which they hear from those that do not profess to Preach within those bounds who can deny that they are guilty to their own death What those bounds are I shall say by and by In the mean time let them take heed whose neglect of the written word or whose zeal to preaching shuts the Scriptures out the Church that they contribute not to the bringing in of the secret and invisible Word of the Enthusiasts It is now no dainty to hear that the word which we have written in our Bibles is not the Word that saveth but that which is secretly and invisibly spoken to us within by Gods Spirit And whosoever attributeth the reverence due to Gods word to any such dictate without dependence upon the Scriptures that is deriving the same from the Scripture by those means which God hath allowed us for the understanding of them according to the premises what shall hinder him to preferre the dictate of his own Spirit under pretense of Gods before that which he admitteth to come from Gods Spirit For he who admitteth the greater contradiction of two parallel Soveraigns why should he not admit a less that the written word is not Gods word in competition with the dictate of his own Spirit when there is so easie a cloke of expounding the written word though against all reason and rule of expounding it yet so as to submit even the substance of Christianty to the dictate of a private spirit We have an example for it in the impostures of Mahomet For doth not the Alcoran acknowledge both our Lord Christ and Moses true Prophets of God besides all other attributes yet in as much as it pretendeth the Spirit given to Mahomet in such a degree as to controle them both it smoothes the way to the renouncing of Christianity when the power of the sword fell out on the side of it Simon Magus and his followers the Gnosticks might have done the like had the like power been on their side as the Manichees did in part if those things be true that we read in Cedronus of a party of them possessed of the Power of the Sword about the parts of Armenia all upon pretense of higher revelations then were granted to the Apostles The same is alleged against the Paraclete of Montanus and perhaps his followers being disowned by the Church might fall to such extremities but at the beginning it doth not appear that he pretended any more then to introduce certain strict orders into the Church as injoyned by his Spirit and those of his fellow Prophets which it was not expedient for the Church to undertake and being so it was requisite for him to conform unto the Church any pretense of the Spirit notwithstanding but otherwise were no way destructive to Christianity Suppose then the reading of the Scriptures to be one of those offices for the which the Church is to assemble the order of reading them which is that which remains is a thing to subject so common reason that there need not much dispute about it If we look upon Tertullianes or before him Justin Martyrs Apologies for the Christians there will appear no more then this that every Church that is every Body of Christians under one Bishop did prescribe themselves that order for reading the Scriptures in the Church which they found requisite And if that primitive simplicity which the Christianity under persecution was managed with had continued what fault could have been found with it But when the World was come into the Church which he that injoyes his right senses will not believe did come into it all with the like affections to the professions which they undertook it was in vain to hope that differences would not rise or might not rise about this as well as other points in which the exercise of Christianity consisted Differences arising the greater authority is that to which the ending of them obliges all men to have recourse The greater authority you have seen is that of the greatest Churches whither in Synods or not requiring Synods to oblige the less by reason of the exigence or reasonableness of the case The order of reading the Scriptures and of singing or saying the Psalms and Hymns of Gods praises being grounded upon no other reason nor tending to any other end then that of exercising and improving the Christianity of Gods people I need noâ— dispute that the Order which the power of the Church of Rome hâ—d introduced here as well in the rest of the West was such as made the Assemblies of the Church fruitlesse to that purpose For what could those shreds of Psalms and Lessonâ— which that order prescribeth contribute that might be considerable to that purpose Nor need I argue how considerable the order of the Church of England is to the same For to finish the Psalter once a year the New Testament thrice a year the Old once besides for reverence to the ancient Ordinance of the Church another Order for beginning the Prophet Esay at Advent and Genesis at Septuagesima to be prosecuted on Festival days is an Order from which the Church hath reason to expect a good effect in the instruction of Gods people And the interweaving of the Lessons with Hymns as it is agreeable to the rules and the practice of the ancient Church so it is in reason a fit mean to preserve attention and quicken devotion in them who use it In the mean time supposing there were considerable objections to be made against this or that order yet Order in generall being a thing so requisite to the preservation of Unity in the Body of the Church there is no reason to be given why any body should be admitted to dispute any Order received that cannot advance another Order which he can pretend to be more effectual to the purpose in which the parties must needs agree I am here to answer that part of the question concerning the Canon of Scripture which I said in the first book concerneth the Law not the faith of the Church whither the reading of those Scriptures which S. Jerome calls Apocryphall Ruffinus upon the Creed Ecclesiasticall for part of the Church office be for the ediâ—ication of the Church or not And a few words shall serve me to answer it with The very name of Ecclesiastical serves him that admits the Church to be one Body the unity whereof requires some uniformity in the order of those offices the communion whereof is one part of the end for which it subsisteth For it is manifest that the whole Church hath frequented the reading of them and that they are called Ecclesiastical for no other reason but because the reading of them hath been frequented by the Church in the Church And whosoever makes this any title of separation from the Church of Rome will make his Title Schismatical separating for that which is common to the present Church of Rome with the whole Church But because the repute of the Church is so slight
are not clear And surely when they are commanded to stand to the determinations of their Judges in things questionable concerning the Law Deut. XVII 8-12 that which was questionable was not clear to all concerned in the Law and the determining of it was neither adding to nor taking from the Law In like maner hee that should adde to or take from the book of S. Johns Revelations take it if you please for the complement of the whole Bible and say as much either of the whole or of any part of it deserves the plagues written there to be added to him and his part taken away out of the book of Life For who doubteth that falsifying the Scriptures is a crime of a very high nature But so it will be whether all things necessary to salvation be clear in the Scriptures or not Nay falsifying the sense of the Scriptures not altering the words may deserve the very same because the true sense might and ought to have been cleared in the Scriptures as not clear to all that are concerned in it And may not S. Paul bid Anathema to whosoever shall preach another Gospel than that which hee had preached to the Galatians unlesse all things necessary to salvation be clear in the Scriptures First let it appear which cannot appear because it is not true that the Scriptures of the New Testament were written when he preached it Or if not that whatsoever is clear in the Scriptures which wee have is clear in the Scriptures which they had when S. Paul preached The Beraeans had reason to examine S. Pauls preaching by the Scriptures who alleged the Old Testament for it and demanded to be acknowledged an Apostle of Christ according as his preaching agreed therewith But what needed his preaching if the means of salvation which hee preached were clearly contained in the Old Scriptures The miracles related by S. Johns Gospel are written that believing wee may have life Why because there is nothing else requisite to salvation to be believed Or as I said to the Leviathan because hee that comes to believe shall be instructed in all things necessary to his salvation whether by the miracles there related or otherwise And cannot the Law be a light to the steps of them that walked by the Law can it not inlighten their eyes and give wisedom to the simple unlesse all things necessary to salvation be clear in the Scriptures I do maintain for a consequence of the grounds of Christianity that the New Testament is vailed in the Old that David and Solomon being Prophets and the doctrine of the Prophets tending to discover the New Testament under the Old by degrees more and more the Law is called by them a light because it taught them who discovered the secret of the Gospel in it and under it the way to that salvation which only the Gospel procureth And in this consideration it is said Psalm XXV 8 11 13. Them that be meek shall God guide in judgment and such as be gentle them shall hee teach his Law What man is hee that feareth the Lord Him shall hee teach in the way that hee shall chuse The secret of the Lord is among them that fear him and hee will snow them his Covenant And though I cannot here make this good yet will the exception be of force to infringe a voluntary presumption that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures because the Law forsooth is a light to the actions of him that lived under it Now to all those Scriptures whereby it is pretended that the Scriptures are clear to them that have Gods Spirit but obscure to them that have it not I conceive I have settled a peremptory exception by showing that the believing of all things necessary to salvation is a condition requisite to the attaining of the Grace or gift of Gods Spirit For if that be true then can no presumption of the right understanding of the Scriptures be granted upon supposition of Gods Spirit and the dictate of it If that exposition of the Scripture which any man pretendeth be not evidenced by those reasons which the motives of Faith create and justifie without supposing it to be made known by Gods Spirit to him that pretends it in vain will it be to allege that the Spirit of God is in him that sets it forth Neither do wee finde that they who pretend Gods Spirit do rest in that pretense least they should be laught at for their paines But do allege reasons for their pretense as much as they who pretend the Church to be Infallible do allege reasons whereby they know that which they decree to be true Which were a disparagement to the Spirit of God if the dictate thereof were to passe for evidence I grant therefore that true Christians have Gods Spirit and that thereby they do try and condemne all things that agree not with our common Christianity and that this is the Unction whereof S. John speaketh But not because the gift of the Holy Ghost importeth a promise of understanding the Scriptures in all Christians but because it supposeth the knowledge of that which is necessary to salvation which is our common Christianity and therefore inableth to condemne all that agreeth not with it If there were over and above a grace of understanding the Scriptures of discovering the Gospel in the Law extant in the Church under the Apostles to which our Lord opened their hearts Luke XXIV 45. and which Justine the Martyr Dial. cum Tryph. affirmeth that the Church of his time was indowed with first it was given in consideration of their professing Christianity Then it tended onely to discover those grounds upon which the Church now proceeds in the use of ordinary reason to exponnd the Old Testament according to the New As for Cartwrights argument I relate it not because I think it worth the answering but that you may see how prejudice is able to transport even learned men from their senses It had been easie for one lesse a Scholar than hee to have said that when Jeremy saith it never came in Gods minde to command their Idolatries hee meanta great deal more that hee had forbidden them under the greatest penalties of the Law Which all that know the Law know to be true When hee forgetteth such an obvious figure you may see hee had a minde to inferre more than the words of the Prophet will prove It is to be observed in this place that there is no mention of things necessary to salvation in all these Scriptures Nor can it be said that this limitation of the sufficience and clearnesse of the Scriptures is as clearly grounded upon the Scriptures as it were requisite that things necessary to salvation should be clear to all that seek to be saved And this shall serve for my answer if any man should be so confident as to undertake to prove the sufficience and clearnesse of them so limited by the consent of the
Church For it is manifest that hitherto the authorities of Church Writers cannot be considered any otherwise than as the opinions of particular persons which no wayes import the consent of the whole Church For whereas hitherto there is nothing to oblige the Faith of any Christian but that which is plaine by the Scriptures and the consent of the Church It no wayes appears as yet how the authorities of Church Writers can evidence the consent of Church I will not therefore be curious here to heap up the sayings of the Fathers commending the sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures One or two I will take notice of because they are all I can remember in which the limitation thereof to things which our salvation requires us to believe is expressed S. Augustine de doctr Christianâ— II. 9. In eis quae aperte in Scripturis posita sunt inveâ—iuntâ—r illa omnia qnae continent fideâ— moresq vivendi In those things which are plainty set down in the Scriptures is found whatsoever that Faith or maners by which wee live doth containe S. Chrysostome in II. ad Thessal Hom. III. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are plain and plain and straight in the Scriptures all things that are necessary are mâ—nifest Whereunto wee may addâ— the words of Constantine to the Council of Nâ—â—â—a in Theodoreâ— Eâ—clef Hist l. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles and the Oracles of the ancient Prophets plainly teach us what wee are to think of God But I will also take notice that the same S. Augustine de doctr Christ III. 2. saith that the Rule of Faith which hee had set forth in the first book is had from the plainer places of the Scripture and the authority of the Church And the same S. Chrysostome in the same Homily sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those things which the Apostles writ and those which they delivered by word of mouth are equally credible Therefore let us think the Tradition of the Church deserves credit It is a Tradition seek no more And Vincentius in the beginning of his Commâ—nitorium or Remembrance confessing the Canon of the Scriptures to be every way perfect and sufficient requires neverthelesse the Tradition of the Church for the steddy understanding of it And therefore I have just ground to say that all that is necessary to salvation is not clear in the Scriptures to all that can reade in the opinion of S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine But to all that reade supposing the Rule of Faith received from the Church to bound and limit the sense and exposition of the Scriptures And therefore may more justly suppose the same limitation whâ—n they speak of the perfection and sufficience and clearnesse of the Scripture at large without confining their speech to that which the necessity of salvation requires us to believe And this is already a sufficient barr to any man that shall pretend the consent of the Church which concurreth to evidence the truth of the Scripture for the perspicuity thereof in things necessary to be believed to all whom they may concerne For so long as Tradition may be requisite besides Scripture that cannot appear When it shall appear whether requisite or not then will it appear how farr the sufficience and perspicuity of the Scripture reacheth And this I come now to inquire CHAP. VI. All interpretation of Scripture is to be confined within the Tradition of the Church This supposeth that the Church is a Communion instituted by God What means there is to make evidence of Gods Charter upon which the Corporation of the Church subsisteth The name of the Church in the Scriptures often signifieth the Whole or Cathelick Church THis presumption then which is able to prejudice the truth by disparaging the means God hath given to discover it And that by possessing men that things pretended to be necessary to salvation would have been clear of themselves to all men in the Scriptures if they were true But nothing conducing to clear the doubtfull meaning of any Scripture that is never so true This presumption I say being removed and the authority of the Church as the reason of believing taken away it remaines that wee affirm whatsoever the whole Church from the beginning hath received and practised for the Rule of Faith and maners all that to be evidently true by the same reason for which wee believe the very Scriptures And therefore that the meaning of them is necessarily to be confined within those bounds so that nothing must be admitted for the truth of them which contradicteth the same Wee saw before that the Scripture consisteth of motives to Faith and mater of Faith That in the motives of Faith supposing them sufficient when admitted for true a difficulty may be made upon what evidence they are admitted for true That the conviction of this truth consisteth in the profession and conversation of all those who from the beginning receiving Christianity have transmitted it to their successors for a Law and Rule to their beliefs and conversations Wherefore there can remain no further question concerning the truth of that which stands recommended to us by those same means that evidence the truth of those 〈◊〉 for which wee receive Christianity Had there been no 〈◊〉 Christianity to have been read in the profession and practice of all that call themselves Christians it would not have been possible to convince the enemies of Christianity that wee are obliged to believe the Scriptures If the professing and practising things so contrary to the interest of flesh and bloud be an â—vidence that they are delivered and received from them who first showed reasons to believe It must first remain evident that there are certain things that were so professed and practised from the beginning before it can be evident that the motives upon which they are said to be received were indeed tendred to the world for that purpose This is that common stock of Christianity which in the first place after receiving the Scriptures is to be admitted for the next principle toward the settling of truth controverted concerning the meaning of them as flowing immediately from the reason for which they are received and immediately flowing into the evidence that can be made of any thing questionable in the same It is that sound ingredient of nature which by due application must either cure all distempers in the Church or leave them incurable and everlasting And truly if it were as easie to make evidence what those things are which have been received professed and practised from the beginning by the whole Church as it is necessary to admit all such for truth I suppose there would remain no great difficulty in admitting this principle But in regard it is so easie to show what contradiction hath been made within the pale of the Church to that which elsewhere otherwhiles hath been received I cannot tell whether men despaire to finde any thing generally received
truth as to show further how well it agreeth with the sense of the Catholick Church by which I had begun to show that wee are to examine all maters of Faith Indeed I must caution this first that I do not pretend as if this point were any part of the Rule of Faith which is the substance of Christianity to be believed but of all points concerning the knowledge of the Scriptures which is the skill of Christian Divines I hold it of most consequence And that therefore though I am not obliged to affirm that it is expresly taught by all the primitive Doctors of the Church as all maintaining the mystical â—ense it may be maintained that by consequence they do all unanimously deliver it Origen in praef de Principiis so accounts it so will it be necessary to show how well it standeth with the sense of them that it may appear that there is no consent of the whole Church against it It shall be therefore sufficient to name S. Jerome S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine the first affirming that hee reades nothing of the kingdom of heaven in all the Old Testament Epist CXXIX Mihi in Evangelio promittuntur regna coelorum quae vetus Instrumentum omnino non nominat To mee the kingdom of heaven is promised by the Gospel which the Old Testament nameth not at all The second in his Homilies de Lazaro and divers others places raising his exhortations drawn from examples of the Saints in the Old Testament upon this ground that if they did so and so when the Resurrection was not preached it behooveth us under the Gospel to do much more The last besides other places whereof some you may finde quoted in my book of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church in the book de Gestis Palestinis relating it for one of the Articles which Pelagius renounced at that Synod not onely that the Saints under the Law obtained salvation by it but even that the salvation of the world to come was preached under the Law The Article charged upon Pelagius you shall finde there to be this cap. V. Regnum coelorum etiam in veteri Testamento promissum That the kingdome of heaven was promised also in the Old Testament To which Pelagius answering That this may be proved by the Scriptures was judged by the Council not to depart from the Faith of the Church Which notwithstanding when S. Austine considers That the Old Testament in vulgar Language signifies the books of the Old Testament in which the kingdome of heaven is promised as the Gospel is fore-told But in the Scriptures the Old Covenant in which it is not promised Hee sayes as much as I have done Therefore hee saith further In illo verò Testamento quod Vetus dicitur datâ—m est in monte Sinâ non invenitur apertissime promitti nisi terrena foelicitas But in that which is called the Old Testament and was given in mount Sina none but earthly felicity is found to be very openly promised Whereupon hee proceedeth to observe that the Land of Canaan is called the Land of Promise in which the promises of the Old Testament figuring the spiritual promises belonging to the New are tendred by the Law And reason hee had to insist upon this because of another Article charged upon Pelagius of kin to this that men were saved under the Law as under the Gospel As you may see there cap. XI Which might well be understood to mean without the Grace of Christ But having cleared the ground of the difference between the literal and allegorical sense of the Scriptures of the Old Testament I hold it utterly unnecessary if not altogether impertinent to tender further proof of this position from the Fathers then the constant agreement of them in maintaining that difference Being when it is rightly understood the necessary and immediate consequence of it Indeed it cannot be maintained that they did understand expresly the true ground of this difference which had they done they would not have been found to use it impertinently and unseasonably as all lovers of Truth must avow that many times they do Notwithstanding in as much as they agree in maintaining and using of it from which use the ground of it which is this position is to be inferred it shall be enough that all of them agree in delivering that by consequence which the principal of them at least in expounding the Scriptures do expresly asfirme For nothing obliges mee to maintaine that this is a poiâ—t necessary to the salvation of all Christians to be believed And by consequence that it hath been every where taught and no where contradicted It is sufficient that I can and do hold it more generally necessary to the right understanding of the Scriptures than any other point of skill in the Scriptures Now if any man object that this is the doctrine of the Socinians I answer first That they also hold that nothing is necessary to salvation to be believed but that which is clear to all men in the Scriptures And that this position hath a necessary influence into their whole Heresie which is grounded upon the unreasonable presumption of it On the contrary the difference between the Law and the Gospel is a principle from which I hope to draw good consequences in maintainance of the Faith of the Church against the Socinians who if they did alwaies see the consequence of their owne positions would not deny the Tradition of the Church as I observed afore If they do not I am not to waive the doctrine of the Fathers because the Socinians acknowledge it But lastly I demand whether Socinus provide for the salvation of the Fathers or not If so why is his opinion blamed If not why is mine opinion that do taken for his CHAP. XIV The Leviathans opinâ—on that Christ came to restore that kingdome of God which the Jewes cast off when they rejected Samuel It overthroweth the foundation of Christianity The true Government of Gods ancient people The name of the Church in the New Testament cannot signifie the Synagogue Nor any Christian State THis position being settled in the next place I will proceed upon it to argue the vanity of that conceit of the Leviathan pag. 263. that the intent of Christs coming was to regaine unto God by a New Covenant that Kingdome which being his by the Old Covenant had been ravished from him by the rebellion of the Israelites in the election of Saul For supposing most truly that God became their King by the Covenant of the Law and that under him Moses had the Soveraigne Power to all purposes pag. 250 251 252. hee inferreth further that after Moses it was by God vested in the High Priests Aarons Successors though hee for his time was subject to Moses And this pag. 217. from that text of Exodus XIX 6. where God promiseth them that upon undertaking his Covenant they should be a Sacerdotal Kingdome which in
for God which are sacrificing burning incense pouring out drink-offerings and adoration But others there are by doing which a man cannot be concluded to worship any thing but God till he do it in that way and fashion as is one by those that professe to worship it for God If it be said that these are Jews which allow Traditions but that there is another sort of Jews called Scripturaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which admit nothing but the leter of the Scriptures I answer that those also who admit onely the Text of Scripture and pretend to determine all controversies about the Law by consequences to be drawn from it could never come to agreement among themselves what consequence should take place and what not did they not acknowledge some publick persons whose determinations the whole body of them submitteth to the consequences which they derive their observations by from the leter of the Law being so ridiculously insufficient that they could not satisfie the meanest understandings otherwise as may appear by those which the Talmudists alledge for their constitutions Which being no lesse ridiculous then the traditions which they alledge incredible would be both to no effect did not the publick power of the Nation which while the Law stood was of force by it but now it is void ought to cease put all pretenses beyond dispute And for that which is alledged out of the Apocalyps which in sound of words seems to import some such thing concerning the vvhole book of the Scriptures as these Texts of Moses import concerning the Lavv I shall desire the understanding Reader but to consider that protestation vvhereby Irenaeus conjures all that should copy his Book to collate it vvell vvith the Original that they might be sure neither to adde to it nor take from it as Eusebius relateth out of his Book de Ogdoade against the Valentinians Eccl. First V. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I adjure thee that shalt copy out this Book by our Lord â—esus Christ and by his glorious presence when he comes to judge the quick and dead to collate what thou hast transcribed and correct it by this Copy whence thou hast transcribed it with care and likewise to transcribe this adsuration and puâ—â—it in the Copy Setting aside this adjuration what is the difference between S. Iohns charge and the matter of it And finding the words of S. Iohn to import neither more nor lesse to tell me what he thinks of this argument S. Iohn protesteth in the conclusion of his Revelation that who so shall adde any thing to the true and authentick Copy of these Prophesies to him shall be added the plagues written it who so taketh from it from him shall be taken his share in the Book of life and the holy City and the good things written in that Book Therefore all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are contained in the Scriptures clearly to all understandings But strain the consequence of this Text beyond the words of it which concern onely the words of the prophesie of this Book that is the Apocalyps if you please and take it for a seal to the whole Bible forbidding to take any thing from or to adde any thing to it for some of the Ancients have so argued from it shall he that addeth the true sense to or taketh false glosses from the Bible by force of that evidence which the Tradition of the Church createth be thought therefore to adde to the Word of God or to take from it Then did God provide that his own Law should be violated by his own Law when having forbidden to adde or to take from Moses Law he provided a power to limit or to extend both the sense and practise of it and that under pain of death to all that refractarily should resist it Now I demand of them that shall alledge S. Pauls Anathema against him that should preach any other Gospel then what he had preached to the Galatians against the position that I maintain whether he do believe that the Galatians had then the New Testament consisting of the four Gospels and other Apostolicall Scriptures or whether he can maintain that they had any part of it For if this cannot as is evident that it cannot be affirmed then of necessity S. Paul speaks of the Gospel not as we have it written in the Books of the New Testament but as they had received it from the preaching of S. Paul by word of mouth which being common to all Christians unlesse we question whether all the Apostles preached the same Gospell cannot be thought to destroy either the being of the Catholick Church or the saith which it supposeth or the power wherein it consisteth and the Authority of those acts which have voluntarily proceeded from it As for the Beraeans that examined even the doctrine of S. Paul by the Scriptures is it a wonder that they should not take S. Paul for an Apostle of Jesus Christ upon his own word but should demand of him to show by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ that so they might be induced to believe him sent to preach the Gospel of Christ Therefore when they were become Christians we must believe that they understood themselves and S. Paul better then to call his doctrine under examinarion or to dispute with him about the meaning of the Scriptures which he should alledge which our illuminati which take this for an argument must consequently do because they value not in S. Paul the commission of an Apostle but the presumption they have that the Holy Ghost moved him to write the Scriptures which he hath left us though they have nothing to alledge for it but the general commission of an Apostle To the words of the Evangelist Ioh. XX. 30. 31. I answer that he speaks onely of his own Gospel And that the things written in that Gospel are sufficient to induce a man to believe that believing he may have life But that is not sufficient to inferre that therefore all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are clearly expressed either in S. Iohns Gospel or in the whole Scripture because he that is induced by the things there written to belive the truth of Christianity may seek further instruction in the substance thereof that he may attain unto life by imbracing the same So S. Iohn saith not that a man hath life by believing what is there but what by knowing it he cometh to believe As for those words of S. Paul 1 Tim. III. 16. 17. I confidently believe that S. Paul speaketh onely of the Books of the Old Testament then before the writings of the Apostles were gathered into that body which now is the New Testament known by the name of the Scriptures Being well assured that no evidence can be made to the contrary because of those alone it could be demanded that they should bear witnesse to that which the Apostles preached and taught There being no
can be attributed to the spirit of God speaking of Gods own people in the mouth of David And without doubt as Idolatry was the originall of the most gross customes of sinne as appeares by the premises So can there be no greater argument of the corruption of mans nature then the departure of all nations from the worship of one true God to the worship of they knew not what That all nations coming of one blood from one God which at their first apostasy was so well known to them and not able to blot out of their own hearts the conscience of the service they ought him should imagine themselves discharged of that obligation by tendring it to what they pleased saving a small part of mankinde whom he reserved to himselfe by making them acquainted with himself through the familiarity which he used them with if all other arguments of a common principle of corruption in our common nature were lost is enough to make the apostasy of our first forefathers credible which the relation of Moses makes truth Wherefore when David attributes to himselfe by nature that which the people of God attribute to the Gentiles it must needs be understood in regard of a principle common to both which the Grace of God suffereth not to come to effect but preventeth in his people And when he attributeth the same to his malicious enemies Jewes onely by the first birth he warranteth us to say the same of those that are Jewes by the second birth so farre as the birth of both is the same I will not forbear to alledge here the Law of Leviticus that appoints a time of impurity for women that have brought forth as no lesse fit to signifie the evil inclination to which our nature by the fall of Adam is become liable then the ceremonies of the Law are fitly used by God to shadow the truth of the Gospel Not that I make any doubt that this impurity of it self is but legall as the impurity contracted by touching a dead man or a living creature that was unclean or that of the leprosie or by the custome of women or the like Which I am resolved amounts to no more then an incapacity of freely conversing with Gods people or an obligation to a sacrifice which is there called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it purged this incapacity which in regard of that positive Law may be called sinne But this being granted and these Legall incapacities being by the correspondence of the Law with the Gospel to signifie the cause for which men are uncapable of heaven As the leprosie of the body and the touching of a dead man or a living creature that is unclean by the law necessarily signifieth that incapacity which cometh by the custome of sinne So that uncleannesse which ariseth from those things which come from our own bodies seemeth by necessary correspondence to signifie that incapacity of coming to heaven which ariseth from the inward inclination of our nature to wickednesse Neither will I omit to allege the saying of the Prophet David alleging the reason of Gods compassion to his people in their sinnes to be their mortality Psal LXXVIII 40. For he considered that they were but flesh and even as a wind that passeth away and cometh not againe And Psal CIII 14-17 For he knoweth our frame he remembreth that we are dust The dayes of man are as of grasse as the bud of the field so springeth he For a wind passeth upon it and it is not And the place knoweth it no more But the goodnesse of the Lord is from generation to generation upon them that fear him and his righteousnesse upon childrens children For having shewed that the bodily death to which Adam was sentenced implied in it spritituall death and supposed the same according to S. Paul I may well say that he could not expresse that reason which Christians alledge to God for his compassion upon their infirmities more properly to the time and state of the Law then by alleging the death which our bodies are subject to as an argument of sinne which it is allotted to punish And the antithesis which follows between our short life and the continuance of Gods mercies to his servants of their posterity comes corespondently to set forth the grace of the Gospel though sparingly signified as under the Law And here I must not forget the Wise mans exhortation Wisdome I. 12 Affect not death through the error of your life nor purchase destruction through the workes of your hands For God made not death nor taketh pleasure in the destruction of the living For he made all things to indure And the beginnings of the world were healthful and no deadly poyson among them nor any dominion of hell upon the earth For righteousnesse is immortall But the wicked with their words and works purchased it And thinking it their friend decayed and made a covenant with it because they are worthy to be on the side of it Here it is evident that the speech is of temporall death but so that by it is intimated spirituall death according to that which hath oft been observed and will oft come to be observed that the mystery of Christianity intimated in the old Testament begins more plainly to be discovered in these books then in the canonicall Scriptures And therefore though the purchase of death is attributed to the evil words and works of the wicked yet seeing it hath taken place over all the world contrary to the first institution of God thereby he leaves us to argue the corruption of nature which moveth mankinde to take pleasure in those workes by which death takes place Last of all I will allege not the authority of the Book of Job which is not questionable but the authority of the Greek Translation of it Be the author thereof who may be be the authority thereof what it may be it is manifest how ancient it is and that it came from the people of God while they continued the people of God and hath passed the approbation of the Apostles When therefore it is said that no man is clear of sin no not the infant of one day old upon earth It remaineth manifest that this was the sense of the then people of God As it appeares also by Philo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That to sinne is a property born with all that are born in as much as it is come to birth And divers sayings of the Heathens might be alledged as obscure arguments of that truth which the Gospel is grounded upon But that I conceive the disorders of the world the greatest whereof that can be named is that which I named even now of the worship of Idols are greater and more evidences of the same then any sayings of Writers Which therefore it will not be requisite to heap into this abridgement CHAP. XII The Haeresie of Simon Magus the beginning of the Gnosticks
rather here to prevent the objection that may be made that I ground my selfe upon the authority of men when I allege the testimonies of Church Writers For those that may abuse themselves with such a fond imagination as this are to consider that I claime as yet no other credit not onely for Tertullian who after hee turned Montanist was not of the Church but for the Fathers of the Church but that which common sense allowes men of common sense in witnessing maters of historical truth To wit that they who published writings that are come to posterity would not have alleged things for true which every man might see to be false in point of fact Because by so doing common sense must needs tell them that they must of necessity utterly discredit the cause which they meant to promote As in the case in hand If wee say that Tertullian being a Montanist alleged against the Church things so notoriously false that all the world might see and know them to be false wee refuse him the credit of a man in his right senses For what were hee but a mad man that would tell the Church that such or such Customes you know are practised among Christians knowing that they were not practised by the Catholick Church though they might be among the Montanists Therefore though I put a great deal of difference between the authority of Tertullian and S. Basil in regulating the Church yet in witneshng mater of fact I can ascribe no more to S. Basils testimony in his book de Sp. S. cap. XXVII than I do to this of Tertullian His words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of things decreed and preached that are kept in the Church some wee have from written doctrine some wee have received as delivered in secret down to us from the Tradition of the Apostles both of the same force to godlinesse And this will no man contradict that hath but a little experience in the rules of the Church For if wee go about to refuse unwritten customes as of no great effect wee shall unawares wound the Gospel in the dangerous part or rather turn the Faith preached into a bare name As first to mention the first and commonest Who taught us by writing to mark with the figure of the Crosse those that have hoped in the name of our Lord Christ Jesus What Scripture taught us to turn to the East when wee pray Which of the Saints left us by writing the words of invocation upon discovering the bread of Thanksgiving and the cup of Blessing For wee are not content with those which the Apostle or the Gospel mentions but promote and inferre others as of great force toward the Sacrament which wee have received by unwritten doctrine Wee also blesse the water of Baptisme and the oile of anointing and besides the man himself that is baptized from what Scripture and not from silent and secret Tradition And indeed what written word taught the very anointing of oile And that a man is drenched thrice whence comes it And other things about Baptisme renouncing Satan and his Angels from what Scripture come they And not from this unpublished and secret doctrine I will not here dispute the saying of S. Basil that these orders are of the same force toward Christian piety as the Scriptures And that Christianity would be but a bare name were it not for these unwritten customes how the truth of it holds Nay it were easie to instance against him as well as against Tertullian that among the particulars which they name there are those which never were in force through the whole Church but onely in some parts of it My present purpose demands onely this that Christians had rules which they observed for Lawes in the exercise of their communion And therefore by the intent of those who inforced those rules do constitute a Society or Corporation by the name of the Church Which Corporation Tertullian whether a Montanist or not when hee writ the book which I quote claimeth to belong to in reckoning himself among those that observed the Rules of the Catholick Church If wee suppose the Church to be one Body consisting of all Churches which are all of them several Bodies it will be not onely reasonable but absolutely necessary by consequence to grant that some orders there must be which shall have the force of the whole others onely in some parts of it And though S. Basil or Tertullian mistake local customes for general yet had there not alwaies been a Body capable of being tied by general customes there had been no room for this mistake No prejudice shall hinder mee to name here the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles Not as if I meant to maintain that the writings so called were indeed penned by them But because they contain such limitations of customes delivered the Church by the Apostles as were received and in use at such times and in such parts of the Church where those who penned those writings writ For though I should grant that those limitations are not agreeable to that which was brought in by the Apostles no man would be so ridiculous as to demand that there were never any orders or customes delivered the Church by the Apostles which succeeding times did limit otherwise The book of Canons which was acknowledged by the representatives of the whole Church in the Council of Chalcedon if it be survayed shall be found to contain onely particular limitations of general orders held by the Church before those Canons were made by the several Councils either the same with those in the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles or differing onely according to several times and places For wee have yet extant a book of Canons made out of the Africane Councils containing the like limitations of the same customes and orders which though not the same yet served to preserve the Churches of Africk in unity with the rest of the Church This Code wee finde added to the former by Dionysius Exâ—guus in his translation of the Canons together with the Canons of the Council at Sardica And Cassiodore who lived the same time with Dionysius affirmes that this collection was in use in the Church of Rome at that time Divin lect cap. XXIII But there is extant a later Collection of Canons under the title of the Church of Rome consisting of the same Canons together with some of the Rescripts of Popes which were come into use and authority in the Western Church at such time as the said Collection was made Of the same Canons consisteth another Greek collection printed by du Tillet and commented by Balsamon which addeth hereunto the Canons of the sixth and seventh Synod in use in the Greek Church but not acknowledged by the Latine Where instead thereof the collections of Martinus Braccarensis and Isidorus Mercator of Burchardns Bishop of Wormes and Ives of Chartres where last of all the collection of Gratiane the Dominican Monk was in
But hee that complaineth of that will be bound to advance some other meaning of those texts which may be free from contradiction both to the Rule of Faith and to Historical truth which common sense justifieth And yet admit no mention of publick Penance in the Church no intent to speak of it in all the Scriptures there alleged Which perhaps will be too hard to do Further I labor not I will suppose no man so wilfull as to dispute the right of excluding from the Communion of the Church granting a power of limiting the conditions upon which it is to be restored to them who forfeited it And this is visible It was but a mater of LXX years after the decease of S. John according to Eusebius his Chronicle that Montamis appeared to demand that Adulterers might not be readmitted to the communion of the Church upon Penance That those that had married the second time might not communicate That the rule of Fasting might be stricter than was in use That it might not be lawfull to fly from persecution for the Faith It is manifest that these were his pretenses by Tertullian that maintaines them being seduced with the opinion of inspirations and revelations granted him and his partizans to that purpose These pretenses were afterwards in part revived at Rome by Novatianus to get himself the Bishoprick there by excluding from Penance and reconciliation those that had fallen away in the persecution of Decius It appeareth also that those men alleged for themselves the very passages of the Apostles which I allege to my intent Neither can it appear that ever any son of the Church did contradict them by saying that the Apostles meant nothing of Penance as they imagined And now let all men judge whether the Church have reason to hold this evidence of Penance and by consequence of its own being a Church Was Epiphanius and all that writ against the Novatians troubled to no purpose at the VI of the Ebrews when those Schismaticks alleging it for themselves might have been silenced by denying that it concerned Penance Why did not the Church allege that the sin unto death 1 John V. 17. is no such thing as Apostasy from Christianity when the Novatians alleged it to prove that Apostates were not to be reconciled to the Church How came it to passe that there was so much doubt made in the Church of Rome of admitting the Epistle to the Ebrews for Canonical Scripture witnesse S. Jerome Epist ad Dardanum as thinking that it did absolutely contradict the re-admitting of Apostates which had been practised in that Church before Montanus Tertullian of all men was troubled without cause that the incestuous person whom hee supposes to be excommunicated at Corinth by S. Pauls Order 1 Cor. V. should be re-admitted by his Indulgence 1 Cor. VII De Pudicitiâ cap. XIII XIV XV. because hee saw this was a peremptory exception against Montanus that a crime equal to Adultery should by S. Paul be admitted to Penance How easie a thing it had been for him to say that there is nothing of Penance nothing of Excommunication which Penance presupposes and therefore inferres in delivering to Satan the incestuous person in commanding them not so much as to eat with those that are called brethren that is Christians but are indeed such as the incestuous But hee being some fourteen hundred years nearer the beginning of Christianity than wee and being satisfied by his five senses of those things which new Heresies and Schismes oblige us to argue by consequences found that his Patriarch Montanus could not answer so And therefore thinking that the Church could not answer their arguments forces an answer to this by saying it was not the same man that is excommunicated by the Apostles Order 1 Cor. V. and restored by his Indulgence 2 Cor. VII Because hee saw the reconciling of a sinner to the Church by Penance as lively described and signified by S. Pauls Indulgence there as by any record of the Church at such time as it was most in use And can there remain any doubt of this Excommunication because the Church cannot now deliver to Satan for destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus Surely all the writings of the Apostles do bear witnesse that the miraculous graces of the Holy Ghost which they had then but all Christians see the Church hath not now served not onely to witnesse the truth of Christianity but the authority of the Apostles in behalf of it This authority having taken effect by those Ordinances which the Church hath received at their hands It is no longer requisite that God should bear witnesse to his own Ordinances by such miraculous effects seeing hee doth no longer bear witnesse to the truth of Christianity by the like Hee that believes that whosoever is not in the Church is in the power of Satan needs no reason why hee is delivered to Satan that is put out of the Church Hee that believes it not is not to be perswaded that there is a power of Excommunication granted the Church But that the Christian saith which the Church preacheth is true for that without peradventure preached the Church At least till some body show us that this reason is insufficient hee must not demand that wee give an Article of our Creed and all the help to salvation which the communion of the Catholick Church pretendeth for such an objection as this Chuse now whether you will say as I say That under the Apostles difficulty was made of re-admitting some sorts of sins but never any peremptory order against it and so that Montanus and Novatianus were Schismaticks for seperating from the Church when the whole Church was agreed that there was a necessity of it or look about for a more reasonable sense to assoile the great difficulties of these passages Provided that you offer not violence to common sense and historical truth by imagining that so near the Apostles time there could be so much question about Penance they having neither meant nor ordained any thing about it To this argument all the most ancient records of the Church wheresoever mention is made of reconciling by Penance all the Penitential Canons of later ages will bear witnesse For who can undertake to answer or rather to obscure the evidence made in the place aforenamed that some sins were refused Penance and reconcilement in the first ages of the Church When wee have a whole book of Tertullian contending with Montannus to impose a Law upon it of re-admitting no Adulterers When wee know a whole sect of Novatians that left the Church that they might re-admit no Apostates As for the Penitential Canons of later ages it is manifest to any man that shall peruse and compare them with that which hath been said of the primitive times that they are nothing else but the abatement of that rigor of Discipline which during the primitive heat and zele of
observable than in the Psalmes XVI 11. Thou shalt make known to mee the way of life Fulnesse of joyes is before thee and pleasures at thy right hand for ever more Is not this true in the sense of Ezekiah Esa XXXVII 10 21 First hee saith I shall see the Lord no more in the land of the living But upon the tender of the Prophet hee askes What is the signe that I shall go up into the house of the Lord Where the presence or right hand of God and the pleasure of it is the joy that his people have to worship him before the Ark of his presence Psal XVII 15. As for mee I will behold thy presence in righteousnesse when I awake I shall be satisfied with thy likenesse The same thing hee meanes and hee awakes when hee comes out of trouble to serve God Though I am to grant that I cannot think of any text in all the book of Psalms wherein the world to come is more literally exâ—ressed thâ—n in these words Psalm CXXVI 5 6. They that sow in tears shall reap in joy Hee that now goeth on his way weeping shall doub lesse come again in joy and bring in his sheaves Whether at the returne from Captivity or in heaven let the beginning of the Psalme speak When the Lord turned again the Captivity of his people thâ—n were wee like men that dreame But there would be no end if I should go about to produce all those passages of the Psalmes wherein the same is to be observed Let us come now to the New Testament and produce first the sayings of the Apostles wherein my position is expresly affirmed especially in the Apostle to the Hebrewes VII 19. For the Law persited nothing but the bringing in of à better hope by which wee draw nigh unto God What is this better hope but that of the world to come so much better than the Land of Promise and what bringeth it in but the Gospel of Christ by whom alone sinners have accesse to God X. 19 Againe VIII 6. But now hee hath obtained a more excellent ministery by how much hee is the Mediator of a better Covenant which is inacted upon better promises IX 15. And therefore is â—ee the Mediator of a New Covenant that dâ—ath interceding for the redemption of those sins that were under the first Covenant those that are called may receive the promise of eternal life This more excellent Ministery is the Priesthood of Chriâ—t after the order of Melchisedeck To make way for which the whole Epistle ciâ—putâ—s that the Levitical Priesthood is removed as the interest of Christianity against the Law of Moses and the qâ—â—â—â—ion on foot required Now Melchisedek was â— Priest not by the law of a carnal precept but by the power of indissoluble life saith hee again Ebr. VII 19. What thiâ— carnal precept is you have IX 9-14 When hee saith that at present to wit under the Law gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot persit him that serveth as to the conscience consisting onely in meats and drinks and several washings and carnal justifications imposed till the time of Reforma 〈…〉 When Christ coming as a High Priest of good things to come and having fo 〈…〉 sage into heaven cleanses the conscience from dead works to serve the living â—â—d So that according to the Apostle the Sacrifices of the Law effecting onâ—ly a carnal right to the Congregation of Gods people the Sacrifice of Christ a right to heaven this right is tendred by the Gospel the other by the Law And thus S. Paul 2 Tim. I. 9 10. calleth the Gospel the Grace that was given us in Christ Jesus before the ages of the world but is manifested now by the appearance of our Lord Christ Jesus who hath destroyed death but declared life and incorruption by the Gospel For though the life to come was known and declared by the Prophets under the Law yet had they no expresse commission to ingage God for it till Christ rendred it as that which the Gospel covenants for on Gods part But I must not forget the occasion of that memorable passage quoted from Ebr. IX 9. from the discourse that went afore whereby the Apostle declares the whole course and constitution of the service of the Temple to be nothing else but a Parable of the present time to wit of Christianity As also the legal Tabernacle was nothing else but a Copy of the Heavenly by the pattern whereof hee observes that Moses was commanded to build it VIII 5 6. calling it therefore the Worldly Sanctuary IX 1. because it was a Copy as it were of this whole world in the several parts of it as Philo and Josephus have discoursed at large The most Holy place into which the High Priest entred once a year by the Apostles interpretation answereth to the highest heavens whereunto our Lord Christ is ascended whom therefore hee calleth the minister of the true Tabernacle which God and not man pitched VIII 7 And therefore the outward Sanctuary into which the Priests went once a day was intended to signifie the Starry heavens and the Court of the Tabernacle the World here below as Philo and Josephus declare justifying the reason why the Apostle calls it a Worldly Tabernacle This interpretation of the Ceremonial Law made by the Apostle in this place by that which it expresly affirmes concerning the twofold sense of that part of the Old Testament induces a consequence to the twofold sense of all the rest Inferring that if the mystical and allegorical sense of the Old Testament determine in the promises of the world to come then the literal and historical sense of the same determines in the promises of this life the allegory that is to say the reason of interpreting the Old Testament to that purpose consisting in nothing else but the correspondence between them I am not ignorant that some Divines have done their best to create one Controversie more to divide the Church by maintaining that there is but one sense of the Scriptures which the leter intends The things figured under the Old Testament and the figures of them there set down making but one and the same sense as a man and his picture are called the same man because without the things signified the signes are nothing at least in the nature of signes For my part I finde it a thing as easie as for every fool to tye knots which a wise man cannot loose to ingage in disputes in which men cannot yield to the truth while that ingagement continues But I finde no pretense why that sense of the Scriptures which they make one consisting of the figure and the thing figured should not be counted two one immediately the other principally intended Because the Gospel was a secret under the Law as S. Paul so many times layes down So that hee which knew the Law many times understood not the utmost intent of it under the Gospel Seeing then that this way of
because being to be held as a Heathen or a Publicane as being Excommunicate that is to say suppposing that to be true which Erastus would have to be salse by consequence and in effect it would become lawfull to sue him before Gentiles as being no longer a Christian Now when it followeth What forever yee binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven If wee take binding and loosing in a general sense to signifie that Power of giving Law so that hereeby the Church is inabled to give Law to the Church setting aside for the present who of the Church is to give Law who to receive it then I say that by virtue hereof the Power of Excommunicating is given to the Church Because it is nothing else but such a Right established by a Law of God And if God give his Church a Power to make Laws then hee gives it Power to make a Law that shall give force to all the rest by inacting that penalty that shall be requisite to restrain disobedience But if wee take the terms of binding and loosing as they are used among the Jews and by consequence when that which is unlawfull is done for declaring what is lawfull or unlawfull to be done to be discharged of it I say that admitting the difference between the Law and the Gospel which I have established the Power of Excommunicating will follow in the Church For supposing the Law not to tender remission of sin in order to life everlafting but to the remporal privileges of a Jew to be bound and to be loose will signifie no more than to be in or out of possession of those privileges uncapable or capable of the fame by doing or not doing what the Law requireth to be done for that purpose In the mean time this Power will argue a Common-wealth of Israel founded by God by virtue of which foundation the Power of those who are inabled by the Law to make this declaration takes effect to all purposes contained in the Law But. supposing the Gospel to tender remission of sins in order to life everlasting upon such terms as the Covenant of Grace importeth To be bound and to be loose will signifie freedom from sin or the captivity and fervitude of it And therefore the Power of declaring this estare and what is to be done for the attaining of it will necessarily inserre a Society of the Church founded upon the Power of making that declaration whereupon any man may be accepted for such Neither can it be imagined that any part any degree of the fame can be in any man but so farr and to effect as the Community of the Church shall have allowed It is not now unknown that divers of those that dispute Controversies for the Church of Rome do challenge the Power of making Law for the Church by virtue of this Power of binding and loosing given by our Lord to his Apostles And this opinion taketh place by the former interpretation of these words which being admitted that consequence cannot be refused But taking the Power of binding and loosing to be by virtue of the Keyes of Gods House which are the Keyes of David or the House of David the figure of the Church which is that signification which the language of the Scripture required when our Lord. having promised his Church adds Mat. XVI 19. Unto thee will I give the Keyes of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heaven what soever thou loosest on earth shall be loosed in heaven The Power of binding and loosing in the Church will be correspondent to that which the Doctors of the Synagogue had of declaring this or that lawfull or unlawfull according to Moses Laws and a man tied to do this or that for maintaining his privilege by it And having said this I conceive I have done more than hee that distinguished these two meanings in our Lords words thought fit to do Hee distinguishing thus in the first book de Synedriis pag. 291 hath thought it enough to argue that neither the one nor the other will serve to ground the Power of Excommunicating in the Church Wherein what hee hath proved I referre my self to that which hath been said But in what sense the words of our Lord are to be understood according to his own opinion hee hath not declared how requisite foever it had been to do as I according to my opinion indeavor to do As for that little Objection that in Our Lords words it is not persons but things that are said to be bound and loose It is to be underflood that things are neither bound nor loose of themselves But that by the way of common understanding of men and speech it is attributed to them from the obligations that Iye upon men or persons by virtue of which obligations or freedom from them such things as they import are said to be bound or loose as lawfull or unlawfull for them to use who using them are either bound or free to such rights as the using or not using of them inferrs Though by consequence of this Power the Power of binding by Law or loosing that is of leaving free without tying by Law will naturally follow For as in Civil Government whatfoever person or persons are absolutely and without limitaiton indowed with the Soveraign Power must necessaraily be indowed with the Power of giving Law whereby they do but limit themselves what Law they will govern by which is before those Laws be declared their will and pleasure So if wee suppose in the Church a Power of admitting into and casting out of the Society of the Church wee must needs suppose a Power of giving Law to this Society because no Society at all can have Communion with it self but according to some Rules of exercising the said Communion which for the present are called Laws Now our Lord Christ having given his Disciples the Power of binding and Loosing by opening or shutting the doors of his Church that is by admitting into or excluding out of it hath thereby given them the Power of framing his Catholick Church Not that they are so properly said to binde those whom they shut out of the Church For when Christianity declareth mankinde to be under sin not to be freed of it but by submitting to Chrissianity the bond is contracted by him that finneth the shutting of the Church door upon him is but refusing him the cure whereof hee tenders himself uncapable But those whom they admit into the Church they are properly said to loose because though they cannot be loosed without their own act yet that act is not to be done without submitting to that authority which is intrusted to require it And this authority with those who acknowledge it by being admitted into the Church is that which consstuteth the Society and Corporation of the Church For admitting into the Church and allowing to continue
proved that is from the Society of the Church and the unity thereof from whence it follows that what is founâ—d to be taught in the Church by men authorized by the Communion thereof and qualified to teach and that without contradiction is not contrary to the Rule of Faith but if it be taught with one consent it is part of it Without contradiction I mean here when a man is not charged to transgresse the Faith of the Church in that which hee teacheth much lesse disowned by the Church for teaching it Not when no man is found to hold a contrary opinion which alwaies falls out in things disputable For the Communion of the Church necessarily importeth that a man qualified with authority in it professe nothing contrary to that Faith the profession whereof qualifies all to be of the Church Though other things there be many wherein a man may be allowed not onely to believe but to professe contrary to that which another professes and yet qualified not onely to be of the Church but to bear that authority which the Society thereof constituteth The name therefore of Fathers importeth at least some part of that superiority which the Society of the Church giveth And therefore belongeth not properly to those that are not so qualified though they that are not so qualified may be the authors of such writings as have the lot to remain to posterity But the authority of Fathers which is grounded upon this presumption that persons qualified in the Church teach nothing contrary to the Faith of it because their quality in the Church would become questionable if they should teach that which agrees not with the Faith of the Church This authority I say cannot appear in the writings of private Christians Because the Church is no further chargable by allowing him the Communion of the Church who declareth to believe onely that which indeed contradicts the Rule of Faith then of taking no notice what a private man professes to think out of that ignorance which may beseem a capacity of being better informed Hereupon it is that I think it no exception to the due authority of the Fathers that Arnobius or Laectantius should be utterly disdained in some particulars The one known to have been a Novice in Christianity when hee writ and writing as S. Jerom testifies to declare himself a Christian by trying his stile as being Master of a School of Eloquence in defense thereof against the Gentiles had it seems the ill chance to light upon some writings of the Gnosticks according to Saturninus or Basilides and taking them for Christians because they affected to go under that name translated their monstrous opinions into his work as points of Christianity The other whether a novice or no I cannot say marked neverthelesse by S. Jerome as one more able to refure Gentilisme than to give an account of Christianity and therefore to have been converted to Christianity but not to have learned it what presumption a discreet man can make of Christianity by his Book let every discreet man judg I will not say the like of Justine the Martyr a man who hath deserved farr more of Christianity by renouncing the world and taking upon him the profession and habit of a Philosopher among the Gentiles thereby to gain opportunity of maintaining Christianity on all occasions which the Heathen Philosophers took to maintain the positions of their several sects A resolution truly generous and Christian In the mean time having in him more of a Philosopher than of a Scholar and gathering his knowledg rather from travail and conversation than from reading it is no mervail if hee hath suffered many impostures at least in maters of historical truth which hee that should demand that the Church should answer as allowing his books to be read would be very unreasonable When as bearing no rank in the Church above that of all Christians for any thing I can perceive if hee should have mistaken himself in any thing neerly concerning the substance of Christianity his eminent merits towards the Church might have been of force to have drowned all consideration of them and given his writings passeport to posterity notwithstanding I will not extend this consideration to the writings of Clemens Alexandrinus of Origen and of Tertullian The last whereof that is Tertullian belongs not to this rank having put himself out of the Communion of the Church by making a party against the Church of Carthage upon the pretenses of the Montanists The second that is Origen whatsoever opinions hee had cannot be said either to have held them so resolutely or to have professed them so publickly that those that were nearest him could be thought accessories to them And therefore as his very great merits of the Church otherwise held him in his rank in the Church during his time so his extravagancies cannot impeach that authority which others and hee also in such things as hee agrees with them in do truly purchase by the allowance of the Church The same is to be said of his Master Clemens whose writings as they are not so many so neither his extravagancies so great and considerable But even these eccentrical Writers by being marked for positions particular to them besides the credit of historical truth which in times nearest the Apostles is of great consequence to inform us of the primitive state of Christianity and therefore of incomparable value towards the settling of a right judgment in all things now questionable I say beside that which is common to them with all Writers they get by the exceptions which are made against them the advantage of a Rule of Law in the rest that is to say that setting aside those points in which they are excepted against they are according to the Rule of Faith in things not excepted against against In fine the authority of the whole Church is found to be expresly ingaged in all things that have passed into effect either from the determination of Synods which having been assembled by the free consent thereof have been received by the like free consent whether all or part were present at the Synod or from the act of any particular Church the proceeding and grounds whereof hath been approved of and received into effect by the whole Which in some measure may be said of the writings of particular Doctors In as much as it is manifest that extravagant doctrines may have been published in several parts of the Church which particular Doctors may have imployed their pens to contradict before any Church had imployed any censure to condemn As by Epiphanius in the Heresie of the Origenists it appeareth that Origen was contradicted by Methodius If therefore such extravagances so contradicted be extinguished such writings have continued cherished by the Church it is evidence enough that the Church it self is ingaged in the condemnation of those extravagances which have been suppressed by the means of such writings And all this serves to maintain and
therefore affected a compliance with the ancient Church And truly it is fit it should be thought that they complied with him because hee complied with the Catholick Church for by that reason they shall comply with the Church if in any thing hee comply not with it But it is a great deal too little for him to say that will say the truth for the Church of England For it hath an Injunction which ought still to have the force of a Law that no interpretation of the Scripture be alleged contrary to the consent of the Fathers Which had it been observed the innovations which I dispute against could have had no pretense If this be not enough hee that shall take pains to peruse what Dr. Field hath writ hereupon in his work of the Church shall find that which I say to be no novelty either in the Church of England of in the best learned Doctors beyond the Seas And sure the Reformation was not betrayed when the B. of Sarum challenged all the Church of Rome at S. Pauls Crosse to make good the points in difference by the first DC years of the Church Always it is easie for me to demonstrate that this resolution That the Scripture holding the meaning of it by the Tradition of the Church is the onely means to decide controversies of Faith is neerer to the common terms that the Scripture is the onely Rule of Faith than to that Infallibility which is pretended for the Church of Rome Having demonstrated that to depend upon the Infallibility of the present and the Tradition of the Catholick Church are things inconsistent whereas this cannot be inconsistent with that Scripture which is no lesse delivered from age to age than Tradition is though the one by writing the other by word of mouth and serving chiefly to determine the true meaning of it when it comes in debate And if prejudice and passion carry not men headlong to the ruine of that Christianity which they professâ— it cannot seem an envious thing to comply with the most learned of the Church of Rome who acknowledge not yet any other Infallibility in the Church then I claime rather than with the Socinians the whole Interest of whose Heresie consists in being tryed by Scripture alone without bringing the consent of the Church into consequence and that supposing all mater of Faith must be clear in the Scripture to all them that consult with nothing but Scripture But I cannot leave this point till I have considered a singular conceit advanced in Rushworthes Dialogues for maintaining the Infallibility of the Church upon a new account The pretense of that Book is to establish a certain ground of the choice of Religion by the judgement of common sense To which purpose I pretend not to speak in this place thinking it sufficient if this whole work may inable them who are moved with it duely to make that choice for themselves and to show those that depend on them how to do the like But in as much as no man will deny the choice of Religion to be the choice of truth before falshood in those particulars whereof the difference of Religion consists It is manifest that the means of discerning between true and false in mater of Faith which I pretend cannot stand with that which hee advanceth It consists in two points That the Scripture is not and that Tradition is the certain means of deciding this truth Which if no more were said will not amount to a contradiction against that which I resolve For hee that sayes the Scripture is not the onely means excluding that Tradition which determines the meaning of it doth neither deny that Tradition is nor say that the Scripture is the certain means of deciding this kind of truth But the issue of his reasons will easily show upon what termes the contradiction stands Hee citeth then common sense to witnesse that wee cannot rest certain that wee have those Scriptures which came wee agree by inspiration of God by reason of the manifold changes which common sense makes appearance must come to passe in transcribing upon such a supposition as this That so many Columns as one Book contâ—ins so many Copies at least are made every hundreth years and in every Copy so many faults at least as words in one Column Upon which account 15 or 16 times as many faults having been made in all copies as there are words it will be so much oddes that wee have no true Scripture in any place Abating onely for those faults that may have fallen out to be the same in several copies And if Sixtus V Pope causing 100 copies of the Vulgar Latine to be compared found two thousand faults supposing two thousand copies extant which may be supposed a hundred thousand in any Language what will remain unquestionable It is further alleged that the Scripture is written in Languages now ceased which some call Learned Languages because men learn them to know such Books as are written in them the meaning whereof not being subject to sense dependeth upon such a guessing kind of skill as is subject to mistake as experience showes in commenting of all Authors But especially the Hebrew and that Greek in which wee have the Scriptures That having originally no vowels to determine the reading of it wanting Conjunctions and Preposiaions to determine the signification of him that speaks all the Language extant being contained in the Bible alone the Jews Language differing so much as it does from it the Language of the Prophets consisting of such dark Tropes and Figures that no skill seems to determine what they mean This so copious and by that means so various in the expressions of it though wanting that variety of Conjugations by which the Hebrew and other Eastern Languages vary the sense that to determine the meaning of it is more than any ordinary skill can compasse Adde hereunto the manifold equivocations incident to whatsoever is expressed by writing more incident to the Scripture as pretending to give us the sense of our Lords words for example not the very syllables Adde the uncertainties which the multiplicity of Translations must needs produce and all this must needs amount to this reckoning That God never meant the Bible for the means to decide controversies of Faith the meaning whereof requires many principles which God alone can procure because so indefinite Which the nature of the Book argueth no lesse as I observed being written in no method of a Law or a Rule nor having those decisions that are to oblige distinguished from mater of a farre diverse and almost impertinent nature Upon these premises it is inferred as evident to common sense that the Scripture produces no distinct resolution of controversies though as infinitely usefull for instruction in virtue so tending to show the truth in maters of Faith in grosse and being read rather to know what is in it than to judge by it by the summary agreement of it with that which
qui post Baptismum supervixerit non sufficiat nisi sanctitatem mentis corporis habeat quae sine sobrietate difficile custoditur It is to be noted that faith alone is not enough for him that survives after Baptisme unlesse he have the holinesse both of mind and body which without sobriety is hardly preserved Here you have S. Jeromes distinction between the works of Faith and of the Law and Baptisme the boundary of righteousnesse by Faith alone without the works of Faith And if any man be so impertinent as to suspect S. Jerome for a Pelalagian wherein he agrees with Pelagius S. Austine may perswade him that Pelagius is no Pelagian in this but speakes the sense of the Church Serm. LXXI De Tempore Quomodo fides per dilectionem operatur Et quomodo justificatur homo per fidem absque operibus legis Quomodo intendite fratres Credit aliquis percepit fidei Sacramenta in lecto mortuus est Defuit illi operandi tempus Quid dicimus Quia non est justificatus Plane dicimus justificatum credentem in eum qui justificat impium Ergo rite justificatus est operatus non est Impletur sententia Apostoli dicentis Arbitramur justificari hominem per fidem sine operibus Legis Latro qui cum Domino crucifixus est corde credidit ad justitiam ore confessus est ad salutem Nam fides quae per dilectionem operatur etsi non sit in quo exterius operetur in corde tamen illa fervens servatur Nam erant quidam in lâ—ge qui de operibus Legis gloriabantur quae fortasse non dilectione sed timore faciebant volebant se justos videri praeponi Gentibus quae opus legis non fecerant Apostolus autem praedicans fidem Gentibus cum eos qui accedebaut ad Dominum videret justificaetos ex fide utram quia crediderant bene operarentur non quia bene opetati sunt credere mererentur exclamavit securus ait Quia potest justificari homo ex fide sine operibus Legis Vt illi magis non fuerint justi qui quod faciâ—bant timort faciâ—bant Cum fides per dilectionem operetur in corde etiamsi foris non exit in opere How workes Faith by Love And how is a man justified by Faith without the workes of the Law Brethren marke how A man believes receives the Sacraments of Faith in his bed and dies wants time of working What shall we say That he is not justified Plainly we say he is justified believing in him that justifies the wicked So he is justified but wrought not The saying of the Apostle is fulfilled I suppose a man is justified by Faith without the workes of the Law The thiefe that was crucified with our Lord believed with the heart to righteousnesse and confessed to salvation with the mouth For Faith that worketh by love when there is nothing to work upon outwardly remaines neverthelesse fervent in the heart For there were those under the Law that boasted of the workes of the Law which perhaps they did not for love but for fear and would seem righteous and be preferred before Gentiles that had not done the work of the Law But the Apostle preaching the Faith to the Gentiles and seeing those who come to the Lord justified by Faith so that they did well because they had believed and not merited to believe by well doing cries out securely and sayes that a man may be justified by saith without the workes of the Law So that they who did what they did for fear of the Law rather were not righteous Whereas faith may work by love in the heart though it go not forth in any work Againe Libro quaestionum LXXXIII quaest LXXVI Si quis cum crediderit mox de hac vita discesserit justificatio fidei manet cum illo Non praesentibus bonis operibus quia non merito ad illam sed gratia pervenit Nec consequentibus quia in hac vita esse non sinitur If a man depart out of this life straight after he hath believed the justification by faith remaineth with him good workes neither accompanying because he came not to it by merit but by grace nor following because he is not suffered to live The reason being the same for which those who depart without Baptisme if not by their own fault are held to be saved In regard whereof S. Bernard Epist LXXVII thinkes that the Gospel Mark XVI 16. Having said He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved Doth not repeat He that is not baptized shall be demned But onely He that believeth not shall be demned Here the onely case in which a Christian can be saved without good workes is when time obliges him not to bring them forth And the onely reason why the workes of the Law justifie not is Because the Spirituall obedience of the Law presupposeth faith the knowledge of the Law according to the letter reaching onely to produce the outward work without that inward disposition which onely Christianity effecteth as well as requireth A thing which S. Austine in the dispute with Pelagius so often repeateth De Spiritu Litera Cap. VIII XXIX Contra duas Epistolas Plagianorum III. 2 7. De Gratia Christi peccato Originali I. 13. II. 24. De Gratia lib. arbitrio Cap. XII Origen in Rom. III. Libro III. Indulgentia namque non futurorum sed preteritorum criminum datur Igitur ut ad praepositum redeamus justificatur homo per fidem cui ad justificationem nihil conferunt opera Legis Vbi vero fides non est quae credentem justificet etiamsi quis opera habeat ex lege tamen quiâ— non sunt adificata supra fundamentum fidei quamvis videantur esse bonâ— operatorem suum justificare non pessunt si eis deest fides quae est signaculum corum qui justificantur a Deo For faith granteth indulgence of sâ—nnes past not to come He therefore is justified by Faith to returne to our purpose to whose justification workes of the Law contribute nothing But where that faith which justifieth him that believeth is not though a man have workes according to the Law yet because they are not built upon the foundation of Faith though they seeme good they cannot justifie their workers wanting Faith which is the maâ—ke of those that are justified by God The same Origen in the same book bringeth in the example of the thiefe upon the Crosse and of the woman that had been a sinner but was saved by her Faith Luke VII to the same purpose And I will not omit the wordes of S. Jerome upon that of Isa LXIV 5. All our righteousnesse is like a menstruous ragge Libro XVII In quo considerandum quod justitia quae in Lege est ad comparationem Evangelicâ— puritatis immunditia nominetur Etenim non est glorificatum quod prius glorificatum suit propter excellentem gloriam And
of Christianity on our part under the title of the Spirit of patefaction as you may see by Volkelius Instit III. 14. Signifying hereby as it seemeth that conviction which the Spirit of God tendereth by the motives of Christianity to manifest the truth of the Gospel preventing the will with help to inable it but not effecting either the outward act or the inward resolution to do it as you may see S. Augustine distinguish upon his own words related out of his Bookes of free will De Gratia Christi I. 41. This I here lay forth on purpose to shew that I cannot come cleare of that which I have undertaken to resolve concerning the Covenant of Grace nor any man be satisfied in the difficulties that concern it without taking in hand the whole dispute concerning the free will of man and the free Grace of God For having by the premises shewed that the condition which the Covenant of Grace requires on our part is an act of free will Though such an act as compriseth the ingagement of a mans whole life to Gods service Unlesse it appeare that the grace of the holy Ghost which God found requisite for the performance of Christianity can never be ascribed to the free will of man as due to the right useof it it will not sufficiently appear how the Gospel may be called the Covenant of Grace But before I go further I must not omit to observe a great difference between Socinus and Pelagius and how that difference seems to reflect upon the present dispute For Socinus first had conceived such disgust as I said of that predestination which appoints men to life meerly in consideration of the obedience of Christ as their own for whom it was appointed Then considered well that free will serves not so long as the helps whereby we are inabled to imbrace Christ and to persevere in Christianity may be attributed to the obedience of as assigned by God to the consideration and recognizance of it And therefore found it the onely clear course of establishing that force of freewil that he had imagined without consulting the proceediugs of the Church against Pelagius to say That the merits and sufferings of Christ were not valuable for such a purchase as being a meer man from his birth onely that he was conceived not by the way of humane generation but by the holy Ghost of the blessed Virgine And that afterwards being thirty yeares of age or thereabouts according to the time that John the Baptist began to preach he was taken up into heaven to God and there made acquainted with his message of the Gospel to mankinde which he undertaking upon the perill of all the hardship which he was to indure at the Jewes hands for it it pleased God to advance him for his obedience though due as to God from his creature to be God to the true power and worship of God though in dependance upon himself originally God For the obedience of Christ being thus over rewarded in his own person it remaineth that the gift of the holy Ghost howsoever requisite to the performance of Christianity be ascribed to the meer goodnesse of God which moved him to propose the promise thereof to those who should imbrace the Gospel as a recompense for so doing not as any grace of Christ that is any help of grace given in consideration of Christ resolving a man to imbrace it It cannot be said that Pelagius had any hand in this part of Socinus his Heresie who could not have been heard in the Church at that time had he once advanced any such ground as this though so pertinent to his position as you see by Socinus But as Pelagius thought of no such thing when he began first to dispute against the grace of Christ so can it not be said that his followers never thought of having recourse to this plea as the onely clear ground for their position to stand upon could it be made good But for the truth hereof there being no cause why I should swell this Book with those things that have been said already I will remit the reader to Jansenius his August where he shall find what remaines in the records of the Church how the Pelagians went about to joyne with the Nestorians and to make our Lord Christ to have purchased his Godhead by the actions and behavoiur of his humane nature and how in this regard they remaine involved in the condemnation of Nestorius at the council of Ephesus Though whereas the beginning of this error is there ascribed to Origen it is easie to observe a vast difference between this pretense and that conceit which is found at present in his books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but whether resolutely deliverd by him may be questioned that the humane soul of Christ was chosen by God for the word to be incarnate in in consideration of that which it had done in the other world For this supposes the Godhead of Christ before his incarnation and the truth of it which Socinus his opinion to which these relations make the Pelagians to have inclined destroyeth And so it is manifest that according to Socinus there can be no such thing as the Grace of Christ according to Pelagius there is not But that which is common to both proceeds upon a supposition common to both That man is presently in the same state of free will in which he was created that the fall of our first parents did no harme to their posterity neither can their children that are baptized be baptized into the remission of sinne when they have none of their own Though for Socinus his part he laughs at the baptizing of infants who allowes the baptizing of men that have sinned themselves but as a ceremony of indifference which Pelagius though he be content to allow and require yet not to the purpose of remission of sinne in infants Now the Church of God in which the Baptisme of infants hath been practised ever since the times of the Apostles alwayes understood the Gentiles that had been left to themselves to fall away to the worship of Idols to be wholy under the power of Satan by virtue of that advantage which he had of our forefathers And the Jewes who had retired themselves to the worship of one true God so little able by that Law to withdraw themselves from under sin that few of them were vouchsafed Gods Spirit acknowledging therefore all this to proceed from the leaven of the first sinne they acknowledged the necessity of Christs coming for the cure of it the sufficience of the cure in his Godhead from everlasting and the obedience of our flesh wherein it was incarnate This being the state of the dispute it appeareth that the intent which I propose obligeth me not to dispatch without maintaining the eternall Godhead of our Lord Christ Though not so as to consider the whole controversie of the holy Trinity but onely that of the person and natures of
was unknowne and by him to his disciples whereby after the power came downe upon him from above he did miracles And that when he had suffered that which came from above flâ—w up againe from Jesus So that Jesus suffered and rose againe but the Christ which came upon him from above flew up againe without suffering which is that which came downe in the shape of a dove and that Jesus is not the Christ Where you see he makes the coming of Christ to be nothing else but an escape made by the Holy Ghost when he came upon our Lord out of the Fullnesse of the Godhead to return thither againe when he had suffered Now it is agreed upon that Cerinthus had spread his Heresies in Asia when Saint John writ his Gospell And though Epiphanius report that it was Ebion whom Saint John met with in the bath and refused to come in it so long as he was there calling away his Scholars with him Yet it must be resolved that it is a meere mistake of his memory because himselfe testifies as afore that the Heresy of Cerinthus flourished in Asia and in Galatia and because Eusebius after Irenaeus who conversed with Saint Johns Scholar Polycarpus reports it of Cerinthus As for the Heresy of Ebion it is manifest by Epiphanius himself in his Heresy that it sprung up first and flourished most in the parts of Palestine beyond or besides Jordane which they called Peraea what time the Church of Jerusalem had forsaken the City to remove themselves to Pella where God had provided for them at the destruction of it So that it appeareth not that Saint John saw the birth of it being probably removed into Asia before that time I shall therefore neede to say nothing of the Heresy of Ebion having Saint Jerome in Catalogo to witnesse that the Gospell of Saint John was written at the request of the Bishops of Asia in opposition to Cerinthus But the stocke of that evidence which I shall bring out of the Scripture for the state of our Lord Christ and his Godhead before his coming in the flesh lying therefore in the beginning of that Gospell which was writ on purpose to exclude it I shall referre the rest of that which I shall gather out of the New Testament to the sense and effect of it CHAP. XIII The Word was at the beginning of all things The apparitions of the Old Testament Prefaces to the Incarnation of Christ Ambassadors are not honoured with the honour due to their Masters The Word of God that was afterwards incarnate was in those Angels that spoke in Gods Name No Angel honoured as God under the New Testament The Word was with God at the beginning of all things as after his return THE Gospel of Saint John then beginneth thus In the beginning wâ—s the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God The same was in the beginning with God In which words the Socinians will not have the beginning to be the beginning of all things but the beginning of preaching the Gospel That is to say when John the Baptist began to preach And the Word to be the man Jesus so called because he was the man whom God had appointed to publish it So that in the beginning was the Word is in their sense When John the Baptist began to preach there was a man whom God had appointed to publish the Gospel And truly I cannot deny that the beginning here might signifie the beginning of the Gospel by the same reason as in the Scripture and in all Languages words signify more then they expresse But that reason can be no other then this because a man speakes of things mentioned afore in discourse or of that which is otherwise known to be the subject of his discourse So words signifie more then they expresse because something that is known need not be repeated at every turne What is the reason then why this addition not being expressed is to be understood Forsooth Saint Mark beginneth his Gospel thus The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Sonne of God As it is written in the Prophets Behold I send my Messenger before thy face that shall prepare thy way before thee The voice of him that cryeth in the wildernesse Prepare â—e the way of the Lord make his path plaine John was baptizing in the wildernesse Is not this a good reason Because in one Text of Saint Marke you find the beginning of the Gospel to be the preaching of John therefore wheresoever you read the beginning you are to understand by it the beginning of the Gospel At least in the beginning of S. Johns Gospel we must seek no other meaning for it But who will warrant that the word Gospel in S. Marke signifies the preaching of the Gospel as sometimes it does or this book of the Gospel which S. Mark takes in hand to write The words it is manifest may signifie either and therefore it cannot be manifest that the word beginning without any addition is put to signifie the one and not the other For if you understand the beginning of the book of the Gospel when S. John saies In the begining was the Word Their turne is not served As for the title of the Word which scarce any of the Apostles but S. John attributes to our Lord Look upon the beginning of his first Epistle That which was from the beginning which we have heard and seen and our hands have handled of the Word of Life for the Life hath been manifested and we have seen and bear witnesse and declare unto you that everlasting Life which was with the Father and hath been manifested unto us That which we have heard and seen declare we unto you Here it must be a man that S. John calls the Word when he speakes not onely of hearing but of seeing and handling the Word of Life But when he saies that the Word was with God from the beginning and since hath been made manifest to us is there nothing but the man and his office of preaching the Gospel to be considered for the reason why he is called the Word What meant then the Apostle Ebr. IV. 12 13 The Word of God is quick and active and cutteth beyond any two edged sword and cometh so farre as to divide between the soul and the spirit to the joints and marrow and judgeth the thoughts and conceits of the heart Neither is any creature obscure to it but all things naked and bare to the eyes of him whom we have to do with Where you see he begins his discourse concerning the Gospel but ends it in God And therefore attributes to the gospel under the name of the Word those things which onely God can do because to the Author of it under the Name of the Word he attributes the knowledge and governing of all things For the reason then why our Lord is called the Word we must have recourse to that which the most ancient
in the stream then it was in the fountaine And therefore though the terms of the Scripture agreeing with those which the most ancient Fathers of the Church use may justly authorize and bring into use those expressions which have not been usuall upon a due understanding of the intent to which they are used yet is there no power in the Church to render those terms which have passed for Christian and Catholick in the Primitive times of the Church suspected of Heresie in these times Origen is strongly charged by the ancient times in particular by Epiphanius as the Seminary of the Arians And that the Arians might not have advantage by many of his sayings were too much to undertake and that which my businesse no way requires The Socinians have made their advantages of Erasmus his writings And is any man so silly as to imagine that Erasmus was therefore of Socinus his Faith Have they not made the like use of Maldonate and his Commentaries upon the Gospels And is there any appearance that his meaning should be that of Socinus I will not therefore deny that the Cardinall du Perron in his answer to King James pag. 633. does acknowledge that Arius were able to maintaine himself within compasse of Tradition were he to be tried by the Fathers before the Council of Nicaea But I give the Reader notice that this is the consequence and the interest of that position which deriveth Tradition of Faith from an expresse act of the present Church supposing the matter of it not to have been of force and effectually acknowledged in all ages of the Church Which if it were true in this case then could no man be obliged to believe the Trinity as matter of Faith Though it might remaine questionable whether or no a man may be obliged to conform to it as consistent with the Faith and not to scandalize the unity of the Church by rejecting the act and decree of it according to the Position setled in the first book I will further acknowledge that I have seen an answer to Crellius the Socinians book de Deo by one Botsaccus now of Danzick I take it in the end whereof I find a number of exceptions made by the Socinians in their writings which I have not seen against the Faith of all that writ before Constantine in particular as inconsistent with that of Nicaea the particulars whereof because I have not seen the books and therefore cannot presume to answer particularly I could not here repeate would the model of my book give leave In general whosoever will take the paines to peruse that which is there alledged shall perceive First that those who alledge them fall out among themselves perpetually sometimes and for some sayings challenging Tertulliane for example or Clement or Origen for one of them that believe not the Trinity otherwise disowning them as those that helped to introduce the Faith of it But no where remembring themselves concerned to make good that which they maintaine out of the words of Hegesippus in Eusebius that the Faith of the whole Church was defloured presently upon the death of the Apostles and to shew that such a change did indeed come to passe in the Faith of the holy Trinity Secondly that there is no more difficulty in reducing the sense of their sayings there questioned to the sense of the Church after the Councile of Nicaea then in reducing the sense of Athanasius when he alloweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be understood of the proceeding of the Sonne from the Father of everlasting Or the sense of all these Fathers that understood the Father is greater then I of the priviledge of the originall and author which the Father of necessity hath personally above the Sonne and the holy Ghost the Godhead being one and the same to the same sense One passage of Tertulliane I have thought worth the clearing because it seems to containe a remarkable conceit of his in expounding the words of Solomon in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the sense of the Church so many years before Arius built his heresie in a manner upon it The words are in his book contra Hermogenem Cap. III. Quia pater Deus est judex deus est non tamen ideo Pater semper judex semper quia Deus semper Nam nec Pater potuit esse ante Flium nec judex ante delictum Fuit autem tempus cum delictum filius non fuit quod judicem qui patrem Dominuâ— facâ—reâ— For God also is Father and God is judge and yet not alwayes Father and judge because alwayes God For neither could he be Father before a Sonne nor judge before sinne But there was a time when neither sinne was to make God a judge nor Sonne to make God a Father He that reads this onely would think at a blush that it is the very marke of Arius his haerâ—sie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a time when the Son was not But the answer is in his book contra Praxeam Cap. V. Ante omnia enim Deus erat solus ipse sibi mundus locus omnia Solus autem quia nihil aliud extrinsecus prâ—ter illum Caeterum ne tunc quideâ— solus Habebat enim secum quam habebat in semetipso Rationem suam scilicet Rationalis enim Deus ratio in ipso prius ita in ipso omnia Quâ— ratio sensus ipsius est Hanc Graeci 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicunt quâ— vocabulâ— sermonem etiam appellamus Ideâ—que in usu est nostrorum per simplicitatem interpretationis Sermonem dicere in primordio apud Deum fuisse cum magis rationem competat antiquiorem â—aberi quia non sermonalis a principio sed rationalis Dâ—us etiam ante principium Et quia ipse quoque sermo ratione consistens priorem eam ut substantiam suâ—m â—stendat Tamen sic nihil interest Nam â—tsi Deus nondum sermonem suum miserat proinde â—um cum ipsa in ipsa ratione intra semetipsum habebat â—acite cogitando disputandâ— secum quae per sermonem mox erat dicturus Cum ratione enim sua cogitans atque disponens sermonem eam efficiebat quâ—m sermone tractabat For before all things God was alone to himself both World and place and all But alone because without there was nothing besides him otherwise even then not alone For he had with him that which he had in him his reason forsooth For God is reasonable and reason was in him before and so all things This reason is his sense This the Greek calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which name also we call speech Therefore our people use for one translation to say that speech was in the beginning with God Whereas it is more pertinent that reason should be counted more ancient because God spokâ— it from the beginning but had reason even before the beginning And
Irenaeus expresly maintaineth him one and the same God with the Father and true God and his generation ineffable without beginning and from everlasting Clemens makes him God â—quall to God as his Sonne Origen not in any work now extant that may be questioned but as he is alledged by Athanasius de decretis Synodi Niceâ—ae saies of him that if there be any image of God who is invisible that image must also be invisible with a great deal more to the same purpose where he also quotes Theognostus in secundo hypopseon affirming the same at large to set aside those that are questioned And shall we not think our selves obliged so to understand their words which the importunity of Heresies have made questionable that they may consist and agree with those which remaine unquestionable Especially all of them agreeing in this That the world was made and is governed by Christ And that the whole dispensation of God tending to the salvation of mankinde whether before the Law or under the Law as well as since his appearing in the flesh was executed by him as a preface and prologue to his coming in the flesh a supposition which all seem to ground themselves upon especially against the Jewes in giving account of our common Christianity That our Faith is in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost That we are to glorifie to worship and to be baptized in the Name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost And in counting all Hereticks that denied it For communion with the Church not communicating with those who believe it not because they believe it not is an evidence which no words of doubtfull construction can obscure in the judgement of any man that is reasonable Nay among the very heathen that have made any mention of the Christian Faith doth not Plinies Epistle concerning the Christians acknowledge that they sung hymns to Christ as to God Doth not Lucian in his Philopatris manifestly expresse the Faith of the Trinity as the cognizance of Christians at that time hath it not appeared by these inventions wherewith the Gnosticks sophisticated it that the Fulness of the Godhead consists in the Trinity according to the Christian Faith as according to the severall Sects of them in their severall inventions That the Christians honoured and worshipped the blessed Trinity as those Sects did those imaginatitions of their own which they call the Fullnesse of the Godhead When Ebion Cerinthus Artemon Theodorus and after them Sabellius Noetus Praxâ—as and Paâ—lus Samosatenus were disowned by the whole Church and excluded the communion of all Christians did not all Churches that agreed in refusing them find themselves possessed of a contrary Faith as the reason for which they were refused Were all Christians out of their simplicity cunning enough to assoile all the reasons whereby these and Arius to boot did or might argue their pretenses from texts of Scripture Or did they think themselves bound to rest in the visible consent of the whole Church whether they were able to do that or not In fine the learned Jesuite Petavius in the Preface to his books de Trinitate and the beginning of the first as he hath evidently shewed that the substance of the faith of the Trinity is acknowledged by these ancient Christians some of whose words seem to disparage the Godhead of our Lord Christ So he indeavoureth to shew that they did it out of a desire to reconcile the faith with the doctrine of Plato and his followers If his opinion be admitted there will remaine evidence enough for the Tradition of Faith even in their writings whose skill in the Scriptures goes not the right way to maintaine it The plain song will be good musick though the descant transgresse Though for my part having seen what he hath said I repent me not of that which I had conceived out of Tertullianâ— That out of a desire to reconcile the creation of wisdome in the Proverbs according to the Greek not the doctrine of Plato with the rule of Faith they conceived this a supposition fit to do it That by Gods proceeding to create the World his mind or wisdome which incarnate is our Lord Christ attained not the essence and being which it had in God from everlasting but the denomination and quality of his Word and Sonne For you shall find there that most of them concurre in the speculations of Tertulliane Whereby you may see that this learned Jesuite is not agreed with the Cardinall du Perron to deny the reason why we hold the Faith of the holy Trinity originally from the decree of the Council of Nicâ—a and from that authority of the Church which maintaineth it But from the reason whereupon that decree was grounded and made That is from the meaning of the Scriptures expressed and limited by the Tradition of the Church And therefore not burthening my self here with the expounding of all those passages of their writings before Arius which may seem to derogate from the Tradition of the Church in that point I shall referre the Reader to those things whereby he showeth that they do unanimously concurre in maintaining the same Faith For if there be amongst them that have had speculations tending to reconcile some Scriptures to it which are not onely ill grounded as I dispute not but this of Tertulliane is but also prejudiciall to the Faith as some of Origens whom I have mentioned already That this is to be imputed to the inconsequence of their severall discourses not to any difference in their common Faith I remit you to that which he hath said to judge Onely whereas he de Trinitate II. 2. hath given you a full account of those Fathers which expound the words of our Lord The Father is greater then I to be meant of his Godhead which I have onely named in gross I will advise you again hereupon that many things which are said of the Sonne as inferior to the Father as when he is said to Minister unto the Father in creating the World may be imputed not to any inequality in that Godhead which is the same in all the Trinity but unto the manner of having it the Father originally as the Fountaine the Sonne and the holy Ghost as from him wherein the difference of the persons consisteth To the same Petavius de Trinitate VIII 2. I remit them that would be satisfied of the sense of the Fathers in that which I alledged for the reason why our Lord is called the Word by S. John To wit that the intercourse between God and man after the fall was executed and managed by his Ministry Not because I think this name of the Word unfit to signifiy the originall proceeding of the Sonne from the Father much lesse his concurrence in and to the creation of all things But because believing as I do that the mystery of the Trinity is revealed by the coming of our Lord I find great reason to conceive that his Apostle intended thereby to intimate
Chaldee of Oâ—kelus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nunc enim aderat mihi â—t mitterem For it was now neere me to stretch forth my hand That is I was neere doing it Perhaps signifies neither more nor lesse And if S. Paul translates part of iâ— word for word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For this cause have I raised thee up that I might sâ—ew my power upon thee Yet is that nothing to the sense of that which went afore nor to argue any intent in S. â—aul to give occasion for those horrible imaginations that have been framed upon these words as if God made Pharo and all in his case on purpose to shew his power and get glory by damning them to everlasting torments For it followes a litle after in S. Paul What if God wiâ—ling to shâ—w his wrath and make knowne his power have borne with much long â—uffering the vessels of wrath fit for destruction And that to make knowne the riches of his Glory upon vessels of mercy which he had prepared for glory In which words it is manifest that God spared the life of Pharao in the plague of pestilence though then fit for destruction For by this discourse it appeares 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifiâ—s Fit of themselves not fitted by God out of his long suffering though willing that is determining to make his power knowne by destroying him proving utterly obdurate But this out of an intent by the consideration of what they had seen come upon him to win his owne people from the Idolatry of Egypt to submit to his law As when S. Paul writ by the judgements of God upon the Jews for rejecting Christianity he called the gentiles to it For this is the inference that S. Paul makes in the next words Which are even we whom he hath called not onely of the Jews but of the Gentiles Introducing in the same words that comparison between the Jews whom he then called to the Law and the Gentiles whom he was now calling to Christianity which the correspondence between the Old and New testament importeth And so the sense of S. Paul is the same with that which S. â—eter said in the words quoted afore that God delaies his wrath in taking vengeance upon the oppressors of his people because he would have none of them perish but all come to repentance The sense which I deliver you have in Grotius his Annotations before the publishing of them in a booke of Miletrius concerning this subject since in the late Annotations and before any of them came forth many yeares I had declared it for my sense of these words By which you may see that Pharao seeing himselfe and his people not cut off when their cattle were destroyed by the pestilence did not believe that it came from God And also when God had declared his purpose in preserving him alive to terrifie him the more and when he had caused the plague of Haile to cease which then he moveth him with is by the love of rule over those whom by right he had nothing â—o doe with perswaded to breake his promise of letting them goe when it should cease Moses having told him that he would breake it Ex. IX 27-35 And because God knew that these temptations would prevaile over Pharao therefore he had foretold the plagues and the deliverance of his people upon them Ex. III. 19. VI. 2. anâ— therefore it is truly said both that God hardned Pharos heart to wit by causing him to meet with these considerations which made him neglect the plague For that which elsewâ—eâ—e is called hardening of his heart is called not setting his heart upon the plague â—x VII 23. and that Pharao hardened his heart or that his heart was hard Ex. VII 3. 13. VIII 10 15. IX 7. 12 34 X. â— v 20. Lastly observe that when Pharao had let the people goe God led them not by the way of the land of the Philistiâ—s which was the neerest because God said lest the people repent them when they see war and returne into Egypt But made them goe about by the way of the wildernesse of the Red Sea Ex XIII 17. 18. And againe Ex. XIV 1-5 God spake to Moses saying speake to the children of Israel and let them return and incamp against Pâ—â—hahiroth between Migdol and the Sea before Baalsephon even against it shall they incampe beside the Sea And Pharao will say of the children of Israel they are intangled in the land the wildernesse hath inclosed them And I will harden Pharaâ—hs heart and he shall pursue them and I will get glory upon Pharao and all his host and the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord. And they did so And it was told the King of Egypt that the people â—led For it is to be observed that God had not yet required of Pharo that he should let them free for ever though he had made him let them goe withouâ— any promise of returne When therefore he sees on the one side that the meaning of God was not that they should return any more which made him so unwilling to let them goe as alwaies supposing it And on the other side that by their undiscreet march as he thought which God had provided for another cause there was hope to bring them backâ—â—â— is old thoughts revived that all these plagues come not from God but otherwise that he might yet bâ—â—ng them under his rule Whereby it is most evident First that the destruction of Pharaâ— was designed by God through these meanes in consideration First of oppressing his people then his impenitence upon these extraordinary tryals Then that it appeared to him that they wouâ—d take effect when he saith Pharao will say they are intangled in the land and that this is the hardening of Pharaos heart by God And hereupon dependeth that which is said of the Egyptians Wisdome XIX 1 2. But wrath without mercy pursueth the wicked unto the end because he also had foreseen what they should doe in time to câ—me To wit that repenting themselves they would straightway pursue those whom they should have leâ— goe diligently intreating them to depart Seeing the impenitenâ—e and unbeliefe of their obdurate hearts to have been such that there by it appeared to God how upon the first overturne they would returne to their first hope of reducing the Israelites to their bondage See the like in the enemies that God raised Solomon to punish his idol a tries 1 Kings XI 14-23-26 Hadad the Edomiâ—e having escaped into Egypt every man knowâ—s that jealousies between neighbouring Princes makes them ready to entertaine their Neighbours Enemies though under colour oâ— relieving of the oppressed even when the cause is noâ— cleare And though â—adad were never so welâ—ome in Egypt yet every man knowes what diffâ—rence there is between râ—â—â—ng at home and courâ—ing Pharao in Egypt And can there remaine any question how God raised Hadad for an enemy to Slâ—mon Hâ—w but by providing that
paines to make them partizans in questions which they understand not and give them the confidence to censure for Arminians those that resolve them in such termes as they comprehend not Neverthelesse at the last judgement of God they may have cause to complaine of them if not for teaching them to tye knoâ—s which they cannot teach them to loose yet for inducing them to breake the peace of the Church to obtaine freedome of professing or imposing upon others the beliefe of things thus prejudiciall to Christianity In the meane time it shall be enough for me by this short resolution to have drawn a line which they that will tread the Labyrinth of this dispute may be guided by the best that I can show from falling headlong on either side Not doubting that the skill of those who being more traded in it resolve to avoid both extremities may produce that information which may oblige me for further intelligence as well as the rest of the Church But having confidence that the denying of Gods Predetermination is not the denying of Gods effectuall Grace which I have showed that it doth stand with freewill according to the supposition that I advance though I undertake not to show how reason reconciles the parts of it And truly I am confident that when S. Austine in his book de Correptione Gratia distinguishes between that help of Grace without which we cannot obay the Gospell of Christ and that help by which we do it auxilium quo auxilium sine quo non and whensoever else he makes the efficacy of Grace to attaine the doing of that which it effecteth not onely the inabling of man to do it he never intended to determine the maner how it is effected For though S. Austin himselfe hath balked the ground which himselfe had laid for the distinction between the antcedent and consequent will of God in his book de Spiritu litera Chap. XXXIII by bringing in other expositions of S. Pauls words God would have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledg of the truth that are inconsistent with it Though I have not found him distinguish betweene necessity upon supposition and antecedent as Anselme in pursuance of his Doctrine hath don yet he that shall read what he hath said of the redemption of all mankind upon Psalm XCV besides abundance of other passages whereby he concurreth to witnesse that sense of the redemption of all mankind of Gods will that all be saved of sufficient Grace that is not effectuall which the Church generally declareth as I showed you before I say he that considereth them will find it more reasonable to reconcile him to his owne doctrine then to pretend a change in his judgement where he acknowledges none as in the mater of preventing Grace he doth not acknowledge Certainely seeing that Prosper in defending him frequently and clearely acknowledges Christ to have dyed for all mankind out of Gods will that all might be saved But the author of the book de â—â—catione Gentium never yet suspected for a partizane of the Semipelagians hath so plentifully maintained it during the time that the parties in Gaule charged one another for Semipelagians and Praedestinatians For during that time was it writ without peradventure they will never deserve well of S. Austine that defend him otherwise So far are we from being obliged by his doctrine to acknowledge grace to come to effect by Gods predetermining the wil of man to all that coms to passe when I have shâ—wed a supposition according to which it may be don without prejudice to Christianity though beyond my understanding to show how For supposing the common faith to be this That God appointeth them to life or to death whom he foreseeth to imbrace or not imbrace Christianity and to persevere or not persevere in the practice of it till death Can it not be true also that he hath appointed some and not others the meanes whereby he foresees that they will persevere Nay if some only persevere in the state of Grace when all might as the Council of Orange hath decreed what is there but Gods will to create the difference much more between them that never heare of the Gospell and those that refuse it And what hath Christianity hereupon to answer but Porphyries question why Christ came not afore That is why God suffered man to fall and sin to come into the world Why he maketh not all men true Christians when he might For one answer would serve all these questions Which if it be a scandall to Christianity that it is not answered it remaines that Christians be Porphyries disciples In the mean time absolute predestination to grace infers not absolute predestination to glory Nor obliges God to procure sin as the meanes to his end or as the meanes to that meanes to predetermine mans will to doe it But did Saint Austines doctrine in my opinion containe any thing contrary to the doctrine of the rest of the Church concerning the antecedent consequent will of God the coming of evill into the world and that the foreknowledge of God does not effect but suppose it the freedome of the will from necessity while slave to sin I would think my selfe obliged to renounce him that I might adhere to the rest of the Church Counting it a thing ridiculous and contrary to the principles of Christian truth acknowledging the tradition of Faith to come from the whole Church to advance the doctrine of a member thereof though so eminent as S. Austine against that which the rest of the Church is acknowledged to have taught If iâ— be said that the supposition of Gods foreseeing the event of mens resolutions by the objects and considerations which he appoints them to be moved with is an invention of the Jesuites or at least hath been much maintained by them I demand what advantage they have that espouâ—e the supposition of the Dominicans the first Inquisitors that is Ministers of persecution for Religion by the interest of the Church of Rome with secular powers Especially adding unto it the position of justifying faith by believing that we are predestinate so destructive to the Covenant of Grace Yet I give the reader that is willing to take the paines of being informed notice that the supposition which I advance is rather in the forme that is to be collected out of Durandus then in that which the Iesuites since have given it In fine let Maldonat and Jesuites think it their honour to professe that they like not such and such expositions of scripture because they come from the Hereticks by which names we know whom they meane Let Puritan preachers coâ—fe their simple heareâ—s with a prejudice against all that they like not as drawne from Arminians or Jesuites whose positions they understood not and when they are understood are nearer the truth then their owne I shall find my selfe never the lesse oâ—liged to follow that truth for Christs sake which I
goods of it depending upon the same it is manifest that whether the sacrifices which the Congregation was bound to offer of course upon ordinary or solemne dayes or those which purged legall impurities inferring onely incapacities of conversing which Gods people or those which were offered for sinnes properly so called or for acknowledgment of blessings received or whatsoever they were all were made an offered upon the generall claime to the land of promise and every mans share in it Neither is there any greater argument hereof then this That there is no sacrifice appointed by the Law for capitall offenses Num. XV. 23. 27. 28. 29. as those which the Law deprived of all interest in the land of promise all right to converse among Gods people Which what it signified to Christians you may see by the apostle Ebr. II. â— X. 28. to wit that they who stick not to the termes of their Christianity must expect so much the heavier vengeance at Gods hands And therefore when the Apostle argues Ebr. X. 4 It is impossible that the blood of bulls and goates should take away sinne The answer is given by the same Apostle Ebr. IX 13. If the blood of bulls and of goates and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the defiled sanctifieth to the purity of the â—lesh That it takes not away the guilt of sinne from the conscience which shuts heaven upon us but it takes away the incapacity of coming into the Tabernacle or conversing among Gods people or other forfeitures of legall promises And therefore I may conclude that the sacrifices which the Law was established with Ex. XX. 4 â—â— though not expiatory gave the people right to the land of promise to wit as done to solemnize their resolution of submitting to the Law For the people having beene Idolaters in Aegypt as we understand by the Prophet Ezek XX. 6. 7. and now submitting to a Covenant with God for the land of promise by obeying his Law are they not thereby accepted by God for heires of it This seemes indeede not to stand well with the opinion of the Fathers S. Chrysostome Theodoret and divers others the best expositers of the Scriptures that the ancient Church hath that the sacrifices of the Law were appointed by God not of his owne originall intent but upon occasion of their pronenesse to worship Idols as the Hethen did granting them those rites which they had knowne them serve their idols with so as they might be performed after that perticulare manner which he should injoyne as done to him alone And this they make the meaning of the Prophet when he saith that God commanded their Fathers nothing concerning Sacrifices at their coming out of Aegypt Jer. VII 22. because we see that in theire first coming out of Aegypt he treates with them about keeping his Lawes but not about sacrifices Ex. XV. 25. 26. But nothing hinders those sacrifices which were brought in occasionally to have been intended to figure the sacrifice of Christ As nothing hinders those sacrifices which from the beginning had been dâ—livered the Fathers as pleges of Gods love to them through Christ to be by the malice of the devill diverted and imployed to the service of Idols Certainly the Fathers before the floud sacrificed nothing but whole burnt offeringes because at that time they were not to eate of their sacrifices feeding onely on things that grew out of the earth Gen. I 28. For afterwards when he gave the sons of Noe license to eat flesh Noe offered peace offerings whereof part being burnt upon the Altare the rest went to the use of those that had sacrificed to â—east upon Gen. VIII 19. 20. IX 4. And those which Moses solemnized the Covenant of the Law with were holocausts and peace offerings Exod. XXIV 5. those which the Law makes properly explatory being afterwards introduced by the Law Now that all sacrifices are figures of Christ we have not onely the generall reason premised but particulare instances in the New Testament The Paschall Lambe 1 Cor. V. 7. The holocausts and peace offeringes which the Law was inacted with Exod. XXIV 5. Ebr. IX 18-22 together with all those the blood whereof purgeth by the Law The daily burnt offeringes of the Congregation Ebr. X. 1. for Socinus is ridiculously willfull to understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there once a yeare as if the speech were onely of the sacrifice for the day of atonement and by consequence all anniversary oblations And whereas Socinus observes that no lambe is appointed by the Law for a Propitiatory sacrifice I suppose when the Baptist saith John 1. 36. Behold the lambe of God that takes away the sinnes of the world when S. John saith Apoc. 1 5. To him that loved us and hath washt us from our sinnes in his bloude when the Martyrs say Apoc. V. 9. Thou wast killed and hast brought us to God out of every kinred and tribe and language and nation when the Apostle Apoc. XIII 8. mentions those whose names are not written in the booke of life of the Lambe slaine from the foundation of the world These I suppose knew well enough what creatures were sacrificed and yet declare that Christ was figured by Lambes to what purpose let their words argue It is manifest indeed that the Epistle to the Ebrues argues most upon the anniversary sacrifice of the day of atonement whereof one thing I must observe to him concerning the accomplishment of that which it figureth that as he maketh it together with all other sacrifices the bloud whereof is sprinkled upon the Arke to signify Christ crucified without the walls of Jerusalem So he maketh the sacrifice of Christ crucified signified thereby a pâ—ace offering for the Church to feed upon as we doe in the sacrament of the Eucharist though by the Jewes not to be touched because they killed it without the City as abominable Ebr. XIII 8-16 But Socinus will not have this sacrifice made at least not perfected nor Christ an High Preist till he entred into the heavens to present it to God as the High Priest into the Holy of Holies to sprinkle the blood How then is he figured by those sacrifices the blood whereof is not caried within the vaile I grant the sacrifice of Christ is not done till Christ come to judgment as that was not done till the High Priest came out of the Holy of Holies declaring the accepting of it Levit XVI 18 19 20. But as he must Be an High Priest that sacrificed what God accepted so must Christ be High priest before he was killed And therefore a sacrifice as the Apostle expressely saith Ebr. X. 26 27 28. That having abolished sinne by the sacrifice of himselfe he shall appeare againe to the salvation of them that expect him As the High Priest out of the Holy of Holies The same is many wayes evident by Ebr. IX 14-20 For where Socinus will have Christ to offer himselfe unspotted to God by the â—ternall Spirit by presenting
Certainly the word Do this is that which the whole action is grounded upon as pretending to execute it and therefore the effect of it so far as consecrating the Eucharist is already come to passe when the Church may say This is our Lords Body this is his bloud as our Lord said This is my body this is my bloud But the strength of this resolution I confesse lies in the consent of the Church and those circumstances visible in the practice thereof which to them that observe them with reason are manifest evidences of this sense I have observed in a Book of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church p. 347-370 the passâ—ges of divers of the most ancient Writers of the Church in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or giving thanks is put for consecrating the Eucharist Unto which adde the words of Irenaeus in Eusebius Eccles Hist V. 20. concerning the then Bishop of Rome Anicetus when Polycarpus was there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is hee gave way to Polycarpus to celebrate the Eucharist For seeing that this Sacrament that is the Elements consecrated are called the Eucharist all over the Church from this thanks-giving the act thereof passing upon them to give them by way of Metonymie this name What can be more reasonable than to grant that it is this act and not the rehersal of the words of the Gospel which relate what our Lord did and said in instituting as well as celebrating it by which the consecâ—ation is performed Though on the oâ—her side I insist that these words have alwayes been rehearsed by the Church in consecrating the Eucharist and ought still to be frequented and among them those which our Lord said when hee delivered it This is my body This is my bloud which now the whole School thinks to be the onely operâ—tive words in that change which the making of the Elemâ—nts to become the Sacrament imports I have also showed in the same place that S. Paul when hee saith 1 Cor. XIV 16 17. For if thou blesse by the Spirit hee that fills the place of an Idâ—ot or private perâ—on how shall hee say the Amen upon this thanks-giving For hee knoweth not what thou sayest For thou indeed givest thanks well but the other is not edified by blessing and giving thanks means the consecrating of the Eucharist which thoâ—e that hâ—d the grâ—ce of Languages among the Corinthians undertook then to do in unknown tongues and are therefore reproved by the Apostle Because it may appear by the constant practice of the whole Church that it ended with an Amen of the people which S. Paul therefore calls the Amen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to wit that was used in that case And also that when hee writeth to Timothy I exhort therefore first of all to make supplications prayers intercessions thanks-givings for all men For Kings and all that are in eminence that wee may lead a peaceable and quiet life in all piety and gravity hee intends to châ—rge that at the celebration of the Eucharist which here hee calleth Thanks-givings prayers be made as for all states of men so especially for publick Powers and Princes Because S. Augustine S. Ambrose and the Author de Vocatione Gentium I. 12. do expresly testifie unto us that the custome which the Church then and always afore and since hath had to do this came from this Ordinance of S. Paul and containeth the fulfilling of it And because it is manifest by all the forms of Liturgie in all Churches that are yet extant and by the mention made of the maner of it upon occasion in the writings of the Fathers that the Eucharist was never to be celebrated without prayer for all states of Christs Church And this indeed is a great part of the evidence which I pretend There are extant yet in several Languages several Liturgies that is forms of that complete Service of God by Psalmes and Lessons and Sermons and Prayers the Crown whereof was the Eucharist as that of S. Mark of S. James of S. Peter S. Basil S. Chrysostome which are the forms that were used in their Churches of Alexandria Jerusalem Rome Caesarea Constantinople though not as they had from the beginning appointed but as Prelates of authority and credit had thought fit to adde to or take froâ— or châ—nge that which they from the beginning had appointed There is besides the Canon of the Roman Masse that is the Canonical or Regular Prayâ—r which the Eucharist is consecrated with which is the same in Latine with that of S. Peter in Greek upon the mater as of a truth the Greek is but the Translation of the Latine it seems for the use of these Greeks in Italy that follow the Church of Rome and that of S. Ambrose at Milane three translated out of Arâ—biâ—k by the Mâ—ronites at Rome the Ethiopick translated â—into Latine many Canons called by them Anaphora in the Maronites Missal lately printed at Rome in the Syriack one of the Christians of S. Thomas in the East-Indies in Latine In all these you shall observe a Prayer to begin where the Deacon formerly saying Sursum corda Lift up your hearts the people answered Habemus ad Dominum Wee lift them up unto the Lord. The subject of it is at least where any length is allowed it to praise God for creating the world and maintaining Man-kind through his providence with the fruits of the earth Then after acknowledgement of Adams Fall for using first those means of reclaiming Man-kind unto God which wee find by the Scriptures that it pleased God to use under the Law of Nature first by the Patriarches then under the Law of Moses by the Prophets then sending our Lord Christ to redeem the world Upon which occasion rehearsing how hee instituted the Eucharist at his last Supper prayer is made that the Holy Ghost coming down upon the present Elements may sanctifie them to become the body and bloud of Christ so that they which receive them may be filled with his Grace This being so visible in so many of these Liturgies shall wee say that all that followes after the Deacons warning let us give thanks makes up that which the ancient Church after S. Paul by a peculiar term of art as it were calls the Eucharist or Thanksgiving Or that the Sacrament which taketh the name from it is consecrated onely by rehearsing those words which our Lord said when hee delivered it This is my body this is my bloud Especially all reason in the world inforcing that the presence of the body and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist being that which God promiseth upon the observation and performance of his institution and appointment cannot be ascribed to any thing else In the Latine Masse before the rehersal of the Institution they pray thus Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quaesumus benedictam ascriptam ratam rationabilem acceptabilemque facere digneris Vt nobis corpus sanguis
a prejudice peremptorily over-ruling all the pety exceptions that our time hath produced to dissolve this Unity which ought to have been preferred before them had they been just and true as none of them proveth CHAP. XXIV The Service of God to be prescribed in a known Language No pretense that the Latine is now understood The means to preserve Unity in the Church notwithstanding The true reason of a Sacrifice inforceth Communion in the Eucharist What occasions may dispense in it Communion in both kindes commanded the People Objections answered Who is chargeable with the abuse I Would now make one Controversie more how much soever I pretend to abate Controversies than hitherto hath been disputed between the Reformation and the Church of Rome because though wee hear not of it in our books of Controversies yet in deed and in practice it is the most visible difference between the exercice of Religion in the two professions that you can name For what is it that men go to Church for but to hear a Sermon on one side and to hear a Mass on the other side And yet among so many books of Controversies who hath disputed whether a man is rather to go to Church to hear a Sermon or not to hear a Mass but to receive the Eucharist This is the reason indeed why I dispute not this Controversie because the Mass should be the Eucharist but by abuses crept in by length of time is become something else untill I can state the question upon such terms as may make the reason of Reformation visible Whether the celebration of the Eucharist is to be done in a Language which the people for the most part understand not in Latine as the Mass supposing the most part understand it not is first to be setled before wee inquire what it is that Christians chiefly assemble themselves for Though the question concerns not the Eucharist any more than the other offices of Gods publick Service onely as the Eucharist if it prove the principal of them is principally concerned in it I am then to confesse in the beginning that those of the Church of Rome have a strong and weighty objection against mee why they ought not to give way that the Service of the Church though in a form preseribed by the Church as I require should be celebrated in the Vulgar Languages which every people understand The objection is drawn from that which wee have seen come to pass For the Service of the Church the form and terms of it being submitted to the construction of every one because in English hath given occasion to people utterly unable to judg either how agreeable maters excepted against are to Christianity or how necessary the form to the preservation of unity in the Church first to desire a change then to seek it in a way of fact though by dissolving the Unity of this Church For hee that maintains as I do that whatsoever defects the form established may have are not of waight to perswade a change in case of danger to Unity And secondly that those who have attempted the change have not had either the lot or the skill to light upon the true defects of it but to change for the worse in all things considerable must needs affirm that otherwise they could never have had the means to possess mens fansies with those appearances of reason for it which have made them think themselves wise enough to undertake so great a change And truly there is nothing so dangerous to Christianity as a superficial skill in the Scriptures and maters of the Church Which may move them that are puffed up with it to attempt that for the best which it cannot inable them for to see that so it is indeed Whereas they who hold no opinion in maters above their capacity because concerning the state of the whole are at better leisure to seek their salvation by making their benefit of the order provided Seeing then it cannot be denied that the benefit of having the Service of God prescribed by the Church in our Vulgar English hath occasioned so great a mischief as the destruction of it it seems the Church of Rome hath reason to refuse children edge tools to cut themselves with in not giving way to the publick Service of God in the Vulgar Languages Unless it could be maintained that no form ought to be prescribed which is all one as to say that there ought to be no Church in as much as there can be no Unity in the Faith of Christ and the Service of God according to the same otherwise Now that you may judg what effect this objection ought to have wee must remember S. Pauls dispute upon another occasion indeed but from the same grounds and reasons which are to be alleged for the edification of the Church in our case God had stirred up many Prophets in the Church of Corinth together with those who celebrated the mysteries of Christianity in unknown Languages and others that could interpret the same in the Vulgar partly out of an intent to manifest to the Gentiles and Jews his own presence in his Church including and presupposing the truth of Christianity but partly also for the instruction of the people novices in Christianity for a great part in the truth of it and for the celebration of those Offices wherewith hee is to be served by his Church It came to pass that divers puffed up with the conceit of Gods using them to demonstrate his presence among his people took upon them to bring forth those things which the Spirit of God moved them to speak in unknown Languages at the publick assemblies of the Church Who might indeed admire the work of God but could neither improve their knowledg in his truth nor exercice their devotion in his praises or those prayers to him which were uttered in an unknown Language This is that which the Apostle disputeth against throughout the fourteenth Chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians making express mention of Prayers Blessings which I have showed to be the consecration of the Eucharist and Psalms ver 14-17-26 and concluding v. 27 28. that no man speak any thing in the Church though it be that doctrine those prayers or praises of God which his own Spirit suggesteth unless there be some body present that can interpret Which what case can there fall out for the Church which it reacheth not For you see S. Paul excludeth out of the Church even the dictates of Gods Spirit evidencing his presence in the Church by miraculous operations unless they may be interpreted for the edification and direction of the Church What can hee then admit for the Service of God in the name of his Church or for the instruction thereof which it can neither be instructed by nor offer unto him for his service Nay what cause can there be why the Church should meet according to S. Paul if there be nothing done that is understood What
the same effect there is no cause why he should be excused of Idolatry for his paines But withall he cannot be excused of contradicting himselfe as grossely as he that maintaines those Saints or Angels to be that one true God whom he acknowledges not to be that God but his creatures If there be reason to presume that they who acknowledge Saints or Angels their Mediators Intercessors or advocates to God intend to commit Idolatry by contradicting themselves thus grossely there may be reason to thinke that they count them their Mediators Intercessors or Advocates to God to that effect to which Christ alone is our Mediator Intercessor or Advocate But if whosoever is accepted to pray for an other is necessarily by so doing his Mediator Intecessor or Advocate to him with whom he is admitted to deal on his behalfe by his prayers then will it be necessary to limite the worke of mediation to that effect which may be allowed to the intercession of the Saints or Angels for us if we will have them to be to purpose Certainely neither could Iob intercede for his friends nor Samuel for the Israelites nor Abraham for Abimelech or Pharao nor any of Gods Prophets for any that had or were to have recourse to them for that purpose but they must be by so doing Mediators intercessors and Advocates for them with God For neither can the mediation of Saints or Angels nor of any prophet or other that can be persumed to have favour with God be to any effect but that which the termes of that reconciliation which our Lord Christ hath purchased for us doe settle or allow But he that saith the Saints and Angels pray for us saith not that we are to pray to Saints or Angels nor can be say it without Idolatry intending that we are to do that to them which they do to God for us On the other side though that which we doe to them and that which they doe to God be both called praying yet it wil be very difficult for him that really and actually apprehendeth all Saints and Angels to be Gods creatures to render both the same honour though supposing not granting the same Christianity to injoyn both But to come to particulars I will distinguish three sorts of prayers to Saints wheâ—her taught or allowed to be taught in the Church of Rome The first is of those that are made to God but to desire his blessings by and through the merits and intercession of his Saints I cannot give so fit an example as out of the Canon of the Masse which all the Westerne Churches of that communion do now use There it is said communicantes memoriam venerantes omnium Sanctorum tuorum quorum meritis precibusque concedas ut in omnibus protectionis tuae muniamur auxilio Communicating in and reverencing the memory of such and such and of all thy Saints by whose merit and prayer grant that in all things we may be guarded by thy protection and helpe There is also a short prayer for the Priest to say when he comes to the Altar as he findes opportunity Oramus te Domine per merita sanctorum tuorum quorum reliquia hic sunt omnium sanctorum ut indulgere digneris omnia peccata mea We pray thee Lord by the merits of the Saints whose reliques are here and all Saints that thou wouldest vouchsafe to release me all my sins And on the first Sunday in Advent mentioning the Blessed Virgin they pray Vt qui vere eam matrem Dei credimus ejus apud te intercessionibus adjuvemur That we who believe her truely the mother of God may be helped by her intercessions with thee The second is that which their Litanies containe which though I doe not undertake to know how they are used or how they ought to be used by particular Christians that is how far voluntary how far obligatory yet the forme of them is manifest that whereas you have in them sometimes Lord have mercy upon us Christ have mercy upon us Holy Trinity one God have mercy upon us You have much oftner the Blessed Virgine repeated again and againe under a number of her attributes you have also all the Saints and Angels or such as the present occasion pretends for the object of the devotion which a man tenders named and spoken to with Ora pronobis that is Pray for us The blessed virgine some saie with te rogamus audi nos We beseech thee to heare us One thing I must not forget to observe that the prayers which follow those Litanies are almost alwaies of the first kind That is to say addressed directly to God but mentioning the intercession of Saints or Angels for the meanes to obtain our prayers at his hands The third is when they desire immediately of them the same blessings spirituall and temporall which all Christians desire of God There is a Psalter to be seen with the Name of God changed every where into the Name of the blessed Virgine There is a book of devotion in French with this title Moyen de bien seruir prier adorer la Vierge Marie The way well to serve pray to and adore the blessed Virgine There are divers forms of prayer as well as excessive speeches concerning her especially and other Saints quoted in the Answer to the Jesuites Challenge pag. 330-345 Of those then the first kind seems to me utterly agreeable with Christianity importing onely the exercise of that Communion which all members of Gods Church hold with all members of it ordained by God for the meanes to obtaine for one another the Grace which the obedience of our Lord Jesus Christ hath purchased for us without difference whether dead or alive Because we stand assured that they have the same affection for us dead or alive so farre as they know us and our estate and are obliged to desire and esteem their prayers for us as for all the members of Christs mysticall body Neither is it in reason conceivable that all Christians from the beginning should make them the occasion of their devotions as I said out of any consideration but this For as concerning the terme of merit perpetually frequented in these prayers it hath been alwawes maintained by those of the Reformation that it is not used by the Latine Fathers in any other sense then that which they allow Therefore the Canon of the Masse and probably other prayers which are still in use being more ancient then the greatest part of the Latine Fathers there is no reason to make any diffficulty of admitting it in that sense the ground whereof I have maintained in the second Book The third taking them at the foot of the leter and valuing the intent of those that use them by nothing but the words of them are meer Idolatries as desiring of the creature that which God onely gives which is the worship of the creature for the Creator God blessed for evermore And were we bound to make
same ground to wit that the offenses that fall out among Gods people might not scandalize the Gentiles Therefore Saint James writing his Epistle to converted Jewes supposeth that they exercised the same power of judging between Christian and Christian as they did being Jewes between Jew and Jew And exhort them thereupon to use it like Christians James II. 1-13 for this I have shewed to be his meaning in another place And Saint Cypriane teaches Quirinus in the testimonies which he produces against the Jewes out of the Scripture III. 44. Fideles inter se disceptantes non debere Gentilem Judicem experiri In Epistola Pauli ad Corinth I. Audet quisquam vestrum That Christians being in debate among themselves are not to come to the triall of a heathen Judge For in the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians you have dare any of you In the Constitutions of the Apostles II. 45 46 47. this authority is most truly attributed to the Church by describing the manner of proceeding in it Nor will any man of reason question that the author of them though not so ancient as the title under which he goes understood the state of the Church before Constantine There he showes that the Church in the use of this power aimed at the precept of our Lord to be reconciled to our brethren before we offer sacrifice to God Mat. V. 23 24. For though the offering of beasts in sacrifice to God be ceased yet the reason of the precept holds in the Eucharist and the offering of those oblations out of which it was consecrated for Christians To this purpose he prescribeth that Consistories be held on the Munday to see what differences were on foot in the Church that they might have the week before them to set them to right that so they might offer at the Eucharist on the Lords day with a clear conscience For at the Eucharist they were to salute one another with a kisse of peace and the deacon cried aloude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let no man have any thing against any man let no man give the kisse of peace dissembling All evidences for the practice of the Church That which Gratiane hath alledged out of the Epistle of Clemens to James of Jerusalem Causa XI Quaest I. Cap. XXXII is found also in the life of Saint Peter out of the book of the Popes lives which you have in the Counciles though in that Copy of it which hath since been published under the name of Anastasius it appeareth not The words are these in the Epistle Si qui ex fratribus negotia habent inter se apud cognitores seculi non judicentur Sed apud Presbyterâ—s Ecclesiae quicquid illud est definitur If any of the brethren have suits among themselves let them not be judged before judges of the World But whatsoever it is let it be judged before the Priests of the Church The life of Saint Peter saith thus Hic Petrus B. Clementem Episcopum consecravit cui Cathedram vel Ecclesiam omnem disponendam commisit dicens Sicut mihi gubernandi tradita est a Domino meo Jesu Christo potestas ligandi sâ—lvendique ita ego tibi committo ut ordines dispositores diversarum causarum per quos actus non Ecclesiastici profligentur tu minime curis seculi deditus reperiâ—â— sed solummodo orationi praedicationi ad populum vacare stude This Peter consecrated B. Clement Bishop and committed to him the see or the whole Church to be ordered saying As the power of governing or binding and loosing was delivered me by my Lord Jesus Christ so do I also depute thee to ordain those that may dispose of divers causes by whom actions that are not of the Church may be dispatched so that thou be not found addicted to secular cares but onely study to attend upon prayer and preaching to the people I know the first is forged and the second of little credit And he that writ the Epistle might intend to create an authority against trying the Clergy in secular Courts which could not be the subject of any thing that Clement might write But both authors write what they might know in their time to have fitted the Apostles time There is nothing more suitable to that estate which the Apostles signify then that Clemens should appoint who should attend upon the dispatching of suits between his people that he might attend upon the principall of his Office For that all resorted not then to the Church it is ridiculous to imagine It is enough that there is no instance extant of any suit between Christians tried before Gentiles before Constantinâ— And this is the reason why Constantine undertaking the protection of Christianity made the Law that is yet extant in the Code of Theodosius de Episcopali Audientia I. that any man might appeale to the Bishop in any cause before sentence Is there any appearance that so vast a priviledge would ever have been either demanded or granted had not the matter of it been in use by the Constitution of the Church among Christians Therefore it was no marvaile that it was limited afterwards for it made the Church judge in all causes in which one party would appeal to it as it appeares by Justinians Law and other constitutions afore Justiniane For when the Empire was become Christiane the reason of our Lords and his Apostles Order was expired In the mean time the referring of causes to the Bishop upon appeale was but to referre the causes of Christians to the Bishop which belonged to his knowledge afore And when all were Christians to demand that all should resort to the Bishop had been to dissolve the Civile Government which the Church supposeth The causes that were afterward heard by Bishops of the trouble whereof Saint Augustine complaines and which Saint Peter had cause to provide that Clemens should not be oppressed with resorted to them either as arbitrators by consent of parties or as Judges delegated by the secular power in causes limited by their acts And now is the time to answer the objection against the being of the Church and the Protection which is drawn from those bounds which the power of excommunicating challenged by the Church hath been and is confined to by all Christiane states Though having made the question generall I find it requisite to extend also the answer to those other points wherein I have said the right of the Church is seen and upon which the society thereof is founded no lesse then upon the power of excommunicating And then the argument will be to this effect That seeing no Christian can deny that the Lawes the Ordinations the Censures of the Church are lawfully prohibited to take effect by the secular Powers of Christian States therefore the right of doing those acts stands not by Gods Law but by the sufferance and appointment of the same secular Powers chusing whom they please to execute their own rights