Christ shed for reâ—â—ission of sins the life of the Kingdom of heaven See the unbaptized deprived also of the bread and cup of life is divided from the Kingdom of Heaven where Christ the well of life remains So it appears that the African Church had this custome but held it not necessary to salvation as Baptism But by Gennadius de dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis Cap. LII It appears to have been a custome of the Church when Hereticks were reconciled to the Church by confirmation to give their little ones the Eucharist presently upon it And Ordo Romanus de Baptismo prescribes it after the solemn Baptism before Easter which the French Capitulary I. 161. and Alcuinus also de divinis officiis provideth for And in the Eastern Church Dionysius in the end of the booke de Hierarchiâ Ecclesiasticâ In the mean time it is to be considered that there being no order that all should be baptized Infants nor at what age Whereupon St. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XLII in Sanctum Bapt. advises at three or four years of age it cannot be said to have been a generall custome of the Church Nor that it could be originall from the Apostles because the solemn times of Baptisme at Easter and Whitsontide cannot be thought to have been settled till Christianity was grown very vulgar For as for those that were baptized upon particular occasions or in danger of death it cannot be thought that the Eucharist was celebrated for their purpose nor doth any example appear that it was ever brought them from the Church On the contrary when the times of Baptisme came to be disused because it was found to be for the best that all should be baptized Infants upon this occasion the receiving of the Eucharist came to be deferred as much longer then was fitting in my opinion then it was given too soon in S. Cyprians time according to the example related by him in his Book de Lapsis where the Child whom the Pagans had given bread dipped in the wine that had been consecrated to their Idols because too young to eat of the flesh of their sacrifices receives the Eucharist in the Church CHAP. XXIV Two sorts of means to resolve whatsoever is resolvable concerning the Scripture Upon what terms the Church may or is to determine controversies of Faith And what obligation that determination produceth Traditions of the Apostles oblige the present Church as the reasons of them continue or not Instances in our Lords Passeover and Eucharist Penance under the Apostles and afterwards S. Pauls vail eating blood and things offered to Idols The power of the Church in limiting these Traditions I May now proceed I conceive to resolve generally upon what principles any thing questionable in Christianity is determinable and as franckly as briefly do affirm that there are but two sorts of means to resolve us in any thing of that nature Tradition and Argument Authority and Reason History and Logick For whatsoever any Artist or Divine hath said of the great use of the languages in discovering the true meaning of the Original Scriptures by the ancient Translations as well as the Originalls which I allow as much as they demand they must give me leave to observe that seeing all languages are certain Lawes of speaking which have the force of signifying by being delivered to posterity upon agreement of their Predeoessors all that helpe is duly ascribed to Tradition which we have from the Languages Indeed this is no Tradition of the Church no more then all History and Historicall truth concerning the times the places the persons mentioned in the Scripture concerning the Lawes the Customes the Fashions and orders practised by persons mentioned in the Scriptures in all particulars whereof the Scripture speaks which whether it be delivered by Christians or not Christians as far as the common reason of men alloweth or warranteth it for Historical truth is to be admitted into consequence in inquiring the meaning of the Scriptures and without it all pretense of Languages is pedantick and contemptible as that which gives the true reason to the Language of the Scripture whatsoever it import in vulgar use This helpe being applied to the Text of the Scripture it will be of consequence to confider the process of the discourse pursuing that which may appear to be intended not by any mans fancy but by those marks which cleared by the helps premised may appear to signifie it Which is the work of reason supposing the truth of the Scriptures And whereas other passages of Scripture either are clearer of themselves or being made clearer by using the same helps may seem to argue the meaning of that which is questioned whereas other parts of Christianity resolved afore may serve as principles to inferre by consequence of reason the truth of that which remains in doubt not to be impured therefore to reason but to the truth from which reason argues as believed and not seen this also is no lesss the work of reason supposing the truth of the Scriptures But whereas there be two sorts of things questionable in Christianity and all that is questionable meerly in point of truth hath relation to and dependance upon the rule of faith as consequent to it or consistent with it if we will have it true or otherwise if false I acknowledge in the first place that nothing of this nature can be questionable further then as some Scripture the meaning whereof is not evident createth the doubt And therefore that the determination of the meaning of that Scripture is the determination of the truth questionable For seeing the truth of Gods nature and counsails which Christianity revealeth are things which no Christian can pretend to have known otherwise then by revelation from God and that we have evidence that whatsoever we have by Scripture is revealed but by the Tradition of the Church no further then all the Church agreeth in it all that wherein it agreeeth being supposed to be in the Scripture and much more then that It followeth that nothing can be affirmed as consequent to or consistent with that which the tradition of the Church containeth but by the Scripture and from the Scripture So that I willingly admit whatsoever is alleadged from divers sayings of the Fathers that whatsoever is not proved out of the Scriptures is as easily rejected as it is affirmed limiting the meaning of it as I have said But whatsoever there is Scripture produced to prove seeing we have prescribed that nothing can be admitted for the true meaning of any Scripture that is against the Catholick Tradition of the Church it behoveth that evidence be made that what is pretended to be true hath been taught in the Church so expresly as may inferre the allowance of it and therefore is not against the rule of Faith But this being cleared so manifest as it is that the Church hath not the priviledge of infallibility in any express act which is not justifiable from the universall
â—omething for the placing of every man every momâ—nâ— â—◠〈◊〉 estate which thereby hee fore-seeth And the possibility oâ— fore-seeing what will follow being something because no conâ—râ—â—iction destroyes the consistence of the terms inâ—errs by the infiâ—â—â—â— perfection of God the actual fore-sight of what will come to pâ—â—â— though not in it self which is nothing yet in God who is all things And all this involving no predetermination of mans will by God the discourse cannot be superfluous which resolveth the foresight of future contingencies into the decree which supposeth the knowledg of things conditionally future not which inferreth the fore knowledg of things absolutely future For by this means nothing that is found in the Scripture will contradict the substance of Faith which predetermination destroyeth though disclaiming all possibility of making evidence to common sense how it may come to pass And though Gods decree to permit sin can be no sufficient ground of his fore sight that what hee hindreth not shall come to pass as I have argued pag. 209. yet if wee consider withall that there is no question of Gods permitting any man to sin but onely him that is prevented with temptation to sin it may not untruly be said that God fore-sees sin in his own deccee of permitting it including the state of him that is tempted in that case wherein God decrees to permit sin In which case God fore-seeth it properly in his decree of placing the man in that estate not of suffering himto sin which the opinion that I contradict in that place absolutely refuseth And upon these terms when it is resolved Chap. XXVI that predestination to the first Grace is absolute you must not understand predestination to the act of conversioâ— but to the helps which effect it For whatsoever be the motives upon which a man actually resolves it in whatsoever circumstance hee meets them nothing but his own freedom determines his conversion though without those helps hee had not or could not have determined it And therefore if it be said that it is a barr to the prayers and indeavors of those that are moved to be Christians to tell them that their resolution depends upon something which is not in their Power To wit that congruity wherein the efficacy of Grace consisteth The answer is That absolutely whatsoever is requisite to the conversion of him who is called to be a Christian is in his Power Though upon supposition of Gods fore-knowledg that may be said to be requisite without which God fore-sees hee will not be converted when absolutely if hee would hee might have been converted and when supposing hee had been otherwise moved hee would have been converted In which case it is absolutely enough to the charging of any man with his duty that absolutely hee wanted nothing requisite to inable him for a right choice Though upon supposition of Gods fore-knowledg the doing of his duty requires whatsoever God fore-sees that it will not be done without it I have no more to say but that the Contents of the Chapters are premised instead of a Table for which they may well serve in books of this nature And that in regard to the difficulty of the Copy and the ordinary faileurs of the Press the Reader is desired to correct the faults that are marked before hee begin and to serve himself in the rest THE CONTENTS OF THE First Book CHAP. I. ALL agree that Reason is to decide controversies of Faith The objection thaâ— Faith is taught by Gods Spirit answered What Reason decideth questions of Faith The resolution of Faith ends not in the light of Reason but in that which Reason evidenceth to come from Gods messengers Page 1 CHAP. II. The question between the Scripture and the Church which of them is Judge in matters of Faith Whether opinion the Tradition of the Church stands better with Those that hold the Scripture to be clear in all things necessary to salvation have no reason to exclude the Tradition of the Church What opinions they are that deny the Church to be a Society or Corporation by Gods Law 3 CHAP. III. That neither the sentence of the Church nor the dictate of Gods Spirit can be the reason why the Scripâ—ures are to be received No man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit without knowing that he is a true Christian Which supposeth the truth of the Scriptures The motives of Faith are the reason why the Scriptures are to be believed And the consent of Gods people the reason that evidences those motives to be infallibly true How the Scriptures are believed for themselves How a circlâ— is made in rendring a reason of the Faith The Scriptures are Gods Law to all to whom they are published by Gods act of publishing them But Civil Law by the act of Soveraign Powers in acting Christianity upon their Subjects 7 CHAP. IV. Neither the Dictate of Gods Spirit nor the aâ—thority of the Church is the reason of believing any thing in Christianity Whether the Church be before the Scripture or the Scripture before the Church The Scriptures contain not the Infallibility of the Church Nor the consent of all Christians 18 CHAP. V. All things necessary to salvation are not clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Not in the old Testament Not in the Gospel Not in the Writings of the Apostles It is necessary to salvation to believe more then this that our Lord is the Christ Time causeth obscurity in the Scriptures aswell as in other Records That it is no where said in the Scriptures that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures Neither is there any consent of all Christians to evidence the same 25 CHAP. VI. All interpretation of Scripture is to be consined within the Tradition of the Church This supposeth that the Church is a Communion instituted by God What means there is to make evidence of Gods Charter upon which the corporation of the Church subsisteth The name of the Church in the Scriptures often signifieth the Whole or Catholick Church CHAP. VII That the Apostles delivered to the Church a Summary of Christianity which all that should be baptized were to profess Evidence out of the Scriptures Evidence out of the Scriptures for Tradition regulating the Communion of the Church and the Order of it Evidence for the Rule of Faith out of the records of the Church For the Canons of the Church and the pedegree of them from the order established in the Church by the Apostles That the profession of Christianity and that by being baptized is necessary to the salvation of a Christian CHAP. VIII That the power of Governing the whole Church was in the Apostles and Disciples of Christ and those whom they tooke to assist them in the part of it The power of their Successors must needs be derived from those Why that succession which appears in one Church necessarily holdeth all Churches The holding of Councils evidenceth the Unity of the Church
CHAP. IX The Keyes of the Church given to the Apostles and exercised by excommunication under the Apostles The ground thereof is that profession which all that are baptized are to make That Penance and abatâ—ment of Penance hath been in force ever since and under the Apostles In particular of excluding Hereticks CHAP. X. Evidence of the Apostles act from the effect of it in preserving the Vnity of the Church Of the businesse of Marcion and Montanus That about keeping Easter That of the Novatians of rebaptizing Hereticks of Paulus Samosatenus of Dionysius Alexandrinus and Arius Of communicatory leters and the intercourse of the Church under and after the Apostles CHAP. XI Upon what grounds the first book de Synedriis holds that the Church cannot excommunicate Before the law there was no such Power nor by it Christians went for Jewes under the Apostles His sense of some Scriptures What the Leviathan saith in generall concerning the Power of the Church Both suppose that Ecclesiasticall Power includeth Temporall which is not true Of the Oxford Doctors Paraenesis CHAP. XII That the Law expresly covenanted for the Land of Promise A great Objection against this from the Great precept of the Law The hope of the world to come under the Law and the obedience which it required was grounded upon reason from the true God the tradition of the Fathers and the Doctrine of the Prophets The Love of God above all by the Law extendeth no further than he precepts of the Law the lâ—ve of our Neighbor onely to Jews Of the Ceremonial Judicial and Moral Law CHAP. XIII That the Law tendereth no other promise but that of the Land of Canaan How the Resurrection is signified by the Prophets Expresse texts of the Apostles Their Arguments and the Arguments of our Lord do suppose the mystical sense of the Scriptures That this sense is to be made good throughout the Scripture wheresoever the ground of it takes place Christianity well grounded supposing this What parts of Scripture may be questionable whether they have a mysticall sense or not The sayings and doings of our Lord have it As also those passages of the Old Testament which are fulfilled by the same The sense of the Fathers CHAP. XIV The Leviathans opinion that Christ came to restore that Kingdome of God which the Jewes cast off when they rejected Sâ—muel It overthroweth the foundation of Christianity The true Government of Gods ancient people The name of the Church in the New Testament cannot signifie the Synagogue Nor any Christian State CHAP. XV. How the Power of the Church is founded upon the Law The Power of the Kingdome Priesthood Prophets and Rulers of that people all of divine right How farre these qualities and the powers of them are to continue in the Church The sense of the Fathers in this point That the acts of S. Paul and the rest of the Apostles were nâ—t of force by virtue of the Law What Ecclesiastical Power should have been among the Jewes in case they had received the Gospel and so the state had stood CHAP. XVI The Church founded upon the Power given the Apostles What is the subject mater of Church Lawes The Right of the Church to Tythes and Oblations is not grounded upon the Law though evidenced by it and by practice of the Patriarchs Evidence of the Apostles Order in the Scriptures The Church of Jerusalem held not community of Goods The original practice of the Church CHAP. XVII The Power of Excommunication in the Church is not founded in the Law What argument there is of it in the Old Testament The allegorical sense thereof is argumentative It was not necessary that the Christians should incurre persecution for using the Power of the Keyes and not by virtue of the Law CHAP. XVIII The difference between S. Pauls anathema and that of the Jews It is not necessary that the Christians anathema should signifie cursing That the incestuous person at Corinth was Excommunicated by S. Paul Jurisdiction of the Church Telling the Church binding and loosing holding him that is bound for a Heathen or a Publicanâ— signifie the same The coherence of our Lords discourse Of Excommunication and Indulgence by private persons in the Ancient Church That Excommunication and the Power of the Church could not come in force by the voluntary consent of the first Christians How it may be said to be voluntary Of the confederacy of the primitive Christians CHAP XIX That Power which was in Churches under the Apostles can never be in any Christian Soveraign The dâ—fference between the Church and the Synagogue in that regard The interest of Seculâ—r Power in determining maters of faith presuppâ—seâ—h the Socieâ—y of the Church and the act of it No man can be bound to profâ—sse tâ—e contrary of that which he believeth Every man is bound to professe thâ—t Christianity which hee believeth The Church is the chiefe Teacher of Christianity through Christendom as the Soveraign of Civil Peace thorough his Dominions Why the Church is to decide maters of Faith rather then the State neither being infallible 146 CHAP. XX. The rest of the Oxford Doctors pretense The Power of binding and loosing supposeth not onely the Preaching of the Gospel but the outward act of Faith Christians are not at liberty to cast themselves in what formes of Churches the Law of Nature alloweth They are Judges in chief for themselvss in mater of Religion supposing the Catholick Church not otherwise Secular Power cannâ—t punish for Relâ—gion but supposing the act of the Church nor do any act to inforce Religion unlâ—sse the Church determine the mater of it 151 CHAP. XXI How the Tradition of the Church limits the interpretation of Scriptures How the declaration of the Church becomes a reasonable marke of Heresie That which is not found in the Scriptures may have been delivered by the Apostles Some things delivered by the Apostles and recorded in the Scriptures may not oblige S. Austines Rule of Apostolical Traditions 159 CHAP. XXII The Authority of the Fathers is not grounded upon any presumption of their Learning or Holinesse How farr they challenge the credit of Historical truth The pre-eminence of the Primitive The presumption that is grounded upon their ranks and qualities in the Church Of Arnobius Lactantius Tertulliâ—n Origen Clemens and the approbation of Posterity 165 CHAP. XXIII Two iâ—stances against the premises besides the obâ—ection concerning the beginning of Antichrist under the Apostles The General answer to it The seven Trumpeâ—s in the Apocalypse fore-tell the destruction of the Jewes The seven Vials the plagues inflicted upon the Empire for the ten persecutions The correspondence of Daniels Prophesie inferreth the same Neither S. Pauls Prophesie nor S. Johns concerneth any Christian Neither the opinion of the Chiliasts nor the the giving of the Eucharist to Infants new Baptized Catholick 169 CHAP. XXIV Two sorts of means to resolve whatsoever is resolvable conceâ—rning the Scripture Vpon what terms the Church may or
is to determine controversies of Faith And what obligation that determination produceth Traditions of the Apostles oblige the present Church as the reasons of them continue or not Instances in our Lords Passeover and Eucharist Penance under the Apostles and afterwards S. Pauls vail eaâ—ing blood and things offered to Idols The power of the Church in limiting these Traditions 178 CHAP. XXV The power of the Church in limiting even the Traditions of the Apostles Not every abuse of this power a sâ—fficient warrant for particular Churches to reforme themselves Heresie consists in denying something necessary to salvation to be believed Schism in departing from the unity of the Church whether upon that or any other cause Implicite Faith no virtue but the effect of it may be the work of Christian charity p. 163 CHAP. XXVI What is to add to Gods Law What to adde to the Apocalypse S. Pauls Anathema The Beraeans S. Johns Gospel sufficient to make one believe and the Scriptures the man of God perfect How the Law giveth light and Christians are taught by God How Idolatry is said not to be commanded by God 168 CHAP. XXVII Why it was death to transgress the determinations of the Jewes Consistory and what power this argueth in the Church A difference between the authority of the Apostles and that of the Church The being of the Church to the worlds end with power of the Keyes makes it not infallible Obedience to Superiours and the Pillar of truth inferre it not 175 CHAP. XXXI The Fathers acknowledge the sufficiencie 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—rnesse of the Scriptures as the Traditions of the Church They are to be reconciled by limiting the termes which they use The limitations of those sayings which make all Christian truth to be contained in the Scriptures Of those which make the authority of the Church the ground of Faith 181 CHAP. XXXII Answer to an Objection that choice of Religion becomes difficult upon these terms This resolution is for the Interest of the Reformation Those that make the Church Infallible cannot those that make the Scriptures â—â—ear â—nd sufficient may own Tradition for evidence to determine the meaning of the Scriptures and controversies of Faith The Interest of the Church of England The pretense of Rushworthes Dialogues that we have no unquestionable Scripture and that tâ—e Tradition of the Church never changes 192 CHAP. XXXI That the Scriptures which wee have are unquestionable That mistakes in Copying are not considerable to the sense and effect of them The meaning of the Hebrew and Greek even of the Prophets determinable to the deciding of Controversies How Religion delivered by Tradition becomes subject to be corrupted 198 CHAP. XXXIV The dispute concerning the Canon of Scripture and the translations thereof in two Questions There can be no Tradition for those books that were written since Prophesie ceased Wherein the excellence of them above other books lies The chiâ—fe objections against them are questionâ—ble In those parcels of the New Testament that have been questioned the case is not the same The sense of the Church 207 CHAP. XXXIII Onely the Originall Copy can be Authentick But the truth thereof may as well be found in the translations of the Old Testament as in the Jewes Copies The Jewes have not falsified them of malice The points come neither from Moses nor Esdras but from the Talmud Iewes 218 CHAP. XXXIV Of the ancientest Translations of the Bible into Greek first With the Authors and authority of the same Then into the Chaldee Syriack and Latine Exceptions against the Greek and the Samaritane Pentateuch They are helps never thelesse to assure the true reading of the Scriptures though with other Copies whether Jewish or Christian Though the Vulgar Latine were better than the present Greek yet must both depend upon the Original Greek of the New Testament No danger to Christianity by the differences remaining in the Bible 224 The CONTENTS of the second Book CHAP. I. TWo parts of that which remains How the dispute concerning the Holy Trinity with Socinus belongs to the first The Question of justification by Faith alone The Opinion of Socinus concerning the whole Covenant of Grace The opinion of those who make justifying Faith the knowledge of a mans Predestination opposite to it in the other extream The difference between it and that of the Antinomians That there are mean Opinions p. 1 CHAP. II. Evidence what is the condition of the Covenant of Grace The contract of Baptism The promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to Christs not to Johns Baptism Those are made Christs Disciples as Christians that take up his Cross in Baptism The effects of Baptism according to the Apostles 5 CHAP. III. The exhortations of the Apostles that are drawn from the patterns of the Old Testament suppose the same How the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament are the same how not the same How the new Testament and the New Covenant are both one The free-will of man acteth the same part in dealing about the New-Covenant as about the Old The Gospel a Law 12 CHAP. IV. The consent of the whole Church evidenced by the custome of catechising By the opinion thereof concerning the salvation of those that delayed their Baptism By the rites and Ceremonies of Baptism Why no Penance for sins before but after Baptism The doctrine of the Church of England evident in this case 17 CHAP. V. The Preaching of our Lord and his Apostles evidenceth that some act of Mans free choice is the condition which it requireth The correspondence between the Old and New Testament inferreth the same So do the errors of Socinians and Antinomians concerning the necessity of Baptism Objections deferred 23 CHAP. VI. Justifying faith sometimes consists in believing the truth Sometimes in trust in God grounded upon the truth Sometimes in Christianity that is in imbracing and professing it And that in the Fathers as well as in the Scriptures Of the informed and formed Faith of the Schools 30 CHAP. VII The last signification of Faith is properly justifying Faith The first by a Metonymy of the cause The second of the effect Those that are not justified do truly believe The trust of a Christian presupposeth him to be justified All the promises of the Gospel become due at once by the Covenant of Grace That to believe that we are Elect or justified is not justifying faith 37 CHAP. VIII The objection from S. Paul We are not justifyed by the Law nor by Works but by Grace and by Faith Not meant of the Gospel and the works that suppose it The question that S. Paul speakes to is of the Law of Moses and the workes of it He sets those workes in the same rank with the works of the Gentiles by the light of nature The civil and outward works of the Law may be done by Gentiles How the Law is a Pedagogue to Christ 43 CHAP. IX Of the Faith and Justification of Abraham and the Patriarkes according to the Apostles
Imperial Lawes could never be of force to void the Power of the Church Evidence for it 125 CHAP. XV. Another opinion admiâ—ting the ground of Lawfull Impediments What Impediments arise upon the Constitution of the Church generally as a Society or particularly as of Christians By what Law some degrees are prohibited Christians And of the Polygamy of the Patriarchs Mariage with the deceased wives Sister and with a Cousin Germane by what Law prohibited Of the Profession of Continence and the validity of clandestine Mariages The bound of Ecclesiastical Power in Mariage upon these grounds 134 CHAP. XVI Of the Power of making Governours and Ministers of the Church Vpon what ground the Hierarchy of Bishops Priests and Deacons standath in opposition to Presbyteries and Congregations Of the Power of Confirming and the evidence for the Hierarchy which it yeeldeth Of those Scriptures which seem â—o speake of Presbyteries or Congregations 145 CHAP. XVII The power given the XII under the Title of Apostles and the LXX Disciples That the VII were Deacons Of the first Presbyters at Jerusalem and the interest of the People Presbyters appropriated to Churches under the Apostles S. Pauls Deacons no Presbyters No ground for Lay Elders 152 CHAP. XVIII The Apostlet all of equall power S. Peter onely chiefe in managing it The ground for the pre-eminence of Churches before and over Churches Of Alexandria Antiochia Jerusalem and Rome Ground for the pre-eminence of the Church of Rome before all Churches The consequence of that Ground A summary of the evidence for it 161 CHAP. XIX Of the proceedings about Marcion and Montanus at Rome The business of Pope Victor about keeping Easter a peremptory instance The businesse of the Novatians evidenceth the same Of the businesses concerning the rebaptizing of Hereticks Dionysius of Alexandria Paulus Samosatenus S. Cypriane and of the Donatists under Constantine 168 CHAP. XX. Of the constitution and authority of Councils The ground of the pre-eminence of Churches in the Romane Empire The VI. Canon of the Council of Niâ—aea The pre-eminence of the Church of Rome and that of Constantinople Some instances against the Superiority of Bishops out of the records of the Church what offices every Order by Gods Law or by Canon Law ministreth 175 CHAP. XXI Of the times of Gods service By what Title of his Law the first day of the week is kept Holy How the Sabbath is to be sanctified by Moses Law The fourth Commandment the ground upon which the Apostles inacted it Vpon what ground the Church limiteth the times of Gods service Of Easter and the Lent Fast afore it Of the difference of mâ—ats and measure of Fasting Of keeping of our Lords Birth-day and other Festivals and the regular hours of the day for Gods service 190 CHAP. XXII The people of God tied to build Synâ—gogues though not by the leter of the Law The Church to provide Churches though the Scripture command it not Prescribing the form of Gods publick service is not quenching the Spirit The Psalter is prescribed the Church for Gods Praises The Scriptures prescribed to be read in the Church The order of reading them to be prescribed by the Church 203 CHAP. XXIII The consecration of the Eucharist prescribed by Tradition for the mater of it The Lords Prayer prescribed in all Services The mater of Prayers for all estates prescribed The form of Baptism necessary to be prescribed The same reason holdeth in the formes of other Offices 211 CHAP. XXIV The service of God prescribed to be in a known Language No pretense that the Latine is now understood The means to preserve Unity in the Church notwithstanding The true reason of a Sacrifice inforceth Communion in the Eucharist What occasions may dispense in it Communion in both kinds commanded the People Objections answered Who is chargeable with the abuse 217 CHAP. XXV Prayer the more principall Office of Gods service then Preaching Preaching neither Gods word nor the meanes of salvation unlesse limited to the Faith of Gods Church What the edification of the Church by preaching further requires The Order for divine service according to the course of the Church of England According to the custome of the universal Church 273 CHAP. XXV Idolatry presupposeth an imâ—gination that there is more Gods then one Objections out of the Scripture that it is the worship of the true God under an Image the Original of worshipping the elements of the world The Devill And Images Of the Idolatry of Magicians and of the Gnosticks What Idolatry the cases of Aaron and Jeroboam involve Of the Idolatries practised under the Kings and Judges in answer to objections 282 CHAP. XXVI The place or rather the State of happy and miserable Soules otherwise understood by Gods people before Christs ascension then after it What the Apocalypse what the rest of the Apostles declare Onely Martyrs before Gods Throne Of the sight of God 302 CHAP. XXVII The Souls of the Fathers were not in the Devils Power till Christ Though the Old Testament declare not their estate Of Samuels soul The soul of our Lord Christ parting from his body went with the Thiefe to Paradise Of his triumph over the powers of darknesse Prayer for the dead signifieth â—o delivering of souls out of Purgatory The Covenant of Grace requires imperfect happinesse before the generall judgement Of forgivenesse in the world to come and paying the utmost farthing 310 CHAP. XXVIII Ancient opinions in the Church of the place of souls before the day of judgement No Tradition that the Fathers were in the Vâ—rge of Hell under the Earth The reason of the difference in the expressions of the Fathers of the Church What Tradition of the Church for the place of Christs soul during his death The Saints soules in secret mansions according to the Tradition of the Church Prayer for the dead supposeth the same No Purgatory according to the Tradition of the Church 325 CHAP. XXIX The ground upon which Ceremonies are to be used in the service of the Church Instances out of the Scriptures and Tradition of the Apostles Of the equivocation of the word Sacrament in the Fathers The reason of a Sacrament in Baptism and the Eucharist In extream Unction In Mariage In Confirmation Ordination and Penance 340 CHAP. XXX To worship Christ in the Eucharist though believing transubstantiation is not Idolatry Ground for the honour of Saints and Martyrs The Saints and the Angels pray for us Three sorts of Prayers to Saints The first agreeable with Christianity The last may be Idolatry The second a step to it Of the Reliques of the Saints Bodies What the second Commandment prohibiteth or alloweth The second Council of Nicaea doth not decree Idolatry And yet there is no decree in the Church for the worshipping of Images 350 CHAP. XXXI The ground for Monastical life in the Scriptures And in the practice of the primitive Church The Church getteth no peculiar interest in them who professe it by their professing of it
question hereafter for the Principles which here wee seek to decide but supposing sufficient reason propounded to make it evidently credible And hee that alleges Gods Spirit for what hee cannot show sufficient reason to believe otherwise may thank himself if hee perish by believing that which hee cannot oblige another man to believe Here wee must make a difference between those men whom God imployes to deal with other men in his name and those which come to God by their means For of the first it is enough to demand how it appears that they come from God To demand by what means hee makes his will known to them supposing they come from him is more than needs at least in this place For if it be granted mee that the Apostles and Prophets were the messengers of God suppose I cannot tell how Prophesies are made evident to the souls of them to whom the Spirit of God reveals them No body will question Whether or no hee ought to believe these whom hee acknowledges Gods messengers And therefore it will be no prejudice to my purpose to set aside all curious dispute how and by what means God reveales his messages to those whom by such revelations hee makes Prophets But those that derive their knowledg from the report of such as are believed to come from God must as well give account how they know that which they believe to come from such report as why such report is to be believed For if wee believe that God furnished those whom hee imployed with sufficient means to make it appear that they came on his message wee can dispute no further why their report is to be believed If wee believe it not there will be no cause why those who pretend themselves to be Gods messengers should not be neglected as fools or rejected as impostors Nay there will be no cause why wee should be Christians upon the report of those that show us not sufficient reason to receive them for Gods messengers But this being admitted and believed unlesse evidence can be made what was delivered by them that came on Gods message it is in vain to impose any thing on the Faith of them that are ready to receive whatsoever comes upon that score The resolution then of all controversies in Religion which the Church is divided about consists in making evidence what hath been delivered by them whom all Christians believe that God sent to man on his message And therefore there will remain no great difficulty about the force and use of reason in matters of Faith if wee consider that it is one thing to resolve them by such principles as the light of reason evidenceth another to do it by the use of reason evidencing what Gods messengers have delivered to us For all dispute in point of Faith tends only to evidence what wee have received from the authors of our Faith Till that evidence come doubt remaineth when it is come it vanisheth Without the use of reason this evidence is not made though not by that which the light of nature discovereth yet by those helps which reason imployeth to make it appear what wee have received from those from whom wee received our Christianity Which without those helps did not appear But if competition fall out between that which is thus evidenced to come from God on the one side and on the other side the light of reason seeming evidently to contradict the truth of it First wee are certain that this competition or contradiction is only in appearance because both reason and revelation is from God who cannot oblige us to make contradictory resolutions Then there is no help without the use of reason to unmask this appearance I will not here go about to controule that which may be alleged on either side in any particular point by any general prejudice chusing rather to referre the debate to that particular question in which cause of competition may appear then to presume upon any thing which the truth of Christianity the only supposition which hitherto I premise appeareth not so contain Only this I will prescribe It is not the exception of a Christian to say That which the light of reason evidenceth not to be possible is not true though commended to us by the same reasons which move us to be Christians For the nature of God the counsails of God the works of God being such things as mans understanding hath no skill of till it be enlightened by God from above That sense of Gods oracles which the motives of Faith do inforce is no lesse undisputable then it is undisputable whether that which God saith be true or not who inacts his revelations by those motives CHAP. II. The question between the Scripture and the Church which of them is Judge in matters of Faith Whether opinion the Tradition of the Church stands better with Those that hold the Scripture to be clear in all things necessary to salvation have no reason to exclude the Tradition of the Church What opinions they are that deny the Church to be a Society or Corporation by Gods Law THe cure of all diseases comes from the sound ingredients of nature when they get the upper hand and restore nature by expelling that which was against it Neither can the divisions and distempers of the Church be cured but by the common truth which the parties acknowledg when the right understanding of it clears the mistakes which mans weaknesse tainteth it with There is a sufficient stock of sound Principles left all the parties which I mean when all of them acknowledg the Scriptures that is so much of them as all agree to contain the word of God But supposing the truth of them to come from God First it remaines in difference how the meaning of them may be determined when doubt is made of it And then because nothing but the true meaning of the Scripture can be counted Scripture if there be a way to determine that Whether any thing over and above it is to be received for the word of God with it Concerning which point it is well enough known what opinions there are on foot When Luther first disputed against the Indulgences of Leo X Pope those that appeared in defense of them the Master of the Popes Palace and Eckius finding themselves scanted of mater to allege out of the Scriptures betook themselvs to the common place of the Church and the Power of it the force whereof stood upon this consequence That whatsoever the Church shall decree is to be received for unquestionable Afterwards certain Articles extracted out of Luthers Writings being condemned by a Bull of the Pope Luther interposes his appeal to a Council that should decree according to the Scripture alone This is the rise of the great Controversie still on foot between the Church and the Scripture between Scripture and the Tradition of the Church of what force each of them is in deciding controversies of Faith They that hold
the Church to be the onely infallible Judge of all Controversies of Faith necessarily suppose that the Church is by Gods appointment that is Jure divino a Corporation Society or Body of men visible though not Civil because standing upon Gods will revealed in order to the happinesse of the world to come In which Society because in no Society all that are Interessed can act for themselvs it behooveth that there be a publick Authority vested in some persons or Bodies the Act whereof may oblige the whole And thus it may and must be understood that the Church is maintained to be Judge in Controversies of Faith by the definitive sentence of those that have authority to oblige the Body Whether Pope or Council wee dispute not here or what else may be imagined For that as all other Controversies in Religion is to be decided by the resolution of the point now in hand what is the means to determine by reason all such differences Which if it could not be decided without supposing whose authority is to tye the Church there could be no end of differences in the Church whatsoever there will be Here is then an opinion famous enough that the Church is indowed with a gift of Infallability by virtue whereof whatsoever sentence is passed by them that are authorized on behalf of the Church becomes matter of Faith and obliges all men to receive it by the same reason for which they receive the Christian Faith Now they who in opposition to this opinion do maintain the Scriptures to be the onely Judge in Controversies of Faith do involve in this opposition an equivocation manifest enough For it is manifest that their intent is to render a reason by this position why they submit not to that sentence which condemneth their positions in the name of the Church To wit because it is contrary to the Scriptures And further why they with-draw themselves from the communion of that Church which condemneth them and joyn in communion grounded upon the profession of the positions condemned maintaining themselves thereupon to be the true Church of God and those that condemne them the corrupt and counterfeit Whereby it appeareth that in effect they do maintain that there is no Judge provided by God to be visible in his Church with the gift of Infallible But that they are themselves and ought to be Judges to condemne all sentences given against the Scripture by any authority established in the Church By which means the Scripture becomes no more the Judge but the Rule or the Law by which men are to judge Whether they are to stand to such sentences as are given in the name of the Church or not Now if the Scripture be the Law or the Rule by which Controversies of Faith are to be judged there will be no pretense to exclude any means that may serve as evidence to clear the meaning of it And therefore there will be no cause why the Tradition of the Church should not be joyned with the Scripture in deciding Controversies of Faith Not disputing hitherto whether or no it contain any thing that the Scripture containeth not to clear and to determine the sense of the Scripture Whereas they that maintain the sentence of the present Church to be the reason of believing can no way resolve their belief into the Tradition of the Catholick Church Because that supposes only the act of our Lord and his Apostles delivering to the Church that which it holdeth Which who so supposeth can allege no other reason why hee believeth And therefore the sentence of the present Church cannot be the reason why any man should believe that which there was reason from the beginning to believe without it They who to exclude the Tradition of the Church state this position upon these terms That all things necessary to salvation are clearly contained in the Scriptures pretending to limit the generality of the question put it upon an issue not to be tryed till wee have resolved what means there is to determine the meaning of the Scripture For to be necessary to salvation is to be true and something more So that nothing can appear necessary to salvation till it can appear to be true Nor appear to be true untill it can be resolved what means there is to distinguish between true and false Besides how unlimited this limitation is may appear by this Because whatsoever is clear is said to be clear in relation to some sight And there is so much difference between the sight of several Christians that nothing can be said to be clear to all because it is clear to some And that which is not clear to all whose salvation is concerned in it what availes it those to whom it is not clear Now I suppose those that advance these termes will not grant that nothing is necessary to salvation that may be questioned by an argument out of the Scripture which all Christians cannot answer Knowing that such things as themselvs hold necessary to salvation may be assalted by such reasons out of the Scripture as they do not think all Christians fit to resolve Besides they do not pretend that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scripture of themselvs but by consequence of reason which may make them clear Now hee that would draw true consequences from the Scripture had need be well informed of the mater of that Scripture which hee drawes into consequence And to that information how can it appear that any thing is more necessary than the Tradition of the Church Therefore though I say not yet whether it be true or false that all things necessary to salvation are clearly contained in the Scriptures yet at the present I say that this is not the prime truth which must give a reason of all that followes upon it but demands a reason to be given for it by those principles upon which the resolution of all maters of Faith depends All this while wee agree upon the supposition that the Church is a Society of men subsisting by Gods revealed will distinct from all other Societies Because as I said those that have departed from the Church of Rome have hitherto pretended their own communion to be the true Church For if it be said that they do not or scarce ever did agree in communion one with another so that they can pretend to constitute all one Church That is not because they do not think that they ought all to constitute one Church but because they agree not upon the conditions Each part thinking that the other doth not believe as those whom they may communicate with ought to believe But this is now manifestly contradicted by two opinions among us though the one can be no â—ect the other as yet appears not to be one The first is that of them that think themselves above Ordinances the Communion of the Church onely obliging proficients and every perfect Christian being to himself a Church Of these
Church For it is manifest that hitherto the authorities of Church Writers cannot be considered any otherwise than as the opinions of particular persons which no wayes import the consent of the whole Church For whereas hitherto there is nothing to oblige the Faith of any Christian but that which is plaine by the Scriptures and the consent of the Church It no wayes appears as yet how the authorities of Church Writers can evidence the consent of Church I will not therefore be curious here to heap up the sayings of the Fathers commending the sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures One or two I will take notice of because they are all I can remember in which the limitation thereof to things which our salvation requires us to believe is expressed S. Augustine de doctr Christianâ— II. 9. In eis quae aperte in Scripturis posita sunt inveâ—iuntâ—r illa omnia qnae continent fideâ— moresq vivendi In those things which are plainty set down in the Scriptures is found whatsoever that Faith or maners by which wee live doth containe S. Chrysostome in II. ad Thessal Hom. III. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are plain and plain and straight in the Scriptures all things that are necessary are mâ—nifest Whereunto wee may addâ— the words of Constantine to the Council of Nâ—â—â—a in Theodoreâ— Eâ—clef Hist l. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles and the Oracles of the ancient Prophets plainly teach us what wee are to think of God But I will also take notice that the same S. Augustine de doctr Christ III. 2. saith that the Rule of Faith which hee had set forth in the first book is had from the plainer places of the Scripture and the authority of the Church And the same S. Chrysostome in the same Homily sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those things which the Apostles writ and those which they delivered by word of mouth are equally credible Therefore let us think the Tradition of the Church deserves credit It is a Tradition seek no more And Vincentius in the beginning of his Commâ—nitorium or Remembrance confessing the Canon of the Scriptures to be every way perfect and sufficient requires neverthelesse the Tradition of the Church for the steddy understanding of it And therefore I have just ground to say that all that is necessary to salvation is not clear in the Scriptures to all that can reade in the opinion of S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine But to all that reade supposing the Rule of Faith received from the Church to bound and limit the sense and exposition of the Scriptures And therefore may more justly suppose the same limitation whâ—n they speak of the perfection and sufficience and clearnesse of the Scripture at large without confining their speech to that which the necessity of salvation requires us to believe And this is already a sufficient barr to any man that shall pretend the consent of the Church which concurreth to evidence the truth of the Scripture for the perspicuity thereof in things necessary to be believed to all whom they may concerne For so long as Tradition may be requisite besides Scripture that cannot appear When it shall appear whether requisite or not then will it appear how farr the sufficience and perspicuity of the Scripture reacheth And this I come now to inquire CHAP. VI. All interpretation of Scripture is to be confined within the Tradition of the Church This supposeth that the Church is a Communion instituted by God What means there is to make evidence of Gods Charter upon which the Corporation of the Church subsisteth The name of the Church in the Scriptures often signifieth the Whole or Cathelick Church THis presumption then which is able to prejudice the truth by disparaging the means God hath given to discover it And that by possessing men that things pretended to be necessary to salvation would have been clear of themselves to all men in the Scriptures if they were true But nothing conducing to clear the doubtfull meaning of any Scripture that is never so true This presumption I say being removed and the authority of the Church as the reason of believing taken away it remaines that wee affirm whatsoever the whole Church from the beginning hath received and practised for the Rule of Faith and maners all that to be evidently true by the same reason for which wee believe the very Scriptures And therefore that the meaning of them is necessarily to be confined within those bounds so that nothing must be admitted for the truth of them which contradicteth the same Wee saw before that the Scripture consisteth of motives to Faith and mater of Faith That in the motives of Faith supposing them sufficient when admitted for true a difficulty may be made upon what evidence they are admitted for true That the conviction of this truth consisteth in the profession and conversation of all those who from the beginning receiving Christianity have transmitted it to their successors for a Law and Rule to their beliefs and conversations Wherefore there can remain no further question concerning the truth of that which stands recommended to us by those same means that evidence the truth of those 〈◊〉 for which wee receive Christianity Had there been no 〈◊〉 Christianity to have been read in the profession and practice of all that call themselves Christians it would not have been possible to convince the enemies of Christianity that wee are obliged to believe the Scriptures If the professing and practising things so contrary to the interest of flesh and bloud be an â—vidence that they are delivered and received from them who first showed reasons to believe It must first remain evident that there are certain things that were so professed and practised from the beginning before it can be evident that the motives upon which they are said to be received were indeed tendred to the world for that purpose This is that common stock of Christianity which in the first place after receiving the Scriptures is to be admitted for the next principle toward the settling of truth controverted concerning the meaning of them as flowing immediately from the reason for which they are received and immediately flowing into the evidence that can be made of any thing questionable in the same It is that sound ingredient of nature which by due application must either cure all distempers in the Church or leave them incurable and everlasting And truly if it were as easie to make evidence what those things are which have been received professed and practised from the beginning by the whole Church as it is necessary to admit all such for truth I suppose there would remain no great difficulty in admitting this principle But in regard it is so easie to show what contradiction hath been made within the pale of the Church to that which elsewhere otherwhiles hath been received I cannot tell whether men despaire to finde any thing generally received
from the beginning and therefore lay aside this principle not as false but as uselesse and not to be put in practice Wherein that men mistake not themselves they must take notice That it will not concerne my position That all original Catholick Tradition is to be supposed for unquestionable truth in deciding what is questionable concerning the truth of the Scripture that concerning most maters there is no Catholick Tradition or consent of the Church For I do professe that were not the Church or had it not been one Society one visible Body Communion or Corporation of men from the beginning the communion whereof alwaies confined the profession and conversation of Christians to some certain visible Rule I should think it impossible to make evidence of any common truth received of all Christians But if it can be made to appear that the Church was from the beginning such a Society then may such Rules as reasonably appear to be original and Catholick as it can appear reasonable to any man that hee ought to be a Christian Here I must note that concerning the State of the Church whether it be such a Society as I have said distinct from all Civil Societies of Christian Kingdomes and Common-wealths there may be two questions made The one of Fact whether indeed the Church hath been such a Society since the first being of it and the conversion of believers to Christianity The other of Right whether by the appointment of God or by humane consent of such who being converted to Christianity agreed to live in communion by whatsoever Rule it may appear they have admitted But these two are so near one another that if the question of Fact can be voided and it appear that such was the Church from the beginning it will be a presumption in a maner peremtory of the Churches Title by divine right Though there is difference made between them as appeâ—rs by the opinion related afore that the power of Excommunication was settled in the Church afore Constantine by humane consent not by Gods appointment Which by consequence of like reason extends to all other points wherein the power of the Church consists For my present purpose it were enough to make it appear that the Church was de Facto such a Society from the beginning But the proving of the point of Right will be only making the same inference which hath been alwaies concluded out of that evidence which resolveth the point of Fact And the conclusion thus inferred will be both necessary and effectual to clâ—are the positive right of the Church in deciding Controversies of Faith which will be the best satisfaction why negatively it cannot extend to create the ground upon which wee are to believe I will therefore wrap them up both together in the processe of my discourse In which I finde that difficulty which S. Augustine observeth in proving any of those things which are most manifest to common reason and sense For it shall be hard to bring arguments that are much clearer than that which they intend to prove That the Church had been from the beginning one outwardly by visible Communion as well as one inwardly by invisible Faith and love could not be questioned so long as it prevailed Neither was it foreseen at dissolving the Unity of the Western Church for the Reformation that it would ever come to this dispute whether there had been alwaies and ought to be one Catholick and Apostolick Church For each party hoped well to be so themselves as being perswaded that their adversaries ought to unite themselves unto them upon acknowledgment that the truth was on their side And truly I acknowledge that there is no clear mention of a precrpt of God commanding all Christians to hold the unity of the Catholick Church by outward communion with it For the intent of God to call the Gentiles to Christianity seemeth to be the utmost of that which is clearly declared by the Scriptures That his intent was to unite all Christians in one visible communion of the Church there is evidence by consequence to be had from the Scriptures But what the form should be before the materials were prepared it were as strange to think that the stones and timber particular Christians ought to know as that the Surveyors the Apostles and their fellowes should not know That therefore the Church was from the beginning and ought to be one visible Communion must be showed by the ingredients and principles or elements of all visible Societies Which in the Society of the Church will appear proportionable to the nature and pretense of it Supposing from common sense and experience that all Civil Societies or Common-wealthes unto which the name of Societies or Communities principally because most visibly belongeth are constituted and founded upon certain Rights of Soveraigne Power which some call in Latine Jura Majestatis being indeed the particulars wherein the Right and Power of Soveraignty consisteth For when it is once resolved in what hands that Power is to remaine then is the State and Form of Government constituted and thereby distinguished from other formes of Common-wealth according to the qualitie of those persons in whom this Power is established That being ruled by certain Lawes acknowledging certain Governors being subject to the Power of the Sword by which those Governors execute those Lawes are the effects of Soveraigne Power being the principal of the said ingredients or particulars the certain and necessary marks of a distinct Common-wealth is that which I suppose from common experience There are Societies which subsist by the Law of Nature and Nations As that which Aristotle observes among those that are imbarked in the same bottome for the same voyage That which the Jewes Law supposes among the Caravans of the East consisting of subjects and members of several Common-wealthes There are Communities and Corporations which subsist by the Act of Soveraigne Power in each Common-wealth allowing that Power over the Members to the whole ihat is such persons as are allowed to act for the whole as they think fit If the whole Church from the beginning have acknowledged certain Lawes by which they were governed in those things wherein the Communion of the Church consisteth certain Governors to whom they ought to give respect according to those Lawes a Power of putting out of the Church answerable to the Power of putting to death by the sword into which the coâ—ctive Power of Common-wealths is resolved then is the Church and alwaies was such a Society wherein the same Rule of Faith might be and was alwaies from the beginning preserved by Tradition and Custome which is my present businesse to show And if the Church alwaies was so de Facto then is it so alwaies de Jure If it did alwaies hold unity in the Faith and communion in the service of God by the meanes of certain Lawes certaine Rulers certaine Power of granting or refusing this Communion Then was there a precept of
mentioning the Devil and his Angels nor of that not mentioning the creation of Angels The knowledge then requisite to save a Christian containeth the Apostasy of the evil Angels whether it be in the Creed or not because neither the Creed as it is nor Baptisme in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost can be understood to have any sense without supposing it And therefore Irenaeus I. 2. could not deliver this Rule without mentioning the Devil and his Angels though I intend not thereupon to argue that it was contained in the words of the Creed at that time By S. Cyrils Catechises you shall understand that those who pretended to Baptisme at Easter were to be instructed in the sense and grounds of their Creed during the Lent And S. Augustine in his book de Catechizandis rudibus where hee acquaints his friend that had writ to him about something of that office with the form that hee was wont to use instructs him to begin with the beginning of Genesis and setting forth what course God had taken with mankinde before and under the Law to bring down his discourse to the coming of Christ and from thence to his second coming to Judgment Which is to the very same purpose onely taking opportunity to mixe the motives of Faith which the Old Testament containeth with the mater of Faith which the New Testament requireth Whatsoever then is said of the Rule of Faith in the writings of the Fathers is to be understood of the Creed Whereof though it be not maintained that the words which Pretenders were required to render by heart were the same yet the substance of it the reasons and grounds which make every point necessary to be believed were alwaies the same in all Churches and remaine unchangeable I would not have any hereupon to think that the mater of this Rule is not in my conceit contained in the Scriptures For I finde S. Cyril Catech. V. protesting that it containes nothing but that which concerned our salvation the most selected out of the Scriptures And therefore in other places he tenders his Scholars evidence out of the Scriptures and wishes them not to believe that whereof there is no such evidence And to the same effect Eucherius in Symb. Hom. I. Paschasius de Sp. S. in Praef. and after them Thomas Aquinas secunda II. Quest I. Art IX all agree that the form of the Creed was made up out of the Scriptures Giving such reasons as no reasonable Christian can refuse Not onely because all they whose salvation is concerned have not leisure to study the Scriptures but because they that have cannot easily or safely discern wherein the substance of Faith upon the profession whereof our salvation depends consisteth Supposing that they were able to discern between true and false in the meaning of the Scriptures To which I will adde onely that which Tâ—rtullian and others of the Fathers observe of the ancient Hereticks that their fashion was to take occasion upon one or two texts to overthrow and deny the main substance and scope of the whole Scriptures Which whether it be seen in the Sects of our time or not I will not say here because I will not take any thing for granted which I have not yet principles to prove but supposing it onely a thing possible I will think I give a sufficient reason why God should provide Tradition as well as Scripture to bound the sense of it As S. Cyril also cautioneth in the place aforenamed where hee so liberally acknowledgeth the Creed to be taken out of the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For saith hee the Faith was not framed as it pleased men but the most substantial maters collected out of the Scripture do make up one doctrine of the Faith For I beseech you what had they whosoever they were that first framed the Creed but Tradition whereby to distinguish that which is substantial from that which is not Heare Origen in the Preface to his books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cùm multi sum qui sentire se putent quae Christi sunt nonnulii eorum diversa à prioribus sentiant servetur verò Ecclesiastica praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens Illa sola credenda est veritas quae in nullo ab Ecclesiasticâ discordat traditione Illud tamen scire opor tet quoniam sancti Apostoli fidem Christi praedicantes de quibusdam quidem quaecunque necessaria crediderunt omnibus credentibus etiam his qui erga inquisitionem divinae scientiae pigriores videbantur manifestissimê tradiderunt Rationem scilicet assertionis relinquentes eis inquirendam qui Spiritûs dona excellentia praecipuè sermonis sapientiae scientiae per ipsum Spiritum Sanctum percipere merebantur De aliis verò dixerunt quidem quia sint quomodo autem aut unde sint siluerunt profectò ut studiosiores quoque l. quique ex posteris suis amatores sapientiae scientiae exercitium habere possent in quo ingenii sui fructum ostendere valerent Hi videlicet qui dignos se capaces sapientiae praepararent Species verò eorum quae per praedicationem Apostolicam manifestè traduntur hae sunt There being many that think their sense to be Christian and yet the sense of some differs from their predecessors But that which the Church preaches as delivered by order of succession from the Apostles being preserved and remaining the same in the Churches That onely is to be believed for truth which nothing differs from the Tradition of the Church This notwithstanding wee must know That the holy Apostles preaching the Faith of Christ delivered some things as many as they held necessary most manifestly to all believers even those whom they found the duller in the search of divine knowledge Leaving the reason why they affirmed them to the search of those that goe to receive the eminent gifts of the Holy Ghost especially of utterance wisedom and knowledge by the Holy Ghost Of other things they said that they are but how or whereupon they are they said not Forsooth that the more studious of their Successors loving wisedom and knowledge might have some exercise wherein to show the fruit of their wit To wit those that should prepare themselves to be worthy and capable of wisedom Now the particulars of that which is manifestly delivered by the preaching of the Apostles are these Which hee proceedeth to set down But Vincentius Lerinensis hath writ a Discourse on purpose to show that this Rule of Faith being delivered by succession to the principal as S. Paul requires Timothy to do and by them to those that were baptized was the ground upon which all Heresies attempting upon the Faith were condemned So that so many Heresies as historical truth will evidence to have been excluded the Church from the Apostles time for mater of belief so many convictions of this Rule Which
rather here to prevent the objection that may be made that I ground my selfe upon the authority of men when I allege the testimonies of Church Writers For those that may abuse themselves with such a fond imagination as this are to consider that I claime as yet no other credit not onely for Tertullian who after hee turned Montanist was not of the Church but for the Fathers of the Church but that which common sense allowes men of common sense in witnessing maters of historical truth To wit that they who published writings that are come to posterity would not have alleged things for true which every man might see to be false in point of fact Because by so doing common sense must needs tell them that they must of necessity utterly discredit the cause which they meant to promote As in the case in hand If wee say that Tertullian being a Montanist alleged against the Church things so notoriously false that all the world might see and know them to be false wee refuse him the credit of a man in his right senses For what were hee but a mad man that would tell the Church that such or such Customes you know are practised among Christians knowing that they were not practised by the Catholick Church though they might be among the Montanists Therefore though I put a great deal of difference between the authority of Tertullian and S. Basil in regulating the Church yet in witneshng mater of fact I can ascribe no more to S. Basils testimony in his book de Sp. S. cap. XXVII than I do to this of Tertullian His words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of things decreed and preached that are kept in the Church some wee have from written doctrine some wee have received as delivered in secret down to us from the Tradition of the Apostles both of the same force to godlinesse And this will no man contradict that hath but a little experience in the rules of the Church For if wee go about to refuse unwritten customes as of no great effect wee shall unawares wound the Gospel in the dangerous part or rather turn the Faith preached into a bare name As first to mention the first and commonest Who taught us by writing to mark with the figure of the Crosse those that have hoped in the name of our Lord Christ Jesus What Scripture taught us to turn to the East when wee pray Which of the Saints left us by writing the words of invocation upon discovering the bread of Thanksgiving and the cup of Blessing For wee are not content with those which the Apostle or the Gospel mentions but promote and inferre others as of great force toward the Sacrament which wee have received by unwritten doctrine Wee also blesse the water of Baptisme and the oile of anointing and besides the man himself that is baptized from what Scripture and not from silent and secret Tradition And indeed what written word taught the very anointing of oile And that a man is drenched thrice whence comes it And other things about Baptisme renouncing Satan and his Angels from what Scripture come they And not from this unpublished and secret doctrine I will not here dispute the saying of S. Basil that these orders are of the same force toward Christian piety as the Scriptures And that Christianity would be but a bare name were it not for these unwritten customes how the truth of it holds Nay it were easie to instance against him as well as against Tertullian that among the particulars which they name there are those which never were in force through the whole Church but onely in some parts of it My present purpose demands onely this that Christians had rules which they observed for Lawes in the exercise of their communion And therefore by the intent of those who inforced those rules do constitute a Society or Corporation by the name of the Church Which Corporation Tertullian whether a Montanist or not when hee writ the book which I quote claimeth to belong to in reckoning himself among those that observed the Rules of the Catholick Church If wee suppose the Church to be one Body consisting of all Churches which are all of them several Bodies it will be not onely reasonable but absolutely necessary by consequence to grant that some orders there must be which shall have the force of the whole others onely in some parts of it And though S. Basil or Tertullian mistake local customes for general yet had there not alwaies been a Body capable of being tied by general customes there had been no room for this mistake No prejudice shall hinder mee to name here the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles Not as if I meant to maintain that the writings so called were indeed penned by them But because they contain such limitations of customes delivered the Church by the Apostles as were received and in use at such times and in such parts of the Church where those who penned those writings writ For though I should grant that those limitations are not agreeable to that which was brought in by the Apostles no man would be so ridiculous as to demand that there were never any orders or customes delivered the Church by the Apostles which succeeding times did limit otherwise The book of Canons which was acknowledged by the representatives of the whole Church in the Council of Chalcedon if it be survayed shall be found to contain onely particular limitations of general orders held by the Church before those Canons were made by the several Councils either the same with those in the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles or differing onely according to several times and places For wee have yet extant a book of Canons made out of the Africane Councils containing the like limitations of the same customes and orders which though not the same yet served to preserve the Churches of Africk in unity with the rest of the Church This Code wee finde added to the former by Dionysius Exâ—guus in his translation of the Canons together with the Canons of the Council at Sardica And Cassiodore who lived the same time with Dionysius affirmes that this collection was in use in the Church of Rome at that time Divin lect cap. XXIII But there is extant a later Collection of Canons under the title of the Church of Rome consisting of the same Canons together with some of the Rescripts of Popes which were come into use and authority in the Western Church at such time as the said Collection was made Of the same Canons consisteth another Greek collection printed by du Tillet and commented by Balsamon which addeth hereunto the Canons of the sixth and seventh Synod in use in the Greek Church but not acknowledged by the Latine Where instead thereof the collections of Martinus Braccarensis and Isidorus Mercator of Burchardns Bishop of Wormes and Ives of Chartres where last of all the collection of Gratiane the Dominican Monk was in
use till the Rescripts of the Pope took place and excluded the Canons of the whole Church The succession of which Law is so visible that hee that may say that the order presently in force can no way agree with that which was established by the Apostles shall not have the face to asfirm that there never was any order established by the Apostles instead of it so visible shall the impressions be of that corruption by which it declines from the order first established by the Apostles And therefore I allege here in the last place the consent of those of the Reformation who in answering this objection when it is argued that therefore Tradition is necessary as well as Scripture do not deny that there was a Rule of Faith that there were Orders delivered the Church by the Apostles to preserve the Unity of the Church But to answer for themselves why they stand not to the present Church of Rome in them do allege That the Rule of Faith delivered the Church by word of mouth is also delivered by writing and contained in the Scriptures Tnat the Rules of good order which the Apostles delivered were never intended to be unchangeable as you may heare Tertullian say de Velandis Virginibus cap. I. For in making this answer they do acknowledge that the Church had a Rule of Faith which it had received for a Law from the Apostles and therefore delivered for a Law to all that became Christians But whether this Rule be contained in the Scriptures or not concernes not my present purpose seeing it will be as much the cognizance of Christians and foundation of the Society and Corporation of the Church tending to maintain unity in the profession and exercise of Christianity whether so or otherwise Onely no man will deny that it may be not so easie to discern by the Scriptures alone what belongs to it what not as it may appear to be by the Churches delivering of it Nor do I pretend here that the orders delivered by the Apostles are all unchangeable For who knoweth not that the Lawes of every Common-wealth do change from age to age the state of Government remaining the same because those rights in which Soveraignty consisteth remain the same And therefore it is enough for my purpose that the Church had certain orders regulating the proceeding thereof in maters wherein it is to communicate as well under the Apostles as in succeeding ages Nor requiring that they should be alwaies the same but that they should come alway from the same power which they left in the Church that so the Body may appear to continue alwaies one and the same And that I proceed to prove by showing that the power of those publick persons which did alwaies act in behalf of the Church in admitting into and excluding out of the Church whereby those Laws were in force and wherein the Unity of the Church consisteth is derived from our Lord by the act of his Apostles CHAP. VIII That the Power of Governing the whole Church was in the Apostles and Disciples of Christ and those whom they took to assist them in the parts of it The Power of their Successors must needs be derived from those Why that Succession which appeares in one Church necessarily holdeth all Churches The holding of Councils evidenceth the Vnity of the Church FOr this I must presume of in the first place That as the Church is and was to be the true spiritual Israel of God when his ancient people departed from him by refusing the Gospel So to signifie this did our Lord chuse out XII Apostles and LXX Disciples answerable to the XII Princes of Tribes and the LXX Elders which with Moses were to govern Gods ancient people Neither do I mervail that wee finde in the Scriptures no further use made of these LXX no further power exercised by them under that title The difference between Gods ancient and new people appearing straight after our Lords Ascension and making that order uselesse for the future For Israel dwelling all in one Land might easily be governed by one Soveraign Court in maters of the Law answerable in power to that of Moses and his LXX Elders But Christianity being to be dispersed all over the world those LXX with our Lord chose for his present service could not serve for the like purpose in time to come It is therefore enough that the number of them signifies unto us the foresaid purpose their office for the time to come being swallowed up in the offices of the rest of our Lords Disciples besides the XII Apostles remaining alwaies the Judges of the XII Tribes of Israel here and in the world to come I am sensible that some both of our Presbyterians and Independents have been nibbling at this point as if they had a minde if they durst to say That the Apostles had no authority in the Church but as writers of Scriptures As for the Goverment of the Church that the people or their buckram Elders were to give them checkmate in it But having met with this pretense in another place and heard no man open his mouth to maintain it I shall at present rest content to have showed afore that their authority is the ground of the authority of their writings here that their Traditions were Law to the Church and that by their writings which mention not so much as what the Traditions were Whereby it appears that they took place as acts of their perpetual authority over the Church not as revelations of Gods will sent by those Epistles wherein sometimes they are not so much as named Besides the Apostles then at such time as the Church of Jerusalem contained all Christendome as I observed afore you have mention of the Elders at Jerusalem Acts XI 30. XV. 2 4 6 22 23. And again after the propagation of Christianity XXI 18. Of leading men also among the brethren who were also Prophets Doctors and Evangelists XV. 22 32 35. These then had not their commission from the Apostles because other disciples as well as the XII received at our Lords own hands the power of remitting sins by the Holy Ghost John XX. 18-23 But there was never yet any doubt made that their authority was limitable by the Apostles because of the eminence of the XII among the Disciples And therefore hee that would say that the LXX were contained in the number of those Elders and Leaders could no more be contradicted then some of the Ancient Fathers can be contradicted in reporting that some of them were of the number of the VII that were chosen to assist the Apostles Acts VI. S. Paul further rehearsing the graces that our Lord hath granted for the edification of his Church reckoneth Apostles Evangelists Prophets Pastors and Doctors Eph. IV. 11. 1 Cor. XII 28. Now it is the whole Church that the Apostle speaks of here as I observed afore and therefore the authority here mentioned extendeth to the whole Church But
may have an issue which I pretend requires the Tradition of the Church and that the communion and Corporation of the Church as the onely meanes to maintain and propagate Tradition in it This our Independent Congregations cannot allow but must stand upon the other plea of those Hereticks that it came in beside if not against Gods appointment which the Donatists questioned not And therefore you shall finde S. Austine in the place aforenamed allege against them the Scriptures fore-telling the calling of all Nations which hee supposeth fulfilled in the Catholick Church then visible and therefore supposeth the communion to be ordained by God wherein the visibility thereof consisteth Otherwise it had been strange to tell the Donatists that they communicating with the Catholick Bishop of Rome communicated with all the Church that acknowledged him but the Donatists acknowledging the Donatist Bishop whom they had set up at Rome were therefore disowned by all the Church beside I do not deny that those of the Reformation are to give account of those things which the Donatists are charged with Nor do I imagine that their account cannot be sufficient because that of the Donatists was not But I say that the trial must be by the Scriptures which both parts acknowledge And I say further that the rest of the Reformation may and ought to admit the Unity of the Church in visible communion as the Donatists did because otherwise they cannot pretend that others are bound to bâ— what they are But our Independent Congregations cannot because if all were as they there could be no one Church obliged to that communion which makes it visible Now I must here caution that I intend not here to inferre that these Rulers succeeded the Apostles by a title of Divine Right as if it were Gods Law that this succession should alwaies continue For I demand for the present upon the exception of those of the Reformation that succession of Faith and doctrine is of more consequence than succession of persons And therefore that there can be no Law of God whereby the right which men hold by personal succession can or ought to hinder the Reformation of Faith and doctrine of Christianity if it may appear that the succession of persons hath not been effectual to preserve the succession of Faith That which I demand from the premises is this That no man in his right senses can imagine that all Christendome should agree in acknowledging those for lawfull Rulers of the Church in the times next the Apostles that had usurped their places contrary to the will of the Apostles and those Disciples which concurred to the work of the Apostles and those who derived their authority from either of both during the time of the Scriptures which I spoke of afore For those of the Reformation that make this exception by making it do acknowledge that there was such a visible succession of Pastors the correspondence of whom as here I argue maintained the unity of a visible Corporation in the Catholick Church And how many records of historical truth undeniable of all that would not be thought to renounce their common sense do testifie unto us visible acts of the Apostles giving power to them whom they left behinde them as those whom they gave it to have transmitted the like power to their successors But when it once appeares that they were owned by the consent of all Christians communicating with them in that quality which they held in their own Churches it can no more be imagined that they could attain those qualities by deceit or violence contrary to the will of their predecessors than it can be imagined that the common Christianity which wee all acknowledge could prevail over all by imposing upon their belief such motives to believe as never were seen because never done And therefore whatsoever change may have succeeded in those qualities from that which the Apostles instituted from the beginning or by abuse of the same in the Faith which they were trusted to propagate without adding or taking away which changes may be the subject of Reformation in the Church and the belief of it yet that this point is not of that nature That all lawfull authority in the Church is derived from that which was in the Apostles propagated by some visible act of theirs I will presume upon as proved by the premises CHAP. IX The Keyes of the Church given the Apostles and exercised by Excommunication under the Apostles The ground thereof is that profession which all that are baptized are to make That Penance and abatemeut of Penance hath been in force ever since and under the Apostles In particular of excluding Hereticks IN the last place the right of Excommunication consists in the power of remitting and retaining sins given by our Lord to his Church with the Keyes of it First to S. Peter alone our Lord saith Mat. XVI 19. I will give thee the Keyes of the kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed there But afterwards to the Body of his Disciples Mat. XVIII 17 18. If hee heare thee not tell the Church If he hear not the Church let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publicane Verily I say unto you Whatsoever yet binde as afore And to the XII breathing upon them John XX. 22 23. Receive yee the Holy Ghost Whose sins soever yee remit they are remitted and whose sins soever yee retaine they are retained By virtue of this Commission S. Peter saith to Simon Magus discovered a counterfeit Christian Acts VIII 20-24 Thy money perish with thee because thou hast thought to purchase the gift of God with money Thou hast neither part nor lot in this Word for thy heart is not right before God Repent thorefore of this thy malice and pray God that if possible this device of thine heart may be forgiven thee For I see thou art in the gall of bitternesse and the bond of unrighteousnesse And Simon answering said Pray you to the Lord for mee that nothing come upon mee of that which you have said Where having excluded him from the benefit of Christianity what hee is to expect hee leaves to the trial of future time But most manifestly S. Paul 1 Cor. V. commandeth them to deliver the incestuous person to Satan adding directions and reasons why they are to abstaine from the conversation of such Christians And pursueth this discourse with a charge of ending the sutes of their Christians within the Church 1 Cor. VI. which either signifies nothing or inforces the power of Excommunication to oblige the parties to stand to the sentence But the case of the incestuous person is made still more manifest by the reason of the sentence in joyned upon his repentance and the sorrow testified by the Church 2 Cor. II. 4-11 VII 8-11 In the Epistle to the Ebrewes VI. 4-8 X. 26-29 the Apostle declaring that they
be said that God granteth the Secular Power any right to punish him for that choice for which hee maketh him unaccountable The ground of my reason lies in that which hath been said against the Infallibility of the Church For if the sentence of the Church be not of force to oblige any man to believe the truth of it much lesse can the sentence of any Christian though never so Soveraign oblige the meanest of his Subjects to believe that Religion to be true which hee commandeth because hee commandeth it And whatsoever penalty the Soveraign inflicteth upon those that concurre not to the exercise of that Religion which hee holdeth forth as when hee denieth them protection in the exercise of their own which as I have showed is no mean one implieth a command of exercising his and is inflicted in consideration of obeying Gods command which the Subject is inabled by God to judge that hee hath against all the world to the contrary So that upon these terms the Secular Power which is inabled to judge for it self upon the same account with the meanest Subject thereof cannot have power to punish any Subject for exercising any Religion which it alloweth not For all Power as I said afore is a moral quality consisting in a Right of obliging another mans will by the act of his will that hath it Therefore if a Subject cannot be obliged by the will of his Soveraign to professe and to exercise that Religion which his Soveraign prescribeth then cannot the Soveraign have power to impose any penalty upon his Subject for professing or exercising that Christianity which hee believeth All Christianity obliging a man to the utmost of his ability to professe and to exercise that Religion which hee believeth to be true And the reason is manifest For Christianity is from God and the Secular Power is from God though by several means Christianity by the coming of Christ and the preaching of his Apostles Secular Power by what means I will not here dispute nor yet suppose any thing that is questionable That which serves my turn is evident to the common reason of all men That by another act of God than that upon which Christianity standeth That Christianity dependeth not upon it That as I argued against the Leviathan by a Law which no Secular Power can abate If therefore God oblige a Christian by his Christianity to serve God otherwise than his Soveraign commandeth hee is bound by the same bond to disobey his Soveraign to obey God which obliged the primitive Christians to suffer death rather than renounce the Faith But I intend not to say that absolutely which I say upon supposition of this Doctors sense Nor do I intend here to dispute that which I have resolved in another place what kind of penalties Secular Power is able to inact that Christianity with which it self professeth The question is now how the Secular Power is able or becomes able to impose penalties in maters of Religion which as a Christian it is not able to oblige the Subject to acknowledge not how far these penalties may extend A question which cannot be answered not supposing the Church A question which is no question supposing it For supposing that God sending Christianity founds for part of it the visible society and corporation of a Church assuring the common sense of all people thereby what is the condition upon which Salvation is to be had by communicating with it What will remain but to conform to the communion of this Church labouring to work out every man his own Salvation by the means which the communion thereof furnisheth Which whoso doth not but pretends to disturbe it will remain punishable by the Secular Power for I have said already that the Church is not inabled to inflict temporal penalties not absolutely because it is Christian but upon supposition that it maintaineth the true Church The acts whereof as Excommunication by the original constitution thereof inforceth So did not the Secular Power inforce that Excommunication it must of necessity become ineffectual when the world is come into the Church and Christianity professed by the State And this is the resolution that I have given in another place that the acts of the Church for the mater of them are limited by the Church that is to say by persons qualified by the Church and in behalf of it but the force that executes them must come from the State For supposing the Church to be founded by God and the power of it resolved into that act wherein this foundation consisteth Whatsoever the Church is by this power inabled to do will belong to the Church by Gods Law to do though the mater of that which it doth be not limited by Gods Law but by the act of men inabled by Gods Law to do it S. Cyprian and others of the Fathers have reason when they argue that the acts of the Church are the acts of God For no man capable of common reason can doubt that what is done by commission from superiour Power is the act of that Power which granted the commission so far as it ownes the execution of it And I have sufficiently limited the Power granted the Church heretofore by the mater of that communion for which it subsisteth and the supposition of the Christianity upon which it subsisteth What is therefore done by virtue of this commission though perhaps ill done for the inward intent with which men do it yet being within the bounds of the Power established by God is to be accepted as his own act without contesting whose act of founding the Church it cannot be infringed Which if it be true so far is the Secular Power from being able to create or constitute a Church by creating that difference of qualities in which the difference between several Members thereof consisteth that it is not able of it self to do any of these acts which the Church that is those who are qualified by and for the Church are thereby qualified to do without committing the sinne of Sacrilege in seizing the Powers which by Gods act are constituted and therefore consecrated and dedicated to his own service into its own hands not supposing the free act of the Church without fraud and violence to the doing of it CHAP. XXI How the Tradition of the Church limits the interpretation of Scriptures How the declaration of the Church becomes a reasonable mark of Heresie That which is not found in the Scriptures may have been delivered by the Apostles Some things delivered by the Apostles and recorded in the Scriptures may not oblige S. Austines Rule of Apostolical Traditions ANd by this means I make account I have gained another principle towards the interpretation of Scripture and resolution of things questioned in Christianity either concerning the Rule of Faith or such Laws and Customs determining the circumstances of Ecclesiastical Communion as I showed afore are understood by the name of Apostolical Traditions Which principle that no
who will or can think it reasonable that the Church should be thought to avow all that hath been written by any of the Church and is come to the hands of posterity by whatsoever means Or who will think it strange that a Christian should not understand the Rule of his Christianity though the right understanding thereof should have been the condition requisite to the making of him a Christian If the profession made by the writing from which posterity hath it were evidently so notorious to the Church and the maintenance thereof so obstinate that the Church could not avoid taking notice of it and contradicting it without quitting the trust of the Rule of Faith deposited with it then and not otherwise I do admit that the contrary of that which is regularly and ordinarily taught by Church Writers is inconsistent with the Rule of Faith Besides this another presumption or prescription limiting the interpretation or Scriptures in such things as concern the Traditions of the Apostles wee may be confident to have gained from the Society of the Church demonstrated by the premises To wit that if any thing be questionable whether it come by Tradition from the Apostles or not there can no conclusion be made in the negative because it is not expressed in the Scriptures Here I desire all them that will not mistake mee to take notice that I intend not here to conclude or inferre what force those Traditions which I pretend may come from the Apostles though it be not certified by the Scriptures may have to oblige the Church which question I found it requisite to set aside once afore But that which here I affirme onely concerns the question of fact that it is not impossible to make evidence that some Orders or Rites and customes of the Church had their beginning of being brought in for Laws to the Church by the Apostles though not written in the Scriptures Confessing neverthelesse that the proving hereof which no reason can hinder mee to proceed with here will be a step to the resolving of that force which the Traditions of the Apostles whether written or not written in the Scriptures have and ought to have in obliging the Church at present when it shall appear to be common to written and unwritten Traditions to have their authority from the Apostles And the evidence of this prescription depends upon a more general one limiting the interpretation of Scripture in mater of this nature that is concerning the Laws of the Church how far they were intended by the Apostles to tye the Church not to exceed the practice of the Church succeeding the times of the Apostles The demonstration whereof consists in certain instances of things recorded by the Scriptures of the New Testament either evidencing onely mater of fact that is what was then done and therefore importing no precept what was to be done for the future or importing such precepts as no man will stand to be now in force It is manifest that the Scriptures report how the Disciples under the Apostles were wont to assemble themselves to serve God by the Offices of Christianity upon the first day of the week called vulgarly Sunday after the Resurrection of Christ John XX. 19 26. Acts. XX. 7. Con. XVI 2. Apoc. I. 10. Speaking of the banishment of S. John conforming himself to the times of the Church for the service of God and thereupon ravish'd in Spirit Which no man questions It is said indeed in this case as it is said by others in the question of Tithes that the first day of the week is commanded to be kept holy of Christians by the fourth Commandment But I demand of any man that can tell seven whether the first day of the week and the seventh day of the week be the same day of the week or not And if this be unquestionable I demand further whether the Jews were tyed by the fourth Commandement to keep the last day of the week or not Assuring my self that whosoever believes the Scriptures and reads the Commandement that obliges them to rest all that day in which God rested from making Heaven and Earth can no more doubt that they were bound to rest on Saturday than that God rested from making Heaven and Earth upon that day I demand then whether the same precept that obliged them to keep Saturday can oblige Christians to keep Sunday And do conclude that it can no more be said then that the same word signifies both the seventh and the first day So wide an error so small a mistake can cause when faction hath once swallowed it A man would think it a very easie mistake to understand the seventh day of the week which God commands to be hallowed as if it signified one of the seven and no more Which if it were true then were the Jews never tied to rest on the Saturday by Gods Law but might have chosen which day of seven they would have rested on notwithstanding that God rested on the Saturday which is to make the reason of the precept impertinent to the mater of it I intend not to deny that the reason and ground upon which the Christian Church came to be enjoyned to keep the first day of the week is drawn and to be drawn from the fourth Commandment But I say further that the reason and ground of a positive Law makes it not a Law but the act of him that hath power to give Law signifying that hee intends to inact it for a Law whether hee expresse the reason or not And thus I say as I have hitherto said concerning other Ordinances which have the force of Law to oblige the Church that they can no more stand by virtue of such Ordinances as I acknowledge to have been torrespondent to them under the Law of Moses than Christianity by the virtue of Judaisme or the Gospel by virtue of the Law which though it bear witnesse to the Gospel yet hee were a Madman that should say That hee who was bound to be circumcised by virtue of that circumcision should be bound to be baptized supposing him of the number of Christians who agree that Baptisme coming in force circumcision could no more continue in force And surely those simple people who of late times have taken upon them to keep the Saturday though it were in truth and effect no lesse than the renouncing of their Christianity yet in reason did no more then pursue the grounds which their Predecessors had laid and drawn the conclusion which necessarily followes upon their premises that if the fourth Commandment be in force then either the Saturday is to be kept or the Jews were never tied to keep it Besides this particular it is manifest that the Apostles observe the third and sixth and ninth hours of the day for the service of God Acts II. 15. III. 1. X. 3 9 30. And this according to an Order then in force among Gods people according to the Scriptures Psal LV. 18
is evident that hee allowes them that which the Apostles had forbidden because it is evident that this is one of those differences which Jews by the Law were bound to make If therefore there be this difference in the Scriptures it is manifest that the leter of them doth not determine what obliges So again the same Apostle 1 Cor. XI 1-16 disputeth at large that men ought not but women ought to cover their heads at praying or prophesying in the Church For the intent whereof though it hath been the subject of whole books in this age I conceive I need go no further than Tertullians book de Velandis Virginibus who living so much nearer the Apostles knew better the custoÌ„ms of their Churches than all the Criticks of this time Hee disputes the case in question then whether Virgins had a privilege not to vail their faces at Divine Service by arguing that they cannot be excepted from S. Pauls words and alleging the example of the Church of Corinth where at that very time the Virgins vailed their faces at Divine Service as other women did Which whether it tye the Church or not at this time it will scarce be granted by those who now practice it not And in another place 1 Tim. V. 3-6 hee showeth that there was then an Order of Widowes whose maintenance hee ordereth to come from the stock of the Church as likewise how they are to be qualified and how imployed Of which Order there is no where any step remaining in the Church at â—resent though nothing be more imperative than the Order concerning it So the precept of the Apostle serves not to oblige the Church at present though by Scripture And if I may use the argument ad hominem upon the supposition of those that I dispute with who intend not to take any thing for true which I prove not as debating the principles of Christian truth it is manifest that the Apostle James V. 14. appointeth that the sick be anointed with oil together with prayers as well for the recovery of their health as for the forgivenesse of their sins Which it is manifest that it cannot appear not to oblige the Church at this time by virtue of that Scripture which injoyneth it And therefore to say nothing at present whether it do indeed oblige the now Church or not those that believe it doth not oblige cannot be able to give a reason why it obligeth not by the Scripture alone And this is the argument whereby I prove that the interpretation of Scripture as concerning mater of Law to the Church or the means to be used in determining what obligeth what not cannot transgresse the tradition and practice of the Church Because that which is propounded in the Scriptures as meer mater of fact may oblige and that which is propounded as mater of precept creating right may not oblige the Scripture not determining whether it intend that obligation to be universal or not For having showed afore that the Church is a Society instituted by God to which these Rules are given as Laws to govern it in the exercise of those Offices wherein the Communion therâ—of consisteth all reasonable men must grant that as the intent and meaning of all Laws is to be gathered from the primitive and original practice of that Society for which they were made so is the reason of all Orders delivered to the Church by the Apostles and by consequence their intent how farr they were to oblige to be measured by the first and most ancient practice of the Church which first had them to use Whereunto let us adde these considerations That the Orders delivered the Church by the Apostles were of necessity in force before mention can be made of them in their writings That the writing of them is neither the reason why they oblige nor a thing thereunto requisite but meerly supervenient to the force of them And that there is sufficient evidence that those motives to believe which the Scripture recordeth but cannot evidence are neverthelesse true and that the truth of those motives cannot be evident but by the Society of the Church which the said Laws do maintain For upon these conâ—â—derations it will appear necessarily consequent that as there be Apostolical Traditions which the Scripture evidently witnesseth so evidence may be made of them without Scripture The Rule of S. Austine how to discern what Traditions do indeed come from the Apostles is well enough known to be this To wit that which is observed over all the Church though it cannot be discerned when where or by whom it came first in force that is in his times by the authority of what Synod it was settled that must be deemed and taken to come from the authority of the Apostles themselves I will not use the terms of Synod or Synods because I conceive the Church was from the beginning by virtue of the perpetual intelligence and correspondence settled and used between the parts of it a standing Synod even when there was no Assembly of persons authorized to consent in behalf of their respective Churches Such things as became requisite to be determined in any Church being thereby so communicated to the rest as the order taken in one either to be accepted by them or redressed Neither will I say that the Rule is so effectual as it is true For I cannot warrant how general the practice of every thing that may come in question can appear to have been over the whole Church nor whether it may appear to have begun from some act of the Church to be designed by some place or persons or not which in S. Austines time I doubt not might be made to appear and being made to appear would maintain the Rule to be true Nor have I need of any such Rule as may serve to discern whatsoever may become questionable whether it come from the Apostles themselves or not It shall suffice mee here to presume thus much that no man can prescribe against any Rule of the Church that it comes not from the Apostles because it is not recorded in the holy Scriptures And therefore that nothing hindereth competent evidence to be made of the authority of the Apostles in some Orders of the Church of which there is no mention in the Scriptures Correspondently to that which was settled afore concerning the Rule of Faith that no man can prescribe against any thing questionable that it is no part of it because it is not evident in Scripture or because such arguments may be made against it out of the Scriptures which every one whose salvation it concerns is not able evidently to assoile And all this being determined I intend neverthelesse that it still shall remain questionable how farr these Orders of the Apostles oblige the Church Because I intend not to prescribe from all this that those Orders which shall appear to have been brought in by the Apostles may not become uselesse to the Church CHAP.
the second of the LXX whose privildges are not to be communicated to any authority to be preserved in the Church afterwards But the importance of these exhortations is not such as can inferre any imagination of infallibility in those whom they are exhorted to follow For they that know the bounds of that Power which the Apostles had trusted with the Governours of particular Churches presupposing the Christianity and Laws of Ecclesiastical communion which themselves had delivered may safely be exhorted to acknowledge them to esteem them above measure in love to obey them and to give way to them remembring those from whom they had first received Christianity from whom they had received these instructions as well as their then Rulers because they had long before received and yielded obedience to those things which we except from the obedience of present Rulers as presupposed to any power they can challenge As for the words of S. Paul 1 Tim. III. 15. I confess they containe a very just and full attribute of the Church and a Title serving to justifie all the right I challenge for it For if the Church be the House of the living God then is it by Gods founding and appointment a Body consisting of all members of the true Church wherein God dwells as of old in the Temple at Jerusalem as he dwells in every Christian as he dwelt in the Tabernacle and Campe of the Israelites And if it be the Pillar that sustains the truth then must it have wherewith to maintain it beside the truth it selfe which is the Scriptures And what what can that be but the testimony of it selfe as a body and fellowship of men onely which securing it selfe that is succession by the evidence made to the Predecessors of the same body maintains the truth once committed to the trust of it not onely by writing but also by practice But what is this to the gift of Infallibility for suppose the Church by the foundation of it inabled to maintain both the truth and the sufficience of the motives of faith against Infidels and also the rule of faith against Hereticks by the evidence which it maketh that they are received What is this to the creating of faith by decreeing that which before it was decreed was not the object of faith but upon such decree obligeth all faithful to believe Surely the Church cannot be the Pillar that sustains any faith but that which is laid upon it as received from the beginning not that which it layeth upon the foundation of faith Here I will desire the Reader to peruse these words of S. Basil Epist LXII speaking of the Bishop of Neo caesarea deceased 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is a man gone that of all men of his time most evidently excelled in all and every of those good things that belong to men The stay of his Country the ornament of the Church the Pillar that sustained the truth For if a particular Prelate may duly be qualified as well the Pillar that supporteth the truth as the prop of his Country Well may the Church be thought capable of the same stile though it create no matter of faith by decreeing but onely preserve that which it hath received by defending and maintaining it CHAP. XXXI The Fathers acknowledge the Sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures as the Traditions of the Church They are to be reconciled by limiting the terms which they use The limitation of those sayings which make all Christian truth to be contained in the Scriptures Of those which make the authority of the Church the ground of Faith IT is now time having showed the meaning of those Scriptures which are alleged for both extremes which I avoid to do the like for some of those sayings of the Fathers which are pleaded to the same purpose This abridgment cannot consider all Therefore I will not multiply those which speak to one and the same purpose Nor marshal them according to the mater which they speak to Finding them speak to any branch of those extremes which I decline I will put them down as they come S. Augustine again de Doctr. Christianâ II. 6. for one place you had afore Magnifice salubriter Spiritus Sanctus ità Scripturas modificavit ut locis apertioribus fami occurreret obscurioribus fastidia detergeret Nihil enim ferè de illis obscuritatibus eruitur quod non planissimè dictum alibi reperiatur Gallantly as well as wholesomly hath the Holy Ghost so tempered the Scriptures as to satisfie hunger by those places that are plain by those that are obscure to wipe of queasiness For there is scarce any thing digged out of those dark places that is not found most manifestly said elsewhere Epist III. Tanta est Christianarum profunditas literarum ut in eis quotidie proficerem si eas solas ab ineunte pueritiâ usque ad decrepitam senectutem maximo otio summo studio meliore ingenio conarer addiscere Non quòd ad ea quae necessaria sunt saluti tant â in eis perveniatur difficultate Sed cùm ibi quisque fidem tenuerit sine quâ rectè pieque non vivitur tam multa tamque multis mysteriorum umbraculis opaca intelligenda proficientibus restant So great is the depth of the Writings of Christianity that I should profit in them continually if I should indeavor to learn them onely at very great leasure with most earnest study having a better wit from the beginning of my nonage till decrepit old age Not as if it were so hard to attain to that which is necessary in them But when a man hath attained the Faith without which there is no good and godly living there remain so many things to be understood and so darkly shadowed with manifold mysteries Clemens Protreptico 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hear yee then that are farre off hear yee that are near hand The word is not hid from any It is a common light it shineth upon all men There are no Cimmerians in the Word As some said then that there were in the world that had no Sun Irenaeus II. 46. Vniversae Scripturae Propheticae Apostolicae in aperto sine ambiguitate similiter ab omnibus audiri possunt All the Scriptures both of the Prophets and Apostles are open and without ambiguity and may be heard or understood alike of all III. 15. Doctrina Apostolorum manifesta firma nihil subtrahens neque alia quidem in abscondito alia verò in manifesto docent um The doctrine of the Apostles is clear and firm and conceals nothing As not teaching one thing in secret and another openly Origen contra Celsum VII 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The vnlgar after their entrance made may easily study to apprehend even the deeper notions that are hid in the Scriptures For it is manifest to any man that reads them that they may have much deeper sense than that which straight appears in them Which becomes
every Instrument of a contract contain every thing that is in force by the said contract Surely it is a thing so difficult to contain in writing every thing that a contract intends that many times if witnesses were not alive other whiles if general Lawes did not determine the intent of words in fine if there were nothing to help the tenor of such Instruments things contracted would hardly sort to effect Consider now what is alleged on the other side how resolutely how generally the Tradition both of the Rule of Faith and of Lawes to the Church is acknowledged even by those witnesses whose sayings are alleged to argue the sufficience perfection and evidence of the Scriptures Is it civil is it reasonable to say that the Writers of the Christian Church make it their businesse to contradict themselves which no Scholar will admit either Infidels Pagans Jewes Mahumetans or Hereticks to do Is it not easie to save them from contradicting themselves by saying that Tradition of Faith containeth nothing that is not in the Scriptures but limits the meaning of that which they contain Tradition of Lawes may contain that which is not in the Scriptures for the species of fact but is derived from the Scripture for the authority from whence it proceeds Or is it possible by any other means reasonably to save them from contradicting themselves These generals premised freely may wee make our approaches to the particulars and by considering the circumstance of the places where they lye make our selves consident to finde some limitation restraining the generality of their words to make them agree as well with my position as with themselves For example Epiphanius Haer. LXXVI Irenaeus II. 46. III. 15. Athanasius Dispcum Ario say all is clear in the Scriptures Meaning that the sense of the Church is clearly the sense of the Scriptures in the points questioned But not to them who exclude that Tradition which themselves include and presuppose Observe again that the perspicuity of the Scriptures is not limited to things necessary to salvation in all that hath been alleged but once in S. Austine Epist III. and observe withall that the knowledg of things necessary proceeds upon supposition of the Rule of Faith acknowledged and received from the Church in the Catechizing of those that were baptized Not determined by every ones sense of the Scriptures It is therefore easily granted that the Scriptures were made for all sorts of people that they might profit by them Alwaies provided that they bring with them the Faith of the Catholick Church for the Rule within the bounds whereof they may profit by reading them otherwise they may and they may not And therefore those sayings which were alleged to prove them obscure convincing that they are not clear to all understandings because they require study and search and digging do necessarily leave him that comes without his Rule not onely in doubt of finding the truth but in danger of taking error for it Upon the like supposition S. Austine affirms de Vtilitate credendi VI. that any man may finde enough in the Old Testament that seeks as he ought For to seek humbly and devoutely is the same thing for him that is no Christian For the Manichees to whom S. Austine recommends the Old Testament in this place were Christians no further than the name as it is for him that is a Christian to seek like a Christian that is having before his eyes the Faith of the Church And this is that which S. Austine means that hee who is no Christian so seeking may finde enough to make him a Christian That is as much as hee is to expect from the Old Testament And this supposition is exprest by Origen contra Celsum VII when hee sayes that the unlearned may study the Scriptures with profit after their entrance made For this entrance is the Rule of Faith which they were taught when they were baptized And the Catechism of that time containing as well the motives as the mater of Faith appears to the unlearned the way into the deep that is the mystical sense of the Scripture Upon the same terms may wee proceed to grant all that is alleged to show that which is not contained in the Scriptures not to be receivable in point of Christian truth For having showed that the Rule of Faith is wholly contained in the Scriptures And nothing contained in the records of Church Writers to be unquestionable but the Rule and Tradition of Faith Whatsoever further intelligence and information can be pretended either tending to establish the same or by consequence of reason to flow from it if it cannot be pretended to come from Tradition because there is no Tradition of the Church concerning that wherein the Church agrees not either it must come from the Scripture or by the like revelation as the Scriptures which no Church Writer pretends to have For as for that which by consequence of reason is derived from those things which the Scripture expresseth Seeing the words of the Scripture is not the word of God but the sense and meaning of them it were a thing very impertinent to question whether or no that be contained in the Scripture which the true sense of the Scripture by due consequence of argument imports But if the question be of Lawes delivered the Church by the Apostles having showed that there may sufficient evidence be made of such though not recorded in the Scriptures there can no presumption be made being not found in the Scriptures that therefore a Law was not first brought into the Church by the Apostles And yet it remains grounded upon the Scriptures in point of righâ— because the authority by which it was brought into the Church is either established or attested by the Scriptures Mater of fact being competently evidenced by other historical truth besides And upon these terms wee may proceed to acknowledg the goodness of an argument drawn negatively from the Scriptures that is to say inferring this is not in the Scriptures therefore not true Doth my position then oblige mee to deny Irenaeus affirming III. that the Apostles writ the same that they preached Or S. Austine in Psalmum XXI de Vnitate Ecclesiae cap. V. and Optatus V. tying the Donatists to be tried by the Scriptures Both parties pretending to be children of God are to be tryed by their Fathers Will that is by the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament But if there shall fall out any difference about the intent of their Fathers Will the meaning of the Old and New Testament shall I think that is said in vain which is alleged on the other side out of the same S. Austine contra Cresconium I. 33. that if a man would not erre in that point hee is to advise with the Church which the Scripture evidenceth For the question being about the rebaptizing of Hereticks that is about a Law of the Church if you will have S. Austine agree with S. Austine
The Word shines upon all and is hid to none saith Clemens to the Gentiles But it is enough for his purpose that they may be convinced of Christianity whether the Scriptures contain it clearly to all understandings or not Tertullian prescribeth that when once wee believe wee are to believe that wee have nothing else to believe because the Gnosticks pretended secrets which our common Christianity they confessed contained not Claudius Apollinaris is afraid that our common Christianity might be thought unperfit if hee should write against Montanus And does not Christians writing one against another cast a mark of imperfection upon it in the opinion of unbelievers though Christians ought to know that God is not tyed to prevent offenses Assuredly the Gospel of which hee speaks is neither any one Gospel nor all four Nor can the word Gospel signifie either the New Testament alone or the Old and New both Nor could hee be thought to adde to them by expounding them and thereby maintaining the Church Therefore hee inferrs a good consequence that because it is forbidden to adde to or take from the Law therefore our common Christianity is not unperfit nor ought wee to do that whereby it may seem unperfit Now as for the sayings alleged out of S. Austine that import as much as the words which wee had afore Ego Evangelio non crederem having showed what is the effect and intent of them I shall not be very solicitous to show how all that is said to the same effect is answered For as there is no head so hard that cannot distinguish between the authority of the Church as it is a visible Body of men that could never have been cozened into the beliefe of Christianity upon pretended motives whether sufficient or not and as it is supposed by Christians to be a Body founded by God So is there no heart so hardned with prejudice as to refuse this demand That the authority of the Church as the Church presupposes the truth of Christianity and therefore proves it not And by consequence no truth that Christianity either containeth or inferreth Which being admitted if any thing be ascribed to the Church which seems not to suppose any part of Christian truth it must be referred to the authority and credit of the Church as a visible Body of men moving others to imbrace the Christian Faith For though this credit contribute to the making of those men Christians which are won to the Church already setled and so the Church is the Church before they are Christians Yet is the ground and reason which makes the Church a Body founded by God to wit the profession of Christianity more ancient in order of reason and nature than the being of the Church And upon supposition of this ground that is that the Church hath true reasons as well as sufficient to believe proceeds all that authority of the Church which S. Austine allegeth to the Manichees upon so high terms that hee would not believe were hee not moved by it to believe Neither was it the authority of the Church vested in the rest of the Apostles that gave S. Paul the authority of an Apostle over the Church though I have said afore that all the authority which the Church can ever have was in the Apostles and disciples of our Lord for the time And though it is manifest that S. Paul could not have had the Authority of an Apostle over the Church had he not been owned by the rest of the Apostles but the Authority of our Lord Christ in the Apostles of the same effect in obliging the Church to receive S. Paul for an Apostle as to receive that which they preached for the Faith Nor is the mater much otherwise in the receiving of any Scripture for Canonital For neither can any mans writing be owned for Canonical Scripture not supposing his person owned by the Apostles And his authority being so owned is necessarily before any authority of the Church and the very being of it That some Scriptures may be received in some Churches and not in others is not because any Church can have authority to reject that which another is bound to receive but because some Church may not know that some Scripture comes from a man so owned by the Apostles though another may know it and yet be a Church and salvation be had in the communion of it such knowledg depending meerly upon evidence in point of fact And therefore the act of the Church in listing the Scripture hath no authority but that which the presumption of such evidence createth As for the rest of that which is alleged for the authority of the Church if S. Jerome resolve to stand to the Church of Rome it is not because hee takes the sentence thereof to be infallible but because hee had reason to presume that it were in vain for an Angel in heaven to preach any other Faith to it than that which once had been received Nor doth S. Cyprian make the not believing the Popes infallibility the sourse of all Heresie and Schism but the neglect of authority derived from the Apostles upon the Heads of particular Churches in the consent of whom the visibility of the true Faith and Church both consisteth For it is meer slight of hand to take the Rock which the Gates of Hell vanquish not in S. Austine for the Church of Rome because hee spoke of it in the words next afore Being meant of the Vine which hee had speech of a little afore that to wit the Christianity which our Lord Christ preacheth For in S. Bernards time I grant the stile was changed and it might passe for good doctrine to say That the Faith cannot suffer any failleur in the Church of Rome As for all those passages of the Fathers which are alleged in recommendation whether of Tradition for the Rule of Faith or of Traditions which are the Lawes of the Church they are all mine own They cannot serve the turn of any opinion but that which I pretend That the Tradition of the Church witnessed and evidenced by the continual exercice and practice of the Church extant in the records of the Church not constituted and created by any expresse act of those that have authority in behalf of the Church as it giveth bounds to the interpretation of the Scripture in such things as concern the Rule of Faith So it discovereth what Lawes the Church received from the Apostles and by consequence what is agreeable and consequent to the intent of the same in future times according to the difference between that and the present state of the Church Let those things therefore which have been produced here be added to that which I alleged in the beginning to make evidence for the Corporation of the Church from the Lawes given it by the Apostles Irenaus shall serve both for the authority of the Scripture antecedent to the authority of the Church and for the Tradition of the Church bounding
the sense of it For if the same Faith which first was preached was afterwards committed to writing by the Apostles and how should those Christians which had not the use of leters be saved otherwise then was it the authority of the Apostles acknowledged by them that found themselves tyed to be Christians which made the Faith to oblige whether delivered by writing or without it The consent of all Churches in the same Rule of Faith serving for evidence of the Apostles act in delivering the same to the Churches Nor can any further reason be demanded why that knowledg which the Gnosticks prerended to have received by secret wayes should be refuted than the want of this And therefore it is in vain to allege that as they scorned the Scripture so they alleged Tradition for this secret knowledge The Tradition which they alleged being secret and such as could not be made to appear But no lesse contradictory to the Tradition of the Church than to the Scriptures both infallibly witnessed by the consent of all Churches And hereupon I leave the sayings of S. Austine setting aside the authority of the Council of Nicaea and affirming that former General Councils may be corrected by later without answer As also the sayings of them who affirm the Faith which our Lord hath taught to be the rock upon which the Church is built For if no building can lay that foundation upon which it standeth then cannot the Church make mater of Faith being founded upon it And that authority which may be set aside or corrected can be no infallible ground of Faith It is true it is pleaded that though in the Church of Rome there be some that do believe that the Church is able to make new Articles of Faith that is to make such determinations in maters of Faith as shall oblige all men to believe them as much as they are obliged to believe all that which comes from our Lord by his Apostles Others that do believe onely that the Church is able to evidence what the Apostles delivered to the Church and that this evidence is the ground whereon particular persons are to rest that whatsoever is so evidenced was indeed so delivered by the Apostles yet both these agree in one and the same reason of believing both of them alleging the Tradition of the Apostles to the Church for the ground of their Faith But this is more than any man of reason can believe unlesse wee allow him that affirms contradictories to ground himself upon one part of the contradiction which the other part of it destroyes For seeing that there must be but one reason one ground upon which we believe all that we believe and that it is manifest that those Articles of Faith which the determination of the Church creates being not such by any thing which that determination supposes are believed to be such meerly in consideration of the authority of the Church that determines them By consequence the Scripture and whatsoever is held to be of Faith upon any ground which the authority of the Church createth is no mater of Faith but by the authority of the Church determining that it be held for such On the other side hee that allowes Tradition to be the reason why hee believes the Christian Faith necessarily allowes all that hee allowes to be mater of Faith not onely to be true but to be mater of Faith before ever the Church determine it So that allowing him to say that hee holds his Faith by Tradition hee must allow mee that hee contradicts himself whensoever hee takes upon him to maintain that the Church creates new Articles of Faith which were not so the instant before the determination of the Church CHAP. XXXII Answer to an Objection that choice of Religion becomes difficult upon these terms This resolution is for the Interest of the Reformation Those that make the Church Infallible cannot those that make the Scripture clear and sufficient may own Tradition for evidence to determine the meaning of the Scriptures and Controversies of Faith The Interest of the Church of England The pretense of Rushworthes Dialogues that wee have no unquestionable Scripture and that the Tradition of the Church never changes AS little shall I need to be troubled at any reason that may be framed against this resolution having answered the prejudice that seems to sway most men to apprehend that God must have been wanting to his Church if all things necessary to salvation be not clearly laid down in the Scriptures For it is very manifest that the very same presumption possesses the mindes of the adverse party that God must needs have provided a visible Judge infallible in deciding all Controversies of Faith Whether the Church or any person or persons authorized in behalf of the Church for the present all is one I shall therefore onely demand that it be considered first that God was no way tied either to send our Lord Christ or to give his Gospel which because it comes of Gods free grace is therefore called the Word of his Grace and the Covenant of Grace Then that hee hath not found himself obliged to provide effectual means to bring all mankinde to the knowledge of it resting content to have provided such as if men be not wanting to their own salvation and the salvation of the rest of mankinde may be sufficient to bring all men to the knowledg of it And when it is come to knowledg all discreet Christians notwithstanding must acknowledg that the motives thereof fully propounded though abundantly sufficient to reasonable persons yet do not constrain those that are convicted by them to proceed according to them as necessary reasons constrain all understandings that see them to judg by them For how should it be a trial of mens dispositions if there were no way to avoid the necessity of those motives that inforce it Now if any knowledg can be had of truth in maters of faith that become disputable it must all of necessity depend upon the sufficiency of those motives which convict men to imbrace the Christian Faith And if there be any such skill as that of a Divine among Christians of necessity all of it proceeds upon supposition of the said motives which not pretending to show the reason of things which they convict men to believe convict them notwithstanding to believe that they are revealed by God For what conviction can there be that this or that is true unlesse it may appear to fall under those motives as the means which God hath imployed so to recommend it Therefore can it not be reasonable to require a greater evidence to the truth of things disputable among Christians than God hath allowed Christianity it self which being supposed on all hands it remains questionable whether this or that be part of it Therefore can it not be presumed that God hath made the Scriptures clear in all points necessary to salvation to all understandings concerned or that hee hath
provided a visible Judg infallible in determining Controversies of Faith either because originally his goodnesse requires it or because wee cannot suppose that men can be obliged to imbrace the Gospel upon other terms It is sufficient that having given the Scriptures hee hath over and above provided the Communion of the Church to preserve the Rule of Faith and the Laws of the Church in the sensible knowledg and common practice of all Christians that the means of salvation might be sufficient and yet men remain subject to trial whether they would render them uneffectual or not to themselvs and the rest of mankinde I confess indeed it would be much for the ease of the parties and would shorten their work very much if it might be admitted for a presumption that all things necessary are clear in the Scriptures or that the Church is an infallible Judg in Controversies of Faith For then the superficial sound of the words of Scripture repeated by rote in the Pulpit or out of the Pulpit would serve to knock the greatest question on the head without any advise what difficulties remain behind undecided upon no lesse appearances in Scripture On the other side a decree of the Council of Trent would serve to put the Scripture to silence without any proffer to satisfie the conscience that is moved with the authority thereof equally obliging with our common Christianity with the sense of the Church on the same side to boot Thus much is visible that they whose businesse it is in England to reconcile souls to the Church of Rome finde their work ready done when they have gained this point and men all their lives afore grounded upon contrary reasons in the particulars which are the subject of the breach change their profession without any coutrary resolution in those particulars that is their former grounds remaining in force Surely nothing were more desirable than a ready and short way to the truth in things so concerning But to pretend it upon a ground which if any thing can be demonstrative in this kinde is demonstratively proved that it cannot be true To wit the authority of the Church decreeing without means to derive that which it decreeth from the motives that should evidence it to be revealed by God This I say to pretend is no better than an Imposture And if this be true I remain secure of that which every man will object against the resolution which I advance that whereas the meaning of the Scripture alone is a thing too difficult for the most part of men to compasse I require further that it be assured by the records of the Church which are endlesse and which no mans industry can attain to know So that the meer despair of finding resolution by the means propounded will justifie to God him that followes probabilities as being all one in that case whether there be no truth or whether it cannot appear to those whom it concerns This Objection I say I do not finde so heavy upon mee that I have any cause to mince but rather to aggravate the difficulty of it having showed that the means provided by God to make evidence of the Faith to the consciences of particular Chaistians is not any gift of infallibility vested in any person or persons on behalf of the whole Church but the Unity of the whole Church grounded upon the profession of the same Faith as the condition of it For in all reason what Unity bindes that Division destroyes And whatsoever Unity contributes to the assurance of a Christian that hee is in the way to salvation so long as hee continues in the Unity of the Church that the Division of the Church necessarily derogates from the same assurance in him that cannot continue in that Unity which is once dissolved and yet believing the Scriptures and our common Christianity to be infallibly true cannot believe the parties to be infallible as they are And what hath hee that desireth the Unity of the Church to do but to aggravate that difficulty of attaining salvation which the division thereof produceth I do therefore grant and challenge as for mine own Interest that it is very difficult for unlearned Christians to discern the truth in those Controversies about which a settled division is once formed as now in the Western Church At least upon so true and so clear grounds as may assure them that they make their choice upon no other interest than that of Gods truth But I do not therefore yield to that which this difficulty it seems hath wrung from Vincentius Lerinensis with whom agreeth the Opus imperfectum in Mat. as you have them quoted afore That there is no means but Scripture to convince inveterate Heresies The reason whereof the later of those authors renders Because those Heresies have their Churches their Pastors and the succession of them and their Communion as well as Catholick Christians For hee supposeth Pastors lawfully constituted to have fallen away to those Heresies And truly the case of this difficulty was put when the Arian Faction had possessed so great a part of the Church that S. Gregory Nazianzene in the place afore quoted acknowledges that the true Church could not be judged by numbers With whom S. Hilary libro de Synodis agreeth But if the same Nazianzene scorn them that value the Church by numbers Liberius in the place afore quoted out of Theodoret revies it upon him in saying that the cause of the Faith could not suffer though hee were alone For not onely the Scriptures continue alwaies the same but though the present Church fail it follows not that the Tradition of the Whole Church must fail with it So long as the original sense of the Whole Church may be evident by the agreement thereof with the Scripture wee may discern what is Catholick without the sentence of the present Church And that which is not so to be discerned for Catholick wee may presume that our salvation requires us not to believe it And therefore Vincentius and his fellow are so to be understood that it is difficult indeed to make evidence to private Christians of Tradition contrary to that which they see received by Heresies And therefore that for the convicting of them in the truth recourie is to be had to the Scriptures But Vincentius who as I showed you acknowledges evidence for Tradition from written records of the Church need not have said that there is no means to convince inveterate Heresies but the Scriptures Be this difficulty then the evidence how much it concerns the salvation of all Christians that the Unity of the Church be restored That the choice of private Christians in maters concerning their salvation be not put upon the sentencing of those disputes the reasons whereof they are not able to manage For being restored upon agreement in those things which it is sufficient for all Christians to believe it will neither be easie for private Christians to frame to themselves opinions
therefore affected a compliance with the ancient Church And truly it is fit it should be thought that they complied with him because hee complied with the Catholick Church for by that reason they shall comply with the Church if in any thing hee comply not with it But it is a great deal too little for him to say that will say the truth for the Church of England For it hath an Injunction which ought still to have the force of a Law that no interpretation of the Scripture be alleged contrary to the consent of the Fathers Which had it been observed the innovations which I dispute against could have had no pretense If this be not enough hee that shall take pains to peruse what Dr. Field hath writ hereupon in his work of the Church shall find that which I say to be no novelty either in the Church of England of in the best learned Doctors beyond the Seas And sure the Reformation was not betrayed when the B. of Sarum challenged all the Church of Rome at S. Pauls Crosse to make good the points in difference by the first DC years of the Church Always it is easie for me to demonstrate that this resolution That the Scripture holding the meaning of it by the Tradition of the Church is the onely means to decide controversies of Faith is neerer to the common terms that the Scripture is the onely Rule of Faith than to that Infallibility which is pretended for the Church of Rome Having demonstrated that to depend upon the Infallibility of the present and the Tradition of the Catholick Church are things inconsistent whereas this cannot be inconsistent with that Scripture which is no lesse delivered from age to age than Tradition is though the one by writing the other by word of mouth and serving chiefly to determine the true meaning of it when it comes in debate And if prejudice and passion carry not men headlong to the ruine of that Christianity which they professâ— it cannot seem an envious thing to comply with the most learned of the Church of Rome who acknowledge not yet any other Infallibility in the Church then I claime rather than with the Socinians the whole Interest of whose Heresie consists in being tryed by Scripture alone without bringing the consent of the Church into consequence and that supposing all mater of Faith must be clear in the Scripture to all them that consult with nothing but Scripture But I cannot leave this point till I have considered a singular conceit advanced in Rushworthes Dialogues for maintaining the Infallibility of the Church upon a new account The pretense of that Book is to establish a certain ground of the choice of Religion by the judgement of common sense To which purpose I pretend not to speak in this place thinking it sufficient if this whole work may inable them who are moved with it duely to make that choice for themselves and to show those that depend on them how to do the like But in as much as no man will deny the choice of Religion to be the choice of truth before falshood in those particulars whereof the difference of Religion consists It is manifest that the means of discerning between true and false in mater of Faith which I pretend cannot stand with that which hee advanceth It consists in two points That the Scripture is not and that Tradition is the certain means of deciding this truth Which if no more were said will not amount to a contradiction against that which I resolve For hee that sayes the Scripture is not the onely means excluding that Tradition which determines the meaning of it doth neither deny that Tradition is nor say that the Scripture is the certain means of deciding this kind of truth But the issue of his reasons will easily show upon what termes the contradiction stands Hee citeth then common sense to witnesse that wee cannot rest certain that wee have those Scriptures which came wee agree by inspiration of God by reason of the manifold changes which common sense makes appearance must come to passe in transcribing upon such a supposition as this That so many Columns as one Book contâ—ins so many Copies at least are made every hundreth years and in every Copy so many faults at least as words in one Column Upon which account 15 or 16 times as many faults having been made in all copies as there are words it will be so much oddes that wee have no true Scripture in any place Abating onely for those faults that may have fallen out to be the same in several copies And if Sixtus V Pope causing 100 copies of the Vulgar Latine to be compared found two thousand faults supposing two thousand copies extant which may be supposed a hundred thousand in any Language what will remain unquestionable It is further alleged that the Scripture is written in Languages now ceased which some call Learned Languages because men learn them to know such Books as are written in them the meaning whereof not being subject to sense dependeth upon such a guessing kind of skill as is subject to mistake as experience showes in commenting of all Authors But especially the Hebrew and that Greek in which wee have the Scriptures That having originally no vowels to determine the reading of it wanting Conjunctions and Preposiaions to determine the signification of him that speaks all the Language extant being contained in the Bible alone the Jews Language differing so much as it does from it the Language of the Prophets consisting of such dark Tropes and Figures that no skill seems to determine what they mean This so copious and by that means so various in the expressions of it though wanting that variety of Conjugations by which the Hebrew and other Eastern Languages vary the sense that to determine the meaning of it is more than any ordinary skill can compasse Adde hereunto the manifold equivocations incident to whatsoever is expressed by writing more incident to the Scripture as pretending to give us the sense of our Lords words for example not the very syllables Adde the uncertainties which the multiplicity of Translations must needs produce and all this must needs amount to this reckoning That God never meant the Bible for the means to decide controversies of Faith the meaning whereof requires many principles which God alone can procure because so indefinite Which the nature of the Book argueth no lesse as I observed being written in no method of a Law or a Rule nor having those decisions that are to oblige distinguished from mater of a farre diverse and almost impertinent nature Upon these premises it is inferred as evident to common sense that the Scripture produces no distinct resolution of controversies though as infinitely usefull for instruction in virtue so tending to show the truth in maters of Faith in grosse and being read rather to know what is in it than to judge by it by the summary agreement of it with that which
is held and practised convincing where the truth is and on which side especially if wee content our selves with what is probable from it expecting from Tradition what is definite and certain For supposing so great a Congregation as the Church to take this for the ground of their Faith that nothing is to be believed for revealed truth but what they have received from hand to hand from the Apostles it must be granted First that they had the same perswasion from the beginning Because having never declared to their successors what are the particulars they are to receive either they had from the beginning this principle to distinguish mater of faith from that which is not or could never introduce it without grosse imposture And besides that holding this perswasion they could never admit any thing as received from their Fore-fathers which was not so indeed Because whole Nations can never agree so to deceive in a mater subject to sense as to say that they received this or that from their Fore-fathers when they did not the reason being the same in all ages since Christ as in our own For the Christian Faith being so repeated so inculcated by the preaching of the Apostles how long soever wee suppose the remembrance of their doctrine to have remained certain in the Church so long wee may inferre that age which had this certain remembrance must convey it as certain in a sensible distance of time and by the means of such distances that it must needs come no lesse certain to us Neither can any breach have been made upon the Faith without contesting the common principle of Tradition in the first place and secondly the consequence and correspondence which the Articles of Christianity have one with another by means whereof hee that questioneth one must needs by consequence prejudice others And Religion being a bond by observing which people are perswaded they shall attain happinesse the same motives to enter into this bond in general the same grounds of embracing Christianity in particular remaining how should wee imagine any part of it should be either lost or changed which necessarily must concurre to the effect of the whole For being dispersed as from the beginning it hath been over so many Nations whose authority can be a sufficient reason to perswade them all that which hee sayes to have been received from the Apostles not that which they were possessed of afore Who is able to move them with hopes and fears answerable to those which wrought them to imbrace it either to silence or to change it And yet so long as it can appear that the contrary was received so long time must the change require to prevaile and so much more to leave the truth forgot and yet subject to be evidenced by any Records that may remain So that there is no appearance that the principles producing such a change should so long time prevail as those motives that first evidenced the truth And further upon all this appearance in point of fact it is argued à priori and as it were in point of Right That God having provided so many possibilities to make the preservation of Christianity so easie the effect must needs have followed lest the means should have been provided in vain if no effect should insue All possibility being to no purpose when no effect followes and no effect but this answering the means that render it so possible CHAP. XXXI That the Scriptures which wee have are unquestionable That mistakes in Copying are not considerable to the sense and effect of them The meaning of the Hebrew and Greek even of the Prophets determinable to the deciding of Controversies How Religion delivered by Tradition becomes subject to be corrupted THis is the summe of this new account which to my understanding maintains the Infallibility of the present Church upon as high terms as those that resolve the reason of their Faith into it and yet not upon any gift of Infallibility intailed upon any visible act of any persons however qualified on behalf of the Church but upon a pretense of evidence made to common sense that those who acknowledge Tradition cannot receive any thing not onely which they believe to be but which is indeed inconsistent with it Wherein I shall protest in the first place that I have nothing to do with the terms of great error or Christianity so as to say here that either Christianity which hee calleth Christs Law or any part of it either hath been or may be renounced by them that pretend to admit nothing as revealed truth but what they believe was received from the Apostles and that so great an error as this may have crept into the Church For the present purpose being general to try how any thing in debate may be tryed whether agreeable to the Faith or not I should count it a great impertinence and the ruine of all that I design to infer upon sufficient principles which I pretend those which I reject not to be to be ingaged to show how great any error may be before I have a ground to inferre whether it be an error or not But if I may proceed to settle such a ground I shall make no doubt to convince all that remain convict of the truth thereof how great the error is which it convicteth It shall therefore suffice mee for the present to state the opposition which I make to this pretense upon these termes That the common sense of all Christians determineth those who pretend to admit nothing as of Faith but what they receive from our Lord and his Apostles to be subject neverthelesse under that pretense to receive things really inconsistent with it and which may be discerned so to be by the means which wee have to decide such questions The Scriptures interpreted by the Original and Catholick Tradition of the Church The evidence of this position necessarily consists in that which is to be said for Scripture and Tradition joyntly as the onely sufficient means to evidence Christian truths that is to say that having showed the arguments made against Scripture alone and for Tradition alone to be ineffectual and void That which remains for the truth will be this that the Scripture with Tradition to determine the meaning of it do both together make a sufficient means to determine the truth of any thing questioned concerning Christianity I say then in behalf of the Scripture which this plea so undervalueth as not to acknowledge any such thing but in favour to them whom they dispute with that it is a mervail to see how the greater difference with common enemies is forgot upon lesse quarrels among our selves For if there be any such men as Atheists that deny the beginning of the world and the marks of Gods providence expressed in the government of it as I would there were none I demand how they could be more gratified than by making it beleeved that we are no more tied to beleeve Moses writings
that we have to come from God than we please For if it be fifteen or sixteen to one that the words which we have are not from God what respect can oblige us to do more And would Pagans and Idolaters think themselves lesse bound to us if we could perswade them that whatsoever is pretended in Scripture of a Covenant made by God with Abraham and his posterity to acknowledge and worship him alone for the true God may be denied so farre as by saying that no man can say we have any Record of it As for the Jews what a favour were it to them to quit them all that can be alleged against them out of Moses and the Prophets by saying That we cannot be assured that it is their writing For if it be said that whatsoever the Church hath interest to use against Atheists Pagans and Jews will be admitted upon Tradition having renounced Scripture can it be imagined that having granted that the whole narration upon which Christianity steppeth in may have been counterfeited in writing any man can undertake to show the truth of the same unquestionable by word of mouth Surely it may well astonish a man void of prejudice to see it so carefully alleged how many ambiguities and equivocations necessarily fall out in expressing mens mindes by writing never considering that the same may fall out in whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth so much more uncureably as a man writes upon more deliberation than hee speaks and posterity can affirm with more confidence that which is delivered by writing to have been said than that which is onely so reported For let common sense judg by what is usually done by men for the preserving of evidence concerning their estates whether it be more effectual to have it in writing or onely by word of mouth For whatsoever can be pretended to come by Tradition from the Apostles must first have been delivered in the Ebrew language at least that language which they spake and was so near the Ebrew of the Old Testament that in the New Testament it is called by that name Thence being turned into Greek or Latine it must have come afterwards into the now vulgar languages of Christendom Neither can any man imagine how the profession of Christians should be conveyed by Tradition and not by word of mouth Where though they that heard the Apostles certainly understood their meaning which there can be no question of when the intent is familiarly to teach it yet the terms wherein it was delivered not remaining upon record as much difference may creep in as there may be difference in several mens apprehensions saving that which the communion of the Church determineth And will any common sense allow that the meaning thereof shall be more certain than the words are more certain than the meaning of written words which are certain though obscure and yet not without competent means to bring the intent of them to light But I must not preferr any thing of this nature before any thing wee have in the Scriptures so long as both sides acknowledg it I demand then whether the precept of the Law which injoyned the Israelites to teach it their children concerned the written Law or not The Prophet David Psalm LXXVIII 1-8 shewes the practice of it and so do other passages of the Old Testament and surely there can be no doubt made that Moses himself did deliver and inculcate the sense of the precepts to his hearers But will any common sense allow that hee forgot his text when hee expounded the meaning of it Our Lord commands the Jews to search the Scriptures hee remits Dives in the Parable to Moses and the Prophets S. Paul presses that all things that are written are written for our learning that wee through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope That all Scripture inspired from God is profitable and a great deal more to the same effect and shall wee open the mouth of Atheism with an answer that this concerns not us who no way stand convict that wee have the words of Moses and the Prophets of our Lord and his Apostles Let this therefore passe for a desperate attempt of making a breach for Atheism Heathenism Judaism to enter in provided that the Reformation should have nothing to say against the Church of Rome But let it be demanded whether any of those that writ for the Church against Heresies were masters of the common sense of men or not And let it be demanded when they alleged the Scriptures against them whether they thought the meaning of them determinable or not It is true Tertullian prescribed against Hereticks that the Church was not tied to dispute with them out of the Scriptures and certainly had just reason so to do Because though they admitted the Apostles to have Gods Spirit yet they admitted not that Spirit to have declared to them the bottom of the truth as to themselves and therefore made use of the Scriptures as the Alcoran doth so farre onely as they agreed with the Traditions of their own Masters whom they supposed to have the falnesse of the truth Whereas it is manifest that Christianity admits no dispute from the Scriptures but from them that acknowledg no gifts of Gods Spirit that suppose not Christianity and the Scriptures Therefore those that disputed against the Heresies that grew up afterwards and acknowledged no revelation but that which had brought on Christianity what did they dispute upon For evidently they neither had nor used that prescription which Tertullian insisted upon against his Hereticks But as Tertullian might though not bound to so much use the Scriptures against such Hereticks as well as against Jews and Infidels did they who succeeded onely use it against succeeding Heresies that own no further revelation than that which Scripture came with not as necessity but to show the advantage they had for this they must do if nothing but probability is to be had from the Scriptures but the peremptory truth is without Scripture evident in the determination of the present Church which was first visible in ejecting Hereticks Certainly such a breach upon common sense cannot be admitted as for them that have evidence for the truth to compromise it to a dispute of probabilities Here therefore I do appeal to the common sense of all men that see how all the disputes that have been made from the beginning for the Faith against Heresies do consist of Scriptures drawn into consequence against them though in behalf of that which they professed to hold from the Apostles whether all this pains was taken to show what was probable or what was true upon the evidence of the true sense of Scripture falling within the compasse of that which they held from the Apostles The ground then of that account which pretends that wee have no Scripture is very frivolous For if common sense be valued by the experience of those that handle written Copies not by
the motives of Christianity could never have prevailed to introduce it into the belief and profession of all Christendom had they not been true But it followeth not therefore that Christianity beeing settled and a Power to conclude the Church lawfully vested in some members of it in behalf of the whole within due bounds The act of this Power transgressing the due bounds shall not be able to produce in so great a Body an opinion of the like obligation upon the expresse act of this Power as upon Tradition truly derived from the Apostles For the truth of Christianity professed called in question mens lives and fortunes which they were not therefore so ready to ingage upon an imposture But if when Soveraigns own the act of that Power which concludeth the Church hee that acknowledges it not calls in question his estate and reputation or whatsoever good of this world the protection of the Church ingageth Upon this account then it is possible that innovation should come into the Church without calling in question the common principle that nothing is to be admitted which comes not from the Apostles Nay without calling in question other points of Christianity so received Because nothing hinders things inconsistent with or at least impertinent to that which the Apostles have delivered to be received as consequent to that which indeed they have delivered though not as expresly contained in the same And because I would not speak without instance in a businesse so general I demand of those that hold this opinion whether they believe that the Greek and Latine Church at such time as the Schism fell out between them did both believe Tradition as well as Scripture And when it appears that there was no visible difference between them in that regard at that time I shall desire them to tell mee what they think of their demand that all Sectaries have alwayes left Tradition to betake themselves to Scripture alone For though I pretend not to suppose either the one party or the other guilty of Schism or Heresie in this place yet I pretend it visible to common sense that they who pretend to receive nothing but from the Apostles may think that which is not to be received from the Apostles unlesse contradictories may be both true at once Another instance I will give that learned Gentleman Tho. White who professeth to put Rushworths Dialogues into the world as his ward and an Orfane out of the book which hee hath published of the mean state of souls between death and the general Judgment to show that there is a Tradition of the Church that the greatest part of the souls of Christians that are not damned continue in a state of joy or grief proportionable to the affection they had to this world while they were of it to be purged thereof at the general Judgment but are not translated by any prayers of the Church to the kingdom of heaven from Purgatory pains For I demand of him that believes this whether it be received now or not how hee will defend his Ward that maintains the present Tradition to be alwaies the same For if it be said that it is not decreed by the Church though generally believed and practiced accordingly I will say that my businesse is done when the most votes by so many degrees are consenting to that which hee maintains is contrary to the Tradition of the Apostles his vote and perhaps two or three more in the communion of the Church of Rome not hindring that which is received in practice to be a more effectual Law in force than abundance of things inacted in writing that will never come to effect A third instance I will give in the difference between the Reformation and the Church of Rome concerning the Canon of Scripture Supposing that the late Scholastical History thereof hath made evidence that those books belonging to the Old Testament which the Council of Trent maketh Canonical Scripture were never received for such from the Apostles In as much as it is evident that there were in all ages of the Church that did not take them for Canonical Scripture For this being supposed what question can remain that this decree cannot be taken to proceed from Tradition of the Apostles But from a mistake in the Power of the Church as grounded upon a gift of infallibility tyed by God upon the visible act of persons inabled to decree in Council Otherwise men of reason would not have taken upon them to make that Canonical Scripture which there is evidence that they never received for Canonical Scripture And indeed I who have no more to demand here but that something may be thought by the Church to come from the Apostles which in truth it never received from the Apostles do seek no more by the premises but this That no general presumption from the present Church be receivable against evidence of historical truth in the records of by-past ages That men will not take that for the Tradition of the Catholick Church which some part of the Church they see hath not owned for such That they will abate of the generality of their position as the particulars out of which the induction must rise may require I take not upon mee to say here that any foundation of Faith necessary to the salvation of all hath been or can have been extinguished by Tradition of the present Church But I say here that something may be taken by the present Church to come from the Apostles which in truth comes not from the Apostles And so long as that is true I say that the choice of Religion cannot be prejudged by common sense without taking into consideration the weight of those truths which may appear to be held otherwise by the present Church then originally they have been received from the Apostles Now to that which is said that unlesse Christianity continue as it was delivered the possibilities provided by God to that end will be in vaine Though it be a dispute as unseasonable here as to little purpose yet because it requires no more than common sense to judge I say that the ends of Gods creatures and works are none of Gods ends My meaning is that it is one thing to say God would have this to be the end of his creature happinesse for example to be the end of man another thing to say that hee made man to bring him to happinesse The difference being the same in the works of his providence whether it be said that hee provided such means as of their nature tended to propagate the truth of Christianity preached by the Apostles to all posterity or that hee intended thereby to propagate the same In a word whether it be said to be Gods end or the end of his works And truly hee that sayes it was Gods end consequently sayes that God falls short of his end if it come not to passe But hee that will speak of God with reverence must not imagine
that they were inspired by Gods Spirit or that the authors thereof ever spoke by the same And with this resolution the testimonies of Ecclesiastical writers will agree well enough if wee consider that to prove them to have the testimony of the Church to be inspired by God it is not enough to allege either the word or the deed either of Writers or Councils alleging the authority of them or calling them Holy Divine or Canonical Scriptures Nothing but universal consent making good this testimony which the dissent of any part creates an exception against For if those to whom any thing is said to be delivered agree not in it how can it be said to be delivered to them who protest not to have received it Wherefore having settled this afore that no decree of the Church inforceth more than the reason of preserving unity in the Church can require wee must by consequence say that if the credit of divine inspiration be denied them by such authors as the Church approveth no decree of the Church can oblige to believe them for such though how farr it may oblige to use them I dispute not here It shall therefore serve my turn to name S. Jerome in this cause Not as if Athanasius in Synopsi Melito of Sardis in Eusebius S. Gregory Nazianzene abundance of others both of the most ancient Writers of the Church and of others more modern who justly preferr S. Jerome in this cause did not reject all those parts or most of them which the Church of England rejecteth But because were S. Jerome alive in it there could be no Tradition of the Church for that which S. Jerome not onely a member but so received a Doctor of the Church refuseth For it will not serve the turn to say that hee writ when the Church had decreed nothing in it who had hee lived after the Council of Trent would have writ otherwise The reasons of his opinion standing for which no Council could decree otherwise Hee would therefore have obeyed the Church in using those books which it should prescribe But his belief whether inspired by God or not hee would have built upon such grounds the truth whereof the very being of the Church presupposeth Nor will I stand to scan the sayings of Ecclesiastical Writers or the acts of Councils concerning the authority of all and every one of these books any further in this place There is extant of late a Scholastical History of the Canon of the Scripture in which this is exactly done And upon that I will discharge my self in this point referring my Reader for the consent of the Church unto it And what importeth it I beseech you that they are called Sacred or Canonical Scriptures As if all such writings were not holy which serve to settle the holy Faith of Christians And though it is now received that they are called Canonical because they contain the Rule of our Faith and maners and perhaps are so called in this notion by S. Augustine and other Fathers of the Church Yet if wee go to the most ancient use of this word Canon from which the attribute of Canonical Scripture descendeth it will easily appear that it signifieth no more than the list or Catalogue of Scriptures received by the Church For who should make or settle the list of Scriptures receivable but the Church that receiveth the same it being manifest that they who writ the particulars knew not what the whole should contain And truly as I said afore that the Church of Rome it self doth not by any act of the force of Law challenge that the decrees of the Church are infallible So is it to be acknowledged that in this point of all other it doth most really use in effect that power which formally and expresly it no where challengeth Proceeding to order those books to be received with the like affection of piety as those which are agreed to be inspired by God which it is evident by expresse testimonies of Church writers were not so received from the beginning by the Church So that they who made the decree renouncing all pretense of revelation to themselves in common or to every one in particular can give no account how they came to know that which they decree to be true So great inconveniences the not duely limiting the power of the Church contrives even them into that think themselves therefore free from mistake in managing of it not because they think they know what they do but because they think they cannot do amisse It remaineth therefore that standing to the proper sense of this decree importing that wee are to believe these books as inspired by God neither can they maintain nor wee receive it But if it shall be condescended to abate the proper and native meaning of it so as to signifie onely the same affection of piety moving to receive them not the same object obliging Christian piety to the esteem of them it will remain then determinable by that which shall be said to prove how these books may or ought to be recommended or injoyned by the Church or received of and from the Church CHAP. XXXIII Onely the Original Copy can be Authentick But the truth thereof may as well be found in the translations of the Old Testament as in the Jewes Copies The Jewes have not falsified them of malice The Points come neither from Moses nor Esdras but from the Talmud Jewes AS to the other point it is by consequence manifest that the Church hath nothing to do to injoyn any Copy of the Scripture to be received as authentick but that which it self originally received because it is what it is before the Church receive it Therefore seeing the Scripture of the Old Testament was penned first and delivered in the Ebrew Tongue for I need not here except that little part of Esdras and Daniel which is in the Chaldee the same reason holding in both that of the New in the Greek there is no question to be made but those are the authentick Copies Neither can the decree of the Council of Trent bear any dispute to them who have admitted the premises if it be taken to import that the Church thereby settleth the credit of Scripture inspired by God upon the Copy which it self advanceth taking the same away from the Copy which the author penned That credit depending meerly upon the commission of God and his Spirit upon the which the very being of the Church equally dependeth But it is manifest that it cannot be said that the said decree necessarily importeth so much because it is at this day free for every one to maintain that the Original Ebrew and Greek are the Authentick Copies the Vulgar Latine onely injoyned not to be refused in act of dispute or question which hindreth no recourse to the Originals for the determining of the meaning which it importeth Hee that will see this tried need go no further than a little book of Sorbonne Doctor called
Valerianus de Flavigny Professor of the Ebrew in the University of Paris written in opposition to an opinion vented in the Preface to the great Bible lately published there in disparagement of the Ebrew Copy of the Old Testament Where hee shall see that opinion refuted with that eagernesse and the contrary attested by the opinions of so many Divines of so great note in the Church of Rome since that Council that no man that sees them can deny that notwithstanding the decree it is free for every man to maintain the original Copies to be authentick And truly hee that should affirm the credit of the Scripture to stand upon the decree of the present Church or upon the testimony of the Spirit must by consequence have recourse to the same visible decree or to the same invisible dictate whensoever it shall be necessary to accept or refuse the reading of any text of Scripture with that faith which if it be false the whole truth of Christianity will be forfeit What Rushworth and his possession would do to evidence what reading of the Scripture is indeed authentick when as it doth not appear what is the reading which the Church is truly in possession of let him advise For in that case hee must expresly avow the consequence of his position that the Scripture is not considerable in resolving Controversies of Faith Because the Church is not in possession of the certain reading of any Scripture For if hee say hee hath made short work in that question having discharged the Scripture of being necessary to the Church and therefore acquitted himself of any necessity to show how wee may come by true Scripture and in stead thereof and all other means of deciding Controversies in the Church established the tradition presently in possession First it will be easier for mee to verifie the short Rule of Faith by the Scriptures interpreted according to that which by records may appear to have been from the beginning of force in the Church than it will be for him to show what is the Tradition which the Church is in possession of at present And that this being showed I shall not need to fear any great danger that hee may object from the variety of reading which may be found in several Copies the necessity of salvation being secured And then in the next place to say That the Scripture is not necessary though not for the salvation of every Christian yet for the salvation of the Body of Christians which is the Church Though that faction which separation ingenders will suffer no opinion to be plausible but those which are in extreams Yet I hope the malice of Satan hath not yet debauched the ears of Christians to indure And thus as afore it was settled that the whole Scripture is received for the word of God upon the credit of Tradition so of every part and parcel of it wherein the credit of several Copies consisteth it is consequently to be said that nothing can oblige the faith of a Christian to receive it unquestionably for the word of God the Tradition whereof is not unquestionable But thus mâ—ch being settled That what was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew is to be received for the authentick Word of God What was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew may still remain questionable That is to say this being agreed it may still remain questionable what Copies they are that do contain that which was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew How probable it is I need not yet say but any man of common sense must say that it is possible through the changes that time is able to produce that the translations shall prove better than the originals and that the Scriptures shall be truer read among those that have received than among those that delivered them And this is indeed the true state of the question which is now come to be disputed upon due terms as it seems To wit whether the Ebrew Copies which now wee have from the Jews and the Greek Copies of the New Testament now extant contain that Scripture which all Christians are bound to receive upon their Christianity not onely in opposition to the Vulgar Latine which the Council of Trent injoyneth and to the authority of the present Church thinking that it is concluded in that decree but in opposition to that Tradition which other ancient Copies either original or translated may and do contain and evidence In which point I shall in the first place professe as concerning the Old Testament that I finde it no inconvenience but a great deal of reason to grant that at what time those books were made up into a Body and consigned unto the Synagogue the reading which wee have received from them was not delivered as unquestionable so that it should be any prejudice to the Law of God to suspect it but as the most probable and by admitting whereof no prejudiee to the said Law could follow And the safety of this position both Jews and Christians will witnesse with mee For if the Jews rruly acknowledg and insist that their Judaism is sufficiently grounded and witnessed by the leter of the Old Testament which wee have the Christians that their Christianity is as sufficiently to be evidenced by the Copies wee have as Christianity was intended to be delivered by the Scriptures of the Old Testament Is it possible that it should be a mater of jealousie for mee to admit that in that Body of the Old Testament which the Christians have received from the Jews there may be found some passages the reading whereof was not received as unquestionable when the Body of the Old Testament was consigned to the Synagogue from whence the Church receiveth it I say not when this time was nor would I have that which I affirm here to stand upon a circumstance so disputable I do believe the Jews when they tell us of the men of the Great Synagogue after the return from the Captivity from whom and by whom the Scriptures they believe were settled and delivered to their posterity I do also believe that this Assembly might and did indure whilest the Grace of Prophets had vogue and was in force among Gods people For if I believe them when they tell mee that there was such a company of men I cannot disbelieve them that the Prophets Haggai Zachary and Malachi the Scribe Esdras the same with Malachi as they tell us for any thing I know for why should I not believe Malachi being appellative and signifying my messenger to be Esdras his surname given him from that which is prophesied Mal. III. 1 Mordecai Nehemias Josue the son of Josedok and many others of that time were of it But shall I believe that their Prophetical grace was imployed to decide the true reading of the Scripture shall I believe that a new revelation was given to notifie how every leter and syllable was to be read when neither the consequence of the mater required it
of their people that wee have the vulgar Latine and that ancient and worthy Christian translation into the Syriack is there any body will undertake to say Either that having these helps wee cannot assure our selves of the Scripture which God delivered to the Church so farr as the necessity of the Church requireth to be assured of it Or that nothing but the Copy which now wee have from the Jews is to be regarded God having provided us so many helps over and above For suppose the Samaritane Copy of the Law to have been fâ—lâ—ified by Desitheus must it not needs have been falsified upon some certain design And will one certain design require or will it indure that all should be falsified whether it concerned that design or not So suppose those Jews of Alexandria who turned the Old Testament into Greek gave themselves liberty to make the Book of Job the Proverbs more of the Old Testament if more can be alleged not what the original contained but what themselves fansied would be handsom shall wee therefore say the whole work is not a translation but a Romance which wee see stick so close to the original in the most of the Scripture Surely the very great antiquity of both Copies and the experience which all that study the Scriptures with an intent to clear the meaning of them have of the great advantage which the comparing of the Greek advances more and more every day to that design will no way indure that it should be counted no translation of the Old Testament Or that though a man pretend not to build upon the credit of either of those Copies alone in opposition to the Ebrew which wee now use Yet the agreement of them with other Copies together with the reason and consequence or pertinence of sense inforced by the text of the Scripture may give him just ground to assure himself and the Church of the true reading of the Scripture yea though the present Ebrew should not agree with others For I shall not need here to say what or how great faults may be found in our Ebrew Copies who had rather be assured that there were none at all to be found greater or lesse But that wee who neither relye upon the dictate of the Spirit to them that are able to conclude the Church nor much lesse to particular Churches for assuring the true reading of Scripture are not bound to resolve our faith in it into the present Tradition of the Synagogue having over and above so considerable helps to the verifying of the same For magnifying first the providence of God in that the Jews having Christians in utter hatred should neverthelesse neither be willing for their interest nor able for their malice to falsifie those things in their own books which bear witnesse against themselves Seeing God hath given the Church that most ancient Greek Translation which is commonly ascribed to LXX Interpreters sent from Jerusalem but more justly to the Jews of Alexandria besides that Copy of the Law which the Samaritanes still use Since wee have considerable remains of those Greek Translations made by Aquila Symmachus and Theodotion the Bodies whereof to the great losse of the Church have perished with the worthy labors of Origen in joyning them in columes to the Ebrew Since wee have those ancient translations into the Chaldee which the Jews make so much esteem of Since wee have the Syriack and Vulgar Latine made by Christians to say nothing of the Arabick whether made by Jews or Christians or of any other though ancient translations which have not had the like use and credit in the Church So far am I from giving way to that unreasonable demand so destructive to the being of Christianity that wee cannot assure our selves that wee have any Scripture That in all that I have to say or shall have said concerning the dispute on foot in England about Religion I shall neither undertake to assure men that will be content with reason that I allege nothing for Scripture which I cannot justifie so to be or else undertake to resolve that which shall come in debate without the help of that which I cannot assure to be such Not intending in that which follows to allege any more evidence hereof in the particulars than I have done in the premises But building my self upon the resolution premised and intending that there shall be nothing to be objected from the true means of questioning and settling the true reading of the Scriptures that may breed any considerable scruple concerning the truth of those Scriptures which I shall imploy to my purpose As for the part of the difficulty which remains concerning the true reading of the New Testament it is in vain to maintain the decree of the Council of Trent by pretending that the Greek Copy out of which the Vulgar Latine was translated vvas more intire and of better credit than the Greek Copies novv extant Understanding that decree to make that Copy authentick in point of faith by virtue of any gift of Infallibility intailed upon the decrees of the present Church For if it be onely made authentick because the use and credit of it is not allowed to be questioned in the Church it is another question as I have said already vvhich I pretend not to touch in this place For supposing the Copy from which the Vulgar Latine was translated to have been better than any Greek Copy now extant the credit of the Vulgar Latine is not to be ascribed to the decree of the Council that decrees this any more than the fundamental Laws of this Kingdom of England were the fundamental Laws thereof by virtue of any Act of Parliament by which they were not constituted but declared and acknowledged to be such And if the credit of the Vulgar Latine be derived from the Greek Copy out of which it was translated then is it no further authentick than as it expresseth the authentick reading which then was found in the Greek out of which it was translated And so the whole credit of the Scripture is resolved into the credit of the Originals whereof wee stand possest in the translations of them that remain in whatsoever Language So that the question comes to be the very same that remained before concerning the authentick Copy of the Old Testament and the resolution clear that the Original Greek is the authentick the reading thereof being first assured neither by the dictate of Gods Spirit to any persons inabled to oblige the Church by their decrees nor to any never so good Christian much lesse by the Tradition of any particular Copy which the Church stands possest of but by that Tradition which is justified and assured by all Copies wherein the leter of the Scripture is recorded to the Church For though I do for disputation sake suppose yet do I not grant for a truth that the Copy out of which the Vulgar Latine was translated is to be held of better credit than that
out of which that excellent translation into the Syriack which to the great benefit of Christianity these last ages have brought into Europe was made The antiquity of this later and the eminent helps which it hath contributed toward the understanding of the New Testament being so great as the Vulgar Latine though very learned and therefore very helpfull can never out-shine And yet will I never grant that either one or both of them and that with the help of the Arabick and other the most ancient Translations which the Church beside may have are not to give account to the consent of many Copies now extant nay to the credit of some one if it should so fall out in any passage that the sense of the Scripture which cannot be made out by the rest is clear to common reason according to that one Whether such a case do ever fall out in any part of the Scripture or not The assurance of Christianity not standing in this that either this or that is or must needs be true but in this that the Church is assured in all cases But by this it may appear how innocent the resolution of the authentick Original of the Old Testament vvhich I have premised is and hovv safely I ground my self not upon the credit of the Jevvs Copy but upon all the records vvhereby the Church assureth the Tradition of the Scripture In that it is freely confessed that the difference of reading vvhich can become questionable notvvithstanding the superstitious diligence of the Jevvs in preserving their Copy is neither so frequent nor any thing so vveighty as in the Nevv Which hovv much more considerable it is tovvards the upholding of our common Christianity is plain enough to him that shall have perused but the premises And surely vvere it not true as hath been premised that a certain Rule of Faith vvas from the beginning delivered to the Church it vvould seem strange that wee cannot deny that there have considerable differences crept into the reading of the New Testament so much more nearly concerning our salvation than the Old in the reading whereof through the diligence of the Jews there remains no considerable difference But if wee remember that S. Paul makes the ministery of Preaching the Gospel to be the ministery of the Spirit in opposition to the ministery of Moses in giving the Law which was the ministeâ—y of the leter wee shall finde that Faith the receiving whereof qualified Christians to be indowed with the Holy Ghost to be of such sufficience that remaining intire wee need not think the Church disparaged if the records thereof suffer decay so long as the effect of them remains written by the Holy Ghost in the hearts and lives of Christians Alwayes it being unquestionable that there are considerable differences remaining in the reading of the New Testament it will be a very great impertinence to fore-cast any danger in granting that some question may be made to the Jews Copy of the Old Testament though neither so frequent nor so considerable And all that hath been said hath issue in this consequence to justifie and to recommend to the world the usefulnesse of the design lately set on foot in London for printing the Bible with the most ancient and learned Translations in columns most agreeably to the design of Origen in his Teâ—rapla Hexapla and Octapla that is Old Testament of four six and eight columns recording the several numbers of Translations or columns whereof his several Editions consisted For in a word this furniture and that which serves to the same purpose for who will undertake that one book shall contain all is the Instrument I appeal to for evidence of the Scripture which wee have And further here is the original means of determining the sense of the same though besides this I have claimed many other helps to be requisite to that purpose The end of the First Book LAUS DEO OF THE COVENANT OF GRACE The second BOOK CHAP. 1. Two parts of that which remains How the dispute concerning the Holy Trinity with Socinus belongs to the first The Question of justification by Faith alone The Opinion of Socinus concerning the whole Covenant of Grace The opinion of those who make justifying Faith the knowledge of a mans Predestination opposite to it in the other extream The difference between it and that of the Antinomians That there are mean Opinions THE greatest difference that is to be discerned among those things that concern the duty of all Christians consists in this that some of them concern Christians as Christians others as members of the Church For though all Christians as Christians are bound to be members of the Church in as much as it is a part of their profession to believe one Catholick Church yet their obligation to be Christians being in order of nature and reason before their obligation to be members of the Church because the very being of the Church presupposeth all that are members of it to be Christians that obligation which is originall and more ancient must needs be presupposed to that which is grounded upon it Of what consequence it may be to distinguish this difference in the matter of Christian duties will perhaps appear in due time In the mean I shall freely say my opinion that all the Divines in the Christian world cannot more pertinently and to better purpose comprise the subject which they professe to be imployed about then by dividing it into that which concerns Christians as Christians and that which concerns them as members of the Church For mine own present purpose it is evident that the disputes which divide us do concern either the state of particular Christians towards God or the obligation they have to other Christians as members of the Church So that the matter which I propose to my insuing discourse is sufficiently comprised in two heads one of the Covenant of Grace the other of the Laws of the Church I know it may be said that the heresie of Socinus is of the number of those that have footing among us and that the principal point of it concerning the faith of the holy Trinity comes not properly under either of these heads And I deny not that it is very dangerous for us in regard of two points that have so great vogue among us The first is the cleare sufficience of the Scriptures commonly passing so without any limits that it seems to follow of good right that what is not clear out of the Scriptures to all understandings cannot be necessary for the salvation of all Christians to believe So that no man can be bound to take that for an Article of his Faith against which they can show him arguments out of the Scriptures which he cannot clearly assoile The other is that they put it in the power of Christians to erect Churches at their pleasure though supposing the Faith which Socinus teacheth and pretending to serve God according to the same without
Irenaeus expresly maintaineth him one and the same God with the Father and true God and his generation ineffable without beginning and from everlasting Clemens makes him God â—quall to God as his Sonne Origen not in any work now extant that may be questioned but as he is alledged by Athanasius de decretis Synodi Niceâ—ae saies of him that if there be any image of God who is invisible that image must also be invisible with a great deal more to the same purpose where he also quotes Theognostus in secundo hypopseon affirming the same at large to set aside those that are questioned And shall we not think our selves obliged so to understand their words which the importunity of Heresies have made questionable that they may consist and agree with those which remaine unquestionable Especially all of them agreeing in this That the world was made and is governed by Christ And that the whole dispensation of God tending to the salvation of mankinde whether before the Law or under the Law as well as since his appearing in the flesh was executed by him as a preface and prologue to his coming in the flesh a supposition which all seem to ground themselves upon especially against the Jewes in giving account of our common Christianity That our Faith is in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost That we are to glorifie to worship and to be baptized in the Name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost And in counting all Hereticks that denied it For communion with the Church not communicating with those who believe it not because they believe it not is an evidence which no words of doubtfull construction can obscure in the judgement of any man that is reasonable Nay among the very heathen that have made any mention of the Christian Faith doth not Plinies Epistle concerning the Christians acknowledge that they sung hymns to Christ as to God Doth not Lucian in his Philopatris manifestly expresse the Faith of the Trinity as the cognizance of Christians at that time hath it not appeared by these inventions wherewith the Gnosticks sophisticated it that the Fulness of the Godhead consists in the Trinity according to the Christian Faith as according to the severall Sects of them in their severall inventions That the Christians honoured and worshipped the blessed Trinity as those Sects did those imaginatitions of their own which they call the Fullnesse of the Godhead When Ebion Cerinthus Artemon Theodorus and after them Sabellius Noetus Praxâ—as and Paâ—lus Samosatenus were disowned by the whole Church and excluded the communion of all Christians did not all Churches that agreed in refusing them find themselves possessed of a contrary Faith as the reason for which they were refused Were all Christians out of their simplicity cunning enough to assoile all the reasons whereby these and Arius to boot did or might argue their pretenses from texts of Scripture Or did they think themselves bound to rest in the visible consent of the whole Church whether they were able to do that or not In fine the learned Jesuite Petavius in the Preface to his books de Trinitate and the beginning of the first as he hath evidently shewed that the substance of the faith of the Trinity is acknowledged by these ancient Christians some of whose words seem to disparage the Godhead of our Lord Christ So he indeavoureth to shew that they did it out of a desire to reconcile the faith with the doctrine of Plato and his followers If his opinion be admitted there will remaine evidence enough for the Tradition of Faith even in their writings whose skill in the Scriptures goes not the right way to maintaine it The plain song will be good musick though the descant transgresse Though for my part having seen what he hath said I repent me not of that which I had conceived out of Tertullianâ— That out of a desire to reconcile the creation of wisdome in the Proverbs according to the Greek not the doctrine of Plato with the rule of Faith they conceived this a supposition fit to do it That by Gods proceeding to create the World his mind or wisdome which incarnate is our Lord Christ attained not the essence and being which it had in God from everlasting but the denomination and quality of his Word and Sonne For you shall find there that most of them concurre in the speculations of Tertulliane Whereby you may see that this learned Jesuite is not agreed with the Cardinall du Perron to deny the reason why we hold the Faith of the holy Trinity originally from the decree of the Council of Nicâ—a and from that authority of the Church which maintaineth it But from the reason whereupon that decree was grounded and made That is from the meaning of the Scriptures expressed and limited by the Tradition of the Church And therefore not burthening my self here with the expounding of all those passages of their writings before Arius which may seem to derogate from the Tradition of the Church in that point I shall referre the Reader to those things whereby he showeth that they do unanimously concurre in maintaining the same Faith For if there be amongst them that have had speculations tending to reconcile some Scriptures to it which are not onely ill grounded as I dispute not but this of Tertulliane is but also prejudiciall to the Faith as some of Origens whom I have mentioned already That this is to be imputed to the inconsequence of their severall discourses not to any difference in their common Faith I remit you to that which he hath said to judge Onely whereas he de Trinitate II. 2. hath given you a full account of those Fathers which expound the words of our Lord The Father is greater then I to be meant of his Godhead which I have onely named in gross I will advise you again hereupon that many things which are said of the Sonne as inferior to the Father as when he is said to Minister unto the Father in creating the World may be imputed not to any inequality in that Godhead which is the same in all the Trinity but unto the manner of having it the Father originally as the Fountaine the Sonne and the holy Ghost as from him wherein the difference of the persons consisteth To the same Petavius de Trinitate VIII 2. I remit them that would be satisfied of the sense of the Fathers in that which I alledged for the reason why our Lord is called the Word by S. John To wit that the intercourse between God and man after the fall was executed and managed by his Ministry Not because I think this name of the Word unfit to signifiy the originall proceeding of the Sonne from the Father much lesse his concurrence in and to the creation of all things But because believing as I do that the mystery of the Trinity is revealed by the coming of our Lord I find great reason to conceive that his Apostle intended thereby to intimate
of the Church not onely of divine right as provided for by the Apostles but holding the rank of an end to which particular provisions of the Apostles in this mater seem but as means It is true I am farre from believing that had the Reformation retained this Apostolical Government the Church of Rome would thereby have been moved to joyn in it But when I see the Schisme which it hath occasioned to stand partly upon this difference When I see so many particulars begun by the Apostles as the Scriptures themselves evidence others determinable by the Church When I see those that correct Magnificat introduce instead of them those Lawes which have neither any witnesse from the Scriptures nor any footing in the authority of the whole Church I must needs conclude those that do these things in as much as they do them to be causes of the Schism that is Schismaticks For what authority upon earth can introduce any form reconcileable with that which the Apostles first introduced to procure the vanity of the Church being to continue one and the same Body from the beginning to the end but he must give cause of dissolving the unity of the said Body unlesse he can convince the rest of the Church that it is Gods act to whom all the Church is to be subject whereas to him they are not Wherâ—fore let not Presbyterians or Independents think that they have done their work when they can answer texts of Scripture so as not to be convinced that Bishops are of divine Right Unless they can harden themselves against the belief of one Catholick Church they must further give account why they depart from that which is not against Gods Law to introduce that which it commandeth not For that is to proclaim to the Church that they will not be of it unlesse they may be governed as they list themselves Whereas they cannot be of it by being governed otherwise then the whole Church from the beginning hath been Let them not marvail that those who go not along with them in it forewarn others of making themselves Schismaticks by communicating in their innovations But against the Independants I must further take notice that by the supposition of one Society of the whole Church the whole pretense of the Congregations is quite excluded For if God appointed all Churches to make one Church by the communion of all in the service of God supposing the same faith then did not God appoint all Congregations to be chief within themselves but to depend upon the whole both for the Rule of Faith and for the order of Gods service Again it is evident to common sense that the people of one Church can pretend no interess to give Law to another Church Whereas whomsoever we inable to preserve the unity of the whole those persons must eithâ—r have right to oblige those that are not of their own Congregations or else God shall hâ—ve provided that the Church shall be one but excluded the onely means by which it can be preserved one And therefore to all those texts of Scriptures which are alleged to prove the chief Power of the People in the Church which is the ground of the Congregations I give here this general answer which elsewhere I have applied to the said several passages First by way of exception that they can inferre no more now against the Clergy then they could thâ—n against the Apostles So that seeing the Apostles were then chief notwithstanding all that those Scriptures contain the Clergy also remain now chief in the Church Secondly and directly that they import no more then the tesâ—imony consent and concurrence of the people by way of suffrage or agreement and applause to the Acts of the Clergy the interess whereof is grounded upon the sensible knowledge which the people have of the persons concerned in Ordinations Censures or other Acts of the Church in regard whâ—reof it is no more then reason requires that they be duly satisfied of the proceedings of the Church without making them Judges of maters of Right in it So that to make the people chief in Church maters upon account of this Title is to make the people of England Soveraign because English Juries have power to return evidence in mater of fact either effectual or void Another reason I here advance upon supposition of the force and weight of the Tradition of the Church in evidencing the reason and intent of the sayings and doings of the Apostles recorded in the Scriptures Philip one of the seven having preached and converted and baptized the Samaritanes the Apostles at Jerusalem send down to them Peter and John at whose prâ—yers with â—â—ying thâ—â—r 〈◊〉 on them they receive the Holy Ghost Act. VIII 14-17 And so S. Paul â—â—yes hâ—nds upon the twelve men that were baptized afore at Ephesus â—â—â—â—hey receive the Holy Ghost Act. XIX 1-8 For what reason shall we imagine why they that were inâ—bled to baptize were not â—â—abled to give the Holy Ghost baptism being the condition upon which the Holy Ghost was due by the promise of the Gospel but to show that they were baptized into the uniâ—y of the Church out of which they were not to expect the Holy Ghost Thâ—refore that their Baptism may have effect that is give the Holy Ghost the allowâ—nce of the Apostles upon whose government the unity of the Church dependeth is requite Whiâ—h allowance their prayers for the Holy Ghost and Impoâ—â—â—ion of hands implâ—eth and presupposeth It cannot be doubted that the visible Grace of â—peaking in strâ—nge languages the great works of God was then given for an evidence of the presence of the Holy Ghost with Gods people whereupon it is called by S. Paul 1 Cor. XII 7. The manifestatioâ— of the Spirit But evâ—n of this kind of Graces S. Paul saith again 1 Cor. XIV 32. 33. The Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets For God is not the author of unsetlednesse but of order as in all Churches of the Saints If therefore there come no confusion upon Prophets Prophesying one by one because God who is the Author of Order grants such inspirations and revelations to inferiours that they cease not therefore to be subject to those which he grants to Superiours How much more re asonable is it that the Gift of the Holy Ghost promised to them that are baptized should neverthelesse deâ—end upon the blessing of the Apostles So that when S. Peter sayes to them that were convâ—rted at Pentecost Act. II. 38. Repent and be Baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto remission of sinnes and yâ— shall receive the gift of the Holy â—host It seems to me no more then reason requires that he â—upposes the same blessing As also S. Paul in those of whom he saith That having believed in Christ they were sealed by the Holy spirit of promise And again Grieve not the holy spirit of God whereby ye are sealed to the day
Congregations I do indeed acknowledge that there is difficulty in expounding those texts of the Apostles which speak to this purpose so as to agree them with the Originall and universal practice of the Church And therefore it is no marvail if learned men that have handled this point among us where without affectation I may say that it hath been most curiously and ingenuously disputed have gone several wayes upon severall grounds in assigning the reason why the degree of Deacons is mentioned next to the degree of Bishops in so many texts of the Apostles having the order of Priests between both as the original and perpetual custome of the Church required For it is well enough known that there is an opinion published and maintained by many learned observations in the primitive antiquity of the Church that during the time when those texts of the Apostles were written there were but two Orders of Bishops and Deacons established in the Church though Bishops also are called Presbyters the name not being yet appropriated to the midle order while it was not introduced as afterwards it came to be And this opinion allegeth Epiphanius very fitly confuting Aerius the Heretick or Schismatick objecting the same that at the beginning the multitude of believers in less places being so small that one Governour together with some Ministers to attend upon him in executing his Orders might well serve them it is no marvail if there be no mention of any more Orders in so many texts of the Apostles And it may be said that as there were Churches founded and governed by a certain order from the beginning that we read of them in the Apostles so no Bishop Priest or Deacon was appropriated to any particular Church till after that time by degrees they came to be selled to certain Churches by Ecclesiastical Law and Custome So that during the time of the Apostles themselves and their companions whom they associated to themselves for their assistance were in common the Governours of Churches then founded according as they fell out to be present in these Churches to whom they had the most relation by planting and watering the faith planted in them either by virtue of the agreement taken by the Apostles within themselves or by the appointment of some of them if we speak of their companions and assistances But afterwards when the faith came to be setled then as those which had been Governours of Churches in common before became chief Governours of particular Churches to whom by lawful consent they became appropriated so were they provided of Priests and Deacons to assist and attend them in the execution of their office towards the body of Christians then mulplyed in severall Churches I do confess to have declared an opinion something differing from both of these sayings about the reason here demanded As not being perswaded either that the Order of Presbyters was not yet introduced into the Church during the Apostles time or that chief Governours were not appropriated and setled in some Churches during the same though I have no need to undertake that in all they were believing and maintaining that the Apostles themselves in the Churches of their own planting and watering were acknowledged chief Governours in ordering notwithstanding their extraordinary both Power not confined to any one Church and graces and abilities porportionable In which regard and under which limitation visible to the common sense of all men of their own and the next ages I do maintain Bishops to be their successors Whereupon it follows that I allow the name of Bishops in the Apostles writings to comprehend Priests also because of the mater of their function common to both though with a chief Power in the Bishop in Priests so limited as to do nothing that is to say nothing of consequence to his Power over the whole Church without his consent and allowance But this variety of opinion in expounding these Scriptures draweth after it no further consequence to prejudice the primitive Law of Goverment in the Church then this That there are more waies then one to answer the seeming probabilities pretending to make the evidence of Catholick Tradition unreconcileable with the truth of the Scriptures in the agreement whereof the demonstration of this truth consisteth I conceive therefore I might very well referre my self to the Readers free judgement to compare the reasons which I have produced with those that since have been used Notwithstanding I shall not think much briefly according to the model of this design to express the sense I have of the most native meaning of the most texts alleged in this businesse that I may have opportunity to point out again the peremptory exceptions which â—re visible in them either to the imagination of mungrill Prâ—sbyteries compounded of Clergy and People during the time of the Apostles or of the chief Power of any such Presbyteries in their resepective Churches CHAP. XVII The Power given the XII under the Title of Apostles and the LXX Disciples That the VII were Deacons Of the first Presbyters at Jerusalem and the Interest of the People Presbyters appropriated to Churches under the Apostles S. Pauls Deacons no Presbyters No ground for Lay Flders FIrst then as the name of Apostle in the Originall meaning is very general to signifie any commissary Proxy delegate or Ambassador so the use of it in the Apostles writings is larger then to be confined to the twelve For when S. Paul saith That our Lord appeared to the twelve afterwards to all the Apostles 1 Cor. XV. 5. 7. He must needs understand other Apostles besides the twelve perhaps the same that he meant where he reckoned Andronicus and Junias remarkable among the Apostles Rom. XVI 7. And that in another â—ense then Paul and Barnabas are called Apostles Act. XIV 4. 14. For the name of Apostle intimating whose Apostle he is that is called an Apostle we have no reason to count Paul and Barnabas any mans Apostles but our Lord Christs though they were first sent with the blessing of such Doctors and Prophets as the Church of Antiochia then had Acts XIII 1. 2 3. whose authority cannot in any reason be thought to extend so farre as to constitute an Apostle parâ—llel to the Twelve which S. Paul so oft so expresly challenges For since we see their commission is immediately from the Holy Ghost that is from God we are not to value their right by the solemnity which it is visibly conferred upon them with Unlesse you will say that by virtue of that Imposition of Hands they were messengers and Commissaries of that Church and that they then appeared to be no more then so though afterwards God set on them marks of the same authority with the Twelve Truly those whom S. Paul calls false Apostles transferring themselves into the Apostles of Christ 1 Cor. XI 13. must neâ—ds be understood to have pretended commission from our Lord Christ himself For hereupon they stood upon it that they had
in the judgement of many that think themselves the most refined Christians that they allow it not that common sense in managing the businesse of Christianity which they must needs allow Jews Pagans Mahometans in faithfully serving their own faithlesse suppositions and which all experience shows us that it serves all mankind to what purpose soever it is imployed and that notwithstanding so great a triall of it as the governing of so great a Body as the Church is in unity so farre and so long as this Unity hath prevailed it is therefore necessary to give a reason why the Church so used them Which supposing the premises it will be as easie as it is necessary for me to give and that more sufficient if I mistake not then can possibly be given not supposing the same For if the secret of the resurrection the general judgement and the World to come if the mystery of the Holy Triniâ—y consisting in the Word or Wisdome and Spirit of God if the inward and spiritual service of God in truth of heart be more clearly opened in them by the work of Providence dispensing the effect of Canonicall Scripture by the occurrences of time then in the Law and the Prophets themselves which I have showed both that so it is and why so it is from the ground of the difference between the Old and the New Testament then I suppose there is sufficient reason why those who admit the Old Testament to be made for common edification in the Church should not put any question concerning those Scriptures Those new lights among us who do not allow the Psalter to be pertinently and reasonably imployed for the publick service of God upon all occasions as the Church hath alwaies imployed it may assure us that they understand not why the Scriptures of the Old Testament are read in the Church because they understand not the correspondence between the Old and the New Testament in the understanding whereof the edification of the Church by the Scriptures of the Old Testament consisteth There may be offence taken at divers things in these Scriptures I deny not But there may be offence taken in like maner at divers things in the Canonicall Scriptures of the Old Testament The humility of Christians requires them edifying themselves in that which they understand in the Scriptures according to our common Christianity in the rest which they understand not to refer themselves to their Superiours The Church understood well enough this difference and this correspondence to be discovered by these writings as the time required when it appointed Learners to read them And though I stand not upon terms yet I conceive they are more properly called Ecclesiastical because the Church hath imployed them to be read in the Church then Apocryphal according to the use of that word in the Church to signifie such writings as the Church suspecteth and therefore alloweth not to be read whither in publick or in private Whereupon I conceive also that the term of Canonical Scripture hath and ought to have two senses one when we speak of the Jews Canon in the Old Testament another when we speak of the Canon of the Church For seeing the Tradition of the Synagogue is perfect evidence what Scriptures of the old Testament are to be received as inspired by God the word Canon in that case may well signifie the Rule of our Faith or maners But because the Church cannot pretend to create that evidence originally but onely to transmit what she receiveth from the Synagogue Pretending neverthelesse to give a Rule what shall be read for the edification of the Church the word Canon therefore in that case will signifie onely the list or Catalogue of Scriptures which the Church appoints to be read in the Church which seems to reconcile the diverse accounts extant in severall Records of the Church CHAP. XXIII The consideration of the Eucharist prescribed by Tradition for the mater of it Lords Prayer prescribed in all services The mater of Prayers for all estates prescribed The form of Baptism necessary to be prescribed The same reason holdeth in the forms of other Offices IN the next place I do maintain that the Order of celebrating the Eucharist and the Prayer which it was was from the beginning solemnized with were from the beginning prescribed the Church by unwritten custome that is by Tradition from the Apoâ—â—les containing though not so many words that it was not lawful to use more or lesse for these were always occasions for celebrating the Eucharist emergent which must be intimated in fewer or more words in the celebrating of it yet the mater and substance of the Consecration of it together with the mater and substance of the necessities of the Church for which it was offered that is to say for which the Church was and is to pray at the celebration of it as hoping to obtain them by the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross which it representeth as received from the beginning was every were known to be the same This I inferr from that which I have said in the Book afore quoted of those Texts of S. Paul where those Prayers of the Church which the Eucharist is consecrated with are called Eucharistia or Thanksgiving if not rather the thanksgiving because it was a certain form of Thanksgiving well known to all Christians by that name from whence the Sacrament â—o consecrated was also so called from the time that our Lord hâ—ing blessed or given thanks to the Father over the Elements had said This is my body this is my blood and order is given that at the celebration thereof Prayers be made for the necessities of the Church and of all people 1 Cor. XIV 25. 26. 1 Tiâ—â— II. 1-8 Together with those passages of primitive antiquity from whence it appeareth there that the form of consecrating the Eucharist used and known generally in the Church is called Eucharistia and that the custome of interceding for all the necessities of the Church and for the reducing of unbelievers to the same is and hath been taken up and ever frequented by the Church in obedience to and prosecution of the said precept of the Apostles This observation might perhaps be thought too obscure evidence â—o bring to light a point of this consequence were it not justified by all that I produced afore to show that the Eucharist is consecrated by the Prayers of the Church which celebrateth it upon the faith of our Lords institution and promise For the mater of these Prayers tending to a certain purpose that the Elements may become the Body and Blood of Christ and convay his Spirit to those who receive them with living faith the Consecration which is the effect of them requires that the form of them be prescript and certain though not in number of words yet in sense in tent and substance And this by the evidence there produced may appear to have been maintained from the beginning by Tradition in
not that which is invisible by their authority in point of right For want of this authority whatsoever is done by virtue of that usurpation being voide before God I will not examine whether the forme wherein they execute the Offices of the Church which they thinke fit to exercise agree with the ground and intent of the Church or not Only I charge a peculiar nullity in their consecrating the Eucharist by neglecting the Prayer for making the elements the body and blood of Christ without which the Church never thought it could consecrate the Eucharist Whether having departed from the Church Presbyteries and Congregations scorne to learne any part of their duty from the Church least that might seeme to weaken the ground of their departure Or whether they intend that the elements remaine meere signes to strengthen mens faith that they are of the number of the elect which they are before they be consecrated as much as afterwards The want of Consecration rendering it no Sacrament that is ministred the ministring of it upon a ground destructive to Christianity renders it much more On the other side the succession of Pastors from the Apostles or those who received their authority from the Apostles is taken for a sufficient presumption on behalfe of the Church of Rome that it is Catholick But I have showed that the Tradition of Faith and the authority of the Scriptures which containe it is more ancient then the being of the Church and presupposed to the same as a condition upon which it standeth That the authority of the Apostles and the Powers left by them in and with the Church the one is originally the effective cause the other immediately the Law by which it subsisteth and in which the government thereof consisteth That the Church hath Power in Lawes of lesse consequence though given the Church by the Apostles though recorded by the Scriptures where that change which succeeds in the state of Christendome renders them uselesse to preserve the unity of the Church presupposing the Faith in order to the publick service of God But neither can the Church have power in the faith to add to take away to change any thing in that profession of Christianity wherein the salvation of all Christians consisteth and which the being of the Church presupposeth Nor in that act of the Apostles authority whereby the unity of the Church was founded and setled Nor in that service of God for which it was provided There is therefore something else requisite to evidence the Church of Rome to be the true Church exclusive to the Reformation then the visible succession of Pastors though that by the premises be one of the Laws that concurre to make every Church a Catholicke Church The Faith upon which the powers constituted by the Apostles in which the forme of government by which the service of God for which it subsisteth If these be not maintained according to the Scriptures interpreted by the originall and Catholicke Tradition of the Church it is in vaine to alledge the personall succession of Pastors though that be one ingredient in the government of it without which neither could the Faith be preserved nor the service of God maintained though with it they might possibly faile of being preserved and maintained for a mark of the true Church The Preaching of that Word and that Ministring of the Sacraments understanding by that particular all the offices of Gods publicke service in the Church which the Tradition of the Whole limiteth the Scriptures interpreted thereby to teach is the onely marke as afore to make the Church visible To come then to our case Is it therefore become warrantable to communicate with the Church of Rome because it is become unwarrantable to communicate with Presbyteries or Congregations This is indeed the rest of the difficulty which it is the whole businesse of this Book to resolve To which I must answer that absolutely the case is as it was though comparatively much otherwise For if the State of Religion be the same at Rome but in England farre worse then it was the condition upon which communion with the Church of Rome is obtained is never a whit more agreeable to Christianity then afore but it is become more pardonable for him that sees what he ought to avoide not to see what he ought to follow He that is admitted to communion with the Church of Rome by the Bull of profession of Faith inacted by Pius IV. Pope not by the Councile of Trent besides many particulars there added to the Creed which whether true or false according to the premises he sweares to as much as to his Creed at length professes to admit without doubting whatsoever else the sacred Canons and generall Councils especially the Synode of Trent hath delivered decreed and declared damning and rejecting as anathema whatsoever the Church damneth and rejecteth for heresie under anathema But whether the whole Church or the present Church the oath limiteth not Here is no formall and expresse profession that a man believes the present Church to be Infallible And therefore it was justly alledged in the first Booke that â—he Church hath never enjoyned the professing of it But here is a just ground for a reasonable Construction that it is hereby intended to be exacted because a man swears to admit the acts of Counciles as he does to admit his Creed and the holy Scriptures Nor can there be a more effectuall challenge of that priviledge then the use of it in the decree of the Councile that the Scriptures which we call Apocrypha be admitted with the like reverence as the unquestionable Canonicall Scriptures being all injoyned to be received as all of one rancke Which before the decree had never been injoyned to be received but with that difference which had alwaies been acknowledged in the Church For this act giving them the authority of prophetical Scripture inspired by God which they had not afore though it involve a nullity because that which was not inspired by God to him that writ it when he writ it can never have the authority of inspired by God because it can never become inspired by God Nor can become known that it was indeed inspired by God not having been so received from the begining without revelation anew to that purpose yet usurpeth Infallibility because it injoyneth that which no authority but that which immediate revelation createth can injoyne Further the decree of the Councile concerning justification involving a mistake in the terme and understanding by it the infusion of grace whereby the righteousnesse that dwelleth in a Christian is formally and properly that which settles him in the state of righteous before God not fundamentally and metonymically that which is required in him that is estated in the same by God in consideration of our Lord Christ Though I maintaine that this decree prejudiceth not the substance of Christianity Yet must it not be allowed to expresse the true reason by which it
our sinnes imputable to Christ nor his sufferings to us formally and personally but as the meritorious causes which satisfaction answerâ—â—h The effect of it the Covenant of Grace as well as helpe to perform it The Fathers saved by the Faith of Christ to come The Gospel a new Law The prâ—perâ—y of satisfaction and punishment in Christs sufferings Of the sense of the Catholick Church 245 CHAP. XXX God might have reconciled man to himselfe without the coming of Christ The promise of â—â—â— Gâ—spel dâ—pend as well upon his active as passive obedience Christ need 〈…〉 pâ—iâ—â—s that we might not The opinion that maketh justiâ—â—â—g 〈…〉 â—rust in God not true Yet not prejudicial to the Faith The dâ—câ—â—â— of the Council of Trent and the doctrine of the Schoole how it is not preâ—udicial to the Faith As also that of Socinus 254 CHAP. XXXI The state of the question concerning the perseverance of those that are once justified Of three senses one true one inconsistent wiâ—h the faith the third neither true nor yet destructive to the Faith Evidence from â—â—â— writings of the Apostles From the Old Testament The grace of Proâ—heâ—â—e when it presupposeth sanctifying grace Answer to some texts and of S. Pauls mâ—aâ—â—ng in the VII of the Romans Of the Polygamy of the Fathers What assurance of Grace Christians may have The Tradition of the Church 266 CHAP. XXXII How the fulfilling of Gods Law is possible how impossible for a Christian Of the difference between mortall and veniall sinne What love of God and of our neighbour was necessary under the Old Testament Whether the Sermon in the Mount correct the false interpretation of the â—ewes or inhanse the obligatin of the Law Of the difference between matter of Precept and matter of Counsail and the Perfection of Christians 285 CHAP. XXXIII Whether any workes of Christians be satisfactory for sinne and meritorious of heaven or not The recovery of Gods grace for a Christian fallen from it a worke of labour and time The necessity and essicacy of Penance to that purpose according to the Scriptures and the practice of the Church Merit by virtue of Gods promise necessary The Catholick Church agrees in it the present Church of Rome allowes merit of justice 300 The CONTENTS of the third Book CHAP. I. THe Society of the Church founded upon the duty of communicating in the Offices of Gods service The Sacrament of the Eucharist among those Offices proper to Christianity What opinions concerning the presence of Christs body and Blood in the Eucharist are on foot page 1 CHAP. II. That the Natural substance of the Elements remaines in the Sacrament That the Body and Blood of Christ is neverthâ—lâ—sse present in the same when it is received noâ— by the receiving of it The eating of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Câ—â—sâ— necessarily requireth the same This causes no contradâ—ction nor improperty â—â— the words of our Lord. 3 CHAP. III. That the presence of Christs body in the Eucharist depends not upon the living 〈◊〉 of him that receives but upon the true profession of Christianity in the 〈◊〉 thâ—â— câ—lâ—brates The Scâ—iâ—tureâ— that are alleged for the dependence of 〈◊〉 the communication of the properties They conclude not the sense of them b◠〈◊〉 â—â—ey are alleged How the Scripture confineth the flesh of Christ to the 〈◊〉 16 CHAP. IV. The opinion which maketh the Consecration to be done by rehearsing the operative words That our Lord consecrated by Thanksgiving The Form of it in all Lâ—â—urgies together with the consent of the Fathers Evidence that there is â—o Tradition of the Church for the abolishing of the Elements 23 CHAP. V. It cannot be proved by the Old Testament that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice How by the New Testament it may be so accounted Four reasons thereof depending upon the nature of Justifying Faith premised The consent of the Catholick Church The concurrence of the Church of England to the premises 38 CHAP. VI. The reason of the Order by which I proceed brings me to the Baptism of Infants in the next place The power of the Keyes seen in granting Baptism as well as in communicating the Eucharist Why Socinians make Baptism indifferent Why Antinomians make it a mistake to Baptize The grounds upon which I shake off both With answer to some objections 53 CHAP. VII The ground of Baptizing Infants Originall sinne though not instituted till Christ rose again No other cure for it Infants of Christians may be Disciplâ—â— are holy The effect of Circumcision under the Law inferreth the effect of Baptism under the Gospel 58 CHAP. VIII What is alledged to impeach Tradition for Baptizing Infants Proves not that any could be saved regularly who dyed unbaptized but that baptizing at years was a strong means to make good Christians Why the Church now Baptize What becomes of Infants dying unbaptized unanswerable What those Infants get who dye baptized â—5 CHAP. IX What controversie the Reformation hath with the Church of Rome about Penance Inward repentance that is sincere obtaineth pardon alone Remission of 〈◊〉 by the Gospel onely The condition of it by the Ministry of the Church What the power of binding and loosing contains more then Preaching or taking away offences Sinne may be pardoned without the use of it Wherein the necessity of using it lyeth 73 CHAP. X. The Sâ—cts of the Montanists Novatians Donatists and Meletians evidence the cure of sinne by Penance to be a Tradition of the Apostles So doâ—h the agreement of primitive practice with their writings Indulgence of regular Penance from the Apostles Confession of secret sinnes in the primitive Church That no sinne can be cured withoâ—â— the Keyes of the Church there is no Tradition from the Apostles The necessity of confessing secret sinnes whereupon it stands 86 CHAP. IX Penance is not required to redeem the debt of temporall punishment when the sinne is pardoned What assuraâ—ce of forgivenesse the law of auricular Confession as it is used in the Church of Rome procureth Of injoyning Penance after absolution performed Setting aside abuses the Law is agreeable to Gods Of the order taken by the Church of England 98 CHAP. XI The Unction of the sick pretendeth onely boaily health upon supposition of the cure of sinne by the Keyes of the Church Objections answered The Tradition of the Church evidenceth the same 106 CHAP. XII The ground of the Right of the Church in Matrimoniall causes Mariage of one with one iâ—solubly is a Law of Christianity The Law of Moses not injoyning it The Law of the Empire not aiming at the ground of it Evidence from the primitive practice of the Church 114 CHAP. XIV Scripture alledged to prove the bond of Mariage insoluble in case of adultery uneffectual S. Paul and our Lord speak both to one purpose according to S. Jerome and S. Austine The contrary opinion more reasonable and more general in the Church Why the Church may restrain the innocent party from marying again The
it may be said in some regard that the Church was before the Scriptures when as in order of reason it is evident that the truth of Christianity is supposed to the being of it inasmuch as no man can be or be known to be of the Church but as hee is or is known to be a Christian And truly those that dispute the authority of the Church to be the the reason to believe the sentence of it in mater of Faith to be true are to consider what they will say to that opinion which utterly denies any such authority any such thing as a Church Understanding the Church to be a Society founded by Gods appointment giving publick authority to some persons so or so qualified by that appointment in behalf of the whole For this all must deny that admit Erastus his opinion of Excommunication to be true if they will admit the consequence of their own doctrine Which opinion I have therefore premised in staring this Question that it may appear to require such an answer as may not suppose the being of the Church in that nature but may be a means to demonstrate it But as it is not my intent to begg so great a thing in question by proceeding upon supposition of any authority in the Church before I can prove it to be a Corporation founded with such authority as the foundation of it requireth So is it as farre from my meaning to deny that authority which I do not suppose For hee that denieth the authority of the Church to be the reason why any thing is to be taken for truth or for the meaning of the Scripture may take the due and true authority of the Church to be a part of that truth which is more ancient than the authority of the Church Inasmuch as it must be believed that God hath founded a Society of them which professe Christianity by the name of the Church giving such authority to some members of it in behalf of the whole as hee pleased before it can be believed that this or that is within the authority of the Church For that there is a Church and a publick authority in it and for it and what things they are that fall under that authority if it be true is part of that truth which our Lord and his Apostles whose authority is more ancient than the Church have declared Indeed if it were true that the first truth which all Christians are to believe and for the reason of it to believe every thing else is the saying of persons so and so qualified in the Church then were it evident that the belief of that which is questioned in religion could not be resolved into any other principle But if it be manifest by the motives of Christianity that the authority of the Apostles is antecedent to it that all Scripture and the meaning of Scripture which signifies nothing beside it own meaning and Tradition of the Apostles if any such Tradition over and above Scripture may appear is true not supposing it as appeares by the premises then is the authority of the Church no ground of Faith and so not Infallible There are indeed sundry Objections made both out of Scripture and the Fathers to weaken and to shake such an evident truth which are not here to be related till wee have resolved as well what is the reason of believing in Controversies of Faith as what is not In the mean time if wee demand by what means any person that can pretend to give sentence in Controversies of Faith knowes his own sentence to be infallible or upon what ground hee gives sentence Hee that answers by Scripture or authority of Writers that professe to have learned from the Scriptures or reasons depending on the authority of our Lord and his Apostles acknowledges the authority of the Church not to be the reason of believing For what need wee all this if it were If hee say by the same means for which these are receivable that is by revelation from God It will be presently demanded to make evidence of such revelation the same evidence as wee have for the truth of the Scriptures Which because it cannot be done therefore is this plea laid aside even by them who neverthelesse professe to imbrace the Communion of the Church of Rome because they believe the Church to be Infallible But if it be destructive to all use of reason to deny the conclusion admitting the premises then let him never hope to prevaile in any dispute that holds the conclusion denying the premises For to hold the sentence of the Church Infallible when the means that depend upon the authority of our Lord and his Apostles proves whatsoever is to be believed without supposing any such thing when revelation independent upon their authority there is acknowledged to be none averreth Infallibility in the sentence of the Church denying the onely principle that can inferre it And therefore those that speak things so inconsequent so inconsistent I shall not grant that they speake those things which themselves think and believe but rather that like men upon the rack they speak things which themselves may and in some sort do know not to be true For whosoever holds an opinion which hee sees an argument against that hee cannot resolve is really and truly upon the rack and of necessity seeks to escape by contradicting what himself confesseth otherwise Which every man of necessity doth who acknowledging the reason of believing Christianity to lye in the authority of our Lord and his Apostles challengeth neverthelesse that Infallability which is the reason of believing to all sentences of the Church the mater of which sentence if it be true the reason of it must depend immediately upon the same authority upon which the authority of the Church which sentenceth dependeth But the consequence of this assertion deserves further consideration because all that followes depends upon it Suppose that the Scriptures prove themselves to be the Word of God by the reasons of believing contained in them witnessed by the common sense of all Christians For this admits no dispute If the same consent can evidence any thing belonging to the mater of Faith that will appear to oblige the Faith of all Christians upon the same reason as the Scriptures do whether contained in the Scriptures or not For who will undertake that God could not have preserved Christianity without either Scriptures or new revelations And therefore hee chose the way of writing not as of absolute necessity but as of incomparable advantage If therefore God might have obliged man to believe any thing not delivered by writing whether hee hath or not will remain questionable supposing the Scriptures to be the Word of God upon the ground aforesaid Besides there are many things so manifest in the Scriptures that they can indure no dispute supposing the Scriptures to be the Word of God Many things are every day cleared more and more by applying the knowledg
made of a General Council whether constituted according to right or not whether proceeding without force and fraud or not Is it as evident to all Christians as their Christianity or the Scriptures that it is not If it be said that all Catholicks agree that the Pope with a General Council or a General Council confirmed by the Pope cannot erre First what shall oblige them to agree For if they agree not their Infallibility is not evident to all Christians nor if their agreement appear casual can it be taken for a ground of Faith that is undefeifible Then to set aside all the East which contesting the Power of the Pope cannot concurre to this Infallibility about the Councils of Constance and Basle when the dispute between the Pope and Council was at the hottest there lived divers Doctors of repute that have maintained this Infallibility to be the gift and privilege not of the present but of the Catholick Church By name Ockam Alliacensis Panormitane Antoninus Cusanus Clemangis and Mirandula Whose words you may see in Doctor Baron of Aberdene his dispute de Objecto Fidei Tract V. Cap. XIX XX. Further I demand if there be in the Church a gift of Infallibility indâ—pendent upon the Scripture that is obliging to believe the decrees thereof which our common Christianity evidenceth not can it appear without the like reasons for which wee believe the Scripture Where is the evidence that Gods Spirit inspires them with their decrees Nay when wee see Popes and Councils imploy the same means to finde the truth of things in question which other men do would they have us believe that they shall not fail by Gods providence when they use no means but that may fail nor have themselves any reason in them to evidence that they do not fail For if they had they might make it appear But of all things the strâ—ngest is that they should undertake to perâ—wade the world this when as the Church it self never determined it Of all things that ever the Church of any time took in hand to decree it will never appear that ever it was decreed that the decrees of the present Church are to be admitted for Gods truth And therefore there is not so much appearance of any opinion the Church of Rome has that it is true as there is of humane policy in breeding men up in such prejudicate conceits which education makes them as zealous of as of their Faith though meer contradiction to the grounds of it That being intangled in their own understandings to hold things so inconsistent they may be the fitter instruments to intangle others in that obedience to the Church which they hold necessary though upon false reasons For as Antony disputes in Tully de Oratore that no man is so fit to induce others into passion as hee that appears really possessed with the same so is no man so fit to imbroile the true reason and order of believing in another mans understanding as hee that is himself first confounded in it There is indeed a plauâ—â—ble inconvenience alleged if it be not admitted to wit that differences cannot be ended otherwise But to object an inconvenience is not to answer an argument say Logicians Nor is it say I to demonstrate a truth It is requisite the Church should be one Suppose wee this for the present for it is not proved as yet but it is not therefore necessary that the unity thereof should depend upon the deâ—ision of all Controversies that arise what true what false It is a great deal easier to command men not to decide their own opinions than to believe their adversaries For to decide is nothing else but to command all men to judge one part to be true when it appeareth that a great part have already judged it to be false But not to offend him that hath declared a contrary judgment is a thing to be attained of him that cannot see reason to judge the same Charity may have place in all things in question among Christians though Faith be confined to the proper mater of it though wee cannot yet determine what that proper mater is and upon what termes it standeth It remains therefore that all presumption concerning the truth of the Churches decrees presupposeth the corporation of the Church the foundation thereof nor can any way be evidenced by supposing onely the truth of the Scriptures and the consent of Christians as Christians which conveyes the evidence thereof unto us So that the belief of the Scriptures and of all things so clear in the Scriptures that they are not questioned in the Church depending upon the evidence of Gods revelations to his messengers But the belief of the Churches decrees inasmuch as not evidenced by the Scriptures upon the presumption of the right use of the Power vested in them that decree by the foundation of the Church if that foundation may appear they do not allow us the common reason of all men that require us to yield the same credit to both CHAP. V. All things necessary to salvation are not clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Not in the Old Testament Not in the Gospel Not in the Writings of the Apostles It is necessary to salvation to believe more than this that our Lord is the Christ Time causeth obscurity in the Scriptures aswell as in other Records That it is no where said in the Scriptures that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures Neither is there any consent of all Christians to evidence the same IN the next place to proceed by steps I must negatively conclude on the other side that all things necessary to the salvation of all are not of themselves clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Whereby I say not that all such things are not contained in the Scriptures as if some thing necessary to the salvation of all were to be received by Tradition alone Nor that being in the Scriptures they are not clear and discernable to the understandings of those that are furnished with means requisite to discern the meaning of the Scriptures But that which I stand upon is that it is not nor ought to be a presumption that this or that is not necessary to salvation because it is not clear in the Scriptures Which if it were admitted whosoever were able to make such an argument against any Article of Faith as all understandings interessed in salvation could not dissolve such as it is plain may be made against the truth of Christianity should have gained this that though it may be true yet it cannot be an Article of Faith To my purpose indeed it were enough in this place to prove that this is not the first truth in Christianity to wit that all things necessary to salvation are clear by the Scriptures For having obtained that there is no Rule to conclude those doctrines which may be questioned not to be Articles of Faith so that it cannot thereupon be
the Temple to serve God with his then people Acts II. 42 44 46. V. 13. VI. 1 4. And shall wee think that all the Christians in Corinth where God had said to S. Paul that hee had many people Acts XVIII 10. could meet in one room because S. Paul sayes 1 Cor. XI 20. when yee meet together in one place For they must not onely meet together but sup together as the Apostle showes which would require a great room if God had many people there And all the believers at Jerusalem met together and supped together Acts II. 44 46. VI. 1. but not VIM in one room as I suppoâ—e Therefore at Corinth also there might be more Congregations than one where the Church was but one and all might meet together though in several places several assemblies In the mean time I do not hear what they say to that which I have alleged in my book of the Right of a Church in a Christian State pag. 44-50 to show that wee never read of more Churches than one in one City but every where of more than one in one Province in the writings of the Apostles And therefore I will here plead further That from the time of the Apostles to the Reformation which wherein it consisteth my businesse is to inquire and therefore not to suppose that it consisteth in every thing that hath been done all the Independents in the world shall never be able to show mee any thing called a Church but the Body of Christians that lived in one City and the territory of it Indeed at the first preaching of Christianity it must needs come to passe that the number of Christians in a very great City might be so little that they might meet all at once And the name of Cities might be extended to Townes and Villages that could make but few Congregations when the question was made whether they should make several Churches or resort to one As I have instanced there But because wee have yet extant antient lists of all the Churches of the Romane Empire and the Soveraignties into which it is dissolved punctually agreeing with the records of all Church Writers in comprising the whole summe of Christians within and under one City in one Church It may perhaps be found that all the Christians in a whole Nation might resort to one Church which was the Church of the Head City But that ever there were any Christians that took it for a Law that every Congregation is to be a Church before the Reformation it can by no means appear whatsoever hath been done since And therefore I challenge that all reasonable men must allow all Christians that succeeded the Apostles understood the meaning of their writings by their acts when they cast all the Christians in under one City every where into one Church then those who now challenge for a Law of God that all Congregations are to be Churches And thus farre it appears by the same evidence upon which wee accept of our common Christianity that is by the Scriptures and by the consent of all Christians that the Apostles so founded the Churches of their planting that they might be fit to concurre to the constitution of one whole Church CHAP. VII That the Apostles delivered to the Church a Summary of Christianity which all should be baptized were to profess Evidence out of the Scriptures Evidence out of the Scriptures for Tradition regulating the Communion of the Church and the Order of it Evidence for the Rule of Faith out of the records of the Church For the Canons of the Church and the pedegree of them from the Order established in the Church by the Apostles That the profession of Christianity and that by being baptized is necessary to the salvation of a Christian BUt I will grant that this were not evidence enough out of the Scriptures for a point of such consequence as it will appear to be of when it apâ—eares to be true were it not for the general inference that I made afore Here I challenge having proved against the Leviathan that whosoever acknowledges our Lord Jesus to be the Christ must acknowledge whatsoever hee teaches and delivers either by himself or the Apostles his Deputies to be Law to the Church That whatsoever it may appear any way that the Aposâ—lhs delivered to the Church to be observed in it is of that nature I say further it is evident by their writings that they delivered to the Church a certain Summary of Christianity which whosoever was admitted into the Church by Baâ—tisme underto professe and practise Indeed this is the main point now in hand that all interpretation of Scripture is to be confined within this Summary as the Rule of our common Christianity And therefore it may seem that I go about first to prove the Corporation of the Church by this Rule And then to prove the Rule by the consent of the Church whereby I pretend to evidence what the Apostles delivered to the Church for the Rule of our common Christianity But I can easily answer that it is one thing to question whether the Apostles did deliver any such Rule to the Church from the beginning or not Another what it containes and what belongs to it as part of it what not If it may appear by the writings of the Apostles that delivered it and by the acknowledgment of the Church that received it for what othâ—r meane can there be to make it appear that such a sense the Apostles did deliver to the Church it will be a great part of the evidence that they did found the Church for a Corporation wherein the profession of it might be preserved and wherein God mâ—â—â—t be served according to the profession of it And if this may appear then the consent of this Corporation will be as good evidence as the subject mater allowes whether any thing questionable be part of it or not Let us then heare the Apostles Thanks be to God saith S. Paul Rom. VI. 17. that being once slaves to sinne yee have obeyed from your heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you Had hee onely said it was dâ—livered they had not acknowledged themselves obliged but when hee sayes they obeyed it hee shows they were under the obligation that God cast on them by delivering it 2 Pet. II. 21. It had been better for them not to have owned the way of righteousnesse than having owned it to return from the holy commandement delivered What is this holy commandement what is this way of righteousnesse but in one word Christianity Which when hee saith it was delivered hee means by Metonymy that it was received because hee saith further that they had owned it The same is called by another Apostle Jude 3. the Faith once delivered to the Saints And S. Paul 2 Tim. I. 13 14. Hold fast the form of wholesom words which thou hast heard of mee in faith and love which is through Christ Jesus Keep that good
thing which was deposited in trust with thee through the Holy Ghost that dwelleth in us II. 2. And those things which thou hast heard of mee under many witnesses deposite with trusty persons who may alsobe able to teach others Would you have any thing plainer than this to show that the Summe of Christianity was delivered for a Rule by the Apostles by which their Successors were to examine all Doctrines Therefore 1 Tim. II. 20. O Timothy keep that which is committed to thy trust avoiding profane novelties of termes and oppositions of knowledge falsly so called which some professing have failed of the Faith By the Rule of Faith which he had deposited in his trust he will have him exclude the pretenses of the Gnosticks which every man might see were inconsistent with it Whereupon S. John calls it the Unction 1 John II. 20-24 27. by which they knew all things To wit that belong to the common Faith of Christians And therefore the inconsistence of it with the pretenses of the Antichristian They continuing in that which they had heard from the beginning when they turned Christians And you saith the Apostle have an unction from the Holy One and know all things I write not to you because you know not the truth but because you know it and that no lye is of the Truth Therefore let that which you have heard from the beginning abide in you If that which you have heard from the beginning abide in you then shall you also abide in the Sonne and in the Father It is plaine enough why this truth which they have heard from the beginning of their Christianity is called the Unction because the anointing of the Holy Ghost the gift whereof as I have showed you presupposeth Christianity is granted upon consideration of being baptized into the profession of Christianity Wherefore it followeth in S. John As for you the Vnction which you have received of him abideth in you And yee need not that any man teach you But as the same Vnction teacheth you of all things and is true and no lye and as it hath taught you abide in it The Unction teacheth all things that a Christian is to avoid because it teacheth to avoid all that agreeth not with the truth which the same Unction had taught him afore When according to that which hath been said being moved by the Holy Ghost to become a Christian hee was taught that truth upon profession whereof hee received the gift of the Holy Ghost for an habitual indowment And the same is the Apostles meaning when hee saith again 1 John III. 9. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sinne for his seed abideth in him The seed of which a Christian is born is the Word of the Gospel which begetteth children to God when it prevaileth with sinners to become Christians This Word obliging Christians upon their salvation not to sinne abideth not in him that sinneth neither sinneth hee in whom it abideth So whether you call it Vnction or Seed In regard it is the Rule of our conversation as well as of our belief as hee that abideth in the truth must needs reject Heresies contrary to it so in whom the seed which hee is born of abideth hee cannot sinne And in his second Epistle 6 7 9. with S. Paul hee calls it the commandement which they had received from the same beginning to preserve them from the impostures of that time inticing to transgresse it In fine that this Tradition is the Law whereupon our Christianity standeth you may see by the Apostle 1 Pet. III. 20. when hee saith that Baptisme saveth us not the putting away the filth of the flesh but the examination of a good conscience to God That is to say the answer that is made out of a good conscience to the interrogatories that were even then propounded to them that were baptized by which answer they tied themselves to professe the Faith and to live according to it Which S. Paul therefore calls that good profession which Timothy had made before many witnesses 1 Tim. VI. 12 13 14. to wit when hee was baptized and therefore conjures him by the good profession which our Lord made before Pilate of his Kingdome for which hee suffered death to preserve it unspotted Which if it be so then must no Christian imagine that the receiving of this Tradition or Rule of Faith upon which men were admitted to Baptisme and made Christians consisted onely in professing to believe that which is necessary for the salvation of all Christians to be believed but also in undertaking to live as Christianity requireth Therefore S. Paul sometimes in his writings referres himself to the precepts not onely which hee had delivered them but also which they had received of him charging his flock not onely with their duty but also with their engagement 1 Thess IV. 1 2 11. 2 Thess III. 6. But besides the Rule of Faith there is another sort of Traditions concerning the outward order in the Church by which Unity is preserved in the communion of those Offices which God is to be served with by Christians which Christians come to be subject to by receiving their Baptisme from the Church and consequently undertaking to serve God with the Church For it is manifest that this communion cannot be maintained without certain Rules limiting the maner and circumstances of Gods service for time and place and the persons both which are admitted to communion with the Church and which are inabled to minister the Offices of the same Baptisme is the door to all Gods Ordinances that Christians are obliged to serve God with The praising of God the reading and hearing of the Scriptures and the expounding of them the common prayers of Christian Assemblies are all Offices which no Christian doubts that God is to be served with under the Gospel though there be no expresse precept of the New Testament what Offices the publick service of God is to consist of because before the Gospel they were alwaies in use among Gods people The Sacrament of the Eucharist being instituted by Christ to be frequented by the Church at their Assemblies for the service of God must be reckoned among the positive Laws of God to his Church obliging only because commanded Hee that supposeth the Church a Corporation founded by God to maintaine the communion of those that believe in these Offices must consequently maintain a Power of settling good order in the exercise of them as for all other circumstances so especially for the qualities of persons concurring to the celebrating of them Hee that shows by the Scripture that this order was provided for by the Apostles in the Churches of their founding shows that they intended the Church for a Body indowed with Power of limiting the like Rules for the future And this is to be showed by many passages of S. Pauls Epistles 1 Cor. XI 2 3-16 20-34 having commended them for observing his Traditions as hee had delivered
them hee is fain to argue very hard that their women ought their men ought not to be vailed at divine Service Concluding that if his reasons would not prevail the contentious must rest in this That wee have no such custome neither the Churches of God Why so if particular Churches be not tied to keep unity with the whole And by and by proposing another disorder in that they received not the Eucharist in commune poore and rich hee reproveth it as contrary to that which hee had delivered to them from the beginning Concluding that The rest will I set in order when I come So 2 Thess II. 25. Stand therefore brethren and hold fast the Traditions which yee have been taught either by word of mouth or by any letter of ours Neither can it be imagined that all Christians should be bound to heare the Apostles and not be bound to hold those things for Lawes to their conversation in maters of Religion which the Apostles should teach them to that purpose Of this nature is the decree at Jerusalem Acts XV. 20 28. that the then Churches of the Gentiles should abstain from things strangled and bloud as well as from fornication and the pollution of Idols For what is the ground or the purpose of it but to preserve them in unity with the Churches of Jews become Christians Of this nature is that blessing or Thanksgiving mentioned by S. Paul 1 Cor. XIV 16 17. 1 Tim. II. 1. being as I have showed in a Discourse of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church pag. 350-370 a form of Prayer or Thanksgiving delivered in substance by the Apostles for which the Sacrament of our Lords Supper hath been alwaies called the Eucharist because it is to be celebrated with it Of the same nature is tha order which S. James gives of praying for the sick anointing them with oile aswell for the forgivenesse of their sins as for the recovery of their bodily health James V. 14 15. Which I suppose no man will deny that it concernes all Churches alike If there be this evidence in the Scriptures for the beginnings of Church Law the practice of the Church from this beginning will afford much more Hee that would deny the Tradition of the Rule of Faith what will hee say to the Creed of the Apostles Not that I would have the words and syllables of it to containe whatsoever it is necessary for the salvation of a Christian to believe But because the Creed is not the words of the Creed but the sense and meaning of them together with that coherence and dependence of the parts thereof one upon and with another which the reasons and grounds of them inforce But first let it be understood that I make a difference between the Rule of Faith and the substance of Christianity Supposing Christianity to consist partly in mater of Faith partly in mater of maners Partly in things to be believed partly in things to be done though the Creed extend onely to mater of Faith There is nothing more evident in the practice of the whole Church before the world had admitted the profession of Christianity than this That there was a time allowed and required by the Church for those that professed themselves converted to believe the truth of Christianity to give trial of their conversation before they were admitted to Baptisme The Constitutions of the Apostles VIII 32. name three years but with this limitation that if any man demonstrate extraordinary zele to Christianity hee be received without so long trial Therefore if Clemens Alexandrinus require five it makes no difference For what marvail if several Churches at several times had several customes when as upon extraordinary occasions they were dispensable The Constitutions require extraordinary trial of those that had practised any sort of Magick judging by the experience of the times that it was hard to part with such superstitions It is enough for my purpose that during this time they might learn to behave themselves as Christians by conversing among Christians by coming to Church and bearing a part in the praises of God and hearing the Scriptures read and expounded And what is more notorious in the practice of the ancient Church than the difference between Missa Catechumenorum and Missa Fidelium Between that part of the Office of the Church which Pretenders to Christianity were admitted to or Hearers that is Scholars and Learners of it and that which was peculiar to Believers that is those that were Baptized and made Christians It is the designe of Clemens Alexandrinus his Paedagogus to show how the Word whether our Lord Christ or his Gospel is the Pedagogue of mankinde in bringing them to be Christians Not as wee mistake that word to signifie the Master of a School but as the fashion was then for men of quality to appoint a sonne a Governor to conduct him to School and home againe to attend on him at his exercises and upon all occasions to put him in minde how it might become him to behave himself and to report to his Father if hee proved untractable Thus hee maketh Pretenders to Christianity to be conducted by our Lord Christ and his Gospel in the conversation of Christians till they come to demand their Baptisme of the Church As it is manifest by the end of the Book where this Governor conducting his charge to the Church gives him up into his own hands so hee saith expresly as no more Governor of children but Master of men in the School of his Church Supposing then the point of maners and godly life to be part of the substance of Christianity it is evident that the Church alwaies acknowledged a certain Rule of Faith in that those who were thus prepared were alwaies taught their Creed that is required to repete it and heare it expounded by those whom the Church trusted for that purpose It is not my intent here to insist that the words of the Creed were delivered by the Apostles themselves or that the Rule of Baptisme delivered by our Lord in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is not a sufficient Symbole or cognizance for a Christian For what is there necessary to the salvation of all Christians that is not contained in the profession of him that desires to be baptized into this Faith But it is enough for my present purpose that it was alwaies requisite that whosoever is baptized should be instructed upon what termes hee is to expect to be saved by Christ and that which all were required to professe for that purpose to be the Rule of Faith For whether it may appeare that this or that is of that nature must come to trial though the question be only of the sense of the Creed supposing that the very words were delivered by the Apostles themselves For example It is not possible to render a reason of the coming of Christ not mentioning the fall of Adam nor of that not
because all agreed that they transgressed therefore they were excluded the Church But Vincentius besides this advanceth another mark to discern what belongs to the Rule that is what the ground and scope of our Creed requires For it might be said that perhaps something may come in question whether consistent with the Rule of Faith or not in which there hath passed no decree of the primitive Church because never questioned by that time Wherein therefore wee shall be to seek notwithstanding the decrees past by the Church upon ancient Heresies Which to meet with Vincentius saith further that whatsoever hath been unanimously taught in the Church by writing that is alwaies by all every where to that no contradiction is ever to be admitted in the Church Here the stile changes For whereas Irenaeus Tertullian and others of former time appeal onely to that which was visible in the practice of all Churches By the time of the Council at Ephesus the dare of Vincentius his book so much had been written upon all points of Faith and upon the Scriptures that hee presumeth evidence may be made of it all what may stand with that which the whole Church had taught what may not I know this proposition satisfieth not now because I know Vincentius proceedeth upon supposition that the Church was and ought to be alwaies one Body in which that which agreeth with the Faith might be taught that which agreeth not might not Which is the question now in dispute For upon other termes it had been madnesse in him to allege and maintain the Council of Ephesus condemning Nestorius as infringing the Rule of Faith upon this presumption because ten received Doctors of the Church had formerly delivered the contrary of his doctrine It is well enough known that there are many questions in which though there may be ten Fathers alleged on one side yet there may be more alleged on the other side And it were a piteous case if Vincentius or I could tell you no wiser a way for the ending of Controversies in Religion than by counting noses The presumption lies in this That the witnesles that depose being of such credit in the Church as the quality which they beare in it presupposeth it cannot reasonably be imagined that they could teach that for truth which is inconsistent with Christianity but they must be contradicted in it and their quality and degree in the Church questioned upon it And that the Church having been alwaies one and the same Body from Christ whosoever should undertake to teach that for the Christian Faith which from the beginning had been counted false hee would have been questioned for contradicting that profession which qualified him for that rank which hee held in the Church It is the case of Nestorius who venting his Heresie in the Church gave the people occasion to check at it and the Council of Ephesus to condemn it Now Vincentius his discourse presupposeth that the doctrine of those ten whom hee allegeth had not been contradicted A thing which must needs be presupposed by him that supposed the Great Council of Nicaea had decreed no more than that which had alwaies been taught in the Church For it is plain that without questioning the Faith setled at Nicaea there is no room for the opinion of Nestorius But otherwise should ten of that quality which hee allegeth be so considerably contradicted that it must be presumed their doctrine was suffered to passe not as not taken notice of but as not contradicting the common profession of Christians it will appear a presumption that neither part is of the substance of Faith but both allowed to be taught in the Church And if it appear further that the fewer in number and the lesse in rank and quality in the Church hold that which dependeth more necessarily upon the Rule of Faith which containeth the substance of the Scriptures it will be no way prejudicial to the Unity and authority of the Church as a Corporation founded by God that a private man as I am should conclude it for truth against the greater authority in maters depending upon the foundation of the Church If it be said that this evidence supposeth the necessity of Baptisme to the making of a Christian Which not onely the Leviathaâ— is farr from granting who professeth himself bound to renounce Christ at the command of his Soveraign But the Socinians also and some of our Sectaries hold indifferent to salvation whether baptized or not I answer That the question here is not what belongs or belongs not to the Rule of Faith and Christian conversation necessary to the salvation of all Christians but whether there be any such Rule or not That the original and universal custome of Carechizing all Christians evidenceth such a Rule by the consent of all Christians as you have seen it evidenced by the frequent mention thereof in Scriptures That therefore it stands recommended to us by the same means and upon the same grounds for which wee receive the holy Scriptures And that though when the World was come into the Church and many more were baptized infants then afore it cannot be said that this order of Catechizing was so substantially performed as afore Yet the mater and theme of it remaining in the Tradition of the Creed and the sense of it in the writings of the Fathers and the decrees of the Church against Hereticks it remains still visible what belongs to it what not as I shall make appear in that which is questioned within the subject of this book Onely this is the place where I am to allege against the Leviathan why the profession of Christianity is necessary to the salvation of all Christians Whereupon it will follow without further proof that it is necessary to salvation to believe more than that Jesus is the Christ To wit whatsoever this Rule of Christianity containeth the profession whereof is requisite to Christianity Heare our Lord Mat. X. 32 33. Luke XII 8 9. Whosoever shall renounce mee before men him will I renounce before my Father which is in heaven And whosoever shall acknowledge mee before men him will I acknowledge before my Father which is in heaven And S. Paul Rom. X. 9 10. If thou confesse with thy mouth that Jesus is the Lard and believe with thy heaâ—t that God raised him from the dead that shalt be saved For with the heart a man believes to righteousnesse and with the mouth hee professeth to salvation And a Tim. II. 12. If wee deny him hee will deny us Our Lords Commission to his Apostles is Mat. XXVIII 19. Go make disciples all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Who are then Christs Disciples That wee may know what the Apostles are to make them whom they make Christs Disciples Yâ—e are my Disciples saith our Lord if yee do whatsoever I command you And John XV. 8. Herein is my Father glorified that yee heart 〈◊〉 fruit
the visibility of the Church and the assurance that every particular Christian might have during this intelligence and correspondence that holding communion with his own Pastor hee held the true Faith together with the Unity of the Catholick Church Neither putting trust in man which God curseth nor in his own understanding for the sense of the Scriptures but trusting his own common sense as well for the means of conveying to him the mater as the motives of Christianity For why is it enough for Irenaeus and Tertullian for S. Augustine and Optatus to allege the Church of Rome and the succession from the Apostles for evidence that the Faith of those Hereticks was contrived by themselves that the Donatists were out of communion with the Church Because supposing that the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord all communicated in the same Faith which they taught the Churches of their own founding other Churches founded and the Pastors of them constituted by the authority of those Churches must needs be founded and settled upon condition of maintaining and professing the same Faith So that if any Christian or Pastor should attempt the unsettling of any part thereof the people to stand bound rather to follow the original consent of the whole from whence they received their Christianity than any man that should forfeit his ingagement to the whole in the judgment of the whole This being the true ground for the authority of Councils might and did take effect without assembling of Councils S. Cyprian directs his leters to Steven Bishop of Rome to write to the Churches of Gaule to ordain a new Bishop in stead of Marcianus in the Church of Arles because hee had joyned with the Novatians To the Spanish Bishops owning the Deposing of Basilides and Martialis and the Ordaining of those whom they had put in their places notwithstanding that upon false suggestions they had gained Steven Bishop of Rome to maintain them Epist LXV LXVI Could any man in his right senses have attempted this had it not been received among Christians which hee alleges that the people of particular Churches are bound not to acknowledge those for their Pastors whom the communion of the Church disowneth whether assembled in Council or not The acts of Councils themselves such are the creation of a Bishop of Arles in stead of Marcianus of Spanish Bishops in stead of Basilides and Martialis depending upon the authority of the Churches of Rome and Carthage that concurred not to them in presence If this be imputed to any mistake of Gods appointment in the ancient Church it will be easie for mee to allege Tertullians reason to as good purpose against our Independent Congregations as hee used it against the Hereticks of his time For if the chief Power of the Church be vested in those that assemble to serve God at once without any obligation to the resolution of other Congregations then is the trust that a Christian can repose in the Church resolved into that confidence which hee hath of those seven with whom hee joyneth to make a Congregation that the ruling part of them cannot faile Or rathâ—r into that which hee hath of himself and of the Spirit of God guiding his choice to those that shall not faile They presuming themselves to have the Spirit of God without declaring what Christianity they professe for the condition upon which they obtain it need no provision of a Catholick Church to preserve that Faith which the Gift of the Holy Ghost supposeth God who requireth the profession of a true Faith in them upon whom hee bestoweth his Spirit hath provided the communion of his Church for a means to assure us of that which it preserveth That it is presumption in them to oversee this no imposture in the Church to challenge it Tertullians reason determines The Hereticks pleaded that the Churches had departed from the Faith which the Apostles had left them To this after other allegations hee sets his rest up on this one that error is infinite truth one and the same That no common sense will allow that to be a mistake in which all Christians agree They all agreed in the same Faith against those Hereticks because they all agreed in acknowledging the Catholick Church provided by God to preserve and propagate it against our Independent Congregations Thus Tertullian de Praescript XXVIII There have been some Disputers of Controversies that have claimed the benefit of Tertullians exception against the Hereticks of his time in behalf of the Church of Rome Hee pleadeth not that the Catholicks ought not but that they are not bound to admit them to dispute upon the Scriptures being able to condemne them without the Scriptures And they plead that the Reformation not standing to those Pastors whom they acknowledge to possesse the place of those that derived their authority by succession from the Apostles may be condemned without Scripture as not holding the truth who hold not that which is taught by the said Pastors Which is to demand of those of the Reformation for an end of all debates first to acknowledge those Pastors and that which they teach then to take that for the true meaning of the Scripture which that which they reach alloweth or requireth But this supposes the sentence of the Church to be an infallible ground for the truth of that which it determineth And therefore to be accepted with the same Faith as our common Christianity or the Scriptures Which I showed you already to be false It shall therefore suffice mee to say that those men consider not the difference between the plea of the Reformation and that of those Hereticks For they acknowledging our Lord Christ and his Apostles no otherwise than the Alcoran and Mahomet doth where they served their turn made no scruple to say when it was for their purpose that they knew not the depth of Gods minde which themselves by some secret way having attained to know were therefore called Gnosticks That they imparted not the utmost of their knowledge to all alike when that served their turne That therefore the Scriptures were unperfect and revealed not that secret whereby they promised their salvation but by incklings These things you shall finde in Tertullian de Praescript XXII and Irenaeus III. 1. as well as that plea which I mentioned afore that the Churches were fallen from that which they had received of the Apostles Whereas those of the Reformation allege against the Church of Rome that those Hereticks pretended Tradition as they do Without cause indeed For what is Tradition pretended to be delivered in secret to them and by them who tender no evidence for it to that which the visibility of Christianity and the grounds upon which it is settled justifieth But so as to make it appear that they no way disown the Apostles or their writings nor can expect salvation by any other meanes And therefore are manifestly to be tryed by the Scriptures acknowledged on both sides provided the trial
Christianity was in force And therefore as visibly derive themselves fromt the Apostles as the corrupt Christianity of this time can derive it self from that which they planted pure from the fountain But there can be no such evidence of this point or of the whole mater in hand concerning the Corporation of the Church as the excluding of Hereticks and Schismaticks out of it S. Paul 2 Thess III. 6-14 orders them to withdraw from every brother that walkes disorderly and not according to the Tradition which saith hee yee have received from us To mark them and not to converse with them that they may be ashamed But with the excommunicate not so much as to eat 1 Cor. V. 11. So likewise having exhorted the Romanes XVI 12. to mark those that cause divisions and scandals beside the doctrine which saith hee yee have received of us to avoid them hee hath thereby given us to understand that hee would have Christians abhorr all conversation with those that declare themselves Hereticks I have in another place allowed S. Jeromes exposition of that Text of S. Paul Titus III. 9. A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition avoid Understanding it of Schismaticks who as it followes do condemne themselves when they voluntarily forsake the communion of the Church which other sinners are excluded from whether they will or not But considering there is no admonition against Schisme which is declared as soon as it is done as there may be against Heresie which may lurk before it is professed I count is as properly said that Hereticks condemn themselves whenâ—oever they professe to believe the contrary of that which they professed when they were made Christians as Schismaticks when they excommunicate themselves The Apostle indeed seems to use a moderate term when hee saith A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition avoid So the original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be translated according to Cyrils Glosses where wee reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excuso recuso evito which last sounds in English to avoid But in Vulcanius his Glosses evito signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To have in horror as well as to take heed and to avoid And it is to be understood that S. Paul prescribes that to Tiâ—us which hee intends all his flock should practise Supposing that being Christians they would be carefull to avoid the infection of those whom their Pastors should avoid because they counted them dangerous not to themselves but to their flock To this purpose S. Jude 22 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Copy at S. James reades 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reproue some that preferre themselves before others But nothing so pertinently to the opposition between pity and terror that followes And some truly take pity on putting a difference or behaving your selves with a difference towards them others save through feare of the judgment of God or of the Church hating even the garment that is spotted with sin It appeares that the Gnosticks whom hee writes against could counterfeit themselves Christians to seduce the simple from the Faith to their Heresies Therefore Jude 11 12. They perished in the contradiction of Core They are spots in your Feasts of love banqueting with you and feeding themselves without feare And 1 Pet. II. 14 18. they are said to bait unstable soules And They bait with fleshly concupiscences through wantonnesse those that had truly escaped from them that live in error They were not afraid to communicate with Christians at their Feasts of love where the Sacrament of the Eucharist was also celebrated that they might get means and opportunity of seducing the simple to separate with them from the Church And therefore S. Jude 19. These are they who separate themselves as S. Peter saith that they perish in the contradiction of Core So then those that are curable either by pity or by terror hee exhorts them to save But when hee charges them to hate even the garmâ—nâ— thâ—t is spotted with sin hee charges them much more to abhorre the communion of those that were discovered to be uncurable For with what zele they taught to avoid the Hereticks of that time let S. John be Judge John II. 10 11. If any man come to you that brings not this doctrine but transgresses it and abides not in it as hee said just afore take him not into your house as you do them who bring testimony that they hold the Christian faith neither salute him for hee that salutes him is accessory to his evil works Certainly hee requires great demonstration of a minde detesting Heresie that affirmes those who afford them the ordinary civility of salutation to be accessory to their evil works But it is to be considered that the Apostle speaks of the Heresies which Simon Magus and Cerinthus had then set on foot when hee sayes there II John 7. Many impostors are gone out into the world who professe not Jesus Christ come in the flesh For though they wore the name of Christians yet they professed not that Jesus of Nazareth then come in the flesh was the Christ But Simon Magus and his disciple Menander both pretended themselves to be the Christ Saturninus and Basilides some of their invisible principles Valentinus one of his Aeones and likewise Marcus Cerinthus the power that came upon Jesus of Nazareth at his Baptisme and left him at his Crosse So the rest untill Cerdon and Marcion who pretending that Jesus of Nazareth was not Son of the God of Israel denied by consequence that Christ was come in the flesh S. Cyprian Epist LXXIII having disputed that these Heresies do not hold the same Father the same Son the same Holy Ghost with the Church comes down to the Marcionites strongly arguing that they who made one God of Israel anotherÌ„ the Father of our Lord Christ and his Manhood onely in appearance cannot be said to believe in Christ as Christians do Adding very plainly that they are those of whom the Apostle speaketh 1 John IV. 2. that they are of the Spirit of Antichrist and that the Spirit of Antichrist hath possessed their breasts But there is no such commentary upon S. â—ohns words as that which is related of hiâ— by Irenaeus III. 3. from the mouth of Polycarpus that hee would not indure to be in the bath with Cerinthus the enemy of Gods truth And of Polycarpus that being desired by Marcion to own him hee answered that hee did own him for â—he first-born of Satan Which actions Irenaeus thus construeth Tantum Apostoli horum discipuli habuerunt timorem ut neque verbo tenus communicarent alicui eorum qui adulteraverunt veritatem Quemadmodum Paulus ait Haereticum hominem post unam alteram correptionem devita Sciens quoniam perversus est qui est talis à seipso damnatus So great fear had the Apostles and Disciples not to communicate so farr as in words with any of those who
Church been in possession and practice at that time the Bishop of Rome had been a mad man to think that refusing it would be the means to reduce those of Asia to his judgment and practice If this possession and practice had no ground of right is it possible that none of either party should discover the sandy foundation of the dispute and perswade the parties which were so much in love with their own way on both sides to give no heed to other Churches the Communion of the Church having no ground and therefore being of no consequence What meant Irenaeus so to trouble himself to perswade Victor to hold communion with those of Asia though not condescending to keep Easter by the same Rule but that hee saw if the Church of Rome should break with the Churches of Asia that hee must break either with the one or the other of them who desired to hold communion with both Were the Disciples of the Apostles or at least of their Disciples cousened into a humane Tradition of the Unity of the Catholick and Apostolick Church when hee so earnestly labored that holding with the Church of Rome hee might not be constrained to forbear the intercourse which for the advancement of Christianity hee held with the Churches of Asia But S. Cyprians time affordes divers passages of great consequence The Schisme of the Novatians in the first place It is a thing manifest by Eusebius his Histories VI. 44 46. VII 4 5. that the Church of Antiochia together with the Churches of Pontus which then seem to have either resorted to Antiochia or in consideration of neighborhood to have held great correspondence with that Church and Cilicia made very great difficulty in admitting the election of Cornelius and condemning the Novatians for refusing to receive into communion those who in time of persecution had sacrificed to Idols and so renounced the Christian Faith In time by the intercession of Dionysius of Alexandria moved it seems with the consent of the rest of the Church they were also induced to disclaime the Novatians and to concurr to restore the Unity of the Church which for the time had remained in suspense And it is a thing very much to be observed which the Council at Antiochia in Encoeniis Dominicae aureae pleads to the Church of Rome in the dispute they had with Pope Julius about admitting the Acts of it in Sozomenus III. 8. and Socrates II. 5. They had taken upon them to make a new provision in that which the great Council at Nicaea had taken order in afore Which was in effect to make void the acts of that Council The Pope I suppose had reason to except that this could not be done without his consent including in it the consent of the Churches which adheered to him unlesse wee imagine that the Synod of Antiochia being but a part of those who had decreed at the Council of Nicaea had power to dissolve the acts of the whole What is it then toat this Synod allege for themselves Even this That having preserved or restored the Unity of the Church of Rome by disclaiming the Novatians they expected the like compliance from them in the present businesse Whereby it appeareth that the consent of the whole Church did make and was to make good the acts of part of it though not assembled with them in Council no lesse than if they were And indeed what made the second general Council of Constantinople under Theodosius to be general none having appeared at it for the Western Churches but the consent of Damasus and his Synod ex postfacto the rest of the West adheering to the same Which if it be so I do not think I need any other evidence that from S. Cyprians time all Christians did believe that they are bound to maintain themselves in communion with the Church when they believe that the consent thereof is able to do such acts as these I cannot here omit the words of Dionysius of Alexandria out of a leter to Novatianus recorded by Eusebius Eccl. Hist VII 45. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If you were carried away against your will as you say you may show that by returning with your will For you should have indured any thing rather than smite asunder the Church of God And to suffer martyrdome rather than divide the Church had been no lesse glory than rather than commit Idolatry but greater in my judgmene For there a man suffers martyrdome for his own soul alone but here for the whole Church And now if you can perswade or constraine the brethren to return to concord your fall will not be so great as that exploit But if they will not be ruled and you cannot by all means save your own soul It is easie to observe that the same Churches which had made so much difficulty in disclaiming the Novatians were they who joyned with S. Cyprian in standing upon the rebaptizing of those that had been baptized by Hereticks As appeares not only by Firmilianus his Epistle to S. Cyprian but also by Dionysius of Alexandria de bapt III. alleged by Euscbius VII 7. even before S. Cyprian Whereby wee see how much Eusebius contradicts himself when hee sayes VII 3. that S. Cyprian was the first that called in question the Tradition received in that case In this businesse the XIX Canon of the Council of Nicaea makes it evident that neither S. Cyprians party nor their adversaries altogether prevailed For it is there inacted That those who had been baptized by the Samosatenians should be baptized again And must not the same needs hold much more of the Gnosticks and of almost all the rest of those Heresies which S. Cyprian nameth in his LXX Epistle Besides it is manifest by the second Council at Arles can XVII that of Laodicea can VII VIII Gennadius de dogm Eccl. cap. LII and others that the practice of the Churches after this dispute was ended was not every where the same And which is most remarkable Not onely the great Council at Arles Can. VIII makes a Rule for the Africane Churches which the first Council at Carthage followeth to the like purpose with that of the Council of Nicaea But also Optatus lib. I. demonstrates that hee rebaptized the Sabellians which the foresaid Rule alloweth not Whereby it appeareth that the extream opinions held by Steven of Rome that none were to be rebaptized and by S. Cyprian that all were moderated by the succeeding practice of the Churches though diverse in divers parts of the Church Now let mee ask by what means this moderation came to prevaile over that vehemence of contention which you may see the parties transported with in S. Cyprians Epistles What could it be but the conscience of that obligation which both parties owned to preserve the Unity of the Church and the respect of those other Churches that were not ingaged in the dispute as they were The businesse of Paulus Samosatenus is of the same time Was
the Synod of Antiochia mad when they writ the Leter which you may reade in Eusebius VII 30. in the name of the Churches represented by that Synod to the rest of the Churches in Christendome signifying the sentence of deposition pronounced against Samosatenus and requiring them to joyn with it If it be madnesse to think them so mad as to summon the rest of the Churches upon an obligation which they did not acknowledge what shall it be to think that this obligation was but imaginary or at least voluntarily contracted not inacted by the will of our Lord declared by his Apostles The Emperor Aurelian being appealed by the Council to cause Samosatenus to be put our of his Bishops house by force who maintained himself in it by force against the sentence of the Synod decreed that possession should be given to him whom the Christian Bishops of Italy and Rome should acknowledge for Bishop by writing to him under that title Certainly this Heathen Emperor in referring the execution of the Synods decree to the consent of those remarkable parts of the Church whereupon the consent of the rest might reasonably be presumed understood the constitution of the Church by his five senses better than those learned Christians of our time who argue seriously that this Paulus Samosatenus was not excommunicated by the Synod of Antiochia but by the Emperor Aurelian For this is the course by which all the acts of the whole Church ever came in force those parts of the Church which were not present at the doing of them concurring ex postfacto to inact them and the civil power to grant the execution of them by secular power Perhaps it will not be fit here to let passe that which Athanasius relates libro de sontentiâ Dionysii Alexandrini That this Dionysius writing against Sabellius gave occasion to the Bishops of Pentapolis who resorted to the Church of Alexandria as wee see by the VI Canon of Nicaea to suspect him of that which afterwards was the Heresie of Arius And that Dionysius of Rome being made acquainted by them with a mater of that consequence to the whole Church this Dionysius writ him an Apology on purpose to give satisfaction of his Faith wherein S. Athanasius hath great cause to triumph that the Heresie of Arius which arose afterwards is no lesse condemned than that of Sabellius presently on foot Grant wee that it was an office of Christian charity to tender this satisfaction where it was become so requisite The example of Samosatenus shows that their addresse tended to question if not to displace their Bishop by the authority of the rest of the Church ingaging the consent of his own had hee been discovered to harbor the contrary Heresie to that of Sabellius And indeed what was the rise of all those contentions about Arius that succeeded in the Church after the Council of Nicaea but this question whether Arius should be re-admitted one of the Presbyters of the Church at Alexandria or remaine excommunicate And those truly that do not believe there is any Church but a Congregation that assembles together for the service of God must needs think all Christendome stark mad for so many years together as they labored by so many Synods to attain an agreement through the Church in this and in the cause of Athanasius that depended upon it But those who believe the power of the Church to eschere to the State when it declares it selfe Christian must think the Emperors Constantius and Valens mad when they put themselves to that trouble and charâ—e of so many Synods to obtain that consent of the Church which in point of right their own power might have commanded without all that ado In the decrees of divers of those many Synods that were held about this businesse you shall finde that those Churches which the said decrees are sent to are charged not to write to the Bishops whom they depoâ—e That is to say Not to give them the stile of Bishops not to deal with them about any thing concerning the Church but to hold them as cut off from the Church Just as the Emperor Aurelian afore commanded possession to be delivered to him whom the Bishops of Italy and Rome should write to as Bishop This little circumstance expresses the means by which the communion of the Church was maintained To wit by continual intercourse of leters and messengers from Churches to Churches whereby the one understood the proceedings of the other and being satisfied of the reason of them gave force and execution to them within their own Bodies And this course being visibly derived from the practice of the Apostles sufficeth to evidence the Unity of the Church established by the exercise of that communication which maintained it When wee see the Apostles from the Churches upon which they were for the time resident dare Leters to other Churches signifying the Communion of those Churches one with another by the communion of all with the Apostles who taught and brought into force the termes and conditions upon which they were to communicate one with another have wee not the pattern of that intercourse and communion between several Churches by which common sense showeth all them that look into the records of the Church that the Unity and Communion of the whole was continued to after ages The words of Tertullian de praescript haeret cap. XX. must not be omitted here Itaque tot ac tantae Ecclesiae una est illa ab Apostolis prima ex qua omnes Sic omnes prima Apostolicae duâ— unà omnes probant veritatem Dum est illis communicatio pacis appellatio fraternitatis contesseratio hospitalitatis Quae jura non alia ratio regit quam ejusdem Sacramenti una traditio Therefore so many and so great Churches are all that one primitive Church from the Apostles out of which all come So all are the primitive and Apostolical while all agree in proving the truth While they have the communication of peace the title of brotherhood the common mark of hospitality Which rights nothing but the same tradition of the same mystery ruleth It is to be known that among the Greeks and Romans if a man had made acquaintance and friendship in a forrain City the fashion was to leave a mark for a pledge of it with one another which was called tessexa upon recognisance whereof hee that should come to the place where the other dwelt was not onely to be intertained by him whereupon these friends are called hospites signifying both hosts and guests but also assiisted in any businesse which hee might have in that place Such a kinde of right as this Tertullian saith there was between Christians and Christians between Churches and Churches Hee that produced the cognisance of the Church from whence hee came found not onely accesse to the communion of the Church to which hee came but assistance in his necessities and business in the name of a Christian
truth as to show further how well it agreeth with the sense of the Catholick Church by which I had begun to show that wee are to examine all maters of Faith Indeed I must caution this first that I do not pretend as if this point were any part of the Rule of Faith which is the substance of Christianity to be believed but of all points concerning the knowledge of the Scriptures which is the skill of Christian Divines I hold it of most consequence And that therefore though I am not obliged to affirm that it is expresly taught by all the primitive Doctors of the Church as all maintaining the mystical â—ense it may be maintained that by consequence they do all unanimously deliver it Origen in praef de Principiis so accounts it so will it be necessary to show how well it standeth with the sense of them that it may appear that there is no consent of the whole Church against it It shall be therefore sufficient to name S. Jerome S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine the first affirming that hee reades nothing of the kingdom of heaven in all the Old Testament Epist CXXIX Mihi in Evangelio promittuntur regna coelorum quae vetus Instrumentum omnino non nominat To mee the kingdom of heaven is promised by the Gospel which the Old Testament nameth not at all The second in his Homilies de Lazaro and divers others places raising his exhortations drawn from examples of the Saints in the Old Testament upon this ground that if they did so and so when the Resurrection was not preached it behooveth us under the Gospel to do much more The last besides other places whereof some you may finde quoted in my book of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church in the book de Gestis Palestinis relating it for one of the Articles which Pelagius renounced at that Synod not onely that the Saints under the Law obtained salvation by it but even that the salvation of the world to come was preached under the Law The Article charged upon Pelagius you shall finde there to be this cap. V. Regnum coelorum etiam in veteri Testamento promissum That the kingdome of heaven was promised also in the Old Testament To which Pelagius answering That this may be proved by the Scriptures was judged by the Council not to depart from the Faith of the Church Which notwithstanding when S. Austine considers That the Old Testament in vulgar Language signifies the books of the Old Testament in which the kingdome of heaven is promised as the Gospel is fore-told But in the Scriptures the Old Covenant in which it is not promised Hee sayes as much as I have done Therefore hee saith further In illo verò Testamento quod Vetus dicitur datâ—m est in monte Sinâ non invenitur apertissime promitti nisi terrena foelicitas But in that which is called the Old Testament and was given in mount Sina none but earthly felicity is found to be very openly promised Whereupon hee proceedeth to observe that the Land of Canaan is called the Land of Promise in which the promises of the Old Testament figuring the spiritual promises belonging to the New are tendred by the Law And reason hee had to insist upon this because of another Article charged upon Pelagius of kin to this that men were saved under the Law as under the Gospel As you may see there cap. XI Which might well be understood to mean without the Grace of Christ But having cleared the ground of the difference between the literal and allegorical sense of the Scriptures of the Old Testament I hold it utterly unnecessary if not altogether impertinent to tender further proof of this position from the Fathers then the constant agreement of them in maintaining that difference Being when it is rightly understood the necessary and immediate consequence of it Indeed it cannot be maintained that they did understand expresly the true ground of this difference which had they done they would not have been found to use it impertinently and unseasonably as all lovers of Truth must avow that many times they do Notwithstanding in as much as they agree in maintaining and using of it from which use the ground of it which is this position is to be inferred it shall be enough that all of them agree in delivering that by consequence which the principal of them at least in expounding the Scriptures do expresly asfirme For nothing obliges mee to maintaine that this is a poiâ—t necessary to the salvation of all Christians to be believed And by consequence that it hath been every where taught and no where contradicted It is sufficient that I can and do hold it more generally necessary to the right understanding of the Scriptures than any other point of skill in the Scriptures Now if any man object that this is the doctrine of the Socinians I answer first That they also hold that nothing is necessary to salvation to be believed but that which is clear to all men in the Scriptures And that this position hath a necessary influence into their whole Heresie which is grounded upon the unreasonable presumption of it On the contrary the difference between the Law and the Gospel is a principle from which I hope to draw good consequences in maintainance of the Faith of the Church against the Socinians who if they did alwaies see the consequence of their owne positions would not deny the Tradition of the Church as I observed afore If they do not I am not to waive the doctrine of the Fathers because the Socinians acknowledge it But lastly I demand whether Socinus provide for the salvation of the Fathers or not If so why is his opinion blamed If not why is mine opinion that do taken for his CHAP. XIV The Leviathans opinâ—on that Christ came to restore that kingdome of God which the Jewes cast off when they rejected Samuel It overthroweth the foundation of Christianity The true Government of Gods ancient people The name of the Church in the New Testament cannot signifie the Synagogue Nor any Christian State THis position being settled in the next place I will proceed upon it to argue the vanity of that conceit of the Leviathan pag. 263. that the intent of Christs coming was to regaine unto God by a New Covenant that Kingdome which being his by the Old Covenant had been ravished from him by the rebellion of the Israelites in the election of Saul For supposing most truly that God became their King by the Covenant of the Law and that under him Moses had the Soveraigne Power to all purposes pag. 250 251 252. hee inferreth further that after Moses it was by God vested in the High Priests Aarons Successors though hee for his time was subject to Moses And this pag. 217. from that text of Exodus XIX 6. where God promiseth them that upon undertaking his Covenant they should be a Sacerdotal Kingdome which in
them obliged If there were no more in question but the uniting of seven persons into one of our Independent Congregations or as many more as may all hear any man preach at once I should grant that such Bodies might subsist for such a time as the cōmon batred of the Church restrains the peevishnesse of particular persons from breaking that Communion which no tye of conscience obliges them to maintain But if the experience of divers years hath not brought forth any union betwixt any two such Congregations in England so farr as I can learn what was it that united all Christians from East to West into that one Communion visibly distinguished from all Heresies and Schisms which till about the Council of Chalcedon remained inviolable supposing no obligation of our common Christianity delivered by the Apostles to maintain it Is it possible for any man to imagine that with one consent they would have cast themselves into such a form of observation and practice as all to acknowledge the direction of the same persons in several parts to acknowledge those Rules which Generally were the same though in maters of lesse moment differing in several parts to intertain or refuse communion with them that were intertained or refused by the Church where they dwelt for a common cause had there been nothing but their own fansy to tell them not onely what was requisite to intertain such communion but whether it were requisite to intertain such communion or not If such a thing should be said the processe of my discourse were never a whit the more satisfied unlesse some body could show mee how the truth of Christianity can be well grounded upon those motives the evidence whereof resolves into the consent of all Christians And yet that which all Christians have visibly made a Law to their conversation from the beginning to wit the communion of one Catholick Church not belong at all to the mater of our common Christianity And therefore this plea is no lesse ruinous to our common Christianity the ground whereof it undermineth than to common sense For that in such difference of judgments as mankinde is liable to the whole Church should be swayed to unanimity herein by the Prerogative as it were of the Synagogue uniting themselves by imbracing the Ordinances thereof the evident state of the times whereof wee speak will not admit to any pretense of probability The division between Jews and Christians being then advanced to such a hatred on the Jews part that it would have been a very implausible cause to say that Christians ought to follow the Jewes whose curses they heard every day whose persecutions they felt in the tortures which at their instance were inflicted by the Gentiles A thing so evident both by the Writings of the Apostles and the ancientest records of the Church that I will not wrong the Readers patience to prove it True it is that at times and in places great compliance was used by Christians to gain them who elsewhere were so ready to persecute their fellow Christians As at Jerusalem under and after S. James at Ephesus and in Asia under S. John there is great appearance to believe In the mean time hee that can make a question whether the separation between Jewes and Christians and the hatred ensuing upon it were formed under the Apostles must make a question of the truth of S. Pauls Epistles to the Galatians to the Colossians to the Philippians to Titus and especially that to the Hebrews Besides that during the time whereof Irenaeus speaks Christianity was extended so farr beyond Judaisme that a great part of the Church could not be acquainted with the conversation of the Jewes much lesse learn and imbrace their orders And therefore as I do admit and imbrace the diligence of those learned men who bestow their paines to show how the Rules and Customes of the Church are derived from those of the Synagogue So I prescribe one general prejudice concerning all orders that may appear to be so derived that they are all to the Church Traditions of the Apostles and by their act came in force in it And that upon the premises that neither they had any force from the Law of Moses not could be admitted by common consent of Christians after the separation was formed that is after the Apostles time And therefore by their authority were introduced into the Church Having excepted thus much it will notwithstanding be time to distinguish that the orders and customes and observations of the Church may be said to be voluntary as nothing is more voluntary than Christianity it self though there be nothing to which a man is so much obliged For though the will of God and our salvation and whatsoever God hath done to show that salvation depends upon Christianity oblige us to it yet they oblige us also to imbrace it voluntarily so that whatsoever should be done in respect of it without an inward inward inclination of the will would be abominable In which regard whatsoever our Christianity obliges us to is no lesse voluntary than it is And in this sense I grant that the confederation of common Discipline which prevailed in the primitive Church was by the free and voluntary consent of Christians who be freely and voluntary consenting to the profession of Christianity consented freely to maintain the Communion of the Church which they knew to belong to that profession as a part of it But then this consent which is voluntary in regard that the choice of Christianity is free becomes necessary upon the obligation of making good the Christianity which once wee have professed the Communion of the Church professed by all obliging every one for his part to maintain it So when Pliny reports to Trajan of the Christians Ep. X. Solitos Sacramento se obstringere ne Furta ne Latrocinia ne Adulteria committerent nè fidem fallerent ne depositum negarent That they were wont to tye themselves by a Sacrament to commit no Thefts Robberies or Adulteries not to fail of their faith or deny that which was deposited in their trust being demanded It is manifest that all this is the profession of all Christians and that the Sacrament of Baptisme is properly the Vow of observing it And though I dispute not here that the Eucharist is called a Sacrament and Sacramentum in Latine signifies an Oath yet in as much as it is the meaning of the Sacrament of Baptisme I conceive I understood not Pliny amisse when I conceived that hee speaks in this place of the Eucharist when hee reports that they were wont before day to sing Psalms in praise of Christ as God and to tye themselves to the particulars hee names by a Sacrament And the same Tertullian understood by Pliny when hee saith hee reports to Trajan Apolog. II. Praeter obstinationem non sacrificandi nihil aliud se de Sacramentis as Heraldus truly reads it eorum comperisse quà m coetus antelucanos ad canendum
to range themselves among their own respective Sectaries So that to impute the corruption of their damnable inventions to the Church because they mixed themselves with the Church till they were discovered is the same justice that the Gentiles did the Christians in charging them with those horrible incests and vilainies which the Gnosticks only were guilty of because they so farr as it was for their turn affected to shelter themselves under the profession of Christians I shall have occasion in another place to inquire further concerning the riâ—ng of the Gnosticks during the time of the Apostles In the mean time because I see those who know not how to yield to the truth when it is showed them stand in the justification of the wrong that is done the Church by expounding of the corruptions of the Papacy that which Hegesippus saith of the Gnosticks it shall be enough to give you his own words in Eusebius Eccles Hist III. 32. R. Steph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hegesippus saith That till that time the Church remained a pure Virgin and undefloured Those that indeavored to adulterate the true Rule of that preaching which saveth the Rule of Faith which I said so much of afore lurking in obscure holes of darknesse till then if any such there were But the sacred quire of the Apostles having found the several ends of their lives And that generation of men being past that were vouchsafed to hear the wisedom of God with their own ears then did the confirmation of atheistical error receive beginning through the deceit of false Teachers Who now none of the Apostles remaining undertook bare-headed for the future to preach that Knowledge which is falsly so called in opposition to the preaching of the truth For here you have in expresse terms that Knowledge falsly so called from whence the Church after S. Paul calls all those Hereticks Gnosticks as pretending to have got it by such means as our Lord had not discovered to his Apostles You have also the difference between their lurking under the Apostles and their open preaching after their death in terms so expresse that hee must have a good will to it whoever oversees I shall be obliged to referr my self to these same words in another place Now to that which is objected concerning the opinion of the Millennaries I answer first that it cannot be thought ever to have been Catholick For Iustine the Martyr who first mentions it in his dispute with Trypho the Jew not many years after the Apostles expresly testifies that it was the opinion of the most orthodox Christians to wit in his judgment but withall that it was contradicted by others who were neverthelesse Christians even in his account that is of the Communion of the Church Which as it is a peremptory exception against the Universality so is it a reasonable presumption against the Originality of it Seeing that in so few years between him and the Apostles those that believed not all which they had delivered for the common Christianity can in no probability be thought to have injoyed the Communion of the Church And truely had it not been contradicted elsewhere that excellent Prelate Denys of Alexandriae that suppressed it in Egypt about CXXX after as you may see in Eusebius Eccles Hist VII 23 24 25. would have found a hard text of it For the intelligence and correspondence then in use between all parts of the Church would easily have confirmed those of his charge even against him The reason of atchieving the work was because the rest of Christendom insisted not on it Neither is the number or repute of Writers extant the reason to conclude any thing Catholick if the premises be true But the evidence which may be made sometimes from the disputes of able Writers but much more from the acts which past in the Church according or against that which they dispute that their doctrine was received or not received by the Church in whole or in part as necessary or not And therefore secondly I say that the mater of this position concerneth not the Rule of Faith commonly obliging all Christians but the interpretation of a true Prophesie indeed but the true understanding whereof whoso would make necessary to the salvation of all Christians should tye all Christians upon their salvation to understand the Apocalypse which who does To justifie this opinion it hath been showed that the Jewes have this opinion that their Christ shall raign M years when hee comes which seeing they cannot be supposed to have received from the Christians it makes a just presumption that they had it even in S. Iohns time The Jewes have a Tradition which they attribute to the School of one R. Elias mentioned in many of their writings by name in Baal haturim upon Gen. II. and which is also the conceit not onely of Lactantius VII 14. Tychonius the Donatist in his V Rule for expounding the Scripture and the Epistle anciently intitled to S. Barnabas and lately published but also as you may see in the late Lord Primates Latine Discourse of Cainan That as there passed II M years before the Law under the Law counting from Abraham II M years so the dayes of Christ should be II M years and after that the everlasting Sabbath But whether or no the Jews of S. Iohns time could expect this thousand years for the complement of the Sabbath or work of VIIM years which this Tradition promised Whether or no Christians may expect the end of the World at the end of VII M years the Sabbath that shall succeed being eternity according to that of S. Peter and of the Psalm that M years are as a day in Gods sight let them that have nothing else to do inquire Certainly it will not concern the meaning of the Apocalypse unlesse it could be said that the M years there fore-told are to begin after II M years of our Lord are finished Indeed this wee see that the Jewes whom King Alphonsus imployed to make the accounts of the Celestial motions in appointing the motion of the fixed Starrs from West to East to come rome round in XLIXM years the irregularity of that motion to come round in VII M years and that not being obliged to it by any observations made the like account of Sabbaths of thousands of years and VII thousands as the Law doth of dayes or years or Sabbaths of years But if these Jewes be pitifully put to it when to excuse their not believing in Christ who came when the World was about IVM years old according to their own Tradition they are fain to say that it hath failed a small mater of almost XVII C years for their sins Among the Christians what can be said more but that it pleased God to promise them M years of prosperity and raign which the Jews forsaking Christ promised themselves to no purpose Seing the beginning of them cannot be tyed to the end of VIM years from the beginning of the
Christians had not sufficiently renounced Idolatry in receiving the faith or as if it were not free for them being Christians to Gods creatures which perhaps might have been sacrificed to Idols But because as I said afore the Jews had a custome not to eat any thing till they had inquired whether sacrificed to Idols or consecrated by offering the first fruits thereof which scrupulosity those who did not observe they counted not so much enemies to Idols as they ought to be which opinion of their fellow Christians was not so consistent with that opinion of Christianity which was requisite Not as if fornication were not sufficiently prohibited by Christianity but because simple fornication being accounted no sinne but meerly indifferent among the Gentiles all the professions and all the decrees that could be made were little enough to perswade the Jews that their fellow Christians of the Gentiles held it in the like detestation as themselves Now though we find that the Christians did sometimes and in most places forbear blood and things strangled and offered to Idols even where this reason ceased and that perhaps out of an opinion that the decree of the Apostles took hold of them in doing which they did but abridge themselves of the common freedom of Christians yet seeing the Apostles give no such sign of any intent of reviving that which was once a Law to all that came from Noe but forgotten and never published again it followeth that the Church is no more led by the reason of their decree then those Churches of Rome and Corinth were whom S. Paul licences to eat all meats in generall as the Romanes or things sacrificed to Idols expresly as the Corinthians excepting the case of scandall which our common Christianity excepteth setting aside the decree of Jerusalem which S. Paul alledgeth not and naming two cases wherein that scandall might fall out as excepting no other case But in all these instances and others that might be brought as it was visible to the Church whether the reasons for which such alterations were brought into the Church continued in force or not so was it both necessary and sufficient for them that might question whither they were tied to them or not to see the expresse act or the custome of the Church for their assurance For what other ground had they to assure their consciences even against the Scripture in all ages of the Church For if these reasons be not obvious if every one admit them not much lesse will every one find a resolution wherein all may agree and all scandall and dissention may be suppressed CHAP. XXV The power of the Church in limiting even the Traditions of the Apostles Not every abuse of this power a sufficient warrant for particular Churches to reforme themselves Heresie consists in denying something necessary to salvation to be believed Schism in departing from the unity of the Church whether upon that or any other cause Implicite Faith no virtue but the effect of it may be the work of Christian charity SUpposing now the Church a Society and the same from the first to the second coming from Christ by Gods appointment Let it be considered what is the difference between the state thereof under the Apostles and under Constantine or now under so many Soveraignties as have shared these parts of the Empire And let any understanding that can apprehend what Lawes or what Customes are requisite to the preservation of unity in the communion of the Church in the one and in the other estate I say let any such understanding pronounce whither the same Lawes can serve the Church as we see it now or as we read of it under Constantine and as it was under the Apostles He that sayes yea will make any man that understands say that he understands not what he speaks of he that sayes nay must yeeld that even the Lawes given the Church by the Apostles oblige not the Church so farre as they become useless to the purpose for which they are intended seeing it is manifest that all Laws of all Societies whatsoever so farre as they become unserviceable so far must needs cease to oblige And the Apostles though they might know by the spirit the state of the Church that should come after yet had they intended to give Laws to that State they had not given Laws to the State which was when they lived and gave Laws The authority therefore of the Apostles remaining unquestionable and the Ordinances also by them brought into the Church for the maintenance of Gods service according to Christianity the Church must needs have power not onely to limite and determine such things as were never limited nor determined by the Apostles but even those things also the determination whereof made by the Apostles by the change of time and the state of the Church therewith are become evidently uselesse and unserviceable to the intent for which it standeth And if it be true that I said afore that all power produceth an obligation of obeying it in some things I say not in all as afore even when it is abused in respect of God and of a good Conscienceâ— then is the act of the Church so farre a warrant to all those that shall follow it so farre even in things which a man not onely suspects but sees to be ill ordered by those that act in behalfe of it This is that which all the variety and multitude of Canons Rites and Ordinances which hath been introduced into the Church before there was cause of making any change without consent of the whole evidenceth being nothing else but new limitations of those Ordinances which the Apostles either supposed or introduced for the maintenance of Gods service determining the circumstances according to the which they were to be exercised For if there were alwayes cause since the beginning for particular Churches that is parts of the vvhole to make such changes vvithout consent of the whole as might justly cause a breach between that part and the whole then was there never any such thing as a Catholick Church which all Christians profess to believe And truly the Jews Law may be an argument as it is a patern of the same right which notwithstanding an express precept of neither adding to it nor taking from it unlesse we admit a power of determining circumstances not limited by the letter of it becomes unserviceable and not to be put in practice as may easily appear to any man that shall peruse the cases that are put upon supposition of those precepts which determine not the same Whereupon a power is provided by the same Law of inflicting capitall punishment upon any that not resting upon the determination established by those that have authority in behalfe of the whole shall tend to divide the Synagogue Iintend not hereby to say that the power of giving Law to the Church cannot be so well abused that it may at length inable or oblige parts of the Church
to provide for themselves such an order in the communion of Christianity as may stand with the Scriptures and the unity of the Church though without consent of the whole Church of the present time For it is evident that this disorder may be so great in the Laws of the Church as to make them uselesse and unserviceable not onely to the profession of the true faith or to the service of God for which the communion of the Church standeth but even to the unity of the Church it selfe which is the prime precept that all which the Church does ought to aim at It is evident also that this is the true cause which the reformation hath to dispute against the Church of Rome But this I say that though particular Churches must necessarily have their particular Lawes which are the differences which severall Churches observe in the exercise of the same Ordinances yet may not any particular Church make it selfe any Law which may tend to separation by disclaiming the unity of the whole Church or either expresly or by due construction denying the same This is done by abrogating Apostolicall Traditions as inconsistent with Christianity for the mater of them not because the reason and ground of them is ceased For they who disclaim the Authority of the Apostles cannot acknowledge the unity of the Church And they who make Apostolical Ordinances inconsistent with Christianity do necessarily disclaim the Authority of the Apostles The same is done by abrogating the constitution of the Church done by virtue of the Authority left it by the Apostles For to disclaim the Church in this Authority is to disclaim the Apostles that left it And though this Authority may be so abused that particular Churches that is to say parts of the whole Church may thereby be authorized yea obliged to provide for themselves without the consent of the whole yet not against the authority of the whole that is to say of the Apostles from whence it proceedeth Nor is every abuse thereof a cause sufficient to warrant the scandals that such proceedings necessarily produce And this shall be enough for me to have said in this place Having I suppose established those principles by the right application whereof he that can make it may judge what is the true plea whereby that separation which the reformation hath occasioned must either be justified or be thought unjustifiable From that which hath been said the difference between Heresie and Schisme and the true nature of both crimes in opposition to Christianity may and ought to be inferred in this place because it ought not to be forgotten which ought daily to be lamented that at the beginning of the troubles it was questioned in the Lords House whether there were any such crimes or not or whether they were onely bug-bares to scare Children with and that hereupon every man sees England over-run with both The word Heresie signifies nothing but Choice and therefore the signification of it is sometimes indifferent importing no more then a way of professing and living which a man voluntarily chuseth as S. Paul useth it when he saith That he lived according to the most exact Heresie of the Iewes Religion a Pharisee Act. XXVI 5. For it is known that besides the necessary profession of the Jews Law there were three sects which no man by being a Jew was obliged to but by his own free choice the Pharisees the Sadduces and the Essenes which being all maintained by the Law as it was then used the common name of them cannot signifie any crime among them to whom S. Paul then spoke whatsoever we believe of the Sadduces And thus it sounds among them who use it to signifie the Sects of the Grecian Philosophers allowed by those who imbraced them not As in the Title or Lucians discourse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But because it is too ordinary for men of their own choice to depart from the rule to which they are or ought to stand obliged thereupon the word is most part used to signifie the free choice of a rule of living contrary to that rule which they stood obliged to before In which sense Adam is called by Tertullian the first Heretick as he that first departed from the will of God to live according to his own Supposing now that Christianity obliges both to the rule of faith and to the society of the Church by virtue of that rule because the beliefe of the Catholick Church is part of it as hath been declared afore it is manifest that whosoever dis-believes any part of that rule the beliefe whereof is the condition upon which a man becomes a Christian and thereby forfeits his interest in those promises which God hath made to Christians doth or may either lead others or follow in living according to that belief which he chooseth whether professing it as a Christian ought to profess his Christianity or not And in this sense it seems to be used by S. Paul when he sayes Titus III. 10. 11. A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition avoid Knowing that such a one is turned aside and sinneth being condemned by himselfe For when he speaks of admonishing them he signifies that he speaks not of such as had actually departed from the communion of the Church but sheltred themselves under the common profession of Christians doing every thing as they did that by such means they might inveigle such as suspected nothing to admit their infusions which I showed before to have been the fashion of the Gnosticks whose Doctrines the Apostle 1 Pet. II. 1. calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pestilent Heresies And whom S. Paul must needs speak of in this place because there were no other on foot so as to be mentioned by their writings Such a one then the Apostle saith is condemned by himselfe in the same sense as the Councills and Chuch-Writers say of one in the same case in seipsum sententiam dixit He hath given sentence against himselfe because by refusing the second admonition he hath declared himselfe obstinate in that which the common Christianity maketh inconsistent with the communion of the Church And this more proper to the circumstance of this text then S. Jeroms interpretation of those that condemn themselves to be put out of the Church by voluntarily leaving the communion of it though that also is not farre from truth concerning them who are properly signified by the generall name of Hereticks For it is very evident that when S. Paul saith 1 Cor. XI 17. There must be Heresies among you his meaning is onely of such factions as tended to Schism whereof he admonisheth them 1 Cor. I. 10. That there be Schisms among them Now it is manifest how much difference there is between him who holdeth something contrary to the faith and yet departeth not from the communion of the Church and him that departeth from the commnion of the Church though holding nothing contrary to the substance of
clearly all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians it will not hurt my opinion to inferre That because it is unlawful to adde any thing to Moses Law by saying that it is and ought to be part of it when it is not nor ought to be therefore it is unlawfull to adde any thing to the Bible by saying that it is necessary to the salvation of all Christians though not written there For this my opinion sayes not And truly I must here alledge that Gods Law Deut. XVII 8 -12 provideth a power in that people to resolve and determine all things which the peace and unity of that people requireth to be determined And that for the effect of this power we have to show all the constitutions and determinations whereby the precepts of Moses Law are limited how they are to be observed which we find recorded in the Jews Talmud and all the disputes and debates that have ended in those determinations In as much as we have to allegde that our Lord in the Gospell hath commanded to hear the Scribes and Pharisees as those that sit in Moses Chair For those constitutions derive their Pedigree from those that were in force in our Lords time by the authority of the Scribes and Pharisees as it appears to all that compare them with the particulars mentioned in the Scriptures in Philo and Iosephus For though the particulars be not alwaies the same because time produces continual charge in particular custome yet there is agreement enough to show that it was successively the same authority that made such orderly and moderate changes as the state of the time might require or mens fancies imagine in the practise of their Law Whereby it is evident that the power of so interpreting the Law being established by the Law cannot be against the Law as forbidden by it And this abundantly enough for the justifying of that which I have said For the interpretation and limitation of the Precepts of the Law by the tradition left with Moses and by the Authority setled in the Synagogue being established by the Law cannot be counted an addition to the Law Therefore the interpretation of the Scriptures by Tradition left the Church by the Apostles and the limitation of the circumstances which the service of God is to be regulated with by the Authority setled in the Church cannot be counted an addition to Gods new Law or to the Scriptures of the New Testament But because the satisfaction of the Reader in the true intent of these precepts of the Law requires more I shall say further That I conceive that God providing a power requisite to determine all circumstances which the practice of the Law should require repeats neverthelesse a caution of adding to or taking from the Law that it might not be thought that this Power extended to alter any thing in the worship of the one true God which all the precepts of the Law tended to limite Surely in the Text of Deut. XII 32. this caution followes immediately upon warning given not to worship God by any of those Ceremonies with which the Gentiles honoured their false Gods the reason whereof is plain least by using the like ceremonies the honour of those false Gods to whom they were tendred by those that believed in them might be admitted Whereupon when it is inferred that nothing be added to or taken from those precepts by which the Law commandeth to serve the true God it is manifest how well the limitation of circumstances questionable in the practice of the Law stands with this caution so soon as it appears that the precepts thereof cannot be practised till so limited And upon the same caution Deut. IV. 2. he inferres immediately Thine eyes have seen what the Lord did to those that served Baal-peor now they are dead and thou alive this day As supposing this consequence That if they stuck close to their own the true God nothing should seduce them from his Laws Not this That if they stuck close to their own the true God nothing should perswade them to practice the precepts of his worship in that sorm which the power appointed by him should determine So that both Texts prepress upon them the precepts of the Law as those whereby the worship of the true God is distinguished not as if of themselves they contained mater to oblige that people or to procure them happiness And surely the determinations of their Elders as they concur to the same ends so are they inforced by the same obligation which the precepts themselves produce And therefore it will not be amiss to take notice how far the Jews who acknowledge all that I say of limiting the Law are from thinking it to be contradicted by these Scriptures Solomon Jarchi upon Deut. VI. 2. Thou stalt not adde As for example to the five Sections in the Phylacteries to the five kinds in the banquet which we cary at the feast of Tabernacles to the five Thrummes in the Fringes And so when he sayes Thou shalt not take away They are commanded by the Law to wear frontlets upon them to put them in remembrance of the precepts thereof Ex. XIII 9. Deut. VI. 8. XI 18. to carry in their hands and to walk with a Bush made up of the branches of severall trees at the feast of Tabernacles Levit. XXIII 40. to put a fringe to the corners of their Garments made of a thred of Hyacinth among others Numb V. 38. 39. But that those frontlets should contain five Sections of the Law no more that those fringes should consist of four kinds besides the Hyacinth which are the determinations of their Elders these according to his opinion they are as much forbidden to adde to as to take from that which is determined by the leter of the Law Abenezra seems to be more sober upon the same place Thou shalt not adde saith he Of your own conceit as thinking the worship of God to consist in it For believing that they vow to worship one God alone and that no passive acts which the light of nature injoyneth not can be esteemed the worship of God of themselves but in the doing of them is the keeping of that Law which appoints them it is one thing to worship God as the precepts of the Law determined by that Power which it appoints do injoyn another thing to introduce rules of worshipping God not by virtue of his Law but upon a mans own conceit And therefore it is forbidden them to inquire after the fashions by which the Gentiles worshipped their Gods Deut. XII 30. as a presumption that he which should say that he would worship God as they did their Idols had a mind to worship their Idols in stead of God otherwise he would rest content with that way of worshipping God which the Law had prescribed Whereupon the Jews determine that there are four Ceremonies which who so does to any thing but to God alone must be understood to worship it
for God which are sacrificing burning incense pouring out drink-offerings and adoration But others there are by doing which a man cannot be concluded to worship any thing but God till he do it in that way and fashion as is one by those that professe to worship it for God If it be said that these are Jews which allow Traditions but that there is another sort of Jews called Scripturaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which admit nothing but the leter of the Scriptures I answer that those also who admit onely the Text of Scripture and pretend to determine all controversies about the Law by consequences to be drawn from it could never come to agreement among themselves what consequence should take place and what not did they not acknowledge some publick persons whose determinations the whole body of them submitteth to the consequences which they derive their observations by from the leter of the Law being so ridiculously insufficient that they could not satisfie the meanest understandings otherwise as may appear by those which the Talmudists alledge for their constitutions Which being no lesse ridiculous then the traditions which they alledge incredible would be both to no effect did not the publick power of the Nation which while the Law stood was of force by it but now it is void ought to cease put all pretenses beyond dispute And for that which is alledged out of the Apocalyps which in sound of words seems to import some such thing concerning the vvhole book of the Scriptures as these Texts of Moses import concerning the Lavv I shall desire the understanding Reader but to consider that protestation vvhereby Irenaeus conjures all that should copy his Book to collate it vvell vvith the Original that they might be sure neither to adde to it nor take from it as Eusebius relateth out of his Book de Ogdoade against the Valentinians Eccl. First V. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I adjure thee that shalt copy out this Book by our Lord â—esus Christ and by his glorious presence when he comes to judge the quick and dead to collate what thou hast transcribed and correct it by this Copy whence thou hast transcribed it with care and likewise to transcribe this adsuration and puâ—â—it in the Copy Setting aside this adjuration what is the difference between S. Iohns charge and the matter of it And finding the words of S. Iohn to import neither more nor lesse to tell me what he thinks of this argument S. Iohn protesteth in the conclusion of his Revelation that who so shall adde any thing to the true and authentick Copy of these Prophesies to him shall be added the plagues written it who so taketh from it from him shall be taken his share in the Book of life and the holy City and the good things written in that Book Therefore all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are contained in the Scriptures clearly to all understandings But strain the consequence of this Text beyond the words of it which concern onely the words of the prophesie of this Book that is the Apocalyps if you please and take it for a seal to the whole Bible forbidding to take any thing from or to adde any thing to it for some of the Ancients have so argued from it shall he that addeth the true sense to or taketh false glosses from the Bible by force of that evidence which the Tradition of the Church createth be thought therefore to adde to the Word of God or to take from it Then did God provide that his own Law should be violated by his own Law when having forbidden to adde or to take from Moses Law he provided a power to limit or to extend both the sense and practise of it and that under pain of death to all that refractarily should resist it Now I demand of them that shall alledge S. Pauls Anathema against him that should preach any other Gospel then what he had preached to the Galatians against the position that I maintain whether he do believe that the Galatians had then the New Testament consisting of the four Gospels and other Apostolicall Scriptures or whether he can maintain that they had any part of it For if this cannot as is evident that it cannot be affirmed then of necessity S. Paul speaks of the Gospel not as we have it written in the Books of the New Testament but as they had received it from the preaching of S. Paul by word of mouth which being common to all Christians unlesse we question whether all the Apostles preached the same Gospell cannot be thought to destroy either the being of the Catholick Church or the saith which it supposeth or the power wherein it consisteth and the Authority of those acts which have voluntarily proceeded from it As for the Beraeans that examined even the doctrine of S. Paul by the Scriptures is it a wonder that they should not take S. Paul for an Apostle of Jesus Christ upon his own word but should demand of him to show by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ that so they might be induced to believe him sent to preach the Gospel of Christ Therefore when they were become Christians we must believe that they understood themselves and S. Paul better then to call his doctrine under examinarion or to dispute with him about the meaning of the Scriptures which he should alledge which our illuminati which take this for an argument must consequently do because they value not in S. Paul the commission of an Apostle but the presumption they have that the Holy Ghost moved him to write the Scriptures which he hath left us though they have nothing to alledge for it but the general commission of an Apostle To the words of the Evangelist Ioh. XX. 30. 31. I answer that he speaks onely of his own Gospel And that the things written in that Gospel are sufficient to induce a man to believe that believing he may have life But that is not sufficient to inferre that therefore all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are clearly expressed either in S. Iohns Gospel or in the whole Scripture because he that is induced by the things there written to belive the truth of Christianity may seek further instruction in the substance thereof that he may attain unto life by imbracing the same So S. Iohn saith not that a man hath life by believing what is there but what by knowing it he cometh to believe As for those words of S. Paul 1 Tim. III. 16. 17. I confidently believe that S. Paul speaketh onely of the Books of the Old Testament then before the writings of the Apostles were gathered into that body which now is the New Testament known by the name of the Scriptures Being well assured that no evidence can be made to the contrary because of those alone it could be demanded that they should bear witnesse to that which the Apostles preached and taught There being no
I. 1. Theodoret in Levit. Quaest IX Theophilus II. Paschali S. Jerome in Psal XCVIII Omne quod loquimur debemus affirmare ex Scripturis Sanctis Whatsoever wee say wee are to prove out of the Holy Scriptures To the same purpose in Mat. XXIII in Aggaei I. Origen in Mat. Tract XXIII That wee are to silence gain-sayers by the Scriptures as our Lord did the Sadduces Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem quae mihi factorem ostendit facta I adore the fulness of the Scripture which showes mee both the Maker and what hee made saith Tertulliane contra Hermog cap. XXII S. Austine de peccat meritis remiss II. 36. Credo etiam hinc divinorum eloquiorum claerissima autorit as esset si homo sine dispendio promissae salutis ignorare non posset I believe there would be found some clear authority of the Word of God for this the original of mans soul if a man could not be ignorant of it without losse of the salvation that is promised In fine seeing it is acknowledged that the Scripture is a Rule to our Faith on all hands the saying of S. Chrysostome in Phil. III. Hom. XII is not refusable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Rule is not capable of adding to or taking from it For so it looseth being a Rule For the same reason S. Basil in Esa II. and Ascet Reg. I. condemns all that is done without Scripture On the other side in the next place a greater thing cannot be said for the Church than that which Tertul. contra Marc. IV. 2. S. ser Ep. LXXXIX S. Aust cont Faust XXVIII 4. have said that S. Pauls authority depended upon the allowance of the Apostles at Jerusalem Tertul. Denique ut cum auâ—oâ—ibus contuâ—â—t convenit de regulâ Fidei dextras miscuere In a word as som as hee had conferred with men in authority and agreed about the Rule of Faith they shook hands S. Jer. Ostendens se non habuisse securitatem praedicandi Evangolii nisi Petri caeterorum Apostolorum qui cum eo erant fuisset sententia roboratum Showing that hee had not assurance to preach the Gospel had it not been confirmed by the sentence of Peter and the rest of the Apostles that were with him S. Austine That the Church would not have believed at all had not this been done Among the sentences of the Fathers which make S. Peter the rock on which the Church is built the words of S. Austine contra partem Donati are of most appearance Ipsa est Petra quam non vincunt superbae inferorum Portae This Church of Rome is the Rock which the proud gates of Hell overcome not S. Jerome is alleged hereupon consulting Damasus then Pope in maters of Faith as tied to stand to his sentence Epist LVII and Apolog. contra Rufinum Scito Romanam fidem Apostolicâ voce landatam istiusmodi praestigias non recipere Etiamsi Angelus aliter annunciet quà m semel praedicatum est Petri authoritate munitum non posse â—â—utari Know that the Faith of Rome commended by the voice of the Apostle is not liable to such tricks Though an Angel preach otherwise than once was preached that being fortified by the authority of S. Peter it cannot be changed The saying of S. Cyprian is notorious Non aliunde haereses orta sunt aut nata schismata nisi indè quòd Sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur nec unus in Ecclesiâ ad tempus Saeerdos ad tempus Judex Christi vice cogitatur cui si secundum magisteria divina fraternit as obtemperaret universa nemo adversùm Sacerdotum Collegium quicqam moveret nemo discidio unit atis Christi Ecclesiam scinderet Heresies spring and Schisms arise from no cause but this That the Priest of God is not obeyed that men think not that there is one Priest in the Church one Judg in Christs stead for the time Whom if the whole Brother-hood did obey as God teacheth no man would move any thing against the College of Priests or tear the Church with a rent in the Vnity of it The authority which the Church giveth to the Scripture is again testified by S. Austine contra Epist fundamenti cap. V. Cui libro necesse est me credere si credo Evangelio Quum utramque Scripturam similiter mihi Catholica commendet authoritas Which book of the Acts I must needs believe if I believe the Gospel Catholick authority alike commending to mee both Scriptures To the same purpose contra Faustum XI 2. XIII 5. XXII 19. XVIII 7. XXVIII 2. XXXIII ult Therefore hee warns him that reads the Scriptures to preferr those books which all Churches receive before those which onely some And of them those which more and greater Churches receive before those which fewer and lesse So that if more receive some and greater others though the case hee thinks doth not fall out the authority of them must be the same And contra Cresconium II. 31. Neque enim sine causâ tam salubri vigilantiâ Canon Ecclesiasticum constitutus est ad quem certi Prophetarum Apostoloruus libri pertineant quos omnino judicare non audoamus For neither was the Rule of the Church settled with such wholesom vigilance without cause to which certain books of the Prophets and Apostles might belong which wee should dare on any terms to censure Where manifestly hee ascribeth the difference between Canonical Scripture and that which is not to an act of the Church settling the same Of the Power of the Church to decide Controversies of Faith all the Records of the Church if that will serve the turn do bear plentifull witnesse But the evidence for the gift of Infallibility from them seems to consist in this consequence That otherwise there would be no end of Controversies neither should God have provided sufficiently for his Church S. Austine contra Cresconium I. 33. Quisquis falli met uit huyus obscuritate quaestionis Ecclesiam de illâ consulat quam sine ullâ ambiguitate Scriptura sacra demonstrat Whosoever is afraid to be deceived by the darkness of this question concerning Rebaptizing let him consult the Church about it which the Holy Scripture demonstrateth without any ambiguity S. Bernard Epist CXC ad Innoc. II. Papam Opertet ad vestrum referri Apostolatum pericula quaeque scandala emergentia in regno Dei ac praesertim quae de fide contingunt Dignum namque arbitror ibi potissimum resarciri damna Fidei ubi non possit Fides sentire defectum All dangers and scandals that appear in the kingdome of God are to be referred to your Apostleship For I conceive it sitting that the decaies of the Faith should there especially be repaired where the Faith is not subject to fail As concerning the mater of Traditions wee are not to forget Irenaeus III. 2 3 4. where hee showes that the Gnosticks scorning both Scripture and Tradition as coming from those that knew not Gods minde
as they pretended to do thence calling themselves Gnosticks may be convinced by that evidence which the consent of all Churches in the same Faith tenders common sense for the Tradition of the Apostles Which saith hee wee must have stuck to had they left us nought in writing as those Christians then did which had not the use of leters Epiphanius Haer. LXI 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All Gods words do not need allegory but are to be understood as they are But they need consideration to know the force of each mater Tradition also is to be used For all is not to be had from Gods Sriptures For the Holy Apostles delivered some things in writing others by Tradition as the Apostle saith So Haer. LV. LXXV S. Jerome advers Lucif Multa quae per Traditionem in Ecclesiis observantur auctoritatem sibi scriptae Legis usurpà runt Orthod Non quidem abnuo hanc esse Ecclesiasticam consuetudinem Sed quale est ut Leges Ecclesiae ad haeresim transferas Many things that are observed in the Churches by Tradition have usurped to themselves the authority of written Law The Orthodox party answers I deny not the custome of the Church to be such But what a business is it that you transform the Lawes of the Church into Heresie S. Austine Epist CXVIII Illa autem quae non scripta sed tradita custodimus quae quidem toto terrarum orbe servantur dantur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenariis Conciliis quorum est in Ecclesiâ saluberrima auctoritas commendata atque statuta retineri But those things which wee observe though not written but delivered being observed all over the world wee are given to understand that they are held as recommended and setled either by the Apostles themselves or by General Councils the authority whereof is very wholesom in the Church To the same purpose de Bapt. contra Donat. II 7. IV. 6 24. V. 23. de Vnitate Ecclesiae XIX contra Cresconiam I. 31 32 33. The supposed Dionysius the Areopagite Eccles Hierarchiae cap. I. mentioneth that instruction which the Apostles delivered without writing as a witnesse of the Church though not as a Scholar of the Apostles And Eusebius de demonstr Evang. I. 8. acknowledgeth written Lawes of the Apostles Concilium Gangrense in fine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And wee desire in summe that all things delivered by the Scriptures of God and the Traditions of the Apostles be observed in the Church And Greg. Nazianzene Orat. I. advers Jul. referrs those Ordinances which I quoted out of him afore to the Apostles as Authors of them Some sayings of the Fathers are also alleged to show that they held the Scriptures obscure Origen in Levit. Hom. V. allegorizeth the Law of burning some part of the peace-offerings to signifie that some things in the Scriptures are reserved to Gods knowledg least wee understand them otherwise than truth requires The same saith Irenaeus II. 47. even in the world to come that man may alwayes learn but God alwayes teach the maters of God S. Chrysostome in Joan. Hom. XL. observes that our Lord bids Search the Scriptures By digging as for mines or treasure So if they may be understood with searching yet it followeth not that every one is able to take that course in searching them that is requisite And Opus imperfectum in Mat. Hom. XLIV Ergò non sunt Scriptnrae clausae Sed obscurae quidem ut cum labore inveniantur non autem clausae ut nullo modo inveniantur Therefore the Scriptures are not shut Dark indeed they are so that they are found with pains But not shut so as by no means to be found Adding that as it is for the praise of them that finde them that they sought so for the condemnation of them that seek not that they understand them not S. Jerome ad Algasiam Quaest VIII Omnis Epistola ad Romanos miris obscuritatibus involuta est The whole Epistle to the Romanes is involved with marvellous darkness Epist ad Paulinum Hoc autem velamen non solùm in facie Moysi sed in Evangelistis Apostolis positum est This vail is not onely in Moses face but upon the Evangelists and Apostles And Nisi aperta fuerint universa quae scripta sunt ab eo qui habet clavem David qui aperit nemo claudit qui claudit nemo aperit nullo alio reserante pandentur Unless all things that are written be opened by him who hath the Key of David who opens and no man shuts who shuts and no man opens no man else will unlock and lay them forth Before him Origen in Exodum Hom. XII is afraid that the Evangelists and Apostles as well as the Prophets will prove not onely vailed but sealed to us as the Prophet saith unlesse wee both study and pray that the Lamb of the Tribe of Juda may open us the Seals of it Here I will advise the parties to consider how they can advantage themselves by those sayings of the Fathers which contain not the terms of that position which they do nothing unlesse they inforce Allege they what they can allege out of the Fathers to show that they acknowledg the Scriptures both sufficient and perspicuous I shall not be troubled at it but shall willingly concurr to acknowledg the same I acknowledg the Scriptures to be an Instrument of God though a Moral Instrument And I shall have a care not to acknowledg that God ever provided or used au Instrument that would not serve his turn Instrumentum Vetus Novum is a term in every mans mouth to signifie the Old and New Testament But there are Natural Instruments and there are Moral Instruments I say not that there is no third kind of Instruments for it may be there are Artificial Instruments of a several nature from both but my present purâ—ose obliges mee not to consider that difference When the substance or frame of the Instrument inables it to serve him that imployes it well may it be called a Natural Instrument as the parts of mans body or other creatures which execute the operations of the soul When neither the substance nor frame of the thing which that substance produces concurrs to the work to the which it is Instrumental but it is done meerly by the consent of mans will the reason is the same of Gods will if it be an Instrument between man and God then is it great reason why it should be called a Moral Instrument because the force of it lyes in the maners of those who use it to testifie those acts which they do not mean to transgresse Such as all civil records are in regard of the effect of those contracts or deeds which they come to witnesse The Old and New Testament are the records of two several Treaties or Contracts if you please that have passed between God and Man And therefore authentick because the writings of those who contracted those Treaties But does
it must be upon the terms of my position the practice of the Church giving bounds to the sense of the Scripture I can therefore safely agree with the Constitutions of the Apostles with S. Cyprian and Leo and whosoever else teaches that it is not safe for the people to assure their consciences upon the credit of their Pastors But it is because I suppose the Unity of the Church provided by God for a ground upon which the people may reasonably presume when they are to adhere to their Pastors when not To wit when they are owned not when they are disowned by the Unity of the Church For though this provision becomes uneffectual when this Unity is dissolved yet ought not that to be an argument that the goodnesse of God never made that provision which the malice of man may defeat But that whosoever concurrs to maintain the division concurrs to defeat that provision which God hath made As safely do I agree with all them who agree that whatsoever is taught in Christianity is to be proved by the Scriptures For if it belong to the Rule of Faith it is intended by the Scriptures though that intent is evidenced by the Tradition of the Church If to the Lawes of the Church the authority of it comes from the Scriptures though the evidence of it may depend upon common sense which the practice of the Church may convince If over and above both it is not receivable if not contained in the Scriptures And in this regard whosoever maintains the whole Scripture to be the Rule of Faith is throughly justified by all those testimonies that have been alleged to that purpose For though it be not necessary to the salvation of all Christians to understand the meaning of all the Scriptures yet what Scripture soever a man attains to understand is as much a Rule to his Faith as that which a man cannot be saved if hee understand not the sense of it whether in and by the Scripture or without it And though a man may be obliged to believe that which is not in the Scripture to have been instituted by the Apostles yet is he not obliged to observe it but upon that reason which the Scripture delivereth And upon these terms is the whole Scripture a Rule of Faith from which as nothing is to be taken away so is nothing to be added to it as the saying of S. Chrysostome in Phil. II. Hom. XII requireth And the saying of S. Basil in Esa II. and Ascet Reg. I. condemning all that is done without Scripture takes place upon no other terms than these Not as Cartwright and our Puritanes after him imagine that a man is to have a text of Scripture specifying every thing which hee doth for his warrant For as it is in it self ridiculous to imagine that all cases which fall out can be ruled by expresse text of Scripture our Christianity being concerned infinite wayes of which it is evident that the Scripture had no occasion to speak So if the words of the Scripture be lodged in a heart where the work of them dwelleth not a thing which wee see too possible to come to passe it is the ready way to make the Word of God a color for all unrighteousnesse not onely to others but to the very heart of him who hath that cloke for it It is therefore enough that the reason of every thing which a Christian doth is to be derived from that doctrine which the Scripture declaeth And where a man proceedeth to do that for which hee hath not such a reason so grounded as reasonable men use to go by then cometh that to passe which S. Basil chargeth Ascet Reg. LXXX That What is not of faith is sin It is true according to that sense which hitherto I have used after many Church Writers the Rule of Faith extendeth not to all the Scriptures but onely to that which it is necessary to salvation to believe and to know Which every man knowes that all the Scripture is not For though it be necessary to salvation to believe that all the Scripture is true yet is it not necessary to salvation to know all that the Scripture containeth And the reason why I use it in this sense is to distinguish those things contained in the Scriptures which Tradition extendeth to from those to which it extendeth not For upon these terms is the sense of them limitable to the common Faith But I quarel not therefore the opinion of them that maintaine the whole Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith acknowledging that whatsoever it containeth is necessarily to be believed by all that come to understand it And whatsoever it containeth not though the Scripture alone obligeth not to believe the truth of it is not necessarily to be observed for any other reason but that which the Scripture declareth As for S. Basil making it apostasy to bring that which is not written into the Faith It is a thing well known that the Arians were charged by the Church for bringing in words that were not in the Scriptures saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a time when Christ was not And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That hee was made of nothing On the other side after the Council of Nicaea the Arians charged the Church for bringing in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same substance Where then lay the difference between the Inndelity of the Arians and the Faith of the Church Theodoret showes it Hist Eccles I. 8. out of Athanasius de Actis Concil Niceni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith hee They were condemned by written words piously understood But how appears this piety For I suppose the Arians would not have granted it Hee addeth that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had been used by the Fathers which had it been inconsistent with the sense of the Church could not have been indured in a mater concerning the Rule of Faith whereas their terms were contrary to that which is found in the Scriptures Now S. Basil acknowledgeth that hee had elsewhere dealing with Hereticks used terms not found in the Scriptures to exclude their sense contrary to the Scriptures as you shall finde by the Authors alleged that the Council of Nicaea had done but to those who desired information with a single heart hee resolves to rest content with the Scriptures The terms whereof his meaning is that the Hereticks did not rest content with because they had a minde to depart from the Faith Upon the same terms Tertullian pronounces the Wo that belongs to them which adde to Gods Word upon Hermogenes because his error concerned the Article of our Creed that God made heaven and earth And S. Austine presumes the reason why there is no clear Scripture for the original of the soul to be because hee presumes that it concerns not the substance of Faith Besides these Observations some of those passages which are alleged may concern Christianity rather than the Scriptures
destructive to their particular salvation within that compasse neither will their fall be imputable to the Church but to themselves if they do But neither shall this difficulty be so great an inconvenience in our common Christianity nor so insuperable as it seems to those that are loth to be too much troubled about the world to come For I never found that God pretendeth to give or that it is reason hee should give those means for attaining that truth by which wee must be saved which it should not lye within the malice of man to render difficult for them to compasse whom they concern I finde it abundantly enough for his unspeakable goodness and exactly agreeable with those means whereby hee convicteth the world of the truth of Christianity that hee give those whom it concerns such means to discern the truth of things in debate as being duly applyed are of themselves sufficient to create a resolution as certain as the weight of the mater in debate shall require And such I maintain the Scripture to be containing the sense of it within those bounds which the Rule of Faith and the Lawes given the Church by our Lord and his Apostles do limit For what is more obvious than to discern what the whole Body of the Church hath agreed in what not what is manifestly consequent to the same what not what is agreeable to the ground and end of those Lawes which the Church first received from our Lord and his Apostles what not Let prejudice cast what mists of difficulties it can before the light which God hath given his Church to discover the truth hee that stands out of their way shall discern much more art used to obscure than to discern it Neither is there any reason why it is so hard to make it discernable to all that are concerned but the unreasonable prejudices either of the force of humane authority in mater of Faith and the extent of Tradition beyond the Rule of Faith or that the consent of the whole Church may as well come from Antichrist as from the Apostles If the records of the Church were handled without these prejudices lesse learning than this age shows in other maters might serve to evidence the consent of â— Church in more controversies than wee have to those that would be content to rest in the Scripture expounded according to the same But if the Church that is those that uave right in behalf of the Church being perswaded of a sacrilegious privilege of Infallibility shall take upon them to determine truths in debate to limit Lawes to the Church without respect to this Rule which if they respect they manifestly renounce the privilege of their Infallibility I mervail not that God suffers his people to be tried with such difficulties whose sins I doubt deserve this tryal But then I say further that it is not the providence of God that is the means which hee hath provided to resolve men in debates of Christianity but it is the malice of man that makes that means uneffectual which God hath made sufficient I must now answer an envious objection that this resolution is not according to the positions of those that professe the Reformation with us To which I will speak as freely as to the rest having profess'd my self utterly assoiled of all faction and respect of mens persons to way against the means of finding the truth and for that reason devested even the Fathers of the Church of all authority which their merits from Christianity have purchased to hear what their testimonies argue in point of Historical truth I say then first that may saying no way prejudices the intent and interest of the Reformation whatsoever insufficience it may charge the expressions of Reformers with I know the worst that can be alleged in this point is that Luther in appealing from the Pope and Council called by him to a Council that should judg meerly by the Scriptures first framed this Controversie between the Scriptures and the Church which since hath been alwaies in debate so that hee which will not be tried by the Scriptures alone plainly seems to quit the party and give up the game Who has this imagination though never to apparent let mee desire him to go a little higher to the first commencing of the plea about Indulgences For there can be nothing more manifest than this That when those that undertook that cause against Luther found that the present practice of the Church could not be derived from any thing recorded in the Scripture they were forced to betake themselves to the authority of the Church not that which consisteth in testifying the faith once delivered but in creating that which never was of force untill the exercice of it Here let all the world judg for I am confident the case is so plain that all the world may judg in it whether Luther had any Interest to demand that the Scripture alone should be heard in opposition to the Tradition received from the beginning by the Church tending as I have said to nothing but to limit the meaning of the Scripture Or that his Interest required him to protest that the truth for which hee stood was not to be liable to the Sentence of the present Church And therefore when afterwards hee appealed to a Council which should pronounce by the Scriptures alone if this tend to exclude those means which are subordinate to the attaining of the meaning of the Scriptures I do utterly deny that it can be understood so to be meant by any man that would not defeat his own enterprize And therefore that it must be understood to exclude onely the authority of the present Church so farre as it proceeds not upon supposition of those grounds whereupon the Church is to pronounce For what hinders the sentence of the Church to be infallible not of it self alone but as it proceeds upon those means which duely applied produce a sentence that is infallible And truly were not his plea so to be understood all his Followers Melancthan Chemnitius and others who have written Volumes to show how their profession agrees with that of the Catholick Church should have taken pains to commit a very great inconsequence For as I have argued that those who maintain the Infallibility of the present Church do contradict themselves whensoever they have recourse either to the Scripture or to any Records of the Church to evidence the sense of the Scripture in that which otherwise they professe the authority of the Church alone infallibly to determine So those that will have the Scripture alone to determine all Controversies of Faith and yet take the pains to bring evidence of the meaning thereof from that which hath been received in the Church may very well be said to take pains to contradict themselves Some of our Scottish Presbyterians have observed that the Church of England was reformed by those that had more esteem of Melancthon than of Calvin and
Christianity as the corruption of it Surely he that considers not amiss will finde that it was a great ease to them that were convinced to acknowledg a God above them to imagine the name and honor of this God to rest in something of their own choice or devising which being set up by themselves reason would they should hope to please and have propitious by such obedience and service as they could allow Correspondently God having given the Jewes a Law of such precepts as might be outwardly performed without inward obedience whosoever believe the most difficult point of Gods service to be the submission of the heart will finde it a gain that hee can perswade himself of Gods peace without it whatsoever trouble whatsoever cost hee be at for that perswasion otherwise If then there be in mans nature a principle of Paganism and Judaism notwithstanding that men cannot be at quiet till by imbracing a religion they think they are at peace with God Is it a strange thing that they who have attained the truth of Christianity should entertain a perswasion of peace with God upoâ— terms really inconsequent to or inconsistent with the true intent of it Surely if wee reflect upon the motives of it and the motives of them it cannot seem strange I have said and it is manifest that the nature of Christianity though sufficient yet were purposely provided not to be constraining that the effect of them might be the trial of those dispositions that should be moved therewith And is it a mervail that means to perswade those that have received Christianity that things inconsistent with that which was first delivered are indeed consequent to the same should be left among those that professe that they ought to receive nothing but what was first delivered by our Lord and his Apostles I say nothing now of renouncing Christianity while men professe this for I confesse and insist that while men do believe that there is a society of men visible by the name of the Church it will not be possible for them to forget their whole Christianity or to imbrace the contrary of it But I say that notwithstanding the profession of receiving Christianity from our Lord and his Apostles the present Church may admit Lawes whether of belief or of Communion inconsistent with that which they received at first I allege further that so long as all parts of the Church held free intercourse and correspondence with one another it was a thing either difficult or altogether impossible to bring such things either into the perswasion or practice of all parts of it according to the difficulty of bringing so great a body to agree in any thing against which any part might protest with effect And this held not onely before the Church was ingraffed into the State of the Romano Empire but also so long after as this accessory help of Christianity did not obscure and in the end extinguish the original intercourse and correspondence of the Church For then it grew both possible and easie for them who had the Secular Power on their side to make that which the authority thereof was imployed to maintain to passe for Tradition in the Church Seeing it is manifest that in the ordinary language of Church Writers Tradition signifies no lesse that which the Church delivers to succeeding ages than that which it received from the Apostles Adde hereunto the opinion of the authority of the Church truly pretended originally within the true bounds but by neglecting the due bounds of the truth of Christianity which it supposeth infinitely extended to all States which Powermay have interest to introduce For if it be not impossible to perswade those who know they have received their Christianity upon motives provided by God to convince the judgments and consciences of all that see them to imbrace those things to which the witnesse of them may be applyed that they are to imbrace whatsoever either the expresse act or the silent practice of the Church inforces whether the motives of Faith be applicable to them or not Then is it not impossible to perswade them any thing which this Power shall think to be for their Interest to perswade For no mans Interest it can be to go about to perswade the world that expresse contradictories are both true at once And if it were not impossible that the imaginations of most of them that dispute Controversies for the Church of Rome should be so imbroyled with the equivocation of this word Church as not to distinguish the Infallible authority thereof as a multitude of men not to be deceived in testifying the truth from the authority of it as a Body constituted upon supposition of the same Shall it not be easie for those who can obtain a reputation of the World that their act is to oblige the whole Church to obtain of the same to make no difference between that which is presently decreed and that which was originally delivered by the Apostles The said difference remaining disputable not onely by any text of Scripture but by any record of historical truth testifying the contrary to have passed for truth in any other age or part of the Church Upon these premises I do appeal to the common sense of all men to judge whether the Church professing to hold nothing but by Tradition from the Apostles may not be induced to admit that as received from the Apostles which indeed never was delivered by the Apostles For when the Socinians pretend that the Faith of the Trinity of the Incarnation and Satisfaction of our Lord Christ not being delivered by the Apostles in their writings crept into the Church as soon as they were dead they still maintain that nothing is to be admitted but what comes from our Lord and his Apostles But upon their supposition that Antichrist came into the Church as soon as they were dead are obliged to renounce all that can be pretended to come by Tradition and in that very next age Which I yield and insist that whosoever shall consider the intercourse and correspondence visibly establisht by the Apostles between all parts of the Church shall easily perceive to be a contradiction to common sense But when so much difference is visible between the State of the Church in several ages and what change hath succeeded in things manifest to inferre what may have succeeded in things disputable Hee must have his minde well and thoroughly possessed with prejudice to the utter renouncing of common sense that can indure a demand so contrary to all appearance to be imposed upon his common sense The same I say to the other demands of certain and sensible distances of time which they that see the end of may be certainly assured what was received at the beginning of them and so by mean distances this age what was held by the Apostles Of the like time for blotting out the remembrance of the truth as for introducing falshood For it is evidently true that
great difficulty could remain in reading that which was of it self understood The necessity of this method in writing is the difficulty of understanding that is to say a capacity of being determined to several senses in those writings to which it is applyed Suppose now that to be true which I showed afore to be probable that from the Captivity the study of the Law came in request according to the Law From that time it must be known amongst them how the Scriptures were to be read And truly from that time the Scribes were much more in request though I have showed elsewhere that their profession began under the Prophets being nothing else but their Disciples which wee reade of in their writings I have also showed that the profession extended from the Judges of the Great Consistory to School-masters that taught children to reade and Notaries that writ Contracts These mens profession consisting in nothing else but the Scriptures for what learning had they in writing besides is it strange that children could be taught by Tradition to reade it though the vulgar language was somewhat changed This supposition indeed will inferr that the reading could not be so precisely determined for all to agree in the same But it will also inferr that the more the study was in use the more precise determination they must needs attain Now I desire the indifferent Reader to consider two points both of them certain and resolved in the Tradition of the Jews The first that this method of points is part of the Law delivered by word of mouth as appears by the Tradition in the Gomara that hee that hath sworn that such a one shall never be the better for him may teach him the Scriptures because that they may be done for â—ire but hee may not teach him the points because the Law by word of mouth must not be taught for hire The second that it was never held lawfull to commit this civil Law to writing till the time of R. Juda that first writ their Misnaioth or repetitions of the Law upon a resolution taken by the Nation that the preservation of the Law in their dispersions did necessarily require that it should be committed to writing as Maimoni the Key to the Taâ—mud in the beginning and divers others of the Jews do witness Hee that would see more to justifie both these points let him look in Buxtorfius his answer to Capellus I. 2. where hee hath showed sufficient reason to resolve against his own opinion That all the Jews say of the points delivered to Moses in Mount Sinai is to be understood of the right reading and sense of the Law which must be delivered from hand to hand but was unlawfull to be committed to writing before the beginning of the Talmud by R. Juda To wit with authority For it was lawfull for Scholars to keep notes of their lessons Upon these premises I inferr that there were no points written in the Jewes Bibles before this time and that upon this decree they began to busie themselves in finding a method by points and applying the same to the Scripture though it is most agreeable to reason that it should have been some ages before it was setled and received by a Nation so dispersed as they were And herewith agreeth all the evidence which the records of that Nation can make Though I repeat not here the testimonies in which it consisteth having been so effectually done already in books for the purpose CHAP. XXXIV Of the anciâ—n est Translations of the Bible into Greek first With the Authors and authority of the same Then into the Chaldee Syriack and Latine Exceptions against the Greek and the Samaritane Pentateuch They are helps nevertheless to assure the true reading of the Scriptures though with other Copies whether Jewish or Christian Though the Vulgar Latine were better than the present Greek yet must both depend upon the Original Greek of the New Testaâ—ent No danger to Christianity by the differences remaining in the Bible THe first turning of the Bible into Greek the common opinion saith was done by the authority of the High Priest and heads of that people residâ—nt at Jerusalem and by men sent on purpose VI of every Tribe in all LXXII called therefore by the round number for brevities sake the LXX Translatoâ—s to Ptolomee Philadelphus But this relation suffers many difficulties that have been made of late years and indeed seems to come from a writing pretending the name of Aristeas a Minister of the said Prince from whence Philo and Josephus seem to have received the credit of it Who being of those Jews that used the Greek tongue may very well be thought to cherish that report which makes for the reputation of their Law with them that spoke it Josephus wee know in other points hath related Legends or Romances for historical truth as that of the acts and death of Moses and that of the third of Esdras concerning the dispute of the three Squires of the Body to King Darius As for Philo wee have S. Jerome who hath made sport of the legend hee â—ells of this businesse To wit how that being shut up every man in a several room at the end of so many dayes they gave up every man his Copy translated all in the same words to a tittle Which rooms Justine the Martyr couzened by the Jews of Alexandria reports were extant in his time and that hee had seen them in his dispute with Trypho the Jew But the particulars are too many to finde a room in this abâ—idgment Those that would be further informed in this point may see what Scaliger hath said against this Tradition in his Annotations upon Eusebius his Chronicle and what Morinus and others have said for it But though wee grant the book of Aristeas to be a true History not a Romance which â—â—w will do that reade it for the roughnesse of the Greek makes it rather the language of some obscure Legendary then of a Courtyer at Alexandria though wee grant that there were LXXII sent from Jerusalem to Philadelphus and did translate him the Law because besides the agreement of all other Jews and Christians Aristobulus a learned Jew of Alexandria writing to Pâ—olomee Philometor in Eusebius de Praepar Evang. XIII 7. an exposition of the Law some CXXX years after averrs it yet will not that serve the turn to make this Copy which wee have their work Because the same Aristobulus together with Josephus and Philo the Talmud Jews besides and S. Jerome among the Christians do agree that those LXXII that came from Jerusalem translated onely the five books of Moses as you may see them alleged in a late discourse of the late Lord Primate of Ireland de LXX Int. Versione Cap. I. Now it is most evident that the Copy which wee have is all of one hand and that it can by no means be thought that the five books of Moses which are part of it were translated by
of penance failing of that which they had undertaken by it What is reformation in the Church and what is not is the subject of this present dispute therefore I cannot here grant that which some of the reformation may have done to be well done Otherwise I am secure no man will choke me with naming a Church that had no discipline of penance But that so it was I refer my self to that which I have said in the first book I demand here what is the ground and reason that so it must be For supposing the Keys of Gods Kingdom exercised in the first place in limiting the terms upon which baptisme is granted not in ministring of it Of necessity it followeth that in the second place it be seen and exercised in limiting the terms upon which those that have failed of that which they undertook at their Baptism may be restored to the visible communion of the Church upon presumption that they are restored to the invisible communion of those promises which the Gospel tendreth Not supposing this there is no reason why it should signifie any more than a scene acted upon a stage as it is taken to signifie by those who understand not this Lastly I will mention here the expresse Doctrine of the Church of England in the beginning of the Catechism declaring three things to have been undertaken in behalfe of him that is baptized That he shall forsake the Devil and all his works the pomp and vanities of this world and the evil desires of the flesh and not to be seduced by him either from believing the faith of Christ or from keeping Gods Commandements And again in the admonition to the Sureties after Baptism you must remember that it is your parts and duties to see that these Infants be taught so soon as they shall be able to learn what a solemn vow promise and profession they have made by you For all that come to Christianity believing what promises they get right to by it and being admitted to it uppon those terms there can remain no question upon what terms they attain the said promises Nor can or ought any Doctrine of that Church to what purpose soever cautioned be interpreted to the prejudice of that wherein the salvation of all consisteth But further in the Introduction to the Office of Baptism For asmuch as all men are conceived and born in sin and that our Saviour Christ saith None can enter into the Kingdome of God except he be regenerate and born anew of water and of the Holy Ghost I beseech you to call upon God that these children may be baptized with water and the Holy Ghost and received into Christs holy Church and be made lively members of the same Proceeding to pray That they comming to thy holy baptisme may receive remission of their sins by their spirituall regeneration In the exhortation after the Gospel Doubt ye not therefore but earnestly believe that he will likewise favourably receive these present Infants that he will imbrace them with the arms of his mercie that he will give unto them the blessing of eternall life and make them partakers of his everlasting Kingdome Again Ye have heard also that our L. Jesus Christ hath promised in his Gospel to grant all these things that ye have praied for And after the Sacrament Seeing now that these children be regenerate and graffed in the bodie of Christs congregation And again We yield thee heartie thanks that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this Infant with thy holy Spirit to receive him for thine own child by adoption and to incorporate him into thy holy Congregation All this can leave no doubt of the communion of the Church of England with the whole Church in this point so nearly concerning the salvation of all Christians CHAP. V. The Preaching of our Lord and his Apostles evidenceth that some act of Mans free choice is the condition which it requireth The correspondence betwen the Old and New Testament inferreth the same So do the errors of Socinians and Antinomians concerning the necessity of Baptism Objections deferred THe whole tenor of the Scripture would afford matter of Argument to inforce this consequence But it shall be enough to have thus far pointed out the ground upon which the meaning of the rest is to proceed The reasons of this position from the principles of Christianity can be no other than those which have been touched upon occasion of treating the passages of Scripture hitherto alledged Yet to make the consequence still more evident I will here repeat first the consideration of Gods sending our Lord Christ to show the world sufficient motives why they should imbrace his Gospel as well as to teach them what it is and wherein it consisteth I will not here insist upon any supposition of the clear sufficience of the Scriptures or the necessity of Tradition besides the Scriptures But I will appeal to the common sense of all men to judge whether it be within the compass of reason that our Lord Christ should come to preach and to exhort men to acknowledge him to be come from God and to take up his Cross should show them reasons to believe that all which he preached is true that so they might be perswaded willingly to follow him Should give certain proofs of his rising again from death to inforce the same If men have no will no choice no freedom to do what he requires them or not to do it whether in other things they have it or not The same to be said of his Apostles and Disciples who were strange Creatures to expose their lives for a Warrant of the truth of what they said if they had not willingly and freely imbraced that profession themselves which they pretended to induce the world with the like freedome of choice to imbrace Thus far then we are assured by common sense that the condition required by the Covenant of Grace on our part must be some act of mans free choice the doing whereof at Gods demand must qualifie us for those promises which it tenders But this is not all that may appeare to common reason by the proceeding of our Lord and his Apostles The preaching of the Gospel-premises for a supposition upon which it proceedeth That mankind are become enemies unto God through sin and subjects of his wrath Proposing therepon the termes upon which they may be reconciled to God and intitled presently to and in due time possessed of everlasting happiness Suppose these terms purchased by the satisfaction of Christ though not granting it because all that call themselves Christians in the West do not is it possible to imagine that they who declare all mankind to be Gods enemies for sinne should have commission to declare them heires of his Kingdome not supposing them turned from sin to that righteousnesse which shall be as universally according to Gods will as their sin is against it As on the contrary supposing this do you not suppose
God which it restraines in these words to the Father from any that by the sense of him that speaks them can be understood to be included in it And that the sense of our Lord may be notwithstanding this onely to include the Sonne in the property of this attribute the true God I go no further then the sense of all Christians who all affirme the father to be the onely true God but believe the Sonne to be the same onely true God neverthelesse And that this is his sense I referre my self to the titles attributes workes and worship of the onely true God challenged hitherto from his words And this sense the words of S. John the meaning whereof according to the ordinary reading I have shewed before not to advantage Socinus seem to intend according to the true reading which the Vulgar Latine justified by the Marques of Velez his Spanish Copies as you may by the readings added to the Great Bible preserveth We know that the Sâ—nne of God is come and hath given us understanding to know the true one Et sumus in vero filius ejus Jesu Christo And we are in his true Sonne Jesus Christ This is the true God and eternall life Whereas it is ordinarily read And we are in the true One in his Sonne Christ Or Through his Sonne Jesus Christ 1 John V. 20. For it seemeth that the Apostle folding up both attributes of the True one that is as it followeth the True God and the True Sonne of God in our Lord Christ pointeth at the words of our Lord recorded by himself alone John XVII 3. This is eternall life to know thee the onely true God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ Challenging for him that he is no more to be excluded from the Title of onely true God then from that of author of eternall Life If it be said This cannot be Because there would be then more then one onely true God The answer is ready that this is not an argument from the force of these words that this cannot be the sense of them But from the light of reason that this sense cannot be true I know it is a trick that Crellius puts upon the Reader throughout his first Book de Deo Trino Vno that the sense of the Church is not the sense of the Scriptures because it contradicteth the evidence of natures light But when the sense of the Scripture is in question the dictate of reason concerning the truth of the matter is to be set aside that it may be judged without anticipation of prejudice from evidence planted in the very words of it And this is the answer to the rest of those texts that have the like exclusive but not in so strong terms as this Now when our Lord saith Of that day and hour knoweth not the Sonne I know S. Hilary laboureth very eloquently to shew that he meanes no more then that he had not commission to declare it But this would make the sense of our Lord to be the sense of those men who when they are asked that which they hold unfit to declare and yet would not seem to refuse the civility of declaring it do answer that they know not to wit so as to hold it fit to be told I will not tye my self to maintaine this reservation fit for our Saviour to use Especially where no circumstance of the case or the discourse appeares to intimate such a meaning to them whom he discourseth with When he said in the Comoedy Tu nescis id quod scis Dromo si sapias If thou beest wise thou knowest not what thou knowest Every man understands his meaning to be thou wilt not declare it Whether when the Messias saith I know not the day of judgement Men would conceive that he meant no more then this That he is not to declare it seems to be very questionable I can by no meanes comprehend how it can be prejudiciall to the Faith to say that the humane soul of Christ the knowledge whereof is necessarily limitted to the capacity of a creature and knowes things above nature by voluntary revelation of the Word and Spirit which knowes whatsoever is in God 1 Cor. II. 10 11. should be ignorant of something that is to come Luke II. 40 52. It is said The child grew and waxed strong in Spirit growing full of wisdome and the grace of God was upon it And Jesus improved in wisdome and stature and grace with God and men Shall I go and say that he seemed thus to grow as boyes in the Schools when they cannot answer texts of Aristotle that he speakes there in the sense of the ancient Philosophers The Schoole Doctors will have our Lords humane soul to have known all from the moment that he was conceived and think him not â—ound in the Faith that doubts of it But if onely originall Tradition be matter of Faith according to the Principle that is setled the meaning of particular texts of Scripture cannot be such Especially when it is evident that such a meaning is not necessarily consequent to that which is matter of Faith And if you look but upon the sayings of the Fathers that are alledged by the learned Jesuite Petavius 1 De Trinitate III. 5-11 You shall easily perceive how truly it is said by Leontius de Sectis pag. 546. Speaking of the Agnoâ—tae who were a Sect of Eutychians which held that our Lord knowes not all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But we say that we are not to stand stifly upon these things Therefore neither did the Synod of Calcedon trouble is about any such position as this Yet it is to be known that many of the Fathers even almost all say that he was ignorant Certainly Irenaeus and Athanasius if narrowly examined demand no more but that he is ignorant of nothing according to his Godhead So that it is so farre from being matter of Faith that it is not in the Church ever to make it so whatsoever the Church may do to oblige the members of it not to declare their judgment to the scandale of others in a point so obscure Now the words of S. Paul do manifestly distinguish between our Lord Christ and all Creatures insisting thus Who is the Image of the invisible God the first born of the whole Creature For in him were all things created whether in Heaven or on Earth Surely he in whom as by whom all things are sayd to have been made is not intended to be comprised in the number of things made by being called the first born of the whole Creature And therefore I conceive the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the compound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to signifie according to the Hebrew not first but before We have eminent examples in the Gospels John I. 15. the Baptist sayth of our Lord Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because he was before me Our Lord. John XV. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The world
Gregory of Nâ—oâ—aesarea may perhaps relish either it was not publickly taken notice of when it was published or passed over in silence for the present in respect of his merit toward the Church As it must be said of his opinion concerning souls flitting into new bodies As for Euseb of Caesarea and the author of the Constitutions which are both charged in this point Eusebius living in the time when the consent of the Church over-ruled the contrary rather evidenceth then interrupteth that Tradition which condemneth him if he agree not with it But the author of the Constitutions is not known at what time he lived to write in the name of Clemens the Apostles Scholar that which for his part he thought most likely to come from the Apostles Whether or no he might think it became him writing in that name to use such terms as he found the ancientest Church-Writers use before the businesse of Arius Whether or no he might mistake himself in doing so I will not dispute But being hard to believe that he writ till the heresie of Arius and Eâ—nâ—mâ—us was down As I can give my self no good reason why he should bring in Arius under the habit of the Apostles so I see the suspicion which he hath contracted in a manner as ancient as the credit of his book in the Church After all this if any man marvail that Alexander Bishop of Alexandria should think so slightly of Arius his opinion as in debating it sometimes to side with him sometimes with his adversaries according to Sozomenus Eccles Hist I. 15. Let him consider that the Ecclesiasticall Historians informe us that the difference of Arius was commenced at a Consistory That is at a meeting of the Clergy to debate the businesse Onely Sozomenus that there had been divers meetings about it In which Alexander had not declared himself but spoken sometimes on this side and sometimes on that Not because there is any appearance in the story that Arius himself could have construed his procedings as if he had been doubtfull which side to choose But because any wise man in his place would have thought it the way to preserve his authority over Arius by not declaring himself party against him till he appeared untractable by that reason which his authority must inforce when it self would not serve the turn As for the great Constantine who in his Leter to the Church of Alexandria declareth many times that the question concerned not the substance of Faith It must be said that being no Christian as yet nor catechized in the Faith his information failed either in matter of fact reporting the position of Arius in such terms as might bear a good construction in which what latitude there is it may appear by the premises or in point of right making that not to concern the substance of Faith which indeed doth For those terms in which all the Ecclesiastical Histories agree that the debate was stated are such as indeed do concern the substance of Faith Neither is there any mark in the writings of the Fathers before this time upon which it can be said that any of them thought that there was a time when the Word of God which being incarnate in our Lord Christ was not but was made by God of nothing after that time Which are the characters that distinguish the heresie of Arius Set aside then the Constitutions Eusebius Origen and his Scholar Dionysius as questionable in point of fact or as granted that the sense of their words is not reconcileable with the Faith in point of right the retraction of Dionysius makes as much more for the Faith then his misprision condemned by Gennadius de Dogm Eccl. Cap. IV. and Facundus X. 5. against it as the rejecting of Sabellius makes more for the same then the doubtfull words of Gregory of Nâ—ocaesarea against That which is to be said thereupon is that there can be therefore no reason to blame the Councill of Nicaea for adding to the Creed the terme of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to oblige the Arians to the sense of the Church S. Athanasius in his Treatise de Actis Conc. Nicen. hath shewed us that it was introduced to cut off those equivocations whereby they ought to cover their owne sense under those other words which were propounded as capeable of the Catholick sense He that will say that this course ought not to have been held or that having taken effect it ought not to have been retained may as well say that the faith of Christ or the Unity of Gods service in that faith is not to be preserved For being once questioned therâ— must be a Rule and a mark to discern Christians from Hereticks I observe therefoâ—e likewise that the troubles which Arius occasioned in the Church never came to an end till the word person in Latine and hypostasis in Greek was admitted in opposition to the word essence or nature included in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Council of Nicaea had introduced into the Creed that the difference between the Church and Arius might be stated upon the expresse terms of three persons and one nature For it is evident by S. Jerome Epist LVII that the terme of hypostasis for person was not then received who writes to Pope Damasus to be authorized by him whether to admit or to refuse it But as after that time we hear no further question of the term so under the Emperor Gratiane and Pope Damasus we find the dispute extinguished But I say neverthelesse that there is no cause therefore to imagine that the sense of the Church and the faith thereof hath received any change by the use of new terms which the necessity of preventing Hereticks hath obliged the Church to introduce And I say as the others said that the importance and consequence of the said new terms ought to be reduced to that force which the sense of the Church according to the Scriptures alloweth or rather prescribeth And that whosoever shall take upon him under pretense of the most unquestionable decrees that any age of the Church hath produced to prescribe against that sense which the primitive records of the Church do inforce in so doing sets up the authority of that present Church against the Tradition of the Catholick And after all this shall the Socinians be admitted to alledge that S. Hilary quittâ—th a doubt whether the holy Ghost is to be called God or not Surely the Socinians cannot be admitted to alledge this unlesse they will be content to submit to S. Hilary in the whole businesse Nay unlesse they will stand to the Church to which S. Hilary stands But for those that are not Socinians and would be satisfied I will not use that wretched answer of Erasmus in that excellent preface to S. Hilarys works That the Church hath since decreed otherwise As if there were not a reason why the Church so decreed or as if he were not bound to render that reason
so ballanced But chiefly because I see the subject of the dispute to be all upon the literall and mysticall sense of these Scriptures Without the knowledge whereof I am confident the Faith of a Christian is intire though the skill of a divine is nothing And for the consent of the Fathers how generall soever it be after Irenaeus I have the authority of the same Irenaeus backed by his reason in that excellent Chapter where he distinguishes between the Tradition of Faith and the skill of the Scriptures to resolve me that neither this point nor any other point which depends upon the agreement between the Old Testament and the New as this does can belong to the Faith of a Christian but onely to the skill of a divine But now this being premised and setled it will be easie for me to inferre that a state of meer nature is a thing very possible had it pleased God to appoint it by proposing no higher end then naturall happinesse no harder meanes then Originall innocence to man whom he had made The reasons premised sufficiently serving to shew that there is no contradiction in the being of that which there is so much appearance that it was indeed But I must advise you withall that I mean it upon a farre other supposition then that of the Schoole Doctors They supposing that man was created to that estate of supernaturall happinesse to which the Gospel pretendeth to regenerate Christians hold that it was Gods meer free grace that he was not created with that contradiction between the reason and appetite which the principles of his nature are of themselves apt to produce Whereupon it foloweth that concupiscence is Gods creature that is the indowment of it signifying by concupiscence that contrariety to reason which the disorder of sensuall appetite produceth A saying that hath fallen from the pen of S. Augustine and that after his businesse with Pelagius Retract I. 9. allowing what he had writ to that purpose against the Manichees in his third book de libero arbitrio which he mentioneth againe and no way disalloweth in his book de Dono perseverantiae cap. XI and XII but seemeth utterly inconsistent with the grounds which he stands upon against Pelagius For supposing contrariety and disorder in the motions of mans soul what is there in this confusion which it hath created in the doings of mankind that might not have come to passe without the fall Unlesse we suppose that a man can be reasonably madde or that concupiscence which reason boundeth not could be contained within any rule or measure not supposing any gift of God inabling reason to give bounds to it or preventing the effect of it which the supposition of pure nature alloweth us not to suppose For the very state of mortality supposing the immortality of the soul either requireth in man the conscience of integrity before God or inferreth upon him a bad expectation for the world to come And therefore though the sorrows that bring death might serve for advantage to happinesse were reasonable to govern passion in using them yet not being able they can be nothing but essayes of that displeasure of God which he is to expect in the world to come And therefore this escape of S. Augustine may seem to abate the zeale of those who would make his opinion the rule of our common Faith That which my resolution inferreth is no more then this That supposing God did not create man in an estate capable to attaine the said supernaturall happinesse he might neverthelesse had he pleased have created him in an estate of immortality without impeachment of trouble or of sorrow but not capable of further happinesse then his then life in Paradise upon earth importeth Not that I intend to say that God had been without any purpose of calling man whom he had created in this state unto the state of supernaturall grace whereby he might become capable of everlasting glory in the world to come as Christians believe themselves to be For the meaning of those that suppose this is that God purposed to exercise man first in this lower estate and having proved him and found him faithfull in it supposing Adam had not fallen to have called him afterwards to a higher condition of that immortality which we expect in the world to come upon trial of fidelity in that obedience here which is correspondent to it Whereupon it is reasonably though not necessarily consequent that this calling being to be performed by the Word of God which being afterwards incarnate is our Lord Christ and the Spirit which dwelt in him without measure our Lord Christ should have come in our flesh though Adam had not fallen to do this And this is alledged for a reason why afterwards the Law that was given to Moses covenanted expresly for no more then the happinnesse of this present life though covertly being joyned with that discipline of godlinesse which the people of God had received by tradition from their Fathers it afforded sufficient argument of the happinesse of the world to come for those who should imbrace the worship of God in spirit and truth though under the paedagogie and figures of the Law For they say it is suitable to the proceeding of God in restoring mankind that we understand him first to intend the recovering of that naturall integrity in which man was created by calling his people to that uprightnesse of civile conversation in the service of the onely true God which might be a protection to as many as under the shelter of such civile Lawes should take upon them the profession of true righteousnesse to God Intending afterwards by our Lord Christ to set on foot a treaty of the said righteousnesse upon terms of happinesse in the world to come But thesâ— things though containing nothing prejudiciall to Christianity yet not being grounded upon expresse scripture but collected by reasoning the ground and rule of Gods purpose which concerns not the truth of the Gospel whether so or not I am neither obliged to admit nor refuse So much of Gods counsel remaining alwaies visibly true That he pleased to proceed by degrees in setting his Gospel on foot by preparing his people for it by the discipline of the Law and the insufficience thereof visible by that time which he intended for the coming of our Lord Christ though we say that man was at first created in a state of supernaturall grace and capable of everlasting happinesse For still the reason of Gods proceeding by degrees will be that first there might be a time to try how great the disease was by the failing of the cure thereof by the Law before so great a Physitian as the Sonne of God came in person to visite it This onely I must adde because all this discourse proceeds upon supposition that man might have been created in an estate of meer nature if indowed with uprightnesse capable to attaine that happinesse which that estate required That
Eve was the Mother of the living And though conceived in sin yet was not be in sin or sinfull But whether every one that turns from sin to Faith turn from sinfull custome as from his Mother to life one of the twelve Prophets will be my witnesse saying shall I give my first-born for impiety the fruit of my belly for the sin of my Soul He traduceth not him that said Increase and multiply but he calleth the first inclinations from our birth by which we are ignorant of God impieties He saith most truly that they cannot render a reason how we are born under Adams curse but by charging God He granteth actuall sin in conception but that not the sin of the Child that is conceived He saith the custome of sin may be our Mother Eve in the mysticall sense of David But he ascribeth it to those first motions from our birth which make mankind ignorant of God till they turn to Christianity Whether this be my plea or no let him that hath perused the Premises judge This same is to be said of S. Chrysostome in his Homily ad Neophytos denying that Infants are baptized because they are polluted with sin To wit that he appropriateth the name of sin to actuall sin But as Clemens acknowledges the first motions that we have from our birth to tend to ignorance of God So S. Chrysostome Hom. XI in VI. ad Rom. Hom. XIII in VII ad Rom. cleerly ascribes the coming in of concupiscence to Adams sin or rather to the sentence of mortality inflicted by God upon it wherein he is followed by Theodoret in V. ad Rom. observing that the want of things necessary to the sustenance of our mortality provokes excesses and that sins If this reason can generally hold so that all concupiscence may be said to be the consequence of mortality Christianity will be sound the necessity of Christs coming for the repair of Adams fall remaining the same But this is the reason why the same S. Chrysostome Hom. X. in VI. ad Rom. when S. Paul saith By one mans disobedience many are made sinners understandeth by sinners liable to death Concupiscence wherein Originall sinne consisteth as I have shewed being the consequence of mortality according to S. Chrysostome As for those that censure books at Oxford if they like not this I demand but one thing what they think of Zuinglius his Writings For I suppose none of them believes that Zuinglius holds originall sinne to be properly sinne or that infants are damned for it though whether they come to everlasting life or no notwithstanding their concupiscence which they are born with I find not that he saith Let them therefore choose whether they will censure Zuinglius his bookes or professe that they have the Faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons And therefore I do not understand why I should make any more of this difference of language then of that which was on foot in the ancient Church about the terms of hypostasis in the blessed Trinity among those who haâ—tily adhered to the Faith of the Church And I conceive I may compare it with the difference between the Latine and the Greek Church about the procession of the Holy Ghost whether from the Father and the Sonne oâ— from the Father by the Sonne For though I do believe with the Western Church that he proceedeth from both Yet the Eastern Church acknowledging as it doth from the Father by the Sonne If it had been in me the matter should never have come to a breach in the Church about that difference Even so the terme of Originall sinne being received in the Western Church to exclude the heresie of Pelagius I do not intend to take offence at the using or give offence by the refusing of it But I shall not therefore condemn those times or persons of the Church that used it not as unsound or defective in the Faith the Tradition whereof is not to be derived but by that which all parts agree in professing As for the punishment of everlasting torments upon infants that depart with it it is a thing utterly past my capacity to understand how it concerns the necessity of Christs coming that those infants who are not cured by it should be thought liable to them Would his death be in vaine would the Grace which it purchaseth be unnecessary unlesse those infants that have committed no actuall sinne go into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels Shall the corruption of our nature by the fall of Adam be counted a fable unlesse I be able to maintaine that infants are there or shew where they are if not there Or will any man undertake to shew me that consent of the whole Church in this point which is visible by the premises as concerning that corruption of nature which I challenge to be mater of Faith It is not to be denied that S. Augustine and enow after him have maintained it and perhaps thought that the Faith cannot be maintained otherwise But can that therefore be the Tradition of the whole Church which Doctors allowed by the Church do not believe In this as in other instances we see a difference between maters of Faith and Ecclesiasticall doctrines of which you have a Book of Gernadius intituled dâ— dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis For such positions as passe without offense when they are held and professed by such as injoy the communion of the Church or more then so rank of authority in it must necessarily be counted doctrines of the Church And yet if it appear that the contrary hath been held other whiles and else where they do not oblige our belief as matters of Faith As for the article of the Church of England which ascribeth the desert of Gods wrath and damnation to Originall sinne â— conceive it is alwaies the duty of every sonne of the Church so to interpret so to limit or to extend the acts of the Church of England that is the sense of them that it may agree with the Faith of the Catholick Church Because all such acts serve and are to serve onely to maintaine the Church of England a member thereof by maintaining the Faith of it How much more at this time that unity and communion which these acts tendred to maintain amongst our selves being irrecoverably violated by men equally concerned in the cherishing of it For admitting the Faith and the Laws of the primitive Church what can any Church allege why they are not one with us Not admitting them what can we alledge why we are not one with others It followeth therefore of necessity that the wrath of God and damnation which Originall sin deserveth according to the Article of the Church of England be confined to the losse and coming short of that salvation to which the first Adam being appointed the second Adam hath restored us There being no more to be had either by necessary consequence from the Scripture or by Tradition
to the intrinsecall value of the workes which freewill alone doth but to the promise annexed by God to the works which freewill by the help of Grace purchased by Christ produceth It was no marvaile indeed that they who had overseen the actuall helps of Grace should a scribe the merit of habituall grace so the language of that time spoke to the act of freewill in beginning to believe that is to be a Christian as not depending upon that operation of grace which themselves supposed though they oversaw it But it were ridiculous to think that he who by the preaching of the Gospel and the reasons which it letteth forth why men are to be Christians is effectually moved to become a Christian is not to impute his being so to that grace which preventeth him with those reasons How much more when those reasons are acknowledged to be the instrument whereby the Holy Ghost worketh a mans conversion at the first or his perseverance at the last is it necessary to impute it to the grace of Christ that is to those helps which God in regard to Christs death preventeth us with Surely should grace immediately determin the wil to it the effects that should be imputable to grace would be the same neither the cov of grace nor the experience of common sense remaining the same which wil not allow such a chang in a mans life as becoming a good christian of an enemy to Christs Crosse to succeed without an express change in the wil upon reasons convincing the judgement that this world is to be set behind the world to com It is now to be acknowledged that S. Austine writing against these mens positions as they were revealed to him by the letters of Prosper and Hilary his book now extant de Praedestinatione sanctorum de dono Perseverantiae hath determined the reason why one man is converted and persevereth unto death an other not to consist in nothing that can resolve into any act of mans will but ends in Gods free appointment That Pope Celestinus writing to the Bishops of Gaule upon the sollicitation of the same Prosper and Hilary in recommendation of S. Austines dostrine then so much questioned in those parts determines not onely the sufficience but the efficacy of the meanes of Grace to come from Gods Grace That the second councile of Orange determining the same in divers particulares concerning the conversion of man to become a true Christian concerning his perseverance to the end in that estate hath onely determined that by the helpe and assistance of Christ and the grace received in Baptisme a Christian may if he will faithfully labour fullfill whatsoever his salvation requireth Is there any thing in all this to signifie that a mans will before he determine is determined by God to imbrace Christianity and persevere in it to the end or not That every man is determined to everlasting glory or paine without consideration of those deeds of his for which at the last he shall be sentenced to it and either suffer or injoy it Here I must have recourse againe to Vossius his Collections finding them sufficient and my model not allowing me to say more Whether no helpe of Grace but that which takes effect be sufficient That is whether men refuse Christianity or faile of performing it because they could not imbrace and persevere in it or because they would not when they might let him that shall have perused what he hath collected in the second part of this seventh book say as to the perswasion of the whole Church Whether God would have all men to be saved and hath appointed the death of our Lord Christ to that intent let him that shall have perused the first part of the same Thesi II. III. give sentence what the Church hath allwaies believed No lesse manifest is it by that which he saith there parte II. thesi II. Parte III. thes I. II. that there is no reason to be given why any man sinneth or is damned because God would have it so On the contrary that the reason why a man is not saved to whom the Gospell is tendred is because he refuseth it which God for his part tendreth to all mankind In fine that the Catholike Church from the beginning believed no more then that those who should believe and persevere to the end good Christians were appointed by God to be saved Understanding this to be don by vertue of Gods Grace for which no reason can be rendred from any thing that a man can doe as preventing all his indeavours I acknowledg to appeare by that which he hath said Lib. VI. thes VIII When therefore S. Austine maintainneth as I have acknowledged that he doth mainetaine that the reason why one man is converted and perseveres unto death another not resolves into Gods meere appointment I will not dispute whether this be more then the whole Church delivereth for that which it is necessary to salvation to believe It is enough for me to maintaine that it seemeth to follow by good consequence of the best reasons that I can see from that sense of our Lord and his Apostles doctrine which the Church hath alwaies taught Which will allow me to maintaine as well the predetermination of the will as absolut predestination to glory and paine to be inconsistent as with the Covenant of Grace so with the Tradition of the Church I find that Gennadius being manifestly one of those in Gaule that contradicted some thing of S. Austines doctrine by his commending of Faustus and Cassiane and censuring not onely Prosper who confuted Cassianus but even S. Austine in his booke of Eclesiasticall writers in a certaine addition to that list of heresies which S. Jerom hath made reckoneth them in the list of the Heretickes condemned by the Church who teach absolute Predestination under the name of Predestinatians After him not onely Hincmarus of Rheims condemning Gotescalcus a Monk of his Province for maintayning it being transmitted to him by Rabanus of Ments who in a Synod there had condemned him for the same hath supposed it condemned for an heresy by the ancient Church but also before Hincmarus Arnobius that hath expounded the Psalms called Arnobius the younger by some and a certaine continuation of S. Hieromes Cronicle under the the name of Tiro Prosper the one contradicteth them the later mentions that they had their beginning from S. Austins writings Sirmondus also the learned Jesuite hath published a peece so ancient that pretending to make a list of Heresies it goeth no further then Nestorius reckoning next after him the Predestinatians as those who derived themselves from S. Austines doctrine To which it is well enough knowne what opposition is now made by them who believe not that there ever was any such Heresy but that the adversaries of S. Austine in Gaule do pretend that such a Sect did indeed rise upon misunderstanding his Doctrine And certainely there are properly no Heretickes
paines to make them partizans in questions which they understand not and give them the confidence to censure for Arminians those that resolve them in such termes as they comprehend not Neverthelesse at the last judgement of God they may have cause to complaine of them if not for teaching them to tye knoâ—s which they cannot teach them to loose yet for inducing them to breake the peace of the Church to obtaine freedome of professing or imposing upon others the beliefe of things thus prejudiciall to Christianity In the meane time it shall be enough for me by this short resolution to have drawn a line which they that will tread the Labyrinth of this dispute may be guided by the best that I can show from falling headlong on either side Not doubting that the skill of those who being more traded in it resolve to avoid both extremities may produce that information which may oblige me for further intelligence as well as the rest of the Church But having confidence that the denying of Gods Predetermination is not the denying of Gods effectuall Grace which I have showed that it doth stand with freewill according to the supposition that I advance though I undertake not to show how reason reconciles the parts of it And truly I am confident that when S. Austine in his book de Correptione Gratia distinguishes between that help of Grace without which we cannot obay the Gospell of Christ and that help by which we do it auxilium quo auxilium sine quo non and whensoever else he makes the efficacy of Grace to attaine the doing of that which it effecteth not onely the inabling of man to do it he never intended to determine the maner how it is effected For though S. Austin himselfe hath balked the ground which himselfe had laid for the distinction between the antcedent and consequent will of God in his book de Spiritu litera Chap. XXXIII by bringing in other expositions of S. Pauls words God would have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledg of the truth that are inconsistent with it Though I have not found him distinguish betweene necessity upon supposition and antecedent as Anselme in pursuance of his Doctrine hath don yet he that shall read what he hath said of the redemption of all mankind upon Psalm XCV besides abundance of other passages whereby he concurreth to witnesse that sense of the redemption of all mankind of Gods will that all be saved of sufficient Grace that is not effectuall which the Church generally declareth as I showed you before I say he that considereth them will find it more reasonable to reconcile him to his owne doctrine then to pretend a change in his judgement where he acknowledges none as in the mater of preventing Grace he doth not acknowledge Certainely seeing that Prosper in defending him frequently and clearely acknowledges Christ to have dyed for all mankind out of Gods will that all might be saved But the author of the book de â—â—catione Gentium never yet suspected for a partizane of the Semipelagians hath so plentifully maintained it during the time that the parties in Gaule charged one another for Semipelagians and Praedestinatians For during that time was it writ without peradventure they will never deserve well of S. Austine that defend him otherwise So far are we from being obliged by his doctrine to acknowledge grace to come to effect by Gods predetermining the wil of man to all that coms to passe when I have shâ—wed a supposition according to which it may be don without prejudice to Christianity though beyond my understanding to show how For supposing the common faith to be this That God appointeth them to life or to death whom he foreseeth to imbrace or not imbrace Christianity and to persevere or not persevere in the practice of it till death Can it not be true also that he hath appointed some and not others the meanes whereby he foresees that they will persevere Nay if some only persevere in the state of Grace when all might as the Council of Orange hath decreed what is there but Gods will to create the difference much more between them that never heare of the Gospell and those that refuse it And what hath Christianity hereupon to answer but Porphyries question why Christ came not afore That is why God suffered man to fall and sin to come into the world Why he maketh not all men true Christians when he might For one answer would serve all these questions Which if it be a scandall to Christianity that it is not answered it remaines that Christians be Porphyries disciples In the mean time absolute predestination to grace infers not absolute predestination to glory Nor obliges God to procure sin as the meanes to his end or as the meanes to that meanes to predetermine mans will to doe it But did Saint Austines doctrine in my opinion containe any thing contrary to the doctrine of the rest of the Church concerning the antecedent consequent will of God the coming of evill into the world and that the foreknowledge of God does not effect but suppose it the freedome of the will from necessity while slave to sin I would think my selfe obliged to renounce him that I might adhere to the rest of the Church Counting it a thing ridiculous and contrary to the principles of Christian truth acknowledging the tradition of Faith to come from the whole Church to advance the doctrine of a member thereof though so eminent as S. Austine against that which the rest of the Church is acknowledged to have taught If iâ— be said that the supposition of Gods foreseeing the event of mens resolutions by the objects and considerations which he appoints them to be moved with is an invention of the Jesuites or at least hath been much maintained by them I demand what advantage they have that espouâ—e the supposition of the Dominicans the first Inquisitors that is Ministers of persecution for Religion by the interest of the Church of Rome with secular powers Especially adding unto it the position of justifying faith by believing that we are predestinate so destructive to the Covenant of Grace Yet I give the reader that is willing to take the paines of being informed notice that the supposition which I advance is rather in the forme that is to be collected out of Durandus then in that which the Iesuites since have given it In fine let Maldonat and Jesuites think it their honour to professe that they like not such and such expositions of scripture because they come from the Hereticks by which names we know whom they meane Let Puritan preachers coâ—fe their simple heareâ—s with a prejudice against all that they like not as drawne from Arminians or Jesuites whose positions they understood not and when they are understood are nearer the truth then their owne I shall find my selfe never the lesse oâ—liged to follow that truth for Christs sake which I
Covenant of Grace and by that Faith whereby we undertake that Christianity wherâ—into we are baptized they who make the office oâ— Faith in justifying no more then beleeving the Gospell to be true seeme as voide of the truth in that as those who place it in reposing trust and confidence in God upon it For as the Gospell gives sufficient ground of trust and confidence in God from the first moment that any man heares of it what state soever it is and how sinfull in which it overtakes him if we speak of confidence that we may or shall obtaine remission of sins upon condition of imbracing and performing the condition which it advanceth So if wee speake of trust and confidence in God as indeed and actually reconciled to God seeing it supposeth justification it must needes suppose that Faith which justifieth And so justifying Faith cannot be said to consist in it but by consequence of nature to produce it On the other side whereas all the works that a man can doe after he sincerely beleeves the truth of the Gospell but before he hath made profession of Christianity by being baptized cannot availe to the forgivenesse of sinne much lesse to intitle him to everlasting life according to the doctrine of the Apostles It can by no means be imagined that when they attribute justification to Faith whether alone or in opposition to workes or to the Law they doe attribute it to that Faith whereby he remains not justifyed not to that which he iâ— necessarily justifyed as soone as he hath And this is the true end of that endlesse dispute between Faith and good workes when it is questioned whether true Faith can be without Good workes or not For it is manifest that Hereticks Schismaticks and sinfull Christians doe as truely beleeve either the whole Gospell so farre as the Common salvation of Christians requireth or at least that part which their Heresy or Schisme contesteth not as a good Christian really doth It is nolesse manifest that not onely Heretickes and Schismatickes but even badde and sinfull Christians also not onely may but really have a true and reall confidence in God as to the world to come without which those that beleeve the world to come could not live and dy in that course which indeed renders them uncapable of it But the Faith which whosoever is baptized plighteth to God to professe the Faith which he hath taught to the death and to live according to it must needes either be counterfeite and so produce no effect but the damning of him that is baptized with it or produce the workes of Faith so long as it is and continues sincere And thus is the Tradition of the Church concerning justification by the good works of Christians reconciled not onely with the doctrine of the Apostles that a man is not justified by the workes that go before Christianity But also with the Tradition of the Church concerning the ingredience of Baptisme into the same work And with the doctrine of the Fathers manifestly distinguishing that true Faith which produceth good workes from that dead faith which doth not not by the accession of Love but by marks intrinsecall to the nature of it manifestly distinguishing those good workes which indeed doe justify from those which for the mind which they are done with doe not justify but for their kind might had they been done by Christians by the boundary between them which is baptisme But so that the workes themselves are but the materiall part that is the thing which the Covenant of Grace requireth But the reason and consideration in which they are accepted by God to that effect is not the influence of our free will though cured of concupiscence as cured it may be in this life and acted by Gods Spirit but the Grace of God moving him in consideration of our Lord Christs sufferinges first to publish the Gospell then to accept the profession and life of Christians according to it for a condition qualifying them for that which he promiseth by it Which is but the English of that which is commonly said that God accepteth of our workes as dipped in Christs bloud which he accepteth not if he accept them not to that effect which his Gospell promiseth having as he doth if the Gospel be true all that he accepteth not to that purpose Having said this in common as it were to both these opinions in particulare to that which I propose last or rather to the rest of it I say three things First that it may be understood two wayes To wit that this holds Either by virtue of the originall Law of God or by virtue of that dispensation in it that abatement of the penalty of it which the Gospell imports For so long as it is onely said that God infuseth into him that receives the Sacrament of Baptisme out of a resolution of Loving God above all an habit of supernatuall righteousnesse which is formally the remission of sinnes as extinguishing them by contrary dispositions and that this is the righteousnesse which he pleades to God for the reward of the world to come I say all this while it is not said whether the nature and kind of the quality thus produced oblige God to give him that happinesse of the world to come in recompense of it or whether the promise of the Gospell decreed and declared out of his meer goodnesse render that due by way of recompense which otherwise this disposition could no way claime For he that sayes that the naturall worth of the qualities here supposed claimes the reward as due by Gods justice must needes say that they justify by Gods originall Law But he that sayes by Gods promise and onely by that justice which consists in keeping promise by the Covenant of Grace Now then I say if that this opinion proceed upon first ground it is destructive to the Christian faith For I have shewed that the Gospel containes a Covenant of Grace not onely in regard of helpes of Grace to fulfill the condition which it requires which I have shewed that God grants in consideration of our Lord Christ and his obedience but also because in the same consideration he accepteth of the condition both to extinguish the debt of sinne and to intitle us to everlasting life which otherwise it inables us not to claime And both these regards I have showed belong to the Christian Faith Now he that affirmeth that the righteousnesse which God infuses into those that are baptized challengeth remission of sinnes and everlasting life or rather challengeth everlasting life because it extinguisheth sinne by Gods originall justice acknowledges indeed the Grace of God in granting those helps by which we attaine the said righteousnesse and that in consideration of our Lord Christ and his obedience But acknowledgeth not the Grace of God through Christ in accepting of it to such purpose and therein as I suppose denies the Covenant of Grace which the Gospel containâ—s Secondly I
would not I agree with the Law that it is good But it is not I that do it but sinne that dwelleth in me And this law in his members warring against the Law of his mind he sayes lead him captive to the Law of sin in his members so that he cries out Miserable man that I am who shall deliver me from the body of this death Whereunto is added the authority of S. Augustine pressing this exhortation so hard that it serves for an aspersion of Pelagius his heresy for a man not to allow it Though S. Augustine is not alone in it Methodius against Origen in Epiphanius writing against his heresy S. Gregory Nazianzene and others perhaps among the Fathers follow the same sense But the aspersion is too abusive For I have showed that the Tradition of the Church declared by the records of the Fathers extendeth not to the exposition of particular Scriptures but to give bounds within which the Scriptures are to be understood Wherefore had S. Augustine and his party truly expounded this Scripture yet ought it not to be a mark of Plagianisme to maintaine another exposition without supposing any part of Pelagius his heresie But if they consider further that S. Augustine acknowledges no more then the motions of concupiscence which are alive in the regenerate to divert the rigor of their intentions from the course of Christianity not the committing of any sinne that layeth wast a good conscience to be consistent with the state of grace they will have little joy of S. Augustines exposition of this place For what is that to the murther and adulteries of David to the apostrasy of S. Peter to the Idolatries of Solomon Or what consequence is it because concupiscence is alive in Christians that are at peace with God untill death that therefore David S. Peter and Solomon were at peace with God before they had washed away those sinnes by repentance Wherefore I must utterly discharge S. Augustine and those of his sense of having said any thing prejudiciall to Christianity by expounding S. Paul according to it The question that remaineth will be how S. Paul can call himselfe carnall and sold under sinne how he can say I like not that which I doe For I doe not what I would but what I hate And to will is present with me but how to doe that which is good I find not And I find a Law by which when I would doe well evill is at hand to me And that this Law in my members warring against the Law of my mind leades mee captive to the Law of sinne that is in my members And wretched man that I am who will deliver me from the body of this death The question I say will be how all this can be said of him of whome it followes Rom. VIII 1 2 5-8 There is therefore now no damnation for those in Christ Jesus that walke not after the flesh but after the spirit For the Law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath freed me from the Law of sinne and of death For they that are according to the flesh mind the thinges of the flesh They that are according to the Spirit the things of the spirit For the sense of the flesh is death but the sense of the spirit life and peace Because the sense of the flesh is enemy to God for it is not nor can be subject to the Law of God Neither can they that are in the flesh please God For if these things cannot be said of the same man at the same time it remains that though we allow S. Augustine and those of his sense that a Christian falls continually into sinne and by continuall offices of Christianity comes cleare of it yet when he willfully runnes into that sin which he cannot but know that it cannot stand with his Christianity he cannot be of that number for whom S. Paul sayes there is no condemnation in Christ Jesus that walke not after the flesh but after the Spirit And therefore for the true meaning of the Scripture in hand it will be requisite to have recourse to that figure of speach whereby S. Paul himselfe declareth that he speakes that of himselfe which he would have understood of others meerely for the a voiding of offense 1 Cor. IV. 6. So is it no mervaile if to make those that were zealous of the Law beleeve that they could not be saved but by Christianity he whom they took for an Apostle show it in his owne case before he was a Christian saying Is the Law sinne Nay I had not knowne sinne but by the Law Rom. VII 7 I have showed you how Grotius hath understood him to speak of himselfe in the person of an Israelite comparing himselfe considered as having received the Law and under the Law with himselfe before he received it If any man think this consideration to farre fetched for S. Paul to propose to those zealous of the Law that he writes to He may understand him to speake in the person of one of them to whome the Gospell had been proposed and thereby conviction of the spirituall sense of the Law which therefore the concupiscence which we are borne with cannot but make great difficulty to imbrace according to the premises For seing the Scribes and Pharises having received the Tradition of the world to come in opposition to the Sadduces had prevailed with the body of that people to believe that the outward observation of the law according to the letter was the means to bring them to the rewards of it It is no mervaile if S. Paul in the person of one so reduced say I had not known concupiscence had I not found the Law to say Thou shalt not covet For he that understood not the Law of God to prohibit the inward motions of concupiscence till by the preaching of Christianity he learned that to be the intent of the precept may very well say that he knew not concupiscence but by the Law so preached By that same reason might he say as it followeth Without the Law sinne is dead But I was once alive without the Law To wit when he thought himself in the way to life under the doctrine of the Pharisees But when the commandment came to be declared to him in that sense which the salvation tendred by the Gospel requireth it s no marvaile if sinne that was in him and concupiscence of it revived and he was discovered to be dead in sinne as not yeelding to the cure of it But that the commandment which was given for life became unto his death because sinne taking occasion by it deceived and slew him All this takes place in that Pharisee who being perswaded by the Pharisees that by not contriving to take away his neighbors wife and goods he stood qualifyed for the world to come now coming to know by the preaching of the Gospell the restraint of inward concupiscence is commanded by it found himself by meanes of the
give not thine heritage for a reproach Joel II. 12-17 Sure this is something more then not allowing a mans self to sinne or not liking that which he does when he sinnes which no man that ever heard of Christianity can do till he have contracted such a custome of sinning that he is not sensible of any remorse for it And it is a thing most strange that those who pretend to be the cream of Christianity should think the sinnes of the regenerate not to forfeit the state of Grace nor contract Gods displeasure because they are done with dislike Judas might have robbed the poor so oft that at length he might be without remorse but certainly he betrayed not his master without reluctation The regenerate if truly so and not hypocrites must needs find the burthen of sinne which they commit aggravated by the grace which they had received afore And therefore must needs find themselves obliged to a deeper measure of humiliation to expiate their ingratitude and to recover the favour of God which they had forfeited by abusing it afore This seems in my opinion to perswade a good Christian that workes of humiliation and Penance are requisite to recover the state of Grace and to render God againe propitious to those that have fallen from the grace of their Baptisme As that which I said afore seemes to show that it is not prejudiciall to the satisfaction of our Lord should be satisfied by such meanes Now the originall and generall practice of Gods Church punctually agreeth with that which hath been said Our Lord preacheth repentance but admitteth all that professe it to be his disciples not taking cognizance what they had been professing to become such as he requireth for the future So his Church knowing that there is no sinne so deep that his bloud cannot wash away admitteth all to Baptisme declaring that without repentance it availeth onely to their damnation but demanding no visible satisfaction of it in them that were not hitherto of the Church But those who falsify the profession upon which they were admitted to Baptisme and that so visibly that the forfeiture of Gods grace is visible by the same meanes those were so excluded the communion of the Church which ought to suppose a presumption of the state of Grace at least the possibility of it that at the first the greatest question was whether they should be admitted to any hope of reconcilement by the Church or not As it appeareth by the breaches of the Montanists and Novatians and partly of the Donatists and Meletians If this admission were granted it was onely to this effect at the beginning that they might tender the Church satisfaction of the sincerity of that sorrow wherewith they pretended to satisfy God that is to appease his wrath and to recover his grace Those who think Penance was injoyned to no other effect in the ancient Church then to make satisfaction for the scandall which the notoriousnesse of sinne had contracted are as farre wide of the truth as those who think it onely made satisfaction for a debt of temporall punishment the staine of sinne and guilt of eternall punishment being abolished by submitting it to the Keyes of the Church out of that sorrow which they call Attrition which they will have to be changed into Contrition by the humility of that confession which submitteth a mans sinne to the keyes of the Church In what sense attrition may be said to be changed into contrition by the ministery of Penance I shall have occasion to debate againe in the third Book For the present I must not forget the ground which I have presupposed that the Gosspel is presupposed to the being and constitution of the Church And therefore that remission of sinnes by the Church and the ministery of Penance in the Church supposeth the accomplishment of that condition and the production of that disposition which by the Gospel qualifieth for remission of sinne Neither can the ministery of the Church be otherwise necessary then as it may be effectuall to produce the same How in the Penitent that sorrow for fear of punishment which the first sight of sinne necessarily causeth which is attrition in their termes is changed into that sorrow for having offended God which the love of God causeth is to be understood I conceive by that which I said afore That the ministery of the Church cannot supersede or dispense with the meanes whereby that change is brought to passe as the argument proposed evidences by the Scriptures So from the Tradition of the Church I conceive I have peremptory evidence For those that deferred their Penance till danger of death then confessing their sinnes submitted to the keyes of the Church though they were not refused reconcilement in that estate though they were admitted to the communion of the Eucharist yet their salvation remained questionable in case they survived not to perform their Penance This you shall find at large in Saint Augustine Homilia XLI ex L. though some attribute it to Saint Ambrose But you have it in Saint Augustine againe de Tempore sermone LVII And when it is found in a letter of Faustus in answer to Paulinus of Nola it cannot be excepted that Faustus is a suspected author because of his opposition to Saint Augustine in a point wherein it is evident that he concurreth with Saint Augustine But in the fourth Councill of Carthage also Can. VII and VIII those that submit to Penance and receive the Eucharist in danger of death are not to think themselves acquitted of their sinne if they survive sine manus impositione That is without performing their Penance during which they were at the service of the Church prayed for with imposition of hands And therefore he who having thus submitted to Penance and received the Eucharist recovered might be promoted to the Clergy according to the IV Councill of Toledo Can. LIII and Concil Gerund can IX Whereas whosoever had done Penance in the Church could never be admitted to the Clergy afterwards Because such a one had not been properly under Penance the sinne that is supposed in the case of the former Canon not being specified but onely generally confessed for sinne Whereby it appeareth sufficiently that in regard it is possible the sorrow wherewith a man submitteth to Penance in that case should be so sincere as to obtaine pardon at Gods hands therefore the communion was not refused But in regard of the doubt that remained in the businesse the Church warranted not the pardon till satisfied of his conversion by the performance of his Penance And therefore it is manifest that the ancient Church did not believe attrition to be changed into contrition by submitting to the Keyes of the Church making question of the salvation of those upon whom the Keyes of the Church had passed because the operation of Penance injoyned was prevented by death And so the practice of the ancient Church concurreth with the doctrine of the Apostles to
fiat dilectissimi filii tui Domini nostri Jesu Christi Which oblation thou O God wee pray thee vouchsafe to make in all respects blessed imputable accountable reasonable and acceptable That it may become to us the body and bloud of thy well-beloved Son our Lord Christ Jesus Then after the Institution Jube haec perferri per manus sancti Angeli tui in sublime altare tuum in conspectu divinae Majestatis tuae Ut quotquot ex hoc altaris participatione sacrosanctum filii tui corpus sanguinem sumpâ—erimus omni benedictione coelesti gratia repleamur Command them to be carried by the hands of thy holy Angel unto thine Altar that is above before thy divine Majesty that as many of us as shall receive the holy body and bloud of thy Son by this communion of the Altar may be filled with all heavenly benediction and grace These two parts of this Prayer are joyned into one in most of those Forms which I have named whether before the rehersal of the institution or after it Onely in those many Forms which the Maronites Missal containeth the rehersal of the institution comes immediately after the Peace Which was in the Apostles time that Kisse of Peace which they command going immediately before the Deacons warning to lift up hearts to the Consecrating of the Eucharist Though those words are not now found in any of these Syriack forms For after the institution is rehearsed it is easie to observe that there followes constantly though not immediately but interposing some other Prayers a Prayer to the same effect with these two But in two several formes For in all of them saving two or three which pray that the Elements may become the body and bloud of Christ to the Salvation of those that receive by the Holy Ghost coming down upon them Prayer is made that this body and this bloud of Christ may be to the Salvation of the Receivers Which may be understood to signifie the effect of both these Prayers in so few words But it may also be understood to signifie that whosoever framed them conceived the consecration to be made by the rehersal of the institution premised Which if I did believe I should not think them ancient but contrived at Rome where they are printed upon the doctrine of the School now in vogue For in all formes besides the effect of these prayers is to be found without excepting any of those which wee may have any confidence of that they are come intire to our hands I demand then whether I have reason to attribute the force of consecrating the Eucharist upon which the Sacramental presence of the body and bloud of Christ depends to the recital of what Christ said or did at his celebrating the Eucharist or instituting it for the future Or to the Prayer which all Christians have made and all either do make or should make to the expresse purpose of obtaining this Sacramental as well as spiritual presence Hear how Justine describes the action Apolog. II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Having done our Prayers wee salute one another with a kisse Then as I said that the Peace was next before the Consecration is offered to the cheif of the Brethren bread and a cup of water and wine mixed Which hee takes and sends up praise and glory to the Father of all through the name of the Son and Holy Ghost Giving thanks at large that wee are vouchsafed these things at his hands To wit the means which God used to reclame Man-kind under the Law of nature and Moses and lastly the coming of Christ and his death and the institution of the Eucharist Who having finished his Thanks-giving and Prayers for the making of the Elements the body and bloud of Christ by the Holy Ghost all the people present follow with an acclamation saying Amen Afterwards hee calls the Sacrament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The food which thanks hath been given for by the prayer of that word which came from him That is which our Lord Christ appointed the Eucharist to be consecrated with when hee commanded his Disciples to do that which hee had done So Origen in Mat. XV. calls the Eucharist Panem verbo Dei per obsecrationem sanctificatum Bread sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer And contra Celsum VIII Oblatos panes edimus corpus sanctum quoddam per preces factos Wee eat the bread that was offered made a kinde of holy body by prayer Not that which is grounded upon that Word of God by which his creatures are our nourishment as Justine saith afterwards that Christians blesse God by the Son and Holy Ghost for all the food they take but that Word of Christ whereby hee commanded to do that which hee had done S. Cyril of Jerusalem Catech. Mystag III. saith That the bread is no more common bread after the calling of the Holy Ghost upon it Because hee saith afterwards Cat. Myst V. that the Church prayes God to send the Holy Ghost upon the Elements to make them the body and bloud of Christ As I said So S. Basil calls the form of Consecration which I showed you hee affirms to come by Tradition from the Apostles as here I maintaiu it doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The words of invocation To wit whereby wee call for the Holy Ghost to come upon the elements and consecrate them de Spiritu Sancto cap. XXVII S. Gregory Nyssene de vitâ Mosis saith the bread is sanctified by the Word of God which is his Son But to say further by what means hee adds in virtue of the blessing To wit which the Church consecrates the Eucharist with as our Lord did Optatus describes the Altars or Communion Tables which the Donatists broke For they were of wood not of stone Quo Deus omnipotens invocatus sit quo postulatus descendit Spiritus Sanctus On which almighty God was called to come down On which the Holy Ghost upon demand did come down S. Jerome describes the dignity of Priests Epist LXXXV Ad quorum preces corpus Christi sanguisque conficitur At whose prayers the Body and Bloud of Christ is made To wit by God And in Sophoniae III. Impiè agunt in legem putantes Eucharistiam imprecantis facere verba non vitam Et necessariam esse tantùm solennem Orationem non Sacerdotum merita They transgresse the Law of Christ thinking that the Eucharist is made by the words not the life of him that prayes over it And that only the customary prayer not the works of the Priest are requisite In fine as often as you reade mysticam precem or mysticam benedictionem when there is speech of the Eucharist in the Fathers be assured that which here I maintain is there understood True it is Irenaeus V. 2. affirmeth that the Bread and the Wine receiving or admitting the Word of God accipientia become the Eucharist of the Body and Bloud of Christ But what word this is hee
of his Gospel nor the faith of their Predecessors can make any appearance of freeing them from it what madness will it be not to expect it from not to impute it to that condition which succeedeth the condition by which the children of Gods ancient people stood intitled to the Land of promise CHAP. VIII What is alleadged to impeach Tradition for baptizing Infants Proves not that any could be saved regularly who dyed unbaptized but that baptizing at yeares was a strong means to make good Christians Why the Church now Baptize Infants What becomes of Infants dying unbaptized unanswerable What those Infants gâ—t who dye baptized ANd thus from the Scriptures alone I have proved that Infants are capable of Baptism and that the Church is bound to provide them of it unlesse we will say that the Church is not bound to provide them of that means of salvation which the Church alone dispenseth And upon these terms I conceive I may safely acknowledge that there is no Precept for baptizing of the Infants of Christians written in the Scripture presuming that it is written in the Scripture that Infants are to be provided of the necessary means of salvation by the Church For though it be not necessary that all Infants be baptized because they are Infants yet will it be necessary that they be baptized before they go out of the world And therefore while they are Infants rather then they should go out of the world unbaptized But the practice of the whole Church and that from the beginning challenges the effect of S. Augustines rule that what is received of the whole Church and not by any expresse act of the Church from which the beginning of it may be demonstrable must of necessity be imputed to the Tradition of the Apostles For the judgements of men being so diverse as they are how can it be imagined that so great a body and so farre dispersed as the Church should agree to impose such a bâ—rthen upon themselves had they not understood the obligation of it by the means of them from whom they received their Christianity The testimonies of Tertullian de Bapt. cap. XVIII of S. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XL. in sanctum baptisma and of Walafridus Strabus de Reb. Eccles cap. XXVI that dehoâ—t froâ— baptizing Infants or declare that the Church in the first ages did not baptize during infancy are so farre from making any exception to this evidence that they contain sufficient evidence for the same truth if we be so considerate as to understand this Tradition not to require that all be baptized during infancy but that no Infant go out of the world unbaptized For he that will imploy a litâ—le common sense may see that there may be reasons to make men think it better that Baptism be ministred to those that can understand what it imports what they undertake provided that they go not out of the world unbaptized but that there be an effectual course taken for the baptizing of them in danger of death For that it is not my sense but the sense of the Churâ—h that makes the Baptisâ— of Infants necessary not because Infants but least they dye unbaptizâ—d I appeal to S. Austine Enchirid. cap. XLIII A parvulo enim recens nato usque ad decrepitum fenem sicut nullus prohibendus est à baptismâ— ita nullus est qui non peccato â—oriatur in baptismâ— Sed parâ—uli tantum Orginali For from the litle one new born to the decrepâ—t old man as none is to be hindred of Baptism so is there none that does not dye to sin in Baptism But little ones onely to Original He â—aith not that from young to old all are to be Baptized but none is to be refused Baptism supposing the necessity of his case and the rule of the Church to require it The same is to be said of the Canon of Neo-caesarea that allows the baptism of a woman with childe because it exâ—nds not to the baptizing of the Infant in her wombe before confession of faith And of the custoâ—â— of the Greeks to this day testified by Balfanum and Renaras upon that Canon For what need more words I acknowledge that Vives upon S. Austin de Civit. dei l. 27. gives very great reasons why it were better that the Baptism of Infants were differred till they come to the discretion of understâ—nding to what they ingage themselves But shall I therefore believe that Vives was an Anabaptist that he did not believe Original sinne that he acknowledged any cure for it without Baptism that he thought it not necessary to salvation that all should be Baptized before death A ridiculous thing once to imagine Thus much for certain so sure and evident as it is that when he writ this the custome of the Church was to baptize Infants so certain it is that when all that I have alledged was written and done that men should not be baptized in infancy there was a constant custome and practice in force in the Church whereby care was taken that no Infant should dye unbaptized And though they expresse reasons for which they had rather Christians should be baptized at years yet never any Christian expressed any opinion or any reason why Infants should not be baptized rather then dye unbaptized Never was there any opinion heard of and allowed in the Church that Gods Predestination adore without Baptism or any thing else beside it can be taken for a cure of Original sin Irenaeus is one of the next to the Apostles that we have He when he saith II. 39. Christus venit per seipsum omnes salvare omnes inquam qui per eum renâ—scuntur in deum infantes parvulos parvos juvenes seniores Christ came to save by himself all who by him are born anew unto God Infants and litle ones and children and young men and old ones If any man think fit to question whether in his language renati in deum can be understood without Baptism when he speaks of Infants must suppose that one that is not an Infant may bee regenerate without it Such a one must know that though he dare understand that which S. Paul never said when he calls Baptism the laver of regeneration Titus III. 5. yet Irenaeus with the whole Church of God never understood any regeneration without it Thus much for certain as to these words of Irenaeus if he understand the regeneration of men to be by Baptism he cannot understand the regeneration of Infants to come otherwise S. Cyprian whatsoever his reasons be when he contendeth for the baptizing of all Infants as he evidences the practice of the Church so he maintaines the same grounds upon which I have shewed that it did proceed Tertullian de Animâ cap. XXXIX S. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XLII abundantly prove mine intent The words of Tertullian Huic enim Apostolus ex sanctificato alterutro sexu sanctos procreari ait tam ex seminis praerogativâ
and ruled the whole Church and might as easily make his corruptions generall as Christ Christianity But if it were meerly their saying to make it a Tradition of the Apostles what shall we say of Pelagius For they must pardon me who think that the hatred of his Heresie brought the baptism of Infants into force More generall it might deservedly make it For by the condemning of his Heresie the danger of Infants going out of the world was conâ—eâ—â—ed But it was the Baptism of Infants being in force afore that made his opinion an Heresie as making the necessity of Baptism visible as supposed by all Christians and therefore the truth of Original sin Pelagius was not so very a fool as they imagine If all the knowledge that a man of his time could get by seeing all parts of the Church would have served for an exception to the authority of the baptism of Infants he might have wrangled with his adverse party about the exposition of those Scriptures which are alleadged in the point till this day and his opinion have found footing in the Church But because he could not sâ—op mens eyes so as not to see what they saw we may for wantonnesse betray the cause of God by letting the interpretation of the Scriptures loose to every mans fancy which God had appointed to be confined within the Tradition of his Apostles but they could not chuse but condemn that position which the visible practice of the Church proclaimed to be Heresie Thus farre then I proceed upon the Tradition of the Apostles to make the Baptism of Infants necessary in case of necessity that is of danger of death But I that condemn not the ancients for disputing that it ought not to be generall nor the Greek Church for reserving it till years of discretion supposing the means of it reasonably secured in that case am not like to attribute the necessity of baptizing all Infants which the present Laws of the Church do introduce to the tradition of the Apostles but to the original power of the Church founded upon the constitution thereof in determining the circumstances of those offices which being incumbent upon the Church are not determined by any law of either of his Apostles For though I take not upon me to say that there can no reason be given why this particular should not now be so determined as we see it is who do acknowledge great reasons to have been alleadged by the ancients to the contrary for their time yet I see so many ways for the misunderstanding and the neglect of Christianity to creep upon the Church that I cannot see sufficient reason why the Church should trust the conscience of particular Christians whom it concerned to see to the baptism of all Infants that might come into that case now that the world was come into the Church and that therefore the Church could not have the like presumption of the conscience of all that professed Christianity in the discharge of an office of that concernment to that which it might reasonably have while it was under persecution and men could not be thought to imbrace Christianity but for conscience sake And therefore as I do maintain it alwaies to have been within the lawfull power of the Church to make a generall Law as now it is so I must averre that there was just reason and ground for the exercise of that power in determining this point whither as in the East with some toleration of those whom they had confidence in for seeing to the baptizing of their Infants in danger of death or generally as in the West to see the occasion of mischiefe and scandall prevented by doing it presently after birth And therefore those that forsake the unity of the Church â—ather then be subject to a Law which it may lawfully make as I have showed if that which hath been resolved of the difference between Heresie and Schism be true cannot avoid being schismaticks As for the ground of that opinion which moves them to break up the seal of God marked upon those that are baptized unto the hope of salvation upon the obligation of Christianity by baptizing them anew to the hope of salvation without the obligation of Christianity whether they are to be counted Hereticks therefore or not let who will dispute This I may justly inferre they take as sure a course to murther the souls of those whom they baptize again as of those whom they let go out of the world unbaptized There remains two questions which seem to make this resolution hard to believe If there be no salvation without Baptism no not for the Infants of Christians it is demanded what becomes of their souls and whither they go I must needs allow that those ancient and later Divines alledged by Cassander and our Hooker after him had reason to entertain a charitable hope of the happinesse of those who being prevented by the inevitable casualties of mans life of attaining the Sacrament of Baptism are accompanied out of the world by the prayers of Christian Parents commending them to God with the same affections wherewith they alwaies vowed them to God by bringing them to Christianity so soon as they should become capable to be instructed in it But if I will stand to the bounds of Gods revealed will I must also say that this hope is presumed without book that is without any Law of God to warrant the effect of it For if God promise the Kingdom of heaven to Infants that depart after Baptism as the reasons premised and the practice of the Church make evidence nothing hindreth the mercy of God to extend to those that depart without it where nothing hindreth the power of his grace to regenerate without the Sacrament those whom he hath not expressed that he will not regenerate But this shall not proceed from any obligation of his Covenant of Grace nor tend to make good the evidence thereof which the practice of the Church createth And therefore shall make onely a presumption of what may be and not of what is I find that Arminius had further a doubtful conceit that all Infants departing without Baptism are to be saved by the virtue of Gods second Covenant and the death of Christ upon which it is grounded God having extended both as farre as sinne by the first Adam extendeth But the publication of the second Covenant and the intent of Christs death upon which it is grounded being conditional as hath been showed I suppose it is not enough to intitle Infants to the benefit thereof that they never did any thing to refuse it Otherwise what cause is there why all the Gentiles that go out of the world without hearing of Christianity should not be saved by virtue of it notwithstanding all that they sinne against the Law of nature Because the New Covenant is to take effect where it is not refuted and sinnes against the Law of nature cannot be constrained as a refusall of the
Covenant of Grace And supposing that excluding themselves from Gods mercy by sinning against the law of nature as I said in the second Book they are thereby necessarily excluded from all benefit of the second Covenant It is not because they were born under the benefit of it intitled thereunto by the same birth which makes them need it but because as by their birth they need it so by their birth supposing the coming of our Lord Christ they are onely capable of it Therefore it remains firme that though God by Christs death stand obliged to receive those that turn to Christianity yet the Covenant is not inacted till the party become obliged to it And so it remains that I answer negatively that whosoever hope charity may be allowed there is no legall assurance or presumption of salvation for Infants that depart afore Baptism If this will not serve unlesse I affirm where they are and in what estate I will affirm that I know not but I will affirm further that it is an effect of the tree of knowledge to demand a further answer being well resolved that God hath given none They that will not believe the Mystery of the Trinity till I demonstrate to them how three persons can subsist in one nature one in two natures must be Arians or Socinians for any thing that I have here said They that will not believe the Covenant of Grace till they have a reason why God hath taken such a course as will not save those whom he might have taken a course to save must for me be Pelagians or Stoicall Predestinations They that will not submit to the Baptism of Infants till I can tell them where thoâ—e are and in what estate that depart unbaptized must for me be Anabaptists But when that is done how will they be Christians unlesse Christianity preâ—end to resolvâ— these quesâ—ions before a man is obliged to be a Christian which no Christian can imagine I can easily say that they are not to be in the estate of them that are condemned to punishment answerable to their works seeing originall sinne howsoever foul is not the worke of him that hath it And he that undertakes to press me by the Scriptures will as soon be dumbe as he finds the torments of hell no where assigned by the Scriptures but to the works of those thâ—t actually tranâ—gress Gods Lâ—ws As for that condemnation of all mankind by the first Adam our of which it is recovered by the second Adam according to S. Paul Rom. V. I suppose all the world will allow that I acknowledge it whâ—n I allow not those Infants the Kingdom of God that deparâ— unbâ—ptizâ—d If it be â—â—id thâ—t Fulgentius in his Book de fide ad Petrum reckons it for a part of the Catholick faith that Infants departing without Baptism are in hell torments it will be as easie for me to say that Genâ—adius in his Book de dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis acknowedges it not For though Gennadius was onâ— of thoâ—â— whose opinion concerning Grace was prohibited by the Council of Orange and that there is appearance enough that Fulgentius writ expresly to contradict him in the list of positions received by the Church yet seeing this point is not defined by the Councill much lâ—sse by any act of the Church against Pelagius still much lesse by any Tradition of the whole Church before and after Pelagius though it may pass for dogma Ecclesiasticum such a position as the Church alloweth to be held and professed yet it cannot be prâ—ssed for any part of the rule of faith which cannot but be acknowledged by all the Church I will add the words of Gregory Nazianzenâ— in the same Oration a litle afore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some delay for negligence others for covetousâ—esse others are in no capacity to receive it for infancy perhaps or some accident utterly involuntary whereby though they would they could not attain the Grace As therefore we found much difference among those so these They that wholly scorn it in deed are worse then the more covetous or negligent But these are worse then those who fail of the Gift for ignorance or constraint For constraint is no other thing then to fail against a mans will And I truly think that those shall be punished as for their other wickednesse so for neglecting Baptism Those also though lâ—sse because guilty of failing rather for folly then malice But that the last shall neither be punished nor glorified by the iust Judge as without malice though unsealed and suffering rather then doing harm For he who is not worthy of punishment is not therefore of honour as he that is not worthy of honour is not therefore of punishment And I consider also thiâ— If thou condemnest him for murther that would have murdered onely because he would without murdering let him that desired baptism without being baptized be counted baptized In this last câ—se supposing a mans resolution to be a Christian so compleat that only opportunity of being baptized is wanting I conclude with the Church sâ—nce Gregories time that there is no doubt in the salvation of such a one And that by virtue of his own words that Baptism is the Covenant of a new life which if a mans heart fully resolve upon between God and himselfe to doubt of his salvation because his baptism is prevented is contrary to S. Peter to ascribe his salvation to the cleansing of the flesh not to the profession of a good conscience In the mean time he who acknowledges that such a one is not punished for not being baptized though not glorified can neither allow the Kingdom of heaven to an Infant that dyes unbaptized nor condemn him for Original sinne which is for not being baptized As for the opinion of Pâ—lagius who because our Lord said Except ye be born of water and of the spirit ye cannot enter into the Kingdom of God granteth Infants that dye unbaptized noâ— to coâ—e to Gods Kingdom but would have thâ—m come to everlasting life neverthelâ—sse the Anabaptists may learn modeâ—ty of him in handling the Scriptures with reverence and not allowing regeneration by water and the Holy Ghost where the Church never allowed the Kingdom of God But on the other side when he maketh life everlasting which himselfe cannot â—istinguish from the Kingdom of God due to nature and birth he voideth the grace of Christ and the intent of his coming seeing nothing but their own choice can hinder men to attain that without Christ which is due to infants by their birth And if any man think to blast this with the reputation of Popery as the conscience of this time is to make that Popery which they understand noâ— â—nd may juâ—â—ly give reasonâ—ble and conscionable men a good opinion of Popery the imputation whereof is so brutishly abused what will he think oâ— himselfe when he finds himselfe in the company of so many Doctors of the Church of Rome as at this day
that God is satisfied that is to say his wrath appeased and his favour regained by the means which the Church prescribeth But requireth also that he submit not onely to use the cure which the Church prescribeth but to the judgement thereof in admitting the effect of it And upon these terms and upon no other the virtue of Baptism mortified by sinne reviveth again according to the doctrine of the School For if nothing else but the sincere resolution of living and dying as a Christian can intitle any man to the promises of the Gospel what is it that must intitle him to them that hath once forfeited his title Surely nothing but the renewing of that trust which is forfeited by failing of it And surely that trust is not so easily re-established as it is first contracted I have shewed you in the second Book what reason we have to believe that the severity of the ancient Church in readmitting those that failed of their profession at their Baptism necessarily argues the difficulty of being re-estated in the favour of God There goes more indeed to the satisfying of the Church that he who had failed of his Christianity hath sincerely renewed his resolution for it then to the renewing of it But that this resolution will as well be effectuall and durable as it is sincere it is as difficult to assure a mans selfe as to satisfie the Church The power of the Church then in binding and loosing that is in remitting or retaining sinne consists not onely in declaring a sinner either bound or loose Whether in generall by preaching the Gospel or in particular by refusing or restoring him to the communion of the Church For whom the Church bindeth for sinne known to the Church his pardon is not to be had without the act of the Church But in constraining him that will be a Christian to mortifie the love of sinne in himselfe as his sin declares it to be alive in him is the power of the Church in remitting sinne exercised And in pronouncing sentence of absolution in what form soever the power of assuring the same Let us now look over these same Scriptures again for by them having no other we must judge whether this power extends to all sins so that no sinne after Baptism can be pardoned without the ministery of the Church and the use of it Whether it extend onely to notorious sinners as an abatement of the sentence of excommunication which being liable to upon demonstration of repentance they are admitted to be reconciled by it or lastly whether there be some other reason to determine the extent of it Surely he that argues because God hath given his Disciples this Power and the Church after them therefore he hath commanded all sinners to use it denying all hope of pardon to them that do not use it by declaring their sinnes to them whom the Church trusts for it makes a lame consequence For will any reason allow him to say that otherwise this power signifies nothing when it is granted to extend to the curing of all notorious sinnes That which we learn of it from S. Paul to the Corinthians without all controversie concerns no sinnes but but such The sinne of him that had maried his Fathers wife was so well known that it had raised a party in the Church of such as pretended it to be consistent with Christianity And when S. Paul is afraid that coming to them he shall be fain to put many of them to Penance for the sinnes which having committed they would have made no demonstration of conversion from them before his coming it is evident enough that he speaks of no secret sinnes because the punishment which he pretends to inflict is for standing out against his leters in their sinnes As for that sinne which the Epistle to the Hebrews seems to exclude from reconcilement with God by the Church Apostasy from Christianity it is necessarily and essentially a manifest sinne because it consists in the visible renouncing of that profession which had been visibly made But coming to S. James we find that he commands the Priests of the Church to be sent for promising forgivenesse of sinnes upon their Prayers And therefore when he proceedeth to say Confesse your sinnes to one another and pray for one another we gather that he promiseth the pardon of those sinnes which the sick person shall have confessed to the Priests of the Church For if it be requisite for obtaining the prayers of a Brother for the pardon of our sinnes that we confesse them to him he that prescribes it must needs understand those sinnes which he promises forgivenesse upon their prayers to be declared to them afore It is therefore manifest that the Apostle here delivereth a precept of confessing sinne both to one another and to the Priests of the Church supposing the cure of sinne be known to all Christians by the Tradition of our common Christianity and the visible custome and practice of all Churches by works of humiliation and mortification of devotion and mercy whereby satisfaction is made not onely to the Church which receiveth offense by visible sinne but also to God who is offended by all sinne in that sense and to that effect which hath been justified in the second Book Namely to the appeasing of his wrath to the regaining of his grace and favour to the restoring of the Covenant of Grace contracted at our Baptism which sinne had made void And therefore in virtue of that satisfaction for all sinne which was once made by our Lord Christ upon the Cross without which that which we are able to do towards this effect would all have been to no purpose Whereupon that the Church is not satisfied in such a case but supposing that God is satisfied first and that the prayers which the Church maketh for the pardon of sinne are granted and made or ought to be granted and made upon presumption that the sinner is in a way of obtaining pardon of God by those Prayers upon his submission to the use of those means which either the Priests of the Church by the authority thereof shall injoyn or a Brother by his skill and discretion shall advise This being unavoidably the meaning of the Apostles first it is manifest that all Christians being directed by the Apostle to have recourse to the Keyes of the Church for the cure of sinne in the danger of death they may be more obliged to the same course in time of health because it may then be used whereas in danger of death though it must be prescribed yet it cannot be used but by him that surviveth Secondly it is further implyed that the sinne which a man confesseth to his Brother if he be not able to advise a meete cure for it is not onely by the party but by him also to be brought to the Church And so in both cases you have an injunction of the Apostle for the submitting of secret sinne to the Keyes
of the Church But you have also a possibility for the cure of sinne without the authority of the Church in as much as it had been too impertinent for the Apostle to have given a Precept of confessing sinne to one another if no sinne could be pardoned without having recourse to the Church The same is the effect of S. Johns words If a man see his Brother sinne a sinne not unto death For it is manifest that that sinne which one man sees is not notorious to the Church And yet the distinction which S. John maketh between the sinne which he commandeth a private Christian to pray for and the sinnes which he commandeth not the Church to pray for with the difficulties which the primitive Church had about it show that those sinnes which private advice cannot cure he would have brought to the Church And S. Johns meaning is that a man should pray for such sinnes of his Brother as he is sure are not to death Supposing first his Brother disposed by himself or by his advise to take the course that may qualifie him for forgivenesse But if it prove doubtful whether to death or not the Apostle by saying that there are some sinnes which he referreth to the Church whither to pray for pardon of them to wit in order to restoring them to the communion of the Church or not supposeth that they are reported to the Church by him that saw them when the Church saw them not But first supposing that they might possibly have been cured without bringing them to the Church And if these things be true then is the bringing of a sinner back from the error of his way according to that Precept of S. James which followeth an obligation that is to be discharged not onely by the office of a private Christian in convicting a private Christian of his sinne and of the means that he is to use for his recovery but also by bringing him to the Church if the case require it Which obligation will necesâ—atily lie upon the sinner himself in the first place But so that his own skill and fidelity to his own salvation may possibly furnish him his cure at home The tenor of our Saviours words throughly inforceth the same according to that which I observed in the first Book p. 140. that all Christians may be said to bind sinne by showing a Christian his sinne in case he refuse that cure which he that convicts him of his sinne convicts him that is to use And to loose sin in case he imbrace it But this in the inner Court of the Conscience between God and the soul For though the words of our Lord If thy Brother offend thee tell him of it between him and thee extend to private injuries obliging a Christian first to seek reparation by the good will of his party upon remonstrance of the wrong Then not to seek it out of the Church but by the Church yet they necessarily comprehend all sinnes which another man knows which to him are offences And therefore when our Saviour saith If he hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother it is manifest that the effect of his promise which followeth Whosoever ye bind on earth shall be bound in heaven is obtained by the act of a private Christian without recourse to the publick authority of the Church And who will believe that the skill and fidelity of some private Christian may not furnish him as good a cure as he can expect to learn from any private Christian to whom he can have recourse And yet the process of our Lords discourse showes that the intent of it concerns in chiefe the exercise of the Keyes of Gods Church even upon those sinnes which are not notorious Which who so considers cannot refuse to grant that S. Pauls injunction for the restoring of him that is surprised in sinne concerns both the office of private Christiaâ—s and also of a whole Church and the Body of it And truly considering what hath been said concerning Scripture and Tradition it cannot seem strange that the Apostles leaving such authority with the Churches of their founding with generall instructions to those whom they trusted them with writing to the Bodies of those Churches things respectively concerning all Christians should give directions concerning all in generall terms which the visible practice of the said Churches might determine to the respective office of each quality and estate in those Churches No more then that our Lord finding the power of the Keyes not yet visible before Christianity should propose his instructions in that generality which onely his Apostles orders and the practice of their Churches upon their instructions determineth For the power of the Keyes in the Church inables it further untill the worlds end to limit further whatsoever shall appear to require further determination to the end of binding and loosing of sinne which it importeth according as the present state of the Church in every age shall require Let us now consider that though I have made evidence by consequence from the writings of the Apostles that remission of sinnes committed after Baptism may be obtained without the Keyes of the Church yet it is hard to find any expresse promise to that effect in their writings unlesse it be that of S. Johns first Epistle In which notwithstanding a limitation of that confession which the Apostle requires to the Church and to those that are trusted by the Church may reasonably be understood supposing the way of curing sinne by the ministery of the Church to have been customary and therefore known at that time And on the contrary though I do believe these consequences to be unreproveable yet it is to be considered that S. Pauls indulgence seems to be granted upon a particular occasion incident to distemper the ordinary course of the Church Namely the prevailing of some sinne to a faction of some great or the greatest part of the Church Which as it necessarily intercepted the use of the power of the Keyes though provided and ordained by God for the curing of the said sinnes so can it by no means argue that God hath not appointed it for the ordinary means of curing them As for the consequence which was made from the testimonies of the Law and the Prophets and of the Gospels before the establishment of the Covenant of Baptism to show that they take effect also in sinnes after Baptism It may easily be considered that they take place no further then that disposition which is requisite to the forgivenesse of those sinnes whereby the grace of Baptism is violated may be supposed to be produced without helpe of the Church Which as I conceive I have proved to be possible so I conceive no man living can prove to be so easie that all those who stand in need of the remedy can presume upon so good ground as the safety of the soul requires to obtain it or to have obtained it of themselves without that helpe which
the ministery appointed by God in his Church furnishes Which if it be true it will inevitably follow that the most part of Christians are for the most part bound in conscience to have recourse to the power of the Church and the Keyes thereof for the cure of those sinnes which are not of themselves notorious And that other Christians may be tied in conscience to bring them to the Church for it by making known those sinnes which otherwise are not notorious To wit when they cannot reasonably presume that of themselves they will apply themselves to the means which the cure requires And if this be true it will also follow that it is in the power of the Church to make Rules of force to bind the consciences of those who are of the Church limiting the terms upon which they shall stand bound to have recourse to the Church for that purpose Indeed had the Apostles delivered any such faith That a man is justified by believing that he is appointed by God to salvation immediately upon consideration of Christ without any disposition qualifying him for it onely limiting his right in this appointment to the time that this appointment is revealed to him which revelation is that faith which alone justifieth I would then confesse that this interpretation of Scripture would no way be receivable because indeed no such Scriptures could have proceeded from those that delivered such a faith It would then be sufficient that he to whom this predestination is revealed by justifying faith should say Lord have mercy upon me at breathing out his last Or rather it would be needlesse nay damnable for him to desire that mercy which if he were not sure of before he said it he must be damned for want of that faith which onely saveth But if all Christians be justified by sincerely undertaking the profession of Christianity and that this sincerity is inconsistent with doing contrary to that which this profession containeth then let all men of discretion and conscience judge not whether the Church hath reason to believe that every such a one will voluntarily charge himself with that humiliation which may seem to mortifie the passions that made him sin afore and make his profession sincere for the future but whether himselfe hath reason to believe that either he knows how to value it or will effectually perform it not being instructed and obliged to it by the Church Seeing then on the side that God hath provided the Ministery of the Church for the purpose the effect of it in reconciling notorious sinnes being undeniable On the other no reason can presume that all Christians either know or will supply to themselves the work and effect of that Ministery being left to themselves It followeth that though voluntary Penance is not necessary for obtaining remission of every sinne yet it is necessary for the body of the Church because there is no ground of presumption that the sinnes thereof are or can be cleansed without it CHAP. X. The Sects of the Montanists Novations Donatists and Meletians evidence the cure of sinne by Penance to be a Tradition of the Apostles So doth the agreement of primitive practice with their writings Indulgence of regular Penance from the Apostles Confession of secret sinnes in the Primitive Church That no sinne can be cured without the Keyes of the Church there is no Tradition from the Apostles The necessity of confessing secret sinnes whereupon it stands ANd this is that whch the Tradition of the Church that is the originall and universall practice of Penance evidencing that it could have no other beginning then the authority of the Apostles which onely could oblige the whole Church throughly justifieth I told you at the beginning how near Montanus his Heresie was to the death of S. John when the age of the Apostles ended And it will not be amiss to tell you here that I shall show you in another place that in all probability it is still elder by above twenty years then Eusebius his account which there I allowed doth make it The pretense thereof among other austerities which they pretended to impose for Rules upon the whole Church upon the authority of Prophesies Inspirations and Revelations which they had or pretended to have was to exclude some great crimes from reconcilement with God by the means of the Church that is to say in the language of those times from being admitted to Penance I demand now of any man that will imploy a little of his common sense upon the businesse whether there had been any subject for Montanus to pretend the introducing of greater austerity then was practised in the Church in this point if there had been no practice of Penance then in the Church capable of greater strictnesse then was commonly practised And if his common sense gives no sentence let him advise either with that which remains of Tertullian for Montanus or against him in the records of the Church and tell me whether they do condemn the reconciling of sinne by Penance prescribed in the Church or that strictnâ—sse which Montanus pretended to introduce over and above the common practice evidencing therfore the force of that Penance which as generally practiâ—ed by condemning him for indeavouring to inhanse it Thus much for certain had not Montanus pretended to impose the austerity which he affected for a Rule upon the rest of the Church the occasion for which he was excluded out of the Church had not been He had reduced the Churches of Phrygia to his sense rather by the credit of those Revelations then by any authority which he stood professed of in them so farre as I learn And from thence it came to passe that his Doctrine continued so long in force there that the sect is call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which the Phrygians follow and the Sectaries Cataphryges in Latine But when according to the strict correspondence that then was exercised between all Churches it came to be communicated to the Churches of Asia we find by Eusebius how his pretense of Revelations was rejected as counterfeit or as unsufficient and by consequence the Law which upon the authority of them he pretended to impose upon the Church That being rejected by the neighbour Churches he travailed to Rome or sent to Rome to approve them there that being so received he might upon new grounds tender them to his neighbours we learn by Tertullian That being rejected there also Tertullian out of the passion he had for them being drawn away from the Church maintained their profession in a Church erected by Schism upon that account at Carthage till the times of S. Augustine by whom they were reduced to the communion of the Catholick Church we learn by Sirmondus his Praedestinatus and the same S. Augustine But otherwise the Phrygians were counted Sectaries by the rest of the Church that is necessarily Schismaticks and perhaps Hereticks if indeed by being separated from the body of the Church they became
seems to demonstrate not only the Tradition of the Apostles concerning Penance and Excommunication which it abateth and the Keyes of the Church which it manageth but also the Power which it exerciseth not to consist in pardoning sinne at large and immediately but in procuring that disposition to which the Gospel hath proclaimed forgiveness and upon knowledge thereof in assuring the pardon which it pronounceth For whoso considereth the premises can never be so madd as to imagine that men were refused reconcilement even at the point of death or reconciled with a reservation of Penance to be performed if they survived meerly for the satisfaction of the Church and the example of others But because the Church remained not satisfied that God was satisfied with their present disposition as qualifying them for pardon according to his promise Some men have mistaken themselves so farr as to imagine that when a man was admitted to absolution by imposition of hands and the Communion in danger of death by the ancâ—ient Church he could stand bound no further to any Penance But it is very evident in the practice of the ancient Church that in regard some sinnes were not admitted to reconcilement by Penance therefore it concerned the Penitent in the first place to make suit to be admitted Which being granted and he having undertaken the Penance imposed upon him in the next place he was admitted to the Prayers of the Church at all the solemn Assemblies of the Church during the time of his Penance with imposition of hands as the means to obtain pardon at Gods hands So Imposition of hands signified not Absolution but the way to it and capacity of it supposing the performance of Penance imposed And this is petere poenitentiam accipere poenitentiam propter manûs impositionem in the ancient canons by name Concil Tolet. XI can XII to demand Penance and to accept of Penance by imposition of hands As appears by that form of the publick service of the Church which you have in the Constituions II. 8. 9. where you have the form of prayer to be offered for Penitents when they were dismissed before the celebration of the Eucharist he that prayeth holding his hands over them kneeling Neither was there any other absolution then this in use according to the ancient custome of the Church He who having declared himself offended at himself for that which he had done had obtained of the Church to be admitted to Penance for the time that his Penance continued was prayed for by the Church that his sinne might be pardoned in order to communion with the Church The time of his Penance being compleated his absolution was the restoring of him to communion with the Church in the Sacrament of the Eucharist This is that absolution upon which the Church warranteth his pardon not by pronouncing him pardoned but supposing him qualified for it by that disposition which his Penance had produced And though afterwards the form of absolution changed and was pronounced by way of sentence not by way of Prayer desired yet was there still the more doubt to be made of the validity thereof the more confidence it signified because the more trust was reposed in the power of the Church the lesse provision was made for that disposition which the Gospel before the being of the Church requireth One thing more I desire may be considered in the practice of the ancient Church to evidence the same which is this The Church being necessitated to abate of the primitive strictnesse and to admit all maner of sinnes to reconcilement by Penance that they might the better answer their trust to God in not warranting the pardon of sinne without reasonable trial of repentance took a course of lengthning the time of Penance during which the conversation of the Penitent might yield assurance of it For the Canons whereby so many years Penance is prescribed upon such and such sinnes were couched in writing long after the times of Montanus or Novatians And therefore the customes whereby they came in force before they came in writing had their beginning from that obligation which the Church desired to discharge of not warranting forgiveness of sinne but upon due grounds In this case then and generally whosoever was injoyned Penance to qualifie him for communion with the Church if he did any eminent act which might evidence the sincerity and zeal of his conversion or his forwardness and eagerness in taking revenge upon himself was not onely of custome and course so much the easier readmitted by the Church but was ordered by the Canons to be so much the easier and sooner readmitted For evidence whereof as also of divers other particulars here alleadged I will remit the Reader that would be informed to Morinus his great work de administratione Poenitentiae It shall serve my turn here to point out to you the ground which these effects evidence to be this That the Catholick Church proceeded not in binding and loosing as if it had any power to give pardon at large But as supposing that those that are bound by the Church cannot be loosed but by the Church nor loosed by the Church but supposing the disposition that qualifieth for pardon produced in them by that Penance which the authority thereof constraineth to undergo And therefore that in the power of injoyning Penance fitting as well as of declaring pardon the power of forgiving sinnes in the Church is by the tradition of the Church declared to consist I will conclude with the words of Firmilianus Bishop of Casarea Cappadocia in his Leter to S. Cyprian among S. Cyprians LXXV He saith that they used in their parts to hold Synods every year Ut si qua graviora sunt communi consilio dirigantur Lapsis quoque fatribus post lavacrum salutare à Diabolo vulneratis per poenitentiam medela quaeratur Non quasi à nobis remissionem peccatorum consequantur sed ut per nos ad intelligentiam delictorum suorum convertantur domino pleniùs satisfacere cogantur This businesse of greater waight may be ordered by common advice And remedy found by Penance for brethren that have fallen away being wounded by the Devill after the laver of salvation Not as if they got pardon of sinnes from us but that being by our means converted to understand their own sinnes they may be constrained to make the fuller satisfaction to God These are the very terms upon which my opinion standeth Let us now compare the Originall and general practice of the Church with that which we have in the Apostles writings and say by the agreement whither their authority were the beginning of it or not Shall we think that all who ever questioned the reconciling of some sinnes were utterly void of common sense in imagining that the Apostle to the Hebrews and S. John writing of the sin unto death intended not to speak of that pardon which the Church may or ought to give or not give when
about to impose new Laws upon the Church But those new Laws I show you were excepted against from the beginning of pretending them Let any man show me that voluntary confession of secret sins was ever exceped against in Tertullian who writ that Book when he was of the Catholick Church earnestly perswading to it Likewise though he writ his Book de Pâ—dicitia when he was become a Montanist yet it is easie to discern what he speaks in it as a Montanist by discerning what the Catholick Church contests and what it allows of his doctrine In the seventh Chapter of that Book it is manifest that he calls those sinnes to Penance which he were a mad man that should take either for scandalous or for notorious The Novatians being a branch of the Montanists and refusing to reconcile the greatest sins are to be thought to have followed their order in reconciling lesse sins as it is manifest by S. Ambrose de Poenit. V. 2. that they did Therefore they and therefore the Catholick Church did practice the discipline of Penance upon sins neither notorious nor scandalous In S. Cyprianâ— you have severall places where he mentions Penance for those sinnes which were to be confessed according to the custome of the Church after a certain time of humiliation when they were to be admitted to imposition of hands that is to the prayers of the Church for the pardon of him whom the Bishops blessing which the â—mposition of hands signifies acknowledged hopefull for remission of sinnes Epist X. LV. The same S. Cypriane de lapsis manifestly instances in those that had committed Idolatry secretly or had resolved towards it what befel them because they revealed it not to the Church so that sometimes they did reveal it Here cometh in the fact of Nectarius related by Socrates V. 19. because the custome being to confesse to a Priest deputed to that purpose sinnes not otherwise known who was to direct what she should publickly declare when she came before the congregation a certain noble Woman whose case is there related proceeded to declare that which caused such scandall that thereupon Nectarius then Bishop of Constantinople thought fit to put down the office which that Priest then held and executed of receiving the confession of those sinnes which were afterwards in part to be made known to the Church as the Priest intrusted should direct For Socrates relating the discourse which he had with the Priest which advised Nectarius to abolish the office aforesaid saith that he told him it was to be feared that he had given occasion to bring S. Pauls precept to no effect which saith Communicate not in the fruitlesse workes of darknesse but rather reprove them Which must suppose the publishing of those sinnes which a man may pretend by brotherly correction to restore And it is manifest that secret confession of sinnes hath remained in the Eastern Church and in that of Constantinople particularly even to this time So that no man can imagine that it was abrogated by Nectarius Origen in Psal XXXVII Hom. II. advises indeed to look about you for a skilful Physitian to whom you may open the disease of your soul good reason For there being a number of Presbyters by whom every Church was governed and it being in a mans choice whom he would have recourse to were he not to blame that should not make diligent choice But when he adviseth further that if he think the sinne fit to be declared to the assembly of the Church as where it is to be cured doth he not require necessary Penance upon voluntary confessions S. Ambrose de Pâ—nit II. 7. I. 6. II. 8. 9. laboureth to abate the shame of confessing sinnes If he speak of publick sinnes there can be no reason why For what hath he to do to abate that shame that cannot be avoided That which may be avoided is that which cometh by confessing such sins as it is in a mans power to conceal The same is evident in S. Augustinâ— Hom. ult ex L. And is further cleared by this that it is evident that he who was discovered not to have discovered to the Church that sinne which he was privy to but the world was not is by many acts of the Church constrained to undergo Penance for that default And in the Eliberitanâ— Canons it is provided that he who confesseth of his own accord shall come off with a lighter Penance he who is revealed by another shall be liable to a harder censure Can. LXXVI But no evidence can be so effectuall as the introducing of the Law of auricular confession that is of confessing once a year as well as receiving the Eucharist once a year For be it granted as it is most true that this Law comes into force and effect by the secular power of those soveraignties of Christendom which complying with the interest of the Church of Rome have agreed and do agree to inact the decrees of those Councils which have been held by the authority of it or the provisions thereof during the time that no Councils are held by temporall penalties upon their iubjects Is it therefore imaginable that the Councill could have pretended to introduce this limitation and demand the secular power to inact it had it not been a custome in force before that act was done that people should submit themselves to Penance for those sinâ—es which the Church without themselves could not charge them with Could any man offer so much violence to his own reason as to affirm that which himself cannot believe he would easily be convinced by producing the fashion of Ashwednesday and the order for the greatest part of Christians to declare themselves Penitents at the beginning of Lent with a pretence of obtaining absolution to the intent of receiving the communion of the Eucharist at Easter Which being more ancient then that law sufficiently demonstrateth that the effect of it was not to introduce the confession of secret sinnes which alwayes had been in use and force in the Church but expresly to limit and determine that which had been alwayes done formerly for the future to be done by all and at the least once a year It remains now to show the originall and generall practice of the Church that there is no Tradition to evidence that no sinne after Baptism can obtain remission but by the Church speaking of such sinnes as make the grace of Baptism void which is sufficiently done already if we remenber that not only the Montâ—nists or the Novatians but the Church also did sometimes exclude some sinnes from all hope of reconciliation by the Church not excluding them neverthelesse from hope of pardon with God but not ingaging the Church to warrant it For I demand in what consideration that pardon is obtained which the Church supposes possible for them to obtain Is it not upon the same score as all Christians obtain padon of sin To wit by being qualified for it with that disposition of mind which
reconcilement with God For where there is means for those that are detected of notorious sinnes to be restored to the Communion of the Church without the hardship of Penance there can be no reason to imagine that those whose sinnes are secret will of themselves submit themselves to the Keyes of the Church to procure pardon or to assure themselves of it I find great reason to believe that at the first those sinnes which were brought under publick Penance by the primitive Church were onely those three great crimes of Murder Adultery and Idolatry which the Montanists and Novatians excluded from reconcilement by Penance and the branches that were reducible to the same For Pacianus Paraenesi ad Poenitentiam speaking expresly of this mater expresses no more But when the Empire was Christian and the Church became ingraffed into the State then was the Rule inlarged to all crimes that the Laws of the State made capital to which in point of conscience those that are infamous by Civil Law are not inferiour though being not so pernicious to the world they are not by Civil Law punished with death The Reformation of Ecclesiastical Law intended here under Edward VI. hath taken notice of these terms As for the Presbyterians that would so fain be authorized by the State to swagger domineer over the consciences of their poor Neighbors that they have not been ashamed to submit the Original power of the Church to an appeal to the secular which is in English to let Parliament men live as they list so themselves might be inabled to do what they listed with litle ones to give them the power of the Church is to destroy the Church the power whereof they pretend not to exercise to the curing of sin but onely to the abolishing of scandall which the Church never pretended to abolish but by curing the sinne And yet they must give me leave to ask further either how that conscience can be cured of sinne that is not wounded with it or how it can be wounded with it that is bound to believe the pardon of sinne before repentance So necessary it is that they be required to disclaim the remission of sinne and the opinion of saving faith without supposing repentance and the same to be procured by the Keys of the Church before we suppose them to be a Church CHAP. XI The Unction of the sick pretendeth onely bodily health upon supposition of the cure of sinne by the Keyes of the Church Objections answered The Tradition of the Church evidenceth the same BEfore I leave this point I am here to consider what Ecclesiasticall power it is and how well grounded which the Church of Rome pretendeth to exercise in extream Unction so called because it belongeth to the sick in extremity and being accounted by them in the number of the seven Sacraments is applyed unto the sick over and above the Sacraments of Penance and of the Eucharist The question of the Sacraments wherein the nature of them consisteth and by consequence how many of them there are I wholly set aside from the present discourse Because I conceive it will be determined more briefly upon more setled grounds all at once when I shall have discovered what powers they are which the Church indeed exerciseth by those actions which are or which may be pretended to be Sacraments But it is plain enough that the Church of Rome pretendeth also to exercise the power of the Keys in extream unction because according to the words of S. James afore quoted they assign the effect of it to be the remission of sinne On the contrary they who by the promise of bodily health to be restored to the sick upon the unction which the Apostle prescribeth do gather that the whole office there commanded was temporary as only intended for those ages when the miraculous grace of healing was in force in the Church by consequence do not admit any office to be incharged or any power estated upon the Church by it That which hath been premised to show that the circumstances of the Apostles words together with the originall and generall practice of the Church argueth aloud his intent to concern the exercise of the Keyes of the Church and the power of them towards those that are in danger of death ingageth my resolution to be this That the unction of the sick together with the prayers of the Church for the recovery of their bodily health which Christianity alloweth not without praying principally for the health of the soul is no way commanded by S. James but as an appertenance or an appendant to the exercise of the power of the Keyes in reconciling the sick to the Church whereupon the prayers thereof become due and therefore without further promise of remission of sinne or grace then that generall promise which the injoyning of prayer for the sick presupposeth The reason of this assertion is now to be deduced out of the Scriptures supposing for grounds those things which hitherto have been setled When our Lord sent his Disciples to preach the Gospel and to do those works that might witnesse them to be the Disciples of him that was sent by God it is said Mark VI. 13. That they cast out many Devils and annointed many sick with oyl and healed them Now it is evident that the miracles of the Apostles as did their Masters tended to one generall purpose by bodily cures to intimate the cure of sinne and the recovery of life and health to the soul which our Lord pretended to bring and tender them though by his works convincing them that he was the Messias whom they expected to bring them deliverance from their bodily enemies and the happinesse of injoying freely the Land promised by their Fathers Whereby we may see what consideration those Writers of Controversies have of the Scriptures that ground the unction of the sick which they will have to be a Sacrament of the New Testament upon this action of the Apostles when as the Gospel though now in preaching by the Apostles as well as our Lord yet was not established till his death past and accepâ—ed by God and by his resurrection declared to be accepted as the ratification of that ambassage of reconcilement and peace which he came to publish Far more discreet is that which the Council of Trent hath said that being intimated by S. Mark it is published by S. James At least if we understand the ground whereupon we maintain that the cure of sin is intimated by that bodily health which S. Mark relateth to have been restored by the Apostles For so indeed it is The bodily cures which the Apostles then did seemed to intimate that the imbracing and undertaking of Christianity is from Christs death forwards in consideration thereof the cure of the soul and the restoring of it from death to life Which if it be so then hath the Church no further power in the pardoning or abolishing of sinne then the absolute
Epist IX ad Probum Statuimus fide Catholica suffragante illud esse conjugium quod primitus erat divina gratia fundatum Conventumque secundaemulieris priore superstite nec divortio ejectâ nullo pacto posse esse legitimum We decree the Catholick faith voting for it that to be mariage which first was founded upon Gods grace that was first made according to Christianity and that the wedding of a second wife leaving the first can by no means be lawful Which exception could possibly signifie nothing if in no case not of adultery a second could be maried while the first is alive And in the West Chromatius of Aquileia in Mat. V. as well as in the East Asterius Homil. an liceat dimittere uxorem the first damns him that shall mary again excepting adultery The second would have his hearers perswaded that nothing but death or adultery dissolves mariage But do I therefore say that the Church cannot forbid the innocent party to mary again or is bound by Gods law to allow it All Ecclesiastical Law being nothing but the restraining of that which Gods Law hath left indefinite And the inconveniences being both visible and horrible I conceive I am duly informed that George late Arch-bishop of Canterbury was satisfied in the proceeding of the High Commission Court to tie them that are divorced from marying again upon experience of adultery designed upon collusion to free the parties from wedlock having been formerly tender in imposing that charge The Greek Church may beter avoid such inconveniences not being tied to any Law of the Land but the tempering of the Canons remaining in the Governors of the Church But they that would not have the Lawes of the Church and the justice of the Land became Stales and pandars to such vilanies must either make adultery death and so take away the dispute or revive publick Penance and so take away the infamy of his bed and the taint of his issue that shall be reconciled to an Adulteresse or lastly bear with that inconvenience which the casualties of the world may oblige any man to which is to propose the chastity of single life in stead of the chastity of wedlock when the security of a mans conscience and the offence of the Church allows it not But though this in regard of the intricacies of the question and the inconveniences evident to practice may remain in the power of the Church yet can it never come within the power of the Church to determine that it is prejudiciall to the Christian faith to do so as by Gods Law And the Church that erres not in prohibiting mariage upon divorce for adultery will erre in determining for mater of faith that Gods law prohibites it so long as such reasons from the Scriptures are not silenced by any Tradition of the whole Church It is easie to see by S. Augustine de adulterini conjugiis II. 5-12 that publick Penance was the means to restore an adulteresse to the same reputation among Christians which an adulteresse that turned Christian must needs recover among Christians And that is the reason why the Canon of Arles orders that young Christians be advised not to mary again that their wives may be recovered of their adultery by Penance and so their mariage re-estated I see also that Justiniane Nov. CXVII hath taken order that women excessive in incontinence be delivered to the Bishop of the City to be put into a Monastery there to do Penance during life And supposing adultery to be death according to Moses Law the inconvenience ceaseth If the Civil Law inable not the Church to avoid the scandall of this collusion it is no marvail that the Church is constrained to impose upon the innocent more then Gods law requires to avoid that scandall which Gods law makes the greater inconvenience And thus having showed you that S. Austines interpretation of fornication is not true I have into the bargain showed you that it cannot serve to prove divorce upon other causes besides adultery and so the insolubility of mariage excepting our Saviours exception is as firmly proved as the consent of the Church can prove any thing in Christianity I know Origen argues that poysoning killing children robbing the house may be as destructive to the Society of Wedlock as Adultery And he thereupon seems to inferre that our Saviour excepts adultery onely for instance intending all causes equally destructive to wedlock as Grotius who follows his sense seems to limit it But Origens opinion will not interrupt the Tradition of the Church unlesse it could appear to have come into practice sometime in some part of the Church Neither would it serve his turn that would have those divorces which the secular Power allowes to extend to marying again For Origen never intended that his own opinion should bind but that it is in the power of the Church to void mariages upon other causes For he saith he knew some Governours of Churches suffer a woman to mary her former husband living Praeter Scripturam besides the Scripture And that as Moses permitted divorce to avoid a greater mischiefe But I may question whether they thought that against the Scripture which Origen thought to be against the Scripture And in the mean time as I do not see what breach his report can make upon the Tradition of the Church so it is plain the Power of the Church and not the secular did that which he reports And truly what the testimony of S. Austine extending that Adultery upon which our Saviour grants divorce to all mortall sinne but confining him that is so divorced not to mary another can avail him that would intitle the secular Power to create causes of divorce to the effect of marying again let all reason and conscience judge I shall conclude my argument Exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis An exception settles the rule in all that is not excepted Either our Saviour intended that who had put away a Yoke-fellow for adultery should mary again or not If so he hath forbidden marying again upon other causes If not much more For though upon adultery he hath forbidden to mary again And thus is the Power of the Church in Matrimoniall causes founded upon the Law which our Lord Christ hath confined all Christians to of marying one to one and indissolubly whither without exception or excepting adultery For seeing that of necessity many questions must arise upon the execution of such a Law and that Civil Power may as well be enemy to Christianity as not and that as well professing to maintain it as professing to persecute it to say that God hath left the Consciences of Christians to be secured by the Civil Power submitting to what it determines is to say that under the Gospell God hath not made the observing of his lawes the condition of obtaining his promises This is that power which Tertulliane in several places expresly voucheth de Pudicitiâ cap. IV. Penes nos speaking
Churches of all one Soveraignty constitute the Nationall Church containing all the Provinces thereof so would they have also Provincial Synodical and Classical Churches consisting of the Congregations Classes and Synods which each respective Classis Synod or Province containeth The other mean opinion is the frame of the Catholick Church I as have showed and shall show it to have been in force from the time of the Apostles Having first showed that the visible unity of the Church is a thing commanded by God in the first place for the communion of all Christians in the true faith and in the service of God according to the same For it is visible that the means by which this hath been attained is the dividing of Christendom into Churches which we now call Dioceses providing each of them a sufficient number of Priests and Deacons under one Head the Bishop as well to regulate the faith and maners of the people as to Minister unto them the offices of Gods service Therefore whatsoever means I imployed at the beginning to show that those persons who succeeded the Apostles in time obtained not their places by force or fraud but by their will and appointment will here be effectual to prove that the qualities which they held in their severall Churches were not obtained by force or fraud but by the same appointment Wherefore having showed that from the beginning the unity of the Church hath been mainâ—ained by the mutuall intelligence and correspondence of the chief Churches upon whom the less depended And that this intelligence and correspondence was alwaies addressed and managed by the heads of the said Churches nor could it indeed have been maintained had there not been such Heads alwaies ready to address and manage the same I have in effect showed that this was the course whereby the Apostles executed their design of maintaining unity in the Church Is it not plain by the instances produced in the first Book that the whole Church remained satisfied of the saith of each Christian upon the testimony of his Bishops because they rested satisfied of his That hereupon whosoever was recommended by his Bishop was admitted to communion as well abroad as at home What other interess had the Church of Rome in the faith of Paulus Samosatenus or Dionysius Alexandrinus the Churches of Alexandria and Antiochia in the proceedinge of Novatianus all Churches in the fortune of Athanasius What other reaâ—on can any man give for that uniform difformity of Ecclesiasticall Traditions and customes which â—ppeareth from point to point in all maters the whole Church agreeing in things of highest concernment but all Churches differing in maters of lesse consequence Is it not manifest whensoever inâ—stead of this daily correspondence Synods were assembled upon more pressing occasions that onely Bâ—shops appeared in behalf of their respective Churches For if others appeaâ—ed in the name of Bishops upon occasion of old age or other hinderances I need not say that it was the Bishops right in which another appeared Into these qualities and preheminences over the rest whether of the Clergy or People that Bishops should be able to inâ—â—nuate themselves all over Christendom had it not been so appointed by the Apostles it is no lesse contradictory to common sense then that Christianity should ever have been received had not such men as our Lord Christ and his Apostles preached and done such things as the Scriptures relate to make it receivable Or then that all Christians should of their own inclinations agree to those Laws which have made the Church one Society from the beginning had they not found themselves tied to follow the appointment of the Apostles that founded it Wherefore I will not take upon me to show you the names of Archbishops Primates and Patriarchs in the Scriptures Much lesse any command there recorded that all Churches be governed by Bishops all higher Churches by higher Bishops But I pretend to have showed by the particulars produced in the Right of the Church Chap. III. in the Primitive Government of Churches throughout and in the Apostolical form of Divine Service Chap. IV. and never contradicted to my knowledge that there are express marks left us in the Scriptures of severall Churches planted in several Cities so that there is never mention of more Churches then one in one City but perpetually of more then one in one Province of Heads of those Churches whether Apostles themselves or their fellows and successors applyed to the charge of several Churches Of chief Churches and inferiour Churches according to the capacity of the Cities in which they were first planted I challenge further here as proved by that which hath been said in the first Book That this form of Government hath been in sorce ever since the time of the Apostles whose immediate successors are to be named in the greatest Seas upon which it is evident that inferiour Churches depended from the same time As manifest by that which hath been said in the places afore-named That the advice and assistance of Presbyters together with the ministery and attendance of Deacons to and upon the said Heads is as anciently evident in the Records of the Church as any Record of any Church is ancient And upon these premises I conclude That the same course and way of Government by Bishops Priests and Deacons which afterwards prevailed throughout the whole Church was first begun by the Apostles as without whose authority it could not have taken effect all over the Church And of those that take upon them to depart from the Church that they may not be so governed I take my self inabled to demand where there is any precept recorded in Scripture that the Government of the whole Church be setled either in Independant Congregations or in Congregationâ—l Classical Synodical Provincial and National Churches The very names are as barbarous to the language of the Scriptures â—s the subject is to the Writers of it And yet were all this showed me I would say that as the Magicians of Pharoah in the third Miracle so must the Architects of this design fail in the highest point of aecumenical or Catholick Which having never been compassed but by the means of single heads of the chief Churches it is absolutely too late for any other form to pretend I say not to come from any command of the Apostles but to be receivable in the Church being founded by God for one and the same body to continue till the coming of Christ to judgement For if the Apostles of our Lord determining in part that Order which should preserve the unity of the Church which what it was the original practice of the whole Church evidenceth leave the rest to be determined by the Church for its own necessity and use That which is so determined by the Châ—rch whensoever it becomes necessary to maintain unity in the Church shall no lesse oblige then that which the Apostles determined in specie themselves The reason is the unity
which is the whole Church These being the particulars that concern this point in the writings of the Apostles I am not solicitous for an answer to the Puritanes objections finding in them no ingredient of any of their designs but onely a number of Presbyters of the same rank in one and the same Church no wayes inconsistent with the superiority of Bishops no ways induring the Power of the Keys in the hands of Lay Elders But if the writings of the Apostles express not that form of Government by Bishops Priests and Deacons which it is manifest that the whole Church ever since their time hath used First neither can it be said to agree any thing so near with any of their designs And all the difference is reasonably imputable to the difference between the State of the Church in making and made the qualities of Apostles and Evangelists not being to be propagated to posterity any more then their persons but the uniformity of succeeding times not being imputable to any thing but their appointment As for the reason why the titles of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are so promiscuously used as well in the records of the primitive Church as in the writings of the Apostles I admit that of Epiphanius that at the beginning a Bishop with his Deacons might serve some Churches I admit the ordaining of Bishops for inferiour Churches to be framed and in the Churches of mother Cities according to Clemens I admit the ordaining of Clergy to no particular Churches But I cannot reject that which I learned from an author no wayes inconsiderable the supposed S. Ambrose upon S. Pauls Epistles He not onely in the words quoted in the first Book upon 1 Cor. XI but upon Rom. XVI and 1 Cor. I. alleges that when S. Paul writ Governours were not setled in all Churches acknowledging that Presbyters were Can he then be thought to make Presbyters and the Governours of Churches all one But Amalarius de officiis Eccles II. 13. quoting things out of these his Commentaries which now appear not and out of him Rabanus upon 1 Tim. IV. 14. and Titus I. sayes that they who under the Apostles had power to ordain and are now called Bishops were then set over whole Provinces by the name of Apostles agreeing herein with Theodoret upon 1 Tim. III. IV. and S. Hierome upon Gal. I. and many others of the Fathers that extend the name of Apostles far beyond the XII as Timothy in Asia Titus in Creete The Churches of particular Cities having their own Presbyters to govern them but expecting ordinations and the setling of the more weighty causes from these their superiours These were the Presbyters that ordained Timothy 1 Tim. IV. 14. saith Rabanus who certainly being ordained to so high a charge could not be ordained by the Presbyters of any particular Church Now the successors of these Apostles or Presbyters finding themselves inferior to their Predecessors saith he and the same title a burthen to them appropriated themselves the name of Bishops which imports care leaving to Priests that which imports dignity to wit that of Presbyters This Amalarius allegeth out of the said Commentaries Adding that in process of time through the bounty of those who had the power of ordaining these Bishops were setled two or three in a Province untill at length not onely over all Cities but in places that needed not Bishops This being partly the importance of this Authors words partly that which Amalarius and Rabanus gather from his meaning gives a clear answer to all that S. Jerome hath objected out of the writings of the Apostles to prove that Bishops and Presbyters are by their institution both one because they are called both by the same title And therefore cannot with any judgement be alleged to his purpose In fine the same Author upon Ephes IV. affirmeth that for the propagation of Christianity all were permitted at the first to preach the Gospel to Baptize and to expound the Scriptures in the Church But when Churches were setled and Governours appointed then order was taken that no man should presume to execute that office to which he was not ordained By whom I beseech you but by the same who had formerly allowed and trusted all Christians with all offices which the propagation of the common Christianity required Even the Apostles and Disciples and their companions and assistants in whom that part of power rested which the Apostles had indowed them with until Bishops being setled over all Churches they might truly be said to succeed the Apostles in the Government of their respective Churches though no body can pretend to succeed them in that power over all Churches that belonged to their care which the agreements passed between the Apostles must needs allow each one Nor need I deny that which sometimes the Fathers affirm that even Presbyters succeed the Apostles For in the Churches of Barnabas and Sauls founding Act. XIV 28. while they had no Governours but Aposâ—les and Presbyters it is manifest that the Presbyters did whatsoever they were able to do as Lieutenants of the Apostles and in their stead But shall any man inâ—â—rre thereupon that they who say this allow Presbyters to do whatsoever the Apostles could do seeing them limited as I have said by the Authors which I allege For what if my Author say upon Ephes IV. that at the first the Elders of the Presbyters succeeded upon the Bishops decease Shall thâ— rule of succession make any difference in the power to which he succeeds Or both acknowledge the Laws which they that order both shall have appointed even the Apostles Let S. Hierome then and whosoever prefers S. Hieroms arguments before that evidence which the practice of the Church creates have leave to dispute out of the Scriptures the beginning of Bishops from the authority of the Church which neither S. Hierome nor any man else could ever have brought the whole Church to agree in had not the Apostles order gone afore for the ground of it provided that the love of his opinion carry him not from the unity of the Church as it did Aerius For he that saith that this ought to be a Law to the Church need not say that every Christian is bound upon his salvation to believe that it ought to be a Law to the Church so long as the succession of the Apostles is upon record in the Church in the persons of single Bishops by whom the Tradition of faith was preserved according to Irenaeus and Tertullian the unity of the Church according to Optaâ—us and S. Austine What wilfullnesse can serve to make all Presbyters equal in that power which all the acts whereby the unity of the Church hath been really maintained evidently challenge to the preheminence of their Bishops above them in their respective Churches The constitution of the whole Church out of all Churches as members of the whole will necessarily argue a pre-eminence of Power in the
at Jerusalem hearing that Samaria had received the word of God sent to them Peter and John Can S. Peter go upon commission from the Apostles who gives the Apostles the commission they have Those that preached circumcision at Antiochia had no commission for it from the Church at Jerusalem Act. XV. 24. It must have been from S. Peter if that Church had acted then by virtue of his Commission But he was present and is signified as one of them that writ these words Let any man stand upon it that will that the false Apostles whom S Paul writes against 2 Cor. XI 13. pretended commission from S. Peter because of the opposition which they made between him on the one side and S Paul and Apollos on the other side 2 Cor. I. 12. Though I showed you beter reason afore that they pretended that commission from the Apostles which they disowned Acts XV. 24. It is easie for me to say that they pretended not S. Peters name as Soveraign over the Apostles but as founder of the Church of Corinth as well as S. Paul which Dionysius of Corinth in Eusebius witnesseth Whereas when S. Paul pleads his Commission of Apostle from God and not from man Gal. I. 1. II. 6 9. and that in express opposition to S. James and S. John as well as to S. Peter it is manifest that they as well as S. Peter might have pretended to give it had he not been an Apostle but being an Apostle none but our Lord Christ And therefore when he resists S. Peter and reproves him to the face Gal. II. 11-14 understand this resistance and reproof as you please whither true or colourable had S. Peter been Monarch it had not been for an Apostle to colour his proceeding with a pretense inferring rebellion against his Soveraign Wherefore there may be lesand greater Apostles foâ— personâ—ble qualiâ—ies And S. Paul that is the least of them for his calling may be inferiour to none for his labours 1 Cor. XV. 9. 10. 2 Cor. XI 5. XII 11. 12. Nay S. Peter may have a standing pre-eminence of Head of the Bench to avoid confusion and to create order in their proceedings and yet their commission be immediate from our Lord and the mater of it and the power it creates the same for substance Having thus destroyed this ground upon which some people claim a Monarchy over the Church for the Pope by the scriptures without seeking for other exceptions to the pretense that may be made to the same purpose from the Tradition of the Catholick Church I proceed to setle the ground of that eminence and superiority which I conceive some Churches have over others for the unity of the whole Church Because of necessity the reason and ground upon which it stands must be the measure of it how farre it extends And the positive truth thereof will be negatively an exception to that Soveraignty which the Bishop of Rome by the succession of S. Peter pretendeth I say then that the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord Christ intending to convert the World to the Faith and to establish one Church of all that should be converted to it did agree and appoint that the Churches of the chiefe Cities should be the chief Churches and that the Churches of inferiour Cities should depend upon them and have recourse to them in all things that might concern the common Christianity whither in the Rule of Faith or in the Unity of the Church in the offices of Gods service reserving unto themselves the ordering of those things which being of lesse moment might concern their own peace and good order rather then the interesse of other Churches I do not pretend to produce any act under the Apostles hands in which this conclusion is signed but to proceed upon the principles premised to argue and to inferre that those things which I shall evidently show have passed in the Church could not otherwise have come to pass unlesse we could suppose that a constant order which hath wholly taken place in the Church ever since the Apostles could have prevailed over those infinite wayes which confusion might have imagined had there been no ground from whence this certain order should rise And here I do profess that if any man will needs be contentious and say that this order came not in by the appointment of the Apostles themselves because during their time the probability of converting the Romane Empire and other Nations to Christianity could not appear and that it doth not appear by any circumstance of Scripture that the Spirit of Prophesy was given them to such purposes I will rather grant all this then contend about those terms which I need not insist upon though I do firmly believe that before all the Apostles left the World the conversion of the Gentiles was their design and the design of their successors But I will provide on the other side that whither the Apostles themselves or their companions and successors in whom the power of governing the whole Church was as fully to all purposes as in the Apostles themselves for though they might be assisted by the Gift of Prophesy in those occasions as it is probable they were at the Council of Jerusalem Acts XV. yet must their authority proceed whether so assisted or not the obligation upon the Church must needs remain the same to cherish and maintain that Order which once might have been established by them the Unity of the Church which is the end of it not being otherwise attainable And upon this ground I maintain that the Churches of Rome Alexandria and Antiochia had from the beginning a priviledge of eminence above other Churches For Rome being the seat of the Empire Alexandria and Antiochia which had formerly been the Seates of the Successors of Ptolomee in Aegypt and Seleucus in Asia having from their first coming under the Romane Empire had their peâ—uliar Governours it is no marvail if the Churches founded in them held their peculiar priviledges and eminences over the Churches of their resorts from the very founding of Christianity in these mother Cities and the propagating of it from thence into inferiour Cities and thence over the confines And this is the onely reason that can be rendred why the Church of Jerusalem which in respect of the first abode of the Apostles and the propagation of Christianity is justly counted the mother of all Churches and which gave law to that of Antiochia and the rest that were concerned in the same dispute with it and during the Apostles time received oblations of maintenance from the Churches of the Gentiles became afterwards inferiour to these and in particular to that of Antiochia But he that shall compare these Cities and the greatnesse of them and eminence over their respective Territories with that of Rome not onely over the rest of the Empire but over those Cities with find it consequent to the ground of this design not that the Church of Rome should be
whole Church departing from their rigour in consideration of it In the mean time it must not be neglected that Rome having Dionysius of Alexandria to side with it was able to weigh against so great a consent Which giveth no leave to abate any thing of the regular pre-eminence of it above other Churches But when we see that neither Rome prevailed that no Hereticks should be rebaptized nor the adverse party that all but an abatement is made by the Council of Nicaea in rebaptizing Samosatenians of Laodicea in rebaptizing Moâ—tanists by the Churches of Africk the practice whereof Optatus relateth in rebaptizing Sabellians to say nothing of other Rules mentioned in the first Book did they take shall we say the breast of the Pope for the cenâ—er of infallibility in the Church and the voice of the whole Church for evidence of Tradition from the Apostles or the sentence thereof to be without appeal in maters not determined by it Neither will I passe by that litle that we have upon record in the case of Dionysius of Alexandria complained of to Dionysius of Rome as inclining to that which was afterwards the Heresy of Arius in things that he had written against Sabellius Without observing not as most do that in so great a case recourse is had to the Church of Rome and to no Church besides it but that there is no remembrance left of any recourse had to other Churches when as there is remembrance of the recourse that was had to the Church of Rome in it For iâ— appeareth by the course that was held in other cases that the ordinary way was to communicate maters concerning the common interest with as many Churches as there was convenience to do As expecting reâ—ress by their conâ—urrence and assistance And therefore I count it ridiculous to suppose that a â—ater of so great concernment was not referred to any but the Bishop of Rome because it is not recorded of any besides it For what reason or sense is there to expect thâ—t when we are so scâ—nâ—ed of records in the first ages of the Church we should â—ind in every particular businesse remembrance of that which was alwayes done But when in this as in all other cases which I have touched you find recourse alwayes had to the Church of Rome but very little or no mention of other Churches in the West especially though concerned in the mater as much as it shall we not take it for an argument that they usually referred themselves to the Church of Rome expecting satisfaction in their common interests from the trust which they reposed in it In the mater of Samosatenus there are two passages expresly signifying the two chief points of my position Read the leter of the Synod giving account of their proceedings to all Churches and tell me who can have the confidence to maintain that the force of their sentence depended onely upon the Popes allowance It is true the leter is written on purpose to obtain the consent of other Churches by giving them account of their proceedings For they did noâ— presume of the justice of them upon any visible circumstance of the persons place maner or form in which they were assembled This they expected from the mater and ground of their sentence and the way of proceeding to it But when the same account that is given to Rome is given to other Churches evâ—ry one as they were of consequence to the Whole neither can the approbâ—tion of one be supposed to oblige the Whole nor doth any thing hinder it to be held for the Head or prime part of the Whole and of most consequence to sway the resolution of the whole in which the presumption that the sentence is according to right becometh compleat But when the seculâ—r Power is called upon to give execution to it by the force of this World Aureliane the Emperour suspendeth his proceeding upon the resolution of Rome and Italy Whereby he sheweth that these were held to be of most regard and consequence in maters that concerned the whole For seeing Aureliane at that time having a good opinion of Christians whom a while after he persecuted determined to do them a favour in quiâ—ting their differences by way of right it cannot be imagined that he would take a course which they should refuse but such as the order of the Church established before did require And therefore the allowance of the Bishops of Rome and Italy is expressed for a just presumption that an act done by such a Synod and afterwards acknowledged by them could not be disowned by the rest of the Church In the mean time when he names the Bishops of Rome and Italy I must not omit an opinion that hath been published many years since because it seems considerable The ground whereof is this That Sex Aurelius Victor Epit. in Adrianâ— reports that the Government of the Romane Empire which was afterwards established by Constantine was first moulded and framed in the most materiall points of it by Adriane Whereupon it becomes probable that when Aureliane refers himselfe to the judgement of the Bishop of Rome and Italy the meaning is to the Bishops of Rome and Milane and the rest of those Churches that resorted unto Rome and Milane as the chief Churches upon which they depended For that after Constantine Milane was the Head of all the rest of those Provinces of Italy that reâ—orted not to the Church of Rome it is so manifest that I will not trouble the Reader with proving it here again There are besides some cases mentioned in S. Cyprians Epistles of great force to clear the terms upon which the unity of the Church subsisted as well as the being and constitution of it which some of them have been already alleged to evidence Basilides Bishop of Asturica in Spain convicted of Apostasy in persecution to the worship of Idols was deposed by the Bishops of those quarters and another setled in his stead He repairs to Stephen Bishop of Rome to obtain by false information and favour his sentence to restore or to confirm him S. Cyprian excuses Stephen as circumvented blaming him thâ— did it but not for going to Rome or seeking to be restored by that means For to say truth he must have blamed the contrary party that had recourse to Carthage seeking to maintain what they had done by the sentence of the Church of Carthagâ— which that LXVIII Epistle caries as well for Martialis Bishop it seems of Emerita in Spain as Basilides whom for the like crime he judges unworthy to hold his Bishoprick Again Martianus Bishop of Arles adhered to Novatiaâ—us as S. Cyprian was informed by the Bishop of Lions Hereupon he writes to Stephen at Rome to write into Gaul for the deposing of Marcianus and the settling of another in his stead Epist LXVII Again Felicissimus and Fortunaâ—â—s Presbyters of the Church of Carâ—hage under S. Cyprian with others to the number of five having made a party
Easter was then in use And if it can be said that the keeping of Easter for seven dayes from whence in stead of the Heathen names the Christians called the dayes of the week feriam primam secundam septimam and the use to pray standing from Easter to Whitsuntide were not original nor universal customs of the Church but accessory and local yet can it never be said that there was any time or any part of the Church that did not fast before Easter that Fast which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek and quadragefimam in Latine Though I cannot say for forty days as the name seems to import 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a summ of fifty days in the language of all Jews or Christians that write in Greek For I have not on any hand any satisfaction in the words of Irenaeus the true reading whereof there maintained seemeth to import that in some places they fasted but forty hours before the Feast of the Resurrection Tertullian de Jejuniis cap. XIII objecteth to the Catholicks that they Fasted the Easter Fast citra dies quibus ablatus est sponsus On this side the dayes on which the Bridegroom was taken away More dayes than our Lord was in the grave But that is farr from forty That which is alleged for the forty dayes Fast out of Ignatius is not found in the true Copy Thus farr the solemnity of Easter and the Fast before it appear original But not forty days This will scarce allow that to be true which the learned Selden in his book de Anno Jud. c. XXI produceth of his Eutychius which saith that the Christians after the Ascension of our Lord though they kept Easter when our Lord suffred and rose again yet kept the Fast of forty days immediately after the Epiphany as our Lord after his Baptism which they supposed fell on the day of his birth and that when Demetrius was Bishop of Alexandria by many leters and messages that passed between him and Victor of Rome and the then Patriarchs of Jerusalem and Antiochia it was agreed that the order which hath since prevailed should take place Much less will the said passages of Irenaeus and Tertullian allow that which the book of the Popes lives compiled by Anastasius but out of the records of that Church reports of Telesphorus that hee ordered the Lent Fast for VII weeks afore Easter rather signifying that hee ordered something about it which later authors report according to that which was later in debate For that there was dispute in the time of Pius about keeping Easter that is ending the Fast on the Lords day or according to the Jews may appear by the revelation which Hermes his Pastor pretendeth to that purpose Which Anastasius allegeth to that purpose Therefore though I can allow Eutychius no credit of historical truth when hee agreeth not with authors which have that credit yet in a case where intelligence is wanting I must needs think his relation considerable It is well enough known what Socrates hath discoursed for his opinion that the Lent Fast came in by meer custom not by any Order of the Apostles what hee hath alleged of the visible practice of the Church in his time to that purpose Eccles â—ist V. 21. Sozomenus VII 19. more particularly that the Montanists fasted two weeks some three continual weeks others as much or more weeks as came to three weeks which perhaps may save Socrates his credit reporting that at Rome three weeks if it be true which Peitus hath observed that Leo and S. Austine say that they fasted not the the Tuesdayes and Thursdayes of Lent in their time others in five six or seven More he might have said For the Christians of Syria Aethiopia and the Coptites begin their Ninive a week before Septuagesima That is their forty days fast because Jonas prophesied Yet forty dayes and Ninive shall be destroyed The variety seemes to argue that it came by degrees to this certain number of dayes by the example of the Clergy the freedom of the people and the authority of the Church Which though I shall be glad to be informed further in whether so or otherwise yet having setled from the beginning that the chief difference between the Apostles Orders and those of the Whole Church is the mater of them determinable by common sense and the state of times to conduce or not to conduce to the end of Gods service for which it stands To mee it makes not much difference whether instituted by the Apostles or received by the whole Church the power of the Church manifestly extending to it And the solemnizing thereof being of such inestimable use though not for the instructing of them that stood to be Christians as in the primitive times yet alwayes for the profession and practice of Penance and for the reconciling of sinners to the Communion of the Eucharist at Easter And therefore if I do not apply unto the Forty days Fast as to the Fast before Easter I do apply the rule of S. Austine that those things which the whole Church observeth having no remembrance of the beginning of them must be ascribed to the Tradition of the Apostles yet I do apply unto them that other saying of S. Austine which importeth That to dispute against those things which the whole Church observeth is the height of madnesse Nor is there any thing in that Law unsurable to Christianity but that which the coming of the world into the Church necessarily inforceth That all are constrained to keep it and so good Christians notwithstanding the exception of the sick and impotent may suffer for the refractory and prophane among whom they live Who when it came first in use no doubt were left to themselves and to that which the good example of the Clergy moved them in conscieâ—ce to undergo The Church of England I see for the prejudices which that time was possest with could not undertake to restore the ancient custome of publick Penance at the beginning of Lent But when the Church professeth withall how much it were for the souls health of all that Penance were restored when it prescribeth a Commination against sinners to charge upon particular Consciences to exercise that themselves which for preserving of Unity it undertaketh not to impose upon all when it ordereth those Prayers for the service of that season which cannot be said with a good conscience but by those who in some measure apply themselvs to these exercises well may we grant that the tares of false doctrine springing up with the Reformation have made these wholsome orders of litle effect but it must never be granted that the Church of England maketh either the Lent Fast or other times of fasting superstitiosu As for the difference of meats true it is that S. Paul hath marked those that sorbid mariage that injoyn abistnence from meats which God hath made to be received with thanksgiving by those that believe and
found that our Lord was born about the feast of Tabernacles with the Jews in September being a figure of the Tabernacle of his flesh Though this was ingeniously argued yet had it proved true it had been an unsufferable levit in any man to inferre the dissolution of order in the service of God and the peace of his Church upon the supposition of it For who ever heard the Church declare that the celebration of our Lords birth on the XXV of December proceeds upon supposition that he was indeed born that day So that supposing it uncertain on what day he was born it was to be celebrated on no day What reason what sense can justisie such a consequence when the circumstance of time is not considerable towards the end of Festivals which is the service of God but onely as an occasion for the Church to take of assembling Christians Not as among the Jews whose solemnities having dependence upon the Land of promise and the temporal promises thereof if they kept not the due season of the year were indeed abominable Those therefore that would perswade us that there is any fault in solemnizing the remembrance of Christs birth ought first to shew us if they mean any good to our common Christianity that the birth of Christ is not a â—it occasion of assembling Christian people to serve God with the offices of Christianity Which if they should go about they might well blush to remember that having been so zealous to cry up Market days for fit occasions of Gods service wherein there is so much appearance of worldly profit by increase of Trade and commerce of people they should have so litle regard to that consideration upon which all mater of all Christian assemblies depends as not to think it a just occasion of assembling Gods people It is true indeed there hath been some difference in the observation of the Church about the day the VI of January having heretofore been observed in some parts of the Church for the day of Christs birth as well as of his baptism Which probably came from the Gospel saying that our Lord was baptized at thirty years of age Luk. III. 23. and giving thereby occasion to place both upon one and the same day This you shall find in Cassiane Collat. X. 1. And where Ammianus XXI relateth of Juliane that not willing as yet to declare himself Apostate he came forth to Church die Epiphaniorum upon the Epiphany Zonaras reporting the same saith upon the Nativity Not because it was so held and observed in the West but because Zonaras a Greek relates it as the East accounted it And this was the ground for the XII days when the XXV of December prevailed over the East which was lately come to pass in S. Chrysostomes time as it is well known that Scaliger hath observed But what will half-sighted ignorance plead for the great boldnesse which it taketh of innovating in the orders of the Church upon a supposition always conjectural and we acknowledged false by all Chronologers For could ever any man assure but upon probable conjecture that Judas Maccabaeus did begin the service of the Temple rather with the first order then with that at which it left off three years afore which every man remembred But time having since discovered that it was not the true year of Christs birth upon which Scaliger thought he was born so farr is this ignorance from any plea for it self that it may well be a warning to the like boldness to be beter informed before they undertake to reform For now they are to advise how to answer Bucherius the Jesuit who by counting the courses of the Priests from the dedication under fudas to the true year of Christs birth hath found the time of it to fall near the XXV of December from the annunciation of Zachary being of the course of Abia. And the L. Primates late Annals maintain the XXV of December for the true day of our Lords birth delivered by S. Peter to the Church of Rome upon the credit of the records of the Taxes then extant at Rome and alleged by Tertullian Though the same Tradition was not preserved in the Eastern Churches in so much that till S. Chrysostomes time all the Churches agreed not in the day upon which they solemnized it Now if there be so great reason why the Lent Fast should go before the Feast of Easter to prepare all the world to renew the purpose and profession of their Christianity by the exercise of devotion and Penance as well as to prepare those that stood for their Christianity to their Baptism at Easter which was ror many ages the custome of the Church how can it be denied that the solemnity of Advent before the celebration of Christs birth is an order fit to provide the like means and opportunities and advantages for the advancement and improvement of Christianity by the like exercises Nor shall I need further to dispute for the observing of Wednesdays and Fridayes or Saturdays with those that have admitted the premises that the Church may and ought to set asâ—de certain days for the service of God in fasting and Penance for our own unworthinesse as well as in feasâ—ing and rejoycing for Gods goodnesse For â—â—nce our transgressions have their recourse as sure as the remembrance of our Lords rising again is it for the advantage or for the disadvantage of Christianity that the Friday should be observed for the service of God by humbling out selves in the sight of our â—â—nnes as the Lords day for his service by setting forth his praises in the sight of his mercies And seeing the Jews from before our Lords time observed Mundays and Thursdays for their private and publick huâ—â—liations and the moâ—â— solemn days of assembling in their Synagogues as I have showed there And that the Christians have always observed Wednesdays and Frydays to the like purposes It seems to remain certain thereby that the translation of the days is the act of the Apostles seeking those days which were alike distant from the Lords day as those which the Jews observed were from the Sabbath Because no reason will allow that after the time of the Apostles the breach between the Church and the Synagogue being completed Christians should imitate the orders of the Jews and all agree in it It must therefore be concluded that the observation of Wednesdays and Thursdays is from the Apostles Though the fasting upon Saturday which the West observeth come from the custome of the Church of Rome which the rest of the West hath conformed it self to in succeeding ages Of the observation of the Saints memories and the days on which the Martyrs suffered which the ancient Church called their birth-days to wit into a beter world I shall not say much for the reason alleged before Onely this that those who think not so eminent accidents sufficient occasions for the Church to meet upon for the service of God in the
the Church according to the affirmation of S. Basil that this Prayer is a Tradition of the whole Church Many are the Lâ—â—urgies that is the formes of celebrating the Eucharist in the Eastern Churches under Constantinople Alexandria and Antiochia yet extant which show the substance of it after the Deacon had said Lift up your hearts the People answering Wee life them up to the Lord which evidently pointeth ouâ— that which S. Paul calls the Thanksgiving or Blessing wherein the Consecration of the Sacrament consisteth beginning there and ending with the Lords Prayer in all of them to be this Repeating the creation of all things and the fall of man to praise God that hee left him not helpless but called first the Fathers then gave the Law and when it appeared that all this would not serve to reclaim him to God sent his onely Son to redeem him by his Cross who instituted this remembrance of it Praising God therefore for all this but especially for the death and resurrection of Christ and praying that the Spirit promised may come upon the elements presently set forth and make them the Body and Bloud of Christ that they who receive them with living Faith may be filled with the Grace of it I acknowledg that the repetition of the creation and fall of man the calling of the Patriarchs and giving the Law is all silenced or left out in the Latine Canon that is that Canonical Prayer which this Sacrament is consecrated and communicated with neither can I say that it is extant in the Ambrosian or any form besides that may appear to have been anciently in use in any part of the Western Church Though I have reason enough to conceive that it was used from the beginning and afterwards cut off for the shortning of the service because of the great consent that is found among forms used in the Eastern parts and because wee see how the Psalms and Lessons retained in them are abridged of that length which by the Constitutions of the Apostles and other ancienter records of the Church may appear to have been used in former ages But there can be no reason to say that the leaving out of all this being so remote a ground of the present action makes any difference in the substance and effect of that prayer which it is done and performed with And the rest being the same in all forms that remain extant inables mee to conclude that the Prayers of the Church which the Eucharist is to be consecrated with were from the beginning prescribed not for so many words but for the substance of them not in writing but by silent custom and Tradition received by the Church from the Apostles and ought to continue the same to the end of the world in all Churches There is a little objection to be made against this from that which Walafridus Strabo and other Latine Writers concerning the Offices of the Church have reported from some passages of S. Jerome and S. Gregory the Great That S. Peter at the first did consecrate the Eucharist with the Lords Prayer onely Which if it all this falls to the ground and the form of consecrating the Eucharist hath proved so uniform meerly by the consent of after ages and will remain subject to be changed again seeing that the Lords Prayer may for the substance of it be rendred into other terms and conceptions as many wayes as a man pleases But there is I have showed you a mistake in the meaning of these passages intended onely in opposition to that variety of Psalms and Lessons and Hymns and Prayers which afterwards were brought in to make the celebration of the Sacrament more solemn in regard whereof they say that S. Peter consecrated onely with the Lords Prayer not with any of those additions for solemnities sake when hee consecrated by that Thanksgiving or Blessing which our Lord consecrated the Sacrament at his last Supper with adding onely in stead of all other solemnities the Lords Prayer which the Consecration is still concluded with in all ancient forms For when the Order and occasions of Assemblies were not setled but the Offices of Christianity were to be ministred upon such opportunities as they could finde out for themselves it is no mervail if S. Peter himself might be obliged to abare all but meerly what was requisite And truly I may here seasonably say that I conceive the Lords Prayer is justly called by Tertullian Oratio legitima or the Prayer which the Law that is the precept of our Lord in the Gospel When yee pray say thus prescribeth not as if hee would have them serve him with no other prayer but this But that they should alwayes use this as a set prayer whatever other occasions they might have of addressing themselves to God with other prayers For accordingly I do observe that in all prescribed forms upon what occasion soever not onely of celebrating the Eucharist which assemblies have therefore been called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Missae in Latine from the dismission of them as in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the gathering of them whereas the Latine word Collectae which answers it is extended to other assemblies but other more dayly and hourly occasions according to the premises concerning Five hours of Prayer in the day in S. Cyprians time which since have come to seven that there is alwayes a room for the Lords Prayer as if the service of God were not lawfull according to the precept When yee pray say thus unless it be used Which is that which I shall advise them of who either exclude it as unlawfull or forbear it as offensive that they may consider how they count themselves members of Christs Church waiving that which the whole Church hath practiced in obedience to his precept for conformity with the enemies of his Church There is yet another sort of Prayers which are offered to God at the celebration of the Eucharist according to S. Pauls command for all estates and orders of men whether in the world or in the Church and for all their necessities in regard whereof I showed you afore that the Eucharist is counted a Sacrifice for the Church or rather for all mankinde As the High Priest when hee went into the Holy of Holies according to Philo prayed for the whole world representing the intercession of Christ for the same now at the right hand of God which the Church in his name by celebrating this Sacrament executeth and commemorateth upon earth And the form hereof I can easily say by the same reason is for mater and substance though not for so many words and for the conceptions it is expressed with prescribed according to S. Pauls command by the custom of the Church received by Tradition from the Apostles For when I have once named the necessities of all Orders and Estates without or within the Church in general supposing what Christianity requires Christians to pray for as well in behalf of
whereby they thought they held their estate whether of this world or the hope they might have of the world to come For my opinion obligeth me not to say that Idolatry was commanded by this law of Jeroboam or practised by all that conformed to it But that though not expresly commanded yet it followed by necessary consequence upon the introducing of the Law Not by consequence of naturall necessity from that which the terms thereof imported but by that necessity which the Schoole calls morall when the common discretion of men that are able to judge in such matters evidences that supposing such a Law it must needs and will come to passe CHAP. XXVI The Place or rather the State of happy and miserable Soules otherwise understood by Gods people before Christs ascension then after it What the Apocalypse what the rest of the Apostles declare Onely Martyrs before Gods Throne Of the sight of God I Come now to the nicest point if I mistake not of all that occasions the present Controversies and divisions of the Western Church the state of soules departed with the profession of Christianity till the day of Judgement The resolution whereof that which remaines concerning the publick service of God the order and circumstances of the same must presuppose This resolution must procede upon supposition of that which the first book hath declared concerning the knowledge of the Resurrection and the world to come under the Old Testament and the reservation and good husbandry in declaring it which is used in the writings of it The consideration whereof mightily commendeth the wisdome and judgment of the ancient Church in proposing the bookes which we call Apocrypha for the instruction of the Ca echumeni or learners of Christianity For these are they in which the Resurrection and the world to come and the happy state of righteous soules after death is plainly and without circumstance first set forth I need not here repeat the seven Maccabees and their mother professing to dy for Gods Law in confidence of Resurrection to the world to come 2 Mac. VII 9 11 23 36. nor the Apostle Ebr. XI 35-38 testifying the same of them and the rest that lived or died in their case But I must not omit the Wisdom of Solomon the subject whereof as I said afore is to commend the Law of God to the Gentiles that in stead of persecuting Gods people they might learn the worship of the onely true God For this he doth by this argument that those who persecute Gods people think there remains no life after this but shall find that the righteous were at rest as soone at they were dead and in the day of judgement shall triumph over their enemies Wisdome II. III. 1-8 V From hence proceeding to show how the wisdome of Gods people derives it selfe from Gods wisdome who so strangely delivered them from the persecutions of Pharaoh and the Egyptians for a warning to those that might undertake the like In particular the Kings of Egypt under whom this was writ and the Jewes most used the Greek The Wisdome of Jesus the sonne of Sirach pretending to lay down those rules of righteous conversation which the study of the Law the off-spring of Gods Wisdome had furnished him with is not so copious in this point though the precepts of inward and spirituall obedience and service of God from the heart which he delivers throughout can by no meanes be parted from the hope of the world to come being grounded upon nothing else And he proposeth it plainly from the beginning when he saith He that feareth God it shall go well with him in the end and at the day of his death he shall be blessed The very additions to Daniel are a bulwarke to the Faith of the Church when it appeares that the happinesse of righteous soules after death is not taken up by any blind tradition among Christians but before Christianity expressed for the sense of Daniels fellows in those words of their hymne O ye spirits and souls of the righteous blesse ye the Lord praise him and magnify him for ever And whatsoever we may make of the second book of Maccabees the antiquity of it will alwayes be evidence that the principall author of it Jason of Cyrene could never have been either so senselesse or so impudent as to impose upon his nation that prayers or sacrifices were used by them in regard of the resurrection if they believed not the being and sense of humane souls after death 2 Mac. XII 43. Proceed we to those passages concerning this point which the Gospell afford us and consider how well they agree herewith I will not here dispute that our Lord intended to relate a thing that really was come to passe but to propose a parable or resemblance of that which might and did come to passe when he said Luke XVI 19 There was a certaine rich man that was clad with fine linnen and purple and made good chear every day But I will presume upon this That no man that meanes not to make a mockery of the Scriptures will indure that our Lord should represent unto us in such terms as we are able to bear that which falls out to righteous and wicked soules after death if there were no such thing as sense and capacity of pleasure and paine in souls departed according to that which they do here I will also propose to consideration the description of the place whereby he represents unto us the different estate of those whom it receiveth And in Hell lifting up his eyes being in torments he sees Abraham from afarre and Lazarus in his bosome And afterwards And besides all this between us and you there is a great gappe fixed so that those who would passe from hence cannot nor may they passe from thence to us For I perceive it is swallowed for Gospell amongst us that Dives being in Hell saw Lazarus in the third heavens Whereas the Scripture saith onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the invisible place of good and bad â—oules For so the processe of the Parable obliges us to understand it Sâ—â—ing it would be somewhat strange to understand that gappe wherewith the place of happy soules is here described to be parted from the place of torments to be the earth and all that is between the third heavens and it The Jewes at this time as we see by the Gospell believing according to the testimonies alleged that righteous soules were in rest and pleasure and happinesse wicked in misery and torments called the place or state of those torments Gehenna from the valley of the sonnes of Hinnom neer Jerusalem where those that of old time sacrificed their children to devils burnt them with fire The horror of which place it appears was taken up for a resemblance fit to represent the torment of the wicked soules after death In like manner Gods people being sensible of Gods mercy in using meanes to bring them back to the ancient inheritance
against us This execution then is either upon refusing the termes of reconcilement or upon failing of that which we undertake by accepting them That is not upon those failleures which may consist with reconcilement as those who would have these words to signifie Purgatory imagine but which destroy it And therefore the limitation till thou hast paid the utmost farthing signifies as Mat. I. 15. He knew her not till she had brought fourth her first borne son though he never knew her That is to say his utmost farthing shall never be paid My opinion would allow me to accept of Tertullians and S. Cyprians sense of this text who do indeed acknowledge the voiding of those effects of sin which may remain upon those that depart in the state of Grace between death and the day of judgement to be the paying of this utmost farthing But I have shewed you why it agrees not with the intent of the words And if it did it were nothing to Purgatory because Tertullian expresseth it to be paid mâ—ra resurrectioniâ— by the delay of the resurrection that is not before tâ—e generall judgement whereby Purgatory is quite spoiled For pretending the expinting of veniall sin which consisteth with reconcilement together with satisfying the debt of temporall punishment reserved by God upon that sin which he remitteth it cannot be intended by him that gives warning of seeking reconcilement not of voiding the penalties which may remaine when it is obtained Where you may see by survaying the scriptures which have been debated that there is not the least pretense in them for paying this debt by induring the flames of Purgatory for that sin which is forgiven afore But that all satisfaction endeth in voiding the guilt of sin by appeasing the wrâ—th of God for it before wee goe hence There be other texts both of the old and New Testament that are usually alleaged in this dispute But because rather for show then substance I will rather presume that all reasonable men may see where the consequence failes then use so many words as it requires to show it He shall sit as a refiner that purifieth silver and â—â—all purifiâ— the Sons of Levi and purge them as Gold and silver that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in rightousnesse saith the Prophet Malachi III. 3. But manifestly speaking of the first coming of Christ and triall which the Gospel passes them through that turn Christians upon mature advice Whatsoever trial the second coming of Christ may bring with it correspondent to the first it will be nothing to Purgatory the day of judgement determining it As for thee also by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth the prisoners out of the pit where in was no water Saith the Prophet Zachary IX 11. speaking of the returne from the Captivity of Babylon and of the prince of Israel that should figure oâ—t our Lord Christ and rule from sea to sea and from the river to the ends of the earth Whereby it appeareth that the spiritual sense of this Prophesy ending â—n the redemption of mankind by the death of Christ and his Kingdome by the preaching of his Gospel can by no meanes be extended to any delivering out of Purgatory and if it could must not be intended to take place before the second coming Which intent would also appear groundlesse in this Because I have showed that he did not deliver the soules of the Fathers out of the Devils hands at his first coming which this text is alleaged to prove no lesse then Purgatory For this will confine it to the delivery of mankind from sin by the death of our Lord Christ and his sufferings CHAP. XXVIII Ancient opinions in the Church of the place of soules before the day of judgement No Tradition that the Fathers were in the Verge of Hell under the Earth The reason of the difference in the expressions of the Fathers of the Church What Tradition of the Church for the place of Christs soule during his death The Saints soules in secret mansions according to the Tradition of the Church Prayer for the dead supposeth the same No Purgatory according to the Tradition of the Church LEt us now consider the Tradition of the Church in these particulars Justin the Martyr in his dispute with Trypho the Jew by the example of Samuel proveth that the soules of the Fathers and Prophets were in the hands of the Powers of darkenesse And that by the prayer of our Lord Psal XXII 21. wee are taught to pray at our departure that God would not give us up to them as he at his death commends his soule into his Fathers hands It â—s wel enough known that Clemens Alexandrinus believes that both our Lord his Apostles went into Hel to deliver from thence such soules as should admit that which he came to preach He followed in it the Apocryphall vision of Hermes then in request where this is still found libro III. similitud III. and what followers he hath in this opinion you may see by the late Lord Primate his answer to the Jesuites Challenge p. 274. S. Austine de Haer. LXXIX after Philastrius de Haer. LXXIV counts this opinion in the list of Heresies Yet doubted not that he did deliver thence whom he found fit Epist XCIX de Gen. ad Lit. XII 33 34. Nor S. Jerom that he did them good who were there though how it can not be said in Ephes IV. libro II. To the same purpose in IV. Dan. I. in III. Lament II. That this opinion had great vogue in the Church and must be counted in the number of Ecclesiasticall positions cannot be denyed That it is or ever was held as of the Rule of Faith it must Marcion was the fiâ—st that placed the Fathers soules in Hell that he might assigne heaven for the part of his Christ and his God as wee learne by Tertullian IV. 3 4. to wit to entertaine his disciples For this ingageth Tertullian to oppose the Gulfe and the rich mans lifting up his eyes in Hell for arguments that Abrahams bosome is no part of it but higher then Hell though not in heaven to refresh all believers Abr. children til the resurrection for he allowes paradise onely to Martyrs which he maketh also the place under the Alâ—ar where S. Iohn saw onely Martyrs soules though else where Apolog. cap XLVII and in his Poem de Judicio cap. VIII he assigneth it to incertaine the Saints soules without any difference alleaging a revelation to Perpetua a Montanist Virgine to that purpose de Resurr XLIII And therefore de Anima LV. makes that which he made before higher then hell but not in heaven a part of hell where our Lord visited the Fathers soules to wit the upper part of it being all contayned within the entrailes of the earth To the same purpose Iraeneus V. 31. saith it is manifest that the soules of Christians goe into an invisible place the English of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
assigned them by God to attend the resurrection in it Because our Lord being to undergoe the lot of mortals stayed till the third day in the lower parts of the earth where the soules of the dead were And though he allege for this an Apocryphall passage which he takes to be Esayes III. 23. but Jeremies IV. 39. yet saies it no more but that the Lord God of Israel remembred his dead a sleep in the delve of the Earth and went down to them to bring them the news of his saving health Of which preaching otherwise Irenaeus and Tertullian say nothing Here then to show that there is no Tradition in the Church for Limbus Patrum you have in the opinion of Irenius and Tertullian a state of coutent and joy for all righteous soules till the resurrection though within the earth for the place Where our Saviour was with them during his death But it is stil more particularly described in a fragment of a very ancient Christian who is called Josephus but is thought to be Caius that writ against the Montanists in Tertullians time The booke is mentioned by Photius XLVIII the fragment is published by Heschelius in his annotations there And there is a copy of it in the Library at Oxford a transcript whereof I have to show by the favour of the late learned Doctor Langbane The tenor of it is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a place under the Earth where light cometh not and therefore darke and assigned for soules to be guarded by Angels that distribute them their lots for a time One quarter of it is the lake of unquenchable fire which the wicked shall be thrown into at the last day when the righteous shall receive the kingdome who in the meane time are in the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but quartered a part For there is one common descent at the entrance whereof stands the Archangel with his host distributing the souls that are conducted by theire Angels the righteous to the right hand to be lighted and conducted with melody by the good Angels to the company of the righteous in a place of light and joy The wicked as prisoners with violence and shame on the left to hard by the said lake hearing the boyling of it and seeing the righteous in joy afar off and expecting as the righteous better things so they worse at the day of judgement Set aside the limiting of the place to be under the earth in what description can the scriptures better agree then in this The verses of the Sibyls libro I. conducting the three sons of Noe to Acheron in the house of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tell us that there they shall be honoured 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because they are the off spring of the blessed happy men themselves whom the Lord of Host gave a good mind and conserred counsels with them who shall be happy though they goe to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hell And is not this a cleare resolution of S. Austins doubt whether Abrahams bosom belong to Hell or to Paradise Epist LVII in Psalm XXXV and whether inferi or Hell doe ever signifie a good place in the Scripture as Abrahams bosome certainely doth de Gen. ad lit XII 23 34. which he supposeth to be resolved in the negative Epist XCIX But finds no absurdity in the affirmative de Civit. XX 15. For taking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely for a place invsible where the souls of good as well as bad are disposed of untill the day of judgement in which the Scriptures and the Church both agree If inferi be the Latine of it every where Inferi also must signifie such a place But taking it to signifie a place under the Earth as it is true the word Inferi signifieth who dare undertake that either the scriptures have taught or there is any tradition of the Church that the soules of the righteous till the resurrection are guarded under the Earth though the authors hitherto quoted have believed it whose opinion therefore in that point is no part of the Tradition of the Church S. Austine for certaine admitteth all but that resolving Euchirid CIIX. Tempus quod inter hominis mortem ultimam resurrectionem interpositum est animas abditis receptaculis continet sicut unaquaeque digna est vel requie vel aerumna pro eo quod sortita est in carne dum viveret The time that comes between a mans death and the last resurrection guards soules in secret receptacles as every one is worthy of rest or sorrow according to the Lot of it whilst lived in the flesh For what are these secret receptacles but the invisible place which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth Pope Pius I in his letter to Justus Bishop of Vicuna the ancientest that the latine Church hath that is unquestionable Presbyteri illi qui ab Apostolis educati usque ad nos pervenerunt a domino vocati in cubilibus aeternis clausi tenentur The ancients saith he who being bred by the Apostles were come to our time being called by the Lord are kept shut up in eternall bed-chambers to wit until the last judgement Novatianus of S. Cyprians time in his book de Trinitate I. Quae infra terram sunt neque ipsa sunt digestis ordinatis potestatibus vacua Locus enim est quo piorum impiorumque animae ducuntur futuri judicii praejudicia sentientes Nor are the parts under the Earth void of orderly disposed Powers For there is the place to which the soules of the Godly and the wicked are conducted feeling the prejudice of the judgement which is to come The same saith Origen all but the place de Principiis IV. 2. Qui de hocmundo secundum communem istam mortem recedunt pro actibus suis meritis dispensantur prâ—ut digni fuerint judicati Alii quidem in locum qui dicitur Infernus alii in sinum Abrahae per diversas mansiones Those that goe out of this world by this common death are disposed of according to theire works and deserts some into the place called Hell others into the bosome of Abraham according to severall lodgings So also in Num XXI hom XXVI S. Hilary saith the same in Psalm II. CXX For thus he writeth Exeuntes de corpore ad introitum illum regni caelestis per custodiam Domini fideles omnes reservabuntur in sinu scilicet Abrabae interim collocati quo adire impios interjectum chaos inhibet quosque introcundi rursum in regnum coelorum tempus adveniat All the faithfull going out of the body to the entrey of the heavenly kingdom shall be kept there under the Lords guard as placed for the time in Abrahams bosome whether the gulf interposed prohibits the wicked to come till the time of re entring the kingdom of heaven come againe And therefore the same he meanes when he saies in Psalmum CXXXVIII that the Law of human necessity which our Lord refused not is
either from Hethen writers or from the Scriptures There being nothing under the earth but that which answereth this Hemispere above the earth Which clause is added to meete with one opinion of the Gentiles that the lower hemispere is the place of soules and the torments of Hell which they call Tartara as much beneath it as heaven is above this Onely here it must be provided that the gulfe be not forgotten which our Lord fixeth between Abrahams bosome and the place of torments Dionysius Eccles Hierarch Cap. II. seemeth to agree with Gregory Nyssenâ— and so doe others whom unlesse you distinguish thus you wil not find to speak things consequent to themselvs And I am much confirmed in it first by the difference of opinions among the fathers concerning Samuels soul Which we as there be enough of them that cannot indure to yeild it to have been in the devils power to raise so are they by that meanes obliged to maintaine the rest of the Fathers souls with Samuels to have gon into Abrahams bosom with Lazarus Secondly by their agreement in acknowledging that Paradise which was shut upon man for the sinne of Adam is opened by the death of Christ to receive the righteous For to conceive that they understood this of that Paradise which Adam was expulsed would be to make them too childish But understanding it of that estate which that Paradise signified you have Saint Basil assigning Paradise to Lazarus de Jejunio Hom. I. Besides another Homily intitled to Zeno Bishop of Verona Nay you have expresly in Philo Carpathius upon Cant. VI. 2. My love is gone into his garden Or his Paradise Tunc enim Paradisum triumphator ingressus est cum ad inferos penetravit Then did he enter Paradise in triumph when he pierced into hell Making the beds of spices there to be the souls of the Fathers to whom our Lord conducted the good thiefe And Olympiodorus upon Cant. III. saith that some make Paradise under the earth and that there Dives saw Lazarus Others in heaven Whereas the letter of the Scripture placeth it upon the earth But howsoever that the righteous are both in joy and peace and also in Paradise Thinges not to be reconciled not distinguishing as I do Lastly the reason of Faith setleth me upon this ground The reason of Faith I say not the rule of Faith For I do not say that any part of the dispute belongs to that which the salvation of all Christians necessarily requireth them to believe He who understandeth that himself is saved by imbracing Christianity and living according to it I do not understand why he should be damned because he understood not by what meanes the Fathers afore Christ were saved provided he deny not their salvation to the disparagement of Christianity whereof they were the forerunners And this is the case of Hermes and Justine and Clemens and if there were any others who thought that the Fathers or the Philosophers were saved by believing in Christ at his descent into hell meerly because they understood not the ground of that difference between the litterall and mysticall sense of the Old Testament which I have said Indeed in regard it is by consequence destructive to Christianity that the Fathers should have attained salvation any wayes but as Christians in that regard I answer the position is by consequence prejudiciall to Christianity But because by that consequence which the most censorious of the error do not owne and not owning necessarily incurre some other inconvenience to Christianity I say not that they destroy the common faith who hold it but that they destroy the true reason of it which subsisteth not unlesse we grant that the Fathers obtained salvation by Christ Nor that unlesse we grant that they came not under the Devils Power by death who died qualified for salvation as that time required There remaines no question what company the soul of Christ was with for the time that it remained parted from the body nor how the descent thereof to Hell is to be understood supposing the premises The Tradition of the descent of Christs soul into hell can by no meanes be parted from the Tradition of an intent to visite the soules of the Fathers That supposes that the soules of the Fathers were disposed of under the earth whether in the intrails of the earth or in the hemisphere below us as the Heathen did imagine And infers that the intent of it was to redeem them out of the devils hands to go with our Lord Christ into his kingdome Could this be maintained to be the Tradition of the Church I might be straitned by the Tradition of the Church But as I have showed it to be by consequence prejudiciall to the Faith So I have showed that there is no Tradition of the Church for the disposing of all soules before Christ under the earth whether in the devils hands or otherwise Nor for the translating of any soule from under the earth to heaven with Christ and by Christ But for the continuance of all in those unknown lodgings where they are disposed at their death till the day of judgement whether before or after Christ Though the Latine hath no name to signify them but inferi or infernum necessarily signifying as to the originall of the word the parts beneath the earth There is therefore no question to be made as to the Tradition of the Church that the soule of Christ parting with the body went to the soules of the Fathers which the Gospell represents us in Abrahams bosom whether the death of Christ removing the debt of sin which shut Paradise upon Adam make that place known to us by the name of Paradise to which our Lord inducted the good thiefe Or whether the Jewes had used that name for the place to which they believed the soules of the righteous do go But there is therefore no Tradition remaining of the descent of Christs soul into hell to rescue the soules of the Fathers out of the Verge of Hell commonly called Limbus Patrum to go with him into his kingdome True it is which Irenaeus saith and the Tradition of the Church will justify it that our Lord Christ was to undergo the condition of the dead for the redemption of mankind And therefore the separation of his humane soul from the body was really the condition in consideration whereof we are freed from the dominion of death True it is that this dominion of death is signified in the Old Test by the returning of Adam to the earth of which he was made And that the grave is an earnest of the second death in all those that belong not to the N. Test while the Old was in force Therefore that our L. Christ was to undergo the condition common to mankinde to which the first Adam was accursed is a part of our common faith Because the curse was to be voided by his undergoing of it Accordingly therefore you shall find by the
then I said before to show you that the ancient Church from the beginning held the happinesse of the Saints souls to continue imperfect till the resurrection of their bodies Gennadius de dogmat Eccles LXXVIII LXXIX will have us to take it for the doctrine of the Church that the soules of the Fathers before Christ were in hell tiâ—l they were delivered thence by Christ That since Christ they go straight to Christ expecting the resurrection of their bodies that with them they may attaine intire happinesse And that this doctrine had for some time great vogue in the Church I deny not Nor intend to deny that the Saints are with Christ some whereof the Apocalypse represents before the Throne But that there is no Tradition for the translating of the Fathers souls that the saints are in Abrahams bosom or Paradise with them till the resurrection I conceive I have showed by clearing the sayings of the most ancient Christians from the misprisions which they are intangled with He that shall consider the premises may find Tertul. Lactant. and Victorinus whom Cardinal Bellar. acknowledgeth to detaine all soules in their store-houses till the resurrection De S. Beat. I. 5. good company among the rest of the Fathers And therefore I will referre it to the reader to judge between that exposition that he fits the passages of the Fathers with which he produces and that which my opinion requires Especially having Doctor Stapleton Defens Ecclesiast Authorit â— 2. to confesse with others of that side that all the ancients in a manner do hold the contrary of that which is since defined by the Councile of Florence Saint Bernard I must not omit because it is he who considering the text of the Apocalypse which you may see by the premises sayes more then all the Scripture besides hath so pertinently observed out of it that they are but in the Court as yet but at the consummation of their blisse shall enter into Gods house Therefore he maketh three states of the soule The first in tents the second in the Courts the third in Gods house into which neither the Saints shall enter without the common people of the Church nor their soules without their bodies De omnibus Sanctis Serm III. And Serm. IV. the Saints which now see onely the manhood of Christ under the altar he saith shall be lifted upon the altar to see the essence of God The Schoole since his time upon occasion of the contest with the Greek Church believing with Saint Bernard hath stated the dispute upon this terme of seeing God And John XXII Pope is questioned whether intending to determine with Saint Bernard he held heresy heretically or not For his successor Bennet XII first and after him the Councile of Florence hath decreed that for matter of Faith which before the decree was not matter of Faith And therefore if that be true which I said in the first book can never become matter of Faith For my part I see Saint Augustine de cura pro mortuis cap. IX resolve the question how the dead can know what is done here three wayes By the report of those who go hence and by the will of God remember what is done here by the ministery of Angels and by the revelation of Gods Spirit And if Saint John being in the Spirit saw by vision of Prophesy God sitting upon his throne in heaven as well as the Elders and Martyrs soules did I can easily grant that those souls which should have such revelations of Gods Spirit whether by the ministery of Angels or without it might see God upon his Throne as Saint John and the Prophets did and and as the Elders and Martyrs are there described to do But this would be no more that sight of God in which Saint Paul and Saint John seem to place the happinesse of Gods kingdome then that sight of God which Moses had when he communed face to face with God before the Ark was that sight whereof God said to him Thou shalt not see my face For no man shall see my face and live This for certain S. Augustine deriving the knowledge of our maters which blessed soules may have from the ministery of Angels and revelations of Gods Spirit and perhaps from report from hence was farre enough from owning Saint Gregories consequence Quae intus omnipotentis Dei claritatem vident nullo modo credendum est quod foris sit aliquid quod ignorent Those who see within the brightnesse of Almighty God it is not to be thought that there is any thing which they are ignorant of without Moral XII 14. For supposing the Saints see the essence of God it followeth not that thereby they see what is done here because it is not the essence of God but his will by which it may appear So farre it is from any appearance of truth that he who hath recourse to soules that go hence to the ministery of Angels to revelations of Gods Spirit to inform the saints departed of that which is done here should believe them to have that sight of God wherein the happinesse of his kingdom consisteth In fine by the Arch-bishop of Spalato de Rep. Ecclesi VIII 110-120 you shall find the opinion of Calvine to be the same I here maintaine though his followers it seemes are afraid of the evidence for it or the consequence of it Let us see whether justly or not It hath been a custome so general in the church to pray for the dead that no beginning of it can be assigned no time no part of the Ch. where it was not used And though the rejecting of it makes not Aerius an Heretick as disbelieving any part of the faith yet had he broke from the Ch. upon no other cause but that which the whole Church besids him owned he must as a Schismatick have come into Epiphanius his lift of Heresies intending to comprise all parties severed from the Church All that I have known pretended is that which the learned Blondel in a French work of the Sibyls verses hath conjectured that it had the begâ—nning from that book Which book as divers before him have showed reason why it should be thought the worke of a Christian intending to advance Cristianity by such meanes So I confesse I can not see whence it should come more probably then from Montanus or some of his fellow Prophets as he conjectureth For though he hath failed of his usuall diligence in clearing the difficulties which the account of time raiseth how Justine Martyrs Apology and Hermes his Pastor should borrow from Montanus yet doe I not see why Montanus might not begin to declare himselfe by it before the date of them But neither doth my businesse require or my modell allow me to debate it For supposing Justine Martyr or Clemens or Tertullian or Lactantius or many more particular writers were induced to allege it as for the advantâ—ge of the common Christianity He that sees not how
brother Satyrus as likewise Gregory Nazianzene for his brother Caesarius whome neverthelesse they suppose to be in happinesse Their words you may see there p. 188. To which he that will take the paines may adde all that Blâ—ndel hath collected in his second book of the Sibyls Cap. XLI of Epitaphes which pray for them whom they describe in happinesse For in short where there is hope that the deceased is among Gods Saints there is there doubt on the other side that he may have need of light and peace and refreshment And therefore the supposed Dionysius Eccl. Hierarch Cap. VII where he relateth the custome of praying for the remission of sins in behalfe of the dead relateth the singing of psalmes of thanks-giving at funeralls And S. Austine telleth how Euodius begun the CI. Psal when his mother was dead yet in consideration of the danger which every soule that dies is subject to prayeth for her as he had commanded Confess IX 12. In fine though custom made not the dâ—fference every where visible between Prayers for Saints and prayers for ordinary Christians yet was the common Faith of the Church a sufficient ground for both whatsoever descant private construction might make upon the plainsong of it Tertullian expecting the raigne of Christians upon earth for a thowsand yeares and thinking those that should rise first most advantaged tooke the delay of rising againe for paying the utmost farthing and to have part with them that rise first fit to be prayed for for our friends that are dead de Amina Cap. LVIII de Monog Cap. X. But this the Church is not chargeable with That there was a conceit among some licentious Christians that the paines of the damned might either cease or be abated by the prayers of the living you shall find by the answer so often quoted p. 226 232. and that All Souls day had the beginning from such a conceite But though men openly wicked may dye in communion with the Church yet the Church supposeth no man damned that dies in communion with the Church and therefore the Church is not chargeable with prayers for the damned It is a knowne rule of the Church that the offerings of those that dyed not in communion with the Church should not be received that the offerings of those that dye in communion with the Church could not be refused That this Rule is more ancient then the Heresy of Marcion and others before Marcion that baptized others for those that were dead as you have seene that is as ancient as the Apostles appears Because the reason why they baptized others in their stead must be because all those that were baptized were prayed for at the Eucharist and onely those as you see by S. Austine and the Canon of the Masse quoted just afore If then men openly wicked dyed in communion with the Church it was because the Laws of the Church were not executed which had they beene executed they should not have dyed in communion with the Church And because this inexecution may be for the common good of the Church it was not offensive that such were prayed for among other members of the Church For there is possibility for the salvation of those for whose salvation there is no presumption that is reasonable And there had been just offence for the kindred and friends of such dead had they been refused the common right of all members of the Church Therefore S. Austine saies though they that dye in this case receive no help yet they that remaine alive receive some comfort and satisfaction in the memory of their relations being owned by the prayers of the Church for Christians I will not here allege that the Church of England teacheth to pray for the dead where the Litanie praies for deliverance in the hour of death and in the day of judgement Or when we pray after the communion that by the merits and death of Christ and through faith in his blood we and all the whole Church may obtaine remission of our sins and all other benefits of his passion But it is manifest that in the service appointed in the time of Edward the VI. prayer is made for the dead both before the Communion and at the Buriall to the same purpose as I maintaine It is manifest also that it was changed in Queen Elizabeths time to content the Puritans who now it appeares could not be content with lesse then breaking of the Church in peeces And therefore since unity hath not beene obtayned by parting with the Law of the Catholike Church in mine opinion for the love of it I continue the resolution to bound Reformation by the rule of the Catholike Church Allowing that it may be matter of Reformation to restore the prayers which are made for the dead to the originall sense of the whole Church but maintayning that to take away all prayer for the dead is not paring off abuses but cutting to the quick For I must now adde that all this showes the praiers of the Church of Rome for the delivering of soules out of Purgatory paines to have no ground in the Tradition of the Church there being no such place as Purgatory among those store-houses which are designed for those that depart in the state of Grace till the day of judgement no paine appointed to make satisfaction for the debt of temporall punishment remayning when the sin is remitted no translating of soules so purged from purgatory to heaven and the happynesse of it The delay of the resurrection may be a penalty if you take into it the consideration of that estate in which the soule may be detayned being such as that affection to the drosse of the world which it departeth with inforceth But what use is there of torment when the race is done When neither amendment of the party on whom it is inflicted nor of others that see the example can be expected to make God torment them whom he is reconciled to for the satisfaction of his vindicative justice is to make his vindicative justice delight in the evill of his creature when no reformation is to be expected by it Which in the government of the world is cruelty not justice If the law allow an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth it could never stand with Christianity under the law to take it where it repaires not a mans losse though the magistrate was to give it being required Civil Law may allow revenge to satisfie passion but the magistrate grants reparation to satisfie commutative justice which the party may demand for meere revenge That there is no ground for such punishment in the tradition of the Church I refer you to the title of Purgatory in the answer to the Iesuits challenge for evidence And it is indeed a thing which the disputing of our controversies hath made to appeare That there was from the beginning no question of any punishment for them that dye in Gods Grace That S. Austine
began to make some question of it upon some disputes which he met with That S. Gregory first professed an opinion of it granted upon no scripture no nor Tradition of faith but upon aparitions and revelations That there is great appearance that Venerable Bede having received it from S. Gregorys Scholars who planted Christianity here added much to it by his credulity in such maters And yet that they had yet assigned no quarter in the Verge of Hell for this purpose but onely believed it of certaine soules in some places of this earth untill the Schoole hammered out a debt of punishment to which souls acquited both of the guilt and staine of sin may remaine lyable The extending of indulgence to the voyding of this how properly soever it may be counted purging of soules made the position a mater of great jelousy for the interest of profit which our common Christianity abhorreth And indulgence indeed of Canonicall penance I have showed hath the first ground in S. Pauls example and necessary use in the Church But when redeeming of penance was come into practice in the Church it was granted upon considerations with Christianity and the safety of poore soules allowed not Of paying a rate of taking the Crosse against Infidels of moderne Jubiles But that there should be a stock of merit in the Church upon account of works of supererogation done by the Saints which theire owne reward answereth not and that the Church in granting indulgence of penance may allow it to his account that receives indulgence is a conceite as injurious to the merits of Christ the consideration of all pardon and to the Covenant of Grace the condition whereof it abateth so that hath no evidence from any rule or practice of the ancient Church But that they should be thought to be of force to redeeme soules out of Purgatory and that taxing the time which they grant and the like for which neither there is nor can be any ground The best that is said or can be said in defense of them who publish them to poore people by whom they are frequented is that they get themselves mony the account whereof being almes they charge themselves with And that people are by this meanes imployed in the works of devotion which if not available to the effect which they imagine are how soever good for their soules health As for the translating of soules to heaven before the day of judgement it is so diametrally contrary to all antiquity that the very naming of it takes away all pretense for Traditon on behalfe of Purgatory It is acknowledged indeed that a number of the ancient Fathers during the flourishing times of the Church doe believe that the fire which the world is to be burnt up with as it shall involve the wicked and cary them to be everlastingly tormented in the sink of the world so it shall touch and scorch even the Saints themselves to try if their works be such as Gods vengeance can take hold of and to purge away that drosse which the love of the world they dyed with importeth This is by divers called Origens Purgatory because they conceive his credit might move S. Hilary S. Basil S. Ambrose Gregory Nyssene and Nazanizain S. Jerome S. Austine and S. Chry. with divers others to follow it But Blondel having observed that it is found in the Sibyles verses will needs have them all to have taken it up from thence Which as I have no reason to yeild to having showed already that the credit of that book was not the foundation of other particular opinions which had vogue in the Church So do I not find those famous Doctors so affected to Origen whose writings concerning the exposition of the scriptures they were necessarily obliged to frequent as to admit an opinion so neere concerning the faith upon this recommendation on whom they declare so much jelousy in mater of Faith For my part as I find it very agreeable to the words of S. Paul when he saith that they whose works are burnt up shall escape themselves but as through fire So how mens works should be tryed or burnt up by that fire I find it not easy to be understood And therefore without taking upon me to censure so great persons for innovating in the Church or to maintaine that in which there is no concurrence of any Scripture with any consent of the whole Church I leave the truth of this to judgement as secure that it will not concern the common Faith But this I say peremptorily that admitting it there remaines no pretense for Purgatory in the Tradition of the Church unlesse it be by equivocation of words For this coming to passe at the day of judgement admitteth no release before And without release before Purgatory fire goes quite out No Indulgences no Jubilies no stock of merit to be dispensed by the Church to such workes of devotion as it limiteth can be any of any request if they take not effect afore the day of judgement Take away the opinion of translating souls from the Verge of hell which Purgatory to the sight of God and the Clergy of the Church of Rome shall no more eat the sins of the people as the Prophet complaines of the Priests under the Law For while the people are perswaded that their sins are cured by the sentence of absolution once pronounced Penance serving onely to extinguish the debt of temporall punishment remaining and that to be ransomed by the services which they pay for in the name of their friends which are dead the Clergy live by those sins of which the people dy because they are not duly cured For the lusts for which men sin not being cured by that hardship of Penance which the case requireth to change attrition into contrition the guilt of sin remaines upon the head of him in whose heart the love of sin remaines alive notwithstanding the keyes of the Church mistaking in that case Besides take away the opinion of translating soules from hell to heaven since the coming of Christ and there will remaine no ground for the translating of the Fathers souls from the verge of hell which is Limbus Patrum to the sight of God by the descent of our Lord into hell and his rising from the dead againe There will be no cause why that reason which I tender for that vanity of immaginations rather then opinions or belief in the Fathers which that which all agree in is intangled with should not be admitted For the translating of Christian soules from Purgatory to heaven not being believed why should the translating the Fathers souls remaine Why should not the simple Faith in which all Christians agree revive and take the place of Tradition in the Church which indeed it hath that between death and the day of judgement the good are in joy the bad in paine both incomplete till both be fulfilled after both shall have received their finall doome CHAP. XXIX The
ground upon which Ceremonies are to be used in the service of the Church Instances out of the Scriptures and Tradition of the Apostles Of the equivocation of the word Sacrament in the Fathers The reason of a Sacrament in Baptisme and the Eucharist In extreme Vnction In Marriage In Confirmation Ordination and Penance NOW to come to the reason for which Ceremonies are to be used in the publick service of God I must here rest in that which I have rendred in my Book of the service of God at the assemblies of the Church being satisfied that it pointeth at the very ground for the use of them from the beginning among Gods people Man is compounded of soule and body and the worship of God and prayer to God is an act of the soule which the body by the senses thereof may diverte the mind from but cannot help forwards it till by the motion and gesture of the body the soul be ingaged to attend on that which the mind proposeth Therefore the people of God in the Scripture pray alwaies either standing or kneeling unlesse some speciall cause move them to prostrate themselves That their ordinary posture was standing appeares by Mat. VI. 5. Mark XI 25. Luke XVIII 11. Neh. IX 5. Jerem. XV. 1. XVIII 19. Job XXX 20. And they have reason who derive the Stations of the primitive Christians and the use of not kneeling on Lords dayes and between Easter and Whitsontide from their custome But therefore they kneeled in Lent and ' Daniel kneeled when he fasted IX 20. and Moses fell prostrate before God Deut. IX 18 25. but Esdras upon his knees Esd IX 5. X. 1. as Daniel also VII 11. to what purpose but to cast down the mind by the posture of the body that being sensible of his wants a man may attend upon God with deep devotion and reverence The Publicane durst not lift up his eyes to heaven Luke XVIII 13. which showes that otherwise they did lift up their eyes and spread their hands to heaven as Lam. III. 41. 1 Kings VIII 54. 1 Tim. II. 8. But the Publicane smote upon his brest because he exacted Penance of himselfe He was a foole for his paines if that be Reformation which is pretended to claime familiarity with Almighty God by talking with him negligently to signify that we are sure of him having Faith that we are predestinate to life as of the number of those for whom Christ died exclusively to the rest of mankind Or if it be Reformation to sit and censure with how fit and pertinent conceptions in how proper and choice terms a man expresses his necessities and the necessities of his people to God But praying to God is something else than all this and not onely the ancient people of God but those who have no sense of religion but that which nature forceth them to show us by their practice that lowlinesse of the body stirreth as well as testâ—fieth reverence in the minde to God in his service All this holdeth taking a man by himselfe as a single Christiane But supposing the society of a Church and an assembly of Gods people for his service there is more to be said The people of God spoke much by visible signes not all by words Jeremy might have said to them of Jerusalem take example by the Rechabites who drink no wine upon the order of their Patriarch But that was not enough He must bringe them to the Temple and set wine before them that having formally refused it he might thereupon protest to his people The same Jeremy might have told the Jewes as Saint Paul doth the Romanes that men are as clay in the Potters hands without going down to the Potters and seeing him spoile a vessell that he was making that he might thereupon take his rise and say that God was framing evil against them whom he had made Jer. XVIII 1-5 without buying an earthen vessell and breaking it before the ancients of the People and of the Priests to tell them that God would break them likewise Jer. XIX 1 11 12. when he makes all that businesse on purpose he showes what force visible signes have to make impression upon the minde of that which words signify neverthelesse The Law would never have appointed to sit still on the Sabbath in remembrance of the creation of the world or the deliverance from Egypt to carry a bundle of branches in the hand and to dwell in booths in remembrance of the voiage through the wildernesse otherwise And is not this reason fit to be applied to the assemblies of Christians Witnesse the Prophet Joel Why must they weep and mourne with their fasting why must the children and sucklings assemble why must the joy of the bride chamber be superseded but to make impression of sorrow upon particulars from that which the publick expresseth Joel II. 13-16 The people of Niniveh and the King thereof put on sackcloth and sat in ashes nor man nor beast must tast foode or drinke water at the preaching of Jonas III. 5. 6. 7. On the contrary at the bringing of the Arke into the City of David Chron. XIII 8. XV. 28. They have seen thy goings O God even the goings of my God my King into the sanctuary The singers went before those that played on instruments followed amongst them were the damsels playing on timbrells And the solemnity which the wall of Jerusalem was dedicated with you may read in Nehem. XII 27-43 The Festival of our Lords Resurrection presupposeth the Fast of the Passion makes all the Lords dayes of the year festivall by renewing weekly that joy which it solemnizeth The Fast which goeth before it by the institution of the Apostles agreeing in it because not agreeing when it should end in Tertullians time was inlarged to those dayes on which the Bridegroome was not missing but by just use of the Churches Power is inlarged to fourty dayes Shall it be superstitious for the Church to professe solemn Penance and mourning for that time which gained the Ninivites that grace which the Gospel tendereth the Gentiles that repent according to their example If it be Reformation to abolish all ceremonies let it be Reformation for Gods people to understand any difference between an humiliation and a thanksgiving Saint Paul disputeth hard that the women of Corinth ought to be vailed the men unvailed Not for any consideration of reverence to God which the uncovering of the head did not signify in those times But to signify the humility and modesty of the sex which had he spoken of serving God in private he need not have stood upon and therefore in regard to the Church Which if it be true if consideration ought to be had of the Church in celebrating the service of God at the assemblies thereof then it is requisite that when the World is come into the Church and all assemble those ceremonies should be used which were not requisite when the numbers were small and the assemblies thereof
the acts of them that teach these prayers the acts of the Church because it tolerates them and maintaines them in it in stead of casting them out it would be hard to free that Church from Idolatrie which whoso admitteth can by no meanes grant it to be a Church the being whereof supposeth the worship of one God exclusive to any thing else But the words of them are capable of the same limitation that I gave to the words of our Lord when I said that they whom Christians do good to here may be said to receive them into everlasting habitations because God does it in consideration of them and of the good done them And so when Irenaeus calls the Virgine Mary the advocate of Eve V. 19. he that considers his words there and III. 33. shall find that he saith it not because she prayed for her but because she believed the Angels message and submitted to Gods will and so became the meanes of saving all though by our Lord Christ who pleadeth even for her as well as for Eve Ground enough there is for such a construction even the belief of one God alone that stands in the head of our Creed which we have no reason to thinke the Church allowes them secretly to renounce whom she alloweth to make these prayers And therefore no ground to construe them so as if the Church by allowing them did renounce the ground of all her Christianity But not ground enough to satisfie a reasonable man that all that make them do hold that infinite distance between God and his saints and Angels of whom they demand the same effects which if they hold not they are Idolaters as the Heathen were who being convinced of one Godhead as the Fathers challenge to their faces divided it into one principall and divers that by his gift are such How shall I presume that simple Christians in the devotions of their hearts understand that distance of God from his creatures which their words signify not which the wisest of their teachres will be much troubled to say by what figure of speech they can allow it Especially if it be considered how little reason or interest in religion there can be to advance the reverence of Christian people towards the Saints or Angels so farre above the reason and ground which ought to be the spring-head of it For so farre are we from any Tradition of the Catholicke Church for this that the admonition of Epiphanius to the Collyridians takes-hold of it Haer. LXXIX For they also would have been Christians being a sort of women in Arabia who in imitation of the Eucharist offered to the Virgine Mary and communicated Therefore Epiphanius reproves them by the Custome of the Church that no such thing was ever done in the Church as well as by the ground of Christianity that Christians worship onely one God This admonition then takes hold though not of the Church yet of the prayers which it alloweth signifying the same with their oblations So doth the admonition of Saint Ambrose in Rom. I. to them who reserve nothing to God that they give not to his servants So doth that of Saint Augustine de vera Rel. Cap. LV. that our religion is not to consist in worshipping the dead And that an Angel forbad S. John to worship him but onely God whose fellow-servants they were So doth the argument of S. Gregory Nyssene contra Eunom IV. and Athanasius contra Arian III. concluding our Lord to be God because he is worshipped which Cornelius was forbid by Saint Peter Saint John by the Angel to do to them saith Athanasius In fine so dangerous is the case that whoso communicateth in it is no way reasonably assured that he communicateth not in the worship of Idols Onely the Church of England having acknowledged the Church of Rome a true Church though corrupt ever since the Reformation I am obliged so to interpret the prayers thereof as to acknowledge the corruption so great that the prayers which it alloweth may be Idolatries if they be made in that sense which they may properly signify But not that they are necessarily Idolatries For if they were necessarily Idolatries then were the Church of Rome necessarily no Church The being of Christianity presupposing the worship of one true God And though to confute the Heretickes the stile of moderne devotions leaves nothing to God which is not attributed to and desired of his Saints Yet it cannot be denied they may be the words of them who believe that God alone can give that which they desire The second sort it is confessed had the beginning in the flourishing times of the Church after Constantine The lights of the Greek and Latine Church Basil Nazianzene Nyssene Ambrose Jerome Augustine Chrysostome Cyrils both Theodoret Fulgentius Gregory the Great Leo more or rather all after that time have all of them spoken to the Saints departed and desired their assistance But neither is this enough to make a Tradition of the Church For the Church had been CCC years before it began Irenaeus is mistaken when he is alledged for it as I said even now Cardinall Bellarmine alleges out of Eusebius de Praeparat XIII 10. Vota ipsis facimus We make our prayers to them But the Greek beares onely We make our prayers to God at their monuments Athanasius de sanctissima deipara whom he quotes is certainly of a later date then Athanasius Out of S. Hillary I see nothing brought nor remember any thing to be brought to that purpose In fine after Constantine when the Festivalls of the Saints being publickly celebrated occasioned the confluence of Gentiles as well as Christians and innumerable things were done which seemed miracles done by God to attest the honour done them and the truth of Christianity which it supposed I acknowledge those great lights did think fit to addresse themselves to them as petitioners but so at the first as those that were no wayes assured by our common Christianity that their petitions arrived at their knowledge You have seen Saint Augustine acknowledge that they must come by such meanes as God is no way tied to furnish Gregory Nazianzene speakes to Gorgonia in his Oration upon her and to Constantius in his first oration against Juliane but under a doubtfull condition if they were sensible of what he spake Enough to distinguish praying to God from any addresse to a creature though religion be the ground of it And when the apparitions about their monuments were held unquestionable yet was it questioned whether the same souâ— could be present at once in places of so much distance or Angels appear like them as you may see in the answer aforesaid pag. 391. 394. Nay Hugo de S. Victore in Cassander Epist XIX hath inabled him to hold that the Litanies do not suppose that the Saints hear them and therefore are expounded by some to signify conditionall desires if God grant them to come to their knowledge But of that I speak
not yet onely as it inables me to conclude that this kind of prayer is not Idolatry This necessarily followes from the premises Because a man cannot take that Saint or Angel for God whose prayers he desires But manifestly showes that his desire is grounded upon the relation which he thinkes he hath to him by our Lord Christ and by his Church Neverthelesse though it be not Idolatry the consequence and production of it not being distinguishable from Idolatry the Church must needes stand obliged to give it those bounds that may prevent such mischeif as that which shall make it no Church For though the degrees are not visible by which the abuse is come to this height yet I conceive it appeares by Walafridus Strabus de Rebus Ecclesiasticis cap. XXVIII that before S. Jerome the Saints had no roome in the Litanies which answer Pray for us after every Saints name There he telleth that S. Jerome first translated Eusebius his Martyrologe containing what Saints died on what dayes of the year at the request of Chromatius and Heliodorus Bishops upon occasion of that commendation which the Emperor Theodosius had given Gregory Bishop of Cordova for commemorating every day at the Eucharist the saints of the day And afore this he affirmeth the Saints names had no room in the Letanies And Chemnitius hath given us the transcript of an ancient Letanie out of a written Copy belonging to the Abbey of Corbey upon the Wesor which calleth upon the Saints Sancte Petre Sancte Paule c. but so that the suffrage is Exaudi Christe O Christ hear us or them for us which is the effect of the first sort of Prayer and an evident argument that the formes now in force took possession by degrees For the Letatanies are properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord have mercy upon us as the Liturgies of Saint Basil and Saint Chrisostome call them By that forme of service which the Constitutions of the Apostles relate where the Deacon indites to the people what they are to pray for in behalf of all estates in the Church and their necessities you shall see the people answer onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord have mercy That is their part Thence came the name of Letanies whether such devotions were used in Processions or otherwise That in the Letanies of Saint Gregory whereof we read in his life I. 41. 42. The Saints were spoken to the people answering Ora pro nobis pray for us it is easy to believe For of Charles the Great and Walafridus his time there is no question to be made That the same was done in Saint Basils Letanies whereof Epist LXIII or in those which Mamertus Bishop of Vienna instituted as we find by Sidonius Epist V. 14. VII 1. which have since been called Rogations there is no manner of appearance And the innovaâ—ion of Petrus Fullo the Eutychian Bishop of Antiochia after the Councile of Chalcedon which Nicephorus relates Eccles Hist XV. 28. in bringing the Blessed Virgine into the prayers of the Church is enough to assure us there is no Tradition of the Apostles for it A difference very considerable For grant the monuments of Saints and Martyrs the places for Christians to meet at for Gods service in publicke for their private devotions by primitive Christianity All this while the service of God is the work the honour of the Saints determines onely the time and place of it Processions celebrated with Letanies were assemblies for Gods service to turn away his plagues and the like And when the Saints come into them their honor becomes part of the work for which Christians assemble Suppose a simple soul can distinguish between Ora pro nobis and Domine miserere between Pray for us and Lord have mercy upon us How shall I be assured that it distinguishes between the honour that Pagans gave the lesse gods under Jupiter the Father of gods and that which himself gives the Saints under the God of those Saints And is it enough that the Church injoynes not nor teaches Idolatry Is it not further bound to secure us against it I know not whether it can be said that Processions and Letanies are voluntary devotions which the people are not answerable for if they neglect They were first brought in and since frequented at the instance of Prelates and their Clergy and if they be amisse the people are snared by their meanes that is by the Church if the Church bear them out in it And by these three sorts of Prayers it appears that without giving bounds to private conceits there is meanes to stop mens course from that extreamity which whether it be reall Idolatry or not nothing can assure us Upon these terms I stand I have heard those relations upon credit not to be questioned which make their devotions to Saints hardly distinguishable from the Idolatries of Pagans That they who preferred them could not or did not distinguish I say not In fine they demonstrate manifold more affection for the Blessed Virgine or some particular Saints then for our Lord. That they call not upon Saints to pray for them but to help them That they neither expresse nor can be presumed to meane by praying for them but by granting their prayers In fine that they demonstrate inward subjection of the heart wherein Idolatrie consists I cannot disbelieve those who relate what they see done What may be the reason why to them rather then to God It was a meanes to bring the world to be Christians that it was preswaded that God protected Christians by the intercession of those Saints whose Festivalls they solemnized But it brought them to be Christians with that love of the world and the present commodities of it which Christianity pretends to leave without the Church among the Pagans Should they resigne these affections to their Christianity they would have immediate recourse to God whom having to friend they know they need neither be troubled for plague nor toothach nor any thing which the Crosse of Christ consists with While they cannot assure themselves that they do no marvaile if they would have such Christianity as may give them hope of that by the Saints which God assures them not by it I grant it no Idolatrie that is not necessarily any Idolatrie to pray to Saints to pray for us The very matter implies an equivocation in the word praying which nothing hinders the heart to distinguish But is it fit for the Church to maintaine it because it is necessarily no Idolatry I grant Ora pro nobis in the Letanies might be taken for the ejaculation of a desire which a man knowes not whether it is heard or not as some instance in a leter which a man would write though uncertaine whether it shall come to hand or not and I could wish that the people were taught so much by the form as a powerfull meanes to preserve the distance between God and his creature alive in their esteem I count it not
the sword without the authority of the Soveraigne And therefore wee see that afterwards the good King Jehosaphat manifestly gives commission to these Judges at Jerusalem as well as to their inferiours when he restores them to the exercise of theire office according to law upon what occasion soever it may seeme to have been interrupted 2. Chron. XVII 7 8. 9. XIX 4 5 6 7 8 9 And hereupon the Psalme saith CXXII 5. There is the seat of judgement even the seat of the house of David But the Leviathan hereupon argues That as Solomon consecrated the Temple by his own prayers so Christian Princes may in their owne person consecrate Churches and not onely that but ordaine and celebrate the Eucharist and Preach and do all thiâ—gs themselves which their subjects may doe who are but their ministers The answer to which is first That herein he contradicts his own position that by the scriptures that is by Gods Law the right of designing persons to be Ordained and of doing other things of like nature belonges to the people of every Church But the office of solemnizing the ordination by imposition of hands and in like maner of executing other acts of like nature to the ministers of those Churches succeeding the Apostles Seconâ—ly that he is not able to show a reason why the great Turk should not by consequence be able to consecrate Eucharist Preach and do any office wherein Christianity obligeth his Christian subjects to communicate and they accordingly stand bound to receive them at his hands For he challenges not this right for the Soveraigne as Christian but as Soveraigne And therefore a Christian Soveraign can no more do that which every Christian his subject cannot do of this nature then a Soveraign that is not a Christian Lastly that the consequence is not true nor can be proved for the reason aforesaid which if it were not all that he inferreth though never so grosse would follow Indeed there were as I observed three estates established by the Law in that people The Priests the Judges and the Prophets And because established by the Law therefore successive The Priests by birth yet a Corporation by Law as by Law indowed with the rights of their Tribe Therefore when it comes to settle their courses and ministeries in the Temple I have observed in my booke of the rights of the Church p. 230. that this is not done by David alone but with the assistance of the principall of that Tribe For the Judges there is no reason why we should not believe the Tradition of the Jewes that they were all qualified to fit in any of their Courts by imposition of the hands of some that had received the same from Moses and his Judges Though this quality made them onely capable of being Judges to which they were still actually to be chosen by the King or by the Court. So that when the Talmudists relate that King David ordained XXXM on one day they understand that he did not this as King but as qualified to ordaine though as King he might actually make Judges But being zealous of the Law as they describe him spending his time about the niceties of it and having his guard of Cerethites and Pelethites whom they understand to be Doctors all or Scholars of the Law they consequently make us believe that he meant to store the nation wiâ—h persons qualified to be Judges As for the succession of the prophets tha depended meerely upon Gods free Grace though a course of learning and discipline was without question founded by Moses and maintained by his successors to make them fit by such education for the Grace And these being the Schools of the prophets in the Scriptures when the spirit of prophesy failed became the schools of Scribes Doctors and learners of the Law out of whom Judges came As Prophets then had their authority immediately from God so were they the forerunners of our Saviour Christ and his Apostles as our Saviour showeth when he saith Mat. XXIII 34. Behold I send unto you Prophets and Scribes and wisemen and of them ye shall kill and crucifie and of them you shall scourge in your Synagogues and persecute from city to city For God having appointed them by the Law of Deut. XVIII 18-22 to have recourse also to the prophets which he should raise untill the Messias should come in whom S. Steven challengeth that Law to be fulfiled Acts VII 37. if Prophets preaching by Gods commission displeased evill rulers they easily found pretences to quarel the evidence of their commission and to put them to death as false prophets which was that which they did to our Saviour Christ and his Apostles and those who preached Christ afterwards These then having commission from God alone had in them as I showed afore the qualities both of Priests in offering to God that service in spirit truth which Christianity pretendeth and of judges in determining that which should become questionable in the Church And as the Kings of Israel were bound by Gods Lawes to maintaine all those qualities in the execution of their office So the Church being founded and having subsisted three hundred years by this power of the Apostles Constantinâ— and all Christian Princes aster him finding â—â— in that estate become obliged by Gods Law to maintaine the Church whereof they became members by professing Christianity in that estate and quality wherein they become member of it And upon these termes have the Kings of England and all other Christian Princes the same rights in Church matters which the godly Kings of Israel and Christian Emperors are found to have exercised Whereof it shall be enough here to give the most eminent instance that can be alledged in the Heresy of Arius and all the factions that were canvased in the Church to restore it being once suppressed by the Synode of Nicaea Which one act of the Church though the whole power of the Empire in two Emperors Constantius and Valius though perhaps with far different intents laboured to make voide yet they never tooke upon them to do it immediately of themselves but by meanes of Synods which they might work to their intent or by the meanes of persons apposted by them to have the power of the chief Churches And therefore whereas that Synode as it was an act of the Empire was easily recalled by the breath of either of those Emperors as it was an act of the Church it prevailed over all their intentions and by the prevailing of it we continue untainted with the heresy of Arius The reason because the right of the Church was so notorious to all Christians that those Emperors that did not professe Christianity when they did not persecute it made good the acts of it As it is to be seen in that eminent example of Aureliane which I will repeate againe because it is still alledged to argue that Paulus Samosatenus was excommunicated by the secular power of Aureliane But when
you say something more to limit the ground upon which they may be no lesse What limitation I would adde is plain by the premises The preaching of that Word and that ministring of the Sacraments which the Tradition of the whole Church confineth the sense of the Scriptures to intend is the onely mark of the Church that can be visible For I suppose preaching twice a Sunday is not if a man be left free to preach what he will onely professing to beleeve the Bible which what Heresy disowneth and to make what he thinks good of it And yet how is the generality of people provided for otherwise unlesse it be because they have preachers that are counted godly men by those whom what warrants to be godly men themselves In the mean time is it not evident that Preachers and people are overspread with a damnable heresy of Antinomians and Enthusiasts formerly when Puritanes were not divided from the Church of England called Etonists and Grindeltons according to severall Countries These believe so to be saved by the free Grace of God by which our Lord died for the Elect that by the revelation thereof which is justifying Faith all their sinnes past present and to come are remitted So that to repent of sinne or to contend against it is the renouncing of Gods free Grace and saving Faith How much might be alledged to show how all is now overspread with it The Book called Animadversions upon a Petition out of Wales shall serve to speak the sense of them who call themselves the godly party as speaking to them in Body Thus it speaks pag. 36. Look through your vail of duties profession and ordinances and try your heart with what spirit of love obedience and truth you are in your work And whether will you stand to this judgement Or rather that God should judge you according to grace to the name and nature of Christ written upon you and in you Sure the great Judge will thus judge us at last by his great judgement or last judgement Not by the outward conversation nor inward intention but finally by his eternall Election according to the Book of Life This just afore he calleth the seed of Christ and his righteousnesse in a Christian And pag. 38. When we are inraged we let fly at mens principles being not satisfied to rebuke mens actions opinions and workes but would be avenged of their Principles too As if we would kill them at the very hart pull them up by the Rootes and leave them in an uncurable condition rotten in their Principles But Principles ly deeper then the heart and are indeed Christ who is the Principle and beginning of all things who though heart fail and flesh faile yet he abides the root of all Shall he pretend to be a Christian that professes this Shall any pretend to be a Church that spue it not out Let heaven and earth judge whether poor soules are otherwise to be secured of the Word then by two sermons a Sunday when the sense of the Godly is claimed to consist in a position so peremptorily destructive to salvation as this It will be said perhaps that now the Ministers of the Congregations have subscribed the confession of the Assembly But alas the covering is too short When a Bishop in the Catholick Church subscribed a Councile there was just presumption that no man under his authority could be seduced from the Faith subscribed Because no man communicated with the Catholick Church but by communicating with him that had subscribed it Who shall warrant that the godly who have this sense not liable to any authority in the Church shall stand to the subscriptions of those Ministers or to the authority of the Assembly pretended by the Presbyteries If they would declare themselves tied so to do who shall warrant that there is not a salvo for it in the Confession which they subscribe If there were not why should any difficulty be made to spue out that position which is the seed of it That justifying Faith consisteth in believing that a man is of the number of the Elect for whom Christ died excluding others Why that which is the fruit of it That they who transgresse the Covenant of Baptisme come not under the state of sin and damnation come not from under the state of Grace Why but because a back-door must be left for them that draw the true conclusion from their own premises reserving themselves the liberty to deny the conclusion admitting the premises It is not then a confession of faith that will make the Word that is preached a mark of the Church without some mark visible to common sense warranting that confession of Faith As for the Sacraments no Church no Sacraments If they suppose that ground upon which that intent to which the whole Church hath used them there is no further cause of division in the Church for that secures the rule of Faith If not they are no Sacraments but by equivocation of words they are sacriledges in profaning Gods Ordinances The Sacrament of Baptisme because the necessary meanes of salvation is admitted for good when ministred by those who are not of the Church but alwaies void of the effect of grace To which it reviveth so soone as the true Faith is professed in the unity of the Church If a Sacrament be a visible signe of invisible grace that baptisme is no baptisme which signifieth the grace it should effect but indeed effecteth not Such is that Baptisme which is used to seale a Covenant of Grace without the condition of Christianity a Covenant that is not the Covenant of two parties but the promise of one Whence comes the humor of rebaptizing but to be discharged of that Christianity which the baptisme of the Church of England exacteth Why do they refuse Baptisme in New England to all that refuse to enter into the Covenant of Congregations How comes it more necessary to salvation to be of a Congregation then to be Baptized and made a Christian Is it not because it is thought that salvation is to be had without that profession of Christianity which the Sacrament of Baptisme sealeth That it is not to be had without renouncing it Upon these termes those that are denied Baptisme by the Congregations because they are not of the Congregations are denied salvation as much as in them lies but not indeed and in truth For the necessity of baptisme supposing a profession of the Catholicke Church they perish not by refusing it who will not have it by renouncing the Catholicke Church that is by covenanting themselves into Congregations They that are so affected must know that they have authority of themselves to baptize to effect which no Congregation in New England is able to do If the Sacrament of the Eucharist seale that Covenant of Grace which conditioneth not for Christianity it is no sacrament but by equivocation of words Where that conditionall is doubtfull or voide there is no security
takes place The Councile then transgresseth the Power of the Church in erecting a Position of the Schoole and that in the proper sense of the terms not true into an article of the Faith But the Bull much more in requiring to sweare it And whether or no the decree of the Councile concerne the salvation of a single Christian being under it The swearing to it which the Bull injoyneth necessarily concerns the salvation of him who if he understand the businesse knowes it not to be true if he understand it not cannot sweare it But that the satisfaction of Penance is not to abolish the guilt of eternall death by changing the love of this world into the Love of God above all things but to redeem the debt of temporall punishment remaining when the sinne is remitted by the Sacrament or when it cannot be had by the meer desire of it as it is decreed Sess VI. cap. XIV this is necessarily prejudiciall to the Christianity of those who must needs be induced by it to think themselves restored to Gods grace without the meanes which his Gospel requireth For be Penance never so much a Sacrament if the Church suppose the Gospel the applying of the Keyes thereof cannot abate that condition which the Gospel requireth but is imployed to effect it Therefore absolution proceeds not but upon supposition that the change of a mans disposition is visible by the performing of his Penance If the case of necessity create an exception which the Church presumeth that God dispenseth in and therefore reconcileth all in the point of death by giving them the Eucharist It is not because there is ground of pardon in their being reconciled but in the procuring of their being qualified for it which must not have been presumed upon otherwise For the presumption of pardon not lying in the act of reconcilement by the power of the Keyes but in the ground of it upon the corrupt custome of absolving first and imposing Penance to be performed afterwards to decree this construction that it is not imposed for remission of sinne as conditionally depending on it but to pay the temporall punishment remaining when it is remitted was to heape abuses upon abuses For hence is come the change of attrition into contrition by the sentence of absolution in him in whom all the Penance that is in joyned pretends nothing else then to effect it So that pardon being held forth upon undue grounds the corruption of our nature must needs presume upon it when it is not effected How then shall a man sweare to admit this without consenting and concurring to the intangling of simple soules in the snares of their sinnes And this is therefore a point wherein the Christianity which the decree constituteth is necessarily defective as not providing for that which the Gospel maketh requisite to the remission of sinne but teaching to expect it from the act of declaring it by the Church without supposing the ground upon which the Gospel tendreth it If the decree of Transubstantiation could possibly be expounded to signify onely the Sacramentall presence of the body and bloud of Christ which I maintaine the consecration effecteth what would that serve the turne when it is further required that we hold him anathemâ— that believes the substance of the elements to remaine which being so manifestly justifyed by the Scriptures neither any Tradition of the Church nor any reason rendring the bodily presence of them inconsistent with the Sacramentall presence of the flesh and bloud of Christ excludeth Nor is it enough that Christian people frequent themselves and admit in others the use and effect of these offices which the Councile of Florence first decreed to make up the seven Sacraments unlesse they sweare to hold them for Sacraments without distinguishing either in that grace which the ceremony signifieth or in the force whereby they concurre to the obtaining of it Whereas the difference between our common Christianity and that which the Church is able to contribute towards the effect of it by any office which it is inabled to celebrate ought to distinguish the grace of the holy Ghost which Baptisme and the Eucharist immediately bestow by virtue of the Covenant of Grace which they inact and establish from that which any office of the Church by Gods promise to hear the prayers thereof is able to bring to passe Further seeing that by the Scriptures expounded according to the originall Tradition of the Church the soules of those that depart in grace are in an imperfect state of happinesse till the generall judgement according to the state in which they depart Neither can any prayers be made to redeem soules out of Purgatory paines to the sight of God which the decree of the Councile of Florence supposeth upon those termes Nor any assurance be had that the prayers which are made to the Saints do come to their knowledge And how then shall a good Christian swear to believe that Soules are helped out of Purgatory by the prayers of the living or that he is to pray to saints of whom he can by no meanes be assured that they hear his prayers Surely it cannot be imagined that the communion of the Eucharist in one kinde the making of these prayers to Saints which distinguish them not from God desiring of them those things which onely God can give the setting up of their images in Churches to be worshipped and prayed to in the house of Gods service the worshipping of images as the objects of that worship in respect of their principals which is not the worship of their principals the serving of God in an unknown Language the barring of Christian people from the Scriptures the maintaining of Masses where no body communicates scarce any body assisteth the opinion of applying the virtue of Christs death by them to those who neither communicate nor assist them with their devotions by virtue of the Sacrisice the tendring of pardon for sinne by Indulgences whereof there can be no effect but the releasing of Penance injoyned These and other customes of that Church which have the force and effect of Law which written lawes many times never attaine are so farre from being reasonable meanes to advance the service of God that to live under them and to yield conformity to them is a burthen unsufferable for a Christian to undergo to approve them by being reconciled to the Church that maintaines them a scandal incurable and irreparable But to swear further and to professe firmely to admit and imbrace them as contained within the title of constitutions and observations of that Church is a thing which to me it seems strange that it should ever be required of a Christian The effect of this Bull is of so high a nature in regard of those whom it concerns that never any Generall Councile pretended to produce the like That every man should owne the Lawes of the Society wherein he lives so farre as to live in conformity with them
man mistake mee pretends not any general Rule for the interpretation of Scripture even in those things which concern the Rule of Faith but inferrs a prescription against any thing that can be alleged out of Scripture that if it may appear to be contrary to that which the whole Church hath received and held from the beginning it cannot be the true meaning of that Scripture which is alleged to prove it For the meaning even of those Scriptures which concern the Rule of Faith must be had by the same same means by which I shall come by and by to show that the meaning of all Scriptures whatsoever they concern is to be had and established But the being and constitution of the Society of the Catholick Church from the beginning is of force to prescribe this limitation to the Fansies of all men that take upon them to interpret the Scriptures that they neither admit nor impose upon any man any thing for the true sense of Scripture whereby the substance of Christianity which the Rule of Faith importeth may become questionable So that an evidence of such opposition ought to out-shine and supresse any appearance or supposed evidence of truth in any such sense The Rule of Faith Not to go about to determine in this place what it containes because it is the Master-piece of all the Divines of Christendome to say what is fundamental in Christianity and what is not but to give a grosse description of what men mean when they inquire for it consists partly in things to be believed partly in things to be done Hee that holds so much of Christian truth as may reasonably certifie him of all that is requisite to qualifie a Christian man for remission of sins and life everlasting which are the promises of the Gospel may well be said to hold the whole Rule of Faith in things to be believed Hee that holds so much of Christian truth as may reasonably certifie him of all that is requisie to preserve all Christians with consciences void of sin may be said to hold it in things to be done For the common Rule of Faith importeth not what is necessity for any Christian but for all Christians And that any thing contrary to the salvation of all Christians should be held and professed by all Christians is a grosse contradiction to common sense Whereupon it is no lesse evidently true that the Catholick Church of all ages and places is utterly infallible In as much as it is a grosse contradiction to suppose a number of men to attain salvation who all do hold some thing destructive to the salvation of any one So much difference there is between the whole Church which is the Catholick Church of all times and places and the present Catholick Church respectively to those ages in which the Communion of the whole was not interrupted by any breach but effectuated by actual correspondence For the act of the Catholick Church in this sense which I call the present Church if it be lawfull obligeth all that are of it But it self stands obliged to the Faith of the whole Church as that which the being privilege of a Church resupposeth to beâ— rofessed by it And of this I cannot conceive how any question should remain The difficulty that remains is how it may appear that all this is not a fine nothing how it may reasonably seem to signifie something towards the limitation which I prescribe to the interpretation of those Scriptures which may be alleged in mater concerning the Rule of Faith And the answer is that seeing it hath appeared that the Apostles of our Lord Christ established from the beginning one Catholick Church consisting of all Churches by the will of God and his appointment and that in consideration of that which was made to appear afore that all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians though evidently extant and discernable in the Scriptures are not neverthelesse evidently discernable by all them whose salvation they concern that therefore the unity and Communion of the Catholick Church was provided by God as the depository of his truth the acknowledgment whereof should be necessary to obtain life everlasting So that the effect of this trust deposited by God in the Church to be at least thus much That whatsoever was advanced in any part thereof as belonging to the Rule of Faith being condemned where first it was advanced and in consequence of that condemnation by all other parts of the Church to that effect as to render those that held it uncapable of the Communion of all the whole Church That this I say might be accounted a reasonable mark to discern such doctrine to be destructive to the Rule of Faith And thus were all Heresies marked for such by the Church and upon this ground those marks were receivable not onely before Constantine but so long as it may be visible that nothing hindred this correspondence wherein the actual unity of the Church consisted to operate and have effect For if this be the reason and ground which made these marks reasonable as grounded upon it then hee that supposes this reason either actually interrupted or impeached cannot presume upon the like effect And therefore the justifying of these marks requires the evidencing of this correspondence of the Church and no more And truly I could not but admire to finde it alleged by Crellius the Socinian in his answer to Grotius concerning the satisfaction of Christ where hee argues that no Ecclesiastical Writer ever profest that opinion I say I admired to finde him answer that Pelagius the Heretick maintained the same For sure it is not much more pertinent than if hee should allege that the Jewes professe our Lord Jesus not to be the Messias or that the Gentiles do not worship one true God In as much as though they be further from the faith of true Christians than Pelagius yet an Heretick is no lesse excluded from the Communion of the Church than a Jew or a Gentile And the whole reason for which the testiemonies of Ecclesiastical Writers is receivable to evidence maters concerning the Rule of Faith to which they can give no credit but are by acknowledging the same receivable for Christians is the Communion of the Church which make it evident that what such men professe in the Church is not against the Faith of the Church And this in the second place may be a reasonable presumption or evidence of that which belongeth to the Rule of Faith when a thing is so ordinarily and vulgarly taught by Church Writers that there can be no reasonable presumption made by the doctrine of any of them that the contrary was ever allowed by the Church So then I do not tye my self to this that if any thing be found in the writings of any of those whom wee call commonly Fathers it is therefore not contrary to Christianity or to the Rule of Faith that is either expresly or by consequence For
quà m ex institutionis disciplinâ Caeterùm inquit immundi nascerentur quasi designatos tamen sanctitati ac per hoc etiam saluti intelligi volens fidelium filios Ut hujus spei pignore matrimoniis quae retinenda censuerat patrocinaretur Alioquin memin erat dominicae definitionis Nisi quis nascetur ex aquâ spiritu non ibit in regum dei id est â—oâ— erit sanctus Ita omnis anima eo usque in Adam censetur donec in Christo recenseaâ—ur For hereupon the Apostle also saith that men are born holy of either sex sanctified as by prerogative of seed so by breeding and discipline Otherwise saith he they should be born unclean giving to understand that the children of Christians are as it were designed to holinesse and thereby to salvation that he might patronize those mariages which he thought fit to be maintained by the pledge of this hope Otherwise he remembred the determination of our Lord Unlesse a man be born of water and the spirit he shall not go into Gods Kingdom That is he shall not be holy So every soul is so long listed in Adam till it be listed again in Christ Which you see is not done but by Baptism according to Tertullian Therefore in the end of the next Chapter Proinde cùm ad fidem pervenit reformata per secundam nativitatem ex aquà supernâ virtute detracto corruptionis pristinae aulaeo totam lucem suam conspicit Therefore when it comes to the faith being reformed by a second birth of water and the power above and the curtain of former corruptions drawn she sees her whole light And de Bapt. cap. XVII shewing in what case a Lay-man might baptize Sufficiat scilicet in necessitatibus utaris sicubi aut loci aut temporis aut personae conditio compellit Tunc enim constantia succurrentis excipitur cùm urget circumstantia periclitantis Let it suffice thee to use it the right of baptizing in cases of necessity if at any time the condition of place or time or person constrain For then is the resolution of him that helpeth accepted when the case of him that runneth bazard presseth There is no such thing as any case of such necessity in the opinion of our Anabaptists therefore it is not Tertullians He shows that the Church alloweth a Lay-man to baptize because it believed that the children of Christians could not enter into the Kingdom of God otherwise The words of Gregory Nazianzene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Be all this saith he that delays Baptism in those that demand Baptism But what would you say of Infants that are neither sensible of the losse nor of the Grace Shall we baptize also these By all means if any danger should presâ— For it is better they should be sanctified insensible then depart unsealed and not persued And of this circumcision that is applied on the eighth day to those who cannot reason is a reason to us The daubing of the door-posts also preserving the first born by things unsensible For the rest I give mine opinion staying three years or something over or under that at which age they may hear and answer something of Religion though not perfitly but grosly understanding it then to sanctifie their souls and bodies with the great Sacrament that perfecteth us By and by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And it is in all reason of more advantage to be fortified by the Laver for the suddain accidents of danger that incounter us not being capable of helpe He proceeds disputing against those that would not be baptized aâ—ore thirty because of our Lords example All this is so plain that I will adde nothing to point out the effect and consequence of his words Nor doth the VI Canon of Neo-caesarea signifie any more then this providing that women be baptized while they are with childe And that it be not thought that the baptism of the Mother concerns the child 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because every ones proper purpose upon profession is declared Nor Walafridus Strabus de Rebus Ecclesiasticis cap. XXVI saying plainly that in the primititive times the Grace of Baptism was wont to be granted onely to them that were found in body and mind to understand what they expected and what they undertook by being baptized For though the solemn profession of Baptism be a powerfull means to make it effectuall yet what is that to the necessity of baptizing before death And that the custome here testified was not generall the Infant that received the Eucharist in S. Cyprian de Lapsis besides the opinion of Nazianzene which you had even now will witnesse Neither do the examples of S. Chrysostome who being bred under Meletius Bishop of Antiochia was not Baptized till one and twenty or of the same Nazianzene who having a Bishop to his Father was not baptized till he came to mans age prove any more than the then custome of the Church allows that it was by particular men thought fit to be deferred supposing that in case of necessity it were secured But a great many witnesses speak not so much as the Law the rule the custome of giving Baptism by any man that was a Christian in that case of necessity For out of that case of necessity the office of baptizing belonged to the very highest in the Church to wit to as might stand with the more weighty imployments of their office For otherwise a little common sense would serve to inform them that those offices which required more of their personal knowledge skill wisdome and goodnesse were to be preferred before the office of Baptizing which though it concerns salvation yet requires no such qualities Can any man then imagine any reason why all Christians are licensed or rather commanded to baptize in that case but the necessity of the office and that no Infant should go out of the world unbaptized And this chokes all the exception that is made from the custome of giving Infants the Eucharist in the ancient Church For as I have shewed before that it was not held necessary to salvation as Baptism was so here I must alledge that it cannot be said that the Eucharist was celebrated and that all Christians might celebrate the Eucharist in this case of necessity to the intent that Infants might not go out of the world either unbaptized or without the Eucharist As for Origen upon the Romans and S. Austin de Gen. X. 43 who affirmed the Baptism of Infants to come from the Tradition of the Apostles suppose we for the present that it is not Origen that speaks them but Ruffinus that translated him and that this is said IVC years after the birth of Christ CCC and more after the death of the Apostles was it not visible to them what came from the Apostles what from the determination or practice of the Church For that it should come from abuse he that would tell me must first perswade me that Antichrist was in being
LXIII If a Clergy-man knowing that his wife hath committed adultery dismiss her not LXV Sodomites LXXI If a woman forsaking an adulterer whom she had married afore marry another LXXII If a Christian be slain or confiscate upon the information of a Christian LXXIII If a man accuse a Clergy-man to wit criminally as a subject a subject before secular Powers of a crime which he cannot prove LXXV We see by these very particulars an abatement of that which Tertullian stood upon that no adultery should ever be restored to communion again For here Penance is allowed adultery the first time by the VII And she that leaves her Husband and maryes another is allowed the communion in danger of death As also after her first Husband is dead by the IX And so are Virgines that turn Whores if afterwards they repent and abstain before death by the XIII So for murther a Christian Woman that kills her maid is admitted to Penance by the V. And a Catechumena that is a woman professing Christianity before Baptism that kills the childe conceived of adultery by the LXVIII So in Idolatry Those who onely wear such a Crown as those that sacrificed did wear but sacrifice not nor are at the charge of sacrificing by the LV. And truly that VII Canon which allowes Penance upon adultery onely the first time but refuses the communion of the second time even in danger of death is manifestly more severe then that Rule which divers of the Fathers Origen in Levit. XXV Hom. XV. S. Ambrose de Paenit II. 10. 11. S. Augustine Epist LIII LIV. Hanil L. do mention as in force and use at their time to wit that Penance cannot be done the second time For though a man be not readmitted to communion by Penance upon falling into the same or a more grievous crime the second time yet may be allowed the communion in danger of death Just as S. Ambrose ad Virginâ—â— Lapsam cap. VIII censures her to do Penance till death Innocent I. Pope Epist II. expresly affirms that this was done in consideration of the times because if men were lightly admitted after having fallen in persecution who would hazard life for the profession of his faith But that afterwards either the Church must be Novatians or grant Penance in danger of death And truly the breach which the Novatians made must needs oblige the Church to readmit unto communion in danger of death But if the Church were obliged to be strict when there was fear of persecution least all should fall away then was it obliged to abate when many were fallen away that the Body thereof might be recovered and restored And the words of Innocent that follow are sufficient to show how much the Church then presumed upon that Penance that Absolution that communion which a man was admitted to upon confession of sinne in danger of death For he saith Tribuetur ergo cum Poenitentiâ extrema Communio The last Communion therefore shall be allowed with Penaâ—ce Now it is evident by the Canons which Gratiane hath compiled XXVI Quaest VI. VII VIII Quaest VII cap I. that when a man was admitted to Penance upon confession in danger of death the communion was given him provisionally as well to obtain the grace of God to strengthen him in that exigent as for the quiet of his conscience but neverthelesse he stood bound over to perform the Penance which was or should be injoyned in case he recovered And therefore when Pope Caelestine I Epist I. invayes against those who refused Absolution and the communion in danger of death and Leo I. Pope Epist LIX orders that they be reconciled by giving them the Communion It is to be supposed that they understand this Penance to be injoyned in that case because the custome of the Church required it And this serves to void the doubt that may be made what the Keyes of the Church can have to do in the remitting of sinnes as soon as they are confessed which serve to loose sinne no further then they serve to procure and to create that disposition which qualifies for forgivenesse You saw afore in the second Book what difficulty the ancient Church made in warranting the salvation of those that repented upon their Death bed though they proceeded to submit themselves and their sinnes to the Keyes of the Church for their absolution and the communion of the Eucharist at their departure And though Gennadius de dogmatibus Eccles cap. LXXX say freely that he is a Novation and not a Christian that presumes not faithfully of Gods mercifull purpose to save that which was lost even in him that departs upon confessing his sinne yet still this is but a presumption of what may be not a warrant of what is which the power of the Keyes regularly used promises Otherwise what would Gennadius say to the great Councill of Arles under Constantine which denies absolution in that case Can. I. as you see the Eliberitane Canons do True it is which S. Cyprian saith Nunquam sera est poenitentia si sit vera Repentance is never late if it be true But who will maintain that to be true which the terrour of death and remorse of conscience may rack out of him in whom the love of God and goodnesse hath not formed that resolution of maintaining his professed Christianity which makes God the end of all his actions when as all that is done in such a case by common experience may be imputed to a true grounded desire of avoiding punishment for his own sake with a superficiall desire of doing well for Gods sake Though on the other side it may be presumed that such a one is not first moved with dislike of his sinne when first he submits it to the Keyes of the Church but hath first done many such acts of sincere contrition as his own judgement directed him to for the gaining of Gods grace And at length to give himselfe further satisfaction resolves to humble himselfe not onely to the declaring of his own shame but to the undergoing of that Penance upon performance whereof the Rules of the Church also warrant his forgivenesse Between these contrary presumptions the primitive severity of the Church it appears refused absolution and the communion even in danger of death to some of the most grievous sins Which afterwards was thought fit to be abated Not proclaiming dispair to any sinner but to oblige him not lightly to presume upon pardon of that sinne which the Church could never presume that a man can repent him of enough For on the other side it appears what inconvenience the granting of reconcilement to all at the point of death may produce if the intent of the Church in binding over to Penance him that escapes be not understood Namely to give men cause to presume of pardon by the Church when the Keyes thereof cannot have their operation in producing the disposition that is requisite And thus the primitive practice of the Church
Wisdome XIV 14-17 When a Prince hving lost a deare Son causeth the image of him to be made for his comfort and remembrance of him which is propagated by the honour done to his image Not that he meanes that all idolatry came from this beginning for certainely it would have been utterly senselesse to have expected this from men possessed of the beliefe of one true God till that time But because this might become the beginnig of that Idolatry that was performed to the deceased among those who having once admitted the beliefe of more Gods then one and in particular worshiping dead men could give no reason why they should doe lesse for them then for others And if it were posible for the Devil to induce men to worship the creature for God it is not strange that by pretended apparitions revelations and miracles don about these statues or Images he should maintain in them a belief of the presence of that imaginary deitie which they intended thereby to represent record in the statue or image which must needs be a powerfull meanes to multiply those ceremonies and solemnities wherewith they pretended to honour the Deity there inclosed Certainely for this reason it was that among the Greeks and Romans the consecrating of a Temple was the setting up and dedicating in it the statue of that Deity in honor whereof it was built So you see it every foot in Pausanias and in the life of Alexander Severus it is related for a singularity of Adrians curiosity in following all Religions that he built in every City a Temple without any statue in it which he had intended for our Lord Christ had he not been advised that all the world would turne Christians if he should take that course And though it is rather thought that Adrian indeed did intend them for Temples to himselfe yet still that holds which the history addeth Quae hodie idcirco quia non habent numina dicuntur Hadriani That they are called Adrians because they have no Godhead Which the Heathen believed them to have so soone as the statue of that God was set up whose the Temple was to be And this is not questioned that Alexander Severus intended that our Lord Christ should be worshiped as one of their Gods which would have made him as much an Idole as their Gods as the same Emperour did indeed worshiping as wel Christ and Abraham as the deified Emperours Orpheus or Achilles among his closet Gods as his life relateth Thus much is to be noted that Maimoni where he relateth the beginning of Idolatry as I alleaged afore acknowledgeth that it was mightily promoted by revelations apparitions miracles pretended to be done by the stars or elements of the world at such monuments of their presence as had been provided Which since Gods truth imputeth to the Devill the worship of these creatures was no lesse the worship of the Devill then sacrifices offered to the dead And all this is further confirmed by the Idolatry of Magicians which for Balaams sake I hold unquestionable For having showed before that Balaam though he knew there was a God which was able to defeat all his witchcraft did neverthelesse addresse himselfe to his familiars by offering sacrifices to obtain of them the cursing of Israel which he knew could not be obtained without the leave of their God whom he acknowledgeth under the same name which his people never conmunicated to any besides shall it seeme strange that people weary of their Christianity because it easeth them not of the little discontentments of their estate in this world which they meet with should either formally or by due construction renounce the benefit of it by contracting for some curiosities which they desire but their Christianity hath appointed them no meanes to procure Or that renouncing God and Christ in the same maner and degree as they contract for those things they should translate the honor which the little Religion that can allow such a contract leaves in him that cannot deny a God and yet serves him thus unto the Devile from whom they expect their desires Especially the experience of all nations Christians Jewes and Pagaus acknowledging those acts which themselves though worshippers of Deviles counted unlawfull because upon contracts tending to the mischiefe of mankind And the evidence of the Sabbaths and solemnities of witches in these times of Christianity being no way to be baffled by such reasons as â—end to take away all reason for the punishing of witches which the Law of Moses establisheth Though nothing hinder the alleging of such as may make men wary what evidence they accept in cases more private and secret In the life of Pythagoras by Jamblichus Cap XXIIX there are divers and sundry feates of his doing reported which to Christians that know the difference between cleane and uncleane spirits cannot see in to have been don otherwise then by familiarity with uncleane spirits Which he might easily learne by his travels among the Egyptians and Caldeans Nations among whom as well Magick as Idolatry had been both bred and advanced if we believe either the scriptures or the writings of Pagans as well as of Christians And truly it is manifest that the being and office of Angels about God was knowne to him and to his followers but without any distinction between the good and the bad which the scripture onely teacheth Which is also to be seen in the writings of Plato where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is never taken in any ill sense as necessarily it is by all them who acknowledge Apostate Angels Neither is it possible for any Christian to make any other interpretation of that familiar which Socrates in Plato affirmeth that he was alwaies attended with called Socrates his Daemon or Genius then of a deceiving sâ—irit unlesse it could stand with Christianity to believe that God granted the assistance of his spirit or Angels to Pagans and that so constant as is not to be found of any of his prophets It is true indeed that there are many things in Plato which learned men doe compare and reduce to the rule of the Christian Faith concerning the Holy Trinity blessed for ever more But he that compares The mind of God the Word of God the Idea of God the Spirit of God the Wisdome of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Plato delivereth with that Fulnesse of the Godhead that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Saturninus and Basilides propounded to be worshipped by their followers in Ireneus and Epiphanius considering withall that the Angels which are not distinguished from God by Plato according to that infinite distance which is to be acknowledged between God and his creatures were by most sects of the Gnosticks admitted into that Fulnesse of the Godhead which the severall sects of them worshiped will have reason to believe the Fathers of the Church when they make the Philosophers the Patriarches of the Hereticks And that the
divinity of Plato was a tradition derived by Pythagoras from the familiarity which he had with uncleane spirits seeking to refine the grosse Idolatry of the Gentiles into a more subtill way of worshiping the Devile Which being imitated by Simon Magus and his followers of whom Menander professed Magick as Basilides and Marcus also did and the monuments of the Basilidians Magicke are extant to this day in the hands of Antiquaries as you may see in Baronius his Annales and the life of Peireski written by Gassendus and still more plentifully in a latter Booke on purpose to expound the monuments of the Basillidians God called Abraxas in those severall Fulnesses of the Godhead which the severall sects of them tuaght worshipped brought forth that worship of Angels which S. Paul condemned Col. II. 8-9 Whether as belonging to the fulnesse of the Godhead or as revealers of it Especially if it be considered that the deriving of the Originall and beginning of evill from a principle belonging to that Fulnesse of the Godhead which each sect of the Gnosticks acknowledged a position common to them all is also a part of Plato and Pythagoras his Philosophy which the Stoicks also from whom the Heretick Hermogenes in Tertullian deriveth it were tainted with as well as with the opinion of Fate utterly inconsistant with the worship of the true God as Aristotle and Epicurus his Philosophy free enough from familiarity with uncleane spirits is with denying of providence at least in human affaires which the eternity of the world necessarily produceth Neither is the Heresy of Cerdon and Marcion which succeeded the Gnosticks any thing else but Pythagoras his position of a principle of Good and an other of Evil applyed to the supposition of Christianity though such as they thought good to admit As for that of the Manichees we may an well allow Epiphanius deriving it from one Scythianus a rich merchant from Arabia to Egypt who having also learned their Magick writ foure books to maintaine Pythagoras his two principles And going unto Jerusalem to confer with the Christians there who maintained one true God and getting the worse betook himselfe to his Magick and exercising the same on the top of an house was cast downe from thence and dyed His disciple also and slave Terbinthus whom he left his heire going into Persia to confer with the priests of Mithras about the same purpose and being worsted betook himselfe to his masters Magick and got his death as his master had done Thus saith Epiphanius and that Manes marying his widow by his books and by his wealth became author of this sect onely that having got the books of the Old New Testament he used what colours they would afford him to intitle his device to Christianity for the seducing of Christians But whoso considers what master Pocâ—â—k hath produced out of the relations of the Saracens concerning the religion of the Persians p. 146. 150. whatsoever contest his predecessors might have with the Persians must acknowledg the Heresy of the Manichees to come from the Idolatry of the Persians the divines where of acknowedg a Principle of darknesse opposite to a Principle of light as we read also in Agathias expressely lib. II. that the religion of the Persians is that of Manichees And these considerations here put together upon this occasion may well seeme as I conceive to satisfie us that it is no marvaile the Pagane Greeks Romans should be so brutish as to worship stocks and stones having among them those wits that have left such excellent things of God and of mans duety to God upon record Seeing it appeares that the most divine of them were no otherwise taught then as it might best serve the Deviles turne to detaine them in the more subtill Idolatry of Magicians The rest being tainted with such positions as stand not with the worship of one true God So that it is no marvaile if they complyed with the vulgar Idolatries of their nations to him that considers that which I have written in the review of my booke of the right of the Church in a Christian state p. CLXVII to show that the followers of Plato and Pythagoras in the first times of Christianity as they were themselves Magicians so were great instruments to promote the persecuting of Christianity Which is also the true reason why the Gnosticks having devised every sect a way of Idolatry proper to themseves did indifferently counterfeit themselves Jewes Christians or Pagans for avoiding of persecution or for gaining of Proselytes eating things sacrificed to Idoles in despite of S Paul and taking part in the Idolatrous spectacles and sight of the Gentiles as Irenaeus with the rest of the Fathers witnesseth These particulars I have thus far inlarged to make a full induction of all the waies of Idolatry mentioned in the scriptures wherewith all the writings of the Jewes Pagans and Christians exactly agree by which induction it may appeare that all the waies of Idolatry which the Scripture mentioneth doe presuppose the beliefe of some imaginary and false Godhead properly called an idole as imaginary and without subsistence though that name is no lesse properly attributed to the image of it then the Image of any thing is called by the name of that which it representeth because of the intercourse which by the meanes of such Images those that worshipped them had with the author of such Imaginations even the Devile thinking they had it with theire imaginary Deities And the worshipping of those Dieties whether before under such an image or without it is that which is called Idolatry in the Scriptures For though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may generally signifie all images and can have no bad sense in the usage of Hethen writers because they could never thinke amisse of the Images which they thought represented their Deities Yet when Christianity had brought in a beliefe that it was the Devile whom the Gentiles worshipped under those Images the word Idole being appropriated to them must needs be are a sense of that which the Christians detested Iust as I said even now of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it must needs beare another sense to the eares of Christans then it could among the heathen poets or Philosophers This language S. Jerome useth when in his translation of Eusebius his Chronicle num MDCCCLIV he saith of Judas Maccabaeus Templum ab Idolrum imaginibus expurgavit that he purged the temple from images of Idoles supposing the difference which I make between imaginary deityes and their Images And S. Austine in lib. Jud. Quaest XLI speaking of the case of Gedeon Cum Idolum non fuerit id est cujusdam Dei falsi simulacrum seeing it was no idole that is to say the image of any false God Which if it be true it will no way be possible to exempt the case of Aaron or Jereboam from that reason of Idolatry which this induction inforceth Or to imagine that
bodies the holy Ghost that dwelt in them here raiseth This is that precious pearle and that hid treasure this is that grain of mustard seed that leaven which being purchased at the price of all we have and sowed in the heart and layd up in the past of our thoughts makes all our actions fruitfull to the riches of everlasting happinesse This is that little spot of truth for the maintaining whereof so many bloudy fields of Controversies in Religion are and have been fought by soules that perish by maintaining division in the Church to the prejudice if not the losse of that truth for which they fight As the country alwaies suffers by the warre that is made for it All this while it is to be remembred that Baptisme tieth not onely to professe this faith unto death but to live according to Christianity Whether it be by virtue of Moses Law cleared by our Lord of the false glosses of the Scribes and Pharisees or by the New Law of Christ clearing the spiritual intent of the Old it is not necessary to salvation for a Christian to know For Irenaeus briefly distinguishing mater of Faith from mater of Knowledge in the Scriptures 1. 2 4. makes all that which concerns the reason of the difference in Gods proceeding under the Law and the Gospel to be mater of abundant knowledge not of necessary faith But it is necessary for the salvation of a Christian to know that by being a Christian he undertakes to suppresse mortify and prevent as far as in him lies even the first motions of concupiscence whether in the lusts of the flesh or the lust of the eyes or the pride of life as our Lord in the Gospel hath clearly laid forth howsoever the Law have expressed or intimated the same And this is that warre with the devil the world and the flesh for the keeping of Gods commandments which our Baptisme undertaketh For there is no difference in things to be done concerning a private Christian as a private Christian that seems to be any considerable ground of division in the Church The substance of our common Christianity in that part seems to remain without dispute In things that are to be believed it were well if it could be said so truly that there is no part of the rule of Faith in dispute In the meane time the substance of Christianity containing whatsoever it is necessary for the salvation of all Christians to know whether in matter of Faith or of maners whereof to speak properly the rule of Faith signifieth onely the first part consisteth onely in that which concerns a particular Christian as such whether to be believed or to be done But what then shall the beliefe of one holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church in our Creed signify Onely that there are Christians in the world Shall a Christian be saved by believing that which all Christians see that there is a company of men that call themselves Christians Or shall it therefore be necessary to the salvation of all Christians to know that God hath founded the whole body of the Church consisting of all Churches for a Society and Corporation subsisting by his Law shall it concern the salvation of simple Christians to understand the nature of Corporations and to know how visible communion in Christian Offices makes the Church such a one believing that this comes by Gods appointment I do not imagine any such thing Indeed whosoever allowes no ground of difference between true Christians on the one side and hereticks and schismaticks on the other side cannot admit the belief of one Catholicke Church for an article of his Creed For had there never been heresie or schisme the communion of all Christians with all Christians going forwards without interruption the Church had been no lesse Catholicke then now that it is called Catholicke to distinguish it from heresies and schismes which prevailed sometimes in some places but never spread nor lasted with the Church But had there been no profession qualifying for communion with the Church Had there been no power in the Church to limit the Order and circumstance of Communion in the Offices of Christianity it could never have been visible whom a Christian was to communicate with professing himself bound by believing one Catholicke Church to communicate with it Because by this meanes it was visible and because being visible an obligation was acknowledged of communicating with it the profession of this obligation was to be part of the common Christianity which the Creed was to signify But when it is no more visible whom a Christian is to communicate with by reason of division in the Church what is it then that resolves whom a Christian is to communicate with That is indeed the question which this whole businesse intends to resolve For the Reformation having occasioned division in the Church the parties are both visible but which is the true Church remaines invisible so long as it remaines in despute For though it be not invisible to that reason which proceeds aright upon due principles yet that is not required of all Christians that would be saved And therefore if it be not visible to the common reason of all men it is invisible This I alledge to no further purpose then to show how much all parties stand obliged to procure the reunion of the Church as answerable for the soules that may miscarry by chusing amisse in that which Gods ordinance makes visible but mens disorder invisible to common sense For the more difficult the way of salvation proves by this meanes the more shall all estates stand obliged to clear it Let us then see wherein the difficulty of the choice consisteth let us see what satisfaction the parties tender common sense that salvation is to be had by leaving of them The Word and the Sacraments are the markes of the true Church So say the Doctors of the Reformation so say perhaps their confessions of Faith It were too long to dispute that But how are these markes distinctive For I suppose they pretend not to make known the Reformed Churches to constitute the true Church in opposition to the Church of Rome by markes common to both And will any common sense allow that the Church of Rome will grant that they have not the word of God or the Sacraments which they allow the Reformed to have If you adde the pure preaching of the Word and the pure ministring of the Sacraments you advance not a foot For is common sense able to judge that the Reformed way is pure that of the Church of Rome impure It judgeth that they who call it so think so Whether it be so or not it must come under dispute And appealing to the Scriptures it appeareth that common sense is not judge in the meaning and consequence of them upon which the resolution depends It is therefore manifest that the preaching of the word and the ministring of the Sacraments is no mark of the Church unlesse
to communicate All are bound to communicate once a year at Easter and before they do it to say they are sory for the sinnes they confesse undertaking the Penance which is injoyned not for cleansing the sinne but to remaine for Purgatory if they do it not here The like at the point of death with extreme unction over and above Within the compasse of this law Christians may fall into the hands of conscientious Curates and Confessors that shall not faile to instruct them wherein their Christianity and salvation consists and how they are to serve God in Spirit and in truth preferring the principall before the accessory rubbish of ceremonies and observations indifferent of themselves but which spend the strength of the seed and root of Christianity in leaves and chaff without fruit But they may also fall under such as shall direct them to look upon the virtue of the sacrifice that is repeated in the Masse and promise themselves the benefit thereof by the work done without their assistance To look upon their Penance onely as that which must be paid for in Purgatory if not done here To do as the Church does and to believe as it believes promising themselves salvation by being of communion therewith though it import no more then I have said Nay though they be directed such devotions as are common to God with his creature as spend the seed of Christianity in the chaffe of observations impertinent to the end of it On the other side departing thence to Congregations and Presbyteries what meanes of salvation shall a Christian have Two Sermons a Sunday and a prayer before and after each But whether it be the Word of God or his that Preaches whether Christianity allow to pray as he prayes or not no Rule to secure And whether Christian liberty allow that men be tied to serve God from Sunday to Sunday or not untill Gods spirit indite what every man shall say to God no way resolved A man may possibly light upon him that does not take justifying Faith to consist in beleeving that a man is of the elect for whome alone Christ died or that beleeving it presses the consequences which contradict his owne premises as if he did not But how easy is it to light upon him that drawes the true conclusion from the premises which he professeth and maketh meere Popery of the whole duty of a Christian Certainly the Church of Rome holdeth no error in the Faith any thing neare so pernicious as this That of transubstantiation is but a fleabite in comparison of it He who by reason of his education is afraide to thinke that the elements remaine is he therefore become incapable of the Spirit of God conveyed by the Body and Blood of our Lord in the Sacrament And certainely that is the prime Interest of our Christianity in it though the bodily presence of the elements is no way prejudiciall to the same But who so beleeveth he hath Gods Word for his salvation not supposing any condition requisite may think himselfe tied to live like a Christian but by no meanes but by holding contradictories at once Which though all men by consequence do because all erre Yet in matters of so high consequence to do it cannot be without prejudice to the work of Christianity and dangerous to the salvation it promiseth Nor can Baptisme or the Eucharist be Baptisme or the Eucharist but equivocally to them that allow the true consequence of this And shall any man perswade me that unlesse a man will sweare that which no man is able to show that a Christian may sweare he perishes without help for want of this communion so obtained Or on the other side that his salvation can be secured who to obtaine that meanes of salvation which Congregations or Presbyteries tender concurre to the open act of Schisme which they do So necessary is it for me to continue in the resolution of my nonage as being convinced upon a new inquiry that the meanes of salvation are more sufficient more agreeable for substance to the Scriptures expounded by the originall practice of the whole Church though perhaps not for forme in that meane then in either extreme This resolution then being thus grounded what alteration can the present calamity of the Church of England make in it to perswade a man to believe thosearticles which the Bull of Pius VI. addeth to the common faith to maintaine whatsoever is once grown a custome in the Church of Rome as for that service of God which it destroyeth Or on the other side to become a party to that expresse act of Schisme with misprision of Heresy involved in it which the erecting of Congregations and Presbyteries importeth Epiphanius mentioneth one Zachaeus in Syria that retired himself from communion with the Church to serve God alone If the force of the Sword destroy the opportunities and meanes of yeelding God that service which a mans Christianity professed upon mature choice requireth shall it be imputable to him that desiring to serve God with his Church he is excluded by them who ground their communion upon conditions which the common Christianity alloweth not Or to them by whom he is so excluded I can onely say to the scattered remaines of the Church of England whose communion I cherish because it standeth upon those termes which give me sufficient ground for the hope of Salvation which I have cherished from my cradle that the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Church of England being no longer in force by the Power of this world are by consâ—quence no longer a sufficient Rule for the order of their communion in the offices of Gods service In which Order the visibility of every Church consisteth Not as if the nature of good and badde in the matter of them had suffered any change but because being the mean to preserve unity in the service of God upon those termes which the Law of the Land inforced they are no sufficient meane to preserve it upon those termes which onely our Christianity requireth To wit that it be distinct from Congregations and Presbyteries as well as from the Church of Rome Which in my opinion making it necessary to the salvation of every Christian to communicate with the Catholicke Church that is with a Church which ought to be a member of the whole Church is of great consequence For neither is it actually and properly a Church the order whereof in the service of God is not visible Nor is there sufficient meanes in that case for the effect of a Church and of that visible order in which the being of a Church consisteth towards the salvation of those who are of it or might be of it And this is that which must justify that which I have done in speaking out so farre what I conceive the Rule of Faith what the Lawes of the Catholick Church require to be provided for in every Church and every estate For if they be not wanting to themselves to their
Title to the salvation of Gods people they have enough in the Scriâ—tures interpreted by the Original Tradition practice of the whole â—hurch both to condemn the errors which the ground of their Comâ—â—nion obliges them to disown to give such a rule to the order of 〈◊〉 Communion in the offices of Gods service as the present state 〈◊〉 compared with the primitive state of those Christians who â—â—fir â—ucceeded the Apostles shall seem to require It is indeed a very great case to me that having declared against untrue and unsufficient causes for dividing the Church for which there can be no cause sufficient I have owned the cause which I think sufficient for a particular Church to provide for it selfe without the consent of the whole For by this meanes I secure my self from being accessory to Schisme and the innumerable mischiefes which it produceth But I confesse this declaration makes me liable to a consequence of very great importance That there is no true meane no just way to reconcile any difference in the Church but upon those grounds and those termes which I propose For supposing the Society of the Church by Gods Law upon what termes the least sucking Heresy amongst us is reconcileable to the party from which it broke last supposing it reconcileable upon the grounds and termes of our common Christianity upon the same termes is the Reformation reconcileable to the Church of Rome the Greek Church to the Latine all parts to the Whole the Congregations and Presbyteries to the Church of England Whereas not proceeding upon those grounds not standing on those termes all preâ—ense of reconciling even the Reformed among themselves will prove a meer pretense Laus Deo FINIS Faults escaped in the firse Booke PAge 7. line 47. r. shall it be disc pag. 20. l. 45. r. to all sentences p. 21. l. 50. 1 Thes V. 14 15. r. 12 13. l. 52 Heb. XII r. XIII 23. 39. r. the act 40. 6. then those r. better then â— 28. under-r undertooke 48. 30. r. washing or sitting downe to 59. 53. r. adulterers 66. 28. Ladies day r. Lords day 89. 53. secret to the r. seâ—reâ— so 95. 46. with r. which 115. 26. those found r. thes 116. 33. that this r. that is 121. 4. r. intertainment 122. 7. Church with r. with him 137. 8. without r. within 140. 13. r. virtue of the 147. 1. we had r. he had 57. r. indowment 155. 25. now have r. now are 172. 34. after Acts put 176. 25. dele rome 177. 52. r. he eat 178. 28. then it was r. as it was 181. 57. r. so continuall 182. 51. to Gods r. to use G. 183. 37. comming from Christ r. of Christ 185. 6. after lamented put 186. 21. there may r. may be 189. 29. r. change 190. 14. banquet r. banquet 28. passive r. positive 45. r. owned 193. 16 â—ele argument 221. 2. not up r. cast up 235. 18. if when r. when 237. 16. which the r. with the 37. aliver r. alone 241. 16. Ahab r. Jehn 248. 50. Jeroboams then r. Jeroboams sinne 250. 38. neither r. either Second Book Pag. 7. l. 30. r. we be p. 8. 36. John 7. 37. r. 39. 40. r. now if 20. 41. Joh. IV. r. Ephes IV. 22. 12. that those r. those that 62. 19. he pert r. be pâ—rt 23. Heb. IV. 16. r. 1. 68. of as r. of man as 71. 33. r. evidenced 101. 55. r. the Angels 109. 9. and both r. so bâ—th 116. 56. as you may by r. as you may see by 118. 35. Solomons r. Solomons words 36. r. composed 119. 51. dele â—â— 125. 28. r. to deriâ—e 26. 53. which r. with which 128. 31. r. they thought 162. 5. tendred r. raended 164. 54. serve or the purpose not r. serve the purpose or not 165. 24. concerning r. consining 56. upon necessity r. upon the like n. 166. 21. after that r. the line afore iâ—ports this or that 167. to see that it supposeth r. that it is sup 171. 55. r. comes not to passe 174. 45. will not r. shall not 184. 28. of that k. r. or that k. 57. for which they addict themselves to love r. which they addict themselves to for love 51. r. with the 189. 35. discerne r. deserve 192. 36. ye knowing r. ye knowe 193. 34. or r. if 195. 15. â—ay r. might 35. 1. Ad â—â—â—ah 198. 24. that is r. that it is prophets r. prophet 199. 12. were r. we are 17. in r. is 49. r. soverainty 201. 13. upon passe r. to â—asse 203. 31. generation r. regen 206. 49. observations r. observation 207. 51. lusted r. lasted 208. 56. teach r. reach 209. 10. deceâ—t r. decree 22. you r. them 26. verifying r. resolving 211. 34. supposed r. suppose 215. 21. causes r. clauses 216. 6. XI r. I. 217. 53. refutes r. refuses 218. â—agined r. imagining 52. without the bonds r. wâ—thâ—n the bounds 219. 9. adxe r. adde 220. 3. of the r. to the 37. r. allwayes freely doe it 221. 24. whereby r. that order 922. 34. by one r. by somâ— 223. 37. revealed r. related 224. 30. S. S. Austine point S. Austme 225. 57. of God r. to God 240. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 247 49. r. or to show 250. 12. they can be r. can be 251. 32. this part r. his â— 256. 55. in sending r. â—endriâ—g 259. 16. r. conceiving 260. 32. r. having excluded 35. r. proposes 261. 29. 31. r. premises premises 264. 27. r. 〈◊〉 281. 6. r. â—â—â— can 282. 38. r. distinguisâ—eâ—h 289. 45. r. which the 296. 26. let him in r. let them 297. 7. the rank of it r. the werk 300. 25. as I said 1. I said 304. 33. should be r. that God should 307. 13. but the r. be â—â—â—â—â— Third Book Pag. 6. l. 9. r. to be no more 12. 54. it not r. is not 14. 2. which r. with 16. 1. is not r. is the 19. 6. after r. afore 37. 47. r. though not under 54. 7. r. times r. termes 55. 53. r. promises 58. 21. truly one r. done 61. 23. r. on purpose 64. 21. r. S. Peter 65. 51. r. Zonarâ—â— 66. 10. a dore r. alone 69. 37. r. refused 38. r. construed 48. r. whatsoever 70. 1. r. Predestinatians 86. 1. r. Novatians 88. 55. r. Homil. 91. 25. r. Cappadocâ—â— 95. 25. r. Synedrâ—â—s 98. 58. repentance r. upon rep 110. 55. r. prescribed 111. 22. r. ministery 32. was Apostle r. we Apostles 113. 56. r. import 57. practice 1. Priests 115. 53. r. prefers 116. 4. for forn r. except for â— 117. 54. r. draw them 119. 57. corrected r. 〈◊〉 122. 1. time r. â—erme 123. 12. r. is it 128. 2. r. Mileu 137. 49. r. Gentium secuâ—â—â—m 〈◊〉 139. 13. r. her husbands brother 145. 4. r. all one 151. 29. r. setled 160. 16. r. Eldest 163. 58. r. will find 164. 41. according the r. to the 169. 33. r. the third 43. r. of the chief 178. 42. r. rights 191. 44. r. good works 197. 2. first r. seventh 206. 39. r. further for the ord 209. 1. r. so subject to 25. r. once a moneth 252. 2. r. if it be true all 273. 32. or so as 276. 46. or r. nor 277. 54. r. noâ— by the order 279. 2. r. conferred 280. 12. r. preached 282. â—2 and more r. and not 283. 46. r. oblige 285. 17. r. which God 44. upon r. up an 288. 10. r. God which tho 292. 20. seem r. serve 31â— 22. r. apparitions 316. 10. r. it is 318. 56. r. if the fire 327. 26. our r. one 328. 58. dele ne 334. 41. r. consecration 335. 29. in the r. is 336. 41. as he r. she 338. 7. r. grounded 56. this rec r. 〈◊〉 339. 31. r. variety 341. 22. r. and makes 26. not missing r. missing 29. any dif r. â—o â— 342. 16. r. which by to blessing 345. 30. r. Chrisme 36. hands r. bâ—nds 5â— some r. serve 349. 50. r. subsisteâ—â— 352. 6. r. premises 353. 53. instructing r. in serving 356. 55. sometimes 360. 7. r. no â— 364. 58. r. reasâ—â—able though noâ—â— 370. 55. r. Laickâ— 372. 53. r. ground 373. 38. r. necessarily 374. 5. r. degrees 374. 39. sureâ—y r. society 378. 13. r. as when 381. 36. r. upon Ep. but upon acts of the 385. 1. r. supposeth 40. r. supposition 54. r. of â—â—â— then that