either mediately or immediately The Gift was Faith of Miracles The Faith was grounded upon the Revelation and the Revelation was that God would work such and such a Miracle when they prayed commanded or imposed hands This was invented still to drown all Christian Gifts and Graces in Faith 4. Fourthly The two Testaments the Law and the Gospel Id. ib. c. 1. P. 347. are two in nature substance and kind This I know is Calvins Doctrine and his Followers but not the Fathers nor theirs who follow them For thus writeth Lactantius The Jews use the Old Judaei veteri utuntur nos novo sed tamen diversa non sunt quia novum veteris a dimpletio esâ— in utreque Idem Testator chrisius est Lactant. l. 4. Instit c. 20. Chrysost Tom. 7. Ser. 1. p. 16. Iren. l. 4. c. 26. dem Fraeceptum timentitus Lex est amaâ—tibus gratia Aug. ad Simpl. l. 1. qu. 1. Testament we the New but yet they are not diverse because the New is the fulfilling of the Old and Christ is the same Testator in both And Chrysostom thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the New and old Testaments be divided as to time yet they are united as to their scope And before both these Irenaeus speaketh thus The Precepts of perfect life are the same in both Testaments and being the same declare the same God who urged particular Precepts agreeing with each but the most eminent and chief without which we cannot be saved are the same in both And after all these and many more Austin in sundry places affirmeth the same thing as doth our Church * Articles of Church of Eng. art 7. Voet. Select Disp part 4. de lege Evang qâ—â—aest 4. It matters therefore not much with me that Voetius wou'd rather disgrace this opinion then disprove it by saying The Socinians and such as are much of the same mind with them as the Remonstrants and Papists so hold but his Party deny it absolutely Fifthly St. James cap. 2. v. 26. understands a pretended Faith or the profession of Faith as appears v. 14 18. This doth not appear any more than it appears that such is that Faith whereby they hold they are justified Why have they why can they not to this very day assign and describe plainly either that special Act or that special Proposition or Article of Faith whereby they are justified without any works of Faith in Co-ordination to Faith or other Graces Sixthly There is no offence to say He Christ suffered the Ib. pag. 277. Also on the Creed p. 215. pains of Hell so far forth as this suffering might consist with the purity of his Manhood and with the truth of his personal union This is right Calvin Seventhly The Sacraments administred by the Second sort Id. Cases of Conscience l. 2. c 8. i. e. Private Persons having no authority ordinary is a mere nullity If this be true what becomes of the Acts of divers eminent Reformers in case it be proved they never had any Ordinary Authority or Ordination Why do not they rebaptize those who are baptized by Independents whom they must confess to have no Ordinary Authority or Ordination or have renounced it as some of them have professed to my self Eighthly Baptism is appointed of God to be no more but a seal Ib. p. 74. annexed unto and depending upon the Covenant Afterwards he repeats the same in a far worse manner As also on the Galatians In Gal. p. 235. Ninthly If any man binds himself by Oath to live in single Perkins Cases of Cons p. 109 110. life without marriage and after finds that God hath not given him the gift of Continence in this case his Oath becomes impossible to be kept and therefore being reversed by God and becoming unlawful it may be broken without impiety This is a device to excuse we know whom principally and leaves men at liberty to break such lawful vows under pretence that God hath denyed his sufficient Grace to keep them and they are impossible to be kept who shall determine when God denyes that Gift Every man that is tempted to break his Vow Tenthly The Vow of Regular obedience is against the word of God 1 Cor. 7. 7. ye are bought with a price be not the servants of men And why is this so rather then for subjects to vow obedience to their Governors and children to their Parents If you say because God commandeth the latter and not the former you imply that God could command contrary things for this is to be subject to man as well as that St. Paul is quite mistaken by such Scholiasts as thus interpret him Eleventhly Whatsoever wanteth conformity to the Law of God Ib. p. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nyssen Catech. O rat c 7. is sin whether it be with consent of will or no. This supposes what is false viz. that any thing can be morally evil the will altogether dissenting both as to cause in general and effect 12. Zipporah's act of circumcising her child was a sin of Toleration Ib. p. 8. So is murder divers times and is this no other 13. Second grace is nothing else but the continuance of the first grace This I wonder at as much as any thing in him who advances Quid enim debet esse incundius vel infirmis gratid qud sanantur vel pigris gratid qud excitantur vel volentibus gratrà qud adjuventur Aug. in Bonifacio Epist 106. Cases of Conscience p. 66. Grace so highly It is contrary to Austin in many places as to name no more in his Epistle to Boniface in these words distinguishing a threefold grace For what is more comfortable to the weak then grace whereby they are healed or to the sloathful then grace whereby they are quickned or to the willing then grace whereby they are helped 14. Christ knew not that the fig-tree had no figs on it till he came to it He might better have said he knows not the day of judgment till it comes The Fathers Answer to the Arrians objecting this will serve for both 15. The fourth Commandment is Moral and hath nothing Ib. l. 2. c. â—4 Ceremonial in it 16. In regard of Conscience Holiness and Religion all places Ib. p 78. are equal and alike in the New Testament since the coming of Christ The House or Field is as holy as the Church And if we pray in either of them our prayer is as acceptable to God as that which is made in the Church The contrary will appear afterward 17. All virtues that are not joyn'd with renovation and Ib. p. 335. Item Gal. 1. 5. change of Affection are no better then sins This point the Philosophers never knew No I warrant them For had they they should have known more then any good Christian as it is thus crudely delivered Austin vulgarly quoted favors it not 18. Infidels do steal and usurp the blessings of God
works rites or Ceremonies of the Law delivered them by Moses as Saint Paul hath not only taught us but irrefragably proved against them in several places of his Epistles For the summ of his Argument and force may truly be reduced to this form as it is laid down more largely in his third Chapter to the Galatians Judaizing after the embracing of the Gospel of Christ Galat. 3. That way whereby Abraham Isaack Jacob and the most holy and renowned Patriarchs of the Jewish Line were justified before God must needs be it which God chiefly intended for the Justification of their Posterity to whom all the promises of God were made through them But neither Abraham nor Isanck nor Jacob were Justified by the Law of Moses so religious and rigorously now insisted on The first part of this reason will be easily granted by the Jews because they were the principal of the Jewish nation and honoured by God above any that succeeded them and therefore undoubtedly Justified by God But that this justification could V. 17. not be according to or by the Law of Moses Saint Paul in the forecited Chapter apparently proves where he shews that the Law was four hundred and thirty years after Abraham And how could that which then had no being be a cause of justification of Abraham Again the accounting of Righteous before God is to be justified before God But Abraham was accounted Righteous before God by Faith and Galat. 3. 6. Gen. 16. 6. Gal. 3. v. 7. not by Law For so saith the Scripture Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness Therefore They that are of Faith they are children of Abraham that is They who believed and live as did Abraham are Abrahams spiritual seed and heirs apparent of all the Promises made to him whereby all nations not the Jewish only should be blessed Furthermore No man could ever be Justified by that law but may rather be said to be condemned and cursed by it which he nor no man else did ever Deut. 27. 26. keep And the law saith expresly Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the Gal. 3. 10. words of this Law to do them which Confirming is well explained by the Apostle by Continuing For who ever by disobedience breaketh it cannot be said to confirm it or continue in it Now seeing all flesh failed more or less in the due observation thereof there must be provision otherwise made by God if so be he would have any saved It will perhaps be here said That God in such cases had appointed Sacrifices for expiations and reconciliations with him But against this not so much the Auctority as the Argument of the same Apostle makes in his Epistle to the Hebrews saying In those Sacrifices there is a remembrance made of sins Heb. 10. once every year That is notwithstanding there were daily Sacrifices made according to the Law every day and upon special sins peculiar Sacrifices made by the offendor for an atonement yet every year to shew the insufficiencie of the Precedent Ceremonies mention was made of the sins of the People when the High Priest entred into the Holiest of Holie And the reason of this imperfection is given by the Author to the Hebrews when V. 4. he argueth First from the nature the Sacrifices themselves That it is impossible that the blood of Bulls and of Goats should take away sins or as one of their own Prophets before him intimateth saying Wherewith shall I Mic. 6. 6. come before the Lord and bow my self before the High God Shall I come before him with Burnt offerings and Calves of a year old Will the Lord be pleased 7. with thousands of Rams or with ten thousands of Rivers of oil Shall I give my first born for my transgression The fruit of my body for the sin of my Soul And so again in the book of the Psalms Sacrifices and offerings thou Psal 4. 6 7. didst not desire mine ears hast thou opened Burnt-offerings and sin-offerings hast thou not required Then said I Lo I come in the volume of the book it is written of me c. All which with many such like places do declare what esteem Good and Godly men had of the Legal Sacrifices that were but in themselves insufficient and unacceptable to Almighty God for either the expiating and satisfying for sins or the appeasing of God offended by the same and therefore some further remedie some more excellent means of reconcisiation were necessary And this appears from the ends of such Sacrifices instituted which principally were these First to declare a right that God had in all those Creatures which he had given man for his use and service Secondly to represent to man the guilt and punishment unto which he was subject by his sins as verily as that beast so slain and sacrificed before his eyes Thirdly to insinuate unto him the true means of becoming reconciled unto God offended which was A Second general end of the Old Law which was to prefigure the Messias and only true Saviour of the world who related not only to Abrahams seed but to all to whom the promise made to Abraham related viz. Gen. 22. 18. Galat. 3. 10. In thy seed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed And therefore if such an objection be made Wherefore serveth the Law if not to such Ends Saint Paul answereth thus It was added because of transgressions to whom the Promise was made Because of Transgression First by reason that the Oral Covenant made with Adam and renewed to Abraham suffice not of it self to contain man in his dutie without the additional statute committed to writing by Moses called signally The Law Secondly this became to them under it a rule and direction until such time as the seed to whom it was promised should come i. e. The fulness of the Gentiles to whom through Adam and Abraham both the Messias was promised Whence appeareth the vanitie of the Jews imagination supposing that God by an immutable decree had affixed the priviledges and benefits of the Gospel entirely to the Jews And this inferrs another argument used by Saint Paul against the perfection and perpetuity of the Jewish Law For nothing was promised to Abraham and his seed peculiarly but upon the Covenant of Circumcision But Abraham was not reputed righteous before God by vertue of Circumcision but being Righteous was Circumcised and all the principal Promises made to Abraham as the Father of the Faithful were before Circumcision as the historie in Genesis assures us and Saint Paul to the Romans argueth and concludes against the Jews They which are the children of the Flesh are not the Children of God that is in that respect or for that cause because they were lineally descended from Abrahams flesh and blood but the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed i. e. They were the persons comprehended in the Covenant and promises made to
inconditionate and absolute on mans part is to blaspheme the immutable Justice of God and withall destroy the use of Faith in order to our Justification For it is impossible any thing bearing the name of a cause or condition as Faith certainly doth when we say We are Justified by â—aith should be posteriour to the thing it so relates unto The promise indeed of pardon and Justification of a sinner is actually made to those who do not actualâ—y believe and repent but promise answerably and covenant to believe and repent Non enim ut fâ—â—â— eat ignis cal facit sed quia fervet Nâ—c ideo benâ— currit roâ—a ut rotunda sâ—t sed quia rotunda Aâ—g ad Simplic Qu. 1. but the Execution and performance of this promise is not made before there be an actual fulfilling of our Covenant with God But then on the other side there must be perfect Justification before there can be that perfect Sanctification which we all aspire unto and God expects from us For then are we truly Sanctified when our works are holy and acceptable unto to God which they are not untill they proceed from a person so far Justified as to be accepted of God Whence may be resolved that doubt about Gods acceptation of the person for the works sake or the work for the persons sake For wisely and truly did the wife of Manoah inferr Gods acceptation of their sacrifice from the favour and grace he bore unto their persons and at the same time prove the favour God bore to their persons from the Acceptance of their sacrifice saying If the Lord were pleased to kil us he Judg. 13. 23. would not have received a burnt-offering and a meat-offering at our hands neither would he have shewed us all these things nor would as at this time have told us such things as these That God therefore accepted their Burnt-offering it is a sign he approved their persons but the reason antecedent of Gods acceptation of their sacrifice was because he first approved their persons And yet notwithstanding the goodness of the person is the original of the goodness of the work nothing hinders but the goodness of the work may add value favour and estimation unto the person As to use Luthers comparison and others after and before him the tree bears the fruit and not the fruit the tree And the goodness of the tree is the cause of the goodness of the fruit and not the goodness of the fruit the cause of the goodness of the tree Yet the fruit doth procure an esteem and valuation from the owner to the tree and endears it to him to the cultivating the ground and dressing it and conferring much more on that than others In like manner the Person Sanctified and Justified produces good works and not those good works him but some actions accompanied with Gods grace antecedent and inferiour to the fruit it self Yet doth the fruit of good Works add much of esteem and honour from God to such a person and render him capable of an excellent reward for St. Paul to the Philippians assureth them and us when he saith I desire fruit that may abound to your account Phil. 2. 7. CHAP. XVIII Of Justification as an Effect of Faith and Good Works Justification and Justice to be distinguished and How The several Causes of our Justification Being in Christ the Principal Cause What it is to be in Christ The means and manner of being in Christ. TO the informing our selves aright in the much controverted point of Justification which whether it be a proper effect of Good works or not doth certainly bear such a relation â—o them as may well claim this place to be treated of it seemeth very expedient after we have distinguished and illustrated it by Sanctification explained to proceed to distinguish it likewise from Justice For as Righteousness or holiness the ground of Sanctification is to be distinguished from Sanctification it self so is Justice the ground to be distinguished from Justification its complement and perfect on This being omitted or confusedly delivered by diverse hath been no small cause of great obscurities For Righteousness or Justice seems to be nothing else but an exact agreement of a mans actions in general to the true Rule of Acting and that Rule is the Law or word of God For he that offends not against that is undoubtedly a Just man of himself by his own works and needs nothing but Justice to declare and ackowledg him for such no mercy nor favour As that thing which agrees with the square or Rule is perfect But notwithstanding such supposed perfect conformitie to the Law of God be perfect righteousness yet is not this to be Justified Neither can any man in Religion be said more to Justifie himself than in civil cases where it is plainly one thing to be innocent and to be an accurate unreproveable observer of the Law in all things and to have sentence pronounced in his behalf that so indeed he really is For this is only to Justifie him though in pleading his own case in clearing and vindicating himself a man is vulgarly said to Justifie himself And no otherwise if we will keep to the safe way of proper and strict speaking is it in Religion Supposing that which never happen'd since Christ that a man should have so punctually observed every small as well as great precept of Gods Law that no exception could be taken against him yet is he not hereby Justified though he may be said to be the true Cause of his Justification and that he hath merited it Which St. Paul seems to implie unto us saying For I know 1 Cor. 4. 4. nothing by my self yet am I not hereby Justified For in truth Justification is an act of God only as Judge no less then author of his own Laws upon the intuition of due Conformitie to it or Satisfaction of it And as a man may possibly be just and yet never be Justified taking things abstractly so may a man be unjust and guilty and yet be justified doth not the word of God as well as common reason and experience certifie so much He that Justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the Just even Prov. 17. 15. they both are abomination unto the Lord. This then surely may be No man then can be justified by himself or any Act or Acts of him no not through Christ But though he cannot thus Judicially and formally Justifie himself it is not so repugnant to reason or Scripture to be said Materially and Causally to act towards his Justification Nay he cannot come up to the rigour of the Rule nor excel so far in Justice and holiness as to demand at Gods hands his absolving sentence yet that he cannot contribute towards it is not only false but dangerous doctrine leading men into a sloathfull despondencie and despair so that they shall do nothing at all because they cannot do all that is required of
end of all St. Pauls Epistles to the Romans to the Colossians to the Galatians to the Hebrews especially not excluding the other where he most expresly and zealously urges Faith against works and he shall soon perceive that his intention and drift is not absolutely to oppose works of Faith to the doctrine or Grace of Faith but the works of the Law which infirmer Christians newly entred into the Faith of Christ had so venerable an opinion of that they imagined Christ could profit nothing without the works either Ceremonial or Moral of the Law of Moses For whereas they for instance depended absolutely on Circumcision for their Justification and thought that without so sacred and solemn a Rite they could not be profited by Christ himself St. Paul on the other side resolutely and positively determineth thus Behold I Paul say unto you that if you be circumcised Gal. 5. 2. v. 4. Christ shall profit you nothing And presently after Christ is become of no effect unto you whosoever of you are Justified by the Law ye are fallen from Grace Can any thing be more manifest then here it is that Grace is opposed to the Law And that to trust in that is to fall from Christ And when it followeth We through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by Faith is it not v. 5. as plain as need be that Faith is here taken for that doctrine and not Act of Faith whereby men are instructed in Christ believe in Christ adhere to him relinquishing the imperfect and antiquated doctrine of the Law and its practises which by St. Paul are all called Flesh in opposition to the spiritual worship of the Gospel as to the Philippians For we are the Circumcision Phil. 3. 3. which worship God in the Spirit and rejoyce in Christ Jesus and have no confidence in the flesh Though I might also have confidence in the flesh c. 4. Rom. 3. 21. And to the Romans But now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested that is surely now is the doctrine of Righteousness published through Christ without the Law being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all 22. 20. 27. and upon all that believe And verse the twentieth By the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified c. And verse the twenty seventh the Anti thesis or opposition doth most evidently declare the Apostles intention Where is boasting then It is excluded By what Law Of Works Nay but by the Law of Faith The Law of Works then is the Law of Moses and the Law of Faith is the Law of Christ And to be Justified by Faith in Jesus of which immediately before is to be understood of the whole Covenant of Grace or Faith which is made to us in Christ Jesus and revealed in the Gospel as contradistinct to that Covenant of Works given by Moses and not of any special Grace or Act of Faith as Faith is sometimes distinguished from other Evangelical Graces It may be said that the works of the Law are excluded expresly and therefore no competition is to be made between them and Faith in the case of our Justification To which my answer is That though I grant that not only the works of the Law though moral do not Justifie but not the works of Faith of themselves yet I may confidently say None of these places commonly alleadged by the Exalters of Faith and Depressors of Good works to null the merits of works done even in Faith of Christ do according to the literal meaning really perform so much yet I rather choose to affirm That the works excluded by St. Paul are not works of the Law moral so much as Mosaical For the morality of the Old Law was not properly of Moses but the Ceremonial only and consequently the Law from these taking its denomination of Mosaical when works of the Law are mentioned in the New Testament we are to understand Mosaical Works rather than Moral but not at all works of Faith So that whatsoever is contended or pretended our being justified freely by Grace and justified again by Faith do Rom. 3. 24. Gal. 2. 16. not at all deny our Justification by works of Faith or that the efficiency of such a Faith is quite of another nature from that of works done in Faith But yet it is plain from the whole design of the Epistle of St. James the Quoniam haec opinio fuerit exerta sine operibus justificari hominem aliae Apostolicae Epistolae Petri Joannis Jacobi Judae contra eum maximâ— dirigunt intentionem ut vehementer astruant fidem sine operibus nihil prodesse c. Aug. de Fide Operibus c. 14. second Epistle of St. Peter the Epistle of St. Jude that divers of Old did so mistake St. Paul as of late dayes he hath been understood which moved St. Austin to say directly that these Epistles were on purpose contrived and published to obviate such a misconstruction of the Blessed Apostle as if he had intended when he often sayes We are Justified by Faith only a separate notion of Faith from works and effects of Faith which was far from him from whence we have a very compendious solid and clear reconciliation of St. James his Epistle especially with those of St. Paul For as is shewed already certain it is that it being his principal end to oppose and void the pretensions of the Jews to Justification without believing in Christ or as a more moderate sort of them weak in the Faith of Christ admitting no sufficiency in Christ to justifie them without a dash as least of Moses's Law he declared freely for an absolute sufficiency in the Faith of Christ to justify and save such as believe in him This doctrine of St. Paul was quite mistaken by some who supposed that the act of believing simpâ—y taken or the Grace of Faith specially used was it whereby they were in a certain way of being justified leaving out the fruits and effects of that lively Faith and making it a dead Faith as St. James calleth it who thus argueth against such a fond and dangerous presumption What doth it profit my brethren though a James 2. 14. 17. man say he hath Faith and have not works can Faith save him Faith without works is dead For the use and end of knowledge and Faith being only obedience and a life according to Faith what a monstrous and ridiculous thing would it be to divide the Cause from the effects proper to it But it is usually replied No God forbid we should divide Faith from good Works Where there is true justifying Faith there will be there must be good works and that for several other reasons but not for our Justification This is most true whereever there is a Justifying Faith there will be good Works but what do they there in order to
on him It was a sign likewise that his Seed were specially chosen to Gods favour to inherit that promised Land and many other temporal blessings which no wayes concerned other Nations It might have likewise many other moral purposes which are ingeniously sought out and largely prosecuted by others and especially Postillers 'T is true that many Nations observed this Rite of Circumcision but not by the appointment of God nor by their own invention but as transmitted to them from such who either descended from Abraham or received it from him Neither was it to such of the Nature of a Sacrament because not given them of God and having no promises annext to that Act in them but only as in Abraham For the Covenant that God made with mankind which we have call'd the Covenant of Works in opposition to that of Faith in Christ made after the Fall was made to Adam and all his for ever though all the Posterity of Adam reaped not the like visible benefit from it And this second Covenant received several additions according to the several Revelations it pleased God to make unto some part of mankind above others and that with Abraham and his Seed The first eminent Act of God was to Abraham himself when he gave him the Promise that the Messias should descend from him and gave him the sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Rom. 4. 11. Faith which he had being uncircumcised c. Now what Faith was that which Abraham had before he was circumcised Not that which moved him to offer his Son Isaac to God and yet believe that he should inherit the blessings promised to him but it was that Faith which he had in the more ancient and general promise with Adam concerning the Messias For otherwise the Apostles argument to prove that we are justified by Faith and not by works of the Law would not hold good which in effect is this The same way that the Patriarchs and particularly your Father Abraham was justified the same way must ye be justifid too but Abraham was not justified by the works of the Law but by Faith in Christ v. 10 11 12 13. And this appeareth plainly For if Abraham were justified before the Law and before Circumcision then surely Circumcision and the works of the Law could not avail to his Justification For how was Faith reckoned to Abraham for righteousness In circumcision or in uncircumcision not in circumcision but in uncircumcision And he received the sign of Circumcision as a seal of the Righteousness of the Faith he had being yet uncircumcised From whence it appeareth That what Covenant was made with Abraham by Circumcision was not absolutely a new Covenant but a special Priviledge and Interest given to him in that long before made with Adam after his breaking the first Covenant of Obedience and Works And thus we see the nature and end of the first Sacrament given to the Jews before Christ Circumcision And the second Sacrament of Note was much of the same nature as not being given to make an absolute generally new Covenant with Mankind but only to signifie the peculiar Right that People had to the general Covenants above others that as Gods First-born sons of all Nations they should have a double portion of that Grace which was common otherwise to all And farther an addition of Temporal blessings was made sure to them by it upon the due observation of those Rites and Laws given them And this blessing was twofold hereby signified First that passed in delivering them so eminently and miraculously from the destroying Angel who killed the First-born of the Aegyptians and brought them from that tedious and grievous bondage by which they were oppressed And therefore it was called the Passover The second consisted in an Assurance of the promised Possessions in the Land of Canaan Now besides these litteral significations and ends there were two other Spiritually intimated by them relating to the Gospel and its Services And they were the remission of sins in Baptism and the right to heaven and bliss after death by the participation of the means of Salvation the Mannah of his Word and the Sacraments of his Promises Baptism and the Holy Eucharist CHAP. XXXVI Of the Evangelical Sacraments Of the various application of the name Sacrament Two Sacraments Vnivocally so called under the Gospel only The others Equivocally Five conditions of a Sacrament Of the reputed Sacraments of Orders Matrimony and Extream Vnction in particular AS under the Old Testament There were some special Sacraments and properly so called besides many others which by mens interpretation rather than Gods Institution were so called as the Tree of Life in Paradise Noahs Ark Passing through the Red Sea the Brasen Serpent and the like so also under the Gospel as St. Paul saith There are Gods many and Lords many but to us there is but one God So are there Sacraments many and many Sacramental things but to us there are but two Sacraments properly so called Baptism and the Eucharist or Supper of the Lord. Therefore purposing to speak of all the reputed as well as real Sacraments of the Gospel because though not Sacraments yet very Sacred and deserving well to be understood we shall divide them into equivocal or improper and univocal or proper Sacraments Of the former rank we make Orders sacred Matrimony Penitence or Repentance Confirmation and extream Unction Of the latter sort are Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. Now to understand the just reason of this discrimination between Sacraments it is necessary that we pitch upon some general Definition of a true Sacrament by which as a Light and Rule the False are to be examined and judged And therefore shall resume our Definition before laid down of a Sacrament A Sacrament is a visible sign instituted by God to produce an invisible grace in the soul of man which we have already defended But if men will religiously contend about words it cannot be denyed That many of the Ancient and Holy Fathers and the perpetual language of the Church have accustomed themselves to call many more things than Two or Seven or perhaps Seven times seven Sacraments because they do contain something sacred and mysterious in them but yet amount not to the perfection either of our received two Sacraments or perhaps of the other five And so long as men hold to the true and real Sacraments and have the due use of them it matters not much if they give the Name Praelect de Sacram. Qu. 6. c. 1. Sacrament unto those things which are not worthy of it as Whitaker hath well said But the Reasons against more than two Sacraments in the proper sense may be these First That we read not of the institution of any more than two by God or Christ in the New Testament and of these two clear evidence there is found as may more fully be seen when we come to treat of them Nay
but I said that Cook reports them as heard from Diodates own mouth and I there give him the very Page where those words are to be found and this simple Quarreller and Vindicator of Puritans hath no other way to evade this then by a bold and sensless denial of the thing so apparent Now to that excellently learned person Bochartus what is it I say against him but that he would needs be medling where it concerns him not as the too common practise hath constantly been both of French and Dutch Divines What have they to do to interpose so often and uncharitably in behalf of Puritans as they have Is it not sufficient that they are not disquieted by us in their singularities and inconformities to the perpetual constitution and orders of Christs Universal Church but they must needs seek all occasions pragmatically to animate Sectaries to give them counsel and assistance to give them Communicatory Nisi me mea fallat opinio afhâ— mare auâ—â—â— quamum familtaris congress is gratiâ lâ—pâ—re vâ—nour à Duâ—â—llor antua illum à me superari crationis scriptae nitâ—re utilitate cun ejus scriptio â—â—ta prolixitate ariditate pariat fastidium taedium lectori hand dubium mea etiam ad aperturam libri detmebit cum amaena fincifera voluptate capietque desiderio alteriora legendi nullis offuciis Strephis paralogismis imprimis diverticulis cum à proposiio tum à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cardine litis quaestioniquâ— quae inter Hiâ— raâ—chic â—â— Puritanos vertitur deterritus conâ—â—â—sâ—â— ad aljiciendas chartas ut in lectione vindiciarum Durellianarum Lud. Molin ante Durel Patroni p. 2. 3. Letters in the height of their Seditions and Schisms to write Apologies and Vindications for them as Bochartus hath In which besides this I think he was in an error to suppose that that great Truth he defends of Subjects not to take up Arms against their Soveraign can be made good from the Cabbalistical and Talmudical sayings of the Rabbies upon which that Thesis is chiefly built and may be as easily pull'd down by rejecting such Ornaments rather then Arguments of Speech And this is all he objects against me in that bold Work of his saving several reproachful tearms which I will not trouble any body with Only concerning the Canina facundia i. e. Dogged Eloquence he taxeth me with I may tell him I am not fit to be his or his Brethrens Scholar in such Speeches And yet as * Turpe est contra ardenter perversa assâ—rentes 〈◊〉 pra veritaâ—â— frgidi res inveno i. Rusâ—ic Diac. Advers Acephâ—l Rusticus Diaconus hath it against the Acephali or headless Schismaticks in his days It 's very absurd for us to be found more cool for the Truth when we write against such as vehemently assert the contrary And concerning the barbarousness and unevenness of my stile though I want not matter of defense from several heads I shall pass them over and also his most polite and elegant stile for which he praises himself so worthily and wisely and only refer the Reader to that one instance which he may find Page 2 and 3 of his Patronus against Monsieur Durell where this great and vain-glorious Latinst while he magnifies his singular Talent of Elegance in the Latin Tongue offends in his tedious and ill-joynted Period against the Rules of Rhetorick and in worse concordance against the common Rules of Grammar So unluckie is this man and that in more ways then I will object to him And now I must touch a farther occasion of my present undertaking and that was the many errors vented by dissenting persons in our Church with which our Adversaries commonly revil'd us as shall be seen by and by in the mean time least any should suppose I go out Perkinsius qui in Aâ—li◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—he legiae 〈◊〉 â—xiulâ—â— â—ujus 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 Vortius Biâ—lioth l. 2 c. 3. of the common road of forreign Reformers so much trod by many Dissenters amongst us because I was not well skill'd in Calvins Bezas and Ursins Works I must tell them they were the Authors first of all recommended unto me and read by me more then those of our own Church And because I knew well of what great account as well abroad as at home Mr. Perkins his works were I would be no stranger in them but finding in them a servile and credulous spirit so far addicted to such Modern Divines that scarce any thing so new harsh or inconsistent with the judgment of Antiquity fell from them but Perkins presently took it up for Scripture and Catholick Doctrine and transcribed the same into his Works I have here collected in brief what I observed as Heterodox in his Works apt to corrupt young and injudicious Readers But here I shall say nothing of his known monstrous sense of Gods Decrees and Predestination but what a Learned Person his great friend and defender hath said before me Bishop * Abbot in Thompson Diâ—â— c. 1. Perkinsius vir alt quin eruditur pius 〈…〉 quam ille centra 〈◊〉 câ—ntra veteris Ecclesiae fidâ—m cura lâ—psâ—â— Alani absoluâ—â— dâ—cretam 〈…〉 non levem erravit Perkins on Gal. 3. v. 12. Abbot Perkins saith he otherwise a very learned and godly man in describing Divine Predestination which contrary to our and the Ancient Church he hath determined to be decreed without the fall of Adam hath committed no small Error 1. The first I observe is his sense of Justification by Faith thus expressed The Gospel promiseth life to him that doth nothing in the cause of his Salvation but only believeth in Christ and promiseth Salvation to him that believeth yet not for his Faith nor for any Works but for the Merits of Christ The Law then requires doing unto Salvation and the Gospel believing and nothing else Both ends of this sentence are utterly false and scandalous to Christianity it self and most of all as he there explains Non apprehendi potest quod promittitur nisi custoditu a fucrit 〈◊〉 jubetur Leo M. Ser. 9. ad jejun 7. Mensis V. 18. himself thus Believing and doing are opposed in the Article of Justification in our good conversation they agree Faith goeth before and Doing follows but in the work of our Justification they are as fire and water To the same effect he speaketh afterward All which we have refuted shewing that in no place of Scripture are the works of Faith opposed to Faith in Christ in any consideration but only the works of the Law as opposite to or not done in Christ nor in Faith 2. Secondly he saith A third benefit to them that believe in Id. ib. cap. 3. p. 320. Christ is That they have liberty to live and serve God without fear of damnation or any other evil 3. Thirdly God never gave to any man power to effect a Chap. 3. 5. Miracle
only to signifie how Christ was lifted up on the Cross but as practised in the Roman Church to the intent direct and divine Worship be given it 7. Wicked men eat not the Body of Christ Sure enough in a proper sense not denominatively only as the consecrated Elements are called the Body of Christ very often and currently 8. That they who communicate not are to be put out of the Church This is such an Error as the Ancient Church was guilty of as well as we as your own Vicecomes sheweth at large Vicecomes Vol. 3. l. 1. c. 18. 9. The Keys of the Church consist only in opening the Word of God No such thing is held by us 10. Private Confession is to be taken away Not so much as Sectaries say this absolutely 11. The Ceremonies of the Church are to be abrogated Simply and falsly said and directly contrary to the Articles of our Artic. 20. Church 12. Prayers in the Latin Tongue are barbarous and against St. Pauls Precept Very true where they are at first so instituted and understood by very few or none and so are they in the English Tongue or any other 13. No man can fulfill the Law This is true or false as it may be taken 14. More Masses then one cannot be said in one day in one Church Here our Accuser saith he knows not what For neither doth our Church inhibit more then once to officiate Liturgically neither did the Ancient Church practise if permit it for above four hundred years after Christ as appears from Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria consulting with Leo the first Bishop of Rome what he should Leo 1 Epist 79 or as some So. See also Grecian consecr Dist c. 51. do when Christians were so numerous that they could not all be received into the Church at once who answered In such cases he might safely reiterate the office And the Council of Antisiodorum or Auxere held about the Year 578 decreed that but one Mass should be said upon one Altar in one day which is as much observed by the Church of Rome now-a-days as other Canons of Councils which lye in their way thrown out And where in the Ancient Church do you read of above one Altar in one Church 15. Unity is no Note of the Church Discords and Divisions are certain signs of Errors but Unity is no certain sign of Truth nor so much as of a Church how then can it be of a true Church 16. Universal Councils may be repeal'd by Particular This See Petrus Gregorius Syntagm l. 15. c 3. is nothing he might have said by particular persons as the Popes who may according to that Church null Acts of Councils Oecumenical But we only hold that in things mutable according to the condition Article 34. of Time Place and other Circumstances rendring some Decrees prejudicial to some Churches contrary to the intention of the first Ordainers of them a Provincial Church may make alterations 17. The Church may erre in Faith And what of that meaning any one Individual single Church as the Roman hath according to our Articles 18. The Precepts of the Church concerning set Fasts are A Doctrine of Devils It is rather a Doctrine of Devils to teach so 19. Peter was not the Prince of the Apostles Peter was A or if you will The Principal Apostle but he was not the Prince of any one of them much less of all 20. The Bishop of Rome is Antichrist We are not so much agreed about this point as to give in a full verdict but we agree he is Antichristian 21. The difference concerning Leaven and Easter is inconsiderable Where no danger of Schisms or confusions may alter the case it is true 22. It is Heathenish to invoke Saints that reign with Christ Whether heathenish or no may be doubted they never worshipping any relating to Christ But for all that it may be and is superstitious and idolatrous in the sense very current in the Roman Church 23. The Reliques of Saints are not to be worshipped We hold so indeed though we hold they are to be respected relatively 24. The Saints in Heaven have no merits It is true taken strictly and properly 25. Indulgences of the Church are vain They are not only vain but wicked and generally blasphemous and ridiculous as mangâ—ed by the Church of Rome contrary or at least without all Precedents of the Christian Church for many hundred years viz. in remitting Sins or Punishments after this life and that divers times before they are committed Is not this fine and wonderful ancient and Catholick 26. Nothing is to be read in the Church besides Canonical Scripture This is rank Puritanism contradicted by themselves in their practise who read their Sermons as well as others and pray which is aequivalent to reading in this case out of their own heads rather than Scripture 27. In Oecumenical Councils and Private for the explaining of the Doctrine of Faith the consent of Lay-Princes is necessary It is necessary for the orderly assembling of such Councils It is necessary for the giving any Secular enforcement unto them 28. That it is lawful for Lay-men alone the Clergy opposing to introduce the Ancient Religion This is true no farther then that of Gerson which is alledged to this purpose A Lay-man with Scripture on his side is to be preferred before a Council without it Supposing a monstrous Proposition no wonder if a monstrous conclusion follows 29. He is no Bishop that teacheth not This is also a Puritan strain It being only true that he is no faithful conscientious Pastor but either proud or treacherous or sloathful or basely prudent who doth not in person discharge his Office so far as he is able without turning the care of his flock over to others using that for an argument of keeping close in his Cabin which is rather an argument of appearing in his charge viz. storms on the Church Opposition the Faith and Orders of the Church meet withal and difficulties obstructing the truth It being both shameful and ridiculous both in Bishop and Priest to censure others for enemies to the Church and for them so to wast it in all mens esteem in deserting it and delivering it up to the care of others themselves seeking little else then their temporal Harvest and case These men are over the Church indeed but 't is as the Extinguisher is over the Candle to put it out They pretend for themselves they have been sufferers for the Church and so it should seem indeed by their carriage to it in that through their scandalous negligence as to their charge they take a course to revenge themselves of it by making it suffer as much or more for them 30. Faith alone justifies How this is held we have even now as also we shall hereafter more fully explain 31. There are no Merits in Good works There are none properly so called 32. Priests and Monks may marry 'T is true where the
him and the Matter it self far from judicious or solid in many places Much more wisely and learnedly had Joannes Forbesius of Aberdeen in Scotland set forth his Controversial Work called Instruct Hist Theol. l. 4. c. 4. § 29. Instructiones Historico Theologicae yet imperfect as it should seem by himself who refers us to the twenty forth and twenty fifth Book of that Work there being extant only sixteen And surely as the Book argues great Learning in the Author so might it have proved no less beneficial to the Christian World had there been less complyance with Calvin in it which might be the reason that it found not that entertainment in England that otherwise it might have had but was commended and published to the World by Andrew Rivett the Dutch Divines giving full approbation thereunto to whom it should seem declining the judgment of that Church he stood more obliged to he submitted his Work which yet might be excused in part it being a time viz. 1645. when such havock and dissipation of the English Church was made by the Calvinizing Scots and Scotizing English as were not to be excused nor ever forgotten For mine own particular I would not have any to expect here a Book of Preaching or Devotion of both which and especially the former there seems to be little want amongst us so neither purely Scholastical but serving to all these purposes And therefore I have wrote it in the English Tongue aiming at no higher end than to profit those of our own Church and Nation And therefore I call it An Introduction intimating my principal Intention to be to prepare the way to the Readers ascent from this to more high and ample Disquisitions And this farther according to the mind of the Church of England I say this was my Purpose I do not say that this I have alwayes exactly and infallibly attained any more than those Learned Writers before me who have endeavoured to give us the sum of the Laws of our Nation as I have of the Religion of our Church have attained their ends according to their desires and therefore much less to the expectation of others Wherefore the Apology which Learned Dr. Cowell used to the Reader of his Institutions of the English Laws with some little variation may aptly enough serve my turn against the proneness of some Censurers whom it may offend that I take upon me to determine what the Church of England holds when as there is and alwayes will be and that in all Churches some Diversity in the Writers But as Littleton of old advised his Son so would I advise Vt autem Littletonus suum … um sic ego vâ—â— praemonitus multâ—o magis esse cupio ne omnia huc congesta Juri nâ—stro consentanea statim exâ—â—…iâ—etis Neque enim hoc opus est nâ—strae â—talia tamen esse non injuriâ forte polliceor c. Johan Cowellus Praefat. Institut Juris Anglic. you much more that ye do not presently perswade your selves that all things here collected are agreeable to our Law for this is past our power Yet such I may promise them to be as will not be unprofitable And I may safely adde I have not invented any thing which I know to be repugnant to the Established Faith or Worship amongst us The Method that I here use I hope is not obscure nor unuseful to the Reader nor Illogical but consisting of parts cohering with one another and succeeding each other visibly enough though I know well I might have subdivided several Chapters and Heads into more distinct Sections and peradventure might have erred and offended more on the other hand as Seneca hath observed Philosâ—phiam in partes nâ—n in frusira dividamidividi enim illam non concidi utile est Nam comprehendere quemadmedum maxima iâ— minima dist â—â—le est Senec. Epist 89. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Nyssâ—de virâ Mosis p. 180. and daily may be seen in the Compendiums on this Subject of Forrein Writers they do who are too curious confounding by distinguishing In the general Division of this into two Parts I follow Gregorie Nyssene who summeth up all Religion under these two Heads Worship which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the other a Right Understanding of the true Nature of God Only Natural Reason teaching every man that he must Know aright before he can Do aright I have set Knowledge which is the same with Faith in a Christian in the first place and Worship in the Second Part of this Draught of Religion It remains now that according to the custom of Adventurers into the Censure of this captious Age I should bespeak the favourable opinion and friendly or rather in this case charitable acceptance of my present endeavours from the true Christian Reader for from others my hopes are very small but I shall only crave the removing of that prejudice and improving of that Purity of Intention in the reading which I may with a good Conscience profess to have had in the writing And especially shall pray God to prosper it to those dissenting Brethren amongst us who I fear are no less apt to take offense then our professed Enemies as disagreeing from their perswasions in many things But that is none of my fault But my hearts desire and prayer to God is with St. Paul Rom. 10. 1. that they might be saved For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God but not according to knowledge To inform therefore such was my principal design as likewise to exhort them in the fear and for the love of God and the Truth to consider at length and lay seriously to heart the scandalous and most pernicious evil of that Division for which as yet they have given no tolerable reason which they can with any confidence perswade themselves will hold before God And having themselves wrote so many and horrible things against such Schism all their allegations and complaints against their Governours for hard usage of their tender Consciences are no more to be regarded by the Church than the froward cryes and carriage of Children when their Parents would look their Heads and take out their Vermine For what is that moderation and compounding with us they sometimes offer and excuse themselves from the foresaid accusations by as if they sought Peace and Vnity but to imitate the worst of Bankrupts and thrive by breaking now their open and most cruel dealings towards us have failed them And which is most unreasonable of all neither can nor will give any just assurance of persevering in a true and cordial communion with the Church so modelled as they propound in their Moderation until it becomes such as they could wish and that is quite to overthrow the whole visible constitution of it as their Oaths and Covenants not disclaimed bind them And to stick so immoveably as too many do at lighter things such as Rites and Ceremonies which cannot possibly
Abraham all which sufficiently nulls the Jews pretensions taken from their Law We now proceed to the Second general Head against them taken from their Messias CHAP. VI. The Vanity of the Jewish Religion shewed from the proofs of the true Messias long since come which are many BOth Jews and Christians agree that the Covenant made by God with Adam and Abraham was through the Messias But the difference between them is notwithstanding very great The Jews still expecting the Messias to come and the Christian believing it as the first Article of his Faith that he is actually come and hath delivered his Laws and performed all things prefigured and promised by the Law of Moses If this supposition of the Christian be not true then is the whole Bodie of his Faith a meer shadow and false And if the Messias be come then is the Religion of the Jew false and no better then a vain Superstition This therefore is diligently and Faithfully to be enquired into though with this Caution premised That it is a thing to be supposed no less and taken for granted in the Christian Religion that Christ the Messias is come then it is to be supposed to Religion in general that there is a God These following Circumstances evince the Messias to be come First the certain expiration of the time prefixed by the Holy Scriptures and the Jewish Doctors themselves for the coming of Christ The great Masters of the Jews affirm that the world shall continue six thousand years whereof two thousand are to go before the Law and two thousand should be under the Law of Moses and that in the fifth thousand year the Messias should Sixtus Senenfis Bibl. lib. 2. Genebr Chro. initio Vid. Rayl mundum Martini Pug. fidei Part. 2. cap. 6. come into the world Who these are and from whence they collect this is no place to shew here Genebrard Galatinus Raymundus Martini have done it and many of the Fathers receiving their tradition from them have spoken to that purpose But the Jews themselves do reckon from the Creation to this day above five thousand four hundred years and yet there is no appearance of a Messias for their turn So that being driven to this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 extremitie they have been constrained to take up this curse to secure their suspected Cause viz. Let the Spirit of all them be burst in pieces who compute times as Buxtorfe relates to us And if it be so as some Jews have Buxtorf Synagog cap. 3. Vid. Ray mundum Martini Pug. fidei Part. 2. cap. 6. phancied viz. That the Messias was born the same day their Temple was burnt at Jerusalem Where has he spent his time all this while Why doth he not appear to their deliverance They are wont to say It is for their sins In which I agree with them that indeed it is for their sins that they are never like to see that Messias whom they dream of because they rejected See Chrysostom Serm. 3. Against the Jews Tom. 6. p. 338 339. him who came to them as the true Messias Secondly The apt Analogie and correspondence between the Messias received by Christians and foretold by the ancient Prophets doth declare him come For instance that of Genesis That the seed of the woman should Gen. 3. Deut. 18. 15. break the Serpents head That in Deutronomie A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up of your brethren like unto me c. That of Esay the seventh and thirty fourth verse Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bring forth a child Esa 7. 34. and they shall call his name Immanuel however modern Jews endeavour to pervert and corrupt that text That of the Psalmist The Lord said unto my Psal 110. Lord fit thou on my Right hand until I have made thine enemies thy footstool That of Micah And thou Bethlehem Judah art not the least amongst the Princes Mich. 5. 2. of Judah For out of thee shall come a Governour which shall rule my people Israel And many more like places are interpreted of the Jews themselves of the Messias And it being so whom have they to show now the time is past that many stand in competition with Christ our true Messias Thirdly several Events prove the Messias already come In Genesis it is Gen. 49. 10. Numb 24. 17. Esa 9. 6. Esa 4. 2. John 5. 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanasius de Incarnatione Chrysostom Ser. 2. against the Jews p. 333 334. to 6. sheweth how that thrice they were cōfounded in attempting to rebuild their City and Temple said The Scepter shall not depart from Judah nor the law-giver from between his feet until Shiloh come c. And so in Numbers there shall come a Star out of Jacob and Scepter out of Israel And in Esay To us a Son is born to us a Child is given and the Government shall be upon his shoulders And by the same Prophet it is said In that day shall the Branch of the Lord be beautiful and glorious c. To which many other places might be added All which we urge not upon our own authority but the judgement of their ancient Rabbies especially that Famous Chaldee Paraphrast so applying them Now these can belong to none but him whom we acknowledge for the Messias Christ Jesus though diverse Impostors and false Christs have pretended to such Prophecies to the delusion and confusion of that unhappy and blind Nation as Christ truly foretold And however great varietie may be found amongst Learned Christians concerning the precise times wherein the said Predictions had their verification yet all unanimously agree that they are fulfilled the Jew in vain dissenting Fourthly the Destructions and Dissipations of that Nation and Church prove the truth of the Messias come For now so great obscurity and confusion are found in their best Records and especially their Genealogies upon which depend their assurance of their Messias that not knowing now them of the Tribe of Judah from them of any other Tribe and much less the Line of David from others They are not able to distinguish a vain pretender from a real heir of David and so must needs suspect all pretenders to be the Messias Fifthly by vertue of the Ancient Phophecies and promises made unto the Jews by their Predecessors their form of worship was to continue unto their Messias at least but nothing is more plain than that this is actually dissolved and that in the most material parts of it Their holy City Jerusalem their more Holy Temple in it and their most Holy Altar in that are all ruined and buried in oblivion and a Mock City built in opposition to that by Alius Adrian and from him called Aelia properly Sixthly The unparralell'd Judgments of God continually pursuing that Nation until the accomplishment of all things foretold by Christ and his Apostles concerning destruction to come upon them to the utmost confuteth their Expectations
and confirm our Faith in Christ as the true Messias For First about the time of Christs Coming into the world the Scepter of all Political and Ecclesiastical Power was utterly taken from them Herod Scaliger Proleg in Chron. Euseb that Alien what ever Scaliger and some others siding with him say making him a Jew invaded all civil Power and kept it to himself and then proceeded to baffle all Sacerdotal Rights Killed most of the Heads of the Principal Families and at his pleasure put in and out Priests as also the Romans did likewise All which some find in the Misterie of Christs age when he was put to death For it is observed that there were thirty Jubilees from the time that the Israelites first entred into the Land of Promise until the Coming of Christ to preach and publish the Gospel at which time the Scriptures tell us that he was about thirty years of age after which time there were never any more kept by that People And that John the Baptist who was the Voice in the wilderness preparing the way for Christ was that Trumpet which was to sound at the Publication of the Evangelical Jubilee and cessation of the Legal and abolition of the whole Fabrick of that Church For to proceed in the historie of their miseries and ruine about the Fourtieth year after the birth of Christ and scarce seven years after his death and Passion whereby they had brought the curse of innocent blood upon themselves and children a very sore calamnitie seised all that people at once by the Emperour Caligula his commanding his Statue to be erected amongst them as a God which caused a great slaughter of them at Alexandria and coufusion in Judaea And when Philo Judaeus of Alexandria attempted to satisfie and pacifie the Emperour Philo Judeus de Legatione ad Caium without it himself witnesses with what shame scorn and sharp reprehension he was repulsed and thrust out of the Emperours presence Who thereupon with his philosophie endeavouring to comfort his brethren with expectation of Divine assistance found himself deceived their troubles multiplying upon them until the death of that Emperour About the same time in Babylon and Seleucia perished about 50000 under the Grand Mutinier Annelus About the year of Christ 68 Florus Procurator of Syria crushed the Jews two years together until rebelling against the Romans they were set upon by Cestius the Roman General who slew great numbers of them wasted their Country took their strong holds of Defence held against the Romans and rased them came to Jerusalem it selfe and might have taken that also but that God had reserved them to greater mischiefs and vengeance the Roman army being called off upon other occasions In the thirteenth year of Nero the year after Vespasian under the Emperour was recalled out of Achaia to invade and reduce the Jews to more absolute obedience and subjection who coming into Gallilee destroyed the Country and put to death no fewer then 100000 persons and led captive with him to the number of fourty thousand in the year 72 Vespasian himself being Emperour sent his son Titus into Jewrie to finish the conquests of those mutinous and obstinate Countries and after devastations of the same coming to the siege of Hierusalem it self so many and unparallel'd were the miseries suffered by them that no age or history could equal them till at last taking the City firing the Temple against his will and strong endeavour by the tacit and irresistible decree of God there were numbred of those that perished in the Citty no fewer then 1100000 and about fourtie thousand Captives with the sale of which all persons were glutted refusing them at the lowest and basest rates the prophecie of old being at this time especially verified Ye shall be sold to your enemies for bondmen Deut. 28. 68. and bond-women and no man shall buy you This ruine and waste so quelled and broke them that they were disabled and disheartned for divers years to attempt any mischiefs but about the year 116 under Trajan the Emperour Gods Justice began to awake against them farther For in several parts of the Roman Empire as it were by consent at the same time rebelling they slue of Greeks and Romans above two hundred thousand and as many in the Island of Cyprus alone but Trajan sending the Roman Forces amongst them destroyed innumerable thousands of them In the year 130. mutinying again under Adrian the Emperour being seduced by a false Prophet and Christ Barchocab they were destroyed with great slaughter And five years after mutinying again Julius Severus was called out of Britain and going against them destroyed fifty thousand of them with fifty strong holds nine hundred principal Towns rasing eighty to the ground leaving the Land in a manner desolate And the year following finished the work by destroying five hundred and eighty thousand Jews besides an infinite multitude which perished by Exile ansd Famine all the Jews being forbidden to remain in any part of Judea or so much as to look back upon it Jerusalem is laid quite waste and another City built not far from it named as is said Aelia from Aelius Adrianus the Emperour And to pursue these miserable obstinate wretches no farther since that time which is as great an Instance as any hath been or can be given of Divine wrath against them though they be in numbers great and in riches too and industrious and zealous for their superstition they have been both so infatuated and blasted in all their counsels and designs that they could never make a Society amongst themselves so far as in any part of the World to be governed within themselves or exercise their Religion but by restraint and at the will and pleasure of others Now to conclude That that should be the true Religion which for these sixteen hundred years could no where be truly practised or exercised according to the pretended obligations of their Law the ground and form of the same is incredible and next to impossible Or that the true Messias should not be actually come or Christ should not be he whose predictions and Justice have been so manifestly verified upon his implacable enemies and withal hath so far raised and exalted and asserted and propagated and defended the believers in him is most unreasonable to doubt of after such convictions and evidences But last of all Let any indifferent judge compare the Doctrine and Services of the Jewish Superstition with the received Rule and ground of it the Old Testament and he shall easily discern how they have by their many Talmudical inventions their bold and ridiculous Comments upon the Scripture held in no less if not much greater veneration than the Scripture it self their infinite absurd and directly false Traditions imposed upon all of their way as Oracles turned their Faith into Fables and their Facts to have no agreement with the Letter of their Law but newly invented most of them except Circumcision
the several Senses and Meanings according to which the Scriptures may be understood IT being found what is the Letter of the Word of God It is necessary to know what is the true sense of it For this is only in truth the Word and not the Letters Syllables or Grammatical words To know this we must first distinguish a Sense Historical and Mystical The Historical Sense is the same as the Literal so called because it is that which is primarily signified and intended by such a form of words And this is twofold For either these words are to be taken in the proper and natural signification as I may call that which is in most vulgar use or in their borrowed and mataphorical Sense As when I call a thing hard and apply it to Iron or Stone I speak properly and according to the Natural sense but when I apply Hardness to the heart I speak improperly and Metaphorically and yet Literally too intending thereby to signifie not any natural but moral quality in the heart The Seven Ears saith Joseph in Genesis are seven years and the Seven fat Kine are Seven years And so Christ in the Gospel This is my Body and infinite others in Scripture are Metaphorical and Literal Senses both The Mystical Sense is that which is a translation not so much of words from one signification to another as of the entire Sense to a meaning not excluding the Historical or Literal Sense but built upon it and occasion'd by it And is commonly divided into the Tropological Allegorical and Anagogical which some as Origen make coordinate with the former saying The Scripture is a certain Intelligible world wherein are four Parts Origen Homil 2. In Diversos as four Elements The Earth is the Literal Sense The waters is the profound Moral Sense The Air is the Natural Sense or natural science therein found And above all the sublime sense which is Fire In another place he mentions only the Historical Moral and Mystical And generally Idem Homil. 5. in Leviticum the Fathers do acknowledg all these though with some variation not distinguishing them as we have as might be shown were it needful to enlarge here on that subject The Moral Sense is that which is drawn from the natural to signifie the manners and conditions of men The Allegorical is a sense under a continuation of tropes and figures The Anagogical a translation of the meaning of things said or done on earth to things proper to heaven The Oxe being suffered to eat while he trod out the Corn according to St. Paul in the Moral sense signified that the labourer was worthy of his hire Mount Sinah and Mount Sion as the same Gal. 2. 24 25. Apostle saith signified the two Cities of God Earthly and Heavenly Allegorically And the Church of God upon Earth the Church Triumphant in heaven It is therefore without reason and modesty both that some strickt Modern Divines have set themselves against the Antient in contracting all these senses into one so as to allow no more which is of very ill consequence to the Faith both of Jew and Christian For generally all the hopes of the Jews concerning the Messias to come and all the proofs of the Christian taken from the Old Testament That he is come would come to little or nothing seeing there is manifestly a Literal or Historical sense primarily intended upon which the Mistical is built So that the arguments of the Evangelists and St. Paul in his Epistles convincing that Christ was the true Messias must needs be invalid seeing their quotation to that purpose had certainly another Literal Sense And it is against the condition of the whole Law it self which as St. Paul Heb. 10. 1. saith was a Shadow of good things to come and not the very things themselves It is here replied commonly That all these are but one Literal Perkins on Galâ—â— 22. sense diversely expressed which is to grant all that is contended for but with a reservation of a peculiar way of speaking to themselves that having been so infortunate as to judge of things amiss they may in some manner solace themselves with variety of phrase too commonly found amongst such as resolve to say something new where there is no just cause at all And to that which seems a Difficultie That no Symbolical sense can be argumentative or prove any thing in Divinity we answer That it cannot indeed unless it be known first to be the true Mistical sense of the words alledged For neither is the Literal sense it self until it be known that such was the true intent of the Speaker But those things which were symbolically and Mystically delivered in the Law being well known to Christ and his Apostles as likewise to the Learnedest of the Jewish Doctors by a received current tradition amongst them were of force to the ends alledged by them But where such a Mystical sense is not received nothing can be inferred from thence which is conclusive CHAP. X. Of the true Interpretation of Holy Scriptures The true meaning not the letter properly Scripture Of the difficultie of attaining the proper sense and the Reasons thereof IT availeth a Christian as little to have the Letter of the word of God without the genuine sense as it doth a man to have the shell without the Kernel For the sense is the word of God not the Letter Wicked men yea the Devil himselfe maketh use of the Letter to contradict the truth it self as St. Hierome hath observed and other Fathers and constant experience certifieth not without the consent of the Scripture it self which saith of it self In it are some things hard to be understood which 2 Pet. 3. 16. they that are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do all other Scriptures to their own destruction Therefore because it is very necessarie to be informed of the difficulties and dangers in misinterpreting Scripture before we can throughly apply our selves to prevent and avoid them we will First shew briefly That many things are difficult in Scripture and the Reasons why and after proceed to the most probable means rightly to interpret the same And these obstacles in attaining the true sense of Gods word are either found in our selves or in Gods wisdome and Providence or lastly in the Word of God it self Some indeed piously but inconsiderately make all the reason of difficulties not denied by them altogether in the Scripture to be in Man supposing they hereby vindicate Gods Providence from that censure it might otherwise be liable unto if so be that God should deliver such a Law to man which could not well be understood but apt to mislead men into errour And therefore say they It is the darkness and perversness of mans understanding and will that make things in Scripture obscure and not the condition of the Scriptures themselves But this no ways doth attain its end For when did God deliver his written word unto Mankind
that none can without another extraordinary confirmation rest satisfied that so it is really with him Lastly for our clearer proceeding We are herein to distinguish between the attaining to the true sense of Scripture and the decision or determination of Controversies according to the Scripture And that the most important Query is not so much Whether a man hath the Spirit or not or whether he hath the truest and most genuine meaning of the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures or not but how this should be made known and manifested so far unto others as that they should rationally and soberly rest satisfied in the opinions of the said pretenders to such truths For it s well and smartly said in this doubt The Question is not Whether the Spirit in a Man or Church or the Scripture though this last way is very improperly expressed be the best Judge of the Sense of Scripture but where it resides to such purposes And what a great stir is made to little purpose while the former is so easily granted on all sides and there is nothing done at all to convince a sober man or Christian That such or such persons are they we ought expect the dictates of Gods Spirit from For Judgement properly so called can never be separated from Autority or lawful presiding over others joyned with power to oblige to such sentence as shall be passed but how this should be competible to single or many Persons agreeing in the same thing in their private capacity yea though enabled with the spirit more than ordinary cannot well be understood So that at most they can be judges of controversies only for themselves and that at their own peril and can do no more than perswade advise and exhort not oblige others to think as they do But Judges must and ought to do more or they had as good do nothing So that that which hath found great acceptance and applause by too many doth upon examination prove very insignificant and impertinent to the resolution of the difficultie in hand viz. That things that are necessary are obvious in Scripture and Every man is Judge to himself granting I say This which is yet really untrue yet scarce any thing is said to the purpose which enquired not so much How a man might perswade himself but how and with what influence he may proceed to the conviction and reducing of others so that the essential to a Church be not destroyed as it certainly must be where no communion is and there will infallibly cease all communion where it is meerly arbitrary for Christians to believe and judge and walk and worship as they please For this it is for every man to judge for himself Will it be yet farther said That we should bear with one another and live peaceably and charitably one with another and not molest each other for his Judgement If it be as I know it is I reply first That this plausibility without possibility is not true according to the opinions of them who use it For they certainly hold That Heresie and Schism are not to be endured or born withal Christ and God must not be blasphemed by unsound opinions or prophane or superstitious actions and this diversity yea contrariety of judging must needs find these faults in one another very often and consequently be of opinion That they are not to be suffered and Charity must not be so far mistaken or abused as to licentiate such enormities But What if after all this contention for the Spirit it be not judge at all as in truth it is not in any proper sense For the Spirit is only the due qualification of the Person or Persons not simply to judge for that descends upon them by being ordinarily and orderly constituted over the Church of Christ but to judge aright and to give faithful and unerring sentence in matters under debate and question And the same may be in proportion affirmed of Reason termed by some who would seem to excell others in reason most improperly as well as unreasonably Judge of Controversies For all judgement disquisition and expositions are made by Persons not by things Reason indeed is the Instrument whereby a Person is enabled to judge or find out the truth unto which unless there be a due accession of Autority and Power such reason though very exquisite and happy must keep within its own doors and judge at home for it self and not for others nor contrary to more publick and autoritative determinations without the peril of being taxed of Arrogance and it self justly condemned if not for the Inward errours of the mind for the outward errors in ill managing truths If it were so That Reason in men were infallible we ought not to stand upon nicities of terms or improper language But for men to deny others the Seat and Power of Judicature because they may err and to take it to themselves as if the spirit of Error had no power over them is at the same time a grievous though pleasing error both against Reason and common justice too And if it be said That every man is bound by the Law of nature being indued with reason to use that reason and not bruitishly to suffer himself he knows not or cares not whether to becarried by others Reasons and not his own I retort And every man is obliged by the Law of Nations which is a more refined principle than that of gross Nature properly taken to contain himself in the order of Community he is placed and to submit to the reason of common Judgement no less than his own For undoubtedly until every man in private and particular be unerrable which is not to be expected on this side heaven there will diverse inconsistent judgements prevail and divide one from another and cause such a breach as the society whether divine or humane will soon perish and come to nothing But granting what was before demanded That every man must act according to his reason above the nature of beasts this doth not conclude That therefore he must be let alone and not brought even by force to submit to others against such reason First Because it is not resolved by any but a mans own deceitful opinion That it is really reason which is so presumed to be Secondly Because he that is so constrained to submit his reason is not thereby denyed either the nature or use of his but still much transcendeth the capacity of beasts For He discusses he discourses he judges rationally after the manner of men even when the effect of all these Acts are contrary to reason And lastly In wise men and good humble Christians there is a superior principal of reasonableness to that of meer direct nature For That he that has most reason on his side and when that it self is controverted he that according to appearance of Circumstances may lay the fairest claim to that is to be followed no rational man can deny Therefore should a Mans
distinct from Divine and Justifying Faith Of Faith Explicit and Implicit HAving thus spoken of the Rule of Christian Faith and its Auxiliary Tradition we are now to proceed to the Nature and Acts the Effects Subject and Object of it For as all Christian Religion is summed up in one Notion of Christian Faith so all Faith may be reduced unto the foresaid Heads Faith taken in its greatest extent containeth as well Humane as Divine And may be defined A firm assent of the mind to a thing reported And there are two things which principally incline the mind to believe The Evidence of the thing offered to the understanding or the Fidelity and Veracity of him that so delivers any thing unto us For if the thing be Fides est donum divinitùs infusum menti hominis quae citra ullam haesitantiam credit esse verissima quaecunque nobis Deus per utrumque Testtradidit ac promisit Erasm in Symbolum apparent in it self to our reasons or senses we presently believe it And if the thing be obscure and difficult to be discerned by us yet if we stand assured of the faithfulness of him that so reports it to us and his wisdom we yield assent thereunto But Faith properly Divine hath a twofold fountain so constituting and denominating it The Matter believed which is not common nor natural but spiritual and heavenly But more especially that Faith is Divine which is not produced in the soul of Man upon any natural reasons necessarily inferring the same but upon a superior motive inducing unto it that is Autoritie divine and because it hath declared and revealed so much unto us as St. Peter believing Christ to be the Son of God it is said Flesh and Boood hath not revealed it unto thee but my Father which is in heaven This Mat. 16. 17. was a divine Faith upon a double respect 1. by reason of the object Christ a divine person 2. by reason of the Cause God by whose power he believed the same it not being in the power of flesh and blood any natural reason to convince the judgement so far as absolutely to believe That Christ was so the Son of God so that to be revealed is that which makes the Faith properly divine and not the divine object or thing believed For as it hath been observed by others any thing natural and which by natural reason may be demonstrated and so must be believed by a natural Faith being also commended unto us upon divine autority or revelation may be also believed by a divine Faith That there is an invisible Deity is clearly demonstrable from the visible things of this World and accordingly may and ought to be believed upon the warrant of natural reason it self as St. Paul teacheth us saying The Invisible things of him from the Creation of the Rom. 1. 20. world are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made even his eternal power and Godhead so that they are without excuse That is If God had not revealed all this yet men ought to believe this out of sense and reason but this hinders not but this very thing should become an article of our Creed also and so because it is revealed Form in us a divine Faith But we must be aware of an ambiguity in Revelation which may mislead us For sometimes Revelation is used for the thing revealed And sometimes for the Act Revealing that which we call now The Revelation of St John and in truth all Scriptures as we have them now are the things God did reveal unto his servants but the Act whereby they were revealed or the Act revealing this to them ended with the persons receiving them And this is no superfluous or curious observation because of a received maxim in the Schools That without a supernatural act we cannot give due assent unto a supernatural object nor believe truths revealed by God without a super added aid of Grace illuminating and inclining the mind to assent thereto From whence doth follow That of all divine Faith is most properly if not only divine which doth believe that such things are Revealed of God and not That which supposes them to have been revealed by God and that he said so as is expressed unto us doth believe For this latter even any natural man and greatest infidel in the world would believe who believes there is a God it being included and implied in the very notion of a Deity that God cannot lie or deceive or affirm a thing to be which is not But the Christian Faith mounts much higher then Heathens and by the Grace of God believes that God hath Revealed such things wherein consists his Christian Faith The first thing then a true believer indeed must believe is That the Scriptures are the word of God and this as it is the most fundamental so is it most difficult of all to one not educated in the Faith of Christians because it neither can be proved by Scripture nor whatevermen who promise nothing less in their presumptuous methods then clear demonstrations may say and argue by Tradition The Scriptures though not testimonie of it self yet matter and manner may induce and Tradition fortifie that but the Crown of all true Christian Faith must be set on by Gods Grace A Second thing in order is when we believe that God hath spoken such things that we believe the things themselves so delivered to us of God For though as is said any rational heathen may well do this yet many a Christian doth it not For The foo◠not in knowledge so much as practise 〈◊〉 14. ◠◠Ti◠◠9. hath said in his heart there is no God saith the Psalmist and St. Paul that many out of an evil conscience have made Shipwrack of their Faith which really once they had A third degree of Christian Faith is When not onely we believe that God hath revealed his Law unto us and what he hath so revealed to be most faithful true and holy but obey the same For in Scripture Faith is taken for Obedience and Obedience for Faith as in the famous instance of Abraham who is said to believe God and that his Faith was counted for Righteousness And why is Abraham said to believe God so signally Because he was perswaded that God bade him offer up his Son unto him No but because he did it by Faith as is witnessed in the Epistle to the Hebrews And this acceptation of Faith is much confirmed by the contrary Heb. 11. 17. speech of Scripture in whose sense they who obey not God are commonly said not to believe him as in the Book of Deuteronomie Deut. 9. 23. Likewise when the Lord sent unto you from Kadesh-Barnea saying Go up and possess the Land which I have given you then ye rebelled against the Commandement of the Lord your God and believed him not nor hearkened unto his voice And therefore in the Acts of the Apostles it is said
A great Acts. 6. 8. company of the Priests were obedient unto the Faith That is believed what was Preached by the Apostles And yet more expresly St. Pauls phrase to the Romans declares this where he saith But unto them that Rom. 2. 8. are contentious and do not obey the truth but obey unrighteousness indignation and wrath For no man can so properly be said to Obey as to Believe a truth But that distinction of greatest moment to the illustrating of many obscurities and solving many doubts arising to Christian Readers out of the Scripture and especially St. Pauls Epistles is that of Faith into the Doctrine of Faith or Object and in sum the whole New Covenant as manifested in the New Testament And the Act and Grace of Faith in a true Believer The former is that which we are required to believe The latter signifies the inward propension to the receiving the things so manifested in the Gospel And is again subdivided into Faith complexly or generally taken and specially that as comprehending the whole duty of a true Believer and all Christian Graces flowing from that Fountain and built upon that Foundation This as distinct from the two other Theological Graces Hope and Charity of all which St. Paul treateth distinctly in his first Epistle to the Corinthians concluding his thirteenth 1 Cor. 13. 13. Chapter thus And now abideth Faith Hope and Charity And that Faith is taken for the Doctrine of Faith or of Christ revealed in the Gospel is Acts 6. 7. very plain and very necessary to be noted as in the place to the Romans even now touched where as Obedience is taken for the act of believing Faith is taken for the Gospel it self And in the same Book it is written that Felix sent for Paul and heard him concerning the Faith in Christ that Acts. 24. 24. suâ—â—â—y was the Gospel or Doctrine of Christ or through Christ And St. Paul to Timothy Now the Spirit speaketh expresly that in the latter times 1 Tim. 4. 1. some shall depart from the Faith giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of Devils Where Doctrines of Devils is opposed to Faith the Doctrine of Christ And in the Acts Elimas is said to seek to turn away the Governour Acts. 13. 8. from the Faith And so Act. 14. 22. And Faith is not only so taken for the Gospel as opposed to Gentile but Jewish works and worship or the Law of Moses and that most frequently in St. Pauls Epistles as shall appear more plainly by and by In the mean time here preparing grounds for a more important disquisition it will not be amiss to note other supposed kinds of Faith of which four are vulgarly by modern Divines pitch't upon as of a quite different nature and form They are Historical Faith Temporarie Faith which last but for a season Miraculous Faith seen in working of miracles All which terms of Faith I without any more adoo grant to have ground in Scripture as so many distinct Acts but not kinds of Faith They are very unadvisedly distinguished as several Species because several events or effects they may be all brought under that of Justifying Faith not as Species under their Genus but as parts are reduced to the whole or degrees inferiour to the highest For undoubtedly Historical Faith as they call it whereby a man gives a general Credence or assent to what is delivered in Scripture is a degree and good step to that called Justifying Faith and there is no Justifying Faith without it And so are the Acts of a Temporary Faith and Miraculous Faith acts of a Justifying Faith For as for the temporariness or failing it distinguishes Christian Faith neither from Gentile nor Jewish belief nor true from false but only as to the Event that the one continues and comes to perfection and the other comes to untimely end Which puts no more difference between the Justifying and not Justifying Faith then the untimely death of a child does distinguish him from a man which is in growth not in nature according to which all good distinctions ought to be made For if nothing be wanting to the denominating this failing Faith a Justifying and saving Faith but duration how can they be thus reasonably distinguished And as to the Faith producing miracles it is the very same in nature with that which was required by our Saviour Christ to have miracles wrought upon them that were by him miraculously cured than which nothing occurs more frequently in the Gospels and is an act of Justifying Faith as supposing the belief of Christ according as the Gospel describes him which as it shall be shewed presantly is the true Justifying Faith For as Christ himselfe saith in St. Mark No man shall do a Mark 9. 39. Miracle in my name that can lightly speak evil of me So that by Faith in Christ such miracles being wrought who can denie it to be the effect of a Justifying Faith But that which may have deceived men is an opinion That what ever proceeds from a Justifying Faith must needs proceed from it as it justifies For in truth Miracles or the gift of the working them is not that which commends us to God to our justification but to men and Graces rather than Gifts both Sanctify and justify Yet this hinders not but Justifying Faith may be the spring from whence that Gift proceeds and so not opposite to it But it is here commonly said That Heathens and Reprobates may have the three sorts of Faith here opposed to Justifying Faith But I must crave leave to denie and declare their errour herein For It is a contradiction to say A man can so much as Historically believe all the Gospel and yet continue an Infidel The Devil therefore believing as St. James tells us for his words are much stood upon in this Case is no Infidel And yet he nor prophane Believers and reprobates are not true Christians not because they have nothing faithful in them but because this good ground and Justifying Faith Inchoate being as the Schools speak unformed and destitute of a proportion of Charity and obedience never increases to act or reap fruits of Righteousness which is to â—e Justified And Reprobates Faith may be true Faith so much as they have of it and so long as they hold it For God forbid that their Faith should make them Reprobates It is their want of Faith in perfection and perseverance that so distinguishes them For were not that Faith true real and and saving which they have or had they might be damned for having no Faith at all but they cannot be damned for not continuing and growing in that Faith as the Scriptures assure us some shall And no more at presant needs here be alledged than what St. Peter at large delivereth 1 Epistle C. 2. V. 13 14. 15. 20 c. Some add hereunto an Hypocritical Faith which indeed must needs be quite of another kind but what
saveth the observer of it but the Spirit i. e. the Spiritual Law giveth Life But if the ministration of death written and graven in Stones was glorious so that 7. the Children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his Countenance which glory was to be done away How shall not the ministration 8. of the Spirit be rather glorious For even that which was made glorious 10. had no glory in this respect by reason of the glory that excelleth All this doth shew the great disparitie between the Law and the Gospel and the preheminence of This above That So be the Law in it self and for that season and for that people glorious and good yet upon the approach of the Gospel and its being in force all that perished and the works thereof no longer good works much less justifying because they were not done in Faith not in the Faith of Christ but in the Faith of Moses The principal then yea only Good works that are now of any account as to absolute acceptation at Gods hands are those which are done in an Evangelical manner Now the manner of acting thus Evangelically to the denomination of our works Good is thus described by St. Paul For by Grace are Ephes 2. 8. ye saved through Faith and that not of your selves it is the gift of God Not 9. of works least any man should boast For we are his workmanship created in 10. Christ Jesus unto Good works which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them Which certainly implieth that Grace being taken for the Gospel of Grace in opposition to the Law Christ in opposition to Moses and Faith to the belief of Moses Law we are no longer of the Old man but the New man we are created anew in Christ and that Good works from him and through Faith in him are they only that properly can be so called and to these we are fashioned and as it were created by the Gospel So that if we should describe Good works of Christians we may call them Acts done in the Faith of Christ according to the tenor of the Gospel as a Rule directing us to the manner and End of working Nevertheless though these be good and every Good and Faithful Christian stands obliged by vertue of his Holy Faith professed and the Covenant of Grace entred into with God under the Gospel and the hope of obtaining the special promises of the Gospel yet are they not in themselves Good as to the perfection prescribed by that Rule and in Justice might be exacted by God through the ordinarily inseparable defects from humane frailty so long as we are in this world And how far they avail it now follows to be examined CHAP. XV. Of the Effect of Good Works which is the Effect of Faith How Works may be denominated Good How they dispose to Grace Of the Works of the Regenerate Of the proper conditions required to Good Works or Evangelical SUpposing then that there are such works which both God and man esteem Good it is next to be sought into how far their Goodness does extend and of what efficacie they are or what are the Effects of them Remembring withall that here Faith is no way excluded but advanced rather seing Good works being the Effects of Faith the Effects of Good works must of necessity be likewise the Effects of Faith as the fruit ows no less to the Root which gives life and growth to the whole tree than it doth to the branch from which it immediately proceeds Yet is it here to be noted answerable to what is said before That all good works do not proceed from Faith For the works of the Gentiles have a real goodness in them and that much more than they of the Jew as they are Jewish and yet not done in Faith nor attaining to the Decorum or perfection of the Gospel and therefore frequently called sinful and no ways conducing directly to salvation or Justification as do the works wrought in Faith I say directly because as in nature a man is said to live the Life of a sensible Creature before he come to the perfection of humane nature so may there be a preparatory or previous goodness in the works of Infidels which may dispose to not merit the life or form of Faith But because the Regeneration called sometimes the Creation of the New man to shew the absoluteness and independence of the Divine power and pleasure in such Acts doth not proceed as nature doth For that which may be as predisposing is not simply requisite to the introducing the form of Spiritual Life but by the most free and powerful providence many are elected and brought to Spiritual Life without any such previous goodness And if we should grant natural or moral Justice were necessary as an Antecedent to Faith it would not follow that it were so by way of merit or disposing God to perfect that rude beginning with the accession of his Grace For we are to make a necessary difference between Preparation to Grace so much talked of For there is a preparation of a mans self or the subject which is to receive this holy impression and there is a preparation of the Agent which conferrs this by moving or inclining him to such an End I suppose the Schools and severer assertors of the Freeness of Gods Grace to which a man cannot by acts of nature dispose himself do mean the latter viz. that no man by any principle of nature or habits of virtue acquired and exercised according to the Rules of Justice and wisdom can thereby be said to have done any thing which of it self might incline God to regenerate him by his Grace For it seems to me keeping to the Rules and sense of Scripture as unlikely that a Christian should be author any more of Spiritual Life than a man is of his Natural But no man can with any sense be said to contribute to his natural Life no more can he to his Spiritual Life which is commonly called the First Grace But that the natural man living soberly Justly and temperately is not thereby in a greater readiness and less distant from the divine Grace perfecting the same were hard to affirm as well considering the method that God usually takes though not alwaies nor is bound to any is to proceed not per saltum as they say or from one extream to another on the suddain but by apt gradations as the encouragement is from hence given to immortality it self And yet as wood being orderly laid can never thereby merit or claim a kindling or as a conveiance of a great Mannor being fully and fairly drawn can never deserve nor so much as for its sake dispose the Lord whose it is to pass it away by setting his hand and seal to it so neither can any fair hand of natural works induce God to conferr on a man the State of Grace For this
Justice But to arrive in this doubtful and perplexed way to the right end of this Dispute it will be necessarie to pass briefly through all the several Causes of our Justification and so much the rather because divers before have so done and failed in their Divinity because of a mistake in Logick in miscalling Causes And first we must know otherwise then some have taught That the Material Cause of our Justification is not the graces in us nor the pardon without us nor remission of sins nor obedience of Christ nor of our selves but the person justified is the subject of Justification For who with good sense can say Our sins are justified our good works are Justified Acts. 13. 3â— True it is St. Paul saith by him Christ all that believe are justified from all things from which ye could not be Justified by the Law of Moses Shewing hereby that we are Justified from our sins but not that our sins are Justified And so where St. James speaks so often of which hereafter that we are Justified by Works he intendeth not to say our Works are Justified For t is the person not the qualities of him that is Justified And if any speak otherwise they must be helpt out by recurring to Figurative not proper speaking In such cases as these if ever we would judge aright we must hold as precisely as can be to propriety of speech About the Final cause of our Justification I find nothing singular but in common with all the Acts of God towards man and all the Actions of Man towards God viz The glory of God Neither is there any difference of parties herein But concerning the Formal Cause of our Justification before God some discord is found yea concerning a Formal Cause in General what it is and wherein it consisteth which is very necessarie to be understood to attain to the true notion of being Formally Justified A Formal Cause then is that whereby a thing is what it is subsists in it self and is distinguished from other things being always essential and intrinsecal to the thing so by it constituted that it cannot be so much as conceived without it and cannot possibly but be with it This whether artificial or not I weigh not much but is a true description of that Cause For instance sake A man is a man properly by his soul and not by his body his soul being his Inward form and as it is impossible that he should be so without it so is it impossible but that he should be so with it whatever outward visible defects or imperfections may appear otherwise So in the present cause it must necessarily be that the Formal Cause of our Justification be intrinsecal to the Justified person and that not being that he should not be justified Contrary to what some have affirmed upon this occasion who from an instance of an Eclipse would show that the formal Cause is not alwayes intrinsecal to that which it formeth For say they as it should seem by the autority of Zabarel In an Eclipse of the Sun the Moon interposing is the formal Cause of the Darkness of the Earth and yet it is not intrinsecal to it but separate But the mistake is plain that the Moon being not the cause of the earth it self but of the darkness of the earth only it is not the Formal Cause of that and so may be extrinsecal to it and intrinsecal to the darkness as the formal cause but whether this be so or not we are here only to show that no cause formal can be external to the thing of which it is the form and by consequence that nothing without us can be the formal cause of our Justification or that whereby we are denominated Just before God So that neither Christ nor his merits do render us so Justified And therefore they who to magnifie the mistery of our Justification do object to themselves How a man can be Just by the justice of another and how righteous by another persons righteousness any more than a man can hear with another mans ears or see with another mans eyes do tie such a knot as they can by no means loose For in plain truth neither the one nor the other can formally be But they may say As it is Christs righteousness indeed and rests only in him so we cannot be said to be justified formally by it but as it is made ours especially by Faith and is applied unto us so we may be formally Justified by it To which I say that if that individual formal Righteousness which is in Christ were by any means so transferred formally unto us and infused into us that we should in like manner possess it as did Christ then indeed the argument would hold very good that by such application we were Justified formally by Christs righteousness but no such thing will be granted neither is any such thing needfull For though the Scripture saith directly that Christ is The Lord our Phil. 3. 9. righteousness and St. Paul desireth to be found in Christ not having his own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by Faith Yet we are not to understand hereby that the formal righteousness of Christ becomes our formal Righteousness but that he is by the Gospel he revealed unto us the teacher of Righteousness and that far different from that Righteousness of the Law which St. Paul calls his own as that which he brought with him to Christ and he is Justification is neither but a certain action in God applied unto us or a certain respect or relation whereby we ar acquit of our sins and accepted to life everlasting Perkins Gal 2. 16. Rom. 8. 30. the Prime Cause of our Righteousness sending his holy Spirit unto us and by his merits appeasing the wrath of God and satisfying his Justice for us all which is not the formal cause of our Righteousness or Justification For neither is that formal righteousness in us which is inherent Righteousness the formal Cause of our Justification But our Justification formal is an Act of God terminating in Man whereby he is absolved from all guilt reputed Just and accepted to Grace and favour with God When God hath actually passed this divine free and gracious sentence upon a sinner then and not before is he formally Justified This is the end and consummation of all differences between God and man and the initiating him into all saving Grace here and Glory hereafter as St. Paul writing to the Romans witnesseth in these words Whom he predestinated them he also called and whom he called them he also Justified and whom he justified them he also glorified CHAP. XIX Of the Efficient Cause of Justification IT remains therefore now that we proceed to the means causes and motives inducing God Almighty thus to Justifie Man a sinner whom he might rather condemn for his unrighteousness And these as
others to justifie and now crouding into it all others to make it justifying they affirm what at first they were so much denyed namely That justifying Faith is not so much a single or singular Christian Grace as a confluence of many Evangelical Graces together which render a man capable of being justified according to the Covenant of Free Grace before God though never worthy To which we readily assent Again If as they say Faith Sola non Solitâ—riâ— Only not Alone justifies it will be no less difficult for them to give either good autority or reason why the same may not be ascribed to Love or Charity or to Hope and when the insufficiencie of either of these be declared to that effect it may not as reasonably now as before he replyed and said Charity only doth justifie but not alone because Faith and Hope must be conjoyned with it There is little judgment or sincerity in such manner of disputings as these But here to prevent suspition of mis-reporting the opinions of such as contend for a modern notion of justification by Faith which the Holy Fathers were ignorant of I find my self constrained to set down the state and reason of the Question as that learned man Mr. Perkins hath explain'd Perkins on Gal. 3. v. 10. c and defended Justification by Faith In his Reformed Catholique Point the fourth And in his Comment on the Galatians he moves this necessary Querie as most material to the clearing of the Controversie What is that very thing that causeth a man to stand righteous before God and to be accepted to Life everlasting To this in both places he answers altogether to the same sense and purpose and with very little alteration of words saying The Obedience or Righteousness of Christ and it stands in two things his Passion in Life and Death and his Fulfilling the Law joyned therewith which he calls the Active and Passive Obedience of Christ In which resolution there is no difference between us no exception justly to be taken Perkins Reform Catholick pag. 570 Now sayes he afterward pag. 570. Reform Cath. All both Papists and Protestants agree that a sinner is justified by Faith This agreement saith he is only in word And why so The Papist saying we are justified by Faith understands a General or Catholick Faith whereby a man believeth the Articles of Religion to be true But we hold That the Faith which justifieth is a Particular Faith whereby we apply to our selves the Promises of Righteousness and Life everlasting by Christ But if we say That even the General Faith not taken for the Object or Articles of Faith but Habit exercised performeth this sufficiently though not immediately as in truth we do by the influence it hath upon inferiour and subordinate Graces whereof a Particular is but one then in vain is all laid upon the Particular Faith And that place by him alledged out of Galatians 2. 20. makes more against what he would prove by it than for it viz. I live by the Faith of the Son of God For it is directly denyed That hereby is intended such a Particular Faith as is before mentioned by us The words of the Apostle before and the main design of his Epistle declaring that he understood no other Faith in Christ here than that General whereby he relinquished the Law of Moses with all its imperfect umbrages and betook himself by Faith to Christ and liv'd now according to Christ and not to Moses Neither doth that which follows prove the specialty of this St. Pauls Faith as he conceives viz. Who hath loved me and given himself for me particularly For this is apparently a Predicate of Christ and not of the Faith there spoken of It is a description of Christ and not of the Faith in Christ which if it were would make but little to the purpose For who knows not that a General Faith comprehends a particular Faith and the Faith whereby we believe and receive the Gospel disposes us to believe that Christ died for us which is one part of that Faith And the Faith that believes that Christ dyed for all doth necessarily lead us to believe that Christ dyed for me particularly Therefore still it remaineth unresolved what singular and signal vertue there is in the Particular Grace of Faith which other Evangelical Graces depending upon the General Faith as well as doth this Particular Faith may not be capable of in order to our Justification Hear we then to understand this better what the same learned Author sayes in the entrance to that Treatise of the Reformed Catholick A man is justified by Faith alone because Faith is that alone instrument created in the heart by the Holy Ghost whereby the sinner layeth hold on Christ his Righteousness and applyeth the same unto himself There is neither Hope nor Love nor any other Grace of God within man that doth this but Faith alone Thus he Where several things are taken for granted not to be granted First That Faith is any more created in the heart of man than any other Grace there expressed or implyed Secondly That it is an Instrument Active laying hold of Christ in a special different manner from other Graces For in truth we are not so much justified or made partakers of Christ by our laying hold of him as by his laying hold of us Thirdly That in what sense Faith may be said to lay hold on Christ in the same the other Graces may not likewise be said so to do because all Graces speaking properly which are indeed operative as is said towards our Sanctification are but Passive in order to our Justification which is an act of God only declaring and holding us Just in Christ Jesus So that the old Querie here returns upon us again Which of all these Graces prevail most to the inserting us into Christ which I grant to be the General Faith as a foundation and first mover of all Graces And as for the particular Faith compared with its fellow Graces it may be allowed a greater vertue but not of another kind in reference to our union with Christ For when an humble and desponding Christian considering his own unworthiness and the unsufficiency of his repentance it self and graces to incline God to mercy so far as for their sakes to accept him in Christ for just and innocent he as the last refuge he hath quitteth all worth and capacities in himself and fleeth with a strong confidence which in this case is called Faith unto the free and absolute Grace of God revealed in Christ Jesus unto us upon which God beholding the whole glory of the Absolution of such a sinner to redound to his Grace is pleased to receive such a person to mercy according to that of the Prophet Esay Thou shalt keep him in perfect Isâ—iah 25. 3. peace whose mind is stayed on thee because he trusteth in thee Than which words I find no testimonies of Scripture of the many
drunkenness who putteth the bottle to his neighbours mouth provoking him to drink to excess or of Theft who will by no means steal himself but is aiding in his advice and putting advantages into his hands to take anothers Goods In like manner the necessary consequence of a light Errour being very notorious though a person be not formally an Heretick in the conclusion which he may protest against as not following from his erroneous proposition yet if in truth it doth so and is generally so reputed to the mis-leading of Christians such a man is really or virtually an Heretick and obnoxious to the guilt and punishment due unto such Errours which he denies For instance It is a notorious Heresie to hold it unnecessary there should be any Church of Christ and to affirm That it suffices that every good Christian hath the word of God and believes and lives by himself though the word of God contradicts this impiety sufficiently and to be a Christian at large If any person heretically inclined shall deny that this is his opinion or that thus he would have it yet if he preaches such Doctrine and publishes such Opinions which do necessarily infer thus much he is a notorious Heretick in reality though not in the formality As also if he should teach The Church hath no power to enjoyn any thing besides what the word of God requires This Errour taken simply and nakedly hath no such monstrousness as may not pass for tolerable but in the necessary consequence it is as pernicious to the community of Christians as to preach against Christ himself And therefore the argument of late Rationalists is very false founded upon this ground Socinus Chi. viz. That Christians are not to be obliged under pain of damnation such as Anathema's and Excommunications are to any thing which Christ hath not by his Law prescribed For this indeed taken strictly is true Christ for ought may appear doth not in Scripture command Rites in use with the Church but Christ under pain of his displeasure doth require that we should do all things not contrary to his injunctions for the keeping up Non sunt parva existimanda sine quibus magna consistere enim possint Hieron of the nature of a Church and Christian Society and therefore though the Errour be in it self light it falls in the event heavy upon Christianity it self and deserves no less rigour than is used towards the offender in Faith it self Lastly From hence we may reasonably judge of the frequent denunciations of alienation from the Faith and Church against them who erred heretically affirming in general That Heresie quite alienated from the Church and that Society could not be of the Church which maintained an Heresie For first we are to note that few or none before St. Cyprians time were so severely censured by the ancient Fathers but such as were offenders against the very principles of Christianity it self St. Cyprian indeed and others from him extended this censure to such as were less criminal For it is a very hard matter to instance in any one Article of Faith though I know some great Clerks have attempted it which Novations or Donatists rejected or offended against So that abating somewhat for the vehemence of the zeal conceived against such enemies to the Church in the writings of Fathers against Hereticks it will appear that it was matter of Fact rather than Faith or Heresie which exposed them to such censures For uncharitableness will as certainly damn as unfaithfulness And he that dies for Christ as divers Hereticks did in animosity groundless against his brother and especially against the Church of which he is or ought to be a member may notwithstanding loose his Life hereafter as well as here But of this more now we are to speak of the Church CHAP. XXIII Of the proper Subject of Faith the Church The distinction and description of the Church In what sense the Church is a Collection of Saints Communion Visible as well as Invisible necessary to the constituting a Church HAving spoken of the Nature Kinds Acts and Effects of Christian Faith we proceed now to speak of the proper Subject of Faith which is the Church Which word is commonly used as well for the Place where our Lord is publickly and solemnly worshipped as for the People of God serving and worshipping him But of this latter only we art to treat at present which we define to be A Calling and Collection of Saints from The Church is an universal Congregation or fellowship of Gods faithful People and Elect built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ being the head and corner stone Hom. Chur. of Engl. Part. 2. pa. 213. their vain Conversation in the world to the Faith and Worship of God according to the Rule and Laws of his Holy word and to visible communion with themselves which description I doubt not to be grounded in all its parts upon the Scriptures themselves And that God is the Author and only Institutor of such a Church if it needed any proof the Scripture would soon afford it St. Paul saith to the Corinthians Chap. 7. * 1 Cor. 7. 17. But as God hath distributed to every man as the Lord hath called every one so let him walk and so ordain I in all Churches And so exhorteth the Thessalonians to †1 Thess 2. 12 walk worthy of God who called them to his Kingdom and Glory And so in very many places else where as will appear farther now we consider the Term from whence God doth call and choose his faithful people and that is the World the world not taken in its natural sense signifying the Natural bodies of all sorts of which it consisteth nor absolutely from it in the more special sense in which Mankind is sometimes called the world for civil conversation and humane mutual Offices may be maintained and ought between Christians and Heathens or Infidels but rather in a moral sense that is unnatural unjust unrighteous communication with the wicked of the world as wicked as St. Paul explaineth himself to the 1 Cor. 5. 9 10. Corinthians I wrote unto you in an Epistle not to company with fornicatours Yet not altogether to refuse to converse with the fornicatours of this world or with the covetous or extortioners or with Idolaters for them must ye needs go out of the world but if any man that is called a brother be a fornicatour c. St. Peter takes most of the terms in our description speaking 1 Pet. 2. 9 10. of Converts to the Faith Ye are a chosen generation a Royal Priesthood an holy Nation a peculiar People that ye should shew forth the praises of God who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light c. And St. Paul to the Ephesians According as he hath chosen us in him before the Ephes 1. 4. foundation of the World that we should be holy and
reason together with their rejecting of so eminent a Servant of God as was Samuel that God 1 Sam. 8. 10. said of the People they had rejected him rather than Samuel From Saul to the Captivity it is manifest what their Government was and from thence it matters not as to our present purpose how they governed themselves seeing they were ruled by the Regal Power of Foreign Princes until shaking off that yoke they were brought under that form by their own Deliverers which was again extorted from them by usurping Tyrants So that when Philo-Judeus and Josephus seem to write of an Aristocratical Government instituted by Moses they can no otherwise be understood to write faithfully but in reference to Ecclesiastical Courts and Cases of Religion purely wherein the Counsel of many was to take place but not to the administration of Civil Justice unless as is above-said when they were themselves subject to Forrain Princes The Objections against this Form thus asserted I leave to be answered from the positive grounds thus laid down And commend the Reader to the learned Disputations of others which are many concerning the excellencie and benefits of one Form above another But as to Hereditary and Elective Governments what is convenient may be gathered from the general discourse now made Now we proceed to the Third thing in Government the mutual Obligation of Governour and Governed CHAP. XXVI Of the mutual Relations and Obligations of Soveraigns and Subjects No Right in Subjects to resist their Soveraigns tyrannizing over them What Tyranny is Of Tyrants with a Title and Tyrants without Title Of Magistrates Inferiour and Supream the vanity and mischief of that distinction The Confusion of Co-ordinate Governments in one State Possession or Invasion giveth no Right to Rulers The Reasons why THAT we read not in the New Testament of any Rules or Advice given to Kings and Princes how to govern the people under them the reason is plain viz. Because in those dayes there were none Christian and St. Paul says What 1 Cor. 5. 12. have I to do to judge them that are without the Church For doubtless had any been of the Society of Christians they had fallen under the Christian Discipline and Precepts of the Apostles But that occasion of instructing Kings in the due administration of their power failing we are to seek for satisfaction from the old Testament where not much is found besides general moral Precepts of Sobriety Temperance Justice and the like enjoyned Solomon by David his Father and left by Solomon in his Book of Proverbs for Rules to succeeding Princes Moses likewise not without Gods appointment hath drawn up some special Precepts for Kings to follow in the real and cordial embracing of Gods word and worship and taking the defense and protection thereof Of which to speak it little behoves us at present Neither purpose we out of Humane Arguments and Autority to prescribe to Supreams what they ought to do or how to govern any farther than the known Rules of Justice in common do require For no doubt there is a mutual Obligation between Soveraign and Subject and that he is tyed and circumscribed in the exercise of his power by God as really as this is in his Obedience to him and that upon the common duties expressed by St. Paul of Masters to Servants and Husbands to Wives and Parents to Children For it doth not at all follow That because Princes are not subject to their Subjects therefore they are free from all subjection Ephes 6. 8. No St. Paul's Rule holds good to Kings as well as to Masters viz. That they should know that their King and Master is in heaven and that Kings are to be subject as well to the Laws of God as their Subjects are to the Laws of Man And though Children ought to obey their Parents in all things yet there is tacitly understood certain Laws of Limitation restraining the boundless tyranny of both civil and natural Parents For Subjects and Children are to know that they have a higher Lord and a more powerful Father to whom in the first place obedience must be paid And we must withdraw our selves from the commands of our Earthly Soveraign when our Heavenly who is his Soveraign doth require it as all rational Kings do grant as well as People But neither ought we to restrain the will of Princes to the literal and express will of God only but even to the most just and reasonable Laws of Humane Authority but only we must distinguish the vast difference between the obligation of Subjects to the just and equal Laws prescribed and imposed on them and that of Princes in relation to those Laws concerning their governing For all Laws contain two special causalities in them The one Exemplary whereby a Form and Rule is prescribed directing such as are to be guided thereby to the observation of Justice Equity and Reason as well to the publick as private good And to this so far as it is reasonable Kings are no less bound than Subjects they ought to observe entirely and religiously these sound and profitable Laws and that under pain of Gods displeasure The other causality which Laws have is Efficient and Compulsive whereby a Civil penalty being denounced and impending over the head of the infringers thereof they are better guarded from transgressions by either loss of outward good or life it self according to the merit of the Offense It cannot either consist with the Law of God or Nations to inflict punishments on Princes Soveraign Not but that for instnace murder adultery unjust spoil and robbery of the Subjects may no less considering the nature of the Crime deserve such punishment of Princes as they do of People but because there is none in such cases that can or ought duly and regularly to execute such Laws because there can be no such execution without the power of the Sword and there can be but one proper subject of that power in any one Republick Every man must not put to death him that is a notorious offender no not though he be justly and legally condemned to dye but he or they only who are thereunto rightly impowred and authorized by the Supream And though every man may in his own mind and judgment sentence a malefactour whose crime is high and apparent to death yet cannot he in civil judicature render him obnoxious to it And the reason hereof is plain because Justice must be done justly or else there is incurred no less guilt than is sought and intended to be revenged And of all guilt I know not whether any be greater than the assuming of such a power which no wayes belongs to a man For better it were to take away ones horse or to ravish another mans wife or to extort unjustly anothers estate than to devest a Prince of his Right of Rule and usurp it to himself and that first because no mans estate or any thing that is his doth descend
Eucharist and especially going upon the grounds of Luther Calvin Perkins and some others of Great note that all Sacerdotal they may call them if they please Ministerial Acts done by him who is no true Minister are really null and void Fourthly we conclude that seeing all Ecclesiastical power as Ecclesiastical doth proceed from Christ and his Successors and that by Ordinary and visible means they who have not received the same by such Ordinary Methods are usurpers of the same whether Political or Mystical And that to deny this to the Church is to deny that which Christ hath given them and such a Principle of the Churches well Being without which it cannot subsist and it not subsisting neither can the Faith it self And to the reason above given we may add Prescription beyond all memory For from Christs time to this day a perpetual and peculiar power hath ever been in the Clergy which hath constantly likewise born the name of the Church to assemble define and dispose matters of Religion And why should not Prescription under Unchristian as well as Christian Governours for so many Ages together be as valid sacred and binding to acknowledgment in the Case of Religion as Civil Matters will ever remain a question in Conscience and common Equity even after irresistible Power hath forced a Resolution otherwise It is true such is the more natural and Ancient Right Civil Power hath over the outward Persons of men than that which Religion hath over the Inward man that it may claim a dominion and disposal of the Persons of even Christian subjects contrary to the soft and infirm Laws of the Church because as hath been said Men are Men before they are Christians and Nature goeth before Grace And Civil society is the Basis and support to Ecclesiastical Yet the grounds of Christianity being once received for good and divine and that Religion cannot subsist nor the Church consist without being a Society and no Society without a Right of counsel and consultation and no consultation without a Right to assemble together the Right of assembling must needs be in trinsique to the Church it self Now if no man that is a Christian can take away the essential ingredient to the Church how can any deny this of Assembling For the practise of it constantly and confidently by the Apostles and brethren contrary to the express will of the Lawful Powers of the Jews and Romans and the reason given in the Acts of the Apostles of obeying God rather then man do imply certainly a Law and Charter from God so to do and if this be granted as it must who can deny by the same Rule necessity of Cause and constant Prescription that they may as well provide for the safety of the Faith by securing the state of the Church as for the truth and stability of the Church by securing the true Faith by doctrine and determination The Great question hath ever been Whether the Church should suffer loss of power and priviledges upon the Supream Powers becomming Christian Or the Supream power it self loose that dominion which it had before it became of the Church For if Christianity subjected Kings necessarily to the Laws of others not deriving from them then were not Kings in so good a Condition after they were Christians as before when they had no such pretences or restraints upon them and so should Christs Law destroy or maim at least the Law of God by which Kings reign But there may be somewhatsaid weakning this absurdity For Granting this That there is a God and that he is to be worshipped and that as he appointeth all which we must by nature believe it seems no less natural to have these observed than the Laws of natural Dominion Now granting that at present which if we be true to our Religion we must not deny viz. That Christian Religion is the true Religion and that God will be worshipped in such sort as is therein contained For any Prince absolute to submit to the essentials of that Religion is not to loose any thing of his Pristine Rights which he had before being an Heathen for he never had any Right to go against the Law of God more then to go against the Law of Nature but it doth restrain his Acts and the exercise of his Power And if the Supream after he hath embraced Christianity shall proceed to exert the same Authority over the Church as before yet the Church hath no power to resist or restrain him Civilly any more than when he was an Alien to it Now it being apparent that Christian Faith and Churches had their Forms of believing and Communion before Soveraign powers were converted and that he who is truly converted to a Religion doth embrace it upon the terms which he there finds not such as he brings with him or devises therefore there lies an Obligation upon such powers to preserve the same as they found it inviolate And truly for any secular Power to become Christian with a condition of inverting the orders of the Church and deluting the Faith is to take away much more than ordinary accrues unto it by such a change It is true the distinction is considerable between the Power of a Christian and unchristian King exerted in this manner because taking the Church in the Largest sense in which all Christians in Communion are of it what Christian Kings act with the Church may in some sense bear the name of the Church as it doth in the State acting according to their secular capacity but much more improperly there than here because there are no inferiour Officers or Magistrates in such a Commonwealth which are not of his founding and institution whatsoever they do referr to him and whatsoever almost he doth is executed by them But Christ as we have shewed having ordained special Officers of his own which derive not their Spiritual Power at all from the Civil and to this end that his Church might be duly taught and governed what is done without the concurrence of these can in no proper sense bear the name of the Church But many say the King is a Mixt person consisting partly of Ecclesiastical and partly Civil Authority but this taken in the ordinary latitude is to begg the Question and more a great deal than at first was demanded For who knows how far this Mixture extends and that it comprehends not the Mystical Power of the Church as well as the Political And how have they proved one more than the other by such a title It were reasonable therefore first to declare his Rights in Ecclesiastical matters as well as Civil and thence conclude he is a Mixt Person and not to affirm barely he is a Mixt Person and from thence inferr they know not what Ecclesiastical power themselves And if he hath such power whether it is immediately of God annexed to his Natural Right or by consent of the Church is attributed unto him For by taking this course we
require as absolute Righteous internal and external as man is able to attain to in this world and as the Law required though nor so as if without it there were no possibility of Salvation though for want of it there be a merit of dammation but the rigour is qualified and remitted to us upon the intuition of Christs merits who interposeth for us with God not to exempt us in any kind from any imaginable part or degree of Holiness competible to us but to mitigate and remove the displeasure of God justly conceived against us for not being perfect For it no wayes follows That because such a small proportion of Holiness shall be accepted and such a vast proportion of wickedness shall be forgiven and passed over through Gods free Grace in Christ therefore by the general tenour of the Gospel God requires no more of the one nor less of the other For if the Gospel be as sure it is a more holy Law than that of Moses Is it not so because it requires of those under it greater Holiness A third difference I find is That the Law promiseth Life upon condition of Works but the Gospel upon condition of our committing our selves to Christ by Faith This is very ambiguously spoken and inclining to a very bad sense For what Life and what works are we here to understand It is shewed above how ill-agreed wise Interpreters are Whether any life besides this present is promised by the Law as Mosaical and not Evangelical and with this imitation I profess the Negative Part. Again What works Are we not to understand Works brought in and appointed by Moses To these works are promised indeed Life answerable to thom i. e. temporal and no more But he that saith we attain Life by committing our selves to Christ by Faith doth certainly mean Life spiritual and eternal which vast diversity in the end and reward quite nulls the comparison And besides how by committing our selves to Christ by Faith So as that works of the Gospel and Faith should be laid aside Yes say they as to our Justification though not to the commendation and approbation of our Faith But the vanity of this we have already discovered where we have proved that there is no promise made to us under the Gospel of being justified by Faith that the works of Faith may not be as instrumental to our Justification and Salvation as the Act of Faith so much presumed upon and that the one is as derogatory to the fulness and freeness of Christs Grace and Gods Mercy as the other and no more A fourth difference is That the Law was written in Tables of Stone but the Gospel in the Tables of the Heart Jerem. 31. 33. 2 Corinth 3. 3. This hath a true sense and therefore may pass though lyable to just exceptions as taking the Scriptures in a sense scarce intended Fifthly They say The Law was instill'd into our Nature at our first Creation But the Gospel was above nature and given after the Fall But we are not to distinguish the part from the whole nor the inchoation of a thing from its perfection The Gospel was in more particulars of agreeing with the Law of Nature then the Law of Moses and given in substance before the Law of Moses and 't is these two whose differences are sought after at present In the sixth place it is rightly said that Moses was the Mediatour of the Old Law and Christ of the New by which they explain themselves That by Law they mean Moses his Law For Moses was not the Mediatour of the Law natural but Adam rather And truly in the seventh place it is said The Law was dedicated by the blood of Beasts but the Gospel by the blood of Christ But the conclusion to these viz. That the two Testaments the Law and the Gospel are two in nature substance and kind is so far only true as the Law is taken precisely for that introduced by Moses and not concretely and conjoyntly with that Covenant made between God and Adam after his Fall CHAP. XXXV Considerations on the Sacraments of the Law of Moses Of Circumcision Of the Reason Nature and Ends of it Of the Passover the Reason why it was Instituted Its Vse VVHAT is now said of the nature and distinction of the Covenants made between God and Man do serve much to the clearing of the Nature and Number of Sacraments here to be explained briefly For all Sacraments properly so called are of a Foederal nature between God and Man And this covenanting made by God and Man is signed sealed and confirmed by these Sacraments And therefore according to the variety of these Covenants is also the variety of the Sacraments unless we except that most ancient Covenant of all between God and Man before his Fall For while man retained those connatural Graces bestowed on him by God he needed no such outward helps as Signs and Sacraments to contain him in due obedience to him nor such signs of Gods promises to him being able to act more spiritually freely and perfectly then now But upon the disabling of his inward man by sin once committed and the hebetation of his mind it was no less than necessary that by his outward senses occasion should be offered to the increase of his knowledge fear love and faith in God which is done by the mediation of Sacraments instituted by God and these diversified according to the variety of the Oeconomie it pleased God to use to the World For under the Law of Nature before Moses or Abraham men stood obliged to serve and worship God And in this condition the Sacrifices given to God and Oblations were of the nature and force of Sacraments For whether by light of nature or by special precept men offered Sacrifice to God it is apparent that was rather a signal to testifie their revering his Majesty and duty to him than any actual absolute worship and to insinuate an absolute Dominion and Right God had to our own lives in that instead of them which were forfeited to God by sin we offered Beasts slain to him and to all things in the World in that was exhibited to him so far as might be and returned that which was received from him But to these before Abraham was added that of Circumcision and afterward that of the Passover But we must note that these two Sacraments as they were not originally or from the beginning instituted of God so neither to all men nor for all times And this will appear from the particular occasions taken and reasons rendered of their Ordination For when God commanded Abraham to circumcise his Son and himself and all the Males of his Family it was no sign at all of any thing of general concernment to mankind or of the Messias simply which was before promised but it was a sign only that the Messias should proceed out of his Loyns and Seed which was an extraordinary honour and singular priviledge conferred
punishment and chastisement upon the breach of it And this is a satisfaction of the Law too but not so perfect a◠the former as being intended no otherwise than to secure the better the satisfying of it in the Observation according to the first sense Neither doth this though fully suffered make any man just or innocent but acquits him from farther punishment The former is wont to be called Active Obedience The latter Passive but very improperly For there is no Obedience truly so called but what is Active For all Obedience is an act of the Will but passiveness is no act at all 'T is true a free and willing submission to the punishment inflicted by the Law hath somewhat of action in is and so of obedience but the suffering it self hath nothing of obedience but is the effect of disobedience And therefore much more reasonable is the distinction of satisfaction active whereby we act according to the revealed will of the Legislator and Passive whereby we sustain the penalty threatned against the disobedient And thus we in some sense satisfie the Law when we have undergone all that was imposed upon us by it This first part and most agreeable to the will of God Christ and no man else absolutely fulfilled that we any where read of Every Article and every Particle of the Law of God was fulfilled by him And this was yet no more than he ought to do as man Now what supererogation can be what redundancie to us is hard to be understood though confidently and zealously affirmed by many This we can understand this the Scriptures certifie us that Christ being not obnoxious to the Law and knowing no sin was made sin for us that we might be made 2 Cor. 5. 21. the righteousness of God in him And from hence are derived all our comforts and other benefits by Christ For whereas they say that Christs passive Obedience as they call it did set us free from punishment but not purchase life and glory to us there seems to be a mis-apprehension of Luke 10. 28. the condition of glory and immortality promised by God Do this saith Christ and ye shall live i. e. keep the Commandements Again in the Book of the Psalms and St. Peter God saith The face of the Lord is against them Psalm 34. 16. 1 Pet. 3. 12. that do evil to root out the remembrance of them from the earth And I know no middle state in the Scripture between life and death or glory and misery For God hath promised everlasting happiness not to them that by their Good works purchase or earn it but to those who live according to his Law and stand innocent before him from the violation both of affirmative and negative precepts therein contained He that hath all these things remitted to him is before God as if he had done all the duties of them exactly He that is made partaker of Christs passive satisfaction doth thus stand acquitted and by consequence hath a title and claim by vertue of the same to everlasting bliss without the consideration of this active satisfaction or obedience Now to entertain such an Opinion of a mans private and personal satisfaction for his sins as thereby to be able to claim any either forgiveness of sins passed or happiness to come were to make the Cross of Christ of none effect Yet because the Grace of God is not so free that we should need do nothing more to be made partakers of the fruits of it than passively to receive it but Christian Religian and Faith whereby we are justified and saved is an active principle in us leading to all Good works Therefore it is required that we should do somewhat to put our selvs into a capacity of the benefits of Christs Passion and Merits whereby we are freely justified and saved For as hath been said we are not so freely justified by Grace as to be absolved from all conditions but so freely as that the conditions of coming to and receiving Christ by whom we are saved have no proportion with the salvation from him in justice or common equity Now I see nothing against such a satisfaction to be required of every true and faithful Christian whereby he satisfies the conditions of the Covenant of free Grace in Christ and yet never satisfies the Law it self or for his sins which is absolutely effected by Christ which agrees very well with what I find thus set down by one of our Church We believe that Whites way to the Church §. 40. nu 28. though Christ hath satisfied for the fault and punishment both eternal and temporal for our sins yet our selves are bound to satisfie the commands of the Gospel tying us to repentance and amendment and patient bearing of the Cross Though we do not think that the doing of it is that answers or expiates the judgment of God due to our sins but only serves as a Condition subordinately required that we may be partakers of Christs satisfaction Thus the Papists themselves sometimes describe satisfaction out of Augustine To be the cutting off the cause of sin and the stopping of the wayes that suggest them and stick not to grant there is but one satisfaction only to God even that of Christ and we do not properly satisfie but only do something in respect whereof Christs satisfaction is applyed to us Satisfaction to God thus described we confess c. And thus far the Fathers went and generally no farther however they are drawn to speak more derogatorily to the absolute satisfaction of Christ For thus †Isidor Hispalens lib. 6. Orig cap. ult Satisfactio est causa peccatorum suggestiones excludere ultra peccatum non iterare Isidore of Sevil following herein St. Austin expresseth the matter Satisfaction is to exclude the causes and occasions of sinning and no more to reiterate our sins So that all Acts tending to repentance and amendment of life being called Satisfactions we hold Satisfactions to be necessary And therefore Fastings constant Prayers Alms-deeds punishing the Body outwardly and denying things to it which may any way foment sin yea as the Ancients well said * Est quippe ordo necessarius ut qui commisit illicitu ab usu licitorum restiingat In qua restrictione duo sunt considaranda Satisfactio necessitas Purgationis Aelred Abbas Compend Speculi Charitatis cap. 40. Seeing we have offended God in unlawful use of things lawful to deny our selves the lawful use of the same Yea any punishment laid upon us by our selves or others in order to the bringing us to repentance and amending our lives are much to be commended the abuse which is easily separable from them being removed viz. That such things are in themselves satisfactory to God But though these and the like be not satisfactions of the justice but rather the mercy of God Yet there is a satisfaction which is proper and in some sense adaequate to the offence committed
doth not distinguish there men ought not to distinguish or limit For if it be alleadged that Instruction and Faith ought to go before this Sacrament according to Christs Intention and institution in St. Matthew It is sufficiently answer'd that seeing the Law General by which baptism is made necessary to Salvation hath no exception or condition annexed to it which may concern Infants Infants are therein contained And this implies an exemption from that naturally impossible preparation of Instruction and Faith properly so called And as Calvin well notes Believing Calvin Institut to infant-Baptism is no more requisite than working to their eating and drinking by vertue of the Apostles precept If any will not work neither 2 Thes 3. 10. should he eat Faith and repentance both are required necessarily of such who are capable of them or able to oppose them but of them who are not capable and have no actual sin to be repented of the Act of them who have the Care of them and Tuition joyned with the passiveness or non-remitency of the Infants found a capacity in them But where a Personal power of Willing is found there is exacted a personal knowledge and consent to that Sacrament This will appear from those several reasons built upon the Scriptures First That the Primest antiquity ever so understood the Scripture and practised accordingly Not that Baptism was presently as now administred to Children at their coming into the world seeing Antiquity gives us many instances of such who were not baptized till they came to years of discretion though they were born of Christian Parents For some continued Catecheumenes together with them who were young and Converted from Heathenism unto Christianity Others of purpose and design protracted the time of their baptism upon an opinion that all their Actual as well as Original sins were washed away in Baptism and concluded they had the less to answer for if they were baptized towards the latter end of their dayes Yet though this abuse of Baptism prevailed not upon that opinion only but upon the occasion which was taken of educating and instructing Infidels in the Faith for some good time before they were baptized which custome divers born of Christian Parents imitated yet we find none that the Church wilfully suffered to die without Baptism who were descended of true believers or had been competently instructed in the Faith of Christ which was alwayes according to Christs words intended towards them who had None to resign them up to God and compromise for their due perseverance in the Faith So that there is not the least evidence of Autority ancient in the Church rejecting the baptism of children or denying them to be subjects capable of it And none opposed the same until the year 1030 when Guimund Bishop of Aversa in Campania accused Berengarius Deacon of Anjou for denying Infant-baptism though that opinion was not found directly to be Berengarius's But about the year 1130 this Heresie began to discover it self in France and Germany and was Headed by Peter Bruis and Henricus his Scholar From whom that Faction was called Petrobrusians and Henricians denying withal a Capacity of Childrens entring into the Kingdom of Heaven affirming That only they who were baptized and believed could enter into Heaven But the Waldenses who succeeded them in many of their opinions rejected this their Dogme and so the controversy ceased until the year 1522. when one Nicolas Stork and Thomas Muncer two desperately Phanatical men stirred Sleiden Comment up this opinion and other wicked fancies concerning Civil Government wherein this Latter perished miserably Yet this error was not so soon or easily suppressed but spread farther and continued by the great industry and zeal of Melchior Rinck and Balthazar Hebmaier until about the year 1532 it received its complement from the tongue and hand of Melchior Hofman a Leather-dresser of Germany and so hath been propagated to other places and to this day But not only did none of the ancients oppose Pedobaptism but have declared and proved the use of it As did Irenaus Tertullian Origen Cyprian Augustine and others downward were this a proper place to shew so much We shall rather proceed to those Scriptural reasons inferring this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. cont Arium pag. 147. Tom. â— Secondly either all Children must be damned dying unbaptized or they must have baptism The consequent is plain from that Principle in Christian Religion which Anabaptists have been constreined to deny to uphold their other That all sin not washed away or expiated exposes to damnation and the Principle in Christian Religion is That Children come into the world infected with Originalâ—sm and therefore if there be no remedy against that provided by God all Children of Christian Parents which St. Paul sayes are Holy are liable to eternal death without remedy Now there is no remedy but Christ and his death and Passion are not communicated unto any but by outward Signs and Sacraments And no other do we read of but this of Water in Baptism And the invitation of Christ of infants in St. Mathew doth imply a capacity in them of Grace For Mat. 19. when Christ saith Suffer little Children to come unto me and forbid them Mar. 13. 14. not for of such is the Kingdome of God he doth not mock meaning literally that Infants who are not able to go or stand should come unto him on their own leggs So neither doth he mean in the spiritual sense that Children who have neither reason nor Faith should come unto him by Faith before they be baptized but be brought to him by the Faith of others which may profit them who resist not though they seek not that Grace Thirdly They that are of the Covenant and of the Body of the Church really ought also to be formal partakers of that Body and this they only can obtain by being admitted solemnly into the congregation of Christs Faithful and Elect Church As the children of the Israelites were of necessity to be admitted into the number of that Church by circumcision Gen. 17. 14. or be cut off in wrath from them For St. Paul telleth us how the children of the Believers are sanctified by their Parents And how are they 1 Cor. â—7 14. holy but by being separated from unbelievers and solemnly dedicated to God by the Laver of Regeneration And as in the same place the Apostle saith to the Romans If the first fruit be holy the Lump is holy and if the root be holy so are the branches drawing this Literal to an Evangelical sense and meaning thereby that the Parent being of the Election the Child is so and being so ought to receive the sign of Evangelical circumcision Fourthly The Analogy and apt correspondence between the Sacrament of the Law called Circumcision and that of the Gospel warranteth this For that is not true which they say against this That the Precepts of the New Testament
we have in good degree answered before and there shewed how that the fore-knowledge in God of mans fixed estate whether by his own will electing as they say freely or Gods will determining which fore-knowledge is yielded to God by these Objectors doth oblige them as well as me to shew what profit it would be to man to move or endeavour towards Grace and Life when he is already determined only this is the difference between them The one seems to hold That God by an antecedent act drives the nail whereby man is immoveably fastned to one thing and the other holds That by a subsequent act of knowledge he clincheth it which man himself drove so that it can never stir St. Augustine Aug. Civ Dei l. 5. c. 5. confuting Tullies opinion of Fate impending over all things doth notwithstanding confess and affirm plainly They are much more to be tolerated who hold a Sydereal Fate than he that takes from God the praescience of things future for says he it is most apparent madness for to grant there is a God and to deny he foresees things future And they that put the cuestion to this issue have mended the matter very little or reliev'd themselves all necessity and certainty being a direct enemy to their design of setting man free to do what he list and change his fortune as we say at his pleasure I find in a very grave and learned Author a distinction which I find no where else designed to ease this doubt between Inevitable and Infallible which in truth are not distinct and therefore he is constrained contrary to the agreed way of speech to make Infallible the same with Necessary whereas the distinction is between Necessity and Infallibility or Inevitability which is the very same For what is infallible but that whose act or object shall have a certain event and this event not to be avoided or declined is called Inevitable But whether the Necessity of Causes be such that this event must in nature succeéd is the question and that notwithstanding the Inevitableness or Infallibility of the event there may not be free motions in the Cause tending to that event So that for instance a man may freely choose and will to do that which he certainly shall choose and consequently be properly and truly said to be author of the same be it his damnation or salvation But you will say If Gods Preterition be such that a man is unable to move himself to saving good without it then must he infallibly fall into sin and necessarily and after this all counsels and commâ—nations and exhortations come to nothing and are in vain Nay unless there be unrighteousness with God man cannot be judged for not doing that which he cannot do is not in his power To this St. Augustines Answer is this Because the whole Mass was Aug. Epist 105 sixte damned deservedly in Adam God repays its deserved reproach and bestows an undeserved honour by Grace not by any prerogative of merit not by necessity of Fate not by the unsteadiness of fortune but by the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God which the Aposile doth not open but admires concealed crying out O the depth of the wisdom c. But if this yet doth not absolutely satisfie as I know it doth not some because say they it is to delude man to offer that and exhort to that which it is impossible to attain to so that though God by his absolute and divine Prerogative might have deserted man yet it stands not with his natural equity or simplicity towards his Creature to exhort and threaten when there is such inevitable necessity upon him and condemn him for not doing that which he knows he cannot do without him refusing effectually to assist him I answer It might very well call in question the fair dealing of God towards his Creature if so be he should make an act for him after he was disabled to observe and perform the same not assisting him to the performance of his will But God doth not so for though the Command stands in force against him yet it was not prepared for him in his destitute condition and no reason that Gods right of ruling should change with the vanity of the Creature It suffices that once it was proportionable to him and that the impotency now pleaded is owing to himself and that Gods Laws now are rather recited and propounded to him than made for him in the condition he is in But secondly Gods Commands indeed though but urged anew should be ludicrous and in vain did they totally miss of their ends in being thus repeated and inculcated if they had no success But so it is not as though the Word of God had taken no effect For they are Rom. 9. 6. not all Israel wh are of Israel as St. Paul hath it that is the case is not the same with all men For as St. Paul afterwards What then Israel Rom. 11. 7. hath not obtained that which he seeketh for but the election hath obtained it and the rest were blinded It sufficiently answers the purpose of God in giving his Law and admonishing and threatning and promising thereupon that it obtaineth its ends upon the election For how many things else might we accuse God and Nature for sending us when they do no good at all that we can perceive but rather mischiefs As deluges of waters in a wet time and in droughts great showers of rain emptying themselves into the Sea or sandy deserts from whence nothing springs answerable to such divine bounty But we are taught that God and Nature made things and ordained them in their kind useful for the Universe and never by a particular purpose that every single act or part should have the same visible and proportionable effect that the whole hath And so in the dispensations of his spiritual Graces it suffices to acquit and justifie divine providence that they have their due ends though not the same that man may expect who certainly would never have it rain might he order matters and choose but at such times and in such places as he thinks fit and then alwayes Again It would go harder against this opinion if so be that the only end why God published his Word and gave his Laws weâ—e to convert men that they might be saved This is indeed a principal but not the only intent God hath but the publication of Gods holiness and justice and righteousness and mercy and the like glorious attributes in which publication God is much more known admired and glorified by wicked men and reprobates than otherwise though they oppose and dislike the same even against their own wills giving such like glory to God on earth as they shall in Hell hereafter And we know that no accession of real good being possible to be made to God the outward manifestation is of principal concernment Last of all Could there be an infallible
made of being raised again and of a Resurrection which as is said must relate to the Body fallen And in the same Book He that offered Chap. 12. 43. for the dead is commended in that he was mindful of the Resurrection But none convince us more of a Catholick opinion amongst the Jews received doubtless as a Tradition from their Fathers and supposed to their more express prescriptions in Gods worship then that of Martha to Christ I know that he shall rise again in the Resurrection at the last day And now-a-dayes John 11. 24. the Jews are so well settled in the Doctrine of the Resurrection that they envie the faith of it to any but themselves saying as Buxtorf hath it Buxt Synag cap. 3. There are four things which the Isralites have from God in especial manner above other Nations The Land of Canaaenan The Law Prophesie and The Resurrection of the Dead But in my judgment St. Paul puts it out of all question that the Jews believed of old a Resurrection and that of the Body of which we now speak For thus in the Acts of the Apostles he Acts 24. 15. speaks And have hope towards God which they themselves also allow that there shall be a Resurrection of the dead both of the just and unjust And this Doctrine seemed so essential to St. Paul that without it all Christian Faith were lost as appears out of that most sublime and eloquent Chapter concerning it to the Corinthians where first he layes down his 1 Cor. 15. ground of Christian Faith Christs Death and Resurrection as that upon which all other Articles are founded and without which all preaching and v. 2. all Faith would be in vain And from hence he infers at least a possibility that our bodies being of flesh and bloud of the same nature shall also rise again And that Christs Resurrection was but as the first fruits to the harvest 20. or vintage which in order must necessarily follow And having asserted and confirmed the truth he answers the objections which may seem to disprove it which method we here choose briefly to imitate and follow 35 c. Tertul. Adver Marc. l. 5. c. 9. And first we argue from the term Resurrection which must needs imply somewhat fallen or dossolved as is said as Tertullian against Marcion doth affirm Secondly From the Example of Christ the exemplary cause of our Resurrection For according to St. Pauls disputation at large there is the v. 12 13. same reason for the Resurrection of us as of Christ But Christs body was raised up in that individual substance that was laid in the Grave and therefore must ours likewise And this is it which is affirmed and promised by the Apostle to the Thessalonians For if we believe that Jesus dyed 1 Thess 4. 14. and rose again even us also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him And no doubt can be made but Christ had flesh and bloud after his Resurrection the signs and marks show'd to that purpose convincing not only incredulous Thomas but all of like difficulty of Faith Luke 24. 19. John 20. 27. Thirdly It appeareth from the comparison made by St. Paul to the Corinthians As in Adam all dye even so in Christ shall all be made alive But 1 Cor. 15. 22 23. every one in his own order c. But in Adam all men died corporally therefore in Christ shall all be raised corporally or in their own bodies as Tertullian Tertull. ubi supra Fourthly If immortality be promised to this body then must this body arise and not another But to this mortal body is promised immortality therefore it must rise because there is no imaginable way to have that verified but by a Resurrection And St. Paul saith This corruptible must put on ib. v. 53. incorruption and this mortal must put on immortality And what can we suppose the Apostle aimed at in those words but his own flesh and others And how shall they that are in the Graves hear Christs voice as he saith in St. John unless they be raised by him John 5. 28. Sixthly An argument may be drawn from the truth and justice of God copiously prosecuted by the ancient Fathers and their Followers grounding themselves upon the word of God which saith We must all appear before the Judgment Seat of Christ that every man may receive the things done in his 2 Cor. 5. 10. body according to that he hath done whether it be good or evil But without Iniquuâ— enim Deus si non per id punitur quis aut juvatur per quod operatus est Id. Tert. cap. 12. the Resurrection of the body this distribution of Justice cannot be made And so what will become of those new and bold Philosophers and their Dogmes unchristian who liberally grant and this is more than we have reason to expect from them that there shall be a special time of Restitution of all things and so the soul shall enter again into a body but not that individual substance which before was united to it but yet one making the same individual Person which was before And how so Why the Form according to Aristotle is all and all as to the constituting the same thing and therefore it alone can denominate a man the same though the matter be various But how then can it be said with any truth that every man shall give an account for what he hath done in such a body when according to this sacrilegious phansie it is not the same but another body Lastly Such as was the Resurrection of men miraculously wrought in the Old and New Testament is to be the Resurrection in substance the last day But the child raised by Elisah and that other by Elisha And the 1 Kings 17. 23 2 Kings 4. 34. cap. 13. 21. Matth. 27. 52. man rising to life who was cast upon the bones of Elisha and all those raised by Christ in his life time and at his death When the dead bodies of the Saints arose out of their graves arose all in their bodies in which they dyed Therefore surely such is our Resurrection to be Now because there remain some sore objections to be cleared before Faith can have its perfect work on Christian minds I shall not expatiate contrary to my general purpose to answer all but only that which is all and that out of St. Chrysostomes words thus rendered But there are some Christ in 1 Thess Sern 7. Eth. saith he that disbelieve this thing because they are ignorant of God For pray tell me which is the easier of the two to bring a thing out of nothing or to restore again things that have been dissolved But what say they They say such a man hath suffered shipwrack and is drown'd and so fallen many fishes have devour'd him and every one hath eat some part of those fishes Afterward of those very
favour deferring the punishment of it who might have inflicted it upon both presently until his own appointed time But it can neither be understood nor believed how that pravity shot or guilt which equally infflicted both parts of man should be removed and cleared upon the suffering of one or applications made to it only Fourthly All satisfactions must be proportionable to the wrong and offence in the subject at least if not manner of them But Offenses are committed in the body as well as soul Therefore must the satisfaction likewise be answerable if at all made and there is no ground to suppose that God should assign any such remedy of personal errour which concern one part of man only Fifthly Either a man dyes in Repentance or Impenitencie If in Impenitencie then he hath no benefit of Purgatory according to Romanists If in true Repentance then are all his sins so far cleansed and remitted that there is no need at all of Purgatory which is apparent from the very nature of Repentance which is generally agreed to be a Second Baptism Now as Baptism washeth away all sin originally so that the person dying instantly upon it directly passes to Heaven in like manner must it be in the Baptism of Repentance all actual sins must be forgiven and none remain to be punished or purged This is granted with this exception provided we take Repentance entirely in all its parts whereof satisfaction they say is one which being not thoroughly made on earth must be compleated in Purgatory But to this passing by the dispute of satisfaction which is corrupted notoriously by the same persons we answer as before that all satisfaction In Purgaterio non posse animas mereri aut peccare Bellarm de Purgat lib. 2. c. 2. which can be accepted must be attended with the change of the Will of the person and be an act of the person and therefore this called Satisfaction in Purgatory being no act and having no concurrence of the Will of the Person the body being separate from the soul can no wayes supply the defects of satisfaction in this world and therefore if there be any it must be before the divorce of body and soul Whereupon St. Augustine Aug. Epist 54. who is confidently but vainly alledged as a Patron of this Purgatory fire saith thus Furthermore there is no place of amending manners but in this life for hereafter every man shall have what he in this life procured to himself And now in brief to take notice of the grounds maintaining the Affirmative we answer first to the Scriptures which Valentia makes but four of any cousiderableness though others by Metaphors and Allegories multiply them to no purpose First we must note that however the Old Testament is made use of to confirm this yet the more sincere and sober wholly wave all autorities and examples from thence and so shall we Nay there are some who altogether decline as well the New as Old Testament as doth Petrus Soto not finding any thing to the purpose but would not have us much wonder that nothing appears solid for it there seeing many things are of Tradition without Scripture Yet the most principal and colourable we shall try which are these First Matthew the Twelfth v. 32. Whosoever speaketh against Matth. 12. 32. the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world nor in the world to come Some sins are not forgiven in the world to come therefore some are And that must be in Purgatory This is the sum of the Argument But the consequence is not so good as it is taken to be For it is frequent by way of emphatical speech and aggravation to put more into an argument than is really and strictly intended for true as may by and by appear from such another Instance But not to deny the validity of diverse answers given to it I hold it best to make short work with it and taking the word World as meaning no more than to insinuate unto us what in many other places the New Testament doth a twofold Age of the Church of God one under the Law of Moses and the other under the Law of Christ And plainly tells the spiteful and malicious Jews that they whoso reproachfully and incredulously spake of the Spirit of Grace manifesting it self to the world in miracles could not expect to be forgiven such a notorious sin either by vertue of the Law or Gospel which then began to be published And this state of the Gospel the Apostle calls the Ages to come in his Epistle to the Ephesians And the like discrimination Ephes 2. 7. doth he make in that place to the Hebrews if we compare his words in the sixth Chapter with them in the tenth where he declareth against a Heb. 6. 4 5 6. 10. 26. possibility of salvation to such who when they have once been illuminated and tasted the good things of heaven if they shall fall away from their Baptism and profession of the Faith in which they were once initiated and baptised to restore them again by repentance For to them remains no more Sacrifice for sins By which he means not as some have thought that one hath apostatised from the Christian Faith could never be restored again to Repentance and become a good Christian and in a possibility of salvation but as Eulogius Alexandrinus in Photius hath it very literally Phot. Bibl. and well Such an one returning unto the Law of Moses after he was enlightened or baptised could not possibly hope for any Sacrifice there which should cleanse him from his sins For though there was a possibility of salvation in the Law before Christ to such as never were enlightened to the embracing of the Gospel yet after Christ such as became Christians and relapsed into Judaism could not have any benefit from it because they do in effect deny Christ by whom they should be saved only A second Text from whence Valentia would fetch Purgatory and Bellarmine too whom we here principally examine is that of St. Paul to the Corinthians Every mans work shall be made manifest For the day shall 1 Cor. 3. 13. declare it because it shall be revealed by fire and the fire shall try every mans work of what sort it is c. Which words being to Bellarmin's confession of the hardest of all the Scripture what great confidence can he or his fellows have in them And why doth he call Erasmus Heretick because he gives such an exposition of them as do make void the presumptions supposed to be very strong for Purgatory and Venial sins when he acknowledges such obscurity in them Indeed Erasmus his Notes do plainly overthrow both those imaginary Doctrines supposed to be founded hereon and I might spare any farther trouble but yet shall put in my opinion of them which I take to be grounded upon these two things first the most apt connexion between it and the context before and
entertain with assent and consent morose thoughts as they call lasting and delighting cogitations of sin he may not be said to break the form of his Vow though he in some measure violates the end of his Vow And as to sin which is contained in the Vow of Virginity mens hands and minds were tyed from that before they vowed as really though not so strongly as afterward The precise object therefore of such Vows is properly an unwedded life together with Chastity Which that it is not so unsuperable a difficulty as to exceed the ordinary power of man by the Grace of God enabling him appears from the ordinary course of life of the opposers of that state For do not they themselves pass through the difficult and fiery tryals of such temptations frequently in the prime of their dayes the strength of corrupt nature and weakness of reason faith and prudence to bridle irregular inclinations and yet would take it very ill men should condemn them for violaters of Gods Laws and impure offenders in that kind Can civil prudence or policie secure them in the most dangerous time of all till they are freed from that place which makes them uncapable of being married or they are put into a fair and hopeful condition to live handsomly in the world according to their judgment and design and may not the higher and nobler ends of Religion propounded to a mans self and studiously improved have the same effect and give them the same or greater safety Do they many of them live chastly for thirty years it may be more or less unmarried and yet would be loath to be censured for unchast persons and that upon the grounds of humane and carnal prudence and dare they to decree them to naughtiness out of necessity who shall choose that life perpetually out of the grounds of Religion This hangs very ill together They will say out of St. Paul It is better to marry than to burn Very good But when and how and on whom doth this Rule take place so soon as he begins to burn Or though he burns not till he be rich enough and is outwardly accommodated to his likeing Can a man preserve himself for the worlds sake when he may less expect the assistance of Gods Grace and can he not for Gods sake when he may more hope for it But Theodoret doth in great part relieve 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. Haeretic Fabularum l. 5. c. 26. both one and other where he interprets St. Paul not so rigorously that all infestation of lustful motions should oblige any person to marriage but only such an evil which should wholly master a man Yet is not any person from the remission of the severest Law of Chastity by the favour of God to indulge to himself a latitude in the custody he ought to have over his person for then it becomes not a venial or light Infirmity but a presumptuous breach of his Vow and Gods Law But yet there remains the old known exception against what issaid which not absolutely denying the possibility of such a life denys that any such state of life is to be chosen under the bonds of a Vow To which we may yield Vide eriam Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To. 6. pag. 251. Bellarm. de Monachis l. 2. c. 22. thus much that at the first publishing of the Gospel and practise of single life such Vows of Virginity or chast Widowhood were in less use than afterward That there was not any such life in ordinary use nay so much as mentioned in the Church of the Jews we have heard Chrysostome positively oppose and thereby refel the bold argument of Bellarmine proving the Virgin Mary had made a vow of perpetual Virginity before the Salutation of the Angel towards her which as he and Baronius with many of the same mettal was the cause she wondered so at the manner of speech to her But there were other causes sufficient to cause wonder in the Blessed Virgin besides a Vow of Virginity though some Fathers prone to imagine the highest it may be of the Holy Virgin have in the height of their Rhetorick let fall somewhat to that purpose Yet it is manifest from the See Selden de Jure Gen ium apud Heâ—raeâ—â— lib. 5. cap. 3. Records of the Jewish Church there was nothing of that nature in use amongst them and if not It is not to be believed that the Virgin Mary took up such a strange and illaudable resolution as that was amongst them who esteemed want of off-spring no small disparagement to them I wonder here most at Perkins how his fervour and judgment should so far fail him herein as to give such an unnecessary advantage to his Enemies to affirm that Jeptha's daughter was the first that vowed Virginity When it is most certain that if that sense be granted that she was not sacrificed properly but only devoted to God this was no free act chosen by her self but a sad sentence of her Father condemning her to that unhappy state of life But that it is lawful not only to do this but also Vow the performance thereof needs no other arguments than may be easily drawn from the general grounds of the lawfulness and usefulness of Vows in the former Chapter And the constant practise of the most Saints of God in the Church of God whom upon such account as this for men to pelt with vain censures is the very next way to ruin their own esteem and reputation which they may aim to raise by such unfortunate attempts unless perhaps with such who can judge of nothing but from their mouths For what a man may do lawfully without a Vow he may do much more with a Vow but such things as these may be done without a Vow therefore also with one CHAP. V. Of the second state of special serving God the Clerical state or Ministerial Of the necessity and liberty of singleness of life in a Clergy-man The Opinion and custom of Antiquity concerning it That it is in the power of the Church at this day to restrain or permit the marriage of Priests The Conveniencies and Inconveniencies of wedded life in Priests Chrysostom's Judgment of Marriage and Virginity recited IN the next place we are to look into the state of serving God in Ecclesiastical Ministration and here first apply what is above spoken concerning Celebacie to the Clergy There are not wanting amongst the Romanists who annex Celebacie to a Clerical Life by a Divine Precept but with so little probability of truth and modesty of writing that the learnedest of their own Party are ashamed of them and confute them and so we leave them The most current opinion is That by perpetual Tradition and Precept of the Church marriage of the Clergy hath been restrained But this will by no means hold First against the very first institution of Ecclesiastical Persons by Christ himself who as it were to sanctifie marriage
mend their hearts and bring them to conform to sound forms of words than to please them in their carnal appetites after novelties no new occasions requiring But this is not all We except much more against the matter and manner of their prayers in that they have quite lost and depraved the nature of prayer For that they give such loose rains unto their tongues generally that instead of Confession Petition and Thanksgiving of which prayer ought principally to consist they fly out into preaching and jumble and confound those duties so together that many times in preaching they mourn and pray and this is with the wondering multitude accounted the best Sermon They likewise in their prayers fall on preaching and this is the powerful praying But they are to consider that to convert men is not the office of prayer but of preaching I shall add but one of their Objections more the rest being easily solved out of the premises They say If a prescribed Form or Liturgy had been good or profitable for the Church Christ without question would have delivered one for his Church To which on the contrary I return If extemporary conceived prayer had been so necessary as is pretended surely Christ would some where or other have ordained that we should use extemporary prayers and conceive that Sacrifice just as we offer it But the misery of these Arguers is that whereas the Scripture commends and commands nothing so much as prayer not one the least precept have they been able to find through the whole Scripture requiring prayer extemporary And then is not this an humane invention Is it not Will-worship But that Christ hath prescribed a form and matter of prayer too we hold it proved out of the two Evangelists I know well they hold the contrary What more equal and just way to find out the truth than to hear both ancient and modern Interpreters upon that doubt to their dayes Do they find any that say the Lords Prayer is so a Rule or Form that it is not to be the very matter of our prayer too in terms If not Is not this another humane invention hammer'd out of the Crowns of perverse and unskilful men What would they say if this very Lords Prayer as we call it was by Christ himself drawn from some received forms amongst the Jews before Christs time This is affirmed by divers very learned men in Judaical Antiquities They were set against it enough and more than enough before this surely would turn their stomachs worse Yet shall we take leave here to recite that sober and most probable Judgment of the Magdeburgenses concerning the use of the Lords Prayer Without Magdeburgens Centur. 1. lib. 2. cap. 4. doubt the Apostles propounded the form of prayer delivered by Christ to the Churches and required all to pray after that manner although they themselves used other forms of prayers Much may be said in the defense and confirmation of the received forms of communicating in publick But what more than what answers the vain cavils against it which is done Or the general concurrence of Heathen Jewish and Christian practise all which where it can be shewed they had any common service show that it was constantly determined and of one form and never changed but by advice of Authority Which to prove because the Affirmative is insinite we here put in a challenge to give any one instance to the contrary viz. of any one Church Jewish or Christian where the publick Service was arbitrary and left to the private Priest or Minister to form or model as he pleased He that shall advise with Gennadius Massiliensis shall find that one solemn point in his Gennad Massil Eccles Dog cap. 30. dayes for the administration of the publick Worship was this to keep to the solemnities of Sacerdotal Prayers which from the Apostles were deliver'd to the whole world and were celebrated in all the Catholick Church uniformly that there might be an agreement between the Law or Rule of believing and praying And where there is a liberty to pray what men list in publick manner there will soon spring up a liberty to preach what men list and upon that for the common sort to believe what they list unless that Law of Arms which themselves have exclaimed against in Religion keep them in awe For if we should speak truly and properly they who have no publick known received form of Worship amongst them can have no Christian Communion one with another and therefore they desire they know not what and we should do we know not what if we should joyn with them I prove it thus All Communion properly so called is in prayer and administration of Sacraments therefore signally called the Communion and not at all or least of all in Faith or Sermons because a man may believe as much as any Church or Preacher requires of him and yet be a cursed Schismatick and Alien from the Church But he that communicates in Prayers and the Sacraments hath full conjunction with that Body with which he so communicates Now farther to the intent that men may agree in one they certainly must first know that one thing For what is Communion but a common union in One thing which is a bond so to unite them But where this is uncertain moveable and new as the day and hour in which it is produced how is it possible men should know it or agree to it And if not How can they be said to enjoy communion in it Communion is much mistaken if it be look't on as a thing transient or consisting only in the act and passing away with it and ending and coming again at the returning of the like act but it is a thing habitual and permanent So that if we should suppose a man hath heard and approved for no man but he that means to be guilty of worse than Popish implicit Faith can approve a thing meerly future as extemporary prayers are such prayers and thereupon freely assented to them How can this last longer than the very instant of having passed such a sentence for before he heard them he could by no means yield rational assent and after he hath heard them it can last little longer than the sound doth in his head for at the next meeting he is as far behind and to seek as before and suspends communion But in forms once heard judged and compared with the Rule of Faith and Worship a man holds constant real though not actual Communion exercised with that Body of which he is a member And upon common humane probability may with general devotion joyn with and in such service of God though he be out of hearing especially which is most easie being acquainted with the method of the Liturgy and the purport of the several Actions Postures and Gestures relating to the several parts thereof And can these men in consciscience require that we should joyn with them who are so ill set together
affirmeth that it is Desecrated by the interrment of Hereticks there But certainly the words in the Revelation expressing a Vision meant no such thing as they are alledged for but only that in that Vision the holy Apostle beheld the souls of Saints and Martyrs departed humbled before or at the foot of the Altar as the manner was anciently to pray especially at the time v. 10. of offering crying aloud and with great importunity for justice and revenge upon the Persecutors of the Church and Murderers of them for the Testimony of Christ Jesus But because such hath been and I fear ever will be the corruption of Christian Religion that he that hath power in his hands and money good store in his purse shall be Sainted so far as outward ceremonies and priviledges can advance him he that would be at the charge of breaking up of the ground hath not been denyed nor dare any that I know whatever they ought to do deny him the liberty of being buried in the Church This may be and must be passed over but the affectation or irreligious ambition of building stately Seats and making that which is common to all Christians peculiar to some house so as upon no occasion it must be used by others is wicked and sacrilegious and much more the taking in of any the least part of Gods ground as the Church is to the prophane uses of making Tombs and Sepulchres and no other They are wont to say There is room enough besides It may be so for they commonly who thus enclose or usurp Gods Land have thin'd the inhabitants of the place where they live by illegal enclosures of the Common belonging to the Parish and so almost dispeopled the place But what is that to them more than any body else And why may not any man upon the same reason violently or fraudulently take away certain Acres of Land from him and say in his defense He hath left him enough still And least such as are Patrons of Churches and have certain supposed Prerogatives over the Chancels above what can be pretended to by the common sort of people should conceive they may there do as they please they are to know That in right and conscience such fore-mention'd practises can least of all be done For as the Founder of the Church so likewise the Builders of Chancels from whence only they can pretend such priviledge and as the maintainers of it in repair do at the time of the consecration consent to a total alienation of all civil propriety from themselves they can neither build nor bury there nor incommodate the place more than any other man for they are only Guardians and not Owners of that place upon which they may and ought to exclude and refuse all such incommodations of others as may any way deface or straiten or empair the same but they have no more right to do any such things there themselves then he that is Trustee or Guardian to an Orphan to seize upon his estate or any part thereof to his own use And it is only civil custom which hath given him a peculiar right of burial there rather then any body else And this may seem sufficient if not too much to have said of the Negative force of Dedication of Churches against Usurpers of Gods and Christians Rights The positive effect which is a veneration and worship therein of God Almighty doth farther confirm this and is contained in the end expressed as well as in the form of Dedication used by Solomon as the constant practise of the Jews whose Tabernacle or Temple had nothing of constant preaching or instruction of the people but only Prayers and Sacrifices Afterward their Synagogues called also Proseuchae for convenience because Acts 13. 27. all people could not meet at the Temple were erected where as the Scripture tells us the Law was read and Moses preached every Sabbath day but they had their special denomination fâ—ouâ— the Office and Acts of Prayer Synagogue signifying no more than an Assembly in general From whence if not also from the consent of all Nations besides who had Temples to their Gods it may appear that the most principal end of Gods House was alwayes till an ignorant irregular Generation sprang up esteemed the House of Prayer and Worship and teaching and instruction of people very necessary indeed as the foundation upon which all worship must be built was not that main end as is pretended And this worship being in its proper place in the Church was always and ought to be performed in most publique manner and most solemn as to outward appearance as well as inward affection to which too many deluded by a gross and cheap piece of Sophistry would confine Gods worship It is time we have no direct precept in the New Testament that I can call to mind enjoyning any particular behaviour at the time of Gods service nor yet in the Law And why so were not that very necessary in case any outward carriage were necessary Yes truly if so be such a Religious manner of worship could be known to us no other way than by Revelation extraordinary For Gods word is very sparing in those things of which we may by the common light of Nature attain to the knowledge For who is there that knows there is a God that knoweth not also that he is to be worshipped Who is there that knoweth that God is to be worshipped thar knoweth not also that he is to worshipped in the most lowly and reverent manner And that reverence outward is mutable and various according to the opinion of several Countries and therefore no one general Rule could be made comprehending and obliging all people but this is laid down to us that what is accounted in any Nation most solemn humble and reverent is that which is required of us in the worship of God But surely kneeling bowing the body uncovering the head yea and prostration of the body in convenient time and place are acts of worship such as were in use among the Jews of old continued by the Apostles and successors in Faith and Devotion as innumerable places of Holy Writ in the Old and New Testament intimate unto us where falling low at Gods footstool bowing the knee and such like outward acts of reverence are put for prayer it self which they never would have been had not they been the known manner of worship And Salvian describes Salvian de Provid lib. 7. Ad domos statim dominicas 〈◊〉 c. to us the custom of Christians in his early days thus We presently haste to the Lords house we cast our bodies on the floor and pray with weeping and joy mixt together And I am not advis'd of more then one place which interdicts any one piece of irreverence as unnatural and that the superstition of Puritans hath cast them into and that is covering of mens faces in the time of publique prayer when the hat as an instance
a good while after So that the same difficulty is in reference to the Sabbath and it and is thus solved by Calvin himself That there were certain previous injunctions given Calvin Harmon in Pent. particularly and more rudely by God concerning the observation of certain Rites before that more exact delivery of them by God to Moses on Mount Sinai And as alwayes a day or time was allotted so likewise some special place separated from common uses as that called here the Tabernacle to the service of God For had there been any proper weakly day appointed by God before Moses surely we should have found some little mention thereof in the History of Moses from the Creation to his days but not a word of any such thing do we find to that purpose CHAP. XIII Of the Institution of the Lords Day That it was in part of Apostolical and partly Ecclesiastical Tradition Festival Days and Fasting derived unto us from the same Fountain and accordingly to be observed upon the like grounds Private Prayers in Families to the neglect of the Publique Worship unacceptable to God Of the Obligation all Priests have to pray daily according to their Office Of the Abuse of Holy days in the Number and unjustifiable occasions of them Of the Seven Hours of Prayer approved by the Ancient Church and our First Reformers Mr. Prinne's Cavils against Canonical Hours refuted THAT the Institution of the Lords day hath no known foundation from the Command of God or Christ may be collected from what is said But that the Apostles and Church Apostolical did by their example and practice commend it to following generations of Christians I acknowledge most true But still there remains a knot to be untied about the force of that Constitution whether it was only of Custom or Precept or all the Obligation proceeded from the decrees of the Church after the Apostles For direct Precept we find little or no Grounds in Scripture For Practice Apostolical and Custom upon that descending to posterity also the accession of the Laws Ecclesiastical and Imperial we make no scruple to acknowledge them to be very solemn and obligatory upon all good Christians But seeing all things practis'd by the Apostles are not Obligatory it will be worth the enquiry under what Capacity they so acted whether as Apostles or as Governors of the Church in such a large sense as might be communicable to their successours That it was not meerly and precisely an Apostolical Act to establish such a Festival seems to appear from the grounds found in the Law of Nature moving men to celebrate a day to God again that the first day of the week being the day of our Lord and Saviours Resurrection seems to be no other than Common Ecclesiastical Prudence as that which agreeth most with the End it self viz. The due commemoration of Christs resurrection on that day but that Christ should be so Commemorated and God so glorified seems to me to be specially Apostolical and so Divine that it is not alterable by the Counsel or Decrees of the Church any time after from whence may conveniently be reconciled the opposite opinions of both School-men and Canonists some of whom have asserted the divine Right of the Lords day and others the Ecclesiastical or Canonical only For that a day be Festivally observed to God is Natural that on such a Festival or Thanksgiving day Christ should be magnified and God praised is Apostolical but that on the First day of the week Christian Prudence and the necessary power of the Church may seem to suffice Which appeareth from the manner of celebrating the Christian Sabbath which hath been always left to the Authority and wisdom of the Church varying according to occasions given For that Christians very anciently met to treat of divine matters to communicate to celebrate the Eucharist and to sing Psalms Hymns and Spiritual Songs Justine Justin Apol. 2. Tertul. Apologer Martyr and Tertullian and the famous Epistle of Pliny witness And to this end they had a vacation from all worldly servile matters as many proofs of Antiquity demonstrate And for the dignity of this day it was that on it and none other Bishops were to be consecrated by the constitution of Leo 1. And what are the Prerogatives of this First Leo 1. Distinct 75. c. 1. Quod die c. day of the week are explained at large by the Ancient Fathers and Councils here not to be rehearsed From this Fountain of Ecclesiastical power resident in the Church springeth the Act of instituting other days to the Glory and Praise of God of two sorts viz. days of Humiliation and Exultation or joy For it is certain that after it was agreed upon that Christs Resurrection should be weekly celebrated it was consented to also that a Yearly Thanksgiving should be kept for the same which was the Christians Passover and our Easter day is immemorially practised and without interruption derived to this present age And therefore as well because it is the greatest matter of joy that at any time befell the Church of Christ as because it regulateth other principal Feasts and Fasts of the Church as lastly because thence is plainly inferred a power in the Church of ordaining Feasts and Fasts to the worship of God it is called by the Ancient The Mother of Feasts And surely upon this the Fathers of the Church produced many other Daughter-Feasts not all in a year nor an age but according to their power to maintain and defend them which was very difficult for them to do as becomed under Gentile persecution who were most severe against such Celebrities instituted by Christians to the overthrow and contempt of Gentile worship which according to the Light of nature consisted much in this as Seneca Legum Conditores Festùm instruerunt dies ut ad hilaritatem homines cogerent c. Seneca de Tranquil Aninai c. 15. hath said in these words The Founders of Laws ordained Festival days to the end that men might meet publiquely in Jollity puting some moderation to Labours as necessary for them These Gentile Institutions prevailing not only to Idololatrical service but corruption of manners contrary to nature it self The Ancient Fathers of the Church knew no better Antidote against such poison than to introduce Christian Festivals whereby all the natural and Civil benefit of Vacation from Labours friendly conversation and such like might be enjoyed and due worship and praise be given unto God in Christ Jesus And therefore Theodoret. Serm. 7. de Sacrificiis Theodoret with other Fathers is not ashamed to profess as a very laudable and religious occasion of Christian Feasts That they succeeded the Idolatrous and lewd Feasts of the Gentiles which some but in vain would turn against the use of them But they stand upon surer foundations than to be blown down with the wind of vain doctrines blustering against them For First as is said Nature it self directs to them
the opinion of Tertullian They who tranâ—gress the Rule of Discipline cease to be reckoned among Christians And as Clemens Alexandrinus saith As it behoveth a person of Equity to falsifie in nothing and to go back from Qui excedunt dâ— Reculâ— disciplinâ— dâ—sinunt hâ—berâ— Christiani Tertul. Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. p. 753 764. nothing that he hath promised although others should break Covenants so it becometh us to transgress the Ecclesiastical Canon in no manner And to convince any man of conscience or fear of God of this Balsamon's reasons may suffice demonstrating a greater reverence and respect to be due to the Constitutions of the Church than to the Laws of the State For saith he the Canons being explained and confirmed by Kings and Holy Fathers are received as the Scriptures But the Laws of the State were received and established by Kings alone and therefore do not prevail against See Photius's Nomocanon Tit. 1. c. 2. cum Palsamone p. 817 818. the Scriptures nor the Canons And this I rather instance in from the Greek than Latin Church because the ignorant and loud clamors of Sectaries have had nothing more to alledg against the Sacredness of Ecclesiastical Constitutions than that which serves their turns in all things Popishness of Canonical Obedience But may they judg what they please according as design and interest sway them this we constantly and confidently affirm that whoever despises the Rules of of Obedience and Laws of the Church cannot rise higher in that Part of Christian Religion which we call Worship of God than may meer Moral men Because that which chiefly distinguishes good Christians from good honest Heathens next to the doctrine of Faith is proportionable Obedience as well to those God hath substituted under him to ordain things omitted in the Scriptures for the security of the Faith regulating devotion and worship and peace of the Church none of which can long subsist without such a Power acknowledged and obeyed in the Governors of the Church And this â—pparently is at the bottom of the deceitful pretences of Christian Liberty and Conscience for disobedience of them who are designed thereby to ruine and overthrow as matter of fact hath demonstrated But it is not only the Puritans intollerable dogms against obedience but the contrary practise of no small persons of place and esteem in the Church who can heartily and with zeal even to indignation prosecute Sectaries inconformity to the Discipline and Rites of the Church glorying and boasting that they are Sons of the Church and yet do more mischief to the Church by their ill govern'd persons as to common honesty sobriety and gravity and more advance and bring into credit and reputation the enemies of the Church than all their fair and fallacious pretences could otherwise possibly do If such persons who have not attained to common Moral prudence or Philosophy bear such kindness as they flourish with to the Church let them shew it as that lewd Fellow in the Athenian Senate was advised who notwithstanding his vitious life had somewhat very beneficial to the Common-wealth to propound in the Senate and commend it by the mouth of another For what can be more absurd and ridiculous than for any such person to profess esteem to that Church which condemns him more than any other Society And whereas it supposes as a foundation natural justice continence and temperance and the like moral vertues to the divine Precepts and Institutions of Perfection what may turn the stomach and raise laughter more at a man then for such an one to discover his offense at an unceremonious Puritane the matter of whose Crime is nothing comparable to his If thou beest a Christian saith a holy Father either speak as thou livest or live as thou speakest What evil spirit hath set thee on first to abuse thy self with scandalous practises and then the Church by taking Sanctuary in it Can stupidity so far accompany vice as first to break the known and common Laws and Rules of good conversation which is affront enough to the Church and then to add to that affront by professing a special duty to that which thereby is destroyed There is no Sect or Schism whose Orders and Laws of Christian walking with God can be compared with those of the Church of England there being nothing amongst them besides Faith which an Heathen may not do that never heard of Christian Perfection accounting nothing needful to be done nothing unlawful to them which is not punishable by the Law of man or against the light of nature Christ they say hath purchased for them a liberty to do what they please in eating drinking sleepping and other matters so that they wrong not their own bodies nor injure their Neighbors And shall there be that protect themselves under this Churches shelter in such light loose foolish and vitious courses to the degrading of it beneath her inferiors Is this to be sons of the Church and not only so but to brag that such they are in open hostility to it I confess notwithstanding all this in comparing the enemies to the true Faith together we are to distinguish between the doers of evil simply and the teachers of men so to do And that though drunkenness and uncleaness be greater sins by far in their nature than is dissent from a ceremony or Rite not necessary in its nature Yet for any man with a spirit of opposition and contention to take upon him to declare against such an unnecessary order and teach men against the unity and peace of the Church otherwise than becomes him is no less criminal in the consequence before God yea probably much more than those other more scandalous before men and will more endanger his Soul But concerning such persons as are in profession really Sons and perhaps Fathers of the Church and yet wilfully and studiously violate the Laws Constitutions Rubricks or Canons of it no necessity compelling them no reason being to be alledged defending them but what is taken from their ease which otherwise would be much interrupted or their benefit and profit which would be much hindred I leave their own hearts and Consciences to condemn them until God himself doth which certainly without repentance he will and that out of their own consciences and mouths their consciences which witness that these are the true causes of their negligence and contempt of their Duty in their proper stations and their mouths and professions in that they pretend obedience and are much offended at the disobedience of Puritans as if God and the Church would be sufficiently satisfied with their Anger against them while they themselves regard it no farther than is for their turn Two vulgar apologies I shall here take notice of only For as for that which is also commonly said that evil times hinder them from their duty I shall say no more but humbly advise them to deal sincerely with God and their own consciences in such cases
say out of the Decalogue Six days shalt thou labour and do all that thou hast to do Therefore 1 Tim. 4. 3. must thou not keep any Holy-day to Gods Service but Sunday So say they God hath created all Meats to be received with Thanksgiving Therefore you must not abstain from them Indeed one place excellently well interprets the other For just as God hath said Six days shalt thou work so hath he said All Meats shall be eaten under the Gospel And as it would be unlawful under that supposed command to rest on any of the Six days from labour so is it unlawful under the Gospel to fast or abstain from meat any one day How can or dare any man if such arguing as this will hold good cease any one day from eating and drinking if it be a command that we must eat and drink all meats now not hurtful to our bodies and that without any exception or limitation of time Do not they much more offend against Christian liberty and Gods command who will not eat at all those creatures that God hath commanded or sanctified to our use by his Word than they who eat some sort of Gods good creatures but omit others But undoubtedly God never intended to enact a formal Law or give a Precept that the one or other should be done but to grant a liberty and indulgence so to do Now no Indulgences are Commands nor being not accepted generally offend the Donor God in the Decalogue had chosen one day to himself and for the six remaining left them free to do that which he forbad to do on the Seventh And this is all that is meant by Thou shalt labor six days God under the Gospel hath taken of the distinction of meats clean and unclean legally and freely pronounces us at liberty to eat what of them we please for none of them can hurt or defile us naturally as the Manichaeans held nor any Legally as the Jews held But they may Evangelically and Morally I hope when we commit gluttony with them may they not Yes excess they except but their Argument excepts not excess taken from the natures of things For ten pounds of meat and many quarts of wine are as clean as an ounce or a pint and God hath made all alike And so fish is as clean and as much Gods creature as flesh and flesh as fish Have they heard of any so blockish as to deny it of late dayes But what saith St. Paul They are evil to that man who eateth with offence Offence of whom Rom. 14. 2â— Of a mans own self no surely but offence of others And to eat against lawful commands fish or flesh is an offence to Superiours and that is much more an offence than to offend ones equal ones brother or inferiour as it would be for a man to strike his Master or Father than his Brother or Fellow servants Whence then I wonder to astonishment should it proceed to credibility that the Conscience of an obscure and inferiour Christian no doubt but an extraordinary person in his own eyes and opinion should preponderate the outward Laws and inward Consciences of his Governours according to which restrictions were devised and concluded Against such Aegyptian Pursuers of the Israel of God the Church a cloud of Witnesses may be opposed but they who dare consult ancient Presidents know it too well to put it to that issue That of the resolute and conceited man in the Commedian sitting their purpose much better Ego mihi video Ego mihi sapio Ego mihi credo plurimum Plautus I see for my self I am wise for my self I believe my self exceedingly And therefore to finall purpose is it to use allegations here which for the Observation of the Lenton Fast hath been so amply and exactly handled by a late Right Reverend and Learned Hand And for the Vigils Septuagesima Sexagesima Ember and Rogation weeks sufficient Authority and Reason are produced before their distinct Offices in the above-mentioned Collection of Private Devotions of old composed and by Authority instituted to the benefit of such as pretend to be of the Reformation established But those that are taught solemnly to quarrel at the whole no wonder they oppose it in such parts of it But yet something to their fears of superstition in distinction of Meats besides what is already said What if they be mistaken and the Church distinguishes not fish from flesh Undoubtedly at the first Institution of Fasts Christians were equally interdicted both and this custom is to this day retained in the Greek Church Our Christian Ancients not distinguishing between the flesh of fishes and the flesh of beasts properly so called living on the earth Imitating in their Fasts the perpetual Abstinence of the Fathers before the Floud eating neither one nor other but contenting themselves with the fruits of the earth and of trees flesh and wine being brought into the World together by Noah for the use of man For as Clemens Alexandrinus hath observed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. p. 717. Origen in Gen. 1. v. 29. Hieronym in Jovin lib. 1. Munsterus in Gen. 3. 17. Man before the Floud was an eater of Grain rather than of Flesh And Origen after him upon Genesis saith This History plainly declares that God at first only permitted hearbs and the fruits of Trees for mans food But afterward license was granted to Noah to eat flesh And St. Hierome about the beginning of his Treatise against Jovinian saith the same and of late Munster and others which to cite here were needless The Western Church for ought can be perceived at first abstained equally from fish and flesh And therefore St. Hierome where he states the case of the Church making choice of Meats and shows the difference between the judgment of it and Hereticks such as were Marcion and Tatianus of whom he understandeth the Apostle to speak in his Second Epistie to Timothy addeth Nec hoc dicimus quòd negamus Pisces caetera si 2 Tim. 4. Hieron in Jovin lib. 2. cap. 1â— voluntas suerit in cibo esse sumenda whereby it may seem as if no less scruple had been made about the eating fish then of flesh But it is evident that about that time some distinction in Use not in Nature of Meats was made by the Church nothing scarce more frequently occurring in the decrees of Councils and Fathers writings than the defense of the Church her practise in discriminating Meats and yet condemning and anathematizing such Hereticks as abstaâ—ned from any Meats proper for mans use out of opinion of uncleanness that should be naturally in some more than others But the Western Church through favour and indulgence hath for many Ages permitted the use of fish to all obedient Sons as also of wine at such times as her Fasts are observed It is therefore a great mistake in her Enemies and Accusers to judge her of rigour in limiting
the Church before they departed this life but not so far as to remit the offences against God or that without actual demonstrations of their hearty sorrow for their sins and steadfast purposes and professions of future amendment they should have pronounced over them the Absolution of all their sins and that perhaps when they could no more desire than deserve such a Sentence CHAP. XIX A Preparation to the Explication of the Decalogue by treating of Laws in General What is a Law Several kinds of Laws Of the obligation of Laws from Justice not Force only Three Conditions required to obliging Of the Ten Commandments in special Their Authour Nature and Use BUT because a general Opinion as well amongst Christians as Exod. 34. 28. Deut. 4. 13. according to the Hebr. and Septuag And Josephus Antiquit l. 4. c. 8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appellat Jews hath prevailed that those Ten Commandments or as they are otherwise called Ten Words which God spake to the Children of Israel by Moses on Mount Sinai are an absolute Compendium and Rule of Obedience to God as well in our immediate Service towards him as our mediate in our duty towards our Neighbour a brief inquiry into the Decalogue will neither be unseasonable nor impertinent and the better to accomplish this first to speak of Laws in General before we treat of these more signal and eminent Laws of God A Law then to begin with the Definition seems to be nothing else but The rational and just will of a Soveraign Power declared and manifested to its Subjects for the better informing directing and regulating them according to truth and justice This Description though I find not entirely and absolutely in others yet is found in its several parts of which it consisteth in divers Authours and comprehends not only Humane but Divine Laws equally and not only written but unwritten also For it were a very fond and weak imagination in a man to conceive that the Writing Printing or Graving in Stone as the Ten Commandments are said to be can contribute any thing toward the force and due vigour of a Law any further than that thereby it becomes better known to all therein concerned Promulgation indeed is essential to all Laws but the Promulgation or Publication by the foresaid means is not so but any other notice given thereof may suffice But while a thing lyes hid in the mind and breast only of the proper Legislatours or Governours it cannot in reason obtain the nature or force of a Law but then only it doth when it either is known or might and ought to be known according to the manner of publication And this declared will must not be the act of any inferiour or subordinate person who of himself hath no right to will or require the observation of his Dictates or Orders but of the Supream originally at least though not immediately The universal and absolute Soveraign of all things is God alone and his Power alone and right of Dominion of which we have spoken in the beginning abundantly suffices to justifie all demands of service and obedience from his Creatures and that according to his absolute will without any exception or limitation it being intrinsecally good whatever shall appear to be the Will of God even because it is the Will of God who is nothing but Goodness in the most absolute sense And hence it is that notwithstanding Laws are divided into Divine Humane and Ecclesiastical yet in truth and upon due search it will be found that they all are Divine really though not formally and mediately though not immediately as Tully excellently and little less than divinely hath defined Lex est nihil aliud nise recta à numine deorum tracta ratio imperans honesta prchibens contraria Cicero Philipp 11. Clem. Alex Strom. l. 1. p. 350. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hierocles in Carm. Pyth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Demosthen in Anst The Law of Man which sometimes is called the Law Positive is derived by reason as a thing which is necessarily and probably following of the Law of Reason and of the Law of God And therefore in every Law Positive well made is somewhat of the Law of Reason and of the Law of God and to discern the Law of God and the Law of Reason from the Law Positive is very hard Dâ—ctâ—ur and Student cap 4. saying A Law is nothing else but right Reason drawn from the Gods themselves commanding honest things and forbidding the contrary And to the same effect writeth Clemens Alexandrinus and Hierocles saying Law is that Operative mind and Divine will which perpetually advances and preserves all things So that whatever Law be it Civil or Ecclesiastical which can not draw in some remote manner at least its descent from Heaven and God Almighty is not just or reasonable and by consequence not properly a Law but the private Lust of Tyrants But then in deducing Laws of Humane birth from God there must not be such a rigorous course taken as that whatever is not contained expresly in his revealed Word or obvious to the eye of Nature should be condemned as spurious and illegitimate and having no right to oblige men to observance and submission thereunto For some things are more clearly and some more obscurely some things more nearly and some more remotely deducible from their first fountain some Laws natural and the like may be said of Divinely revealed and Ecclesiastical are sufficiently apparent to all or most intelligent men as just and reasonable others as Thomas hath observed are evident so to be to the more understanding and searching Wits this being to be received as a plain and undoubted Rule in doubtful Cases that the professed Authours and Interpreters of Laws are generally better seen into the Natural Divine and Moral reason and obligation of a Law and the common benefit and expediencie thereof than inferiour and ignorant persons who are prone to judge of the reasonableness and usefulness of it as it best agrees with their own private judgments none of the certainest or Interests none of the justest many times not considering which is most necessary the common good claiming prerogative above particular So that there can be no more unnatural Rule than that which would have every man a Law and Rule and Reason to himself or definitively and finally to judge for and of himself in all things what is just and reasonable This is altogether lawâ—ess and repugnant to the revealed Will of God which hath ordained several orders and ranks of men whereof some are to be in Power and Authority others in subjection and obedience And from hence it proceedeth that Magistrates who are the only Law-givers and true Interpreters of Laws given have had somewhat more of the Image of God ascribed to them than other common men because as it is Gods primary power and prerogative to give Laws to all the world as his Subjects so is it the
have from the matter it self divided the Commandments so that Four which relate principally to God should be placed in the First Table and Six in the Second which seems to be most rational though no less arbitrary than the other There are likewise among the Jews who agree not in the very matter it self of the Ten Commandments For some as the Talmudists and others following them do make that we call properly The Proaem or Preface I am the Lord thy God to be part of the First Commandment which is denyed by Aberbenel and others of them as well as most of us For this Proposition or Sentence I am the Lord thy God is as we say properly Enunciative or Indicative or purely affirmative and not Imperative or Commanding as all Precepts must be which are so properly called The First Commandment therefore is this Thou shalt have no other Gods §. I. but me Where it is first to be observed that almost thorow the whole Decalogue some variety in words is to be found in Exodus and in Deuteromy the Fifth where it is repeated The Reason whereof Grotius thinks to be this That here Moses did set down or rather took precisely what was spoken or written by the Angel but in Deuteronomy he rehearses the same himself without such absolute Punctualities of words or expressions and yet must we not dare to say or believe that Moses transgressed his own Rule given by God in the Fourth Chapter before viz. Ye shall not adde unto Deut. 4. 2. the word which I command you neither shall ye diminish ought from it that ye may keep the Commandments of the Lord your God which I command you So that it is a vain Scholie some would give us upon that and such like Texts of Scripture that nothing at all must be added to Gods word more than we find the Letter to require For undoubtedly such speeches mean no more than that we should do or say neither more or less to overthrow the intention of God in his Commandments For otherwise all the large and far fetched senses devised and applyed by the precise Masters and Mistakers of that Rule to each particular Precept in the Decalogue would be found either Superstitious or Sacrilegious inventions though not inconsistent with the Analogy of Faith Furthermore Laws are of two sorts generally Affirmative or Negative In the Negative of which this is one the ordinary method of explication is first to declare those sins of Commission which are prohibited and then the Duties Graces and Vertues which are there implicitly required on the contrary this being one general Rule of expounding the Decalogue that where any vice or sin is forbidden there the contrary vertue is commanded And on the other side Where any vertue or holy act is required there the contrary vice or evil is interdicted As for Example Here it is forbidden that we should have or make or worship any other God but the one true God therefore on the contrary there is an implicite injunction duly and faithfully to serve that one true God And though the sense Negative is most current and general through the whole Decalogue yet were the Affirmative duties they which God principally aimed at and intended For Negatives do not make us holy to God in themselves but only as they are necessary introductions and good beginnings to the more perfect performance of Positive Duties It would avail a man very little towards the fulfilâ—ing of this First Commandment not to worship more Gods than one for so he mâ—ght worship none at all and be a greater offender than the Idolater that worships many We are therefore in the first place to enquire what are those Vertues and Graces God commands and so shall we more readiâ—y and easily conceive what errours and sins we are hereby commanded to avoid Some of both sorts we shall here instance in to make more compleat that rude and imperfect account given above of the Acts of Obedience and Holiness owing from every good Christian to God but as in a Table rather than in a Treatise The Supposition then that this first Precept requires of us the true worship of God doth infer all that train of Graces thereunto necessary which are commonly reduced to these three Theological Vertues Faith Hope and Charity Of the nature of Faith as well in General as Particular have we spoken largely in the first Part Yet rather in a speculative than practical or obediential way which is proper to this place By the duty of Faith then it is first required that we should have a competent knowledge of God and of his will for some knowledge must of necessity go before Faith There is a twofold knowledge One of simple apprehension or intelligence and this must go before Faith For how Rom. 10. 14. saith St. Paul shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard It is impossible a man should worship God before he believes there is a God And impossible he should believe there is a God before he hath some notion or apprehension of a God either by hearing which is the ordinary way or by some inward suggestion And therefore we read that Paul inquiring of the Acts 19. 2. Novices in Christianity at Ephesus Have ye received the Holy Ghost they answered We have not as yet heard whether there be an Holy Ghost or no. And there is another knowledge of Assurance which assurance is caused in Humane Sciences by an orderly and necessary connexion of natural causes one with another but in Divine matters by Faith which causes that or greater perswasion than any outward artificial Demonstrations And therefore both the encrease of our knowledge and the encrease and strengthning of our Faith are much required by this Precept according as we have the Scriptures more particularly advising us and that by St. Peter 2 Pet. 1. 5. And beside all this giving all diligence adde to your faith vertue and to vertue knowledge and to knowledge temperance c. And so in his first Epistle 1 Pet. 2. 3. 1 Tim. 2. 4. Taste and see how good the Lord is And St. Paul to Timothy God will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth And infinite other places Next to knowledge of God seems to be the fear of God according as Acts 9. 39. the Scripture hath it And the Churches were edified walking in the fear of the Lord. Next to Fear comes Repentance and Sorrow for sins past then Renovation or that properly called Obedience in Newness of Life with many others not here to be insisted on The second Grace is Hope which excites to walk and act according to the Gospel from the consideration of the many Promises and upon the intuitiâ—n of an excellent reward to follow certainly the fulfilling the will of God Of which we have spoken in treating of Gods works Lastly Charity with its retinue of Divine Graces is required
heart Not he that looketh on a woman but he that looketh on her to lust after her is condemned though all curious studious idle impertinent views of men or women upon which may follow ordinarily the sparks and then the flames of lust are forbidden Again not all lusting of the heart is to be compared to the acts of lusting inwardly with the act outward joyned to that Adultery of the heart our Saviour Christ doth not equal to the Adultery of act but makes it Adultery in a degree inferiour Secondly There is uncleanness of the Tongue too when it breaketh out into impure light foolish lascivious speeches tending to begetting evil thoughts and acts in others against which St. Paul declareth in his Epistle to the Ephesians Let no corrupt communication come out of your mouth but Coloss 4 29. that which is good to the use of edifying that it may minister grace to the hearers Coloss 3. 8. And to the Coâ—ossians But now ye also put off all these anger wrath malice blasphemy filthy communication out of your mouth Thirdly Actual uncleanness which is accomplished in the deeds of the flesh And â—aâ—h several degrees which may be distinguished into Unnatural and Natural Unnatural consisteth in the vile acts a man or woman may commit upon their own bodies perverting the course and end of nature instituting diversity of Sexes for sober and profitable propagation making that void in some manner at least At which St. Paul may seem to strike as Ephes 5. 12. far as modesty would permit when he says It is a shame to speak of those things which are done of them in secret meaning the impurities of Gnostick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodoret. Haret Fabul cap. 7. and Valentinian Conventicles to the reproach of Primitive Christianity Epiphanius relating how besides those called natural lusts between Sexes distinct they dishonoured and corrupted their own bodies in the highest acts of single uncleanness and made up some of their Mysteries thereby And however single persons do not so prodigiously abuse themselves as did those impure Hereticks pretending greater Sanctity and deeper Mysteries in their Religion then the Catholicks yet must it needs be a great offense to God so to corrupt a mans self in yielding to fleshly temptations condemned by Heathen Poets though themselves were immodest for a violation of the Law of Nature it self which therefore all Christians especially of weak reason strong passions and young years are most watchfully to beware of and resolutely to avoid Another sort of acted rather then actual Uncleanness here prohibited is the foul sin of Sodomie to which the wicked Citizens of Sodom destroyed Gen. 19. 4 5. Rom. 1. 26. by fire gave denomination as may appear in the Book of Genesis And of which St. Paul to the Romans speaketh when he saith that God delivered up the Gentiles to these unnatural Lusts as a punishment of their gross Idolatry For this cause God gave them up to vile affections For even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature And likewise the men leaving the natural use of the women burned in their lusts one towards another men with men working that which is unseemly and receiving in themselves that recompense of their errours which was meet A Third unnatural Lust is that called Bestiality or abusing or being abused Lev. 28. 23. by Beasts in lustful acts against which God hath in his Word as well as by the Light and Law of Nature declared The more natural but yet unchristian Lusts here forbidden are Adultery which is either simple viz. when a married person committeth uncleanness with an unmarried where some make two kinds the one when the man is married but the woman single which they commonly make the less and so indeed it is by reason that it brings no spurious brood to inherit or share the Goods of any other man but him that he knowingly and willingly bestows them on The other is when the woman is married and the man single which is besides the general sin subject to the foresaid mischief And therefore hereby the woman offends in these four respects Incredulity not believing or regarding the Law and Word of God to the contrary 2. Not reverencing the Laws of the Church 3. Treachery against her Faith and Troth given before God to her Husband whereby she delivered unto him 1 Cor. 7. 4. the power of her Body as St. Paul speaketh 1 Cor. 7. as likewise doth the Husband to his Wife upon the same occasion and therefore thus far the Man and Woman transgressing offend equally 4. They say the Woman in such cases is a Thief in that she spoileth her Husband of his goods and giveth them to a false Issue he would knowingly no wayes yield them to But yet saith Thomas the man sinneth no less than the woman however Thomas in decem Praecepta Opusc 3. he may flatter himself otherwise And the sum of his reason is this First Because that the man hath no more power over his Body than the woman over hers Secondly Because the man is stronger naturally than the woman and endued with more reason Thirdly Because the man is the Head of the woman and her teacher as St. Paul saith therefore as it is a greater sin for a Priest than a Layman to offend in that kind so is it for a man who is as it were Gods Minister even in spiritual matters to the woman And in truth we find little or no difference put by the Scripture between the fact James 4. 4. of the one and the other St. James joyning them thus together Ye Adulterers and Adulteresses know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with Levit. 20. 10. God Yet Moses his Law decreed the Adulteress to be put to death but not the Adulterer as offending more against the Civil capacity of Man And perhaps for the hardness of their hearts least they should do it themselves God would have it done in a more orderly and just way Some Laws of Christians at this day granting the man leave to kill his wife himself finding her in actual Adultery Fornication likewise which some calling Simple have legitimated in great measure is condemned by this Commandment St. Paul as it were foreseeing and intending to confound such modern Doctours saith Know ye not 1 Cor. 6 9 10. that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God be not deceived neither Fornicators nor Idolaters nor Adulterers nor Effeminate nor Abusers of themselves with mankind Nor Thieves nor Covetous nor Drunkards nor Revilers nor Extortioners shall inherit the Kingdom of God And to the Hebrews But Fornicators and Adulterers God shall judge And so likewise the Excusers or Extenuaters of them so far as to bring down the guilt of either of them to that of a venial sin only which is as much as nothing Est ergo heresis dicere Fornicationem simplicem