications might be being driven and confined in a maner to the Communion of the Church by being excluded or at least abridged the Communion of the Synagogue must they not needs forfeit their Communion by not fulfilling the condition by which they held it Or could they forfeit it upon other gronnds or to other effect than those upon which and to which they held it Indeed I will not undertake to give you many Scripture examples of Excommunications
that wee are at a distance from the Church of Rome and all who communicate with it upon a just cause of refusing the Reformation as all that professe the Reformation suppose And therefore that there remains no visible presumption what is true the ground of visibility being destroyed by the division of the Church I shall be far enough from extenuating the force of this objection or the effect of this division acknowledging that according to my opinion holding both the Reformation and the Catholick Church the Church should be visible but is indeed invisible Not absolutely but as that which is hardly visible may truly be called invisible because every one whom it concerns cannot attain to discern it upon clear grounds For my intent is to aggravate the mischiefs of division to the highest which they who believe not the Catholick Church do not take for any inconvenience And therefore I grant all and do acknowledge that division in the Church necessarily destroyeth that provision which God hath made for the unlearned as well as the learned equally concerned in the common Salvation of Christians to discern by their common sense where to resort for that which is necessary to the Salvation of all and how to improve and husband the same as their proficience in Christianity calls for more at their hands then the Salvation of all requires Whereby it comes to pass that they are put to make their choice in maters whereof it is not possible for ordinary capacities to comprehend the grounds And so must chuse out of fansy education prejudice faction or which is the vilest of all interest of this world which is in one word profit But this being a choice that must be made and though difficult yet possible to be well made hee that without supposing Infallibility on the one side or Reformation on the other side would discern between true and false supposing the Original unity of the Catholick Church must be a madman if hee advise not with the Records of the Catholick Church though out of date as to force of Law on both sides to tell him wherein Reformation infallibly consisteth For by that means though hee shall not be able to restore that unity which is once violated the duty of all but obliging to an effect that cannot take place without the consent of parties yet hee shall be able so to behave himself and that Church which goes by this Rule be it greater or be it lesse shall be so constituted as not to make but to suffer the division which it is charged with But hee who preaches original liberty to all Christians to cast themselves into Presbyteries or into Congregations at their choice bids them sail the main Sea without Ballast and besides departing from the Unity of the Church by becoming Members of arbitrary Societies not parts of the whole by the visible act of visible power in it expose themselves to the shelves and quick sands of positions destructive to the Faith of the Church And I am to demand of this Doctor if the Presbyteries be Churches by association of Congregations and the Congregations Churches without it and those which are neither Presbyteries nor Congregations that is in effect all the Parish Churches of the land be Churches no lesse than either of both because they have one whom the Triers call a godly man sent them to preach whatsoever he can make of the Bible I say I must demand of him what it is that qualifies a man a Member of a Church or a Church a Church and how a man by being such a one becomes a Member of the whole Church which hitherto hath been thought necessary to the Salvation of every Christian For who knoweth not the dispute that remains between the Reformation and the Church of Rome which shall be the true Church Which if every man be at liberty to become a Member of a Congregation with any six more that hee likes who by that means shall be a Church is plainly about nothing And therefore wee are plainly invited to a new Christianity part whereof hath hitherto been to think our selves Members of the Catholick Church by being Members of some particular Church part of the Catholick So certain it is that had not the Creed been first banished out of mens hearts it had not been banished out of the Church But when this Doctor maintaineth further that all men having power in chief to chuse for themselves in mater of Religion the Soveraign hath Power not onely to chuse for it self but to impose penalties upon those which owe no man any account of their choice if they chuse not that which the Soveraign chuseth I confesse I find this toucheth mee and the remnant of the Church of England to the quick edifying the Soveraign to deny protection in the exercise of Religion to them who find themselves bound never to communicate in the change that is made and in making in Religion amongst us But I find withal so much inconsequence and contradiction to his own sense and the sense of all Christians in it that I hope no Secular Power will be so prodigal of a good conscience as to make it self the executioner of a doctrine tending to so unchristian injustice For if as hee saith no man is answerable for the Religion hee chuseth to any but God how shall hee be liable to be punished by man for that wherein hee offendeth him not Or how can any man offend him to whom hee is not countable Nor will it serve the turn to say That by denying protection in the exercise of Religion the Secular Power punisheth no man for the judgement of his conscience For all Christians of what profession soever do generally believe that they are bound to exercise the Religion which they are bound to professe That Baptisme wherein by the positive will of God under the Gospel the profession of Christianity consisteth truly obliging true Christians to assemble themselves for the service of God with his Church according to the Rules of it It cannot therefore be said that it is no penalty no persecution for Religion to deny protection in the exercise of Religion to them who are not punished for the judgment of their conscience For whosoever can be supposed to be a good Christian not onely had rather but surely had better lose his life much more any comfort of it than lose the exercise of his Christianity in the service of God whereupon his Salvation so neerly dependeth Nor will it serve the turn to say as this Doctor saith that in persecuting the Christian Faith much more in denying protection to the exercise of any profession which it inforceth the Heathen Emperors exceeded not their Power but onely abused it having granted afore that a man is free to chuse for himself that is not countable for his Religion to his Soveraign For if it once be said that God granteth all men all freedom in the choice of their Religion it cannot
the Christian Faith The one forfeiteth his interest in Heaven by the inward act of his soul refusing the common faith which saveth all Christians though outwardly holding communion with the Church The other by the inward act of the soul proceeding to the outward act of dissolving the communion of the Church which the common charity of Christians in the first place is to maintain If both these crimes may come under the the common name of Heresie because inward misbelief naturally tendeth to make a sect of such as shall profess to live according to it no marvail if all divisions of the Church be commonly called both Heresies and Schisms whatsoever be the cause upon which they divide If meer schisms that is where the cause is not any thing necessary to the salvation of all to be believed be also Heresie in the Language of the Apostles Neverthelesse there being so much difference between the two crimes and the grounds of them it is necessary to understand setting aside all aequivocation of terms that there is a crime consisting in mis-believing some Article of the faith which if you please may properly be called Heresie And another consisting in dissolving the unity of the Church which is properly called Schism when there is no further pretense for it then some Law which the Church being able to make the other part will rather depart then admit There may divisions in the Church upon pretence of such doctrines as are not necessary to the salvation of all and so no part of the rule of faith but so evidently to be deduced from it and from the rest of the Scriptures that the Church may have cause to determine the same and yet others may choose rather to depart from the Church then suffer the determination thereof to take place Which divisions that memorable observation of S. Jerome seems to call Heresies which said that all Schisms naturally devise to themselves some Heresie that is some doctrine extravagant from the doctrine of the Church that they may seem not to have departed from the Church for nothing Which is very well exemplified by S. Austine in the Donatists But whether such divisions are to be counted Heresies or Schisms both names properly signifying all divisions of the Church and only that crime which consisteth in mis-believing some Articles of faith appropriating the name of Heresie because common use hath given it no peculiar name of its own I leave to him that shall please to determine it Supposing these things it will not be requisite for me to say much to that which hath been published concerning the nature of Schism of late That being to be had onely out of the Scripture it is no where there to be had but in S. Paul to the Corinthians That there was at Corinth when S. Paul writ onely one Congregation of Christians which he calleth the Church of Corinth That therefore there is no crime of schism but in breaking one Congregation into more As for any visible society of the Catholick Church acknowledging the materials men that professe Christianity which he that sees cannot believe to the form which is that unity which is visible he is as great a stranger as if he had never heard of the Creed acknowledging notwithstanding an invisible unity in the common faith and love of Christians upon perswasion whereof he challenges as great freedom from schism as ever any member of the Catholick Church could claim For having showed how a thing which God made visible for many ages may reasonably be expected to be found in the Scriptures I am not to yield to try it by any part of them knowing that whosoever evidenceth a society of the Church by Gods Law evidenceth the crime that consists in the dissolving of it And it were fit we were told how all the Christians in a City where God had much people should sit at one Table or at least sup in one room before we believe that there was then no more Christians at Corinth then could assemble at once Which if I did believe I would notwithstanding alledge Iustine the Martyrs words Apol II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 On the day called Sunday all that dwelt in Cities or in Countries assemble themselves in one And supposing that then there were more Christians in Rome and the Territorie thereof for example for he writes to the Emperour Antoninus then could meet together in one place As Iustine means not when he saies That all in Cities or Countries meet in one that all made one Assembly but met all in common assemblies I would thereupon argue that no more does S. Paul say when he gives these rules to the Corinthians 1 Cor. XI 14. which serve any assembly that there was then but one Congregation at Corinth If in Iustines time if afore if after he can show me any Church of Rome or any City beside Rome that contained not all the Christians of that City and the Territory thereof I will believe that when Clemens writ the Letter lately published from the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth there were no more Christians at Rome or at Corinth then could meet all at once But if in all the Scripture as well as in all the Records of the Church a Church signifie the university of Christians which one City and the Territory thereof containeth it is an affront to common sense for him to deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the Church that is contained in the City and Territory of Rome or Corinth Let the learned Publisher of that Epistle take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there for Inquilinus or Peregrinus in Inmate or Pilgrim because his Greek gave him leave he that hath been showed so plentiful mention of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the subject in question for that which we now call a Diocese can have no reason to see with his eyes but because he is resolved not to use his own For in the very address of Polycarpus his Epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the Church of God dwelling beside Philippi The dative case quite spoils the construction of the words to his sense If the Church of the Philippians dwelt near Philippi then the Christians of the Territory belonged to the Church of the City As for the visible unity of the Catholick Church it was not so easie for me to evidence that which could not be questionable till the difference between Catholick Church and true Church came to be questionable As it is not hard for any Christian to question whither the Church which was Catholick for so many ages ought now to be Catholick or not For till he have destroyed the evidence which this abridgement hath been able to advance and when that is done new evidence will not be wanting so long as the records of the Church are Historically true and men continue possest of common sense it is in vain to alledge the dictate of his own
that we have to come from God than we please For if it be fifteen or sixteen to one that the words which we have are not from God what respect can oblige us to do more And would Pagans and Idolaters think themselves lesse bound to us if we could perswade them that whatsoever is pretended in Scripture of a Covenant made by God with Abraham and his posterity to acknowledge and worship him alone for the true God may be denied so farre as by saying that no man can say we have any Record of it As for the Jews what a favour were it to them to quit them all that can be alleged against them out of Moses and the Prophets by saying That we cannot be assured that it is their writing For if it be said that whatsoever the Church hath interest to use against Atheists Pagans and Jews will be admitted upon Tradition having renounced Scripture can it be imagined that having granted that the whole narration upon which Christianity steppeth in may have been counterfeited in writing any man can undertake to show the truth of the same unquestionable by word of mouth Surely it may well astonish a man void of prejudice to see it so carefully alleged how many ambiguities and equivocations necessarily fall out in expressing mens mindes by writing never considering that the same may fall out in whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth so much more uncureably as a man writes upon more deliberation than hee speaks and posterity can affirm with more confidence that which is delivered by writing to have been said than that which is onely so reported For let common sense judg by what is usually done by men for the preserving of evidence concerning their estates whether it be more effectual to have it in writing or onely by word of mouth For whatsoever can be pretended to come by Tradition from the Apostles must first have been delivered in the Ebrew language at least that language which they spake and was so near the Ebrew of the Old Testament that in the New Testament it is called by that name Thence being turned into Greek or Latine it must have come afterwards into the now vulgar languages of Christendom Neither can any man imagine how the profession of Christians should be conveyed by Tradition and not by word of mouth Where though they that heard the Apostles certainly understood their meaning which there can be no question of when the intent is familiarly to teach it yet the terms wherein it was delivered not remaining upon record as much difference may creep in as there may be difference in several mens apprehensions saving that which the communion of the Church determineth And will any common sense allow that the meaning thereof shall be more certain than the words are more certain than the meaning of written words which are certain though obscure and yet not without competent means to bring the intent of them to light But I must not preferr any thing of this nature before any thing wee have in the Scriptures so long as both sides acknowledg it I demand then whether the precept of the Law which injoyned the Israelites to teach it their children concerned the written Law or not The Prophet David Psalm LXXVIII 1-8 shewes the practice of it and so do other passages of the Old Testament and surely there can be no doubt made that Moses himself did deliver and inculcate the sense of the precepts to his hearers But will any common sense allow that hee forgot his text when hee expounded the meaning of it Our Lord commands the Jews to search the Scriptures hee remits Dives in the Parable to Moses and the Prophets S. Paul presses that all things that are written are written for our learning that wee through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope That all Scripture inspired from God is profitable and a great deal more to the same effect and shall wee open the mouth of Atheism with an answer that this concerns not us who no way stand convict that wee have the words of Moses and the Prophets of our Lord and his Apostles Let this therefore passe for a desperate attempt of making a breach for Atheism Heathenism Judaism to enter in provided that the Reformation should have nothing to say against the Church of Rome But let it be demanded whether any of those that writ for the Church against Heresies were masters of the common sense of men or not And let it be demanded when they alleged the Scriptures against them whether they thought the meaning of them determinable or not It is true Tertullian prescribed against Hereticks that the Church was not tied to dispute with them out of the Scriptures and certainly had just reason so to do Because though they admitted the Apostles to have Gods Spirit yet they admitted not that Spirit to have declared to them the bottom of the truth as to themselves and therefore made use of the Scriptures as the Alcoran doth so farre onely as they agreed with the Traditions of their own Masters whom they supposed to have the falnesse of the truth Whereas it is manifest that Christianity admits no dispute from the Scriptures but from them that acknowledg no gifts of Gods Spirit that suppose not Christianity and the Scriptures Therefore those that disputed against the Heresies that grew up afterwards and acknowledged no revelation but that which had brought on Christianity what did they dispute upon For evidently they neither had nor used that prescription which Tertullian insisted upon against his Hereticks But as Tertullian might though not bound to so much use the Scriptures against such Hereticks as well as against Jews and Infidels did they who succeeded onely use it against succeeding Heresies that own no further revelation than that which Scripture came with not as necessity but to show the advantage they had for this they must do if nothing but probability is to be had from the Scriptures but the peremptory truth is without Scripture evident in the determination of the present Church which was first visible in ejecting Hereticks Certainly such a breach upon common sense cannot be admitted as for them that have evidence for the truth to compromise it to a dispute of probabilities Here therefore I do appeal to the common sense of all men that see how all the disputes that have been made from the beginning for the Faith against Heresies do consist of Scriptures drawn into consequence against them though in behalf of that which they professed to hold from the Apostles whether all this pains was taken to show what was probable or what was true upon the evidence of the true sense of Scripture falling within the compasse of that which they held from the Apostles The ground then of that account which pretends that wee have no Scripture is very frivolous For if common sense be valued by the experience of those that handle written Copies not by
Moses a little before his death though in effect they had submitted to whatsoever should be required in Gods name by Moses when they passed the red Sea under his conduct Only it is to be observed that the Covenant of Circumcision which God had made with Abraham when he gave him the Land of Promise remained for their Title to it when the promise thereof became limited by the Law Which limitation because they submitted to by leaving Aegypt under the conduct of Moses and being shadowed by the Cloud saw their enemies drowned in the red Sea therefore are they elegantly said by S. Paul to be baptized into Moses in the Cloud and in the Sea For if being redeemed from the Aegypt of this world we undertake to leave it under the conduct of our Lord Christ If hereupon our sins be drowned in the waters of Baptism Were not they baptized in the same sense as we passe the red Sea at our comming out of Aegypt But both upon supposition of the correspondence between the two Testaments without which all this argument could neither have force nor relish And therefore I cannot but admire to see men learned in the Scriptures to maintain by this place that the Sacraments of the Old Testament are the same with the Sacraments of the New Not distinguishing whether immediatly or by way of correspondence For if you make the Kingdom of Heaven and the Land of Promise all a thing then is Baptism and the passage of the red Sea all one But then it will be all one to believe in Christ and to submit to his conduct to Paradise as to believe in Moses as the Israelites did hereupon Exod. XIV 31. and to put themselves under his conduct to the Land of Promise Which is my Argument But if setting aside the correspondence you make their ingagement to God under Moses for obtaining the Land of promise one thing and our ingagement to God under Christ another Certainly the immediate assurance of this and the immediate assurance of that which by means of the correspondence becoms also the assurance of this are severall things And if there be between the Old and New Covenant that correspondence which makes that the figure of this they may as well be said to be one and the same and by consequence the Sacraments of them as a mans Picture is called by his name when seeing the Pictures of our Princes for example we say This is H. the eight and this Queen Elizabeth But to say that the Sacraments of the Old Law do immediately figure or assure the same thing which the Sacraments of the Gospel do is the same thing as to say the rest of the Land of Promise and the everlasting rest of the Kingdom of Heaven are both one and the same Let us now see by what right that is upon what ground S. Paul argues that concerning the Gospel from the words of Moses Deut. XIII 11 -14 which is manifestly said by him concerning the Law Rom. X. 6 -10 The righteousnesse that is of Faith saith thus Say not in thine heart who will ascend into Heaven To wit to bring down Christ Or who will go down into the deep To wit to bring up Christ from the dead But what saith it The Word is near thee in thy mouth and in thy heart That is the word of Faith which we Preach That if thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe with thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved For with the heart a man believes to righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made to salvation The argument is this If Moses duly warn the Israelites that they have no excuse for not obeying the Law which he had put as it were in their mouths and into their hearts so plainly had he taught it them then cannot those that hear the Apostles Preach the Gospel excuse themselves in not obeying it being so plainly shewed That if they professe Christ with their mouths believing with the heart that God raised him from the dead they should be saved That this word of Faith is put as it were in their mouths and in their hearts Can this be made good to be Moses his meaning not supposing that the Spirit of God intended the Gospel by the Law Or can it be denied so to be supposing it If therefore the profession of an Israelite tie him to the Law of God given the Jews shall not the profession of a Christian tie him to the Law of God given the Jews shall not the profession of a Christian tie him to the Law of God given the Christians Shall not the professing of Christ which the Apostle speaks of be the undertaking of it For S. Paul by saying that they were baptized into Moses under the Cloud and in the Sea plainly sheweth that as their undertaking to march under the conduct of Moses towards the Land of Promise through the red Sea was rewarded by God with the drowning of their enemies and the overshadowing of the Cloud So our undertaking to follow Christ towards that Kingdom which he obtained by his Crosse is rewarded with the extinguishing of sin and the refreshing of the Holy Ghost in our travel to the world to come And therefore the ingagement of the second Covenant being inacted and settled upon us by the Sacrament of Baptism the promises of the Covenant must needs depend upon the same What else shall the name of a New Covenant or a New testament signifie if we will not have them to signifie nothing Some man perhaps may marvel whence it comes that the agreement between God and his ancient People being alwaies represented in the Old Testament in the nature and terms of a Covenant the New is by the Apostle proved to have the nature of the last Will and Tessament of our Lord Christ Hebr. IX 16 17. But if this Testament be also a Covenant as the same Apostle saith Hebr. VIII 9. He hath obtained a more excellent Ministery by how much he is the Mediator of a better Covenant which is inacted upon better promises there will be no cause to marvell The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in ordinary Greek signifies no more than a mans last Will and Testament But in the use of the Jews that spoke Greek such as are the Apostles the translators of the Old Testament into Greek and others it fignisies also a Covenant If further it pleased God that our Lord Christ should die to assure us of everlasting life on his part which thereby he purchased obliging God on his part to give it to those that shall be found qualified for it well may the Apostle affirm that it is the last Will and Testament of him who died to make it irrevocable because mens Wills are not so till death But it containeth nevertheless a Covenant because men become not Sons of God by birth but by choice accepting the adoption which is tendred being
by some of theit own body that they who demanded Baptism were no counterfeits but would stand to what they undertook it ought to be an Argument that they were to undertake that which they give the Church security to perform And indeed this custom being nothing else but an appertenance or consequence of the Interrogatories of Baptism I need say no more but that it appears thereby what those that were admitted to Baptism undertook when they were to have Sureties to undertake for them that they dissembled not in that which they undertook But in the next place I will alledge the constitution of the Church and all the authority of it Grounded as by the means which I have imployed to make evidence of it appeareth upon supposition and presumption that by being baptized into the visible communion thereof we attain invisible communion in the promises which the Gospel tendreth There are some that take upon them to censure the ancient Church for the abuse which I spoke of even now in delaying of Baptism These men if they will go alwaies by the same weights and measures must call S. Paul to account why he makes this demand 1 Cor. V. 12 13. What have I to do to judge those that are without do not ye judge those that are within But those that are without God shall judge For those who professed only to believe Christianity though obliged to learn how to behave themselves like Christians for with what face could they demand Baptism otherwise yet to speak properly were not Christians were not of the Church Therefore Clemens Alexandrinus in the end of his Paedagogus bringeth in the Word that is our Lord Christ or his Gospel which he calleth the Paedagogue for governing these Children and Novices in Christianity in their way to the Church giving up this Office to himselfe as being to become for the future their Doctor and Master and Bishop◠at their entrance into the Churcch The passage is remarkable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But it is not for me to teach these things further saith the Paedagogue We have need of a Doctor to expound these holy Oracles and to him we must go And truly it is time for me to give over my Office of Paedagogue and for you to become the Doctors Hearers He receiving you bread with good government having behaved themselves well during the time of their trial shall teach you these Oracles And in good time here is the Church and the onely Doctor the Bridegroom the good mind of a good Father Christ or the Gospel of Christ is the Paedagogue that guides and governs Children in Christianity to the School that is to the Church to demand baptism having behaved themselves well by the way during the time of their triall When that is done he teaches them no more as children are taught by a Paedagogue But as a Master teaches his Scholars so Christ those that are become his Disciples by being baptized Therefore afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Paedagogue having set us in the Church hoth recommended us to himselfe the Word the Doctor and Bishop of all And this is our Lords Commission to his Apostles to make them Disciples that should take up his Crosse by baptizing them in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Then to teach them to observe all that he had given them in Charge The same is the ground of Cassanders observation which is much to my purpose That the Church putteth no man to penance whatsoever his life may have been for any thing done before Baptism Zosimus thinks he layes a great imputation upon Christianity in pretending that Constantine finding no means to come clear of the bloud of his Wife Fausta or his Son Crispus gave ear to Christianity because it pretended to wash away all sin That Constantine should seek those meanes which Heathenism pretendeth to purge sin with may well be thought to proceed from the malignity of the Gentiles against the first Christian Prince For the rest not disputing of his doings before Baptism because the Church judgeth not that those are without though he professed Christianity when they were done it would be a disparagement to that Fountain which God hath opened for Juda and Jerusalem that there should be any sin which it cannot cleanse supposing the change sincere which the undertaking of Christianity professeth If not God is his Judge But though the Church refuse no man Baptism because professing Christianity he had delayed his Baptism yet as it appeared sufficiently by the scruple that was made of the salvation of those that died in that estate that the Church disallowed it so when they were come into the Church a mark of the authority of the Church was fastened upon them in that those that were baptized in their beds were made uncapable by one of those Canons which I spoke of in the first Book that were in force before the Church had any Canons in writing of being promoted to the Clergy For this you shall find objected to Noratianus by Cornelius in Eusebius Eccles Hist VII 43. That by the Canons he ought not to have been promoted to any rank in the Clergy because he had been baptized in his bed of sickness having delayed his Baptism for fear of persecution till he found himselfe in danger of death And though the Church put no man to penance for his life before Baptism because Christianity it selfe pretendeth a totall change in him that imbraceth it and that the Church judgeth not but presumeth of the truth of that change which is pretended by him that is without yet it fasteneth a mark of the authority which it purchaseth upon Christianity by providing that no man who had been ever put to penance should be promoted to any rank of the Clergy The reason is expressed in those words of Clemens his Epistle to the Corinthians pag. 54. speaking of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Preaching over Countreys and Cities they made the First-fruits of them whom they had converted Bishops and Ministers of them that should believe The learned Bloudell will have these First-fruits to signifie those that were first converted to Christianity A mistake more sutable to the prejudice which he had undertook to maintain then to the rest of his learning For who knoweth not that First-fruits are the best the floure the cream of the whole And if no man that dared not to professe Christianity no man that had been put to penance for failing having profest it is to be of the Clergy you see why they are called the First-fruits of Christians In the mean time if the Church judge not those that are without doth it not judge those that are within according to S. Paul Show me any thing that ever was called a Church that is shew me the time when and the place where Christianity was ever settled and exercised according to order and rule where those that had received Baptism were not under a discipline
to depend upon the consequence of it No more can Christianity allow the assnrance of this truth I am justified supposing it to be true to be the ground why it is true And if any man say that justifying faith is not the assurance of this truth I am justified but of this truth I am â—redestinate to life the reason being Because the obedience of Christ appointed for the salvation of the elect alone is imputed to him once for all to life not onely for the present to righteousnesse can any reason be given why this reason should not take effect from everlasting but depend upon the knowledge of it wherein justifying faith is said to consist For if the onely consideration that intitles him to the promises of the Gospel be the obedience of Christ why shall not that right take place from the same date from which the consideration tendered for it takes place Why should not the opinion of the Antinomians at least that which I make to be ground of that Heresie take place rather then this of Presbyterians For both of them being equally destructive to the Gospel of Christ that which agrees best with it self the several assumptions whereof are most consistent with and consequent to one another is doubtlesse the more receivable Now whether we make justification granted from everlasting to the elect for whom alone Christ was sent to go before faith as the object goes before the knowledge and assurance of it Or whether we make it to depend upon faith though passed meerely in consideration of the obedience of Christ deputed for the salvation of the elect alone there will remaine no obligation upon the elect to performe any obedience to God being intitled to and assured of salvation afore it and without it For the Gospel is the last Law of God derogatory to any declaration of his will antecedent to it and not suffering any other to take place further then is provided by it So that supposing that God hath published salvation to the elect meerly in consideration of Christ without requiring any terms at their hands Well may it be said that notwithstanding he may determine them to do those things which he would have them do that shall be saved But it cannot be said that he can oblige them to any condition to be performed of their free choice Or consequently that there can remaine any difference between good and bad in the doings of them who are free from all obligation to the meanes because intitled to the end without them And truly it is more modesty to say that the actions of the elect to which God determines them upon these terms are not good then to say as by consequence it must be said that the actions of the reprobates are bad which upon these terms are not their actions but Gods nor imputable to any will of theirs but to his But this inconvenience being unavoidable whether we make justification to depend upon that faith which consists in assureing us of the same and that is to make an object to depend upon the act which it produceth or that faith to depend upon it as included in predestination to liâ—e both of them being destructive to Christianity it is but a poor plaister by contradicting a mans self to seem to salve so great an inconvenience And truly t is much to be wondered at how those that professe nothing but Scripture could ever perswade themselves of an imagination for which there is nothing to be alledged out of the whole tenor of the Scriptures Whatsoever can be produced out of the Old Testament for that trust which the people of God might or ought to have in God for the obtaining of his promises whatsoever out of the New for that peace and security with which Christians may and ought to expect the world to come supposing but not granting all that can be pretended thereby do but demand where it is said that a man hath this trust this peace this security by having it and all will be mute And therefore having shewed that the trust and peace of a Christian supposeth that ground upon which he is justified I will spend no more words to shew that the knowledge and assurance of justification or predestination supposes the being of it and that the ground whereupon it takes place CHAP. VIII The objection from S. Paul We are not justified by the Law nor by Workes but by Grace and by Faith Not meant of the Gospel and the workes that suppose it The question that S. Paul speakes to is of the Law of Moses and the Workes of it He sets those workes in the same rank with the workes of the Gentils by the light of nature The civil and outward workes of the Law may be done by Gentiles How the Law is a Pedagogue to Christ THE last reason whereby I prove my intent consists in the assoiling of that Objection which is alledged from the disputes of S. Pauls Epistles arguing that a Christian is not justified by the Law or by the works of the Law and therefore by Grace and by Faith For he that is justified by ingaging himself to professe Christianity and to live according to the same must needs be justified by performing his ingagement Unlesse a man would say that he is justified by making a promise which he never observeth and which it concerns him not to keep being once justified by making of it And truly having said that God admits a man into the state of his Grace in consideration of the act of undertaking this profession I do not onely grant but challenge for my privilege to maintaine that he hold him in the same state in consideration of the act or acts whereby he performes the same And therefore to the Objection I returne this in generall That I do not grant any man to be justified by any thing that supposes not of the Gospel of Christ since the publishing of it That is not by such works as can be done by him that hath not yet admitted and imbraced the Gospel of Christ and that by virtue of that Grace of God which sets on foot the Covenant of Grace For the Law going before the Gospel and being unable to produce that obedience which God would accept in lieu of the World to come further then as containing in it self the Gospel and the effects of it It is manifest that righteousnesse cannot be attributed to the Law nor the works of the Law And yet if we consider that the Gospel it self is a law of God whereby he ties at least himself to certain rerms upon which he declares that he will be reconciled with his enemies There is no reason to understand when S. Paul sayes that a man is not justified by the Law or the works of the Law that he meanes to deny a Christian to be justified by doing according to the Gospel which is the law that God pretends to introduce in stead of that law by which the
Apostle denies any man to be justified For all Christianity acknowledges that the Gospel is implied in the Law neither could the justification of the Fathers before and under the Law by Faith be maintained otherwise And therefore it is no strange thing to say that under the Law there were those that obtained that righteousnesse which the Gospel tendereth though not by the Law but by the Gospel which under the Law though not published was yet in force to such as by meanes of the Law were brought to embrace the secret of it But it cannot there-therefore be said that they were justified by the Law or by the works of it but by Grace and by Faith though the Law was a meanes that God used to bring them to the Grace of Faith And therefore when the Apostles inferences are imployed to fortifie this argument To wit that if a Christian be justified by works depending upon the Covenant of Grace then he hath whereof he may glory which Abraham that was justified by Faith had not Then hath he no meanes to attain that peace and security which the Gospel tendereth all having the conscience of such works as do interrupt it I do utterly deny both consequences For I say that the works that depend upon the Gospel are neither done without the Grace of God from whence the Gospel comes neither are they available to justify him whom the Gospel overtakes in sinne of themselves but by virtue of that Grace of God from whence the Gospel comes Now I challenge the most wilfull unreasonable man in the world to say how he that sayes this challenges any thing whereoâ— he may glory without God who acknowledges to have received that which he tenders from Gods gift and the promise which God tenders in lieu of it from his bounty and goodnesse To say how a man can be more assured that he is in the state of Gods grace then he can be assured of what himself thinks and does For not to decide at present how and how farre a man may be assured of Gods grace whatsoever assurance can be attained must be attained upon the assurance which a man may have of his own heart and actions and that as S Paul saies 1 Cor. 11. 10. No man knows what is in a man but the Spirit of a man that is in him For if it be said â—hat this assurance is from the Spirit of God and therefore supposes not so much as the knowledge of our selves I must except peremptorily that which I premised as a supposition in due place that no man hath the Spirit of God but upon supposition of Christianity And therefore no man can know that he hath the Spirit of God but upon supposition that he knows himself to be a good Christian otherwise it would be impossible for any man to discern in himself between the dictates of a good and bad Spirit seeing it is manifest that among those that professe Christianity many things are imputed to the Spirit of God which are contrary to Christianity Now of the sincerity of that intention wherewith a man ingages to live like a Christian a man may stand as much assured as he can stand assured of his own confidence in God or that he doth indeed believe himself to be predestinate to life And therfore it is no prejudice to that security and peace of conscience which the Gospel tendereth that it presupposeth this ingagement and the performance of it This answer then proceedeth upon these two presumptions That the grace of Christ which is the grace of God through Christ is necessary to the having of that faith which alone justifieth Which the heresy of Socinus denies with Pelagius And that it justifieth not of it self but by virtue of that grace of Christ that is the grace which God declares in consideration of his obedience These presumptions it is not my purpose to suppose gratis without debating the grounds upon which they are to be received having once purposed to resolve wherein the Covenant of Grace stands But I must have leave to take them in hand in their respective places and for the present to dispatch that which presses here which is to shew that the intent of S. Paul and the rest of the Scriptures which he expounds most at large is this That a Christian is not justified by the Law of Moses and those works that are done precisely by virtue thereof not including in it the Gospel of Christ but by undertaking the profession of Christianity and performing the same which is in his language by faith without the workes of the Law and therefore consequently by those workes which are done by virtue of this faith in performance of it And first I appeale to the state of the question in S. Pauls Epistles what it is the Apostle intends to evict by all that he disputes And demand who can or dare undertake that he had any occasion to decide that which here is questioned upon supposition that a Christian is justified by the Covenant of Grace alone which the Gospel tendereth Whether by Faith alone which is the assurance of salvation or trust in God through Christ Or by Faith alone which is the undertaking of Christianity and living according to the same For it is evident in the Scriptures of the Apostles how much adoe they had to perswade the Jewes who had received Christ that the Gentiles which had done the like were not bound to keep the Law which they it is evident did keep These had no ground had they understood from the beginning of their Christianity that their righteousnesse and salvation depended not upon the keeping of it under the Gospel of Christ It is evident that the trouble which Jewish Christians raised in the Churches to whom those Epistles are directed which dispute this point fullest upon occasion of this difficulty was the subject and cause of directing the same What cause then can there be why these Epistles should prove that a Christian is not justified by such works as suppose the Covenant of Grace when as the disease they pretend to cure consists in believing to be justified by the works of Moses Law which supposeth it not For it is evident that had it been received as now that Moses Law is void the occasion of this dispute in these Epistles had ceased what ever benefit besides might have been procured by them for succeeding ages of the Church Is it not plain that the pretense of S. Paul in the Epistle to the Romanes is this that neither the Gentiles by the Law of Nature nor the Jewes by the Law of Moses can obtaine righteousnesse or avoid the judgement of God and therefore that it is necessary for both to imbrace Christianity He that reades the two first chapters cannot question this In the fourteenth chapter together with the beginning of the fifteenth you shall find him resolving upon what terms these two sorts of Christians were to converse with one another And
are justified before God But the inward and Spirituall observation of them at least the purpose and intention of it as it depends upon the grace of Christ which the Gospel publisheth so must it necessarily be included in that faith which in opposition to the works of the Law qualifies Christians for those promises which the Gospel tendereth But that which must remove all doubt of the Apostles meaning in this point must be the removing that difficulty which held the Jewes then and still holds them in the opinion of obtaining righteousnesse and salvation by the Law For certainely could S. Paul have perswaded them that the ancient Fathers from the beginning of whose salvation theyh could not doubt though under the Law yet obtained not salvation by the law but by the Gospel it had been an easie thing for him to have perswaded them to it The Apostles intent therefore is to perswade them to that which because it was hard to perswade them to therefore they continued Jewes and refused to become Christians Now let us suppose that which I have premised that the Law expressely covenanteth onely for the worldly happinesse of that people in the land of promise requiring in lieu of it onely the outward and civil observation of the law But the summe of that outward observation thereof which is expressely covenanted for consisting in the worship of one God whose providence in the particular actions of his creatures it presupposeth maintaining also a Tradition of the immortality of mans soul and of bringing all mens actions to account shall not all that are born under this Law stand necessarily convict that they owe this God that inward and spirituall obedience wherein his worship in Spirit and truth consisteth And seeing the same God tenders them terms of that reconcilement and friendship which maintaines them in that state of this world whereby they may be able and fit to render him such inward and spirituall obedience punctually making good the same to them Have they not reason enough to conclude that they shall not faile of his favour and grace so long as they proceed in a course of such obedience How much more having the examples of the ancient Fathers the doctrine which they delivered by word of mouth the instructions of the Prophets whom God raised up from time to time to assure them that this was that principall intent of Gods law though it made the least noise in it how much more I say must they needs stand convict both of their own obligation to tender God this obedience and also that tendring it they could not faile of Gods favour toward them even as to the life to come Though this cannot be said to be the Gospel of Christ because it containeth not the dispensation of his life in the flesh nor the expresse tender of the life to come in consideration of the profession of his Name and of living according to his doctrine Yet if it be truly said that the Gospel is implied and vailed in the Law either this signifies nothing or this is the thing that it signifies For upon this ground it is manifest that there was alwayes a twofold sense and effect of Moses Law and by consequence a twofold law By virtue of which difference whereas it is said Heb. VII 16. That the legall Priesthood stood by the law of a carnall precept And the precepts thereof are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I said afore And the blood of bulls and of goats and the ashes of the red heifer are said to sanctifie to the cleansing of the flesh Heb. IX 10. 13. On the other side S. Paul saith that the Law is spirituall and that the commandment was given to life and therefore discovers concupiscence to be sinne Rom. VII 7 10 14. And S. Steven saith to his people of Moses that he received living oracles to give unto us Acts VII 38. And S. Paul of himself and his fellow Apostles delivering the doctrine of the Gospel Which things we speak saith he not with words taught by mans wisdome but taught by the holy Ghost comparing spiritual things with spiritual things 1 Cor. II. 13. that is the spiritual things which the Gospel expresseth with the same spiritual things implied by the law As I shewed afore that the same S. Pauls meaning is that the man of God is perfectly furnished to every good work when he is able to make the Scriptures of the Old Testament usefull to instruct reprove teach and comfort Christians in Christianity 2 Tim. III. 16 17. And truly whatsoever is said in the writings of the Apostles or the sayings of our Lord Christ supposing the difference between that which is Spirituall and that which is carnall or literall in the Scriptures must be expounded upon this ground of the Apostle that all the promises of God are yea in Christ and in him amen as S. Paul saith 2 Cor. I. 20. That is to say that the temporall promises of Moses law were intended for and fulfilled in the eternall promises of Christs Gospel For upon this ground there is a Jew according to the letter and a Jew according to the Spirit that is a Christian Rom. II. 28 29. There are sons according to the flesh and sons according to promise Rom. IX 8. and he that was born of the bondmaide was born according to the flesh and persecuted him that was born of the free woman according to the Spirit Gal. IV. 23. 29. For this reason it is said That the Fathers all eat the same spirituall meat and drank the same spirituall drink as we Christians do For they drank of the spirituall rock that followed them which rock was Christ 1 Cor. X. 3 4. Because as Christianity was intended by the law so was Christ by the figures of the law neither is there any other reason to be given why the letter killeth but the Spirit quickneth as S. Paul affirmeth 2 Cor. III. 6. but this Because as the law in the literall sense provides no remedy for those that fall into Capitall crimes but leaves them to the justice of the law So the Spirituall sense of it was not available to bring men to life though available to convict them of sinne So that the Jews whom S. Paul pursueth as guilty of sinne by the conviction of the law stand noverthelesse convict that they were never able however convict of sin to attain righteousnesse by the help of it alone and therfore that they are no lesse obliged to have recourse to the Gospel and to imbrace Christianity then the Gentiles themselves who had no other pretense to avoid the judgement of God which the Gospel publisheth This is the intent of S. Paul in the first chapters of his Epistle to the Romanes which he recapitulates in this generall inference Rom. III. 9. We have pleaded before that Jewes and Gentiles both are under sinne And againe Rom. XI 32. God hath shut up all under disobedience that he might have
restore And supposing that Christ raises onely those that are Christs as S. Paul speaks it is their bodies that he raises at last and that from that death which came by Adam Seeing then it cannot be doubted that S. Paul when he saies that by one man came death meanes the death of the body and seeing death passed upon all it is manifest that Adams sin passed upon all upon whom the death passed which it brought after it For otherwise how can it be said sinne came into the world by one man Is it possible to imagine that all men should propose to themselves to imitate the sinne of Adam Not possible Supposing all Adams posterity sinners to God they may be understood all to have imitated their first Father Adam two wayes For in as much as they sinne against God as he first did they may be said to imitate him in doing the like of that which he did though they had no knowledge of what he did much lesse propose to themselves his example to do that wherein they are said to imitate him in sinning against God This I confesse may truly be said but not to S. Pauls purpose Who intends not to say wherein sinne consists as to say in doing what Adam did But from whence it proceeds that from thence he may shew how it is taken away Now if it be said that all men in sinning do imitate Adam as proposing his example to themselves in the nature of a motive so that therefore it might be said that sinne came into the world by one man and death by sin which the Apostles discourse requires This would be evidently false In as much as the greatest part of the sinnes of mankinde are and have been committed by them that never knew what Adam did so farre from proposing to themselves to do the like So that it cannot be avoided that by the sinne of Adam all sinne came into the world as well as all death And therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seemeth to signifie in whom that is through whom all have sinned as Acts V. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the faith of his name 1 Cor. VIII 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall perish through thy knowledge For if it be said that it is not a handsome manner of speech that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom should relate to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one man which it stands in such a distance from Let him be sure that there is nothing more ordinary in S. Pauls language then such transpositions And seeing death which I have shewed the Apostle speakes of hath equally passed upon all mankind it would be very impertinent to say that it passed upon all men in as much as every man had sinned And truly though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signifie in Greek in as much as all had sinned or so farre as every man had sinned or because all had sinned to wit in Adam by the same reason as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the language of the Poets signifies the same as in the beginning of Homer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet it seems to me evident that the sinne which S. Paul speakes of when he saies that Through the disobedience of one man sin came into the world and death by sinne is the sinne that every man does in the world And therefore when it followeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meaning must be through whom all men have sinned those sins which themselvs do For seeing there was mention of one man afore by whom sinne came into the world it is more reasonable that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be personall relating to that one man through whom all have sinned then reall to signifie because all had sinned And so it is not said by these wordes that all Adams posterity did commit the sinne of Adam in his committing of it But it is said that all the sinne that Adams posterity commits comes by the meanes of Adams sinne that is originall sinne is not expresly but metonymically not formally but fundamentally signified in that all sinne is affirmed to come from that of Adam and evicence also in that death is said to come by it That which hath been said makes me stand astonished to see a Doctor of the Church of England acknowledge no further signification of the Apostles words As by one man sinne came into the world and death by sinne and so sinne passed upon all in whom all have sinned But this That Adam sinned first and so all his posterity after him So that by one man sinne came into the world because coming upon all it must needs come first upon the first Not because his sinne had any influence upon others to cause their sinnes For seeing Pelagius whom it concerned so much to maintaine that Adams sinne did no harme to his posterity having made it the ground of his Heresie could not neverthe lesse put off the force of these words without a shift of imitation though so pittifully â—ame that it could not reach the farre greater part of his posterity It may justly seem strange that he who pretends not to go any thing so farre as Pelagius should not allow that sense of them which Pelagius could not refuse But if he oversee that which obliged Pelagius to grant that they intend to set forth the meanes by which sinne came into the world the observing of it will be enough to exclude his devise For to let passe that which is peremptory in them the comparison between the first and second Adam by whom this Doctor will not deny the righteousnesse of Christians to come otherwise then as the first righteous whatsoever Pelagius or Socinus doe because I cannot void that issue in this place The very processe of S. Pauls dispute having first convicted both Jewes and Gentiles of sin then Chap. IV. shewed how that faith which he preached promiseth righteousnesse requireth us to understand that he comes now to set forth by what meanes this sinne on the one side and this righteousnesse on the other comes into the world Neither will the words of the text be so satisfied wherein we find the same sense repeated in divers expressions which are not all capeable of that equivocation whereof these words by one mans disobedience are For S. Paul saith not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one man but according to the reasons premised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through whom all have sinned and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by that is through the transgression of that one and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 judgement to condemnation out of one besides on the otherside 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift through Grace Rom. V. 12 15 16. And this shall serve for the present to shew how unable this conceit is to stand against the evidence of the words Reserving that which is most peremptory in the matter and the consequence of it till I come to shew that our Lord Christ
thus proceedeth Heb. IX 13 14. For if the blood of Bulls and Goats and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkled sanctify the polluted to the purifying of the flesh how much more shall the blood of Christ who through the everlasting spirit offered himself to God blamelesse cleanse our conscience from dead works to serve the living God For though the Soul of Christ raised from the dead have immortality which is life indissoluable yet it hath not the virtue of it which is to be ascribed to the Spirit which raised him from the dead as vvell as us according to S. Paul Rom. VIII 10. 11. If Christ be in you though the body be dead because of sin yet the Spirit is life because of righteousness But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you he that raised Iesus from the dead shall quicken your mortall bodies also through his Spirit that dwelleth in you And whether the cleansing of sin can be ascribed to any gift bestowed upon the humane Soule of Christ as here they vvould have it ascribed to the immortality thereof let all the World judge I deny not indeed that Christ offers the Sacrifice of himself to the Father in the Heaven of Heavens as the Priest offered him the blood of those Sacrifices which were burnt without the Camp in that Holy of Holies But if I should deny that he offered himself to God vvhen he vvas crucified I might as vvell deny that the Priests offered therein Sacrifices to God when they killed them at the Altar and burnt them upon it So manifest so certain it is that the eternall Spirit by virtue whereof the blood of Christ being offered cleanseth sin was in Christ before his rising again And this is that which S. Paul saith 1 Tim. III. 16. And without crontroversie Great is the mystery of Godliness God was manifested in the Flesh justified in the Spirit preached to the Gentiles seen of Angels believed of the World taken up into Glory It is sayd indeed that the Syriack the Vulgar Latine the Arabick and the Commentaries under S. Ambrose his name all want 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here and understand S. Paul to speak of the Gospel all the while And that the Gospel being sayd to be preached before it is sayd to be taken up into Glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be no more then that it is exalted and glorified As if the order of the words did inforce that which is first sayd to have been first done or as if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not signifie the taking of him up to God but the making of the Gospel famous Such violence will a prejudicate supposition offer even to Gods words rather then to quit an argument For to what sense can the Gospel be sayd to be manifested in the flesh because preached by the man Christ And suppose it may be sayd to be justified by the Spirit as Wisdome is justified by the Children of Wisdome Mat. XI 9. Luke VII 35. how much more proper is it to understand that God who appeared in the flesh should be sayd to be justified so to be in or by the Spirit the Works whereof shewed him so to be as afore Neither shall we need to make any greater doubt of the reading of those vvords of S. Paul Acts XX. 28. Look therefore to your selves and to the whole Flock ever which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to feed the Church of God which he hath gotten with his blood Though the written Copy at S. James and the Syriack read here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because that the Church over which the Holy Ghost makes Bishops it bought with the blood of Christ is the same with that of the Apostle afore that the blood of Christ offered by the eternall Spirit cleanseth sin Neither is it so easie to avoyd the words of the Apostle Heb. XI 16. as some imagine For he took not Angels but the Seed of Abraham he took Suppose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be to challenge which is done by laying hands on that which we challenge Is the ground therefore void upon which he challenges these to life as his own that through feare of death were in bondage does not the whole Epistle argue that this is done by the offering of our flesh saith he not expresly that it behoved him to become like his Brethren in all things and that he is not ashamed to call them Brethren because he that sanctifieth and those who are sanctified are all of one Heb. XI 11. 14. 17. does Christ vindicate mankind or the Seed of Abraham For though this is written to the Hebrews alone yet it was written at such time as all christians understood that it belongs no less to the Gentiles Wherfore it is manifest that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which might seem to signifie Christs challenging mankind or vindicating them into freedome from death as well here as elswhere is restrained by the Text and consequence of the Apostles discourse to signifie the assuming of mans nature by the means whereof he won mankind into freedome and maintains it in the same In fine when the Apostle sayth 1 Pet. I. 11. That the ancient Prophets did search against what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ that was in them did declare and profess the sufferings to come upon Christ and the glories following the same He sheweth plainly that the same Spirit by which they spake by fits dwelt in the flesh of Christ for ever having once assumed it Of which Spirit the Evangelist sayth Marke XI 8. That Jesus knew by the Spirit how the Pharises reasoned of him within themselves For as I sayd afore that when it is sayd in the Old Testament that the word of God came to this or that Prophet an Angel appeared unto him speaking in the person of God vvho vvas therefore vvorshiped as God because the Word of God for vvhich being incarnate our Lord Jesus is for ever to be Worshiped as God vvas in that Angel at the present for that Service So I must further note here that upon such Word of God coming to a Prophet he became inspired that is possessed and acted by the Spirit of God for the time of that Service vvhich God by such a message imployed him about Not that all Prophets did receive such Word by such message from God before they spake those things which we believe still they spake by the Spirit of God For there is a great deal of appearance in the Scripture for that which the Jewes doctors deliver unto us Abarbanel by name alleging Maimoni for his saying upon Numb XI that there are inferior degrees of Prophesie which comes not by apparitions in which a man saw one that spake to him in Gods Name but sometimes meerly by inspiration of Gods Spirit inwardly moving either to act or to speak as
Church which they corrupted by denying these attributes to the man Jesus attributed the same things to him which they denying were therefore excluded out of the Church When S. John proceedeth saying We saw his glory as the glory of the onely begotten Sonne of God he refers to that which went afore he dwelt among us Now seeing it is so ordinary for the Jewes to call the majesty of God dwelling among men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the very word that S. John uses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are obliged thereby to understand that the majesty of God dwelling among us in the tabernacle of Christs flesh bodily as figuratively it had done in the Tabernacle or Temple of the Jews declared it self notwithstanding by those glorious works which it wrought in his flesh to be what it was For the title of Sonne of God is given in the Old Testament to the Angels first and to the Messias when David saith Ps LXXXIX 18. I will make him my first born higher then the Kings of the earth Whereby it is evident that this title in the Literall sense belonged first to David Of whom also he that will maintaine the difference between the literall and the Spirituall sense upon that ground which I setled before must maintaine those words of David Psal II. 7. Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee To be said Now I suppose that those who expected the Messias to come as a temporall Prince to deliver the people of Israel from the yoke of their oppressors into the free use of that Law which they had received from God as did not onely the rest of the world when Christ came but even his own disciples before his rising againe could by no meanes be informed of that Spirituall kingdome which by the dwelling of the Word in our flesh was intended to be raised Which if it be true though they called the Messiah the Sonne of God as well as the Sonne of David yet is it impossible that they should conceive the same ground for which he is so called and by consequence understand the title in the same sense as we do And this difference of signification is necessary even in the understanding of the Gospel For when the Centurion saith at our Lords death Mark XV. 39. Of a truth this man was the Sonne of God It is not reasonable to imagine that he who dreamed not at all of his rising againe but was a meer heathen should call him the Sonne of God in that sense which we believe But either as Heathenisme allowed Sonnes of the Gods as some thinke or as by conversing with the Jews they had understood them to hold the Messias whom they expected to be the Sonne of God as Prince raised by God What shall we say then of the Apostles demand Vnto which of the angels said he at any time Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee When we find the title of Sonnes of God in the Old Testament attributed to Angels Surely it is necessary to have recourse to that sense in the which it was then known that Christians attributed this title to our Lord Still known by the honour which then and now the Church tendereth him according to it For what will all that Socinus acknowledgeth availe to make good the Apostles assumption when he saies that our Lord is the Sonne of God because conceived without man by the holy Ghost in the womb of a Virgine Is this any more then Adam may challenge for which he is called the Sonne of God Luke III. 38 For the effective cause entereth not into the nature of that which it produceth Neither importeth it any thing to the state of our Lord that he was conceived of the holy Ghost if we suppose nothing in him but a soul and a body which those that are born of man and woman have How then is the title of the Sonne of God incompetible to the Angels which Adam thus farre challenges If you look back upon the premises there remaines no doubt nor any way to escape it otherwise The holy Ghost overshadowing the blessed Virgine not onely workes the conception of a Sonne but dwells for ever according to the fullnesse of the Godhead in the manhood so conceived as by the nature of the Godhead planted in the Word which then came to dwell in the manhood so conceived Therefore that holy thing which is borne of the Virgine being called the Sonne of God is made so much above the Angels as the esteem which this name imports is above any thing that is attributed to them in the Scriptures Therefore is this Sonne of God honoured as God during his being upon earth by them that were instructed to understand the effect of it though they that were not disciples but took it onely for a title of the Messias which they knew he pretended to be perhaps conceived not so much by it Therefore our Lord himself poses the Pharisees how they would have David to understand the Messias to be his Lord whom they knew to be his Sonne Mat. XXII 42 45. Mark XII 35 37. Luke XX. 41 44. This is then that which S. Paul saith Col. I. 19. For in him it pleased God that all the fullnesse should dwell And Col. II. 9. 10. For in him dwelleth all the fullnesse of the Godhead bodily And Ye are filled through him Speaking of Christ I shewed you before that the heresies of that time some whereof it is manifest were then seducing the Colossians did all agree in preaching God the Father of all things to be unknown together with all that belonged to the compleating of the Godhead till they made him known And all this contrived by the devil to subvert the Faith of Christ by counterfeiting something like it in sound like false coyne to cozen the simple with Whereas therefore S. Paul here saith that the fullnesse of the Godhead dwelleth bodily in Christ And our Lord so often in S. Johns Gospel that the Father dwelleth in him and he in the Father And the fullnesse of the holy Ghost dwelleth in the Word incarnate as I shewed even now It is manifest that they laboured to introduce a counterfeit Fullnesse of the Godhead of their own devising into that esteem and worship which the fullnesse of the Godhead contained in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost preached by our Lord Christ and his Apostles challengeth And therefore that the fullnesse of the Godhead challenged by S. Paul to dwell in the flesh of Christ must stand in opposition to that fullnesse which these sects worshipped Being challenged by S. Paul as vindicating the Christian Faith from that corruption wherewith these Sects pretended to adulterate it And being challenged by those Sects in opposition to S. Paul and the Christian Faith which he vindicateth to rest in those whom they severally preached not in the Sonne and holy Ghost together with the Father as he maintaineth For when the fullnesse of
the Godhead is said to dwell bodily in the Sonne it is to be understood that the holy Ghost also dwells in him without measure which with the Father makes up that fullnesse that S. Paul understands in opposition to those which the heresies preached For as it is plaine that the Valentinians worshipped their thirty Aeones or intellectual worlds so it is certain that the rest of their Sects worshipped that fullnesse which they preached Nay those that held the world to be made by Angels that fell away from the fullnesse worshipped also those Angels which the Christians call devils as the heathen did and all Magicians do as all ages witnesse This also is the reason why S. Paul saith further that the fullnesse of the Godhead dwelleth in Christ bodily because in the Temple and Sanctuary and Ark of the Covenant and Sacrifices and Ceremonies of that people all pledges of Gods presence it is certaine to Christians that the fullnesse of the Godhead dwelt as the body in the shadow equally correspondent to it For so I shewed you afore that the ark of the Covenant which in the XXIV Psalme is called the Lord of glory is by the Apostle said to be our Lord Christ But this reason is imployed by S. Paul to make opposition against them who pretended the Law to be given by those Angels the worship of whom together with the observation of the Law or at least of such precepts thereof as they might pretend the said Angels to have revealed to them they undertook to revive that by this counterfeit Christianity they might avoid that persecution which the Jewes out of their zeal for the Law brought upon true Christians For if it were the fulnesse of the Godhead which dwelt figuratively in the ark of the Covenant as now bodily in the flesh of Christ then were not those Angels authors of the Law nor the observations thereof to be renewed together with the worship of those Angels And therefore it is not to be omitted that when S. Paul addes And ye are filled through him who is the head of all principality and power Through whom ye are also circumcised with that circumcision which is done without hands by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh through the circumcision of Christ He withdraweth them from the observations of the Law by declaring that the intent of them is fulfilled in good Christians from the fullnesse of the Spirit that is of the Godhead that dwelt in Christ Which is that which S. John intendeth when he saith That we saw his glory as of the onely begotten Son of God full of grace and truth That is to say Of that grace which contained the truth of those figures and shadows As it followeth by and by Of his fulnesse we all have received and grace for grace Because the Law was given by Moses but grace and peace came by Jesus Christ For the Grace of the Gospel of Christ as it comes in stead of the grace of Moses Law and both from the fullnesse of Christ which as I said afore was resident for the time in that Angel that delivered the Law to Moses in Gods Name In fine so manifest are those words that Grotius himself who otherwise in expounding this Epistle hath warped to the Socinians could not forbear to avow the bodily dwelling of the fullnesse of the Godhead in Christ to signify that which the Church calls the hypostaticall union of the natures Here I argue that when S. Paul saith Phil. II. 6 7. that our Lord being in the form of God emptied himself taking the form of a slave this emptinesse which he took is directly opposed by S. Paul to that fullnesse of the Godhead which he had and dissembled by the emptinesse of that state which he assumed For here it is much to be observed that as S. Paul affirmeth the fullnesse of the Godhead to dwell bodily in Christ because the holy Ghost is understood alwayes to be resident in the Word incarnate So by the same reason the Father also is contained in the Sonne as the Sonne in the Father likewise God the Father being so called in the New Testament where the Sonne is revealed in respect of the Sonne who revealed it and whom it revealeth And that in opposition to that fullness from which each of the aforesaid Sects pretended the Revelation of the Father otherwise unknown It is not therefore to be doubted that our Lord when he saies as many times in the Gospel he does John X 38. For my works sake believe that the Father is in me and I in him XIV 7-11 If ye had known me ye would have known my Father also And henceforth ye know him and have seen him Philip saith unto him Lord shew us the Father and it shall suffice us Jesus saith to him So long am I with you and knowest thou not me Philip he that hath seen me hath seen the Father and how sayest thou shew us the Father Believest thou not that I am in the Father and the Father in me the words that I speak to you I speak not of my self but the Father that abideth in me he doth the works Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me If not believe me for the very works sake I say it must not it cannot be doubted that our Lord meanes by these words not that he said nothing did nothing but by commission from God which every Prophet could say so farre as a Prophet And the Jews need not to have taken up stones to throw at him when he said John X. 10. I and the Father are one had he meant no more but that it was his Fathers will which he declared But of necessity these sayings must import that as the Word containeth the Holy Ghost and is contained in it So is the Son contained in the Father and the Father in the Son who revealeth him as the Gnosticks hereupon took occasion to pretend that the unknown Father was contained in that Fulness by which the severall Sects of them pretended that he was made known And therefore when S. John saith That the glory of our Lord was seen to be the glory of the onely begotten Son of God though it be granted that the title of onely begotten implyeth and insinuateth by way of elegancy dearly beloved because every onely Son is so as you may see it shewd by testimonies both of the Scripturs and other writers in Grotius yet if this be the reason of that elegance in the word the ground of it therefore cannot be denied And so the question will have recourse why the only begotten Son and if not because conceived by the Holy Ghost then because in him dwelleth bodily the fulness of the Godhead To which sense the words of the Apostle John I. 18. are very pertinent No man hath seen God at any time The onely begotten Son that is in the bosome of the Father he hath declared him Hear
agree that this is said When I can charge the Jewes themselves acknowledging likewise that this is meant of the Messias that the title and workes and attributes and worship of God are ascribed to the Messias even by the Old Testament I need not be thought to weaken the cause of our common Christianity by making the ground of it unremoveable Neither shall I stick by the same reason to acknowledge among the rest of those titles which Isaiah prophesieth of Ezekias noâ— that his name shall be the mighty God but that is as the pillar of Moses is called God is my standard so the title of Ezekias shall be God is mighty Because of the might God should shew by him in doing good to his people And as I will not say that he can be called the Father of eternity so I can say and do that whosoever will maintaine that God intended that Moses Law should cease which is so often said to be given for ever in the Scripture must grant that those words which may signify eternity when the matter or circumstance of the speech requires do signifie no more then a time whereof the term is unknown in the Old Testament I say likewise that the then people of God were to understand that Isaiah promised them Gods Spirit and the graces thereoâ— to rest upon their Princes by whom he promiseth them deliverance But all this being granted when it is either granted or proved on the other side that the name and workes and titles and worship of the onely true God are ascribed and challenged to our Lord Christ by his word of the New or Old Testament and the grounds upon which the meaning of it is evidenced upon supposition hereof I will neverthelesse challenge that sense of these Prophesies in behalf of our Lord Christ by virtue of the subject matter of the New Testament and the whole current thereof determining the capacity of those words wherein these Prophesies are delâ—vered unto it For I professe and maintaine that the difference between the Literall and mysticall sense of the Old Testament necessary to be maintained by all that will maintaine the truth of Christianity against the Jews cannot be maintained without granting such an equivocation in the words of it as the correspondence between the kingdom of heaven and that of Israel the Priesthood of Christ and Aaron the Propheticall office of Josua and Jesus in fine between the land of Canaan and the heavenly Paradise produceth And that when this is maintained throughout the Scripture then is that great work of Gods wisdome in making way for the Gospel by the Law glorified to the conviction of the Jews which when it is sometimes challenged and elsewhere waved becomes a stumbling block to the obstinacy of that willfull People It remaines that I omit not those things which Solomon preaches of the Wisdom of God in so sublime and mysterious language that when we read S. Paul intitling Christ The power of God and the wisdome of God 1 Cor. I. 24. we cannot refuse to understand them of the Godhead dwelling in his flesh as the Church hath alwayes done Wisdome was at the making of all things was brought forth before any thing was made Gods delight that delights it self in Gods workes especially in conversing with mankinde Prov. VIII 23-31 Adde hereunto Prov. IV. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wisdom is the principal or beginning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Adde Prov. III. 19 20. that God made heaven and earth by Wisdome Adde the words of a Prophet to whom God sends his friends to be expiated and reconciled to God Job XLII 7 8. that Wisdome is known to God alone as that which he looked upon when he ordained the creation of the universe Job XXVIII 20-28 Adde the Prophet David signifying the same in fewer words In wisdome hast thou made them all Psal CIV 24. that Wisdome which saith to all men by Job XXVIII 29. by David Psal CXI 10. by Solomon Prov. I. 2 IX 9. Eccles XII 15. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdome In which Wisdome the whole businesse of Solomons doctrine seems to be that the whole happinesse of man consisteth Is all this with Socinus but a figure of Rhetorick called Prosopopaeia whereby Solomon brings in Wisdom in the person of Gods favourite to signify that it comes from God and to inflame all men to love that which Solomon had prayed for to God to make him a happy Prince 1 Kings III. 9 11 12. 2 Chron. I. 10 11 Truly this were something for a Jew to acknowledge that the wisdome of Gods people which Moses also shews consisted in their Lawâ— Deut. IV. 6. came from God to order their doings to God For from hence it will follow that as those that are to give account to God of the most inward intentions and inclinations of the heart so are they obliged to order them and all the productions of them according to his will and to his honour and service But for a Christian that hath learnt the whole work of the Law to have been preparative to that which our Lord by his Gospel was to do and that before the Law the Fathers were instructed to live as Christians now do or should do the Law adding nothing but civile Lawes to inforce the obedience of them that rebelled against their discipline and ceremonies to figure the Gospel to come for such a one not to understand when Gods Prophets proclaime that the wisdome by which God made the World takes delight to converse with mankind to reduce it from Idols to the worship of God to stirre up Prophets to preserve them in it and to foretell Christ to come that the same wisdome which did this afterwards in our flesh did it afore without it is a fault to the Christianity which he professeth He that writ the Wisdome of Solomon though no Christian â—aw more when he said Wisd X. 1 2. This Wisdome preserved the first Father of the World who was made alone and drew him out of his sinne and gave him strength to rule all things Proceeding to shew the same of the Fathers that succeed The same author having presaced Wisd VI. 23. that he would shew how Wisdome was brought forth adds Wisd VII 22-27 that description which attributes to Wisdome the same that the Apostle ascribes to Christ The image or shine of Gods glory and substance the unstained mirror of his virtue the breath of his Power the flowing forth of the glory of the most High which sustaineth all things that he made and remaining the same renewâ—th or maketh new all things and setling upon holy mens mindes makes them Gods friends and Prophets And this having premised that the Spirit of God goes through all the World and that Wisdome is a Spirit that convinceth the secret perversenesse of the heart Wisd â— 5 6 7. Then of the death of the first-born in Egypt XVIII 14 15 16. For when all things were
vvhich is the proper signification of the Greek vvord here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense vvith the Latine create liberos as I sayd I know how much dispute there is that our Lord when he sayth The Father is greater then I is to be understood of his humane nature VVhich to me I confesse seems very hard that our Saviour should tell his Disciples for their comfort that God is greater then man and that therefore they ought to be comforted because he was going to God And having alwaies given this reason vvhy the eternall VVord of God was imployed in redeeming mankind because it came from God from everlasting I find that the priviledge of being the fountain of the Godhead vvhich is of necessity proper to the Father alone importeth that which the Sonne and the holy Ghost cannot have Not as if they had not the Godhead which is the same in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost But because they have it not from themselves and that it is necessarily more to give then to receive Whereupon it cannot be denied that the Sonne and the holy Ghost though honoured with the titles works attributes and worship of God are neverthelesse expressed and signified by the Scriptures as depending upon the Father and as something of his namely his Sonne and his Spirit though the same God also neverthelesse And this is without doubt the true answer to most of what Crellius brings in the second part of his first book De Deo that our Lord came not from himself nor to do his own will or to seek his own glory that he that believeth in him believeth not in him but in the Father that sent him John XII 4â— that he was called of God as Aaron Heb. V. 4. 5. that he received instruction from the Father that he prays to him that his words and workes are not his own but his Fathers and much more containing one and the very same difficulty which is assoiled by saying That wheresoever the weaknesse of his humane nature is not signified by the importance of what is said the rest is to be referred to the commission which he undertook to execute in our flesh which Commission supposes his coming from the Father of everlasting as the ground and reason of his undertaking of it This is that which the Prophet David signifieth Psalm XL. 7 8 9. Sacrifice and meat offering thou desirest none mine ears hast thou bored Which the Apostle Heb X. 9. quotes thus A body hast thou fitted for me The taking of our flesh being his giving up of himself for a servant to do Gods message in it as the servant that had his ear bored was to be free no more Exod. XXI 5. Burnt offering and sacrifice for sinne thou acceptest not Then said I loe I come To do thy will O God written of me in the voâ—lume of the Book is my desire yea thy Law is within my heart For his freedome in undertaking this commission as it supposeth a ground why it should be tendered so it importeth that obedience which God rewardeth And this is the cause why our Saviour tells his disciples If you loved me you would be glad that I go to my Father because the Father â—â— greater then I For if the Commission came from him then is he to performe all that the execution thereof inferreth That is to exalt our Lord to that estate which his disciples would be glad of if they knew what it were Nor let any man think that there is any danger of Arrius his heresie in all this I confesse the reasons I have advanced against Socinus do not formally destroy the pretense of the Arrians And the reason is because I find that I cannot kill those two birds with one stone Nor make the reasons that I advance to evidence the meaning of these Scriptures which are in question not to be that which Socinus would have to reach so farre as expresly and formally to destroy that sense which Arrius pretendeth I am confident that who will take the paines to consider that the Word was in the beginning when all was made shall have no ground to say that there was another beginning before the beginning of all things when that Word was made That this word was with God at the beginning as his bosome counseller Shall not sâ—y when God wanted his counsell That this Word was God Shall not say that any Christian is to count that God which is made of nothing That all things were made by it That any thing was made by that which is not God That the glory thereof in our flesh is the glory of the onely begotten Sonne of the Father shall make any difference between the honour of the Father and the honour of the Sonne And so I count it enough that the sense of the Scriptures here pleaded hath in it enough to resist the Arians with though this resistance be not here expressed But thus much is evident that as the Latine Fathers especially since S. Augustine have understood these words to be meant of our Lord Christ according to his humane nature so the Greek Fathers have understood them to be true even according to the divine nature upon that reason which I have declared And S. Hilary of the Latine Church though afore S. Augustine expresseth the reason which I have alledged ab authoritate originis because the priviledge of being Author and originall in respect of the Sonne and holy Ghost is that which they in respect of the Father can have nothing to countervail And this I say because I am perswaded that it is a consideration necessary to the maintaining and evidencing of the Tradition of the Church in this point For those that understand the state of this dispute must needs know that the most ancient writers of the Church Justine the Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian Origen and the rest that were before the Council of Nicaea do speak of the Sonne of God as of the Minister and workman to execute the counsels of God in making and governing of the World And therefore are spoken of by very learned men of these times enemies enough to those Heresies as men to be suspected in the sincerity of the Christiane Faith A thing not to be marvailed at in those that believe the expresse act and decree of the present Church to be the reason and ground of believing For upon that account what hinders that to become matter of Faith being decreed by those which are enabled on behalf of the Church which was not matter of Faith an hour before But those that draw the reason why they believe from the evidence which the society communion of the church tender to common sense that nothing could be refused by the whole body thereof but that which appeared to all contrary to that which all have received from the beginning will count it a violent abuse to all reason to make the Christiane Faith larger
because speech it self standing upon reason shews it to be the former as that whereupon it standeth But even so it maters not For though God had not yet sent forth his speech he had it no lesse within himself with and within his very reason silently thinking and disposing with himself those things which he was to utter by speech Further Cap. VI. VII Nam ut primum Deus voluit ea quae cum Sophia ratione sermone disposuerat intrase in substantias species sâ—as edere ipsum primum protulit sermonem habentem intra se individuas suas rationem sapientiam ut per ipsum â—ierent universa per quem erant cogitata disposita imo facta jam quantum in Deisensu Hoc enim eis deerat ut coram quoque in suis speciâ—bus substantiis cognoscerentur tenerentur Tunc igitur etiam ipse sâ—rmâ— speciem ornatum suum sumit sonum vocem cum dicit Deus Fiat Lux. Hâ—c est nativitas perfecta sermonis dum ex Deo procedit conditus ab â—o primum ad cogitatum in nomine Sophiae Dominus condidit me initium viarum dehinc generatus ad effectum cum pararet coelum aderam ei siâ—â—l exinde â—um patrem sibi faciens de quo procedendo filius factus est primogenitus ut ante omnia genitus unigenitus ut solus ex Deo genitus proprie de vulvâ— cordis ipsius secundum quod Pater ipse testatur Eructavit cor meum sermonem optimum Ad quem deinceps gaudens proinde gaâ—deâ—tem in persona illiâ—â— Filius meus es tu ego hodie genui te ante Luciferum genui te Sic filius ex sua persona profitetur Patrem in nomine Sophiae dominus condidit me initium viarum in opera sua For as soon as God pleased to put forth into their own substances and kinds those things which he had ordered within himself with the reason and speech of wisdom the first he brought forth was speech having in it reason and wisdom from which it is unseparable that all things might be made by that whereby they had been devised and disposed nay made aleready as to the sense of God For they wanted onely this to be known and had in their own kindes and substances Then therefore even Gods speech it self assumed his own kinde and dresse sound and voice when God said Let there be Light This is the perfect birth of speech as it proceedeth from God First made by him for a thought devised by him under the name of Wisdome the Lord made me the beginning of his wayes then ingendered to effect I was together with him when he prepared the heavens thenceforth making him his Father for I read Patrem sibi faciens not Pâ—câ—m as I find it promised by proceeding from whom he became a Sonne firstborn as born before all things and onely as alone ingendered by God from the proper womb of his heart according as the Father himself also witnesseth My heart hath uttered an excellent speech To whom rejoycing according as he rejoyceth in the Fathers person he saith Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee And before the morning starre have I ingendred thee As the Sonne also in his person professeth the Father under the name of Wisdome The Lord made me the beginning of wayes unto his works All this if it be understood as becometh God will containe nothing prejudiciall to the Faith of Gods Church whether it containe the true sense of the Scriptures or not through sound and voice and speech and thought or devise if they be understood as they signify in Gods creatures are inconsistent with his excellence But so farre it will be from Arius his heresie as to answer the very ground of it by saying That the Word or reason or Wisdome of God which incaâ—nate is our Lord Christ was from everlasting in God but not under the notion quality or attribute of Sonne till the making of the World And that as Tertulliane said in the place from whence the objection is quoted accidentis rei mentio the mention of an accessory to wit the declaration of Gods will to make the World gave him the denomination of Son which he bore not afore according to Tertulliane whether he hit the true sense of the Scripture in it or onely indeavour so to do though alwayes the same from everlasting The answer to this difficult passage of Tertulliane may serve for another contra Praxeam Cap. II. unicum Deum non alias putat credendum quam si ipsum eundemque Patrem Filium Spiritum dicat Quasi non sic quoquc unus sit omnia dum ex uno omnia per substantiâ— scilicet unitatem nihilominus custodiatur aeconomiae sacramentum quae unitatem in trinitatem disponit tres dividens Patrem Filium Spiritum Sanctum Tres autem not sâ—aâ—â— sed gradu non substantia sed forma nec potestate sed specie Vnius autem status unius substantiae unius potestatis quia unus Deus ex quâ— gradus isti formae species in nomine Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti deputantur He thinkes he is not otherwise to believe one God then saying that the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost are all one As if one were not all as well if all proceed from one By unity of substance forsooth preserving neverthelesse the mystery of that distribution which disposeth the Vnity into a Trinity ordering three the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost But not three for state but for rank not for substance but for forme not for power but for specialty But of one state one substance one power because one God from whom those ranks and formes and specialties are understood These words non statu sed gradu both Cardinal Bellarmine and Valentia meeting in a passage of Bullinger not naming his author have charged with Arianisme being indeed Tertuallians words manifestly expressing the Unity of the Godhead the substance state and power of it in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost by their personall properties characters or notions in the terms of gradus formae species rankes formes and specialties no other being then in use In like sort Ignatius according to the true Copies saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Goa was born Epist ad Ephes he calls him there Son of God and Son of man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God manifest as man He calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The eternall Word that came not forth from silence Epist ad Magnes Athanasius de Synodis quotes out of him We have one Physitian bodily and incorporeal ingendred and not ingendred God in man Justine calleth him the word of God indistinct from him in virtue and Power and â—â—caranate He makes him the Lord of hosts and the King of Glory He expresseth his procession by light kindled from light and fire from fire
uprightnesse of Adams posterity upon the condition of his obedience when as it is evident enough that it was in his power to have done otherwise And this account being rendred it will be easie to say why Eve found not the effect of her transgression before Adam had eaten the forbidden fruit To wit Not because she should never have found any had not he sinned But because the effects of it do not necessarily follow instantly at all times and in all things and that in tempting Adam which was the next thing she did they did instantly appear As for the great difficulty how the spirituall substance of the soul should receive a taint from the carnall concupiscence whereby it cometh to be united to the body I will here challenge the benefit of that principle which I have once established That which once was not matter of Faith can never by processe of time or any act the Church can do become matter of Faith Though we may become more obliged to believe it not by the generall obligation of Christianity but by having studied the reasons by which it is deduced from the principles of Faith Besides that light of reason which Faith presupposeth And by the same reason the Church may justly injoyne it to be received â—hat is to say not openly contradicted For such is the matter of the propagation of mans soul whether by transplanting as part of the Fathers hold or by immediate existence from God in the body which nature prepareth for it Which having been manifestly disputable in S. Augustines time I hold it very consequent to that which I have done in the point of the Trinity whether it may be made evident to reason or not to leave it without producing any mans reason by which I pretend to maintaine that it is either traâ—uced or created A wayes supposing that no reason can be receivable which provideth not for the immortality of it which no man questions Lastly it is manifest that actuall sinne â—s first called by the name of sinne because first subject to sense but so that the displeasure of God and by consequence the name of sinne is no lesse reall against habituall sinnes So I will confesse further as afore of the terms of essence and person in the mystery of the blessed Trinity that they were brought into the Church to prevent the malice of hereticks and to settle a right understanding in that which was necessary to be received by Christians So now that the terme of Original sinne was first brought in by S. Augustine and the Church of his time to expresse that ground upon which the Church had from the beginning maintained the grace of our Lord Christ and the necessity of it But that thâ—s ground is not to be maintained unlesse we acknowledge besides those habits of sinne which we contract an habituall inclination to sinne bred in our nature from the fall of Adam which may be called sinne in regard of the likenesse and correspondence of it to and with other inclinations to sinne contracted by custome Having thus set aside this opinion before I come to decide the difficulty proposed I hold it necessary to debate that which both parts seem to take for granted neither of them having expressed any reason to oblige us so to take it That is whether Adam were created to supernaturall happinesse which is that which Christians now expect in the presence of God for everlasting and therefore indowed with those graces which might make him capable of it Or onely in a state of naturall happinesse consisting in the content of this life onely and supposing perfect obedience to God in the course of it Were it but for the the repute I have of Grotius for his skill in the Scriptures who in one of his Annotations upon Cassander hath declared this opinion for part of his judgement I should count it worth the debating But I have found it further maintained by reasons which seem to me considerable and no way prejudiciall to the Faith Which notwithstanding I do not intend to propose for mine own ingaging my self to maintaine this but to confront with the reasons brought for it what I find reasonable to be said on the other side that in a nice and obscure point the discreet reader may chuse what he shall think most fit to allow Now all the argument that can be drawn into consequence on either side arising from the relation of Moses compared with such texts of the New Testament as may give light to it It is first argued That seeing God first framed man of the dust of the earth and breathed into him the breath of life and man became a living soule It seemeth evident that he was made in a state of naturall life onely S. Paul having said in comparing him with Christ 1 Cor. XV. 45. So also it is written The first man Adam became a living soul The last Adam became a quickning Spirit Meaning to say That as Moses saith that Adam became a living soul So not that Moses saith but that Christians may say that Christ is become a quickning Spirit For hereupon it followes in S. Paul that as that which is spirituall was to follow so that which is naturall or animall was to go before But to this on behalf of the other part me thinks it may be said That Moses as all the Old Testament speakes onely of the state of our naturall life but intends by the correspondence between materiall and spiritual things as the figure and that which it figures to signify to us that which belongs to that spirituall life which the Gospel introduces Of which intent all that I have produced to settle that difference between the litterall and mysticall sense of the Old Testament is evidence So that Gods breathing the breath of life into mans nostrills is the figure of his breathing the spirituall life of Grace into the soul which divers ancient Fathers of the Church have understood to be signified by the same words and that according to the true ground and rule of expounding the Scripture if they suppose the breath of naturall life signified first by the same words to be inspired as a figure of the spirituall life of grace To which agrees well enough that which followes That man became a living soul in correspondence to the second Adam who is become a quickning Spirit according to S. Paul For Christ is become a quickning Spirit because he shall raise the mortall bodies of those in whom his Spirit dwelt here But Adam though we suppose him to be made a living soul in respect of the life of Grace yet had that life from the Spirit of Grace the fullnesse whereof dwelt in Christ On the other side it is argued that seeing man was made in the image of God and his likenesse Gen. I. 26 27. IX 6. and that the image of God consists in that righteousnesse and true holinesse to which Christians are regenerated by grace Ephes IV.
from everlasting possessed of all that he can desire and therefore not to be moved with the desire of any thing which he hath not to procure it But when I say God will have this to be for that I say that God hath appointed not onely his creatures but whatsoever he bestowes upon his creatures for that as for their end which therefore if it faile it is not God that failes of his end but the creature that failes of the end that God appoints it And indeed the doubt is vaine though to many it seems difficult that God should faile of his end if we should say that he would have any thing come to passe which indeed comes not to passe For if God would have it come to passe immediately by his own operation and absolutely it were indeed a faileure of his omnipotence if it should not come to pass But that he would have it to come to passe by the operation of his creature and reserving a condition if it do as it should do supposeth his omnipotence in making the creature able to do or not to do this or that but destroyes it not by the faileure of that which it is not imployed about So also when I say God does this because of that to wit in the nature of a motive or impulsive cause I say no more but this that God from everlasting determined that it should come to passe in consideration of that because of which it is truly said to come to passe Which no way signifies any motion of desire impressed in his own excellence but that he orders the reason of all things that come to passe The antecedent then or conditional will of God consists in appointing all that he bestowes upon his creature or acts towards it for several and proper ends But supposes a possibility in those ends to be brought to passe grounded upon an ability in the creature to bring them to passe In so much as God otherwise cannot be said to treat w th men as men nor they ground a conscience of duty from themselves to God but supposing him to mean that which his words signify from them by whom they come and that whoso grants promises commands threatens any thing upon an impossible condition neither grants threatens promises or commands it but says right nothing I will give you my daughter in marriage if you touch the starrs with your little finger That is saith the Civilian in the Romane Law I will not give you my daughter in marriage I say not so much But that God under an impossible condition signifies no part of his own intentions This antecedent will of God they that understand not in S. Pauls words when he sayes Christ gave himself a ransom for all do think it enough to distinguish between sufficient and effectuall and that granting the blood of Christ to be a sufficient ransom for mankind it will be true that he gave it for all though no way intending it for any but those who are saved Which is farre otherwise For that which is not true without an addition abating the proper signification of the words is absolutely untrue unlesse the addition not being expressed may by due construction of reason be found to be implied Now to say That Christs blood is onely sufficient to redeem all but intended to redeem onely some is to say that it was not given for all as S. Paul affirmeth though being a price sufficient to redeem all it might have been given for all which is not enough to make good that he gave it for all as S. Paul affirmeth And that it might have been given for all being sufficient to redeem all is no sufficient reason to inferre S. Pauls injunction of praying for all men even for Princes and the Powers under them then no friends to Christianity so that whether for them or not was more questionable then whether for others or not For it followeth not because Christs blood is sufficient to ransom all mankind therefore we are to pray for the salvation of all mankind not supposing it given for their ransome Therefore this addition of abatement can by no construction of reason be found to be implied in the words But we must have recourse to that antecedent will of God by which Christ intended to pay that which was sufficient for all mankind though not intending to oblige God to do the utmost of that which his justice will allow to bring all to salvation in consideration of it but onely what his own wisdome should think fit to be done in that consideration for that purpose Which alloweth not onely a possibillity of salvation but also a sufficience of meanes to bring all mankind to it provided by God as purchased by Christ whatsoever may interpose to defeat the effect thereof which God not being obliged to hinder thinks fit in his secret wisdome to permit Neither can this secret will of God be any way reconciled to his declared will that is neither can this declared will of God which comes not to effect be ever maintained to be the will of God as the Word of God calleth it or to be truly declared upon those terms But onely to be a declaration or signe that God would have that come to passe which indeed he would not have come to passe as not coming to passe because he would not have it come to passe But if God have put no barre to the salvation of any man antecedent to the death of Christ but hath by Christs death provided all meanes sufficient to save all then it is truly said John III. 16. So God loved the World that he gave his onely begotten Sonne that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have life everlasting though God doeth not what he might do but what he thinks fit to do to make the ransom which Christ gave for all effectuall to the salvation of all Nor is this infringed by saying that the conditionall will of God is not absolutely the will of God but with a term of abatement his will upon condition which without that addition abating the proper sense of Gods will it were not A thing which I have professed already by premising that God wills not any of those things which come not to passe as his own end but as the end of those meanes which he provides to bring them to passe For the question is not about the act but the object of Gods will which the Apostle also means when he saith This is the will of God even your holinesse 1 Thes IV 3. when it is disputed whether all signify some and the world the elect when the Scripture saith that Christ gave himself for all and for the World and therefore that God would have all to be saved and none to perish The act of Gods antecedent will is as properly expressed by that which God would have done as of his consequent will by that which God will do Nor is there any
it may be said that a thing comes to passe necessarily and that sense in which it may be said that it must necessarily come to passe For I suppose that the property of our English will help me here to distinguish these two senses to all that consider their mother tongue and may discerne a severall meanâ—ng when a man saies the fire burnes necessarily Peter must necessarily deny our Lord supposing that our Lord had fore told it For when the necessity is understood to be in the cause which the nature thereof though by Gods will determines it is proper to say thaâ— it comes to passe necessarily But when the necessity is understood to stand upâ—n a supposition of the effect either being or knowne to be which knowledg presupposeth it to be being supposâ—d to be true or the like it is proper to say this must needs come to passe or it must of necessity come to passe but not that it comes to passe necessarily because then the necessity must noâ— fall upon the coming of it upon passe but upon the manner by which it comes to pâ—sse I say then if any can inferr upon my saying that the necessity which it infers is antecedent to the being of it I grant I am faln into the inconvenience which I would a void and will disclaime the position upon which it followes But if it be onely consequent upon supposition either that it is or that it is taken to be it is no more then that necessity which is found in all coâ—tiâ—gencies according to all opinions that must allow all things necessarily to be â—hough not to be necessarily supposing that they are Now when I say that God determines the evenâ—s of future contingencies I say not that he doth it by determining their causes to do them speaking of free causes for the contingâ—â—cies which come to passe by the concurrence of naturall causes I grant â—o be meere necessities in regard it is necessary that when every cause actâ— to the uâ—most of his strength that must not onely needs come to passe but come to passe necessarily which the concurrence of severall forces produceth and must needâ— appear in the causes to any that comprehends the force of them all buâ— that this act of his ends in determining the motives which present themâ—elves to such causes Which act is consistent with an other act whereby he mâ—intaines the cause in an ability of doing or not doing that which it is movâ—d to do But that comprehending the inclinations thereof and the force oâ— the motives which it is presented with he comprehends thereby that it will proceed to act though comprehending that it might doe otherwiâ—e shâ—uld it regard those appearances which either habitually it hath or actuâ—lly â—t â—â—ght to have Now I confesse againe it is hard for me to show how it ought actually to have those appearances which habitually it hath But seeing thaâ— supposing this I show evidently how the providence of God iâ— unceâ—easibâ—â— the will remaining free and the effects thereof contingent I will rathâ—r conâ—esse that I cannot shew where their freedome might or ought to move when it does not then destroy the ground of all Christianity Thus much is evident supposing my saying that the certainty of the event includes the supposition of the will acting freely therefore infers no necessity antecedent to it the knowledge upon which providence decrees foreseeing that it will freely proceed being so moved CHAP. XXV The grounds of the difference between sufficient and effectuall How naturall occasions conduce to supernaturall actions The insufficience of Jansenius his doctrine Of sufficient grace under the Law of Moses and Nature ANd now I shall not use many words to declare what it is that makes those helps of grace which of themselves are sufficient effectuall For if all particulars are contayned in their generalls that which is said of all the works of providence must hold in those helps of supernaturall grace whereby it conducteth to the happinesse of the world to come And therefore the efficacy of Gods grace taking efficacy to imply the effect consists in the order which providence useth that the motives of Christianity whether to imbrace or performe the profession of it be presented in such circumstances as may render them accepted of the will to whose judgement for the preâ—ent they so appeare So that the same for nature and kind prove effectall to one which to an other prove void and frustrate For it is manifest that those helps are the grace of Christ even as they are sufficient and supposing them not to take effect And it ought to be manifest that the circumstances in which they are present to every particular person are brought to passe by the conduct of Gods spirit which filleth the world and attaineth from the beginning to the end of all things which come to passe And this spirit and the coming thereof being purchased by our Lord Christ and granted in consideration of his obedience it is easy to bee seen how it is the grace of Christ not onely as sufficient but also as effectuall This resolution then presupposeth two things as proved Chap. XVIII The first That the preaching of the Gospell is the grace of Christ That is to say A Grace granted by God in consideration of Christs merits and sufferings The second That the grace of Christ attaineth and reacheth the very effect of conversion and new obedience and resteth not in having inabled man to doe it of himselfe without the influence of it To make this part of faith better to be understood among believers better to be maintained against unbelievers that which this resolution advanceth is this That the Grace of the H. Ghost purchased by the humiliation of Christ and by his exaltation obtained as it is the meanes which God hath provided for the publishing of his Gospell to the conviction of all who understand it that they ought to submit to the faith and live according to it so it is the meanes to make it effectuall to the conversion of the Nations to Christianity that conversion effectuall in their lives and conversations by presenting the reasons and grounds thereof being of themselves sufficient for the worke to every mans consideration in those circumstances procured by the providence of God which it executeth in which his wisdome â—oresaw that they would takâ— effect and become to the purpose And truly when our Lord saith Iohn XVI 8 9 10. And when he cometh he will convict the world of sin of righteousnesse of judgement Of sin because they believe not in mee Of judgement because the prince of this world is condemned we must understand that the H. Ghost convinced the world of sin because those miracles which the Apostles did by the holy Ghost convincing the world that they spoke the word of God shewed the world that they were under sin and liable to Gods wrath if they became not Christians And that he convinced
whom he predestinated those he also called and whom he called those he also justified and whom he justified those be also glorified The purpose according to which he describes them to be called to whose good all things conduce is either the purpose of God or their own As Barnabas exhorteth them that were converted to cleave to God with purpose of heart Acts XI 23. For those that are called are often taken by S. Paul metonymically for those that have obeyed their calling by God as Rom. I. 6 7. 1. Corin. â— 2. 24. Jude 9. Apoc. XVII 14. and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epe IV. 1. And so all things conduce to good for those that not onely are professed Christians but are so from a steddy purpose of heart But though we grant that they are described by two qualifications one that they love God the other that thy are predestinated to life that is called out of a purpose in God to save them yet they are not predestinated by God to become conformable to the pattern of Christ which consists in bearing his Crosse but as Christians And this it is which here S. Paul saies they are predestinated to not to life The predestination which he speakes of here is not of men to be saved but of Christians to beare the Crosse of Christ whereof he had said a little afore for the occasion of this discourse Rom. VIII 17 18. If we be sons then also â—eires Heires of God but joint heires with Christ that if we suffer with him we may also be glorified with him For I reckon that the sufferings of this time are not valuable with the glory that is to be revealed upon us And when he calleth them Saints and those that love God and those he foreknew it is manifest that the foreknowledge which he meaneth is that whereby God knew them true Christians from the heart whom he intends to prove and therefore appoints them to beare Christs Crosse that being justified that is approved in so doing they may be glorified in Gods purpose and the right and title of their owne estate All this being manifest by the proposition of the Chapter There is now therefore no more condemnation for them that are in Christ Jesus that live not after the flesh but after the spirit Which words plainly describing those that are Christians from a grounded purpose of the heart of whome the sequele of the discourse must proceed manifestly demonstrate that S. Paul speakes not of Gods predestinating any man to be saved but of predestinating those whom he knowes to be good Christians to beare Christs Crosse and so to obtaine Gods promises As the same S. Paul saith that it was granted of grace to the Philippians not onely to believe in Christ but to suffer for Christ Phi. XI 26. And hereby it is manifest that succeeding graces are bestowed in consideration of the right use of those that went afore For here you see that those who being moved by the helps of Gods preventing grace have submitted themselves to the profession of Christianity from the heart are in consideration thereof designed by God to the happy accomplishment of their course And this is invincibly evidenced by the promise of the H. Ghost tendred by the Gospel to those that obey Gods calling by undertaking to be Christians for the inabling of them to persevere in that which tâ—ey undertake The same is exprest in the words of the Apostle when having menaced the Hebrew Christians with the expectation of vengeance upon their Apostasy he thus restores them againe Heb XI 9. 10. But we are perswaded better things and that belong to salvation of you beloved though we thus speake For God is not unjust to forget your worke and labour of love which ye showe to his name ministring to the saints as still ye doe For it is manifest that the Apostle expects here the supply of grace inabling to persevere from the justice of God in consideration of that which they had done in performance of their Christian profession before On the other side it may be objected that if the whole worke of grace in the life of each Christian be resolved into the free appointment of God in regard that those helps which each man is first prevented with cannot be granted in consideration of any worke of our nature the rest depending on those first helps it is to no purpose to dispute how the freedome of the will takes place in every particular act each mans finall estate being no lesse determined then if there were no place for it Neither availeth it any man that God appointeth him not to death or gives him sufficient helps to bring him to life seeing that the efficacy of them depending upon his meere will the sufficience of them serves but to aggravate his sentence To this my answer is that I conceive I am not to answer further then S. Paul hath done Who having objected to him selfe in the person of the Jewes thinking much they should not be saved by the Law Why doth God then find fault For who hath resisted his will Rom. IX 29. Returnes an answer that denies not that God might convert the Jewes to Christianity did he think it fitting But thus Nay rather who art thou O man that disputest with God Shall the earthen pot say to the potter Why hast thou made me thus Hath not the potter power over the clay to make one vessell to an honourable use another to a dishonourable of the same compost What if God willing to shew wrath and make knowne his power hath borne with much long suffering the vessels of wrath fit to be destroyed That he might also make knowne the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy us whom he hath called not onely of the Jewes but also of the Gentiles whom he hath prepared for glory Where since God forbeares the vessels of his wrath with that long suffering which S. Peter saies â—leades to repentance designing to shew his wrath the heavyer upon them for neglecting it it is manifest that they are not said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if God had fited them for it as designed and made to that dishonourable use which is the reason why I translated it not as a participle but as a noune not fitted for destruction as by God but fit for destruction as of themselves And therefore that one and the same masse of compost out of which the potter makes vessels to contrary uses is to be compared with mankind in that estate in which the Gospell finds it the question being made why some obay it and not others why the Gentiles rather then the Jewes and the argument made that if Gods grace be the cause then are not they to be blamed that neglect it And the Apostle having premised for his ground that all mankind being overtaken by the Gospell destitute of righteousnesse are to become Christians that they may obtain it This being the case it
paines to make them partizans in questions which they understand not and give them the confidence to censure for Arminians those that resolve them in such termes as they comprehend not Neverthelesse at the last judgement of God they may have cause to complaine of them if not for teaching them to tye knoâ—s which they cannot teach them to loose yet for inducing them to breake the peace of the Church to obtaine freedome of professing or imposing upon others the beliefe of things thus prejudiciall to Christianity In the meane time it shall be enough for me by this short resolution to have drawn a line which they that will tread the Labyrinth of this dispute may be guided by the best that I can show from falling headlong on either side Not doubting that the skill of those who being more traded in it resolve to avoid both extremities may produce that information which may oblige me for further intelligence as well as the rest of the Church But having confidence that the denying of Gods Predetermination is not the denying of Gods effectuall Grace which I have showed that it doth stand with freewill according to the supposition that I advance though I undertake not to show how reason reconciles the parts of it And truly I am confident that when S. Austine in his book de Correptione Gratia distinguishes between that help of Grace without which we cannot obay the Gospell of Christ and that help by which we do it auxilium quo auxilium sine quo non and whensoever else he makes the efficacy of Grace to attaine the doing of that which it effecteth not onely the inabling of man to do it he never intended to determine the maner how it is effected For though S. Austin himselfe hath balked the ground which himselfe had laid for the distinction between the antcedent and consequent will of God in his book de Spiritu litera Chap. XXXIII by bringing in other expositions of S. Pauls words God would have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledg of the truth that are inconsistent with it Though I have not found him distinguish betweene necessity upon supposition and antecedent as Anselme in pursuance of his Doctrine hath don yet he that shall read what he hath said of the redemption of all mankind upon Psalm XCV besides abundance of other passages whereby he concurreth to witnesse that sense of the redemption of all mankind of Gods will that all be saved of sufficient Grace that is not effectuall which the Church generally declareth as I showed you before I say he that considereth them will find it more reasonable to reconcile him to his owne doctrine then to pretend a change in his judgement where he acknowledges none as in the mater of preventing Grace he doth not acknowledge Certainely seeing that Prosper in defending him frequently and clearely acknowledges Christ to have dyed for all mankind out of Gods will that all might be saved But the author of the book de â—â—catione Gentium never yet suspected for a partizane of the Semipelagians hath so plentifully maintained it during the time that the parties in Gaule charged one another for Semipelagians and Praedestinatians For during that time was it writ without peradventure they will never deserve well of S. Austine that defend him otherwise So far are we from being obliged by his doctrine to acknowledge grace to come to effect by Gods predetermining the wil of man to all that coms to passe when I have shâ—wed a supposition according to which it may be don without prejudice to Christianity though beyond my understanding to show how For supposing the common faith to be this That God appointeth them to life or to death whom he foreseeth to imbrace or not imbrace Christianity and to persevere or not persevere in the practice of it till death Can it not be true also that he hath appointed some and not others the meanes whereby he foresees that they will persevere Nay if some only persevere in the state of Grace when all might as the Council of Orange hath decreed what is there but Gods will to create the difference much more between them that never heare of the Gospell and those that refuse it And what hath Christianity hereupon to answer but Porphyries question why Christ came not afore That is why God suffered man to fall and sin to come into the world Why he maketh not all men true Christians when he might For one answer would serve all these questions Which if it be a scandall to Christianity that it is not answered it remaines that Christians be Porphyries disciples In the mean time absolute predestination to grace infers not absolute predestination to glory Nor obliges God to procure sin as the meanes to his end or as the meanes to that meanes to predetermine mans will to doe it But did Saint Austines doctrine in my opinion containe any thing contrary to the doctrine of the rest of the Church concerning the antecedent consequent will of God the coming of evill into the world and that the foreknowledge of God does not effect but suppose it the freedome of the will from necessity while slave to sin I would think my selfe obliged to renounce him that I might adhere to the rest of the Church Counting it a thing ridiculous and contrary to the principles of Christian truth acknowledging the tradition of Faith to come from the whole Church to advance the doctrine of a member thereof though so eminent as S. Austine against that which the rest of the Church is acknowledged to have taught If iâ— be said that the supposition of Gods foreseeing the event of mens resolutions by the objects and considerations which he appoints them to be moved with is an invention of the Jesuites or at least hath been much maintained by them I demand what advantage they have that espouâ—e the supposition of the Dominicans the first Inquisitors that is Ministers of persecution for Religion by the interest of the Church of Rome with secular powers Especially adding unto it the position of justifying faith by believing that we are predestinate so destructive to the Covenant of Grace Yet I give the reader that is willing to take the paines of being informed notice that the supposition which I advance is rather in the forme that is to be collected out of Durandus then in that which the Iesuites since have given it In fine let Maldonat and Jesuites think it their honour to professe that they like not such and such expositions of scripture because they come from the Hereticks by which names we know whom they meane Let Puritan preachers coâ—fe their simple heareâ—s with a prejudice against all that they like not as drawne from Arminians or Jesuites whose positions they understood not and when they are understood are nearer the truth then their owne I shall find my selfe never the lesse oâ—liged to follow that truth for Christs sake which I
man that comeâ— into the world with concupiscence becomes either habituated to the love of God above all things or indowed with the habituall assistance of Gods Spirit by that promise which the Gospell importeth Thus much is to be seenâ— by that which hath been said That in the justification of a sinner by Christianity which I have showed to be the condition of it there is a twofold change either implied or signified For that a man should become reconciled to God continues in the same affection to himselfe and the world as before he heard of Christ is a thing which the soâ—ereâ—t of them that dispute justification by faith alone abhorre And that a man by the Gospel should be intitled to no more then that disposition which be is changed to obligeth God to give is no lesse horrible to them that dispute justification by the works of faith And therefore besides that change in the nature and disposition of him that becomes estaâ—ed in the promises of the Gospel which justification involveth there is another change in Gods esteeme which is morall by virtue of his free promise which the change which his nature hath received signifieth not because Gods will onely infâ—rs it The former of these the Schoole insist upon and they seeme to follow S. Austinâ— in it who though he have nothing to doe with any conceit of habituall grace yet most an end attributeth the effect of justifying even before God to those inherent acts of righteousnesse whereby the grace of God translateth his enimies into that state of his grace The later though it be that which both the Scriptures and the most ancient records of the Church doe expresse yet so long as the effect of justifying is attributed to the disposition which is inherent in the soule not for the worth of it but by Gods Grace it can containe nothing either formally destructive or by consequence prejudiciall to the Faith That the one is fundamentally implyed the other formally signified in the justification of a Christian belongs rather to the skill of a divine in understanding the Scriptures then to the virtue of a Christian in holding the faith What the Church thinkes of the workes of those who believing do not yet declare themselves Christians by procuring Baptisme as it is a consideration fit for this place so is it manifest by the doubt which they make of the salvation of those that dye in that estate For though the life that they live supposing the preventing Grace of the holy Ghost to bring them to that estate must needs be ascribed to the same yet is it not as yet under the promise of reward because they are not yet under the Covenant of Grace but onely disposed to it And how good soever their life may be yet so long as it proceeds not to an effectuall resolution of undertaking Christs Crosse it is buâ— actuall and dependeth dâ— facto upon the assistance of Gods Spirit which dâ— jurâ— they can challenge no title in being not yet estated in Gods promises but onely prevented by those helps which they can claime no difference of right in from those that are not prevented with the same But he that undertakes Christs Crosse by coming to Baptisme with a good conscience obtaineth remission of sinnes adoption to be Gods Sonne and right and title to everlasting life Which adoption and which title as they are morall rights and qualities so are they meer appendences of that justification which God alloweth the Faith of those that are baptized sincerely without consideration of workes according to the doctrine of the Fathers Supposing it is true as much change as between a Christian and no Christian in him that obtaines them in which regard it is no marvaile if remission of sinnes or justification be ascribed to the said change many times in their writings For how such sayings are to be understood imports onely the signification of words not the salvation of a Christian but not importing Gods consideration of their qualities the consideration of whose works is excluded S. Augustine it is true considering this change in him that is justified which is indeed the ground upon which God accepteth of his Faith to that purpose and using the word justifying to signify the same hath occasioned the Schoole to agree in that forme of doctrine which the Council of Trent canonizeth But though he frequent the terme more then others in that sense yet can he no wayes be thought to depart from the meaning of the rest who do sometimes describe justification by the ground which it supposeth sometimes by the quality in Gods account which it signifyeth Acknowledging all of them the gift of the holy Ghost to be obtained by this faith which justifyeth of Gods free Grace indeed which onely moved him to set the Gospel on foot but as due by the promise which it containeth to abide and to dwell with him that voides not the condition upon which it is granted This grace of the holy Ghost habitually dwelling in them that have undertaken Christs Crosse to inable them to go through with the work of it as it cannot be unfruitfull in good works so are those works henceforth under the promise of reward which no workes done afore Baptisme can challenge I must not leave this point till I have said a word or two of Socinus his opinion as to this point of justifying faith For as concerning the two points premised I conceive I have showed you that it is no lesse destructive to Faith in teaching that a man is able of himself to imbrace and to fulfill all that the Gospel requires at his hands withoâ—â— any help of Gods grace granted in respect of our Lord Christs obedience Then that God accepteth what a man is so able to performe not out of any consideration thereof but of his own free goodnesse which moving him to settle such a decree moved him to send our Lord Christ to publish and assure it As for the rest of his opinion having maintained that the efficacy of all acts whether of Gods grace or of mans will toward the obtaining of the promises of the Gospel necessarily depends upon the receiving of Baptisme where the outward fulfilling of the promises of a positive precept which the onely will of him that is converted to Christianity fulfilleth not is not unavoidablely prevented by casualties which his will cannot overcome I suppose I have by that meanes showed that his opinion is destructive to Christianity because destructive to the precept of receiving Baptisme without which no man is a Christian And truly this imputation reflects upon the other extreme opinion concerning the justification of a Christian which ascribing it to believing that a man is predestinate excludes it from being necessary either as a meanes to salvation or as a thing commanded both which considerations concurre in the necessity of it supposing the premises For the necessity of that which is necessary as the meanes and the
sacrifices and other ceremonies thereof how little soever they minded the true intent and meaning of it were the true predecessors of the Scribes and Pharisees in our Lords time and the Prophets and their disciples the forerunners of our Lord and his Apostles and that both persecuted both upon the same score of account The inward righteousnesse of the heart which God onely alloweth being that which both preached and professed though the former under that knowledge of God and of his will with the Law the other which the Gospell advanceth And this the true and reall ground why they and that which befell them under the Old Testament do beare the figure of our Lord and his Apostles and that which befell them by the rulers of the Jewes in the New According to the words of our Lord Mat. XXIII 34 where he showeth that by crucifying himself and persecuting his disciples they do but fill up the measure of their Fathers wickednesse And S. Paul of the Jewes to the same effect 1 Thes II. 15 16. Who both killed the Lord Jesus and their own Prophets and please not God and oppose all men Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved For wrath is come on them to the end I say then that under that dimme light of Gods will which the Saints of the Old Testament injoyed when the world to come was not yet covenanted for nor the sayings and doings of our Lord Christ manifested to invite to Christianity it is necessarily consequent that God should accept of that obedience under the law which as it must come from a sincere heart and studious of pleasing him so must it needs come short of that perfection which the Gospel requireth For as I said before that love of God with all the heart and all the soul and all the might which the Law requireth is limited by the precepts of the law which whoso observes with all the heart and so forth must be thought to have performed that love wherein then the observation of Gods law consisted As for the precept of not coveting of which S. Paul sayes Rom. VII 7-11 that he had not known concupiscence had not the Law said Thou shalt not covet And Saint Augustine observes that being joyned to to the precept of loving God above all things they comprise all Christianity Though all this be true according to the spirituall sense of the Law yet according to the leter it cannot be denied that the last precept of the decalogue forbiddeth onely compassing that which is another mans Counting his wife in that number because there was then meanes to compasse another mans wife without breaking the Law which allowed of divorces And therefore this is the senâ—e of that which followeth in S. Paul Sinne taking advantage wrought in me all concupiscence by the commandment For without the Law sin is dead But I once lived without the law But the commandment coming sin revived and I died And the commandment which was to life was found for me to death For sin taking occasion by the commandment deceived me and so slew me All this I say as the rest of that Epistle concerning the inability of the Law to bring us to righteousnesse is to be understood of the outward and litterall sense of the law To wit that the Israelites before they received the Law and so other men without the Law understood not that it was a sinne but a piece of wit to compasse a mans wife or goods without violence or to commit that uncleannesse to which the law had assigned no penalty So the Law being given and having assigned no penalty to the transgression of this precept was it marvile that sin prevailing over that conviction of the conscience which the precept tendered should seduce a man to give way to concupiscence and turn the precept that was given for life to his death He then that was not imposed upon with this â—light of sinne but received the commandment as Gods who hath other penalties in store then those which the Law assigneth if out of conscience to God he observed the Laws of his worship from the heart if he kept all that which not onely the penalties assigned by the law but the will of God declared by the precept convinced him to take hold of his conscience is it not reason to conclude that he fulfilled that measure of spirituall righteousnesse which God for that time required of them whom he assured of the world to come upon condition of such obedience Which if it be so that obligation to this righteousnesse which was so declared under the Law is that Law of spirituall obedience which God judgeth those by whom for that time he accepted unto the reward of the world to come As for the precept of loving our neighbour as our selves having showed that it concerned onely Israelites under the Law I have also by the same meanes showed that they were to detest the Gentiles as Idolaters that detestation being the meanes to keep them up to the service of God from falling away to Idols Whereupon as by the Law he that fell from the Law and seduced his kindred to do the like was to find no maner of pity at the hand even of his brethren Deut. XIII 8. So also it is provided by the Jews Constitutions that they shall observe no rule of common equity in seeking evidence against such a one to bring him to conviction and to make him an example And as for those hypocrites which under pretense of the outward and carnall observatiof the Law persecuted the preachers of true spiritual righteousnesse the Prophets of Old and our Lord and his Apostles who pretended to carry it unto the Gentiles whom they hold themselves obliged to hate as having been once Idolaters it is visible that those Saints who suffered persecution at their hands did not find themselves tied to that measure which the Gospel prescribeth of praying for their enemies to the utmost This is seen in those curses which David and Jeremy pursue their enemies with the Gospel having prescribed for a generall rule to all Christians Blesse them that curse you Mat. V. 44. Luke VI. 27. Rom. XII 14. 1 Pet. III. 9. James III. 9. I deny not that herein they were figures and forerunners of our Lord and his disciples and their sayings prophesies of the curses that should overtake the people of the Jewes for persecuting them For I have showed just now the ground upon which this is to be received But I challenge that ground also which I setled at the beginning that the mysticall sense of the Scripture alwayes supposeth a litterall sense and that these things cannot be understood to be fulfilled in our Lord Christ but that first they must have been verified in the Prophets themselves In whome as it is plaine that the persecutions for which they curse did come to passe so plaine it is that their curses fell upon their persecutors For nothing
Moses is certainly a transcript or rude draught of this originall righteousnesse due from man to God And therefore purposely made so curiously scrupulous that even the earthly promises of the land of Canaan and temporall happinesse in it should not be obtained by the exact observation thereof as I observed afore But it was also an intimation of the Gospell of Christ not onely in the provision which it made for expiation of transgressions the signification whereof the greatest part never understood but in those grounds of assurance which it gave those that should observe it from the heart as before God and for his love of the reward of the world to come In which regard S. Paul and the Apostles so often alledge the saying of the Prophet Abac. II. 4. The just shall live by faith and Saint Paul Rom. I. 15. saith that the righteousnesse of God is revealed by the Gospel from faith to faith That is from the faâ—th of Christ to come to the faith of Christ come And Saint John Baptist saith of our Lord John I. 16. Of his fullnesse we have all received grace for grace Because the law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ So that though the grace of the Gospel came by Christ yet it succeeded the same grace under the law though as under a fainter light so in a scarser measure And Saint Augustine rightly accounteth those that attaine truâ— righteousnesse under the law to belong to the New Testament as carnall Christians under the Gospell to the Oâ—d But if the faithfull at that time were saved by that scarse measure of righteousnesse which the faint light they were under required then were they also saved though not by fullfilling the originall Law of righteousnesse due from man to God yet by fulfilling that rule of Evangelicall righteousnesse which God under the Law required at their hands In which regard if the Fathers by things recorded of them in the Old Testament may be seene to have attained that perfection which Saint Paul calles his glory in doing that which he was not commanded as a meanes to the discharging of that wherein the perfection of Christians consisteth that which became mater of precept under the Gospel is necessarily to be taken for mater of counsell under the Law Alwayes understanding that as those helps of grace without which I have showed that they had not been able to performe such righteousnesse under the Law were granted even then in consideration of our Lord Christs interposing his mediation to the redeeming of mankind so was the righteousnesse then performed accepted in no consideration but of the obedience of Christ and his righteousnesse CHAP. XXXIII Whether any workes of Christians be satisfactory for sinne and meritorious of heaven or not The recovery of Gods grace for a Christian fallen from it a work of labour and time The necessity and efficacy of Penance to that purpose according to the Scriptures and the practise of the Church Merit by virtue of Gods promise necessary The Catholicke Church agrees in it the present Church of Rome allowes merit of justice ANother dispute there is that makes an endlesse noise never to be decided but upon this ground not to be maintained admitting it That is Whether the workes of Christians merit heaven or not which I must inlarge into another point of so neer nature to it that both may as easily be resolved as the one Whether the humiliation for sinne in praying fasting giving â—lmes by Christians in confidence of the satisfaction of Christ to obtaine pardon of God be satisfactory for sinne or not For in as much as to be free from evill is good and to obtaine a discharge from punishment is as much as to deserve a reward in so much it is all one to satisfie for sinne so as to be discharged of punishment and to fulfill an obligation so as to claime a reward Whereupon as I said afore that all satisfaction is necessarily of the nature of merit To this question then or to these questions the answer is necessarily consequent from the premises That if we regard the originall law of God neither can any man make God satisfaction for his sinne nor merit the reward of everlasting life at his hands But if we regard that dispensation in it which the Gospel preacheth in consideration of the merits and satisfaction of our Lord Christ neither shall any man attain forgivenesse of sinne without making satisfaction for it nor the reward of everlasting life without making it due to him by virtue of Gods promise The proofe of the first point consists in all those passages of Scripture which require repentance as a condition requisite to the obtaining remission of sins whether in the New Testament or in the Old In as much as I have showed that the promiseâ— of the Gospel were obtained under the Law upon the same termes and conditions for substance as under the Gospel though for the measure proportionable to that light of knowledge and those helpes of Grace which the dispensation of God under the Old Law afforded In particular taking notice of the theme of Saint John Baptist which our Lord also took for the argument of his preaching Repent for the kingdome of heaven is at hand Mat. III. 2. IV. 17. Mark I. 15. which the Apostles also followed Acts II. 38. III. 19. Upon that ground which Saint Paul also debates in the beginning of the Epistle to the Romanes that the necessity of the Gospell and Christianity is grounded upon a supposition that both Jewes and Gentiles are liable to sinne without Christ and by consequence to judgement And againe of those texts of the Apostles writings wherein there is mention or intimation of Penance required or injoyned by them or by the Church in their time for the obtaining of remission of sinnes by the keyes which I have handled in another place And thirdly of those passages which I have quoted in this book disputing of Justification by faith to show that remission of sinnes done after baptisme is obtained for Christians by prayer joyned with fasting and giving of almes to move God to give us pardon as we forgive or give to our brethren But this proofe consists also in all those scriptures which I have alledged to show that the bloud of Christ and his sufferings are truly and properly satisfaction for the sinnes of mankind For as he that believes this can by no meanes imagine that any man can make satisfaction for his own sinnes by the originall Law of God for then the coming of Christ had been in vaine as not necessary neither had there needed that dispensation in Gods proceeding with mankind upon the originall rule of righteousnesse which the Gospel declareth So can he by no meanes imagine the satisfaction which any man can tender God for his sinne to import any more then the fulfilling of that condition which God by his Gospell requireth to qualify any man that
and really to him that so receives it There is besides another opinion extremely distant from this last in regard thaâ— whereas this ascribes the presence of the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Eucharist to the faith of them that receive it which is after the consecration of the Sacrament in as much as it is exercised in receiving the same the other extreme opinion that I speak of attibutes it to the hypostatical Union of the two natures in the person of Christ the consequence whereof they will have to be this That the perfections of the God-head are communicated to the humane nature in the person of Christ exalted to the Power of gathering and conducting his Church through this world to the world to come Because this Power being to be exercised in our nature requires and imports the attributes of the God-head to the executing and in the executing of it For seeing the Manhood of Christ cannot communicate with his God-head in giving this spiritual assistance to his Church but first it must be present and seeing this assistance is given by the Sacrament of the Eucharist of necessity they think the Body and Bloud of Christ must be present in the Eucharist to give this assistance by virtue of the hypostatical Union ordained for that purpose And so this opinion becomes extremely opposite to the last because it attributes the presence and so the receiving of the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist to that Faith which takes effect after that consecration which makes the Sacrament Whereas this attributes the same to the hypostatical Union of the Manhood with the God-head in Christ taking effect without exception after his exaltation to glory which it is manifest is so long since past and done before the celebration of it CHAP. II. That the natural substance of the Elements remains in the Sacrament That the Body and Bloud of Christ is neverthelesse present in the same when it is received not by the receiving of it The eating of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse necessarily requireth the same This causes no contradiction nor improperty in the words of our Lord. THis being the question wherein I am now to give judgment and no more required of a Divine than to give such a meaning to those few Scriptures which depose in it as may no way contradict the Rule of Faith I shall without considering how to content those factions which these opinions have made content my self by delivering that opinion which I conceive best satisfies the plain words of the Scripture without trenching upon any ground of Christianity within which the meaning of the Scriptures is to remain I say then first that if wee will not offer open violence to the words of the Scripture and to all consideration of reason that may deserve to direct the meaning of it wee must grant in the first place That the bodily substance of Bread and Wine is not abolished nor ceaseth in this Sacrament by virtue of the consecration of it And of this I conceive the manifest words of the Scripture wheresoever there is mention of this Sacrament are evidence enough Mat. XXVI 26-29 And when they were eating Jesus took bread and having blessed brake and gave it to his Disciples saying Take eat this is my Body And taking the cup hee gave thanks and gave it to them saying Drink yee all of it For this is that bloud of mine of the New Testament which is shed for many unto remission of sins And I say unto you I will not drink from henceforth of this production of the vine till I drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdome In S. Mark I can imagine no maâ—er of difference but this Mark XIV 24 25. This is my bloud of the New Testament which is shed for many Verily I say unto you that I will not drink of that which the vine brings forth till I drink it new in the kingdome of God In S. Luke thus XXII 17-20 And taking the cup hee said Take this and divide it amongst you For I say unto you that I will not drink of that which the Vine brings forth till the kingdome of God come And hee took bread and having given thanks brake it and gave it to them saying This is my Body which is given for you Do this in remembrance of mee Likewise also the cup after having supped saying This cup is the New Testament in my bloud which is shed for you S. Paul 1 Cor. XI 23-32 For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered to you that the Lord Jesus in the night that hee was betrayed took bread and having given thanks brake it saying Take eat this is my body which is broken for you This do in remembrance of mee Likewise also the cup after having supped saying This cup is the New Testament in my bloud This do so often as yee drink it in remembrance of mee For so often as you eat this bread and drink this cup yee declare the Lords death till hee come Therefore whoso eateth this bread or drinketh this cup unworthily is guilty of the body and bloud of Christ But let a man examine himself and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For whoso eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords Body Therefore many among you are sick and weak and many fall asleep For if wee did discern our selves wee should not be condemned But when wee are judged wee are chastised by the Lord that wee be not condemned with the world And again 1 Cor. X. 16 17 18. The cup of blessing which wee blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ The bread which wee break is it not the communion of the Body of Christ For as the bread is one so wee many are one body For wee all partake of the same bread Had not a man as good bid the Scripture be silent for hee will believe what hee list notwithstanding the Scripture as set all this evidence upon the rack to make it deny that which it cries aloud For when S. Matthew tells us that our Lord took bread and having blessed brake and gave it saying This is my Body that hee took the cup and having given thanks gave it to them saying This is my Bloud Is it not as manifest that hee sayes This bread is my Body this wine is my Bloud as that hee sayes This is my Body this is my Bloud Unlesse wee think that This can demonstrate any thing but that which had been spoke of afore in the processe without giving any mark to know what it is that hee meant to demonstrate There is none of them that deny this but will be puzzled to say himself what hee would have the Disciples to whom this is said understand by This forbidding them to understand that which went before In S. Mark S. Luke and S. Paul the
the same state with him that contracteth upon articles But there is as much said when our Lord saith onely This is my body which is given for you if it be rightly understood that is supposing the body of Christ to have been given to be sacrificed for us upon the Crosse For hee that tenders this to eat thereby declares that hee incites to the profession of that Covenant which otherwise appears to have been inacted by that which hee tenders The same sense is contained in S. Pauls words 1 Cor. V. 8 9. Christ your Passeover is slain for you Let us therefore feast not with old loven nor with the leven of malice and deceit but with the unlevened bread of sincerity and truth For if wee consider the circumstance of time and place which our Lord took to institute the Sacrament of the Eucharist just when the Paschal Lamb was eaten how shall wee deny the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse to have been as presently received there as the Sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb was the subject and occasion of the Feast at which hee ordained it But the discourse by which the Apostle perswades Christians to separate themselves from the Jewes Ebr. XIII 10-16 is most pertinent to this purpose as that which is not to be understood otherwise Though when hee saith Wee have an Altar whereof those that serve the Tabernacle have no right to eat I allow that by an Altar hee means metonymically a Sacrifice For proving his intent by instancing in those Sacrifices for sin the bloud whereof was carried within the vail being by the Law appointed to be burnt without the Camp or City Jerusalem hee supposes them to figure our Lord Christ who suffered without Jerusalem Inferring thereupon that they ought to go forth of the communion of the Synagogue though they were to suffer persecution at the hands of their brethren for it But when hee proceedeth By him therefore let us offer to God the sacrifice of praise continually that is the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his Name And to do good and to communicate forget not for with such sacrifices God is well pleased Either wee must conceive him to return to his purpose and to show what Sacrifice hee meant when hee said Wee have an Altar of which they that wait upon the Tabernacle have no right to eat Or wee can give no reason what hee meant to argue that the Jewes have no right to the Sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse which Christians pretend not to eat of in any Sacrifice but in the Eucharist And surely if wee consider but the name of Eucharist wee cannot think it could have been more properly signified than by calling it the sacrifice of praise the fruit of the lips that confesse the Name of God For when hee proceeds to exhort not to forget communicating their goods do wee not know and have wee not made it to appear that this must be by their oblations to the Altar the first-fruits of their goods whereof the Eucharist being first consecrated the rest served the necessities of the Church Which as hath been showed was the original of all Consecrations and Dedications that have been made in Christianity If therefore the eating of the Sacrifice of the Crosse in the Sacrament of the Eucharist mean no more but the signifying and the figuring of that eating of the Sacrifice of the Crosse which is done by a lively Faith that is by every one that considers the death of Christ with that Faith which supposing all that the Gospel sayes of it to be true resolves faithfully to professe Christianity the question is why the Sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted by God why in those elements and to what purpose seeing without Gods appointment men could have done it of themselves to the same effect But if it be manifest that by the Sacrament of the Eucharist God pretends to tender us the communion of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse then is there another presence of the body and bloud of our Lord in the Sacrament beside that spiritual presence in the soul which that living faith effecteth without the Sacrament as well as in the receiving of it Which kinde of presence you may if you please call the representation of the Sacrifice of Christ so as you understand the word representation to signifie not the figuring or resembling of that which is onely signified But as it signifies in the Romane Laws when a man is said repraesentare pecuniam who payes ready money Deriving the signification of it à re praesenti not from the preposition re Which will import not the presenting of that againe to a mans senses which once is past but the tendring of that to a mans possession which is tendred him upon the place That this is the intent of the Sacrament of the Eucharist one peremptory argument there remains in the words of S. Paul when hee sayes Whoso eateth this bread and drinketh this cup unworthily is guilty of the body and blood of Christ For neither can it be said that the Apostle by way of hyperbole calls the slighting of Gods ordinance which hee hath appointed to signifie Christs death the crucifying of our Lord again Because it is manifest that his menace is grounded upon a particular consideration of the nature of the crime not upon that which is seen in every sin Renouncing Christianity indeed is truly the crucifying of Christ again as the Apostle shewes Ebr. VI. 6. and unworthily receiving the Eucharist is by just construction the renouncing of Christianity because that is it which renews the bond of observing it But otherwise it were too cold an expression to make S. Paul call it the crucifying of Christ for that which is common to all sins Nor would it serve the turn For when it follows Hee that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords Body Unlesse a man discern the Lords Body where it is not of necessity it must there be where it is discerned to be not made to be there by being discerned to be there It will now be objected that I hold things inconsistent and state such a sense of our Lords words as makes contradictories true For if bread and wine remaining bread and wine can be also the body and bloud of Christ that is unlesse granting them to be that which they are wee deny them to be that which is not that which wee grant them to be there will be no cause why wee should believe any thing to be that which it is more than that which it is not All difference being a sufficient ground of that contradiction which denies any thing to be that which differs from it that is which it is not The difficulty of answering this is the same which every man findes when hee is put to prove that which is most evident or to make that clear by words which all mens common sense admits Supposing
as our Lord was when hee spoke the words that I indeavor to clear When therefore the properties of the divine nature are attributed to the Manhood of our Lord supposing as all good Christians do that neither natures nor properties are confounded what can wee say but this That by such attributions as these in the Language of his Prophets the Apostles God would have us understand a supernatural conjunction and union of two natures in one person of our Lord And what shall wee then say when the name of Christs body and bloud is attributed to the bread and wine of the Eucharist but that God would have us understand a supernatural conjunction and union between the body and bloud of Christ and the said bread and wine whereby they become as truly the instrument of conveying Gods Spirit to them who receive as they ought as the same Spirit was alwaies in his natural body and bloud For it maters not that the union of the two natures is indissoluble that of Christs body and bloud onely in order to the use of the elements that is speaking properly from the consecration to the receiving The reason of both unions being the same that makes both supernatural to wit the will of God passed upon both and understood by the Scriptures to be passed upon both though to several effects and purposes Therefore I am no way singular in this sense All they of the Confession of Auspurg do maintain it before mee and think it enough to say that it is an unusual or extraordinary maner of speech when one thing is said to be another of a several kinde and nature but which the unusual and extraordinary case that is signified both expounds and justifies They indeed maintain another reason of this presence and therefore another maner of it For if by virtue of the hypostatical union the omnipresence of the God-head is communicated to the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist then is the flesh and bloud of Christ there not onely mystically but bodily But if supposing both the elements and the flesh and bloud of Christ bodily present it may neverthelesse truly be said This is my flesh This is my bloud How much more if as I say the elements onely be there bodily but the flesh and bloud of Christ onely mystically and spiritually And therefore I finde it reasonable for mee to argue that the sense of so many men both learned and others understanding the words of our Lord in this sense ought to convince any man that it is not against common sense and therefore tending so much to make good the words of our Lord and the holy Scripture it not to be let go I do not intend neverthelesse hereby to grant that the sense of these words This is my body this is my bloud for This is the signe of my body and bloud is a true sense because abundance of learned as well as ordinary people take it so to be But well and good that it might have been maintained to be the true sense of them had no more been expressed by the Scripture in that businesse For then I suppose the sense of the Church of which I say nothing as yâ—t could not have evidenced so much more as I have deduced by consequence from the rest of the Scripture But the mystical presence of the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Eucharist being further deduced from the Scripture by good consequence I conceive the common understanding of all those men who granting that do not grâ—nt the Elements to be abolished sufficient ground for mee that the signification of these words This is my body this is my bloud inforceth it not Whereas on the other side the substance of the Elements is not distinguishable by common sense from their accidents for whether the quantity and the mater be all one or not whether beside the mater and accidents which the quantity is invested with a substantial form berequisite is yet disputable among Philosophers And therefore no reason can presume that the Apostles to whom these words were spoken did understand This of which our Lord speaks to signifie the sensible accidents of bread an swine severed from the material substance of the same I may therefore very well undertake to say that this sense of the words is more proper than conceiving the substance of bread and wine to be abolished the effect of grace to the Church remaining the same For the property of speech is not to be judged by the signification of a single word but by the tenor of the speech wherein it stands and the intent of him that speaks declared by his actions and the viâ—ible circumstances of the same Now our Lord having taught those to whom this was spoken that the eating of his flesh and drinking of his bloud is done by living faith must be supposed by appointing this Sacrament tendring his flesh to eat and his bloud to drink to limit and determine an office in the doing whereof his flesh and bloud is either eaten and drunk or crucified according to the premises If then the eating and drinking of his flesh and bloud out of the Sacrament be meerly spiritual by living faith shall not the presence thereof in the Sacrament be according Shall it not be enough that they are mystically present in the Sacrament to be spiritually eaten by them that receive them with living faith to be crucified of them that do not Is it any way pertinent to the spiritual eating of them that they are bodily present Is it not far more proper to that which our Lord was about tending without question to the spiritual union which hee seeks with his Church that hee should be understood to promise the mystical than the bodily presence of them in the Sacrament which is nothing else than a Mystery by the proper signification and intent of it I grant an abatement of that which the terms of body and bloud were originally imposed to signifie being without question that which is visible and subject to sense But if the nature of the action which our Lord was about of the subject which his words expresse be such as requires this abatement then cannot the original sense of these words be so proper for this place as this abatement Here I will observe that the Council of Trent it self Sess XIII cap. I. speaketh so warily in this mater as not to exclude all maner of tropes from the right sense of these words saying Indignissimum sanè flagitium est ea à quibusdam contentiosis pravis hominibus ad sictitia imaginarios trapos quibus veritas caernis sanguinis Christi negatur contra universum Ecclesiâ— sensum detorqueri It is indeed a very great indignity that they are by some contentious and perverse persons wrested aside to contrived and imaginary tropes whereby the truth of Christs flesh and bloud is denied contrary to the whole sense of the Church They were wiser than to
of his Gospel nor the faith of their Predecessors can make any appearance of freeing them from it what madness will it be not to expect it from not to impute it to that condition which succeedeth the condition by which the children of Gods ancient people stood intitled to the Land of promise CHAP. VIII What is alleadged to impeach Tradition for baptizing Infants Proves not that any could be saved regularly who dyed unbaptized but that baptizing at yeares was a strong means to make good Christians Why the Church now Baptize Infants What becomes of Infants dying unbaptized unanswerable What those Infants gâ—t who dye baptized ANd thus from the Scriptures alone I have proved that Infants are capable of Baptism and that the Church is bound to provide them of it unlesse we will say that the Church is not bound to provide them of that means of salvation which the Church alone dispenseth And upon these terms I conceive I may safely acknowledge that there is no Precept for baptizing of the Infants of Christians written in the Scripture presuming that it is written in the Scripture that Infants are to be provided of the necessary means of salvation by the Church For though it be not necessary that all Infants be baptized because they are Infants yet will it be necessary that they be baptized before they go out of the world And therefore while they are Infants rather then they should go out of the world unbaptized But the practice of the whole Church and that from the beginning challenges the effect of S. Augustines rule that what is received of the whole Church and not by any expresse act of the Church from which the beginning of it may be demonstrable must of necessity be imputed to the Tradition of the Apostles For the judgements of men being so diverse as they are how can it be imagined that so great a body and so farre dispersed as the Church should agree to impose such a bâ—rthen upon themselves had they not understood the obligation of it by the means of them from whom they received their Christianity The testimonies of Tertullian de Bapt. cap. XVIII of S. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XL. in sanctum baptisma and of Walafridus Strabus de Reb. Eccles cap. XXVI that dehoâ—t froâ— baptizing Infants or declare that the Church in the first ages did not baptize during infancy are so farre from making any exception to this evidence that they contain sufficient evidence for the same truth if we be so considerate as to understand this Tradition not to require that all be baptized during infancy but that no Infant go out of the world unbaptized For he that will imploy a litâ—le common sense may see that there may be reasons to make men think it better that Baptism be ministred to those that can understand what it imports what they undertake provided that they go not out of the world unbaptized but that there be an effectual course taken for the baptizing of them in danger of death For that it is not my sense but the sense of the Churâ—h that makes the Baptisâ— of Infants necessary not because Infants but least they dye unbaptizâ—d I appeal to S. Austine Enchirid. cap. XLIII A parvulo enim recens nato usque ad decrepitum fenem sicut nullus prohibendus est à baptismâ— ita nullus est qui non peccato â—oriatur in baptismâ— Sed parâ—uli tantum Orginali For from the litle one new born to the decrepâ—t old man as none is to be hindred of Baptism so is there none that does not dye to sin in Baptism But little ones onely to Original He â—aith not that from young to old all are to be Baptized but none is to be refused Baptism supposing the necessity of his case and the rule of the Church to require it The same is to be said of the Canon of Neo-caesarea that allows the baptism of a woman with childe because it exâ—nds not to the baptizing of the Infant in her wombe before confession of faith And of the custoâ—â— of the Greeks to this day testified by Balfanum and Renaras upon that Canon For what need more words I acknowledge that Vives upon S. Austin de Civit. dei l. 27. gives very great reasons why it were better that the Baptism of Infants were differred till they come to the discretion of understâ—nding to what they ingage themselves But shall I therefore believe that Vives was an Anabaptist that he did not believe Original sinne that he acknowledged any cure for it without Baptism that he thought it not necessary to salvation that all should be Baptized before death A ridiculous thing once to imagine Thus much for certain so sure and evident as it is that when he writ this the custome of the Church was to baptize Infants so certain it is that when all that I have alledged was written and done that men should not be baptized in infancy there was a constant custome and practice in force in the Church whereby care was taken that no Infant should dye unbaptized And though they expresse reasons for which they had rather Christians should be baptized at years yet never any Christian expressed any opinion or any reason why Infants should not be baptized rather then dye unbaptized Never was there any opinion heard of and allowed in the Church that Gods Predestination adore without Baptism or any thing else beside it can be taken for a cure of Original sin Irenaeus is one of the next to the Apostles that we have He when he saith II. 39. Christus venit per seipsum omnes salvare omnes inquam qui per eum renâ—scuntur in deum infantes parvulos parvos juvenes seniores Christ came to save by himself all who by him are born anew unto God Infants and litle ones and children and young men and old ones If any man think fit to question whether in his language renati in deum can be understood without Baptism when he speaks of Infants must suppose that one that is not an Infant may bee regenerate without it Such a one must know that though he dare understand that which S. Paul never said when he calls Baptism the laver of regeneration Titus III. 5. yet Irenaeus with the whole Church of God never understood any regeneration without it Thus much for certain as to these words of Irenaeus if he understand the regeneration of men to be by Baptism he cannot understand the regeneration of Infants to come otherwise S. Cyprian whatsoever his reasons be when he contendeth for the baptizing of all Infants as he evidences the practice of the Church so he maintaines the same grounds upon which I have shewed that it did proceed Tertullian de Animâ cap. XXXIX S. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XLII abundantly prove mine intent The words of Tertullian Huic enim Apostolus ex sanctificato alterutro sexu sanctos procreari ait tam ex seminis praerogativâ
and legall whereof before the ground onely was reasonable But I do not mean this dependance to be the effect of the fourth Commandment onely which prescribeth onely bodily rest as I have showed but of these appendences of it whereby the Assemblies of the Jews and their sacrifices for that day are inacted For because they were to serve God upon the Sabbath it was certainly reasonable in regard of our Lords resurrection that Christians should serve God upon the first day of the Week If any man in this regard will call the Lords day the Christians Sabbath or the like I find no fault with it nay I find it so called by the Christians of Aethiopia in Scaliger VII de Emend Temporum Provided he conne my opinion that thanks which it deserves for leaving no further room to unstable spirits to imagine as some great Masters have done that it is in the power of Churches or of Christian Powers â—rotecting them to chuse another day of seven or of less then seven for Gods publick service For not being out of the reach of such power immediately by virtue of the fourth Commandment as I and they both have shewed it is beyond the reaâ—h of it by virtue of the Apostles authority and the act of it And now it is time to declare the sense of the Catholick Church derived from the doctrine and writings of the Apostles to be this concerning the times of Gods service That the offices thereof being alwayes acceptable to God and seasonable so that they be orderly done it is the duty of the Church to provide that they be as frequently celebrated as the occasions of the world will allow not by particular Christians alone but at the common assemblies of the Church Whereby it may appear how injurious and prejudicial to the service of God the zele of those is who challenging the whole Sunday for the service of God by virtue of the fourth Commandement seem thereupon to take it for granted that there ought to be no order for the publick service of God upon other Festivals and times of Fasting appointed by the Church nor which is more for the dayly celebration of divine service in the Church There hath been a pretense indeed that when the fourth Commandement saith Six dayes thou shalt labor and do all that thou hast to do It forbiddeth the Church to give any Rule of forbearing bodily labor for the exercise of Gods service But so ridiculous that even these who have the conscience to hold the conclusion have not the face to maintain the premises That form of speech manifestly importing no more than this That the present Law requires no more than keeping the first day of the week seeing it is manifest that by other Laws God intended to proceed further and to except other dayes from the bodily labor of his then people for his service Thereupon it is manifest that the Synagogue proceeded likewise to except other dayes for which there rose occasions for the like purpose And truly those who think it a burthen to the duty of working for mens living that there should be an Order for the dayly serving of God in the Church having all them to attend it that are not prevented of it by necessary occasions may look upon the Jews and blush to consider that they as S. Jerome Epiphanius and Justine the Martyr assure us should assemble themselves thrice a day in their Synagogues to curse our Lord Christ which their own Constitutions not mentioning do provide for the service of God nevertheless but that it should be counted superstitious for Christians to meet for Gods service in publick unless it be on the Lords day Certainly the practice of the primitive Christians at Jerusalem signifies no such thing all the contribution there raised tending to no other purpose but that the Church might hold together in the doctrine of the Apostles and the service of God and celebration of the Eucharist Though they went also into the Temple and served God with the Jews whom they then hoped and intended to reduce unto Christianity But I will referr my self in this point as in that which follows to that which I have said in my Book of the service of God at the Assemblies of the Church Chap. VIII having received from no hand any maner of satisfaction in the least of it Whereby it will appear that the Church hath power to limit the times of Gods service upon this ground Because the occasions of the world suffer not Christians alwayes to attend it which so oft as the Church shall finde it possible they are bound to do And that the use of this power as it is justified by the practice of the whole Church so it is necessary to the advancement of godlinesse according to Christianity Nor can the effect thereof be superseded without hindring the service of God whatsoever the strict keeping of the Lords day may contribute to the same Those times of persecution succeeded to the primitive Church wherein it is altogether admirable to consider how it was possible to reduce the whole body of Christians to an orderly course of so frequent service of God as appeareth The difficulties of assembling themselves being so great as under persecution must needs be Therefore when the exercise of Christianity was free and peaceable when all Nations and Languages upon their conversion to Christianity had made it their business and set aside means by which the service of God might be daily celebrated and all men have opportunity to frequent the same so farr either as their occasions would give leave or their hearts to God minde them to frame their occasions to take away this order and to destroy the means of executing it as either superstitious or superfluous what is it else but that curse which the Jews in their Synagogues would have wished Christianity when they met to curse Christ And if all difference of dayes for the service of God being taken away by Christianity so that no office of it is at any time unacceptable as the offices of Judaism were abominable not upon their legal days And the Apostles have notwithstanding for orders sake that there might be a certain time inviolably dedicated to that purpose set aside the first day of the week for it shall wee question whether it was they that instituted the solemnity of Easter Holy-days and consequently of Whitsuntide in remembrance of the resurrection of our Lord and the coming of the Holy Ghost or not For all the Lords dayes in the year have the mark that stands on them from that one on which our Lord rose again And since wee know that the difference about keeping Easter is as ancient as the Apostles and that there could have been no ground for it had not the Lords day born that mark at that time the question being onely when the Fast should end and the celebration of Easter come on can any doubt remain that the solemnity of
is easily seen extendeth further then those Psalms which by the Titles of them or by other circumstance of Scriptures may appear to have been composed to be sung in the Temple though this contain a peremptory instance against this strange demand that it should be unlawful to serve God with set forms For what difference can be imagined between Psalms and Prayers as to that purpose But the conclusion is directed against that new light which pretendeth to cast the Psalms out of the Church because it appeareth that they were composed upon the particular occasions of the Prophet David or other servants of God by whom they were penned and therefore not concerning the state of Christs Church so as to be frequented by Christians upon publick as well as private occasions for the praises of God This conceit is sufficient to show how litle these new lights do understand of our common Christianity over-looking that which the Church hath alwayes supposed against the Jews as the onely ground whereupon she wresteth the Scriptures of the Old Testament out of their hands and turneth them to the interest of the Church against themselves To wit that the Prophets being inspired by the same spirit which our Lord sent his Apostles did preach the same Christianity with them though according to the dispensation of that time figuring the spiritual estate of Christians by the temporall estate of Gods then people and injoyning the duties of Gods spiritual obedience in a measure correspondent to the light of the time For upon this ground hath it been received by the whole Church that the case of David and of other the servants of God who penned the Psalms is the case first of our Lord Christ then of Christs Church whitheâ— in the whole thereof or in the state of particular Christians David and the rest bearing first the person of Christ then of his Church according to the principles premised in the first Book I might here allege that ingenious saying of S. Hilary that Christ hath the Key of David because the spiritual sense of the Pâ—â—lter is opened by the discovery of Christ and his Church I might allege S. Austine accepting of Tychonius the Donatist his rules for the exposition of the Psalmes that those things which are literally understood of the temporall state of David and Gods then people are to be spiritually understood of the state of our Lord Christ here on earth first then of the spiritual estate of his whole Church and of each Christian But I had rather allege the practice of of Gods whole Church of which there is no age no part to be named and produced in which it may appear that God was not served by singing the Psalms of David to his praise Not that I would confine this office to that form which the Psalter yeelds or think that the Apostles exhortations Col. III. 16. James V. 13. Ephes 19. can be confined unto them Being well assured by comparing that which I read in the Apostles whith that which I read in Tertullians Apologetick where he saith that the Christians at their feasts of love were wont to provoke one another to sing something of Gods praises that they did in a simple stile but from a deep and losty sense compose the praises of God in Psalms of their own fitted to that light which the coming of Christ hath brought into the Church But that I would have this lothing of the Book of Psalms recommended not by the Church of England but by the whole Church to be taken for an evident mark that we are weary of the common Christianity of Gods people and do lust for new meat of our own asking if not for the fleshpots and Onyons and Garlicke of Egypt As for the reading of the Scriptures in the Church which the whole Church hath used as generally as it hath had the Scriptures for we understand by Irenaeus and may see by our ancestors the Saxons that Christianity hath subsisted among people that had not not the use of leters Though our anceflors the Saxons had the Scriptures before they had the use of leters by the means of them who brought them Christianity But Irenaeus speaks of barbarous Nations that were Christians before they knew of any Scriptures I see it rather neglected then disputed against by the sects of this time Why neglected divers reasons may be conceived though they perhaps as a disparagement to the Spirit whence they may pretend to have their Orders the carnall man onely chusing in Religion that which by the use of reason he is convinced to come from God contrary to the principles setled at the beginning think fit to allege none Their illuminati perhaps are already so perfit in the Text that it were loss of time for them to assemble to hear the Scriptures read To whom I must say That those who are inlightned by God are alwayes humble and ready to continue in the unity of the Church as I have showed by the premises that all Christians ought to do That if they do so the greater part of the Church by much will have need to learn the Scriptures that â—is instruction out of them by hearing them read in the Church That all that are inlightned by God are taught to condescend to the necessities of the weak and simple And that those who break from the Church rather then do so may think themselves strong but their strength is the strenth of Madmen that see not what they do In fine that they who have received light by the knowledge of the Scriptures must needs add to their light by hearing them read and that there is no beter way for them to add to it being the way which the primitive Fathers took for that purpose It may perhaps be imagined that the reading of the Scriptures takes up the time of assemblies and excludes the preaching of the Word To which I must say for the present that it is a strange piece of providence to exclude the reading of the Scripture which we know to be the word of God and to have in it no cause of offence but that which the want of understanding in the hearers thereof ministreth out of a desire to make way for that which pretendeth indeed always to be the word of God but no understanding so simple no conscience so seared that must not needs know that it is not that it cannot always be the word of God because of the contradictions that pass under that Title And that in maters of so high nature at this time that if the one be the word of God the other must not be counted the word of humane weakness but of diabolical malice There are indeed certain bounds within which that which is preached out of the Pulpit may be presumed and taken for the word of God as it might be if it were said in another place But if ignorant people that cannot take upon them to judge shall presume it of that
to you to be the commandements of the Lord. Which is to say that all even Prophets are to be subject to the Apostles by consequence to none but them who have received commission from the Apostles For howshal any order he setled to maintain unity in the communion of Gods service upon any other principle but that upon which the Coirnthians are obliged to rest in this which therefore being setled by order from the apostles is from thencforth trusted with the teaching of Gods people and no man further then he is trusted by the same Neither is it any marvaile that in the Church of England after orders confirmed after possession of a Church license of preaching is granted by the Bishop Because there are divers offices as well concerning the cure of soules as the service of God in the Church to which men may be appointed by the Lawes of the Church who are not to be trusted with Preaching even to their own people but upon expresse submission to the Bishops correction in behalfe of his Church For if sufficient power be reserved the Bishop to provide for his flock it will be in him to provide instruction for them by such persons as he shall think fit to trust and if it be not in him so to doe the fault is in the Lawes abridging his power of making a cheerfull account to God for his people Howsoever from hence it may appeare how ridiculous a thing it is to judge of the instruction a Bishop affords his flock by the sermons himselfe preaches unlesse it could be thought that his lungs and sides could reach all his people For his fidelity in trusting such persons as are to be trusted with teaching his people and his care in watching over the performance of their trust extendeth alike to all and maketh his Clergy his instruments in feeding his flock And whatsoever may have decayed in this Order through the Church of England the restoring thereof by wholsom Lawes aswell Ecclesiastcall as Civill had been and is the Reformation of Christianity not the rooting up of the very foundations of the Church out of zeale to exirtpate the order of Bishops And since the licentiousnesse of preaching what any man can make of the Bible hath made so faire a way for so few years to the rooting up of Christianity with the Church what will there be to secure the consciences of Gods people that they may safely go to Church and trust their soules with the means of salvation that are there to be found but the restoring of Gods Church That is to say of that authority which he by his Apostles hath provided for the determining of all things concerning his publike service supposing the profession of that faith which the whole Church hath maintained from the beginning as received from our Lord by his Apostles Which if it be true the same reason will oblige all men to provide the meanes of salvation for themselves that is to follow them of their owne choice without direction or constraint of the Lawes in the meane time I doe not conceive it becomes me to say what ought to be as I conceive it behoves me to say what ought not to be This I will say having proved that the prayses of God and Prayers much more the Eucharist are principal in comparison of preaching which is subordinate That the assemblies of Gods people ought to be more frequent for them then they can be for heareing of Sermons as I have showed by the premises S. Paul commands to pray continually and David saith the praises of God shall be alwaies in his mouth not expressing the assemblies of Gods people but inferring that which I have said of the dayly service of God in publick in my book of the assemblies of the Church Chap. VIII I maintain there is no ground no precept no example no practise of dayly preaching like this for daily prayers which if it be true the confining of assemblies to sermons is to Gods disservice It will be said that S. Paul 1 Tim. IV. 2. Thus exhorteth Preach the word be instant in season out of season examine rebuke exhort with all long suffering and meeknesse And it is as easily answered that here is nothing to the purpose Instance in the preaching of the word refers to unbelievers To induce them to be Christians though out of season is alwaies seasonable Long-suffering and meeknesse in examining rebuking exhorting of Christians privately may be publikely if not according to order must needs be unseasonable Men seeme to imagin that there were Pulpits and Churches and audiences ready to heare the Apostles preach before men were Christians When they were they shall find that meanes of meeting was provided by Christian people according to their duty the order appointed by them and their successors That they sate upon their chaires in teaching challenging the authority by which they taught the people sometimes standing somtimes allowed to sit downe None but Deacons preached standing when the order and discipline of the primitive Church was in force To deal with those that were not Christians S. Paul must goe out into the Piazza or to the Exchange to Gentiles to do that which they did in the Synagogue or in the temple to the Jewes Acts XVII 7 11. 46. In preaching to Jewes it was their advantage to observe the orders of the Synogogue And yet he that shall peruse that which I have said in the book aforenamed shall never say that those assemblies were principally for preaching which the Apostles made use of to preach to the Synagogue When they had ordered the assemblies of Churches what have you in their writings to recommed frequent preaching but S. Pauls order in the use of these miraculous graces given the Corinthians 1 Cor. XIV unlesse it be drawne into consequence that S. Paul prevailed till midnight Acts. XX. 7. as if the act of an Apostle being to depart were a precedent to the order of the Church Buâ— I have showed you in the foresaid book Chap X. that the Eucharists have a share in the use of the said graces and the worke of the said assemblies as also Hymnes of Gods praises And in â— Cor. XI you read very much of the Eucharist as also of praying Prophesying that is praysing God by Psalmes as I have said there Chap. V. without any mention of Preaching If the Doctrine of the Apostles be joyned with breaking of bread and Prayer Acts XI 42. If the Elders that laboure in the word and doctrine be preferred by S. Paul 1 Tim. V. 17. You have a solemn instruction concerning prayers and the Eucharist 1. Tim. II. 1 2. as also exhortations to frequent it Ebr. XIII 15. without any mention of preaching In fine there is nothing in the Scripture to question the ground which I setled afore As for the practice of the Church I will goe no further then Gennadius de dogmatibus Eccles Cap. LIII neither commending nor blaming those that
him who believes it not so present as in my opinion the ancient Church did believe Both must worship the body and blood of Christ because incarnate and therefore as the body and blood of Christ is inseparable from the consideration of his God-head which every Christian intends to worship And how can then a mans mistake in thinking the elements to be away which indeed are there make him guilty of honouring those creaturs as God which we know if he thought that they were there he must needs take for creatures and therefore could not honour for God I doe believe it hath been said by great Doctors of the Church of Rome that they must needs think themselves flat Idolaters if they could think that the elements are not abolished That showes what confidence they would have the world apprehend that they hold their opinion with But not that the consequence is true unlesse that which I have said be reprovable For what reason can be given why that bodily gesture which professedly signifieth the honour of God tendred to Christ spiritually present in the Eucharist should be Idolatry because the bread and wine are believed to remaine there Which according to their opinion supposing them to be abolished their accidents onely remaining is no idolatry but the worship of our Lord Christ for God In the next place as concerning prayer to Saints I must suppose that the termes of prayer invocation calling upon and whatsoever else we can use are or may be in despite of our hearts equivocal that is we may be constrained unlesse we use that diligence which common discretion counts superfluous to use the same words in signifyng requests made to God and to man Which are not equivocall according to that equivocation which comes by meere chance but by that for which there is a reasonable ground in that eminence which out conceptions and therefore our words which signifie them expresse unto us For all the apprehensions that we have of God all things intelligible coming from things sensiâ—le we can have no proper conceite of Gods excellence and the eminence thereof above his creatures which necessarily appeares to us under attributes common to his creatures removing that imperfection which in them they are joyned with This is the reason why all signes of honour in word or deed may be equivocall when they need not be counted so being joyned with signes either of other words or deeds which may serve to determine the capacity of them Adoration worship respect reverence or howsoever you translate the Latine cultus are of this kind as I said afore Ingressus scenam populum saltator adorat coming upon the stage to dance he adores or worships the people or as an othersaies jactat basia he throwes them kisses He does reverence to the spectators by kissing his hand and saluting them with it So prayer invocation calling upon God is not so proper to God but that whether you will or not every petition to a Prince or a Court of justice is necessarily a prayer and he that makes it invocates or calls upon that Prince or that Court for favour or for justice Now the militant Church necessarily hath communion with the triumphant believing that all those who are departed in Gods Grace are at rest and secure of being parted from him for the future though those who have neglected the content of this world the most for his service and are in the best of those mansions which are provided for them till the day of judgement whom here we call properly Saints injoy the neerest accesse to his presence To dispute whether we are bonnd to honour them or not were to dispute whether we are to be Christians and to believe this or not Whether this honour be Religious or civill nothing but equivocation of words makes disputable and the cause of that equivocation the want of words vulgar use not having provided words properly to signifie conceptions which came not from common sence If we call it Religion it is manifest that all religion is that reverence which the conscience of our obligation to God rendreth If civil the inconvenience is more grosse though lesse dangerous For how can we owe civill respect where there is no relation of members of the same city or Common wealth Plainely their excellence and the relation we have to them being intelligible onely by Christianity must borrowe a name from that which vulgar language attributes to God or to men our superiours I need say nothing in particular of Angels whom if we believe to be Gods ministers imployed instructing his children upon earth we must needs own their honour though the intercourse between us be invisible It were easy to pick up sayings of the Fathers by which religious honour is proper to Christ and others in which that honour that reverence which religion injoines is tendred Saints and Angels And all to be imputed to nothing but want of proper termes for that honour which religion injoyneth in respect of God and that relation which God hath setled betweene the Church militant and triumphant being reasonably called Religious provided that the distance be not confounded between the religious honour of God and that honour of the creature which the religious honour of God injoines being neither civill nor humane but such as a creature is capable of for religions sake and that relation which it setleth I must come to particulars that I may be understood He that could wish that the memories of the Martyrs and other Saints who lived so as to assure the Church they would have beene Martyrs had they been called to it had not beene honoured as it is plaine they were honured by Christians must find in his heart by consequence to wish that Christianity had not prevailed For this honour depending on nothing but the assurance of their happinesse in them that remained alive was that which moved unbelievers to bethinke themselves of the reason they had to be Christians What were then those honours Reverence in preserving the remaines of their bodies and burying them celebrating the remembrance of their agonies every yeare assembling themselves at their monuments making the daies of their death Festivals the places of their buriall Churches building and consecrating Churches to the service of God in remembrance of them I will adde further for the custome seemeth to come from undefiled Christianity burying the remains of their bodies under the stones upon which the Eucharist was celebrated What was there in all this but Christianity That the circumstances of Gods service which no law of God had limited the time the place the occasion of assembling for the service of God alwaies acceptable to God should be determined by such glorious accidents for Christianity as the departure of those who had thus concluded their race What can be so properly counted the raigne of the Saints and Martyrs with Christ which S. Iohn foretelleth Apoc. XX. as this honour when it came to
the same effect there is no cause why he should be excused of Idolatry for his paines But withall he cannot be excused of contradicting himselfe as grossely as he that maintaines those Saints or Angels to be that one true God whom he acknowledges not to be that God but his creatures If there be reason to presume that they who acknowledge Saints or Angels their Mediators Intercessors or advocates to God intend to commit Idolatry by contradicting themselves thus grossely there may be reason to thinke that they count them their Mediators Intercessors or Advocates to God to that effect to which Christ alone is our Mediator Intercessor or Advocate But if whosoever is accepted to pray for an other is necessarily by so doing his Mediator Intecessor or Advocate to him with whom he is admitted to deal on his behalfe by his prayers then will it be necessary to limite the worke of mediation to that effect which may be allowed to the intercession of the Saints or Angels for us if we will have them to be to purpose Certainely neither could Iob intercede for his friends nor Samuel for the Israelites nor Abraham for Abimelech or Pharao nor any of Gods Prophets for any that had or were to have recourse to them for that purpose but they must be by so doing Mediators intercessors and Advocates for them with God For neither can the mediation of Saints or Angels nor of any prophet or other that can be persumed to have favour with God be to any effect but that which the termes of that reconciliation which our Lord Christ hath purchased for us doe settle or allow But he that saith the Saints and Angels pray for us saith not that we are to pray to Saints or Angels nor can be say it without Idolatry intending that we are to do that to them which they do to God for us On the other side though that which we doe to them and that which they doe to God be both called praying yet it wil be very difficult for him that really and actually apprehendeth all Saints and Angels to be Gods creatures to render both the same honour though supposing not granting the same Christianity to injoyn both But to come to particulars I will distinguish three sorts of prayers to Saints wheâ—her taught or allowed to be taught in the Church of Rome The first is of those that are made to God but to desire his blessings by and through the merits and intercession of his Saints I cannot give so fit an example as out of the Canon of the Masse which all the Westerne Churches of that communion do now use There it is said communicantes memoriam venerantes omnium Sanctorum tuorum quorum meritis precibusque concedas ut in omnibus protectionis tuae muniamur auxilio Communicating in and reverencing the memory of such and such and of all thy Saints by whose merit and prayer grant that in all things we may be guarded by thy protection and helpe There is also a short prayer for the Priest to say when he comes to the Altar as he findes opportunity Oramus te Domine per merita sanctorum tuorum quorum reliquia hic sunt omnium sanctorum ut indulgere digneris omnia peccata mea We pray thee Lord by the merits of the Saints whose reliques are here and all Saints that thou wouldest vouchsafe to release me all my sins And on the first Sunday in Advent mentioning the Blessed Virgin they pray Vt qui vere eam matrem Dei credimus ejus apud te intercessionibus adjuvemur That we who believe her truely the mother of God may be helped by her intercessions with thee The second is that which their Litanies containe which though I doe not undertake to know how they are used or how they ought to be used by particular Christians that is how far voluntary how far obligatory yet the forme of them is manifest that whereas you have in them sometimes Lord have mercy upon us Christ have mercy upon us Holy Trinity one God have mercy upon us You have much oftner the Blessed Virgine repeated again and againe under a number of her attributes you have also all the Saints and Angels or such as the present occasion pretends for the object of the devotion which a man tenders named and spoken to with Ora pronobis that is Pray for us The blessed virgine some saie with te rogamus audi nos We beseech thee to heare us One thing I must not forget to observe that the prayers which follow those Litanies are almost alwaies of the first kind That is to say addressed directly to God but mentioning the intercession of Saints or Angels for the meanes to obtain our prayers at his hands The third is when they desire immediately of them the same blessings spirituall and temporall which all Christians desire of God There is a Psalter to be seen with the Name of God changed every where into the Name of the blessed Virgine There is a book of devotion in French with this title Moyen de bien seruir prier adorer la Vierge Marie The way well to serve pray to and adore the blessed Virgine There are divers forms of prayer as well as excessive speeches concerning her especially and other Saints quoted in the Answer to the Jesuites Challenge pag. 330-345 Of those then the first kind seems to me utterly agreeable with Christianity importing onely the exercise of that Communion which all members of Gods Church hold with all members of it ordained by God for the meanes to obtaine for one another the Grace which the obedience of our Lord Jesus Christ hath purchased for us without difference whether dead or alive Because we stand assured that they have the same affection for us dead or alive so farre as they know us and our estate and are obliged to desire and esteem their prayers for us as for all the members of Christs mysticall body Neither is it in reason conceivable that all Christians from the beginning should make them the occasion of their devotions as I said out of any consideration but this For as concerning the terme of merit perpetually frequented in these prayers it hath been alwawes maintained by those of the Reformation that it is not used by the Latine Fathers in any other sense then that which they allow Therefore the Canon of the Masse and probably other prayers which are still in use being more ancient then the greatest part of the Latine Fathers there is no reason to make any diffficulty of admitting it in that sense the ground whereof I have maintained in the second Book The third taking them at the foot of the leter and valuing the intent of those that use them by nothing but the words of them are meer Idolatries as desiring of the creature that which God onely gives which is the worship of the creature for the Creator God blessed for evermore And were we bound to make
the â—lesh to fall from their own to their husbands or their wives Gods the worshippers whereof they saw prosper in the world Not so those who had undertaken his Crosse and thereupon if faithfully had received his spirit which the Gospell bringeth For so why should the Church think that having Images should seduce those that are such to thinkâ— them the seates of some God head which supposeth a conceite of more Gods then one And upon this supposition proceedeth all that is written â—n the prophesies of Esay and Jeremy in the book of Baruch under the person of Jeremy and in the rest of the prophets in scorne of the Images of the Gentiles To wit that they imagined some Deity contayned and inclosed in them which were indeed meere wood and stone The question that remaines is but onely this whether this power of the Church hath been duely executed and within the bounds of our common Christianity or not For to pretend that the Apostles themselves have put it in use by prescribing that images be had and in Churches would be to contradict all that appeares in the point by the records of the Church For though I be obliged to say that there was never any constitution of the Apostles injoyning the whole Church not to bring any image into any Church because all the Church that is considerable hath sometimes done it yet will it easily appeare there is no act of the whole Church binding all to have them in Churches The council of Elivira Can. XXXVI Placuit picturas in Ecclesiis esse non debere ne quod câ—litur in parietibus pingatur It seemed good that there be no pictures in the Churches least that which is worshiped be pictured on the wales The Epistle of Epiphanius to Iohn Bishop of Jerusalem is extant in S. Jerome relating how finding somthing of our Lord Christ painted upon a vaile in a Church of his Diocesse he gave order to teare it which being out of his Diocese he could not have don had he not thought it against Gods Law and therfore no law of the Church And Eusebius Eccles Hist VII 18. relating the statue of our Lord curing the woman that had the issue of blood at Caesaâ—ea Philipi faith it is no marvaile that Gentils converted to the â—aith should honour our Lord and his Apostles for he saith he had sâ—en images of Peter and Paul as well as of our Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preserved from their time as the Gentiles used to honour their Saviors or benefactors But had it been against Gods Law would not the Apostles have told them so would they not have believed the Apostles whom they belâ—eved before they were Christians The picture of the good shepheard upon the Chalices of the Church which Tertullian appeales to de Pudicit cap. VII easily shows that they used not his Picture who used an Embleme of Christ for a Picture And you heard S. Austine say that he knew many worshippers of Pictures and Tombes among Christians The true ground and effect of these passages is hard for me to evidence here in a few words I believe S. Austine saw some dow baked Christians doe that at the tombes of Christians which when they were idolaters they did at the tombes of their friends where part of their Idolatries don were to their Ghosts For by that which followes he complains that he saw that excesse of meate and drinke upon the graves of Christians which it is no marvaile if the Idolatries of the Gentiles allowed So that it is no such marvaile that such Christians should worship Pictures as did the Gentiles The Canon is one of the hardest pieces of antiquity that I know The most probable seemes to be this That it followes the reason alleged in Deuteronomy against any image for God because they saw no shape of God So the word cultus seemes strictly to signifie that honour which Christianity tenders immediately to God not that which it may injoine to his creature And their reason will be this because the God head cannot be painted therefore no Pictures in Churches I doe believe there was somthing of the quarrell betweene Iohn of Jerusalem and Epiphanius about Origen upon which Theophilus of Alexandria heaved S. Chrosystome out of the Sea of Constantinople in that act of tearing the vaile But I believe Epiphanius acted according to his opinion in it and an opinion that he owned to all the world what ever the rest of the Church did for we see not that proceeding against Iohn of Jerusalem as against S. Chrosystome Eusebius might thinke those statues of our Lord and his cure those pictures of S. Peter and S. Paul more ancient then indeed they were But neither doth he charge any Idolatry upon them nor is there any question in the case but of having pictures in private not in the Church That after this time Churches were everywhere trimmed with the stories of the Saints and the Passions of the Martyrs I need not repeat much to prove the controversy in the East about the worshipping of them is evidence enough that the use of them went forward but with such contradiction that some held them Idoles and broke them in peeces who were there upon called Iconoclastâ— others worshipped them who after many attempts of the contrary party prevailed at length in a Council at Nicaea thence called the VII General Council with the concurrence of the Pope That the decree of the Councill injoines no Idolatry notwithstanding whatsoever prejudice to the contrary I must maintaine as unquestionable supposing the premises So far is it from leaving any roome for the imagination of any false God head to be represented by the images which it allowes that it expressely distinguisheth that honour done the image of our Lord Christ to be equâ—vâ—cally called worship that is to be onely so called but not to signifie the esteeme of God which he that believes the Holy Trinity can no way attâ—ibute to the image of our Lord supposing not granting that it were lawfull to honoure the image of our Lord not with any gesture or word signifying any God head inclosed in it which the idolatries of the heathen did signifie but that it is the picture of that man who also is God which he who believes the Trinity and puts off his hat and bowes the knee to the image of our Lord must needs signifie I say this shall be no â—dolatry because whether the worship of the image or of him whose image it is necessarily it is no worship of God but proceeds from an esteem that the image is a contemptible creature but that the man whom it signifies is God I say upon these termes it is not possible that it should be Idolatry to worship this image Because though the words or the gesture which are used may signifie the honour due to God alone yet the profession under which they are used necessarily limits them to the honour of that which is not
held to be God namely the image â—t is to be granted that whosoever it was that writ the book against Imageâ— under the name of Charles the great did understand the council to injoine the worship of God to be giveâ— the image of our Lord For of any othâ—r image of God there was no question in that Councile But it is not to be denied that it was a meere mistake and that the Councile acknowledging that submission of the heart which the excellence of God onely challenges proper to the Holy Tâ—inity maintaines a signification of that esteeme to be paid to the Image of our Lord. For the words of the Councile I refer you to Estius in III. Sentent distinct IX ss II. and III. where you shall see besides the honour due to God alone and the honour due to his Saints the Council injoines a kind of honour for the images of either respectively signifying the esteeme we have for God and of his Saints I know there is much noise of Latria to signifie the honour due to God alone and Dulia that which belongs to his Saintâ— And I am satisfied that there is no ground for the difference either in the originall reason or use of the words But as nothing hinders them to be taken as words of art use to be taken to signifie peculiar conceptions in Christianity so if dulia be understood as S. Austine understandes it câ—ntra Faustum XX. 21. for that love and communion which we imbrace the saints that are alâ—ve with there is no fear of Idolatry in honouring the Saints departed with dulia But the honour we give the images is not the honour we give the principal but onely by the equivocating of terms according to the decree of the Council Therefore that honour of images which the decree maintaineth is no Idolatry But he that saies it is no idolatry which they injoine does not therefore justifie or commend them for injoyningit It were a pittifull commendation for the Church that it is not Idolatry which the decree thereof injoynes It is therefore no evidence that the decree obliges because it injoines no idolatry You saw how neere the honour of Saints in the prayers which come from this decree came to Idolatry And though those that counted Images idoles in the East stood for the honour of the Saints yet it is certaine and visible that the authors of the decree did intend to advance the honour of the Saints thereby and effect it What is that effect That the Saints are prayed to by Christians in such forme and with such termes as doe not distinguish whether they hold them Gods or creatures Grant they agree with their profession and you must construe them to the due difference suppose they understand not the common profession or the consequence of it who warants them no Idolaters It is alleged out of S. Basil de Spiritu Sancto cap. XVIII that the honour of the Image passeth to the principall He speaketh of the honour of the Sonne that it is the honour of the Father whose image the Son is And so it is indeed The honour of the Father and of the Son is both one and the same To say that the image of our Lord is to be honoured as he is is perfect idolatry But he who believes the Son to be of the fathers substance and his picture to be his picture cannot say so if he be in his wits Either he commits Idolatry or he contradicts himselfe That may and must be said It is easy to see how many Divines of the Church of Rome make images honourable with the honour of their principall The images of our Lord by consequence with latria the honour proper to God When this is said it must be cured by distinguishing though not properly yet improperly though not by it self yet accidentally reducible to that honour which the principall is worshipped with that is the image of Christ as God Yet you are not to use these termes to the people least they prove Idolaters or have cause to think their teachers such So Cardinall Bellarmine de Imaginibus II. 23 24 25. There is a cure for Idolatry in the distinction supposing him to contradict himself For what greater contradiction then that the honour that may be reduced to the honour of God should be the honour of God seeing that it is not the honour of God which is not proper to God as consisting in the esteeme of him above all things So for the adoration of the Crosse the signe of the Crosse which I spoke of before is onely a ceremony which being from the beginning frequented by Christians upon all occasions the Church had reason to make use of in the solemnizing of the greatest actions of Gods publike service particularly those whereby the authority of the Church is convayed and exercised The Crosse whereon our Lord Christ was crucified is a relique though not parte of his body yet for coming so nere to his body deserving to be honoured Other Crosses are the images of that The Schoole Doctors question what honour it is which the true Crosse of Christ demands And the head of them Thomas Aquinaâ— answers the honour proper to God by the name of latria Either as representing the figure of Christ crucified or as washed with his blood If the Crosse of Christ must be worshipped with the honour proper to God because washed with our Saviours bloud then must it have received divine vertue from his bloud Is not this construction reasonable And what made the Idoles of the Hethen idoles but an opinion of divine vertue residing in them by being set up for the exercise of their religion that supposed many Gods I grant the construction is necessary though not reasonable For I find it construed otherwise To make a difference between the true Crosse of Christ which is honoured for a relique and other Crosses which are honoured as the pictures of it and signes putting us in mind of Christ on the Crosse So the words of Thomas Aquinas may be reasonably taken to teach Idolatry If they be not necessarily so to be taken yet as he teacheth to honour it with Latria either he teacheth Idolatry or contradicteth himself for the same reason as in Images What the effect of these excessive positions hath been is easie to see They clothe their images they paint them they guild them the finest they may They think themselves holy for touching kissing and caressing them as children do their babies They touch their bodies with them and think themselves hallowed by the meanes They put a cotton on the end of a stick and touch first the images then the eyes the lips and the noses of them that come and that in their surplisses Thus are they induced to pray directly to the Saints for their carnall concupiscences as did the heathen idolaters to vow to give themselves to them to put themselves under their protection and defence to set them up in their
Gods Church But here you have S. Jeromes argument if S. Paul require the use of wedlock to be foâ—borne for extraordinary devotions then hath the Church reason to indeavour that they whose ordinary devotions ought to be extraordinary in comparison of the people be such as forbeare it alwaies Especially in regard of those offices of the Church the occasions whereof may fall out at any time and sudaine Truely were there nothing to doe but to preach twice a week there could no such fall out Nor can I show you better evidence then this that that order is not the order of Gods Church Againe Epiphanius in the premises chargeth the Novatians with ignorance in not permitting the Laity to marry second wives which their Fathers the Montanists are evidently chargeable with Not considering that the Clergy were intended for the creame of Christians not in knowledg or language but in Christianity Therefore he that had been baptized in danger of death not afore and he that had done publike penance was not admitted No more was he that had marryed a second wife which when all is said is S. Pauls meaning 1. Tim. III. 2. For he that had more wives then one was no Christian and therefore in no capacity for the Clergy who was not to communicate with the Church And they who think S. Chrysostome in Epist ad Titum hom II. expounds him of those who being parted by divorce should mary a second wife must say whether afore baptisme or after For that alters the case For though it was a doubt in S. Jeromes time whether he that had marryed one afore baptisme another after were under this incapacity or not But after baptisme it is not to be thought that the Church had so little respect of our Lords Lawes as to admit adulterers though not as to the Roman Lawes yet as to Gods Athenagoras calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fashionable adultery in regard to the world For as to the Church adultery it was alwaies but never fashionable Wherefore S. Chrysostomes argument is to this purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How should he governe well the Church that kept no good will for her that was gon For a man is not chargeble for not keeping affection for her whom he puts away when she is gon but well and good for her that is dead And if he say that S. Paul hereby pun shes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the incontinent and that the case hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many blames it is plain that civill people have alwaies had them in esteeme above others that have staid at their first marryage And therefore though no civill Law forbid it as S. Chrysostome observeth nor Christianity yet is it no marvell if the lawes of the Church which the Apostles hereby inacted set a marke upon it which civility disesteemeth See Grotius his annotations on the place and Luke II. 36. If we consider that the widowes which the Church maintayned were to be such 1. Tim. V. 9. then that it hath alwaies been an incapacity by the Canons of the Church we shall not need seek any other beginning for it S. Chrysostome in 1 ad Tim. Hom X though the copy be not cleare saies plaine enough that the Apostles exacted no more then this signifying what the Canons at that time did require For I doe not pretend that the Apostles themselves either injoyned themselves single life or gave over theire wives when they went about their office Though nothing can appeares to the contrary the many examples of Bishops and Priests that gave over the use of wedlock from the time of their ministry with the consent of their wives giving appearance that they thought the Apostles had done the same It is enough that their instructions were a ground for the Church to proceed in it and a step towards it That course which the Councill of Nicaea confirmed by resting content with it seemeth agreeable both with justice and that holinesse to which the Church pretendeth But before I come to that I must not forget the second reason moving the Church to indeavour it to wit the dispensing of the Church goods according to the intent for which they are dedicated to God in being estated upon it For by the ground hereof setled in the first book it evidently appeareth that the Clergy are not proprietaries in the fruits of them But have onely full right to maintaine themselves upon them with that moderation and abstinence in their private expence which continuall attendance upon Gods service involved in their profession necessarily inferteth Otherwise it is manifest that they are trusted by Christian people with the dispensing of their oblations and consecrations to the maintenance of the poore part of the originall consideration upon which they were estated upon the Church Nor can any civill Law providing contribution of the people for the necessary subsistence of the poore of every parish ever extinguish this obligation so long as the Church is a Church and stands upon its owne title That hospitality to which Church goods are and alwaies have been accounted liable consisting not in secular intertainment which bringeth on ambition of worldly expence and costly superfluities But in providing for the poore and strangers and distressed whether at home or abrode the intent whereof redounds to the account of him that provideth the meanes and therefore the execution thereof to his account that dispenseth the same For if the intent of the Church and all the Lawes of it demonstrate that the Clergy are to be the first fruits of Christianity then doth the renouncing of the world which all Christians by their Baptisme professe in the first place take hold of them But that the injoying of superfluities in the world is utterly inconsistent with Therefore the profession of the Clergy necessarily limiteth their right in Church goods to a spare and moderate maintenance the trust which is upon them by intent of pious consecrations expressed in the originall custome and practice of the Church taking place in point of conscience where their owne necessities cease Now it is indeed become evident by corruption prevailing in the Church that single men becoming trusted with Church goods can abuse them so well to their owne riot or to the inriching of their relations that maried men could have don no more But that never came to passe til chiefly by the coming of the world into the Church those maners and customes in which the eminency of the clergy above the people did and ought to consist suffered shipwrack in the multitude of offenders after they had beene maintained a great while by the eminent abstinence of Prelates and inferiour Clergy able for authority and meanes to have produced bad examples Whether common reason is tyed to judge it more probable that the moderation and abstinence which the Clergy professeth should prevaile and take effect they living single or maried that I suppose onely comes in consideration when the dispute
who create the parties by heading the division have to look about them least they become guilty of the greatest part of soules which in reason must needs perish by the extremities in which it consisteth And the representing of the grounds thereof unto the parties though it may seem an office unnecessary for a private Christian to undertake yet seemeth to me so free from all imputation of offense in discharging of our common Christianity and the obligation of it that I am no lesse willing to undergoe any offense which it may bring upon me then I am to want the advantages which allowing the present Reformation might give me In the mean time I remaine obliged not to repent me of the resolution of my nonage to remaine in the communion of the Church of England There I find an authority visibly derived from the act of the Apostles by meanes of their successors Nor ought it to be of force to question the validity thereof that the Church of Rome and the communion thereof acknowledgeth not the Ordinations and other Acts which are done by virtue of it as done without the consent of the whole Church which it is true did visibly concurre to the authorizing of all acts done by the Clergy as constituted by virtue of those Lawes which all did acknowledge and under the profession of executing the offices of their severall orders according to the same For the issue of that dispute will be triable by the cause of limiting the exercise of them to those termes which the Reformation thereof containeth which if they prove such as the common Christianity expressed in the Scriptures expounded by the original practice of the whole Church renders necessary to be maintained notwithstanding the rest of the Church agree not in them the blame of separation that hath insued thereupon will not be chargeable upon them that retire themselves to them for the salvation of Christian soules but on them who refuse all reasonable compliance in concurring to that which may seem any way tollerable But towards that triall that which hath been said must suffice The substance of that Christianity which all must be saved by when all disputes and decrees and contradictions are at an end is more properly maintained in that simplicity which all that are concerned are capable of by the terms of that Baptisme which it ministreth requiring the profession of them from all that are confirmed at years of discretion then all the disputes on both sides then all decrees on the one side all confessions of faith on the other side have been able to deliver it And I conceive I have some ground to say so great a word having been able by limiting the term of justifying faith in the writings of the Apostles according to the same to resolve upon what termes both sides are to agree if they will not set up the rest of their division upon something which the truth of Christianity justifieth not on either side For by admitting Christianity that is the sincere profession thereof to be the Faith which onely justifyeth in the writings of the Apostles whatsoever is in difference as concerning the Covenant of Grace is resolved without prejudicing either the necessity of Grace to the undertaking the performing the accepting of it for the reward or the necessity of good works in consideration for the same The substance of Chrianity about which there is any difference being thus secured there remaines no question concerning Baptisme and the Eucharist to the effect for which they are instituted being ministred upon this ground and the profession of it with the form which the Catholick Church requireth to the consecration of the Eucharist Nor doth the Church of England either make Sacraments of the rest of the seven or abolish the Offices because the Church of Rome makes them Sacraments Nor wanteth it an order for the daily morning and evening service of God for the celebration of Festivalls and times of Fasting for the observation of ceremonies fit to create that devotion and reverence which they signify to vulgar understandings in the service of God But praying to Saints and worshipping of Images or of the Eucharist Prayers for the delivery of the dead out of Purgatory the Communion in one kind Masses without Communions being additions to or detractions from that simplicity of Gods service which the originall order of the Church delivereth visible to common reason comparing the present order of the Church of Rome with the Scriptures and primitive records of the Church there is no cause to think that the Catholick Church is disowned by laying them aside It is true it was an extraordinary act of Secular Power in Church maters to inforce the change without any consent from the greater part of the Church But if the matter of the change be the restoring of Lawes which our common Christianity as well as the Primitive orders of the Church of both which Christian Powers are borne Protectors make requisite the secular power acteth within the sphere of it and the division is not imputable to them that make the change but to them that refuse their concurrence to it Well had it been had that most pious and necessary desire thereof to restore publick Penance been seconded by the zeal and compliance of all estates and not stifled by the tares of Puritanisme growing up with the Reformation of it For as there can be no just pretense of Reformation when the effect of it is not the frequentation of Gods publick service in that forme which it restoreth but the suppressing of it in that form which it rejecteth So the communion of the Eucharist being the chiefe office in which it consisteth the abolishing of private Masses is an unsusticient pretense for Reformation where that provision for the frequenting of the communion is not made which the restoring of the order in force before private Masses came in requireth Nor can any meane be imagined to maintaine continuall communion with that purity of conscience which the holinesse of Christianity requireth but the restoring of Penance In fine if any thing may have been defective or amisse in that order which the Church of England establisheth it is but justice to compare it in grosse with both extreames which it avoideth and considering that it is not in any private man to make the body of the Church such as thâ—y could wish to serve God with to rest content in that he is not obliged to become a party to those things which he approves not conforming himself to the order in force in hope of that grace which communion with the Church in the offices of Gods service promiseth For consider againe what meanes of salvation all Christians have by communion with the Church of Rome All are bound to be at Masse on every Festivall day but to say onely so many Paters and so many Aves as belong to the hour Not to assist with their devotions that which they understand not much lesse
â—omething for the placing of every man every momâ—nâ— â—◠〈◊〉 estate which thereby hee fore-seeth And the possibility oâ— fore-seeing what will follow being something because no conâ—râ—â—iction destroyes the consistence of the terms inâ—errs by the infiâ—â—â—â— perfection of God the actual fore-sight of what will come to pâ—â—â— though not in it self which is nothing yet in God who is all things And all this involving no predetermination of mans will by God the discourse cannot be superfluous which resolveth the foresight of future contingencies into the decree which supposeth the knowledg of things conditionally future not which inferreth the fore knowledg of things absolutely future For by this means nothing that is found in the Scripture will contradict the substance of Faith which predetermination destroyeth though disclaiming all possibility of making evidence to common sense how it may come to pass And though Gods decree to permit sin can be no sufficient ground of his fore sight that what hee hindreth not shall come to pass as I have argued pag. 209. yet if wee consider withall that there is no question of Gods permitting any man to sin but onely him that is prevented with temptation to sin it may not untruly be said that God fore-sees sin in his own deccee of permitting it including the state of him that is tempted in that case wherein God decrees to permit sin In which case God fore-seeth it properly in his decree of placing the man in that estate not of suffering himto sin which the opinion that I contradict in that place absolutely refuseth And upon these terms when it is resolved Chap. XXVI that predestination to the first Grace is absolute you must not understand predestination to the act of conversioâ— but to the helps which effect it For whatsoever be the motives upon which a man actually resolves it in whatsoever circumstance hee meets them nothing but his own freedom determines his conversion though without those helps hee had not or could not have determined it And therefore if it be said that it is a barr to the prayers and indeavors of those that are moved to be Christians to tell them that their resolution depends upon something which is not in their Power To wit that congruity wherein the efficacy of Grace consisteth The answer is That absolutely whatsoever is requisite to the conversion of him who is called to be a Christian is in his Power Though upon supposition of Gods fore-knowledg that may be said to be requisite without which God fore-sees hee will not be converted when absolutely if hee would hee might have been converted and when supposing hee had been otherwise moved hee would have been converted In which case it is absolutely enough to the charging of any man with his duty that absolutely hee wanted nothing requisite to inable him for a right choice Though upon supposition of Gods fore-knowledg the doing of his duty requires whatsoever God fore-sees that it will not be done without it I have no more to say but that the Contents of the Chapters are premised instead of a Table for which they may well serve in books of this nature And that in regard to the difficulty of the Copy and the ordinary faileurs of the Press the Reader is desired to correct the faults that are marked before hee begin and to serve himself in the rest THE CONTENTS OF THE First Book CHAP. I. ALL agree that Reason is to decide controversies of Faith The objection thaâ— Faith is taught by Gods Spirit answered What Reason decideth questions of Faith The resolution of Faith ends not in the light of Reason but in that which Reason evidenceth to come from Gods messengers Page 1 CHAP. II. The question between the Scripture and the Church which of them is Judge in matters of Faith Whether opinion the Tradition of the Church stands better with Those that hold the Scripture to be clear in all things necessary to salvation have no reason to exclude the Tradition of the Church What opinions they are that deny the Church to be a Society or Corporation by Gods Law 3 CHAP. III. That neither the sentence of the Church nor the dictate of Gods Spirit can be the reason why the Scripâ—ures are to be received No man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit without knowing that he is a true Christian Which supposeth the truth of the Scriptures The motives of Faith are the reason why the Scriptures are to be believed And the consent of Gods people the reason that evidences those motives to be infallibly true How the Scriptures are believed for themselves How a circlâ— is made in rendring a reason of the Faith The Scriptures are Gods Law to all to whom they are published by Gods act of publishing them But Civil Law by the act of Soveraign Powers in acting Christianity upon their Subjects 7 CHAP. IV. Neither the Dictate of Gods Spirit nor the aâ—thority of the Church is the reason of believing any thing in Christianity Whether the Church be before the Scripture or the Scripture before the Church The Scriptures contain not the Infallibility of the Church Nor the consent of all Christians 18 CHAP. V. All things necessary to salvation are not clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Not in the old Testament Not in the Gospel Not in the Writings of the Apostles It is necessary to salvation to believe more then this that our Lord is the Christ Time causeth obscurity in the Scriptures aswell as in other Records That it is no where said in the Scriptures that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures Neither is there any consent of all Christians to evidence the same 25 CHAP. VI. All interpretation of Scripture is to be consined within the Tradition of the Church This supposeth that the Church is a Communion instituted by God What means there is to make evidence of Gods Charter upon which the corporation of the Church subsisteth The name of the Church in the Scriptures often signifieth the Whole or Catholick Church CHAP. VII That the Apostles delivered to the Church a Summary of Christianity which all that should be baptized were to profess Evidence out of the Scriptures Evidence out of the Scriptures for Tradition regulating the Communion of the Church and the Order of it Evidence for the Rule of Faith out of the records of the Church For the Canons of the Church and the pedegree of them from the order established in the Church by the Apostles That the profession of Christianity and that by being baptized is necessary to the salvation of a Christian CHAP. VIII That the power of Governing the whole Church was in the Apostles and Disciples of Christ and those whom they tooke to assist them in the part of it The power of their Successors must needs be derived from those Why that succession which appears in one Church necessarily holdeth all Churches The holding of Councils evidenceth the Unity of the Church
holy Ghost though they presuppose not in themselves the profession of that true Christianity which the Catholike Church teacheth and whether baptized or not Whether supposing themselves praedestinate to life from everlasting upon the dictate of the same Spirit or justified by that faith which consisteth in revealing to them their praedestination from everlasting Alwayes supposing they have the Spirit in consideration of the merits and satisfaction of Christ without supposing the truth of that Christianity which they professe as a condition required by God in them whom he gives his Spirit But the opinion of the Socinians having in detestation this unchristian as well as unreasonable Principle acknowledgeth the gift of the holy Ghost to be granted by God to those who believing our Lord Jesus to be the Christ resolve to live according to all that he hath taught but denieth any consideration of the merits and satisfaction of Christ either in his sending the Gospel or in his giving the holy Ghost to enable a man to perform that which it requireth Onely acknowledging the free grace of God in sending those terms of reconcilement which the Gospel importeth and the free choice of man in accepting or refusing the same But upon the accepting or refusing of them concluding the promises of the Gospel to be necessarily due And therefore presuming that it is altogether unreasonable to make them still to depend upon an outward ceremony of Baptisme by water the consideration upon which they are tendered being already performed And therefore construing the proceeding of the Apostles and the Scriptures wherein they are mentioned upon such presumptions as these they conclude the reason and intent of the Baptisme which they gave according to the Commission of our Lord to be particular to the condition of those who being Jews or Gentiles before were thereby to acknowledge their uncleannesse in that estate and to professe a contrary course for the future So that the reason ceasing why they did Baptize the obligation also of their Baptisme must necessarily cease But in this great distance between the grounds upon which these extream opinions inferre the indifference of Baptisme it is easie to observe something common to both Namely that neither of them acknowledgeth any Catholike Church or any presumption of the visible unity thereof limiting that part of the Doctrine taught by the Scriptures which it is necessary to the salvation of all Christians that they professe as received from hand to hand by the Churches of the Apostles founding to be exacted of them whom they Baptize into themselves For this being set aside why should not Enthusiasts perswade themselves that they have the Spirit of God and a title to all the promises of the Gospel depending upon it by Christ if the Socinians can perswade themselves that they may have it by the meer act of their free will accepting the tender of the Gospel by believing that our Lord is the Christ and resolving to live as he hath taught without any consideration of his merits and sufferings Both being perswaded that for their salvation they are to make what they can of the Scriptures without any regard to the Church for securing the intent and meaning of it What shall hinder them indeed supposing the way plained to them both by admitting the necessity of Baptisme to be such that all the effects and consequences thereof may be thought to be had and obtained before and without it Certainly the waving of those grounds upon which the necessity of Baptisme may appear to be consistent with the undoubted efficacy of that Christianity which the heart onely feeleth is the breach that hath made a gap for these Heresies to enter into Gods Church For if no man can be thought to have right to be baptized that hath not true and living Faith which true and living faith alone qualifies any man for Remission of sins and salvation whether it consist in believing that our Lord Jesus is the Christ because he who believes that is obliged to live as he teacheth the Scriptures according to the Socinians Or in believing that we are praedestinate to life in regard of our Lord Christ dying for us according to the Enthusiasts what remaineth for Baptisme to procure that is not assured already before a man be Baptized And therefore I conceive I demand nothing but reason For all the gaine that I demand from all this is no more but that it be freely acknowledged that justification by faith alone and that faith which alone justifieth be not so understood as to make the promises of the Gospel due before Baptisme to which the Scripture interpreted by the consent and practice of the whole Church testifieth that Baptisme concurreth A thing which can by no means be obtained but by placing that faith which alone justifieth aswell in the outward act of professing as in the inward act of believing This profession containing an expresse promise or vow to God whereby we undertake to live as those who believe the Gospel of Christ are by Gods Law to live And that promise or vow to be celebrated and solemnized by the Sacrament of Baptisme appointed by our Lord Christ to that purpose For seeing the professing of Christianity and not the believing of it is that which brings upon the Church that persecution which the Crosse of Christ the mark of a disciple signifies neither can it be reasonable that God should allow the promises of the Gospel to any quality that includeth it not nor unreasonable that he should make them depend upon it And seing it is not the profession of any thing that a man may call Christianity though perhaps grounded upon an imagination that he hath learned it from the Scriptures which God accepteth whatsoever a man may suffer for the maintenance and affirmation of it but of that which himself sent our Lord Christ to preach It is no marvel if God who esteemeth nothing but for that affection of the heart wherewith it is done should notwithstanding accept no disposition of the heart towards the profession of Christianity but that which is executed and solemnized by such an outward ceremony as himself hath limited his disciples their successors to celebrate it with For supposing that God hath founded the unity of his Church upon supposition of professing that Christianity which he gave his Apostles Commission to preach consisting in the visible communion of those offices which God is served with by Christians it will be evident why God who esteemeth the heart alone hath not allowed the promises of his Gospel to any but those who professe Christianity by being admitted to Baptisme by the Church Because as it is not any beliefe or resolution that may be called Christianity but that which the Church hath received from the Lord and his Apostles that qualifies a man for those promises which God tenders by the Covenant of Grace So it is not the profession of any beliefe or resolution that qualifies a