figure in saying That God would have that done which he will not do because he knowes sufficient reason to the contrary whether he declare it or not but setting that reason aside would have done Or that he would have that done which he provideth sufficient meanes to bring to passe But that all should signify some and the world the elect because God will not do all he can to save those whom he would have to be saved is a figure in Rhetorick called Mendacium when a man denies the Scripture to be true The same is the difficulty when our Lord Christ who saith to the Father John XVII 9. I ask for them I ask not for the world but for them whom thou hast given me for they are thine prayes upon the Crosse Father forgive them for they know not what they do For though he ask not that for the world which he askes for his disciples yet he would not have prayed for that which he knew not that God would have done His prayer being the reason moving God to grant meanes effectuall to bring to passe that which it desireth But had there been in God a purpose to exclude the Jews from the benefit of Christs death considering them as not having yet refused the grace which Christ prayed for it could not have been said that he would have our Lord Christ dy or pray for them and therefore that he would have them to be saved This is then my argument that the will of man is neither by the originall constitution of God determinable by his immediate operation nor by mans originall sinne subject to a necessity of doing or not doing this or that Because God treats with the posterity of Adam concerning the Covenant of the Law first and since concerning the Covenant of grace no otherwise then originally he treated with Adam about not eating the forbidden fruit For in conscience were it for the credit of Christianity that infidels whom we would perswade to be Christians should say True if you could shew me that God by his immediate act determines me to do as you require me without which you tell me I cannot do it and with which I cannot but do it Or that by the sinne of Adam I am not become subject to the necessity of doing or not doing this or that But supposing either of these if you move me to do what you professe I cannot do you are either a mad man your self or take me for one Do they take their hearers for men and Christians or for beasts who having first taught that man can do nothing but what God determines him to do inferre thereupon that they must indeavour themselves to do what God commands and what their Christianity requires Or that they are obliged by their Christianity to do that which their corruption from Adam necessitates them not to do Is it for the honour of Gods justice that it should be said that he intends to damne the most part of men for that which by their originall corruption they were utterly unable to do without giving them sufficient help to do it no help being sufficient which the determination of the will by the immediate operation of God makes not effectuall as they think Do they not make the Gospel of Christ a mockery that make it to require a condition impossible to be performed by any whom God determines not to perform it having resolved not to determine the greatest part of them that know it to performe it Certainly this is not to make the secret will of God contradict the declared will of God but to make the declared will of God a meer falshood unlesse the declaring will make contradictions true For to will that this be done for an end which God that willeth will not have come to pass makes contradictions the object of that will and that for the same consideration at the same time God from everlasting determining meerly in consideration of his own will that the condition of that which he would have to come to passe conditionally will not come to passe What is it then to declare all this to the posterity of Adam already lapsed without tendring help sufficient to inable them to imbrace what he tendereth For it is manifest that Adam had sufficient grace to doe what God commanded and it is as manifest that God tenders both the Law to the Israelite and the Gospell to the World in the same form as he tendred Adam the prohibition of eating the forbidden fruit Nor can it be denied that this prohibition contained in the force of it all the perswasions all the exhortations all the promises all the threatnings which either the Law or the Gospell to their respective ends and purposes can be inforced with It must therefore be concluded not that they suppose in Adams posterity an ability to do what they require as did the origiginall prohibition of eating the forbidden fruit but that they bring with them sufficient help to perform it not supposing any thing that may barre the efficacy thereof till the will of him to whom it is tendered makes it void And truly speaking of that which the naturall indowment of freedom necessarily imports in the reasonable creature it is utterly impossible that any thing should determine the will of man to do or not to do this or that but his own action formally or in the nature of a formal cause which therefore in the will cannot be the action of God nor be attributed imputed or ascribed to him to whom it were blasphemy to impute that which his creature is honoured with That God should immediately act upon the soul of man or his will is no inconvenience Because that act must end in the will or soul and not attaine that effect which the imperfection of the creature bringeth to passe Ending therefore in the creature and not in that which the action of the creature produceth it leaveth the same of necessity in the state wherein God first made it And I may well suppose here and will suppose that Gods act of creation continues the same for all the time that he maintaines the creature in that perfection of being that is to say in that ability of acting which from the beginning he gave it This discourse I confesse extendeth to the voiding of the immediate concurrence of God to the actions of his creature which my purpose necessarily requires me not to maintaine For concurrence-supposeth the creature to act without help of God that concurreth and therefore cannot be requisite on behalf of the cause being supposed to act of it self but on behalf of the effect wherein it endeth Which having a being is supposed necessarily to require immediate dependance upon the first being which is God A strange subtlety acknowledging the creature able to act and supposing it to act of it self to imagine that this act can end in nothing as that which it effecteth without Gods concurrence Which immediately attaining the
from the whole Church For to require me to believe them to be in the torments prepared for the devil and his angels because I cannot say where they are were a reason too unreasonable for a Christian CHAP. XXI The opinion that makâ—s the Predetermination of mans will by God the sourse of his freedom And wherein Jansenius differs from it Of necessity upon supposition absolute The necessity of the Will following the last dictate of the understanding is onely upon supposition As also that which Gods foresight creates The difference between indifferent and undetermined These things thus premised as concerning that estate wherein the Gospell overtaketh the will of man to whom Christ is tendered being under original sin I say that it findes him not void of that freedome of choice in doing or not doing this or that which stands in opposition to necessity But that which stands in opposition to the bondage and servitude of sin This position is intended to contradict an opinion which seemeth to be very ordinary among Divines as well of the Reformation as the Church of Rome though more ingeniously professed and maintained by these Who pretending to derive the efficacy of Gods Predestination and the grace which it provideth from that decree of his Will whereby he determineth the will of his creature to do or not to doe watsoever is indeed don or not don in order of nature before it determine it selfe do consequently professe that notwithstanding this Predetermination of the will is no lesse effectuall then Gods omnipotence whereof it is the immediate and indefeasible consequence and effect yet there is no freedome in the creature no contingence in the effects of it but that which followeth upon this will of God determining understanding Creatures to do that which they do freely as it determining understanding Creatures to do that which they do necessarily This position though I intend not to admit yet I count it a point of ingenuity in them who think they free themselves of great dificulties by supposing it expressely to maintaine the truth of that supposition whereof they make so much advantage For they who not daring to incounter the difficulties wherewith it is chargeable do claime the consequences of it without premising the expresse supposition of it do as good as say nothing where they advise not the reader of those difficulties which the prime principle that they proceed upon is burthened with But he that sees how particular instances depend upon generall principles shall not stick to judge of their positions by the dependance they have upon this supposition so soon as they are informed of the credit which it deserves Now this predetermination Being the immediate effect of Gods omnipotency as for the cause of it as for the nature of it troubles very much those that maintaine it to say wherein it consists as indeed it may very well trouble any man to say of what colour a Chimaera is being in rerum natura just nothing For if they say it is a principle infused by the immediate worke of grace into the Will it is straightwaies evident that the having of it is not to make the Will able which all habituall indowments tend to but to make it actually to worke It must therefore consist in a certain motion or impulse immediately wrought by God in the Will which though it is not in the will to have depending meerely upon the Will of God yet that neither good nor ill can be don without it being necessary as they think to the effectuall determining of the will upon two accounts First as the will is a secondary cause that cannot worke unlesse moved by the first cause Secondly as the Will not being determined of it selfe cannot be determined to any act but by the same first cause But these two accompts seem to me both one For nothing can determine the will to act speaking of that which determines it formally or in the nature of a formall cause but the act of it For supposing the will to act and excluding whatsoever else might be considered the will remaines determined Not suposing that it may further be questioned what determines it The question then being onely what it is that determines the will in the nature of the effective cause the difficulty that causeth the question is but one because it is presumed that the second cause can not act if not acted that is determined to act by the first The nature then of this motion received lodged in the Will is imagined neverthelesse to be successive such as is the being of colours in the aire when they goe to the eye or that impulse which a handicraft-man moves his tooll with And the necessity of it standeth upon a generall account not of originall sine but of Gods creature such as the will in all estates is requisite to the acts of the will because nothing can be don by the creature but that which God shall determine it to do But there is of late an other opinion started in the Church of Rome by Jansenius in his Augustinus which maintaines that the Will in all actions that are goâ—d according to Christianity is determined by grace effectually inclining the will by the love of true good preventing not expecting the motion thereof and producing that influence of the will whereby formally it acteth The nature of it then consists in that very act of life whereby the reasonable creature exerciseth its choice no waies requisite to the actions of nature which man is able to do under originall sin but meerely upon that account as the cure of it restoring the due command over that concupiscence wherein originall sin consisteth and not extending to the state of innocence Which notwithstanding the will is no lesse naturally determined by it then by that principle which the other opinion advanceth For they say both that the will is not determined by the object howsoever proposed but morally as he that outwardly adviseth or perswadeth determines him that resolves upon that consideration which he advanceth to that which he proposeth And therefore this determination both agree satisfies not that efficacy of grace which the scriptures proposed in the premises require Therefore as the former opinion determineth the will naturally by a principle really lodged in the nature of the wil so this by the very vitall act of vvilling really subsistng in the nature of the Will though produced by God a cause above nature which when the delight in good which it importeth is so great as to swallow up all contradiction it determineth to the same preventing the determination of it selfe when otherwise acknowledging that though of the same nature with that which overcometh it is never the lesse defeasible From this ground there flowes an other difference between these two opinions we goe further from the fountaine head still more visible For the former admitting free will to be a faculty able to act or not to act supposing all
effect in which the action of the creature endeth will enforce that God is as properly said to give light as the sunne to burn as the fire to do that act which is essentially sinne as the man that sinnes And therefore at once not to sinne because we suppose his concourse tied by the originall Law of creation to the determination of his creature And to sinne as producing immediately whatsoever is in that action which is essentially sinne For unlesse the species or nature of the act importing generally no sinne were a thing subsisting by it self as by the understanding it is considered setting aside the sinne which the particular that is acted implyeth as Plato is supposed to have maintained his ideas it is impossible that he who doth the act which is essentially sinne should be said truly not to sinne The Law of concurring to the doing of sinne and producing the act which essentially importeth it necessarily drawing the imputation thereof upon him that freely tied himself by setling it Let it once be said therefore that God made the fire able to burn the sunne able to shine the will of man able to make a free choice as he is a reasonable creature and it will be very impertinent to require any action but that of the fire to the consuming of wood but that of the sunne to the dispelling of darknesse supposing God to maintaine or rather to issue every moment the ability of burning or shining once given his creature from his own spring head of being so long as his creature indureth And therefore if ever God made the will able to chuse the doing or not doing of this before that upon the direction not of right reason which directeth not to sinne but alwayes of reason for all choice supposes reason to direct it it is impertinent to suppose any thing requisite to the exercise of this freedome of choice but the maintenance of reason issuing from the fountaine of Gods Wisdome so long as the man continues a reasonable creature If the immediate concurrence of God to the action of his creature make the actions wherein the perfection of his creature consisteth much more the imperfections and faileurs of it a staine to his excellence much more shall the act of determining the choice of his creature free before it be determined impute to God whatsoever it importeth for the worse the imputation whereof or the better is a staine to his excellency And is it possible that God by making the creature capable of such imputations should depose himself from the Throne of his Godhead and set up his creature in his stead in making it able to act that either naturally without his immediate concurrence or morally also by determining that freedom by the use of his own reason and choice which he in no instance afore determineth Certainly they consider not what they grant themselves when they suppose that God made it able so to do when they make the abilities which he giveth unable to do their work till he determine them so to do so that being so determined before they determine themselves they cannot do otherwise And suppose it a contradiction that the will should choose that which no reason why it should chuse appeareth certainly when reason pronounceth the motive that appeareth to be sufficient the action that insueth cannot be said to proceed from a cause indifferent to act or not though the determination thereof be not peremptory till the act follow Now is there any necessity why God should interpose to determine the indifference of the cause otherwise then as inabling it to determine its own indifference Suppose then a sentence past in the Court of Reason importing not onely This is to be done But This shall be done Do we not see every moment protestations made by the sensuall appetite and acts entered of them by the judge Indeed if the matter of them do not bear a plea the sentence remaines But is it therefore necessary that execution follow Witnesse those that act against conscience Witnesse Aristotels dispute of incontinence placing the nature of it in doing the contrary of that which the judgement is resolved ought to be done as if the one could be absolutely the best the other the best at this time Witnesse Medea in Ovid when she saies Video meliora proboque deteriora sequor I see the better but I do the worse For the mouth of conscience is to be stopped with a pretense of repentance to come and so present satisfaction is clear gaine by the bargaine If at length it come to execution of the sentence I demand what it is that makes the resolution from thenceforth peremptory but the same reason that determined the choice afore unlesse we suppose new matter advanced in plea first and afterwards voided If that which was sufficient afore prove not effectuall till now it is not because any thing was wanting without which the will was not able to proceed but because reason to the contrary appeared considerable before I grant there be those that have so farre determined the indifference of their own inclinations that no reason to the contrary appeares considerable to delay execution of the sentence past long since But this appears by experience to take place as well in those who have degenerated to devils incarnate as those who have improved to saints upon earth And therefore cannot be attributed to the force of true good acting beyond the appearance which it createth in the mind because Gods immediate act directs it But partly to the habituall grace of the holy Ghost with the resolution of Christianity presenting true good as lovely and beautifull as indeed it is Partly to the custome of doing even those acts which without the assistance of God Spirit our nature cannot do Upon which as the habituall indowment of the holy Ghost followes by Gods gracious promise So there followes naturally a facility of doing even supernaturall actions which men habituate themselves to by the meer force of custome excluding the consideration of all that reason to the contrary that hath proved abortive and addle long since Which notwithstanding the choice remaines free by virtue of that originall freedome which determined the indifference of every man to those actions the frequenting whereof hath created an habit And this is the ground of that account which we owe that God showing sufficient reason why we ought to be Christians and the world to the contrary our choice hath followed for the better or for the worse For the efficacy of the said reasons on either side implies beside the sufficiency of them onely a supposition of that which comes to passe which the same reasons determine a man to do that remaine uneffectuall till the execution of sentence But if the will of God interpose to determine the will before it determines there can be no more ground for any account why it acteth or acteth not then the earth is to give why it
that the Grace whereby we are justified is a quality habitually informing the soule of man as supernaturally infused by God into it But onely that Faith Hope and Charity are infused into them that are justified and inherent in them as shed into theire hearts by the Holy Ghost Which they say may all be understood supposing that a man is justified by the acts of Faith Hope and Love infused or shedde into the hart by the Holy Ghost as well as by habites supernaturally created to reside in the soule For you may see by Morinus in his Late worke de Administrationâ— Pâ—nitentiâ— VIII 2. 3. 7. that for MCC yeares after Christ a good while after the Schoole Doctors were come in there was no question at all made whether we are justified by an infused habit of grace or not and that it was about the yeare MCCL that this opinion intirely prevailed in the Schooles Whereby it appeareth that as this opinion containes nothing destructive to the faith if it be understood in that sense which the Church of Rome allowes that it is not the naturall worth of it which justifies but Gods accepting of it to that effect So if it did yet could not the Church of Rome be said to teach any thing destructive to the faith But onely to allow since â—uch things to be taught For the Council of Vienna under Clement V. determines it not as matter of faith but as the more probable opinion as you may see Clement de summa Trin. Fide Cathol Tit. I. Cap. VII And therefore Albertus Pâ—ghius de libero Arbitrio lib. V notwithstanding this decree stickes not to count this doctrine forged without any authority of Scripture And those that speake of it with more respect then he thinke not themselves tied to that which the Council holdâ— the more probable It is indeed manifest by the experience of all Christians that the custome and practice even of supernaturall actions to which the inclination of corrupt nature is utterly averse breedes in a man an habituated disposition of doing those things with â—ase and pleasure which at the beginning of his Christianity he could not doe without offering himselfe much violence But that habit which custome and practice leaves behind it though supernaturall for the cause or effect of it because the acts upon which it accrues as also those which it produces cannot accrue from meere nature without the helpe of Christs grace is notwithstanding for that wherein it consists a disposition really qualifying the nature and substance of the soule and inclining it to act otherwise then without it Besides the Gospell promising the Holy Ghost for a Gift to abide with and dwell in those that are baptized nothing hinders the Gift thereof to be held and termed an habituall grace In these regards I find it neither prejudiciall nor inconsequent to the Christian faith to acknowledge habituall grace though neither scripture nor tradition of the Church owne any habit of grace created by God and infused into the soule in a moment as the Schoole imagineth But they seeme to have committed another mistake in that the Church having decreed against Pelagius that the Grace of Christ is necessary to all truly good actions and therefore that man cannot merit the first grace this infused habit of grace they have made to be that First grace which God giveth before man will indeavor any thing towards it For so the Master of the Sentences determineth that grace which preventeth mans indevors to be faith with Love libro II. distinct XXVI D. which though it be capable of a very good sense That the motion to beleeve the truth of Christianity out of the love of God is that which Gods grace prevents all mans compliance with yet in what sense they swallowed it will appeare by the difficulties and dispuâ—es they were intangled with about that sorrow which the heart conceives for sinne out of meerâ— love to God not feare of punishment which the love of our selves breedeth For this sorow being necessarily a disposition preparing him for justification that cometh to God in regard the first grace which God preventeth all manâ— indeavors with is to them this infused habit of Faith and love which formally justifieth how he should come prepared for justification by that contrition which without Gods grace man cannot have who is justified by that infused habit of grace which he was first prevented by God with hath been among them the subject of endlesse jangles Whereas it is manifest the maintenance of the Faith against Pelagius requireth no more then that the resolution of persevering in Christianity to the â—nd be thought necessarily to depend upon the motion to imbrace it which God first preventeth man with without respect to any act of man obliging God to grant it And therefore it is manifest that the Church decreed no more against Pelagius but that the first motion to become a good Christian that every man is prevented with must be ascribed to Gods free grace through Christ not ingaged by any act of mans goeing afore Now requiring onely the actuall assistance of Gods preventing grace it is easy enough to say not how attrition that is sorrow for sinne in regard of punishment accompanied with slavish feare is changed into contrition that is sorrow for sinne out of the love of God whome it offendeth For it is not possible that he who loveth God should be sory for sinne for the same reason which he was sorry for while he loved the world But how the man that was attrite becomes contrite For when first the Gospell reveales unto a man his desperate estate in and by the first Adam it is not possible that he should remaine uâ—touched either with sorrow for the present or apprehension for the future And yet no lesse unpossible is it according to Gods ordinary way of working even by his Grace that he should in an instant resolve to imbrace the onely way to give him peace in that exigence But while he neither casts off the motion of grace nor resigneâ— his interest in himselfe and the world to it but considers upon what reason it behoves him to resolve this consideration by the worke of Gods Spirit disâ—overing to him how much God and the next world is to be preferred before himselfe and this as the love of God and the world to come prevailes in him above the love of himselfe and this accordingly of necessity must the greife of having offended God afore prevaile in him above all that he can conceive for the misery he hath incurred And all this by virtue of those helpes which God grants though allwayes in consideration of our Lord Christ yet not by virtue of that Covenant which is not contracted till â— man be baptized but of his owne free goodnesse dispensing the effects of Christs coming according to the reason of his secret wisdome which the Covenant of grace discovers not I neede say no more to show how a
the like moment because of the sentence of the Nicenâ— Council already past in the main ground of the cause and because of the sentence of the Synod of Rome past in the cause Now when this difference comes afterwards to be tried by a General Council at Sardica shall this trial inferre the infinite Power of the Pope or the regular Power of a General Council For surely the Council of Sardica was intended for a General Council as the Emperor Justinian reckons it being summoned by both Emperours Constantius and Constans out of the whole Empire When the breach fell out and the Eastern Bishops withdrew themselves to Philippopolis the whole Power in point of right ought I conceive to remain on that side which was not the cause of the breach But the success sufficiently showeth that it did not so prevail For many a Council might then have been spared The soveraign regard of peace in the Church suffered not those that were in the right to insist upon the acts of it as I suppose In the mean time the Canons thereof whereby appeals to the Pope in the causes of Bishops are setled whither for the West which it represented or for the whole which it had right to conclude not having caused the breach shall I conceive to be forged because they are so aspersed having been acknowledged by Justinian translated by Dionysius Exigâ—us added by the Eastern Church to their Canon Law Or shall I not ask what pretense there could be to settle appeals from other parts to Rome rather then from Rome to other parts had not a pre-eminence of Power and not onely a precedence of rank been acknowledged originally in the Church of Rome But though I think my self bound to acknowledge that such Canons were made by the Council at Sardica yet not that they took effect by the act of it The Canons of Councils had not effect as I said afore till received The troubles that succeeded might well hinder the admitting of them into practice And that this exception is not for nothing I appeal to all that shall but consider that the Canons of the Council of Antiochia which the Eastern Bishops at Sardica stood for made part of the Code of the whole Church which the Council of Chalcedon owned The Canon of Sardica being no part of it till after times And this is the point upon which the dispute between the Pope and the Churches of Africk about appeals most depends The case that brought it to issue was the case of Apiarius a Priest onely that appealed to Rome The Popes Legates pretended that appeals to Rome were settled by the Council of Nicaea The Churches of Africk finding no such Canon of Nicaea in their records desire that recourse might be had to Alexandria and Constantinople for the true Copies The true Copies import no such thing but it is alleged and it is reason it should be alleged that the appeals of Bishops are setled by the Canons of the Council of Sardica the very terms whereof are couched in the instructions to the Council of Africk The Council of Sardica was not the Council of Nicaea but the acts of it were done by those who pretended to maâ—ntain it Whither it were justly done or imported an intent of imposture to challenge the authority of the Canons of Nicaea for the Canons of it I dispute not But had the case in question been the case of a Bishop as it was onely the case of a Priest what could the Churches of Africk have alledged why they should not be tyed by the Canons of Sardica who acknowledged themselves tyed by the Canons of Nicaea For there was onely the Bishop of Carthage present at the Council of Nicaea but there was six and thirty Africane Bishops at the Council of Sardica enow to represent all the Diocese of Africk and to tie those whom they represented What could they alledge but the inexecution of the Council of Sardica Or what greater evidence could they alledge for the inexecution of it then that there was no Copy of any such Canon in the records of all their Churches Or how could the Pope desire a fairer pretense for the execution of it for the future then the concurrence of the Africanâ— Churches by so many Bishops For though the Council of Sardica is quoted in that which is called the VI Council of Carthage yet the whole issue of the businesse was onely whither they were Nicâ—ne Canons that were alleged or not and when it appeared that they were not the dispute was at an end and the Africane Synode by the leter extant in the Africane Code desires the Pope to stand to terms of the Nicene Canons Therefore it is clearly a fault in the Copy that the Council of Sardica is named which could not be pleaded because all knew that it was not in force as the Council of Nicaea was in the Churches of Africk So that the act of the Council of Sardica necessarily presupposeth that the Church of Rome was effectually acknowledged the prime Church of the West and by consequence of all Churches because it setleth the right of appeals upon it before other Churches in certain causes though it appear not what effect it took unlesse you allow the conjecture which I have to propose Within a few years after this contest there appears a standing Commission of the Popes to the Bishops of Thessalonica to be their standing Lieutenants in Illyricum mentioned in the leter of Pope Leo to Anastasins of Thessalonica as derived from their predecessors Had the Bishop of Rome been no more then the Bishop of Thessalonica how came this to be his Lieutenant rather then on the contrary And truly where those priviledges of the Church of Rome over the Churches of Illyricum began whereby the Popes had made the Bishops of Thessalonica their standing Legates appears not by the records of the Church So that it is as free for me to conjecture that they come from the Council of Sardica as for others to conjecture otherwise For it is not unreasonable to think that it might take effect upon the place where it was made with fuller consent of the Bishops of that Diocese present in greater numbers then strangers though scarce known in Africk after some LXX years But at such time as Rome disputed with Africk about appeals and injoyed regular priviledges in Illyricum can the Church of Milane or any Church of Spain or Gaul or Britaine be thought parallel to it From this time the rescripts of the Popes are extant unforged and directed to divers prime Churches of Gaul and Spain And the Heads of them were added by Dionysius Exiguâ—s about DXXX unto that collection of Canons which what force it had in the Western Church appears in that Cresconius abridging the Canons which the African Church used referrs them to the Heads which he follows both beginning at Syricius Cresconius ending at Gelasius And the Copies of Dionysius his Collection that now are
who create the parties by heading the division have to look about them least they become guilty of the greatest part of soules which in reason must needs perish by the extremities in which it consisteth And the representing of the grounds thereof unto the parties though it may seem an office unnecessary for a private Christian to undertake yet seemeth to me so free from all imputation of offense in discharging of our common Christianity and the obligation of it that I am no lesse willing to undergoe any offense which it may bring upon me then I am to want the advantages which allowing the present Reformation might give me In the mean time I remaine obliged not to repent me of the resolution of my nonage to remaine in the communion of the Church of England There I find an authority visibly derived from the act of the Apostles by meanes of their successors Nor ought it to be of force to question the validity thereof that the Church of Rome and the communion thereof acknowledgeth not the Ordinations and other Acts which are done by virtue of it as done without the consent of the whole Church which it is true did visibly concurre to the authorizing of all acts done by the Clergy as constituted by virtue of those Lawes which all did acknowledge and under the profession of executing the offices of their severall orders according to the same For the issue of that dispute will be triable by the cause of limiting the exercise of them to those termes which the Reformation thereof containeth which if they prove such as the common Christianity expressed in the Scriptures expounded by the original practice of the whole Church renders necessary to be maintained notwithstanding the rest of the Church agree not in them the blame of separation that hath insued thereupon will not be chargeable upon them that retire themselves to them for the salvation of Christian soules but on them who refuse all reasonable compliance in concurring to that which may seem any way tollerable But towards that triall that which hath been said must suffice The substance of that Christianity which all must be saved by when all disputes and decrees and contradictions are at an end is more properly maintained in that simplicity which all that are concerned are capable of by the terms of that Baptisme which it ministreth requiring the profession of them from all that are confirmed at years of discretion then all the disputes on both sides then all decrees on the one side all confessions of faith on the other side have been able to deliver it And I conceive I have some ground to say so great a word having been able by limiting the term of justifying faith in the writings of the Apostles according to the same to resolve upon what termes both sides are to agree if they will not set up the rest of their division upon something which the truth of Christianity justifieth not on either side For by admitting Christianity that is the sincere profession thereof to be the Faith which onely justifyeth in the writings of the Apostles whatsoever is in difference as concerning the Covenant of Grace is resolved without prejudicing either the necessity of Grace to the undertaking the performing the accepting of it for the reward or the necessity of good works in consideration for the same The substance of Chrianity about which there is any difference being thus secured there remaines no question concerning Baptisme and the Eucharist to the effect for which they are instituted being ministred upon this ground and the profession of it with the form which the Catholick Church requireth to the consecration of the Eucharist Nor doth the Church of England either make Sacraments of the rest of the seven or abolish the Offices because the Church of Rome makes them Sacraments Nor wanteth it an order for the daily morning and evening service of God for the celebration of Festivalls and times of Fasting for the observation of ceremonies fit to create that devotion and reverence which they signify to vulgar understandings in the service of God But praying to Saints and worshipping of Images or of the Eucharist Prayers for the delivery of the dead out of Purgatory the Communion in one kind Masses without Communions being additions to or detractions from that simplicity of Gods service which the originall order of the Church delivereth visible to common reason comparing the present order of the Church of Rome with the Scriptures and primitive records of the Church there is no cause to think that the Catholick Church is disowned by laying them aside It is true it was an extraordinary act of Secular Power in Church maters to inforce the change without any consent from the greater part of the Church But if the matter of the change be the restoring of Lawes which our common Christianity as well as the Primitive orders of the Church of both which Christian Powers are borne Protectors make requisite the secular power acteth within the sphere of it and the division is not imputable to them that make the change but to them that refuse their concurrence to it Well had it been had that most pious and necessary desire thereof to restore publick Penance been seconded by the zeal and compliance of all estates and not stifled by the tares of Puritanisme growing up with the Reformation of it For as there can be no just pretense of Reformation when the effect of it is not the frequentation of Gods publick service in that forme which it restoreth but the suppressing of it in that form which it rejecteth So the communion of the Eucharist being the chiefe office in which it consisteth the abolishing of private Masses is an unsusticient pretense for Reformation where that provision for the frequenting of the communion is not made which the restoring of the order in force before private Masses came in requireth Nor can any meane be imagined to maintaine continuall communion with that purity of conscience which the holinesse of Christianity requireth but the restoring of Penance In fine if any thing may have been defective or amisse in that order which the Church of England establisheth it is but justice to compare it in grosse with both extreames which it avoideth and considering that it is not in any private man to make the body of the Church such as thâ—y could wish to serve God with to rest content in that he is not obliged to become a party to those things which he approves not conforming himself to the order in force in hope of that grace which communion with the Church in the offices of Gods service promiseth For consider againe what meanes of salvation all Christians have by communion with the Church of Rome All are bound to be at Masse on every Festivall day but to say onely so many Paters and so many Aves as belong to the hour Not to assist with their devotions that which they understand not much lesse
when wee see persons authorized in behalf of their particular Churches do an act which shall oblige those respective Churches For by the same reason persons authorized on behalf of all Churches shall be able to do an act that shall oblige all Churches Which is all that I claim when I maintain that by Gods Law all Churches are to make one Church When Matthias was Ordained an Apostle in stead of Judas I demand why that Assembly of Apostles and Disciples at which this was done should not be counted a General Council having showed that this Church of Jerusalem was then the whole Church and the creating of an Apostle whom all were to acknowledge in that quality for the future being an act concerning the Whole I will not say that the act of creating the seven Acts VI. concerned the whole Church being content that it remaine in question whether the intent of it were such or not But in as much as those that do not allow that they intended to create an Order of Deacons which all Churches were to make use of afterwards do not question that if they did intend it the whole Church must needs stand obliged by it I am not afraid to reckon this Assembly also in the rank of General Councils As for that of Acts XV. it appeareth sufficiently that those who founded the Church of Antiochia had their first commission from the Apostles not onely by the first preaching of the Gospel there and the sending of Barnabas Acts XI 19-26 but chiefly in that those which taught the necessity of observing Moses Law are disowned as having no commission so to teach Acts XV. 24. For as for S. Paul who challengeth an immediate commission from our Lord Gal. I. 1. it is easily granted because hee was made an Apostle Yet in that hee allegeth the verifying of it to S. Peter and S. James and the Churches of Judaea who having never seen his face glorified God for him Gal. I. 18-24 in that hee is brought by Barnabas who acted by commission from the Apostles to Antiochia and upon this beginning was sent by the Holy Ghost that is by Prophesie to do the office of an Apostle with Barnabas Acts XII 1 2 3. in that hee is owned by the Apostles afterwards Acts XV. 12. Gal. II. 1 7-10 which makes it more than probable that both these Texts speak of one and the same time of S. Pauls coming to Jerusalem in these regards I say it appeares sufficiently that the Church was to own him for an Apostle upon the owning his immediate calling from heaven by the rest of the Apostles Wherefore when wee see those that were trusted on behalf of the Church of Antiochia and those Churches which had been founded by those that were sent by the Holy Ghost from thence resort to the Apostles and Church at Jerusalem for an end of the difference in debate well may I with those that have gone afore mee reckon this meeting among the General Councils the cause of it concerning the whole no part concerned that it obliged not I will not say so much of the meeting of S. Paul with S. James Acts XXI 18. though the Elders there mentioned are thought to be those that had the chief authority in the neighbouring Churches as well as in that of Jerusalem And though S. Paul by this time was become rhe Head of many more Churches of his own foundation than afore Because of the dispersion of the rest of the Apostles and the founding of other Churches by this time which could not be tied by the result of this meeting further than the mater of it was inforced by the decree formerly made of which among the Apostles there ought no doubt to be made Let no man expect that I inferre upon these premises that the Church is bound by a positive Law of God to call Councils and to decide all emergencies by the vote of them much lesse that it is not able to do this otherwise I that pretend the Church to be a Corporation founded by God upon a privilege of holding visible Assemblies for the common service of God notwithstanding any secular force prohibiting the same must needes maintain by consequence that the Church hath power in it self to hold all such Assemblies as shall be requisite to maintain the common service of God and the unity in it and the order of all Assemblies that exercise it but especially that profession which it supposeth But I intend not therefore to tye the Church to inflame persecution by holding such Assemblies as may give occasion of sinister suspicions to secular Powers that protect not Christianity when the effect of such Assemblies is to be obtained without assembling For whosoever they be that ought to be authorized in behalf of particular Churches to constitute a Council they can have no other authority than their respective Churches do challenge It cannot be imagined that being present in one place together and seeing one anothers faces can purchase them that authority which they cannot have at home to conclude the whole by the consent of the Council The presence of Representatives affords infinite opportunities of better information one from another by debate one with another which distance of place allowes not otherwise But yet in maters concerning the state of the Whole or any great part of it means of information for the maintenance of that confederacy wherein I maintain the Society of the Church to stand is to be had by daily intercourse intelligence and correspondence between Churches without those Assemblies of Representatives which wee call Councils A thing so visibly practised by the Catholick Church from the beginning that thereupon I conceive it may be called a standing Council in regard of the continual settling of troubles arising in some part and tending to question the peace of the whole by the consent of other Churches concerned had and obtained by means of this mutual intelligence and correspondence The holding of Councils is a way of farre greater dispatch but the expresse consent of Churches obtained upon the place is a more certain foundation of peace in regard of the many questions that may arise as well in the discharge of that trust which Representatives are charged with as in the respect allowed their votes by the Council As it may easily appear by the difficulties that have risen about executing the decrees of Councils And therefore the power of them is meerly derivâ—tive from their respective Churches tending to supply those difficulties of bringing the whole to agreement which distance of place createth That therefore which I allege here is this That the succession of Pastors alleged by Irenaeus and Tertullian to convince the Hereticks of their time by S. Augustine and Optatus to convince the Donatists to be Schismaticks proceed wholey upon supposition of daily intercourse and correspondence between Churches as of force to conclude particular Churches by consent of the whole Which is the true reason of
the Synod of Antiochia mad when they writ the Leter which you may reade in Eusebius VII 30. in the name of the Churches represented by that Synod to the rest of the Churches in Christendome signifying the sentence of deposition pronounced against Samosatenus and requiring them to joyn with it If it be madnesse to think them so mad as to summon the rest of the Churches upon an obligation which they did not acknowledge what shall it be to think that this obligation was but imaginary or at least voluntarily contracted not inacted by the will of our Lord declared by his Apostles The Emperor Aurelian being appealed by the Council to cause Samosatenus to be put our of his Bishops house by force who maintained himself in it by force against the sentence of the Synod decreed that possession should be given to him whom the Christian Bishops of Italy and Rome should acknowledge for Bishop by writing to him under that title Certainly this Heathen Emperor in referring the execution of the Synods decree to the consent of those remarkable parts of the Church whereupon the consent of the rest might reasonably be presumed understood the constitution of the Church by his five senses better than those learned Christians of our time who argue seriously that this Paulus Samosatenus was not excommunicated by the Synod of Antiochia but by the Emperor Aurelian For this is the course by which all the acts of the whole Church ever came in force those parts of the Church which were not present at the doing of them concurring ex postfacto to inact them and the civil power to grant the execution of them by secular power Perhaps it will not be fit here to let passe that which Athanasius relates libro de sontentiâ Dionysii Alexandrini That this Dionysius writing against Sabellius gave occasion to the Bishops of Pentapolis who resorted to the Church of Alexandria as wee see by the VI Canon of Nicaea to suspect him of that which afterwards was the Heresie of Arius And that Dionysius of Rome being made acquainted by them with a mater of that consequence to the whole Church this Dionysius writ him an Apology on purpose to give satisfaction of his Faith wherein S. Athanasius hath great cause to triumph that the Heresie of Arius which arose afterwards is no lesse condemned than that of Sabellius presently on foot Grant wee that it was an office of Christian charity to tender this satisfaction where it was become so requisite The example of Samosatenus shows that their addresse tended to question if not to displace their Bishop by the authority of the rest of the Church ingaging the consent of his own had hee been discovered to harbor the contrary Heresie to that of Sabellius And indeed what was the rise of all those contentions about Arius that succeeded in the Church after the Council of Nicaea but this question whether Arius should be re-admitted one of the Presbyters of the Church at Alexandria or remaine excommunicate And those truly that do not believe there is any Church but a Congregation that assembles together for the service of God must needs think all Christendome stark mad for so many years together as they labored by so many Synods to attain an agreement through the Church in this and in the cause of Athanasius that depended upon it But those who believe the power of the Church to eschere to the State when it declares it selfe Christian must think the Emperors Constantius and Valens mad when they put themselves to that trouble and charâ—e of so many Synods to obtain that consent of the Church which in point of right their own power might have commanded without all that ado In the decrees of divers of those many Synods that were held about this businesse you shall finde that those Churches which the said decrees are sent to are charged not to write to the Bishops whom they depoâ—e That is to say Not to give them the stile of Bishops not to deal with them about any thing concerning the Church but to hold them as cut off from the Church Just as the Emperor Aurelian afore commanded possession to be delivered to him whom the Bishops of Italy and Rome should write to as Bishop This little circumstance expresses the means by which the communion of the Church was maintained To wit by continual intercourse of leters and messengers from Churches to Churches whereby the one understood the proceedings of the other and being satisfied of the reason of them gave force and execution to them within their own Bodies And this course being visibly derived from the practice of the Apostles sufficeth to evidence the Unity of the Church established by the exercise of that communication which maintained it When wee see the Apostles from the Churches upon which they were for the time resident dare Leters to other Churches signifying the Communion of those Churches one with another by the communion of all with the Apostles who taught and brought into force the termes and conditions upon which they were to communicate one with another have wee not the pattern of that intercourse and communion between several Churches by which common sense showeth all them that look into the records of the Church that the Unity and Communion of the whole was continued to after ages The words of Tertullian de praescript haeret cap. XX. must not be omitted here Itaque tot ac tantae Ecclesiae una est illa ab Apostolis prima ex qua omnes Sic omnes prima Apostolicae duâ— unà omnes probant veritatem Dum est illis communicatio pacis appellatio fraternitatis contesseratio hospitalitatis Quae jura non alia ratio regit quam ejusdem Sacramenti una traditio Therefore so many and so great Churches are all that one primitive Church from the Apostles out of which all come So all are the primitive and Apostolical while all agree in proving the truth While they have the communication of peace the title of brotherhood the common mark of hospitality Which rights nothing but the same tradition of the same mystery ruleth It is to be known that among the Greeks and Romans if a man had made acquaintance and friendship in a forrain City the fashion was to leave a mark for a pledge of it with one another which was called tessexa upon recognisance whereof hee that should come to the place where the other dwelt was not onely to be intertained by him whereupon these friends are called hospites signifying both hosts and guests but also assiisted in any businesse which hee might have in that place Such a kinde of right as this Tertullian saith there was between Christians and Christians between Churches and Churches Hee that produced the cognisance of the Church from whence hee came found not onely accesse to the communion of the Church to which hee came but assistance in his necessities and business in the name of a Christian
show were it worth the while as also from whence they took their rise to do it And if he please to step over the water again into France I can show him a more lively picture of an Empire erected within an Empire when the Reformed Churches their had there Civil Assemblies to order the businesse which should arise upon the privileges which they had purchased by their arms for the maintaining of their Religion by force Whether by right or by wrong I say not here But this is the thing which hee calleth Imperium in Imperio the Popes temporal Power making him rather Soveraign above than within other Soveraignties But I have showed you already that this opinion never was the Faith of the Catholick Church but the position of the Papal Faction disclaimed at this day by the farre greater part of that communion though the contrary being countenanced the more make the greater appearance For my own opinion I have delivered it so clear in my book of the Right of the Church in a Christian State that these Authors might if they pleased to oversee all other Divines that deliver the same by that alone have seen what they had to refute And truly I do not believe that any of them can allege a more convicting reason against those that build a Soveraignty within a Soveraignty upon the Title of the Church than that which there is alleged from the Unity of the Church prophesied of in all the promises of the calling of the Gentiles which the constitution of one visible Church of all Christians fulfilleth For if the Church of several Soveraignties is to be one and the same Body by communicating in the Service of God upon supposition of the same Faith then cannot the foundation of it create any title of temporal right to the prejudice and disturbance of those Soveraignties from whence all force within their respective territories is derived If it be said that the supposition is impossible to wit that the Church should have power to Ordain Excommunicate decree and yet be indowed with no force to constrain those that are obliged to stand to the acts thereof The reason now alleged to the contrary is evident For if the obligation of the inward man be of force to resolve a Christian to part with his life to maintain the profession of it If it be part of that obligation which Christianity createth to hold communion with Gods Church is not this obligation enough to inforce the acts of the Church and that excommunication which inforces the same And for experience from the effect it is but alleging the subsistence of the Church till the time that Gregory II and III Popes withdrew their obedience and the obedience of those parts of Italy that followed them from the Emperor Leo Isaunus upon pretense of his erring in the Faith in putting down Images For that is the first example which Christendom hath brought forth of temporal freedom from allegiance due to the Soveraigne founded upon the Title of Christianity If yet it be evident that this was the case in which I see there is some difficulty made But before this time it can neither be said that the Church was not the same after Constantine as before nor that the power of it ever produced any rebellion against the Soveraign upon this Title more than when the Martyrs suffered for their Christianity without defending themselves by force And therefore when this Doctor for the ground of his opinion as visible to his imagination as the common notions in Euclide alleges that all Power all Jurisdiction all Lawes all Punishment all Government all Appeales all Councils are derived first and do lastly resort to the Secular Power no lesse in Ecclesiastical than in Secular Causes and concerning Ecclesiastical as well as Secular Persons because all force which constrains obedience is vested in it his imagination is meerly imbroyled with equivocation of words For all Power is nothing else but a moral quality consisting in the right of obliging other mens wills those in respect of whom the Power holds by the act of his or their wills that have it And what shall hinder God to create such an obligation upon the consciences of Christians by virtue of their Christianity not allowing them any force to inact it but the denial of the communion of the Church Whether the Rules of the Church be called Laws or Canons hee that is tied to hold communion with the Church is tyed to observe those Rules by which it subsists and if hee do not deserves to be set aside rather than the Unity thereof perish Whether yee call them Magistrates or Elders that are appointed to govern the Church it maters not if by virtue of Gods Law the obligation of obeying them be evident in the Scriptures Whether it be properly called Jurisdiction or not when a Christian is censured to be put out of the Church it shall have the same effect with that Jurisdiction whereby a malefactor is put out of the world according as the correspondence between the Church and the State will bear it How this may be counted punishment how not I will not say again having said it already In all causes and concerning all persons I acknowledge there lies an appeal to the Soveraign the Church having to do onely in Ecclesiastical causes concerning men as they are members of the Church and so accidentally when the Church is as large as the State all acknowledging the same Church the Jurisdiction thereof whether properly so called or not extending to as many as that of the State For the last appeal is one of those Jura Majestatis or Prerogatives wherein Soveraignty consisteth neither is it alienable though it is limitable by those termes which Christianity when it is acknowledged to come from God establisheth On the other side the Power of the Church though never so evidently settled by Christianity may be abused not only when it is extended to some temporal effect but also when it is extended beyond the ground and reason of that Christianity which it presupposeth Instances you have of both in the claimes of temporal Power and Infallibility in behalf of the Church And as there lies an appeal to a Heathen Soveraign professing not to persecute his Subjects for their Christianity but to protect them in it upon pretense that it is extended to a temporal effect so may there by an appeal to a Christian Soveraign upon pretense that it is extended beyond the bounds which Christianity alloweth So the Council of Aâ—tiochia appealed Aurelian because Paulus Samosatenus protected himself in his House belonging to the the Church by power derived from him But hee alloweth them that trial which Christianity settleth So Constantine received the appeal of the Donatists but referred the trial to the Church in a Council at Rome and again another at Arles representing all the West But of the bounds of Secular and Ecclesiastical power I must speak again That the
them obliged If there were no more in question but the uniting of seven persons into one of our Independent Congregations or as many more as may all hear any man preach at once I should grant that such Bodies might subsist for such a time as the cōmon batred of the Church restrains the peevishnesse of particular persons from breaking that Communion which no tye of conscience obliges them to maintain But if the experience of divers years hath not brought forth any union betwixt any two such Congregations in England so farr as I can learn what was it that united all Christians from East to West into that one Communion visibly distinguished from all Heresies and Schisms which till about the Council of Chalcedon remained inviolable supposing no obligation of our common Christianity delivered by the Apostles to maintain it Is it possible for any man to imagine that with one consent they would have cast themselves into such a form of observation and practice as all to acknowledge the direction of the same persons in several parts to acknowledge those Rules which Generally were the same though in maters of lesse moment differing in several parts to intertain or refuse communion with them that were intertained or refused by the Church where they dwelt for a common cause had there been nothing but their own fansy to tell them not onely what was requisite to intertain such communion but whether it were requisite to intertain such communion or not If such a thing should be said the processe of my discourse were never a whit the more satisfied unlesse some body could show mee how the truth of Christianity can be well grounded upon those motives the evidence whereof resolves into the consent of all Christians And yet that which all Christians have visibly made a Law to their conversation from the beginning to wit the communion of one Catholick Church not belong at all to the mater of our common Christianity And therefore this plea is no lesse ruinous to our common Christianity the ground whereof it undermineth than to common sense For that in such difference of judgments as mankinde is liable to the whole Church should be swayed to unanimity herein by the Prerogative as it were of the Synagogue uniting themselves by imbracing the Ordinances thereof the evident state of the times whereof wee speak will not admit to any pretense of probability The division between Jews and Christians being then advanced to such a hatred on the Jews part that it would have been a very implausible cause to say that Christians ought to follow the Jewes whose curses they heard every day whose persecutions they felt in the tortures which at their instance were inflicted by the Gentiles A thing so evident both by the Writings of the Apostles and the ancientest records of the Church that I will not wrong the Readers patience to prove it True it is that at times and in places great compliance was used by Christians to gain them who elsewhere were so ready to persecute their fellow Christians As at Jerusalem under and after S. James at Ephesus and in Asia under S. John there is great appearance to believe In the mean time hee that can make a question whether the separation between Jewes and Christians and the hatred ensuing upon it were formed under the Apostles must make a question of the truth of S. Pauls Epistles to the Galatians to the Colossians to the Philippians to Titus and especially that to the Hebrews Besides that during the time whereof Irenaeus speaks Christianity was extended so farr beyond Judaisme that a great part of the Church could not be acquainted with the conversation of the Jewes much lesse learn and imbrace their orders And therefore as I do admit and imbrace the diligence of those learned men who bestow their paines to show how the Rules and Customes of the Church are derived from those of the Synagogue So I prescribe one general prejudice concerning all orders that may appear to be so derived that they are all to the Church Traditions of the Apostles and by their act came in force in it And that upon the premises that neither they had any force from the Law of Moses not could be admitted by common consent of Christians after the separation was formed that is after the Apostles time And therefore by their authority were introduced into the Church Having excepted thus much it will notwithstanding be time to distinguish that the orders and customes and observations of the Church may be said to be voluntary as nothing is more voluntary than Christianity it self though there be nothing to which a man is so much obliged For though the will of God and our salvation and whatsoever God hath done to show that salvation depends upon Christianity oblige us to it yet they oblige us also to imbrace it voluntarily so that whatsoever should be done in respect of it without an inward inward inclination of the will would be abominable In which regard whatsoever our Christianity obliges us to is no lesse voluntary than it is And in this sense I grant that the confederation of common Discipline which prevailed in the primitive Church was by the free and voluntary consent of Christians who be freely and voluntary consenting to the profession of Christianity consented freely to maintain the Communion of the Church which they knew to belong to that profession as a part of it But then this consent which is voluntary in regard that the choice of Christianity is free becomes necessary upon the obligation of making good the Christianity which once wee have professed the Communion of the Church professed by all obliging every one for his part to maintain it So when Pliny reports to Trajan of the Christians Ep. X. Solitos Sacramento se obstringere ne Furta ne Latrocinia ne Adulteria committerent nè fidem fallerent ne depositum negarent That they were wont to tye themselves by a Sacrament to commit no Thefts Robberies or Adulteries not to fail of their faith or deny that which was deposited in their trust being demanded It is manifest that all this is the profession of all Christians and that the Sacrament of Baptisme is properly the Vow of observing it And though I dispute not here that the Eucharist is called a Sacrament and Sacramentum in Latine signifies an Oath yet in as much as it is the meaning of the Sacrament of Baptisme I conceive I understood not Pliny amisse when I conceived that hee speaks in this place of the Eucharist when hee reports that they were wont before day to sing Psalms in praise of Christ as God and to tye themselves to the particulars hee names by a Sacrament And the same Tertullian understood by Pliny when hee saith hee reports to Trajan Apolog. II. Praeter obstinationem non sacrificandi nihil aliud se de Sacramentis as Heraldus truly reads it eorum comperisse quà m coetus antelucanos ad canendum
manifest to those that dedicate themselves to the examining of the Word according to the rate of that leisure and forwardnesse which they bestow upon their exercise in it Athanasius Disp. cum Ario in Conc. Nic. if it be his speaking of the Godhead of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Holy Scriptures clearly declare all things And not onely that which was in debate S. Chrysostome in Lazarum Hom. III. incourages to reade the Scripture because it is not obscure the Gentiles that sought vain-glory by writing books affecting obscurity as the way to be admired but the Holy Ghost seeking the good of all contrariwise In â—oan Hom. II. hee compares S. Johns doctrine to the Sun as shining to all not onely men of understanding but women and youths In Mat. Hom. I. to the same purpose Epiphanius Haer. LXXVI 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For all is clear in Gods Scriptures to those that will come to the Word of God with godly reason and turn not themselvs down the precipices of death through lust wrought in them by the devil To the same purpose Haer. LXIX Gregory Nyssene in Psalm Inscriptiones I. commendeth the Psalms for rendring deep mysteries easie and pleasant to men and women young and old Cyril in Julianum VII answering his scorn of the Scriptures for their vulgar language saith it was so provided that they might not exceed any mans capacity Fulgentius according to S. Austine Sermde Confessoribus Ita suae moderationis tenet temperiem ut nec ovibus desint pabula nec pastoribus alimenta The Scripture holds this moderation in the temper of it that neither the sheep wants food nor the shepherd nourishment in it S. Chrysostome observes that when S. Paul sayes 2 Cor. III. 14. Their senses are blinded in reading the Scriptures Hee makes the cause to be in the Jewes blindenesse when they understand not in the Scriptures Again Origen in Mat. Tract XXV in Rom. III. S. Basil Moral definitione XXV S. Chrysostome in Psal XCV S. Cyril Catech. IV. Rufinus in Symb. agree in affirming that whatsoever is taught in Christianity is to be proved by the Scriptures S. Jerome in Mic. I. Ecclesia Christi quae habitat bene in toto orbe Ecclesias possidens spiritus unitate conjuncta est habet urbes Legis Prophetarum Evangelii Apostolorum non est egressa de finibus suis id est de Scripturis sanctis The Church of Christ being well seated and having Churches all over the world it hath the Cities of the Law the Prophets the Gospel and the Apostles goes not out of her bounds which are the Holy Scriptures Optatus V. putting the case of the Church with the Donatists to be the case of children about their Fathers inheritance sends them to his Will as the Judge of their pretenses And so S. Austine also in Psalmum XXI The Constitutions of the Apostles II. 19. Leo Epist XXIII S. Cypr. Epist LXVIII and many more agree that the People are to answer for themselves if they follow bad Pastors S. Austine adversus Maxim III. 14. Neque ego Nicenum nec tu debes Ariminense tanquam praejudicaturus proferre Concilium Scripturarum authoritatibus non quorumcunque propriis sed utriusque communibus testibus res cum re causa cum causâ ratio cum ratione decertet Neither am I to produce the Council of Nicaea nor you that of Ariminum for a prejudice With authorities of the Scriptures as witnesses common to both not proper to either let mater contend with mater reason with reason cause with cause De Vtilitate credendi VI. hee saith the Scripture of the Old Testament ità esse modificatam ut nemo inde haurire non possit quod sibi satis est si modò ad hauriendum devotè ac piè ut vera religio poscit accedat Is so tempered that any man may draw out of it that which is enough for him if hee come devoutly and piously as true religion requires to draw Vincentius Commonit I. confesseth that inveterate Herâ—â—es and Opus imperfectum in Mat. Hom. XLIX that the corruptions of Antichrist are not to be convinced but by Scripture The same Vincentius Commonit I. and Sulpitius Severus Hist II. acknowledg the Arians to have over-spread the greatest part of the Church Theâ—efore Nazianzene Orat. advers Arianos scorns them that measure the Church by number And Liberius in Theodoret Eccles Hist II. 16. answers Constantius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The cause of the Faith hath never a whit the worse because I am alone But truly I know nothing in all antiquity more peremptory against the Infallibility of the Church than that of Vineentius denying that the Rule of Faith can ever increase or Councils do any more in it than determine that expresly and distinctly which was simply held from the beginning Commonit I. And S. Austine de Vnitate Ecclesiae cap. XVI challenges the Donatists to demonstrate their Church out of the Scriptures S. Ambrose de Incarnatione cap. V. S. Hilary de Trinitate VI. Victor in Marcum cap. III. agree that the Faith is the foundation of the Church by virtue whereof the gates of Hell prevail not against it Therefore S. Austine de Bapt. contra Donat. II. 3. acknowledges that not onely particular Councils are corrected by General but that of General Councils the later may and do correct them that went afore Again Irenaeus III. 1. affirms that the Apostles writ what they preached by the will of God for the foundation and pilar of our Faith Tertulliane de Prâ—script cap. VIII Cùm credimus nihil ultrà desideramus credere Hoc enim prius credimus non esse quod ultra credere debeamus When wee believe wee desire to believe nothing else For first wee believe that there is nothing further which wee ought to believe So cap. XIV XXIX contra Hermog cap. XXII Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis Officina that the world was made of mater preexiâ—ent Si non est scriptum timeat vae illud adjicientibus aut detrahentibus definitum Let the shop of Hermogenes show it written If it be not written let it fear the wo decreed for them that adde or take away Apollinaris in Eusebius Eccl. Hist V. 10. is afraid to write least hee should seem to write or injoyn more than the Gospel to which nothing is to be added or taken from it S. Basil de Fide sayes it is plain apostasie to bring in any thing that is not written And in Asceticis Reg. LXXX proves it because faith is by Gods Word and that which is not of faith is sin So likewise S. Ambrose de Paradiso cap. XII alleging Apoc. XXII 19. S. Austine de Bono Viduitatis I. Sancta Scriptura doctrinae nostrae Regulam figit The Holy Scripture prescribes a Rule to our doctrine To the same purpose de peccatorum remiss II. 36. S. Cyril de Trinitate personâ Christi whose words Damascene uses de Orthod Fide
that hee hath any end but himself nor that hee doth any thing to any other end than to exercise and declare his own perfections If hee do sundry things which of their nature have necessarily such an end as they attain not it is to be said that Gods end never fails in so much as by failing of the end to which they were made they become the subject of some other part of that providence wherein his perfections are exercised and declared Seeing then that all Controversies concerning the Faith have visibly their original from some passages of Scripture which being presupposed true before the foundation of the Church ought to be acknowledged but cannot be constituted by it And seeing that no man that out of the conscience of a Christian hath imbraced all that is written can deny that which hee may have cause to believe to be the sense of the least part of the Scripture without ground to take away that belief It remains that the way to abate Controversies is to rest content with the means that God hath left us to determine the sense of the Scripture not undertaking to tye men further to it than the applying of those means will inferre And truly to imagine that the authority of the Church or the dictate of Gods Spirit should satisfie doubts of that nature without showing the means by which other records of learning are understood and so resolving those doubts which the Scriptures necessarily raise in all them that believe them to be true and the word of God is more than huge cart-loads of Commentaries upon the Scriptures have have been able to do Which being written upon supposition of certain determinations pretended by the Church or certain positions which tending to reform abuses in the Church were taken for testified by Gods Spirit have produced no effect but an utter despair of coming to resolution or at least acknowledgment of resolution in the sense of the Scriptures Whereas let men capable of understanding and managing the means heretofore mentioned think themselves free as indeed they ought to be of all prejudices which the partialities on foot in the Church may have prepossessed them with and come to determine the meaning thereof by the means so prescribed and within those bounds which the consent of the Church acknowledges They shall no sooner discern how the primitive Christianity which we have from the Apostles becomes propagated to us but they shall no less clearly discern the same in their writings And if God have so great a blessing for Christendom as the grace to look upon what hath been written with this freedom there hath been so much of the meaning of the Scripture already discovered by those that have laid aside such prejudices and so much of it is in the way to be discovered every day if the means be pursued as is well to be hoped will and may make partizans think upon the reason they have to maintain partialities in the Church If God have not this blessing in store for Christendom it remains that without or against all satisfaction of conscience concerning the truth of contrary pretenses men give themselves up to follow and professe that which the protection of secular Power shall show them means to live and thrive by In which condition whether there be more of Atheism or of Christianity I leave to him who alone sees all mens hearts to judge CHAP. XXXIV The Dispute concerning the Canon of Scripture and the translations thereof in two Questions There can be no Tradition for those books that were written since Prophesie ceased Wherein the excellence of them above other books lies The chief objections against them are questionable In those parcels of the New Testament that have been questioned the case is not the same The sense of the Church HAving thus resolved the main point in doubt it cannot be denied notwithstanding that there are some parts or appertenances of the Question that remain as yet undecided For as long as it is onely said that the Scripture interpreted by the consent of the Church is a sufficient mean to determine any thing controverted in mater of Christian truth there is nothing said till it appear what these Scriptures are and in what records they are contained And truly it is plain that there remains a controversie concerning the credit of some part of those writings which have been indifferently copied and printed for the Old Testament commonly marked in our English Bibles by the title of Apocrypha And no lesse concerning the credit of the Copies wherein they are recorded For though it is certain and evident that the Old Testament hath been derived from the Ebrew the New from the Greek in which at first they were delivered to the Church Yet seeing it appeareth not of it self impossible such changes may have succeeded in the Copies that the Copies which the Jews now use of the Old Testament are further from that which was first delivered than the Vulgar Latine as also the Copies of the Greek Testament now extant It is a very plain case that this doubt remaining it is not yet resolved what are the principles what the means to determine the truth in maters questionable concerning Christianity I must further distinguish two questions that may be made in both these points before I go further For it is evidently one thing to demand whether those writings which I said remain questionable are to be counted part of the Old Testament or not Another whether they are to be read by Christians either for particular information or for publick edification at the assemblies of the Church And likewise as concerning the other point it is one thing to demand what Copy is to be held for authentick another thing to dispute how every Copy is to be used and frequented in the Church To wit whether translations in mother languages are to be had and into what credit they are to be received For it is manifest that the one sense of both questions demands what the body of the Church either may do or ought to do in proposing or prohibiting the said writings or Copies to be used by the members thereof for their edification in Christian piety But the other what credit they have in themselves upon such grounds as are in nature and reason more ancient than the authority of the Church and which the being and constitution thereof presupposeth And as manifest as it is that these are two questions so manifest must it needs remain that the one of them to wit that which concerns the authority of the Church and the effect of it does not belong to this place nor come to be decided but upon supposition of all the means God hath given his Church to be resolved of any truth that becomes questionable As for the other part of both questions though it hath been and may be among them that will not understand the difference between principles and conclusions because it is for
agree that this is said When I can charge the Jewes themselves acknowledging likewise that this is meant of the Messias that the title and workes and attributes and worship of God are ascribed to the Messias even by the Old Testament I need not be thought to weaken the cause of our common Christianity by making the ground of it unremoveable Neither shall I stick by the same reason to acknowledge among the rest of those titles which Isaiah prophesieth of Ezekias noâ— that his name shall be the mighty God but that is as the pillar of Moses is called God is my standard so the title of Ezekias shall be God is mighty Because of the might God should shew by him in doing good to his people And as I will not say that he can be called the Father of eternity so I can say and do that whosoever will maintaine that God intended that Moses Law should cease which is so often said to be given for ever in the Scripture must grant that those words which may signify eternity when the matter or circumstance of the speech requires do signifie no more then a time whereof the term is unknown in the Old Testament I say likewise that the then people of God were to understand that Isaiah promised them Gods Spirit and the graces thereoâ— to rest upon their Princes by whom he promiseth them deliverance But all this being granted when it is either granted or proved on the other side that the name and workes and titles and worship of the onely true God are ascribed and challenged to our Lord Christ by his word of the New or Old Testament and the grounds upon which the meaning of it is evidenced upon supposition hereof I will neverthelesse challenge that sense of these Prophesies in behalf of our Lord Christ by virtue of the subject matter of the New Testament and the whole current thereof determining the capacity of those words wherein these Prophesies are delâ—vered unto it For I professe and maintaine that the difference between the Literall and mysticall sense of the Old Testament necessary to be maintained by all that will maintaine the truth of Christianity against the Jews cannot be maintained without granting such an equivocation in the words of it as the correspondence between the kingdom of heaven and that of Israel the Priesthood of Christ and Aaron the Propheticall office of Josua and Jesus in fine between the land of Canaan and the heavenly Paradise produceth And that when this is maintained throughout the Scripture then is that great work of Gods wisdome in making way for the Gospel by the Law glorified to the conviction of the Jews which when it is sometimes challenged and elsewhere waved becomes a stumbling block to the obstinacy of that willfull People It remaines that I omit not those things which Solomon preaches of the Wisdom of God in so sublime and mysterious language that when we read S. Paul intitling Christ The power of God and the wisdome of God 1 Cor. I. 24. we cannot refuse to understand them of the Godhead dwelling in his flesh as the Church hath alwayes done Wisdome was at the making of all things was brought forth before any thing was made Gods delight that delights it self in Gods workes especially in conversing with mankinde Prov. VIII 23-31 Adde hereunto Prov. IV. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wisdom is the principal or beginning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Adde Prov. III. 19 20. that God made heaven and earth by Wisdome Adde the words of a Prophet to whom God sends his friends to be expiated and reconciled to God Job XLII 7 8. that Wisdome is known to God alone as that which he looked upon when he ordained the creation of the universe Job XXVIII 20-28 Adde the Prophet David signifying the same in fewer words In wisdome hast thou made them all Psal CIV 24. that Wisdome which saith to all men by Job XXVIII 29. by David Psal CXI 10. by Solomon Prov. I. 2 IX 9. Eccles XII 15. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdome In which Wisdome the whole businesse of Solomons doctrine seems to be that the whole happinesse of man consisteth Is all this with Socinus but a figure of Rhetorick called Prosopopaeia whereby Solomon brings in Wisdom in the person of Gods favourite to signify that it comes from God and to inflame all men to love that which Solomon had prayed for to God to make him a happy Prince 1 Kings III. 9 11 12. 2 Chron. I. 10 11 Truly this were something for a Jew to acknowledge that the wisdome of Gods people which Moses also shews consisted in their Lawâ— Deut. IV. 6. came from God to order their doings to God For from hence it will follow that as those that are to give account to God of the most inward intentions and inclinations of the heart so are they obliged to order them and all the productions of them according to his will and to his honour and service But for a Christian that hath learnt the whole work of the Law to have been preparative to that which our Lord by his Gospel was to do and that before the Law the Fathers were instructed to live as Christians now do or should do the Law adding nothing but civile Lawes to inforce the obedience of them that rebelled against their discipline and ceremonies to figure the Gospel to come for such a one not to understand when Gods Prophets proclaime that the wisdome by which God made the World takes delight to converse with mankind to reduce it from Idols to the worship of God to stirre up Prophets to preserve them in it and to foretell Christ to come that the same wisdome which did this afterwards in our flesh did it afore without it is a fault to the Christianity which he professeth He that writ the Wisdome of Solomon though no Christian â—aw more when he said Wisd X. 1 2. This Wisdome preserved the first Father of the World who was made alone and drew him out of his sinne and gave him strength to rule all things Proceeding to shew the same of the Fathers that succeed The same author having presaced Wisd VI. 23. that he would shew how Wisdome was brought forth adds Wisd VII 22-27 that description which attributes to Wisdome the same that the Apostle ascribes to Christ The image or shine of Gods glory and substance the unstained mirror of his virtue the breath of his Power the flowing forth of the glory of the most High which sustaineth all things that he made and remaining the same renewâ—th or maketh new all things and setling upon holy mens mindes makes them Gods friends and Prophets And this having premised that the Spirit of God goes through all the World and that Wisdome is a Spirit that convinceth the secret perversenesse of the heart Wisd â— 5 6 7. Then of the death of the first-born in Egypt XVIII 14 15 16. For when all things were
thence forth to recover man from the labor of sinne to which when he became mortall he was condemned to Paradise from whence he had been expulsed And therefore our Lord Christ according to S. Peter 1 Pet. IV. 18 19 20. going out of the world by that Spirit whereby he was made alive when he had been put to death in the flesh to wit speaking in his Apostles preached to the Spirits in prison that had been disobedient in the days of Noe Converting the Gentiles by the gift of his Spirit granted upon his sufferings who had refused the same in Noe the Preacher of righteousnesse 1 Pet. II. 5. When God said My Spirit shall no more strive with man Gen VI. 2. For the pilgrimage of the Patriarchs the Promise of the Land of Canaan the Law given by Moses was all but the further limitation and rule of that outward and civile conversation under which the traffique of Christianity was then driven by Prophets who spake by Gods Spirit This Reason Socinus being obliged to miskenne by making our Lord Christ a meer man cannot give that account of the grace of Christ before his coming which the Church doth Acquiting thereby my position That the Law covenanteth expresly onely for the Land of Promise of all suspicion of compliance with his intentions By this you see that Pelagius and Socinus both are carried out of the way of Christianity because they will not acknowledge the decay of mankind by the fall of Adam and the coming of Christ to repair it But those of Marseilles and the parts adjoyning in France that formalized themselves against S. Augustines doctrine of Predestination and effectuall Grace freely and heartily acknowledging Originall sin seem to have justified only upon the true interest of Christianity in that free will which the Covenant of Grace necessarily supposeth though mistaking their way out of humane frailty they failed of the truth though they parted with Pelagius They made faith or at least the beginning of faith and of will to beleive to repent and to turn unto God the work of free will in consideration whereof God though no way tied so to do grants the help of his Grace and Spirit to performe the race of faith Most truly maintaining according to that vvhich hath been professed in the beginning of this book that the act of true Faith is an act of mans free will which God rewardeth with his free Grace To wit with the habituall gift of his spirit inabling true believers to go through with that Faith which thereby they undertake as I have shewed you both these elsewhere Most expresly acknowledging the preaching of the Gospel going before in which whatsoever help the coming of our Lord Chirst hath furnished to move and winne the world to believe is involved But miskenning the grace of the Gospel granted by God in consideration of his obedience to make him a Church that might honour him for it If Pelagius acknowledged no more in the coming of Christ then to make his message appear to be true so that the imbracing of it might oblige God to grant his grace by preventing it with an act of free will complying with it The reason was not because this very tender being the purchase of our Lord Christs free obedience could be subject to any merit of man But because he was engaged to maintaine that we are borne in the same estate in which Adam was made needing nothing but Gods declaration of his will and pleasure towards the fulfilling of it But for them who acknowledge the decay of our nature by the fall of Adam and the coming of our Lord to repair the breaches of it to ascribe the grace which God furnisheth those that believe with for the performing of that which by believing they undertake to the act of freewill in believing which themselves acknowledge to be prevented by so many effects of Christs coming as the preaching of his Gospel necessarily involveth and which the Scriptures so openly acknowledge to be prevented by the Grace of his Spirit purchased by his sufferings must needs argue a great deal of difficulty in the question which the worse divines they appear must needs justifie them to be much the better Christians And indeed there is great cause to excuse them as farre as reason will give leave in a case wherein the Fathers that went afore Pelagius seem to be ingaged with them For it is ordinary enough to read them exhorting to lay out the indeavovrs of free will expecting the assistance of Gods Grace to the accomplishment of that which a man purposes And besides S. Augustine who acknowledges that before the contest with Pelagius he did think faith to be the act of free will which God blesseth with Grace to do as he professeth It cannot be denied that S. Jerome so great an enemy to the Pelagians with some others have expressed that which amounts to it But it is true on the other side that the same Fathers do frequently acknowledge the beginning as well as the accomplishment of our salvation to the grace of God Which is not onely an obligation so to expound their sayings when they set free will before grace as supposing the cure thereof begunne by Grace But also a presumption that those who expresse not the like caution are no otherwise to be understood Especially supposing expresly the motives of faith provided by the holy Ghost granted in consideration of our Lords sufferings in virtue whereof the resolution which is taken for the best must of necessity proceed though by the operation of the same Spirit whereby they are advanced and furnished It is therefore no doubt a commendable thing to excuse the writings of that excellent person John Casiane so farre as the common Faith will give leave as you may see the learned Vossius doth as speaking ambiguously in setting grace before free will sometimes as well as other whiles free will before Grace For Faustus his book De libero arbitrio I cannot say the same though I must needs have that respect for his Christian qualities which the commendations that I read of him in Sidoius Apollinaris deserve For besides that the stile of it is generally such as seems to make free will the umpire between the motions of grace and of sinne which ascribes the ability of well doing to God but the act to our selves that the Fathers under the Law of nature were saved by free will he delivers expresly with Pelagius An oversight grosse enough in any man that shall have considered upon what terms Christianity is to be justified against the Jews out of the Old Testament There is therefore appearance enough that the II Council of Orange which finally decreed against the heresie of Pelagius was held expresly to remove the offenses which that book had made And evidence enough that the articles of it are justified by the tradition of the whole Church For those prayers of the Church that way and subject of
this then that which the supposition of free will necessarily requires Certainly Aristotles resolution that they are sure in the alternative but that neither part of it can be certaine That is to say that Peter being tempted shall either deny his master or not but that being contingent it can neither be certaine that he shall nor that he shall not is utterly inconsistent with that particular providence of God over all things which Châ—â—stianty supposeth renders that great mastâ—r as a man too cunning not to see â—he conâ—equence of his own position very sususpicious in a point so neerely concerning the belief of Gods providence Now future contingencies in the notion of contingencies that are not yet come to passe being in themselves nothing that is to say being onely understood to be posible cannot reduce themselves to the nature and state or future contingencies in the notion of contingencies that shall come to passe such as we believe all contingencies that have or shall come to passe to the worlds end were to God from everlasting It is therefore a meere contradiction to imagin that contingencies either by the possibilty of their nature or by the capacity of the cause that is of it selfe utterly undetermined to do rather then not to do to do this rather then that can be an object capable of being known by that knowledg upon which they may be said to be certaine future as things that shal be not as things that may be not as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to distinguish with Aristotle There are indeed those who undertake that when it is said Peter shall deny his Lord Peter shall not deny his Lord the one of which sayings must needs come to passe seeing this necessity must needs be in the object before it be in the saying because the saying is true or fals by reason that the matter of it is so or otherwise before therefore that part which appeares true in time was true from everlasting But that they suppose cannot be by virtue of any or all causes least the effects should no more be contingencies Therefore by virtue of the things themselves because of a contradiction the one part must needs be true the other false And this being of future contingencies they imagin it is which the knowledg of God attaining is therefore called sight because it reacheth that which is in being and therefore present to it But this imagination is a meere contradiction to common reason which is able to tell any man that possibilities differ onely in this from nothing that there are such things as can bring them to passe And therefore have no being at all but in the ability of their causes Whereas suppose them in being before their causes bring them to passe what remaines for their causes to doe which would have nothing to doe if that which they bring to passe were in being before they bring it so to passe And what contingency could then remaine seeing whatsoever is must needs be while it is For this position prevents any supposition that may be made concerning the being of that which is said to be before you can suppose or understand it to be And where is the difference between the being of God and that of future contingencies both being of themselves Surely supposing the necessity of this their being because God could not see them otherwise they would be not only objects denominating that knowledge of God to be sight which reacheth the present being of them but causes on which the sight of God must depend as our sight depends on the object that causeth it The future being therefore of contingencies necessarily supposeth the determination of their causes The contingence of them that thâ—s determination is from their causes themselves freely determining themselves The certainty of them from the infinite reach of Gods understanding comprehending the resolution of the Creature by the present inclination thereof meeting the considerations which it is presented with Wherefore as it is impossible that the will should act unlesse the understanding go before and the resolution of the will to do or not to do this or that necessarily depends upon some act of the understanding shewing by sufficient reason an end sufficient to move the wil to proceed and resolve So doth not the will effectually proceed untill the understanding shews that reason which effectually moves it to proceed Now these reasons proceeding from those appearances which the objects that every man meets with cause in his mind either at the present or by comparing that which outwardly appears at the present with that which is laid up in the storehouse of the mind And God having provided what objects every man in every moment shall meet with to resolve him what to do in every case that may come in debate It cannot be imagined that he provideth this and knoweth not by the means which he proviâ—eth what will be the issue supposing that he knoweth it not by his own resolution to determine a man by his own immediate act to do whatsoever he does And indeed God comprehending what considerations a man every moment is moved with and what be his own inclinations that is moved with the same it cannot seem strange that by this means seeing it appears impossible that by any other means he should comprehend what will so come to pass though knowing that he that acteth had or might have had sufficient reasons to have done otherwise Wherefore if any man ask me whether God know what will come to pass if any case should be put which he knoweth shall never be put which is now called in the Schools Gods middle knowledge because it hath on the one side that knowledge whereby he comprehendeth the natures of all things and the possibilities of all events on the other side the view which he hath from everlasting of all things that have been are or shall be for that tract of time which they endure because I seem to say that this is it which directs Gods providence in resolving what course to hold by which resolution it appears to him what shall come to pass I shall not answer nevertheless without distinguishing That God comprehends not the issues of those future possibilities which men can imagine to themselves and yet comprehends the issues of these future possibilities whereof we suppose him to determine all the circumstances For let a man infinitely endeavour to limit by his understanding all that he can consider in the case of any man left to his freedome he shall never be able to express that consideration which shall be effectuall certainly to determine him that is presented with it Because it is manifest that infinite considerations more may present themselves to move him to do nothing or otherwise But when the word of God speaks of these means which being provided by God determine effectually the resolution of him that is moved by them to wit by
it may be said that a thing comes to passe necessarily and that sense in which it may be said that it must necessarily come to passe For I suppose that the property of our English will help me here to distinguish these two senses to all that consider their mother tongue and may discerne a severall meanâ—ng when a man saies the fire burnes necessarily Peter must necessarily deny our Lord supposing that our Lord had fore told it For when the necessity is understood to be in the cause which the nature thereof though by Gods will determines it is proper to say thaâ— it comes to passe necessarily But when the necessity is understood to stand upâ—n a supposition of the effect either being or knowne to be which knowledg presupposeth it to be being supposâ—d to be true or the like it is proper to say this must needs come to passe or it must of necessity come to passe but not that it comes to passe necessarily because then the necessity must noâ— fall upon the coming of it upon passe but upon the manner by which it comes to pâ—sse I say then if any can inferr upon my saying that the necessity which it infers is antecedent to the being of it I grant I am faln into the inconvenience which I would a void and will disclaime the position upon which it followes But if it be onely consequent upon supposition either that it is or that it is taken to be it is no more then that necessity which is found in all coâ—tiâ—gencies according to all opinions that must allow all things necessarily to be â—hough not to be necessarily supposing that they are Now when I say that God determines the evenâ—s of future contingencies I say not that he doth it by determining their causes to do them speaking of free causes for the contingâ—â—cies which come to passe by the concurrence of naturall causes I grant â—o be meere necessities in regard it is necessary that when every cause actâ— to the uâ—most of his strength that must not onely needs come to passe but come to passe necessarily which the concurrence of severall forces produceth and must needâ— appear in the causes to any that comprehends the force of them all buâ— that this act of his ends in determining the motives which present themâ—elves to such causes Which act is consistent with an other act whereby he mâ—intaines the cause in an ability of doing or not doing that which it is movâ—d to do But that comprehending the inclinations thereof and the force oâ— the motives which it is presented with he comprehends thereby that it will proceed to act though comprehending that it might doe otherwiâ—e shâ—uld it regard those appearances which either habitually it hath or actuâ—lly â—t â—â—ght to have Now I confesse againe it is hard for me to show how it ought actually to have those appearances which habitually it hath But seeing thaâ— supposing this I show evidently how the providence of God iâ— unceâ—easibâ—â— the will remaining free and the effects thereof contingent I will rathâ—r conâ—esse that I cannot shew where their freedome might or ought to move when it does not then destroy the ground of all Christianity Thus much is evident supposing my saying that the certainty of the event includes the supposition of the will acting freely therefore infers no necessity antecedent to it the knowledge upon which providence decrees foreseeing that it will freely proceed being so moved CHAP. XXV The grounds of the difference between sufficient and effectuall How naturall occasions conduce to supernaturall actions The insufficience of Jansenius his doctrine Of sufficient grace under the Law of Moses and Nature ANd now I shall not use many words to declare what it is that makes those helps of grace which of themselves are sufficient effectuall For if all particulars are contayned in their generalls that which is said of all the works of providence must hold in those helps of supernaturall grace whereby it conducteth to the happinesse of the world to come And therefore the efficacy of Gods grace taking efficacy to imply the effect consists in the order which providence useth that the motives of Christianity whether to imbrace or performe the profession of it be presented in such circumstances as may render them accepted of the will to whose judgement for the preâ—ent they so appeare So that the same for nature and kind prove effectall to one which to an other prove void and frustrate For it is manifest that those helps are the grace of Christ even as they are sufficient and supposing them not to take effect And it ought to be manifest that the circumstances in which they are present to every particular person are brought to passe by the conduct of Gods spirit which filleth the world and attaineth from the beginning to the end of all things which come to passe And this spirit and the coming thereof being purchased by our Lord Christ and granted in consideration of his obedience it is easy to bee seen how it is the grace of Christ not onely as sufficient but also as effectuall This resolution then presupposeth two things as proved Chap. XVIII The first That the preaching of the Gospell is the grace of Christ That is to say A Grace granted by God in consideration of Christs merits and sufferings The second That the grace of Christ attaineth and reacheth the very effect of conversion and new obedience and resteth not in having inabled man to doe it of himselfe without the influence of it To make this part of faith better to be understood among believers better to be maintained against unbelievers that which this resolution advanceth is this That the Grace of the H. Ghost purchased by the humiliation of Christ and by his exaltation obtained as it is the meanes which God hath provided for the publishing of his Gospell to the conviction of all who understand it that they ought to submit to the faith and live according to it so it is the meanes to make it effectuall to the conversion of the Nations to Christianity that conversion effectuall in their lives and conversations by presenting the reasons and grounds thereof being of themselves sufficient for the worke to every mans consideration in those circumstances procured by the providence of God which it executeth in which his wisdome â—oresaw that they would takâ— effect and become to the purpose And truly when our Lord saith Iohn XVI 8 9 10. And when he cometh he will convict the world of sin of righteousnesse of judgement Of sin because they believe not in mee Of judgement because the prince of this world is condemned we must understand that the H. Ghost convinced the world of sin because those miracles which the Apostles did by the holy Ghost convincing the world that they spoke the word of God shewed the world that they were under sin and liable to Gods wrath if they became not Christians And that he convinced
the world of Judgement because the Prince of theis world is condemned by the conversion of those who forefook him to become Christians Therefore S Steven upbraideth the Jews saying Ye stisnecked and uncircumcised in hearts and eares ye do alwaies resist the Holy Ghost even you also as did your fathers Acts VII 51. Because being convicted by the Holy Ghost which spoke in him that he spoke from God neverthelesse they submit not to his message Therefore our Lord Mark III. 28. 29 30 All sins shall be forgiven the sons of men and blasphemies which they shall blaspheme But whoso shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath no remission for ever but is liable to everlasting damnation Because they said he hath an unclean spirit which you have againe Math. XII 31 32. Luke XII 10. Because being convicted that our Lord spoke did his miracles by the Holy Ghost they blasphemed saying that he spoke and did them by an uncleane spirit For these words and these workes are the meanes by which our Lord accomplished â—his promise Iohn XIV 23. If any man love me he will keep my word and my Father will love him and we will come to him and abide with him For before the condition If any man love me be fulfilled the case is that which our Lord expresseth Apoc. III. 20. Behold I stand at the dore and knock And if any man heare my voice and open the dore I will come in to him and sup with him â—e with me But being fulfilled the words of our Lord take place Iohn XVI 15 16 17. If yee love me ye will keep my commandements And I will aske the Father and he will give you an other Advocate to abide with you for ever even the spirit of truth which the world cannot receive because they â—ee it not nor know it but you know it because it abideth with you and is in you For seeing it is manifest by the premises that the undertaking of Christianity is the condition upon which the Holy Ghost is granted as a gift to abide with Christians the preaching of Christianity that is the proposing of those reasons which God by his word hath shewed us why wee should be Christians is the knocking of our Lord Christ by the spirit at the dore of the heart that he may enter and dwell in us by the same spirit according to the words of S. Paul 2. Cor. II. 16. For ye are the Temple of the living God as God hath said To wit I will dwell and converse among them and will be their God and they shall be my people That which some Philosophers say of the naturall generation of man That the soule frames its owne dwelling being fulfilled in the worke of generation by grace when the Holy Ghost by his actuall assistance frameth the man to be fit for the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost by becoming a true Christian If then we believe that the Holy Ghost was given by God and obtained by Christ as well to make the Gospell effectuall as to move the Apostles to preach it there can no doubt remaine that the preaching of the Gospell that is to say the meanes which the Holy Ghost provideth to make it either sufficient or effectual to convince the world of it is the instrument whereby he frameth himself that invisible house of true believers in which he dwelleth And therefore the meanes whereby Gods grace becomes effectuall to those who imbrace it is the same that renders it sufficient for those who refuse it the difference lying as well in the disposition which it meets with for which the man is accountable as in the spirit of God that presenteth it which renders God the praise when it takes effect and leaves men accountable when it does not If this reason had been in consideration with Socinus and perhaps with Pelagius he would have found it necessary acknowledging as all that read the Scriptures must needs acknowledge that which they find so frequent and so cleare in the Scriptures that the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost is granted to inable those who undertake Christianity to performe it to acknowledge also that the actuall help of it is necessary to make the motives of Christianity effectuall to subdâ—e men to it And by consequence that the coming of the second Adam was necessary to restore the breach which the first had made seeing it was not to be repaired without the same Nor is it to be marveled at that naturall meanes conducted by the grace of Christ should produce supernaturall effects such as I have shewed the obediencâ— of Christianity to be which supposing the Covenant of grace and freedome of mans will cannot be otherwise The reasons which appeare to the understanding and move the will to act contrary to the inclination of originall concupâ—scence in professing Christianity and living according to the same being sufficient to convict it to give sentence that so the man ought to doe And the circumstances in which the spirit of Christ conducteth these motives to the heart which it knocketh at by their means being able to represent them valuable to take effect with him who is moved to the contrary by his originall concupiscence And though meanes naturall because they move a man to proceed according to right reason which nature requires him to doe yet as they are brought to passe and conducted by a supernaturall cause nothing hinders the effect to be supernaturall in such a nature as is by them made capable of acting above nature I do much approve the discourse of some that have indeavoured to shew how this comes to passe thus supposing the covenant of the Law to be the renewing of that which was made with Adam in Paradise for the maintaining of him in the happnesse of his naturall life Which we may suppose though we suppose not that God covenanted not with him at all for the life to come For the dispensation of those blessings of this life which the covenant of nature limited by Moses Law to the happinesse of the land of promise tendreth may well be the advantage which God taketh to make the covenant of Grace acceptable especially to those who by Gods blessing failing of the blessings of the first covenant by that meanes becoming out of love with this present worlâ— meeâ— with the Covenant of Grace in such a disposition as may render it acceptable For so long as things goe well with men in this world it seemes haâ—sh to require them to takeup the Crosse of Christ that they may obtain the world to come But when the comforts of this world faile it is no marvell if any condition that tenders hope in the world to come be welcome If it be said that this renders the grace of Christ effectuall onely to the poore and men oâ— meane condition in the world who have cause to be weary of their estâ—te in it It is answered that it is no marvell if the
meanes that makes the grace of Christ effectuall addresse it selfe especially to that estate o men in which our Lord Christ to whom they so become conformable appeared in the world And for that very reason to figure that estâ—te of mind which the Gospell requires the people of â—sraell were by Gods Law left unâ—uâ—nished of many helps of policy and force by which other nations maintain themselves free from servâ—tude that they might remaine obliged to depend upon Gâ—dâ— immediate assistance providence But it is to be said further That the greatest estates of the world being subject to the greatest crosses through want of successe and those great changes to which they are liable this way of preparation to the kingdome of heaven can no way seeme wanting to any estate when a begger is seen no lesse to doâ—e upon this world then an uncleane person is seen to doâ—e upon that whore by whom he is abused It is moreover to be said That the remembrance of death which must and the inconstancy of this world which may deprive us of all the benefits thereof being by Gods judgement the punishment of sin soures all the content of them that drench themselves deepest in the pleasures of this life and gives them just cause to forsake them all in case they stand not with the hope of the world to come And the very injoying of them being injoyed with that conscience which all Châ—â—stians have of Gods providence and the sense of his hand from whence they come is reasonably an advantage to those who injoy the best successe that can be expressâ—d in the course of this world both to become thankfull to God for it and also to prefer â—â—ernity before it Whereby it may appeare that the course of this world disposed by God upon the terms of the covenant of nature containes â—â— it those opportunities and advantages which the act of Gods providence by the grace of Christ knowes easily how to makâ— effectuall to the supernaturall purposes of it This is the place for the rest of that which I am to say of the opinion of Jansenius setling the efficacy of saving grace upon other grounds then those which I use The ground of it seems to stand upon the observation of S. Augustin de corrept gratia Chap. XI XII Distinguishing between the help of grace without which the worke of grace is not don that by which it is don auxilium sine quo non and auxilium quo and comparing the grace of Christ which cometh to effect notwithstanding originall concupiscence with the grace given Adam which might have come to effect had he pleased but came not notwithstanding his innocenâ—e as more powerfull in our weakenesse then that in his strength For hereupon he will have the grace of Christ to be onely that which takes effect confining that help without which the worke of grace cannot be don to the state of innocence as ouâ— of date now under oâ—iginall sin So that the freedome of the will is so far from being râ—quisite to â—he effects â—hereof that it hath no being but bâ— the meanes of it consisting in that free love of that which God commandeth because he commandeth it which it inspireth As on the other side the counâ—erfeit of it in them that sin without reluctation bâ—cause free from righteousnesse is nothing but the free lâ—ve of sin for the saâ—isfaction of concupiscence It is therefore in his opinion impertinent how necessarily the grace of Christ determineth the wil to imbrace the true good seeing it is the love of it the delight in it which grace worketh in the wâ—ll that determines it willingly and freely to imbrace it To tâ—ke the more distinct view of this plea let us put the case in him who running full speed in a course of sin is caâ—led by the preaching of the Gospell to become a Christian Or to the same purpose in him who being a Christian and runnâ—ng the same race is summoned by his profession and the grounds thereof to reâ—urne to it In this case can any man imagine that the reasons which move us all to be Christians shâ—uld raise no love of true good no dislike to sin no feare of vengeance no desire of everlasting hapâ—iâ—esse in him that considers them as they deserve Especially being managed by the spirit of God which knocketh at the dore of the heart by that meanes Or can any man question as it is â—he feare of vengeance that beginneth so it is the love of good for Gods sâ—ke that conâ—ummateth the resolution of becoming a true Christiâ—â— But the quâ—stâ—â—n being put about changing the chief end of a mans whole life and doings can it be supposed that any man is prevented with such a delight in true gooâ—nesse as iâ—stâ—ntly to abandon the lust which his bâ—sâ—nesse hath been hitherto to satisfie without demurre or regret I doubt not that God can immediatly crâ—aâ—e in any man that appearance of true good that shall without debate or looking back transport him to the prosecution of it That notwithstanding the Covenant of grace he may doe it Which though a rule to his ordâ—nâ—ry proceeding is no Law to his Soveraigne perogative But him that is thus sâ—ved though sâ—ved by grace yet we cannot count to be saved by the Covenant of grace Which proposeth a reward to them who are led by motives thereof notwithstanding the difficulties to the contrary though implying the worke of grace in him that overcometh And this no man more câ—earâ—ly acknowledgeth then Jansenius de gratia Christi VIII 2. where â—â— conâ—esseth that the predetermination of the will by the grace of Christ is not indefeasible but onely when it overcomâ—s as Gods predetermination according to the Dominicans is For by this difference whâ—ch in statiâ—g of this opinion I have not neglected afore the efficacy thereof cannot be attribuâ—ed to â—e â—aâ—ure of that help which overcometh aâ— of an other kind then that which pâ—oveth frustrate And therefore notwithstanding that large and elaborat work of his he hath left us to inquire further whence the efficacy of it proceedeth As having in effect onely resolved us wherein the efficacy of Grâ—ce consisteth in the nature of the formall cause Not from whence it proceedâ—th in the nature of the effective cause which the question indeed demandâ—th And truly the very consideration premised That as freedome from sin coâ—sists in the determination of the will to righteousnesse which the Grace of Chrâ—st effecteth so freedome from righteousnesse in the determination of it to sin which it acteth Inâ—orceth an other kind of freedome common to both estates not importing praise or dispraise but a capacity of either by doing that which no necessity determineth a man to doe And therefore that though the grace of Christs Crosse be the medecine yet till it be freely taken it worketh not the cure This is that freedome from necessity by the present condition of our nature the use whereof
is plaine that the objection is the same against S. Paul as against the resolution proposed For as this answer supposes the reason why the Gentiles were converted to be Christians the Jewes not to be resolved into the will of God so the resolution here proposed resolves the reason of the true Christianity and finall perseverance in it of those that shall be saved into that disposition of motives resolving free will which Gods free grace onely appointeth And the question is evidently the same if as one ingredient into the disposition of each mans salvation or damnation it be demanded why God suffered man to fall from the state of innocence but procureth that the preaching of the Gospell arrive at the knowledg of some people and not of others For if supposing sufficient helps of grace the reason where by they become effectuall is neverthelesse resolved into the immediate disposition of God Then though we consider man as not faâ—â—e from the state of innocence and resolve the reason why God should bring him into that estate in which he foresaw that he would fall intending to propagate his kind under the condition of this lapsed estate we have recourse to no other reason then that which S. Paul imployed before us Where we may see the fault which hath been committed by them who to attaine the end of his glory by the absolute salvation of some and damnation of others no otherwaies qualified then as such persons have made the object of Gods predestination to be mankind not made but to be made the purpose of making mankind being the next meanes subordinate to the attaining of that end which the first decree proposed to God For besides that this ingages God to procure the fall of man and the sins in which the reprobate finally persevere no otherwise then the grace in which the Elect depart it makes God to predestinate onely a number and to reprobate the same there being no other consideration possible to be had upon those that are supposed not to be as yet but onely that they may be so many as God shall appoint of either kind So that the glory of God according to this monstrous imagination shall consist onely in saving such a number and in damning such an other rather then one more or one lesse of either sort Neither is this inconvenience cured by the position of those that have been called Sublapsariaus by as monstrous name as the other of Supralapsaians That God seeing mankind Lapsed from the state of innocence resolving to save so many of them to damne so many provided to send our Lord Christ with effectual means to save these leaving those unprovided of sufficient means to find their owne ruine For solong as those that are appointed to be saved and to be damned are qualified no otherwise then as men found in the common case of mans fall the glory of God is made to consist in damning somany of them and saving so many rather then one more or one lesse For the originall corruption in which we are borne though it renders the first Adam unrecoverable without the second yet it leaves every man in every instance undetermined to evill till by his owne choice of evill before good and the habit whâ—ch accrews by custome his naturall inclination to it become so determined that his choice determines without deliberating any more But suppose so many absolutely appointed to life and so many to death in this estate you suppose them respectively determined though not in particular what good or what evill they shall doe yet in generall to sin and to dye in sin or oâ— the other side to attaine the state of grace and to dye in it Vnlesse we thinke that God being God the absolute appointment of his Providence can â—e defeated Whereas in making God determine to save and to damne those who are qualified for each according to the Gospell But to give effectuall meanes of being so qualified to the one which out of his freedome he refutes the others granting them what he deemes to be sufficient we make the glory of God visible here in the one point not disparaging it if in the other it be for the present acknowledged with Saint Paul to be invisible For if there were any other Religion in the World which could pretend maintaynig the differences between good and bad the providence of God in all things and the reward of good and bad in another world to give further reason of the coming in and continuance of evill in the world there might be some pretense of prejudice to the priviledg which Christianity claimeth in maintayning those principles from the inability of declareing the reasons by which God dispenseth the meanes of his effectuall grace But there never was any other religion in the world that could pretend any such thing The Greekish Philosophers who were the Divines of the Gentiles some of them openly professed necessity and fate as the Stoicke thereby destroying freedome and contingence by the consequence Religion and all difference between good and bad much more the truth of Christianity consisting in a treaty for imbracing good and rejecting bad Others supposing this either renounced Providence and by consequence the being of God As Epicurus and his predecessors and followers or at least doubted of it in which mire it is more then probable that our master Aristotle sticks If with Plato and Pythagoras we suppose them clearely to acknowledge all this yet is there a way left either by making the materiall cause coexistent which God from everlasting with Plato or by presupposing those contrarieties of good and evill which Pithagoras imagined to have beene from everlasting made by consequence the principles of all that comes to passe in the World to advance some other cause of good and evill in this world then mans will under Gods providence And it is very remarkable that Epiphanius observes all the Sects of the Gnostickes whereof he of all others hath given us the most particulars proceeded upon a pretence of giving a reason for the coming in of evill into the world To wit by setting up two principles or Gods one the fountaine of evill the other of good Which together with the expresse testimonies of divers others of the Fathers witnessing that they had theire principles from the Greekish Philosophers seems to argue that they took their rise from a pretense of rendring an account of the beginning of evill as well as of good intimating thereby that Christianity did not sufficiently performe it as not pretending all to be declared till the generall judgement And this is the case of Marcionists Manichees For as for Jewes and Mahumetans I suppose there is no man so little read in the difference between them and Christians as to conceive that they can give account of Gods providence in the evill which he maintaineth to be in the world together with the meanes by which some come to life others to
Advocate with the father Jesus Christ the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sins And when David who had the spirit of God upon the same termes as Christians have it excepting that which hath been excepted prayeth Psalm XIX 13 14. Who understandeth his errours Clense me from hidden sins Keep thy servant also from presumptuous sins that they beare not rule over me Then shall I be upright and cleane from great transgressions He showeth sufficiently the difference between veniall and mortall sins as to Christians which in case of invincible ignorance and meere supprize comes to no sin as to Christians But he showeth also that Christians neglecting themselves may come to fall into sins of persumption which he prayeth against For the rest the same S. Iohn incouraging Christians to pray for the sins of Christians with this limitation as I surppose if by their advice they appear to be reduced to take the cours which may procure pardon at Gods hands acknowledgeth further that there is a sin unto death I say not that yee pray for it saith he 1. John V. 16. 17. And the Apostle to the Hebrews VI. 4 5 6. speaketh of some sin which he acknowledgeth not that it can be admitted to penance for the obtaining of forgivenesse which he protesteth again Ebr. X. 26 -31 XII 16 17. It is commonly thought indeed that to deny the true faith against that light which God hath kindled in a mans conscience is hereby declared to be a sin that repentance cannot cure Or rather that God hereby declareth that he will never grant in repentance And truly that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost which our Lord saith shall never he pardoned neither in this world nor in the world to come Mat. XII 31 32. Mark III. 28 29. Luke XII 10. manifestly consisteth in attributing the works which the holy Ghost did to convert men to Christ to the devill being convinced that our Lord came from God by the workes he did for that purpose Just as Saint Steven reproaches the Jewes for resisting the holy Ghost as their Fathers had done Acts VII 51. And that there is no cure for this sin it is manifest because it consisteth in rejecting the cure And apostasy from Christianity which is manifestly the sinne which the Apostle to the Hebrews intendeth differeth from it but as the obligation to Christianity once received differeth from that Christianity which being proposed with conviction a man is bound to receive But otherwise not onely the Church but the Novatians themselves supposed that those who had denied the Faith might recover pardon of God by repentance Nor can it become visible to the Church what is that conviction which whoso transgresseth becomes unpardonable because God hath excluded him from repentance In the meane time how difficult the Primitive Church accounted it to attaine pardon of such sinnes appeares by the excluding of the Montanists and Novatians first then by the long Penance prescribed Apostates Murtherers and Adulterers least the admitting of them to Penance might seem to warrant their pardon upon too light repentance Saint Paul admits the incestuous person at Corinth whether to Penance or to Communion with the Church But upon what termes Least the offender should be swallowed up with extream sorrow and least Satan should advantage himself against them should he refuse it And because having written out of great anguish of heart with teares for them who presumed to bear him out in it he had found them moved with sorrow according to God to repentance with all satisfaction and desire of peace with the Apostle 2 Cor. II. 1-8 VII 7-11 For we understand by Saint Paul 1 Cor. V. 2. 2 Cor. XII 21. that even the Church themselves when they shut a sinner out of the Church did make demonstration of sorrow for his case And therefore himself much more was put to mourning and to professe by his outward habit that he thought his sinne incurable without sorrow answerable to it And when Saint Paul commands the Collossians III. 5. Mortify your members that are upon earth fornication uncleannesse passion evill desire and covetousnesse which is idolatry For which the wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience It is manifest that he placeth the mortifying of these vices in the afflicting and humbling of our earthly members wherein the lusts of them reside Therefore he serves his own body no otherwise but striving for the prize of Christians like one of their Greekish Champions that would not beat the aire he beates his own body black and blew to bring it under servitude Least having preached to others himself should become reprobate 1 Cor. IX 26 27. And certainly if Christianity require this discipline over Saint Pauls body least he should fall into sinne it will require very great severity of them that are fallen into sinne to be exercised upon their bodies the lusts whereof they have satisfied by those sinnes to regain the favour and appease the wrath of God and to settle that hatred of sinne and that love of goodnesse in the heart which the preventing of sinne for the future necessarily requireth The practice of the Old Testament sufficiently signifieth the same Though David in the Psalme that I mentioned afore seem to make the pardon of his sin a thing easily obtained at Gods hands as it is indeed a thing easily obtained supposing the disposition which David desired it with but not that disposition a thing easily obtained yet you shall find the same David elsewhere wetting his bed and watring his couch with his teares so that his beauty is gone with mourning his flesh dried up for want of fatnesse and his bones cleave to his flesh for the voice of his mourning Indeed he alwayes expresseth his affliction to be the subject of his mourning But alwayes acknowledging his sins to be the cause of those afflictions which he therefore takes the course to remove by taking this course for his sinnes The Prophet Esay I. 15 16. thus calleth the Jewes to appease Gods wrath Wash ye make ye clean remove the evil of your workes from before mine eyes cease to do evil learn to do good seek righteousnesse Sure this was never intended to be done by the meer thought of doing it But the Prophet Joel having threatned a plague what doth he prescribe for the cure And now saith the Lord return to me with all your heart with fasting weeping and mourning and rent your hearts and not your garments and turn to the Lord your God for he is gracious and mercifull long-suffering great in mercy and repenteth him of evill Blow the trumpet in Sion sanctify a fast invite the assembly gather the people sanctify a Congregation make the old and young and the sucking infants meet let the bridegroom come forth of his chamber and the bride of her closet let the Priests the ministers of the Lord weep between the Porch and the Altar and say Spare Lord thy people and
counted the Sacrifice of Christ crucified mystically and as in a Sacrament represented to feasted upon by his people The Apostle saith that Christ is gone into no holy place made with hands figurative of the true but into heaven it self to be presented before God for us Nor to offer himself many times as the High Priest goes once a year into the Holy places with that bloud which is not his own For then must hee many times have suffered since the foundation of the world But now once in the end of times is hee manifested by the sacrifice of himself to the voiding of sin And as it is appointed for men once to dye and after that judgment So Christ once offered to take away the sins of many shall appear the second time without sin to those that look for him to salvation Ebr. IX 24-28 But have I said any thing to cause any man to imagine that I suppose Christ to be crucified again as often as the Eucharist is celebrated Do I say those that celebrate it are those Jewes that crucified him once Or do I or can I imagine them to be Jewes at all that would have the sacrifice of our Lord Christ upon the Crosse repeated again and again as legal sacrifices are Certainly I will speak freely neither can they that hold Transubstantion be truly said to stand obliged to any such consequence so long as they acknowledg with all Christians that the Covenant of Grace is for once settled by the one Sacrifice of our Lord upon the Crosse Why because though they believe the natural flesh and bloud of Christ as crucified to be there yet not naturally but sacramentally that is in their sense under the accidents of bread and wine which is indeed and in the sense of the Church under the species or kinds which difference is so great an abatement of that common and usual sense in which all Christians understand that Christ was sacrificed upon the Crosse that all that know it to be their profession which all must know that will not speak of they know not what must acknowledg that the repeating of the Sacrifice of Christ crucified by the Eucharist is not the repeating of that Sacrifice by which mankinde was redeemed otherwise than as a Sacrament is said to be that whereof it is a Sacrament What ground and advantage this gives mee and any man of my opinion to argue from those things which themselves acknowledg that there is no cause why they should insist upon the abolishing of the substance of the Elements in the Eucharist I leave to them that shall think fit to consider the premises to judg But for mee who demand no more than this That in as much as the body and bloud of Christ is in the Eucharist in so much it is the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse I cannot foresee what occasion slander can have to pick any such consequence out of my sayings Certainly the Sacrifices of the Old Law ceased not to be Sacrifices because they were figures and Prophesies of that one Sacrifice upon the Crosse which mankinde was redeemed with And why should the commemoration and representation in that sense of this word repraesentation which I determined afore of that one Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse which mankinde was redeemed with be lesse properly a Sacrifice in dependance upon denomination from that one which the name of Sacrifice upon the Crosse was first used to signifie For all conceit of legal Sacrifice is quite shut out by supposing that Sacrifice past which the Sacrifice of the Eucharist represents and commemorates Whereas all Sacrifices of the Old Law are essentially at least to Christians figurative of the Sacrifice of Christ to come Indeed by that which I have said concerning the nature of a Sacrifice in the Eucharist as it is intended for Christians to feast upon it is evident that this commeâ—orative and representative Sacrifice is of the nature and kinde of Peace-Offerings which by the Law those that offered were to feast upon I will take the Cup of salvation and call upon the Name of the Lord. I will pay my vowes now in the presence of all his people Right dear in the sight of the Lord is the death of his Saints saith the Psalm CXVI 12 13. And that in answer to the question made What reward shall I give unto the Lord for all the benefits that hee hath done unto mee At feasting upon the parts or remains of Peace-Offerings the Master of the Sacrifice began the Cup of Thanksgiving for deliverance received in consideration whereof hee payes his vowes And the Sacrifices which hee payes are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sacrifice of Thanks-giving for deliverance received Is not this the â—ame that Christians do in celebrating the Euâ—harist setting aside the difference between Jews and Christians Wherefore I have showed that it is celebrated and is to be celebrated with commemoration of and thanksgiving for the benefits of God especially that of Christ crucified Which thankâ—giving as it tends to the consecrating thereof so in as much as the consecration tends to the receiving of it another thanksgiving at the receiving of it becomes also due as at feasting upon Peace-Offerings And hereupon I have showed that it is called by the Apostle the sacrifice of Praise the fruit of our lips giving thanks to God And that hâ—ving showed that Jewes have no right to it as a Propitiatory Sacrifice that is not to it because not to the Propitiatory Sacrifice which it representeth But therefore that Christiâ—ns have right to feast upon it as the Jews upon their Peace-Offerings But if it be true as I have showed that the celebrâ—tion of the Eucharist is the renewing of the Covenant of Grace which supposeth propitâ—ation made for the sins of mankinde by that one sacrifice which it commemorâ—teth and representeth the celebration thereof being commanded as a condition to be performed on our part to qualifie us for the promise which it tendreth to those that are qualified as it requireth Shall it be a breaâ—h upon Christianity to say also that it is such a Sacrifice whereby wee make God propitious to us and obtain at his hands the blessings of Grace which the Covenant of Grace tendreth This indeed requireth yet further consideration for what reasons the Sacrament of the Eucharist may be accounted and called a Sacrifice that wee may be able to judge in what sense and for what reason it may be accounted Propitiatory and Impetratory without prejudice to Christianity First then let it be remembred that by the institution and ordinance of God those that dedicate themselves to the service of God in the faith of Christ by Baptism are to dedicate their goods to the maintenance of the Communion of the Church in the said service the chief Office whereof is the celebration of the Eucharist proper to Christianity as I showed a little afore Then be it observed that there were two
in the one in the other to be grounded upon a sentence of absolution that supposes it not And yet it will not be acknowledged that there is any decay of discipline any fault any defect in the Laws and Customes for what is Law but Custome what rule is there for mens actions that custome inforceth not of the Church that cause so much difference in the proceedings of it Howsoever the custome of redeeming Penance came into the Church and how prejudiciall soever the voyage of the H. Land or the like may have been to the discipline of it the application of temporall good to some spirituall end was a poor cloke for such a corruption in comparison of that zeal to Christianity which fighting for Christians against Infidels pretendeth This is the most material occasion that I find alledged for that change which the discipline of the Church hath suffered in granting absolution before Penance To wit the indulgences granted them that undertook to fight for Christians against infidels And this is enough to render the abuse and the decay of discipline by the means thereof visible But when Indulgences are proposed for a small summe of Money pre-supposing indeed such qualifications as need not the Indulgences if rightly understood and had but as not being rightly understood and had render the Indulgences dangerous delusions whither poor people will not rather be induced by our common corruption to imbrace that sense which makes the pardon of their sinnes void as so had then that which makes them to be deceived of their money to no effect by the Church I leave to the conscience of discreet Christians to judge And whither this be not horribly to abuse the Keyes of the Church I leave to God and man to judge In the mean time I onely remind you of that difficulty which the ancient Church made in believing and admitting that those were saved who being admitted to the communion of the Eucharist in danger of death died before they could accomplish that Penance upon undertaking whereof they were admitted to it For is not the case of him that steddily purposeth to perform that Penance which the Church imposeth according to Rule if he survive much more hopeful for salvation dying afore then his that thinks his sinne purged by the sentence of absolution without undertaking or performing any Penance at all in order to the pardon of it And here I summon the Consciences of the Doctors of the Church of Rome Suppose a man take revenge upon himselfe according to a good conscience that is proportionably to the weight of his sinne according to the Rules that were in force in more uncorrupt times of the Church another according to the doctrine that is current in the Church of Rome professing himselfe truly sorry for his sinne and receiving absolution presumes of pardon for it intending to satisfie for temporall punishment that remains as he is directed whether of these is upon the better ground whether of them pretends to pardon upon the better title supposing the premises concerning the Covenant of Grace He who satisfying his conscience upon the original word of the Gospel and the primitive practice of the Church that he hath appeased the wrath of God by taking revenge upon himselfe and is thereby returned to his first resolution for Christianity Or he who being touched with sorrow for his sinne and submitting the same to the Keys of the Church hath done what the current practice thereof requires him to do for redeeming the temporall punishment of iâ— For it is evident in the doctrine of the Apostles and the primitive practice of the Church that the satisfaction of Penance appeaseth the wrath of God upon this ground because it evidenceth that resolution for Christianity to be restored which a man otherwise ought not to presume of in himselfe when he knows in himselfe that it hath been interrupted much lesse ought the Church to presume of it in him when the interruption thereof hath been visible to the Church He then who having conceived sorrow for his â—â—nne submits himselfe to the Keyes of the Church to be restored to Gods grace by the ministery thereof and does as he is injoyned to do if the Church and the person whom the Church trusts for him do their duty that is supposing the Laws of the Church to be good and sufficient and well and sufficiently exercised hath a good and sufficient presumption that he is restored But he who proceedeth upon the common faith of the Gospel and the primitive practice of the Church whereby all that is doubtful in Christianity must be resolved attaineth that assurance of his restoring to the state of salvation which I have showed is attainable But not supposing the Laws of the Church to be either sufficient or sufficiently executed that presumption of pardon which can be built upon it is neither good nor sufficient but rather peremtory to salvation by palliating the crime which it ought to cure Now for the ground which the Church of Rome gives a reasonable man to presume hereof it is not to be denied or dissembled that the Council of Trent Sess XIV cap. VIII declareth that it is the duty of all Confessors to injoyn wholsome and competent Penance upon all Penitents and that by virtue of S. Pauls charge 1 Tim. V. 22. upon which the Power of the Church in imposing Penance is truly grounded seeing the blessing of the Church signifieth by imposition of hands is as much granted in Penance as in ordaining least they become partakers of other mens sinnes declaring withall the intent which they ought to aim at in imposing them But we know also and see thereby that there is no effectuall course taken to see that this be done whither it be possible to take a course that may be effectuall to be done or not And we know besides how great vogue that opinion hath which maketh attrition with the Keyes of the Church that is the shame of declaring a mans sinne to his Confessor a sufficient disposition to forgivenesse And therefore it is justly to be questioned whither the Law of secret confession with these abusive opinions and scandalous practises under which it is now exercised in the Church of Rome is for the best or not That is to say whether the greatest part of them who submit to it do not unduly perswade themselves that their sinnes are cured by it when indeed they are not For considering the ground of all superstition and counterfeit religion to be this that man sensible of the wrath of God due to his sinne on the other side yet favourable to that concupiscence which sinne pleaseth on the otherâ—side desireth a colour to perswade himself that he is reconciled to God by such means as indeed serves not the turn I know not whether perswasion is the more catching supposing the present division between the Reformation and the Church of Rome that a man is justified by believing that he is
not that those Imperial Laws took place which made this profession a lawful cause of dissolving mariage in being per bonam gratiam as the Romane Law called it whether the party so deserted were allowed to mary elsewhere or not And indeed we find S. Basil qq fusius explicat XII and S. Chrysostome in Mat. hom LXIX ad pop Ant. in 1 Tim. hom XIV together with Cassiane in the example of Theonas Collat. XXI 9. 10. in their zeal to monasticall life advising maried persons not to stay for the consent of their parties in making such a profession as this At such time as the West where monasticall life was not yet so originally spread S. Hierome Epist XIV and S. Augustine Epist XLV CXCIX de adult conjugiis maintain the contrary opinion Which to me I confesse seems faâ— more probable For granting single life duely ordered to be the ordinary way and means of attaining perfection in Christianity according to the promises this state of eminence necessarily supposeth that which is necessary to the being of Christianity Therefore the way to perfection must be grounded upon justice Now in justice the contract of mariage among Christians gives each party that interesse in the others body which mariage exerciseth Which interesse noting but consent seems to dissolve And therefore seeing there is no Tradition of the whole Church to inforce this right not onely particular Churches not allowing it shall not seem to me to depart from the Unity of the whole in so doing But also Soveraign Powers through their severall dominions in regard of the interesse which all States have in the mariage or single life of their subjects shall lawfully use their Power to limit the force of it But as for mariage consummate and used I cannot see how the party deserting upon such pretense is excused from the guilt of adultery which the deserted may commit either single or maried again As for the question that may be made whither the mariage of one that hath professed single life be void or valid supposing the profession of single life to be agreeable to Christianity as I conceive I have showed sufficient reason to believe there is no consideration sufficient to make mariage after it valid but the abuse of the profession it selfe amounting to such a height as may serve to satisfie a Christian that in consideration thereof it is it selfe in the first place become void Another impediment yet remains questionable whether it be of force to dissolve those mariages which are called clandestine whither for want of consent in the Parents or the solemnities of the Church Some think that want of consent of Parents not onely makes the act unlawfull which all agree in but the mariage void As if the reverence due to Parents by Gods law did make a mans contract with a thirdperson void who is no waies bound to inquire whither his free consent be lawfully exercised or not In the Scriptures we see Gods people proceed by consent of Parents and daughters especially S. Paul supposes to referre themselves to their Fathers 1 Cor. VII 36. But neither was Esaus mariage taken to be void because it was made without such consent Geâ— XXVII 45. Nor was there any particular consent of Iacobs Parents to his mariages Gen. XXIX nor were the Fathers of Iudah or of Tobias made acquainted with their mariages And as for the Romane Laws which void mariages for want of this consent in some cases it is no more an argument of the Law of nature then the power of the Father by the same Laws which neverthelesse allow the Mother none when as Gods Law alwayes as well as the Law of Moses gives them equall interesse It is therefore manifest that there is ground in Gods Law to make this impediment of force to dissolve mariage contracted without it And that either for the Church as the reverence of Parents is a part of Gods law now in being which the power of the Church pretendeth to preserve Or for the secular Power as the interesse of Parents in the mariages of their children is of consequence to the publick peace and wealth The same may be said of those mariages that are made without witness or without solemnities of the Church saving that those solemnities which contain the approbation of the Church arising upon the account of the Church it is evidently more proper for the Church to make this impediment of force to dissolve mariage For the secular power to inâ—ct the Law of the Church by force of arms and temporall penalties There remains one cause more to hinder mariage so as to dissolve it when consummate being made notwithstanding it the condition of slavery in either of the parties at such time when as the rights of bondage subsisted This cause stands now by the Canon Law and is inâ—orced and limited by the Casuists But it was not the Canon Law that first voided the mariage of a slave taken for free but the Laws of the Empire as Ivo himselfe a Collector of the Canons witnesseth Epist CCXLIII where having produced the Law of Iustiniane he thus proceedeth In tali ergo contractu quod lex damnat non homo sed iâ—stitia separat quia quod contra leges praesumitur per leges solui meretur In such a contract then that which the law oondemns it is not man but justice thâ—â— separates Because what is presumed against Law by law deserves to be dissolved Which reâ—son takes place also in legall kindred according to the Imperiall Lawes whereby an adopted Brother is disabled to mary his sister by adoption In imitation whereof an opinion of the publick honesty of Christianity so prevâ—iled in that Church afterwards that being once Gossips came to be an hindrance of mariage which opinion howsoever grounded notwithstanding introduced the same kind of burthen and no other then that of legall kindred by adoptions These reasons though not admitted by all professions in Religion that shall meet with this yet seeing they proceed upon one and the same common ground the effect and consequence whereof cannot be admitted in some and refused by the rest And seeing that some of them are admitted on all sides there being no other reason sufficient why they should be admitted may serve to evidence the interesse of the Church in Matrimoniall causes And that evidence may serve to inferre that though the secular Power hath also an interess in the same yet in regard of the trouble which concurrence may cause in civill Government Christian Princes and States have done wisely as well as in regard to the interess of the Church they have done Christianly in referring the conduct of Matrimonial causes almost wholly to the Church Especially supposing that they take good heed that the laws thereof neither trench upon the Interess of their Crown not the wealth of their subjects But whither secular Power can make laws by virtue whereof that which a man voluntarily acts afterwards
way allow that other Churches could be obliged to follow the Church of Rome in this sentence the unity of the Church which is the end being of nearer interest and concernment to them all then the authority of Victor or of his Church or then uniformity in this point which is but the mean to obtain it Which as it is true so was it indeed the reason that Irenaeus alleged to Victor â—o divert him from that resolution in Eusebius Eccl. Hist V. 25. 26. where you may see that his credit and the credit of the rest of those that held communion with both prevailed to void those leters which Victor had issued to break of communion with the Churches of Asia And therefore I cannot wish to show you better marks both of the dependence of Churches and the superiority of the Church of Rome and also that this superiority was regular and not soveraign as that of a Monarch when the greatest of inferiour Churches have recourse and respect to it as the center of their communion and yet do not absolutely give up themselves to yield to the authority of it as they do to the sentence of the Council of Niâ—aea because it could not be reasonable for the Churches of Asia to stand out with it Whereby you see the difference between the authority of the Pope and the authority of a general Council The businesse of Novatianus will not require many words to evidence the same consequence by it The Church of Rome it self was the seat of the businesse and the calamity thereof suffering a Schism within her own bowels the occasion of it And I appeal to the experience of the world whither intestine dissension do not discover the respect all men owe to their Neigbours by the need they have of them for the composing of it But not to speak of occasion of advantage but of termes of right that Church having gotten two Heads Cornelius and Novatianus who was then judge which side ought to be accounted the Church of Rome â—o that the other party should be obliged to submit and joyn with it For had it been a Law that obliged the whole Church that those who had fallen away in time of persecution be not admitted to Penance and by consequence to the communion any more which was the motive and ground why Novatianus was made Bishop against Cornelius certainly the rest of the Church must have acknowledged Novatianus who maintained it not Cornelius who waved it Notwithstanding that Cornelius was made by sixteen Bishops of the then resort of that Church Novatianus but by three For though the Canon of the Apostles requiring onely three Bishops or two at least to the ordaining of a Bishop may very well seem to be the ancienter custome in the Church then the IV Canon of Nicaea which provideth that it be done by the consent of all the resort either present or under their hands referring themselves to three that are present yet is it plain that the act of three oâ— two at least was accepted upon presumption of the consent of the rest anâ—â—â—â— dispatch of businesse because Ordinations would otherwise have been â—nrâ—â—â—onâ—bly troublesome But this Canonicall advantage of Cornelius his câ—use could noâ— have wayed against the Novatians plea had it been indeâ—d a 〈…〉 â—â—ds Law to the whole Church that Apostates be not readâ—itted â—o 〈◊〉 For this not onely the Novatians stood upon but afterwards 〈◊〉 â—â—â— persâ—â—ution of Diocletian the Meletians fell away from the 〈…〉 â—o other quarrel as you may see by Epiphanius Haer. LXVIII In thâ—◠〈…〉 the Authority of the rest of the Church must have oversway 〈…〉 of the reâ—ort of the Church of Rome the greatest part whâ—â—◠〈…〉 for Cornelius And because it was a point hitherto not decide◠〈…〉 questionâ—ble in the Church therefore it comes to the sentence 〈…〉 Now it is a question not to be answered by those who make 〈…〉 of the Church of Rome Monarch over the whole how then th◠〈…〉 giving Law to that Church should depend on other Churches as here 〈…〉 iâ— doth For the common intereâ—t of Christianity whether in mater o◠〈…〉 is the ground of the dispute or in the unity of the Church 〈…〉 calleth in question is that which makes the Novatians whither 〈…〉 Sâ—hismaticks not acknowledging Cornelius after that he was aâ—knowleâ—◠〈◊〉 â—y the rest of the Church And for this cause it is that the Churâ—h oâ— â—â—â—â—ochia that is the Synode whereof that Church was the Heâ—◠〈…〉 a return from the Church of Rome for the favour they did it in 〈◊〉 Cornâ—lâ—us which they made great difficulty to do a great while as you 〈…〉 by that which I related in the first Book For supposing that 〈…〉 of Antiochia did no more in the businesse then right required yet 〈…〉 goes he that hath right done him may well acknowlâ—ge himselfe 〈…〉 that doth him right In the mean time S. Cypriane and the Churâ—◠〈…〉 with the dependences of it declare for Cornelius from the 〈…〉 〈◊〉 with his Church of Alexandria and the dependences thereâ—◠〈…〉 â—nâ—ormation are wonne to their side Neither could Fabius an◠〈◊〉 Châ—râ—â—es that resorted to Antiochia have stood out without great mischieâ—â—â—â—â—â— whole And therefore what thanks soever they may deserve of the Church â—â— Rome for doing their duty in such a distresse of it Who can say that the Sovâ—â—aign Power of the Church of Rome obliged them to make it Soveraign de facto which being divided de jure it was not when it is so evident that the unity oâ— the Church obliged them each in their several ranks to concur to that means which God had provided for the maintenance of it by establishing the Church of Rome in the first place In the businesse that â—ell out about rebaptizing Hereticks that returned to the Church when we see the Church of Rome alone ingaged against the Churches of Africk and oâ— the East both for you must remember what I observed afore that thoâ—e who made the moâ—t difficulty in disowning Novatianus were the same that stood for rebaptizing Hereticks with the African Churches on their side we are â—ound to presume that many and great Churches depended upon it to wâ—igh against so great a consent as opposed it For in point of fact it is evident that it was the consent of the geatest part that obliged the rest to joyn with it And in point of right the presumption iâ— peremptory that the greatest part â—ould not agree to determine against Gods Law but walked within those bounds which God had confined his Church with We are not then to marvail so much at the heats which passed between Stephen Bishop of Rome on one side and S. Câ—prian â—or Cartâ—age and Firmilianus chief Bishop of Pontus on the other side â—or it is evident that they referred not themselves to Stephens opinion concerning Gods Law whose successors are now pretended infallible And yet did refer themselves to the judgement of the
to restore those that were fallen away in persecution contrary to the resolution of the Church which had referred it to a Council as we learn by S. Cyprian Epist XXXVIII XL. with Fortunatus a Bishop of this party betaking themselves to Rome are first refused by Cornelius but upon appearance of a party in his Church for them put him to a stand In this case S. Cyprian writing his LV. Epistle acknowledges the Church of Rome the seat of S. Peter and the principal Church whence the unity of the Priesthood was sprung but maintaines that every Bishop hath a portion of Christs flock assigned him to govern upon his account to Christ And therefore that causes are to be ended where they riâ—e and the good intelligence between Bishops ought not to be interrupted by carying causes abroad to be judged again Is not all this true supposing the case For who câ—n chuse but blame a schismaticall attempt But could any man hinder Basilides and Martialis from seeking the Church of Rome had their cause been good seeing their adverse paâ—ty did and might seek to foâ—â—ain Churches Was it not necessary to seek both to Carthage and to Rome for the freeing of the Church of Arles under Marciâ—nus from communion with the Novatians Here I conâ—eive lies the truth Some causes of necessity have recourse to the Church of Rome to wit such as necessarily concern the whole Church either in the faith or in the unity of it Such was the cause of Marcianus which could not be ended but by the same consent which cast the Novatians out of the Church Was the cause of Basilides and Martialis of the same weight was it not meerly personal and concâ—rning mater of fact whither they had indeed sacrificed to Idols or not no question remaining in point of right that such could not be Bishops yet could not the Bishops of Spain over-rule the Bishop of Rome not to receive information from the aggrievâ—d Their way was to have recourse to other Churches the consent whereof might out-way the Church of Rome together with the goodnesse of the cause And the Church of Carthage must have done the same had Felicissimus and Fortunatus found reception at Rome and credit to balâ—nce their cause against S. Cyprian and the African Church So that causes of Faith necessarily concerning the whole Church whensoever they rendâ—r the peace thereof questionable those that for their weight do not concern â—he whole will concern it when they render the peace thereof questionable And so long as Law provideth not bounds to determine what causes shall be ended at home in the parts where they rise what cause is there that may not be pretended to concern the whole and by consequence the Church of Rome which being the principal Church what cause concerning the whole can end without it He that admits not this supposition conâ—â—sting in the regular pre-eminence denying the unlimited Power of the Church of Rome over other Churches will never give a reason why recourse is alwayes had to the Church of Rome and yet if the cause require to other Churches to ballance it The unity of the Church and communion with it is the thing that is â—ought The consent of the greatest Churches that of Rome in the 〈◊〉 place is the meanes to obtain it This businesse therefore is much of kin to that of the Donatists triall under Constantine when they petitioned the secular Power that they might be heard by the Bishops of Gaul intimating the reason vvhy they declined the Bishops of Italy to be because they might be tainted with falling away or shuffling in the perâ—ecution of Diocletian which they charged their adverse party in Africk with because they expresse this for the ground of their Petition in Optatus I. that under Constantius there had been no persecution in Gaâ—l Here I must pass by the consideration of any thing that may concern the dispute between secular and Ecclesiasticall Power as not concerning this place But when Constantine by his answer assigns them for Judges the Bishops of Rome and Milane with such and such of their suffraganes joyning with them the Bishops of Collen Autun and Arles in Gaul to satisfie them it is plain that he refuses them to transgresse that respect which the constitution of the Church challenged for the Churches of Rome and Milane that such causes as concerned the unity of the Church in the Western parts of the Empire should be determined not by the Pope alone noâ— the Church of Rome alone but by the Churches of Rome and Milane as the chief Churches of that part of the Empire the Church of Rome alwayes in the first place On the other side when the Donatists not satisfied with their sentence petition the Emperour again that it may be review'd and the Emperour adjourns them for a second triall to a Council at Arles it is plain that hee allowes them not an appeal from the former sentence because many of those that were Judges in the former Synod did vote in the later Synod But it is as plain that the parties then held not the Popes judgement either alone or in Council unquestionable unlesse all were madd in pretending to give either check or strength to that sentence which was originally unquestionable If therefore a sentence given by the Pope in a Council of Italy which some Gaulish Bishops joyned thereunto might be revised in a fuller Council of Gaulish Bishops with the concurrence of many others as well Italian and Spanish to say nothing of three from Britaine the first unquestionable record of the British Churches is it not manifest that Euclids axiome that the whole is greater then any part of it takes place in the Church as well as the words of S. Jerome Orbis major est Vrbe that the world is greater then the City of Rome Surely if S. Austine Ep. CLXII say well that the Donatists might have appealed to a General Council had they been justly grieved by the sentence at Rome his saying will hold if they had been grieved by the Council of Arles though concluding the Western Church But it will hold also of the Council of Arles that it had been madnesse to call it had not the generality thereof extended to conclude the Western Church further then the former at Rome though the cause came not to it by appeal CHAP. XX. Of the constitution and authority of Councils The ground of the pre-eminences of Churches in the Romane Empire The VI. Canon of the Council of Nicaea The pre-eminence of the Church of Rome and that of Constantinople Some instances against the superiority of Bishops out of the records of the Church what offices every Order by Gods Law or by Canon Law ministreth HEre the next consideration for time being that of the Council of Nicaea the VI Canon whereof first limited by written Law the pre-eminences of Churches in the Empire having taken place by custome before I will not repeat that
nothing For what Jurisdiction had any civill Magistrate that govâ—rnâ—d Rome over other Cities without the Precinct oâ— it And yet shall we be so â—iâ—â—â—ulous the Canon describing the priviledges of the Church of Rome by those of Alexandria which extended as far as the Government of Aegypâ— â—o confine those of the prime Church of the Empire within the 〈…〉 I suppose therefore they have farre the best cause who suppose 〈◊〉 to be called Regiones suburbicariae which were under the Lieutenant of Rome in oppoâ—tion to the Lieutenant of Italy resident a Milane having under him seven of those Provinces into which that Government was then divided In which regard the other ten Provinces which were under the Lieutenant of the City resident at Rome are properly called Suburbicariae though pâ—rt of them were the Isles of Sicilia Sardinia and Corsica c. And here lies the greatest question nothing else bearing water in my judgement For by this Canon â—ll the right and title of the Church of Rome is to be measured by the right oâ— any one of those Churches which were the Heads of Dioceses taking Dioceses for the residences of Lieutenants all which are to be suppoâ—ed equall in power granting onely Rome the precedence which all Order requiâ—es For what right can the Church of Rome challenge which this Canon acknowleges not Is it right or wrong which the decree of the whole Church alloweth not Strongly argued I confess which notwithstanding I am not satisfied with For the intent of the Ganon being to setle the lights of Alexandria is satisfied by rehearsing the like rights in the Churches of Rome and Antiochiâ— which by supposing as in force of old it setleth for the future But is this to declare and limite the Title thereof in regard of the rest especially for the Western Church which the Councill had no occasion to meddle with Judge first by that which appears In the greatest concernments of the Church concerning Montanus concerning the keeping of Easter concerning the cause of the Novatians of rebaptizing Hereticks of Paulus Samosatenus of the Donatists of Dionysius Alexandrinus In fine concerning those which I mentioned out of S. Cyprians Epistles What one Church can there be named to the concurrence whereof the like respect hath been had in things concerning the Faith and Unity of the Whole as that of Rome For that which follows I think there remains no dispute the priviledges thereof still increasing as well by the acts of Councils as by custome and use And of that I must demand a reason how they should come to be cast upon one had there not been from the beginning a stock of Title exclusive to any other of the greatest Churches acknowledging the order of the Apostles to have provided no further then that the Churches of the chiefe Cities should be the chiefe Churches leaving the rest to the Church upon consideration of the State of the World to determine One particular I must insist upon for the eminence of it I have already mentioned the generall Councils whereof how many can be counted General by number of present votes The authority of them then must arise from the admitting of them by the Western Churches And this admission what can it can it be ascribed to but the authority of the Church of Rome eminently involved above all the Churches of the West in the summoning and holding of them and by consequence in their decrees And indeed in the troubles that passed between the East and the West from the Councill of Nicâ—a though the Western Churches have acted by their Representatives upon eminent occasions in great Conncils as the Churches of Britaine had their Bishops at the I. Council of Arles at the Councils of Sarâ—ica and of Ariminum in other occasions they may justly seem to referre themselves to that Church as resolving to regulate themselves by the acts of it So that S. Jerome might very well name Rome and the West as the same paâ—ty in his LXXVII Epistle Haereticum me cum Occidente haereticum cum Aegypto hoc est cum Damaso Petroque condemnent Let them condemn me for an Heretick with the West and with Aegypt that is with Damasus Bishop of Rome and Peter Bishop of Alexandria And against Vigiâ—â—nâ—â—us he calls the Western Churches the Churches of the Apostolick See So S. Basil calls the Bishop of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Crown of the West Epist X. and S. Austine cont Jul. Pelag. I. 2. Puto tibi eam partem Orbis sufficere debere in quâ primum Apostolorum suorum voluit dominus glorioso Martyrio coronare Cui Ecclesiae praesidentem Beatum Iâ—nocentiuâ— si audire voluisses I conceive that part of the world should serve your turn in which it pleased God to Crown with a glorious Martyrdom the first of his Apostles The President of which Church blessed Innocent if you would have heard He supposes Innocent being over the Church of Rome to be over the Western Church In the Council of Ephesus S. Cyril threatens John of Jerusalem that those who will have communion with the West must submit to the sentence of the Synod at Rome against Nestorius Part. I. cap. XXI the leter of Pope Agatho to the Emperour in the VI. General Council Act. IV. supposes the Synods of the Lombards Slaves Frankes Gothes and Britaines to belong to the Synod of Rome and that the Council was to expect account of them from it No otherwise then to the leter of the Synod of Rome to the second Generall Council ninety Bishops of Italy and Gaul concurred according to Theodoret. And Cornelius in S. Hieromes Catalogue writ to Flavianus Bishop of Antiochia from the Synods of Rome Gaul and Africk Whereby it may appear how the Western Churches alwayes went along with that of Rome Which though it give not the Church of Rome that priviledge over the Churches of eight Dioceses which the canons of Nicaea do confirm to the Bishops of Alexandria over the Diocese of Aegypt and the Church of Antiochia over the Eastern Diocâ—ses yet necessarily argueth a singular pre-eminence in it over them all in regard whereof he is stiled Patriarch of the West during the regular Government of the Church and being so acknowledged by King James of excellent memory in his leter to the Cardinall of Perrâ—n may justly charge them to be the cause of dividing the Church that had rather stand divided then own him in that quality But granting the Church of Rome to be regularly the seat of the chiefe Patriarch for so he is stiled in the Council of Chalcedon Act. III. so the Emperour Justine calls Hormisdas so Justinian calls the Bishop of Rome Nov. CIX And the VI Council Act. XVIII counts five seats of Patriarchs And if Gregory Epist XI 54. acknowledge Spain to have no Patriarch and Innocent III. C. grave de Praeb dignit C. antiqua de Privil count but four it is because they would make the Pope more
course that Constantius had done in the mater of Arius to reconcile Egypt to the Church by waiving the Council of Chalcedon for an expedient of his of his own for Constantius sought no more than to reconcile all by waiving of the Council of Nicaea and Acacius by communicating with Hereticks did necessarily as all offenders do make them their Superiors who maintain the Laws for the good of the whole In fine that whatsoever the Popes did by virtue of the Canon can be no ground for any irregular Power in themselves the Canon as justly maintaining the poor Britaines against the Pope as the Pope against Zeno and Acacius But the first General Council makes full recompence for all the Church of Rome may pretend to have gained by the business of Acacius Pope Vigilius being in Constantinople and refusing at the summons of the Emperor and Council to sit it proceeds and condemns three Articles which hee had declared for and so prevails that he himself thought best at length to concurr to the Act And all this being done is disowned by the Bishops of Africk Facundus by name whom hee had set on work to write for the three Articles and Istria till all was reconciled I question not the point of Heresie either in this case or that of Honorius whose constitution whereby hee thought to silence the dispute concerning the two wills in our Lord Christ made him to be condemned for an Heretick in the sixth General Council Onely I count it a pitifull excuse to imagine that the Synod is falsified in this point the VIIth Synod in the last session bidding anathema to Honorius and so many records testifying the same And where it is said that the Synod might err in point of fact that Honorius held Heresie though not in point of right in condemning that for Heresie which is not as the Jansenists at this day admitting the condemnation of five propositions by the late Pope admit not that they are contained in Jansenius his book not to dispute of that it will appear that the Pope may be judged by the Church in other cases besides that of Heresie if Honorius being no Heretick is by the Council condemned for an Heretick Indeed there is no cause that concerns the whole Church but the whole Church may judg it Nor can any cause lightly concern a Pope that concerns not the whole Church The reason why Popes have been so seldom judged is not for want of right but for fear of division in the Church which makes it not expedient to use that right There are many particulars of less consequence pleaded for the Popes Power which I will not examine admitting a regular pre-eminence for him above all other Bishops which is seen in the recourse had to him before others in maters concerning the whole Church but denying that infinite Power which nothing can be alleged to prove I acknowledg indeed that this regular pre-eminence not onely might but supposing the Church to continue in Unity must needs be further and further determined by Canon or by custom whether inlarging or restraining it as by the Canons of Sardica allowing appeals to him in the causes of Bishops For the causes of Bishops do not all necessarily concern the whole Church unless the subject of them be mater of Faith or otherwise that which calleth in question the Unity of the Church and then Lay-mens causes are no less So an appeal to Rome so constituted is properly an appeal there to be sentenced in the last resort But when recourse is had to the Pope in the first place that is no appeal but a course to bring the cause to the sentence of the whole Church whereof his sentence is the first part and a great prejudice to that which follows because of the respect which all that depend upon that Church owe his sentence And this increase of the Popes power I do think to be always a just cause of excluding from the Unity of the Church for refusing obedience to it For the Unity of the Church being of Gods Law and so inâ—bling to limit the terms upon which the Power of the Church is held and exercised by Canonical right it cannot be in the power of any part to cast off those Laws by which it is bounded within the compass of Gods Law at pleasure because they are the conditions upon which the Unity of the whole stands which no part can say they will renounce unless they may hold it upon such terms as they please But whether these limitations may not be so excessively abusive to the liberty of the whole so prejudicial to the service of God in the truth of Christianity for which they and the whole Church stands that parts of the Church may and ought to provide for themselves and their Christianity against the oppression of them that I referr to the last consideration when I shall have showed how maters in difference are to be valued by the principles that are setled In the mean time I must observe that from the time that the Pope was re-imbursed of his loss of Jurisdiction and possessions in those Provinces which upon his rebellion the Emperor with-drew from his obedience by the liberality of Pepin and Charlemaine bestovving upon him the Exarchate vvhich vvith the Kingdom of the Lombards they had taken from the Greekish Empire Though I cannot say that from that time regular proceedings were laid aside in the Western Churches Yet I must say that from thence the Popes had a ground to reduce the regular proceedings of Councils to their own will interest to introduce their own rescripts in stead of all Canons for Law to the Western Church And this though I must not prove here yet here I may allege why I go no further here in this dispute It remains that I gather up some fragments of instances that have been produced to show that Episcopacy is not of divine right because from the beginning either all or some Churches have had none Of the authors whereof I must first demand whether the Unity of the Church be of divine right or not For unless they will put the whole cause upon a new issue that there is no Law of God that the Church should be one I demand of them how this Unity could have been preserved by the equality of all Presbyters which by the Hierarchy I have showed was maintained Till they show mee this I think my self secure of all their litle objections For if the Hierarchy cannot be imputed to chance or to the voluntary agreement of all Christians as uncertain as chance certainly Episcopacy the first ingredient of it can be imputed to nothing but the provision of the Apostles And therefore I must here renew my answer to the question that is made Supposing the superiority of Bishops to consist in the Power of doing some act which a Priest cannot do what act is it that a Bishop by his Order can do a Priest cannot
Hereticks Of those whose Baptism S. Cyprian excepts against Epist ad Jubaianum it is manifest that the Church voiding the baptism of the Samosatenians by the Canon of Nicaea the baptism of other Hereticks by the Canons of Arles and Laodicea must needs make void the baptisms of the greatest part being evidently further removed from the truth which Christianity professeth than those whose baptism the said Canons disallow And though it is admitted according to the dictates of the School that these words I baptize thee in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost contain a sufficient form of this Sacrament Yet that holdeth upon supposition that they who use it do admit the true sense of this word I baptize intending thereby to make him a Christian that is to oblige him to the profession of Christianity whom they baptize Which what reason can any man have to presume of in behalf of those who renounce their baptism once received in the Church of England to be baptized again For all reason of charitable presumptions ceaseth in respect of those who root up the ground thereof by Schism and by departing from the Unity of the Church And besides that wee do not see them declare any profession at all according to which they oblige themselves either to believe or live which is reason enough to oblige others not to take them for Christians not demanding to be taken for Christians by professing themselves Christians wee see the world over-spread with the vermine of the Enthusiasts who accepting of the Scriptures for Gods word upon a perswasion of the dictate of Gods Spirit not supposing the reason for which they are Christians do consequently believe as much in the dictates of the same that are not grounded upon the Word of God as upon those that are So that the imbracing of the Scriptures makes them no more Christians than Mahomets acknowledging Moses and Christ in the Alcoran makes him a Christian For whosoever is perswaded that hee hath the Spirit of God not supposing that it is given him in consideration that hee professeth Christianity supposing therefore the truth thereof in order of reason before hee receive the Spirit may as well as Mahomet in the Alcoran frame both the Old and New Testament to whatsoever sense his imagination which hee takes for Gods Spirit shall dictate This reason why it is necessary to follow the forms which the Church prescribes is more constraining in celebrating the Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist as more nearly concerning the Christianity and salvation of Christians But yet it takes place also in the rest of those Offices whereby the Church pretends to conduct particular Christians in the way to life everlasting Hee that supposes that which I have proved how necessary it is that every sheep of the flock should acknowledg the common Pastor of his Church that the Pastor should acknowledg his flock upon notice of that Christianity which every one of them in particular professeth though hee may acknowledg that originally there is no cause why every Bishop should not prescribe himself the form of it in his own Church yet supposing that experience hath made it appear requisite for the preservation of Unity by Uniformity that the same form should be used must needs finde it requisite that it be prescribed by a Synod greater or less At such time as publick Penance was practiced in the Church when the Penitents were dismissed before the Eucharist with the Blessing and Prayers of the Church can it seem reasonable to any man that any Prayers should be used in celebrating an action of that consequence but those which the like authority prescribeth So much the more if it be found requisite that the practice of private Penance and of the inner Court of the Conscience be maintained in the Church For how should it be fit that every Priest that is trusted with the Power of the Keyes in this Court should exercice it in that form which his private fansy shall dictate Of Ordinations I say the same as of Confirmations Of the Visitation of the Sick and of Mariage as of Penance Onely considering that it is not likely that the reason whereupon the celebration of Mariage is an Office of the Church deriving from those limitations which the precept of our Lord hath fastned upon the Mariage of Christians should be so well understood by all that are to solemnize Matrimony as to do their Office both so as the validity of the contract and so as the performance of that Office which the parties undertake doth require In fine having showed that the Service of God upon the Regular Hours of the day is a Custom both grounded upon the Scripture and tending to the maintenance and advancement of Christian Piety It remains that I say that the form and measure of that devotion which all estates are to offer to God at those hours cannot otherwise be limited to the edification of all than by the determination of the Church They that please themselves with that monstrous imagination that no Christian is to be taught what or how to pray till hee finde himself inabled by the Spirit of God moving him to pray will easily finde that they can never induce the greater part of Christians to think themselves capable of discharging themselves to God in so high an Office as the sense of their Christianity requires They that observe the performance of those who take it upon them shall finde them sacrifice to God that which his Law forbiddeth the mater of their Prayers not consisting with our common Christianity For of a truth it is utterly unreasonable to imagine that God should grant inspirations of the Holy Ghost for such purposes as our common Christianity furnisheth And therefore the consequences of so false a presumption must be either ridiculous or pernicious Now if any man say that hee admits not the premises upon which I inferr these consequences it remaines that the dispute rest upon those premises and come not to these consequences Onely let him take notice that I have showed him the true consequences of my own premises which hee must reprove as inconsistent with Christianity if hee take upon him to blame the premises for any fault that hee findeth with their true consequences And to say truth as the substance and mater of Christianity is concerned in all these Offices though in some more in some less and by consequence in the form of celebrating them So the Unity of the Church is generally concerned in the form of celebrating them all in as much as any difference insisted upon as necessary and not so admitted by others is in point of fact a just occasion of division in the Church And therefore all little disputes of these particulars necessarily resort to the general Whether God hath commanded the Unity of the Church in the external communion of the members thereof or not Which having concluded by the premises I conceive I have founded
supposing that difference between the Law and the Gospell which I have setled in the first book they may advance in the knowledg of Christianity by the preaching of those who understand it But not distinguishing that which is necessary from that which is not necessary by supposing that which is necessary they may heare Sermons all their life long and not know wherein their salvavation consists a thing found by experience when there was a Rule of doctrine agreeable to the Scriptures and not knowing the ground there laid forth upon which the Old Testament beares witnesse to the New they may gaine nothing by hearing sermons all theire life long but mere dissatisfaction in the grounds of our common Christianity Whereas going into the scriptures with those two principles and the humility of Christians they may teach themselves that edification which they ought not to expect from those that acknowledg them not As for the present order which suppresseth all Assemblies for the service of God when there is no Preaching It is manifest that I will not say no understanding no eloquence but no lungs or voice For of a truth this order makes the service of God a worke rather of the lungs and of the voice then of any thing else can furnish entertainement for the assemblies of the church with that which is worth the hearing so oft as it is fit for the people of God to assemble for his service This makes the businesse for which the greatest part now goes to Church to be no more the service of God but to get mater of discourse or debate for the Sabbath as they call it how well the man preached or how well he prayed For whereas they were wont to object against the Church that it was not praying but reading prayers which was ministred to the Church as if attention of mind devotion of spirit could not aswel go a long with him that reades as with him that is to study what to say when he praies now the censures that passe upon mens prayers do shew that the hearers minds cannot be imployed in praying when they are taken up with judging how well the prayer they heare is made Much more justly may the same be said if it be considered how a man is obliged to discerne what the mater of the prayer is whether it be from blasphemy Heresy Slander Rebellion or not least before he be aware he joine in such horible crimes by saying Amen to their prayer which he is no otherway secured to be free from the same Now it may be considered that the prayers which usher sermons in out by the order of the church of England but by the faction that destroyeth it though they exclude the service of God out of the Church upon pretense of praying as the spirit indites yet are indeed no lesse provided aforehand then the prayers of the Church 〈◊〉 a little from time to time as occasion may require to make the people believe that they are ex tempore dictates of the spirit So that the change which many men call reformation consists in this that the peoples devotions are now confined to that which every one that dare mount the Pulpit dare say instead of that which the Church upon mature deliberation had appointed to be said But if it be thus in prayers which are alwaies for substance the same what shal we say of Sermons the substance whereof changeth according to the compasse of the Scripture and all the points of it which the texts upon which men take their rise occasion them to intreat experience in the decay of that reverence devotion which the publick service of God is to be performed with may easily point a man of common understanding to the sourse of it in those false weak suppositions upon which the order or rather the disorder of the present chang standeth Instead whereof therefore acknowledging that there was just cause at the time of the Reformation to complain upon the want of Preaching and instruction of the people I do and am to maintaine that there was never any pretense that the communion of the Eucharist and the service of God that it is to be celebrated with ought to give way and to be excluded the assemblies of christians to bring in that rule which is now in effect a cheife point of the chang that is made with us that without preaching no assembly for Gods service And thereupon though I desire that the more solem service of God when the Eucharist is celebrated may have a sermon for part of it as I have showed both by the Scriptures and by the primative practice of the Church that the use was under the Apostles and in the next ages yet that the order prescribed by the Church of England for the celebrating of the same when and where there is not meanes for a Sermon such as ought to be had is not to be deserted upon any pretense of frequenting Sermons As for more oridinary occasions of assembling for the service of God having proved afore that they ought to be frequented for the celebrating of other Offices of Gods service besides preaching I take it for proved that the order prescribed by the Church of England for the celebrating of Gods service upon such occasions is no way to be deserted but meanes to be sought for the frequenting of it Acknowledging with all the zeale and the joy which S. Paul expresseth for the further edification of those Churches to whom he directeth his Epistles in that Christianity which they had received 1 Cor. I. 5 6 7. Eph. I. 17. 18. Phil. I. 9 Col I. 9. Rom. I. 11. 12. as a strong motive to the Church to procure preaching as frequent as it can be procured and maintained without these offenses That the same S. Paul incourageth directeth frequent ample use of these miraculous graces which God granted the Churches of that time unto that purpose 1. Cor. XIV 1-31 Eph. IV. 7-16 But supposing alwaies the Spirits of the Prophets to be subject to the Prophets because God is not the God of unquietnesse but of peace as in all Churches of the Saints 1 Cor. IV. 32 33. And that there is one body and one spirit even as we are called in one hope of our calling the unity of which spirit is to be preserved in the bond of Peace Eph. IV. 3 4. By vertue of that Order which God had setled in his Church for preserving unity in it declaring his meaning by bestowing the most Eminent Graces upon the most eminent persons of his Apostles by meanes whereof the spirits even of Prophets became subject to greater Prophets for avoiding of unquietnesse and preserving of peace as S. Paul further declareth when he addeth by and by 1. Cor. XIV 36. 37. What came the word of God out from you or came it to you onely if any man think himselfe a Prophet or spirituall let him acknowledg the things I write
which it stands upon other termes But this I say that when the extremity of one party occasions the other to fall into the opposite extreme neither party seemes clearely excusable of the fault which the other commits in betaking it selfe to the opposite extreme And then I say further that when secular force was applyed to impose a burthen which the experience of more in corrupt times had showed that they could not bear the issue must needs be the treading down of Christianity for maintaining of the â—edge that should sense it And therefore the proceedings being voide in all reason of Law it is no marvaile if that moderation which the argeement of both sides might have preserved could not take place I am yet indebted to those of the congregations in a short account of the right of the people in Church maters I have acknowledged that during the time of the Apostles they were present at ordinations at inflicting of penance at Councils that the resolution of maters in debate passed under their knowledg that their consent concurred to put them in force But I have also maintayned that the unity of the Church is the soveraine Law to which all other Lawes though never so much inacted by the Apostles never so evidenty couched in the scriptures are necessarily subordinate as tending onely to maintaine unity by maintaining order in the exercise of those offices for communion wherein the Church subsisteth That in order hereto every Church is a body tending to constitute one body of all Churches consisting of all Christians contayned in one city and the territory of it howsoever cities and their territories may be distinguished as some times meerely upon this account and to this intent and purpose they have been distinguished And by this means I have prescribed that the consent of the people of each Church was never requisite in this consideration because they usually meet together for the service of God â—ut as part of the people of that Church who were to be acquainted with proceedings concerning their Church that they might have reason to rest satisfied in the same I have provided in due place that Lawes expressely provided by the Apostles and recorded in the scriptures for that state of the Church which they saw may and ought to be superseded by the Church in case they prove uselesse to that purpose for which they were provided by that change which succeeds in the state of the Church For how should the soveraign Law of unity take place how should the Church continue one and the same body from the first to the second coming of Christ otherwise Now this interest of the people in maters concerning their Church though related in the scriptures and known by them in point of fact to have had the force of law during the time of the Apostles and accoâ—ingly in the primative Church of the ages next the Apostles yet cannot be said to be any where commanded in point of right for a Law of God to take place in all ages I must therefore prescribe upon this account and doe prescribe That when the world is come into the Church and the whole people of England for example have declared themselves Christians it cannot be any more for the unity of the Church that the consent of the people be required to the validity of those acts which concerne the community of their respective Churches For then would it be no lesse unpossible to constitute one Church of all Churches then it is for all Independents to constitute a Body that may be called the Church of all their congregations each whereof they call a Church And therefore there is no cause why they should demand the same regard to be had to each one of the people when all the people of a City and the bounds thereof concur to constitute the Church of a City and when the chiefe part of Christians within the boundes of a City assembling at once for the service of God might also be acquainted with the proceedings of maters concerning their Church But all this while I am not so simple as to grant that the consent of the people then required to the validity of things done in the Church did consist in plurality of votes having easily huffed out that ridiculous imagination that S. Paul and Barnabas created Elders by votes of the people testified by lifting up their hands the action of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being attributed to themselves not to the people But the consent of the people I meane in body as the people that is a quality distinct from the Clergy in the Church as their superiours and guides in maters concerning the community of it For is there any example in the Scripture that ever they went to the poll or counted noses in passing of maters concerning the Church which the people were acquainted with Is there any such example in all the practice of the primitive Church in which it is acknowledged the same course continued as under the Apostles Ordinations were held in presence of the people that if there were cause they who knew every mans person might object against those who were in nomination if not they might consent by one vote of all that was called their suffrage This being the maner upon this occasion they might did sometimes step before their leaders and demand such as liked them best But so that if they forgot themselves the Clergy was bound not to admit their demand And in case of a Bishop the neighbour Bishops were bound by S. Pauls instructions to Timothy not to lay hands on any for whom they could not answer Tertullian testifieth that mater of excommunication was handled at the assemblies of the Church that is with the knowledge of the people as the case of the incestuous person at Corinth in S. Paul is But neither were all maters handled before the people if the mater of S. Pauls communicating with the Jewes were handled with the Elders before the people were acquainted with it Acts XXI nor is it posible to imagine supposing a Church not to be a congregation but that which I have said that the people can have satisfaction in all maters of that nature when all the world is come into the Church As for Councils it is a thing ridiculous to demand because the people concurred to the resolution of that at Jerusalem Acts XV. therefore that the acts of Councils should passe the people For when the Church of Jerusalem and the whole Church were both the same thing it was no marvaile that the people was to be satisfied in the conclusion of it And by the forme of holding the Spanish Counciles which you have at the begining of the Councils â—â—t appeares that there was provision made for the people to assist and see what was done at their Councils But so unreasonable is it to demand that the people consent to the acts of Councils that it is manifest that there can be no
which it standeth For it is manifest that the powers from whose acts this argument is drawne are such as hold communion with the Church of Rome and acknowledg the Pope in behalf of it As manifest it is that the Pope not onely challengeth to be head of the Church in Church maters but maintaineth Friers Canonists to chalenge for him Soveraigne power in civill causes over all persons in order to Christianity To say then that by the acts which they limite the use of Ecclesiastical power by they pretend that there is no Power in the Church but what they give it is to say that by those acts they contradict themselves and proclaime their own professing themselves Sons of the Church not onely to be without cause but to signifie nothing as words without sense Which with what modesty it can be affirmed in the face of Christendome I leave to Christendome to judge Onely I will here summon the liberties of the Gallicane Church as they are digested by that worthy Advocate of Paris P. Pithaeus to give sentence in this cause being a peece much appealed to by the Father of this argument as that which deserves to be accounted of prime consequence in the businesse I desire those that will take the pains to looke into them to tell me whether they find not these two to be the first two points of them That the King of France is Soveraigne in his own dominions and that he is Protector of the Canons Liberties and priviledges of the Church And then I desire them to imploy the common understanding of men to pronounce whether these be not the same points of secular interest in Church maters which I have advanced Namely as Soveraigne to have no competitor in the right of the Crowne and as Christian to be borne Protector of the Catholicke and Apostolick Faith and of the Church and of the Lawes of it which have no being but upon supposition of that faith whereof one part is the beliefe of the Catholike Church Onely I shall take notice that they protest that they are called Liberties and not Priviledges on purpose to signifie that they are no exceptions to the common right of all Soverainities in Church maters but essentiall points of it Which they call the liberties of the French Church in particular because the Kings of France they thinke have maintained them better then other Princes of Christendome have done In consequence of this collection of Pithaeus besids the proofs of them in two great volums we have of late a commentary of Petrus Puteanus upon these Liberties as they are digested by Pithaeus the businesse whereof is first to make good that they are of more unquestionable right in France then they have been and are practiced also by other Princes and states of Christendome which is answer enough to this whole argument as it stands upon the authority of Christendome expessed by the acts of it Neverthelesse I shall further alledge in this cause the collection which Frier Paul of the order delli Servi hath made of the articles accorded betweene the Pope and the state of Venice concerning the Inquisition the bounds of secular Power in the cognizance of those causes wherein that court may pretend concurrence of Jurisdiction with it I will not undertake to say that the state of Venice maintaining the Inquisition upon such termes as this collection or Capitular declareth doth maintaine those persons in the use of Ecclesiasticall power to whom by the common right of the whole Church it belongeth Neither will I maintaine that whatsoever those articles distinguish and allow the Inquisition is by virtue of the common right of the whole Church For who can ty him to expresse every where what is by Ecclesiasticall right and what of secular privilege by free act of tâ—e state bestowed upon the Church as all states that would be held Christians have alwaies done This I say that he that shall take the paines to look into it shall finde the bounds of secular and Ecclesiastical power so expressely distinguished upon the reasons which I have aleged that it shall be too late to say that they who acknowledge a Church and certaine rights by Gods Lawe belonging to the foundation of it doe contradict themselves when they do limit the exercise of those rights Being ready further to maintaine that they doe nothing but right when they limit the exercise of them according to the reasons which I have advanced As for the Leviathan who hath made himselfe so merry with compasing a state Christian in which the Ecclesiasticall power is distinct from the secular with the governement of Oberon and Queene Mabbe and theire Pugs in the land of Fairies If he speake of a state framed according to the opinion of those that make the Pope soveraigne in all causes and over all persons in order to Christianity I grant he hath reason For there is not nor can be any such state and it would be indeed a kingdome of confusion and darkenesse Nay where the Church it selfe is Soveraigne as in the Popes dominions show the difference of the grounds upon which severall rights and powers are held and exercised will be in some points though not in all no lesse visible then else where But if he intend by consequence to say the same of all Christian states that acknowledg an Ecclesiasticall power derived from the Law of God and not from the secular then I remit to those that shall have perused the practice of Christendome but in those short peeces that I have named whether they believe those states which so governe themselves to be the land of Fairies or his wits that writ such things to have beene troubled with Fairies And now in particular to say what the maintenance of the Church in giving Lawes to the Church requires that is to say in determining those maters the determination whereof becomes necessary for the maintenance of unity in the Communion of the Church It is easy to deduce from the premises that every Christian is under two obligations One to the Church which as a Christian he is bound to communicate with The other as belonging to that state of Government which he believeth to be lawfully setled in his country By the act of those whom he believes to have right to oblige respectively these two societies which if we speake onely of that part of the Church which is in one soverainty consist of the same persons if they be all of the same Church every Christian is respectively obliged For by the premises it remaines manifest that it is the act of the Church to determine the mater of Ecclesiasticall Law and give it force to oblige the respective part thereof under paine of forseiting the communion of the Church But the act of the state either not to hinder this effect when and where Christianity is onely tollerated as a corporation which it alloweth Or to make them Lawes of the state when and where
of the Church nor doe originally be long to it to sentence And all this not distinguishing these severall titles hath been usually understood by the name of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction or the juâ—isdiction of the Church Neither is there any doubt to be made that not onely France in their appeales from the abuse of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction which are there warranted of course but also all Christian states as England in their premunires and injunctions have alwaies provided to redresse the wrong that might be don by the abuse thereof Nor doe I doubt that Spaine it selfe hath made use of such courses as may appeare not onely â—y great volumes upon that subject by Salgado de Somoza and Jeronymo de Cevallos whom I have not seene but more lively by the letters of Cardinall de Ossat where there is so much menâ—ion of the differences between the See of Rome and the ministers of that Crowne in Italy about the jurisdiction of the Church But will all this serve for an argument that there is no such thing as a Church no such jurisdiction as that of the Church in the opinion of Christendome but that which stands by the act of Christian powers because they all pretend to limit the abuse of it When as the very name of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction in the title of those books those actions is sufficient demonstration that they acknowledge and suppose a right to jurisdiction in the Church which they pretend so to limit as neither the Church nor the rest of their subjects to have cause to complaine of wrong by the abuse of it Whether they attaine their pretence or no remaining to be disputed upon the principles hitherto advanced by any man that shall have cause to enter into any treaty of the particulars Neither is the publishing of Erastus his booke against Excommunication at London to be drawne into the like consequence that those who allowed or procured it allowed the substance of that he maintaineth so long as a sufficient reason is to be rendred for it otherwise For at such time as the Presbyterian pretenses were so hot under Queen Elizabeth it is no marvaile if it was thought to show England how they prevailed at home First because he hath advanced such arguments as are really effectuall against them which are not yet nor ever will be answered by them though void of the positive truth which ought to take place in stead of their mistakes And besides because at such time as Popes did what them listed in England it would have been to the purpose to show the English how Macchiavell observes that they were hampred at home And for the like reason when the Geneva platforme was cried up with such zeale here it was not amisse to show the world how it was esteemed under their own noses in the Cantons and the Palatinat And here I cannot forbeare to take notice of the publishing of Grotius his book de Jure summarum potestatum in sacris after his death because that also is drawn into consequence For it is well enough knowne that at his being in Eâ—gland before the Synod at Dort he left it with two great learned prelates of the Church of England Lanctlot Lord Bishop of Winchester and Iohn Lord Bishop of Norwich to peruse And that both of them agreeing in an advice that it should not be published he constantly observed the same till he was dead So that though the writing of it was his act yet the publishing was not But the act of those that would have it appeare that his younger works doe not perfectly agree with the sense of his riper yeares He that in the preface to his Annotations on the Gospels shall reade him disclaiming whatsoever the consent of the Church shall be found to refuse will never believe that he admitted no Corporation of the Church without which no consent thereof could have been observed And therefore may well allow him to change his opinion without giving the world expresse account of it I will adde hereupon one consideration out of the letter of late learned Hales of Eton Colledge from the Synod at Dort to the English Embassador at the Hague For Grotius was then every man knowes one that adhered to the Holland Remonstrants He speaketh of denying them the copie of a decree of the states read them in the Synod December 11. This at the first seemed to me somewhat hard but when I considered that those were the men which heretofore in prejudice of the Church so extreamely flattered the civill magistrate I could not but think this usage a fit reward for such a service And that by a just judgement of God themselves bad the first experience of those inconveniencies which naturally arise out of their doctrine in this behalfe It remaines onelly as concerning this point that I give account of the article of the Church of England which acknowledgeth the King Supreme Governour in all causes and over all persons as well Ecclesiasticall as Civill to this effect as having all that Right in maters of Religion which the pious Kings of Gods ancient people Christian Emperors and Princes have alwaies exercised in the Church And the account that I am to give is what the meaning of this collective which hath been exercised by the Kings of Judah and Christian Princes must be For I have showed that it is not to be granted that Christian Princes may doe that in Christianity which the Kings of â—srael did under the Law Because the Law was given to one people for a condition of the Land of promise the Gospell to all Nations for the condition of everlasting happinesse It is therefore consequently to be said That in as much as the reason and ground upon which the right which those Kings are found to exercise under the Law holds the same under the Gospell so far that power which the Church of England ascribes to the King in Church maters is the same which those Kings are found to exercise in the scriptures But wherein the reason holds not the same insomuch it is necessary to distinguish and acknowledge a difference It seemes to me that when the Law refers the determination of all things questionable concerning the Law in the last resort to the Priests and Levits and to the Judge that shall be in those daies at Jerusalem or the place which God should choose Deut. XVIII 8-12 the reason why it speaks indefinitely of Priest and Judge is because it intended to include the soveraigne whether High Priest who from after the Captivity untill the coming of Herod was chiefe of the people or Chief Judge whether those that are so called who as I said afore were manifestly soveraignes or after them the Kings so that by this Law nothing could be determined without the King either by himselfe or by subordinate Judges And the reason is evident For the penalty of transgressing this law being death otherwise we must allow inferior Judges the power of