most promptly and apertly manifest the native and genuine sense In which part without boasting it may be said that the Protestants exceed the Papists and carry away the Palm Because their Interpreters are wont 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Occumenius saith in Eph. 5. to evert the propriety of speech and to turn all things into the uncertain conjectures of Allegories That what Epiphanius in Nicolaitis said of Origen we may say of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Allegorice explicâ—t quicquid potest He allegorized whatsoever he could Indeed it is said that he interpreted literally Matthew 19. 12. and in the same sense became an Eunuch himself And so the Papists in like manner interpret mostly in the Allegorie excepting that known place This is my Body with a far greater and more dangerous mistake than that of Origen's of that kind of Eunuchs But this Head is too general to be laid down without some necessary cautions Take these few 1. Augustini Regula tenenda est lib. 3. de doctrina Christiana Cap. 5 10 and 11. Cavendum est nè figuratam locutionem ad literam accipiamus vice versa nè locutio propria in figuratum sensum torqueatur Let 's take heed of taking figures literally and of wresting the proper sense into figures 2. It is to be supposed that some places of Scripture are true both in the Type and Antitype both in the literal and mystical sense And Verba sacrae Scripturae sunt praegnantia pariunt gemellos sensum geminum admittunt The words of Sâ—cred Writ are pregnant with matter very fruitful and sometimes bear twins and admit a double sense And 't is an unerring Rule in Divinity Scripture is alwaies to be expounded in the largest sense unless there be in or about the Text some particular restriction to limit it and thus those words Let another take his Office are true both of Doeg and Iudas 3. It is to be observed that in Prophecies some particulars agree to the Type and not to the Truth some to the Truth and not to the Type or to the Type in one sense to the Truth in another Take this Head because somewhat large in its particular branches 1. Some particulars agree to the Type and not to the Truth Psal. 40. 12. 2. Some to the Truth and not to the Type Psal. 16. 10. with Acts 2. 29. and 13. 35 36 37. 3. Or to the Type in one sense and to the Truth in another So in those Psalms wherein David is a Type of Christ As Psal. 2. and 16. and 22. and those in which Solomon as psal 45. and 72. Some things are spoken that must of necessity be understood of them in one Notion of Christ in another Of Pharaoh's Daughter espoused to Solomon and the Church to Christ the one typified by the other Psal. 45. the same may be said Gatak in Isa. 42. But how may we know when we are to interpret in the literal and when in the mystical sense These three Rules will in some measure direct us 1. The first is Augustines golden Rule Si praeceptiva locutio est aut flagitium aut facinus vetans c. If it be a precept forbidding any lewdness or commanding something profitable or beneficial there is no figure in the words Take eat this do in remembrance of me This do ye as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me Indeed This is my Body c. cannot be taken in the literal sense for the reasons to be mentioned afterwards But take eat c. because a preceptive speech and commanding a necessary profitable duty and I am afraid a much neglected duty too we are not to suppose a figure in the words If there be sins of Omission as without controversie there are then those who have not communicated in this Ordinance or not frequently cannot but be found guilty of a dangerous sinful neglect Nothing but ignorance and Phanaticism in the most proper and literal sense can turn this divine precept into an Allegory Some are so fond as to think that this Precept imports no more than feeding upon Christ out of and in contempt of this Sacrament Such self-conceited Gnosticks cannot rationally expect the Churches welcom Eat O Friends drink yea drink abundantly O beloved And if ever such Spiritualists were really fed by Christ they were no doubt better fed than taught But if any man seem to be contentious we have not so learned Christ neither the Churches of God 2. When the Text taken properly affords a fit sense nor doth ought appear in the Context or other places collated that may cross it it is not safe running into metaphorical senses And thus we understand those Buyers and Sellers whom our Saviour cast out of the Tâ—mple Mat. 21. 12. in the Letter and not in the Allegory although some Novellists of our times giving way to their own luxuriant fancies have turned this and all the History of the Gospel into a mysterie or rather a groundless conceit of their own brains 3. Indeed when the words taken in the Letter are absurd and contradictory to sense and reason we must of necessity apply our selves to the figurate sense And surely he is bruitish and hath not the understanding of a man that will Interpret against all sense and reason Reason doth not contradict sense nor Faith reason but only correct them when they exercise themselves in great matters and in things too high for them and beyond their Sphear And 't is fit that sense should give place to reason and reason to Faith as it did in Abraham's case who Rom 4. 18. against Hope or rather beyond Hope as the words may be better rendred i. e. above all causes arguments and appearances of natural Hope such as reason and humane understanding could afford or reach to believed in Hope i. e. in Hope grounded upon the truth and power of God For although there be in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some things hard to be understood yet there is nothing in it repugnant to right reason Although in this life and imperfect state we see 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through a glass darkly and do know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in part And Quoad nos there may not alwaies be ratio rei â—creditae yet there is alwaies ratio credendi Because infinite wisdom cannot be deceived and infinite goodness will not deceive And according to the forementioned Rules we may be satisfied against the Papists literal interpretation of that known place This is my Body 1. Because the letter is contrary and repugnant to our senses which the Scripture it self intimates to be of infallible certainty 2. It is absurd and contradictive of right reason 3. There appears much in the context to cross it nothing at all to countenance it 4. Because other places collated expresly thwart and contradict it 2. Rule Let the fuller Scripture make out the shorter We must compare the shorter place with the
c. Mark 14 22 c. 1 Cor. 11. 23 c. A. Indeed if the forecited Texts ought to be understood in the literal sense we need not dread this Popish Doctrine But if they ought of necessity to have a mystical and figurative sense and interpretation put upon them we may well enough be afraid of that Doctrine which the Papists themselves in the supposed case confess to be gross damnable Idolatry Q But if we once take this liberty to impâ—se our mystical or figurative Interpretation on the Scripture without express warrant of the Scripture it self we shall have no setled belief but be liable continually to be turned aside by any one that can invent a new mystical meaning of the Scripture there being no certain rule to judge of such meanings as there is of the literal ones Nor is there any error how absurd and impious soever but may on such terms be accorded with the Scripture Why therefore must we of necessity suppose the forecited Texts to be understood in the figurative and not in the literal sense A. 1. Because the letter is contrary and repugnant to our senses which the Scripture it self intimates to be of infallible certainty 2. It is absurd and contradictive of right reason 3. There appears much in the contexts to cross it nothing at all to countenance it 4. Because other places collated expresly thwart and contradict it Q. What sense then may or must be put upon the forecited Texts A. It will be an Introduction and a very good help to us for the right understanding of the said Texts to consider those observations taken from the Jewish phrases and customs used in this matter viz. 1. That the Lamb that was drest in the Paschal Supper and set upon the Table was wont to be called the Body of the Passover or the Body of the Paschal Lamb and probably Christ alludes to this phrase when he saith This is my Body as if he should say the Paschal Lamb and the Body of it i. e. the representation of that on the Table in the Jewish Feast that was the memorial of deliverance out of Egypt and type of your deliverance out of the state of sin and death I will now have abrogated and do now institute Bread and Wine instead of that Paschal Lamb that you may hereafter retain and continue to posterity a Memorial and Symbol of me who am the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world and am now about to be sacrificed for you This for the words My Body and my Blood But then 2. For the whole phrase and form of speech This is my Body this is my Blood It seems to be answerable to and substituted instead of the Paschal form This is the Bread of affliction which our Fathers eat in Egypt or This is the unleavened Bread c. or This is the Passover And therefore the Bread and the Wine in the Eucharist are no more the very Body and Blood of Christ than that Bread which the Children of Israel eat in the Land of Canaan was that Identical that very Bread of affliction which their Fathers eat in the Land of Egypt Q. Is not this Popish Doctrine that the Bread of the Eucharist is transubstantiated into the Body and the Wine into the Blood of Christ a very ancient Doctrine A. It is but four hundred fifty nine years since it was declared by Pope Innocent the third in the Council of Lateran Q Is not this impossible and incomprehensible error of Transubstantiation to be rejected with our utmost Detestation A. Yes Q. Doth not this Doctrine suppose a silly Priest to do that which all the Angels cannot do and that is to make his Maker as the Papists call the Host and the people to devour their God A. Yes Q Can they justifie this by Gods omnipotency that God is able to effect it A. No this is no better argument than the Turks may justifie most of the sopperies of their Alcoran by Q. What reasons and grounds have you for the rejection of this abomination A. There are two grounds especially for the rejection of it 1. The Idolatry and Sacriledge which doth ensue upon it and that is the Adoration and worship of the Host a piece of Bread and the mutilation or maiming of the Sacrament by Bread only and the propitiatory Sacrifice of Christ himself in the Mass who was once only offered up to God upon the Cross all which are the issue of this error 2. The Monsters of contradiction and absurdity to sense and reason which follow thereupon It was begotten by feigned Miracles and fabulous Legends and is the Mother of Blasphemies and inextricable absurdities and hath set Faith it self on the Râ—ck and surpasseth all the Harlotry that the Adulterate Church of Rome that Mother of Fornications ever brought forth Q. If you can but make good this high charge you have drawn up against that most degenerate and corrupted Church of Rome in this one error of Transubstantiation being comprehensive of all errors Papâ—l Rome being nothing else but the worst corruption of the once most famous Church of Rome whose Faith was spoken of throughout the world you may easily perswade all the friends of the Bride the Lambs Wife to aboâ—inate all the other Fornications of that Whorish Church And because the Protestants Arguments against Transubstantiation may convince us how fully they have made good this charge pray produce a few of the many Arguments they have against this Mother Error A. 1. Suppose Christ sitting at the Table with his Disciples and eating thâ—s Bread and drinking this Cup first as the custom at the Paschal Supper was and as the Papists generally and the Fathers hold and we deny not because the Scripture seems plain for it Mat. 26. 29. Hence forth I will not drink of the fruit of the Vine supposing therefore this How is it possible or imaginable that he should eat himself or how can he sit at Table and yet be in the mouths of the Apostles Was he at the same time in the Apostles mouths or stomachs while he sate and rose from Table and discoursed those three Chapters of Iohn 15 16 17. Or while he sweat that bloody sweat in his Agony in the Garden c. A monstrous impossibility 2. It 's impossible to make that which was before existent and in being Can a Father beget a Son that is already begotten Can an Architect build an House that is already built Can the Body of Christ which is before the Conversion of the Bread be made or produced by the turning of Bread into it Can he that was conceived by the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin Mary be made by pronouncing of four or five words If ever delusions were strong these are For to make that which is made and to unmake that which is made are equally impossible 3. They say that the substance of Bread and Wine is avoided and that
or they do not If they do then they worship false Gods and are guilty of gross Idolatry there being no similitude or likeness of the true God If they do not then is ignorance the Mother of that Dâ— votion and with the Samaritans they worship they know not what Or if they do worship the true God they worship him ignorantly and know not the manner of the God that made the Heavens and the Earth Deut. 4. 12 15. Isa. 40. 18. Ioh. 4. 22. Acts 17. 23. 2 Kings 7. 26. Q. Why can there be no manner of similitude of the true God A. Because he dwelleth not in Temples made with hands and is the unapproachable invisible God Acts 17. 24. 1 Tim. 6. 16. Q. The Papists worship God by Images the Protestants worship God without them which way therefore are we to worship the true God A. The way the only infallible Judge of Controversies hath declared unto us Q. Is the Pope this infallible Iudge A. There is no infallible Judge upon Earth and the Pope being but the Hâ—ad of a Party the supream Head of the Romanists neither he nor they can be Judge in their own Cause Iam. 4. 12. Mat. 23. 9 10. Prov. 18. 17. Q. Who then is the infallible Iudge of Controversies A. Christ the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father He is the only infallible Judge of Controversies who hath told us all things and wâ— have his Determinations upon Record Q. Where are his Determinations Recorded A. In the holy Scriptures Q. What are his Determinations concerning God and the manner of his worship A. They are 1. Negative that God dwelleth not in Temples neither is to be worshipped by Images made with mens hands Acts 17. 24. with 1 Kings 8. 27. Acts 17. 25. 2. They are affirmative viz. That God is a Spirit and that they that worship him must worship him in Spirit and truth Ioh. 4. 23 24. Q What other sin is chiefly forbidden in this Commandment A. Superstition Q. What is Superstition A. Superstition in the proper and strict notion of the word is the worshipping of Idols or dead men Act. 17. 22. But this is the same with that Idolatry the giving that worship and glory to others which is due to God alone which is forbidden in the first Commandment Q. What is therefore Superstition in the 〈◊〉 generally received notion and as it is forbidden in this Commandment A. It is when things are either abhorred or observed with a zealous or fearful but erroneous relation to God by means of which the superstitious serve either the true God with needless Offices or defraud him of necessary Duties or bestow such honours and service upon others as is proper for and should be peculiar for him only Or More plainly thus It is the worshipping of God in any other way or by any other means than what he hath appointed in his Word called Ordinances the Commandments and Doctrines of men Q. How manifold is this Superstition A. Twofold Affirmative and Negative Q. What is Affirmative Superstition A. That whereby the Superstitious serve the true God with needless Offices Q. And what the Negative A. That whereby men out of a sâ—â—â—pulous Conscience or ignorant fear of displeasing God abstain from things lawful and laudable as sinful and ungodly Q. Doth the Scripture warrant this distinction A. Yes Q. 1. What is the Idolatry and Superstition of the Church of Rome A. The worshipping of the Bread and Wine in the Eucharist out of a false and groundless perswasion that they are substantially changed into the Body and Blood of Christ. 2. The worshipping and invocation of Saints and Angels and particularly of the Virgin Mary which hath now for some Ages been a principal part of their Religion 3. Their worshipping of Images Which practice notwithstanding all their distinctions about it which are no other but what the Heathens used in the same case flies as full in the face of the second Commandment as deliberate and malicious killing of a man is against the sixâ—h Acts 17. 29. Rom. 1. 23. 4. Their superstitious Fasting and ab staining from Flesh in Lent Their superstitious Holy-daies Their adding Cream Oyl and Spittle to the water in Baptism and their Baptizing of Bells Their praying upon Beads and mary more superstitious customs For which there is not the least command in the Scriptures Q. What if the Doctrine of Transubstantiation be not true A. Then by the confession of several of their own learned Writers they are guilty of gross Idolatry Q. Doth not the Bread in the Communion remain Bread after the words of Consecration A. Yes the Scripture expresly calls it so after the words of Consecration 1 Cor. 11. 26 27 28. Q. But what if the Bread be transubstantiâ—te and turned into the very Body of Christ A. Then all mens senses are deceived in a plain sensible matter wherein 't is as hard for them to be deceived as in any thing in the world Q. Why so A. For two things can hardly be imagined more different a little bit of Waâ—er and the whole Body of â— man Q. But what if the Testimony of sensâ— be not to be relied upon A. Then no man is sure that Christianâ—ty it self is true Q. Why so A. For the utmost assurance that the Apostles had of the Truth of Christianity was the Testimony of their own senses concerning our Saviours Miracles Q. And what if the Testimony of sense 〈◊〉 to be relied upon A. Then it plainly follows that no man no not the Apostles themselves had more reason to believe Christianity to be true than every man hath to believe Transubstantiation to be false Q. But if the case be so plain a man would think that at least the Teachers and Guides of that Church should be sensible of it A. Why they are so and afraid the People should be so too and therefore by their corrupt Glosses and Phâ—risaiâ—al Traditions in their interpreting the holy Scriptures they tye up and keep the Pâ—ople in ignorance of the true meaning of those places which do more expresly condemn their damnable Idolatrous practises and their superstitious customs and in their ordinary Caâ—â—chisms and Manuals of Devotion they leave out the second Commandment and divide the tenth into two to make up the Number lest if the common people should know it their Consciences should startle at the doing of a thing so directly contrary to the plain command of God Q. And is it not well observed by the learned from Deut. 11. 28. That he that professeth Idolatry is as if he denied the whole Law A. Yes Q. But because after all the unanswerable Objections and Arguments of the Protestants against Transubstantiation that Monster aâ—d shame of humane nature and the other Blasphenies and absurd Doctrines of the Papists they do all unanimously betake themselves to the authority of their Church as their main and last Refuge and tell us
that though they cannot give us a particular reason of every Doctrine they hold different from us yet they have sufficient reason to submit their judgement wholly to their Churches authority which they know to be infallible and hath Decreed all the Doctrines they hold in opposition to 〈◊〉 Doth it not therefore concern all that â— concerned in the matters of their Salvation to consider whether this easie way of believing be a safe way or no A. Yes it doth very much concern 〈◊〉 all so to do because our mistake herein will greatly hazzard our everlasting Salvation Q. And are not they certainly mistaken that adventure all even all their everlasting concerns upon that authority which overthrows those very things which must be supposed antecedent to the belief of any such authority As 1. The common sense of mankind 2. The force of a Divine Law And 3. The liberty of Iudgement concerning truth and falshood A. Yes Q. And doth not the Church of Rome so A. Yes and thereby forfeits its own authority over men 1. It requires things contrary to common sense as in the Eucharist it requires all its members to deny what they see and handle and smell and taste to be Bread to be true Bread and to believe that the same individual Body may be in a thousand places at once and that things whose nature it is to be in another 〈◊〉 subsist without their proper subject 2. It requires things contrary to the force and reason of a divine Law as it hath left out the second Commandment and hath made it lawful to give religious worship to Images and hath taken away from the people their share of the Cup in the Eucharist 3. It takes away all liberty of judgement concerning truth and falshood in Religion For this is a natural right which every man hath to judge for himself And they that take this away may as well command all men to put out their eyes that they may the better follow their Guides But the other is so much worse because it is an assault upon our understandings it is a robbing us of the greatest Talent God hath committed to our management it is a Rape upon our best faculties and prostituting them to the Lusts of spiritual Tyrants it is not captivating our understandings to the obedience of Faith but enslaving them to the proud and domineering usurpations of men wherein they would do by us as the Philistins did by Sampson they would put our eyes that we might gâ—ind in their Prison and make them sport Q. How may men further offend and sin against the second Coâ—mandment A. Men offend and sin against the second Commandment not only by Idolatry and Superstition but also when they are not zealous for pure worship according to Gods Institution not endeavouring what in them lieth in their places the Reformation of worship according to the pattern in the Word as also when they disuse and neglect especially when they contemn and oppose any of those Ordinances which God hath appointed to be the means of worship Q. 52. What are the reasons annexed to the seâ—ond Commandment A. The reasons annexed to the second Commandment are Gods Soveraignty over us his propriety in us and the zeal he hath to his own worship Explic. Q. In what words are these three reasons annexed to this Commandment expressed A. In these words For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God Q. What is the first reason annexed unto the second Commandment A. Gods Soveraignty over us exprest in these words I the Lord. Q. What do you mean by his Soveraignty over us A. His supream power absolute Dominion and sole Authority over us Q. What is the force of this first reason A. The force of this first reason is because God is the only Soveraign King over us and hath the sole Authority to make Laws for the way of his worship therefore we ought by vertue of our allegiance as we are subjects to observe his Laws and Ordinances and to worship him no other way than that which he hath appointed in his Word Q. What is the second reason annexed to this Commandment A. Gods propriety in us exprest in these words Thy God I the Lord thy God Q. What do you mean by his propriety in us A. His just right and Title to us as his own Q. What is the force of this second reason A. The force of this second reason is because we are Gods therefore we ought to keep close unto him and his appointments and take heed especially of Idolatry and superstition which do alienate the heart from him Q. What is the third reason annexed to this Commandment A. The zeal God hath to his own worship exprest in these words Am â— jealous God I the Lord thy God am a jealous God Q. What is the zeal God hath to his own worship A. It is his jealousie where by out of love to his own worship and Institutions he is highly offended with those that turn aside from him unto their own Inventions Q Wherein doth this zeal and jealousie of God for his own worship shew it self A. The zeal and jealousie of God for his own worship doth shew it self 1. In his accounting the Breakers of this Commandment those that hate him and threatening to punish them unto the third and fourth Generation I the Lord thy God am a jealous God visiting the iniquity of the Fathers upon the Children unto the third and fourth Generation of them that hate me And 2. In his esteeming the keepers of this Commandment such as love him and promising mercies unto thousands of them And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my Commandments Q. How can God in justice visit the iniquity of the Fathers upon their Children A. 1. If the Children do not walk in the sinful steps of their Fathers God will not visit the iniquity of their Fathers upon them 2. It is most equal and righteous for God to visit the iniquity of the Fathers upon their Children when the Children are guilty of the same iniquity and so fill up the measure of their Fathers sins By consenting to partaking of and imitating their Fathers sins Q. 53. What is the third Commandment A. The third Commandment is Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his Name in vain Q. 54. What is required in the third Commandment A. The third Commandment requireth the holy and reverend use of Gods Names Titles Attributes Oâ—dinances Word and Works Explic. Q What are we to understand by the Name of God which we are forbidden in this Commandment to take in vain A. The Name of God which we are forbidden in this Commandment to take in vain is to be taken generally and comprehensively for any thing whereby God maketh himself known Q. By What doth God make himself known A.
in the Prison to the Spirits but to the Spirits in Prison The difference betwixt these two expressions is very great He preached to them in the daies of Noah who were in Prison in the daies of the Apostles He Preached to them out of Prison that are now in Prison which is nothing to their purpose Object 3. Mat. 12. 32. Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man it shall be forgiven him but whoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world neither in the world to come Hence they argue that some sins shall be forgiven in the world to come A. Not to be forgiven in this world nor in the world to come is as much as shall never be forgiven so Matthew explains himself Mat. 12. 31. And so Mark doth express it Mark 3. 29. Read the places Oâ—ject 4. They urge Mat. 5. 25 26. read the place This Prison saith Bellarmine is Purgatory out of which after the Debt is paid the Debtor shall go forth A. 1. Some understand the place literally and if it be so understood it is altogether impertinent to the matter in hand 2. If the place be taken in a spiritual sense by the Prison must necessarily be understood Hell and not Purgatory whence the Debtor shall never come forth because no meer man by his suffering can in a finite time satisfie the infinite offended Justice of God 3. And that which may be an argument to them they interpret other Scriptures where they meet with the like phrases in the same sense we understand this very place see Mat. 1. 25. Gen. 8. 7. Deut. 34. 6. 1 Sam. 15. 35. and 2 Sam. 6. 23. So that in brief in the literal sense it is impertinent and in the spiritual sense it must needs be understood of Hell whence there is no Redemption Q. How many sorts of Prayers are there A. Three viz. Closet Family and Publick Q What do you mean by Closet-Prayer A. Entring into our Closet alone and praying unto our Father in secret Q. Why is Closet-Prayer necessary A. Because those that pray after the manner of Hypocrites to be seen of men have their reward But if we pray to the Father in secret our Father which seeth in secret shall reward us openly Q. And must we in our Closet-Prayers pray both for our selves and others A. Yes Q. When you say you are to pray for others what do you mean by it A. That we ought to pray for all in the Land of the living which is the only Land of hope yea though they be the greatest sinners and such Prisoners as are bound with the bands and setters of their sins they are Prisoners of hope if they have not sinned the sin unto death and we ought to pray for them Q. What do you mean by Family-Prayer A. Praying in and with our Families for our selves and others Q. Why ought we to pray in our Families A. Because God will pour out his fury upon the Families that call not on his Name as having on them the mark and brand of the accursed Heathens Ier. 10. 25. Q. What mean you by Publick-Prayer A. Praying in and with the publick Assemblies for our selves and others Q. Ought not publick prayer to be preferred above all Family-private-prayer A. Yes because every particular Believer hath special interest and power with God and doth prevail with him for all desireable blessings and a multitude of Believers assembled together in publick will have a greater interest and power with God in Prayer than a few met together in a private Family And therefore publick-prayer ought to be and will be preferred by all that regard their own interest above any Family-private-prayer whatsoever Q. Whom doth the Preface of the Lords Prayer teach us to pray unto A. To our Father who is in Heaven Q. And do we by this appellation express our reverence to him and our Faith in him that his Goodness Will and his Power can grant our requests for our selves and others A. Yes Q. But when mention is made of the Father do you exclude the Son or the Holy Ghost from being prayed unto A. No. Q How and in what order are we to direct our Prayers to the persons of the blessed Trinity And whether may we not single out any one of the Persons to whom we may direct more immediately such or such a Prayer A. The case hath so much difficulty in it that a short answer must not be expâ—cted to so great questions as are couched in it yet we will endeavour to give an answer thereunto as briefly as we can in these following Conclusions Some of which will be of use to us as rules of direction to lead us into the sound knowledge of these and other mysteries of the Gospel 1. That in all parts of divine worship and so in this of Prayer the Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity is to be worshipped and respected Or That we ought so to think of God in Prayer as one in Essence yet three in Persons and so as three in Persons that he is but one in Essence 2. That we ought so to think in Prayer of some one Person in the Trinity as thereby to be led to the other two The Father being in the Son and the Son in the Father and the Holy Ghost in them both 3. That in order we are first to direct our Prayers to the blessed Father yet not as first or chief in honour and dignity above the other two but as first in order of subsisting according as the Scripture in two places where the order of the blessed Persons is set down the Father is first set down in order of witnessing 1 Ioh. 5. 7. and invocation and worship Mat. 28. 19. 4. In singling out any one Person in the blessed Trinity we are to pitch most usually on the Father as he to whom we direct our Prayers through the mediation of Christ and by the help of the Holy Ghost That is the Rule and method prescribed by Christ to ask the Father in his Name Ioh. 16. 23. and suitable is and hath been the usual practice of the Saints And yet in such directings of Prayers most what as to the Father in the general intention of their Spirits do the Saints mind and eye the other two Persons and include them as joyntly worshipped and therefore in their Prefaces of Prayer they do oftimes mention expresly that blessed God one in Essence yet three in Persons as he to whom they speak and in the close they subscribe glory to the blessed Father Son and Spirit three Persons yet one God c. 5. We may single out the Son of God the Lord Jesus Christ as he to whom we occasionally present some special request either by way of Apostrophe whilst we are directing our Prayers to the Father or in way of Ejâ—culation as did Stephen Acts 7. 59. Lord Iesus receive my Spirit And so
larger i. e. the place that speaks but briefly of a thing with some other that speaks of it more at large common observation tells us that 't is not the right method to read abstracts first because though they be fuller of matter they are fuller likewise of obscurity And sometimes that of the learned Bacon proves true That Epitomes are the corruptions and moths of Histories Epitomes give us the substance of a matter but full Narratives must clear it up to us with all its due circumstances A compendium gives us the Quintessence Vertue Force and Spirit of a thing but the History at large is necessary to the right understanding of it 3. Let the clearer Scripture clear the obscurer We must compare the obscurer with the clearer i. e. if any place occur which is more obscure but elsewhere propounded to us in words that are more clear we must have recourse to it to clucidâ—te the â—ormer We must compare Moses with the Prophets Of all the Prophets Esaias speaks most clearly who is therefore stiled the Evangelical Prophet and seems rather to write the History than the Prophecie of Christ. We must compare the Old Testament with the New In the Nâ—w Testament the Book of the Revelations is deemed by those Interpreters that are wise unto sobriety and not above what is written to stand in most need of interpretation by the other written Revelations The Sacred Scriptures are written very much historically the Doctrines being interspersed with the History Some Eyangelists speak more clearly than others some most clearly of one part of the History of Christ some of another that all of them collated without conspiring together by a contrived design might give us the compleat History of Christ. That you may see the usefulness of this Rule consult Ioh. 16. 16 17 18. with 28 29 verses compared together 4. Let that Scripture determine the point that intends it You must compare Scripture with Scripture and you must compare them aright compare the place that speaks ex casu occasionally of a matter with some other where it is the main design of the place This Rule is to be attended unto in the Exposition of Parables For if we be strict observers of all by-passages in them instead of Milk we shall wring till blood cometh We must remember that Allegories must not be strained too much and that similitudes aâ—swer not in all Lines but in the chiefest Read for this purpose Luke 16. 5. Out of the scope and intention of the writer is often collected the sense of his words And the scope of the writer may be guessed at by the following circumstances viz. Quorsum quibus contra quos quae ex cujus personâ Why to whom against whom or what of whose pâ—rson he writes which last circumstance clears most passages relating to the Eunuchs Qâ—estion 6. Compare Antecedents and consequents in the place whose sense is dubious and it will much conduce to the right understanding of it Where there is not light enough in the Text there may be a light shining round about it in the Context to enlighten it 7. Negatives are more extensive than affirmatives Affirmativa non valent ubique ad semper negativa ubique or thus Affiâ—mativa valent semper negativa ad semper When God saith Pray it is alwaies true while in this probâ—tionstaâ—e that we must pray but it is not true that we must pray alwaies i. â— do nothing but pray But when 't is said Thou shalt not Kill c. This is our duty at all times there is no time wherein 't is lawful to Kill commit Adultery c. 8. Let an exception straiten and narrow a general Rule Exceptio firmat Regulam in non exceptis terminum praescribit in exceptis An exception confirms the Rule in things not excepted and bounds it against the rest 9. Non est distinguendum ubi Lex non distinguiâ— We must not distinguish where the Law doth not warrant it In Christ Iesus neither Circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but a new Creature If this Rule be attended unto we shall easily understand how nice the distinctions of Conformity and non-conformity are and how unavailable either of them will be in attaining Salvation for us without a reformed life 10. We must carefully distinguish of the Scripture which speaks of the growth of the Church from that which speaks of the infancy of it And thus as for the Discipline of the Church of England our English Reformers considered what it was in the purest times of the first good Christ an Emperours when the Church was in its growth For the times of Persecution in the infancy of the Church before temporal Princes embraced the Christian Faith as they were most excellent times for doctrine and manners so very unproper and unfit for a Pattern or example of outward Government and Policy And doubtless that Government is most excellent both in the community as Christian and in the special notion as reformed that keepeth the middle way between the Pomp of superstitious Tyranny and the meanness of Phanatick Anarchy And this can be nothing else but a wâ—â—l regulated moderate Episcopacy according to this Rule 11. That which the Scripture holds forth at all times must not be prejudiced by what may take in one particular case although Necessitas est jus temporis Necessity be a Law in its time This is a Rule at all times Borrow and pay again This must not be prejudiced by that of the Israelites borrowing of the Egyptians This must not determine Ehud destroyed Eglon therefore thou shalt kill because 't is not safe arguing from particulars to general duties 12. Out of the Tradition and Interpretation of the truly Catholick Church out of the consent of the Fathers and of these either of many or of few of them when eminent for sanctity or learning out of the unanimous conspiration of Doctors and Interpreters the true and literal sense of Holy Writ may be often cleared up unto us By universal Tradition is meant Quod ab omnibus quod ubique quod semper receptum fuit What all the Churches of Christ in all places have ever successively received that is universal Tradition and he is no true Catholick that doth not receive it Where there is a Catholick consent and harmony to bear witness to any Interpretation and that sense is universally and solemnly accepted as it will seem a wilful errour to dâ—pâ—rt from it and to choose solitary and dangerous by-paths where the open road is so free and safe so what can be expected in such singularity but many absurdities and implications and violences offered to the word and truth 13. We must interpret according to the Analogy of Faith We must hold fast the form of sound words Examine the Interpretations of the holy Scriptures by those three Forms the Creed the ten Commandments and the Lords Prayer Mistake not you are not to examine the Scriptures by any