Literal and Grammatical Sense Since therefore the words God's wrath and damnation which are the highest in the Article are capable of a lower sense Temporary Judgments being often so expressed in the Scriptures Ex. 32.10 and 〈◊〉 the whole Old Testâ—ment Mat. 3.7 1 Thess. 2.16 Luk. 23.40 1 Cor. 11.29 1 Pet. 4.17 Rom. 13.2 2 Câ—r 7.5 John 8.10 11. Rom. 14.13 therefore they believe the loss of the Favour of God the Sentence of Death the Troubles of Life and the Corruption of our Faculties may be well called God's wrath and damnation Besides they observe That the main point of the Imputation of Adam's Sin to his Posterity and its being considered by God as their own Act not being expresly taught in the Article here was that moderation observed which the Compilers of the Articles have shewed on many other occasions It is plain from hence that they did not intend to lay a Burthen one Mens Consciences or oblige them to profess a Doctrine that seems to be of hard digestion to a great many The last prejudice that they offer against that Opinion is That the softening the terms of God's wrath and damnation that was brought in by the followers of St. Austin's Doctrine to sâ—ch a moderate and harmless Notiâ—n as to be only a loss of Heaven with a sort of unactive Sâ—â—ep was â—n effect of their apprehending that the World could very ill bear an Opinion of so strange a sound as that all Mankind were to be Damned for the Sin of one Man And that therefore to make this pass the beâ—ter they mitigated Damnation far below the Representation that the Scriptures generally give of it which propose it as the being adjudged to a place of Torment and a state of Horror and Misery Thus I have set down the different Opinions in this point with that true Indifference that I intend to observe on such other occasions and which becomes one who undertakes to explain the Doctrines of the Church and not his own And who is obliged to purpose other Mens Opinions with all Sincerity and to shew what are the Senses that the Learned Men of different persuasions in these matters have put on the words of the Article In which one great and constant Rule to be observed is To represent mens Opinions candidly and to judge as favourably both of them and their Opinions as may be To bear with one another and not to disturb the Peace and Union of the Church by insisting too much and too peremptorily upon matters of such doubtful Disputaion but willingly to leave them to all that liberty to which the Church has left them and which she still allows them ARTICLE X. Of Free-Will The Condition of Man after the Fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works to Faith and calling upon God Wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the Grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will WE shall find the same Moderation observed in this Article that was taken notice of in the former where all disputes concerning the degrees of that feebleness and corruption under which we are fallen by the Sin of Adam are avoided and only the necessity of a preventing and a cooperating Grace is asserted against the Semipelagians and the Pelagians But before we enter upon that it is fitting first to state the true Notion of Free-Will in so far as it is necessary to all rational Agents to make their Actions morally good or bad since it is a Principle that seems to rise out of the Light of Nature That no man is accountable rewardable or punishable but for that in which he acts freely without force or compulsion and so far all are agreed Some imagine That Liberty must suppose a freedom to do or not to do and to act contrariwise at pleasure To others it seems not necessary that such a liberty should be carried to denominate Actions morally good or bad God certainly acts in the perfectest liberty yet he cannot sin Christ had the most exalted liberty in his Human Nature of which a Creature was capable and his Merit was the highest yet he could not sin Angels and glorified Saints though no more capable of Rewards are perfect Moral Agents and yet they cannot sin And the Devils with the damned though not capable of further Punishment yet are still Moral Agents and cannot but sin So this Indifferency to do or not to do cannot be the true Notion of Liberty A truer one seems to them to be this That a Rational Nature is not determined as mere Matter by the Impulse and Motion of other Bodies upon it but is capable of Thought and upon considering the Objects set before it makes Reflection and so chuses Liberty therefore seems to consist in this inward capacity of thinking and of acting and chusing upon Thought The clearer the Thought is and the more constantly that our choice is determined by it the more does a Man rise up to the highest Acts and sublimest Exercises of Liberty A question arises out of this Whether the Will is not always determined by the Understanding so that a Man does always chuse and determine himself upon the account of some Idea or other If this is granted then no liberty will be left to our Faculties We must apprehend things as they are proposed to our Understanding for if a thing appears true to us we must assent to it and if the Will is as blind to the Understanding as the Understanding is determined by the Light in which the Object appears to it then we seem to be concluded under a Fate or Necessity It is after all a vain attempt to argue against every man's experience We perceive in our selves a liberty of turning our Minds to some Ideas or from others we can think longer or shorter of these more exactly and steadily or more slightly and superficially as we please and in this radical freedom of directing or diverting our Thoughts a main part of our Freedom does consist Often Objects as they appear to our Thoughts do so affect or heat them that they do seem to conquer us and carry us after them some Thoughts seeming as it were to intoxicate and charm us Appetites and Passions when much fired by Objects apt to work upon them do agitate us strongly and on the other hand the Impressions of Religion come often in our Minds with such a secret force so much of Terror and such secret Joy mixing with them that they seem to master us yet in all this a Man Acts freely because he thinks and chuses for himself And though perhaps he does not feel himself so entirely balanced that he is indifferent to both sides yet he has still such a remote liberty that he can turn himself to other Objects and Thoughts so
other Church has them equally with her or beyond her If all these must be discussed before we can settle this Question Which is the true Infallible Church A Man must stay long e're he can come to a point in it Therefore there can be no other way taken here but to examine first What makes a particular Church And then since the Catholick Church is an united Body of all particular Churches when the true Notion of a particular Church is fixed it will be easy from that to form a Notion of the Catholick Church It would seem reasonable by the Method of all Creeds in particular of that called the Apostles Creed that we ought first to settle our Faith as to the great Points of the Christian Religion and from thence go to settle the Notion of a true Church And that we ought not to begin with the Notion of a Church and from thence go to the Doctrine The Doctrine of Christianity must be first stated and from this we are to take our measures of all Churches and that chiefly with respect to that Doctrine which every Christian is bound to believe Here a distinction is to be made between those Capital and Fundamental Articles without which a Man cannot be esteemed a true Christian nor a Church a true Church And other Truths which being delivered in Scripture all Men are indeed obliged to believe them yet they are not of that nature that the Ignorance of them or an Error in them can exclude from Salvation To make this sensible It is a Proposition of another sort That Christ died for Sinners than this That he died at the Third or at the Sixth Hour And yet if the Second Proposition is expresly revealed in Scripture we are bound to believe it Since God has said it though it is not of the same nature with the other Here a Controversie does naturally arise that wise People are unwilling to meddle with What Articles are Fundamental and what are not The defining of Fundamental Articles seems on the one hand to deny Salvation to such as do not receive them all which Men are not willing to do And on the other hand it may seem a leaving Men at liberty as to all other particulars that are not reckoned up among the Fundamentals But after all the Covenant of Grace the Terms of Salvation and the Grounds on which we expect it seem to be things of another nature than all other truths which though revealed are not of themselves the Means or Conditions of Salvation Wheresoever true Baptism is there it seems the Essentials of this Covenant are preserved For if we look on Baptism as a Foederal admission into Christianity there can be no Baptism where the Essence of Christianity is not preserved As far then as we believe that any Society has preserved that so far we are bound to receive her Baptism and no further For unless we consider Baptism as a sort of a Charm that such words joined with a washing with Water make one a Christian which seems to be expresly contrary to what St. Peter says of it 1 Pet. â— 21 That it is not the washing away the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good Conscience towards God that saves us We must conclude That Baptism is a Foederal thing in which after that the Sponsions are made the Seal of Regeneration is added From hence it will follow That all who have a true Baptism that makes Men Believers and Christians must also have the true Faith as to the Essentials of Christianity The Fundamentals of Christirnity seems to be all that is necessary to make Baptism True and Valid And upon this a distinction is to be made that will discover and destroy a Sophism that is often used on this occasion A True Church is in one sense a Society that preserves the Essentials and Fundamentals of Christianity In another sense it stands for a Society all whose Doctrines are true that has corrupted no part of this Religion nor mixed any Errors with it A true Man is one who has a Soul and a Body that are the Essential Constituents of a Man Whereas in another sense a Man of Sincerity and Candor is called a true Man Truth in the one Sense imports the Essential Constitution and in the other it imports only a Quality that is accidental to it So when we acknowledge that any Society is a true Church we ought to be supposed to mean no other than that the Covenant of Grace in its Essential Constituent parts is preserved entire in that Body and not that it is true in all its Doctrines and Decisions The Second thing to be considered in a Church is their Association together in the use of the Sacraments For these are given by Christ to the Society as the Rites and Badges of that Body That which makes particular Men Believers is their receiving the Fundamentals of Christianity so that which constitutes the Body of the Church is the Profession of that Faith and the use of those Sacraments which are the Rites and Distinctions of those who profess it In this likewise a distinction is to be made between what is Essential to a Sacrament and what is the exact observance of it according to the Institution Additions to the Sacraments do not annul them though they corrupt them with that adulterate mixture Therefore where the Sponsions are made and washing with Water is used with the words of Christ there we own that there is a true Baptism Though there may be a large Addition of other Rites which we reject as Superstitious though we do not pretend that they null the Baptism But if any part of the Institution is cut off there we do not own the Sacrament to be true Because it being an Institution of Christ's it can no more be esteemed a true Sacrament than as it retains all that which by the Institution appears to be the main and essential parts of the Action Upon this account it is That since Christ appointed Bread and Wine fo his other Sacrament and that he not only blessed both but distributed both with words appropriated to each kind we do not esteem that to be a true Sacrament in which either the one or the other of these kinds is w ithdrawn But in the next place there may be many things necessary in the way of Precept and Order both with relation to the Sacraments and to the other publick Acts of Worship in which tho' Additions or Defects are Erroneous and Faulty yet they do not annul the Sacraments We think none ought to Baptize but Men dedicated to the Service of God and Ordained according to that Constitution that was settled in the Church by the Apostles and yet Baptism by Laicks or by Women such as is most commonly practiced in the Roman Church is not esteemed null by us nor is it repeated Because we make a difference between what is Essential to a Sacrament and what is
there must be a living speaking Judge always ready to guide the Church and to decide Controversies they say this cannot be in the diffusive Body of Christians for these cannot meet to judge Nor can it â—e in a General Council the meeting of which depends upon so many accidents and on the consent of so many Princes that the Infallibility will lie dormant for some Ages if the General Council is the Seat of it Therefore they conclude That since it is certainly in the Church and can be no where else but in the Pope therefore it is lodged in the See of Rome Whereas we on the other hand think this is a strong Argument against the Infallibility in general That it does not appear in whom it is vested And we think that every side does so effectually Confute the other that we believe them all as to that and think they argue much stronger when they prove where it cannot be than when they pretend to prove where it must be This in the Point now in hand concerning the Pope seems as evident 〈◊〉 thing can possibly be It not appearing That after the words of Christ 〈…〉 the other Apostles thought the Point was thereby decided Who 〈…〉 should be the greatest For that Debâ—â—e was still on foot and was 〈◊〉 among them in the very Night in which our Saviour was betrayâ—d Nor does it appear That after the Effusion of the Holy Ghost which certainly Inspired them with the full understanding of Christ's words that thâ—y thought there was any thing peculiarly given to S. Peter beyond the â—â—st He was questioned upon his Baptizing Cornelius He was not singly appealed to in the great Question of Subjecting the Gentiles to the Yoke of the Mosaical Law he delivered his Opinion as one of the Apostles After which St. Iames summed up the Matter and setled the Decision of it He was charged by St. Paul as guilty of dissimulation in that matter for which St. Paul withstood him to his Face And he justifies that in an Epistle confessed to be writ by Divine Inspiration St. Paul does also in the same Epistle plainly assert the equality of his own Authority with his And that he received no Authority from him and owed him no Dependance Nor was he ever Appealed to in any of the Points that appear to have been Disputed in the times that the Epistles were written So that we see no Characters of any special Infallibility that was in him besides that which was the effect of the Inspiration that was in the other Apostles as well as in him Nor is there a Tittle in the Scripture not so much as by a remote Intimation that he was to derive that Authority whatsoever it was to any Successor or to lodge it in any particular City or See The Silence of the Scripture in this Point seems to be a full proof that no such thing was intended by God Otherwise we have all reason to believe that it would have been clearly expressed St. Peter himself ought to have declared this And since both Alexandria and Antioch as well as Rome pretend to derive from him and that the Succession to those Sees began in him this makes a decision in this Point so much the more necessary When St. Peter writ his 2d Epistle in which he mentions a Revelation that he had from Christ of his approaching dissolution though that was a very proper occasion for declaring such an important Matter 2 Pet. 1 1â— he says nothing that relates to it but gives only a new Attestation of the truth of Christ's Divine Mission and of what he himself had been a witness to in the Mount when he saw the excellent glory and heard the voice out of it He leaves a Provision in Writing for the following Ages but says nothing of any Succession or See So that here the greatest of all Privileges is pretâ—nded to be lodged in a Succession of Bishops without any one Passage in Scripture importing it Another set of difficulties arise concerning the Persons who have a right to chuse these Popes in whom this Right is Vested and what number is necessary for a Canonical Election How far Simony voids it and who is the competent Judge of that or who shall judge in the Case of two different Elections which has often happened We must also have a certain Rule to know when the Popes judge as private Persons and when they judge Infallibly With whom they must consult and what Solemnities are necessary to make them speak ex Cathedra or Infallibly For if this Infallibility comes as a Privilege from a Grant made by Christ we ought to expect that all those necessary Circumstances to direct us in order to the receiving and submitting to it should be fixed by the same Authority that made the Grant Here then are very great difficulties Let us now see what is offered to make out this great and important Claim The chief Proof is brought from these Words of our Saviour when upon St. Peter's confessing That he was the Christ the Son of the living God Mat. 16. 16 17 18 19. He said to him Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven This begins with an Allusion to his Name and Discourses built upon such Allusions are not to be understood strictly or Grammatically By the Rock upon which Christ promises to build his Church many of the Fathers have understood the Person of Christ others have understood the Confession of him or Faith in him which indeed is but a different way of expressing the same thing And it is certain that strictly speaking the Church can only be said to be founded upon Christ and upon his Doctrine But in a Secondary sense it may be said to be founded upon the Apostles and upon St. Peter as the first in order which is not to be Disputed Now though this is a Sense which was not put on these Words for many Ages yet when it should be allowed to be their true sense it will not prove any thing to have been granted to St. Peter but what was common to the other Apostles who are all called the Foundations upon which the Church is built That which follows of the gates of hell not being able to prevail against the Church may be either understood of Death Eph. 2.20 Rev. 21.2 14. which is often called the gate to the grave Which is the sense of the Word that is rendred Hell And then the meaning of these Words will be That the Church which Christ was to raise should never be extinguished nor die or come to a period as the Iewish Religion then did Or according to the Custom of the Iews of holding their
and the full Evidence of an Object that is before us and that is clearly apprehended by us So there is a great difference to be made between our Reasonings upon Difficulties that we can neither understand nor resolve and our Reasonings upon clear Principles The one may be false and the other must be true We are sure that a Thing cannot be one and three in the same respect our Reason assures us of this and we do and must believe it but we know that in different respects the same thing may be one and three And since we cannot know all the possibilities of those different respects we must believe upon the Authority of God revealing it that the same thing is both one and three tho' if a Revelation should affirm that the same thing were one and three in the same respect we should not and indeed could not believe it This Argument deserves to be fully opened for we are sure either it is true or we cannot be sure that any thing else whatsoever is true In confirmation of this we ought also to consider the nature and ends of Miracles They put Nature out of its channel and reverse its fixed Laws and Motions and the end of God's giving Men a power to work them is that by them the World may be convinced that such Persons are Commissionated by him to deliver his Pleasure to them in some Particulars And as it could not become the Infinite Wisdom of the Great Creator to change the Order of Nature which is his own Workmanship upon slight Grounds so we cannot suppose that he should work a Chain of Extraordinary Miracles to no purpose It is not to give credit to a Revelation that he is making for the Senses do not perceive it on the contrary they do reject and contradict it and the Revelation instead of getting credit from it is loaded by it as introducing that which destroys all credit and certainty In other Miracles our Senses are appealed to but here they must be appealed from nor is there any Spiritual end served in working this Miracle for it is acknowledged that the effects of this Sacrament are given upon our due coming to it independent upon the Corporal Presence So that the Grace of the Sacrament does not always accompany it since unworthy Receivers tho' according to the Romish Doctrine they receive the true Body of Christ yet they do not receive Grace with it And the Grace that is given in it to the worthy Receivers stays with them after that by the destruction of the Species of the Bread and Wine the Body of Christ is withdrawn So that it is acknowledged that the Spiritual effect of the Sacrament does not depend upon the Corporal Presence Here then it is supposed that God is every day working a great many Miracles in a vast number of different Places and that of so extraordinary a nature that it must be confessed they are far beyond all the other Wonders even of Omnipotence and yet all this is to no end that we can apprehend neither to any sensible and visible end nor to any Internal and Spiritual one This must needs seem an amazing thing that God should work such a Miracle on our behalf and yet should not acquaint us with any end for which he should work it To conclude this whole Argument We have one great advantage in this matter that our Doctrine concerning the Sacrament of a Mystical Presence of Christ in the Symbols and of the effects of it on the worthy and unworthy Receivers is all acknowledged by the Church of Rome but they have added to this the Wonder of the Corporal Presence So that we need bring no Proofs to them at least for that which we teach concerning it since it is all confessed by them But as to that which they have added it is not necessary for us to give Proofs against it it is enough for us if we shew that all the Proofs that they bring for it are weak and unconcluding They must be very demonstrative if it is expected that upon the authority and evidence of them we should be bound to believe a thing which they themselves confess to be contrary both to our Sense and Reasons We cannot by the Laws of Reasoning be bound to give Arguments against it it is enough if we can shew that neither the words of the Institution nor the Discourse in the sixth of St. Iohn do necessarily infer it and if we shew that those Passages can well bear another sense which is agreeable both to the words themselves and to the style of the Scriptures and more particularly to the Phraseology to which the Iews were accustomed upon the occasion on which this was Instituted and if the words can well bear the Sense that we give them then the other advantages that are in it of its being simple and natural of its being suitable to the design of a Sacrament and of its having no hard consequences of any sort depending upon it then I say by all the Rules of expounding Scripture we do justly infer that our Sense of those words ought to be preferred This is according to a Rule that St. Augustin gives to judge what Expressions in Scripture are Figurative and what not Lib. 3. de Doct. Chris. c. 16. If any place seems to command a Crime or horrid Action it is Figurative And for an Instance of this he cites those Words Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of man you have no life in you Which seems to command a Crime and an horrid Action and therefore it is a Figure commanding us to communicate in the Passion of our Lord and to lay up in our Memory with delight and profit that his Flesh was crucified and wounded for us And this was given for a Rule by the great Doctor of the Latin Church so the same Maxim had been delivered almost two Ages before him Hom. 7. in Levit. by the great Doctor of the Greek Church Origen who says that the understanding our Saviour's words of eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood according to the Letter is a Letter that kills These Passages I cite by an Anticipation before I enter upon the enquiry into the Sense of the ancient Church concerning this Matter because they belong to the words of the Institution at least to the Discourse in St. Iohn Now if the Sense that we give to these Words is made good we need be at no more pains to prove that they are capable of no other Sense Since this must prove that to be the only true Sense of them So that for all the Arguments that have been brought by us against this Doctrine arising out of the Fruitfulness of the Matter we were not bound to use them For our Doctrine being confessed by them it wants no Proof and we cannot be bound to prove a Negative Therefore though the Copiousness of this Matter has afforded us many
Arguments for the Negative yet that was not necessary For as a Negative always proves it self so that holds more especially here where that which is denied is accompanied with so many and so strange Absurdities as do follow from this Doctrine The last Topick in this Matter is the Sense that the ancient Church had of it For as we certainly have both the Scriptures and the Evidence of our Senses and Reason of our side so that will be much fortified if it appears that no such Doctrine was received in the First and best Ages And that it came in not all at once but by degrees I shall first urge this Matter by some general Presumptions And then I shall go to plain Proofs But though the Presumptions shall be put only as Presumptions yet if they appear to be violent so that a Man cannot hold giving his Assent to the Conclusion that follows from them then though they are put in the Form of presumptive Arguments yet that will not hinder them from being considered as concluding ones By the stating this Doctrine it has appeared how many Difficulties there are involved in it These are Difficulties that are obvious and soon seen They are not found out by deep enquiry and much speculation They are soon felt and are very hardly avoided And ever since the Time that this Doctrine has been received by the Roman Church these have been much insisted on Explanations have been offered to them all and the whole Principles of natural Philosophy have been cast into a new Mould that they might ply to this Doctrine At least those who have studied their Philosophy in that System have had such Notions put in them while their Minds were yet tender and capable of any Impressions that they have been thereby prepared to this Doctrine before they came to it by a Train of Philosophical Terms and Distinctions so that they were not much alarmed at it when it came to be set before them They are accustomed to think that Ubication or the being in a Place is but an Accident to a Substance So that the same Bodies being in more Places is only its having a few more of those Accidents produced in it by God They are accustomed to think that Accidents are Beings different from Matter like a sort of cloathing to it which do indeed require the having of a Substance for their Subject But yet since they are believed to have a being of their own God may make them subsist As the Skin of a Man may stand out in its proper Shape and Colour though there were nothing but Air or Vacuity within it They are accustomed to think that as an Accident may be without its proper Substance so a Substance may be without its proper Accidents And they do reckon Extension and Impenetrability that is a Bodies so filling a Space that no other Body can be in the same Space with it among its Accidents So that a Body composed of Organs and of large Dimensions may be not only all crouded within one Wafer but an entire distinct Body may be in every separable Part of this Wafer At least in every piece that carries in it the Appearances of Bread These besides many other lesser Subtilties are the evident Results of this Doctrine And it was a natural Effect of its being received that their Philosophy should be so transformed as to agree to it and to prepare Men for it Now to apply this to the Matter we are now upon We find none of these Subtilties among the Ancients They seem to apprehend none of those Difficulties nor do they take any pains to solve or clear them They had a Philosophical Genius and shewed it in all other things They disputed very nicely concerning the Attributes of God concerning his Essence and the Persons of the Trinity They saw the Difficulties concerning the Incarnation of the Eternal Word and Christ's being both God and Man They treat of Original Sin of the Power of Grace and of the Decrees of God They explained the Resurrection of our Bodies and the different States of the Blessed and the Damned They saw the Difficulties in all these Heads and were very Copious in their Explanations of them And they may be rather thought by some too full than too sparing in the canvassing of Difficulties But all those were more speculative Matters in which the Difficulty was not so soon seen as on this Subject Yet they found these out and pursued them with that Subtilty that shewed they were not at all displeased when occasions were offered them to shew their Skill in answering Difficulties Which to name no more appears very evidently to be St. Augustin's Character Yet neither he nor any of the other Fathers seem to have been Sensible of the Difficulties in this Matter They neither state them nor answer them nor do they use those reserves when they speak of Philosophical Matters that Men must have used who were possessed of this Doctrine For a Man cannot hold it without bringing himself to think and speak otherways upon all natural Things than the rest of Mankind do They are so far from this that on the contrary they deliver themselves in a way that shews they had no such Apprehensions of Things They thought that all Creatures were limited to one Place And from thence they argued against the Heathens who believed that their Deities were in every one of those Statues which they consecrated to them From this Head they proved the Divinity of the Holy Ghost Because he wrought in many different Places at once Which he could not do if he were only a Creature They affirm that Christ can be no more on Earth since he is now in Heaven and that he can be but in one Place They say that which hath no Bounds nor Figure and that can neither be touched nor seen cannot be a Body That Bodies are extended in some Place and cannot exist after the Manner of Spirits They argue against the Eternity of Matter from this that nothing could be produced that had a Being before it was produced And on all Occasions they appeal to the Testimony of our Senses as Infallible They say that to believe otherwise tended to reverse the whole State of Life and Order of Nature and to reproach the Providence of God since it must be said that he has given the Knowledge of all his Works to Liars and Deceivers if our Senses may be false That we must doubt of our Faith if the Testimony of hearing seeing and feeling could deceive us And in their Contests with the Marcionites and others concerning the Truth of Christ's Body they appeal always to the Testimony of the Senses as Infallible And even treating of the Sacrament they say without Limitation or Exception that it was Bread as their Eyes witnessed and true Wine that Christ did Consecrate to be the Memorial of his Body and Blood and they tell us in this very Particular that we ought not to
Tell the Church Ibid. Hâ—w the Church is the Pillar and Ground of Truth 206 Christ's Promise I am with you alway even to the end of the world Ibid. Of that It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Ibid. Some Generâ—l Councils have ereed 207 ARTICLE XXII 217 THE Dâ—ctrine of Purgatory Ibid. Sins once pardâ—ned are not punished 218 Vnlâ—ss with chastisements in this life 219 No state of satisfaction aftâ—r death Ibid. No mention made of that in Scripture 220 But it is plain to the contrary 221 Different Opinions among the Ancients Ibid. The Original of Purgatory 222 A pâ—ssâ—ge in Maccabees considered Ibid. A pâ—ssâ—ge in the Epistle to the Corinthians câ—nsidered 223 The prâ—gress â—f the â—elief of Purgatory 2â—4 Prayers for the dead among the Ancients 225 Endâ—wments for redeeming out of Purgâ—toâ—y 226 Whether these ought to be sacred or nâ—t 227 The Doctrine of Pardons and Indulgences 228 It is only the excusing from Penance 229 Nâ— Foundation for it in Scripâ—ure Ibid. General Rules concerning Idolatry 230 Of the Iâ—olatry of Hâ—athens 231 Laws given to the Jews against it Ibid. The Expostulâ—â—ions of the Prophets 232 Concerning the Golden Calf Ibid. And The Calves at Dan and Bethel 233 The Ap stles opposed all Idolatry Ibid. St. Paul at Athens and to the Romans 334 The sense of the Primitive upon it 235 The first use of Images among Christians Ibid. Pictures in Churches for Instruction 236 Were afterwards worshipped Ibid. Contests abâ—ut that Ibid. Images of the Deity and Trinity 237 On what theWorship of Images terminates 238 The due Worship settled by the Council at Trent Ibid. Images consecrated and how 239 Arguments for worshipping them answered Ibid. Arguments against the use or worship of Images 240 The worship of Relicks 241 A due regard to the Bodies of Martyrs Ibid. The progress of Superstition Ibid. No warrant for this in Scripture 242 Hezekiah broke the Brazen Serpent Ibid. The memorable passage concerning the Body of St. Polycarp 243 Fables and Forgeries prevailed Ibid. The Souls of the Martyrs believed to hover about their Tombâ— 244 Nothing of this kind objected to the first Christians Ibid. Disputes between Vigilantius and St. Jerom 245 No Invocation of Saints in the Old Testament 246 The Invocating Angels condemned in the New Tâ—stament 247 No Saints invocated Christ only Ibid. No mention of this in the three first Ages 248 In the Fourth Martyrs invocated Ibid. The progrâ—ss that this made 249 Scandalous Offices in the Church of Rome Ib. Arguments against this Invocation 2â—0 An Apology for those who begun it Ibid. The Scandal given by it 251 Arguments for it ansâ—ered 252 Whethâ—r the Saints see all things in God Ib. This no part of the Communion of Saints 253 Prayers ought to be directed only to God Ib. Revealed Religion designed to deliver the World from Idolatry 254 ARTICLE XXIII 255 A Succâ—ssiâ—n of Pastors ought to be in the Church Ibid. 〈◊〉 was settlâ—d by the Apostles 256 And must continue to the end of the World Ibid. It was settlâ—d in the first Age of the Church 257 The danger of mâ—ns taking to themselves this Authority without a due Vocation Ibid. The difference between means of Salvation and precâ—pts for orders sake 258 What is lawful Authority Ibid. What may be done upon extraordinary occasions 259 Necessity is above Rules of Order Ibid. The High Priests in â—ur Saviour's time 260 Baptism by Women 261 ARTICLE XXIV 262 THE chief end of worshipping God Ib. The Practice of the Jews 263 Rules given by the Apostles Ibid. The Prâ—ctice â—f the Church 264 Arguments for Worship in an unknown Tongue answered Ibid. ARTICLE XXV 266 DIfference between Sacraments and Rites Ibid. Sacraments do not imprint a Character 267 But are not mere Ceremâ—nies 268 What is necessary to constitute a Sacrament 269 That applied to Baptism Ib. And to the Eucharist 270 No meâ—tion of seven Sacraments before Peter Lombard Ibid. Confirmation no Sacrament Ibid. How practised among us Ibid. The use of Chrism in it is new 271 Oyl early used in Christian Rituals Ibid. Bishops only consecrated the Chrism 272 In the Greek Church Presbyters appliâ—d it Ibid. This used in the Western Church but condemned by the Popes Ibid. Disputes concerning Confirmation 273 Concerning Penance Ibid. The true Notion of Repentance Ibid. Confâ—ssion not the matter of a Sacrament 274 The use of Confession Ibid. The Priâ—st's Pardon Ministerial 275 And restrained within bounds Ibid. Auricular Confâ—ssion not necessary 276 Not commanded in the New Testament Ibid. The beginnings of it in the Church 277 Many Canons about Penance Ibid. Confession forbid at Constantinople 278 The ancient Dâ—scipline slâ—ckâ—n'd Ibid. Confâ—ssion may be advised but not commanded 279 The good and bad effâ—cts it may have Ibid. Of Contrition and Attrition 280 The ill effects of the Doctrine of Attrition Ibid. Of doing the Penance or Satisfaction 281 Concerning sorrow for sin Ibid. Of the ill effects of hasty Absolutions 282 Of Fasting and Prayer Ibid. Of the Form I absolve thee 283 Of Hâ—ly Orders 284 Of the ancient Form of Ordinations Ibid. Of delivering the Vessels 285 Orders no Sacrament Ibid. Whether Bishops and Priests are of the same Order 286 Of Marriage Ibid. It can be no Sacrament 287 Intention not necessary Ibid. How Marriage is called a Mystery or Sacrament 288 Marriage dissolved by Adultery Ibid. The Practice of the Church in this matter 289 Of Extreme Vnction Ibid. St. James's words explained 290 Oyl much used in ancient Rituals 291 Pope Innocent's Epistle considered Ibid. Anointing used in order to Recovery 292 Afterwards as the Sacrament of the dying 293 The Sacraments are to be used Ibid. And to be received worthily 294 ARTICLE XXVI 295 SAcraments are not effectual as Prayers are Ibid. Of the Doctrine of Intention 296 The ill consâ—quences of it 297 Of a just Severity in Discipline Ibâ—d Particularly towards the Clergy 298 ARTICLE XXVII 299 COncerning St. John's Baptism Ibid. The Jews used Baptism Ibid. The Christian Baptism 300 The difference between it and St. John's Ib. The necessity of Baptism 301 It is a Precept but not a Mean of Salvation Ibid. Baptism unites us to the Church 302 It also saves us Ibid. St. Peter's words explained 303 St Austin's Doctrine of Baptism Ibid. Baptism is a Foederal Stipulation 304 In what sense it was of more value to preach than to baptize Ibid. Of Infant-Baptism 305 It is grounded on the Law of Nature Ibid. And the Law of Moses and warranted in the New Testament Ibid. In what sense Children can be holy 306 It is also very expedient Ibid. ARTICLE XXVIII 308 THE change made in this Article in Queen Elizabeth's time Ibid. The Explanation of our Doctrine 309 Of the Rituals in the Passover Ibid. Of the words This is my Body 310 And This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood Ibid. Of the horror the Jews had at Blood 311 In what sense only the Disciples could understand our
Testimony that Christ and his Apostles gave to those Books as they were then received by the Iewish Church to whom were committed the Oracles of God Now it is not so much as pretended that ever these Books were received among the Iews or were so much as known to them None of the Writers of the New Testament cite or mention them neither Philo nor Iosephus speak of them Iosephus on the contrary says they had only 22 Books that deserved belief but that those which were written after the time of Artaxerxes were not of equal credit with the rest And that in that Period they had no Prophets at all The Christian Church was for some Ages an utter Stranger to those Books Melito Bishop of Sardis being desired by Onesimus to give him a perfect Catalogue of the Books of the Old Testament took a Journey on purpose to the East to examine this matter at its Source And having as he says made an exact Enquiry he sent him the Names of them just as we receive the Canon of which Eusebius says that he has preserved it Euseb. hist l. 4. c. 26. because it contained all those Books which the Church owned Origen gives us the same Catalogue according to the Tradition of the Iews who divided the Old Testament into 22 Books In Psal. 1. according to the Letters of their Alphabet Athanasius reckons them up in the same manner to be 22 and he more distinctly says that he delivered those In Synop. as they had received them by Tradition In Eppasch and as they were received by the whole Church of Christ because some presumed to mix Apocryphal Books with the Divine Scriptures And therefore he was set on it by the Orthodox Brethren in order to declare the Canonical Books delivered as such by Tradition and believed to be of Divine Inspiration It is true he adds That besides these there were other Books which were not put into the Canon but yet were appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who first come to be instructed in the way of Piety And then he reckons up most of the Apocryphal Books Here is the first mention we find of them as indeed it is very probable they were made at Alexandria by some of those Iews who lived there in great Numbers Both Hilary and Cyril of Ierusalem give us the same Catalogue of the Books of the Old Testament and affirm that they delivered them thus according to the Tradition of the Ancients Cyril says That all other Books are to be put in a Second Order Catech. 4. Gregory Nazienzen reckons up the 22 Books and adds that none besides them are genuine The words that are in the Article are repeated by St. Ierom in several of his Prefaces And that which should determine this whole matter is Can. 59. and 60. That the Council of Laodicea by an express Canon delivers the Catalogue of the Canonical Books as we do decreeing that these only should be read in the Church Now the Canons of this Council were afterwards received into the Code of the Canons of the Universal Church so that here we have the concurring sense of the whole Church of God in this matter It is true the Book of the Revelation not being reckoned in it this may be urged to detract from its Authority But it was already proved that that Book was received much Earlier into the Canon of the Scriptures so the design of this Canon being to establish the Authority of those Books that were to be read in the Church the darkness of the Apocalypse making it appear reasonable not to read it publickly that may be the reason why it is not mentioned in it as well as in some later Catalogues Here we have four Centuries clear for our Canon in Exclusion to all Additions It were easy to carry this much further down and to shew that these Books were never by any express definition received into the Canon till it was done at Trent And that in all the Ages of the Church even after they came to be much esteemed there were divers Writers and those generally the most learned of their time who denied them to be a part of the Canon At first many Writings were read in the Churches that were in high reputation both for the sake of the Authors and of the Contents of them though they were never lookt on as a part of the Canon Can. 47. Such were Clemens's Epistle the Books of Hermas the Acts of the Martyrs besides several other things which were read in particular Churches And among these the Apocryphal Books came also to be read as containing some valuable Books of Instruction besides several Fragments of the Iewish History which were perhaps too easily believed to be true These therefore being usually read they came to be reckoned among Canonical Scriptures For this is the reason assigned in the Third Council of Carthage for calling them Canonical because they had received them from their Fathers as Books that were to be read in Churches And the word Canonical was by some in those Ages used in a large sense in opposition to spurious so that it signified no more than that they were genuine So much depends upon this Article that it seemed necessary to dwell fully upon it and to state it clearly It remains only to observe the Diversity between the Articles now Established and those set forth by K. Edward In the latter there was not a Catalogue given of the Books of Scripture nor was there any distinction stated between the Canonical and the Apocryphal Books In those there is likewise a Paragraph or rather a Parenthesis added after the words proved thereby in these words Although sometimes it may be admitted by God's faithful People as Pious and conducing unto Order and Decency Which are now left out because the Authority of the Church as to matters of Order and Decency which was only intended to be asserted by this Period is more fully explained and stated in the 35 th Article ARTICLE VII Of the Old Testament The Old Testament is not contrary to the New For both in the Old and New Testament Everlasting Life is offered to Mankind by Christ who is the only Mediator between God and Man being both God and Man Wherefore they are not to be heard which feign that the Old Fathers did look only for Transitory Promises Although the Law given from God by Moses as touching Ceremonies and Rites do not bind Christian Men nor the Civil-Precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any Commonwealth yet notwithstanding no Christian Man whatsoever is free from the Obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral THIS Article is made up of the Sixth and the Nineteenth of King Edward's Articles laid together Only the Nineteenth of King Edward's has these words after Moral Wherefore they are not to be heard which teach that the Holy Scriptures were given to none but to the
orantes inclinantesque se propter Deum ante istam crucem inveniant corporis animae sanitatem per eundem reisque dona veniam It is expresly said in the Pontifical Cruci debetur Latria and the Prayers used in the Consecration of a Cross it is prayed That the Blessing of that Cross on which Christ hung may be in it that it may be a healthful Remedy to Mankind a Strengthner of Faith an Increaser of Good Works the Redemption of Souls and a Comfort Protection and Defence against the Cruelty of our Enemies These with all the other Acts of Adoration used among them seem to favour those who are for a Latria to be given to all those Images to the Originals of which it is due and in like the Proportion for Dulia and Hyperdulia to other Images It is needless to prosecute this Matter further It seemed necessary to say so much to justify our Church which has in her Homilies laid this Charge of Idolatry very severely on the Church of Rome and this is so high an Imputation that those who think it false as they cannot without a good Conscience Subscribe or require others to Subscribe the Article concerning the Homilies so they ought to retract their own Subscriptions and to make Solemn Reparations in Justice and Honour for laying so heavy an Imputation unjustly upon that whole Communion There is nothing that can be brought from Scripture that has a shew of an Argument for supporting Image-Worship unless it be that of the Cherubims that were in the holiest of all and that as is supposed were worshipped at least by the High Priest when he went thither once a Year if not by the whole People But first there is a great difference to be made between a Form of Worship immediately prescribed by God and another Form that not only has no warrant for it but seems to be very expresly forbidden It is plain the Cherubims were not seen by the People and so they could be no visible Object of Worship to them Heb. 9.3 7. They were scarce seen by the High Priest himself for the Holiest of all was quite dark no light coming into it but what came through the Veil from the Holy Place and even that had very little Light Nor is there a word concerning the High Priests Worshipping either the Ark or the Cherubim It is true there is a place in the Psalms that seems to favour this as it is rendred by the Vulgar worship his footstool Psal. 99.5 9. for it is holy but both the Hebrew and the Septuagint have it as it is in our Translation worship at his footstool for he is holy and all the Greek Fathers cite these Words so Many of the Latin Fathers do also cite them according to the Greek and the last Words of the Psalm in which the same words are repeated make the Sense of it evident For there it is thus varied Exalt ye the Lord our God and worship at his holy hill for the Lord our God is holy These words coming so soon after the former are a Paraphrase to them and determine their Sense No doubt the High Priest worshipped God who dwelt between the Cherubims in that Cloud of Glory in which he shewed himself visibly present in his Temple but there is no sort of reason to think that in so Majestick a Presence Adoration could be offered to any thing else or that after the High Priest had adored the Divine Essence so manifested he would have fallen to Worship the Ark and the Cherubims This agrees ill with the Figure that is so much used in this Matter of a King and his Chair of State for in the Presence of the King all Respects terminate in his Person whatsoever may be done in his Absence And thus this being not so much as a Precedent much less an Argument for the use of Images and there being nothing else brought from Scripture that with any sort of wresting can be urged for it and the Sense and Practice of the whole Church being so express against it the Progress of it having been so long and so much disputed the tendency of it to Superstition and Abuse being by their own Confession so visible the Scandal that it gives to Iews and Mahometans being so apparent and it carrying in its outward appearances such a Conformity to say at present no more to Heathenish Idolatry we think we have all possible advantages in this Argument We adhere to that Purity of Worship which is in both Testaments so much insisted on we avoid all Scandal and make no Approaches to Heathenism and follow the Pattern set us by the Primitive Church And as our simplicity of Worship needs not be defended since it proves it self so no proofs are brought for the other side but only a pretended usefulness in outward Figures to raise the Mind by the Senses to just Apprehensions of Spiritual Objects which allowing it true will only conclude for the Historical Use of Images but not for the directing our Worship towards them But the effect is quite contrary to the pretence for instead of raising the Mind by the Senses the Mind is rather sunk by them into gross Ideas The Bias of Human Nature lies to Sense and to form gross Imaginations of Incorporeal Objects and therefore instead of gratifying these we ought to wean our Minds from them and to raise them above them all we can Even Men of Speculation and Abstraction feel Nature in this grows too hard for them but the Vulgar is apt to fall so headlong into these Conceits that it looks like the laying of Snares for them to furnish them with such methods and helps for their having gross Thoughts of Spiritual Objects The fondness that the People have for Images their readiness to believe the most incredible Stories concerning them the expence they are at to Enrich and Adorn them their Prostrations before them their Confidence in them their humble and tender Embracing and Kissing of them their pompous and heathenish Processions to do them Honour the Fraternities erected for particular Images not to mention the more universal and established Practices of directing their Prayers to them of setting Lights before them and of Incensing them these I say are things too well known to such as have seen the way of that Religion that they should need to be much enlarged on and yet they are not only allowed of but encouraged Those among them who have too much good sense that they should sink into those foolish apprehensions themselves yet must not only bear with them but often comply with them to avoid the giving of Scandal as they call it not considering the much greater Scandal that they give when they encourage others by their practice to go on in these Follies The enlarging into all the corruptions occasioned by this way of Worship would carry me far but it seems not necessary the thing is so plain in it self The next Head
the concurrence of other Churches In the way of managing this every Body of Men has somewhat peculiar to it self and the Pastors of that Body are the properest Judges in that matter We know that the several Churches even while under one Empire had great varieties in their Forms as appears in the different Practices of the Eastern and Western Churches And as soon as the Roman Empire was broken we see this Variety did increase The Gallican Churches had their Missals different from the Roman And some Churches of Italy followed the Ambrosian But Charles the Great in compliance with the desires of the Pope got the Gallican Churches to depart from their own Missals and to receive the Roman which he might the rather do intending to have raised a New Empire to which a Conformity of Rights might have been a great Step. Even in this Church there was a great Variety of Usages which perhaps were begun under the Heptarchy when the Nation was subdivided into several Kingdoms It is therefore suitable to the Nature of Things to the Authority of the Magistrate and to the Obligations of the Pastoral Care That every Church should act within her self as an entire and independent Body The Churches owe only a Friendly and Brotherly Correspondence to one another but they owe to their own Body Government and Direction and such Provisions and Methods as are most likely to promote the great Ends of Religion and to preserve the Peace of the Society both in Church and State Therefore we are no other way bound by Antient Canons but as the same reason still subsisting we may see the same cause to continue them that there was at first to make them Of all the Bodies of the World the Church of Rome has the worst Grace to reproach us for departing in some Particulars from the Antient Canons since it was her ill Conduct that had brought them all into desuetude And it is not easy to revive again Antiquated Rules even though there may be good reason for it when they fall under that tacit Abrogation which arises out of a long and general disuse of them ARTICLE XXXV Of Homilies The Second Book of Homilies the several Titles whereof we have joined under this Article doth contain a godly and wholesome Doctrine and necessary for these Times as doth the Former Book of Homilies which were set forth in the Time of Edward the Sixth and therefore we judg them to be read in Churches by the Ministers diligently and distinctly that they may be understanded of the People The Names of the Homilies 1. Of the right use of the Church 2. Against Peril of Idolatry 3. Of repairing and keeping clean of Churches 4. Of Good Works First Of Fasting 5. Against Gluttony and Drunkenness 6. Against Excess of Apparel 7. Of Prayer 8. Of the Place and time of Prayer 9. That common Prayers and Sacraments ought to be ministred in a known tongue 10. Of the reverent estimation of God's Word 11. Of Alms-doing 12. Of the Nativity of Christ. 13. Of the Passion of Christ. 14. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 15. Of the worthy receiving of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ. 16. Of the Gifts of the Holy Ghost 17. For the Rogation-days 18. Of the state of Matrimony 19. Of Repentance 20. Against Idleness 21. Against Rebellion AT the time of the Reformation as there could not be found at first a sufficient Number of Preachers to instruct the whole Nation so those that did comply with the changes which were then made were not all well-affected to them so that it was not safe to trust this matter to the Capacity of the one side and to the Integrity of others Therefore to supply the Defects of some and to oblige the rest to teach according to the Form of sound Doctrine there were two Books of Homilies prepared the first was published in King Edward's time the second was not finished till about the time of his Death so it was not published before Queen Elizabeth's time The Design of them was to mix Speculative Points with Practical matters Some explain the Doctrine and others enforce the Rules of Life and Manners These are plain and short Discourses chiefly calculated to possess the Nation with a Sense of the Purity of the Gospel in opposition to the Corruptions of Popery and to reform it from those crying Sins that had been so much connived at under Popery while men knew the Price of them how to compensate for them and to redeem themselves from the Guilt of them by Masses and Sacraments by Indulgences and Absolutions In these Homilies the Scriptures are often applied as they were then understood not so critically as they have been explained since that time But by this Approbation of the two Books of Homilies it is not meant that every Passage of Scripture or Argument that is made use of in them is always convincing or that every Expression is so severely worded that it may not need a little Correction or Explanation All that we profess about them is only that they contain a godly and wholesom Doctrine This ratheâ— relates to the main Importance and Design of them than to every Passagâ— in them Though this may be said concerning them That considering thâ— Age they were written in the Imperfection of our Language and some lesser Defects they are Two very extraordinary Books Some of them arâ— better writ than others and are equal to any thing that has been writ upon those Subjects since that time Upon the whole matter every one whâ— subscribes the Articles ought to read them otherwise he subscribes a Blank he approves a Book implicitely and binds himself to read it as he may be required without knowing any thing concerning it This Approbation is not to be stretched so far as to carry in it a special Assent to every Particular in that whole Volume but a man must be persuaded of the main of the Doctrine that is taught in them To instance this in one particular since there are so many of the Homilies that charge the Church of Rome with Idolatry and that from so many different Topicks no man who thinks that Church is not guilty of Idolatry can with a good Conscience subscribe this Article That the Homilies contain a good and wholesom Doctrine and necessary for these times for according to his sense they contain a false and an uncharitable Charge of Idolatry against a Church that they think is not guilty of it and he will be apt to thâ—nk that this was done to heighten the Aversion of the Nation to it Therefore any who have such favourable thoughts of the Church of Rome are bound by the force of that Persuasion of theirs not to sign this Article but to declare against it as the authorizing of an Accusation against a Church which they think is ill grounded and is by consequence both unjust and uncharitable By necessary for these times is not to be meant
Magistratibus REgia Majesâ—as in hoc Angliae regno ac caeteris ejus dominiis summam habet potestatem ad quam omnium statuum hujus regni sive illi Ecclesiastici sint sive civiles in omnibus causis suprema gubernatio pertinet nulli externae jurisdictioni est subjecta nec esse debet Cum Regiae Majestati summam gubernationem tribuimus quibus titulis intelligimus animos quorundam calumniatorum offendi non damus Regibus nostris aut verbi Dei aut Sacramentorum administrationem quod etiam Injunctiones ab Elizabetha Regina nostra nuper editae apertissime testantur Sed eam tantum praerogativam quam in sacris Scripturis a Deo ipso omnibus piis Principibus videmus semper fuisse attributam hoc est ut omnes status atque ordines fidei suae a Deo commissos sive illi Ecclesiastici sint sive civiles in officio contineant conâ—umaces ac delinquentes gladio civili coerceant Romanus pontifex nullam habet jurisdictionem in hoc regno Angliae Leges Regni possunt Christianos propter capitalia gravia crimina morte punire Christianis licet ex mandato Magisâ—ratus arma portare justa bella administrare De illicita bonorum communicatione FAcultates bona Christianorum non sunt communia quoad jus possessionem ut quidam Anabaptisâ—ae falso jactant debet tamen quisque de his quae possidet pro facultatum ratione pauperibus eleemosynas benigne distribuere De jure jurando QUemadmodum juramentum vanum temerarium a Domino nostro Jesu Christo Apostolo ejus Jacobo Christianis hominibus interdictum esse faâ—emur 〈◊〉 â—hrisâ—ianorum Religionem minime prohibere censemus quin jubente magistratu in causa fidei charitatis jurare liceat modo id fiat juxta Prophetae doctrinam in justitia in judicio veritate Confirmatio Articulorum HIC liber antedictorum Articulorum jam denuo approbatus est per assensum consensum Serenissimae Reginae Elizabethae Dominae nostrae Dei gratia Angliae â—raâ—ciae Hiberniae Reginae defensoris fidel c. retinendus per totum Regnum Angliae exequendus Qui Articuli lecti sunt denuo confirmati subscriptione D. Archiepiscopi Episcoporum superioris domus totius Cleri inferioris domus in Convocatione Anno Domini 1571. THE TABLE of the Contents INâ—roduction Page 1 Hâ—resies gave the Rise to larger Articles Ibid. A Form of Doctrine settled by the Apostles 2 Bâ—shops sent râ—und them a Declaration of their Faith Ibid. These were afterwards enlarged 3 This dâ—ne at the Council of Nice Ibid. Mâ—ny wild Sects at the beginning of the Reformation 4 And many complying-Papists put them on framing this Collection Ibid. The Articles set out at first by the King's Authority 5 A Question whether they are only Articles of Peace or of Dâ—ctrine 6 They bind the Consciences of the Clergy Ibid. The Laity only bound to Peace by them 7 The Subscription to them imports an Assent to them and not only an acquiescing in them 8 But the Articles may have different Senses and if the Words will bear them there is no Prevâ—rication in subscribing them so Ibid. This illustrated in the Third Article 9 The various Readings of the Articles collated with the MSS. Ibid. An Account of those various Readings 16 ARTICLE I. 17 THat there is a God proved by the Consent of Mankind Ibid. Oâ—j 1. Some Nations do not believe a Deity This is answered 18 Obj. 2. It is not the same Belief among them alâ— This is answered Ibid. The Visible World proves a Deity 19 Time nor Number cannot be Eternal nor Infinite Ibid. Moral Arguments to prove that the World had a Beginning 20 Such a Regular Frame could not be fortuitâ—us Ibid. Objection from the Production of Insects answered 21 Argument from Miracles well attested 22 Argument from the Idea of God examined Ibid. God is Eternal and necâ—ssarily exists 23 The Vnity of the Deity Ibid. God is without Body 24 Outward Manifâ—stations only to declare his Presence and Authority 25 No successive Acts in God 26 Question concerning God's immanent Acts Ibid. God has no Pâ—ssions 27 Phrases in Scripture of these explained Ibid. Some Thoughts concerning the Power and Wisdom of God 28 True Ideas of the Goodness of God Ibid. Of Creation and Annihilation 30 Of the Providence of God 31 Objections against it answered 32 Whether God does immediately produce all things 33 Thought and Liberty not proper to Matter 34 Whether Beasts think or are only Machines Ibid. How Bodies and Spirits are united 35 The Doctrine of the Trinity 36 Whether revealed in the Old Testament or not 37 The Doctrine stated Ibid. Argument from the Form of Baptism 38 Other Arguments for it 39 This was received in the First Ages of Christianity 40 Some Attempt to the stating true Ideas of God 41 ARTICLE II. 43 CHrist how the Son of God Ibid. Argument from the Beginning of St. John's Gospel 44 Reflections on the state of the World at that time 45 Arguments from the Epistle to the Philippians Ibid. Other Arguments complicated 46 Argument from Adoration due to him 47 The Silence of the Jews proves this was not then thought to be Idolatry by them 49 Argument from the Epistle to the Hebrews 50 God and Man in Christ made one Person 51 An Account of Nestorius's Doctrine 52 The Truth of Christ's Resurrection Ibid. Christ was to us an Expiatory Sacrifice 53 An Account of Expiatory Sacrifiâ—eâ— 54 The Agonies of Christ explained 55 ARTICLE III. 56 RUffin first published this in the Creed Ibid. Several Senses put on this Article 57 A Local Descent into Hell Ibid. What may be the true sense of the Article 58 ARTICLE IV. 59 THE Proof of Christ's Resurrection Ibid. The Jews in that Time did not disprove it 60 Several Proofs of the Incredibility of a Forgery in this matter 61 The Nature and Proof of a Miracle 62 What must be ascribed to good or evil Spirits 63 The Apostles could not be imposed on Ibid. Nor could they have imposed on the World 64 Of Christ's Ascension 65 Curiosity in these matters taxed Ibid. The Authority with which Christ is now vested 66 ARTICLE V. 68 THE senses of the word Holy Ghost Ibid. It stands oft for a Person 69 Curiosities to be avoided about Procession Ibid. The Holy Ghost is truly God 70 ARTICLE VI. 71 THE Controversy about Oral Tradition 72 That was soon corrupted Ibid. Guarded against by Revelation 73 Tradition corrupted among the Jews 74 The Scripture appealed to by Christ and the Apostles 75 What is well proved from Scripture 76 Objections from the darkness of Scripture answered 77 No sure guard against Error nor against Sin 78 The Proof of the Canon of the Scripture 79 Particularly of the New Testament 80 These Books were early received 81 The Canon of the Old Testament proved 82 Concerning the Pentateuch 83 Objections against the Old
some of every sort of men Yet they declared openly against the other and said that if men were Circumcised or were willing to come under such a Yoke Christ profited them nothing and upon that supposition he had died in vain From this plain Precedent we see what a difference we ought to make between the holding Errors in Doctrinal Matters 5. Gal. 3. 2. Gal. 21. and the Imposing them as Articles of Faith We may live in Communion with those who hold Errors of the one sort but must not with those of the other This also shews the Tyranny of that Church which has imposed the belief of every one of her Doctrines on the Consciences of her Votaries under the highest pains of Anathema's and as Articles of Faith But whatever those at Trent did This Church very carefully avoided the laying that weight upon even those Doctrines which she received as true and therefore though she drew up a large Form of Doctrine yet to all her Lay-Sons this is only a Standard of what she teaches and the Articles are to them only Articles of Church-Communion The Citations that are brought from those two great Primates Laud and Bramhall go no further than this They do not seem to relate to the Clergy that subscribe them but to the Laity and Body of the People The People who do only join in Communion with us may well continue to do so though they may not be fully satisfied with every Proposition in them Unless they should think that they struck against any of the Articles or Foundations of Faith and as those Great men truly observe there is a great difference to be observed in this particular between the Imperious Spirit of the Church of Rome and the modest freedom which ours allows But I come in the next place to consider what the Clergy is bound to by their Subscriptions The meaning of every Subscription is to be taken from the design of the Imposer and from the words of the Subscription it self The Title of the Articles bears That they were agreed upon in Convocation For the avoiding of diversities of Opinions and for the stablishing consent touching true Religion Where it is evident that a Consent in Opinion is designed If we in the next place consider the Declaration that the Church has made in the Canons we shall find that though by the Fifth Canon which relates to the whole Body of the People such are only declared to be Excommunicated ipso facto who shall affirm any of the Articles to be Erroneous or such as he may not with a good Conscience Subscribe to yet the 36 th Canon is express for the Clergy requiring them to Subscribe willingly and ex animo and acknowledge all and every Article to be agreeable to the word of God Upon which Canon it is that the Form of the Subscription runs in these words which seem expresly to declare a man's own Opinion and not a bare consent to an Article of Peace or an Engagement to silence and submission The Statute of the 13 th of Queen Elizabeth cap. 12. which gives the Legal Authority to our requiring Subscriptions in order to a man's being capable of a Benefice requires that every Clergyman should read the Articles in the Church where he is to serve with a Declaration of his Unfeigned Assent to them These things make it very plain that the Subscriptions of the Clergy must be considered as a Declaration of their own Opinion and not as a bare Obligation to silence There arose in K. Iames the First 's Reign great and warm Disputes concerning the Decrees of God and those other Points that were setled in Holland by the Synod of Dort against the Remonstrants Divines of both sides among us appealed to the Articles and pretended they were favourable to them For though the first appearance of them seems to favour the Doctrine of Absolute Decrees and the Irresistibility of Grace yet there are many expressions that have another face and so those of the other Persuasion pleaded for themselves from these Upon this a Royal Declarations was set forth in which after that mention is made of those Disputes and that the men of all sides did take the Articles to be for them order is given for stopping those Disputes for the future and for shutting them in God's promises as they be generally set forth in the Holy Scriptures and the general meaning of the Articles of the Church of England according to them and that no man thereafter should put his own Sense or Comment to be the meaning of the Article but should take it in the Literal and Grammatical Sense In this there has been such a general acquiescing that the fierceness of these Disputes has gone off while men have been left to Subscribe the Articles according to their Literal and Grammatical Sense From which two Things are to be inferred The one is that the Subscription does import an Assent to the Article and the other is that an Article being conceived in such general words that it can admit of different Literal and Grammatical Senses even when the Senses given are plainly contrary one to another both sides may Subscribe the Article with a good Conscience and without any Equivocation To make this more sensible I shall give an instance of it in an Article concerning which there is no Dispute at present The Third Article concerning Christ's descent into Hell is capable of Three different Senses and all the Three are both Literal and Grammatical The First is that Christ descended locally into Hell and preached to the Spirits there in prison and this has one great advantage on its side that those who first prepared the Articles in K. Edward's Time were of this Opinion for they made it a part of it by adding in the Article those words of St. Peter as the Proof or Explanation of it Now though that period was left out in Q. Elizabeth's Time yet no Declaration was made against it so that this Sense was once in possession and was never expresly rejected Besides that it has great support from the Authority of many Fathers who understood the descent into Hell according to this Explanation A Second Sense of which that Article is capable is That by Hell is meant the Grave according to the Signification of the Original Word in the Hebrew and this is supported by the words of Christ's descending into the lower parts of the Earth as also by this That several Creeds that have this Article have not that or Christ's being buried and some that mention his Burial have not this of his Descent into Hell A Third Sense is That by Hell according to the Signification of the Greek Word is to be meant the Place or Region of Spirits separated from their Bodies So that by Christ's descent into Hell is only to be meant that his Soul was really and entirely disunited from his Body not lying dead in it as in an Apoplectical Fit nor
Holy Ghost it must be understood of the Father for when the Father is named with Christ sometimes he is called God simply and sometimes God the Father This Argument from the Threefold Salutation appears yet stronger in the Words in which St. Iohn addresses himself to the Seven Churches in the beginning of the Revelations Rev. 1.4 5. Grace and Peace from him which is which was and which is to come and from the seven Spirits which are before his Throne and from Iesus Christ. By the Seven Spirits must be meant one or more Persons since he wishes or declares Grace and Peace from them Now either this must be meant of Angels or of the Holy Ghost There are no where Prayers made or Blessings given in the Name of Angels This were indeed a worshipping them against which there are express Authorities not only in the other Books of the New Testament but in this Book in particular Nor can it be imagined that Angels could have been named before Iesus Christ So then it remains that Seven being a Number that imports both Variety and Perfection and that was the Sacred Number among the Iews this is a Mystical Expression which is no extraordinary thing in a Book that is all over mysterious And it imports one Person from whom all that variety of Gifts Administrations and Operations that were then in the Church did flow And this is the Holy Ghost But as to his being put in order before Christ as upon the supposition of an Equality the going out of the common order is no great matter so since there was to come after this a full Period that concerned Christ it might be a natural way of Writing to name him last Against all this it is objected That the Designation that is given to the first of these in a Circumlocution that imports Eternity shews that the Great God and not the Person of the Father is to be meant But then how could St. Iohn writing to the Churches wish them Grace and Peace from the other Two A few Verses after this the same Description of Eternal Duration is given to Christ and is a strong Proof of his Eternity and by consequence of his Divinity So what is brought so soon after as a Character of the Eternity of the Son may be also here used to denote the Eternal Father These are the Chief Places in which the Trinity is mentioned all together I do not insist on that contested Passage of St. Iohn's Epistle There are great doubtings made about it 1 Joh. 5.7 The main ground of doubting being the Silence of the Fathers who never made use of it in the Disputes with the Arians and Macedonians There are very considerable things urged on the other hand to support the Authority of that Passage yet I think it is safer to build upon sure and undisputable grounds So I leave it to be maintained by others who are more fully persuaded of its being Authentical There is no need of it This matter is capable of a very full Proof whether that Passage is believed to be a part of the Canon or not It is no small Confirmation of the Truth of this Doctrine that we are certain it was universally received over the whole Christian Church long before there was either a Christian Prince to support it by his Authority or a Council to establish it by Consent And indeed the Council of Nice did nothing but declare what was the Faith of the Christian Church with the addition only of the Word Consubstantial For if all the other Words of the Creed settled at Nice are acknowledged to be true that of the Three Persons being of one Substance will follow from thence by a just consequence We know both by what Tertullian and Novatian writ what was the Faith both of the Roman and the African Churches From Irenaeus we gather the Faith both of the Gallican and the Asiatick Churches And the whole proceedings in the Case of Samosatenus that was the solemnest business that past while the Church was under Oppression and Persecution give us the most convincing Proof possible not only of the Faith of the Eastern Churches at that time but of their Zeal likewise in watching against every Breach that was made in so Sacred a part of their Trust and Depositum These things have been fully opened and enlarged on by others to whom the Reader is referred I shall only desire him to make this Reflection on the state of Christianity at that time The Disputes that were then to be managed with the Heathens against the Deifying or Worshipping of Men and those extravagant Fables concerning the Genealogies of their Heroes and Gods must have obliged the Christians rather to have silenced and supprest the Doctrine of the Trinity than to have owned and published it So that nothing but their being assured that it was a Necessary and Fundamental Article of their Faith could have led them to own it in so publick a manner since the Advantages that the Heathen would have taken from it must be too visible not to be soon observed The Heathens retorted upon them their Doctrine of a Man's being a God and of God's having a Son And every one who engaged in this Controversy framed such Answers to these Objections as he thought he could best maintain This as it gave the Rise to the Errors which some brought into the Church so it furnishes us with a Copious Proof of the common Sense of the Christians of those Ages who all agreed in general to the Doctrine though they had many different and some very Erroneous ways of explaining it among them I now come to the special Proofs concerning each of the Three Persons But there being other Articles relating to the Son and the Holy Ghost the Proofs of these Two will belong more properly to the Explanation of those Articles Therefore all that belongs to this Article is to prove that the Father is truly God but that needs not be much insisted on for there is no dispute about it None deny that he is God many think that he is so truly God that there is no other that can be called God besides him unless it be in a larger sense of the word And therefore I will here conclude all that seems necessary to be said on this first Article on which if I have dwelt the longer it was because the stating the Idea of God right being the Fundamental Article of all Religion and the Key into every part of it this was to be done with all the Fulness and Clearness possible In a word to recapitulate a little what has been said The liveliest way of framing an Idea of God is to consider our own Souls which are said to be made after the Image of God An attentive Reflection on what we perceive in our selves will carry us further than any other thing whatsoever to form just and true Thoughts of God We perceive what Thought is but
an Oral Tradition which they themselves had not put in writing They do sometimes refer themselves to such things as they had delivered to particular Churches but by Tradition in the Apostles days and for some Ages after it is very clear that they meant only the conveyance of the Faith and not any unwritten Doctrines They reckoned the Faith was a sacred depositum which was committed to them and that was to be preserved pure among them But it were very easy to shew in the continued Succession of all the first Christian Writers That they still Appealed to the Scriptures That they Argued from them That they Condemned all Doctrines that were not contained in them and when at any time they brought human Authorities to justify their Opinions or Expressions they contented themselves with a very few and those very late Authorities So that their design in vouching them seems to be rather to clear themselves from the Imputation of having innovated any thing in the Doctrine or in the ways of expressing it than that they thought those Authorities were necessary to prove them by For in that case they must have taken a great deal more pains than they did to have followed up and proved the Tradition much higher than they went We do also plainly see that such Traditions as were not founded on Scripture were easily corrupted and on that account were laid aside by the succeeding Ages Such were the Opinion of Christ's Reign on Earth for a Thousand years The Saints not seeing God till the Resurrection The necessity of giving Infants the Eucharist The Divine Inspiration of the 70 Interpreters besides some more important Matters which in respect to those Times are not to be too much descanted upon It is also plain That the Gnosticks the Valentinians and other Hereticks began very early to set up a Pretension to a Tradition delivered by the Apostles to some particular persons as a Key for understanding the secret meanings that might be in Scripture in opposition to which both Irenaeus Tertullian and others Iren. I. 3. c. 1 2 3 4 5. Tertul. de presc Cap. 20 21 25 27 28. make use of Two sorts of Arguments The one is the Authority of the Scripture it self by which they confuted their Errors The other is a Point of Fact That there was no such Tradition In asserting this they appeal to those Churches which had been founded by the Apostles and in which a Succession of Bishops had been continued down They say in these we must search for Apostolical Tradition This was not said by them as if they had designed to establish Tradition as an Authority distinct from or equal to the Scriptures But only to shew the falshood of that pretence of the Hereticks and that there was no such Tradition for their Heresies as they gave out When this whole Matter is considered in all its parts such as 1 st That nothing is to be believed as an Article of Faith unless it appears to have been Revealed by God 2 dly That Oral Tradition appâ—ars both from the Nature of Man and the Experience of former Times to be an incompetent conveâ—er of Truth 3 dly That some Books were written for the conveyance of those Matters which have been in all Ages carefully preserved and esteemed sacred 4 thly That the Writers of the First Ages do always Argue from and Appeal to these Books And 5 thly That what they have said without Authority from them has been rejected in succeeding Ages the Truth of this Branch of our Article is fully made out If what is contain'd in theScripture in express words is theObject of our Faith then it will follow That whatsoever may be proved from thence by a just and lawful consequence is also to be believed Men may indeed Err in framing these Consequences and Deductions they may mistake or stretch them too far but though there is much Sophistry in the World yet there is also true Logick and a certain Thread of Reasoning And the sense of every Proposition being the same whether expressed always in the same or in different words then whatsoever appears to be clearly the sense of any place of Scripture is an Object of Faith tho it should be otherwise expressed than as it is in Scripture and every just Inference from it must be as true as the Proposition it self is Therefore it is a vain cavil to ask express words of Scripture for every Article That was the Method of all the Anciâ—nt Hereticks Christ and his Apostles Argued from the words and passages in the Old Testament to prove such things as agreed with the true sense of them and so did all the Fathers and therefore so may we do The great Objection to this is That the Scriptures are dark That the same place is capable of different Senses the Literal and the Mystical And therefore since we cannot understand the true Sense of the Scripture we must not Arguefrom it but seek for an Interpreterofit on whom we may depend All Sects Argue from thence and fancy that they find their Tenets in it And therefore this can be no sure way of finding out sacred Truth since so many do err that follow it In Answer to this it is to be considered That the Old Testament was delivered to the whole Nation of the Iews that Moses was read in the Synagogue in the hearing of the Women and Children that whole Nation was to take their Doctrine and Rules from it All Appeals wâ—re made to the Law and to the Prophets among them And though the Propâ—â—cies of the Old Testament were in their Stile and whole Contexture dark and hard to be understood yet when so great a Question as this Who was the true Messias came to be examined the proofs urged for it were Passages in the Old Testament Now the Question was How these were to be understood No Appeal was here made to Tradition or to Church-Authority but only by the Enemies of our Saviour Whereas he and his Disciples urge these passages in their true sense and in the consequences that arose out of them They did in that Appeal to the rational Faculties of those to whom they spoke The Christian Religion was at first delivered to poor and simple Multitudes who were both illiterate and weak the Epistles which are by much the hardest to be understood of the whole New Testament were Addressed to the whole Churches to all the Faithful or Saints that is to all the Christians in those Churches These were afterwards read in all thâ—ir Assemblies Upon this it may reasonably be asked Were these Writings clear in that Age or were they not If they were not it is unaccountable why they were addressed to the whole Body and how they came to be received and entertained as they were It is the End of Speech and Writing to make things to be understood and it is not supposable That Men Inspired by the Holy Ghost either could not or would
Conceit brought in a Superstitious Error in Practice among the Ancient Christians of delaying Baptism till Death as hoping that all Sins were then certainly pardoned A much more dangerous Error than even the Fatal One of trusting to a Death-bed Repentance For Baptism might have been more easily compassed and there was more offered in the way of Argument for building upon it than has been offered at for a Death-bed Repentance St. Peter's Denial his Repentance and his being restored to his Apostolical Dignity seem to be Recorded partly on this account to encourage us even after the most heinous Offences to return to God and never to reckon our Condition desperate were our Sins ever so many but as we find our Hearts hardened in them into an obstinate Impenitency Our Saviour has made our pardoning the offences that others commit against us the measure upon which we may expect pardon from God and he being asked What limits he set to the number of the faults that we were bound to pardon by the Day if Seven was not enough he carried it up to seventy times seven a vast number far beyond the number of offences that any Man will in all probability commit against another in a Day But if they should grow up to all that vast number of 490 yet if our Brother still turns again and repents Luk. 17.4 we are still bound to forgive Now since this is joined with what he declared that if we pardoned our Brother his offences our heavenly Father would also forgive us Matt. 18.35 then we may depend upon this That according to the sincerity of our Repentance our sins are always forgiven us And if this is the Nature of the New Covenant then the Church which is a Society formed upon it must proportion the Rules both of her Communion and Censure to those set in the Gospel A heinous Sin must give us a deeper sorrow and higer degrees of Repentance Scandals must also be taken off and forgiven when the offending Persons have repaired the offence that was given by them with suitable degrees of sorrow St. Paul in the beginnings of Christianity in which it being yet tender and not well known to the World was more apt to be both blemished and corrupted did yet order the Corinthians to receive back into their Communion the Incestuous Person 1 Cor. 5.5 whom by his own Directions they had delivered to Satan they had excommunicated him 2 Cor. 2.7 and by way of reverse to the Gifts of the Holy Ghost poured out upon all Christians he was possessed or haunted with an evil Spirit And yet as St. Paul declares that he forgave him so he orders them to forgive him likewise and he gives a reason for this Conduct from the common principles of pity and humanity lest he should be swallowed up by overmuch sorrow What is in that place mentioned only in a particular instance is extended to a general rule in the Epistle to the Galatians If any one is overtaken in a fault Gal. 6.1 ye which are spiritual restore such a one in the Spirit of meekness considering thy self lest thou also be tempted Where both the supposition that is made and the reason that is given do plainly insinuate that all Men are subject to their several infirmities So that every Man may be overtaken in faults 2 Tim 4.2 Tit. 1.13 1 Joh. 5.16 The charge given to Timothy and Titus to rebuke and exhort does suppose that Christians and even Bishops and Deacons were subject to faults that might deserve correction In that passage cited out of S. Iohn's Epistle as mention is made of a sin unto death for which they were not to pray so mention is made both there and in S. Iames's Epistle of sins for which they were to pray Jam. 5.15 16. and which upon their Prayers were to be forgiven All which places do not only express this to be the tenor of the New Covenant That the sins of Regenerated Persons were to be pardoned in it but they are also clear precedents and rules for the Churches to follow them in their Discipline And therefore those words in S. Iohn that a man born of God doth not and cannot sin must be understood in a larger sense of their not living in the practice of known sins of their not allowing themselves in that course of Life nor going on deliberately with it By the sin unto death is meat the same thing with that Apostacy mentioned in the 6th of the Hebrews Among the Iews some sins were punished by a total excision or cutting off Heb. 6.6 and this probably gave the rise to that designation of a sin unto death The words in the Epistle to the Hebrews do plainly import those who being not only Baptized but having also received a share of the Extraordinary Effusion of the Holy Ghost had totally renounced the Christian Religion and apostatized from the Faith which was a Crucifying of Christ anew Such Apostates to Judaism were thereby involved in the crime and guilt of the crucifying of Christ and the putting him to open shame Now Persons so Apostatizing could not be renewed again by Repentance it not being possible to do any thing toward their conviction that had not been already done and they hardning themselves against all that was offer'd for their conviction were arrived at such a degree of wickedness that it was impossible to work upon them there was nothing left to be tried that had not been already tried and proved to be ineffectual Yet it is to be observed that it was an unjustifiable piece of rigor to apply these words to all such as had fallen in a time of trial and persecution for as they had not those miraculous means of conviction which must be acknowledged to be the strongest the sensiblest and the most easily apprehended of all Arguments so that they could not sin so heinously as those had done who after what they had seen and felt revolted from the Faith Great difference is also to be made between a deliberate sin that a Man goes into upon choice and in which he continues and a Sin that the fears of death and the infirmities of Human Nature betray him into and out of which he quickly recovers himself and for which he mourns bitterly There was no reason to apply what is said in the New Testament against the wicked Apostates of that time to those who were overcome in the Persecution The latter sinned grievously yet it was not in the same kind nor are they in any sort to be compar'd to the former All affectations of excessive severity look like Pharisaical Hypocrisy whereas the Spirit of Christ which is made up of Humility and Charity will make us look so severely to our selves that on that very account we will be gentle even to the failings of others Yet on the other hand the Church ought to endeavour to conform her self so far to her Head and to his
Controversy with that which they think they can the most easily prove the one at the Establishing of Election and the other at the overthrowing of Reprobation Some have studied to seek out middle-ways For they observing that the Scriptures are writ in a great diversity of Stile in Treating of the Good or Evil that happens to us ascribing the one to God and imputing the other to our selves teaching us to ascribe the honour of all that is Good to God and to cast the blame of all that is Evil upon our selves have from thence concluded That God must have a different Influence and Causality in the one from what he has in the other But when they go to make this out they meet with great Difficulties yet they chuse to bear these rather than to involve themselves in those equally great if not greater Difficulties that are in either of the other Opinions They wrap up all in Two General Assertions that are great Practical Truths Let us Arrogate no good to our selves and impute no evil to God and so let the whole matter rest This may be thought by some the lazier as well as the safer way which avoids Difficulties rather than answers them whereas they say of both the Contending Sides That they are better at the starting of Difficulties than at the resolving of them Thus far I have gone upon the general in making such Reflections as will appear but too well grounded to those who have with any Attention read the chief Disputants of both Sides In these great Points all agree That Mercy is freely offered to the World in Christ Jesus That God did freely offer his Son to be our Propitiation and has freely accepted the Sacrifice of his Death in our stead whereas he might have Condemned every Man to have perished for his own Sins That God does in the Dispensation of this Gospel and the Promulgation of it to the several Nations act according to the Freedom of his Grace upon Reasons that are to us mysterious and past finding out That every Man is inexcusable in the sight of God That all Men are so far free as to be praise-worthy or blame-worthy for the Good or Evil that they do That every Man ought to employ his Faculties all he can and to pray and depend earnestly upon God for his Protection and Assistance That no Man in Practice ought to think that there is a Fate or Decree hanging over him and so become slothful in his Duty but that every Man ought to do the best he can as if there were no such Decree since whether there is or is not it is not possible for him to know what it is That every Man ought to be deeply humbled for his Sins in the sight of God without excusing himself by pretending a Decree was upon him or a want of Power in him That all Men are bound to obey the Rules set them in the Gospel and are to expect neither Mercy nor Favour from God but as they set themselves diligently about that And finally That at the Last Day all Men shall be Judged not according to secret Decrees but according to their own Works In these great Truths of which the greater part are Practical all Men agree If they would agree as honestly in the Practice of them as they do in Confessing them to be true they would do that which is much more important and necessary than to speculate and dispute about Niceties by which the World would quickly put on a new Face and then those few that might delight in curious Searches and Arguments would manage them with more Modesty and less Heat and be both less positive and less supercilious I have hitherto insisted on such general Reflections as seemed proper to these Questions I come now in the last place to examine how far our Church hath determined the Matter either in this Article or elsewhere How far she hath restrained her Sons and how far she hath left them at liberty For those different Opinions being so intricate in themselves and so apt â—o raise hot Disputes and to kindle lasting Quarrels it will not be suitable to that Moderation which our Church hath observed in all other things to sâ—retch her Words on these Heads beyond their strict sense The natural equity or reason of things ought rather to carry us on the other hand to as great a Comprehensiveness of all sides as may well consist with the Words in which our Church has expressed herself on those Heads It is not to be denied but that the Article seems to be framed according to St. Austin's Doctrine It supposes Men to be under a Curse and Damnation antecedently to Predestination from which they are delivered by it so it is directly against the Sâ—pralapsarian Doctrine Nor does the Article make any mention of Reprobation no not in a hint no Definition is made concerning it The Article does also seem to assert the Efficacy of Grace That in which the Knot of the whole Dfficulty lies is not Defined that is Whether God's Eternal Purpose or Decree was made according to what he foresaw his Creatures would do or purely upon an Absolute Will in order to his own Glory It is very probable that those who Penned it meant that the Decree was Absolute but yet since they have not said it those who subscribe the Articles do not seem to be bound to any thing that is not expressed in them And therefore since the Remonstrants do not deny but that God having foreseen what all Mankind would according to all the different Circumstances in which they should be put do or not do he upon that did by a firm and Eternal Decree lay that whole Design in all its Branches which he Executes in time they may subscribe this Article without renouncing their Opinion as to this matter On the other hand the Calvinists have less occasion for Scruple since the Article does seem more plainly to favour them The Three Cautions that are added to it do likewise intimate that St. Austin's Doctrine was designed to be settled by the Article For the danger of Mens having the sentence of God's Predestination always before their eyes which may occasion either desperation on the one hand or the wretchlesness of most unclean living on the other belongs only to that side since these Mischiefs do not arise out of the other Hypothesis The other Two of taking the Promises of God in the sense in which they are set forth to us in Holy Scriptures and of following that Will of God that is expresly declared to us in the Word of God relate very visibly to the same Opinion Though others do infer from these Cautions That the Doctrine laid down in the Article must be so understood as to agree with these Cautions and therefore they argue That since Absolute Predestination cannot consist with them that therefore the Article is to be otherwise explained They say the natural Consequence of an Absolute
Decree is either Presumption or Despair since a Man upon that bottom reckons That which way soever the Decree is made it must certainly be accomplished They also argue That because we must receive the Promises of God as conditional we must also believe the Decree to be conditional for Absolute Decrees exclude conditional Promises An Offer cannot be supposed to be made in earnest by him that has excluded the greatest number of Men from it by an antecedent Act of his own And if we must only follow the revealed Will of God we ought not to suppose that there is an Antecedent and Positive Will of God that has decreed our doing the contrary to what he has commanded Thus the one side argues That the Article as it lies in the plain meaning of those who conceived it does very expresly establish their Doctrine And the other argues from those Cautions that are added to it That it ought to be understood so as that it may agree with these Cautions And both sides find in the Article it self such grounds that they reckon they do not renounce their Opinions by subscribing it The Remonstrant side have this further to add That the Universal Extent of the Death of Christ seems to be very plainly affirmed in the most solemn part of all the Offices of the Church For in the Office of Communion and in the Prayer of Consecration we own That Christ by the one Oblation of himself once offered made there a full perfect and sufficient Sacrifice Oblation and Satisfaction for the Sins of the whole World Though the others say That by full perfect and sufficient is not to be understood that Christ's Death was intended to be a compleat Sacrifice and Satisfaction for the whole World but that in its own Value it was capable of being such This is thought too great a stretch put upon the words And there are yet more express words in our Church-Catechism to this purpose which is to be considered as the most solemn Declaration of the sense of the Church since that is the Doctrine in which she instructs all her Children And in that part of it which seems to be most important as being the short Summary of the Apostles Creed it is said God the Son who hath redeemed me and all Mankind Where all must stand in the same Extent of Universality as in the precedent and in the following words The Father who made me and all the World the Holy Ghost who sanctifieth me and all the Elect People of God which being to be understood severely and without exception this must also be taken in the same strictness There is another Argument brought from the Office of Baptism to prove that men may fall from a state of Grace and Regeneration for in the whole Office more particularly in the Thanksgiving after the Baptism it is affirmed That the Person baptized is Regenerated by God's Holy Spirit and is received for his own Child by Adoption Now since it is certain that many who are baptized fall from that state of Grace this seems to import That some of the Regenerate may fall away Which tho' it agree well with St. Austin's Doctrine yet it does not agree with the Calvinists Opinions Thus I have examined this matter in as short a compass as was possible and yet I do not know that I have forgot any important part of the whole Controversy though it is large and has many Branches I have kept as far as I can perceive that Indifference which I proposed to my self in the prosecuting of this matter and have not on this occasion declared my own Opinion though I have not avoided the doing it upon other occasions Since the Church has not been peremptory but that a Latitude has been left to different Opinions I thought it became me to make this Explanation of the Article such And therefore I have not endeavoured to possess the Reader with that which is my own sense in this matter but have laid the Force of the Arguments as well as the Weight of the Difficulties of both Sides before him with all the Advantages that I had found in the Books either of the one or of the other Persuasion And I leave the Choice as free to my Reader as the Church has done ARTICLE XVIII Of obtaining Eternal Salvation only by the Name of Christ. They also are to be accursed that presume to say That every man shall be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth so that he be diligent to frame his Life according to that Law and the Light of Nature For Holy Scripture doth set out unto us only the Name of Iesus Christ whereby men must be saved THE Impiety that is condemned in this Article was first taug htby some of the Heathen Oraters and Philosophers in the Fourth Century who in their Addresses to the Christian Emperors for the Tolerance of Paganism started this Thought that how lively soever it may seem when well set off in a piece of Eloquence will not bear a severe Argument That God is more honoured by the Varieties and different Methods of worshipping and serving him than if all should fall into the same way That this diversity has a Beauty in it and a suitableness to the Infinite Perfections of God and it does not look so like a mutual agreement or concert as when all Men worship him one way But this is rather a Flash of Wit than true Reasoning The Alcoran has carried this matter further to the asserting That all Men in all Religions are equally acceptable to God if they serve him faithfully in them The infusing this into the World that has a shew of Mercy in it made Men more easy to receive their Law and they took care by their extream Severity to fix them in it when they were once engaged for though they use no Force to make Men Musselmans yet they punish with all extremity every thing that looks like Apostacy from it if it is once received The Doctrine of Leviathan that makes Law to be Religion and Religion to be Law that is that obliges Subjects to believe that Religion to be true or at least to follow that which is enacted by the Laws of their Countrey must be built either on this foundation That there is no such thing as Revealed Religion but that it is only a Political Contrivance or that all Religions are equally acceptable to God Others having observ'd that it was a very small part of Mankind that had the advantages of the Christian Religion have thought it too cruel to damn in their thoughts all those who have not heard of it and yet have lived morally and virtuously according to their Light and Education And some to make themselves and others easy in accommodating their Religion to their secular Interests to excuse their changing and to quiet their Consciences have set up this Notion that seems to have a largeness both of good Nature and Charity in
belong'd to it but challenging a great many that were flatly denied and rejected Such as the right of receiving Appeals from the African Churches in which reiterated Instances and a bould Claim upon a Spurious Canon pretended to be of the Council of Nice were long pursued but those Churches asserted their Authority of ending all matters within themselves In all this Contest Infallibility was never claimed no more than it had been by Victor when he excommunicated the Asian Churches for observing Easter on the Fourteenth Day of the Moon and not on the Lord's-Day after according to the Custon of the Roman as well as of other Churches When Pope Stephen quarrelled with St. Cyprian about the rebaptizing of Hereticks Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 23 24 25. Cypr. Ep. 74 75. Firmil Con. Sard. C. 3 7. Cyprian and Firmilian were so far from submitting to his Authority that they speak of him with a freedom used by Equals and with severity that shewed they were far from thinking him Infallible When the whole East was distracted with the Disputes occasioned by the Arian Controversy there was so much Partiality in all their Councils that it was decreed That Appeals should be made to Pope Iulius and afterwards to his Successors though here was an occasion given to assert this Infallibility if it had been thought on yet none ever spoke of it Great Reverence was paid to that Church both because they believed it was founded by St. Peter and St. Paul and chiefly because it was the Imperial City for we see that all other Sees had that degree of Dignity given them which by the Constitution of the Roman Empire was lodged in their Cities And so when Byance was made the Imperial City and called New Rome though more commonly Constantinople it had a Patriarchal Dignity bestowed on it and was in all things declared equal to Old Rome only the point of Rank and Order excepted This was decreed in two General Councils the Second and the Fourth Con. Constant Can. 3. Con. Chalced C 28. in so express a manner that it alone before equitable Judges would fully shew the Sense of the Church in the Fourth and Fifth Century upon this Head When Pope Liberius condemned Athanasius and subscribed to Semi-Arianism this was never considered as a New Decision in that matter so that it altered the the state of it No use was made of it nor was any Argument drawn from it Liberius was universally condemned for what he done and when he repented of it and retracted it he was again owned by the Church We have in the Sixth Century a most undeniable Instance of the Sense of the whole Church in this matter Pope Honorius was by the Sixth General Council condemned as a Monothelite and this in the presence of the Popes Legates and he was anathematized by several of the succeeding Popes It is to no purpose here to examine whether he was justly or unjustly condemned it is e nough that the Sense both of the Eaâ—tern and Western Church appeared evidently in that Age upon these two Points That a Pope might be a Heretick and that being such he might be held accursed for it Con. Sinuess An. 303. Tom. 1. Conc. And in that time there was not any one that suggested that either he could not fall into Heresy since our Saviour had prayed that St. Peter's Faith might not fail or that if he had fallen into it he must be left to the Judgment of God but that the Holy See according to the Fable of P. Marcellin could be judged by no body The Confusions that followed for some Ages in the Western Parts of Europe more particularly in Italy gave occasion to the Bishops of Rome to extend their Authority The Emperors at Constantinople and their Exarchs at Ravenna studied to make them sure to their Interests yet still asserting their Authority over them The new Conquerors studied also to gain them to their side and they managed their matter so dextrously that they went on still increasing and extending their Authority till being much straitned by the Kings of the Lombards they were protected by a new Conquering Family that arose in France in the Eighth Century who to give Credit both to their Usurpation of that Crown and to the extending their Dominions into Italy and the assuming the Empire of the West did both protect and enrich them and enlarged their Authority the greatness of which they reckoned could do them no hurt as long as they kept the Confirmation of their Election to themselves That Family became quickly too feeble to hold that Power long and then an Imposture was published of a Volume of the Decretal Epistles of the Popes of the first Ages in which they were represented as acting according to those high Claims to which they were then beginning to pretend Those Ages were too blind and too ignorant to be capable of searching critically into the truth of this Collection it quickly passed for â—urrent and though some in the beginning disputed it yet that was soon born down and the Credit of that Work was established It furnished them with Precedents that they were careful enough not only to follow but to outdo Thus a Work which is now as universally rejected by the Learned Men of their own Body as spurious as it was then implicity taken for genuine gave the chief Foundation during many Ages to their unbounded Authority And this furnishes us with a very just Prejudice against it That it was managed with so much Fraud and Imposture to which they added afterwards much Cruelty and Violence the two worst Characters possible and the least likely to be found joined with Infallibility For it is reasonable enough to apprehend that if God had lodged such a Privilege any where that he would have so influenced those who were the Depositaries of it that they should have appeared somewhat like that Authority to which they laid Claim and that he would not have forsaken them so that for above Eight hundred Years the Papacy as it is represented by their own Writers is perhaps the worst Succession of Men that is to be found in History But now to come more close to prove what is here asserted in this part of the Article If all those Doctrines which were established at Trent and that have been confirmed by Popes and most of them brought into a new Creed and made parts of it are found to be gross Errors or if but any one of them should be found to be an Error then there is no doubt to be made but that the Church of Rome hath erred So the Proof brought against every one of these is likewise a proof against their Infallibility But I shall here give one Instance of an Error which will not be denied by the greater part of the Church of Rome They have now for above Six hundred Years asserted That they had an Authority over Princes not only to convict and
Courts and Councils about their Gates by the Gates of Hell may be understood the Designs and Contrivances of the Powers of Darkness which should never prevail over the Church to root it out and destroy it for the Word rendred prevail does signify an intire Victory This only imports That the Church should be still preserved against all the Attempts of Hell but does not intimate that no Error was ever to get into it Mat. 3.2 Mat. 4.17 By the words Kingdom of Heaven generally through the whole Gospel the Dispensation of the Messias is understood This appears evidently from the words with which both St. Iohn Baptist and our Saviour begun their Preaching Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand And the many Parables and Comparisons that Christ gave of the Kingdom of Heaven can only be understood of the Preaching of the Gospel This being then agreed to the most natural and the least forced Exposition of those words must be that St. Peter was to open the Dispensation of the Gospel The proper use of a Key is to open a Door And as this agrees with these words He that hath the Key of the House of David that openeth and no man shutteth Rev. 3.7 Luk. 11.51 and shutteth and no man openeth and with the Phrase of the Key of Knowledge by which the Lawyers are described for they had a Key with Writing-Tables given them as the Badges of their Profession So it agrees with the accomplishment of this promise in St. Peter who first opened the Gospel to the Iews after the wonderful Effusion of the Holy Ghost And more eminently when he first opened the Door to the Gentiles preaching to Cornelius and Baptizing him and his Houshold to which the Phrase of the Kingdom of Heaven seems to have a more particular relation This Dispensation was committed to St. Peter and seems to be claimed by him as his peculiar Privilege in the Council at Ierusalem This is a clear and plain sense of these words For those who would carry them further and understand by the Kingdom of Heaven our Eternal Happiness must use many distinctions otherwise if they Expound them literally they will ascribe to St. Peter that which certainly could only belong to our Saviour himsâ—lf Though at the same time it is not to be denied but that under the figure of Keys the power of Discipline and the Conduct and Management of Christians may be understood But as to this all the Pastors of the Church have their share in it nor can it be appropriated to any one Person As for that of binding and loosing and the confirming in Heaven what he should do in Earth whatever it may signify it is no special Grant to St. Peter For the same words are spoken by our Saviour elsewhere to all the Apostles So this is given equally to them all The words binding and loosing are used by the Iewish Writers in the sense of affirming or denying the Obligation of any Precept of the Law that might be in dispute So according to this common Form of Speech and the sense formerly given to the words Kingdom of Heaven the meaning of these words must be That Christ committed to the Apostles the Dispensing his Gospel to the World by which he Authorized them to dissolve the Obligation of the Mosaical Laws and to give other Laws to the Christian Church which they should do under such visible Characters of a Divine Authority impowering and conducting them in it that it should be very evident that what they did on Earth was also ratifyed in Heaven These words thus understood carry in them a clear sense which agrees with the whole Design of the Gospel But whatsoever their sense may be it is plain that there was nothing given peculiarly to St. Peter by them which was not likewise given to the rest of the Apostles Nor do these words of our Saviour to St. Peter import any thing of a Successive Infallibility that was to be derived from him with any distinction beyond the other Apostles Unless 〈◊〉 were a Priority of Order and Dignity and whatever that was there is 〈◊〉 so much as a hint given that it was to descend from him to any See or Succession of Bishops As for our Saviour's praying that St. Peter's Faith might not fail And his restoring him to his Apostolical Function by a thrice repeated charge Feed my sheep feed my lambs that has such a visible Relation to his fall Luk. 22.31 John 21.15 16 17. and to his denying him that it does not seem necessary to enlarge further on the making it out or on shewing that these words are capable of no other Signification and cannot be carried further The Importance of this Argument rather than the Difficulty of it has made it necessary to dwell fully upon it So much depends upon it and the Missionaries of the Church of Rome are so well Instructed in it that it ought to be well considered for how little strength soever there may be in the Arguments brought to prove this Infallibility yet the colours are specious and they are commonly managed both with much Art and with great Confidence ARTICLE XX. Of the Authority of the Church The Church hath Power to decree Rights or Ceremonies and Authority in Matters of Faith And yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Word written neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another Wherefore although the Church be a Witness and Keeper of Holy Writ yet as it ought not to decree any thing against the same so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of Salvation THIS Article consists of Two parts The first asserts a Power in the Church both to decree Rites and Ceremonies and to judge in matters of Faith The second limits this Power over matters of Faith to the Scriptures so that it must neither contradict them nor add any Articles as necessary to Salvation to those contained in them This is suitable to some Words that were once in the Fifth Article but were afterwards left out instead of which the first words of this Article were put in this place according to the Printed Editions tho they are not in the Original of the Articles signed by both Houses of Convocation that are yet extant As to the first part of the Article concerning the Power of the Church either with relation to Ceremonies or Points of Faith the dispute lies only with those who deny all Church-Power and think that Churches ought to be in all things limited by the Rules set in Scripture and that where the Scriptures are silent there ought to be no Rules made but that all Men should be left to their Liberty And in particular That the appointing new Ceremonies looks like a reproaching of the Apostles as if their Constitutions had been so defective that those defects
could they offer at it in a plain contradiction to such Principles as are consistent with the Christian Religion if the Doctrine of the Roman Church is true Here then we have not only the Scripture but Tradition fully of our side Some pretended Christians it is true did very early Worship Images but those were the Gnosticks held in detestation by all the Orthodox Irenaeus Epiphanius and St. Austin tell us Iren. l. 1. c. 24. Epiph. Haeres 27. August de Haeres cap. 7. that they Worshipped the Images of Christ together with Pythagoras Plato and Aristotle Nor are they only blamed for Worshipping the Images of Christ together with these of the Philosophers but they are particularly blamed for having several sorts of Images and Worshipping these as the Heathens did and that among these there was an Image of Christ which they pretended to have had from Pilate Besides these Corrupters of Christianity there were no others among the Christians of the first Ages that Worshipped Images This was so well known to the Heathens that they bring this among other things as a reproach against the Christians that they had no Images Which the first Apologists are so far from denying that they answered them That it was impossible for him who knew God to Worship Images But as human Nature is inclined to visible Objects of Worship so it seems some began to Paint the Walls of their Churches with Pictures or at least moved for it In the beginning of the Fourth Century this was condemned by the Council of Eliberis Can. 36. It pleases us to have no Pictures in Churches lest that which is Worshipped should be Painted upon the Walls Towards the end of that Century we have an account given us by Epiphanius Epiph. ep ad Joan. Hieros of his Indignation occasioned by a Picture that he saw upon a Veil at Anablatha He did not much consider whose Picture it was whether a Picture of Christ or of some Saint he positively affirms it was against the Authority of the Scriptures and the Christian Religion and therefore he tore it but supplied that Church with another Veil It seems private Persons had Statues of Christ and the Apostles Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 18. Aug. in Psal. 113. de Moribus Eccl. Cath. c. 34. which Eusebius censures where he reports it as a remnant of Heathenism It is plain enough from some passages in St. Austin that he knew of no Images in Churches in the beginning of the Fifth Century It is true they began to be brought before that time into some of the Churches of Pontus and Cappadocia which was done very probably to draw the Heathens by this piece of conformity to them to like the Christian Worship the better For that humour began to work and appeared in many Instances of other kinds as well as in this It was not possible that People could see Pictures in their Churches long without paying some marks of respect to them which grew in a little time to the downright worship of them A famous instance we have of this in the Sixth Century Serenus Bishop of Marseilles finding that he could not restrain his People from the Worship of Images broke them in pieces upon which Pope Gregory writ to him blaming him indeed for breaking the Images Greg. Epist. l. 9. Ep. 9. but commending him for not allowing them to be worshipped This he prosecutes in a variety of very plain Expressions It is one thing to worship an Image and another thing to learn by it what is to be worshipped He says they were set up not to be worshipped but to instruct the Ignorant and cites our Saviour's Words Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve to prove that it was not lawful to worship the work of mens hands We see by a fragment cited in the Second Nicene Council that both Iews and Gentiles took advantages from the Worship of Images to reproach the Christians soon after that time The Iews were scandalized at their Worshipping Images as being expresly against the Command of God The Gentiles had also by it great advantages of turning back upon the Christians all that had been written against their Images in the former Ages At last in the beginning of the Eighth Century the famous Controversy about the having or breaking of Images grew hot The Churches of Italy were so set on the worshipping of them This is owned by all the Historians of that Age Anastasius Zonaras Câ—drenus Glycâ—s Theophanes Sigebert Otho Pris. Urspergensis Sigonius Rubens and Ciaâ—â—nius that Pope Gregory the Second gives this for the reason of their Rebelling against the Emperor because of his opposition to Images And here in little more than an Hundred Years the See of Rome changed its Doctrine Pope Gregory the Second being as positive for the worshipping them as the first of that Name had been against it Violent Contentions arose upon this Head The breakers of Images were charged with Iudaism Samaritanism and Manicheism and the worshippers of them were charged with Gentilism and Idolatry One General Council at Constantinople consisting of about Three hundred and thirty eight Bishops condemned the Worshipping them as Idolatrous but another at Nice of Three hundred and fifty Bishops though others say they were only Three hundred asserted the Worship of them Yet as soon as this was known in the West how active soever the See of Rome was for establishing their Worship a Council of about Three hundred Bishops met at Francfort under Charles the Great which condemned the Nicene Council together with the Worship of Images The Gallican Church insisted long upon this matter Books were published in the Name of Charles the Great against them A Council held at Paris under his Son did also condemn Image-worship as contrary to the Honour that is due to God only and to the Commands that he has given us in Scripture The Nicene Council was rejected here in England as our Historians tell us because it asserted the Adoration of Images which the Church of God abhors Agobard Bishop of Lions and Claud of Turin writ against it the former writ with great vehemence The Learned Men of that Communion do now acknowledge that what he writ was according to the sense of the Gallican Church in that Age And even Ionas of Orleans who studied to moderate the matter and to reconcile the Gallican Bishops to the See of Rome yet does himself declare against the Worship of Images We are not concerned to examine how it came that all this vigorous opposition to Image-worship went off so soon It is enough to us that it was once made so resolutely let those who think it so incredible a thing that Churches should depart from the received Traditions answer this as they can As for the Methods then used and the Arguments that were then brought to infuse this Doctrine into the World Acta Con. Nic. 2. Action 4 5 6
not only in the point of Redemption which is not denied by those of the Church of Rome but even in the point of Intercession for when St. Paul is treating concerning the Prayers and Supplications that are to be offered for all Men he concludes that Direction in these Words For there is one God and one Mediator between God and Man 1 Tim. 2. the Man Christ Iesus We think the silence of the New Testament might be a sufficient Argument for this But these Words go farther and imply a Prohibition to address our Prayers to God by any other Mediator All the Directions that are given us of trusting in God and praying to him are upon the matter Prohibitions of trusting to any other or of calling on any other Invocation and Faith are joyned together How shall they call on him in whom they have not believed Rom. 10.14 So that we ought only to pray to God and to Christ according to those words Ye believe in God believe ye also in me John 14.1 We do also know that it was a part of Heathenish Idolatry to Invocate either Demons or departed Men whom they considered as good Beings subordinate to the Divine Essence and imployed by God in the Government of the World and they had almost the same Speculations about them that have been since introduced into the Church concerning Angels and Saints In the condemning all Idolatry no reserve is made in Scripture for this as being faulty only because it was applied wrong or that it might be set right when directed better On the contrary when some Men under the pretence of Humility and of Will-worship Col. 2.18 did according to the Platonick Notions offer to bring in the Worship of Angels into the Church of Colosse pretending as is probable that those Spirits who were imployed by God in the Ministry of the Gospel ought in gratitude for that Service and out of respect to their Dignity to be worshipped St. Paul condemns all this without any reserves made for lower degrees of Worship he charges the Christians to beware of that vain Philosophy Verse 8 9 10. and not to be deceived by those shews of Humility or the Speculations of Men who pretended to explain that which they did not know as intruding into things which they had not seen vainly puffed up by their fleshly Mind If any degrees of invocating Saints or Angels had been consistent with the Christian Religion this was the proper place of declaring them But the condemning that matter so absolutely looks as a very express Prohibition of all sort of Worship to Angels And when St. Iohn fell down to Worship the Angel that had made him such glorious Discoveries upon two several Occasions The Answer he had was See thou do it not Rev. 19.10 Rev. 22.9 worship God I am thy fellow servant It is probable enough that St. Iohn might imagine that the Angel who had made such Discoveries to him was Iesus Christ but the Answer plainly shews that no sort of Worship ought to be offered to Angels nor to any but God The reason given excludes all sort of Worship for that cannot be among Fellow-Servants As Angels are thus forbid to be worshipped so no mention is made of worshipping or invocating anySaints that had died for theFaith such as St. Stephen and St. Iames. In the Epistle to the Hebrews Heb. 13.7 they are required to Remember them which had the rule over them and to follow their faith but not a word of praying to them So that if either the Silence of the Scriptures on this Head or if plain Declarations to the contrary could decide this Matter the Controversy would be soon at an end Christ is always proposed to us as the only Person by whom we come unto God And when St. Paul speaks against the worshipping of Angels he sets Christ out in his Glory in Opposition to it For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily and ye are compleat in him which is the Head of all Principality and Power Col. 2.9 10. pursuing that reason in a great many particulars From the Scriptures if we go to the first Ages of Christianity we find nothing that favours this but a great deal to the contrary Irenaeus disclaims the Invocation of Angels The memorable Passage of the Church of Smirna formerly cited is a full Proof of their Sense in this matter Clemens Alexandrinus and Tertullian do often mention the Worship that was given to God only Clem. Protrep Tertul. Apol. c. 17. by Prayer and so far were they at that time from praying to Saints that they prayed for them as was formerly explained They thought they were not yet in the Presence of God so they could not pray to them as long as that Opinion continued That Form of praying for them is in the Apostolical Constitutions In all that Collection which seems to be a Work of the Fourth or Fifth Century there is not a word that intimates their Praying to Saints In the Council of Laodicea there is an express Condemnation of those who invocated Angels Con. Laod. c. 35. Just. Mart. Apol. 2. Iren. l. 2. c. 35. Orig. Con. Cels. l. 8. Tert. de Orat. c. 1. Athanas. cont Arian Orat. 1 3 4. Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 40. Greg. Niss in Basil. cont Eunap Basil. Hom. 27. cont Eunom l. 4. Epiph. Haeres 64 69 78 79. Theod. de Haer. Fabul l. 5. c. 3. Chrysost. de Trinit this is called a Secret Idolatry and a forsaking of our Lord Iesus Christ. The first Apologists for Christianity do arraign the Worship of Demons and of such as had once lived on Earth in a Stile that shewed they did not apprehend that the Argument could be turned against them for their worshipping either Angels or departed Saints When the Arian Controversy arose the Invocation of Christ is urged by Athanasius Basil Cyril and other Fathers as an evident Argument that he was neither made nor created since they did not pray to Angels or any other Creatures from whence they concluded that Christ was God These are convincing Proofs of the Doctrine of the Three first and of a good part of the Fourth Century It is true as was confessed upon the former Head they began with Martyrs in the end of the Fourth Century They fancied they heard those that called to them and upon that it was no wonder if they invocated them and so private Prayers to them began But as appears both by the Constitutions and several of the Writers of that time the Publick Offices were yet preserved pure St. Austin says plainly The Gentiles built Temples raised Altars ordained Priests and offered Sacrifices to their Gods Aug. con Serm. Ar. c. 29. con Max. l. 13. c. 4. Aug. de Civ Dei l. 22. c. 10. l. 8. c. 27. but we do not erect Temples to our Martyrs as if they were Gods but Memories as to dead Men whose Spirits live with
Penance The Aggregate of all these is the Matter and the Form are the words Ego te Absolvo Now besides what we have to say upon every one of these particulars the Matter of a Sacrament must be some visible Sign applied to him that receives it Innoc. 3. in 4. later Can. 21 22. Conc. Trid. Sess. 14. c. 5. It is therefore a very absurd thing to imagine that a Man 's own Thoughts Words or Actions can be the Matter of a Sacrament How can this be sanctified or applied to him It will be a thing no less absurd to make the Form of a Sacrament to be a practice not much elder than Four hundred Year since no Ritual can be produced nor Author cited for this Form for above a Thousand Years after Christ. All the ancient Forms of receiving Penitents having been by a Blessing in the Form of a Prayer or a Declaration but none of them in these positive words I Absolve thee We think this want of Matter and this new invented Form being without any Institution in Scripture and different from so long a practice of the whole Church are such reasons that we are fully justified in denying Penance to be a Sacrament But because the Doctrine of Repentance is a point of the highest importance there arise several things here that ought to be very carefully examined As to Confession we find in the Scriptures that such as desired St. Iohn's Baptism Matt. 3.6 came confessing their sins but that was previous to Baptism We find also that scandalous Persons were to be openly rebuked before all and so to be put to shame 1 Tim. 5.10 in which no doubt there was a Confession and a publication of the Sin but that was a matter of the Discipline and Order of the Church which made it necessary to note such persons as walked disorderly 2 Thess. 3.14 1 Cor. 5.11 and to have no fellowship with them sometimes not so much as to eat with them who being Christians and such as were called Brothers were a reproach to their Profession But besides the Power given to the Apostles of binding and loosing which as was said on another Head belonged to other matters we find that when our Saviour breathed on his Apostles and gave them the Holy Ghost he with that told them That whose soever sins they remitted John 20.23 they were remitted and whose soever sins they retained they were retained Since a Power of remitting or retaining sin was thus given to them they infer that it seems reasonable that in order to their dispensing it with a due caution the knowledge of all sins ought to be laid open to them Some have thought that this was a Personal thing given to the Apostles with that Miraculous effusion of the Holy Ghost with which such a discerning of Spirits was communicated to them that they could discern the sincerity or hypocrisy of those that came before them by this St. Peter discovered the sin of Ananias and Saphira Acts 5.3 9. and he also saw that Simon of Samaria was in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity So they conclude that this was a part of that extraordinary and miraculous Authority which was given to the Apostles and to them only Acts 8.23 But others who distinguish between the full extent of this Power and the Ministerial Authority that is still to be continued in the Church do believe that these Words may in a lower and more limited Sense belong to the Successors of the Apostles but they argue very strongly that if these Words are to be understood in their full extent as they lie a Priest has by them an absolute and unlimited Power in this Matter not restrained to Conditions or Rules so that if he does Pardon or retain sins whether in that he does right or wrong the sins must be pardoned or retained accordingly He may indeed sin in using it wrong for which he must answer to God but he seems by the literal meaning of these Words to be cloathed with such a Plenipotentiary Authority that his Act must be valid though he may be punished for imploying it amiss An Ambassador that has full Powers though limited by secret Instructions does bind him that so empowered him by every Act that he does pursuant to his Powers how much soever it may go beyond his Instructions for how obnoxious soever that may render him to his Master it does not at all lessen the Authority of what he has done nor the Obligation that arises out of it So these words of Christ's if applied to all Priests must belong to them in their full extent and if so the Salvation or the Damnation of Mankind is put absolutely in the Priest's Power Nor can it be answered That the Conditions of the Pardon of sin that are expressed in the other parts of the Gospel are here to be understood though they are not expressed As we are said to be saved if we believe which does not imply that a single Act of believing the Gospel without any thing else puts us in a state of Salvation In Opposition to this we Answer That the Gospel having so described Faith to us as the Root of all other Graces and Virtues as that which produces them and which is known by them all that is promised upon our Faith must be understood of a Faith so qualified as the Gospel represents it and therefore that cannot be applied to this Case where an unlimited Authority is so particularly exprest that no Condition seems to be implied in it If any Conditions are elsewhere laid upon us in order to our Salvation then according to their Doctrine we may say that of them which they say of Contrition upon this occasion That they are necessary when we cannot procure the Priest's Pardon but that by it the want of them all may be supplied and that the Obligation to them all is superseded by it And if any Conditions are to be understood as limits upon this Power why are not all the Conditions of the Gospel Faith Hope and Charity Contrition and New Obedience made necessary in order to the lawful dispensing of it as well as Confession Attrition and the doing the Penance enjoyned Therefore since no Condition is here named as a restraint upon this General Power that is pretended to be given to Priests by those words of our Saviour they must either be understood as simple and unconditional or they must be limited to all the Conditions that are expressed in the Gospel For there is not the colour of a reason to restrain them to some of them and to leave out the rest And thus we think we are fully justified by saying that by these Words our Saviour did indeed fully empower the Apostles to publish his Gospel to the World and to declare the Terms of Salvation and of obtaining the Pardon of Sin in which they were to be infallibly assisted so that they could
these are of no Value being only Inventions to deceive Men and to expose Religion to Mockery But even severe and afflicting Fasting if done only as a Punishment which when it is over the Penance is believed to be compleated gives such a low Idea of God and Religion that from thence Men are led to think very slightly of Sin when they know at what price they can carry it off Such a continuance in Fasting in order to Prayer as humbles and depresses Nature and raises the Mind is a great mean to reform the World but Fasting as a prescribed Task to expiate our Sins is a scorn put upon Religion Prayer when it arises from a serious Heart that is earnest in it and when it becomes habitual is certainly a most effectual mean to reform the World and to fetch down Divine Assistances But to appoint so many vocal Prayers to be gone through as a Task and then to tell the World that the running through these with few or no inward Acts accompanying them is Contrition or Attrition this is liker a Design to root out all the Impressions of Religion and all sense of that Repentance which the Gospel requires than to promote it This may be a Task fit to accustom Children to but it is contrary to the true Genius of Religion to teach Men instead of that reasonable Service that we ought to offer up to God to give him only the Labour of the Lips which is the Sacrifice of Fools Prayers gone through as a Task can be of no value and can find no acceptation in the sight of God And as St. Paul said that if he gave all his goods to the poor and had not Charity he was nothing 1 Cor. 13 1 2. So the greatest profusion of Alms-giving when done in a mercenary Way to buy off and to purchase a Pardon is the turning of God's House from being a house of prayer to be a den of thieves Upon all these Reasons we except to the whole Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome as to the Satisfaction made by doing Penance And in the last place we except to the Form of Absolution in these Words I Absolve thee We of this Church who use it only to such as are thought to be near Death cannot be meant to understand any thing by it but the full Peace and Pardon of the Church For if we meant a Pardon with relation to God we ought to use it upon many other occasions The Pardon that we give in the Name of God is only declaratory of his Pardon or supplicatory in a Prayer to him for Pardon In this we have the whole Practice of the Church till the Twelfth Century universally of our side All the Fathers all the ancient Liturgies all that have writ upon the Offices and the first Schoolmen are so express in this Matter that the thing in Fact cannot be denied Morinus has published so many of their old Rituals that he has put an end to all doubting about it In the Twelfth Century some few began to use the Words I Absolve thee Yet to soften this Expression that seemed New and Bold some tempered it with these Words in so far as it is granted to my frailty and others with those Words as far as the accusation comes from thee and as the pardon is in me Yet this Form was but little practised So that William Bishop of Paris speaks of the Form of Absolution as given only in a Prayer and not as given in these Words I Absolve thee He lived in the beginning of the Fourteenth Century so that this Practice though begun in other Places before that Time yet was not known long after in so publick a City as Paris But some Schoolmen begun to defend it as implying only a declaration of the Pardon pronounced by the Priest And this having an air of more Authority and being once justified by Learned Men did so universally prevail that in little more than sixty Years time it became the universal Practice of the whole Latin Church So sure a thing is Tradition and so impossible to be changed as they pretend when within the compass of one Age the new Form I Absolve thee was not so much as generally known and before the end of it the old Form of doing it in a Prayer with Imposition of Hands was quite worn out The Idea that arises naturally out of these words is that the Priest pardons Sins and since that is subject to such abuses and has let in so much corruption upon that Church we think we have reason not only to deny that Penance is a Sacrament but likewise to affirm that they have corrupted this great and important Doctrine of Repentance in all the Parts and Branches of it Nor is the matter mended with that Prayer that follows the Absolution The Passion of our Lord Iesus Christ Rituale Romanum de sacr poeniten the Merits of the Blessed Virgin and all the Saints and all the good that thou hast done and the evil that thou hast suffered be to thee for the remission of Sins the increase of Grace and the reward of eternal Life The third Sacrament rejected by this Article is Orders which is reckoned the sixth by the Church of Rome We affirm that Christ appointed a Succession of Pastors in different Ranks to be continued in his Church for the Work of the Gospel and the Care of Souls and that as the Apostles setled the Churches they appointed different Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons And we believe that all who are dedicated to serve in these Ministries after they are examined and judged worthy of them ought to be separated to them by the Imposition of Hands and by Prayer These were the only Rites that we find practised by the Apostles For many Ages the Church of God used no other therefore we acknowledge that Bishops Priests and Deacons ought to be blest and dedicated to the HolyMinistry by Imposition of Hands and Prayer And that then they are received according to the Order and Practice setled by the Apostles to serve in their respective Degrees Men thus separated have thereby Authority to perfect the Saints or Christians that is to perform the Sacred Functions among them to minister to them and to build them up in their most Holy Faith And we think no other Persons without such a Separation and Consecration can lawfully touch the Holy Things In all which we separate the Qualifications of the Functions from the inward Qualities of the Person the one not at all depending on the other The one relating only to the Order and the good Government of the Society and the other relating indeed to the Salvation of him that Officiates but not at all to the Validity of his Office or Service But in all this we see nothing like a Sacrament Here is neither Matter Form nor Institution here is only Prayer The laying on of Hands is only a gesture in Prayer
of their Parents they are naturally their Guardians and if they are entitled to any thing their Parents have a right to transact about it because of the weakness of the Child and what Contracts soever they make by which the Child does not lose but is a gainer these do certainly bind the Child It is then suitable both to the constitution of Mankind and to the dispensation of the Mosaical Covenant that Parents may dedicate their Children to God and may bring them under the obligations of the Gospel and if they may do that then they certainly procure to them with it or in lieu of it a share in the blessings and promises of the Gospel So that they may offer their Children either themselves or by such others of their Friends to whom for that occasion they transfer that Right which they have to transact for and to bind their Children All this receives a great confirmation from the decision which St. Paul makes upon a case that must have hapâ—â—ned commonly at that time which was when one of the Parties in a Married state Husband or Wife was Converted while the other continued still in the former state of Idolatry or Infidelity Here then a scruple naturally arose Whether a Believer or Christian might still live in a married state with an Infidel Besides the ill usage to which that diversity of Religion might give occasion another difficulty might be made Whether a Person defiled by Idolatry did not communicate that Impurity to the Christian and whether the Children born in such a Marriage were to be reckoned a holy seed according to the Iewish Phrase or an unholy unclean Children that is Heathenish Children who were not to be Dedicated to God nor to be Admitted into Covenant with him For unclean in the Old Testament and Unciâ—cumcised signify sometimes the same thing and so St. Peter said that in the case of Cornelius God had shewed him that he should call no Man common or unclean 1 Cor. 14. in allusion to all which St. Paul determines the case not by an immediate Revelation but by the Inferences that he drew from what had been Revealed to him he does appoint the Christian to live with the Infidel and says that the Christian is so far from being defiled by the Infidel that there is a communication of a Blessing that passes from the Christian to the Infidel the one being the better for the Prayers of the other and sharing in the Blessings bestowed on the other The better part was accepted of God in whom mercy rejoices over judgment there was a communication of a Blessing that the Christian derived to the Infidel which at least went so far that their Children were not unclean that is shut out from being dedicated to God but were holy Now it is to be considered that in the New Testament Christians and Saints or Holy stand all promiscuously The Purity of the Christian Doctrine and the Dedication by which Christians offer up themselves to God makes them Holy In Scripture Holiness stands in a double Sense the one is a true and real Purity by which a Man's Faculties and Actions become Holy the other is a dedicated Holiness when any thing is appropriated to God in which sense it stands most commonly in the Old Testament So Times Places and not only Persons but even Utensils applied to the Service of God are called Holy In the New Testament Christian and Saint are the same thing so the saying that Children are Holy when one of the Parents is a Christian must import this that the Child has also a right to be made Holy or to be made a Christian and by consequence that by the Parents Dedication that Child may be made Holy or a Christian. Upon these Reasons we conclude That though there is no express Precept or Rule given in the New Testament for the Baptism of Infants yet it is most agreeable to the Institution of Christ since he conformed his Institutions to those of the Mosaical Law as far as could consist with his Design and therefore in a thing of this kind in which the just tenderness of the human Nature does dispose Parents to secure to their Children a Title to the Mercies and Blessings of the Gospel there is no reason to think that this being so fully set forth and assured to the Iews in the Old Testament that Christ should not have intended to give Parents the same Comforts and Assurances by his Gospel that they had under the Law of Moses Since nothing is said against it we may conclude from the nature of the two Dispensations and the proportion and gradation that is between them that Children under the New Testament are a holy seed as well as they were under the Old and by consequence that they may be now Baptized as well as they were then Circumcised If this may be done then it is very reasonable to say what is said in the Article concerning it That it ought in any wise to be retained in the Church For the same Humanity that obliges Parents to feed their Children and to take care of them while they are in such a helpless state must dictate that it is much more incumbent on them and is as much more necessary as the Soul is more valuable than the Body for them to do all that in them lies for the Souls of their Children for securing to them a share in the Blessings and Privileges of the Gospel and for Dedicating them early to the Christian Religion The Office for Baptizing Infants is in the same words with that for Persons of Riper Age because Infants being then in the power of their Parents who are of Age are considered as in them and as binding themselves by the Vows that they make in their Name Therefore the Office carries on the supposition of an internal Regeneration and in that helpless state the Infant is offered up and Dedicated to God and provided that when he comes to Age he takes those Vows on himself and lives like a Person so in Covenant with God then he shall find the full effects of Baptism and if he dies in that state of Incapacity he being Dedicated to God is certainly accepted of by him and by being put in the Second Adam all the bad effects of his having descended from the First Adam are quite taken away Matt. 19.13 14. Christ when on Earth encouraged those who brought little Children to him he took them in his arms and laid his hands on them and blessed them and said suffer little children to come unto me and forbid them not for of such is the kingdom of God Whatever these words may signify mystically the literal meaning of them is that little Children may be admitted into the Dispensation of the Messias and by consequence that they may be Baptized ARTICLE XXVIII Of the Lord's Supper The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have
impossible to understand it so we conclude that we are in the Right to understand the whole Period in a mystical and figurative Sense And therefore since a Man born and bred a Iew and more particularly accustomed to the Paschal Ceremonies could not have understood our Saviour's Words chiefly at the time of that Festivity otherwise than of a New Covenant that he was to make in which his Body was to be broken and his blood shed for the remission of Sins and that he was to substitute Bread and Wine to be the lasting Memorials of it in the repeating of which his Disciples were to renew their Covenant with God and to claim a share in the blessings of it this I say was the Sense that must naturally have occurred to a Iew upon all this we must conclude that this is the true Sense of these Words Or that otherwise our Saviour must have enlarged more upon them and expressed his meaning more particularly Since therefore he said no more than what according to the Ideas and Customs of the Iews must have been understood as has been explained we must conclude that it and it only is the true Sense of them But we must next consider the importance of a long Discourse of our Saviour's set down by St. Iohn which seems such a preparation of his Apostles to understand this Institution literally John 6.32 33. that the weight of this Argument must turn upon the meaning of that Discourse The design of that was to shew that the Doctrine of Christ was more Excellent than the Law of Moses that though Moses gave the Israelites Manna from Heaven to nourish their Bodies yet notwithstanding that they died in the Wilderness But Christ was to give his Followers such Food that it should give them Life so that if they did eat of it they should never die Where it is apparent that the Bread and nourishment must be such as the life was and that being Eternal and Spiritual the Bread must be so understood For it is clearly expressed how that Food was to be received he that believeth on me hath everlasting life 40. v. Since then he had formerly said that the Bread which he was to give should make them live for ever and since here it is said that this Life is given by Faith then this Bread must be his Doctrine For this is that which Faith receives And when the Iews desired him to give them evermore of that Bread he answered I am the bread of life he that comes to me shall never hunger 47 48 51. v. and he that believeth on me shall never thirst In these words he tells them that they received that Bread by coming to him and by believing on him Christ calls himself that Bread and says that a Man must eat thereof which is plainly a Figure and if Figures are confessed to be in some Parts of their Discourse there is no reason to deny that they run quite through it Christ says that this Bread was his flesh which he was to give for the life of the world which can only be meant of his Offering himself up upon the Cross for the Sins of the World The Iews murmured at this and said how can this Man give us his flesh to eat To which our Saviour answers That except they did eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man 53 54 55. v. they had no life in them Now if these words are to be understood of a literal eating of his Flesh in the Sacrament then no Man can be saved that does not receive it It was a natural Consequence of the expounding these Words of the Sacrament to give it to Children since it is so expresly said that Life is not to be had without it But the words that come next carry this Matter farther whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life It is plain that Christ is here speaking of that without which no Man can have Life and by which all who receive it have Life if therefore this is to be expounded of the Sacrament none can be damned that does receive it and none can be saved that receives it not Therefore since eternal life does always follow the eating of Christ's flesh and the drinking his blood and cannot be had without it then this must be meant of an Internal and Spiritual feeding on him For as none are saved without that so all are saved that have it This is yet clearer from the words that follow my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed It may well be inferred that Christ's Flesh is eaten in the same Sense in which he says it is meat now certainly it is not literally meat For none do say that the Body is nourished by it and yet there is somewhat Emphatical in this since the word indeed is not added in vain but to give weight to the Expression It is also said He that eats my flesh and drinks my blood dwells in me and I in him â—6 v. Here the description seems to be made of that eating and drinking of his Flesh and Blood that it is such as the mutual indwelling of Christ and Believers is Now that is certainly only Internal and Spiritual and not Carnal or Literal And therefore such also must the eating and drinking be All this seems to be very fully confirmed from the Conclusion of that Discourse which ought to be considered as the Key to it all for when the Iews were offended at the hardness of Christ's Discourse he said It is the Spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing v. 6â— The words I speak unto you they are Spirit and they are Life Which do plainly Import that his former Discourse was to be understood in a spiritual Sense that it was a divine Spirit that quickned them or gave them that eternal Life of which he had been speaking And that the Flesh his natural Body was not the conveyer of it All this is confirmed by the Sense in which we find eating and drinking frequently used in the Scriptures according to what is observed by Iewish Writers they stand for Wisdom Learning and all intellectual Apprehensions through which the Soul of Man is preserved by the Perfection that is in them as the Body is preserved by Food So buy and eat eat fat of things drink of wine well refined Maimonides also observes Mâ—râ— Nevochim that whensoever eating and drinking are mentioned in the Book of Proverbs that they are to be understood of Wisdom and the Law And after he has brought several Places of Scripture to this Purpose He concludes that because this acceptation of eating occurs so often and is so manifest as if it were the primary and most proper Sense of the Word therefore hunger and thirst stand for a privation of Wisdom and Vnderstanding And the Caldee Paraphrast turns these Words ye shall draw Water out of the Wells of Salvation thus
as that it can be no where else at the same time And though we can very easily apprehend that an Insinite Power can both create and annihilate Beings at pleasure yet we cannot apprehend that God does change the Essences of Things and so make them to be contrary to that Nature and sort of Being of which he has made them Another Argument against Transubstantiation is this God has made us capable to know and serve him And in order to that he has put some Sâ—nses in us which are the conveyances of many subtile Motions to our Brains that give us Apprehensions of the Objects which by those Motions are represented to us When those Motions are lively and the Object is in a due distance when we feel that neither our Organs nor our Faculties are under any disorder and when the Impression is clear and strong we are determined by it We cannot help being so When we see the Sun risen and all is bright about us it is not possible for us to think that it is dark Night No authority can impose it on us we are not so far the Masters of our own Thoughts as to force our selves to think it though we would for God has made us of such a Nature that we are determined by such an Evidence and cannot contradict it When an Object is at too great a distance we may mistake a weakness or an ill disposition in our sight may misrepresent it and a false Medium Water a Cloud or a Glass may give it a tincture or cast so that we may see cause to correct our first Apprehensions in some Sensations but when we have duly examined every thing when we have corrected one Sense by another we grow at last to be so sure by the Constitution of that Nature that God has given us that we cannot doubt much less believe in contradiction to the express Evidence of our Senses It is by this Evidence only that God convinces the World of the Authority of those whom he sends to speak in his Name He gives them a Power to work Miracles which is an Appeal to the Senses of Mankind and it is the highest Appeal that can be made for those who stood out against the Conviction of Christ's Miracles had no Cloak for their Sins It is the utmost Conviction that God offers or that Man can pretend to From all which we must infer this That either our Senses in their clearest Apprehensions or rather Representations of Things must be Infallible or we must throw up all Faith and Certainty since it is not possible for us to receive the Evidence that is given us of any thing but by our Senses and since we do naturally acquiesce in that Evidence we must acknowledge that God has so made us that this is his voice in us because it is the voice of those Faculties that he has put in us and is the only way by which we can find out Truth and be led by it And if our Faculties fail us in any one thing so that God should reveal to us any thing that did plainly contradict our Faculties he should thereby give us a right to disbelieve them for ever If they can mistake when they bring any Object to us with the fullest Evidence that they can give we can never depend upon them nor be certain of any thing because they shew it Nay we are not and cannot be bound to believe that nor any other Revelation that God may make to convince us We can only receive a Revelation by hearing or reading by our Ears or our Eyes So if any part of this Revelation destroys the certainty of the Evidence that our Senses our Eyes or our Ears give us it destroys it self for we cannot be bound to believe it upon the Evidence of our Senses if this is a part of it that our Senses are not to be trusted Nor will this matter be healed by saying that certainly we must believe God more than our Senses And therefore if he has revealed any thing to us that is contrary to their Evidence we must as to that paâ—ticular believe God before our Senses But that as to all other things where we have not an express Revelation to the contrary we must still believe our Senses There is a difference to be made between that feeble Evidence that our Senses give us of remote Objects or those loose Inferences that we may make from a slight view of Things and the full Evidence that Sense gives us as when we see and smell to we handle and taste the same Object This is the voice of God to us he has made us so that we are determined by it And as we should not believe a Prophet that wrought ever â—o many Miracles if he should contradict any part of that which God had already revealed so we cannot be bound to believe a Revelation contrary to our Sense because that were to believe God in contradiction to Himself which is impossible to be true For we should believe that Revelation certainly upon an Evidence which it self tells us is not certain and this is a Contradiction We believe our Senses upon this foundation because we reckon there is an Intrinsick certainty in their Evidence we do not believe them as we believe another Man upon a Moral presumption of his Truth and Sincerity but we believe them because such is the nature of the Union of our Souls and Bodies which is the work of God that upon the full Impressions that are made upon the Senses the Soul does necessarily produce or rather feel those Thoughts and Sensations arise with a full Evidence that correspond to the motions of sensible Objects upon the Organs of Sense The Soul has a sagacity to examine these Sensations to correct one Sense by another but when she has used all the means she can and the Evidence is still clear she is perswaded and cannot help being so she naturally takes all this to be true because of the necessary connexion that she feels between such Sensations and her assent to them Now if she should find that she could be mistaken in this even tho' she should know this by a Divine Revelation all the Intrinsick certainty of the Evidence of Sense and that connexion between those Sensations and her assent to them should be hereby dissolved To all this another Objection may be made from the Mysteries of the Christian Religion which contradict our Reasons and yet we are bound to believe them altho' Reason is a faculty much superior to Sense But all this is a mistake we cannot be bound to believe any thing that contradicts our Reasons for the Evidence of Reason as well as that of Sense is the voice of God to us But as great difference is to be made between a feeble Evidence that Sense gives us of an Object that is at a distance from us or that appears to us through a false Medium such as a Concave or a Convex-Glass
Sacrifice v. 27. first for his own Sins and then for the People for this he did once when he offered up himself He opposes that to the Annual Expiation made by the Iewish High-Priest Christ entred in once to the Holy Place having made Redemption for us by his own Blood And having laid down that general Maxim 9. ch 22. v. 28. that without shedding of Blood there was no Remission he says Christ was offered once to bear the Sins of many He puts a Question to shew that all Sacrifices were now to cease When the Worshippers are once purged then would not Sacrifices cease to be offered 10. ch v. 11. And he ends with this as a full Conclusion to that Part of his Discourse v. 12. Every Priest stands daily ministring and offering oftentimes the same Sacrifices which can never take away Sin But this Man after he had offered up one Sacrifice for Sins for â—ver sat down on the right Hand of God Here are not general Words ambiguous Expressions or remote Hints but a Thread of a full and clear Discourse to shew that in the strict Sense of the Words we have but one Priest and likewise but one Sacrifice under the Gospel Therefore how largely soever those Words of Priest or Sacrifice may have been used yet according to the true Idea of a propitiatory Sacrifice and of a Priest that reconciles Sinners to God they cannot be applyed to any Acts of our Worship or to any Order of Men upon Earth Nor can the Value and Virtue of any instituted Act of Religion be carried by any Inferences or reasonings beyond that which is put in them by the Institution And therefore since the Institution of this Sacrament has nothing in it that gives us this Idea of it we cannot set any such Value upon it and since the reconciling Sinners to God and the pardoning of Sin are free Acts of his Grace it is therefore a high Presumption in any Man to imagin they can do this by an Act of theirs without Powers and Warrants for it from Scripture Nor can this be pretended to without assuming a most Sacrilegious Sort of Power over the Attributes of God Therefore all the Virtue that can be in the Sacrament is that we do therein gratefully commemorate the Sacrifice of Christ's Death and by renewed Acts of Faith present that to God as our Sacrifice in the Memorial of it which he himself has appointed By so doing we renew our Covenant with God and share in the Effects of that Death which he suffered for us All the antient Liturgies have this as a main Part of the Office that being mindful of the Death of Christ or commemorating it they offered up the Gifts This is the Language of Iustin Martyr Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian and of all the following Writers They do compare this Sacrifice to that of Melchisedec who offered Bread and Wine And though the Text imports only his giving Bread and Wine to Abraham and his Followers yet they applied that generally to the Oblation of Bread and Wine that was made on the Altar But this shews that they did not think of any Sacrifice made by the offering up of Christ. It was the Bread and the Wine only which they thought the Priests of the Christian Religion did offer to God And therefore it is remarkable that when the Fathers answer the Reproach of the Heathens who charged them with Irreligion and Impiety for having no Sacrifices among them they never answer it by saying That they offered up a Sacrifice of inestimable Value to God which must have been the first Answer that could have occurred to a man possessed with the Ideas of the Church of Rome On the contrary Iustin Martyr in his Apology says They had no other Sacrifices but Prayers and Praises Apol. 2. And in his Dialogue with Trypho he confesses That Christians offer to God Oblations according to Malachi's Prophecy when they celebrate the Eucharist Leg. pro Christ. Minut. in Octav. Lib. 8. con Celsum Tert. A. -pol c. 30. Clem. Strom. l. 7. Arnob. lib. 7. in which they commemorate the Lord's Death Both Athenagoras and Minutius Felix justify the Christians for having no other Sacrifices but pure Hearts clean Consciences and a stedfast Faith Origen and Tertullian refute the same Objection in the same manner They set the Prayers of Christians in opposition to all the Sacrifices that were among the Heathens Clemens of Alexandria and Arnobius write in the same strain and they do all make use of one Topick to justify their offering no Sacrifices That God who made all things and to whom all things do belong needs nothing from his Creatures To multiply no more Quotations on this Head Iulian in his time objected the same thing to the Christians which shews that there was then no Idea of a Sacrifice among them otherwise he who knew their Doctrine and Rites had either not denied so positively as he did their having Sacrifices or at least he had shewed how improperly the Eucharist was called one When Cyril of Alexandria towards the middle of the Fifth Century came to answer this Cyr. Al. lib. 10. cont Jul. he insists only upon the inward and spiritual Sacrifices that were offered by Christians which were sutable to a pure and spiritual Essence such as the Divinity was to take pleasure in and therefore he sets that in opposition to the Sacrifices of Beasts Birds and of all other things whatsoever Nor does he so much as mention even in a Hint the Sacrifice of the Eucharist which shews that he did not consider that as a Sacrifice that was propitiatory These things do so plainly set before us the Ideas that the First Ages had of this Sacrament that to one who considers them duly they do not leave so much as a doubt in this matter All that they may say in Homilies or Treatises of Piety concerning the Pure Offering that according to Malachi all Christians offered to God in the Sacrament concerning the Sacrifice and the unbloody Sacrifice of Christians must be understood to relate to the Prayers and Thanksgivings that accompanied it to the Commemoration that was made in it of the Sacrifice offered once upon the Cross and finally to the Oblation of the Bread and Wine which they so often compare both to Abel's Sacrifice and to Melchisedec's offering Bread and Wine It were easy to enlarge further on this Head and from all the Rituals of the Antients to shew that they had none of those Ideas that are now in the Roman Church They had but one Altar in a Church and probably but one in a City They had but one Communion in a day at that Altar So far were they from the many Altars in every Church and the many Masses at every Altar that are now in the Roman Church They did not know what Solitary Masses were without a Communion All the Liturgies and all the Writings of the Antients are as
otherwise too indiscreet a Rigor might have pulled down that which ought to have been built up If in a broken state of things a common Consent ought to be much endeavoured and staid for this is much more necessary in a regular and settled time with relation to the Civil Authority under whom the whole Society is put according to its Constitution But it can never be supposed that the Authority of the Pastors of the Church is no other than that of a Lawyer or a Physician to their Clients who are still at their liberty and are in no sort bound to follow their directions In particular Advices with relation to their private Concerns where no general Rules are agreed on an Authority is not pretended to and these may be compared to all other Advices only with this difference That the Pastors of the Church watch over the Souls of their people and must give an account of them But when things are grown into Method and general Rules are settled there the consideration of Edification and Unity and of maintaining Peace and Order are such sacred Obligations on every one that has a true regard to Religion that such as despise all this may be well look'd on as Heathens and Publicans and they are so much worse than they as a secret and well-disguised Traytor is much more dangerous than an open professed Enemy And though these Words of our Saviour of telling the Church may perhaps not be so strictly applicable to this matter in their primary sense Matt. 18.17 as our Saviour first spoke them yet the Nature of things and the Parity of Reason may well lead us to conclude That though those Words did immediately relate to the composing of private differences and of delating intractable persons to the Synagogues yet they may be well extended to all those publick Offences which are injuries to the whole Body and may be now applied to the Christian Church and to the Pastors and Guides of it though they related to the Synagogue when they were first spoken It is therefore highly congruous both to the whole Design of the Christian Religion and to many Passages in the New Testament that there should be Rules set for censuring Offenders that so they may be reclaimed or at least ashamed and that others may fear And as the final Sentence of every Authority whatsoever must be the cutting off from the Body all such as continue in a wilful disobedience to the Laws of the Society so if any who call themselves Christians will live so as to be a Reproach to that which they profess they must be cut off and cast out for if there is any sort of Power in the Church it must terminate in this This is the last and highest act of their Authority it is like Death or Banishment by the Civil Power which are not proceeded to but upon great occasions in which milder Censures will not prevail and where the general good of the Society requires it So casting out being the last Act of Church-Power like a Parent 's disinheriting a Child it ought to be proceeded in with that slowness and upon such considerations as may well justify the Rigor of it A wilful Contempt of Order and Authority carries virtually in it every other Irregularity because it dissolves the Union of the Body and destroys that Respect by which all the other ends of Religion are to be artained and when this is deliberate and fixed there is no other way of proceeding but by cutting off those who are so refractory and who set such an ill Example to others If the Execution of this should happen to fall under great Disorders so that many scandalous Persons are not censured and a promiscuous multitude is suffered to break in upon the most Sacred Performances this cannot justify private Persons who upon that do withdraw from the Communion of the Church For after all that has been said the Divine Peecept is to every man to try and examine himself and not to try and censure others All Order and Government are destroyed if private Persons take upon them to judg and censure others or to separate from any Body because there are Abuses in the use of this Authority Private Confession in the Church of Rome had quite destroyed the Government of the Church and superseded all the Antient Penitentiary Canons and the Tyranny of the Church of Rome had set many Ingenious Men on many subtle Contrivances either to evade the Force of those Canons to which some regard was still preserved or to maintain the Order of the Church in opposition to the Appeals that were made to Rome And while some pretended to subject all things to the Papal Authority others studied to keep up the Antient Rules The Encroachments that the Temporal and Spiritual Courts ware making upon one another occasioned many Disputes which being managed by such subtle men as the Civilians and Canonists were all this brought in a great variety of Cases and Rules into the Courts of the Church So that instead of the first Simplicity which was evident in the Constitution of the Church not only for the first Three Centuries but for a great many more that came afterwards there grew to be so much Practice and so many Subterfuges in the Rules and manner of proceeding of those Courts that the Church has long groaned under it and has wished to see that effected which was designed in the beginnings of the Reformation The Draught of a Reformation of those Courts is still extant that so instead of the Intricacies Delays and other Disorders that have arisen from the Canon Law we might have another short and plain Body of Rules which might be managed as antiently by Bishops with the Assistance of their Clergy But though this is not yet done and that by reason of it the Tares grow up with the Wheat we ought to let them grow together till the great Harvest comes or at least till a proper Harvest may be given the Church by the Providence of God in which the good may be distinguished and separated from the bad without endangering the Ruin of all which must certainly be the effect of Peoples falling indiscreetly to this before the time ARTICLE XXXIV Of the Traditions of the Church It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one or utterly like for at all times they have been diverse and may be changed according to the diversity of Countries and mens manners so that nothing be ordained against God's Word Whosoever through his private Iudgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the Word of God and be ordained and approved by common Authority ought to be rebuked openly that others may fear to do the like as one that offendeth against the common Order of the Church and hurteth the Authority of the Magistrate and woundeth the Consciences of weak Brethren Every
the Philistines put the People under a Curse if they should eat any Food till Night and this was thought to be so obligatory that the Violation of it was Capital and Ionathan was put in hazard of his Life upon it Thus the High-Priest put our Saviour under the Oath of Cursing Matth. 26.63 64. when he required him to tell Whether he was the Messias or not Upon which our Saviour was according to that Law upon his Oath and though he had continued silent till then as long as it was free to him to speak or not at his pleasure yet then he was bound to speak and so he did speak and owned himself to be what he truly was This was the Form of that Constitution but if by practice it were found that mens pronouncing the words of the Oath themselves when required by a Person in Authority to do it and that such Actions as their lifting up their Hand to Heaven or their laying it on a Bible as importing their Sense of the Terrors contained in that Book were like to make a deeper Impression on them than barely the Judges charging them with the Oath or Curse it seems to be within the compass of Human Authority to change the Rites and Manner of this Oath and to put it in such a Method as might probably work most on the minds of those who were to take it The Institution in general is plain and the making of such Alterations seems to be clearly in the Power of any State or Society of men In the New Testament we find St. Paul prosecuting a Discourse concerning the Oath which God sware to Abraham Heb. 6.13 14 15. who not having a greater to swear by swore by himself and to enforce the Importance of that it is added An oath for confirmation that is Ver. 16. for the affirming or assuring of any thing is the end of all controversy Which plainly shews us what Notion the Author of that Epistle had of an Oath He did not consider it as an Impiety or Prophanation of the Name of God Rev. 10.6 In St. Iohn's Visions an Angel is represented as lifting up his hand and swearing by him that liveth for ever and ever And the Apostles even in their Epistles Rom. 1.9 Gal. 1.20 that are acknowledged to be writ by Divine Inspiration do frequently appeal to God in these words God is witness which contain the whole Essence of an Oath Once St. Paul carries the Expression to a Form of Imprecation 2 Cor. 1.23 when he calls God to a record upon or against his soul. These seem to be Authorities beyond exception justifying the use of an Oath upon a great occasion or before a competent Authority according to that Prophecy quoted in the Article which is thought to relate to the Times of the Messias And thou shalt swear The Lord liveth in truth in judgment and in righteousness and the nations shall bless themselves in him Jer. 4.2 and in him shall they glory These last words seem evidently to relate to the days of the Messiah So here an Oath religiously taken is represented as a part of that Worship which all Nations shall offer up to God under the New Dispensation Against all this the great Objection is That when Christ is correcting the Glosses that the Pharisees put upon the Law whereas they only taught that men should not forswear themselves but perform their oaths unto the Lord our Saviour says Swear not at all neither by the Heaven nor the earth Matth. 5.34 35 36 37. James 5.12 nor by Ierusalem nor by the head but let your communication be yea yea and nay nay for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil And St. Iames speaking of the enduring Afflictions and of the Patience of Iob adds But above all things my brethren swear not neither by the heaven neither by the earth neither by any other oath but let your yea be yea and your nay nay lest ye fall into condemnation It must be confessed that these words seem to be so express and positive that great regard is to be had to a Scruple that is founded on an Authority that seems to be so full But according to what was formerly observed of the manner of the Judiciary Oaths among the Iews these words cannot belong to them Those Oaths were bound upon the Party by the Authority of the Judg in which he was passive and so could not help his being put under an Oath Whereas our Saviour's words relate only to those Oaths which a man took voluntarily on himself but not to those under which he was bound according to the Law of God If our Saviour had intended to have forbidden all Judiciary Oaths he must have annulled that part of the Authority of Magistrates and Parents and have forbid them to put others under Oaths The word Communication that comes afterwards seems to be a Key to our Saviour's words to shew that they ought only to be applied to their Communication or Commerce to those Discourses that pass among men in which it is but too customary to give Oaths a very large share Or since the words that went before concerning the performing of Vows seem to limit the Discourse to them the meaning of Swear not at all may be this Be not ready as the Iews were to make Vows on all occasions to devote themselves or others Instead of those he requires them to use a greater Simplicity in their Communication And St. Iames's words may be also very fitly applied to this since men in their Afflictions are apt to make very indiscreet Vows without considering whether they either can or probably will pay them as if they would pretend by such profuse Vows to overcome or corrupt God This Sense will well agree both to our Saviour's words and to St. Iames's and it seems most reasonable to believe that this is their true Sense for it agrees with every thing else whereas if we understand theâ— in that strict Sense of condemning all Oaths we cannot tell what to make of those Oaths which occur in several Passages of St. Paul's Epistles and least of all what to say to our Saviour's own answering upon Oath when adjured Therefore all rash and vain swearing all swearing in the Communication or Intercourse of Mankind is certainly condemned as well as all Imprecatory Vows But since we have so great Authorities from the Scriptures in both Testaments for other Oaths and since that agrees so evidently with the Principles of Natural Religion we may conclude with the Article That a man may swear when the Magistrate requireth it It is added in a Cause of Faith and Charity for certainly in trifling matters such Reverence is due to the Holy Name of God that swearing ought to be avoided But when it is necessary it ought to be set about with those regards that are due to the Great God who is appealed to A Gravity of Deportment and an Exactness of weighing the truth of what we say are highly necessary here Certainly our Words ought to be few and our Hearts full of the Apprehensions of the Majesty of that God with whom we have to do before whom we stand and to whom we appeal who knows all things and will bring every work to judgment with every secret thing whether it be good or whether it be evil FINIS
that this was a Book fit to serve a Turn but only that this Book was necessary at that time to instruct the Nation aright and so was of great use then But though the Doctrine in it if once true must be always true yet it will not be always of the same necessity to the People As for Instance There are many Discourses in the Epistles of the Apostles that relate to the Controversies then on foot with the Judaizers to the Engagements the Christians then lived in with the Heathens and to those Corrupters of Christianity that were in those days Those Doctrines were necessary for that time but though they are now as true as they were then yet since we have no Commerce either with Iews or Gentiles we cannot say that it is as necessary for the present time to dwell much on those matters as it was for that time to explain them once well If the Nation should come to be quite out of the danger of falling back into Popery it would not be so necessary to insist upon many of the Subjects of the Homilies as it was when they were first prepared ARTICLE XXXVI Of Consecration of Bishops and Ministers The Book of Consecration of Archbishops and Bishops and ordering of Priests and Deacons lately set forth in the time of Edward the Sixth and confirmed at the same time by Authority of Parliament doth contain all things necessary to such Consecration and Ordering neither hath it any thing that of it self is superstitious and ungodly And therefore whosoever are Consecrated and Ordered according to the Rites of that Book since the Second Year of the aforenamed King Edward unto this time or hereafter shall be Consecrated or Ordered according to the same Rites we decree all such to be rightly orderly and lawfully Consecrated and Ordered AS to the most essential parts of this Article they were already examined when the pretended Sacrament of Orders was explained where it was proved that Prayer and Imposition of Hands was all that was necessary to the giving of Orders and that the Forms added in the Roman Pontifical are new and cannot be held to be necessary since the Church had subsisted for many Ages before those were thought on So that either our Ordinations without those Additions are good or the Church of God was for many Ages without true Orders There seems to be here insinuated a Ratification of Orders that were given before this Article was made which being done as the Lawyers phrase it ex post facto it seems these Orders were unlawful when given and that Error was intended to be corrected by this Article The opening a part of the History of that time will clear this matter There was a new Form of Ordinations agreed on by the Bishops in the Third Year of King Edward and when the Book of Common-Prayer with the last Corrections of it was Authorized by Act of Parliament in the Fifth Year of that Reign the New Book of Ordinations was also enacted and was appointed to be a part of the Common-Prayer-Book In Queen Mary's time these Acts were repealed and those Books were condemned by Name When Queen Elizabeth came to the Crown King Edward's Common-Prayer-Book was of new enacted and Queen Mary's Act was repealed But the Book of Ordination was not expresly named it being considered as a part of the Common-Prayer-Book as it had been made in King Edward's time so it was thought no more necessary to mention that Office by Name than to mention all the other Offices that are in the Book Bishop Bonner set on foot a Nicety That since the Book of Ordinations was by name condemned in Queen Mary's time and was not by name revived in Queen Elizabeth's time that therefore it was still condemned by Law and that by consequence Ordinations performed according to this Book were not legal But it is visible that whatsoever might be made out of this according to the Niceties of our Law it has no relation to the Validity of Ordinations as they are Sacred Performances but only as they are Legal Actions with relation to our Constitution Therefore a Declaration was made in a subsequent Parliament That the Book of Ordination was considered as a part of the Book of Common-Prayer And to clear all Scruples or Disputes that might arise upon that matter they by a Retrospect declared them to be good and from that Retrospect in the Act of Parliament the like Clause was put in the Article The chief Exception that can be made to the Foâ—m of giving Oâ—deâ—s amongst us is to those words Receive ye the Holy Ghost which as it is â—o Antient Form it not being above Five hundred Years old so it is taken from Words of our Saviour's that the Church in her besâ— times thought were not to be applied to this It was proper to him to use them who had the Fulness of the Spirit to give it at pleasure He made use of it in constituting his Apostles the Governours of his Church in his own stead and therefore it seems to have a Sound in it that is too bold and assuming as if we could convey the Holy Ghost To this it is to be answered That the Churches both in the East and West have so often changed the Forms of Ordination that our Church may well claim the same Power of appointing New Forms that others have done And since the several Functions and Administrations that are in the Church are by the Apostle said to flow from one and the same Spirit all of them from the Apostles down to the Pastors and Teachers we may then reckon that the Holy Ghost though in a much lower degree is given to those who are inwardly moved of God to undertake that Holy Office So that though that extraordinary Effusion that was poured out upon the Apostles was in them in a much higher degree and was accompanied with most amazing Characters yet still such as do sincerely offer themselves up on a Divine Motion to this Service receive a lower Portion of this Spirit That being laid down these Words Receive ye the Holy Ghost may be understood to be of the nature of a Wish and Prayer as if it were said May thou receive the Holy Ghost and so it will better agree with what follows And be thou a faithful Dispenser of the Word and Sacraments Or it may be observed That in those Sacred Missions the Church and Church-men consider themselves as acting in the Name and Person of Christ. In Baptism it is expresly said I baptize in the Name of the Father c. In the Eucharist we repeat the Words of Christ and apply them to the Elements as said by him So we consider such as deserve to be admitted to those Holy Functions as Persons called and sent of God and therefore the Church in the Name of Christ sends them and because he gives a Portion of his Spirit to those whom he sends therefore the Church in his Name
says Receive the Holy Ghost And in this sense and with this respect the use of these Words may be well justified ARTICLE XXXVII Of Civil Magistrates The Queen's Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and other her Dominions unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes doth appertain and is not nor ought to be subject to any Foreign Iurisdiction Where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the chief Government by which Titles we understand the minds of some slanderous Folks to be offended we give not to our Princes the ministring either of God's Word or of the Sacraments the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testify but that only Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in Holy Scriptures by God himself that is That they should rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubborn and evil-doers The Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction in this Realm of England The Laws of the Realm may punish Christian Men with Death for heinous and grievous Offences It is lawful for Christian Men at the Commandment of the Magistrate to wear Weapons and serve in the Wars THIS Article was much shorter as it was published in King Edward's time and did run thus The King of England is Supreme Head in Earth next under Christ of the Church of England and Ireland Then followed the Paragraph against the Pope's Jurisdiction worded as it is now To which these Words were subjoined The Civil Magistrate is ordained and allowed of God wherefore we must obey him not only for fear of Punishment but also for Conscience sake In Queen Elizabeth's time it was thought fitting to take away those Prejudices that the Papists were generally infusing into the minds of the People against the term Head which seemed to be the more incongruous because a Woman did then reign therefore that was left out and instead of it the words chief Power and chief Government were made use of which do signify the same thing The Queen did also by her Injunctions offer an Explanation of this matter for whereas it was given out by those who had complied with every thing that had been done both in her Father and in her Brother's time but that resolved now to set themselves in opposition to her That she was assuming a much greater Authority than they had pretended to She upon that ordered that Explanation which is referred to in the Article and is in these words For certainly Her Majesty neither doth nor ever will challenge any Authority other than that was challenged and lately used by the said Noble Kings of famous Memory King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth which is and was of antient time due to the Imperial Crown of this Realm that is under God to have the Sovereignty and Rule over ail manner of Persons born within these her Realms Dominions and Countries of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal soever they be so as no other Foreign Power shall or ought to have any Superiority over them And if any Person that hath conceived any other sense of the said Oath shall accept the same Oath with this Interpretation Sense or Meaning Her Majesty is well pleased to accept every such in that behalf as her good and obedient Subjâ—cts and shall acquit them of all manner of Penalties contained in the said Act against such as shall peremptorily and obstinately refuse to take the same Oath Thus this matter is opened as it is both in the Article and in the Injunctions In order to the treating regularly of this Article it is First To be proved That the Pope hath no Jurisdiction in these Kingdoms 2 dly That our Kings or Queens have it And 3 dly The Nature and Measures of this Power and Government are to be stated As for the Pope's Authority though it is now connected with the Infallibility yet it was pretended to and was advanced for many Ages before Infallibility was so much as thought on Nor was the Doctrine of their Infallibility ever so universally received and submitted to in these Western Parts as was that of their Universal Jurisdiction They were in possession of it Appeals were made to them They sent Legates and Bulls every where They granted Exemptions from the ordinary Jurisdiction and took Bishops bound to them by Oaths that were penned in the Form of Oaths of Fealty or Homage This was the first Point that our Reformers did begin with both here and every where else that so they might remove that which was an insuperable Obstruction till it was first taken out of the way to every step that could be made toward a Reformation They laid down therefore this for their Foundation That all Bishops were by their Office and Character equal and that every one of them had the same Authority that any other had over that Flock which was committed to his Care And therefore they said that the Bishops of Rome had no Authority according to the Constitution in which the Churches were settled by the Apostles but over the City of Rome And that any further Jurisdiction that any Antient Popes might have had did arise from the Dignity of the City and the Customs and Laws of the Empire As for their deriving that Authority from St. Peter it is very plain that the Apostles were all made equal to him and that they never understood our Saviour's Words to him as importing any Authority that was given to him over the rest since they continued to the last while our Saviour was among them disputing which of them should be the greatest The Proposition that the Mother of Iames and Iohn made Mat. 20.21 ver 24. ver 26. in which it was evident that they likewise concurred with her shews that they did not apprehend that Christ had made any Declaration in favour of St. Peter as by our Saviour's Answer it appears that he had not done otherwise he would have referred them to what he had already said upon that occasion By the whole History of the Acts of the Apostles it appears that the Apostles acted and consulted in common without considering St. Peter as having any Superiority over them He was called to give an account of his Baptizing Cornelius and he delivered his Opinion in the Council of Ierusalem without any strain of Authority over the rest Acts 11.2 3. Acts 15.7 ver 14 19. Gal. 2 7 8. ver 11. St. Paul does expresly deny that the other Apostles had any Superiority or Jurisdiction over him and he says in plain words that he was the Apostle of the Vncircumcision as St. Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision and in that does rather claim an advantage over him since his was certainly the much wider Province He