Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
law_n faith_n justify_v know_v 7,730 5 5.0832 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A32857 The religion of Protestants a safe way to salvation, or, An answer to a book entituled, Mercy and truth, or, Charity maintain'd by Catholiques, which pretends to prove the contrary to which is added in this third impression The apostolical institution of episcopacy : as also IX sermons ... / by William Chillingworth ... Chillingworth, William, 1602-1644.; Chillingworth, William, 1602-1644. Apostolical institution of episcopacy.; Chillingworth, William, 1602-1644. Sermons. Selections. 1664 (1664) Wing C3890; Wing C3884A_PARTIAL; ESTC R20665 761,347 567

There are 29 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

prohibited All which confirmeth your Majesties grave and learned Censure in your thinking the Geneva translation to be warst of all and that in the Marginal notes annexed to the Geneva translation some are very partial untrue seditious c. Lastly concerning the English translation the Puritans say Our translation of the Psalms comprized in our Book of Common-Prayer doth in addition substraction and alteration differ from the truth of the Hebrew in two hundred places at the least In so much as they do therefore profess to rest doubtful whether a man with a safe conscience may subscribe thereunto And M. Carlile saith of the English translators that they have depraved the sense obscured the truth and deceived the Ignorant that in many places they do detort the Scriptures from the right sense And that they shew themselves to love darkness more than light falshood more than truth And the Ministers of Lincoln-Diocess give their publique testimony terming the English Translation A Translation that taketh away from the Text that addeth to the Text and that sometime to the changing or obscuring of the meaning of the holy Ghost Not without cause therefore did your Majesty affirm that you could never see a Bible well Translated into English Thus farr the Author of the Protestants Apologie c. And I cannot forbear to mention in particular that famous corruption of Luther who in the Text where it is said Rom. 3. v. 28. We account a man to be justified by faith without the works of the Law in favour of Justification by faith alone translateth justified by faith ALONE As likewise the falsification of Zuinglius is no less notorious who in the Gospels of S. Matthew Marke and Luke and in S. Paul in place of This is my Body this is my Bloud translates This signifies my Body this signifies my Bloud And here let Protestants consider duely of these Points Salvation cannot be hoped for without true Faith Faith according to them relies upon Scripture alone Scripture must be delivered to most of them by the Translations Translations depend on the skill and honesty of men in whom nothing is more certain than a most certain possibility to err and no greater evidence of truth than that it is evident some of them embrace falshood by reason of their contrary Translations What then remaineth but that Truth Faith Salvation and All must in them rely upon a fallible and uncertain ground How many poor souls are lamentably seduced while from preaching Ministers they admire a multitude of Texts of divine Scripture but are indeed the false Translations and corruptions of erring men Let them therefore if they will be assured of true Scriptures flye to the alwayes visible Catholique Church against which the gates of hell can never so farr prevail as that she shall be permitted to deceive the Christian world with false Scriptures And Luther himself by unfortunate experience was at length forced to confess thus much saying If the ſ Li. cont Zuing. de verit corp Christ in Eucha world last longer it will be again necessary to receive the Decrees of Councels and to have recourse to them by reason of divers interpretations of Scripture which now raign On the contrary side the Translation approved by the Roman-Church is commended even by our Adversaries and D. Covell in particular saith that it was used in the Church one thousand t In his answer unto M. Joha Burges pag. 94. three hundred years ago and doubteth not to prefer u Ibid. that Translation before oth●rs In so much that whereas the English-Translations be many and among themselves disagreeing he concludeth that of all those the approved Translation authorized by the Church of England is that which cometh nearest to the vulgar and is commonly called the Bishops Bible So that the truth of that Translation which we use must be the rule to judge of the goodness of their Bibles and therefore they are obliged to maintain our Translation if it were but for their own sake 17. But doth indeed the source of their manifold uncertainties stop here No The chiefest difficulty remains concerning the true meaning of Scripture for attaining whereof if Protestants had any certainty they could not disagree so hugely as they do Hence Mr. Hooker saith We are w In his Preface to his Books of Eccl. Politie Sect. 6.26 right sure of this that Nature Scripture and Experience have all taught the wo●ld to seek for the ending of contentions by submitting it self unto some judicial and defini●ive sentence whereunto neither part that contendeth may under any pretence refuse to stand Doctor Fields words are remarkable to this purpose Seeing saith he the Controversies x In his Treatise of the Church in his Epistle dedicatory to the L. Archbishop of Religion in our tim●s are grown in number so many and in nature to intricate that few have time and leisure fewer strength of understanding to examine them what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which among all the societies in the world is that blessed company of holy ones that houshold of Faith that Spouse of Christ and Church of the living God which is the Pillar and Ground of Truth that so they may imbrace her Communion follow her Directions and rest in her Judgement 18. And now that the true Interpretation of Scripture ought to be received from the Church it is also proved by what we have already demonstrated that she it is who must declare what Books be true Scripture wherein if she be assisted by the holy Ghost Why should we not believe her to be infallibly directed concerning the true meaning of them Let Protestants therefore either bring some proof out of Scripture that the Church is guided by the holy Ghost in discerning true Scripture and not in delivering the true sense thereof Or else give us leave to apply against them the argument which S. Augustine opposed to the Manicheans in these words I would not y Con. Ep. Fund cap. 5. believe the Gospel unless the Authority of the Church did move me Them therefore whom I obeyed saying Believe the Gospel why should I not obey saying to me Do not believe Manicheus Luther Calvin c. Choose what thou pleasest If thou shalt say Believe the Catholiques They warn me not to give any credit to you If therefore I believe them I cannot believe thee If thou say Do not believe the Catholiques thou shalt not do well in forcing me to the faith of Manicheus because by the Preaching of Catholiques I believed the Gospel it self If thou say You did well to believe them Catholiques commending the Gospel bu● you did not well to believe them discommending Manicheus Dost thou think me so very foolish that without any reason at all I should believe what thou wilt and not believe what thou wilt not And do not Protestants perfectly resemble these men to whom
for this Reason neither may they speaking in their Decrees be Judges for the same Reason If the Pope's Decrees you will say be obscure he can explain himself and so the Scripture cannot But the holy Ghost that speaks in Scripture can do so if he please and when he is pleased will do so In the mean time it will be fit for you to wait his leisure and to be content that those things of Scripture which are plain should be so and those which are obscure should remain obscure until he please to declare them Besides he can which you cannot warrant me of the Pope or a Councel speak at first so plainly that his words shall need no farther explanation and so in things necessary we believe he hath done And if you say The Decrees of Councels touching Controversies though they be not the Judge yet they are the Judge's sentence So I say the Scripture though not the Judge is the sentence of the Judge When therefore you conclude That to say a Judge is necessary for deciding Controversies about the meaning of Scripture is as much as to say He is necessary to decide what the holy Ghost speaks in Scripture This I grant is true but I may not grant that a Judge such an one as we dispute of is necessary either to do the one or the other For if the Scripture as it is in things necessary be plain why should it be more necessary to have a Judg to interpret them in plain places than to have a Judg to interpret the meaning of a Councel's Decrees and others to interpret their Interpretations others to interpret theirs and so on for ever And where they are not plain there if we using diligence to find the Truth do yet miss of it and fall into Errour there is no danger in it They that err and they that do not err may both be saved So that those places which contain things necessary and wherein Errour were dangerous need no infallible interpreter because they are plain and those that are obscure need none because they contain not things Necessary neither is Errour in them dangerous 13. The Law-maker speaking in the Law I grant it is no more easily understood than the Law it self for his speech is nothing else but the Law I grant it very necessary that besides the Law-maker speaking in the Law there should be other Judges to determine Civil and Criminal Controversies and to give every man that justice which the Law allows him But your Argument drawn from hence to shew a necessity of a Visible Judge in Controversies of Religion I say is Sophistical and that for many Reasons 14. First Because the variety of Civil cases is infinite and therefore there cannot be possibly Laws enough provided for the determination of them and therefore there must be a Judge to supply out of the Principles of Reason the interpretation of the Law where it is defective But the Scripture we say is a perfect Rule of Faith and therefore needs no supply of the defects of it 15. Secondly To execute the Leter of the Law according to rigor would be many times unjust and therefore there is need of a Judge to moderate it whereof in Religion there is no use at all 16. Thirdly In Civil and Criminal Causes the parties have for the most part so much interest and very often so little honesty that they will not submit to a Law though never so plain if it be against them or will not see it to be against them though it be so never so plainly whereas if men were honest and the Law were plain and extended to all cases there would be little need of Judges Now in matters of Religion when the Question is Whether every man be a fit Judge and chooser for himself we suppose men honest and such as understand the difference between a Moment and Eternity And such men we conceive will think it highly concerns them to be of the true Religion but nothing at all that this or that Religion should be the true And then we suppose that all the necessary points of Religion are plain and easie and consequently every man in this cause to be a competent Judge for himself because it concerns himself to judge right as much as eternal happiness is worth And if through his own default he judge amiss he alone shall suffer for it 17. Fourthly In Civil Controversies we are obliged only to external passive obedience and not to an internal and active We are bound to obey the sentence of the Judge or not to resist it but not alwayes to believe it just But in matters of Religion such a Judge is required whom we should be obliged to believe to have judged right So that in Civil Controversies every honest understanding man is fit to be a Judge But in Religion none but he that is infallible 18. Fifthly In Civil Causes there is means and power when the Judge hath decreed to compell men to obey his sentence otherwise I believe Laws alone would be to as much purpose for the ending of differences as Laws and Judges both But all the power in the world is neither fit to convince nor able to compell a man's conscience to consent to any thing Worldly terrour may prevail so far as to make men profess a Religion which they believe not such men I mean who know not that there is a Heaven provided for Martyrs and a Hell for those that dissemble such Truths as are necessary to be professed But to force either any man to believe what he believes not or any honest man to dissemble what he does believe if God commands him to profess it or to profess what he does not believe all the Powers in the World are too weak with all the Powers of Hell to assist them 19. Sixthly In Civil Controversies the case cannot be so put but there may be Judge to end it who is not a party In Controversies of Religion it is in a manner impossible to be avoided but the Judge must be a party For this must be the first Whether he be a Judge or no and in that he must be a party Sure I am the Pope in the Controversies of our time is a chief party for it highly concerns him even as much as his Popedom is worth not to yield any one point of his Religion to be erroneous And he is a man subject to like passions with other men And therefore we may justly decline his sentence for fear temporal respects should either blind his judgement or make him pronounce against it 20. Seventhly In Civil Controversies it is impossible Titius should hold the land in question and Sempronius too and therefore either the Plaintiff must injure the Defendant by disquieting his possession or the Defendant wrong the Plaintiff by keeping his right from him But in Controversies of Religion the Case is otherwise I may hold my opinion and do you no wrong and you
many times would immediately and personally inflict the punishment 8. Now the general Sanction of this whole Law is expressed Deut. 27. v. 26 in these words Deut. 27.26 Cursed is every one that continueth not in all the words of this Law to do them which curse as we find it afterwards at large interpreted imported a sudden violent untimely death together with all kind of misfortune that could make this life miserable so that he was liable to this curse that swerved in any one point or circumstance from what was contained in that Law Notwithstanding in some cases God was pleased to remit the rigour of this curse and to except of certain gifts and offerings and the expiatory sacrifices of beasts as it were in exchange for the lives of the delinquents I should but fruitlesly trifle away the time in insisting any longer upon the nature and quality of the Mosaical Law I will now as I am required by my Text shew you the extream difference and incomparable excellency of the Covenant of Grace or the Gospel beyond this in several respects 9. As first The Moral Duties of the two Tables as they are part of the Mosaical Jewish Law required only an external obedience and conformity to the Affirmative precepts thereof and an abstaining from an outward practise of the Negative They did not reach unto the conscience no more then the National Laws of other Kingdoms do so that for example where the Law of Moses forbids Adultery upon pain of death he that should in his heart lust with any woman could not be accounted a transgressour of Moses his Law neither was he liable to the punishment therein specified whereas the Gospel requires not only an outward and as I may say corporal obedience to Gods commandements but also an inward sanctification of the soul and conscience upon the same penalty of everlasting damnation with the former And what is now said of the moral precepts as they art part of Moses his Law by the same proportion likewise is to be understood of the Judicial 10. Notwithstanding what hath now been said yet we must know that these very Jews to whom this Law was given being the children of Abraham were heirs likewise of the promises which were made unto him and his seed And the way or means whereby they were to attain unto these promises were the very same by which himself obtained them namely Faith So that this Mosaical Law whatsoever glorious opinion the Jews had of it was not that Covenant whereby they were to seek for Justification in the sight of God Till Christ's coming there was no Law given which could have given life that is which could promise everlasting life unto man not the Law of works by reason of mans imperfection and weakness not the Law of Moses by reason of its own weakness as S. Paul clearly demonstrates especially in the Epistle to the Hebrews 11. For what end then was the Law of Moses given S. Paul shall answer the question Gal. 3.19 Gal. 3.19 It was added saith he because of transgressions till the seed should come to whom the promises were made It was added as if he should say After the promises made unto Abraham and his seed this Law was moreover annexed not as any new condition whereby they were to attain unto the promises but that in the mean time till the promises were fulfilled they should be restrained as it were and kept under a strict outward discipline from running into any excess of disobedience for those whom perhaps the goodness and mercy of God in affording them those promises would not by the hope of them be able to bridle they notwithstanding when they saw punishment even unto death without mercy inflicted upon the transgressours they would be more careful of their waies It followes Till the seed should come to whom the promises were made or as himself in Heb. 9. alters the phrase Heb. 9.10 till the time of reformation that is When Christ who was that blessed Seed promised to Abraham should come he would so clearly and convincingly shew unto the world the way of Salvation that they should no longer need to be kept under their old Schoolmaster the Law and therefore at his coming the date of the whole Mosaical Law should expire And that may be one reason why S. Paul is in this chapter so violent against those that would urge the observation of the Mosaical Law forasmuch as by inforcing it now when the seed was already come to whom the promises were made they did seem to evacuate the Coming and Gospel of Christ 12. Now that the Mosaical Law was not given to the Jews for this end that by the fulfilling thereof they should promise to themselves the reward of righteousness everlasting life is evidently demonstrated both by our Saviour in the 5. of Matthew and by S. Paul through all his Epistles but especially in that to the Hebrews The force and vertue of whose arguments may in general be reduc'd to that issue which before I mentioned viz. That the Law by the performance whereof we may expect life requires not only an external conformity to the outward works but an inward spiritual sanctification also of the soul and heart 13. But what saith the Law of Meses It was said saith our Saviour by them of old Mat. 5.21 i. in the Law of Moses Thou shalt not kill not Thou shalt not be angry thou shalt not bear malice in thy heart so that if thou abstainest from Murder thou fulfillest Moses his Law And if thou doest kill thou shalt be in danger of Judgement i. the only punishment which the Law of Moses inflicted upon the transgressours thereof was the danger to be condemn'd to death by the Judgement or Bench of Judges appointed for the execution of this Law But I say unto you I who clearly shew unto you that way wherein you must walk before you can promise to your selves any hope of eternal life I say unto you not only whosoever shall kill his neighbour but whosoever out of malice or rancour V. 22. shall say unto his brother Thou fool shall be in danger of Hell fire V. 27. So likewise not only he which commits Adultery in the outward act is culpable by my Gospel before God but also he which looks upon a woman to lust after her in his heart V. 33. And so instead of Forswearing and breaking of Oaths and Vows which Moses his Law forbad Christ condemns fruitless and unnecessary V. 38. though true Oaths Instead of the Law of Retaliation of injuries Christ commands rather to suffer a second injury than to revenge the first 14. But in the last place the last Example which our Saviour gives may seem to destroy this collection which hath been drawn out of this Chapter for saith he Vers 43. You have heard V. 43. that it hath been said of old Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate
and come short of the glory of God Thus much for the Law of Works 29. The state of mankind without Christ being so deplored so out of al hope as I told you Almighty God out of his infinite mercy and goodness by his unspeakable wisdom found out an attonement accepting of the voluntary exinanition and humiliation of his dearly beloved Son who submitted himself to be made flesh to all our natural infirmities sin only excepted and at last to dye that ignominious accursed death of the Cross for the Redemption of mankind Who in his death made a Covenant with his Father that those and only those who would be willing to submit themselves to the obedience of a new Law which he would prescribe unto mankind should for the merits of his obedience and death be justified in the sight of God have their sins forgiven them and be made heirs of everlasting glory Now that Christ's death was in order of Nature before the giving of the Gospel is I think evident by those words of St. Paul Heb. 9.16 17. where comparing the old Covenant of the Jews with that of Christ he saith Where a Testament is Heb. 9.16.16 there must of necessity be the death of the Testatour for a Testament is of force after men are dead otherwis● it is of no strength at all while the Testatour liveth whereupon neither the first Covenant was dedicated without bloud It was necessary therefore saith he ver 23. that the patterns of things in heaven should be purified with these i. e. with the bloud of Beasts but the heavenly things themselves with better things than those namely with the bloud of Christ 30. Which Covenant of Christ call'd in Scripture the New-Covenant the Covenant of Grace the grace of God the Law of Faith according to the nature of all Covenants being made between two parties at the least requires conditions on both sides to be perform'd and being a Covenant of Promise the conditions on man's part must necessarily go before otherwise they are no conditions at all Now man's duty is comprehended by St. Paul in this word Faith and God's promise in the word Justification And thus farr we have proceeded upon sure grounds for we have plain express words of Scripture for that which hath been said But the main difficulty remains behind and that is the true sense and meaning of these two words Faith and Justification and what respect and dependance they have one of the other Which difficulty by Gods assistance and with your Christian charitable patience I will now endeavour to dissolve 31. For the first therefore which is Faith we may consider it in several respects to wit first as referring us to and denoting the principal object of Evangelical Faith which is Christ Now if Faith be meant in this sense as by many good Writers of our Reformed Churches it is understood then the meaning of that so often repeated saying of St. Paul We are justified by Faith without the works of the Law must be We are justifi'd only for the obedience of Christ and not for our righteousness of the Law which is certainly a most Catholick Orthodox sense and not to be deny'd by any Christian though I doubt it does not express all that St. Paul intended in that Proposition Secondly Faith signifies the Act or exercise or duty of Faith as it comprehends all Evangelical Obedience call'd by St. Paul The Obedience of Faith Rom. 16.26 Rom. 16.26 4.13 9.13 10.6 The Righteousness of Faith Rom. 4 13. 9.13 10.6 And it is an inherent grace or vertue wrought in us by the powerful operation of God's Spirit Or thirdly Rom. 10.9 it may be taken for the Doctrin of Faith call'd also by him the Word of Faith Act. 20.32 Gal. 3.2 Rom. 3.27 Rom. 10.8 and the Word of Gods Grace Act. 20.32 and the hearing of Faith Gal. 3.2 In which sense as if he meant the Word St. Paul may seem to resolve us Rom. 3.27 where he saith that boasting is excluded by the Law of Faith which words are extant in the very heat of the controversie of Justification Now these senses of Faith if they be apply'd to that conclusion of St. Paul We are justified by Faith come all to one pass for in effect it is all one to say We are justifi'd by our Obedience or Righteousness of Faith and to say We are justifi'd by the Gospel which prescribes that Obedience As on the contrary to say We are justifi'd by the Law or by works prescribed by the Law is all one There is a fourth acception of Faith taken for the single Habit or Grace of Faith and apply'd to this proposition only of all Christians that I have heard of by the Belgick Remonstrants which being a new invented fancy and therefore unwarrantable yet I shall hereafter have occasion it may be to say something of it 31. St. Paul's Proposition I am perswaded excludes none of these senses it is capeble of them all But before I shew you how they may consist together I will in the first place declare of what nature that righteousness is which God by vertue of his New Covenant requires at our hands before he will make good his promise unto us First then God requires at our hands a sincere Obedience unto the substance of all Moral duties of the Old Covenant and that by the Gospel And this obedience is so necessary that it is impossible any man should be saved without it The pressing of this Doctrine takes up by much the greatest part of the Evangelical Writings Now that these Duties are not enforc'd upon us as conditions of the Old Covenant of Works is evident because by Christ we are freed from the Obligation of the Old Covenant God forbids that we should have a thought of expecting the hope of righteousness upon those terms For that Covenant will not admit of any imperfection in our works and then in what a miserable case are we There is no hope for us unless some course be taken that not only our imperfections but our sins and those of a high nature be pass'd by and overlook'd by Almighty God as if He had lost his eyes to see them or his memory to remember them 32. The substance then of the Moral Law is enjoyn'd us by the New-Covenant but with what difference I shall shew you presently And hereupon it is that our Saviour saith to the Pharisees who were willing to make any mis-construction of his Doctrine Think you that I am come to destroy the Law I by all means say we God forbid else for unless the old Law be destroy'd we are undone as long as that is alive we are dead If the Law of Works have its natural force still woe be to us Therefore that must not be Christ's meaning His intent is as if he should say Think you that I am come to destroy the righteousness of the Law to dis-oblige men from
Epistle to the Romans be of sufficient force for their sense of Justification Then certainly an Argument from as express words in the Epistle to the Galatians will be as concluding for mine in which Epistle he also purposely states the same questions Gal. 3.11 The words are Gal. 3.11 That no man is justified by the Law in the sight of God it is evident for the Just shall live by faith Now to live I hope does not signifie to have ones sins forgiven him but to be Saved Therefore unless S. Paul include a right unto Salvation within the compass of Justification that Text might have been spared as nothing at all serving for his purpose Besides Is not Salvation as free as gracious as undeserved an act of God as Remission of sins Is it not as much for Christs sake that we are saved as that our sins are forgiven us Thus much for what I suppose is meant by Justification I will now as briefly and as perspicuously as I can without using Allegories and Metaphorical expressions with which this point is ordinarily much obscured shew you the combination of these two words in what sense I suppose S. Paul may use this proposition We are Justified by Faith without the Works of the Law 38. In the first place therefore I will lay down this Conclusion as an infallible safe foundation That if we have respect to the proper meritorious cause of our Justification we must not take Faith in that Proposition for any virtue or Grace inherent in us but only for the proper and principal object thereof Jesus Christ and his Merits And the meaning of that Proposition must be that we are not justified for the merits of any Righteousness in our selves whether Legal or Evangelical but only for the Obedience and Death of our Blessed Saviour Jesus Christ Though this be most true yet I suppose that S. Paul in that proposition had not a respect to the Meritorious Cause of our Justification but to that Formal Condition required in us before we be Justified as I think may appear by that which follows 39. I told you even now that I would in this point purposely abstain from using Metaphors and Figurative Allusions and the reason is because I suppose and not without reasonable grounds that the stating of this point of Justification by Metaphors has made this Doctrine which is set down with greater light and perspicuity in holy Scripture than almost any other to be a Doctrine of the most Scholastical subtilty the fullest of shadows and clouds of all the rest For example In that fashion and dress of Divinity as it is now worn slic'd and mangled into Theses and Distinctions we find this point of our Justification thus express'd That Faith is therefore said to Justifie us because it is that which makes Christs righteousness ours it is as it were an instrument or hand whereby we receive lay hold on and apply Christ unto our selves Here 's nought but flowers of Rhetorick Figures and Metaphors which though they are capable of a good sense yet are very improper to state a Controversie withall 40. But let us examine them a little We must not say they conceive of Faith as if it were a Vertue or Grace or any part of Righteousness inherent in us For Faith as a Grace has no influence at all into our Justification Mark the Coherence of these things Faith is considered as an hand or an instrument in our Justification and yet for all it is a Hand it is nothing in or of us for it seems Hands are not parts of mens bodies Again Faith puts on Christ receives him layes hold upon him makes his righteousness ours and yet it does nothing for all that Besides How can Faith be properly call'd an instrument of Justification An Instrument is that which the principal Cause the Efficient makes use of in his operation Now Justification in this sense is an immanent internal action of God in which there is no co-operation of any other agent nor any real alteration wrought in man the object thereof Does God then use Faith as an instrument in producing the Act of Justification No but it is Instrumentum Passivum saith one That is a thing never heard of in nature before and the meaning is sure Faith certainly is something but what a kind of thing we know not By these means it comes to pass that the Doctrine of our Justification as some men have handled it is become as deep as unsearchable a mystery as that of the Trinity 41. Without question there is nothing can be more evident to a man that shall unpartially consider S. Paul's method in his discourse of Justification then that by Faith he intends some operative working grace in us For instance The Apostle proves that we Christians are to seek for Justification the same way that Abraham attained unto it namely by Faith for saith the Scripture in his quotation Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness What was that which was accounted to him His believing That is say some Christ who was the object of his Belief This is a forc'd interpretation certainly and which a Jew would never have been perswaded to But that Christ was not at all intended in that place it is evident for Abraham's belief there had respect to Gods promise made to him of giving him a Son in his old age and by that Son a Seed as innumerable as the stars in heaven as appears Gen. 15.4 5 6. whereas the Promise of Christ Gen. 15.4 5 6. Gen. 18.18 follows three Chapters after to wit Gen. 18.18 Again the Apostle in many places useth these words We are Justified by Faith in Christ and by the Faith of Jesus Christ which speeches of his will admit of no tolerable sense unless by Faith he intends some work or obedience perform'd by us This therefore being taken for granted that by Faith is meant some condition required at our hands and yet my former conclusion of our Justification only for the merits of Christ remaining firm we will in the next place consider what kind of obedience that of Faith is and in what sense it may be said to justifie us 42. What satisfaction I conceive may be given to this Quaery I will set down in this Assertion Assertion That since Justification even as it includes Remission of sins is that Promise to perform which unto us God has oblig'd himself in the New Covenant it must necessarily presuppose in the person to be so justified such an obedience as the Gospel requires namely first Repentance from dead works a conversion to a new obedience of those holy Moral Commands which are ratifi'd in the Gospel and a relying upon Christ as the only meritorious cause of our Justification and Salvation by a particular Evangelical Faith All this I say is pre-required in the person who is made capable of Justification either in the exercise or at least in
praeparatione cordis in a full resolution of the heart and entire disposition of the mind So that though God be the sole proper Efficient Cause and Christ as Mediatour the sole proper Meritorious Cause of our Justification yet these inherent dispositions are exacted on our part as causae sine quibus non as necessary conditions to be found in us before God will perform this great work freely and graciously towards us and only for the Merits of Christ 43. This Assertion may Reas 1 I suppose be demonstrated first from the nature of a Covenant For unless there be pre-required conditions on man's part to be perform'd before God will proportion his reward the very nature of a Covenant is destroy'd And it will not boot to answer that though there be no qualifications required in a man before he obtain Remission of sins yet they are to be found in us before we be made capable of Salvation For as I have shew'd before Sol. 1 Salvation is as properly a gracious Act of Mercy as free and undeserved a gift as truly bestowed on us only for the Merits of Christ as Remission of sins and therefore may as well consist without any change in us as the former And secondly If that proposition of S. Paul We are Justified by Faith Sol. 2 without the works of the Law exclude all conditions to be perform'd by man If it exclude not only the righteousness of the Law which indeed it doth but the obedience of Faith or the Gospel likewise from being necessary dispositions in us before we receive remission of sins Then another saying of his parallel to this will exclude as well the necessity of an Evangelical Obedience to our salvation For saith S. Paul Eph. 2.8 Eph. 2.8 By Grace are ye saved through Faith and that not of your selves it is the gift of God not of Works lest any man should boast Put I hope no man will be so unchristian-like as to exclude the necessity of our good works to salvation for all this saying of S. Paul therefore they may as well be pre-required to Remission of sins notwithstanding the former place 44. Secondly Reas 2 If there be no necessity of any pre-disposition in us before Remission of sins then a man may have his sins forgiven him and so become a person accepted of God whilest he is a person unregenerate unsanctified whilest he is dead in trespasses and sins Eph. 2.1 c. whilest he walks according to the course of this world according to the prince of the power of the air the Spirit that worketh in the children of disobedience whilest he has his conversation in the lusts of the flesh fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind being notwithstanding his Justification a child of wrath as much as the profanest heathen though the veriest reprobate in the world lastly though he be no child of Abraham according to faith that is not having in him that faith which was imputed to Abraham for righteousness Now whether this Divinity be consonant to Gods Word let your own consciences be Judges 45. A third Argument to prove the Truth of the former Assertion Reas 3 shall be taken from several Texts of Scripture where Justification even as it is taken for Remission of sins is ascribed to other virtues besides Faith whether it be taken for a particular virtue or for the object thereof For example Our Saviour saith expresly Mat. 12.37 By thy words thou shalt be justified and by thy words thou shalt be condemned where we see Justification is taken in that proper sense in which we maintain it against the Papists Again If you forgive men their trespasses Mat. 6.14 45. your heavenly Father will also forgive you But if you forgive not men their trespasses neither will your Father forgive your trespasses Again our Saviour speaking concerning Mary saith Her sins are forgiven her because she loved much Luk. 7.47 If the time or your patience could suffer me Reas 4 I might add a fourth Reason to prove my former Assertion which is the clearness and evidence of agreement and reconciliation between S. Paul and S. James in this point upon these grounds without any new invented Justification before men which is a conceit taken up by some men only to shift off an Adversary's argument which otherwise would press them too hard they think for S. Paul's Faith taken for the obedience of the Gospel would easily accord with S. James his holy and undefiled Religion before God Jam. 1.27 or works which is all one And S. James would be S. Paul's expositour without any injury or detraction at all from the merits of Christ or Gods free and undeserved mercy to us in him But I must hasten 46. The full meaning then of S. Paul's Proposition We are justified by Faith and not by the works of the Law and by consequence the state of the whole controversie of Justification in brief may be this That if we consider the efficient cause of our Justification it is only God which Justifies if that for which we are justified that is the meritorious cause thereof it is not for any thing in our selves but only for the obedience and satisfaction of our Blessed Saviour that God will Justifie us But if we have respect to what kind of Conditions are to be found in us before Christ will suffer us to be made partakers of the benefit of his Merits then we must say that we are not justified by such a Righteousness so perfect absolute and complete as the Law of Works does require but by the righteousness of the Gospel by a Righteousness proportionable to that Grace which God is pleased to bestow on us not by the perfection but sincerity of our obedience to the New Covenant And the Apostle's main argument will serve to prove this to any understanding most undeniably S. Paul has demonstrated that if we consider the rigour of the Law all men both Jews and Gentiles are concluded under sin and most necessarily obnoxious to Gods wrath Which Reason of his would not be at all prevailing unless by works of the Law he intended only such a perfect obedience as the Law requires which by reason of mans weakness is become impossible unto him For it might easily be reply'd upon him thus We confess no man can fulfil the Law but the conditions of the Gospel are not only possible but by the assistance of Gods Spirit easie to be performed so that though for this reason the former Righteousness be excluded from our Justification not only quoad meritum but also quoad praesentiam yet the later Evangelical Righteousness is excluded from our Justification only quoad Meritum 47. But I perceive an Objection ready to assault me and I will impartially assist the force and strength thereof against my self with all the advantage I can It is to this purpose When men are disputing in the Schools or discoursing in the Pulpit they
soever it is holds that which indeed is opposite to the sense of the Scripture which God intended for it is impossible that God should intend Contradictions But then this intended sense is not so fully declared but that they which oppose it may verily believe that they indeed maintain it and have great shew of reason to induce them to believe so and therefore are not to be damned as men opposing that which they either know to be a Truth delivered in Scripture or have no probable Reason to believe the contrary but rather in Charity to be acquitted and absolved as men who endeavour to find the Truth but fail of it through humane frailty This ground being laid the Answer to your ensuing Interrogatories which you conceive impossible is very obvious and easie 14. To the first Whether it be not in any man a grievous sin to deny any one Truth contained in holy Writ I answer Yes if he knew it to be so or have no probable Reason to doubt of it otherwise not 15. To the second Whether there be in such denial any distinction between Fundamental and not-Fundamental sufficient to excuse from Heresie I answer Yes There is such a Distinction But the Reason is because those Points either in themselves or by accident are Fundamental which are evidently contained in Scripture to him that knows them to be so Those not-Fundamental which are there-hence deducible but probably only not evidently 16. To the third Whether it be not impertinent to alledge the Creed as containing all Fundamental Points of Faith as if believing it alone we were at Liberty to deny all other Points of Scripture I answer It was never alledged to any such purpose but only as a sufficient or rather more than a sufficient Summarie of those Points of Faith which were of necessity to be believed actually and explicitly and that only of such which were meerly and purely Credenda and not Agenda 17. To the fourth drawn as a Corollary from the former Whether this be not to say that Of Persons contrary in belief one part only can be saved I answer By no means For they may differ about Points not contained in Scripture They may differ about the sense of some ambiguous Texts of Scripture They may differ about some Doctrines for and against which Scriptures may be alledged with so great probability as may justly excuse either Part from Heresie and a self-condemning Obstinacy And therefore though D. Potter do not take it ill that you believe your selves may be saved in your Religion yet notwithstanding all that hath yet been pretended to the contrarie he may justly condemn you and that out of your own principles of uncharitable presumption for affirming as you do that no man can be saved out of it CHAP. II. What is that means whereby the revealed Truths of God are conveyed to our Understanding and which must determine Controversies in Faith and Religion OF our estimation respect and reverence to holy Scripture even Protestans themselves do in fact give testimony while they possess it from us and take it upon the integrity of our custody No cause imaginable could avert our will from giving the function of supreme and sole Judge to holy Writ if both the thing were not impossible in it self and if both reason and experience did not convince our understanding that by this Assertion Contentions are increased and not ended We acknowledge holy Scrippture to be a most perfect Rule for as much as a Writing can be a Rule We only deny that it excludes either divine Tradition though it be unwritten or an external Judge to keep to propose to interpret in a true Orthodox and Catholique sense Every single Book every Chapter yea every period of holy Scripture is infallibly true and wants no due perfection But must we therefore inferr that all other Books of Scripture are to be excluded lest by addition of them we may seem to derogate from the perfection of the former When the first Books of the Old and New Testament were written they did not exclude unwritten Traditions nor the Authority of the Church to decide Controversies and who hath then so altered their nature and filled them with such jealousies as that now they cannot agree for fear of mutual disparagement What greater wrong is it for the written Word to be compartner now with the unwritten than for the unwritten which was once alone to be afterward joyned with the written Who ever heard that to commend the fidelity of a Keeper were to disauthorize the thing committed to his custody Or that to extol the integrity and knowledge and to avouch the necessity of a Judge in suits of Law were to deny perfection in the Law Are there not in Common-wealths besides the Laws written and unwritten customs Judges appointed to declare both the one and the other as several occasions may require 2. That the Scripture alone cannot be Judge in Controversies of Faith we gather it very clearly From the quality of a writing in general From the nature of holy Writ in particular which must be believed as true and infallible From the Editions and Translations of it From the difficulty to understand it without hazard of Error From the inconveniences that must follow upon the ascribing of sole Judicature to it and finally From the Confessions of our Adversaries And on the other side all these difficulties ceasing and all other qualities requisite to a Judge concurring in the visible Church of Christ our Lord we must conclude that She it is to whom in doubts concerning Faith and Religion all Christians ought to have recourse 3. The name notion nature and properties of a Judge cannot in common reason agree to any meer writing which be it otherwise in it its kind never so highly qualified with sanctity and infallibility yet it must ever be as all writings are deaf dumb and inanimate By a Judge all wise men understand a person endued with life and reason able to hear to examine to declare his mind to the disagreeing parties in such sort as that each one may know whether the sentence be in favour of his cause or against his pretence and he must be applyable and able to do all this as the diversity of Controversies Persons Occasions and Circumstances may require There is a great and plain distinction betwixt a Judge and a Rule For as in a Kingdom the Judge hath his Rule to follow which are the received Laws and Customs so are not they fit orable to declare or be Judges to themselves but that office must belong to a living Judge The holy Scripture may be and is a Rule but cannot be a Judge because it being always the same cannot declare it self any one time or upon any one occasion more particularly then upon any other and let it be read over an hundred times it will be still the same and no more fit alone to terminate Controversies in Faith than the Law
is impossible to know what Books be Scripture which yet to Protestants is the most necessary and chief Point of all other D. Covell expresly saith Doubtless q In his Defence of Mr. Hookers books art 4. p. 31. it is a tolera le opinion in the Church of Rome if they go no further as some of them do not he should have said as none of them do to affirm that the Scriptures are holy and divine in themselves but so esteemed by us for the authority of the Church He will likewise oppose himself to those his Brethren who grant that Controversies cannot be ended without some external living Authority as we noted before Besides how can it be in us a fundamental Error to say the Scripture alone is not Judge of Controversies seeing notwithstanding this our belief we use for interpreting of Scripture all the means which they prescribe as Prayer Conferring of places Consulting the Originals c. and to these add the Instruction and Authority of God's Church which even by his confession cannot err damnably and may afford us more help than can be expected from the industry learning or wit of any private person and finally D. Potter grants that the Church of Rome doth not maintain any fundamental error against Faith and consequently he cannot affirm that our doctrin in this present Controversie is damnable If he answer that their Tenet about the Scriptures being the only Judge of Controversies is not a Fundamental Point of Faith then as he teacheth that the universal Church may err in Points Fundamental so I hope he will not deny but particular Churches and private men are much more obnoxious to error in such Points and in particular in this that Scripture alone is Judge of Controversies And so the very Principle upon which their whole Faith is grounded remains to them uncertain and on the other side for the self-same season they are not certain but that the Church is Judge of Controversies which if she be then their case is lamentable who in general deny her this Authority and in particular Controversies oppose her definitions Besides among publique Conclusions defended in Oxford the year 1633. to the questions Whether the Church have Authority to determine Controversies in Faith And To interpret holy Scripture The answer to both is Affirmative 27. Since then the visible Church of Christ our Lord is that infallible Means whereby the revealed truths of Almighty God are conveyed to our understanding it followeth that to oppose her definitions is to resist God himself which blessed St. Augustine plainly affirmeth when speaking of the Controversie about Rebaptization of such as were baptized by Heretiques he saith This r De unit Eccles c. 2● is neither openly nor evidently read neither by you nor by me yet if there were any wise man of whom our Saviour had given testimony and that he should be consulted in this question we should make no doubt to perform what he should say lest we might seem to gain-say not him so much as Christ by whose testimony he was recommended Now Christ beareth witness to his Church And a little after Whosoever refuseth to follow the practice of the Church doth resist our Saviour himself who by his testimony recommends the Church I conclude therefore with this argument Whosoever resisteth that means which infallibly proposeth to us God's Word or Revelation commits a sin which unrepented excludes Salvation But whosoever resisteth Christ's visible Church doth resist that means which infallibly proposeth God's Word or Revelation to us Therefore whosoever resisteth Christ's visible Church commits a sin which unrepented excludes Salvation Now what visible Church was extant when Luther began his pretended Reformation whether it were the Roman or Protestant Church and whether he and other Protestants do not oppose that visible Church which was spread over the World before and in Luther's time is easie to be determined and importeth every one most seriously to ponder as a thing whereon eternal salvation dependeth And because our Adversaries do here most insist upon the distinction of Points Fundamental and not-Fundamental and in particular teach that the Church may erre in Points not-Fundamental it will be necessary to examine the truth and weight of this evasion which shall be done in the next Chapter An ANSWER to the SECOND CHAPTER Concerning the means whereby the revealed Truths of God are conveyed to our Understanding and which must determine Controversies in Faith and Religion AD § 1. He that would usurp an absolute Lordship and tyranny over any people need not put himself to the trouble and difficulty of abrogating and disanulling the Laws made to maintain the common liberty for he may frustrate their intent and compass his own design as well if he can get the power and authority to interpret them as he pleases and add to them what he pleases and to have his interpretations and additions stand for Laws if he can rule his people by his Laws and his Laws by his Lawyers So the Church of Rome to establish her tyranny over mens consciences needed not either to abolish or corrupt the holy Scriptures the Pillars and supporters of Christian liberty which in regard of the numerous multitude of Copies dispersed through all places translated into almost all Languages guarded with all sollicitous care and industry had been an impossible attempt But the more expedite way and therefore more likely to be successeful was to gain the opinion and esteem of the publique and authoriz'd Interpreter of them and the Authority of adding to them what Doctrin she pleased under the title of Traditions or Definitions For by this means she might both serve herself of all those clauses of Scripture which might be drawn to cast a favourable countenance upon her ambitious pretences which in case the Scripture had been abolished she could not have done and yet be secure enough of having either her power limited or her corruptions and abuses reformed by them this being once setled in the minds of men that unwritten doctrins if proposed by her were to be received with equal reverence to those that were writen and that the sense of Scripture was not that which seemed to mens reason and understanding to be so but that which the Church of Rome should declare to be so seemed it never so unreasonable and incongruous The matter being once thus ordered and the holy Scriptures being made in effect not your Directors and Judges no farther than you please but your servants and instruments alwayes prest and in readiness to advance your designes and disabled wholly with minds so qualified to prejudice or impeach them it is safe for you to put a crown on their head and a reed in their hands and to bow before them and cry Hail Ring of the Jews to pretend a great deal of esteem and respect and reverence to them as here you do But to little purpose is verbal reverence without entire submission and syncere
Protestants in a long discourse transcribed out of the Protestant's Apology That their Translations of the Scripture are very different and by each other mutually condemned Luther 's Translation by Zwinglius and others That of the Zwinglians by Luther The Translation of Oecolampadius by the Divines of Basil that of Castalio by Beza That of Beza by Castalio That of Calvin by Carolus Molinaeus That of Geneva by M. Parks and King James And lastly One of our Translations by the Puritans 59. All which might have been as justly objected against that great variety of Translations extant in the Primitive Church and made use of by the Fathers and Doctors of it For which I desire not that my word but S. Austin's may be taken They which have translated the Scriptures out of the Hebrew into Greek may be numbred but the Latin Interpreters are innumerable For whensoever any one in the first times of Christianity met with a Greek Bible and seemed to himself to have some ability in both Languages he presently ventured upon an Interpretation So He in his second Book of Christian doctrine Cap. 11. Of all these that which was called the Italian Translation was esteemed best so we may learn from the same S. Austin in Chap. 15. of the same Book Amongst all these interpretations saith he let the Italian be preferred for it keeps closer to the Letter and is perspicuous in the sense Yet so far was the Church of that time from presuming upon the absolute purity and perfection even of this best Translation that S. Hierom thought it necessary to make a new Translation of the Old Testament out of the Hebrew Fountain which himself testifies in his Book de Viris illustribus and to correct the Vulgar version of the New Testament according to the truth of the Original Greek amending many errors which had crept into it whether by the mistake of the Author or the negligence of the Transcribers which work he undertook and performed at the request of Damasus Bishop of Rome You constrain me saith he to make a new work of an old that after the Copies of the Scriptures have been dispersed through the whole World I should sit as it were an Arbitrator amongst them and because they vary among themselves should determine what are those things in them which consent with the Greek verity And after Therefore this present Preface promises the four Gospels only corrected by collation with Greek Copies But that they might not be very dissonant from the custom of the Latin reading I have so tempered with my stile the Translation of the Ancients that those things amended which did seem to change the sense other things I have suffered to remain as they were So that in this matter Protestants must either stand or fall with the Primitive Church 60. The Corruption that you charge Luther with and the falsification that you impute to Zwinglius What have we to do with them Or why may not we as justly lay to your charge the Errours which Lyranus or Paulus Brugensis or Laurentius Valla or Cajetan or Erasmus or Arias Montanus or Augustus Nebiensis or Pagnine have committed in their Translations 61. Which yet I say not as if these Translations of Luther and Zwinglius were absolutely indefensible for what such great difference is there between Faith without the Works of the Law and Faith alone without the Works of the Law Or why does not Without Alone signifie all one with Alone Without Consider the matter a little better and observe the use of these phrases of speech in our ordinary talk and perhaps you will begin to doubt whether you had sufficient ground for this invective And then for Zwinglius if it be true as they say it is that the language our Saviour spake in had no such word as Tosignifie but used always to be in stead of it as it is certain the Scripture does in an hundred places then this Translation which you so declaim against will prove no falsification in Zwinglius but a calumny in you 62. But the faith of Protestants relies upon Scripture alone Scripture is delivered to most of them by Translations Translations depend upon the skill and honesty of Men who certainly may err because they are Men and certainly do err at least some of them because their Translations are contrary It seems then the Faith and consequently the Salvation of Protestants relies upon fallible and uncertain grounds 63. This Objection though it may seem to do you great service for the present yet I fear you will repent the time that ever you urged it against us as a fault that we make mens salvation depend upon uncertainties For the Objection returns upon you many ways as first thus The salvation of many millions of Papists as they suppose and teach depends upon their having the Sacrament of Pennance truly administred unto them This again upon the Minister's being a true Priest That such or such a man is Priest not himself much less any other can have any possible certainty for it depends upon a great many contingent and uncertain supposals He that will pretend to be certain of it must undertake to know for a certain all these things that follow 64. First That he was baptized with due matter Secondly with the due form of words which he cannot know unless he were both present and attentive Thirdly he must know that he was baptized with due Intention and that is that the Minister of his Baptism was not a secret Jew nor a Moor nor an Atheist of all which kinds I fear experience gives you just cause to fear that Italy and Spain have Priests not a few but a Christian in heart as well as Profession otherwise believing the Sacrament to be nothing in giving it he could intend to give nothing nor a Samosatenian nor an Arrian but one that was capable of having due intention from which they that believe not the Doctrine of the Trinity are excluded by you And lastly That he was neither drunk nor distracted at the administration of the Sacrament nor our of negligence or malice omitted his intention 65. Fourthly he must undertake to know that the Bishop which ordained him Priest ordained him compleatly with due Matter Form and Intention and consequently that he again was neither Jew nor Moor nor Atheist nor liable to any such exception as is unconsistent with due Intention in giving the Sacrament of Orders 66. Fifthly he must undertake to know that the Bishop which made him Priest was a Priest himself for your Rule is Nihil dat quod non habet And consequently that there was again none of the former nullities in his Baptism which might make him incapable of Ordination nor no invalidity in his Ordination but a true Priest to ordain him again the requisite matter and form and due intention all concurring 67. Lastly he must pretend to know the same of him that made him Priest and him that made Him
122. And how it can be any way advantagious to Civil government that men without warrant from God should usurp a Tyranny over other mens consciences and prescribe unto them without reason and sometime against reason what they shall believe you must shew us plainer if you desire we should believe For to say Verily I do not see but that it must be so is no good demonstration For whereas you say That a man may be a passionate and seditious creature from whence you would have us inferr that he may make use of his interpretation to satisfie his passion and raise sedition There were some colour in this consequence if we as you do make private men infallible Interpreters for others for then indeed they might lead Disciples after them and use them as instruments for their vile purposes But when we say they can only interpret for themselves what harme they can do by their passionate or seditious Interpretations but only endanger both their temporal and eternal happiness I cannot imagine For though we deny the Pope or Church of Rome to be an infallible Judge yet we do not deny but that there are Judges which may proceed with certainty enough against all seditious Persons such as draw men to disobedience either against Church or State as well as against Rebels and Traitors and Theeves and Murderers 123. Ad § 23. The next § in the beginning argues thus For many ages there was no Scripture in the world and for many more there was none in many places of the world yet men wanted not then and there some certain direction what to believe Therefore there was then an infallible Judge Just as if I should say York is not my way from Oxford to London therefore Bristol is Or a Dog is not a horse therefore he is a man As if God had no other waies of revealing himself to men but only by Scripture and an infallible Church * See Chrysost Hom. 1 in Mat. Isidor Pelus l. 3. ep 106. and also Basil in Ps 28. and then you shall confess that by o her means besides these God did communicate himself unto men and made them receive and understand his laws See also to the same purpose Heb. 1.1 S. Chrysostom and Isidorus Pelusiota conceived He might use other means And Saint Paul telleth us that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might be known by his works And that they had the Law written in their hearts Either of these waies might make some faithful men without either necessity of Scripture or Church 124. But D. Potter sayes you say In the Jewish Church there was a living Judge indowed with an absolute infallible direction in cases of moment as all points belonging to divine Faith are And where was that infallible direction in the Jewish Church when they should have received Christ for their Messias and refused him Or perhaps this was not a case of moment D. Potter indeed might say very well not that the high Priest was infallible for certainly he was not but that his determination was to be of necessity obeyed though for the justice of it there was no necessity that it should be believed Besides it is one thing to say that the living Judge in the Jewish Church had an infallible direction another that he was necessitated to follow this direction This is the priviledge which you challenge But it is that not this which the Doctor attributes to the Jews As a man may truely say the Wisemen had an in fallible direction to Christ without saying or thinking that they were constrained to follow it and could not do otherwise 125. But either the Church retains still her Infallibility or it was devested of it upon the receiving of Holy Scripture which is absurd An Argument me thinks like this Either you have horns or you have lost them but you never lost them therefore you have them still If you say you never had horns so say I for ought appears by your reasons the Church never had Infallibility 126. But some Scriptures were received in some places and not in others therefore if Scriptures were the Judge of Controversies some Churches had one Judge and some another And what great inconvenience is there in that that one part of England should have one Judge and another another especially seeing the Books of Scripture which were received by those that received fewest had as much of the Doctrin of Christianity in them as they all had which were received by any all the necessary parts of the Gospel being contained in every one of the four Gospels as I have proved So that they which had all the Books of the New Testament had nothing superfluous For it was not superfluous but profitable that the same thing should be said divers times and be testified by divers witnesses And they that had but one of the four Gospels wanted nothing necessary and therefore it is vainly inferred by you that with months and years as new Canonicall Scriptures grew to be published the Church altered her rule of Faith and judge of Controversies 127. Heresies you say would arise after the Apostles time and after the writ●ng of Scriptures These cannot be discovered condemned and avoided unlesse the Church be infallible Therefore there must be a Church infallible But I pray tell me Why cannot Heresies be sufficiently discovered condemned and avoided by them which believe Scripture to be the rule of Faith If Scripture be sufficient to inform us what is the Faith it must of necessity be also sufficient to teach us what is Heresie seeing Heresie is nothing but a manifest deviation from and an opposition to the Faith That which is streight will plainly teach us what is crooked and one contrary cannot but manifest the other If any one should deny that there is a God that this God is omnipotent omniscient good just true mercifull a rewarder of them that seek him a punisher of them that obstinately offend him That Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Saviour of the World that it is He by obedience to whom men must look to be saved If any man should deny either his Birth or Passion or Resurrection or Ascension or Sitting at the right hand of God his having all power given him in Heaven and Earth That it is he whom God hath appointed to be Judg of the quick the dead That all men shall rise again at the last day That they which believe and repent shall be saved That they which do not believe or repent shall be damned If a man should hold that either the keeping of the Mosaical Law is necessary to Salvation or that good works are not necessary to Salvation In a word if any man should obstinatly contradict the truth of any thing plainly delivered in Scripture who does not see that every one which believes the Scripture hath a sufficient means to discover and condemn and avoid that Heresie without any need of an infallible guide
they might be saved God requiting of us under pain of damnation only to believe the verities therein contained and not the divine Authority of the Books wherein they are contained Not but that it were now very strange and unreasonable if a man should believe the matter of these Books and not the Authority of the Books and therefore if a man should profess the not-believing of these I should have reason to fear he did not believe that But there is not always an equal necessity for the belief of those things for the belief whereof there is an equal reason We have I believe as great reason to believe there was such a man as Henry the eighth King of England as that Jesus Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate yet this is necessary to be believed and that is not so So that if any man should doubt of or d●sbelieve that it were most unreasonably done of him yet it were no mortal sin nor no sin at all God having no where commanded men under pain of damnation to believe all which reason induceth them to believe Therefore as an Executor that should perform the whole will of the dead should fully satisfie the Law though he did not believe that Parchment to be his written Will which indeed is so So I believe that he who believes all the particular Doctrines which integrate Christianity and lives according to them should be saved though he neither believed nor knew that the Gospels were written by the Evangelists or the Epistles by the Apostles 160. This disourse whether it be rational and concluding or no I submit to better judgment but sure I am that the Corollary which you draw from this Position that this Point is not Fundamental is very inconsequent that is that we are uncertain of the truth of it because we say The whole Church much more particular Churches and private men may err in points not Fundamental A pretty sophism depending upon this Principle that whosoever possibly may err he cannot be certain that he doth not err And upon this ground what shall hinder me from concluding that seeing you also hold that neither particular Churches nor private men are infallible even in Fundamentals that even the Fundamentals of Christianity remain to you uncertain A Judge may possibly err in judgment can he therefore never have assurance that he hath judged right A Traveller may possibly mistake his way must I therefore be doubtful whether I am in the right way from my Hall to my Chamber Or can our London-Carrier have no certainty in the middle of the day when he is sober and in his wits that he is in the way to London These you see are right worthy consequences and yet they are as like your own as an egg to an egg or milk to milk 161. And for the self same reason you say we are not certain that the Church is not Judge of Controversies But now this self same appears to be no reason and therefore for all this we may be certain enough that the Church is no Judge of Controversies The ground of this sophism is very like the former viz. that we can be certain of the falshood of no propositions but these only which are damnable errors But I pray good Sir give me your opinion of these The Snow is black the Fire is cold that M. Knot is Arch-Bishop of Toledo that the whole is not greater than a part of the whole that twice two make not four In your opinion good Sir are these damnable Heresies Or because they are not so have we no certainty of the falshood of them I beseech you Sir to consider seriously with what strange captions you have gone about to delude your King and your Country and if you be convinced they are so give glory to God and let the world know it by your deserting that Religion which stands upon such deceitful foundations 162. Besides you say among publique Conclusions defended in Oxford the year 1633. to the Questions Whether the Church have Authority to determine Controversies of F●ith And to interpret holy Scripture The Answer to both is ●ffirmative But what now if I should tell you that in the year 1632. among publique Conclusions defended in Doway one was That God predeterminates men to all their actions good bad and indifferent Will you think your self obliged to be of this opinion If you will say so If not do as you would be done by Again me-thinks so subtil a man as you are should easily apprehend a wide difference between Authority to do a thing and an Absolute The former the Doctor together with the Article of the Church of England attributeth to the Church nay to particular Churches and I subscribe to his opinion that is an Authority of determining Controversies of Faith according to plain and evident Scripture and Universal Tradition and Infallibility while they proceed according to this Rule As if there should arise an Heretique that should call in question Christ's Passion and Resurrection the Church had Authority to decide this Controversie and infallible direction how to do it and to excommunicate this man if he should persist in error I hope you will not deny but that the Judges have Authority to determine Criminal and Civil Controversies and yet I hope you will not say that they are absolutely infallible in their determination Infallible while they proceed according to Law and if they do so but not infallibly certain that they shall ever do so But that the Church should be infallibly assisted by God's Spirit to decide rightly all emergent Controversies even such as might be held diversly of divers men Salva compage fidei and that we might be absolutely certain that the Church should never fail to decree the truth whether she used means or no whether she proceed according to her Rule or not or lastly that we might be absolutely certain that she would never fail to proceed according to her Rule this the Defender of these Conclusions said not and therefore said no more to your purpose than you have all this while that is just nothing 163. Ad § 27. To the place of S. Austin alledged in this Paragraph I Answer First that in many things you will not be tried by S. Augustin's judgement nor submit to his Authority not concerning Appeals to Rome not concerning Transubstantiation not touching the use and worshipping of Images not concerning the State of Saint's souls before the day of Judgment not touching the Virgin Marie's freedom from actual and original sin not touching the necessity of the Eucharist for Infants not touching the damning Infants to hell that die without Baptism not touching the knowledge of Saints departed not touching Purgatory not touching the fallibility of Councels even general Councels not touching perfection and perspicuity of Scripture in matters necessary to Salvation not touching Auricular Confession not touching the half-Communion not touching prayers in an unknown tongue In these things I say you
Allegiance others as learned and honest as they that it is against Faith and unlawful to refuse it and allow the refusing of it Why do some of you hold that it is de Fide that the Pope is Head of the Church by divine Law others the contrary Some hold it de Fide that the blessed Virgin was free from Actual sin others that it is not so Some that the Popes Indirect power over Princes in Temporalties is de Fide Others the contrary Some that it is Universal Tradition and conséquently de Fide that the Virgin Mary was conceived in original sin Others the contrary 6. But what shall we say now if you be not agreed touching your pretended means of Agreement how then can you pretend to Unity either Actual or Potential more than Protestants may Some of you say the Pope alone without a Councel may determine all Controversies But others deny it Some that a general Councel without a Pope may do so Others deny this Some Both in conjunction are infallible determiners Others again deny this Lastly some among you hold the Acceptation of the Decrees of Councels by the Universal Church to be the only way to decide Controversies which others deny by denying the Church to be Infallible And indeed what way of ending Controversies can this be when either part may pretend that they are part of the Church and they receive not the Decree therefore the whole Church hath not received it 7. Again Means of agreeing differences are either rational and well-grounded and of Gods appointment or voluntary and taken up at the pleasure of men Means of the former nature we say you have as little as we For where hath God appointed that the Pope or a Councel or a Councel confirmed by the Pope or that Society of Christians which adhere to him shall be the Infallible Judge of Controversies I desire you to shew any one of these Assertions plainly set down in Scripture as in all reason a thing of this nature should be or at least delivered with a full consent of Fathers or at least taught in plain tearms by any one Father for four hundred yeers after Christ And if you cannot do this as I am sure you cannot and yet will still be obtruding your selves upon us for our Judges Who will not cry out perîsse frontem de rebus 8. But then for means of the other kind such as yours are we have great abundance of them For besides all the ways which you have devised which we may make use of when we please we have a great many more which you yet have never thought of for which we have as good colour out of Scripture as you have for yours For first we could if we would try it by Lots whose Doctrine is true and whose false And you know it is written (a) Pro. 16 33 The Lot is cast into the lap but the whole disposition of it is from the Lord. 2. We could referre them to the King and you know it is written (b) Pro. 16.10 A Divine sentence is in the lips of the King his mouth transgresseth not in judgement (c) Prov. 21 1. The Heart of the King is in the hand of the Lord. We could referre the matter to any Assembly of Christians assemled in the Name of Christ seeing it is written (d) Mat. 18.20 Where two or three are gathered together in my Name there am I in the midst of them We may refer it to any Priest because it is written (e) Mal. 2.7 The Priests lips shall preserve knowledge (f) Mat. 25.2 The Scribes and Pharises sit in Moses chair c. To any Preacher of the Gospel to any Pastor or Doctor for to every one of them Christ hath promised (g) Mat. 28.20 He will be with them alwaies even to the end of the world and of every one of them it is said (h) Luk. 10.16 He that heareth you heareth me c. To any Bishop or Prelate for it is written (i) Heb. 13.17 Obey your Prelates and again (k) Eph. 4.11 He hath given Pastors and Doctors c lest we should be carryed about with every wind of Doctrin To any particular Church of Christians seeing it is a particular Church which is called (l) 1 Tim. 3.15 The house of God the Pillar and Ground of Truth and seeing of any particular Church it is written (m) Mat. 18.17 He that heareth not the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen or Publican We might refer it to any man that prayes for Gods Spirit for it is written (n) Mat. 7.8 Every one that asketh receiveth and again (o) Jam. 1.5 If any man want wisdom let him ask of God who giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not Lastly we might refer it to the Jews for without all doubt of them it is written (p) Isa 59.21 My Spirit that is in thee c. All these means of agreement whereof not any one but hath as much probability from Scripture as that which you obtrude upon us offer themselves upon a sudden to me haply many more might be thought on if we had time but these are enough to shew that would we make use of voluntary and devised means to determine differences we had them in great abundance And if you say These would fail us and contradict themselves So as we pretend have yours There have been Popes against Popes Councels against Councels Councels confirmed by Popes against Councels confirmed by Popes Lastly the Church of some Ages against the Church of other Ages 9. Lastly whereas you find fault That Protestants upbraided with their discords answer that they differ only in Points not Fundamental I desire you tell me Whether they do so or do not so If they do so I hope you will not find fault with the Answer If you say they do not so but in Points Fundamental also then they are not members of the same Church one with another no more than with you And therefore why should you object to any of them their differences from each other any more than to your selves their more and greater differences from you 10. But they are convinced sometimes even by their own confessions that the Ancient Fathers taught divers Points of Popery and then they reply those Fathers may neverthelesse be saved because those errors were not Fundamentall And may not you also be convinced by the confessions of your own men that the Fathers taught divers Points held by Protestants against the Church of Rome and divers against Protestants and the Church of Rome Do not your Purging Indexes clip the tongues and seal up the lips of a great many for such confessions And is not the above-cited confession of your Doway Divines plain and full to the same purpose And do not you also as freely as we charge the Fathers with errors and yet say they were saved Now what else do we understand
we were disobliged from performance of any duty or the eschewing of any vice unless it be expressed in the ten Commandements For to omit the precepts of receiving Sacraments which belong to practice or manners and yet are not contained in the Decalogue there are many sins even against the law of nature and light of reason which are not contained in the ten Commandements except only by similitude analogie reduction or some such way For example 〈◊〉 we find not expressed in the Decalogue either divers sins as Gluttony Drunkenness Pride Sloth Covetuousness in desiring either things superfluous or with too much greediness or divers of our chiefe obligations as Obedience to Princes and all Superiours not only Ecclesiastical but also Civil whose laws Luther Melancthon Calvin and some other Protestants do dangerously affirme not to oblige in conscience and yet these men think they know the ten Commandements as likwise divers Protestants defend Usury to be lawful and the many Treatises of Civilians Canonists and Casuists are witnesses that divers sins against the light of reason and Law of nature are not distinctly expressed in the ten Commandements although when by others diligence they are found unlawful they may be reduced to some of the Commandements and yet not so evidently and particularly but that divers do it in divers manners 12. My third Observation is That our present question being Whether or no the Creed contain so fully all Fundamental Points of Faith that whosoever do not agree in all and every one of those Fundamental Articles cannot have the same substance of Faith nor hope of Salvation if I can produce one or more Points nor contained in the Creed in which if two do not agree both of them cannot expect to be saved I shall have performed as much as I intend and D. Potter must seek out some other Catalogue for Points Fundamental than the Creed Neither is it material to the said purpose whether such Fundamental Points rest only in knowledge and speculation or belief or else be farther referred to work and practice For the habit o● vertue of Faith which inclineth and enableth us to believe both speculative and practical verities is of one and the self same nature and essence For example by the same Faith whereby I speculatively believe there is a God I likewise believe that he is to be adored served and loved which belong to practice The reason is because the Formal Object or motive for which I yeeld assent to those different sorts of material objects is the same in both to wit the revelation or Word of God Where by the way I note that if the Unity or Distinction and nature of Faith were to be taken from the diversity of things revealed by one faith I should believe speculative verities and by another such as tend to practice which I doubt whether D. Potter himself will admit 13. Hence it followeth that whosoever denyeth any one main practical revealed truth is no lesse an Heretique than if he should deny a Point resting in belief alone So that when D Potter to avoid our argument that all Fundamental Points are not contained in the Creed because in it there is no mention of the Sacraments which yet are Points of so main importance that Protestants make the due administration of them to be necessary and essential to constiture a Church answereth that the Sacraments are to be (p) Pag. 235. reckoned rather among the Agenda of the Church than the Credenda they are rather Divine Rites and Ceremonies than Doctrins he either grants what we affirm or in effect sayes Of two kinds of revealed Truths which are necessary to be believed the Creed contains one sort only ergo it contains all kind of revealed Truths necessary to be believed Our question is not de nomine but re not what be called Points of Faith or of Practice but what Points indeed be necessarily to be believed whether they be termed Agenda or Credenda especially the chiefest part of Christian perfection consisting more in Action than in barren Speculation in good works than bare belief in doing than knowing And there are no less contentions concerning practical than speculative truths as Sacraments obtaining remission of sin Invocation of Saints Prayers for dead Adoration of Christ in the Sacrament and many other all which do so much the more import as on them beside right belief doth also depend our practice and the ordering of our life Though D. Potter could therefore give us as he will never be able to do a minute and exact Catalogue of all Truths to be believed that would not make me able enough to know whether or no I have Faith sufficient for Salvation till he also did bring in a particular List of all believed Truths which tend to practice declaring which of them be fundamental which not that so every man might know whether he be not in some Damnable Error for some Article of Faith which farther might give influence into Damnable works 14. These Observations being premised I come to prove that the Creed doth not contain all Points of Faith necessary to be known and believed And to omit that in general it doth not tell us what Points be fundamental or not fundamental which in the way of Protestants is most necessary to be known in particular there is no mention of the greatest evils from which mans calamity proceeded I mean the sin of the Angels of Adam and of Original sin in us nor of the greatest Good from which we expect all good to wit the necessity of Grace for all works tending to piety Nay there is no mention of Angels good or bad The meaning of that most general head Oportet accedentem c. It behoves (q) Heb. 11.6 him that comes to God to believe that He is and is a Remunerator is questioned by the denial of Merit which makes God a Giver but not a Rewarder It is not expressed whether the Article of Remission of sins be understood by Faith alone or else may admit the efficiency of Sacraments There is no mention of Ecclesiastical Apostolical Divine Traditions one way or other or of holy Scriptures in general and much less of every Book in particular nor of the Name Nature Number Effects Matter Forme Minister Intention Necessity of Sacraments and yet the due Administration of Sacraments is with Protestants an essential Note of the Church There is nothing for Baptism of Children nor against Re-baptization There is no mention in favour or against the Sacrifice of the Mass or Power in the Church to institute Rites Holy dayes c. and to inflict Excommunication or other Censures or Priesthood Bishops and the whole Ecclesiastical Hierarchy which are very Fundamental Points of S. Peters Primacie which to Calvin seemeth a fundamental error not of the possibility or impossibility to keep God's Commandements of the procession of the holy Ghost from the Father and Sonne of Purgatory or Prayer for the
to me this declining D. Potter's cases and conveying others into their place is a great assurance that as they were put by him you could say nothing to them 85. But that no suspicion of tergiversation may be fastened upon me I am content to deal with you a little at your own weapons Put the case then though not just as you would have it yet with as much favour to you as in reason you can expect That a Monastery did observe her substantial vows and all Principal Statutes but yet did generally practise and also enjoyn the violation of some lesser yet obliging observances and had done so time out of mind And that some inferiour Monks more conscientious than the rest discovering this abuse should first with all earnestness sollicite their Superiours for a general and orderly reformation of these though small and venial corruptions yet corruptions But finding they hop'd and labour'd in vain to effect this should reform these faults in themselves and refuse to joyn in the practise of them with the rest of their Confraternity and persisting resolutely in such a refusal should by their Superiours be cast out of their Monastery and being not to be re-admitted without a promise of remitting from their stiffeness in these things and of condescending to others in the practise of these small faults should choose rather to continue exiles than to re-enter upon such conditions I would know whether you would condemn such men of Apostacy from the Order Without doubt if you should you would find the stream of your Casuists against you and besides involve S. Paul in the same condemnation who plainly tells us that we may not do the least evil that we may do the greatest good Put case again you should be part of a Society universally infected with some disease and discovering a certain remedy for this disease should perswade the whole company to make use of it but find the greatest part of them so farr in love with their disease that they were resolved to keep it nay so fond of it that they should make a decree that whosoever would leave it should leave their company Suppose now that your self and some few others should notwithstanding their injunction to the contrary free your selves from this disease and thereupon they should absolutely forsake and reject you I would know in this case who deserves to be condemned whether you of uncharitable desertion of your company or they of a tyrannical peevishness And if in these cases you will as I verily believe you will acquit the inferiors and condemn the superiors absolve the minor part and condemn the major then can you with no reason condemn Protestants for choosing rather to be ejected from the communion of the Roman Church than with her to persist as of necessity they were to do if they would continue in her communion in the profession of errors though not destructive of salvation yet hindring edification and in the Practise or at least approbation of many suppose not mortal but venial corruptions 86. Thirdly the Reader may be pleas'd to be advertis'd that you censure too partially the corrupt estate of your Church in comparing it to a Monastery which did confessedly observe their substantial vows and all principal Statutes of their Order and moreover was secured by an infallible assistance for the avoiding of all substantial corruptions for of your Church we confess no such matter but say plainly That she not only might fall into substantial corruptions but did so that she did not only generally violate but of all the members of her communion either in act or approbation require and exact the violation of many substantial laws of Christ both Ceremonial and Moral which though we hope it was pardonable in them who had not means to know their error yet of its own nature and to them who did or might have known their error was certainly damnable And that it was not the tything of Mint and Annise and Cummin the neglect whereof we impute unto you but the neglect of judgment justice and the weightier matters of the Law 87. Fourthly I am to represent unto you that you use Protestants very strangely in comparing them to a company who all were known to be led to their pretended Reformation not with an intent of Reformation but with some other sinister Intention which is impossible to be known of you and therefore to judge so is against Christian charity and common equity and to such a Company as acknowledge that themselves as soon as they were gone out from the Monastery that refused to reform must not hope to be free from those or the like Errors and Corruptions for which they left their Brethren seeing this very hope and nothing else moved them to leave your Communion and this speech of yours so farr as it concerns the same errors plainly destroyes it self For how can they possibly fall into the same errors by forsaking your Communion which that they may forsake they do forsake your Communion And then for other errors of the like nature and quality or more enormious than yours though they deny it not possible but by their negligence and wickedness they may fall into them yet they are so far from acknowledging that they have no hope to avoid this mischief that they proclaim to all the world that it is most prone and easie to do so to all those that fear God and love the Truth and hardly possible for them to do otherwise without supine negligence and extream impiety 88. To fit the Reddition of your perverted Simile to the Proposition of it you tell us that we teach that for all fundamental points the Church is secured from error I answer Fundamental errors may signifie either such as are repugnant to Gods command and so in their own nature damnable though to those which out of invincible ignorance practise them not unpardonable or such as are not only meritoriously but remedilessly pernitious and destructive of Salvation We hope that yours and the Greek and other Churches before the Reformation had not so far apostated from Christ as to be guilty of errors of the later sort We say that not only the Catholique Church but every particular true Church so long as it continues a Church is secur'd from Fundamental errors of this kind but secur'd not absolutely by any promise of divine assistance which being not ordinarily irresistible but temper'd to the nature of the Receivers may be neglected and therefore withdrawn but by the Repugnance of any error in this sense fundamental to the essence and nature of a Church So that to speak properly not any set known company of men is secur'd that though they neglect the means of avoiding error yet certainly they shall not err in fundamentals which were necessary for the constitution of an infallible guide of faith But rather they which know what is meant by a Church are secur'd or rather certain that a Church remaining a Church
by fraud and held by violence 108. These are the Falshoods which in this Answer offer themselves to any attentive Reader and that which remains is meer impertinence As first that a pretence of conscience will not serve to justifie Separation from being Schismatical Which is true but little to the purpose seeing it was not an erroneous perswasion much less an Hypocritical pretence but a true and well grounded conviction of conscience which D. Potter alleaged to justifie Protestants from being Schismatical And therefore though seditious men in Church and State may pretend conscience for a cloak of their rebellion yet this I hope hinders not but that an honest man ought to obey his rightly informed conscience rather than the unjust commands of his tyrannous Superiours Otherwise With what colour can you defend either your own refusing the oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy or the ancient Martyrs and Apostles and Prophets who oftentimes disobeyed the commands of men in authority and for their disobedience made no other but this Apology We must obey God rather than men It is therefore most apparent that this answer must be meerly impertinent seeing it will serve against the Martyrs and Apostles and Prophets and even against your selves as well as against Protestants To as little purpose is your rule out of Lyrinensis against them that followed Luther seeing they pretend and are ready to justifie that they forsook not with the Doctors the faith but only the corruption of the Church As vain altogether is that which followes That in cases of uncertainty we are not to leave our Superiour or cast off his obedience nor publiquely oppose his decrees From whence it will follow very evidently that seeing it is not a matter of faith but disputed question amongst you Whether the Oath of Allegeance be lawful that either you acknowledge not the King your Superior or do against conscience in opposing his and the Kingdoms decree requiring the taking of this Oath This good use I say may very fairly be made of it and is by men of your religion But then it is so far from being a confutation that it is rather a confirmation of D. Potter's assertion For he that useth these words Doth he not plainly import and such was the case of Protestants that we are to leave our Superiours to cast off obedience to them and publiquely to oppose their Decrees when we are certain as Protestants were that what they command God doth countermand Lastly S. Cyprians example is against Protestants impertinently and even ridiculously alleadged For what if S. Cyprian holding his opinion true but not necessary condemned no man much less any Church for holding the contrary Yet me thinks this should lay no obligation upon Luther to do so likwise seeing he held his own opinions not only true but also necessary and the doctrin of the Roman Church not only false but damnable And therefore seeing the condition and state of the parties censured by S. Cyprian and Luther was so different no marvel though their censures also were different according to the supposed merit of the parties delinquent For as for your obtruding again upon us That we believe the points of difference not Fundamental or necessary you have been often told that it is a Calumny We hold your errors as damnable in themselves as you do ours only by accident through invincible ignorance we hope they are not unpardonable and you also profess to think the same of ours 109. Ad § 42. The former part of this discourse grounded on D. Potter's words p. 105. I have already in passing examined and confuted I add in this place 1. That though the Doctor say It is not fit for any private man to oppose his judgement to the publique that is his own judgement and bare authority yet he denies not but occasions may happen wherein it may be warrantable to oppose his reason or the authority of Scripture against it and is not then to be esteem'd to oppose his own judggment to the publique but the judgement of God to the judgement of men Which his following words seem to import He may offer his opinion to be considered of so he do it with evidence or great probability of Scripture or Reason Secondly I am to tell you that you have no ground from him to enterline his words with that Interrogatory his own conceits and yet grounded upon evidence of Scripture For these things are in his words opposed and not confounded and the latter not intended for a repetition as you mistake it but for an Antithesis of the former He may offer saith he his opinion to be considered of so he do it with evidence of Scripture But if he will factiously advance his own conceits that is say I clean contrary to your gloss Such as have not evident nor very probable ground in Scripture for these conceits are properly his own he may justly be branded c. Now that this of the two is the better gloss it is proved by your own interrogation For that imputes absurdity to D. Potter for calling them a mans own conceits which were grounded upon evidence of Scripture And therefore you have shewed little candour or equity in fastening upon them this absurd construction They not only bearing but even requiring another more fair and more sensible Every man ought to be presum'd to speak sense rather than non-sense coherently rather than contradictiously if his words be fairly capable of a better construction For M. Hooker if writing against Puritans he had said something unawares that might give advantage to Papists it were not inexcusable seeing it is a matter of such extream difficulty to hold such a temper in opposing one extream opinion as not to seem to favour the other Yet if his words be rightly consider'd there is nothing in them that will do you any service For though he saies that men are bound to do whatsoever the sentence of finall Decision shall determin as it is plain me are bound to yield such an obedience to all Courts of civil judicature yet he saies not they are bound to think that determination lawful and that sentence just Nay it is plain he saies that they must do according to the Judge's sentence though in their private opinion it seem unjust As if I be cast wrongfully in a suit at law and sentenced to pay an hundred pound I am bound to pay the mony yet I know no law of God or man that binds me in conscience to acquit the Judge of error in his sentence The question therefore being only what men ought to think it is vain for you to tell us what M. Hooker saies at all For M. Hooker though an excellant man was but a man And much more vain to tell us out of him what men ought to do for point of external obedience When in the very same place he supposeth and alloweth that in their private opinion they may think This sentence to which they
that commits any sin must not think himself a true believer Besides seeing faith worketh by Charity and Charity is the effect of faith certainly if the cause were perfect the effect would be perfect and consequently as you make no degrees in Faith so there would be none in Charity and so no man could possibly make any progress in it but all crue believers should be equal in Charity as in faith you make them equal and from thence it would follow unavoidably that whosoever finds in himself any true faith must presently perswade himself that he is perfect in Charity and whosoever on the other side discovers in his charity any imperfection must not believe that he hath any true faith These you see are strange and portentous consequences and yet the deduction of them from your doctrin is clear and apparent which shews this doctrin of yours which you would fain have true that there might be some necessity of your Churches infallibility to be indeed plainly repugnant not only to Truth but even to all Religion and Piety and fit for nothing but to make men negligent of making any progress in Faith or Charity And therefore I must entreat and adjure you either to discover unto me which I take God to witness I cannot perceive some fallacy in my reasons against it or never hereafter to open your mouth in defence of it 5 As for that one single reason which you produce to confirm it it will appear upon examination to be resolved finally into a groundless Assertion of your own contrary to all Truth and experience and that is That no degree of faith less than a most certain and infallible knowledge can be able sufficiently to overbear our will and encounter with humane probabilities being backt with the strength of Flesh and Blood For who sees not that many millions in the world forgo many times their present ease and pleasure undergo great and toilsom labours encounter great difficulties adventure upon great dangers and all this not upon any certain expectation but upon a probable hope of some future gain and commodity and that not infinite and eternal but finite and temporal Who sees not that many men abstain from many things they exceedingly desire not upon any certain assurance but a probable fear of danger that may come after What man ever was there so madly in love with a present penny but that he would willingly spend it upon any little hope that by doing so he might gain an hundred thousand pound And I would fain know what gay probabilities you could devise to disswade him from this Resolution And if you can devise none what reason then or sense is there but that a probable hope of infinite and eternal happiness provided for all those that obey Christ Jesus much more a firm faith though not so certain in some sort as sense or science may be able to sway our will to obedience and encounter with all those temptations which Flesh and Blood can suggest to avert us from it Men may talk their pleasure of an absolute and most infallible certainty but did they generall believe that obedience to Christ were the only way to present and eternal felicity but as firmly and undoubtedly as that there is such a City as Constantinople nay but as much as Caesar's Commentaries or the History of Salust I believe the lives of most men both Papists and Protestants would be better than they are Thus therefore out of your own words I argue against you He that requires to true faith an absolute and infallible certainty for this only Reason because any less degree could not be able to overbear our will c. imports that if a less degree of faith were able to do this then a less degree of faith may be true and divine and saving Faith But experience shews and reason confirms that a firm faith though not so certain as sense or science may be able to encounter and overcome our will and affections And therefore it follows from your own reason that faith which is not a most certain and infallible knowledge may be true and divine and saving faith 6 All these Reasons I have imployed to shew that such a most certain and infallible faith as here you talk of is not so necessary but that without such a high degree of it it is possible to please God And therefore the Doctrins delivered by you § 26 are most presumptuous and uncharitable viz. That such a most certain and infallible faith is necessary to salvation Necessitate Finis or Medii so necessary that after a man is come to the use of reason no man ever was or can be saved without it Wherein you boldly intrude into the judgment-feat of God and damn men for breaking Laws not of God's but your own making But withall you clearly contradict yourself not only where you affirm That your faith depends finally upon the Tradition of Age to Age of Father to Son which cannot be a fit ground but only for a Moral Assurance nor only where you pretend that not alone Hearing and Seeing but also Histories Letters Relations of many which certainly are things not certain and infallible are yet foundations good enough to support your faith Which Doctrin if it were good and allowable Protestants might then hope that their Histories and Letters and Relations might also pass for means sufficient of a sufficient Certainty that they should not be excluded from Salvation for want of such a Certainty But indeed the pressure of the present difficulty compell'd you to speak here what I believe you will not justifie with a pretty tergiversation to shew D. Potter your means of moral certainty whereas the Objection was that you had no means or possibility of infallible certainty for which you are plainly at as great a loss and as far to seek as any of your Adversaries And therefore it concerns you highly not to damn others for want of it lest you involve your selves in the same condemnation according to those terrible words of S. Paul Thou art inexcusable O Man whosoever thou art that judgest For wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thy self for thou that judgest dost the same things c. In this therefore you plainly contradict your self And lastly most plainly in saying as you do here you contradict and retract your pretence of Charity to Protestants in the beginning of your Book For there you make profession that you have no assurance but that Protestants dying Protestants may possibly die with contrition and be saved And here you are very peremptory that they cannot but want a means absolutely necessary to salvation and wanting that cannot but be damned The third Condition you require to faith is that our assent to divine Truths should not only be unknown and unevident by any humane discourse but that absolutely also it should be obscure in it self and ordinarily speaking be void even of supernatural evidence Which words
agree with the Roman Church this he sayes not nor gives you any ground to conclude from him Athanasius when he was excommunicated by Liberius agreed very ill with the Roman Church and yet you will not gainsay but he agreed well enough with the Catholique Bishops The second I am uncertain what the sense of it is and what truth is in it but most certain that it makes nothing to your present purpose For it neither affirms nor imports that separation from the Roman Church is a certain mark of Heresie For the Rights of Communion whatsoever it signifies might be said to flow from it if that Church were by Ecclesiastical Law the head of all other Churches But unless it were made so by divine Authority and that absolutely Separation from it could not be a mark of Heresie 25. For S. Cyprian all the world knows that he (b) It is conf●ssed by Baronius Anno 238. N. 41. By Bellar. l 4. de R Pont. c. 7. Sect. Tertia ratio resolutely opposed a Decree of the Roman Bishop and all that adhered to him in the point of Rebaptizing which that Church at that time delivered as a necessary Tradition So necessary that by the Bishop of Rome Firmilianus and other Bishops of Cappadocia Cilicia and Galatia and generally all who persisted in the contrary opinion (c) Confessed by Baronius An 258. N. 14. 15. By Card. Perron Repl. l. 1. c. 25. were therefore deprived of the Churches Communion which Excommunication could not but involve S. Cyprian who defended the same opinion as resolutely as Firmilianus though Cardinal Perron magisterially and without all colour of proof affirm the contrary and Cyprian in particular so far cast off as for it to be pronounc'd by Stephen A false Christ (d) ●bid Again so necessary that the Bishops which were sent by Cyprian from Africk to Rome were not admitted to the Communion of ordinary conference But all men who were subject to the Bishop of Romes Authority were commanded by him not only to deny them the Churches peace and Communion but even lodging and entertainment manifestly declaring that they reckoned them among those whom S. John forbids to receive to house or to say God speed to them All these terrors notwithstanding S. Cyprian holds still his former opinion And though our of respect to the Churches peace (d) Vide Conc. Carth. apud sur To 1. he judged no man nor cut off any man from the right of Communion for thinking otherwise then he held yet he conceived Stephen and his adherents (e) Bell l. 2. de Con. c 5. Aug. ep 48. l. 1. de Bap. c. 18. to hold a pernitious error And S. Austin though disputing with the Donatists he useth some Tergiversation in the point yet confesseth elsewhere that it is not found that Cyprian did ever change his opinion And so farr was he from conceiving any necessity of doing so by submitting to the judgment of the Bishop and Church of Rome that he plainly professeth that no other Bishop but our Lord Jesus only had power to judg with authority of his judgement and as plainly intimates that Stephen for usurping such a power and making himself a judg over Bishops was little better than a Tyrant and as heavily almost he censures him and peremptorily opposes him as obstinate in error in that very place where he delivers that famous saying How can he have God for his Father who hath not the Church for his Mo●her little doubting it seems but a man might have the Church for his Mother who stood in opposition to the Church of Rome and being farr from thinking what you fondly obtrude upon him that to be united to the Roman Church and to the Church was all one and that separation from S. Peter's Chair was a mark I mean a certain mark either of Schism or Heresie If after all this you will catch at a phrase or a complement of S. Cyprians and with that hope to perswade Protestants who know this story as well as their own name that S. Cyprian did believe that falshood could not have access to the Roman Church and that opposition to it was the brand of an Heretique may we not well expect that you will the next time you write vouch Luther and Calvin also for Abettors of this Phansie and make us poor men believe not only as you say that we have no Metaphysicks but that we have no sense And when you have done so it will be no great difficulty for you to assure us that we read no such thing in Bellarmine Bell. l. 2. de Con. c. 5. Sect. 1. Can●sius in Initio Gatech e Spt. die 14. as that Cyprian was always accounted in the number of Catholicks nor in Canisius that he was a most excellent Doctor and a glorious Martyr nor in your Calender that he is a Saint and a Martyr but that all these are deceptions of our sight and that you ever esteemed him a very Schismatique and an Heretique as having on him the Mark of the Beast opposition to the Chair of Peter Nay that he what ever he pretended knew believed himself to be so in as much as he knew as you pretend and esteemed this opposition to be the Mark of Heresie and knew himself to stand and stand out in such an opposition 26. But we need not seek so farr for matter to refute the vanity of this pretence Let the reader but peruse this very Epistle out of which this sentence is alleaged and he shall need no farther satisfaction against it For he shall find first that you have helped the dice a little with a false or at least with a very bold and streined Translation for S. Cyprian saith not to whom falsehood cannot have access by which many of your favourable Readers I doubt understood that Cyprian had exempted that Church from a possibility of error but to whom perfidiousness cannot have access meaning by perfidiousness in the abstract according to a common figure of speech those perfidious Schismatiques whom he there complains of and of these by a Rhetorical insinuation he says that with such good Christians as the Romans were it was not possible they should find favourable entertainment Not that he conceived it any way impossible they should do so for the very writing this Epistle and many passages in it plainly shew the contrary but because he was confident or at least would seem to be confident they never would and so by his good opinion and confidence in the Romans lay an obligation upon them to do as he presum'd they would do as also in the end of his Epistle he says even of the people of the Church of Rome that being defended by the providence of their Bishop nay by their own Vigilance sufficiently guarded they could not be taken nor deceived with the poysons of Heretiques Not that indeed he thought either this or the former any way impossible For to what
possibly by any sure Mark discern whether their Faith be Divine or humane or if you have any certain signe whereby they may discern whether they believe your Churches infallibility with Divine or only with humane faith I pray produce it for perhaps it may serve us to shew that our faith is divine as well as yours Moreover in affirming that Baptism in act is necessary for Infants and for men only in desire You seem to me in the later to destroy the foundation of the former For if a desire of Baptism will serve men in stead of Baptism then those words of our Saviour Unless a man be born again of water c. are not to be understood literally and rigidly of external Baptism for a desire of Baptism is not Baptism and so your foundation of the absolute necessity of Baptism is destroyed And if you may gloss the Text so far as that men may be saved by the desire without Baptism it self because they cannot have it Why should you not gloss it a litle farther that there may be some hope of the salvation of unbaptized infants to whom it was more impossible to have a desire of Baptism than for the former to have the thing it self Lastly for your Sacrament of Confession we know none such nor any such absolute necessity of it They that confess their sins and forsake them shall find mercy though they confess them to God only and not to men They that confess them both to God and men if they do not effectually and in time forsake them shall not find mercy 3. Whereas you fay that supposing these means once appointed as absolutely necessary to salvation there cannot but arise an obligation of procuring to have them you must suppose I hope that we know them to be so appointed and that it is in our power to procure them otherwise though it may be our ill fortune to fail of the end for want of the means certainly we cannot be obliged to procure them For the rule of the Law is also the dictate of common reason and equity That no man can be obliged to what is impossible We can be obliged to nothing but by vertue of some command now it is impossible that God should command in earnest any thing which he knows to be impossible For to command in earnest is to command with an intent to be obeyed which is not possible he should do when he knows the thing commanded to be impossible Lastly whosoever is obliged to do any thing and does it not commits a fault but Infants commit no fault in not procuring to have Baptism therefore no obligation lies upon them to procure it 4. Whereas you say that if Protestants dissent from you in the point of the necessity of Baptism for infants it cannot be denyed but that our disagreement it in a point fundamental If you mean a point esteemed so by you this indeed cannot be denyed But if you mean a point that indeed is fundamental this may certainly be denyed for I deny it and say that it doth not appear to me any way necessary to Salvation to hold the truth or not to hold an errour touching the condition of these Infants This is certain and we must believe that God will not deal unjustly with them but how in particular he will deal with them concernes not us and therefore we need not much regard it 5. Whereas you say the like of your Sacrament of Penance you only say so but your proofs are wanting Lastly whereas you say This rigour ought not to seem strange or unjust in God but that we are rather to bless him for ordaining us to Salvation by any means I answer that it is true we are not to question the known will of God of injustice yet whether that which you pretend to be Gods will be so indeed or only your presumption this I hope may be question'd lawfully and without presumption and if we have occasion we may safely put you in mind of Ezechiel's commination against all those who say Thus saith the Lord when they have no certain warrant or authority from him to do so 8. Ad § 4. In the fourth Paragraph you deliver this false and wicked Doctrin that for the procuring our own salvation we are alwaies boundunder pain of mortal sin to take the safest way but for avoyding sin we are not bound to do so but may follow the opinion of any probable Doctors though the contrary way be certainly free from sin and theirs be doubtfull Which doctrin in the former part of it is apparently false For though wisdom and Charity to our selves would perswade us alwaies to do so yet many times that way which to our selves and our salvation is more full of hazard is notwithstanding not only lawful but more charitable and more noble For example to fly from a persecution and so to avoid the temptation of it may be the safer way for a mans own salvation yet I presume no man ought to condemn him of impiety who should resolve not to use his liberty in this matter but for Gods greater glory the greater honour of truth and the greater confirmation of his bretheren in the faith choose to stand out the storm and endure the fiery trial rather than avoid it rather to put his own soul to the hazard of a temptation in hope of Gods assistance to go through with it than to baulk the opportunity of doing God and his bretheren so great a service This part therefore of this Doctrin is manifestly untrue The other not only false but impious for therein you plainly give us to understand that in your judgement a resolution to avoid sin to the uttermost of your power is no necessary means of Salvation nay that a man may resolve not to do so without any danger of damnation Therein you teach us that we are to do more for the love of our selves and our own happiness than for the love of God and in so doing contradict our Saviour who expresly commands us to love the Lord our God with all our heart with all our soul and with all our strength and hath taught us that the love of God consists in avoiding sin and keeping his commandements Therein you directly cross S. Pauls doctrin who though he were a very probable Doctor and had delivered his judgement for the lawfulness of eating meats offered to Idols yet he assures us that he which should make scruple of doing so and forbear upon his scruple should not sin but only be a weak brother whereas he who should do it with a doubtful conscience though the action were by S. Paul warranted lawful yet sheuld sin and be condemn'd for so doing You pretend indeed to be rigid defenders and stout champions for the necessity of good works but the truth is you speak lies in hypocrisie and when the matter is well examin'd will appear to make your selves and your own functions necessary but obedience to
knowing Papist can promise himself any security or comfort from them We confess saith he the Church of Rome to be in some sense a true Church and her errors to some men not damnable we believe her Religion safe that is by Gods great mercy not damnable to some such as believe what they profess But we believe it not safe but very dangerous if not certainly damnable to such as profess it when they believe or if their hearts were upright and not perversly obstinate might believe the contrary Observe I pray you these restraining terms which formerly you have dissembled A true Church in some sense not damnable to some men a safe way that is by Gods great mercy not damnable to some And then seeing you have pretended these Confessions to be absolute which are thus plainly limited how can you avoid the imputation of an egregious Sophister You quarrel with the Doctor in the end of your Preface for using in his Book such ambiguous terms as these in some sort in some sense in some degree and desire him if he make any reply either to forbear them or to tell you roundly in what sort in what sense in what degree he understands these and the like mincing phrases But the truth is he hath not left them so ambiguous and undetermin'd as you pretend but told you plainly in what sense your Church may pass for a true Church viz. in regard we may hope that she retains those truths which are simply absolutely and indispensably necessary to Salvation which may suffice to bring those good souls to heaven who wanted means of discovering their errors this is the charitable construction in which you may pass for a Church And to what men your Religion may be safe and your errors not damnable viz. to such whom Ignorance may excuse and therefore he hath more cause to complain of you for quoting his words without those qualifications than you to find fault with him for using of them 30. That your Discourse in the 12 § presseth you as forcibly as Protestants I have shewed above I add here 1. Whereas you say that faith according to your rigid Calvinists is either so strong that once had it can never he lost or so more than weak and so much nothing that it can never be gotten That these are words without sense Never any Calvinist affirmed that faith was so weak and so much nothing that it can never be got●en but it seems you wanted matter to make up your Antithesis and therefore were resolved to speak empty words rather than lose your figure Crimina rasis Librat in antithetis doctas posuisse Figuras Laudatur 2. That there is no Calvinist that will deny the Truth of this Proposition Christ died for all nor to subscribe to that sense of it which your Dominicans put upon it neither can you with coherence to the received Doctrin of your own Society deny that they as well as the Calvinists take away the distinction of sufficient and effectual grace and indeed hold none to be sufficient but only that which is effectual 3. Whereas you say They cannot make their calling certain by good works who do certainly believe that before any good works they are justified and justified by faith alone and by that faith whereby they certainly believe they are justified I answ There is no Protestant but believes that Faith Repentance and universal Obedience are necessary to the obtaining of Gods favour and eternal happiness This being granted the rest is but a speculative Controversie a Question about words which would quickly vanish but that men affect not to understand one another As if a company of Physitians were in consultation and should all agree that three medicines and no more were necessary for the recovery of the Patients health this were sufficient for his direction towards the recovery of his health though concerning the proper and specifical effects of these three medicines there should be amongst them as many differences as men So likewise being generally at accord that these three things Faith Hope and Charity are necessary to salvation so that whosoever wants any of them cannot obtain it and he which hath them all cannot fail of it is it not very evident that they are sufficiently agreed for mens directions to eternal Salvation And seeing Charity is a full comprehension of all good workes they requiring Charity as a necessary qualification in him that will be saved what sense is there in saying they cannot make their calling certain by good works They know what salvation is as well as you and have as much reason to desire it They believe it as heartily as you that there is no good work but shall have its proper reward and that there is no possibility of obtaining the eternal reward without good works and why then may not this Doctrin be a sufficient incitement and provocation unto good works 31. You say that they certainly believe that before any good works they are justified But this is a calumny There is no Protestant but requires to Justification Remission of sins and to Remission of sins they all require Repentance and Repentance I presume may not be denyed the name of a good work being indeed if it be rightly understood and according to the sense of the word in Scripture an effectual conversion from all sin to all holiness But though it be taken for meer Sorrow for sins past and a bare Purpose of amendment yet even this is a good work and therefore Protestants requiring this to Remission of sins and Remission of sins to Justification cannot with candor be pretended to believe that they are justified before any good work 32. You say They believe themselves justified by faith alone and that by that faith whereby they believe themselves justified Some peradventure do so but withal they believe that that faith which is alone and unaccompanied with sincere and universal obedience is to be esteem'd not faith but presumption and is at no hand sufficient to justification that though Charity be not imputed unto justification yet is it required as a necessary disposition in the person to be justified and that though in regard of the imperfection of it no man can be justified by it yet that on the other side no man can be justified without it So that upon the whole matter a man may truly and safely say that the Doctrin of these Protestants taken altogether is not a Doctrin of Liberty not a Doctrin that turns hope into presumtion and carnal security though it may justly be feared that many licentious persons taking it by halfes have made this wicked use of it For my part I do heartily wish that by publique Authority it were so ordered that no man should ever preach or print this Doctrin that Faith alone justifies unless he joyns this together with it that Universal Obedience is necessary to salvation And besides that those Chapters of Saint Paul which intreat of
justification by faith without the works of the Law were never read in the Church but when the 13. Chapter of the 1. Epistle to the Corinth concerning the absolute necessity of Charity should be to prevent misprision read together with them 33. Whereas you say that some Protestants do expresly affirm the former point to be the soul of the Church c. and therefore they must want the Theological vertue of Hope and that none can have true hope while they hope to be saved in their communion I answ They have great reason to believe the Doctrin of justification by faith only a point of great weight and importance if it be rightly understood that is they have reason to esteem it a principal and necessary duty of a Christian to place his hope of justification and salvation not in the perfection of his own righteousness which if it be imperfect will not justifie but only in the mercies of God through Christs satisfaction and yet notwithstanding this nay the rather for this may preserve themselves in the right temper of good Christians which is a happy mixture and sweet composition of confidence and fear If this Doctrin be otherwise expounded than I have here expounded I will not undertake the justification of it only I will say that which I may do truly that I never knew any Protestant such a soli-sidian but that he did believe these divine truths That he must make his calling certain by good works That he must work out his salvation with Fear and Trembling and that while he does not so he can have no well grounded hope of Salvation I say I never met with any who did not believe these divine Truths and that with a more firm and a more unshaken assent than he does that himself is predestinate and that he is justified by believing himself justified I never met with any such who if he saw there were a necessity to do either would not rather forgoe his belief of these Doctrins than the former these which he sees disputed and contradicted and opposed with a great multitude of very potent Arguments than those which being the express words of Scripture whosoever should call into question could not with any modesty pretend to the title of Christian And therefore there is no reason but we may believe that their full assurance of the former Doctrin doth very well qualifie their perswasion of the later and that the former as also the lives of may of them do sufficiently testifie are more effectual to temper their hope and to keep it at a stay of a filial and modest assurance of Gods favour built upon the conscience of his love and fear than the later can be to swell and puffe them up into vain confidence and ungrounded presumption This reason joyn'd with our experience of the honest and religious conversation of many men of this opinion is a sufficient ground for Charity to hope well of their Hope and to assure our selves that it cannot be offensive but rather most acceptable to God if notwithstanding this diversity of opinion we embrace each other with the strict embraces of love and communion To you and your Church we leave it to separate Christians from the Church and to proscribe them from heaven upon trivial and trifling causes As for our selves we conceive a charitable judgement of our Bretheren and their errors though untrue much more pleasing to God than a true judgement if it be uncharitable and therefore shall alwayes choose if we do err to err on the milder and more merciful part and rather to retain those in our Communion which deserve to be ejected than eject those that deserve to be retain'd 34. Lastly whereas you say that seeing Protestants differ about the point of Justification you must needs inferre that they want Unity in faith and consequently all faith and then that they cannot agree what points are fundamentall I answer to the first of these inferences that as well might you inferre it upon Victor Bishop of Rome and Polycrates upon Stephen Bishop of Rome and Saint Cyprian in asmuch as it is undeniably evident that what one of those esteemed necessary to salvation the other esteemed not so But points of Doctrin as all other things are as they are and not as they are esteemed neither can a necessary point be made unnecessary by being so accounted nor an unnecessary point be made necessary by being overvalued But as the ancient Philosophers whose different opinions about the Soule of man you may read in Aristotle de anima and Cicero's Tusculan Questions notwithstanding their divers opinions touching the nature of the soule yet all of them had soules and soules of the same nature Or as those Physitians who dispute whether the Brain or Heart be the principall part of a man yet all of them have brains and have hearts and herein agree sufficiently So likewise though some Protestants esteem that Doctrine the soule of the Church which others do not so highly value yet this hinders not but that which is indeed the soule of the Church may be in both sorts of them And though one account that a necessary truth which others account neither necessary nor perhaps true yet this notwithstanding in those truths which are truly and really necessary they may all agree For no Argument can be more sophistical than this They differ in some points which they esteem necessary Therefore they differ in some that indeed and in truth are so 35. Now as concerning the other Inference That they cannot agree what points are fundamental I have said and prov'd formerly that there is no such necessity as you imagine or pretend that men should certainly know what is and what is not fundamental They that believe all things plainly delivered in Scripture believe all things fundamental and are at sufficient Unity in matters of Faith though they cannot precisely and exactly distinguish between what is fundamental and what is profitable nay though by error they mistake some vain or perhaps some hurtful opinions for necessary and fundamental Truths C 3. Sect. 54. alibi Besides I have shewed above that as Protestants do not agree for you over-reach in saying they cannot touching what points are fundamental so neither do you agree what points are defin'd and so to be accounted and what are not nay nor concerning the subject in which God hath placed this pretended Authority of defining some of you setling it in the Pope himself though alone without a Councel Others in a Councel though divided from the Pope Others only in the conjunction of Councel and Pope Others not in this neither but in the acceptation of the present Church Universal Lastly others not attributing it to this neither but only to the perpetual Succession of the Church of all ages of which divided Company it is very evident and undeniable that every former may be and are obliged to hold many things defin'd and therefore
autem apud omnes unum est non est erratum sed traditum Had the Churches err'd they would have varied What therefore is one and the same amongst all came not sure by error but tradition Thus Tertullian argues very probably from the consent of the Churches of his time not long after the Apostles and that in matter of opinion much more subject to unobserv'd alteration But that in the frame and substance of the necessary Government of the Church a thing alwayes in use and practice there should be so suddain a change as presently after the Apostles times and so universal as received in all the Churches this is clearly impossible SECT VIII For What universal cause can be assigned or faigned of this universal Apostasie You will not imagine that the Apostles all or any of them made any decree for this change when they were living or left order for it in any Will or Testament when they were dying This were to grant the question to wit That the Apostles being to leave the Government of the Churches themselves and either seeing by experience or foreseeing by the Spirit of God the distractions and disorders which would arise from a multitude of equals substituted Episcopal Government instead of their own General Councels to make a Law for a general change for many ages there was none There was no Christian Emperour no coercive power over the Church to enforce it Or if there had been any we know no force was equal to the courage of the Christians of those times Their lives were then at command for they had not then learnt to fight for Christ but their obedience to any thing against his Law was not to be commanded for they had perfectly learn't to die for him Therefore there was no power then to command this change or if there had been any it had been in vain SECT IX What device then shall we study or to what fountain shall we reduce this strange pretended alteration Can it enter into our hearts to think that all the Presbyters and other Christians then being the Apostles Schollers could be generally ignorant of the Will of Christ touching the necessity of a Presbyterial Government Or dare we adventure to think them so strangely wicked all the World over as against knowledge and conscience to conspire against it Imagine the spirit of Diotrephes had entred into some or a great many of the Presbyters and possessed them with an ambitious desire of a forbidden superiority was it possible they should attempt and atchieve it once without any opposition or contradiction and besides that the contagion of this ambition should spread it self and prevail without stop or controul nay without any noise or notice taken of it through all the Churches in the World all the watchmen in the mean time being so fast asleep and all the dogs so dumb that not so much as one should open his mouth against it SECT X. But let us suppose though it be a horrible untruth that the Presbyters and people then were not so good Christians as the Presbyterians are now that they were generally so negligent to retain the government of Christ's Church commanded by Christ which we now are so zealous to restore yet certainly we must not forget nor deny that they were men as we are And if we look upon them but as meer natural men yet knowing by experience how hard a thing it is even for Policy arm'd with Power by many attempts and contrivances and in along time to gain upon the liberty of any one people undoubtedly we shall never entertain so wild an imagination as that among all the Christian Presbyteries in the World neither conscience of duty nor love of liberty nor aversness from pride and usurpation of others over them should prevail so much with any one as to oppose this pretended universal invasion of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ and the liberty of Christians SECT XI When I shall-see therefore all the Fables in the Metamorphosis acted and prove Stories when I shall see all the Democracies and Aristocracies in the World lye down and sleep and awake into Monarchies then will I begin to believe that Presbyterial Government having continued in the Church during the Apostles times should presently after against the Apostles doctrine and the will of Christ be whirl'd about like a scene in a masque and transformed into Episcopacy In the mean time while these things remain thus incredible and in humane reason impossible I hope I shall have leave to conclude thus Episcopal Government is acknowledged to have been universally received in the Church presently after the Apostles times Between the Apostles times and this presently after there was not time enough for nor possibility of so great an alteration And therefore there was no such alteration as is pretended And therefore Episcopacy being confessed to be so Ancient and Catholique must be granted also to be Apostolique Quod erat demonstrandum FINIS NINE SERMONS The First Preached before His MAJESTY King CHARLES the FIRST The other Eight upon special and eminent Occasions BY WILL. CHILLINGWORTH Master of Arts of the UNIVERSITY of OXFORD NOSCE TE IPSVM NE QUID NIMIS LONDON Printed by E. Cotes dwelling in Aldersgate-street Anno Dom. M.DC.LXIV TO THE READER Christian Reader THese Sermons were by the Godly and Learned Author of them fitted to the Congregations to which he was to speak and no doubt intended only for the benefit of Hearers not of Readers Nevertheless it was the desire of many that they might be published upon the hope of good that might be done to the Church of God by them There is need of plain Instructions to incite men to holiness of life as well as accurate Treatises in Points Controverted to discern Truth from Error For which end I dare promise these Sermons will make much where they find an honest and humble Reader It was the Author's greatest care as you may find in the reading of them To handle the Word of God by manifestation of the truth commending himself to every mans conscience in the fight of God as once St. Paul pleaded for himself 2 Cor. 4.2 And if that be the property which they say of an eloquent and good speaker Non ex ore sed ex pectore To speak from his heart rather than his tongue then surely this Author was an excellent Orator one that spake out of sound understanding with true affection How great his parts were and how well improved as may appear by these his Labours so they were fully known and the loss of them sufficiently bewailed by those among whom he lived and conversed Many excellencies there were in him for which his memory remains but this above all was his crown that he unfeignedly sought God's glory and the good of mens souls It remains that these Sermons be read by thee with a care to profit and thanks to God for the benefit thou hast by them sith they are such talents
of professours labours with great penury of true believers It were an easie matter if the time would permit to present unto you many other demonstrations of the same conclusion but to this drawn from our willing ignorance of that which is easie and necessary for us to know I will content my self to add only one more taken from our voluntary and presumptuous neglect to do those things which we know and acknowledge to be necessary If a man should say unto me That it concerns him as much as his life is worth to go presently to such a place and that he knows but one way to it and I should see him stand still or go some other way Had I any reason to believe that this man believes himself Quid Verba audiam cum facta videam saith he in the Comedy Protestatio contra factum non valet saith the Law and why should I believe that that man believes obedience to Christ the only way to present and eternal happiness whom I see wittingly and willingly and constantly and customarily to disobay him The time was that we all knew that the King could reward those that did him service and punish those that did him dis-service and then all men were ready to obey his Command and he was a rare man that durst do any thing to his face that offended him Beloved if we did but believe in God so much as most Subjects do in their King did we as verily believe that God could and would make us perfectly happy if we serve him though all the world conspire to make us miserable and that he could and would make us miserable if we serve him not though all the world should conspire to to make us happy How were it possible that to such a faith our lives should not be conformable Who was there ever so madly in love with a present penny as to run the least hazard of the loss of 10000 l. a year to gain it or not readily to part with it upon any probable hope or light perswasion much more a firm belief that by doing so he should gain 100000 l. Now beloved the happiness which the servants of Christ are promised in the Scripture we all pretend to believe that it exceeds the conjunction of all the good things of the world and much more such a portion as we may possibly enjoy infinitly more then 10000 l. a year or 100000 l. doth a penny for 100000 l. is but a penny so many times over and 10000 l. a year is worth but a certain number of pence but between heaven and earth between finite and infinite between eternity and a moment there is utterly no proportion and therefore seeing we are so apt upon trifling occasions to hazard this heaven for this earth this infinite for this finite this all for this nothing is it not much to be feared that though many of us pretend to much faith we have indeed very little or none at all The sum of all which hath been spoken concerning this point is this Were we firmly perswaded that obedience to the Gospel of Christ is the true and only way to present and eternal happiness without which faith no man living can be justified then the innate desire of our own happiness could not but make us studious inquirers of the will of Christ and conscionable performers of it but there are as experience shews very few who make it their care and business to know the will of Christ and of those few again very many who make no conscience at all of doing what they know therefore though they profess and protest they have faith yet their protestations are not to be regarded against their actions but we may safely and reasonably conclude what was to be concluded That the Doctrin of Christ amongst an infinite of professors labours with great scarcity of true and serious and hearty believers and that herein also we accomplish St. Pauls prediction Having a form of godliness but denying c. But perhaps the truth and reality of our repentance may make some kind of satisfaction to God Almighty for our hypocritical dallying with him in all the rest truly I should be heartily glad it were so but I am so far from being of this faith that herein I fear we are most of all hypocritical and that the generality of professors is so far from a reall practise of true Repentance that scarce one in an hundred understands truly what it is Some satisfie themselves with a bare confession and acknowledgement either that they are sinners in general or that they have committed such and such sins in particular which acknowledgement comes not yet from the heart of a great many but only from their lips and tongues For how many are there that do rather complain and murmure that they are sinners then acknowledge and confess it and make it upon the matter rather their unhappiness and misfortune then their true fault that they are so Such are all they who impute all their commissions of evil to the unavoydable want of restraining grace and all their omission of good to the like want of effectual exciting grace All such as pretend that the Commandements of God are impossible to be kept any better then they are kept and that the World the Flesh and the Devil are even omnipotent enemies and that God neither doth nor will give sufficient strength to resist and overcome them All such as lay all their faults upon Adam and say with those rebellious Israelites whom God assures That they neither had nor should have just reason to say so That their Fathers had eaten sowr grapes and their teeth were set on edge Lastly all such as lay all their sins upon divine prescience and predestination saying with their tongues O what wretched sinners have we been but in their hearts How could we help it we were predestinate to it we could not do otherwise All such as seriously so persuade themselves and think to hide their nakedness with such fig-leaves as these can no more be said to acknowledg themselves guilty of a fault then a man that was born blind or lame with the Stone or Gout can accuse himself of any fault for being born so well may such a one complain and bemone himself and say O wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from this unhappiness but such a complaint is as farr from being a true acknowledgement of any fault as a bare acknowledgement of a fault is farr from true repentance for to confess a fault is to acknowledge that freely and willingly without any constraint or unavoydable necessity we have transgressed the law of God it being in our power by God's grace to have done otherwise To aggravate this fault is to confess we have done so when we might easily have avoyded it and had no great nor violent temptation to it to pretend any great difficulty in the matter is to excuse and extenuate it but to
they which do such things and without amendment of life shall continue doing them shall not be excused by any pretence of sorrow and good purposes They shall not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven And again in another Epistle Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God Be not deceived neither Fornicators nor Idolaters nor Adulterers nor abusers of themselves with mankinde nor Theeves nor Covetous nor Drunkards nor Revilers shall inherit the Kingdom of God In Christ Jesus saith the same S. Paul in other places nothing availeth but faith nothing but a new creature nothing but keeping the Commandements of God it is not then a wishing but a working faith not wishing you were a new Creature nor sorrowing you are not but being a new creature not wishing you had kept nor sorrowing you have not kept nor purposing vainly to keep but keeping his Commandements must prevail with him Follow peace with all men and holiness saith the Divine Author of the Epistle to the Heb. without which no man shall see the Lord. Saint Peter in his second Epistle commends unto us a golden chain of Christian perfections consisting of these links Faith vertue knowledge temperance patience godliness brotherly kindness charity and then adds He that lacketh these things is blind and knoweth not that he was purged from his old sins Let his sorrow be never so great and his desires never so good yet if he lack these things he is blind and was purged from his old sins but is not Lastly St. John He that hath this hope purifieth himself even as he is pure the meaning is not with the same degree of purity for that is impossible but with the same kind the same truth of purity he that doth not purifie himself may nay doth flatter himself and without warrant presume upon God's favour but this hope he hath not and again Little Children let no man deceive you he that doth righteousness is righteous even as he is righteous And thus you see all the divine Writers of the New Testament with one consent and with one mouth proclaim the necessity of real holiness and labour together to disinchant us from this vain phansie That men may be saved by sorrowing for their sin and intending to leave it without effectual conversion and reformation of life which it may well be feared hath sent thousands of souls to hell in a golden dream of heaven But is not this to preach works as the Papists do No certainly it is not but to preach works as Christ and his Apostles do it is to preach the necessity of them which no good Protestant no good Christian ever denyed but it is not to preach the merit of them which is the error of the Papists But is it not to preach the Law in time of the Gospel No certainly it is not for the Law forgives no sins but requires exact obedience and curseth every one which from the beginning to the end of his life continueth not in all things which are written in the Law to do them but the Gospel sayes and accordingly I have said unto you that there is mercy alwayes in store for those who know the day of their visitation and forsake their sins in time of mercy and that God will pardon their imperfections in the progress of holiness who miscall not presuptuous and deliberate Sins by the name of Imperfections but seriously and truly endeavour to be perfect Only I forewarn you that you must never look to be admitted to the wedding feast of the Kings Son either in the impure rags of any customary sin or without the wedding garment of Christian holiness only I forewarn you that whosoever looks to be made partaker of the joyes of heaven must make it the chief if not the only business of his life to know the will of God and to do it that great violence is required by our Saviour for the taking of this Kingdom that the race we are to run is a long race the building we are to erect is a great building and will hardly ●ery hardly be finished in a day that the work we have to do of mortifying all vices and acquiring all Christian vertues is a long work we may easily deferr it too long we cannot possibly begin it too soon Only I would perswade you and I hope I have done it that that Repentance which is not effectual to true and timely Conversion will never be available unto eternal Salvation And if I have proved unto you that this is indeed the nature of true Repentance then certainly I have proved withall that that Repentance wherewith the generality of Christians content themselves notwithstanding their great professions what they are and their glorious protestations of what they intend to be is not the power but the form not the truth but the shadow of true Repentance and that herein also we accomplish St. Pauls prediction Having a form of godliness c. And now what remains but that as I said in the beginning I should humbly intreat and earnestly exhort every man that hath heard me this day to confute in his particular what I have proved true in the general To take care that the sin of formality though it be the sin of our times may yet not be the sin of our persons that we satisfie not our selves with the shadows of Religion without the substance of it nor with the form of godliness without the power of it To this purpose I shall beseech you to consider That though sacrificing burning incense celebrating of set festivals praying fasting and such like were under the Law the service of God commanded by himself yet whensoever they proceed not from nor were joyned with the sincerity of an honest heart he professeth frequently almost in all the Prophets not only his scorn and contempt of them all as fond empty and ridiculous but also his hating loathing and detesting of them as abominable and impious The Sacrifice of the wicked is abomination to God Prov. 15.8 What have I to do with the multitude of your Sacrifices saith the Lord Esay the first I am full of the burnt offerings of Rams and of the fat of fed beasts when ye come to appear before me who required this at your hands Bring no more vain oblations Incense is an abomination to me I cannot suffer your new moons nor sabbaths nor solemn dayes it is iniquity even your solemn assemblies My soul hateth your new moons and your appointed feasts they are a burthen to me I am weary to bear them and when you shall stretch out your hands I will hide mine eyes from you and though you make many prayers I will not hear for your hands are full of bloud And again Isa 66.3 He that kils an Ox is as if he slew a man be that sacrificeth a Lamb as if he cut off a Dogs neck he that offereth an Oblation as if he offered Swines-flesh he that burneth incense
about is clearly detected by our Saviour in his Exposition of the Parable of the Sower in these words When they have heard then cometh the Devil and taketh away the Word out of their Hearts Luk. 7.12 i. e. The Devil will give such people leave freely to hear the Word of God preached to study it dispute it to know and be acquainted with all the curious intricate subtilties of it upon condition that they will promise to resolve not to be a jot the better disposed for it in their lives He can well suffer it to swim in the Brain that the Understanding should be inlightned the fancy affected and pleased with it so that he may have leave to stop the secret intercourse and passages thence to the Heart It troubles him not to have the precious seed of the Word entertain'd by a man so that it may be kept up safe in Granaries and not multiply so that the heart be not plough'd up and furrowed for the receiving of it as long as there is no fruitful Harvest there all goes well 19. He will be so farr from hindering such from going to the Church so that their errant be to learn what they may be able to talk of and maintain discourse with that he could wish every day were a Sunday for them that they might be able by abundance of knowledg fruitless and void of practise to hasten and aggravate their own damnation 20. Now whom the Devil thus uses whom he thus baits nay contents and satisfies with an empty speculative aerial knowledg a knowledg only fruitful in increasing their guilt and torment who can deny to be sottish ignorant easie fools childishly affected with a knowledge glorious only in shew without any substance or depth at all And yet this was a temptation strong enough for Paradise for just so did the Devil entrap Adam at the first so that in him we have received one foil already at this weapon And he proceeds dayly in acting that over again For what was it which destroyed Adam but the preferring of the Tree of Knowledg before the Tree of Life 21. St. James speaking of such persons so insnared seems to take much of the envy and guilt of so cruel a deceit and cousenage as this is from off the Devil Jam. 1.22 and to lay it upon themselves Be not hearers of the Word only but doers also deceiving your selves He confesses such to be fools cousened and deceived people but themselves saith he are their own cheaters wherein lyes a strong emphasis expressing the extream unhappiness of such poor deceived wretches If the cunning insinuation of one that for his own ends pretends friendship to me draw me into some inconvenience or danger the world will think me a fool for being so catch'd and not being able to dive and pierce into his secret purposes But this folly is not of so perfect a strain but that it may deserve both excuse and pity But that man that spends his whole life in contriving and plotting and laying snares for his own soul if after all this ado he be indeed caught in the pit that with so much pains he digged only for himself Would not any man forfeit his discretion that should either excuse or pitty him And in such or worse a case is he that contents himself with bare hearing and knowing the Word 22. Who do you think would undertake to excuse a Pharisee if he should be condemned for want of spiritual wisdom one whose profession it was whose trade and course of life to be conversant in the Scriptures who had spent his age in reading the Holy Writ and teaching others out of it One that was so curious in having the Scripture alwayes near him that he wore it continually about him It was a trimming and ornament to his Apparel It was alwayes in his eyes It was guarded about the wrists of his arms and instead of a-lace or fringe at the bottom of his garment If one after all this curiosity of dressing sedulity in reading industry in teaching should at length with so good parts in such good clothes go down into Hell and so dye for want of true knowledg Who wou'd adventure to excuse him who would dare to pitty him 23. Yet not one or two but the whole Colledge the whole faction of them Matth. 23. you shall find in Matth. 23. very near their end No less then eight woes denounced against them by our Saviour himself who is not very forward to destroy he came upon a farr other business and all those woes for their folly and blindness In the denouncing of every Woe but one he styles them Hypocrites And an Hypocrite you know is the veryest fool in the world for he thinks to cousen and put a cheat upon God whom yet himself confesses to be Omniscient and who knoweth all things In that single woe he calls them blind guides elsewhere Fools and blind This was our Saviour's judgment of them and you may rest upon it that it was upon sufficient grounds 24. But their folly and ridiculous madness will yet more appear if you take notice of the opinion and judgment that these very Pharisees gave of themselves It is in Joh. 7.48 49. The occasion of it was this The great Council of the Sanhedrin seeing so many of the ignorant people as they thought seduced by our Saviour To remedy any further spreading of so dangerous a contagion They by common advice send Officers to attach him and to make him sure enough for preaching The Officers find him busie instructing the people and instead of laying hands on him themselves are even caught and almost bereft of their Infidelity When Sermon was done they return to their Masters the Rulers and Pharisees without their Prisoner and give a good account why they did not fulfil their command in telling them they never heard a better Preacher in their lives Never man say they spake like this man Joh. 7.46 These wise Magistrates pitying the simplicity and easiness of their Sergeants answer them thus Ver. 47 48 49. Are ye also deceived Have any of the Rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him But this people who know not the Law are cursed Implying that if the people had been as well read in the Law of God as their Teachers were they would have kept themselves safe enough from the ensnaring Sermons of Christ But now they may see what difference there is between men utterly unacquainted with Gods Word and themselves how subject they are to destruction and to be cursed of God 25. How is it possible for the wit of man to imagine folly and madness of a more perfect strain Our Saviour Christ who is Truth it self did not exact Faith from his followers meerly for his Miracles sake but sent them to search the Scriptures For they saith he testifie of me Joh. 5.39 And yet these wise men impute it to their knowledg of the Law that
and art afraid of the faces of men thou abhorrest the light And yet darest out-face him whose Eyes are ten thousand times brighter then the Sun Thou wouldest not have the confidence to commit filthiness if thy friend were in company And yet what injury is done to him by it what Commandement of his doest thou transgress in it Or if thou didst What power or authority has he over thee to punish thee Thou wouldest be ashamed to commit such a sin if thy Servant were by one whom thou art so farr from being afraid of that himself his words almost his very thoughts are in thy power Nay if a child were in company thou wouldst not have the face to do it 16. Thou canst not deny but respect to a friend to a servant even to a child will with-hold thee from such practises and yet withall confessest that Almighty God whom thou professest to serve to fear and to love that he all the while looks upon thee and observes thee his Eyes are never removed from thee and which is worse though thou mayest endeavour to forget and blot such actions out of thy remembrance yet it is impossible he should ever forget them He keeps a Register of all thy sins which no time shall ever be able to deface And what will it then profit thee to live a close conceal'd sinner from the world or to gain amongst men the reputation of a devout religious Christian when in the mean time thine own Heart and Conscience shall condemn thee Nay when Almighty God who is greater then thy Heart and knoweth all things when he shall be able to object unto thee all thy close ungodly projects all thy bosome private lusts yea when that conceit wherein thou didst so much please thy self of being able to delude and blind the observation of the World shall nothing avail thee but whatsoever mischiefs thou hast contrived in thy Closet whatsoever abominations thou hast practised in thy Bed all these with each aggravating Circumstance shall be discovered in the presence of all men and Angels and Devils when Satan whom before thou madest an Instrument and Bawd unto thy lusts to whose counsels and suggestions thou before would'st only hearken shall be the most forward and eager to appeach thee 17. When thou art brought to such an exigent as this which without a timely unfeigned repentance as sure as there is a God in Heaven thou shalt at last be brought to what will then they orthodox opinions do thee good what will it then profit thee to say Thou never didst maintain any impious dishonourable Tenents concerning God or any of his glorious Attributes Yea how happy hadst thou been if worse than the most ignorant heathenish Atheist no thought or consideration of God had entred into thy heart For this professing thy self a Christian rightly instructed in the knowledge of God will prove heavier to thee than a thousand milstones hanged about thy neck to sink thee into the bottome of that comfortless Lake of fire and brimstone For for example What a strange plea would it be for a Murderer to say I confess I have committed such or such a murder but all the excuse which I can alledge for my self is that I was well studied in the Laws which forbad murder and I knew that my Judge who tyed me to the observance of this Law upon pain of death was present and observ'd me when I commited the Fact Surely it would be more tolerable for him to say I never heard of any such Law or Judge or if I have been told of such things I gave but little heed to the report I did not at all believe it For though this plea will be very insufficient to acquit the malefactor yet it will be much more advantageous than the former for what were that but to flour the Judge to his face and to pretend a respectful worthy opinion of him for this end that his contempt and negligence in performing his Commandements may be more extream and inexcusable and by consequence without all hope or expectation of pardon I need make no application of the example the Similitude doth sufficiently apply it self 18. Therefore it I were to advise any man who is resolved by his practice to contradict that opinion which he saith he hath of God or that is not resolved to live with that reverence and awfulness due to the Majesty of Almighty God in whose presence he alwaies is I would counsel him not to believe himself when he professes the Omnipresence or Omniscience of God For without all contradiction though by living in a Nation where every one with whom he converses professeth so much he may have learned to say There is a God and that this God is every where present and takes particular notice of whatsoever is done in heaven and earth yet if this Notion were firmly rooted in his soul as a matter of Religion as a business upon which depends the everlasting welfare of his soul and body it is altogether impossible for him to continue in an habitual practice of such things as are evidently repugnant and destructive to such a conceit For tell me Would any man in his right senses when he shall see another drink down a poyson which he knows will suddenly prove mortal unto him I say will any man be so mad as to believe such a one though he should with all the most earnest protestations that can be imagined profess that he is not weary of his life but intends to prolong it as long as God and Nature will give him leave 19. The Case is altogether in each point and circumstance the same For he which saith He believeth or assenteth to any doctrine as a fundamental point of his Religion intends thus much by it that he has bound himself in certain bonds unto Almighty God for so the very name of Religion doth import to expect no benefit at all from him but upon condition of believing such divine Truths as it shall please him to reveal unto him namely as means and helps of a devout religious life and worship of him For God reveals nothing of himself to any man for this end to satisfie his curiosity or to afford him matter of discourse or news but to instruct him how he may behave himself here in this life that he may attain those promises which shall be fulfilled to those who sincerely and devoutly serve and obey him 20. Therefore he that shall say I believe such a Truth revealed by God and yet lives as if he had never heard of such a thing yea as if he had been perswaded of the contrary is as much to be believed as if he should say I will drink a deadly poyson to quench my thirst or will stab my self to the heart for physick to let out superfluous bloud So that that man who is not resolved to break off his wicked courses by repentance and conversion unto God that lives as if the
13. I told you I remember my Text was a Law and I repent not of the expression though I know not how since our divinity has been imprison'd and fetter'd in Theses and distinctions we have lost this word Law and men will by no means indure to hear that Christ came to command us any thing or that he requires any thing at our hands he is all taken up in promise All those precepts which are found in the Gospel are nothing in these mens opinions but mere promises of what God will work in us I know not how sine nobis though indeed they be delivered in fashion like Precepts 14. These and many other such dangerous consequences do and must necessarily arise from that new invented Fatal Necessity A doctrine that fourteen Centuries of Christianity never heard of If we will enquire after the old and good waies we shall find the Gospel it self by its own author call'd a Law For thus saith the Psalmist in the Person of Christ Psal 2.7 I will preach the Law whereof the Lord hath said unto me Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee And how familiar are such speeches as those in our Saviour's mouth This is my command a new commandement I give unto you Ye shall be my Disciples if ye do those things which I command you Among the ancient Fathers we find not only that Christ is a Law-giver but that he hath published Laws which were never heard of before That he hath enlarged the ancient precepts and enjoyned new and yet now 't is Socinianism to say but half so much Clemens Alexandr 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in fine saith that Christ is more than a Law-giver he is both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and quotes S. Peter for it 15. Well then my Text is a Law and a preparatory law it is the voyce of one crying Prepare the waies of the Lord let all hills be depressed and all valleys exalted It bears indeed the same office in our conversion or new birth that Aristotle assigns to his Privation in respect of natural Generation It hath no positive active influence upon the work but it is Principium Occasionale a condition or state necessarily supposed or prerequired in the subject before the business be accomplished For as in Physical Generation there can be no superinduction of forms but the subject which expects a soul must necessarily prepare a room or mansion for it which cannot be unless the soul that did before inhabit there be dispossessed So it likewise comes to pass in our Regeneration there is no receiving of Christ to dwell and live with us unless we turn all our other guests out of doors The Devil you know would not take possession of a house till it was swept and garnished and Dares any man imagine that a heart defiled full of all uncleanness a decayed ruinous soul an earthly sensual mind is a Tabernacle fit to entertain the Son of God were it reasonable to invite Christ to sup in such a mansion much more to rest and inhabit there 16. In the ordinary sacrifices of the old Law God was content to share part of them with his servants the Priests and challeng'd only the inwards as his own due And proportionably in the spiritual sacrifices his claim was My son give me thy heart He was tender then in exacting all his due It was only a temptation we know when God required of Abraham that his only son Isaac should be offer'd in holocaustum for a whole burnt-sacrifice to be utterly consum'd so that no part nor relicks should remain of so beloved a Sacrifice Yet even in those old times there were whole burnt-offerings whereby besides that one oblation of Christ was prefigured likewise our giving up our whole selves souls and bodies as a living reasonable sacrifice unto God And therefore our Saviour Christ who came to fulfil the Law not only by his obedience thereto but also by his perfect and compleat expression of its force and meaning doth in plain terms resolutely and peremptorily exact from all them that purpose to follow him a full perfect resignation of themselves to his disposing without all manner of condition or reservation 17. This was a Doctrine never heard of in the world before compleatly delivered Never did any Prophet or Scribe urge or inforce so much upon Gods people as is herein contained Yet in the Evangelical Law we have it precisely and accurately press'd insomuch that the holy Spirit of God has taken up almost all the Metaphors that can possibly be imagin'd the more forcibly to urge this so necessary a Doctrine 18. We are commanded so perfectly and wholly to devote our selves to Gods service so earnestly and resolutely to undertake his Commands that we must determine to undervalue and despise all earthly and transitory things besides nay from the bottom of our hearts we must hate and detest all things how gainful or delightful or necessary soever they seem if they do in any measure hinder or oppugn us in our journey to Christ 19. We must not so much as look upon Christ or glance our eyes upon his glorious mercy express'd in suffering and satisfying for us for S. Luke calls this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but we must resolve to keep them there fix'd and not deign to think any creature to be a spectacle worthy our looking on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 12.11 saith S. Paul we have no English term that can fully express the force of this word for it is not only as we have it translated looking unto Christ but taking off our speculations from other objects and fastning them upon Christ the author and finisher of our Faith 20. When we have been once acquainted though but imperfectly with this saving knowledge we must strait bring our understandings into captivity unto the obedience thereof and whatsoever other speculations we have how delightful soever they be unto us yet rather then they should over-leaven us and as Knowledge without charity is apt to do puff us up we must with much greater care and industry study to forget them and resolve with S. Paul to know nothing save Jesus Christ and him crucified 21. When we have had notice of that inestimable Jewel the Kingdome of Heaven so called by our Saviour in the Parable exposed to sale though our estate be never so great our wares never so rich and glorious yet we must resolvedly part with all we have utterly undoe our selves and turn bankrupts for the purchasing of it Hence are those commands Sell all thou hast And lest a man should think that when the land is sold he may keep the money in his purse there follows And give to the poor And such care is taken by the holy Ghost in those expressions lest any evasions should be admitted lest it should happen that such a Merchant should find no chapman to buy his wates nor which is scarce possible hands to receive his money
it self but in comparison with those twinkling cloudy stars of Jewish Ordinances and that once glorious but now eclipsed light the Law of Works since then this is the day which the Lord hath made for us we will rejoyce and be glad in it and we will be ready to hearken especially to any thing that shall be spoken concerning our Epiphany concerning that blessed light for many ages removed out of our sight and as on this day beginning to appear in our Horizon 3. The words of my Text I find so full and swelling with expression so fruitful and abounding in rich sense that I am almost sorry I have said so much of them to fit them to this day But in recompence I will spare the labour of shewing their dependance and connexion with the preceding part of the Epistle and consider them as a loose severed Thesis In which is contain'd not only the sum and extract of this Epistle but likewise of Christian Religion in general in opposition both to the Mosaical Law given to the Jews and the Law of Works call'd also the Moral Natural Law which from the beginning of the world hath been assented to and written in the hearts of all mankind The sense of which words if they were inlarg'd may be this We Christians by the tenour and prescript of our Religion expect the hope of Righteousness i. the reward which we hope for by righteousness not as those vain Teachers newly sprung up among you Galatians would have us by obedience unto the carnal Ceremonial Law of Moses but through the Spirit i. by a spiritual worship neither by performing the old Covenant of works which we are not able to fulfil but by faith by such an obedience as is prescribed unto us in the Gospel We through the Spirit wait c. 4. In these words then which comprehend the compleat essence of the Covenant of Grace we may consider First the conditions on mans part required in these words through the Spirit and by Faith Secondly upon the performance of our duty there follows Gods promise or the condition which God will make good unto us and that is the hope of Righteousness or Justification In the former part namely the obedience which is required from us Christians we may consider it first in opposition to the Mosaical Law by these words through the Spirit which import that it is not such an outward carnal obedience as Moses his Law required but an internal Spiritual worship of the heart and soul Secondly the opposition of this new Covenant to the old Covenant of Works in these words by Faith which signifie that we do not hope for salvation by the works of the Law but by the Righteousness of Faith or the Gospel In the second General we may likewise observe first the nature of Justification which comprehends the promises which God has been pleased to propose to us as the reward of our obedience Secondly the interest which we Christians in this life after we have perform'd our duties may have in these promises which is Hope express'd in these words We wait for the hope c. Of these 5. First then of the Covenant of Grace as it is distinguish'd from the Mosaical Law by these words through the Spirit Where we will consider the nature of the Jewish Law and wherein it is distinguish'd from the Christian When Almighty God with a high hand and a stretched out arm had rescued the people of Israel from the Aegyptian slavery and brought them in safety into the Wilderness intending then to settle and reduce them into good order and government himself and by common voluntary consent they all agree to submit themselves to whatsoever laws he shall prescribe unto them as we find Exod. 19. from 3d to the 9th verse Exod. 19.3 c. Judg. 8. So that afterwards Judg. 8. when the people after an unexpected glorious victory obtain'd by Gideon would have made him a King and have setled the government in his house No V. 23. saith Gideon v. 23. I will not rule over you neither shall my Son rule over you The Lord shall rule over you And likewise afterward when Samuel complained to God of the perverseness of the people who were weary of his government and would have a King as the Nations round about them had Thou art deceived saith God It is my government that they are weary of They have not rejected thee but they have rejected me and now are risen up in rebellion against me to depose me from that Dominion which with their free consents I assumed For which intolerable base ingratitude of that Nation in his wrath he gives them a King he appoints his Successour which revenged those injuries and indignities offered to Almighty God to the uttermost upon them 6. Now during the time of Gods reign over them never any King was so careful to provide wholesome laws both for Church and Common-wealth as He was Insomuch as he bids them look about and consider the nations round about them If ever any people was furnished with Laws and Ordinances of such equity and righteousness as theirs were which Laws because they were ordained by Angels in the hand of a Mediator namely Moses are commonly called by the name of the Mosaical Law and are penned down at large by him in his last four Books 7. The Precepts and prohibitions of this Law are of several natures For some duties therein enjoyn'd are such as in their own natures have an intrinsecal essential goodness and righteousness in them and the contrary to them are in themselves evil and would have been so though they had never been expresly prohibited Such are especially the 10. Words or Precepts written by Gods own finger in the two Tables of stone Other Precepts concern matters of their own nature indifferent and are only to be termed good because they were commanded by a positive divine Law such are the Ceremonial Washings Purifications Sacrifices c. A third sort are of a mixt nature the objects of which are for the most part things in their own nature good or evil but yet the circumstances annex'd unto them are meerly arbitrary and alterable as namely those things which are commanded or forbidden by that which is commonly called the Judicial Law for example The Law of fourfold Restitution of things stollen Theft of its own nature is evil and deserves punishment But that the punishment thereof should be such a kind of Restitution is not in it self necessary but may be chang'd either into a corporal punishment or it may be into a civil death according as those who have the government of Kingdoms and States shall think fit and convenient for the dispositions of the times wherein they live as we see by experience in the practise of our own Kingdoms For the due execution of which Laws and punishment of transgressours God appointed Judges and Rulers and where they failed through want of care or partiality himself
their fore-fathers intolerable 23. I will conclude this whole point of the difference between Moses his Law and the Law of Faith or the Gospel in Gods own words by the Prophet Jer. 31.31 Jer. 31.31 twice quoted by St. Paul in Heb. ch 8. ch 10. where God saith Behold the dayes come saith the Lord that I will make a New-Covenant with the House of Israel and with the House of Judah Not according to the Covenant which I made with their Fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt which my Covenant they brake although I was an husband unto them saith the Lord But this shall be the Covenant that I will make with them After those dayes saith the Lord I will put my Laws in their hearts and write them in their inward parts c. As if he should say The former Covenant which I made with them by Moses was only written in two Tables of Stone as the Roman Laws were in 12. Tables and required only an outward conformity and obedience for the which they did not need an inward sanctifying spiritual Grace to enable them as the New Covenant of Grace doth And therefore for the performi●● of that I will abundantly afford and supply them with all the Graces o● my Holy Spirit 24. But a little to interrupt this Text You will say What had not the Jews God's Law written in their hearts also did not they worship him in Spirit as well as we No question But this they did not as commanded by Moses his Law but by that Covenant made with Abraham and by him traduced unto them It follows And I will be their God and they shall be my people i. e. I will be their God after a more especial manner then I was unto them in the Wilderness I will not only be their King to govern them in peace and tranquillity out of the danger and fear of their Enemies the Nations about them and preserve them safe in the promised Land but I will keep them from the fury and malice of their spiritual Enemies that would seek to destroy their souls and I will bring them to a Land infinitely exceeding theirs and whereof the Land of Canaan was but a most unproportionable type and shadow even mine own blessed and glorious Kingdom reserved in the highest Heavens for them who sincerely perform the conditions of my New Covenant Thus farr as largely as so small a measure of time would permit me I have told you the difference betwixt the Covenant of Grace and Moses his Law imply'd in these words of my Text through the Spirit I come now to my second particular namely the distinction of the same Covenant of Grace from the Law of works wherein I shall proceed by the same method i. e. shewing you first absolutely the nature of those Laws and then the several differences betwixt them 25. The Law of Works is the same with that to the obedience whereof Adam was oblig'd in Paradise with this exception that besides the Moral natural Law written in his heart the substance whereof is to this day reserved in the minds of all the sons of Adam Adam had a second positive Law injoyn'd him by God namely the forbidding him to eat of the Tree of Good and Evil which one Precept cannot properly be call'd a part of the Law of Works or Nature since the Action thereby forbidden was not of its own nature evil but only made unlawful by vertue of God's prohibition Excepting therefore this one particular Precept the Law which was given to Adam call'd the Law of Works comprehended in it all kind of moral duties referr'd either to God his Neighbour or Himself which have in them a natural essential goodness or righteousness and by consequence the prohibition of all manner of actions words or thoughts which are in themselves contrary to Justice and Reason All these Precepts are generally suppos'd to be contained in the Ten Words written by Gods own finger in two Tables of Stone though with submission I think that those two Tables contain only directly the moral duties of man to God and his Neighbour for it will require much forcing and straining to bring in the duties and sins of a man against his own person within that compass as Temperance Sobriety and their opposites Gluttony Drunkenness Self-incontinency c. 26. The Obligation to this Law is so strict severe and peremptory That it required not only an universal Obedience to whatsoever is contained in that Law in the full extent latitude and perfection thereof but that continual without interruption through the whole cou●●● of a man's life Insomuch that he that should but once transgress it 〈◊〉 least point or circumstance should without redemption or dispensation be rendred culpable as of the breach of the whole Law and remain lyable to the malediction thereof And to this Law in this strictness mentioned are all men living oblig'd who are out of Christ and who either know not of him or are not willing to submit themselves to his New Covenant 27. The Justification which was due to the performance of this Law by Justice and as the wages thereof that is the condition wherein God oblig'd himself to such as fulfill'd it was the promises of this life and that which is to come Long happy and peaceable days in this world and in their due time a translation to the joys and glory of heaven This Justification did not comprehend Remission of Sins as ours does for the Law excluded all hope of pardon after sin no promise made to repentance repentance would do no good The Court wherein they were to be judg'd was a Court of meer rigorous Justice Justice rejoyc'd over and against Mercy Grace Loving-kindness and all those blessed and glorious Attributes whereby God for our Saviour Jesus Christ his sake is pleased and delighted to be known unto the world 28. This Law in the rigour thereof might easily have been perform'd by Adam he had that perfection of grace and holiness given him which was exactly equal and commensurable to whatsoever duties were enjoyn'd him But by his wilful voluntary God forbid we should say enforc'd or absolutely decree'd prevarication he utterly undid both himself and his posterity leaving them engag'd for his debts and as much of their own without almost any money to pay them Without Christ we are all oblig'd to the same strictness and severity of the Law which by reason of our poverty and want of grace is become impossible to be perform'd by us As the blessed Apostle St. Paul hath evidently proved by Induction in the beginning of his Epistle to the Romans In the first chapter declaring that the Gentiles neither did nor could perform the Law in the second saying as much for the Jews and in the third joyning them both together in the same miserable desperate estate The conclusion of his whole discourse is All have sinned
the necessity of being good holy and vertuous No by no means I am not come to destroy the Law but to fulfil it The righteousness of the Law according to the substance thereof shall be as necessarily required by vertue of that New Covenant which I preach unto you and to which I exhort you all to submit your selves as ever it was by the Old Covenant only because of your weakness and infirmity I will abate the rigour of it Those who notwithstanding my offer of Grace and Pardon upon such easie conditions as I prescribe will yet continue in an habitual state of profaneness and irreligion shall be as culpable nay ten times more miserable than if they never had heard of me for their wilful neglecting so great salvation It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for one tittle of the Law to fail For God would be no looser by the annihilation of the world whereas if any part of the Moral Law should expire the very beams and rayes of Gods essential goodness should be darkened and destroy'd 33. In like manner saith St. Paul Rom. 11. ult Rom. 3. ult Do we make void the Law through Faith God forbid yea we establish the Law Now if a succeeding Covenant establisheth any part of a Precedent especially if there be any alteration made in the conditions established all obligation whatsoever is taken from the Old Covenant and those conditions are in force only by vertue of the New When the Norman Conquerour was pleas'd to establish and confirm to the English some of the ancient Saxons Laws Are those Laws then become in force as they are Saxon No for the Authority of the Saxons the Authors of those Laws is supposed to be extinguished and therefore no power remains in them to look to the execution of them But by the confirmation of the Norman they are become indeed Norman Laws and are now in force not because they were first made by the Saxons but only by vertue of the succeeding power of the Norman line So likewise when the Gospel enjoyns the substance of the same duties which the old Covenant of Works required Are we Christians enforc'd to the obedience of them because they are duties of the Law By no means But only because our Saviour and only Law-maker Jesus Christ commands the same in the Law of Faith 34. Thus far the New Covenant is in some terms of agreement with the Old inasmuch as the same Moral duties are enjoyn'd in them both as parts of the conditions of both But the difference herein is That the Law commands a precise exact fulfilling of these Precepts as I told you before which the Gospel descending to our infirmities remits and qualifies much For in the Gospel he is accounted to fulfil the moral Precepts that obeys them according to that measure of Grace which God is pleas'd to allow him that obeys God though not with a perfect yet with a sincere upright heart that when he is overcome with a temptation to sin continues not in it but recovers himself to his former righteousness by Repentance and new Obedience Thus much then for the moral Precepts and with what difference they are commanded in the Old and New Covenant 35. In the second place there is another part of Evangelical Obedience which is purely Evangelical and which has no commerce nor reference at all to the Law and that is the Grace of Repentance For saith St. Paul Act. 17 30. Act. 17.30 But now that is by the Gospel God commands all men every where to repent Now Repentance implies a serious consideration and acknowledgment of that miserable estate whereunto our sins have brought us and hereupon an hearty unfeigned sorrow for them a perfect hatred and detestation of them inferring a full peremptory resolution to break them off and interrupt the course of them by new obedience This I say is an obedience purely Evangelical The Law of Works did not at all meddle with it neither indeed could it The Law condemns a man assoon as ever he is guilty of the breach thereof and makes no promise at all of Remission of sins upon Repentance but rather quite excludes it Yet from the grace of Repentance we may gather a forcible argument to make good that which before we spoke concerning the Renewing of the Moral Precepts in the New Covenant For no reasonable man can deny that Repentance is absolutely necessary before a man can be Justified Now what is that for which for example a new converted Heathen repents but the breach of the Moral Law therefore by this necessity of Repentance he acknowledgeth and so do we that by such sins he was excluded from all hope of being Justified Now it were absurd for a man to say that any thing excludes a man from being capable of receiving the promises of a Covenant but only the breaking of the conditions thereof 36. The third part of Evangelical Righteousness is Faith not Moral but Christian which is A relying upon Christ as the only meritorious cause of whatsoever benefit we obtain by the new Covenant It being for his sake both that God bestowes upon us grace whereby we are enabled to perform his will and after we have done our duty that he will freely and not as wages bestow upon us the reward thereof There is another virtue Evangelical which is Hope but of that I must speak in my last point And thus I have gone through the Conditions required on mans part in the New Covenant all which I suppose are implyed in this word Faith which being taken in so general a sense may I conceive be thus not improperly defined viz. To be a receiving and embracing of the Promises made unto us in Christ upon the terms and conditions proposed in the Gospel 37. Now follow the conditions on Gods part comprehended in these words The hope of Righteousness which are equivalent to the term of Justification the nature whereof I shall now endeavour to discover Justification I suppose imports the whole Treasure of blessings and favours which God who is rich in mercy will freely bestow on those whom he accepts as Righteous for his beloved Son our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ his sake which are first Remission of sins and an interest unto the Joyes of heaven in this life and a full consummation both of Grace and Glory in the life to come Some I know think that S. Paul when he discourses of Justification thereby intends only Remission of sins And the ground of this opinion is taken from S. Paul quoting those words of David Rom. 4.6 7 8. when he states the Doctrine of Justification Rom. 4.6 7 8. where he saith that David describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth Righteousness without works saying Blessed are they whose unrighteousness is forgiven and whose sins are covered Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord will not impute sin But if this Argument out of the