First-fruits and in these things was the Fountain of the Sacraments and Spiritual Grace and the great Exemplar of the Oeconomy of the Church For Christ was nullius poenitentiae debitor Baptism of Repentance was not necessary to him who never sinn'd but so it became him to fulfil all righteousness and to be a pattern to us all But we have need of these things though he had not and in the same way in which Salvation was wrought by him for himself and for us all in the same way he intended we should walk He was Baptized because his Father appointed it so we must be baptized because Christ hath appointed it and we have need of it too He was Consecrated to be the great Prophet and the great Priest because no man takes on him this honour but he that was called of God as was Aaron and all they who are to minister in his Prophetical office under him must be consecrated and solemnly set apart for that ministration and after his glorious example He was Anointed with a Spiritual Unction from above after his Baptism for after Jesus was baptized he ascended up from the waters and then the Holy Ghost descended upon him It is true he receiv'd the Fulness of the Spirit but we receive him by measure but of his fulness we all receive grace for grace that is all that he receiv'd in order to his great work all that in kind one for another Grace for Grace we are to receive according to our measures and our necessities And as all these he receiv'd by external ministrations so must we God the Father appointed his way and he by his Example first hath appointed the same to us that we also may follow him in the regeneration and work out our Salvation by the same Graces in the like solemnities For if he needed them for himself then we need them much more If he did not need them for himself he needed them for us and for our Example that we might follow his steps who by receiving these exterior solemnities and inward Graces became the Author and finisher of our Salvation and the great Example of his Church I shall not need to make use of the fancy of the Murcosians and Colabarsians who turning all Mysteries into Numbers reckoned the numeral letters of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and made them coincident to the α and ω· but they intended to say that Christ receiving the Holy Dove after his Baptism became all in all to us the beginning and the perfection of our Salvation here he was confirm'd and receiv'd the ω to his α the Consummation to his Initiation the completion of his Baptism and of his Headship in the Gospel But that which I shall rather add is what S. Cyril from hence argues When he truly was baptized in the River of Jordan he ascended out of the waters and the Holy Ghost substantially descended upon him like resting upon like And to you also in like manner after ye have ascended from the waters of Baptism the Vnction is given which bears the image or similitude of him by whom Christ was anointed that as Christ after Baptism and the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him went forth to battel in the Wilderness and overcame the adversary so ye also after Holy Baptism and the mystical Vnction or Confirmation being vested with the Armour of the Holy Spirit are enabled to stand against the opposite Powers Here then is the first great ground of our solemn receiving the Holy Spirit or the Unction from above after Baptism which we understand and represent by the word Confirmation denoting the principal effect of this Unction Spiritual Strength Christ who is the Head of the Church entred this way upon his duty and work and he who was the first of all the Church the Head and great Example is the measure of all the rest for we can go to Heaven no way but in that way in which he went before us There are some who from this Story would infer the descent of the Holy Ghost after Christ's Baptism not to signifie that Confirmation was to be a distinct Rite from Baptism but a part of it yet such a part as gives fulness and Consummation to it S. Hierom Chrysostom Euthymius and Theophylact go not so far but would have us by this to understand that the Holy Ghost is given to them that are baptized But Reason and the Context are both against it 1. Because the Holy Ghost was not given by John's Baptism that was reserv'd to be one of Christ's glories who also when by his Disciples he baptiz'd many did not give them the Holy Ghost and when he commanded his Apostles to baptize all Nations did not at that time so much as promise the Holy Ghost he was promis'd distinctly and given by another Ministration 2. The descent of the Holy Spirit was a distinct ministery from the Baptism it was not only after Jesus ascended from the waters of Baptism but there was something intervening and by a new office or ministration For there was Prayer joyn'd in the ministery So S. Luke observes while Jesus was praying the Heavens were open'd and the Holy Spirit descended for so Jesus was pleas'd to consign the whole Office and Ritual of Confirmation Prayer for invocating the Holy Spirit and giving him by personal application which as the Father did immediately so the Bishops do by Imposition of hands 3. S. Austin observes that the apparition of the Holy Spirit like a Dove was the visible or ritual part and the voice of God was the word to make it to be Sacramental accedit verbum ad elementum â—it Sacramentum for so the ministration was not only perform'd on Christ but consignâ—d to the Church by similitude and exemplar institution I shall only add that the force of this Argument is established to us by more of the Fathers S. Hilary upon this place hath these words The Fathers voice was heard that from those things which were consummated in Christ we might know that after the Baptism of water the Holy Spirit from the gates of Heaven flies unto us and that we are to be anointed with the Vnction of a celestial glory and be made the Sons of God by the adoption of the voice of God the Truth by the very effects of things prefigur'd unto us the similitude of a Sacrament So S. Chrysostom In the beginnings always appears the sensible visions of Spiritual things for their sakes who cannot receive the understanding of an incorporeal nature that if afterwards they be not so done that is after the same visible manner they may be believ'd by those things which were already done But more plain is that of Theophylact The Lord had not need of the descent of the Holy Spirit but he did all things for our sakes and himself is become the First-fruits of all things which we afterwards were to receive that he might become the
first-fruits among many Brethren The consequent is this which I express in the words of S. Austin affirming Christi in Baptismo columbam unctionem nostram praefigurâsse The Dove in Christ's Baptism did represent and prefigure our Unction from above that is the descent of the Holy Ghost upon us in the rite of Confirmation Christ was baptized and so must we But after Baptism he had a new ministration for the reception of the Holy Ghost and because this was done for our sakes we also must follow that example And this being done immediately before his entrance into the Wilderness to be tempted of the Devil it plainly describes to us the Order of this ministery and the Blessing design'd to us After we are baptiz'd we need to be strengthned and confirm'd propter pugnam spiritualem we are to fight against the Flesh the World and the Devil and therefore must receive the ministration of the Holy Spirit of God which is the design and proper work of Confirmation For they are the words of the Excellent Author of the imperfect work upon S. Matthew imputed to S. Chrysostom The Baptism of Water profits us because it washes away the sins we have formerly committed if we repent of them But it does not sanctifie the Soul nor precedes the Concupiscences of the Heart and our evil thoughts nor drives them back nor represses our carnal desires But he therefore who is only so baptized that he does not also receive the Holy Spirit is baptized in his Body and his sins are pardon'd but in his Mind he is yet but a Catechumen for so it is written He that hath not the Spirit of Christ is none of his and therefore afterward out of his flesh will germinate worse sins because he hath not receiv'd the Holy Spirit conserving him in his Baptismal Grace but the house of his Body is empty wherefore that wicked spirit finding it swept with the Doctrines of Faith as with besoms enters in and in a sevenfold manner dwells there Which words besides that they well explicate this mystery do also declare the necessity of Confirmation or receiving the Holy Ghost after Baptism in imitation of the Divine precedent of our Blessed Saviour 2. After the Example of Christ my next Argument is from his Words spoken to Nicodemus in explication of the prime mysteries Evangelical Vnless a man be born of Water and of the Holy Spirit he shall not enter into the Kingdom of God These words are the great Argument which the Church uses for the indispensable necessity of Baptism and having in them so great effort and not being rightly understood they have suffered many Convulsions shall I call them or Interpretations Some serve their own Hypothesis by saying that Water is the Symbol and the Spirit is the Baptismal Grace Others that it is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one is only meant though here be two Signatures But others conclude that Water is only necessary but the Spirit is super-added as being afterwards to supervene and move upon these Waters And others yet affirm that by Water is only meant a Spiritual Ablution or the effect produced by the Spirit and still they have intangled the words so that they have been made useless to the Christian Church and the meaning too many things makes nothing to be understood But Truth is easie intelligible and clear and without objection and is plainly this Unless a man be Baptized into Christ and Confirmed by the Spirit of Christ he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Christ that is he is not perfectly adopted into the Christian Religion or fitted for the Christian Warfare And if this plain and natural sence be admitted the place is not only easie and intelligible but consonant to the whole Design of Christ and Analogy of the New Testament For first Our blessed Saviour was Catechizing of Nicodemus and teaching him the first Rudiments of the Gospel and like a wise Master-builder first lays the foundation The Doctrine of Baptism and laying on of Hands which afterwards S. Paul put into the Christian Catechism as I shall shew in the sequel Now these also are the first Principles of the Christian Religion taught by Christ himself and things which at least to the Doctors might have been so well known that our Blessed Saviour upbraids the not knowing them as a shame to Nicodemus S. Chrysostom and Theophylact Euthymius and Rupertus affirm that this Generation by Water and the Holy Spirit might have been understood by the Old Testament in which Nicodemus was so well skilled Certain it is the Doctrine of Baptisms was well enough known to the Jews and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the illumination and irradiations of the Spirit of God was not new to them who believed the Visions and Dreams the Daughter of a Voice and the influences from Heaven upon the Sons of the Prophets and therefore although Christ intended to teach him more than what he had distinct notice of yet the things themselves had foundation in the Law and the Prophets but although they were high Mysteries and scarce discerned by them who either were ignorant or incurious of such things yet to the Christians they were the very Rudiments of their Religion and are best expounded by observation of what S. Paul placed in the very foundation But 2. Baptism is the first Mystery that is certain but that this of being born of the Spirit is also the next is plain in the very order of the words and that it does mean a Mystery distinct from Baptism will be easily assented to by them who consider that although Christ Baptized and made many Disciples by the Ministery of his Apostles yet they who were so baptized into Christ's Religion did not receive this Baptism of the Spirit till after Christ's Ascension 3. The Baptism of Water was not peculiar to John the Baptist for it was also of Christ and ministred by his command it was common to both and therefore the Baptism of Water is the less principal here Something distinct from it is here intended Now if we add to these words That S. John tells of another Baptism which was Christ's peculiar He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with Fire That these words were literally verified upon the Apostles in Pentecost and afterwards upon all the Baptized in Spiritual effect who besides the Baptism of Water distinctly had the Baptism of the Spirit in Confirmation it will follow that of necessity this must be the meaning and the verification of these words of our Blessed Saviour to Nicodemus which must mean a double Baptism Transibimus per aquam ignem antequam veniemus in refrigerium We must pass through Water and Fire before we enter into Rest that is We must first be Baptized with Water and then with the Holy Ghost who first descended in Fire that is the only way to enter into Christ's Kingdom is by these two Doors of the Tabernacle which God hath pitched
spiritual Unction this Confirmation of baptized persons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We are therefore called Christians because we are anointed with the Vnction of God These words will be best understood by the subsequent testimonies by which it will appear that Confirmation for reasons hereafter mention'd was for many Ages called Chrism or Unction But he adds the Usefulness of it For who is there that enters into the World or that enters into contention or Athletick combats but is anointed with oil By which words he intimates the Unction anciently us'd in Baptism and in Confirmation both for in the first we have our new Birth in the second we are prepar'd for spiritual Combate Tertullian having spoken of the Rites of Baptism proceeds Dehinc saith he manus imponitur per Benedictionem advocans invitans Spiritum Sanctum Tunc ille Sanctissimus Spiritus super emundata benedicta corpora libens à Patre descendit After Baptism the hand is impos'd by Blessing calling and inviting the Holy Spirit Then that most Holy Spirit willingly descends from the Father upon the Bodies that are cleans'd and blessed that is first baptiz'd then confirm'd And again Caro signatur ut anima muniatur Caro manûs impositione adumbratur ut anima Spiritu illuminetur The Flâ—sh is consign'd or seal'd that also is one of the known primitive words for Confirmation that the Soul may be guarded or defended and the Body is overshadowed by the Imposition of hands that the Soul may be enlightned by the Holy Ghost Nay further yet if any man objects that Baptism is sufficient he answers It is true it is sufficient to them that are to die presently but it is not enough for them that are still to live and to fight against their spiritual Enemies For in Baptism we do not receive the Holy Ghost for although the Apostles had been baptiz'd yet the Holy Ghost was come upon none of them until Jesus was glorified sed in aqua emundati sub Angelo Spiritui Sancto praeparamur but being cleans'd by Baptismal water we are dispos'd for the Holy Spirit under the hand of the Angel of the Church under the Bishop's hand And a little after he expostulates the Article Non licebit Deo in suo Organo per manus sanctas sublimitatem modulari spiritalem Is it not lawful for God by an instrument of his own under Holy hands to accord the heights and sublimity of the Spirit For indeed this is the Divine Order and therefore Tertullian reckoning the happiness and excellency of the Church of Rome at that time says She believes in God she signs with Water she clothes with the Spirit viz. in Confirmation she feeds with the Eucharist she exhorts to Martyrdom and against this order or Institution she receives no man S. Cyprian in his Epistle to Jubaianus having urg'd that of the Apostles going to Samaria to impose hands on those whom S. Philip had baptized adds Quod nunc quoque apud nos geritur ut qui in Ecclesia baptizantur per praepositos Ecclesiae offerantur per nostram orationem ac manûs impositionem Spiritum Sanctum consequantur signaculo Dominico consummentur Which custom is also descended to us that they who are baptiz'd might be brought by the Rulers of the Church and by our Prayer and the Imposition of hands said the Martyr-Bishop may obtain the Holy Ghost and be consummated with the Lord's signature And again Vngi necesse est eum qui baptizatus est c. Et super eos qui in Ecclesia baptizati erant Ecclesiasticum legitimum Baptismum consecuti fuerant oratione pro iis habitâ manu impositâ invocaretur infunderetur Spiritus Sanctus It is necessary that every one who is baptiz'd should receive the Unction that he may be Christ's anointed one and may have in him the grace of Christ. They who have receiv'd lawful and Ecclesiastical Baptism it is not necessary they should be baptiz'd again but that which is wanting must be supplied viz. that Prayer being made for them and Hands impos'd the Holy Ghost be invocated and pour'd upon them S. Clement of Alexandria a man of venerable Antiquity and Admirable Learning tells that a certain young man was by S. John delivered to the care of a Bishop who having baptiz'd him Postea verò sigillo Domini tanquam perfectâ tutâque ejus custodiâ eum obsignavit Afterward he sealed him with the Lord's signature the Church-word for Confirmation as with a safe and perfect guard Origen in his seventh Homily upon Ezekiel expounding certain mystical words of the Prophet saith Oleum est quo vir sanctus Vngitur oleum Christi oleum Sanctae Doctrinae Cùm ergò aliquis accepit hoc oleum quo Vngitur Sanctus id est Scripturam sanctam instituentem quomodo oporteat Baptizari in nomine Patris Filii Spiritûs Sancti pauca commutans unxerit quempiam quodammodo dixerit Jam non es Catechumenus consecutus es lavacrum secundae generationis talis homo accipit oleum Dei c. The Vnction of Christ of holy Doctrine is the Oil by which the Holy Man is anointed having been instructed in the Scriptures and taught how to be Baptized then changing a few things he says to him Now you are no longer a Catechumen now you are regenerated in Baptism such a man receives the Vnction of God viz. He then is to be Confirmed S. Dionys commonly called the Areopagite in his excellent Book of Ecclesiastical Hierarchy speaks most fully of the Holy Rite of Confirmation or Chrism Having describ'd at large the office and manner of Baptizing the Catechumens the trine Immersion the vesting them in white Garments he adds Then they bring them again to the Bishop and he consigns him who had been so baptiz'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the most Divinely-operating Vnction and then gives him the most Holy Eucharist And afterwards he says But even to him who is consecrated in the most holy mystery of Regeneration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the perfective Vnction of Chrism gives to him the advent of the Holy Spirit And this Rite of Confirmation then called Chrism from the Spiritual Unction then effected and consign'd also and signified by the Ceremony of Anointing externally which was then the Ceremony of the Church he calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the holy consummation of our Baptismal Regeneration meaning that without this there is something wanting to the Baptized persons And this appears fully in that famous censure of Novatus by Cornelius Bishop of Rome reported by Eusebius Novatus had been Baptized in his bed being very sick and like to die but when he recover'd he did not receive those other things which by the rule of the Church he ought to have receive'd neque Domini sigillo ab Episcopo consignatus est he was not consign'd with the Lord's signature by
is granted But did the Church ever interpret Scripture to signifie Transubstantiation and say that by the force of the words of Scripture it was to be believed If she did not then to say she is a betrer Interpreter is to no purpose for though the Church be a better Interpreter than they yet they did not contradict each other and their sence might be the sence of the Church But if the Church before their time had expounded it against their sence and they not submit to it how do you reckon them Catholicks and not me For it is certain if the Church expounding Scripture did declare it to signifie Transubstantiation they did not submit themselves and their writings to the Church But if the Church had not in their times done it and hath done it since that is another consideration and we are left to remember that till Cajetans time that is till Luthers time the Church had not declared that Scripture did prove Transubstantiation and since that time we know who hath but not the Church Catholick 5. And indeed it had been strange if the Cardinals of Cambray de Sanctovio and of Rochester that Scotus and Biel should never have heard that the Church had declared that the words of Scripture did infer Transubstantiation And it is observable that all these lived long after the Article it self was said to be decreed in the Lateran where if the Article it self was declared yet it was not declared as from Scripture or if it was they did not believe it But it is an usual device amongst their writers to stifle their reason or to secure themselves with a submitting to the authority of their Church even against their argument and if any one speaks a bold truth he cannot escape the Inquisition unless he complement the Church and with a civility tell her that she knows better which in plain English is no otherwise than the fellow that did penance for saying the Priest lay with his wife he was forced to say Tongue thou liest though he was sure his eyes did not lie And this is that which Scotus said Transubstantiation without the determination of the Church is not evidently inferred from Scripture This I say is a complement and was only to secure the Frier from the Inquisitors or else was a direct stifling of his reason for it contains in it a great error or a worse danger For if the Article be not contained so in Scripture as that we are bound to believe it by his being there then the Church must make a new Article or it must remain as it was that is obscure and we uncompell'd and still at liberty For she cannot declare unless it be so she declares what is or what is not If what is not she declares a lie if what is then it is in Scripture before and then we are compelled that is we ought to have believed it If it be said it was there but in it self obscurely I answer then so it is still for if it was obscurely there and not only quoad nos or by defect on our part she cannot say it is plain there neither can she alter it for if she sees it plain then it was plain if it be obscure then she sees it obscurely for she sees it as it is or else she sees it not at all and therefore must declare it to be so that is probably obscurely peradventure but not evidently compellingly necessarily 6. So that if according to the Casuists especially of the Jesuits order it be lawful to follow the opinion of any one probable Doctor here we have five good men and true besides Ocham Bassolis and Melchior Canus to acquit us from our search after this question in Scripture But because this although it satisfies me will not satisfie them that follow the decree of Trent we will try whether this doctrine be to be found in Scripture Pede pes SECT III. Of the sixth Chapter of Saint Johns Gospel 1. IN this Chapter it is earnestly pretended that our blessed Saviour taught the mystery of Transubstantiation but with some different opinions for in this question they are divided all the way some reckon the whole Sermon as the proof of it from verse 33 to 58 though how to make them friends with Bellarmine I understand not who says Constat it is known that the Eucharist is not handled in the whole Chapter for Christ there discourses of Natural bread the miracle of the loaves of Faith and of the Incarnation is a great part of the Chapter Solùm igitur quaestio est de illis verbis Panis quem ego dabo caro mea est pro mundi vitâ de sequentibus fere ad finem capitis The question only is concerning those words verse 51. The bread which I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world and so forward almost until the end of the Chapter The reason which is pretended for it is because Christ speaks in the future and therefore probably relates to the institution which was to be next year but this is a trifle for the same thing in effect is before spoken in the future tense and by way of promise Labour not for the meat that perisheth but for that meat that endureth to everlasting life which the Son of man shall give unto you The same also is affirmed by Christ under the expression of water S. John 4.14 He that drinketh the water which I shall give him shall never thirst but the water which I shall give him shall be a fountain of water springing up to life eternal The places are exactly parallel and yet as this is not meant of Baptism so neither is the other of the Eucharist but both of them of spiritual sumption of Christ. And both of them being promises to them that shall come to Christ and be united to him it were strange if they were not expressed in the future for although they always did signifie in present and in sensu currenti yet because they are of never failing truth to express them in the future is most proper that the expectation of them may appertain to all Ad natos natorum qui nascentur ab illis But then because Christ said The bread which I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the World to suppose this must be meant of a corporal manducation of his flesh in the holy Sacrament is as frivolous as if it were said that nothing that is spoken in the future can be figurative and if so then let it be considered what is meant by these To him that overcomes I will give to eat of the tree of life and To him that overcomes I will give to eat of the hidden Manna These promises are future but certainly figurative and therefore why it may not be so here and be understood of eating Christ spiritually or by faith I am certain there is no cause
unreasonableness I will not say but the same liberty in expounding Scripture or if it be not licence taken but that the Scripture it self is so full and redundant in sences quite contrary what man soever or what company of men soever shall use this principle will certainly find such rare productions from several places that either the unreasonableness of the thing will discover the errour of the proceeding or else there will be a necessity of permitting a great liberty of judgment where is so infinite variety without limit or mark of necessary determination If the first then because an errour is so obvious and ready to our selves it will be great imprudence or tyranny to be hasty in judging others but if the latter it is it that I contend for for it is most unreasonable when either the thing it self ministers variety or that we take licence to our selves in variety of interpretations or proclaim to all the world our great weakness by our actually being deceived that we should either prescribe to others magisterially when we are in errour or limit their understandings when the thing it self affords liberty and variety SECT IV. Of the difficulty of expounding Scripture 1. THese considerations are taken from the nature of Scripture it self but then if we consider that we have no certain ways of determining places of difficulty and question infallibly and certainly but that we must hope to be saved in the belief of things plain necessary and fundamental and our pious endeavour to find out Gods meaning in such places which he hath left under a cloud for other great ends reserved to his own knowledge we shall see a very great necessity in allowing a liberty in Prophesying without prescribing authoritatively to other mens consciences and becoming Lords and Masters of their Faith Now the means of expounding Scripture are either external or internal For the external as Church Authority Tradition Fathers Councils and Decrees of Bishops they are of a distinct consideration and follow after in their order But here we will first consider the invalidity and uncertainty of all those means of expounding Scripture which are more proper and internal to the nature of the thing The great Masters of Commentaries some whereof have undertaken to know all mysteries have propounded many ways to expound Scripture which indeed are excellent helps but not infallible assistances both because themselves are but moral instruments which force not truth ex abscondito as also because they are not infallibly used and applyed 1. Sometime the sence is drawn forth by the context and connexion of parts It is well when it can be so But when there is two or three antecedents and subjects spoken of what man or what rule shall ascertain me that I make my reference true by drawing the relation to such an antecedent to which I have a mind to apply it another hath not For in a contexture where one part does not always depend upon another where things of differing natures intervene and interrupt the first intentions there it is not always very probable to expound Scripture and take its meaning by its proportion to the neighbouring words But who desires satisfaction in this may read the observation verified in S. Gregory's Morals upon Job lib. 5. c. 22. and the instances he there brings are excellent proof that this way of Interpretation does not warrant any man to impose his Expositions upon the belief and understanding of other men too confidently and magisterially 2. Secondly Another great pretence or medium is the conference of places which Illyricus calls ingens remedium foelicissimam expositionem sanctae scripturae and indeed so it is if well and temperately used but then we are beholding to them that do so for there is no rule that can constrain them to it for comparing of places is of so indefinite capacity that if there be ambiguity of words variety of sence alteration of circumstances or difference of stile amongst Divine Writers then there is nothing that may be more abused by wilful people or may more easily deceive the unwary or that may more amuse the most intelligent Observer The Anabaptists take advantage enough in this proceeding and indeed so may any one that list and when we pretend against them the necessity of baptizing all by authority of nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ spiritu they have a parallel for it and tell us that Christ will baptize us with the holy Ghost and with fire and that one place expounds the other and because by fire is not meant an Element or any thing that is natural but an Allegory and figurative expression of the same thing so also by water may be meant the figure signifying the effect or manner of operation of the holy Spirit Fire in one place and water in the other do but represent to us that Christs baptism is nothing else but the cleansing and purifying us by the holy Ghost But that which I here note as of greatest concernment and which in all reason ought to be an utter overthrow to this topick 〈◊〉 an universal abuse of it among those that use it most and when two places seem to have the same expression or if a word have a double signification because in this place it may have such a sence therefore it must because in one of the places the sence is to their purpose they conclude that therefore it must be so in the other too An instance I give in the great Question between the Socinians and the Catholicks If any place be urged in which our blessed Saviour is called God they shew you two or three where the word â—od is taken in a depressed sence for a quasi Deus as when God said to Moses Constitui te Deum Pharaonis and hence they argue because I can shew the word is used for a Deus factus therefore no argument is sufficient to prove Christ to be Deus verus from the appellative of Deus And might not another argue to the exact contrary and as well urge that Moses is Deus verus because in some places the word Deus is used pro Deo aeterno Both ways the Argument concludes impiously and unreasonably It is a fallacy à posse ad esse affirmativè because breaking of bread is sometimes used for an Eucharistical manducation in Scripture therefore I shall not from any testimony of Scripture affirming the first Christians to have broken bread together conclude that they lived hospitably and in common society Because it may possibly be eluded therefore it does not signifie any thing And this is the great way of answering all the Arguments that can be brought against any thing that any man hath a mind to defend and any man that reads any controversies of any side shall find as many instances of this vanity almost as he finds arguments from Scripture this fault was of old noted by S. Austin for then they had got the trick and
acts of their own promote the hope of their own Salvation which men of reason and choice may by acts of vertue and election it is more agreeable to the goodness of God the honour and excellencey of the Sacrament and the necessity of its institution that it should in Infants supply the want of humane acts and free obedience which the very thing itself seems to say it does because its effect is from God and requires nothing on man's part but that its efficacy be not hindered And then in Infants the disposition is equal and the necessity more they cannot ponere obicem and by the same reason cannot doe other acts which without the Sacraments doe advantages towards our hopes of heaven and therefore have more need to be supplied by an act and an Institution Divine and supernatural 7. And this is not onely necessary in respect of the condition of Infants incapacity to doe acts of grace but also in obedience to Divine precept For Christ made a Law whose Sanction is with an exclusive negative to them that are not baptized Vnless a man be born of water and of the Spirit he shall not enter into the Kingdom of heaven If then Infants have a capacity of being coheirs with Christ in the Kingdom of his Father as Christ affirms they have by saying for of such is the kingdom of heaven then there is a necessity that they should be brought to Baptism there being an absolute exclusion of all persons unbaptized and all persons not spiritual from the kingdom of heaven 8. But indeed it is a destruction of all the hopes and happiness of Infants a denying to them an exemption from the final condition of Beasts and Insectils or else a designing of them to a worse misery to say that God hath not appointed some externall or internall means of bringing them to an eternall happiness Internall they have none for Grace being an improvement and heightning the faculties of nature in order to a heightned and supernatural end Grace hath no influence or efficacy upon their faculties who can doe no natural acts of understanding And if there be no externall means then they are destitute of all hopes and possibilities of Salvation 9. But thanks be to God he hath provided better and told us accordingly for he hath made a promise of the Holy Ghost to Infants as well as to men The Promise is made to you and to your children said S. Peter the Promise of the Father the Promise that he would send the holy Ghost Now if you ask how this Promise shall be conveyed to our children we have an express out of the same Sermon of S. Peter Be baptized and ye shall receive the gift of the holy Ghost So that therefore because the Holy Ghost is promised and Baptism is the means of receiving the Promise therefore Baptism pertains to them to whom the Promise which is the effect of Baptism does appertain And that we may not think this Argument is fallible or of humane collection observe that it is the Argument of the same Apostle in express terms For in the case of Cornelius and his Family he justified his proceeding by this very Medium Shall we deny Baptism to them who have received the gift of the holy Ghost as well as we Which Discourse if it be reduced to form of Argument says this They that are capable of the same Grace are receptive of the same sign But then to make the Syllogism up with an Assumption proper to our present purpose Infants are capable of the same Grace that is of the Holy Ghost for the Promise is made to our children as well as to us and S. Paul says the children of believing parents are holy and therefore have the Holy Ghost who is the Fountain of holiness and sanctification Therefore they are to receive the sign and the seal of it that is the Sacrament of Baptism 10. And indeed since God entred a Covenant with the Jews which did also actually involve their children and gave them a sign to establish the Covenant and its appendant Promise either God does not so much love the Church as he did the Synagogue and the mercies of the Gospel are more restrained then the mercies of the Law God having made a Covenant with the Infants of Israel and none with the children of Christian Parents or if he hath yet we want the comfort of its consignation and unless our children are to be baptized and so intitled to the Promises of the new Covenant as the Jewish babes were by Circumcision this mercy which appertains to Infants is so secret and undeclared and unconsigned that we want much of that mercy and outward testimony which gave them comfort and assurance 11. And in proportion to these Precepts and Revelations was the practice Apostolicall For they to whom Christ gave in Precept to make Disciples all nations baptizing them and knew that nations without children never were and that therefore they were passively concerned in that commission baptized whole Families particularly that of Stephanas and divers others in which it is more then probable there were some Minors if not sucking babes And this practice did descend upon the Church in after-Ages by tradition Apostolicall Of this we have sufficient Testimony from Origen Pro hoc Ecclesia ab Apostolis traditionem accepit etiam parvulis baptismum dare and S. Austin Hoc Ecclesia à majorum fide percepit And generally all Writers as Calvin says affirm the same thing For nullus est Scriptor tam vetustus qui non ejus originem ad Apostolorum seculum pro certo referat From hence the Conclusion is that Infants ought to be baptized that it is simply necessary that they who deny it are Hereticks and such are not to be endured because they deny to Infants hopes and take away the possibility of their Salvation which is revealed to us on no other condition of which they are capable but Baptism For by the insinuation of the Type by the action of Christ by the title Infants have to Heaven by the precept of the Gospel by the energy of the Promise by the reasonableness of the thing by the infinite necessity on the Infant 's part by the practice Apostolicall by their Tradition and the universal practice of the Church by all these God and good people proclaim the lawfulness the conveniency and the necessity of Infants Baptism 12. To all this the Anabaptist gives a soft and gentle Answer that it is a goodly harangue which upon strict examination will come to nothing that it pretends fairly and signifies little that some of these Allegations are false some impertinent and all the rest insufficient 13. For the Argument from Circumcision is invalid upon infinite considerations Figures and Types prove nothing unless a Commandment goe along with them or some express to signifie such to be their purpose For the Deluge of waters and the Ark of Noah were a figure of
where he hath intended them but so say that therefore he will doe it by an external act and ministery and that confin'd to a particular viz. this Rite and no other is no good Argument unless God could not doe it without such means or that he had said he would not And why cannot God as well doe his mercies to Infants now immediately as he did before the institution either of Circumcision or Baptism 18. However there is no danger that Infants should perish for want of this external Ministery much less for prevaricating Christ's precept of Nisi quis renatus fuerit c. For first the Water and the Spirit in this place signifie the same thing and by Water is meant the effect of the Spirit cleansing and purifying the Soul as appears in its parallel place of Christ baptizing with the Spirit and with Fire For although this was literally fulfilled in Pentecost yet morally there is more in it for it is the sign of the effect of the Holy Ghost and his productions upon the soul and it was an excellency of our Blessed Saviour's office that he baptizes all that come to him with the Holy Ghost and with Fire for so S. John preferring Christ's mission and office before his own tells the Jews not Christ's Disciples that Christ shall baptize them with Fire and the Holy Spirit that is all that come to him as John the Baptist did with water for so lies the Antithesis And you may as well conclude that Infants must also pass through the fire as through the water And that we may not think this a trick to elude the pressure of this place Peter says the same thing for when he had said that Baptism saves us he adds by way of explication not the washing of the flesh but the confidence of a good Conscience towards God plainly saying that it is not water or the purifying of the body but the cleansing of the Spirit that does that which is supposed to be the effect of Baptism And if our Saviour's exclusive negative be expounded by analogie to this of Peter as certainly the other parallel instance must and this may then it will be so far from proving the necessity of Infants Baptism that it can conclude for no man that he is obliged to the Rite and the Doctrine of the Baptism is onely to derive from the very words of Institution and not to be forced from words which were spoken before it was ordained But to let pass this advantage and to suppose it meant of external Baptism yet this no more infers a necessity of Infants Baptism then the other words of Christ infer a necessity to give them the holy Communion Nisi comederitis carnem Filii hominis biberitis sanguinem non introibitis in regnum coelorum and yet we do not think these words sufficient Argument to communicate them If men therefore will doe us justice either let them give both Sacraments to Infants as some Ages of the Church did or neither For the wit of man is not able to shew a disparity in the Sanction or in the energie of its expression And Simeon Thessalonicensis derides inertem Latinorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as we express it the lazie trifling of the Latines who dream of a difference 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O the unreasonableness and absurdity For why do you baptize them Meaning that because they are equally ignorant in Baptism as in the Eucharist that which hinders them in one is the same impediment in both And therefore they were honest that understood the obligation to be parallel and performed it accordingly and yet because we say they were deceived in one distance and yet the obligation all the world cannot reasonably say but is the same they are as honest and as reasonable that doe neither And since the ancient Church did with an equal opinion of necessity give them the Communion and yet men now adays do not why shall men be burthened with a prejudice and a name of obloquy for not giving the Infants one Sacrament more then they are disliked for not affording them the other If Anabaptist shall be a name of disgrace why shall not some other name be invented for them that deny to communicate Infants which shall be equally disgracefull or else both the Opinions signified by such names be accounted no disparagement but receive their estimate according to their truth 19. Of which truth since we are now taking account from pretences of Scripture it is considerable that the discourse of S. Peter which is pretended for the intitling Infants to the Promise of the Holy Ghost and by consequence to Baptism which is supposed to be its Instrument and conveiance is wholly a fancy and hath in it nothing of certainty or demonstration and not much probability For besides that the thing it self is unreasonable and the Holy Ghost works by the heightning and improving our natural faculties and therefore it is a Promise that so concerns them as they are reasonable creatures and may have a title to it in proportion to their nature but no possession or reception of it till their faculties come into act besides this I say the words mentioned in S. Peter's Sermon which are the onely record of the Promise are interpreted upon a weak mistake The promise belongs to you and to your children therefore Infants are actually receptive of it in that capacity That is the Argument But the reason of it is not yet discovered nor ever will for to you and your children is to you and your posterity to you and your children when they are of the same capacity in which you are effectually receptive of the promise and therefore Tertullian calls Infants designatos sanctitatis ac per hoc etiam salutis the candidates of holiness and salvation those that are designed to it But he that when-ever the word children is used in Scripture shall by children understand Infants must needs believe that in all Israel there were no men but all were Infants and if that had been true it had been the greater wonder they should overcome the Anakims and beat the King of Moab and march so far and discourse so well for they were all called the children of Israel 20. And for the Allegation of S. Paul that Infants are holy if their Parents be faithfull it signifies nothing but that they are holy by designation just as Jeremy and John Baptist were sanctified in their Mothers womb that is they were appointed and designed for holy Ministeries but had not received the Promise of the Father the gift of the Holy Ghost for all that sanctification and just so the children of Christian parents are sanctified that is designed to the service of Jesus Christ and the future participation of the Promises 21. And as the Promise appertains not for ought appears to Infants in that capacity and consistence but onely by the title of their being reasonable creatures and when they come to that
brows we shall eat bread and 't is commanded that if they do not work they shall not eat there being certain laws and conditions of eating I will give to my labourers and hirelings but therefore my child shall have none for be you sure if I give to my child no man's-meat yet God will take as great â—are of Infants as of others and God will by his own immediate mercy keep them alive as long as he hath intended them to live but to say that therefore he will doe it by externall food is no good argument unless God could not doe it without such means or that he had said he would not To this I suppose any reasonable person would say I have given sufficient answer if I tell him that the argument is good that the Infants must eat man's food although God can keep them alive without it and although he hath not said that he will not keep them alive without it I say the argument is good because he hath given them this way and though he could give them another and did never say he would not give them another yet because he never did give them another it is but reasonable that they should have this To the last clause of this number viz. why cannot God as well doe his mercies to infants now immediately as he did before the institution either of Circumcision or Baptism I answer that I know no man that says he cannot but yet this was not sufficient to hinder babes from Circumcision and why then shall it hinder them from Baptism For though God could save Infants always without Circumcision as well as he did sometime yet he required this of them and therefore it may be so in Baptism this pretence notwithstanding Ad 7. This number speaks to the main inquiry and shews the commandement Vnless a man be born of water and of the spirit he shall not enter into the Kingdom of heaven This precept was in all Ages expounded to signifie the ordinary necessity of Baptism to all persons and nisi quis can mean Infants as well as men of age and because it commands a new birth and a regeneration and implies that a natural birth cannot intitle us to Heaven but the second birth must Infants who have as much need and as much right to heaven as men of years and yet cannot have it by natural or first-birth must have it by the second and spiritual and therefore all are upon the same main account and when they are accidentally differenced by age they are also differenced by correspondent accidental and proportionable duties but all must be born again This birth is expressed here by water and the Spirit that is by the Spirit in baptismal water for that is in Scripture called the Laver of a new birth or regeneration Ad 18. But here the Anab. gives us his warrant Though Christ said None but those who are born again by Water and the Spirit shall enter into Heaven he answers fear it not I will warrant you To this purpose it was once said before Yea but hath God said In the day ye shall eat thereof ye shall die I say ye shall not die but ye shall be like Gods But let us hear the answer First It is said that Baptism and the Spirit signifie the same thing for by water is meant the effect of the Spirit I reply that therefore they do not signifie the same thing because by water is meant the effect of the Spirit unless the effect and the cause be the same thing so that here is a contradiction in the parts of the Allegation But if they signifie two things as certainly they do then they may as well signifie the sign and the thing signified as the cause and the effect or they may mean the Sacrament and the grace of the Sacrament as it is most agreeable to the whole analogie of the Gospel For we are sure that Christ ordained Baptism and it is also certain that in Baptism he did give the Spirit and therefore to confound these two is to no purpose when severally they have their certain meaning and the Laws of Christ and the sense of the whole Church the institution and the practice of Baptism make them two terms of a relation a sign and a thing signified the Sacrament and the grace of the Sacrament For I offer it to the consideration of any man that believes Christ to have ordained the Sacrament of Baptism which is most agreeable to the institution of Christ that by water and the spirit should be meant the outward element and inward grace or that by water and spirit should be meant onely the Spirit cleansing us like water But suppose it did mean so what would be effected or perswaded by it more then by the other If it be said that then Infants by this place were not obliged to Baptism I reply that yet they were obliged to new birth nevertheless they must be born again of the Spirit if not of water and the Spirit and if they are bound to be regenerate by the Spirit why they shall not be baptized with water which is the symbol and Sacrament the vehiculum and channel of its ordinary conveyance I profess I cannot understand how to make a reasonable conjecture But it may be they mean that if by water and the Spirit be onely meant Spiritus purificans the cleansing purifying Spirit then this place cannot concern Infants at all But this loop-hole I have already obstructed by placing a bar that can never be removed For it is certain and evident that regeneration or new birth is here enjoyned to all as of absolute and indispensable necessity and if Infants be not obliged to it then by their natural birth they goe to Heaven or not at all but if Infants must be born again then either let these adversaries shew any other way of new birth but this of water and the Spirit or let them acknowledge this to belong to infants and then the former discourse returns upon them in its full strength So that now I shall not need to consider their parallel instance of being baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire For although there are differences enough to be observed the one being onely a Prophecy and the other a Precept the one concerning some onely and the other concerning all the one being verified with degrees and variety the other equally and to all yet this place which in the main expression I confess to have similitude was verified in the letter and first signification of it and so did relate to the miraculous descent of the Holy Ghost in the likeness of tongues of fire but this concerns not all for all were not so baptized And whereas it is said in the Objection that the Baptist told not Christ's Disciples but the Jews and that therefore it was intended to relate to all it was well observed but to no purpose for Christ at that time had no
Disciples But he told it to the Jews and yet it does not follow that they should all be baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire but it is meant onely that that glorious effect should be to them a sign of Christ's eminency above him they should see from him a Baptism greater then that of John And that it must be meant of that miraculous descent of the Holy Spirit in Pentecost and not of any secret gift or private immission appears because the Baptist offered it as a sign and testimony of the prelation and greatness of Christ above him which could not be proved to them by any secret operation which cometh not by observation but by a great and miraculous mission such as was that in Pentecost So that hence to argue that we may as well conclude that Infants must also pass through the fire as through the water is a false conclusion inferred from no premisses because this being onely a Prophecy and inferring no duty could neither concern men or children to any of the purposes of their Argument For Christ never said Vnless ye be baptized with fire and the Spirit ye shall not enter into the Kingdome of heaven but of water and the Spirit he did say it therefore though they must pass through the water yet no smell of fire must pass upon them But there are yet two things by which they offer to escape The one is that in these words Baptism by water is not meant at all but Baptism by the Spirit onely because S. Peter having said that Baptism saves us he addes by way of explication not the washing of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience towards God plainly saying that it is not water but the Spirit To this I reply that when water is taken exclusively to the Spirit it is very true that it is not water that cleanses the Soul and the cleansing of the body cannot save us but who-ever urges the necessity of Baptism urges it but as a necessary Sacrament or Instrument to convey or consign the Spirit and this they might with a little observation have learned there being nothing more usual in discourse then to deny the effect to the instrument when it is compared with the principle and yet not intend to deny to it an instrumental efficiency It is not the pen that writes well but the hand and S. Paul said It is not I but the grace of God and yet it was gratia Dei mecum that is the principal and the less principal together So S. Peter It is not water but the Spirit or which may come to one and the same not the washing the filth of the flesh but purifying the conscience that saves us and yet neither one nor the other are absolutely excluded but the effect which is denied to the instrument is attributed to the principal cause But however this does no more concern Infants then men of age for they are not saved by the washing the body but by the answer of a good conscience by the Spirit of holiness and sanctification that is water alone does not doe it unless the Spirit move upon the water But that water also is in the ministery and is not to be excluded from its portion of the work appears by the words of the Apostle The like figure whereunto even Baptism saves us c. that is Baptism even as it is a figure saves us in some sense of other by way of ministery and instrumental efficiency by conjunction and consolidation with the other but the ceremony the figure the Rite and external ministery must be in or else his words will in no sense be true and could be made true by no interpretation because the Spirit may be the thing figured but can never be a figure The other little 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is that these words were spoken before Baptism was ordained and therefore could not concern Baptism much less prove the necessity of baptizing Infants I answer that so are the sayings of the Prophets long before the coming of Christ and yet concerned his coming most certainly Secondly They were not spoken before the institution of Baptism for the Disciples of Christ did baptize more then the Baptist ever in his life-time they were indeed spoken before the commission was of baptizing all nations or taking the Gentiles into the Church but not before Christ made Disciples and his Apostles baptized them among the Jews And it was so known a thing that great Prophets and the Fathers of an Institution did baptize Disciples that our Blessed Saviour upbraided Nicodemus for his ignorance of that particular and his not understanding words spoken in the proportion and imitation of custome so known among them But then that this Argument which presses so much may be attempted in all the parts of it like Souldiers fighting against Curiassiers that try all the joynts of their armour so doe these to this For they object in the same number that the exclusive negative of Nisi quis does not include Infants but onely persons capable for say they this no more infers a necessity of Infants Baptism then the parallel words of Christ Nisi comâ—deritis unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you infer a necessity to give them the holy Communion c. With this Argument men use to make a great noise in many Questions but in this it will signifie but little First Indeed to one of the Roman Communion it will cause some disorder in this Question both because they think it unlawfull to give the holy Communion to Infants and yet that these words are meant of the holy Communion and if we thought so too I do not doubt but we should communicate them with the same opinion of necessity as did the Primitive Church But to the thing itself I grant that the expression is equal and infers an equal necessity in their respective cases and therefore it is as necessary to eat the flesh of the Son of man and to drink his bloud as to be baptized but then it is to be added that eating and drinking are metaphors and allusions us'd onely upon occasion of Manna which was then spoken of and which occasioned the whole discourse but the thing itself is nothing but that Christ should be received for the life of our Souls as bread and drink is for the life of our bodies Now because there are many ways of receiving Christ there are so many ways of obeying this precept but that some way or other it be obeyed is as necessary as that we be baptized Here onely it is declared to be necessary that Christ be received that we derive our life and our spiritual and eternall being from him now this can concern Infants and does infer an ordinary necessity of their Baptism for in Baptism they are united to Christ and Christ to them in Baptism they receive the beginnings of a new life
have a title to the Promises then the thing is done and this title of theirs can be signified by these words and then either this is a good argument or the thing is confessed without it For he that hath a title to the Promises of the Gospel hath a title to this Promise here mentioned the promise of the Holy Spirit for by him we are sealed to the day of redemption And indeed that this mystery may be rightly understood we are to observe that the Spirit of God is the great ministery of the Gospel and whatsoever blessing Evangelicall we can receive it is the emanation of the Spirit of God Grace and Pardon Wisedome and Hope offices and titles and relations powers priviledges and dignities all are the good things of the Spirit whatsoever we can profit withall or whatsoever we can be profited by is a gift of God the Father of spirits and is transmitted to us by the Holy Spirit of God For it is but a trifle and a dream to think that no person receives the Spirit of God but he that can doe actions and operations spiritual S. Paul distinguishes the effects of the Spirit into three classes there are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides these operations there are gifts and ministeries and they that receive not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the operations or powers to doe actions spiritual may yet receive gifts or at least the blessings of ministery they can be ministred to by others who from the Spirit have received the power of ministration And I instance in these things in which it is certain we can receive the Holy Spirit without any predisposition of our own First We can receive gifts even the wicked have them and they who shall be rejected at the day of Judgement shall yet argue for themselves that they have wrought miracles in the name of the Lord Jesus and yet the gift of miracles is a gift of the Holy Spirit and if the wicked can receive them who are of dispositions contrary to all the emanations of the Holy Spirit then much more may children◠who although they cannot prepare themselves any more then the wicked do yet neither can they doe against them to hinder or obstruct them But of this we have an instance in a young child Daniel whose spirit God raised up to acquit the innocent and to save her soul from unrighteous Judges and when the boys in the street sang Hosanna to the Son of David our Blessed Lord said that if they had held their peace the stones of the street would have cried out Hosanna And therefore that God should from the mouths of babes and sucklings ordain his own praise is one of the Magnalia Dei but no strange thing to be believed by us who are so apparently taught it in Holy Scripture Secondly Benediction or blessing is an emanation of God's Holy Spirit and in the form of blessing which is recorded in the Epistles of S. Paul one great part of it is the communication of the Holy Spirit and it is very probable that those three are but Synonyma The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ is to give us his Holy Spirit and the love of God is to give us his Holy Spirit for the Spirit is the love of the Father and our Blessed Saviour argues it as the testimony of God's love to us If ye who are evil know how to give good things to your children how much more shall your heavenly Father give his Spirit to them that ask him Now since the great summe and compendium of Evangelicall blessings is the Holy Spirit and this which is expressed by three Synonyma's in the second Epistle to the Corinthians is in the first reduced to one it is all but the Grace of the Lord Jesus it will follow that since our Blessed Saviour gave his solemn blessing to children his blessing relating to the Kingdom of Heaven for of such is the Kingdom he will not deny his Spirit to them when he blessed them he gave them something of his Spirit some emanation of that which blesses us all and without which no man can be truly blessed Thirdly Titles to inheritance can be given to Infants without any predisposing act of their own Since therefore Infants dying so can as we all hope receive the inheritance of Saints some mansion in Heaven in that Kingdom which belongs to them and such as they are and that the gift of the Holy Spirit is the consignation to that inheritance nothing can hinder them from receiving the Spirit that is nothing can hinder them to receive a title to the inheritance of the Saints which is the free gift of God and the effect and blessing from the Spirit of God Now how this should prove to Infants to be a title to Baptism is easie enough to be understood For by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body that is the Spirit of God moves upon the waters of Baptism and in that Sacrament adopts us into the mysticall body of Christ and gives us title to a coinheritance with him Ad 21. So that this perfectly confutes what is said in the beginning of Number 21. that Baptism is not the means of conveying the Holy Ghost For it is the Spirit that baptizes it is the Spirit that adopts us to an inheritance of the Promises it is the Spirit that incorporates us into the mysticall body of Christ and upon their own grounds it ought to be confessed for since they affirm the water to be nothing without the Spirit it is certain that the water ought not to be without the Spirit and therefore that this is the soul and life of the Sacrament and therefore usually in conjunction with that ministery unless we hinder it and it cannot be denied but that the Holy Ghost was given ordinarily to new converts at their Baptism And whereas it is said in a parenthesis that this was not as the effect is to the cause or to the proper instrument but as a consequent is to an antecedent in a chain of causes accidentally and by positive institution depending upon each other it is a groundless assertion for when the men were called upon to be baptized and were told they should receive the Holy Ghost and we find that when they were baptized they did receive the Holy Ghost what can be more reasonable then to conclude Baptism to be the ministery of the Spirit And to say that this was not consequent properly and usually but accidentally onely it followed sometimes but was not so much as instrumentally effected by it is as if one should boldly deny all effect to Physick for though men are called upon to take Physick and told they should recover and when they do take Physick they do recover yet men may unreasonably say this recovery does follow the taking of Physick not as an effect to the cause or to the
if he had not been rescued by the Civil Power But men have too much neglected all the ministeries of Grace and this most especially and have not given themselves to a right understanding of it and so neglected it yet more But because the prejudice which these parts of the Christian Church have suffered for want of it is very great as will appear by enumeration of the many and great Blessings consequent to it I am not without hope that it may be a service acceptable to God and an useful ministery to the Souls of my Charges if by instructing them that know not and exhorting them that know I set forward the practice of this Holy Rite and give reasons why the people ought to love it and to desire it and how they are to understand and practise it and consequently with what dutious affections they are to relate to those persons whom God hath in so special and signal manner made to be for their good and eternal benefit the Ministers of the Spirit and Salvation S. Bernard in the Life of S. Malachias my Predecessor in the See of Down and Connor reports that it was the care of that good Prelate to renew the rite of Confirmation in his Diocese where it had been long neglected and gone into desuetude It being too much our case in Ireland I find the same necessity and am oblig'd to the same procedure for the same reason and in pursuance of so excellent an example Hoc enim est Evangelizare Christum said S. Austin non tantùm docere quae sunt dicenda de Christo sed etiam quae observanda ei qui accedit ad compagem corporis Christi For this is to preach the Gospel not only to teach those things which are to be said of Christ but those also which are to be observed by every one who desires to be confederated into the Society of the Body of Christ which is his Church that is not only the doctrines of good Life but the Mysteries of Godliness and the Rituals of Religion which issue from a Divine fountain are to be declar'd by him who would fully preach the Gospel In order to which performance I shall declare 1. The Divine Original Warranty and Institution of the Holy Rite of Confirmation 2. That this Rite was to be a perpetual and never-ceasing Ministration 3. That it was actually continued and practised by all the succeeding Ages of the purest and Primitive Churches 4. That this Rite was appropriate to the Ministery of Bishops 5. That Prayer and Imposition of the Bishop's hands did make the whole Ritual and though other things were added yet they were not necessary or any thing of the Institution 6. That many great Graces and Blessings were consequent to the worthy reception and due ministration of it 7. I shall add something of the manner of Preparation to it and Reception of it SECT I. Of the Divine Original Warranty and Institution of the Holy Rite of Confirmation IN the Church of Rome they have determin'd Confirmation to be a Sacrament proprii nominis properly and really and yet their Doctors have some of them at least been paulò iniquiores a little unequal and unjust to their proposition insomuch that from themselves we have had the greatest opposition in this Article Bonacina and Henriquez allow the proposition but make the Sacrament to be so unnecessary that a little excuse may justifie the omission and almost neglect of it And Loemelius and Daniel à Jesu and generally the English Jesuits have to serve some ends of their own Family and Order disputed it almost into contempt that by representing it as unnecessary they might do all the ministeries Ecclesiastical in England without the assistance of Bishops their Superiors whom they therefore love not because they are so But the Theological Faculty of Paris have condemn'd their Doctrine as temerarious and savouring of Heresie and in the later Schools have approv'd rather the Doctrine of Gamachaeus Estius Kellison and Bellarmine who indeed do follow the Doctrine of the most Eminent persons in the Ancient School Richard of Armagh Scotus Hugo Cavalli and Gerson the Learned Chancellor of Paris who following the Old Roman order Amalarius and Albinus do all teach Confirmation to be of great and pious Use of Divine Original and to many purposes necessary according to the Doctrine of the Scriptures and the Primitive Church Whether Confirmation be a Sacrament of no is of no use to dispute and if it be disputed it can never be prov'd to be so as Baptism and the Lord's Supper that is as generally necessary to Salvation but though it be no Sacrament it cannot follow that it is not of very great Use and holiness and as a Man is never the less tied to Repentance though it be no Sacrament so neither is he ever the less oblig'd to receive Confirmation though it be as it ought acknowledg'd to be of an Use and Nature inferior to the two Sacraments of Divine direct and immediate institution It is certain that the Fathers in a large Symbolical and general sence call it a Sacrament but mean not the same thing by that word when they apply it to Confirmation as they do when they apply it to Baptism and the Lord's Supper That it is an excellent and Divine Ordinance to purposes Spiritual that it comes from God and ministers in our way to God that is all we are concern'd to inquire after and this I shall endeavour to prove not only against the Jesuits but against all Opponents of what side soever My First Argument from Scripture is what I learn from Optatus and S. Cyril Optatus writing against the Donatists hath these words Christ descended into the water not that in him who is God was any thing that could be made cleaner but that the water was to precede the future Vnction for the initiating and ordaining and fulfilling the mysteries of Baptism He was wash'd when he was in the hands of John then followed the order of the mystery and the Father finish'd what the Son did ask and what the Holy Ghost declar'd The Heavens were open'd God the Father anointed him the Spiritual Vnction presently descended in the likeness of a Dove and sate upon his head and was spred all over him and he was called the Christ when he was the anointed of the Father To whom also lest Imposition of hands should seem to be wanting the voice of God was heard from the cloud saying This is my Son in whom I am well pleased hear ye him That which Optatus says is this that upon and in Christ's person Baptism Confirmation and Ordination were consecrated and first appointed He was Baptized by S. John he was Confirm'd by the Holy Spirit and anointed with Spiritual Unction in order to that great work of obedience to his Father's will and he was Consecrated by the voice of God from Heaven In all things Christ is the Head and the
and not Man first by Baptism and then by Confirmation first by Water and then by the Spirit The Primitive Church had this Notion so fully amongst them that the Author of the Apostolical Constitutions attributed to S. Clement who was S. Paul's Scholar affirms That a man is made a perfect Christian meaning Ritually and Sacramentally and by all exterior solemnity by the Water of Baptism and Confirmation of the Bishop and from these words of Christ now alledged derives the use and institution of the Rite of Confirmation The same sence of these words is given to us by S. Cyprian who intending to prove the insufficiency of one without the other says Tunc enim plenè Sanctificari esse Dei filii possunt si Sacramento utroque nascantur cùm scriptum sit Nisi quis natus fuerit ex aqua Spiritu non potest intrare in regnum Dei Then they may be fully Sanctified and become the Sons of God if they be born with both the Sacraments or Rites for it is written Vnless a man be born of Water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God The same also is the Commentary of Eusebius Emissenus and S. Austin tells That although some understand these words only of Baptism and others of the Spirit only viz. in Confirmation yet others and certainly much better understand utrumque Sacramentum both the Mysteries of Confirmation as well as Baptism Amalarius Fortunatus brings this very Text to reprove them that neglect the Episcopal Imposition of Hands Concerning them who by negligence lose the Bishop's presence and receive not the Imposition of his Hands it is to be considered lest in justice they be condemned in which they exercise Justice negligently because they ought to make haste to the Imposition of Hands because Christ said Vnless a man be born again of Water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God And as he said this so also he said Vnless your Righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven To this I foresee two Objections may be made First That Christ did not institute Confirmation in this place because Confirmation being for the gift of the Holy Ghost who was to come upon none of the Apostles till Jesus was glorified these words seem too early for the consigning an Effect that was to be so long after and a Rite that could not be practised till many intermedial events should happen So said the Evangelist The Holy Ghost was come upon none of them because Jesus was not yet glorified intimating that this great Effect was to be in after-time and it is not likely that the Ceremony should be ordained before the Effect it self was ordered and provided for that the Solemnity should be appointed before provisions were made for the Mystery and that the outward which was wholly for the inward should be instituted before the inward and principal had its abode amongst us To this I answer First That it is no unusual thing for Christ gave the Sacrament of his Body before his Body was given the Memorial of his Death was instituted before his Death 2. Confirmation might here as well be instituted as Baptism and by the same reason that the Church from these words concludes the necessity of one she may also infer the designation of the other for the effect of Baptism was at that time no more produced than that of Confirmation Christ had not yet purchased to himself a Church he had not wrought remission of sins to all that believe on him the Death of Christ was not yet passed into which Death the Christian Church was to be Baptized 3. These words are so an institution of Confirmation as the sixth Chapter of S. John is of the blessed Eucharist It was designativa not ordinativa it was in design not in present command here it was preached but not reducible to practice till its proper season 4. It was like the words of Christ to S. Peter When thou art converted confirm thy Brethren Here the command was given but that Confirmation of his Brethren was to be performed in a time relative to a succeeding accident 5. It is certain that long before the event and Grace was given Christ did speak of the Spirit of Confirmation that Spirit which was to descend in Pentecost which all they were to receive who should believe on him which whosoever did receive out of his Belly should flow Rivers of Living Waters as is to be read in that place of S. John now quoted 6. This predesignation of the Holy Spirit of Confirmation was presently followed by some little antepast and donariola or little givings of the Spirit for our Blessed Saviour gave the Holy Ghost three several times First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obscurely and by intimation and secret vertue then when he sent them to heal the sick and anoint them with Oil in the Name of the Lord. Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more expresly and signally after the Resurrection when he took his leave of them and said Receive ye the Holy Ghost And this was to give them a power of ministring Remission of sins and therefore related to Baptism and the ministeries of Repentance But Thirdly he gave it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more perfectly and this was the Spirit of Confirmation for he was not at all until now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says the Text The Holy Ghost was not yet So almost all the Greek Copies Printed and Manuscript and so S. Chrysostom Athanasius Cyril Ammonius in the Catena of the Greeks Leontius Theophylact Euthymius and all the Greek Fathers read it so S. Hierom and S. Austin among the Latines and some Latin Translations read it Our Translations read it The Holy Ghost was not yet given was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in them as some few Greek Copies read it but the meaning is alike Confirmation was not yet actual the Holy Spirit viz. of Confirmation was not yet come upon the Church but it follows not but he was long before promised designed and appointed spoken of and declared * The first of these Collations had the Ceremony of Chrism or Anointing joyned with it which the Church in process of time transferred into her use and ministery yet it is the last only that Christ passed into an Ordinance for ever it is this only which is the Sacramental consummation of our Regeneration in Christ for in this the Holy Spirit is not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 present by his power but present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as S. Gregory Nazianzen expresses it to dwell with us to converse with us and to abide for ever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so S. Paul describes this Spirit of Confirmation the Spirit which he hath poured forth upon us richly or plentifully that is in great measures and to the full consummation of the
turned into words fit for men to speak such men I mean that would be understood signifies plainly this That the most imperfect Repentance towards God is sufficient if it be brought before the Church that is a little on the penitent mans part and a little on the Priests part is disposition enough to the receiving of a pardon So that provided you do all that the Church commands you you may make the bolder to leave out something of Gods command which otherwise you might not do The Priest may do half the work for you These thus represented I shall consider apart 34. I. Confession is an act of Repentance highly requisite to its perfection and in that regard particularly called upon in holy Scripture But concerning this and all the other great exercises actions or general significations of Repentance every word singly is used indefinitely for the whole duty of Repentance Thus Contrition is used by David A broken and a contrite heart O God thou shalt not despise that is a penitent heart God will not reject The same also is the usage of Confession by S. John If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness that is if we repent God hath promised us pardon and his holy Spirit that he will justifie us and that he will sanctifie us And in pursuance of this the Church called Ecclesiastical Repentance by the name of Exomologesis which though it was a Greek word yet both Greeks and Latines used it Exomologesis est humiliandi hominis disciplina So Tertullian Confession is the discipline of humiliation for a man for his sins and S. Ambrose calls Confession poenarum compendium the summ or abbreviature of penance And this word was sometimes chang'd and called Satisfaction which although the Latine Church in the later ages use only for corporal austerities which by way of appropriation they are pleased also to call Penances yet it was anciently used for the whole course and offices of Ecclesiastical Repentance as appears in the Council of Paris of Agatho and the third Council of Toledo The result and effect of this observation is that no more be put upon one part or action of Repentance than upon another to serve ends For pardon of sins is promis'd to the penitent under single words under Contrition under Sorrow under Alms under judging our selves under Confession but no one of these alone is sufficient for pardon and when pardon is promised to any one they must mean the whole duty for when the whole effect is ascribed to a part that part stands for the whole and means more than a part 35. II. But concerning Confession as it is a special act of Repentance the first thing that is to be said of it is that it is due only to God for he is the person injured sin is the prevarication of his laws he is our Judge and he only can pardon as he only can punish eternally Non tibi dico ut tua peccata tanquam in pompam in publicum proferas neque ut te accuses sed ut pareas Prophetae dicenti Revela Domino viam tuam Apud Deum ea confitere apud Judicem confitere peccata tua orans si non linguâ saltem memoriâ ita roga ut tui misereatur I do not enjoyn thee to betray thy self to the publick ear bringing thy sins as into a Theatre but obey the Prophet saying Reveal thy way unto the Lord. Confess to God confess to thy Judge praying if not with thy tongue yet at least with thy mind and pray so that thou mayest be heard So S. Chrysostome And upon those words of S. Paul Let a man examine himself he saith Non revelavit ulcus non in commune Theatrum accusationem produxit c. He did not reveal his ulcer he did not bring his accusation into the common Theatre he made none witness of his sins but in his conscience none standing by God only excepted who sees all things And again upon that of the Psalm My sin is always against me if thou art ashamed to speak it to any one say them daily in thy mind I do not say that thou confess them to thy fellow servant who may upbraid thee say them to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let this judicatory be without assessors or witnesses let God alone see thy confession Quod si verecundiâ retrahente revelare ea coram hominibus erubescis illi quem latere non possunt confiteri ea jugi supplicatione non desinas ac dicere Iniquitatem meam agnosco c. qui absque ullius verecundiae publicatione curare sine improperio peccata donare consuevit So Cassian in the imitation of S. Ambrose If bashfulness call thee back and thou art asham'd to reveal them before men cease not by a continual supplication to confess them to him from whom they cannot be conceal'd who without any pressing upon our modesty is wont to cure and without upbraiding to forgive us our sins And the Fathers of the Council of Cabaillon advanc'd this duty by divers sentences of Scripture itae duntaxat ut Deo qui remissor est peccatorum confiteâ—â—â—â—r peccata nostra cum David dicamus Delictum meum cognitum tibi feci injustitiam meam non abscondi Dixi confitebor adversum me injustitias meas Domino tu remisisti impietatem peccati mei c. God is the pardoner of sins and therefore let us confess to him and say with David I have made my sin known unto thee and mine unrighteousness have I not hid I said I will confess mine iniquity unto the Lord and thou forgavest the wickedness of my sin But this thing is press'd most earnestly by Laurentius Novarriensis who because he was a Father of the Fifth Age his words are of more use by being a testimony that the Ecclesiastical repentance which we find to be now press'd by some as simply necessary was not the doctrine of those times From that day in which thou goest out of the Font thou becomest to thy self a continual Font and a daily remission There is no absolute necessity of the Priests right hand from thence forward God hath appointed thee to be thy own judge thy own arbiter and hath given thee knowledge whereby of thy self thou mayest discern good and evil and because while thou remainest in the body thou canst not be free from sin God hath after baptism plac'd thy remedy within thy self he hath plac'd pardon within thy own choice so that thou art not in the day of thy necessity indispensably tied to seek a Priest but thou thy self as if thou wert a most skilful Doctor and Master mayest amend thy error within thee and wash away thy sin by repentance The fountain is never dry the water is within thee absolution is in thy choice sanctification is in thy diligence pardon
is within the dew of thine own tears Do not thou therefore look neither for John nor Jordan be thou thy own baptist viz. in the baptism of repentance Thou art defiled after thou art washed thy bowels are defiled thy soul is polluted plunge thy self in the waters of repentance cleanse thy self by abundance of tears let compunction be plentifully in thy bowels and the Lord himself shall baptize thee with the Holy Ghost and with fire and shall heap the fruits of repentance and lay them up like wheat but the chaff of thy sins he shall burn with unquenchable fire Many testimonies out of Antiquity to the same purpose are to be seen ready collected by Gratian under the title De poenitentiâ 36. Now if any one shall inquire to what purpose it is that we should confess our sins to God who already knows them all especially since to do so can be no part of mortification to the mans spirit For if I steal in the presence of my brother afterwards to tell him who saw me that I did that which he saw me do is no confusion of face That which will be an answer to this and make it appear necessary to confess to God will also make it appear not to be necessary to confess to men in respect I say of any absolute necessity of the thing or essential obligation of the person I answer that Confession of sins as it is simply taken for enumeration of the actions and kinds of sin can signifie nothing as to God for the reasons now mention'd in the inquiry But when we are commanded to confess our sins it is nothing else but another expression or word for the Commandment of Repentance For Confess your sins means acknowledge that you have done amiss that you were in the wrong way that you were a miserable person wandring out of the paths of God and the methods of Heaven and happiness that you ought not to have done so that you have sinn'd against God and broken his holy laws and therefore are liable and expos'd to all that wrath of God which he will inflict upon you or which he threatned Confession of sins is a justification of God and a sentencing of our selves This is not only certain in the nature of the thing it self but apparent also in the words of David Against thee only have I done this evil ut tu justificeris that thou mightest be justified in thy saying and clear when thou art judged That is if I be a sinner then art thou righteous and just in all the evils thou inflictest So that Confession of sins is like Confession of faith nothing but a signification of our conviction it is a publication of our dislike of sin and a submission to the law of God and a deprecation of the consequent evils Confessio erroris professio est desinendi said S. Hilary A confession of our sin is a profession that we will leave it and again Confessio peccati ea est ut id quod à te gestum est per confessionem peccati confitearis esse peccatum That is confession of sins not that we enumerate the particulars and tell the matter of fact to him that remembers them better than we can but it is a condemning of the sin it self an acknowledging that we have done foolishly a bringing it forth to be crucified and killed This is apparent also in the case of Achan who was sufficiently convict of the matter of fact by the Divine disposing of lots which was one of the ways by which God answered the secret inquiries of the Jews but when he was brought forth to punishment Joshua said unto him My son give I pray thee glory to the Lord God of Israel and make confession unto him that is acknowledge the answer of God to be true and his judgment upon us not to be causless To this answers that part of Achans reply Indeed I have sinned against the Lord God of Israel There God was justified and the glory was given to him that is the glory of his Truth and his Justice but then Joshua adds and tell me now what thou hast done hide it not from me Here it was fit he should make a particular enumeration of the fact and so he did to Joshua saying Thus and thus have I done For to confess to man is another thing than to confess to God Men need to be informed God needs it not but God is to be justified and glorified in the sentence and condemnation of the sin or the sinner and in order to it we must confess our sin that is condemn it confess it to be a sin and our selves guilty and standing at Gods mercy S. Chrysostom upon those words of S. Paul If we would judge our selves we should not be judged hath these words He saith not if we would chastise our selves if we would punish our selves but only if we would acknowledge our sins if we would condemn our selves if we would give sentence against our sins we should be freed from that punishment which is due both here and there For he that hath condemned himself appeases God upon a double account both because he hath acknowledged the sins past and is more careful for the future To this confession of sins is opposed the denying our sin our hiding it from God as Adam did that is either by proceeding in it or by not considering it or by excusing it or by justifying it or by glorying in it all these are high provocations of Gods anger but this anger is taken off by confession Praeveniamus faciem ejus in confessione said the Psalmist Let us come before his presence with thanksgiving so we read it Let us prevent his anger or Let us go before his face with confession so the old Latin Bibles which is a doing as the Prodigal did I will go unto my Father and say unto him Father I have sinned against Heaven and against thee and this is the first act of exterior repentance but it is of that repentance that is indispensably necessary to salvation this is Repentance towards God which the Apostles preach'd in the first publication of Christianity 38. But then besides this there is a Repentance towards men and a Confession in order to it If I have sinn'd against my brother I must ask his pardon and confess my error that is I must repent or confess to him for he that is the injur'd person hath a right over me I am his debtor and oblig'd and he can forgive me if he please and he may chuse that is I must pay him the debt I owe him unless he will be pleased to remit it For God in his infinite wisdom and goodness and justice hath taken care to secure every mans interest and he that takes any thing from me is bound by Gods law to restore it and to restore me to that state of good things from whence he forc'd me Now because for