be convicted of moral evil and so unconcernedly to omit the weightier matters of the Law as Judgment Mercy or Charity in Vnity and Faith what can Charity call this but meer Pharisaism and where must such Pharisaism end at length but in Sadducism even denying of the Blessings and Curses of a Future Life For as Drusius hath Si Patres nostri selvissent mâ—râ—â—â—s resurrecturâ— praemia manere â—ustos â—â—st hanc vitam nâ—n tantoperè râ—bellassent Drusius in Mat. c 3. v. 7. Item in c. 22 23. observed it was one Reason alledged by the Sadduces against the Resurrection If our Fathers had known the dead should rise again and rewards were prepared for the Righteous they would not have rebelled so often not conforming themselves to Gods Rule as is pretended by all but conforming the Rule of Sin and of Faith it self to the good Opinion they had of their own Persons and Actions which Pestilential Contagion now so Epidemical God of his great Mercy remove from us and cause health and soundness of Judgment Affection and Actions to return to us and continue with us to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. THE CONTENTS OF THE CHAPTERS Chap. I. OF the Nature and Grounds of Religion in General Which are not so much Power as the Goodness of God and Justice in the Creature And that Nature it self teaches to be Religious Chap. II. Of the constant and faithful assurance requisite to be had of a Deity The reasons of the necessity of a Divine Supream Power Socinus refuted holding the knowledge of a God not natural Chap. III. Of the Unity of the Divine Nature and the Infiniteness of God Chap. IV. Of the diversity of Religions in the World A brief censure of the Gentile and Mahumetan Religion Chap. V. Of the Jewish Religion The pretence of the Antiquity of it nulled The several erroneous grounds of the Jewish Religion discovered Chap. VI. The vanity of the Jewish Religion shewed from the proofs of the true Messias long since come which are many Chap. VII The Christian Religion described The general Ground thereof the revealed Will of God The necessity of Gods revealing himself Chap. VIII More special Proofs of the truth of Christian Religion and more particularly from the Scriptures being the Word of God which is proved by several reasons Chap. IX Of the several Senses and Meanings according to which the Scriptures may be understood Chap. X. Of the true Interpretation of Holy Scriptures The true meaning not the letter properly Scripture Of the difficulty of attaining the proper sense and the Reasons thereof Chap. XI Of the Means of interpreting the Scripture That they who understand Scripture are not for that authorized to interpret it decisively The Spirit not a proper Judge of the Scriptures sense Reason no Judge of Scripture There is no Infallible Judge of Scripture nor no necessity of it absolute The grounds of an Infallible Judge examined Chap. XII Of Tradition as a Means of understanding the Scriptures Of the certainty of unwritten Traditions that it is inferiour to Scripture or written Tradition No Tradition equal to Sense or Scripture in Evidence Of the proper use of Tradition Chap. XIII Of the nature of Faith What is Faith Of the two general grounds of Faith Faith divine in a twofold sense Revelation the formal reason of Faith Divine Of the several senses and acceptations of Faith That Historical Temporarie and Miraculous Faith are not in nature distinct from Divine and Justifying Faith Of Faith explicite and implicite Chap. XIV Of the effects of true Faith in General Good Works Good Works to be distinguish'd from Perfect Works Actions good four wayes Chap. XV. Of the effect of Good Works which is the effect of Faith How Works may be denominated Good How they dispose to Grace Of the Works of the Regenerate Of the proper conditions required to Good Works or Evangelical Chap. XVI Of Merit as an effect of Good Works The several acceptatations of the word Merit What is Merit properly In what sense Christians may be said to merit How far Good Works are efficacious unto the Reward promised by God Chap. XVII Of the two special effects of Faith and Good Works wrought in Faith Sanctification and Justification what they are Their agreements and differences In what manner Sanctification goes before Justification and how it follows Chap. XVIII Of Justification as an effect of Faith and Good Works Justification and Justice to be distinguished and how The several Causes of our Justification Being in Christ the principal cause What it is to be in Christ The means and manner of being in Christ Chap. XIX Of the efficient cause of Justification Chap. XX. Of the special Notion of Faith and the influence it hath on our Justification Of Faith solitary and only Of a particular and general Faith Particular Faith no more an Instrument of our justification by Christ than other co-ordinate Graces How some ancient Fathers affirm that Faith without Works justifie Chap. XXI A third effect of justifying Faith Assurance of our Salvation How far a man is bound to be sure of his Salvation and how far this assurance may be obtained The Reasons commonly drawn from Scripture proving the necessity of this assurance not sufficient c. Chap. XXII Of the contrary to true Faith Apostasie Heresie and Atheism Their Differences The difficulty of judging aright of Heresie Two things constituting Heresie the evil disposition of the mind and the falsness of the matter How far and when Heresie destroys Faith How far it destroys the Nature of a Church Chap. XXIII Of the proper subject of Faith the Church The distinction and description of the Church In what sense the Church is a Collection of Saints Communion visible as well as invisible necessary to the constituting a Church Chap. XXIV A preparation to the knowledge of Ecclesiastical Society or of the Church from the consideration of humane Societies What is Society What Order What Government Of the Original of Government Reasons against the peoples being the Original of Power and their Right to frame Governments Power not revocable by the people Chap. XXV Of the Form of Civil Government The several sorts of Government That Government in general is not so of Divine Right as that all Governments should be indifferently of Divine Institution but that One especially was instituted of God and that Monarchical The Reasons proving this Chap. XXVI Of the mutual Relations and Obligations of Soveraigns and Subjects No Right in Subjects to resist their Soveraigns tyrannizing over them What Tyranny is Of Tyrants with a Title and Tyrants without Title Of Magistrates Inferiour and Supream the vanity and mischief of that distinction The confusion of co-ordinate Governments in one State Possession or Invasion giveth no Right to Rulers The Reasons why Chap. XXVII An application of the former Discourse of Civil Government to Ecclesiastical How Christs Church is alwayes visible and how invisible Of the communion
the several Senses and Meanings according to which the Scriptures may be understood IT being found what is the Letter of the Word of God It is necessary to know what is the true sense of it For this is only in truth the Word and not the Letters Syllables or Grammatical words To know this we must first distinguish a Sense Historical and Mystical The Historical Sense is the same as the Literal so called because it is that which is primarily signified and intended by such a form of words And this is twofold For either these words are to be taken in the proper and natural signification as I may call that which is in most vulgar use or in their borrowed and mataphorical Sense As when I call a thing hard and apply it to Iron or Stone I speak properly and according to the Natural sense but when I apply Hardness to the heart I speak improperly and Metaphorically and yet Literally too intending thereby to signifie not any natural but moral quality in the heart The Seven Ears saith Joseph in Genesis are seven years and the Seven fat Kine are Seven years And so Christ in the Gospel This is my Body and infinite others in Scripture are Metaphorical and Literal Senses both The Mystical Sense is that which is a translation not so much of words from one signification to another as of the entire Sense to a meaning not excluding the Historical or Literal Sense but built upon it and occasion'd by it And is commonly divided into the Tropological Allegorical and Anagogical which some as Origen make coordinate with the former saying The Scripture is a certain Intelligible world wherein are four Parts Origen Homil 2. In Diversos as four Elements The Earth is the Literal Sense The waters is the profound Moral Sense The Air is the Natural Sense or natural science therein found And above all the sublime sense which is Fire In another place he mentions only the Historical Moral and Mystical And generally Idem Homil. 5. in Leviticum the Fathers do acknowledg all these though with some variation not distinguishing them as we have as might be shown were it needful to enlarge here on that subject The Moral Sense is that which is drawn from the natural to signifie the manners and conditions of men The Allegorical is a sense under a continuation of tropes and figures The Anagogical a translation of the meaning of things said or done on earth to things proper to heaven The Oxe being suffered to eat while he trod out the Corn according to St. Paul in the Moral sense signified that the labourer was worthy of his hire Mount Sinah and Mount Sion as the same Gal. 2. 24 25. Apostle saith signified the two Cities of God Earthly and Heavenly Allegorically And the Church of God upon Earth the Church Triumphant in heaven It is therefore without reason and modesty both that some strickt Modern Divines have set themselves against the Antient in contracting all these senses into one so as to allow no more which is of very ill consequence to the Faith both of Jew and Christian For generally all the hopes of the Jews concerning the Messias to come and all the proofs of the Christian taken from the Old Testament That he is come would come to little or nothing seeing there is manifestly a Literal or Historical sense primarily intended upon which the Mistical is built So that the arguments of the Evangelists and St. Paul in his Epistles convincing that Christ was the true Messias must needs be invalid seeing their quotation to that purpose had certainly another Literal Sense And it is against the condition of the whole Law it self which as St. Paul Heb. 10. 1. saith was a Shadow of good things to come and not the very things themselves It is here replied commonly That all these are but one Literal Perkins on Galâ—â— 22. sense diversely expressed which is to grant all that is contended for but with a reservation of a peculiar way of speaking to themselves that having been so infortunate as to judge of things amiss they may in some manner solace themselves with variety of phrase too commonly found amongst such as resolve to say something new where there is no just cause at all And to that which seems a Difficultie That no Symbolical sense can be argumentative or prove any thing in Divinity we answer That it cannot indeed unless it be known first to be the true Mistical sense of the words alledged For neither is the Literal sense it self until it be known that such was the true intent of the Speaker But those things which were symbolically and Mystically delivered in the Law being well known to Christ and his Apostles as likewise to the Learnedest of the Jewish Doctors by a received current tradition amongst them were of force to the ends alledged by them But where such a Mystical sense is not received nothing can be inferred from thence which is conclusive CHAP. X. Of the true Interpretation of Holy Scriptures The true meaning not the letter properly Scripture Of the difficultie of attaining the proper sense and the Reasons thereof IT availeth a Christian as little to have the Letter of the word of God without the genuine sense as it doth a man to have the shell without the Kernel For the sense is the word of God not the Letter Wicked men yea the Devil himselfe maketh use of the Letter to contradict the truth it self as St. Hierome hath observed and other Fathers and constant experience certifieth not without the consent of the Scripture it self which saith of it self In it are some things hard to be understood which 2 Pet. 3. 16. they that are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do all other Scriptures to their own destruction Therefore because it is very necessarie to be informed of the difficulties and dangers in misinterpreting Scripture before we can throughly apply our selves to prevent and avoid them we will First shew briefly That many things are difficult in Scripture and the Reasons why and after proceed to the most probable means rightly to interpret the same And these obstacles in attaining the true sense of Gods word are either found in our selves or in Gods wisdome and Providence or lastly in the Word of God it self Some indeed piously but inconsiderately make all the reason of difficulties not denied by them altogether in the Scripture to be in Man supposing they hereby vindicate Gods Providence from that censure it might otherwise be liable unto if so be that God should deliver such a Law to man which could not well be understood but apt to mislead men into errour And therefore say they It is the darkness and perversness of mans understanding and will that make things in Scripture obscure and not the condition of the Scriptures themselves But this no ways doth attain its end For when did God deliver his written word unto Mankind
than guide or promote men in the knowledge of Scripture it self which naked would be better understood and resolved on then with them Fifthly The seeming opposition and contradiction in Scripture are no little impediments to the setling of mens minds in the knowledg of them Sixthly a Sixth difficulty will be The distinguishing of things Judicial Ceremonial and Moral so far as to be assured How far it is lawful to use or necessary to refuse what is prescribed by Precept or example in the Old Testament Seventhly To name no more The several various Lections may much offend the simplicity of such who shall not be well inform'd concerning the substantial integrity of Divine writ And all these I recite to no other end than to flacken the precipitancy and cool the impetuous and presumptious heat of such who the less able they are to examine and judge the more confident they are to conclude out of Scriptures what they phansie and like best refusing the outward and ordinary means of receiving the true sense upon indeed a certain truth That Gods Spirit is the best interpreter of its own Laws and God is able to direct them in the sober use of them but a most unsound and unsafe inference from hence that God doth or will so assist them when they neglect those sober outward means he hath no less ordained to that end then the former Of which means we are in the next place here to treat CHAP. XI Of the Means of interpreting the Scripture That they who understand Scripture are not for that authorized to Interpret it decisively The Spirit not a Proper Judge of the Scriptures sense Reason no Judge of Scripture There is no Infallible Judge of Scripture nor no necessity of it absolute The grounds of an Infallible Judge examined THE Opinion That all things necessary to salvation are plainly enough delivered in Scripture is pious and reasonable enough taken with its due qualifications and limitations namely of Persons of Times of Places and such like For of things supposed to be necessary all are not to all men alike necessary no not to the same man at all times For there are some Articles of Faith that are sufficiently explained and propounded to him others are not so and therefore in relation to such a person not so necessary to be explicitly believed Again some points of Religion are necessary to be received for their own sakes after due proposal others are necessary to be received for the sake of others and so imediately only necessary The Articles in the Creed of the Apostles are most of the former sort to be for their own sakes believed But the Articles of the Church and its power and autority which I take not to be mentioned in the Creed as most do are necessary for the preservation of the true Faith it self For without the use and receiving of Discipline there can be no Church properly so called as may hereafter be prooved and without a Church there can be no long continuance of Faith Therefore from hence it is not difficult to null the pretensions of some ranck Disputants who lay it as a Principal foundation and so reasonable that it scarce needs any thing but clamours and out cries to make it take effect on them that shall dare to reject it That nothing is necessarily to be offered to the Faith of any or to be by him received which is not expressed in holy writ For in holy writ it is necessary to observe and obey such as are set over us in the Lord so far as we are not convinced that they determine or impose any thing contrary to the word of God And for ought doth appear it is as necessarily required that we should depend upon our Guides in the Church for the due meaning of the Scriptures as upon the suggestions of Gods Spirit which refuseth not but requireth such outward means concurring with its direction For nothing can be more absurd or vain than simply to depend upon divine intimations of Gods Spirit because it is all sufficient of it self to such purposes For it is not only sufficient to them but to all other as well divine as natural ends and yet to so rest on it as to neglect or pass over contemptuously other meanes is rather to provoke God to denie the ordinary assistance of it For God doth not act in the world according to his power but according to his Will and Promise made unto us It is true that Christ hath promised in St. Mathew Whatsoever ye ask in my name believing ye shall receive and Math. 21. 22. by St. Luke more expresly If ye then being evil know how to give good gifts Luk. 11. 13. unto your children how much more shall your heavenly Father give the holy Spirit to them that ask him These and such like promises of being invested with Gods blessed Spirit must not be so absolutely understood as that all who simply crave it should forthwith certainly be therewith endowed because St. James as other places of Scripture explains and restrains this large promise according to the Oeconomie or more general tenour of the Gospel i. e. That we ask aright and believing which whether we in prayer do duly observe may be well doubted of us though we doubt not of the Thesis it self or Rule That he that asketh aright shall receive And besides these are senses in which such promises are truly verified and Gods Spirit truly given and yet not a full importment of all the graces which flow from it For they who at first were called to the Faith of Christ and baptized were indued with the holy Spirit and yet not presently instated in the discerning of all the mysteries of Christian Faith but still depended upon the Prophets and Apostles and interpreters of Gods will for the attaining of his will even revealed in General For according to the known distinction there are spiritual Gifts signally so called and spiritual Graces And some men may receive the influence of Gods Spirit in the way of Grace which sanctifies the will and affections and not of Gifts which illuminates the mind and understanding and that not only to the use of things absolutely necessary to our Salvation but to the benefit of others Add hereunto That notwithstanding the Spirit is so sufficient of it self and God doth grant it to them who ask it of them We know that generally it is not granted to any but in the way which Christ ordained the same and that was that first it should descend as it also did immediately and primarily upon the Church representative or Ruling who were then his Apostles and holy Disciples and in like manner is it still to be expected soberly through the mediation of such as are by Christ set to govern the Church and rule under him herein succeeding the Apostles and not immediately and by a leap from the head to the lowest members which though it may be yet is so rarely
to the world Upon this Innovating Hereticks were forced to seek subterfuge from revelations and extraordinary discoveries promised as they corruptly understood Scripture by Christ in St. John saying I have yet many things to say unto you but ye Joh. 16 12 13. cannot bear them now Howbeit when the Spirit of truth shall come he will guide you unto all truth c. Hence they collected That Christ communicated not all to his immediate Disciples but reserved diverse things to be imparted extraordinarily to them and the phansie of such extraordinary favours from God is such a bewitching device that few not soundly setled in Faith can chose but expect and thirst after and at last conceit that so God doth deal with them when there is no such matter And of this Sacrilegious and Heretical folly are those Churches no less than simple single persons guilty which under pretense of power in the Church which must not be denyed of declaring the sense of Scripture and Faith do in very deed invent and introduce new Articles of Faith and absurd Scholies unheard of before either in substance or form and say They do but explain only what was before implyed and included in holy Writ For all Articles of Faith all necessary and due Discipline all true Administration of Sacraments wherein the truth of Christian Churches are generally affirmed to consist must long since have been discovered from the Rule of all these or otherwise they who were ignorant of or defective in these could not lay any just claim to be true Churches of Christ So that in truth Antiquity thus understood is an excellent Note of the true Faith and the true Faith not contradicted in worship as is possible more than a Note or Sign of a true Church it is the very Being it self But where Antiquity it self is obscure the condition of a Note according to the Canvasers of this point being to be more cleer than that which is in question it cannot do this good office for us And to argue backward as too many do very incongruously endeavouring to prove that which should prove is to discover the fondness of their opinions and falsness of their cause at the same time For instance to say the Church cannot err in Doctrine therefore we must believe this to be most ancient And to affirm that no man can precisely declare the time and place when such a Doctrine entred the Church taxed for innovation is very absurd as commonly and confidently as it is used For St. Augustine on whose grounds they seem to build this supposition supposed that First no time could be instanced in when such an usance was not in the Church but many times this can be done against pretences to Apostolicalness though the direct time when it began may not be instanced in For whenas most Doctrines of Faith have some practical worship proper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristoteles Polit Lib 5. 8. 175. to them and evidencing them such as are the form the matter the rites of prayer none of which recorded in the Church insinuate any such opinions in that age of the Church especially of publick approbation is it not an argument more than conjectural there was then no such thing believed in the Church though we be not able to determine when it first sprung up Again it is very weak and frivolous which is presumed as unquestionable that all abuses and corruptions in the Church had some proper period wherein they must needs show themselves according to that formality as afterwards they appeared in and became notorious No doubt is to be made but points of Doctrine had their conceptions augmentations and progressions insensible as infinite other things in nature and manners have had and daily have A man may better demand the hour in which an Apple began first to rot or the week in which an old Groat began first to be defaced and loose its form than require a determinate point of time or perhaps the year in which such a Doctrine began to be corrupted into an heretical sense and practise But many of these are very exactly and faithfully set down and found short of immemorialness of Tradition as they term it For Succession another note of the Church I find it by some divided into Succession Doctrinal and Personal meaning better than they speak For I know nothing properly succeeding but where something is departed or lost Now the Doctrine of the Church being incessant and perpetual and not diverse from it self cannot be said so properly to succeed it self as to persevere in the Church But if we should pass that order and allow this language yet the thing it self seems here quite to be mistaken it being not at present enquired into the Faith of the Church which if it were granted to be sound and Catholick doth not of it self necessarily and fully infer a true Church and upon the reasons before agreed to viz. Due administration of Discipline to be essential to a true Church but into the Form constituting it a Visible and Formal Church to which is indispensably required proper Pastors and that by the appointment of Christ as St. Paul thus witnesseth speaking of Christ leaving Ephes 4. 11 12 the earth and ascending into heaven and deputing thereupon certain Officers in his stead in a visible ministration which he ceaseth now to exercise He gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers For the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ Now it is not necessary here to determine the quarrel about the kind of Officers here mentioned it sufficing to our purpose what is very evident that they who are Governours of the Church must be given to the Church by Christ But Christ acting no longer politically or visibly as hath been said and must be yielded but mystically he cannot be said to ordain any immediately in his own person but by the ministry of others Now how is it possible to distinguish them whom Christ hath appointed to constitute others in the Church from them to whom he hath given no such order but by this succession we now speak of namely a traduction of that faculty which is in one deriving it originally though by many intermediate hands from Christ himself to another succeeding him because as the Apostle to the Hebrews speaks the Priests are not suffered to continue by reason of Death This Hebr. 7. 23. surrogation then of Pastors and Priests is not to be at the pleasure or arbitrement of men to institute but must be by the will of Christ and this will of Christ must be revealed unto us either by the ordinary line and course from himself and Apostles or else must by some extraordinary and miraculous way be made known to men For though we deny it to be Christs practise to commission men to these ends we do not deny it to be
Patient or thing that suffereth not according to the full force and vertue which it hath in it self For fire doth not equally prey upon stone and wood nor doth the Physitian give the same strong Physick to a weak body as he doth to a strong nor are Men informed of God after the manner of Angels who behold much more purely and cleerly the Nature of God But mans knowledge is generally taken from the Effects And so comparing those works of God and Acts of God which have some similitude with those of men For as all works of note do imply some care and pains to produce them by men So is God said to labour when he created all things in this world and to rest when he had finished and ended all because this is the manner of men And to be Angry when either just cause is offered by offending him in breaking of his holy Laws or the effects of wrath commonly seen when men are so affected appear by the severe punishments inflicted upon offenders And what is said of the inward affections ascribed unto God may be easily applied to those outward descriptions made of God in Scripture under the form of Man as of Hands Arms Head Heart Eyes and such like which the ancient Fathers against the Heresie of the Anthropomorphites who as Epicurus in Tully took God to be of the same fashion and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 often mentioned by St. Chrysostome Suidas form with Man do affirm to be by Condescension to Man which Condescension is thus described by one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Condescension is when God doth seem to be what he is not but so declares himself to be as he that is to conceive of him is best able to behold him proportioning the revelation of himself to the imbecillity of the contemplator CHAP. IV. Of the Vnity of the Divine Nature as to number and how the Trinity of Persons may consist with the Vnity and simplicity of the Deity Of the proper Notions pertaining to the Mystery of the Trinity viz. Essence Substance Nature Person The Distinction of the Persons in the Trinity Four Enquiries moved How far the Gentiles and Jews understood the Trinity The Proof of the Doctrine of the Trinity from the New Testament and the Explication of it BUT to the exception taken from the Mystery of the Holy Trininity greater regard ought to be had as well for the explication and confirmation of that Doctrine as for the satisfaction of humble enquirers into the same And for more clear and gradual proceeding herein it will be requisite first to explain such terms as this Doctrine much depends on as Essence Substance Nature Person and Trinity it self Essence is of somewhat larger extent than Substance because Substance signifies properly only that which is opposite to Accident or that which adheres or inheres to Substance but Essence signifies all kinds of Beings as well of Accidents as Substances Nature is the restraint of Essence and Substance both in their general Being to some more special kind of thing as there is the Nature of Man and the Nature of Beast the Nature of Accidents and the Nature of Substances the Nature of Colours and the Nature of Quantities so that Nature is not that whereby a thing simply and absolutely is but whereby it is what it is Hence we say also the Nature of God or the Creator and the Nature of the Creature Nature being that by which as is said a thing is what it is and distinct from others And as for the word Trinity it is true what hath been objected by some of old that it is not in terms t◠be found in Scripture for the word doth not import any one or more things absolutely but rather the manner of such things being the better to settle the mind in the apprehension of that great Mystery Now the Holy Scriptures doth very often only propound the Article of Faith to be believed by us but leaves the manner of expressing and conceiving the same to the holy prudence of Men whom he hath for the instruction of inferior persons ordained in his Church which have agreed so to term that three-fold personal Relation in the Deity A Person is defined to be an entire and absolute Being of reasonable nature Man in general is not a Person because he subsisteth not by himself A Beast in particular is not a Person because void of knowledge and reason The soul of Man though endowed with reason is not a Person because not of it self entire and perfect being part of another thing i e. Man But Peter and John are Persons because single Substances absolute in themselves and rational To collect therefore and conclude from what is thus briefly premised we say that these Notions of Essence Substance and Nature are sometimes taken more strictly and properly according to which we must alwayes hold it as a most fundamental Truth in Christian Religion as it is in the Religion of all civilized People that God is but one in Essence Substance or Nature i. e. the Being and Nature of God as God are but one But if we take the said Notions more largely for that which expresses the manner of Being as well as Being it self then may we speak of the nature of a Person as when we say that the nature of a Person is different from the nature of things simply taken And if Nature be taken as sometimes for the condition of a thing or Person we may truly say that in the Trinity the Three Persons as Persons are of a different nature though they differ not in the nature of the Deity For that they really and not imaginarily or by mans fancy and conception different from one another is a received Truth by all reputed true Believers but nothing can be distinct from another but by somewhat peculiar to it and whatever is peculiar to a thing and ingredient into its Being may be and is commonly called the nature of it in which sense we may say Three Persons are of a different nature because the Father is not the Son nor the Son the Father nor the Holy Ghost Father or Son for the nature of the Father as Father is to beget the nature of the Son as Son to be begotten the nature of the Holy Ghost as Holy Ghost to proceed But all this hindereth not in the Nature of God they should be one and the same and so but one distinct God and this makes the Trinity in Unity and the Unity in Trinity For were not the Persons distinct by somewhat real and not so notional as to be fictitious there could not be said to be a Triplicity or Trinity of Persons And again if in nature they were not the same there could be no Identity worthy of that Mystery For other Creatures differing one from another in subsisting distinctly agree in the unity of a general nature as three men agree in the common nature of man But 't is
that as the case now stands as they speak in Acts 4. 12. sensu composito God having determined that no other name under heaven be given whereby men must be saved that there is no salvation in any other but in Christ Jesus But secluding that Decree it doth not appear why God out of the Abyss of his Counsels and Immensness of his Wisdome and absoluteness of his Free Grace might not have compassed Mans salvation some other way My Reason besides those I find used by others is that now intimated If God could entertain such favourable thoughts towards Man as to decree his Salvation without intuition of Christ surely he might have effected it without Christ For 't is neither just nor reasonable to imagine that God could decree any thing absolutely and not absolutely bring it to pass for we cannot so judge of Gods Counsels as we do of Mans who alwayes determines with supposition of means and ability to bring to pass what he determined but all causes out of himself being without exception subject to his will nay his will needing no outward means to attain its purpose or resolution it is sufficient argument that such a thing may be that God without consideration of any means decrees it and at his liberty chooses those means he pleases Neither upon this supposition is the advantage such as the Socinian Heretick expects to his cause It is one of his pernicious heresies That Christ satisfied not by his Passion he expiated not the offense of Man thereby but left him many a good lesson to direct and instruct him in the way to heaven set him an excellent and fair example to follow Makes now at last being in heaven not before intercession and mediates for man but his death was no satisfaction for the wrath of God conceived against the sinner And to make way to this opinion he says that God might without any satisfaction have freely remitted mans offence and therefore it was not absolutely and indispensably requisite that Christ should dye If we should yield all this which is here taken for granted which yet if it be not granted is not so easie to be demonstrated there appears no great advantage to their cause For if it be assured unto us out of holy Writ that God hath determined that no salvation should be attained no recovery had without the mediation of Christ and his satisfaction what availeth it them that possibly it might have been otherwise I confess the advantage to the other side would have been much greater if it could be proved that Gods justice of absolute necessity must have been satisfied by fulfilling the penal part of the Law but however there remains evidence enough from the conditional will of God which according to Scriptures admits of no other way now For so saith St. Paul to the Colossians It pleased the Father that in Col. 1. 19 20. him should all fulness dwell And having made peace through the bloud of his Cross by him to reconcile all things unto himself by him I say whether they be things in heaven or things on earth And Christ himself in St. Luke saith Luke 24 46. Thus it is written and thus it behoved Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day And that repentance and remission of sin should be preached in his Name among all Nations beginning at Jerusalem And St. Peter 2 Pet. 2. 24. Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree that we being dead unto sin should live unto righteousness by whose stripes we were healed And what can be more plain than that of the Epistle to the Hebrews Without Heb. 9. 22 23. shedding of bloud is no remission And lest some may presume to restrain the Apostles words to the state of the Old Law it is added It was therefore necessary that the paterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these but the heavenly things themselves with better Sacrifices than these And what doth the Apostle mean by the better Sacrifices but the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross St. John declares so much exprefly where he saith If we walk in the light as he is in the light we have fellowship one with another 1 John 1. 7. and the bloud of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin And in the fore-cited place of the Hebrews more fully and expresly making a comparison Hebr. 9. 14. between the expiations of the Law and Gospel sayes thus For if the bloud of Bulls and Goats and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkling the unclean sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh how much more shall the bloud of Christ who through the Eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God If therefore God under the Mosaical Law might have passed over the errours and uncleanness of his people Israel but never would remit them without expiations and sacrifices to that end ordained how can it be imagined that the moral errours and impurities of the soul of Man by sin should be expiated or passed over without that Sacrifice and shedding of the bloud of Christ appointed to that purpose Surely therefore a sense there is wherein it is impossible God should remit sins without due punishment for the same inflicted and the least and lowest is that which we call conditional supposing that God hath so decreed that no sin should be expiated but that way A way which besides the excellent agreement it hath with the Justice of God and Mercy also is full of pregnant advices and instructions to the Offender partly informing of the foul and mortal nature of sin which cannot otherwise be pardoned than by such satisfaction of bloud partly by humbling him and moving him to cry God mercy bitterly and heartily and lastly by possesing his mind with a dread and terrour of the nature of sin so as to avoid the same for the time future CHAP. XVI Of the Nature and Person of the Mediatour between God and Man In the beginning was the Word proved to be spoken of Christ and that he had a Being before he was Incarnate The Vnion of two Natures in Christ explained Christ a Mediatour by his Person and by his Office and this by his Sacrificing himself The Scriptures proving this THUS far of the necessity and use of Mediation between God and Man for the reconciling them at this great distance Now it remains to speak more particularly of the Person or Mediatour himself whom Christian Faith acknowledges to be Christ Jesus who as the Scripture tells us came unto the world to save sinners and to save them by his Mediation 1 Tim. 1. 15. And that this is a faithful saying that is a truth to be embraced by true Faith without which there is no Salvation But of the Condition of this Mediatour we find no small differences amongst such who are called Christians
either mediately or immediately The Gift was Faith of Miracles The Faith was grounded upon the Revelation and the Revelation was that God would work such and such a Miracle when they prayed commanded or imposed hands This was invented still to drown all Christian Gifts and Graces in Faith 4. Fourthly The two Testaments the Law and the Gospel Id. ib. c. 1. P. 347. are two in nature substance and kind This I know is Calvins Doctrine and his Followers but not the Fathers nor theirs who follow them For thus writeth Lactantius The Jews use the Old Judaei veteri utuntur nos novo sed tamen diversa non sunt quia novum veteris a dimpletio esâ— in utreque Idem Testator chrisius est Lactant. l. 4. Instit c. 20. Chrysost Tom. 7. Ser. 1. p. 16. Iren. l. 4. c. 26. dem Fraeceptum timentitus Lex est amaâ—tibus gratia Aug. ad Simpl. l. 1. qu. 1. Testament we the New but yet they are not diverse because the New is the fulfilling of the Old and Christ is the same Testator in both And Chrysostom thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the New and old Testaments be divided as to time yet they are united as to their scope And before both these Irenaeus speaketh thus The Precepts of perfect life are the same in both Testaments and being the same declare the same God who urged particular Precepts agreeing with each but the most eminent and chief without which we cannot be saved are the same in both And after all these and many more Austin in sundry places affirmeth the same thing as doth our Church * Articles of Church of Eng. art 7. Voet. Select Disp part 4. de lege Evang qâ—â—aest 4. It matters therefore not much with me that Voetius wou'd rather disgrace this opinion then disprove it by saying The Socinians and such as are much of the same mind with them as the Remonstrants and Papists so hold but his Party deny it absolutely Fifthly St. James cap. 2. v. 26. understands a pretended Faith or the profession of Faith as appears v. 14 18. This doth not appear any more than it appears that such is that Faith whereby they hold they are justified Why have they why can they not to this very day assign and describe plainly either that special Act or that special Proposition or Article of Faith whereby they are justified without any works of Faith in Co-ordination to Faith or other Graces Sixthly There is no offence to say He Christ suffered the Ib. pag. 277. Also on the Creed p. 215. pains of Hell so far forth as this suffering might consist with the purity of his Manhood and with the truth of his personal union This is right Calvin Seventhly The Sacraments administred by the Second sort Id. Cases of Conscience l. 2. c 8. i. e. Private Persons having no authority ordinary is a mere nullity If this be true what becomes of the Acts of divers eminent Reformers in case it be proved they never had any Ordinary Authority or Ordination Why do not they rebaptize those who are baptized by Independents whom they must confess to have no Ordinary Authority or Ordination or have renounced it as some of them have professed to my self Eighthly Baptism is appointed of God to be no more but a seal Ib. p. 74. annexed unto and depending upon the Covenant Afterwards he repeats the same in a far worse manner As also on the Galatians In Gal. p. 235. Ninthly If any man binds himself by Oath to live in single Perkins Cases of Cons p. 109 110. life without marriage and after finds that God hath not given him the gift of Continence in this case his Oath becomes impossible to be kept and therefore being reversed by God and becoming unlawful it may be broken without impiety This is a device to excuse we know whom principally and leaves men at liberty to break such lawful vows under pretence that God hath denyed his sufficient Grace to keep them and they are impossible to be kept who shall determine when God denyes that Gift Every man that is tempted to break his Vow Tenthly The Vow of Regular obedience is against the word of God 1 Cor. 7. 7. ye are bought with a price be not the servants of men And why is this so rather then for subjects to vow obedience to their Governors and children to their Parents If you say because God commandeth the latter and not the former you imply that God could command contrary things for this is to be subject to man as well as that St. Paul is quite mistaken by such Scholiasts as thus interpret him Eleventhly Whatsoever wanteth conformity to the Law of God Ib. p. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nyssen Catech. O rat c 7. is sin whether it be with consent of will or no. This supposes what is false viz. that any thing can be morally evil the will altogether dissenting both as to cause in general and effect 12. Zipporah's act of circumcising her child was a sin of Toleration Ib. p. 8. So is murder divers times and is this no other 13. Second grace is nothing else but the continuance of the first grace This I wonder at as much as any thing in him who advances Quid enim debet esse incundius vel infirmis gratid qud sanantur vel pigris gratid qud excitantur vel volentibus gratrà qud adjuventur Aug. in Bonifacio Epist 106. Cases of Conscience p. 66. Grace so highly It is contrary to Austin in many places as to name no more in his Epistle to Boniface in these words distinguishing a threefold grace For what is more comfortable to the weak then grace whereby they are healed or to the sloathful then grace whereby they are quickned or to the willing then grace whereby they are helped 14. Christ knew not that the fig-tree had no figs on it till he came to it He might better have said he knows not the day of judgment till it comes The Fathers Answer to the Arrians objecting this will serve for both 15. The fourth Commandment is Moral and hath nothing Ib. l. 2. c. â—4 Ceremonial in it 16. In regard of Conscience Holiness and Religion all places Ib. p 78. are equal and alike in the New Testament since the coming of Christ The House or Field is as holy as the Church And if we pray in either of them our prayer is as acceptable to God as that which is made in the Church The contrary will appear afterward 17. All virtues that are not joyn'd with renovation and Ib. p. 335. Item Gal. 1. 5. change of Affection are no better then sins This point the Philosophers never knew No I warrant them For had they they should have known more then any good Christian as it is thus crudely delivered Austin vulgarly quoted favors it not 18. Infidels do steal and usurp the blessings of God
only to signifie how Christ was lifted up on the Cross but as practised in the Roman Church to the intent direct and divine Worship be given it 7. Wicked men eat not the Body of Christ Sure enough in a proper sense not denominatively only as the consecrated Elements are called the Body of Christ very often and currently 8. That they who communicate not are to be put out of the Church This is such an Error as the Ancient Church was guilty of as well as we as your own Vicecomes sheweth at large Vicecomes Vol. 3. l. 1. c. 18. 9. The Keys of the Church consist only in opening the Word of God No such thing is held by us 10. Private Confession is to be taken away Not so much as Sectaries say this absolutely 11. The Ceremonies of the Church are to be abrogated Simply and falsly said and directly contrary to the Articles of our Artic. 20. Church 12. Prayers in the Latin Tongue are barbarous and against St. Pauls Precept Very true where they are at first so instituted and understood by very few or none and so are they in the English Tongue or any other 13. No man can fulfill the Law This is true or false as it may be taken 14. More Masses then one cannot be said in one day in one Church Here our Accuser saith he knows not what For neither doth our Church inhibit more then once to officiate Liturgically neither did the Ancient Church practise if permit it for above four hundred years after Christ as appears from Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria consulting with Leo the first Bishop of Rome what he should Leo 1 Epist 79 or as some So. See also Grecian consecr Dist c. 51. do when Christians were so numerous that they could not all be received into the Church at once who answered In such cases he might safely reiterate the office And the Council of Antisiodorum or Auxere held about the Year 578 decreed that but one Mass should be said upon one Altar in one day which is as much observed by the Church of Rome now-a-days as other Canons of Councils which lye in their way thrown out And where in the Ancient Church do you read of above one Altar in one Church 15. Unity is no Note of the Church Discords and Divisions are certain signs of Errors but Unity is no certain sign of Truth nor so much as of a Church how then can it be of a true Church 16. Universal Councils may be repeal'd by Particular This See Petrus Gregorius Syntagm l. 15. c 3. is nothing he might have said by particular persons as the Popes who may according to that Church null Acts of Councils Oecumenical But we only hold that in things mutable according to the condition Article 34. of Time Place and other Circumstances rendring some Decrees prejudicial to some Churches contrary to the intention of the first Ordainers of them a Provincial Church may make alterations 17. The Church may erre in Faith And what of that meaning any one Individual single Church as the Roman hath according to our Articles 18. The Precepts of the Church concerning set Fasts are A Doctrine of Devils It is rather a Doctrine of Devils to teach so 19. Peter was not the Prince of the Apostles Peter was A or if you will The Principal Apostle but he was not the Prince of any one of them much less of all 20. The Bishop of Rome is Antichrist We are not so much agreed about this point as to give in a full verdict but we agree he is Antichristian 21. The difference concerning Leaven and Easter is inconsiderable Where no danger of Schisms or confusions may alter the case it is true 22. It is Heathenish to invoke Saints that reign with Christ Whether heathenish or no may be doubted they never worshipping any relating to Christ But for all that it may be and is superstitious and idolatrous in the sense very current in the Roman Church 23. The Reliques of Saints are not to be worshipped We hold so indeed though we hold they are to be respected relatively 24. The Saints in Heaven have no merits It is true taken strictly and properly 25. Indulgences of the Church are vain They are not only vain but wicked and generally blasphemous and ridiculous as mangâ—ed by the Church of Rome contrary or at least without all Precedents of the Christian Church for many hundred years viz. in remitting Sins or Punishments after this life and that divers times before they are committed Is not this fine and wonderful ancient and Catholick 26. Nothing is to be read in the Church besides Canonical Scripture This is rank Puritanism contradicted by themselves in their practise who read their Sermons as well as others and pray which is aequivalent to reading in this case out of their own heads rather than Scripture 27. In Oecumenical Councils and Private for the explaining of the Doctrine of Faith the consent of Lay-Princes is necessary It is necessary for the orderly assembling of such Councils It is necessary for the giving any Secular enforcement unto them 28. That it is lawful for Lay-men alone the Clergy opposing to introduce the Ancient Religion This is true no farther then that of Gerson which is alledged to this purpose A Lay-man with Scripture on his side is to be preferred before a Council without it Supposing a monstrous Proposition no wonder if a monstrous conclusion follows 29. He is no Bishop that teacheth not This is also a Puritan strain It being only true that he is no faithful conscientious Pastor but either proud or treacherous or sloathful or basely prudent who doth not in person discharge his Office so far as he is able without turning the care of his flock over to others using that for an argument of keeping close in his Cabin which is rather an argument of appearing in his charge viz. storms on the Church Opposition the Faith and Orders of the Church meet withal and difficulties obstructing the truth It being both shameful and ridiculous both in Bishop and Priest to censure others for enemies to the Church and for them so to wast it in all mens esteem in deserting it and delivering it up to the care of others themselves seeking little else then their temporal Harvest and case These men are over the Church indeed but 't is as the Extinguisher is over the Candle to put it out They pretend for themselves they have been sufferers for the Church and so it should seem indeed by their carriage to it in that through their scandalous negligence as to their charge they take a course to revenge themselves of it by making it suffer as much or more for them 30. Faith alone justifies How this is held we have even now as also we shall hereafter more fully explain 31. There are no Merits in Good works There are none properly so called 32. Priests and Monks may marry 'T is true where the
bear the place of the Example 27. It may be granted that Images may be worshipped C. 23. improperly and by accident with the same kind of worship C. 24. with which the Exemplar but not for their own sakes and properly and therefore Latria is not properly and for themselves to be given for them 28. A Vow is an Act of Religion due to God only like L. 3. c. 9. De cultu sanctor as an Oath and Sacrifice as appears from the Scriptures whose Vowes are constantly said to be made to God Yet it is most certain that in some manner Vowes may be made to Saints 29. It is not probable that Christ in these words this is De Eucharist l. 1. c. 9. my Body would speak figuratively 30. One Body may be in divers places at once L. 3. c. 3. 31. That the Elements in the Eucharist are turned into L. 3. per. tot Christs Body 32. It is a truth necessary to be believed that whole L. 4. c. 21. 22. Christ is in the kind of Bread and whole Christ is in the kind of Wine 33. No more Grace is contain'd in one kind then in C. 23. both 34. Worshipping the Host excuses from Idolatry because C. 29. they believe there is no Bread remaining and no Catholick holds that Divine Worship is to be given to Bread 35. Our Sacrifice is truly and properly called a Sacrifice L. 2. de missa c. 2. no less than the ancient Sacrifices as is shown in the former Book 36. The Rite of Reconciling Sinners after Baptism which De Paenit lib. consists of Repentance discovered by external signs and the word of Absolution Catholicks affirm to be a true and proper Sacrament 37. There is a treasure of superfluous Merits in the Church De Indulg l. c. 2 3 11. which may by the Pope be applyed to the benefit of other persons by Indulgences 38. The Catholick Church doth openly affirm Extream Unction De Extrem Unct. c. 1. to be truly and properly a Sacrament 39. Orders are a Sacrament truly and properly so called De Ord. c. 1. 40. Matrimony of Believers is a proper Sacrament De Matrim c. 1. To these innumerable other might be added of strange nature to the Word of God and belief and practise of the ancient Church but these are more then sufficient to confront those vainly objected to us by them whereof some are most false others most true others false or true as they may be taken And now the manner of proceeding in this Discourse being propounded to be touched in the second place here must not be forgotten In which I confess I have not a little varied from my first intention and resolution which were in a plain compendious way to set down the Principal Doctrine of Faith and Worship agreeable to God's Holy Word and to the mind of the best Ancient Churches as well as our Own and that without Passion or particular Reflexions on any Party or Person by name knowing that of Synesius to be most true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Synes Ep 57. That Soul which would be a Vessel to receive God must be void of all Passions But finding some things both approved and disproved by me would scarce be credited without such instances I held my self obliged to forsake that resolution in the process of my Discourse and a little in the beginning where I was forced by ill Paper and Ink to write somewhat over the second time to make it legible Otherwise I determined to avoid Names and Testimonies of Authors after the manner of them who before me have written Institutions and Sums of this nature Yet have I not taken upon me in an imperious way to multiply Canons and Axioms and impose them with expectation of greater faith in them then such men will allow to the Decrees of the Holy Councils so called And this with a perswasion I know not how or why wrought into credulous persons that now-a-dayes only Scripture is understood and they only speak Scripture but others humane Inventions Which most bold demand 't is a wonder how many prone naturally to superstitious novelties do without the least suspicion of vanity and falsity readily receive for a most certain and fundamental Truth but is indeed a fundamental Error and the root of all Heresie towards the Faith and of all Schism towards the Church I remember how some years since enquiring of one very near to me what Divinity his Tutor grounded him in he answered me Wollebius And farther inquiring what Wollebius said of a certain point he replyed as he there found it against which when I put in my exception he wondered at me and indeavored to silence me by telling me It was a Canon I have not here proceeded so Canonically as others nor yet so Polemically but considering according to St. Johns distinction that there are Children in Christ 1 John 2. 13. and Young men and Old men commonly call'd Incipientes Prosicientes and perfecti i. e. Beginners Proficients and Perfect men I have here pitched upon the mean sort of these to whom to direct my Labors knowing there were but too many Catechises amongst us for the former and too few Treatises or none for the second And that to write Polemically for the satisfaction of the third required another more proper language and a more Scholastical Person and much more large Volumes then this one though this Book hath increased under my hands well nigh thrice as much as I at first intended And in truth it is to be lamented and blushed at that none of the Learned men of our Church have yet appeared in so noble and necessary a Work as the fuller and more entire managing of the Elenctical part of Divinity to the preventing daily mischiefs arising from the necessity of repairing to our Enemies of both sides to perfect Theological Studies without the due ballance on our side to prevent prejudice I hope God will stir up the spirits of some to set their hands to and enable them to go through so good a Work Voetius of Utrecht than whom I think none of this Age hath Certum autorem ejus qui solidè compendiosè accommodatè ad nestra tempora hee â—gat hâ—ctenus non vidi expectandum est ergo c. Voetius Bibl. l. 2. c. 5. been acquainted with more modern Authors much complains for want of some compendious Body of Elenctical Divinitie which to that day he had not seen And therefore expected that long defired Piece of Famous Altingius should at length come forth which was only in the hands of his Scholars in writing Yet I find this Work of Henricus Altingius to have been published the same year with Voetius his Bibliotheca viz. Anno 1654. and called Theologia Elenctica Nova viz. New Elenctical Divinitie which in truth hath not its name New for nothing in that manner of handling Divinity as none before
agreement and ornament of the Whole So that as in Musick some light passing Notes of discord do add grace and sweetness to the Parts the petty particular disagreement of Creatures illustrate and commend the excellency of the Order of Creatures in the World And as it Athanas ib. p. 42. is yet further impossible but if two several Musicians should compose a Lesson or Song consisting of several Voices not consulting with one another but from their several phansies and humours these put together must needs make horrible jarring and discord so were there more then One God who should have an hand in framing this Universe it could not possibly have been avoided but the infinite and destructive inconveniencies in the parts thereof would betray the absurdness of such different Agents Again if there were more Gods then one there may as well be believed Si sint duo quare non plures Terrul cont Marcionem l. 1. c. 5. to be more then a hundred then a thousand then ten thousand and so on For who shall limit or determine them And so the World would be like a Common-wealth which should have more Soveraigns then Subjects Neither can it be imagined with any reason that such a multitude of gods should hold a Common Counsel and lay their heads together as Poets have devised for the wiser management of their Kingdom of this world because all such deliberations and consultations do imply a particular defect Quid intersint Numeri quum duo paria non differant uno Una enim res est quae cadem in duobui Id. ibid. of power and knowledge which are made up in some manner by the concurrence of many supplying such single defects But this supposition quite overthrows the Divine Nature And farther either these supposed Gods must be equal or inferiour to one another in their Attributes If the latter then must such inferiour ones be turned out of the List as insufficient and incapable of such an Equidem unum esse Deum sine initio sine prole naturae sew Patrem magnum atque magnificum quis tam demens tam mente captus neget esse certissimum high dignity If equal to what purpose are many invented when two or more differ not from One Sixthly Infiniteness and Unity are convertible in the inquiry after the nature of God For if God be Infinite he must necessarily be but One if he be One he must necessarily be Infinite Nothing less then Infinite answering the onely less then Infinite necessities of Creatures in the World which all stand in need as well of support and governance as of a First Cause to produce them 7. Lastly The same consent of Nations and People as hath been intimated Hujus nos virtutes per mundum esse diffusas multis vocabulis vocamus c. Maximus Mad. August Epist 43. agreeing in but one GOD as well as in this That there is a God sufficiently evinceth this For not to speak of the more stupid who are no competent Judges in such cases who notwithstanding readily assent to this noble truth once propounded but the more Learned and Wise who upon disquisition and search duly and thorowly made have ever unanimously received this for a most certain truth CHAP. IV. Of the diversity of Religions in the World A Brief censure of the Gentile and Mabomitan Religion HItherto have we treated of Natural Religion as it were that which all men by the light and force of principles put into Man by the hand of God who made him so that scarce doth the Infant turn more naturally to the breast of the Mother than doth Man arrived to the years of reason and common understanding seek to God by way of recognition and dependance on him But this one end to which all tend so unanimously admitteth of many roads leading thereunto which particularly to enumerate were both superfluous and tedious and therefore may well be reduced to these four Heathenish Jewish Mahometan and Christian which are so many Religions according to which One God is worshipped The Heathen or Gentile as the Scripture calls him worship a God and surely desiring as all men naturally do not to err or be deceived especially in such matters as are of greatest importance as the choice of a Deity is do likewise rudely intend to adore none but the true God For as St. Paul well noteth and teaches us in his Epistle to the Romans Rom. 8. 20. the Creature was made subject unto vanity not willingly but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope By which creature he doth certainly mean the Gentile who according to the phrase of Holy Writ speaking according to the received sense and opinion of the highly opinion'd Jews was reputed no more of then a simple creature and nature in opposition to which St. Paul often makes mention of another and New creature as He that is in Christ Jesus is a New creature and elsewhere And by Vanity 2 Corin. 5. 17. Gal. 5. 10. Jonah 2. 8. is commonly understood False Gods and Idols as in Jonah They that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercies meaning False Gods as the Prophet Jeremie likewise affirmeth of the Heathens Gods They are but Jerem. 10. 15. vanity the works of mens hands Now the Creature or Gentiles were unwillingly made subject to these Vanities and false worships in respect of that general Principle inserted in Man whereby he chooses truth before error and consequently the true God before the false however through some particular Blindness of their understanding and darknes their Ephes 4. 18. hearts be alienated from the Life of God or from the living God which is the same Which Darkness of the heart may well be imputed to that Original defect or sin traduced from Adam to all his Posterity Yet notwithstanding even after that general waste made in the Soul of Man God as St. Paul well tells them left not himself without a witness in that he Acts. 14. 17. did good and gave us Rain from Heaven and fruitful seasons filling our hearts with food and gladness So that the Invisible things of him as saith the Rom. 1. 20. same St. Paul from the beginning of the VVorld are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made even his eternal power and godhead so that they are without excuse And the reason hereof goeth before Viz. V. 19. Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them for God hath shewed it unto them The invisible things of God are said to be seen clearly because they are sufficiently exposed to be seen and therefore if they do not see them it must be the affectation of some sensual error which so darkens their mind that they cannot or will not And being thus first corrupted no marvel if their Religion be like unto it not only false but unreasonable and abominable as may appear from these few amongst
infinite reasons First from the Object of their worship generally directed to a multitude of Gods and patching up a plenitude of power out of the shreds of innumerable Demi-gods or pieces of Gods whereof one should have power and vertue in one thing and another in another but this is to deny God in effect who if he be not absolute is not at all and indeed all the arguments before used to prove there can be but one God do prove that to be a false and foolish Religion which alloweth and worshippeth more than one Neither can it suffice to excuse them to say that the wiser of the Heathens acknowledged but one God because it availeth nothing at all but to add to their condemnation for any persons to have a right sense and meaning reserved to themselves and to proceed directly contrary to such found judgment in their practice and worship it self And therefore the most absurd and abominable manner of worshipping their pretended Deities is sufficient conviction of the Religion it self For whereas modesty sobriety temperance chastity truth justice and the like moral vertues were such as the Light of Nature did commend to all men and all consented to be excellent and laudable All these were contemned by the admirers of these Gods yea the very Religion it self tempted and incited many to offend against all these and that which is most intolerable from the examples of the pretended gods so chusing to be worshipped from whence must needs follow what St. Paul affirmeth of the Gentiles Religion and gods The things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to Devils and not to God They were impure and wicked 1 Cor. 10. 20. spirits delighting in absurd and vitious practises And therefore upon this subject no more need be spoken at present The Neat pretender to true worship may be the Mahometan who worshipping the True God so far as may be discerned yet faileth egregiously in the manner of exhibiting the same the very grounds and end also being false and unreasonable For first that the Author and Coiner of that worship was an impostor and made pretences of Sanctity in the midst of impurities and infirmities he was subject unto is apparent out of Histories of those times and places where he by the assistance of a Fugitive Nestorian Monk laid the plot and whole design of his Religion and that among a people altogether rude ignorant barbarous easie to be deceived and cheated into a credulity of pretended Revelations Again the many absurdities and contradictions of their Law most sacred as misnaming of persons mistiming of Facts mistaking of Histories in the gross impossible prophane blasphemous opinions concerning the nature the will the Actions of God contrary to common philosophy and reason Ridiculous and foolish imaginations of Angels utterly false opinions of the nature of things and such like being duly and soberly weighed and examined do convince the whole Fabrick of that superstition of Idleness and foolish fictions And not to multiply more arguments here The way of propagating this Erroneous Fashion of serving God discovereth the Errour of the thing it self For it is a general and most rational Principle deserving admission and belief of all That Religion being the most excellent act of humane Creatures ought to have the most high and noble Faculty of the soul for its proper seat and fountain from whence it should proceed such as is the intellectual faculty of Man But this superstition is carried on by the ministery of the Senses chiefly And moreover It ought to have for its end the most sublime and divine of all But the Mahometan constituteth the low pleasures of the Senses as the sufficient and proper end of all their service making the beatitude of Heaven to consist in perpetual Licentiousness and fresh delights of senses And therefore no need of insisting on this subject here What is here spoken being for method sake rather then necessity or a formal confutation of those Errours CHAP. V. Of the Jewish Religion The Pretence of the Antiquity of it mulled Their several Erroneous grounds of the Jewish Religion discovered DUT the Religion of the Jew requireth more diligent examination as well because of a notable presumption from ancient Tradition and a certain preoccupation of divine truths and auctority of divine Constitution as because the consideration thereof is an introduction to Christian Religion and the disproof of that a proof of the Christian And if according to Christians own concessions and the eminentest Apostle St. Paul they were once the people and true Church of God To Rom. 3. 2. cap. 9. 4. them were committed the Oracles of God To them pertained the Adoption and the glorie and the Covenant and the giving of the Law and the service of God and the Promises Why not alwayes a Church If once Gods people Why not alwayes so If once confessed to be pure and Faithfull When did they cease to be so When first entred corruptions into their Church Under what High Priest And who brought such errours first in This is the sum of what they can say either for themselves or against the Christians of whose Religion which undoubtedly they do and will call Heresie they can give the time and place when and where it sprang up and the person who first founded and advanced the same And if any Church or Society of men in the world can lay claim to the Promises of perpetuity and infallibility surely the Jewish will pretend much more from the Prerogatives peculiar to them as do witness every where the Law and the Prophets To all this a sufficient answer shall be comprehended in the prosecution of the contrary Grounds which here follows which I reduce to these two whereof One concerns their Errour about their Law and the Other about their Messias The first general Errour concerning their Law is first that they suppose that the word of God given to Moses for their proper use was equally to oblige all Nations saving where certain priviledges were pretended to Jews by birth which they suppose no people were worthy or capable of except the stock of Abraham But that all nations could not be included in that Covenant which was made with Abraham nor were all obliged to the Rites and Ceremonies thereof appears from the ordinary impossibility of being observed by all People For how could people of the remotest parts of the earth appear thrice a year at Jerusalem as was commanded the Israelites by God who dwelt in the Land of Canaan How Levit. 12. 6. could all Nations at any time bring their Sacrifices to the door of the House of the Lord to be there received and offered by the Priests Another Errour concerning their Law received by Moses is that they say It was it whereby men should be justified Which is false and that First because the most ancient holy and renowned Patriarchs of the Jewish Line were not so Justified They were not justified by the
that none can without another extraordinary confirmation rest satisfied that so it is really with him Lastly for our clearer proceeding We are herein to distinguish between the attaining to the true sense of Scripture and the decision or determination of Controversies according to the Scripture And that the most important Query is not so much Whether a man hath the Spirit or not or whether he hath the truest and most genuine meaning of the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures or not but how this should be made known and manifested so far unto others as that they should rationally and soberly rest satisfied in the opinions of the said pretenders to such truths For it s well and smartly said in this doubt The Question is not Whether the Spirit in a Man or Church or the Scripture though this last way is very improperly expressed be the best Judge of the Sense of Scripture but where it resides to such purposes And what a great stir is made to little purpose while the former is so easily granted on all sides and there is nothing done at all to convince a sober man or Christian That such or such persons are they we ought expect the dictates of Gods Spirit from For Judgement properly so called can never be separated from Autority or lawful presiding over others joyned with power to oblige to such sentence as shall be passed but how this should be competible to single or many Persons agreeing in the same thing in their private capacity yea though enabled with the spirit more than ordinary cannot well be understood So that at most they can be judges of controversies only for themselves and that at their own peril and can do no more than perswade advise and exhort not oblige others to think as they do But Judges must and ought to do more or they had as good do nothing So that that which hath found great acceptance and applause by too many doth upon examination prove very insignificant and impertinent to the resolution of the difficultie in hand viz. That things that are necessary are obvious in Scripture and Every man is Judge to himself granting I say This which is yet really untrue yet scarce any thing is said to the purpose which enquired not so much How a man might perswade himself but how and with what influence he may proceed to the conviction and reducing of others so that the essential to a Church be not destroyed as it certainly must be where no communion is and there will infallibly cease all communion where it is meerly arbitrary for Christians to believe and judge and walk and worship as they please For this it is for every man to judge for himself Will it be yet farther said That we should bear with one another and live peaceably and charitably one with another and not molest each other for his Judgement If it be as I know it is I reply first That this plausibility without possibility is not true according to the opinions of them who use it For they certainly hold That Heresie and Schism are not to be endured or born withal Christ and God must not be blasphemed by unsound opinions or prophane or superstitious actions and this diversity yea contrariety of judging must needs find these faults in one another very often and consequently be of opinion That they are not to be suffered and Charity must not be so far mistaken or abused as to licentiate such enormities But What if after all this contention for the Spirit it be not judge at all as in truth it is not in any proper sense For the Spirit is only the due qualification of the Person or Persons not simply to judge for that descends upon them by being ordinarily and orderly constituted over the Church of Christ but to judge aright and to give faithful and unerring sentence in matters under debate and question And the same may be in proportion affirmed of Reason termed by some who would seem to excell others in reason most improperly as well as unreasonably Judge of Controversies For all judgement disquisition and expositions are made by Persons not by things Reason indeed is the Instrument whereby a Person is enabled to judge or find out the truth unto which unless there be a due accession of Autority and Power such reason though very exquisite and happy must keep within its own doors and judge at home for it self and not for others nor contrary to more publick and autoritative determinations without the peril of being taxed of Arrogance and it self justly condemned if not for the Inward errours of the mind for the outward errors in ill managing truths If it were so That Reason in men were infallible we ought not to stand upon nicities of terms or improper language But for men to deny others the Seat and Power of Judicature because they may err and to take it to themselves as if the spirit of Error had no power over them is at the same time a grievous though pleasing error both against Reason and common justice too And if it be said That every man is bound by the Law of nature being indued with reason to use that reason and not bruitishly to suffer himself he knows not or cares not whether to becarried by others Reasons and not his own I retort And every man is obliged by the Law of Nations which is a more refined principle than that of gross Nature properly taken to contain himself in the order of Community he is placed and to submit to the reason of common Judgement no less than his own For undoubtedly until every man in private and particular be unerrable which is not to be expected on this side heaven there will diverse inconsistent judgements prevail and divide one from another and cause such a breach as the society whether divine or humane will soon perish and come to nothing But granting what was before demanded That every man must act according to his reason above the nature of beasts this doth not conclude That therefore he must be let alone and not brought even by force to submit to others against such reason First Because it is not resolved by any but a mans own deceitful opinion That it is really reason which is so presumed to be Secondly Because he that is so constrained to submit his reason is not thereby denyed either the nature or use of his but still much transcendeth the capacity of beasts For He discusses he discourses he judges rationally after the manner of men even when the effect of all these Acts are contrary to reason And lastly In wise men and good humble Christians there is a superior principal of reasonableness to that of meer direct nature For That he that has most reason on his side and when that it self is controverted he that according to appearance of Circumstances may lay the fairest claim to that is to be followed no rational man can deny Therefore should a Mans
private reason perswade him That he hath found out the truth and yet at the same time assure him That he is no less fallible than another man and therefore may possibly embrace and hug a false conception with as much fondness as a true and withal That private Judgements are not in themselves so safe as publique nor single as many What violence were this to his reason nay how much more rational than the first simple Act to comply with the Reason of others whom reason also requires to listen to and obey and Scripture much more From hence we may rightly conclude against both extremes in these days who yet agree in this very ill-grounded opinion That there must be an Infallible Director or Judge or we cannot submit to them in matters of Faith and our Salvation This is absolutely untrue both in humane and divine matters Who sees not indeed that it were to be wished for and above all things desired Who sees not the great inconvenience for want of such a standard of opinions as this But can we rationally conclude therefore that so it is Or hath God or ought he of his necessary goodness and wisdom as some have ventured to affirm to grant all things that are infallibly good for man Is it not sufficient that a fair though not infallible way is opened to attain the truth here and bliss hereafter but every one must find it Is it little or no absurditie That infinite never come to means of truth and so great that many who enjoy them do not receive the benefit by them Again Are good manners and virtues no less essential to Salvation than Faith and is there no infallible Judge of manners Is there no infallible Casuist And must there be of points of Faith How many have the infallible Rule of holy Life and yet mistake either in the sense or application of it so far as to perish in unknown Sins And yet none have to prevent that great and common evil call'd for an infallible Censour whose determinations might settle doubtful consciences in greatest safety and silence all apologies which are wont to be made for our sins and errors and so bring us nec essarily to truth or leave us under self and affected condemnation But The Ground of this mistake being farther searched into will be found very weak and fallacious An infallible Faith say they must have an infallible Judge And of these some assume thus There is no man infallible Therefore no man can be Judge of Faith Others assume thus But there is and must be an infallible Faith Therefore there must be an infallible Judge So that we see both would have infallible Judges but differ only in their choice of them For The former would have the Scriptures Judge and Rule which is very honest but very simple The later would have some external Judge which hath much more of reason in it And fails only in the choice of this Judge or in the description of him For There is nothing more unreasonable than to ordain that which is under debate to be Judge of it self besides the great absurdity of confounding the Rule or Law and the Interpreter and Judge And There is nothing more fallacious than to confound Causes and occasions together as the later opinion doth For If the Church or whatever Judge may be supposed were the true direct cause of our Faith then indeed it would necessarily follow That our Faith could no wayes be infallible unless the Judge were also infallible the effect not exceeding the cause nor the Conclusion the Premises or propositions from whence it was deduced But Because the Church is only on Occasion or a Cause without which we should neither believe the Scriptures in general to be the Word of God nor any sentence to be duly drawn from the same there is no necessity at all of such a consequence For The Infallibility now spoken of is either the thing believed which is the Word of God of which the Church I hope is no Cause or the Grace of Faith excited and exercised by us through the Spirit of Grace in us the mynistery of the Church serving thereunto acording to St. Paul saying We therefore as workers together with 2 Cor. 6. 1. him beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain For as in things natural He that applies Actives to Passives that is the Cause proper to the matter about which the Action is is not the proper or natural cause of the Effect but the occasion only yet is said vulgarly so to be as when a man applies fire to combustible matter he may though improperly be said to burn it when it is the fire and not he that burns it So the Church or Judge of Scriptures sense applying the same to a capable subject the effect is true and infallible Faith but it is not the effect of the Church or instrument or mean rather but of the Holy Spirit of Grace which taketh occasion from thence to produce Faith and that infallible For Were this Infallibility we now speak of the Churches then when ever the Church should so propound and urge points of Faith they must needs have an effect in the Soul For if they say The Church teaches in an humane way they say she teaches in a fallible way which overthrows all And from this is cleared that difficulty which opposeth a Judge of Scripture and Faith because none could be found infallible For not making the Judge the cause of Faith but occasion he may be necessarily required to Faith God who is the only principal cause with his holy word seldom or never concurring without those outward means And therefore though I readily enough grant That the Scriptures are so plainly written that a single simple person wanting greater helps to attain to the abstruser sence of them and using his honest and simple endeavour may easily find so much of the Rule of Faith and holy Life as to be saved by them yet I cannot say the same of any men who presuming on Gods power against his promise which includeth the use of outward meanes or mistaking his promise for absolute when it is conditional shall look no farther than their own wits shall lead them Now The outward meanes to which God hath annexed his promise of Grace may be these First That which we have here handled a general and sober submission to the Guides of our youth and our spiritual Fathers and Pastors in Christ which to forsake is the part of a wanton and fornicating Soul according to Solomon This common Reason and nature it self seem to require of all Prov. 2. 17. under Autority by the disposition of Almighty God That they in the first place hearken unto the voice and explication of the Church wherein they are educated until such time as a greater manifestation of truth shall withdraw them unwillingly from the same For so long as Senses are equally probable on both
Traditions It is as seldome found That a tale should be reported in the very same phrase or words it was at first told as it is that things transcribed with any common honesty or diligence should fail considerably so much as in the Letter And if they say in Tradition forms of words are not so much to be stood upon doth it not altogether hold as good when this Tradition is written How then do not men blush to argue so boldly and at the same time so weakly There is therefore a twofold Infallibility to be distinguished as well in Relation to unwritten Doctrines as written the one consisting in the Matter delivered the other in the manner so delivering And truly as to this later it cannot be said without some strong Presumption to the contrary the written Traditions which are the Scriptures have been so preciseâ—y and absolutely defended from either the common injuries of time or special miscarriages incident to humane frailty or perhaps as some conjecture the studious mischiefs of sacrilegious hands laid on them as not one title one word one period should not have been damnified thereby The Providence of God granting some such minuter defections from the Original Copies hath been singular in preserving them in that degree of perfection and entireness we now enjoy them So that infinite is the disparity in this case between them and unwritten Traditions which none have been so audacious positively to affirm though indeed their large and loose reasons seem to tend that way that any one unwritten doctrine hath been conserved unto us in the same form of words it was at first delivered to the Church And the like though not so great advantage is to be acknowledged on the Scriptures part compared with the pretended unwritten word of God in reference to the matter and that in these three respects 1. The Evidence 2. The Importance and 3. The Influence that the doctrine of the Scriptures have and ought to have over all Traditions And for the first It is impossible taking traditions as they are distinguished from Scripture that the like grounds of Faith should be offered to us as we have above shown are to be found proving the Scriptures to be the word of God For are all or some only Gods word All cannot be because Traditions in several Places of the world have been diverse and even contrary Because some are acknowledged to have been the Constitutions of Men or the Church since the Apostolical Age. Because many are acknowledged to have been quite lost Because many have been confessed to be changed of them which remain Now if the Church hath failed in the due Custodie of such treasures committed to her How can any man be assured sufficiently of the integrity of the remainer How can the Church be esteemed an Infallible Witness of traditions And who can but admire the Confidence of such Patrons of the Churches fidelity or rather felicity for I would not nor need I call in question its good will and Honesty in her Office of Preserving the Monuments of our Religion untouch'd by errors who by reasons would demonstrate that that cannot be which we see done before our eyes For at other times the same Party if not the same persons stick not to profess that divers Antienter Traditions are perished and more modern have succeeded them They say that some Traditions are as 〈◊〉 as sense can make them The Tradition that there were such famous Cities as Nineve and Babylon and are such as Constantinople and Rome requires the same Faith as the beholding them with our Eyes But first It should have been said in the argument They are as evident as those things we are informed of by our senses but this is far from truth All the testimonies of Past and present persons affirming that to be so which I have no sense of immediately being abundantly sufficient to beget a belief but not equalling in evidence the testimonie of any mans well-disposed senses For does not this so general testimonie it self depend upon a mans senses receiving the same Or can any man be so well assured upon the Credit of any persons whatever that the Apostles delivered such things to be believed and observed by the Church as if he himself immediately received the same from them If it be said that the case of Ecclesiastical Tradition is far different from humane in that the Church is divinely assisted to such ends supposing this at present still we are no less intregued then before For as is said The truth of a thing and the Evidence whereby it appears to be true are very much different And here it will be no less difficult to make such a supposed Assistance appear then the tradition it self which it commends to the World upon such pretences And therefore they who have sifted this matter more narrowly and stated it most rationally have thought it best to forsake such topicks at present as Extraordinarie Assistances and Hen. Holdeni Analysis Fid. tell us plainly that what the Church doth in this case she doth it not as divinely directed but as so many Men delivering their testimonie which is true but then what becomes of Infallibility all men singly and conjointly as men being fallible Well therefore they proved to tell us That to a jugde of Controversies Credible Testimonie or moral infallibilitie may suffice and to this I agree in the main though the term Moral Certainty and Moral Infallibilitie seems to me as vain and improper as it is modern it upon enquirie amounting to no more then the old Probabilitie well and reasonably grounded The next thing in Holy Writ is the much greater importance the things therein contained are of above unwritten doctrines For who of all the Ancients but such as are by tradition stigmatized for Heretiques for such their Basil Ma. de spiritu sancto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opinions did constitute any rule of Faith distinct from the Scriptures or bring any to stand in competition therewith Some 't is true have distinguished between Dogmes of Traditions and doctrines of the Scripture and haveaffirmed That as well the one as the other ought to be received by a good Christian All this we agree to how we shall show by and by more fully and here by comparing this by the words of St. John saying This Joh. 4. 21. Commandment have we from him that he that loveth God love his brother also By which it is not required that any Christian should with the same kind or degree of Love love his neighbour with which he loveth God For we must love God only for his own sake and our brother for Gods sake Nay when God sayes we must love our neighbour as our selves he does not exclude difference in degrees of love In like manner when it is said That we ought to believe and receive the unwritten as well as written traditions it was never intended by that excellent Father that we should admit
his Benefits before he be in some manner actually in Christ For if all our works are Sanctified by Gods Spirit and acceptable to God only as they are done in Christ how can any such Acts lead us unto Christ or make us capable of him seeing it is one of the greatest perfections and excellencie of good Works or Faith for unless it and we be in Christ it cannot be a saving Faith i. e. leading us to Salvation to make us effectual partakers of and one with him These difficulties constrain us to distinguish both Faith and being in Christ into I cannot say properly two kinds as two eminent Periods and Degrees of Faith and being in Christ The one is initial and preparatory as a foundation which is not a distinct building from the house finished and furnished but a part of it and material Cause thereof The other is consummate and formed yet not so but addition of perfection though not of Parts may be made all mens Faith being capable of farther degrees in this life And from hence that mystical sense of our Saviours words in St. Johns Gospel may both give and receive illustration For in the sixth of John Christ hath these words No man can come unto me except the Joh. 6. 44. Father which hath sent me draw him And in the fourteenth of John he saith I am the way and the truth and the life no man cometh unto the Father but by Joh. 14. 6. me Teaching us That notwithstanding God is the First cause to bring us to be in Christ and that by his Predestination before time and his Calling and Electing us in time to the knowledge and Faith in Christ yet he is not reconciled unto us he doth not pardon us nor justify us before Christ brings us unto him and offers us to him as a new lâ—mp and as capable of his grace and favour which obtained we are then truly justified by Christ And as there are two distinct acts of God the one of his good Providence in bringing us to the Covenant made with mankind in Christ and the other of his special Grace in accepting us through Christ being in the Covenant So are there two principal Periods as I said of being in Christ and the First is when we are taken within the Covenant of the Gospel of Grace by baptism whereby we are made members of Christs mystical Body and inheritours of the Kingdom of Heaven Not that immediately and necessarily All baptized persons are sure to go to heaven but all baptized persons are thereby put into a capacity and Right to heaven To this St. Paul Gal. 3. 27. to the Galatians gives us his fair suffrage saying For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ And the same is implied in this his salutation Salute Andronicus and Junias my kinsmen and my Rom. 16. 7. fellow Prisoners who are of note among the Apostles who also were in Christ before me Where doubtless these persons are said to be in Christ before St. Paul because they were baptized and made profession of Christ before St. Paul And so when he speaks of the Churches of Judea which are in Christ Gal. 1. 22. he meaneth no more than such who were become of Jews Christians in Judea not intending that every one who so professed Christ should be infallibly Justified and saved by Christ as they shall who are arrived to the more perfect state of being in Christ of which the Apostle thus speaketh to the Colossians Whom Christ we preach warning every man and teaching every Col. 1. 28. man in all wisdome that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus Now what is or wherein this perfection in Christ doth consist is I suppose past any mans apprehension or Judgement precisely to determine that is what degree of holiness in Christ God will accept to our Justification but in general these two States of a Christian are plainly deseribed thus by St. Paul to the Corinthians If any man be in Christ Jesus he is a new creature 2 Cor. 5. 17. Where being a new Creature and being in Christ are distinguished as Cause and Effect our being in Christ Jesus being the reason and cause of becoming New creatures So that we may well observe in this case a twofold Conversion requisite to make a man truly in Christ A conversion to Christ by renouncing false Religions and false opinions of a Deity and assenting to and embracing the doctrine according to Godliness This every man doth who takes on him the name profession and mitiating Sacrament of a Christian of this is to be understood what is spoken of the conversion of the Gentiles And this conversion is rather to speak properly Acts 15. 3. a conversion to the truth of Godliness than to true Godliness Or a conversion to the Truth of Faith rather then to the life of Faith of which St. Paul to the Galatians The life which I now live in the flesh I live by the Faith Gal. 2. 20. of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me The summ then of all this is this That to be in Christ effectually to our Justification and Salvation is so to be converted unto him as to believe the Faith of Christ and to Live the life of Christ This being cleared nearer access is made unto the solution of the prime Doubt which is What is that which so farr and fully enstateth us in Christ that thereupon God doth freely justifie us For it is now supposed and granted that our so being in Christ making us partakers of the merits mediation and Righteousness of Christ doth immediately and absolutely qualifie to Justification and secondarily that which brings us into Christ may properly enough be said to be it whereby we are Justified And here comes in the grand dispute about the vertue of Faith Whether that only and wholly performeth this For in what sense Faith may be said to bring us unto Christ or thus to lay hold as they say of Christ in the same may it be truly affirmed that next under God and Christ we are Justified by it This I know not how it can be effected better then by the help of a most obvious and necessary but most neglected distinction of the use and notion of Faith in holy Scripture omitting that threefold Faith above-mentioned and several others impertinently invented and ill imployed in this case For Faith is taken in Scripture either Complexly and Generally for the whole Body of Christian divinity and Graces contained in the New testament Or it is taken Simply and distinctly for a special Grace separate I mean in nature not in Operation from Hope and Charity which together constitute the three Theological Graces Instances of the former have been given already in the twelfth Chapter and need not here be repeated in particular For let any man of common equity and understanding weigh the subject and
alledged more pregnantly proving the power of that fiducial Faith as I may so call it in order to the Justification of a man before God and yet it must here be granted That this trust is much different from the Faith contended for And that from hence or the like Texts not a different vertue in nature or kind though peradventure more effectual and prevalent is ascribed to it above other Graces in order to our Justification All which is no less true of our Sanctification than our Justification For we are altogether as much sanctified by Faith alone as we are justified by Faith alone or only as appeareth from the Scripture which saith That our hearts are John 15. 3. Acts 15. 9. purified by Faith So that in this much disputed Question I know no readier way of satisfying the fearful and dubious mind than by taking a due estimate of the power of a General or Particular Faith in reference to Fides nos à peccatis omnibus purgat mentes nostras illuminat Deo concliat Prosper ubi supr our Sanctification and judging alike of our Justification thereby For we are sanctified as freely by Grace as we are justified and as much by Faith too as Prosper before cited saith And therefore lastly in answer to divers places of the Ancients which are produced to confirm the modern sense of Justification by Faith alone I answer in a word That it is true their words seem to attest so much but their meaning was plainly no more than this That Faith many times doth justifie without Works that is any outward manifestation of their Faith by such fruits but never without inward acts of Repentance and Charity distinct from this special Faith nor without such a devotion to good Works which wants nothing but opportunity to exert them which is by an extraordinary Clemencie and Grace of God accepted for the thing it self This appears by the example by them given to manifest their meaning of the Thief on the Cross who was so justified and saved by Faith alone without good Works answerable thereunto because his sudden faith was prevented by sudden death Nevertheless That his Faith was so much alone as to exclude Repentance and such Graces as were competible to one in his condition from a proportionable concurrence to that effect is no where said nor intended by any of the Fathers whose judgment is of account in the Church of God CHAP. XXI A third Effect of Justifying Faith Assurance of our Salvation How far a man is bound to be sure of his Salvation and how far this assurance may be obtained The Reasons commonly drawn from Scripture proving the necessity of this assurance not sufficient c. ANother effect of Faith or at least consequence upon it hath the certainty or assurance of our Justification and Salvation been commonly reputed The better to understand which we must take as supposed and granted the difference between the Truth of a thing and Evidence of it or the Certainty that such a thing is and the knowledge that so it is So that the doubting of our Justification or Salvation doth not make the thing infallibly so but leaves us under fears and sometimes disconsolations But a competent remedy seems to me to be ready at hand if we consider that our opinion of our selves is no good conclusion against our selves but rather being founded in humility and disowning of our worth and righteousness an introduction to a comfortable hope in Gods mercy who hath begun at least the work of Grace in us by rendring us studious and anxious about his service and our salvation unless it could be proved which we shall see presently whether so or not out of the word of God that it is his will and direct command that we should have this assurance in us For as saint John saith Hereby we know that we are of the truth and shall assurt 1 John 3. 19 20. our hearts before him For if our heart condem us God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things i. e. the hearts and consciences of the children of God do frequently condemn them but their comfort is that God is greater than their hearts and doth not judge according to what opinion good or evil we have of our selves but according to his own Wiâ—dom and Grace So that it is no just inference at all I do not believe I shall be saved therefore I shall not be saved Nor this I do believe I shall not be saved therefore I shall not be saved Only they have great cause thus to argue and conclude against themselves who are wont on the contraâ—y to reason I believe I shall be saved therefore I shall be saved abusing and corrupting the Doctrine of Faith two wayes most dangerously First In making it the simple and direct cause or means unto Justification and then a reason of a Reflex act whereby they stand assured that they are so acquitted and justified before God But St. John in the former words cited reasons much otherwise For having in the 18. verse exhorted to and urged the duty of mutual Christian Charity he inferreth from thence in the 19. verse Hereby we know that we are of the truth c. i. e. from the Indication of Love and Charity to the Brethren â—ere is then an assurance and that before God and yet as we have seen there resteth and consisteth withall a diffidence and doubting as we have shewed The reconciliation of this seeming opposition doth lead us to a necessary distinction tending to the resolving of the principal Querie and it is between the State of Justification and the Act of Justification And again as to Assurance here spoken of It is one thing to be assured of our Justification and another of our Salvation as shall hereafter appear First then I hold it sufficiently demonstrable out of Scripture That a man may and every good Christian ought to be assured that he is in a state of being justified and saved likewise This we teach well in our Church Catechise in answer to this Question Doest not thou think that thou art bound to believe as they have promised for thee thus Yes verily and by Gods help so I will and I heartily thank our heavenly Father that he hath called me to this State of Salvation through Jesus Christ our Saviour Every Christian that in Baptism hath put on Christ and is entred into a Covenant of Grace with God is bound to believe assuredly that thereby he is in a state of Salvation and Justification For thereby God hath especially elected him to salvation of which Election the Scriptures chiefly if not only speak which are drawn to signife the Eternal Decree of God choosing not only men estranged from God to the Covenant of Grace but such as are first within the Covenant to an infallible Justification and Salvation This I say is rarely if at all intended by any of those many Texts of Scripture alledged to
nor too narrow and rigorous The Reason hereof may be first taken from the name which imports such 〈◊〉 dictae Gâ—â—â—â— voce ex interpretatieâ—â— electionas quâ— quis sive ad instituendas suâ—cipiendas utitur c. Tertullianus Praescript cap. 6. Vide 〈◊〉 Hispalens Origin lib. â—3 a singularity of choice and addiction to an opinion which may as well be true as false good as evil Thus the ancient Heathens as well Roman as Grecian used the word and so did the Christians too for some hundred years after Christ And when it began to be restrain'd to the evil part a second thing made the notion of it no less difficult and obscure viz. the largeness of it for those errors which were not material or of any great consequence to the Christian Faith or Church as for to stigmatize them which were of note and moment in the same And a third thing obscuring the true nature is the manner of asserting and maintaining great as well as small Errours The word Heresie generally signifies any opinion either good or bad More especially it signifies an Errour in Religion Thus Ecclesiastical Writers take it Yet most properly it is an Errour in the Foundation of Christian Religion taught and defended with obstinacy Perkins on Galat. 5. v. 20. To understand this we must know how that a twofold Criminalness in Heresie according to the two more essential parts constituting it according to opinions generally received The one is called the formal part which relates to the manner of holding such opinions as are erroneous Inter Haereticâ—s non sunt deputandi qui aut ab Ecclesiasticis seducti sunt à parentibus in errorem lapsi nullà pertinaci animâ—sitate defendunt quaerunt autem 〈◊〉 solicitudine veritatem corrigi parati quum invenerint Augustin Epist 168. For lighter errours against the Doctrine of the Scriptures and peace of the Church being maintained with obstinacy and against due proposal of the truth do characterize and constitute an Heretick The other is the material part namely That about which men do err in Faith And this hath a peculiar difficulty in it arising from the undetermined points of Faith and I think a moral impossibility as they call it to define what are those so necessary points of Faith to be believed the denyal where of makes an Heretick This is thought generally to be sufficiently explained in the Creeds of the Church by some But others find many considerable points not therein comprehended unless by such a reduction whereby any thing almost may be compelled to come under anothers wing There are therefore that hold that the decrees and resolutions of Counsels fully and only can satisfie this scrupulousness and no question but all these conduce very much to the acquiring a settled Judgment in matters of Faith and espeially this latter against which notwithstanding there may be made these following exceptions First That all things defined by Councels and that with the affixing of Anathema's are confessedly not of Faith but of Rites and Order also Secondly That those Canons which are of Faith are so variously and miserably handled and distracted by Learned Interpreters that a sober well-meaning Christian may without any heretical pravity of mind fall involuntarily into a reputed Heresie Thirdly That contrary things have sometimes been determined in several ages From all which it is manifest That it is much more easie to define Heresie then an Heretick because there is an ingredient of personal aversion from or opposition to the Truth which can scarce be discovered but in the abstract Heresie may properly enough be defined to be not an opinion but a False Proposition contrary to the Catholick Faith And if it be thus uncertain and obscure what Heresie is through so many various kinds and degrees thereof answerable to the several branches therefore it cannot be easie to prove all Heresie in the common notion as opposite to Faith to be destructive to Faith That it destroyes that Part of Faith against which it is bent is undeniable but that any particular Errour should destroy the whole any farther than it is opposite to the whole Body of Faith is incredible Some Heresies pluck up the Tree of Life Faith by the roots some cut it down to the root some lop off the arms some lesser branches and some which have been reputed Heresies do only brush and beat off the leaves and ornaments An example of the former is given by St. Paul to the Corinthians some of whom it should seem denied the Resurrection in general and by necessary implication of Christ who was as dead as any mortal man else But if there be no resurrection 1 Cor. 15. 13 14. of the dead then is Christ not risen And if Christ be not risen then is our preaching vain and your faith is also vain It were to no purpose to believe any point in Christian Religion dis-believing that of the resurrection And in short to deny any thing expressed or necessarily and immediately included in the form of words used in Baptism is to root up all our Creed and render all our Faith vain in other Articles An instance of the second sort of Heresie may be to deny the Mediation of Christ by way of satisfaction for us restraining the intercession of him to that supposed one now in Heaven Of the third may be Errours about Free-will and affirming a positive necessity to commit sin against God Of the denyal of the efficacy of Good works done in Christ towards our salvation and the affirming a meritoriousness in them towards the same Of the last the affirming it unlawful to use any Ceremonies in Gods service but what are specially commanded in his word And from hence it seemeth necessary to distinguish Heresies and Hereticks into Formal or direct and Virtual and real A Formal Heresie is Propositio sapiens haeresim est ex cujus concessione co-assumpto aliquo quod non potest rationabiliter negari sequitur â—aeresis in fide vt siquis diceret quod beatus Gregorius non fuisset Papa Gerson de necessitate Salutis that which is expresly maintained and asserted in tearms but denied in the inference and consequence whichyet certainly and necessarily follows upon such positions as supposing a man should with the Monothelites of old affirm that Christ had but one Will. This is a formal and direct Heresie but if as it is possible the same person should deny the true consequence hereof viz. That he consisted but of one Nature He were not a formal Heretick in this latter because though this Errour doth certainly arise from the former yet all Heresies being erroneous apprehensions and affections of the mind this Errour being not received into his mind doth not so affect him as to denominate him formally an Heretick Yet must he answer for Heresie in his account before God because the movers and promoters of such shall no more escape then he shall from the punishment of
in this case no power at all is given or can be given nor in truth ought to be taken away as the manner is from Princes entring through the populacie into the Throne For God only is the proper and immediate Author of Right and Power which he hath inserted into Parents over their Children and hath proportionably prescribed to Kings and Princes without ever advising with the People or expecting their consent or confirmation This the Scripture it self calls Jus Imperii or 1 Sam. 8. 9. lefs significantly with us The Manner of the King Reason calls the same Justice which never takes its measure from earth originally but from heaven not from the People but from God And that Similitude found in the works of a very judicious and learned man to shew the Prophets right to institute at first Kings from their right to restore Kingly Power lapsed by reason of the visible Heir to it ceasing viz. That as the Lord of a Mannour resuming the estate of a Tenant whose legal Heirs are unknown to himself doth argue that it first proceeded from him so the right of the People to constitute a Prince over them upon a total cessation of legal Pretenders do imply an original right to be in the People of founding Monarchs doth to my apprehension infer the contrary being better stated For it sheweth no more than this That in truth God being the true and proper Lord of the Mannour this dominion is devolved unto him and not to the People And that even in such cases a tacit hand of God is seen by many eminent Instances in Histories designing the Person receiving that Rule the People being but so many Stewards of Gods Court in admitting a new Tenant to Kingly Power For by me saith the Prov. 8. 15. Dan. 2. 23 â—â—testas 〈◊〉 est apud Electores ergo nec ab ipsis datur sed ab ipsis tamen certae personae applicatur Grotius De Imperio Summarum Potestat cap. 10. §. 2. Idem de Jure Bel. Pa. lib. 3. c. 3. § 8. 1. Simpliciter esse verum negat Populum creare Magistratus Scripture Kings reign and Princes decree Justice And the like doth Daniel assert to God He changeth the times and seasons he removeth Kings and setteth up Kings he giveth wisdome unto the wise and knowledge c. The most therefore that the People do when they act most in creating Kings is under God to apply the Person to the Place or Office of Governing And therefore in the second place it is no better than Sacrilegiously done by them to mutilate that Power which God hath given by the necessary and common Laws of Natural Justice to Supream Rulers and transfer of it to themselves as it would be for a Guardian to an Orphans estate to pare and pill it and bestow it on himself although perhaps out of terrour the consent of the party so defrauded be obtained lest he should loose all Yet doth not all this contradict the general practise of Subjects who having long continued under equal and reasonable Laws explaining and particularly applying the common Supream Law of Justice to a State or People do present such Rules of Regiment to their future Prince for his confirmation unless they be so far urged on him who hath a Personal Right by Birth to succeed in the Throne as to deny absolutely to submit to him without such conditions yielded unto Indeed could they prove the Right of Choice of the Person to be the same with the Power belonging to the Place they might mangle alterate and adulterate it as they pleased For 't is a Law that a man free from Rulers as these are supposed now to be may do what he will with his own and choose whether he will part with any of it or not and what and how much he will give away but it not being so and a duty lying upon him of being Just He that as our Saviour saith is unjust in the Luke 16. 10. least is unjust also in much But thirdly to shew that there can neither be Divine nor Natural Right in the People to choose or create Governours and much less Government the impossibility of the real and just execution of this power abundantly sufficeth For if men as some have been so blind and bold to affirm were naturally free untill they brought this subjection upon themselves Then first this were general and without exceptions or but partial and with exceptions If this latter be true and some were naturally subject This will destroy the principal dogme it self and open a way to the unanswerable reasons against natural freedom For that which we have by nature we have in common and without exception of the thing it self though peradventure with some discrimination in the degree and measure But if the first be granted That all are free then must cease of necessity subjection natural of children to their parents which hath been with better advice and reason received then it hath by some been well-nigh quite disowned to the making way for Novel Politicks And again Grant that all men were once but no body could never tell when and in a certain place but no body could ever tell where equally free or at least all of years of discretion which is most uncertain It would be known first How men dare to be so presumptuous as to make such a breach of the Law of Nature as this must be viz. To part with their birth-right and to imbezel that which God had given them concomitantly with their own lives I say what a notorious ingratitude and an offense against God to alter nature it self who we may well suppose doth all things most consonantly to Divine reason If therefore men had this Liberty naturally in them I hold it no less a sin to give it away than for one to cut off a member of his body or to destroy ones reason if it lay in his power And to say that the People in such cases do not absolutely devest themselves of power nor part with what God and Nature hath placed in them because they commit only to such the Administration of such power as is resident in them radically it being neither commodious nor possible for the universal Body to manage it self to the due ends of civil Society but reserve unto themselves a right of Revocation upon the Male-administration or abuse of Power so delegated This is to traduce Divince Providence and Wisdom notoriously For what can be a greater reproach to a wise man or the most wise God than to admit such a gross errour as to so constitute and frame a thing to such ends and purposes which it can never attain and to endow a people or person with such a faculty which can never avail nor succeed to the intention of it and never be executed as certainly Supream in the People cannot but must be delivered over to another more capable subject Thus it seemeth to
be pronounced by others who are ordained of God to be judges of our state of Grace upon the discovery of our consciences to them then can be by our selves which is sufficient but of the unalterableness of that state no man can certainly affirm any thing Which holdeth true likewise as to the contrary state of Damnation For though a more than probable judgment may be made of the state of Damnation of him who continues impenitently in notorious sins yet may no man pronounce a peremptory sentence against any such person that he inevitably shall be damn'd because he cannot see into the abstruse Counsels of Almighty God so far as to deny a Liberty left in him to confer such efficacious grace upon such a notorious offender as may reduce him to God no more than withdraw grace from him who at present standeth in all probable way of perseverance This being so it followeth from hence necessarily That the Church of Christ taken for the so faithful and elect that they shall without all peradventure attain the Crown of the Triumphant is evermore in its own nature invisible that is not to be distinguished by us nor known certainly and if so then in vain and to no purpose at all are such Disputations as are made about the invisible Church in that sense of invisibility which signifies that which can in no manner appear certainly to us The other sense of invisibleness according to which a thing is possible to be seen is an object of sense but actually is either not to be seen or with very great difficulty For as in Philosophy it is with Divisibility so may it be with Visibility in Divinity Every thing that hath Quantity according to the Philosopher is divisible or is capable of being divided into lesser parts even without end but yet so small may the parts so divided become at last that no Artist shall be able to cut them any more in pieces So may we understand a thing to be visible which is so small and inconsiderable that actually it can hardly if at all be perceived But visible and palpable being taken for things which not only affect the senses simply but with some more than common notoriety the usual question Whether the Church of Christ is alwayes visible ought to be understood of such a competence of perspicuity as may ordinarily be discerned by persons rightly disposed in their understandings taking here right disposition of our inward apprehensions in a proportionable manner to that which relates to our common outward senses which if it be called into doubt as it may no wonder that the other may be and that without remedy Now according to the most strict acceptation of Visible for whatsoever may possibly be discerned the reasolution will be easie That Christs Church is and must alwayes be visible For thus to be Invisible is as much as not to be at all For seeing the Parts of which it consists be they but two or three persons in the most rigorous sense are Visible the whole must needs be visible too of it self however it may in the more received sense be termed invisible because compared with the Church of Christ as prophesied of and promised in the Gospel it is so inconsiderable as may deserve rather to be accounted invisible it being out-shined and over-shadowed by other Pretenders But there being two things which constitute the Church one the association of many persons into outward communion one with another the other the inward communion in the true Faith of Christ and the former being common very often to Hereticks as well as true Christians it may be doubted whether the true Church of Christ as opposed to heretical Societies is at all visible For seeing the true and orthodox Faith together with its practical holiness do not occur plainly to our senses the true Faith cannot be discerned visibly from the false by any outward sense How can it possibly be said that the Church of Christ is at all visible or apparent to a man 'T is true a man may discern a real man from a painted man or from any other creature from the outward notices of his body though he cannot see his soul which doth primarily constitute the person of man but he cannot see whether he be a true and honest man in a moral sense from any thing appearing outwardly So may one discern the Faith professed in general to be Christian by the outward frame and fashion of the Church professing the same but the soundness of the same and sincerity according to Christs will and institution he cannot from thence conclude upon And therefore if the Catholick Faith as Catholick in the stricter sense can never be visible the Catholick Church so being and denominated from that Faith can never be said to be properly visible but only as a Society not as the true Society of Christians in opposition to the false For instance sense or common reason not informed from the word of God could never judge whether the Arrian or the Catholick Faith as it then began to be called were most truly Christian but they both might judge that they were Christian Societies and so at least outwardly made a true Church But because it is one thing to profess the true Faith and another quite distinct from that Truly to profess the Faith as it is one thing to profess Justice and Truth and Honesty and another truly to profess these and practise them therefore can there be no estimate taken of the true Catholick Church from the persons professing the Catholick Faith who are alwayes uncertain and mutable but judgement must be made from the outward constitution only which are Discipline or Government and not Doctrine or Faith For where the former is not rightly composed according to the mind and institution of Christ there cannot be said to be a true Church And where the second is wanting there must likewise be no Church the foundation of the Church and Rule failing viz. the true Faith But wherever these be inviolately and incorruptly preserved and publickly professed though we should suppose every particular Member of such a Society to be notorious Hypocrites yet the Church might be said to be a true Church because the Church doth not receive any more than its material subsistance from the persons believing but its formal and more distinct Being it hath from the true Regiment and Faith which it is possible though scarce probable may be sufficiently preserved under hypocritical and wicked members of the same This is not only true in it self but appears so to be from the necessity of having any knowledge of the true Church at all and its being visible at any time For it never being certainly visible who are the predestinate infallibly to Life and who are not who shall constantly stand and who shall fall who are inwardly hypocrites and who are faithful and sincere indeed seeing notwithstanding the exactest judgment and search of man there
determined to any one Province or Nation is very groundless and injurious to the whole design Christ had in propagating the Faith For the said commission of Christ given to his Apostles was not Lex but Jus a Right to Act not a Precept indispensably enjoyning the execution according to the full extent of the Letter Again It was not said to each singly Go and teach all nations but to all conjoyntly So that to all it was a direct Precept which was fulfilled if all Nations were by all the Apostles not all by each of them instructed in Christ But the interpretation which taks All nations to be rather understood negatively in opposition to the Jewish Church which enviously denyed the like Priviledges of salvation to the Gentiles which they claimed proper to themselves rather then positively as if by virtue of Christs injunction they were necessitated to pass all the world over which it is certain that neither any one nor all ever did the intention of Christ being to open a wide door of Grace to all Nations so far as humane ability could ordinarily promote the work quite disables that argument As it was lawful therefore for all the Apostles and every one of them to pass into any Part of the world so was it not unlawful to make choise of some one considerable portion wherein to move and officiate according to his Place For otherwise how should it be lawful for them to continue in some one City two three or seven years as 't is as certain as any thing in History can be that some of them did taking a peculiar and pastoral care thereof and its Appendages Now because as their Presence was finite in reference to place so their lives were to time therefore when in any one large Province they could not manage immediately themselves every City of note and command they assigned certain Substitutes to continue and promote what they had begun even during their lives in many Countries And departing this life left them to succeed in a perpetual line to all ages not by intrusion and spontaneous invasion possessing themselves of Rule and Authority over others but according to the same form that themselves were sent by Christ For Christ not only sent his Apostles but enabled them to send others in the like Pastoral charge And these Apostolical Pastours together with that personal Power given them to be exercised by them had also a real paternal Power to constitute others of the like or inferiour order as necessary emergencies required upon the increase of the Professours of Christian Religion as may in due place be more cleerly proved From hence a reason may be rendred of the Opinion of some very sober Bilson and learned Defenders of Episcopal Government who seeing neither the Apostles alone to govern the Church nor Bishops alone have said It is very hard to determine what was the Discipline of the Church in the very Primitive times of all For surely while the Apostles lived the Government of the Church was Apostolical and not properly Episcopal because those Elders otherwise called Bishops said in Scripture to be set over Cities were themselves wholly at the beck and disposal of the Apostles ordaining them and governed and taught under them no otherwise than a Priest may be under a Bishop in all subjection But the Apostles dying and their intire power also with them part of it devolved unto that Person who before in their Right presided over such a Church the Apostolicalness excepted which consisted in an immediate Ordination to that Office by Christ and illimitedness as to the exercise thereof with other signal gifâ—s and graces not here to be insisted on and was properly Episcopal which consisted in an Authority derived from the Apostles and consequently from Christ to govern the Church and not only present for their dayes but because it was to continue to all Ages which it could not without Governours and Teachers to ordain such who should ordain others without interruption for ever And these not only such who should succeed them in the like Pastoral care but who might together with them though under them by their counsel and labours as the common Fathers of the Church take part of his charge upon them in teaching and governing such a portion of that Church as was allotted them And these were called Priests or Presbyters And as the Bishop was constrained Christians multiplying to ordain an assistent Presbyter to him so when the People under that Presbyter increased so far that it was too difficult for him to discharge all Offices of publick and private ministration it was found expedient to ordain an inferiour Officer in the Church to him for his assistance called a Deacon or Minister Not that these two last Orders themselves were of humane or moderner Institution than the Apostles dayes but that they might be likewise undetermined in the place of their Function to any particular Person until the consummation of the Apostolical age But in truth it is hard to determine what the Scripture intends speaking of Deacons and therefore I offer this mean opinion as not inconsistent with theirs who hold them of Apostolical Institution nor with theirs who make them much later For the first may be true as to the Office which was a degree Ecclesiastical as St. Paul intimateth and the other as to the manner of exercise in reference to one place and one presiding there And the like seems most probable concerning the Evangelists who were persons commissioned by the Apostles to preach the Gospel under them without any determination to a certain place or people and saving this large Licence were in no higher degree than simple Presbyters the Apostles themselves presiding in all such places as Pastours But when they were by their farther Authority fixt to one City and Country with a power to create Successours or Co-adjutors in the Government of that Church then they became formal and proper Bishops For the allegation of them is most frivolous who would elude the express testimonies of Scripture affirming that Timothy and Titus were Bishops by saysaying they were Evangelists For by the same reason they may deny they were Presbyters because probably they were Evangelists and so make them of no order in the Church or of another which is yet unknown to the world which whatever it may please men to call it certainly it must be founded on Priestly Power or else they could not have regularly acted as they did Neither was it as some may phansie to degrade such Evangelists whose faculty extended to all places to be confined to one afterward as Bishop First because such power was more truly indetermined to one than extending actually to all For it depended on the pleasure of the Apostles to send them to what place they thought fit Secondly this fixing of them to one place was not without the accession of power of Government as well as preaching which is no where found to
differences which of all Pretenders to these are assuredly so affected and blessed most with them Therefore these are not sufficient lights and demonstration of themselves to us For we grant readily That whatever Church hath all them is without controversie a true Church of Christ but whether this or that Church pretending to them hath them really remains to be enquired into Hence it hath been judged expedient to repair to some more sensible and apparent Notes or Indications to certifie us of matter of Fact viz. that so it is with this Church and not with another And it is well said That Notes of a thing must necessarily be distinct from the thing they notifie unto us and that especially in these two things First in reference to the thing described than which they must be more evident and apparent as the argument must alwayes be more clear than the thing in Question to be proved therewith Secondly in reference to other things they must not be common to more than that thing they are used to express and signifie As no man that never saw an horse before can know it from an Ox by being told that an Horse hath two ears four legs and a long tail And a third note of a true Note may be added and that is that it be inseparable For though no more but one thing has such a mark by which it may be known yet if that thing be moveable and not constant to it it cannot at all times be known by it as the Moon cannot alwayes be distinguished and known from other stars from horns or Angles which many times it wants This speculation is very rational but yet not exempt altogether from the inconveniencies of the former opinion it failing little less in the Invention and Application of such unfailing Notes as are presumed and promised For those being the very choicest of many more Notes mentioned by some for the guiding us to the true Catholick Church they are either obscure or inconstant and separable or lastly common to those Churches not received for pure and Catholick as will appear by and by Therefore I suppose a mean opinion may in this case be most true and safe as that First there can be no such infallible outward means of comming to or discerning the true Church from the false as may secure any one from errour For the Prophesies and Promises of Christ concerning the glory and conspicuousness of his Church viz. that it should be as a City set on a hill That it should be the Light of the world That it should be a Mountain unto which all Nations should flow and such like infer no more than this That whereas under the Law the Doors of Christs Church were in a manner shut against the greatest part of the world under the Gospel Christ would keep open house to all commers and that it should be more possible and easie to enter into the communion of his true Flock than formerly it had been not that it should not be possible to mistake but upon affected and wilful ignorance next to malice Neither doth there appear any greater reason why any man should be infallible in the choice of the true Church than when he is in the true Church that he should be infallible in all points of Faith therein truly professed In a word No greater inconvenience doth appear from the want of infallible means to lead men to the true Church who are in sight but not knowledge of it than to bring Heathens into an ordinary capacity of entring into it A man may be damned in that corrupt and degenerate state he now is in for want of that grace he could not of himself acquire and yet God be under no imputation of injustice or tyranny who gives him no more than he deserves and denyes him no more than he may justly detain from him For the mercy of God exceeds all not only merit but admiration that so many find the way to the truth while some as St. Paul hath it are Ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth 2 Tim. 3. 7. But were it so that those means to salvation whether general or particular did work naturally not Evangelically or morally by the co-adjutancie of grace accompanying them and inwardly disposing the mind to assent to and embrace them then indeed ought there to be certain and infallible causes outward to that end but it is not so for as liberal as God hath shewn himself in the Gospel and means outward of attaining to the truth he keeps the reins still in his own hands and the key of knowledge by him the efficacy of the most probable means even that of distinguishing and knowing the true Church depending upon his free and inscrutable Grace which would in this particular be superfluous and useless if certain access might be made unto it by demonstrative notes to that purpose A second thing commending herein a mean opinion may be the due acknowledgment of the use of such outward marks and means guiding us to this prime truth of the Church For notwithstanding we have said the Grace of God hath a main stroke in every mans right choice of such dubious undemonstrable truths yet doth it not ordinarily concurr and we have nothing to know of extraordinary acts of God but by such ordinary means as he hath instituted and tyed us to observe to be capable thereof and therefore are we to embrace and improve all outward helps which may best conduce to that end otherwise we either forfeit or repel such grace from us And of such means I know none more reasonable and probable to bring us to the knowledge of this point then are they above mentioned Thirdly the use of those means or notes upon tryal will be found to consist not so much in the Affirmative as Negative sense that is not characterizing Catholick Churches in opposition to Heretical by being found only in any Church because they are also found in such as are reputed Heretical but being not found in Churches pretending Catholicisme stigmatizing them for false and defective And truly it is well worth the labour to be informed of errors as that which prepareth to the knowledge of the truth Lastly it is to be observed of the nature of Notes or Properties that they are either of the whole Species or kind as that given by Plato of a Man That he is a two-footed creature having no feathers on his body or they are Particular relating to some Individuum or single one of that kind as that given of God himself to distinguish Saul whom God had 1 Sam. 9. 2. 10. 24 designed King from the rest of the people from his stature That he was higher by head and shoulders than the rest of the people And thus was Elijah the Tishbite known to Amaziah That he was an hairy man girt with 2 Kings 1. 8. a girdle of Leather Now in this question it is
not so much enquired into how absolutely one man may be known from another nor how one Church may be distinguished from another as the Roman from the Greek or the English from the French Church for this thought it be very easie is scarce worth the labour but the doubt and material difficulty is How to know which of these are Catholick and true Churches of Christ and which are Heretical or Erroneous in any degree I say the Enquiry is not which is which Church as a man might be known to be such an one by name from his stature his hair or the like but which of these are true and orthodox Churches This can be by no other notes infallibly but such as are truly and constantly proper to true Churches and are no less found in other true Churches than in this And therefore it is most true what is commonly said That the true Church is known by the true Faith professed right Discipline administred and the holy Sacraments duly used but not before it be certainly known that all these are actually so observed and really not pretendedly only And so is it as true That it being known certainly which is the true Church it must be known likewise by necessary consequence that all these three are faithfully observed in that Church which could not be true without them Now if we first must judge of Churches by the three General Instances and Indications we must first judge of these Ingredients into its Nature and before we can do so must run through a whole body of Divinity and that with fallible judgment in the search of it On the other side if we would know which is the true Religion from the true Church to know the true Church first we must pass through infinite Disputes and Controversies with the like uncertainty of judging aright as before and in doing both these we forsake the pretended method of judging by Notes for we are hereby immers'd in the indagation of the thing it self without consideration of Notes which if they could be had apparently and infallibly would prevent that long and tedious labour of examining the matter it self But such as I have said I know none positive the neerest we can come to the point is Negatively when there is apparently wanting such things as declare at least the unsoundness and imperfection of the whole Body so defective CHAP. XXX Of the Notes of the true Church in Particular Of Antiquity Succession Vnity Vniversality Sanctity How far they are Notes of the true Church THE four principal Notes of the true or rather false Church not found in it are Antiquity Unity Succession Universality and as moderner Controverters in England especially the name of Catholick it self To the first of these we say That her Antiquity is not to be compared with things of quite another nature but with things of the same nature and comprehended in some eminent Period of time For the Natural worship was more ancient than the Mosaical and the Mosaical than the Christian in such things wherein they differed For we have before shown That Christian Religion according to the material and natural Part of it which was that connatural light and reason shining cleerly in the heart of man and directing him to the belief and worship of one God exceeded in time the Jewish worship yet was not to be preferred before it and the like may be said of the Jewish and Christian But the enquiry is chiefly about those of the same Oeconomy the same profession and denomination As if it should be demanded which of the natural Religions were the truest answer might well be made That which was most ancient and agreeable to prime Institution And in like manner That must be the purest of the Jewish or Mosaical which agrees most exactly with the most ancient and first instituted of that kind and so of the Christian undoubtedly that which retained most of the divine Truths and Worship ought to be preferred as the best of that kind as is plain from the Prophet Jeremiah advising that degenerous people and Church thus Stand ye in the wayes and see and ask for the old paths where is the good way and walk therein and ye shall find rest for your souls Nay we may extend this to the Mahometan Religion thus far truly viz. to be informed from antiquity which of all the several Sects are most truly Mahometan weighing their agreement to or discrepancie from the Institutions of the first Author of that Superstition But here it will be necessary to distinguish between things agreeable to the institution things instituted and things contrary to institution and that as well for our better satisfaction in the following notes as this present though I confess all this is overthrown if that be taken for granted which some mischievously would obtrude upon the Christian Church in these last dayes That nothing whether intrinsick or extrinsick to Religion it self in the substance must be instituted but by Christ and such as were divinely inspired by him But this at present I shall take for groundless sensless and unpracticable by the Assertours and Defenders of it some other place being more proper for its confutation But this diversity being allowed as all reason requires the resolution of this case will be much facilitated For surely that Church have it never so many and fair advantages otherwise to commend it to the world which shall either have lost any material Article of Christian Faith or notably corrupted and perverted or introduced any Tenet which is contrary to the first Institution and for which no good ground or reason can be alledged out of the all-sufficient Rule of Faith must needs be false and that no such warrant can be there had the total silence or contrary Doctrine of the Ages next under the Date of Scriptures which we here make the Rule do prove For where neither the Scriptures most ancient expresses or necessarily infers any Doctrine of Faith nor Tradition hath never so understood the Scriptures there no greater evidence can be found upon earth to discern truth from falshood and consequently the Catholick and Apostolick Faith from the Spurious and Heretical And from this head it was that we find the ancient Fathers to oppose and confute the Heretical Inventions and Innovations of men contrary to sound Faith For supposing that Christ was the first founder and dispenser of Christian Doctrine and that he delivered this to the Apostles to be farther propagated in the world what could be said more effectually against perverters of the same than to shew that such fond and impous tenets as Hereticks obtruded upon the world could never have Christ for their Author because those who immediately drew from that Fountain never taught any such thing but the contrary rather And that they did not they proved from instances in all the principal Sees of the Apostles and their immediate and following Successors who never delivered any such Doctrine
Eucharist and especially going upon the grounds of Luther Calvin Perkins and some others of Great note that all Sacerdotal they may call them if they please Ministerial Acts done by him who is no true Minister are really null and void Fourthly we conclude that seeing all Ecclesiastical power as Ecclesiastical doth proceed from Christ and his Successors and that by Ordinary and visible means they who have not received the same by such Ordinary Methods are usurpers of the same whether Political or Mystical And that to deny this to the Church is to deny that which Christ hath given them and such a Principle of the Churches well Being without which it cannot subsist and it not subsisting neither can the Faith it self And to the reason above given we may add Prescription beyond all memory For from Christs time to this day a perpetual and peculiar power hath ever been in the Clergy which hath constantly likewise born the name of the Church to assemble define and dispose matters of Religion And why should not Prescription under Unchristian as well as Christian Governours for so many Ages together be as valid sacred and binding to acknowledgment in the Case of Religion as Civil Matters will ever remain a question in Conscience and common Equity even after irresistible Power hath forced a Resolution otherwise It is true such is the more natural and Ancient Right Civil Power hath over the outward Persons of men than that which Religion hath over the Inward man that it may claim a dominion and disposal of the Persons of even Christian subjects contrary to the soft and infirm Laws of the Church because as hath been said Men are Men before they are Christians and Nature goeth before Grace And Civil society is the Basis and support to Ecclesiastical Yet the grounds of Christianity being once received for good and divine and that Religion cannot subsist nor the Church consist without being a Society and no Society without a Right of counsel and consultation and no consultation without a Right to assemble together the Right of assembling must needs be in trinsique to the Church it self Now if no man that is a Christian can take away the essential ingredient to the Church how can any deny this of Assembling For the practise of it constantly and confidently by the Apostles and brethren contrary to the express will of the Lawful Powers of the Jews and Romans and the reason given in the Acts of the Apostles of obeying God rather then man do imply certainly a Law and Charter from God so to do and if this be granted as it must who can deny by the same Rule necessity of Cause and constant Prescription that they may as well provide for the safety of the Faith by securing the state of the Church as for the truth and stability of the Church by securing the true Faith by doctrine and determination The Great question hath ever been Whether the Church should suffer loss of power and priviledges upon the Supream Powers becomming Christian Or the Supream power it self loose that dominion which it had before it became of the Church For if Christianity subjected Kings necessarily to the Laws of others not deriving from them then were not Kings in so good a Condition after they were Christians as before when they had no such pretences or restraints upon them and so should Christs Law destroy or maim at least the Law of God by which Kings reign But there may be somewhatsaid weakning this absurdity For Granting this That there is a God and that he is to be worshipped and that as he appointeth all which we must by nature believe it seems no less natural to have these observed than the Laws of natural Dominion Now granting that at present which if we be true to our Religion we must not deny viz. That Christian Religion is the true Religion and that God will be worshipped in such sort as is therein contained For any Prince absolute to submit to the essentials of that Religion is not to loose any thing of his Pristine Rights which he had before being an Heathen for he never had any Right to go against the Law of God more then to go against the Law of Nature but it doth restrain his Acts and the exercise of his Power And if the Supream after he hath embraced Christianity shall proceed to exert the same Authority over the Church as before yet the Church hath no power to resist or restrain him Civilly any more than when he was an Alien to it Now it being apparent that Christian Faith and Churches had their Forms of believing and Communion before Soveraign powers were converted and that he who is truly converted to a Religion doth embrace it upon the terms which he there finds not such as he brings with him or devises therefore there lies an Obligation upon such powers to preserve the same as they found it inviolate And truly for any secular Power to become Christian with a condition of inverting the orders of the Church and deluting the Faith is to take away much more than ordinary accrues unto it by such a change It is true the distinction is considerable between the Power of a Christian and unchristian King exerted in this manner because taking the Church in the Largest sense in which all Christians in Communion are of it what Christian Kings act with the Church may in some sense bear the name of the Church as it doth in the State acting according to their secular capacity but much more improperly there than here because there are no inferiour Officers or Magistrates in such a Commonwealth which are not of his founding and institution whatsoever they do referr to him and whatsoever almost he doth is executed by them But Christ as we have shewed having ordained special Officers of his own which derive not their Spiritual Power at all from the Civil and to this end that his Church might be duly taught and governed what is done without the concurrence of these can in no proper sense bear the name of the Church But many say the King is a Mixt person consisting partly of Ecclesiastical and partly Civil Authority but this taken in the ordinary latitude is to begg the Question and more a great deal than at first was demanded For who knows how far this Mixture extends and that it comprehends not the Mystical Power of the Church as well as the Political And how have they proved one more than the other by such a title It were reasonable therefore first to declare his Rights in Ecclesiastical matters as well as Civil and thence conclude he is a Mixt Person and not to affirm barely he is a Mixt Person and from thence inferr they know not what Ecclesiastical power themselves And if he hath such power whether it is immediately of God annexed to his Natural Right or by consent of the Church is attributed unto him For by taking this course we
of it self it is the sting of the Law and the very entrance into the Pit of Hell Evangelical Contrition is when a repentant sinner is grieved for his sin not so much for fear of Hell or any other punishment as because he hath offended and displeased so good and merciful a God This Contrition is caused by the Ministry of the Gospel c. In this vulgar account of Attrition and Contrition or the two Parts of Contrition Legal and Evangelical is a twofold errour committed not to be passed lightly over The one is a rude and common misapprehension of the state of the Gospel as if it were all made up of Mercy and consisted not at all of Justice and Vengeance to be executed upon sinners breaking the Law of the Gospel but whatever we can reasonably suppose of mercy must be owing altogether to the Gospel but if any threatning and severities of Justice be feared that must be borrowed from the Law And what Law I pray do they mean The Old Law I doubt not But the Law before Christ had its moralities or perpetual Duties and its Mosaicalness which was transient and is now actually ceased as all the Obligations and Penalties belonging thereto It cannot be that then which moves to this Legal Contrition but if any thing the moral and perpetual part consisting of Justice and Equity which are no less an ingredient into the Gospel than into the Law properly so called And because there is nothing more absurd and ridiculous than to have a Law consisting of just and holy Precepts and Rules which shall not also consist of proportionable Rewards of the Observers and Breakers thereof returning as St. Paul teaches us at large in his Epistle Rom. 2. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. to the Romans to the Jew and to the Gentile doing well honour and glory and shame and wrath to the evil doer speaking of the present state of the Gospel And we have before shewed That so far is the Gospel from being made up of all mercy that the judgments and punishments therein decreed against Sinners are more grievous than they in the Law and therefore the Gospel is called a Book of Good tidings or News not because the Sinner impenitent shall sind any more favour or so much as he might under the Old Law but because the Salvation here published is of greater extent comprehending all Nations and states of men which the Law did not And also offering full and free means of Repentance and reconciliation to God through Christ and a treasure of Grace as well to assist in the performing of the condition of the Gospel as to pardon and remit what is committed against it upon humiliation and repentance So that the Gospel has a Legal part as the phrase is and Evangelical And the terrours of the Gospel or Legal Part of it have just influence upon the Consciences of men to humble and affright them though there should be O Soror nulla res sic nos ab omni peccato custodit immunes sicut timor inferni et amor Dei Bern. de modo bene vivend Serm. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Chrys Serm. 7. Antioc◠pag. 512. To. 6 no such thing extant as the Old Testament and therefore the Attrition of a Sinner under the guilt and sense of his sins is much more an effect of the Gospel than of the Law And therefore is not so the entrance into the Pit of Hell as if directly it lead to Hell For 't is security and presumption that lead thither rather then the sorrow of Attrition This is certainly a direct occasion of going to Heaven and is an inferiour degree of more ingenuous sorrow and true contrition For this Legal as it is called Contrition is caused by the ministry of the Gospel too and is an effect of Evangelical Faith whereby a Christian having thorowly assented to and been affected with the severe and holy Doctrine thereof becomes humbled under it and is brought to the sight and admiration and affection of the other Part of it which to the truly broken and penitent offereth Grace and Pardon That which seems to have mislead so many into a false notion of the Gospel is the term Gospel or Evangel it self which sounds nothing so much as mercy though the English or Saxon word we know signifies originally no more than Gods Speech which is indifferent Rom. 4. 15. to Mercy and Justice both And such places as this of St. Paul The Law worketh wrath as if he had meant to say thereby that the Gospel did not work wrath as did the Law but that was far from his purpose intending only to shew the difference between the Law and the Gospel as they stood opposed to be in this That the Law without the Gospel which St. Paul preached wrought wrath without remedy but the Gospel though it propoundeth and threatneth wrath too to the unbelieving and disobedient yet continued in it also a sufficient and proper remedy against all those Evils And thus far of the very intrinsick nature of Repentance Attrition and Contrition which are the two proper Parts of it The two most noted acts or effects for Parts they are not are Confession and Satisfaction And first we shall explain this Confession by these degrees First Out of the Abundance of the heart it must necessarily be that the mouth should speak whether good or evil truth or falshood joy or sorrow How then can it reasonably be supposed that no outward expression should appear of so great anguish of mind as is supposed to affect the soul truly humbled and penitent No sober man much less good Christian can choose but commend such Acts as this of true Repentance For as the comparison of an ancient Father hath it well As it is with him that hath almost surfeited himself with ill digested or unwholesome meat lying heavy upon his stomach must cast it forth before he can well be eased or cured even so he whose soul is oppressed with the filth guilt and weight of his sins must vomit them up by due Confession before he can reasonably expect remedy and forgiveness Many and very pressing are the advises and precepts of Holy Scripture to confess our sins and many promises to such as do confess annexed which not intending at present so much a Paraenetical or hortatory Discourse as Dogmatical for the settlement and information of the Judgment and Consciences I shall pass over as agreed to on all hands in the general But Confession of sins being so variously taken viz. for confession to God and confession to Man for confession private and confession publick for confession to our brother whom we have offended particularly and confession to the Church to which we have given scandal none ever took the boldness on them to deny absolutely the use of Confession Nay I cannot find any seriously and positively denying the lawfulness or usefulness of private or auricular
that communion which may detain any man of Christian modesty and Charity from pronouncing such an one to be infallibly damn'd or out of possibility to salvation And if it be hereupon demanded What difference we put between Infidels and such corrupt Christians seeing diverse have undertaken to assert a Possibility of salvation to them also living exactly to the Light and Rule of Nature in them I answer not absolutely at present dashing the argument a-pieces by denying the supposition and their colourable proofs thereof but demonstrating a vast discrimination between the one and other condition For commonly where Heresies which are so properly called and not Gentilism as they are which destroy the first Principles of Christianity are taught and maintained there are to be found all truths necessarie to salvation in a Christian sense For the Holy Scriptures we suppose are there received and submitted unto which are able to make a 2 Tim 3. 16 17. man wise unto salvation and thorowly to furnish him unto all good works And the Records of the Church and ancienter practise good guides against the rocks way-laying a man in his course to Heaven And the want of actual communion with a Church doth then only expose our souls to Perdition when it is wilfully and causelesly slighted and contemned And then only doth Separation visible 〈◊〉 less Visible alienation of mind and affection put on the nature of Schism And there are two general defects in a Church which justify Separation according to those two things we have shewed do constitute a Church Doctrine of Faith and Divine Regiment called commonly Discipline If a Church errs notoriously in the former no Separation can be called Schism oâ— if defective not in Government absolutely for without some Government it could not be so much as a Society but in the Government oâ—dained for it because then it should not be a Christian Society For the faith of Christians held do not make a Christian Society but the Christian Regiment Christian Regiment also I call that not whereby Christians are Governed for Civil Governments are common to Heathens and Christians but that which is Proper to Christians as Christians and was instituted by Christ for Christians and not invented out of mens wise brains and accommodated to the Church and perhaps called Divine to give it greater credit and place amongst Christians Of which we have alreadie spoken It being a common rule amongst the Ancients Clemens Alexand Stromal immutable with me There can be no true Flock without true Pastours And there can be no true Pastours where they are not set over the Flock according to Christs known and received will but some presumed tacit and extraordinary Vocation as they term it when there is an entrance by the Window and not by the Door From hence it doth appear how uncertain and confused their notion and position is who without any more adoe conclude all those to be Schismaticks and that upon their own Principles and Concessions who separate from a Christian Societie which they acknowledge to be a true Church For very great is the ambiguity both of Separation and True Church First Separation is as we have before noted either of Subordinates or Co-ordinates And of Subordinates either simply or with Restriction Simply subordinate I call them not comparitively with Christs Imperial Power but with all External power who by divine Right of Providence owe direct obedience to their Pastours in all things not inhibited by the Law of God to which all Spiritual Pastours are to be no â—ess subject than the sheep themselves And thus every Bishop is true Head and Governor of that Flock which under Christ is committed to his Care and Custodie But in like manner is not that Bishop subject to the Metropolitane and much less that Metropolitane to his Patriarch For these are but Ecclesiastical Constitutions and of no distinct Order though Degree According to which obligations of obeying the refusing to obey and dis-uniting ones self from the Governours of the Church doth aggravate or extenuate the Division and the guilt thereof And without all peradventure may one Church divide from another upon less grounds then the Members of one Church separate from the more immediate Head of the same How thick do instances stand in Ecclesiastical History of Churches who by vertue of their Respective Governours have been divided and yet both remain true Churches Again a True Church is said so to be more than one way viz. As to Being absolutely and Being perfectly We know that every Errour in Doctrine though great nay though heretical doth not presently destroy the nature of a Church absolutely though it takes away from the perfection of a Church How that opinion was delivered by the Fathers viz. That Heresie destroyes the Church we have Cyprianus Epistola 52. â— gat Novatianos eâ—â—e Christianosâ— shewed in part speaking of Heresie and now may add farther that the the same persons of old or their Co-equals denied an Heretique to be a Christian also and therefore they are to be understood of the such foul and unchristian Heresies which rased the foundation of faith it self as did the Valentinians the Gnosticks the Marcionites and such like For t is now agreed to That unless a man be a Christian he cannot be an Heretique Or if at any time they spake of more tolerable Heresies not wholly inconsistent with Christianity it self then they laid the burden of Damnation upon that accessorie but separable Aggravation Uncharitableness which alone and especially conjoined with such errours exposed to damnation But as it is with the Natural Man it is with the Spiritual There are some parts Essential and Vital which cannot be wanting or corrupted but the Whole must loose its nature and denomination and there are others not absolutely Essential which are called Integral without which the Body may possible subsist but not be perfect in its material Parts And so it is with the Body of Faith consisting of so many Articles or members as Parts some Vital and essential some necessarie to its perfections but not its Being absolutely And a Church may be called a true Church which is defective or Excessive in these though not in them And yet we need not betake our selves to that explication by some used of a True-man and a Thief to express how a Church may be a True Church and an erroneous one at the same time For the nature of this truth we ascribe unto the Church consisting only in Morality If the Church failes in that the Nature of it failes as it doth not in a man when he is corrupted with falsness and vice But this we say That although all Truths are equally true as to the nature of Truth it self they are not of equal importance and use to us or to a Church Therefore such a Latitude being in the notion of a True Church how can any man so confidently say that No Church can separate from the Church
of the dead Secondly St. John in the Revelations clears this saying Write blessed Rev. 14. 13. are the dead which dye in the Lord from henceforth for they rest from their labour and their works follow them Their works follow them without the least mention or insinuation of being vegetated and enabled so to do with the prayers of the living And they rest from their labours without being toyled wasted and tormented with worse miseries than ever they suffered upon earth The evasion which is here borrowed from Anselme upon the words which yet in truth are no more Anselm's than the Comments under his name upon the Epistles but Herveus Natalis his living above two hundred years after Anselme that here we are to understand the time of the Resurrection might be accepted for true it is then shall the due reward be rendered to every mans works if this excluded the other For let our adversaries say whether all consideration of good works be deferred until the Resurrection Is it not in reference to them that some men are committed to Purgatory only while others immediately go to hell That some mens pains in Purgatory are gentle and light others more grievous and some mens shorter and some longer even of themselves without the help of their friends upon earth Why then must we needs understand this following of good works to be at the day of Judgment only and not in just proportion the whole time going before And therefore is that elusion we touched of being meant of perfect Men and Martyrs only rested on as the surer of the two and that from De Victore and Haymon It is true he doth speak of such but it can only be said and not proved that he speaks of such only Dying in the Lord being of far greater extent and not upon mens pleasures and the exigencie of a corrupt cause limited But distrust that these devises will not satisfie hath driven a great Champion of this Purgatory into another plainer but much more absurd answer of his own viz. That some men dye absolutely in the Lord as Martyrs c. and some men partly in the Lord and partly not in the Lord This is congruous indeed to the opinion resolved to be maintained and belike St. Augustine gives ground hereunto who in a certain Epistle saith that some men in this life are partly the Sons of Christ and partly the Sons of this world This Augustine might speak in reference to the imperfection of the state of Grace and Sonship here which will admit of some mixture of worldliness and weakness with Grace and Sanctification but doth St. Austine any where say that upon this any man is partly the child of God and partly the child of the Devil at the same time or that at the same time he is in a state of Grace and a state of Sin or reconciled to God and not reconciled This is a new invention but very suitable to the third state after this life Purgatory and both of equal truth The place of Ecclesiastes Where the tree falleth there it shall be brought against a middle state I confess hath besides the most natural sense a sense which may be aimed at besides the denyal of any middle state but that by indifferent interpreters it hath been applyed to the immutableness of mans state at his death is certain For in truth Purgatory as commended to us is a quite different state from that of bliss as a state of torment must be from a state of bliss Fourthly The Holy Scriptures teach us that The bloud of Jesus Christ 1 John 1. 7. John 5. 24. cleanseth us from all our sins and that He that heareth Christs word and believeth on him that sent him hath everlasting life and shall not come into death but is passed from death unto life And we may note that Life simply taken is never used for any other state but that of happiness in holy Scripture and therefore these two states only being mentioned in Scripture it is sufficient to conclude that no more are to be added For were it so that nothing in Scripture were directly spoken against this opinion it would no more avail the defenders of it then it would any other Heretical Invention which might be yet framed without any direct opposition from thence Now the Scriptural reasons against this we make to be these in brief First that as well Scripture as Philosophy to which they assent who introduced these Purgative Flames truly hold that all spiritual purgation and sanctification must have the consent and co-operation of the will to produce any spiritual effect in the soul but the Will after death elects not merits not nor demerits i. e. deserves neither good nor evil but is fixed to the state in which it is But if sin be remaining in the separate soul it must necessarily have its seat principally in the will which is the formal principle of all good and evil And there can be no change in the will of the deceased as to the choise of good or evil simply but only as to the more full and absolute captivating of the same in the admiration of good or pertinacie in evil Therefore the Prayers of the living not having any influence upon the will or affections at that time to change them for the best or correct the pravity of them cannot avail to the meliorating of the soul in reference to its sanctity or impurity Again No corporeal cause can be effectual upon the spirit of Man immediately while it is disjoyned from the body to the cleansing of spiritual stains But the relicts of sin are spiritual and not corporal pollutions and therefore no flames of Purgatory can mundifie the soul so as to render it more innocent and fit for heaven But the flames of Purgatory are sensible and properly material And it is not said that the suffrage of the living obtain remission of sins for the afflicted in Purgatory but only deliver them from punishments there suffered Thirdly All sins being committed in the person of a Man consisting of body and soul must be accounted for as they were acted in the Person and not only in the one Part of him neither can any sin be said to be forgiven the soul without the body which was committed in soul and body together nor can the soul be purged and not the person nor the person and not the body but the body lies unconcerned untouched all this while by such tormenting remedies and therefore there is no probability of any such semi-purgation of the soul which should avail to the benefit and salvation of the whole And therefore the souls of the damned suffering the pains of Hell fire immediately after their departure from the body are not awhit the better for what they suffer Neither can this be alledged to invalidate the other because that in God punishing the souls of the Reprobates without their bodies is no unjustice but rather a
say Amen at thy giving of thanks seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest These words are plain enough one would think to declare that the Apostle intended publick prayer as well as preaching or prophesying Therefore no arts are omitted to obscure and pervert his meaning but with such ill success that it is thereby much more illustrated and confirmed to the loss of such corrupters of Scripture to make it agree with their doctrine and practise For Bellarmine confesses 't is very hard to make it good that the Aposte means Bellarm. de Verbo D. lib. 2. cap. 16. only preaching and so in truth it must needs be but that there is nothing to necessity and a willing mind And therefore to mend the matter he says The Apostle there treateth not of Divine Offices but of Spiritual Songs which Christians were wont to compose to praise God and give him thanks And what if this were so For that they had any formed Liturgies in those early unsetled dayes of the Church while the gifts of the Spirit were so ordinary I much question excepting the Lords Prayer which was ever in publick use as well as private if it be not undoubtedly true what is affirmed by no mean Authors That St. Peter celebrated the Mass taking here Mass in the ancient and innocent signification with the Lords prayer only Doth not the argument of the Apostles hold altogether as valid in the ordinary as extraordinary Praises and Service But when the same Authour can bring scarce any ancienter than himself who are of his opinion and doth bring Haymo Primasius Lombard Thomas and others that he means the Ordinary service what worth can there be in such an evasion Hence it is that another is invented in the same Authour which acknowledges that there is meant Common worship But that the whole Congregation is not thereby to understand but only the Clerk of the Parish who is instead of the unlearned or Idiot to say Amen For Papists make no doubt but such an one there was who should in such manner answer for the rest of the people But I make no doubt but they are miserably mistaken For no records among the Jews from whom most customs of the ancientest Christians descended report any such thing No custom of the primitive Christians warrant this but the contrary whatever Ledesima the Jesuit saith For as shall by and by shewed the people in general without any such discrimination of persons made their solemn returns unto their Bishop or Priest who so celebrated in publick And therefore Bellarmine honestly and learnedly rejecteth this interpretation showing that the phrase of the Apostle which we render Supplyeth the place of the unlearned comprehendeth no less all the vulgar then the pretended Clerk And reason good he should so think because questionless by Unlearned is not there meant general ignorance of men but ignorance of that language which was spoken so extraordinarily For as Salmeron noteth upon the place of St. Paul by Place is meant the order of setting in such Assemblies where the Teachers had one place and the Hearers who for that were called Unlearned had another Hence it is that Salmeron would make clearer work affirming Salmer Com. in 1 Cor. 14. Disp 30. That it is not the end of Divine Service that the people should be instructed but the worshipping of God This Bellarmine approveth but betrays his cause in another point granting that of old prayers publick were for the instruction of the people but now is not this to own a forsaking of antitiquity the chief use of prayers is not the edification or consolation of the people but the worship of God And the Reason which Bellarmine gives is exactly the same which Sectaries amongst us give to silence the people in publick Devotion because The Minister speaketh not to man but unto God To both which we answer briefly and against both viz. The Priest speaketh unto God only in prayer as the proper object and to the people only in preaching as the proper object of that But he also in prayer speaks to the people instrumentally i. e. as to so many instruments or causes concurring to the same end and effect and therefore ought to understand what is petitioned for and obliged to concur with the principal Agent the Minister of God in such worship For though we are far from denying what the Papists and Puritans may say That any prayer is unfruitful or unnecessary which is not understood by the people in whose behalf it is put up for it may avail them who are many miles distant we all grant and consequently a prayer not heard may be useful as well not understood when heard Yet this holds only when inconveniencies or impossibilities obstruct the due exercise of prayer For as to such who are deaf and cannot hear yet come with general reverence to the publick place and so far as they can joyn with the prayers of the Church I make no question but considerable benefit to accrew so such as shall ignorantly scornfully or uncharitably neglect to give their general consent and suffrage to the publick communion in prayer I make no doubt but they bereave themselves of the benefit both of the publick service and their own private worship But this cometh not home to the purpose For of extraordinary acts in Religion as of particular things in Philosophy there is no knowledge and nothing can be determined but this may That generally and ordinarily publick prayers are more prevalent with God when understood and concurred to by publick devotion And herein doth consist the vulgar errour of the Romish Doctours that they suppose St. Paul should mean which I confess as I have said before our Translation too much favours that when he saith The understanding is unfruitful the understanding of the speaker in an unknown tongue whenas the context will certainly inform us he meant the understanding of the hearer who knew nothing of what was so delivered which some of their own Expositors agree to as also they do to the great expediencie as well as antiquity of that custom of the peoples bearing a share in the publick Worship To demonstrate which I shall here at large transcribe what I find in sober and learned Cassander It were to be wisht that according to the precept of the Cassand Defens Lib. De Officio Pii Viri p. 865. Op. Apostle and the ancient Rite of the Church that some consideration were had of the people in the publick prayers of the Church singings and lessons which are undertaken for the peoples sake and that the common sort of Believers should not wholly and constantly be driven from all communion of prayers and divine lessons St. Pauls words are manifest that what is said cannot be understood unless you express it by a tongue signifying your speech and that he who through ignorance understandeth not what is said can by no means answer Amen at the giving of thanks of another
And that Oraculum by notice whereof the Bishop of Rome with the Senate of Cardinals granted to the Sclavonian Nation that they should use the tongue of their Country in sacred actions seemeth to pertain to all Nations named Christians Omnis spiritus laudet Dominum omnis lingua confiteatur ei Let every spirit praise the Lord and every tongue confess to him And Thomas Cajetane a man doubtless most learned and acute wrote in a certain place It were better for the edification of the Church publick prayers to be said in the vulgar tongue in the Church which the people may hear than in the Latin tongue And when he was for this reproved by some he answered He built upon the foundation of the Apostles in his fourteenth Chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians c. Thus far and much more followeth out of that grave man to this purpose So that in one of those things which convince the Church of Rome of Innovation and obstinacie in novelties as nothing need more be said against it to that end nothing being said more for it in the upshot of all Disputes but that for some time it hath been in use there and the Trentine Convention hath Azorus Institut Mor. l. 8. c. 26. Salmer in 1 Cor. 16. Disp 30. made all sure according to their manner by decreeing it inconvenient that Divine Offices should commonly be in the vulgar tongue as Azorius writeth and as Salmeron It anathematizes such as will not be content with the three tongues in which the super scription was written upon the Cross of Christ Which is a fansie without any firmness at all it being certain no such thing was intended thereby and evident that the Hebrew tongue was scarce ever used in Christian services though the Syriack hath been And it is not agreed whether of the two was the Language but this we rest not on nor can the Romanists But when they have turned every stone to little purpose they come to that which will never fail them in this or any other point the determination of their Church and practise of the same which upon no accounts must be violated for that were to loose or hazard all as Azorius in the place fore-cited doth with little modesty and less advantage to his cause profess and answering this question Whether the vulgar tongue might not be indulged to Hereticks petitioning for it and for the peace of the Church saith I answer Councils and Fathers and the Church were never wont to yield to such like Hereticks demands But this he proves in matters quite of a different nature as if when the Fathers would hear of no accommodation with Arius Eutycheus Nestorius holding notorious heresies against Christ even when they would have introduced some verbal agreement they could be precedents to oppose that wherein if it were false can consist no heresie but is true and most generally was practised by all the Fathers and Churches at first and so continued for eight hundred years And therefore he speaks more to this purpose in these words following If it should be granted to Lutherans and Calvinists that they should celebrate Divine Service in their vulgar tongue they would afterward give out that they had got their wills yea that the Church had changed her opinion and left off her ancient custom as contrary to Scripture and so charge the Church with erring and would exult with incredible joy and gladness over it c. This is in truth the very same reason which our grave Puritans render why they conform not to the Church in her Service whenas they confess they have nothing of sin to object against the thing it self viz. They should be judged of mutability and levity should thereby weaken their Ministry in the esteem of their people which in all probability they borrowed from their Father Calvin one of whose reasons against the moderation Calvin Epist of Melancthon was that if they should make any correction in that Reformation which was so hastily hudled up they should weaken their Ministry The reasonableness of which I leave to others to judge of But rejecting the common reasons all of which we are not here to examine of Papists we shall freely oblige them to give better grounds of the Liturgies in unknown tongues than may be ordinarily found amongst them though no sufficient can be given And one is the great veneration had to the traditions of the Ancients in worshipping God not that anciently any instance can be given that may be a precedent to the corruptions of these times but that having with sober grave and holy advice framed a Liturgy in any one tongue they were very scrupulous how they made any alteration therein though of words only and therefore that which is vulgarly spoken altering daily and that which was written remaining altogether unchanged in words tract of time bred a diversity between the one and the other But this we demand of our Adversaries what one president for many hundred years together they can produce where at the first institution of publick Service it was so contriv'd that nothing of the vulgar language should be taken into it There is a vast difference between a passive and an active and purposed inconvenience The ancient predecessours of the Roman Church never intended that their Latin Service should be hid or unknown from the common people which many generations after followed yet so it must needs fall out in time But they who at this day plant Churches in both Indies and obtrude their Latine tongue upon the people there and who deny liberty to other Provincial Churches in Europe and elsewhere to celebrate in their known Language do purpose mischief unto such Christians and become Schismatical in not only not redressing themselves according to the Rule of their fore-fathers whom they should much more imitate in ordering their service so that the Common Christian might understand the same as primitively and for a long time they did than in sticking so severely to the bare Letters and Syllables they used not making conscience of far more scandalous practices in altering the service it self in matter by absurd additions and detractions but with denunciation of Excommunication against such Churches as shall presume to redress that evil of ignorance and render Christians intelligent of what they do But I have been of opinion that the vulgar have been no small cause of this great superstition and inconvenience to themselves In that in process of time their devotion slacking in timely repairing to the Church and in due demeanor in the Church neglecting to concur with the Minister of God and to reciprocate with him and almost deserting the Service by coldness sloth and indevotion the Priest was constrained perhaps with a Deacon or Clerk only to perform the service alone And truly let such people look to their modern teachers who have instilled such ungracious opinions into them as to take them off
it is That divine Adoration receives its specification from the intention which is an act principally of the will so that be the object what it will yet if I have no intention to worship any other than the true God I worship him when I direct my worship to that which we may suppose not to prove upon tryal God But this is not to be granted that intention is sufficient to denominate worship or constitute it true and Catholick though it suffices abundantly to make a worship false when it is intended for such And then may a man be said to intend false worship not only when he knows it to be false but when he might possibly know it to be so and when he intends to worship that which actually is a false object For as hath been said Idolatry consists principally in the understanding as also the Scripture intimateth when it charges the Idolatrous Israelites with ignorance 2 King 17. 26. Isa 4. 9. of God For were not the Samaritans Idolaters who knew not the manner of the God of Israel And what saith the Prophet Isaiah They that make a graven Image i. e. to worship it are all of them vanity and their delectable things shal not profit and they are their own witnesses they see not nor know that they may be ashamed Surely if any man saw and were convinced of his error he would be ashamed of it but 't is his ignorance that detains him as well as precipitates him into such errors Ephes 4. 18. as St. Paul witnesses of the Gentiles Having their understanding darkened through the ignorance that is in them because of the blindness of their heart Fifthly There is no reason to grant that simplicity and sincerity of Intention and Resolution of worshipping none but the true God may not consist and hold good in worshipping more than one God as in the Act. 17. 23. case of the Athenians worshipping the unknown God in the Acts For as Pausanias in Eliacis taking notice of this inscription hath it The Persians threatning Greece with War the Athenians sent to the Lacedemonians to beg aid of them Pan met their Embassador Philippides and expostulated with him why the Athenians had made no statue to him but left him our adding that if they received him he would stand by them Hereupon they erected this Monument To the unknown God Others say That they being miserably harrassed with the Pestilence and finding no relief from them they worshipped bethought themselves there might be a God neglected by them who might relieve them and so dedicated an Altar To the unknown God Might not all these things stand with very great sincerity of intention And yet I suppose it was Idolatry So that sincere resolution and intention of worshipping none but the true God only may be found where many are worshipped For though to us as St. Paul saith * Toletus Instruct Sacerdotum l. 4. c. 14. § 6. There is but one God and one Lord yet with all Nations it was not so they might really and stedfastly believe there were more Gods than one And therefore Tolet the Jesuit well writeth thus Therefore Idolatry is the exhibiting of a Divine worship to a false God For to worship him for true God who is not God either by praising him or invoking him or Sacrificing to him or any wayes prostrating our selves to him is to commit Idolatry False adoration which is Idolatry is never but where an Error in the understanding goeth before †De Ratione lure definiend pag. 273. Num ut Supersationis caput est Id. 〈◊〉 iâ—a emnus Dei caltus non solum extrav ritatem fidei sed etiam extra uniatem Ecclesis alterius Dei cultum in se contnet ab coquem Fides Christiarorum communis intra Ecclesiam colendum propâ—nit Omnis enim Commentitia religio talem sibi Deum colendum pâ—â—ponit qualem sibi ipsa commenta sit non qualem se ipse ostendit Quod Idololatrioe instar quoddam est And besides all this the Author of this tenet in another place acknowledges it to be a sort of Idolatry to feign or device a worship of God otherwise than was instituted of God and that not only to worship God out of the verity of Faith but out of the unity of the Church containeth in it a worship of another God than is propounded by the Christian Faith to be worshiped in the Church And again All commentitions religion propounds such a God to be worshipped as it hath feigned to it self not as he hath declared himself to be By which words I understand him to explain himself and draw nearer to the common notion of Idolatry than he is commonly taken to do For granting that it is a kind of Idolatry to offer any superstitious worship interdicted by God and that in thus doing a man doth in effect frame to himself a God distinct from the true God it may be easily granted that all Idolatry consisteth in Polytheism or plurality of Gods because in effect a man makes strange Gods though not formally as he that constituteth one of purpose to worship as the object of his Devotion And this agreeth with what othet learned men have written of Idolatry Quicunque de Deo secus sentit quam revera est c. Erasm in symbolum Catechesm 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epict. Cap. 38. Perkins Cases of Conscience l. 2. c. 11. Luther Colloq Mensalia p. 91. extending it to a false notion or judgment of the one true God For Erasmus in his Catechism on the Creed saith Whosoever thinketh otherwise of God than in truth he is or doth not believe him to be such as the Authority of the Holy Scriptures hath described him to us believeth not in God but in an Idol To the same purpose speaketh Mr. Perkins thus If adoration be given to the true God with a false and erroneous intention it makes him an Idol For example if the body be bowed with this intent to worship God out of the Trinity as the Turk doth Or if he be worshipped out of his Son with the Jews thus doing we worship not the true God but an Idol To these I add these words of Luther All manner of Religion let it have never so great a name and lustre of Holiness when people will serve God without his word and command is nothing else but plain Idolatry It may be said in behalf of Jews and Turks that they are not Idolaters because they worship God according to the true Light of Nature asserting and magnifying above all men the unity of God and directing their worship after the manner of the service of God before Christ To which answering I shall wave the question about the measure of knowledg the Jews had of the Trinity before Christ of which somewhat hath been said before and rather distinguish between the manner of their believing or disbelieving those mysteries For it is much different
God says he will not hold such guiltless that thus take his name in vain it is figuratively to be understood God intending surely utter ruin and confusion to such Atheistical contemners and affronters of him to his face and before the face of many others And reductively to this command doth pertain the sin of light customary and needless use of Gods name so sacred upon no sufficient grounds or occasions This is indeed to take Gods Name in vain and this will he also not suffer to go unpunished For this is in a manner to make sport with Gods Name and to make him a laughing stock to use his Name and that many times under the form of broad Oaths to make the lye or jest or srippery take the better and degrade and disgrace God Almighty to grace their speeches their tales and witless worthless shameless language For how stupid and miserable is the errour of such who move admiration and laughter by most unseasonable and uncivil as well as ungodly abusing of Gods Name while they think they are admired for their gallantry and wit when really they are ridiculous for the incongruity monstrousness and absurdness of their speeches For what is it else for a man to bring Gods magnificient and glorious Name down from Heaven to justifie a meer toy or trifle and that commonly a known lye which he shall vent at pleasure but as if a man should bring a huge Cable to tye a fly by the legg This would indeed make men laugh but at nothing so much as the folly of the Actour of it And so in prophane and beastly matters to utter the Name of God with great boldness it is very likely that as some would tremble others to whom the wit is principally designed would laugh loud enough the absurd Coxcomb apt to think it is in applause of his wit when really it is at his impudence and presumption as they would undoubtedly at him that should break wind backward in the Kings presence And what is such kind of swearing but breaking wind forward on Gods face There 's indeed all the wit and mirth too But no more of this The positive Vertues required by this Commandment are often and reverend and affectionate using of Gods Name in Prayer Praises and Instructions of our selves and others To confess God before men to the glory of God though to the disadvantage and dammage of our selves when the Case requires according to our Saviours words Whosoever shall confess Luke 12. 8. me before men him shall the son of man also confess before the Angels of God And more particularly is required by this Commandment sober and conscientious swearing upon just occasion For can any man of Religion or Reason imagine that if as some of late and not till of late suppose God would not have men swear at all he would pass that over in silence not only here but through the whole Scripture and give rules and orders how they should swear as here he doth In that therefore God here saith Thou shalt not swear in vain he certainly implyeth a permission and right to swear by his Name rightfully and no other argument ought to be brought to prove the same especially by us here aiming at brevity But we have the Examples both of Old and New Testament proving this To them of the New Testament I know not well what they can or have replyed St. Paul being frequent in it as 2 Cor. 2. 23. Gal. 1. 20. 1 Thess 2. 5. unless they say That being divinely inspired he had a particular dispensation which is as much as nothing it being not at all proved that this was from Dispensation and not known Right And to them of the Old Testament they say It was a meer legal thing but this also is only said and not shewed as it ought to be Nay the contrary may be shewed because nothing was meerly legal or determining with the Law which began not with the Law of Moses but the Examples of Abraham Isaac and Jacob who all swore were much ancienter then the Law of Moses and therefore it was a Natural Law rather than Mosaical whereby men swore anciently and that was not disgraced nor altered by the Law of the Gospel But this miserable mistake is most frequent in the argumentations of presumptuous but unskiâ—â—ul Treaters and as they would be thought admirers of Scripture that a just and righteous document shall fare the worse for being found by them in the Old Testament though not at all relating to the Mosaical Law and when they see cause be rejected and disgraced because it is there found But say they there are many places in the New Testament as of our Saviour and St. James strictly inhibiting swearing at all Matth. 5. 24. 36. and chap. 23. 16 18 20. James 5. 12. These places being urged hard by Anabaptists have driven men to a distinction never thought of till of late and then chiefly if not only by them of the Reformation and especially beyond the Seas whose Common-places generally distinguish between an Oath Publick and exacted by the Magistrates and an Oath Private offered and uttered without any such Authority That say they is lawful and not prohibited by the Scripture but this they grant is But upon tryal as current as this notion is there will be found nothing in Antiquity nothing in Scripture nothing in the nature of the thing it self warranting it or making it unlawful to swear that in private with the due conditions of an Oath mentioned by Jeremy viz. in Truth in Judgment not necessary publick but private Jer. 4. 2. and in Righteousness which a man way safely and innocently swear in publick For who was over Abraham Isaac or Jacob to require them to swear to others Who can legitimate the Oaths of Princes one towards another Who do except against the mutual stipulations of man and wife in contracts because they are not alwayes performed before a Magistrate Princes when they treat with one another are but as private men And yet all these swear solemnly and lawfully And the reason of an Oath implyed in the swear given by St. Paul doth justifie this For if an Oath be the end of all strifes how shall those controversies be ended between private men without an Oath when no Magistrate is at hand If an Oath will effect peace and satisfaction without repairing to the Magistrate what should hinder but it should have its natural effect and end without molesting the Magistrate Can the Magistrate make that part of the Worship of God as lawful swearing is said to be which in it self is not the Worship of God But it may here be questioned farther What hath not the lawful Magistrate greater influence and power over an Oath than private men To which I answer that in this the lawful Powers have a special Prerogative above others in reference to an Oath that though it be just and lawful to swear without commission or
our Saviour Christ informs us in the Gospel extending it to all in common civil society with us And as in the preceding Commandments God required that we should not wrong our Neighbour in evil acts or deeds so here doth he prohibit us from doing him any wrong in word Which word is primarily meant of wrong in Judgment when men are called to testifie to the truth of a matter they by no means should deliver against their Neighbour what is false which may be done three wayes First by false accusations and charges of facts or crimes not committed contrary to Gods word Lev. 19. 16. Thou Lev. 19. 16. Accusatorum lemeritas tribus medis detegitur tribus poenis suljicitur Aut enim calumniantur aut proevaricantur aut tereiversantur c. Annot. in Grot. Par. 2. Cau. 2. Q. 3. Lev. 19. 15. shalt not go up and down as a Tale-bearer among thy people neither shal s thou stand against the bloud of thy Neighbour I am the Lord. And this false dealing in Judgment may be committed three wayes as the Annotatour on Gratian hath observed For false Accusers saith he either slander by bringing false crimes or prevaricate by concealing true crimes or commit tergiversation in quite relinquishing the charge All which are enemies to justice and truth here commanded A second offence in Judgment is in the person of a Witness to affirm a falsity or deny a truth A third is to give a wrong sentence in the office and place of a Judge forbidden by God so severely and frequently and particularly in Leviticus Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment thou shalt not respect the person of the poor nor honour the person of the mighty but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy Neighbour And in common conversation men offend against this Law several wayes Prov. 22. Eccle. 10. 11. Differunt susurratio detractio in fine Nam principalis intentio detractoris est famam proximi denigrare Susarronis autem intentio principalis est illum cui sie invidet per mala quae de eo dicit ab amicitiâ— altorum separare Gerson de 7 Viriis Capitalib 1. By detraction or defamation of our Neighbour whereby properly a man endeavours to lessen and bring to nothing the worthy parts or deeds of him and to amplifie and aggravate his faults and failings to the diminution of his reputation But Solomon tells us A good name is better than precious oyntment Of him likewise we read in Ecclesiastes Surely the serpent will bite without inchantment and a babler is no better He smiteth stingeth woundeth and destroyeth as a Serpent or Adder before he be discovered and hath his name as he doth the office of the old Serpent who hath the name of Devil in the Greek and Latin Tongues from his mischievous slaundering of God and Man He differeth from the Talebearer or Susurro of which before as Gerson observeth in the end For the chief end of the Detractour or Slaunderer is to slur the reputation of his Nighbour But the chief end of the Whisperer or Talebearer is to alienate him whom he envies from the esteem and friendship of another by the evil he speaks of him Which seems to be grounded on Solomon Proverb 16. 28. A froward man soweth strife and a whisperer separateth chief friends And the same more fully and particularly by Solomon Prov. 6. v. 14. declaring how God hateth him that soweth discord and v. 19. A false witness that speaketh lies and him that soweth discord among brethren Another sort of offenders are on the contrary Flatterers and Dissemblers with God or Man whose lips are all oyl and their hearts gall and vinegar or if they should not intend any great mischief directly yet by idle and unreasonable soft and smooth language they corrupt and poyson the minds of their hearers with a vain opinion of themselves to the conceiving of Pride and bringing forth folly and running into so many evils which an open enemy could not have brought upon them Of these therefore speaketh Solomon also Faithful are the wounds of a friend but the kisses of Prov. 27. 6. an enemy are deceitful But of all flattery none so abominable to God or pernicious to Man as that of Religion in soothing men up in wicked known sins for some special quality or singularity of believing and worshipping which upon tryal will not all prove worth a straws end whenas the most material parts of Religion as Humility Charity Unity Obedience of unquestionable worth and excellencie are trampled on as of no use or rather hinderances to sinister and vile ends Murmurers likewise and Complainers may well be brought under the lash of this Law who upon every frivolous and light exception or defect in their Governours are restless unquiet discontented envious mutinous factious and given to alienate the hearts of the Inferiours from their Superiours by suggesting many groundless fears and suspicions and putting in Caveats against them and all this while with very specious pretexts of zeal for truth and the publick good As did Dathan Corah and Abiram against Moses and Aaron as did Aaron and Miriam against Moses and as did Absolom against David and sometimes the whole Congregation of Israel against their Governours which one would have thought being the body of the People which some make the true Supream Power might have passed for Right and Reasonable St. Paul knowing that the Light and Faith of the Gospel seldom masters mens corrupt natures and inclinations so far as to secure them in innocencie from such evils advertises Christians from their examples to beware of such sins saying Neither murmur ye as some of them also murmured and were destroyed 1 Cor. 10. 10. of the destroyer And such are they also who raise false reports and raise or spread false news of no small consequence many times without any tolerable grounds But last of all to this belongs the sin of Lying in general even when it is not accompanied with the mischiefs aforesaid of Detraction or Slandering A lye saith St. Augustine well Est falsa significatio cum voluntate fallendi is Aug. de Menda ad Consen cap. 12. Quantum in ipse est mentitur ille qui dicit verum quod putat falsum Quantum enim ad animum ejus attinet quia nen quod sit hoc dicit non verum dicit quamvis verum inveniatur esse quod dicit nec ullo modo liber est a mendacio qui ore nesciens verum loquitur sciens autem voluntate mentâ—tur Id. Enchirid. cap. 18. a false signification with an intent to deceive Where we must first distinguish between Lying and Telling a Lye He that tells a lye may not lye but speak truth for it may be true that such a lye as is reported was told but to lye it is not necessary a man should make a lye for it suffices he tells that for truth which he either knows or believes to be false
though it were invented by another yea though it should prove true Again this signification may as well be in work act or sign outward whereby such a thing is commonly understood and is intended should be the signifier of his mind and in such manner be so taken as if that thing were which really is not For otherwise a man could not lye to a deaf man which certainly he may as Qui sic loquitur ut credit etsi vera non lâ—quitur fideliter lâ—quitur qui autem non credit quae loquitur â—tsi vera loquitur infideiter lâ—quitur Aug Ep. 135. Item Enchiridio ad Laurentium cap. 18. well as to a blind man And yet farther Not every thing that we say of and from our selves as true is a lye though it be false Why because according to this definition a man must willingly and studiously design the belief of what is false to make it a proper lye For if he believes sincerely he speaks truth and intends no otherwise to be credited by another he doth not lye saith Austin any more than he steals who taketh that which belongs to another man as his own presuming without fraud or wilful errour that it is so or he committeth adultery who contrary to his intentions and will useth another woman as his wife Yet may all these partake of the sin of their respective kinds when that due and sober attention is neglected which may inform a man better for if there are offered unto him competent means of knowing the truth and judging more faithfully and these not being worthily improved the errour doth redoung to the will and that weak and general intention can neither excuse from a lye or Adultery or Idolatry Lastly not the intention of telling a lye doth absolutely constitute a lyer but the intention and will to be believed as true For of the Three kinds of Lyes frequent amongst Schoolmen and other The Officious Lye The Pernicious Lye and The Merry and Jesting Lye The Two first are alwayes Lyes properly taken The Second alwayes and without all doubt evil The first may in some cases be commendable as killing of a man may be when the ground is just and the case deserves death one may be put to death by another with the warrant of legal Authority And that a man may not deceive that man whom he may lawfully kill wants proof I mean by a simple lye wherein the Name of God is not used or taken in vain For though such case may be put in which a man may ruin him with a lye whom he may slay with the sword or strangle with an halter being lawfully required yet must not God be so far abused or his sacred Name prophaned as to be brought to attest a falsity We find none of those holy or eminent persons in Scripture that are brought for to authorize lying who committed this great errour I shall by an Instance out Nisi salubri mendacio Consul fugere hostes ab cornâ— altero clamitans concitasset aciem c. Livius lib. 2. of Livie express my meaning who tells us that the Volscians and the Romans being in fight the Roman army began to give way and turn their backs and all had like to have been lost had not the Consul by a saving Lye cryed out aloud from the other Wing and said That the Enemies fled and were running away and thereby encouraged his Army to fall on again with greater violence and so get the victory And if to destroy a man may not the same be done to save a Life and that a mans own no prejudice thereby happening to others It will be said A man must not commit a sin to save his life And to this it will be answered by granting all is said But they who defend such an officious lye do deny it under those Aug. ad Consent Tom. 4. cap. 9. De Mendacio Pro salute quorundam mentimur Peccatum ergo est sâ—d ventale quâ—d benevolentia excusat Aug in Enchiridio ad Laurent cap. 22. Circumstances to be a Sin Augustine in the Treatise above mentioned affirmeth a Lye to be lawful to the end thereby the evil carnal pollution may be avoided scarce otherwise And no man more rigorous than he and he scarce less constant in any thing then that For in the Third Chapter of the said Treatise he declares That in no case a lye is to be endured for the good event it may have And yet in his Enchiridion he saith We lye for the safety of some men It is therefore a sin but a venial one which good meaning excuses What Austine meant by a Venial sin is not very clear but that he extended it not so far as moderne Divines is to me clear But in his Ennarration of the Sixth Psalm he directly holds that Jocosum Mendacium is not a sin which is certain y the truth when a man doth not speak a thing to the end he may be be ieved but for recreation This may come under the reprehension of Saint Paul to the Ephesians advising that Neither filthiness Ephes 5. 4. nor foolish talking nor jesting which are not convenient should be used but rather giving of thanks but not as the particular sin of lying of which we now speak But Mr. Perkins would prove such lying in jest a sin 1. Because though it Perkins on Galat. ch 1. v. 20. hurts not our neighbour yet it is to the hurt and prejudice of truth This is new too subtile seeing Truth abstractly taken is inviolable invulnerable as God himself is who is Truth And therefore truth is then only wronged when some person is wronged for want of Truth and Justice Darkness doth not hurt the light but such persons only or things as are bereaved of it But thus to tell a lye is to tell a pernicious lye which plainly was St. Austins mind who saith Omnis autem qui mentitur ea contra id quod animo sentit loquitur Id ib. 2. He saith But men are deceived hereby But first we so limit the innocencie of Jocular Lyes that they be not spoken seriously or with any intention to deceive Secondly He himself grants it lawful to deceive by dissimulation or simulation of what is not intended in some cases as in the case of God threatning the abolition of the Israelites Exod. 32. v. 10. And of Joshuah counterfeiting a flight before Ay Josh 8. 5 6. and of Physicians deceiving averse and unruly Patients And how can this possibly stand with that opinion 3. He that tells a lye hurts himself though it be for the good of others for when he speaks the truth indeed he is less believed This is true when a man tells a lye indeed but not when he professes not to speak truth 4. There ought to be a conformity between the speech and mind which is not when a lye is uttered This rule fails in many cases For if a man minds or intends
to do another a mischief must he necessarily speak conformably or do conformably and make good his bad intentions If a man intends to do one a kindness and give him an estate may he not carry himself towards him and all others as if he never intended any such thing But it may be he would restrain this to positive Speeches and Acts which he would have alwayes conformable to inward conceptions And so they are when a man intends to deceive and doth deceive But that the general appearances must conform to the reality of the Intention his own concessions above-noted will not admit It is true therefore only when it is justly required And this suffices to cut the throat of all as they are now called deservedly Jesuitical Aequivocations and Mental Reservations and External dissimulations viz. because none of their real or pretended Superiours can give them any power not to answer according to the serious intention and expectation of legal Enquirers and legal Enquirers they are who have legal Authority in that Nation Again unless their Superiours can give them power of Life and Death as it is an opinion amongst them they may especially the Pope over free Princes and their Subjects they can give them no power to deceive by positive acts or words lawful Powers contrary to the common and received sense and meaning of Enquiries and Answers Thirdly neither of a mans self nor by any Civil Authority how great or good soever nor upon any Case how important soever can a man lawfully use the Name of God in attestation of what is false or confirmation of what his Conscience and Judgment assures him is otherwise than he declares it to be Neither can any man give instance that God ever permitted it or any good or holy man in Scripture presumed to do so And therefore oequivocation in any oaths whether lawfully or unlawfully administred is directly unlawful and to be detested of all men as it is of God The Vertue then which this Commandment requires in opposition to bearing false witness is first a love and veneration of Truth as the sacred daughter of God himself and that in all things and at all times not excepted but more especially Authority and publick Justice requiring it The Inducements hereunto abbreviated Perkins hath collected thus to my hands in the forementioned place 1. Gods command James 3. 14. 2. Lying is a conformity to the Devil 3. We are sanctified by the word of truth John 17. 17. 4. Truth is a Fruit of Gods Spirit Galat. 5. A mark of Gods children Psalm 32. 2. and 15. 2. 5. Destruction is the reward of a Lyar Psal 5. 6. And thus far of the Ninth Commandment The Tenth is Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house Thou shalt not covet § X. thy neighbours wife nor his servant nor his maid nor his Ox nor his Ass nor any thing that is his Which the modern Roman Church having carefully turned the second out of doors as a quarrelsome and troublesome companion are necessitated to divide into two to make up the compleat number of Ten For which fact they have no ground but St. Austin and them who precisely followed him But none of these or any ancient proceeded on their grounds viz. because the Second Commandment gave offence Now seeing many more in number and antiquity have otherwise than Austin considered this Commandment as one entirely The Reasons why they so judge of it are worth enquiring For some eminently learned among them especially in the Scriptures have declared expresly against it as Oleaster and Mercerus Petrus Galatinus inclining that way as Buxtorf hath observed Buxtorf de Decal num 74. 59. And as a little before he hath noted the Jewish Doctours who are to sway much in this Case unless the Papists please to distinguish the Decalogue as they have audaciously the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Testament into Jewish and Christian or Ecclesiastical have unanimously conspired to make this but one Commandment Aben Ezra and Abarbenel mentions indeed such an opinion as the Roman Church maintains but rejects the same as a very fond and vain conceit And the like may be said Estius in Sentent l. 3. Dist 40. §. 3. of Estius his answers and evasions of the reasons on our side which are First That the object of the sin here forbidden is not to distinguish the Command so much as the Act Concupiscence of the mind or heart united in one because then we should have more than two One prohibiting lusting after another mans wife another lusting after his Servants another lusting or coveting his cattle and a fourth his possessions and moveables But St. Paul speaking of this Concupiscence maketh it but one where he Rom. 7. saith I had not known lust except the Law had said Thou shalt not covet The other Precepts therefore having provided against the Acts outward of sin This in the Conclusion goeth as it were over all of them again and interdicteth all inward motions towards any of the sins before forbidden To say therefore with Estius St. Paul saith Thou shalt not lust is as much as if a man should say Thou shalt love which doth not make all the Commandments but one is very idle seeing the word Lust is there taken in an evil sense and may reasonably extend to all the Negative precepts at least as Love doth concern them all and is the sum of the Decalogue But we find no such particular Precept as Love indefinitely taken And besides we are not so much to enquire after matter of Right what might be or ought to be but of fact what is And to collect what is done we are not so much to consult the holy Writ of the New Testament which uses no precise or determinate speech in reference to the number or order of these Commandments but the thing it self which ever amongst the Jews was thus distinguished as we do and generally the Greek Church and the Latin likewise until Austin's dayes And it is certain the Holy Spirit here doth not affect Logical Divisions or Rhetorical Partitions or Methods but delivers things grosly to a rude people inculcating the same thing under diverse forms of speech For according to one of the Rules of expounding the Decalogue viz. That where the outward act is forbidden the inward act is also forbidden and where the Effect there the Cause is also forbidden this should rather seem to be none other Precept than what went before in the seventh and eighth Commandments forbidding Adultery and Theft and by Implication the inward acts of Lusting after the Persons or Possessions of others For that is the beginning and cause of those outward Effects and scandalous sins Another Reason for the entireness of that we call the Tenth Commandment is the order observed in Exodus where Lusting after our Neighbours House is set before Lusting after his Wife or other Persons and then again follow his Goods which shows that
parts both of which retain with them inseparably the necessary ingredient of Fear excessive and needless And the one is a Fear of omitting something judged necessary to be done though in truth it be not The other is a Fear as vain and groundless of committing something necessarily to be avoided as either unlawful in it self or interdicted of God when there is no such matter though he be loudly told there is Both these are really Superstitions the first Positive and the latter Negative being both influenced from Conscience which terrifies the one to do and deters the other from doing without cause not without suspicion or presumption For Conscience taken in the Religious sense cannot be affected but at the apprehension of Apparent Good or Evil at the least And if this be but only an Apparence and not a Reality then is the conscience mistaken and falls into superstitious acts and places Religion in those things which are not capable of such high acts Thus for instance If a man should ascribe as much to the worship of the Body given to God as he doth to the Soul or Heart he were undoubtedly superstitious in excess And on the other side if a man having heard much of the excellencie of Spiritual Worship above outward or Visible should think so contemptibly of this and all acts thereof as unlawful and sinful or superstitious without doubt he were notoriously guilty of Superstition Why Because according to his own principles and phrase he places Religion where God hath not and makes a conscience of that which God no where willeth him to do but rather contrariwise adviseth him to comply with though not by a particular express Law by general and implicite First requiring as really though not so primarily bodily acts and outward reverence as inward and spiritual Secondly by endowing his Substitutes Governours Ecclesiastical with such power as we have before proved to belong to the Church by Gods concession And this agrees very well with the most received definition of Superstition amongst Christians till of very late years when men having a mind to secure their own stake and to blast and traduce the opinions of such as think otherwise than they do fansied and framed to themselves definitions of that and other things as might best agree with their own perswasions and impugn their Adversaries By which unlearned and unjust proceedings they grosly define Superstition by Popery it may be or somewhat else they dislike answerably and Popery by Superstition or a little more regularly not more truly by Will-worship or Humane Inventions for which there appear at least to them no grounds in the Word of God But this they are mistaken much in as well in respect of the Rule by which they would try and condemn Superstition as of the Cause Humane Prudence which they will have no otherwise termed than Humane Inventions when it sutes not with their pleasure which is too commonly called called Conscience For the Scripture hath no where tyed up Christian Authority so strictly as not to permit it to interpose in any thing concerning the Worship of God without special and manifest warrant from thence But the contrary is most certain that it hath granted so much Liberty to Christian Churches as to fashion themselves and modellize their Worship without fear of incurring the violation of it or the offence of God so far as manifest restraints and inhibitions do not appear to the contrary And this Calvin himself once well noted if his own Interests would have suffered him to have been constant to what he delivered against the Anabaptists Improbare quod numquan imprâ—baâ—it Deus niâ—â—ae est homini c. Calvinus contr Anabapt p. 27. 8o. viz. To oppose what God never opposed I must tell you is more rashness and arrogance than is fit for man But let us constantly hold to this that the Authority of God is usurped when that is condemned which he hath permitted They therefore who set their Consciences against those things be they Rites Ceremonies or Traditions by good Ecclesiastical Authority enjoyned which God hath no where forbidden do certainly fall into flat Superstition and that as themselves describe it though not intend it For they without Gods word frame to themselves Fears and Scruples They as the Prophet saith Fear where no fear is creating Good and Evil out of their own heads and at their own pleasures yea contrary very often to the express general Licence and Warrant of Gods Word And whereas Humane Inventions are much cryed out against and made very formidable to such superstitious fearful Heads they are to be earnestly desired to be willing to understand what we can scarce think them so weak as not to be able to understand How that in no place either of Moses or the Prophets or the New Testament Inventions of Men are used in an evil sense but as they imply somewhat rather contrary to then besides the Divine Precepts Sometimes they are used for gross defection from Gods prescribed Worship and for Idolatrous Superstition and sometimes for opinions and practises inconsistent with Gods Law as the Traditions of the Jews condemned by Christ in the Gospel And what is all this to those usances against which after more then an hundred years eager search of the Scripture to this evil intent nothing hath been found or alledged contrary to them But general exceptions tinctur'd speciously with Scripture phrases to no real effect There is no more pernicious Humane Invention than this their fundamental Maxim Nothing must be commanded by Man which is not commanded by God and It is against Christian Liberty to obey Lawful Superiours but where they show Scripture particularly for what they command whereas the truth is these ought according to all reason and good conscience to produce sufficient testimonies of Scripture exempting them from submission under the guilt of disobedience and superstition too both plainly condemned by God in his Word before they oppose themselves to Authority And to this do well agree the Definition given by Thomas of Superstition Thom. 22. Q. 92. 1. Superstition is a Vice opposite to Religion in the excess or extream Not that a man can give more of Divine Worship than is due to God but that he gives Divine Worship either to that he ought not or in a manner he ought not To the first part belong all Direct Idolatry and all Indirect such as are Divinations and innumerable vain Observations of superstitious Heads who from every light unusual occurrence in the Earth of Beasts in the Air of Birds and Fowls in the Water or Fire or Heavens do collect and conclude unlikely things to the great disquiet and fear of their mind their distrust or neglect of Gods Providence and the forsaking of the common rule of Reason and the word of God which ought to regulate mens hopes and fears above all things in the world To the other appertain both that we call Positive Superstition
Tinder-box when they have attained so much of their ends as by the flames they raise to undo and destroy others and enlighten themselves and become powerful and glorious they presently cover those mischievous sparks and put them quite out denying they teach or hold any such things easily foreseeing they must needs have the same effect upon themselves as they had upon others if they be suffered to blaze out as they did when they lighted their Candles Yet so again that they reserved to themselves the same instruments and means of kindling new flames to their advantage when their Interest shall so require it This we have seen done most unjustly and disingenuously unless therefore men could be persuaded first to be faithful and severe observers of the Rules of sincerity and common Justice and deliver no other Rules to their Superiors to Govern them by than they themselves being in Power would hold reasonable to keep religiously themselves which we hear indeed much prosessed but ever saw practised contrarily in vain do men endeavour to dispute men into Reason Faith or Truth It must be the singular and Almighty power of Gods Grace to convince and convert them to the Truth they being the true object of our Pity and Prayers but not of Instructions Perswasions or Arguments And what more pertinent and particular prayer ought we or can we offer to God for their more sound information and confirmation in the truth of Gods Word and Worship then that they object so oft and unadvisedly against us viz. That God would vouchsafe to deliver them from their many private and humane inventions and not teach for Doctrines the Commandments Matth. 15. 9. Hebr. 13. 9. Jer. 7. of Men nor be carried about with divers and strange Doctrines Nor worship God so as he never commanded them neither came it into his heart Alas if they would but keep themselves faithfully and entirely to these Laws which with so much rigour and zeal they exact from others they must let go their hold not of Ceremonies and orders meerly devised by themselves but the greatest part of their Doctrines and Worship wherein they differ from us And the time will once certainly come when we shall not only with confidence but with the greatest comfort expect the full decision of these unchristian Controversies For as St. Jude saith Behold the Lord Jude v. 14 15. cometh with ten thousand of his Saints to execute judgment upon all and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodlily committed and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against them c. I shall end all this with one or two instances of their Superstition and into erable rigour who loudly tax the Church therewith They have often charged the Church with Idolatrous Superstition in propounding and practizing Adoration towards the East And Voetius who hath another dogme for the Puritans comfort viz. That preciseness can no wayes be separated from Voetius Disp Part. 3. de Idolatr In dic th 2. true Religion hath also said That it is a sort of Idolatry by interpretation for a man that prayeth in the Church to turn himself to the East although he hath no consideration that there is or was the Quire wherein Papists are wont to turn to the East But what saith his fellow-Calvinist Maresius who Quo utroque asserto nihil absurdius Sam. Maresius Fascicul Paradoxorum Part. 22. Nec minoris erit superstitionis c. reckons up this and another of his dogms of like nature Then both which assertions nothing is more absurd And after a little interposed he addeth Neither will it be any whit less superstitious to beware of the East at the time of prayer precisely then precisely to make choice of it which was most truly spoken Another instance we have from the same Authour in the same Treatise Paradox 2S where speaking against Voetius his preciseness in pleading for hair shorn close to mens head a fond piece of Religion which in past years Puritans were wonderfully strict in but have of themselves lately seen the vanity of such their practises and laid down he saith As he doth amiss Id. Parad. 28. Ut perperam faciat c. who glories in long hair so shall not he be void of Superstition whoever shall affirm the hair ought wholly to be taken away or clip't above the ears and shall therefore think himself holier than other men that he shows the Asses ears of Midas and then adds very soberly True Godliness is strong and being supported with the base of Christian Liberty throughly understood is not pressed with such anxiousnesses Well adviseth Tilenus Part. 2. Thes Disput 44. Chap. 19. 20. That where the true knowledge and sense of this Liberty is wanting Consciences can take no rest there is no mean nor end of Superstitions For Satan is wont of very toyes and trifles to make dangerous and deadly snares for souls Rom. 14. 5. So he that shall begin to doubt of eating flesh or the use of certain garments by little and little shall find scruples of a murmuring Conscience in other things likewise and at length shall hang in suspense in a perplexed and inextricable Labyrinth Thus far they The evil event of the contrary precise Superstition appearing from two or three instances given by the Parrons of Scruples For according to former grounds Voetius his son by his Fathers insinuations as may well be presumed in a publick Disputation at Utrect June 7. 1643. delivered it for unlawful to wear shooes much longer than the foot or horn-like And I make great doubt whether he had any better reason against that fashion than a certain noted Puritan who seeing me being then a young Scholar wear such shooes accosted me in these very words Why dost thou make thy foot longer than Jesus Christ hath made it To whom I presently answered in these words Why dost thou make thy hair shorter than Jesus Christ hath made it And in truth I continue of this mind still that such a reply is no idle answer to such an idle superstitious question For if it should be demanded why I extend Christian Liberty in the use of Ceremonies farther than Jesus Christ hath extended it not commanding them I would first answer I do not extend it farther because it is impossible for him or any man else to prove that Christ hath denyed this Liberty For that which they imply that Christs command must go before all Christian Acts or Ceremonies in his Service is quite contrary to Christian Liberty For no Christian is left to his liberty where such Laws or Precepts are delivered to him But Christian Liberty is an undetermined power of doing or not doing within the sphere of Good and Evil prescribed which power next under Christ residing in the Heads or Governours of the Church may restrain the indifferencie of inferiour Members of it Secondly I would