Church hath not denyed that Liberty and where they have made no Vow to the contrary bereaving themselves of that Liberty 33. There is no Purgatory 'T is little less then Heretical to Artic. Chur Eng. 22. affirm there is in the Roman sense 34. There is no external Sacrifice Most true in a strict proper sense 35. Devils cannot be driven away by Holy Water and the Sign of the Cross By these alone we have few or none Instances in the Ancient Church that Devils were cast out of the Possessed But many we find and those most authentique and undeniable whereby it appears that the ancient Christians even to St. Chrysostoms dayes did exorcise or cast out Devils by Prayers and Humiliation with which were used the sign of the Cross but not so ancient was Holy Water to that purpose And though we look on this as the Gift of Miracles formerly more general and effectual then now-a-days it is any where honestly to be found yet neither do we deny such power absolutely nor hold such unnecessary Rites utterly unlawful to be used 36. It is unlawful and an horrible wickedness for a man to erect the Image of Christ in Christian Temples No such matter The wickedness consists in giving it the accustomed Worship in the Church of Rome And thus have I given certain Instances of the injurious dealings of both extreams against us as by themselves stated it being my design in the ensuing Treatise to state rather then largely dispute matters more equally and thereby to discover the frauds and falsities current against us I shall now requite their pains in collecting falsly and fraudulently the opinions of our Church by a sincere and faithful proposing of the Heretical and pestilent Dogmes of the Roman Church as I find them laid down and maintain'd by Bellarmine that so even common reason if not sense of indifferent Christians may judge which Church holds most contrary Doctrines to Gods and Mans Laws 1. The Books by us called Apocryphal and so proved by Bellarm. De Verho Dei l. 1. c. 7. the general Consent of the Church in all Ages are Canonical and properly Divine 2. It is neither convenient nor profitable that the Scriptures L. 2. c. 15. 16. or Prayers of the Church should be in the Vulgar Tongue 3. All things necessary to Faith and Holy Life are not contain'd L. 4. c. 3. in the Scriptures but Traditions also 4. Scriptures without Tradition are not simply necessary C. 4. nor sufficient 5. The Apostles applyed not their minds to write by God's C. 4. command but as they were constrained by a certain necessity 6. Scriptures are not Rules of Faith but as a certain C. 12. Monitorie to conserve and nourish the Doctrine received 7. Hereticks deny but Catholicks affirm Peter to be the De Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 2. Head of the Universal Church and made a Prince in Christs stead 8. When Christ said Simon son of John so the Vulgar L. 4. c. 1. Translation in Bellarmine corruptly for Jonas Feed my Sheep he spake only to Peter and gave him his Sheep to feed not exempting the Apostles 9. Whether the Pope may be an Heretick or not it is to be L. 4. c. 2. believed of the whole Church that he can no ways determine that which is Heretical 10. Neither the Pope nor the particular Roman Church C. 4. can erre in Faith 11. The Pope cannot only not erre in Faith but neither C. 5. in Precepts of Manners which are prescribed the whole Church and which are concerning things necessary to Salvation or things in themselves good or evil 12. The Pope alone hath his Jurisdiction immediately from C. 24. Christ but all other Bishops their ordinary Jurisdiction immediately from the Pope 13. The Pope hath Supream power indirectly in all Temporal L. 5. c. 1. 6. matters by reason of his Spiritual power This is the opinion of all Catholick Divines 14. The Pope as Pope may not ordinarily depose Temporal Ibid c. 6. Princes though there be just cause as he may Bishops yet he may change Kingdoms and take them away and give them to another as the highest Spiritual Prince if it be needful to the Salvation of Souls 15. As to Lawes the Pope as Pope cannot ordinarily make a Ibid. Civil Law or establish or make void Lawes of Princes because he is not the Political Prince of the Church yet he may do all these if any Civil Law be necessary to the Salvation of Souls and Kings will not make them and so if Laws be pernicious to Souls and Kings will not abolish them 16. Though the Pope translated the Empire and gave a De Translat Imp. l. 3 c 4. Right to choose a Prince yet he transferred not nor gave that power Supream and most ample which himself had of Christ over all the Church And therefore as when the Cause of the Church required he could translate the Empire from the Greeks to the Germans in like manner might he translate it from the Germans to another Nation upon the like reason c. 17. No obedience is due to a Prince from the Church Câ—â— Berâ—â—â— c. 31. Tom. 7. when he is excommunicated by publick Authority The Pope and his Predecessors never forbad Subjects to obey their Princes for being once deposed by them they were no longer lawful Princes This is it we teach 18. To call General Councils belongs properly to the Tom. 2. de Concil l. 1. c. 12. Pope yet so that the Emperor may do it with his consent 19. Particular Councils confirmed by the Pope cannot erre L. 2. c 5. in Faith and Manners 20. The Pope is simply and absolutely above the whole C. 17. Church and above a General Council so that he may not acknowledge any Judicature on earth above him 21. The Church is a Company of men professing the L. 3. c. 2. same Christian Faith joyned together in the Communion of the same Sacraments under the Government of lawful Pastors and especially One Vicar of Christ on earth the Bishop of Rome 22. Purgatory may be proved out of the Old and New De Purgaâ— 1. c. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. Testament 23. Purgatory is a Doctrine of Faith so that he who believeth Cap. 15. not Purgatory shall never come there but shall be tormented in Hell in everlasting burning 24. Invocation of Saints may be proved from Scripture De Sanct. Beaâ—â—â—d l. 1. c. 19. 25. It 's lawful to make the Image of God the Father in De Reliq c. 8. the form of an Old Man and of the Holy Spirit in the form of a Dove 26. The Images of Christ and of Saints are to be worshipped L. 2. c. 21. De Imag. not only by accident and improperly but also by themselves properly so that they may terminate Worship as considered in themselves and not only as they
with Christians denying them all outward conversation as well as spiritual in matters of Religion Now this seems to be a branch of the Old Greater Excommunication and not in all places disusâ—d And sometimes is unlawful and otherwhile lawful according to the extent and application of them For to inflict the same to the dissolving of ties of nature is not agreeable to the simplicity of the Gospel And Natural Ties we call such as are between Subjects and Soveraign Parents and Children Husband and Wife which by no Ecclesiastical Excommunication can be broken or nulled The reason whereof besides the monstrous effects ensuing upon their evacuation not here to be treated of is this That Ecclesiastical Power can take away no more than it gave nor Christianity destroy what it never builded But Christianity did never simply confer such Rights on men but the Law of Nature only it regulated and directed the same therefore can it not null it It is therefore unchristian for any pretending Ecclesiastical Power to absolve subjects from obedience Civil or Children from natural and the like But every Christian in that he is adopted of God by baptism and admitted into the Society of Christians doth receive thereby certain Rights and power to communicate with it in all things which power may be forfeited and lost by breach of Covenant as well with the Body of the Church to live and believe according to the Received Faith and practice thereof as with the Head Christ And this being so judged by those who are over the Church in the Lord it is very consonant to Christian Religion to deny such of what order or rank soever they be the signs of outward communion Prayer and Communication of the Holy Sacraments of Christ The Church hath power to declare even soveraign Princes uncapable of such Communion and deny it them which we call the Lesser Excommunication Yet because as we said No natural Right can be extinguished upon unchristian misdemeanours If a Supream Prince of a Place should disdain to be denied or opposed in such cases and would make his entrance into the Church by vertue of his Civil Right to all places under his Dominion the most that the Church could do justly in such cases were to diswade him but by any force to resist his entrance into any Church were unlawful as it would be also to minister in a Christian manner in his presence for this cannot be commanded by him but in such cases suffering must be put in practice as for the Faith it self sought to be destroyed Some there are yet who call in question the peculiar and incommunicable Right of decreeing this Censure of Excommunication to those called the Clergy which is very strange seeing this Power is part of that of the Keys delivered by Christ himself to such only as he constituted Governors of the Church and that in Christs days their was a distinction between the Members of his Body as to Inferiority and Superiority Obedience and Command Teacher and Learner and much more in the Apostles days after Christs Assention and much more yet after their days according as the matter of the Church Christians encreasing and improving became more capable of a more convenient form and fashion For as it is in the production of natural things though the Form be certain and constant and the very same at the first production as in its perfection yet it doth not appear so fully and perfectly as afterward So was it with the Body of Christs Church It is certain therefore that from the beginning this Act of Excluding from the Communion was never executed but by the Rulers and Presidents of Congregations though the people might concurr thereto Now that these Rulers whom we may call Bishops or Presbyters were not created by the People nor by the Prince we have shewed already and therefore did nothing in their Right but in the Power of Christ whose Ministers alone they properly were And this being essential to right Administration of the Church how can it be supposed either to be separable from the Church in General or from those persons who are the proper Administrators of it For to say with some It is needless Selden de Jure Gentium apud Bibliander apud Erastum wholly where Christian Magistrates rule whose proper office it is to rebuke and punish vice and scandalous misdemeanors which say they can only be just cause of Excommunication is to destroy the subject of the question which supposes it needful and upon this enquires after the Persons which should Execute the same And spitefully to defeat the Church of all Authority from Christ doth indeed translate this Power to the Civil Magistrate And is not the absurdity the very same which endowes the Christian Governor with Civil Power and which endows the Civil Magistrate with Christian If it be not absurd for a King to be a Philosopher it is not absurd for a Philosopher to be a King If it be not absurd for a Civil Magistrate to have Priestly power it is not absurd for him that hath Priestly power to be a Magistrate There is certainly no inconsistency on either side For things of a far different nature and intention may easily meet in the same person though the things themselves can never be the same Here therefore the things differing so egregiously it is no more than nacessary that a different cause be acknowledged necessary which not appearing the Effect must be denied Now the Cause of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as Ecclesiastical must needs come from him from whom the Church it self hath its Original and being And it is a certain Rule that a man is born to nothing that comes from Christ as Head of his Church but is made and instituted Which whoever is not cannot lay any just claim to any Office under him I know it is objected that Preaching being an Ecclesiastical Act hath without contradiction been practised by diverse and to this day may be no ordination preceeding To which I thus answer by distinguishing first between doing a thing Ex Charitate and Ex Officio out of Charity and out of duty Preaching was ever permittedin the Church especially taken in the larger sense wherein it signifies all declaration of the Gospel out of Charity But the office of Preaching was never suffered but upon antecedent qualifications And these two differ yet farther For he that doth a thing out of Office doth it so that it is not lawful for him absolutely to omit it but he that doth it out of Charity and only by connivance not by commission may cease at his pleasure and as he made may suspend himself when he will Again he that teaches without Autority upon bare permission nay be silenced without any other cause renderd but the will of him that hath the Jurisdiction or if a reason be given because He hath no autority is sufficient But he that is orderly instituted to that end cannot without
a man never was inserted into that Stock is more properly called Atheism or Heathenism or Privative and then is called Apostasie which is a professed renunciation of the Faith once received Or this Division is Partial and so it takes the name of Heresie upon it Schism then must needs be an outward Separation from the Communion of the Church But when we say Schism is a Separation we do not mean so strictly as if it consisted in the Act of Separating so much as the State For we do not call any man a Schismatique who sometimes refuses to communicate with the Church in its outward worship though that done wilfully is a direct way to it as all frequented Actions do at length terminate in habits of the same Nature but it is rather a State of separation and of Dissolution of the continuitie of Church in a moral or divine sense not natural which we seek into at present This Separate State then being a Relation of Opposition as the other was of Conjunction the Term denominating and signallizing both is to be enquired unto And that is insinuated alreadie and must needs be the Church and that as that is united unto Christ or the true Church For there is no separation from that which really is not though it may seem to be It must therefore be a true Church from whence Schismatical separation is made So far do they confute and confound themselves who excuse their Schismaticalness from that which principally constitutes Schism and Schismaticks viz. an acknowledgement of that to be a true Church from which they divide themselves and separate Again We are to note that Separation is either of Persons and Churches in Co-ordination or subordination according to that excellent and ancient distinction of Optatus saying It is one thing for a Bishop to communicate Optatus Mileviâ—â—â— Cont. Parmen Lib. 3. Aldâ— with a Bishop and another for a Lay man or the Inferiour Clergy to communicate with the Bishop And this because what may perhaps justifie a Non-communion with Co-ordinate Persons or Churches which have no autority one over another wil not excuse Subordinate Persons or Churches owing obedience to their Superiours from Schism From whence it is manifest that though all Schism be a Separation yet all Separation is not a Schism And though there may be many and just causes for a Separation there can be no cause to justifie a Schism For Schism is in its nature A studious Separation or State Separate against Christian Charity upon no sufficient Cause or grounds It must be affected or Studious because if upon necessity or involuntary the Diâ—junction of Churches is rather a punishment than a sin and an Infelicity rather than Iniquity as in the dayes of Anastatius the Emperour as Evagrius relates it Who so violently persecuted the Catholick Church in behalfe of the Eutychian Evagrius Hist Eccl. L. C. 30. Heresie that it was crumbled as it were into several parcels And the Governours could not communicate one with another but the Eastern and Western and African Churches were broke asunder Which farther shews that all Criminal Separation which we make Synonimous with Schism must likewise be an Act proceeding from the persons to separated and not the Act of another For no man can make another a Schismatick any more than he can make him a Lyar or a drunkard without his consent For if the Governours of one Church expeâ— out of Communion another upon no just grounds the Church thus separated is not the Schismatick but the other as appears from the words of Firmilianus Bishop of Cappadocia in St Cyprian concerning Pope Stephen advising him he should noâ— be too busie or presumptious in separating others lest he thereby separated himself so that if the Schism had broke out upon no good grounds he who was the Architect of it Separated himself as all others do and it is impossible any man should make though he may declare another a Schismatique any more than he can make him erre without his consent or be uncharitable Yet do they err also that from hence conclude that the Formal reason of Schism consists in Separating a mans self for it is rather the material Cause than formal The formal Cause being as in all other things the very Constitution it self with unreasonableness and uncharitableness No man can make another involuntarily an Heretick And therefore no man can make another a Schismatick All the Guilt redounding to the Agent noâ— Patient in such cases So that it is scarce worth the Enquiring Who began the breach of unity as it outwardly appears but who is actually and Really First divided from Christs Church For they surely are the proper Schismaticks though the name may stick closer to others To understand this we may consider that there is a Vertual Schism and a Formal Schism A Vertual Schism I call real division from Christs Church though it comes not to an open opposition to it or Defiance of it so that where ever is any heresie or considerable Errour nourished or maintained in a Church there is to be found a Schismatick also in reality though not in formality the reason hereof is well expressed by and may best come from the hand of an Adversary to u thus judiciously enquiring It is demanded first saith he Whether Schismaticks be Hereticks Answer The Common opinion Azâ—rius Inst Moral Tom. 1. Lib. 3. C. 20. of the Interpreters of the Canon Law and of the Summists is that the Heretick differs from the Schismatick in that Every Heretick is a Schismatick but not on the contrary Which they prove because the term Shismatick signifies Division But every Heretick turns away separates divides himself from the Church This is very plain and reasonable and so is the consequence from hence That where the Body is so corrupt as to be really infected with notorious errors there it is really so far as it is erroneous separated from the true Church and where it is so far separated from the true Church so far it is Schismatical And when a Church is thus far really Schismatical little or no Scruple is to be made of an outward Separation neither can a guilt be affixed unto it And on the other side if no such real separation and antecedent Guilt can be found in a Church in vain do diverse betake themselves to that specious Shift and evasion that they were cast out and went not out willingly from a Church and that they are willing to return but are not suffered For undoubtedly the very supposition is insincere and faulty that they forsook not the Church before they were ejected And the expulsion followed separation and dissention from it and was not rather the Effect than Cause of them as are all excommunications rightly used For to those that pretend they were turned out do not the doors stand open to receive them and that with thanks if they please to re-enter and re-unite themselves What do they here
is so defended as to call in question the truth of Christs divine nature and to commend and command the direct worship of those objects so mistaken then certainly it is Heresie and somewhat more And so their doctrine of Communicating in one Kind contrary to all the mention we have of celebrating the Eucharist in the Scriptures and those deserving the name of Fathers in the Church may rightly be termed Heretical when it shall be drawn into such a Proposition as this as of necessity it must viz. That it is of equal vertue and use to receive the Sacrament in one kind alone as both Kinds whereas only to deny the use of it is no more than an unjust and sacrilegious piece of Tyranny over the Laicks To these it were easie to add more of like natures as sufficient Grounds to leave such a Church as maintains them But for those who are not in Episcopal nor yet so much as Metropolitan subordination and subjection to that Church but only Patriarchal which obliges cheifly if not only to a recognition of a Remote Right of Order and Principle of unity when the Church is united in bringing them to Councels and keeping them to those Laws which are prescribed by General Consent of the Church and this not originally by first planting and forming a Christian Church in a Nation but restoring and augmenting it the case is yet more plain that it is free for such Churches to relinquish communion of any Church subject to less Errours than are properly called Heresies But for persons educated in a Church and thereby subject to it and owing Canonical obedience not only as they most weakly and wickedly imagine to the Rule of Faith therein asserted and maintained but to the Rule of Unity and Communion outward for such I say to divide from that Church which hath not by falling into notorious Heresies or Idolatrous practices first fallen from Christian Faith is to profess Schism For to alledg that they would incorporate with the Church if certain things which may possibly be parted with without destroying the Faith at least immediately were granted to them is to demand that their Superiors should bow to them rather than they to their Superiors and in effect to make the condition of their obedience and uniting with the Church to be this That first the Church should be of their Religion the difference between them consisting in things in their own nature mutable For though Faith consisteth in those things which are judged necessary in themselves to be received Yet Religion is made up as well of the manner of serving God as the material grounds of it And therefore it is according to the manner of their treaties of peace in other Cases to require the thing in debate to be granted them before they will bear of a commodation or reconciliation This senseless Charity is that of most Desperate Schismaticks Yet not absolutely to despair of reducing some few of them and much less of preventing the like ruine of souls in others we shall now conclude with a few words concerning the Second thing in the beginning of this Point viz. The guilt of Schism Supposing then what is above said that Schism is a Causeless Separation from the Church of Christ meaning by Causeless not want of all reasons or causes but Sufficient as are errours now mention'd in Faith we farther understand by Separation not that of the inward and hidden man but outward and Visible answerable to that we have called and acknowledged to be properly called a Church i. e. Visible For possible we grant it is what we do scarce believe to be actually true though we hear such things sometimes spoken that dissenters may have a tolerable good opinion of a Church as that it is a true Church in their private senses they may pretend some general kindness and Charity to the Members of it Nay they may hold it no grievous sin to communicate with it for some persons especially and yet for all this be rank Schismaticks For Schismatizing in its remoter Cause may spring from evil opinions and dispositions of the inward man but its formality is altogether in outward profession of averseness separation and opposition to a Church This is it which hath raised so much just clamour of the Ancient and even of those very modern Persons who stomach nothing more than to be reduced to their own general Rules and have worthily brandished their swords and pens to bring people to the unity of that Cause which never was the true Faith and to that Visible Company which never was a Church and yet cannot understand their own language nor receive their own reasons and arguments in Cases infinitely more capable of such vindications than the Party they created and asserted Herein surely they have exceeded all other Factions in immodesty and undauntedness that whereas those have been very scrupulous and sparing in delivering doctrines of coercion and constraint to unity and therefore may though with no reason with some little colour stand out against Unity and oppose all Coaction thereunto They of the Presbyterian Sect have preach'd spoken and written so much and expresly against Schism and the Liberty which tends necessarily to it that it is beyond not only reason but admiration they should neither be affected with what other men have said against them nor what they have unanswerably said against themselves but proceed no otherwise than brutishly to hold their Conclusion and stick to their invet eraâ—e errours as if they could find no Church to unite to or had no souls to save or did not even according to their own principles run the apparent hazard of loosing them by that sin which they confess is one of the Greatest Size viz unnecessary division And unnecessary division themselves call what is not for to avoid Idolatrous practises or Heretical errours and yet in their Apologies for themselves alledge none but frivolous instances tending as they judge to Superstition wherein they prove themselves much more superstitious by such religious opposition as they make against them and deeply concerning their best Consciences than they possibly can be who for order sake solemness of worship and conformity to the ancient Customs of Christs Church and to avoid offence unto other Churches sticking inseparably unto them retain rather than invent such adjuncts to Divine Religion It is hard to search out any new Topick from whence to draw out reasons against this hainous sin of Schismatizing wherein I am not prevented by them disputing upon the false suppositions that they at any time were a Church and if they had been that they who opposed them could be said to Divide Schismatically from them of whose communion they never were nor ever were obliged to be They are therefore with others to consider How solemn and severe a command of Christ they slight and contemn who divide from a Church without more weighty exceptions than hitherto have been offered by them or heard
Heaven and Hell But we deny not that the Ancients prayed for the Dead nor do we dissent much from them in that pious act our selves however there are quarrellers amongst us well known by their other affected and morose follies who oppose it because they have no express Scripture for it but we deny they ever prayed for the pardon of their sins or ease of torments so anciently but for an happy rest and restauration in a Resurrection So that we peremptorily deny and well may notwithstanding all proofs brought to the contrary that Prayer for the Dead necessarily infers Roman Purgatory And for the Consequence of this Opinion of Roman Purgatory Indulgences it is so rank a Corruption such a novel and impudent invention as the Church of Rome under that defection it now is never did so great a miracle as to get it any place in sober and knowing mens minds both thing it self and the abuse of it being such as alone may suffice to disgrace the Authours of it and make their pretenses to infallibility alwaies false very ridiculous We know indeed that scarce any thing was of ancienter use in the Church then some Indulgences but no more like these than Earth is like Purgatory Indulgences were made by such who were in autority in the Church towards Penitents who had their Penances allotted them for scandalous Crimes committed against the Faith and Church which Penances were often relaxed and mittigated by the favour and indulgences of the Fathers of the Church good cause appearing for to do so But that ever it was in the power of the Church to give ease to such as were punished in that other Life to come was never heard of for above a thousand years after Christ Alphonsus de Castro is worth the Alphonsus de Castro lib. 8. Adv. Haer. de Indulg reading upon this who is positive for Indulgences but going about to prove them prepares his Reader with a long Preface for such a short Discourse telling him that He ought not to expect for all points of Faith Antiquity or express Scripture For many things are known to the moderner which those ancient Writers were altogether ignorant of For seldome any mention is made in ancient Writers of the transubstantiation of the Bread into Christs Body of the Spirits proceeding from the Son much rarer of Purgatory almost none at all especially among Greek Writers for which reason Purgatory is not believed of the Greek to this day c. The ancient Church caused men to satisfie in this life and would leave nothing to be punished in the Life to come and therefore there is no mention of Indulgences Thus he But adds Amongst the Romans the use of them is said to be very ancient as may in some manner be collected from their stations And it is reported of Gregory the First of whom we even now spake that he granted some in his dayes It is said and reported by where and by whom he could not tell us But he tells us indeed how Innocent the Third that great Innovator and Corrupter of the Church constituted it in the Latherane Council and the Council of Constance after that much which was not before the Year 1200. Judge we from hence what great account is to be made of the many sayings of the Fathers pretended to approve this devise And judge we farther what great Reason or Scripture there is for the Popish faction to derogate so far as they do from the efficacy of Gods Holy Spirit of Grace in the repenting sinner though straitened of time in the exercise and demonstration of his true Conversion and from the fullness of Christs mediation and merits which are ordained for the remission of all sins upon true Repentance For the bloud of Christ cleanseth from all sin saith St. John and so say they understood as in this Life and the Life to come but St. John nor any other holy Writer of Scripture gives us the least intimation of any other season of pardon then that of this Life Therefore here to end this First Part with the end of Man in this world seeing Gods Promises are so liberally revealed unto penitent sinners in this Life without exceptions of matter time or place of venial or mortal sins Seeing Christs merits are absolutely sufficient to acquit the sinner and no limitation is to be found upon Faith and Repentance in Scripture Seeing lastly that Gods Spirit of Grace is of vertue sufficient to sanctifie to the washing away of all filthiness both of flesh and spirit and this life is only mentioned in Scripture for the exerting of this work and perfecting this cure of the soul Let us rather thankfully embrace so great salvation and work it out for St. Paul supposes we may with fear and trembling in this life that so as St. Peter hath 2 Pet. 1. 11. it An entrance may be ministred abundantly unto us into the everlasting Kingdem of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ The End of the First Part. THE Second Part OF THE INTRODUCTION To the Knowledge of the True Catholick Religion CHAP. I. Of the worship of God wherein the Second Part of Christian Religion consists Of the Necessity of worshipping God It is natural to worship God Socinus holding the contrary confuted Of the Name of Religion the Nature of religious worship wherein it consisteth REligion we have defined to be A due Recognition and Retribution made by the Creature to God the Fountain of all Being communicating himself freely to inferiour Beings And this description we have in substance given us by David in his last and most serious charge to Solomon his Son saying And thou Solomon my Son know thou the God of 1 Chron. 28. 9. thy Fathers and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind c. From whence we take the ground of our distinction of Religion into two Parts The true knowledge of God which is attained by the Doctrine of Faith revealed in Gods holy Word and the worship of him there in likewise contained Of the former having already spoken we now proceed more briefly to treat of the second The worship of God And that God is to be worshipped is such an inseparable notion from the acknowledgment of God as nothing can follow more necessarily then that doth from this And it were more reasonable though that be brutish for to deny God absolutely then to deny him worship and service And therefore Seneca saith well The first worshipping of God is to believe there is a God The next to yield to him his Majesty to yield him Sen. Epist 95. his Goodness to understand that he or they governs the world And afterward He sufficiently worships God who imitates him And Tully The Cicero de Natura Deor. lib. 2. worship of God ought to be most excellent and pure and holy and full of piety so that we may constantly worship him with a pure intire and uncorrupt mind and voice
which we have shewed they have not as Jews and he will undoubtedly conclude against their antiquated Religion and Innovated Superstitions CHAP. VII The Christian Religion described The General Ground thereof The Revealed Will of God The Necessity of Gods Revealing himself AFTER the consideration of Religion in General and the reasonableness thereof with the Exclusion of the principal false pretenders of worshipping the true God it follows to treat of the Christian Religion and the Reasonableness and several incomparable Prerogatives thereunto proper And first it is to be known what we mean by Christian Religion and what it is Christian Religion is the worship of the only true God in the unity of nature and trinity of persons through one Mediatour between God and man the Man Christ Jesus according to his Will and Laws revealed in his holy Word commonly called the Scriptures This description whether artificial enough I will not contend but full enough I suppose it is to declare as well What it is in it self as Wherein it is distinct from others And therefore omitting to treat of the more curious and formal part thereof we shall here shew briefly What great advantages it hath above any other to the obliging us to a more faithful and devout observation thereof and that this only and no other can truly please God and lead us to him and crown us hereafter with eternal bliss and glory And it having been proved that by the consent of all Nations there is a God and it following more strongly upon that ground supposed that such a Supream and Infinite being is to be worshiped and that this worship is that which we call Religion and that of the Religions pretending to be divine the others have been found vain and deficient the Right of being received as the only proper worship of God must of necessity devolve upon the Christian Religion as that which is least obnoxious to the same or like exceptions and hath many more sober and rational inducements to perswade the same to any equal judgment Which argument might well be drawn from the very Body of this Religion and the several parts whereof it consisteth together with manifold Pregnant Circumstances attending the same But because this would ask a far longer time and more tedious labour both to Writer and Reader then can consist with this intended Compendium it may abundantly suffice to give such probable and credible proofs of the Scriptures That they are the revealed will of God as Christians do believe without question For the summ and substance of all Christian religion so far as it is truly so called and professed being founded on the Holy Scriptures and there expresly contained if it be evinced that they are of divine Original it will follow That what they deliver is so likewise and consequently the Religion built upon them But because it is one Principle which Christian Religion is built upon in common with all Religions that somewhat must so be believed that no natural reason or Mathematical can invincibly demonstrate And the reason hereof is because the ground of all such demonstations is setled upon the order of Nature between Cause and Effect in point of right rather than matter of fact But that the Scriptures are so the word of God as to be revealed by his Holy Spirit to certain select Persons to that end is altogether matter of fact and that not proceeding from such a necessary and natural Agent as that according to the course of Causes and Effects it could be no otherwise but from a free Agent which certainly might have suspended such acts of Revealing his Will And the same Reason holds against all proper Demonstration from Effect For as it cannot be demonstrated that such a Cause must necessarily have such an Effect it cannot be infallibly proved that such an Effect must have such a Cause For unless it could be proved that fire must necessarily burn it could not be proved that what we see burnt must necessarily proceed from fire For before this can be don it must be shewed that nothing in the world has the same virtue but fire and this supposes that we have a perfect and exact knowledg of every thing and the nature of it in the world Take we an instance yet nearer to our present subject It is a common Maxime amongst the Schoolmen That no Creature can work a Miracle of it self but it must have the Supernatural power of God either immediately or mediately and That whatsoever Effects are wrought by any Spirit inferiour to God deserve not the name of a Miracle And yet it is confessed withall that diverse such works which appear to us as extraordinary and above nature are not of God but some perhaps evil Creature Must it not then first be known what those extraordinary acts are and how they are wrought before it can be concluded that they are of God And how can this infallibly be discern'd but by another miracle and this by a third a third by an infinity of which there can be no knowledg So that in truth the received doctrine of the Schools being thorowly examined the contrary will appear the more reasonable of the two and that we must rather first of all acknowledg a Divine Power precedent and effecting this extraordinary stupendious work before we may call it a Miracle than first admit this to be a Miracle and then and thence infer a Divine Power So that it seems very difficult and dubious to make scientifical conclusions of any thing divine And that after all there may be sufficient presumptions to render a thing credible without lightness and rashness yet the Arguments perswading shall not be so pressing and cogent but due place should remain for a Faith or assent which may not be properly humane and natural which it must needs be if it proceeded simply from sense or reason natural but divine and an admirable temperament be found in that we call The true Christian Faith wherein the Grace of God inwardly moving and inclining the Will to embrace that to which it might notwithstanding all reasons to the contrary not altogether unreasonably have dissented and yet with reason doth assent the Grace of God pulling down 2 Cor. 10. 4 5. strong holds casting down imaginations and every high thing that exalteth it self against the knowledg of God and bringing into Captivity every thought unto the obedience of Christ As St. Paul excellently saith speaking of the carnal warfare of humane ratiocinations either for or against Divine Faith and Doctrine which have no might but through God as he suffers by his justice the reasonings and eloquence of men to take place against his doctrine or to prevail towards the receiving of the truth by the superadded Power of his Holy Spirit as to this end St. Paul speaks in his first Epistle to the Corinthians thus And my speech and my preaching was not 1 Cor. 2. 4 5. with enticing words of mans
that none can without another extraordinary confirmation rest satisfied that so it is really with him Lastly for our clearer proceeding We are herein to distinguish between the attaining to the true sense of Scripture and the decision or determination of Controversies according to the Scripture And that the most important Query is not so much Whether a man hath the Spirit or not or whether he hath the truest and most genuine meaning of the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures or not but how this should be made known and manifested so far unto others as that they should rationally and soberly rest satisfied in the opinions of the said pretenders to such truths For it s well and smartly said in this doubt The Question is not Whether the Spirit in a Man or Church or the Scripture though this last way is very improperly expressed be the best Judge of the Sense of Scripture but where it resides to such purposes And what a great stir is made to little purpose while the former is so easily granted on all sides and there is nothing done at all to convince a sober man or Christian That such or such persons are they we ought expect the dictates of Gods Spirit from For Judgement properly so called can never be separated from Autority or lawful presiding over others joyned with power to oblige to such sentence as shall be passed but how this should be competible to single or many Persons agreeing in the same thing in their private capacity yea though enabled with the spirit more than ordinary cannot well be understood So that at most they can be judges of controversies only for themselves and that at their own peril and can do no more than perswade advise and exhort not oblige others to think as they do But Judges must and ought to do more or they had as good do nothing So that that which hath found great acceptance and applause by too many doth upon examination prove very insignificant and impertinent to the resolution of the difficultie in hand viz. That things that are necessary are obvious in Scripture and Every man is Judge to himself granting I say This which is yet really untrue yet scarce any thing is said to the purpose which enquired not so much How a man might perswade himself but how and with what influence he may proceed to the conviction and reducing of others so that the essential to a Church be not destroyed as it certainly must be where no communion is and there will infallibly cease all communion where it is meerly arbitrary for Christians to believe and judge and walk and worship as they please For this it is for every man to judge for himself Will it be yet farther said That we should bear with one another and live peaceably and charitably one with another and not molest each other for his Judgement If it be as I know it is I reply first That this plausibility without possibility is not true according to the opinions of them who use it For they certainly hold That Heresie and Schism are not to be endured or born withal Christ and God must not be blasphemed by unsound opinions or prophane or superstitious actions and this diversity yea contrariety of judging must needs find these faults in one another very often and consequently be of opinion That they are not to be suffered and Charity must not be so far mistaken or abused as to licentiate such enormities But What if after all this contention for the Spirit it be not judge at all as in truth it is not in any proper sense For the Spirit is only the due qualification of the Person or Persons not simply to judge for that descends upon them by being ordinarily and orderly constituted over the Church of Christ but to judge aright and to give faithful and unerring sentence in matters under debate and question And the same may be in proportion affirmed of Reason termed by some who would seem to excell others in reason most improperly as well as unreasonably Judge of Controversies For all judgement disquisition and expositions are made by Persons not by things Reason indeed is the Instrument whereby a Person is enabled to judge or find out the truth unto which unless there be a due accession of Autority and Power such reason though very exquisite and happy must keep within its own doors and judge at home for it self and not for others nor contrary to more publick and autoritative determinations without the peril of being taxed of Arrogance and it self justly condemned if not for the Inward errours of the mind for the outward errors in ill managing truths If it were so That Reason in men were infallible we ought not to stand upon nicities of terms or improper language But for men to deny others the Seat and Power of Judicature because they may err and to take it to themselves as if the spirit of Error had no power over them is at the same time a grievous though pleasing error both against Reason and common justice too And if it be said That every man is bound by the Law of nature being indued with reason to use that reason and not bruitishly to suffer himself he knows not or cares not whether to becarried by others Reasons and not his own I retort And every man is obliged by the Law of Nations which is a more refined principle than that of gross Nature properly taken to contain himself in the order of Community he is placed and to submit to the reason of common Judgement no less than his own For undoubtedly until every man in private and particular be unerrable which is not to be expected on this side heaven there will diverse inconsistent judgements prevail and divide one from another and cause such a breach as the society whether divine or humane will soon perish and come to nothing But granting what was before demanded That every man must act according to his reason above the nature of beasts this doth not conclude That therefore he must be let alone and not brought even by force to submit to others against such reason First Because it is not resolved by any but a mans own deceitful opinion That it is really reason which is so presumed to be Secondly Because he that is so constrained to submit his reason is not thereby denyed either the nature or use of his but still much transcendeth the capacity of beasts For He discusses he discourses he judges rationally after the manner of men even when the effect of all these Acts are contrary to reason And lastly In wise men and good humble Christians there is a superior principal of reasonableness to that of meer direct nature For That he that has most reason on his side and when that it self is controverted he that according to appearance of Circumstances may lay the fairest claim to that is to be followed no rational man can deny Therefore should a Mans
distinct from Divine and Justifying Faith Of Faith Explicit and Implicit HAving thus spoken of the Rule of Christian Faith and its Auxiliary Tradition we are now to proceed to the Nature and Acts the Effects Subject and Object of it For as all Christian Religion is summed up in one Notion of Christian Faith so all Faith may be reduced unto the foresaid Heads Faith taken in its greatest extent containeth as well Humane as Divine And may be defined A firm assent of the mind to a thing reported And there are two things which principally incline the mind to believe The Evidence of the thing offered to the understanding or the Fidelity and Veracity of him that so delivers any thing unto us For if the thing be Fides est donum divinitùs infusum menti hominis quae citra ullam haesitantiam credit esse verissima quaecunque nobis Deus per utrumque Testtradidit ac promisit Erasm in Symbolum apparent in it self to our reasons or senses we presently believe it And if the thing be obscure and difficult to be discerned by us yet if we stand assured of the faithfulness of him that so reports it to us and his wisdom we yield assent thereunto But Faith properly Divine hath a twofold fountain so constituting and denominating it The Matter believed which is not common nor natural but spiritual and heavenly But more especially that Faith is Divine which is not produced in the soul of Man upon any natural reasons necessarily inferring the same but upon a superior motive inducing unto it that is Autoritie divine and because it hath declared and revealed so much unto us as St. Peter believing Christ to be the Son of God it is said Flesh and Boood hath not revealed it unto thee but my Father which is in heaven This Mat. 16. 17. was a divine Faith upon a double respect 1. by reason of the object Christ a divine person 2. by reason of the Cause God by whose power he believed the same it not being in the power of flesh and blood any natural reason to convince the judgement so far as absolutely to believe That Christ was so the Son of God so that to be revealed is that which makes the Faith properly divine and not the divine object or thing believed For as it hath been observed by others any thing natural and which by natural reason may be demonstrated and so must be believed by a natural Faith being also commended unto us upon divine autority or revelation may be also believed by a divine Faith That there is an invisible Deity is clearly demonstrable from the visible things of this World and accordingly may and ought to be believed upon the warrant of natural reason it self as St. Paul teacheth us saying The Invisible things of him from the Creation of the Rom. 1. 20. world are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made even his eternal power and Godhead so that they are without excuse That is If God had not revealed all this yet men ought to believe this out of sense and reason but this hinders not but this very thing should become an article of our Creed also and so because it is revealed Form in us a divine Faith But we must be aware of an ambiguity in Revelation which may mislead us For sometimes Revelation is used for the thing revealed And sometimes for the Act Revealing that which we call now The Revelation of St John and in truth all Scriptures as we have them now are the things God did reveal unto his servants but the Act whereby they were revealed or the Act revealing this to them ended with the persons receiving them And this is no superfluous or curious observation because of a received maxim in the Schools That without a supernatural act we cannot give due assent unto a supernatural object nor believe truths revealed by God without a super added aid of Grace illuminating and inclining the mind to assent thereto From whence doth follow That of all divine Faith is most properly if not only divine which doth believe that such things are Revealed of God and not That which supposes them to have been revealed by God and that he said so as is expressed unto us doth believe For this latter even any natural man and greatest infidel in the world would believe who believes there is a God it being included and implied in the very notion of a Deity that God cannot lie or deceive or affirm a thing to be which is not But the Christian Faith mounts much higher then Heathens and by the Grace of God believes that God hath Revealed such things wherein consists his Christian Faith The first thing then a true believer indeed must believe is That the Scriptures are the word of God and this as it is the most fundamental so is it most difficult of all to one not educated in the Faith of Christians because it neither can be proved by Scripture nor whatevermen who promise nothing less in their presumptuous methods then clear demonstrations may say and argue by Tradition The Scriptures though not testimonie of it self yet matter and manner may induce and Tradition fortifie that but the Crown of all true Christian Faith must be set on by Gods Grace A Second thing in order is when we believe that God hath spoken such things that we believe the things themselves so delivered to us of God For though as is said any rational heathen may well do this yet many a Christian doth it not For The foo◠not in knowledge so much as practise 〈◊〉 14. ◠◠Ti◠◠9. hath said in his heart there is no God saith the Psalmist and St. Paul that many out of an evil conscience have made Shipwrack of their Faith which really once they had A third degree of Christian Faith is When not onely we believe that God hath revealed his Law unto us and what he hath so revealed to be most faithful true and holy but obey the same For in Scripture Faith is taken for Obedience and Obedience for Faith as in the famous instance of Abraham who is said to believe God and that his Faith was counted for Righteousness And why is Abraham said to believe God so signally Because he was perswaded that God bade him offer up his Son unto him No but because he did it by Faith as is witnessed in the Epistle to the Hebrews And this acceptation of Faith is much confirmed by the contrary Heb. 11. 17. speech of Scripture in whose sense they who obey not God are commonly said not to believe him as in the Book of Deuteronomie Deut. 9. 23. Likewise when the Lord sent unto you from Kadesh-Barnea saying Go up and possess the Land which I have given you then ye rebelled against the Commandement of the Lord your God and believed him not nor hearkened unto his voice And therefore in the Acts of the Apostles it is said
Justice But to arrive in this doubtful and perplexed way to the right end of this Dispute it will be necessarie to pass briefly through all the several Causes of our Justification and so much the rather because divers before have so done and failed in their Divinity because of a mistake in Logick in miscalling Causes And first we must know otherwise then some have taught That the Material Cause of our Justification is not the graces in us nor the pardon without us nor remission of sins nor obedience of Christ nor of our selves but the person justified is the subject of Justification For who with good sense can say Our sins are justified our good works are Justified Acts. 13. 3â— True it is St. Paul saith by him Christ all that believe are justified from all things from which ye could not be Justified by the Law of Moses Shewing hereby that we are Justified from our sins but not that our sins are Justified And so where St. James speaks so often of which hereafter that we are Justified by Works he intendeth not to say our Works are Justified For t is the person not the qualities of him that is Justified And if any speak otherwise they must be helpt out by recurring to Figurative not proper speaking In such cases as these if ever we would judge aright we must hold as precisely as can be to propriety of speech About the Final cause of our Justification I find nothing singular but in common with all the Acts of God towards man and all the Actions of Man towards God viz The glory of God Neither is there any difference of parties herein But concerning the Formal Cause of our Justification before God some discord is found yea concerning a Formal Cause in General what it is and wherein it consisteth which is very necessarie to be understood to attain to the true notion of being Formally Justified A Formal Cause then is that whereby a thing is what it is subsists in it self and is distinguished from other things being always essential and intrinsecal to the thing so by it constituted that it cannot be so much as conceived without it and cannot possibly but be with it This whether artificial or not I weigh not much but is a true description of that Cause For instance sake A man is a man properly by his soul and not by his body his soul being his Inward form and as it is impossible that he should be so without it so is it impossible but that he should be so with it whatever outward visible defects or imperfections may appear otherwise So in the present cause it must necessarily be that the Formal Cause of our Justification be intrinsecal to the Justified person and that not being that he should not be justified Contrary to what some have affirmed upon this occasion who from an instance of an Eclipse would show that the formal Cause is not alwayes intrinsecal to that which it formeth For say they as it should seem by the autority of Zabarel In an Eclipse of the Sun the Moon interposing is the formal Cause of the Darkness of the Earth and yet it is not intrinsecal to it but separate But the mistake is plain that the Moon being not the cause of the earth it self but of the darkness of the earth only it is not the Formal Cause of that and so may be extrinsecal to it and intrinsecal to the darkness as the formal cause but whether this be so or not we are here only to show that no cause formal can be external to the thing of which it is the form and by consequence that nothing without us can be the formal cause of our Justification or that whereby we are denominated Just before God So that neither Christ nor his merits do render us so Justified And therefore they who to magnifie the mistery of our Justification do object to themselves How a man can be Just by the justice of another and how righteous by another persons righteousness any more than a man can hear with another mans ears or see with another mans eyes do tie such a knot as they can by no means loose For in plain truth neither the one nor the other can formally be But they may say As it is Christs righteousness indeed and rests only in him so we cannot be said to be justified formally by it but as it is made ours especially by Faith and is applied unto us so we may be formally Justified by it To which I say that if that individual formal Righteousness which is in Christ were by any means so transferred formally unto us and infused into us that we should in like manner possess it as did Christ then indeed the argument would hold very good that by such application we were Justified formally by Christs righteousness but no such thing will be granted neither is any such thing needfull For though the Scripture saith directly that Christ is The Lord our Phil. 3. 9. righteousness and St. Paul desireth to be found in Christ not having his own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by Faith Yet we are not to understand hereby that the formal righteousness of Christ becomes our formal Righteousness but that he is by the Gospel he revealed unto us the teacher of Righteousness and that far different from that Righteousness of the Law which St. Paul calls his own as that which he brought with him to Christ and he is Justification is neither but a certain action in God applied unto us or a certain respect or relation whereby we ar acquit of our sins and accepted to life everlasting Perkins Gal 2. 16. Rom. 8. 30. the Prime Cause of our Righteousness sending his holy Spirit unto us and by his merits appeasing the wrath of God and satisfying his Justice for us all which is not the formal cause of our Righteousness or Justification For neither is that formal righteousness in us which is inherent Righteousness the formal Cause of our Justification But our Justification formal is an Act of God terminating in Man whereby he is absolved from all guilt reputed Just and accepted to Grace and favour with God When God hath actually passed this divine free and gracious sentence upon a sinner then and not before is he formally Justified This is the end and consummation of all differences between God and man and the initiating him into all saving Grace here and Glory hereafter as St. Paul writing to the Romans witnesseth in these words Whom he predestinated them he also called and whom he called them he also Justified and whom he justified them he also glorified CHAP. XIX Of the Efficient Cause of Justification IT remains therefore now that we proceed to the means causes and motives inducing God Almighty thus to Justifie Man a sinner whom he might rather condemn for his unrighteousness And these as
many and divers in kind as they are may all be reduced unto the Efficient causes so often mistaken for the formal And truly to proceed herein regularly and clearly we must begin with the Cause of all Causes God himself For though Christ be the Cause of all Causes visible and in the actual administration and execution yet he is not the first but subordinate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys Hom. 27. in Joan. Cause of Mans reconciliation to God his Justification and Salvation For as holy Chrysostom divinely and sublimely enquiring into the reason that might incline God to restore Man being fallen and lost by his Apostasy from God unto a state of bliss again to admit of any terms of Reconciliation with him determines it it is nothing but the divine Philanthropie of God his free undeserved unscrutable love towards man springing as it were from his own breast beginning within himself and of himself absolutely irrespectively to any outward motives but to show as St. Paul saith He would have mercie on whom he would have mercie and he Rom. 9. 15. would have compassion on whom he would have compassion and because as the Psalmist hath it Whatsoever the Lord pleased that did he in heaven Psal 135. 6. and in earth in the seas and in all deep places He pleased to leave the fallen Angels and he pleased to restore fallen man and that because it so pleased him For not so much as any consideration of Christ could dispose him to decree so favourably on the behalf of man but first this decree passed and then followed the determination of the means most convenient thereunto which was to send his son to give him to be Incarnate and to be the great and powerful Mediator between God and Man mighty to save Christ then was that which in general moved God Externaly to the Justification of Man after he had conceived of himself a purpose to reconcile man to himself as S. Paul clearly asserteth in his second Epistle to the Corinthians All things are of God who hath reconciled us to himself 2 Cor. 5. 18. by Jesus Christ and hath given to us the ministery of reconciliation To wit that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself not imputing 19. their trespasses unto them and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation And more particularly elsewhere he describeth unto us the several parts of our reconciliation to God saying But of him are ye in Christ Jesus 1 Cor. 1. 30. who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness Sanctification and redemption Therefore it is that so often in Scripture Christ is called a Gal. 3. 20. Heb. 8. 6. 1 Tim. 2. 5. Heb. 9. 15. Heb. 12. 24. Mediator between God and man for the bringing to pass and causing to take effect the General decree of God for the redemption of Mankind For through Christ we were by God predestinated as is taught us by St. Paul to the Ephesians Having predestinated us unto the adoption of Children by Jesus Christ unto himself according to the good pleasure of his will Where Eph. 1. 5. we see plainly that Christ was not the Cause that we were predestinated in Christ but the Good pleasure of his Absolute will Again we were called in Christ as St. Jude implieth saying To them that are sanctified Jud. 1. by God the Father and preserved in Jesus Christ and called And as we are called and sanctified so certainly are we justified freely by Christ And there is nothing more requisite for us to be fully justified in the presence of God then to be made partakers of Christ and as St. Paul saith To be found in Christ not having our own righteousness which is of the Law Phil. 3. 9. whether of Nature or Moses but that which is through the Faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by Faith From whence and several other texts of Holy Scripture testifying the absolute necessity of Christ to the Justifying and saving of us it appeareth that nothing can be more contrary to the Eternal purpose of saving man through Christ yea nothing indeed more tidiculous then to but imagine that there can be any Act in man contradistinct from Christ and not receiving all its worth and vertue from Christ which can avail any thing towards the salvation or Justification of him Or that a man being grafted into Christ and partaking of his graces and merits can fail of being accepted of God unto Justification and salvation For as St. Paul saith to the Romans All have sinned and come short Rom. 3. 23 24 25. of the glory of God Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through Faith in his blood to declare his Righteousness for the Remission of sins that are past through the forbearance of God c. Now there are three things in General which truly denominate us to be in Christ and partakers of him To be partakers of the benefit of his Passion satisfying for us To be partakers of his spirit and graces thereof renewing and sanctifying us and thirdly to be partakers of his Intercession before God on our behalf For as the Scripture tells us He ever liveth to make intercession for us And this Heb. 7. 25. his intercession an Act of his Sacerdotal office is it whereby Christ properly meriteth for us For the Passion of Christ doth sufficiently discharge us of our former Obligations and obnoxiousness to the Law of God and the punishments therein denounced against the contemners and violaters thereof and so may be said having fully satisfied all the Law justly demanded of us to have merited pardon and remission of what is passed doth not thereupon entitle us to any graces or blessings from God but yet putteth us into a capacity of them but the actual collation of them is rather owing unto the uncessant mediation of him before God in behalf of us And this the Scripture intends when it saith We have a great high Priest Heb. 4. 14. that is passed into the Heavens Jesus the son of God And thus we have made a second step towards the clearing our Justification in its Efficient Causes viz That it is wholly effected by Christ made righteousness sanctification and Redemption unto us But a third thing and that of no mean necessity and difficulty both is behind how we come to be so entirely partakers of Christ how Christ so becomes ours as that God should upon the intuition hereof freely Justifie us For as St. Austin hath observed of the giving of the Holy spirit of God to those that ask aright whereas none can ask aright but by the Holy spirit herein is a great mysterie that a man can be said to be capable of the Spirit before he hath the Spirit In like manner can no man be said to be capable of Christ and
his Benefits before he be in some manner actually in Christ For if all our works are Sanctified by Gods Spirit and acceptable to God only as they are done in Christ how can any such Acts lead us unto Christ or make us capable of him seeing it is one of the greatest perfections and excellencie of good Works or Faith for unless it and we be in Christ it cannot be a saving Faith i. e. leading us to Salvation to make us effectual partakers of and one with him These difficulties constrain us to distinguish both Faith and being in Christ into I cannot say properly two kinds as two eminent Periods and Degrees of Faith and being in Christ The one is initial and preparatory as a foundation which is not a distinct building from the house finished and furnished but a part of it and material Cause thereof The other is consummate and formed yet not so but addition of perfection though not of Parts may be made all mens Faith being capable of farther degrees in this life And from hence that mystical sense of our Saviours words in St. Johns Gospel may both give and receive illustration For in the sixth of John Christ hath these words No man can come unto me except the Joh. 6. 44. Father which hath sent me draw him And in the fourteenth of John he saith I am the way and the truth and the life no man cometh unto the Father but by Joh. 14. 6. me Teaching us That notwithstanding God is the First cause to bring us to be in Christ and that by his Predestination before time and his Calling and Electing us in time to the knowledge and Faith in Christ yet he is not reconciled unto us he doth not pardon us nor justify us before Christ brings us unto him and offers us to him as a new lâ—mp and as capable of his grace and favour which obtained we are then truly justified by Christ And as there are two distinct acts of God the one of his good Providence in bringing us to the Covenant made with mankind in Christ and the other of his special Grace in accepting us through Christ being in the Covenant So are there two principal Periods as I said of being in Christ and the First is when we are taken within the Covenant of the Gospel of Grace by baptism whereby we are made members of Christs mystical Body and inheritours of the Kingdom of Heaven Not that immediately and necessarily All baptized persons are sure to go to heaven but all baptized persons are thereby put into a capacity and Right to heaven To this St. Paul Gal. 3. 27. to the Galatians gives us his fair suffrage saying For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ And the same is implied in this his salutation Salute Andronicus and Junias my kinsmen and my Rom. 16. 7. fellow Prisoners who are of note among the Apostles who also were in Christ before me Where doubtless these persons are said to be in Christ before St. Paul because they were baptized and made profession of Christ before St. Paul And so when he speaks of the Churches of Judea which are in Christ Gal. 1. 22. he meaneth no more than such who were become of Jews Christians in Judea not intending that every one who so professed Christ should be infallibly Justified and saved by Christ as they shall who are arrived to the more perfect state of being in Christ of which the Apostle thus speaketh to the Colossians Whom Christ we preach warning every man and teaching every Col. 1. 28. man in all wisdome that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus Now what is or wherein this perfection in Christ doth consist is I suppose past any mans apprehension or Judgement precisely to determine that is what degree of holiness in Christ God will accept to our Justification but in general these two States of a Christian are plainly deseribed thus by St. Paul to the Corinthians If any man be in Christ Jesus he is a new creature 2 Cor. 5. 17. Where being a new Creature and being in Christ are distinguished as Cause and Effect our being in Christ Jesus being the reason and cause of becoming New creatures So that we may well observe in this case a twofold Conversion requisite to make a man truly in Christ A conversion to Christ by renouncing false Religions and false opinions of a Deity and assenting to and embracing the doctrine according to Godliness This every man doth who takes on him the name profession and mitiating Sacrament of a Christian of this is to be understood what is spoken of the conversion of the Gentiles And this conversion is rather to speak properly Acts 15. 3. a conversion to the truth of Godliness than to true Godliness Or a conversion to the Truth of Faith rather then to the life of Faith of which St. Paul to the Galatians The life which I now live in the flesh I live by the Faith Gal. 2. 20. of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me The summ then of all this is this That to be in Christ effectually to our Justification and Salvation is so to be converted unto him as to believe the Faith of Christ and to Live the life of Christ This being cleared nearer access is made unto the solution of the prime Doubt which is What is that which so farr and fully enstateth us in Christ that thereupon God doth freely justifie us For it is now supposed and granted that our so being in Christ making us partakers of the merits mediation and Righteousness of Christ doth immediately and absolutely qualifie to Justification and secondarily that which brings us into Christ may properly enough be said to be it whereby we are Justified And here comes in the grand dispute about the vertue of Faith Whether that only and wholly performeth this For in what sense Faith may be said to bring us unto Christ or thus to lay hold as they say of Christ in the same may it be truly affirmed that next under God and Christ we are Justified by it This I know not how it can be effected better then by the help of a most obvious and necessary but most neglected distinction of the use and notion of Faith in holy Scripture omitting that threefold Faith above-mentioned and several others impertinently invented and ill imployed in this case For Faith is taken in Scripture either Complexly and Generally for the whole Body of Christian divinity and Graces contained in the New testament Or it is taken Simply and distinctly for a special Grace separate I mean in nature not in Operation from Hope and Charity which together constitute the three Theological Graces Instances of the former have been given already in the twelfth Chapter and need not here be repeated in particular For let any man of common equity and understanding weigh the subject and
end of all St. Pauls Epistles to the Romans to the Colossians to the Galatians to the Hebrews especially not excluding the other where he most expresly and zealously urges Faith against works and he shall soon perceive that his intention and drift is not absolutely to oppose works of Faith to the doctrine or Grace of Faith but the works of the Law which infirmer Christians newly entred into the Faith of Christ had so venerable an opinion of that they imagined Christ could profit nothing without the works either Ceremonial or Moral of the Law of Moses For whereas they for instance depended absolutely on Circumcision for their Justification and thought that without so sacred and solemn a Rite they could not be profited by Christ himself St. Paul on the other side resolutely and positively determineth thus Behold I Paul say unto you that if you be circumcised Gal. 5. 2. v. 4. Christ shall profit you nothing And presently after Christ is become of no effect unto you whosoever of you are Justified by the Law ye are fallen from Grace Can any thing be more manifest then here it is that Grace is opposed to the Law And that to trust in that is to fall from Christ And when it followeth We through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by Faith is it not v. 5. as plain as need be that Faith is here taken for that doctrine and not Act of Faith whereby men are instructed in Christ believe in Christ adhere to him relinquishing the imperfect and antiquated doctrine of the Law and its practises which by St. Paul are all called Flesh in opposition to the spiritual worship of the Gospel as to the Philippians For we are the Circumcision Phil. 3. 3. which worship God in the Spirit and rejoyce in Christ Jesus and have no confidence in the flesh Though I might also have confidence in the flesh c. 4. Rom. 3. 21. And to the Romans But now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested that is surely now is the doctrine of Righteousness published through Christ without the Law being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all 22. 20. 27. and upon all that believe And verse the twentieth By the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified c. And verse the twenty seventh the Anti thesis or opposition doth most evidently declare the Apostles intention Where is boasting then It is excluded By what Law Of Works Nay but by the Law of Faith The Law of Works then is the Law of Moses and the Law of Faith is the Law of Christ And to be Justified by Faith in Jesus of which immediately before is to be understood of the whole Covenant of Grace or Faith which is made to us in Christ Jesus and revealed in the Gospel as contradistinct to that Covenant of Works given by Moses and not of any special Grace or Act of Faith as Faith is sometimes distinguished from other Evangelical Graces It may be said that the works of the Law are excluded expresly and therefore no competition is to be made between them and Faith in the case of our Justification To which my answer is That though I grant that not only the works of the Law though moral do not Justifie but not the works of Faith of themselves yet I may confidently say None of these places commonly alleadged by the Exalters of Faith and Depressors of Good works to null the merits of works done even in Faith of Christ do according to the literal meaning really perform so much yet I rather choose to affirm That the works excluded by St. Paul are not works of the Law moral so much as Mosaical For the morality of the Old Law was not properly of Moses but the Ceremonial only and consequently the Law from these taking its denomination of Mosaical when works of the Law are mentioned in the New Testament we are to understand Mosaical Works rather than Moral but not at all works of Faith So that whatsoever is contended or pretended our being justified freely by Grace and justified again by Faith do Rom. 3. 24. Gal. 2. 16. not at all deny our Justification by works of Faith or that the efficiency of such a Faith is quite of another nature from that of works done in Faith But yet it is plain from the whole design of the Epistle of St. James the Quoniam haec opinio fuerit exerta sine operibus justificari hominem aliae Apostolicae Epistolae Petri Joannis Jacobi Judae contra eum maximâ— dirigunt intentionem ut vehementer astruant fidem sine operibus nihil prodesse c. Aug. de Fide Operibus c. 14. second Epistle of St. Peter the Epistle of St. Jude that divers of Old did so mistake St. Paul as of late dayes he hath been understood which moved St. Austin to say directly that these Epistles were on purpose contrived and published to obviate such a misconstruction of the Blessed Apostle as if he had intended when he often sayes We are Justified by Faith only a separate notion of Faith from works and effects of Faith which was far from him from whence we have a very compendious solid and clear reconciliation of St. James his Epistle especially with those of St. Paul For as is shewed already certain it is that it being his principal end to oppose and void the pretensions of the Jews to Justification without believing in Christ or as a more moderate sort of them weak in the Faith of Christ admitting no sufficiency in Christ to justifie them without a dash as least of Moses's Law he declared freely for an absolute sufficiency in the Faith of Christ to justify and save such as believe in him This doctrine of St. Paul was quite mistaken by some who supposed that the act of believing simpâ—y taken or the Grace of Faith specially used was it whereby they were in a certain way of being justified leaving out the fruits and effects of that lively Faith and making it a dead Faith as St. James calleth it who thus argueth against such a fond and dangerous presumption What doth it profit my brethren though a James 2. 14. 17. man say he hath Faith and have not works can Faith save him Faith without works is dead For the use and end of knowledge and Faith being only obedience and a life according to Faith what a monstrous and ridiculous thing would it be to divide the Cause from the effects proper to it But it is usually replied No God forbid we should divide Faith from good Works Where there is true justifying Faith there will be there must be good works and that for several other reasons but not for our Justification This is most true whereever there is a Justifying Faith there will be good Works but what do they there in order to
Justification Just as much as the fair gay train of a Peacock to the bird that draws it after it make a fine show and that is all that we know of But the difficulty is yet very strong behind And that is seeing it is granted that some Faith in Christ is Justifying and some is not Justifying whence comes this about Is it not because one is a lively and operative Faith and the other is drie and unactive and unfruitful So that Faith which is said to Justifie is it self first Justified by its works For though as hath been said Faith doth absolutely produce good Works and not good Works Faith yet good Works are they in which its goodness consists next unto its object Christ and consequently render it Justifying actually And whereas they would evade his and elude St. James's autority by distinguishing the Cause and Sign of our Justification saying That we are Justified only by Faith effectivè effectually but by works as St. James saith ostensivè declaratorily as signs that we are Justified it is a sense meerly obtruded upon the Apostle there being no more grounds or occasion given by St. James why they should understand him that works justifie only declaratorily than are given by St. Paul that I should interpret that Justification which he ascribes to Faith to be only Declaratorily For though Faith received in the mind is not apparent yet when it is professed then it may be said no less to declare our Justification then good works as the Scripture it self testifies saying With the heart man believeth unto righteousness Rom. 10. 10. i. e. to the doing of works of righteousness which proceed from a true Faith and with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation CHAP. XX. Of the Special Notion of Faith and the Influence it hath on our Justification Of Faith Solitary and Onely Of a Particular and General Faith Particular Faith no more an Instrument of our Justification by Christ than other co-ordinate Graces How some Ancient Fathers affirm that Faith without Works Justifie ALL this while we have treated of the complex notion of Faith or at least as it is that first general Grace whereby we are inserted into Christ and justified by it together with its blessed retinue of subordinate Evangelical Graces which are reduced to these three Faith Hope and Charity where Faith standeth by its self and is a peculiar Grace of it self and hath in this acceptation a more then common prerogative attributed unto it in order to our Justification or the bringing us to Christ and partaking of Christ For that is it whereby we are only properly justified and all Graces serve for no other end here than to adopt us for the benefit of Justification through Christ and for Christ's sake alone So that no man can as yet complain That though I derogate somewhat from the vertue and value of Faith in reference to our Justification as it is explained by moderner Divines some I mean I do not in the least detract from the sufficiencies freeness and absolute necessity of Christ's Merits and Grace towards us Yea I establish it nay I augment and commend more the Free Grace of God then do they who have chose another way to express it For all this while I do not compare Works with Christ nor Hope nor Charity nor Obedience with Christ as is plain but I compare now one Grace with another and Faith simply considered with the obedience of Faith For Faith taken as in general for the embracing of the Fundamentum ergo esi justitiae Fides Ambr. Offic. Lib. 1. cap. 29. Lib. 2. cap. 2. Habet vitam aeternam fides quia est fundamentum bonum Habet facta quia vir justus dictis factis probatur c. Id. de Basilicis non Tradendis Fides quae est justitiae fundamentum quam nulla bona opera praecedunt sed ex qua omnia procedunt ipsa nos à peccatis nost◠is purgat c. Prosper Lib. 3. de Vita Contemplativa cap. 21. Fides est omnium bonorum fundamentum humanae salutis initium c. August in Vigilia Pentecostis whole Body of the Gospel hath this undoubted prerogative to be the Grace of all Graces the Mother of all the Fountain from which all flow and as the Fathers generally do justifie because it is the foundation of all access to Christ Which assertion of theirs however later Wits have slighted and contemned as not giving Faith its due in order to our Justification doth in my opinion with much greater perspicuity and simplicity and soundness express its proper office then those newly invented and several distinctions and sub-distinctions confunding rather than setling the judgment of a good Christian And first They ascribe this virtue of Justifying to a special Faith Then they say this Faith doth not justifie as a Work or Act but Grace Then they proceed to affirm That not as a principal cause but only as an instrument created by God in the heart to that end And yet farther Not as an Instrument active and operative but as an Instrument rather receptive and passive as appears by the example given of an Hand which is no true cause of an Alms given but yet it properly receives it But first What a disorder must these multiplyed niceties needs breed in the minds of the simpler sort who are not able to comprehend them and so are brought into great troubles of conscience whether their Faith be directed to Christ under the true relation it ought to bear How much more clear and easie is that Doctrine that teaches First That neither our Faith nor Works proceeding from thence can avail any thing without Christ and that all their sufficiencie is of Christ And next That this Faith and good Works do but qualifie us according to the Free Covenant of Grace for Christ Secondly If it be denyed as in truth it is That Faith is any more an Instrument whether active or passive or a Hand as it is called to lay hold especially in another kind of Christ than Hope or Charity I do not find how they can prove it For I may and do yield a greater degree of vertue in Faith special well founded on God than in other Graces distinct from it but I do not yield that this is the Faith properly by them contended for For It is a mixt compound Grace consisting of Hope and Love which they call Fiducia Confidence and resting upon God This indeed is a special Grace as considered in subordination to the general Grace whereby we assent and submit to the Gospel of Christ but it is not special as distinct from other co-ordinate Graces with it Calvin Inst Petrus Mart. Lo. Com. class 3. cap. 4. num 6. But what manner of Faith say they do we suppose that which goes so ill attended alone First I suppose there is such a Grace distinct from others and that which was set up against
alledged more pregnantly proving the power of that fiducial Faith as I may so call it in order to the Justification of a man before God and yet it must here be granted That this trust is much different from the Faith contended for And that from hence or the like Texts not a different vertue in nature or kind though peradventure more effectual and prevalent is ascribed to it above other Graces in order to our Justification All which is no less true of our Sanctification than our Justification For we are altogether as much sanctified by Faith alone as we are justified by Faith alone or only as appeareth from the Scripture which saith That our hearts are John 15. 3. Acts 15. 9. purified by Faith So that in this much disputed Question I know no readier way of satisfying the fearful and dubious mind than by taking a due estimate of the power of a General or Particular Faith in reference to Fides nos à peccatis omnibus purgat mentes nostras illuminat Deo concliat Prosper ubi supr our Sanctification and judging alike of our Justification thereby For we are sanctified as freely by Grace as we are justified and as much by Faith too as Prosper before cited saith And therefore lastly in answer to divers places of the Ancients which are produced to confirm the modern sense of Justification by Faith alone I answer in a word That it is true their words seem to attest so much but their meaning was plainly no more than this That Faith many times doth justifie without Works that is any outward manifestation of their Faith by such fruits but never without inward acts of Repentance and Charity distinct from this special Faith nor without such a devotion to good Works which wants nothing but opportunity to exert them which is by an extraordinary Clemencie and Grace of God accepted for the thing it self This appears by the example by them given to manifest their meaning of the Thief on the Cross who was so justified and saved by Faith alone without good Works answerable thereunto because his sudden faith was prevented by sudden death Nevertheless That his Faith was so much alone as to exclude Repentance and such Graces as were competible to one in his condition from a proportionable concurrence to that effect is no where said nor intended by any of the Fathers whose judgment is of account in the Church of God CHAP. XXI A third Effect of Justifying Faith Assurance of our Salvation How far a man is bound to be sure of his Salvation and how far this assurance may be obtained The Reasons commonly drawn from Scripture proving the necessity of this assurance not sufficient c. ANother effect of Faith or at least consequence upon it hath the certainty or assurance of our Justification and Salvation been commonly reputed The better to understand which we must take as supposed and granted the difference between the Truth of a thing and Evidence of it or the Certainty that such a thing is and the knowledge that so it is So that the doubting of our Justification or Salvation doth not make the thing infallibly so but leaves us under fears and sometimes disconsolations But a competent remedy seems to me to be ready at hand if we consider that our opinion of our selves is no good conclusion against our selves but rather being founded in humility and disowning of our worth and righteousness an introduction to a comfortable hope in Gods mercy who hath begun at least the work of Grace in us by rendring us studious and anxious about his service and our salvation unless it could be proved which we shall see presently whether so or not out of the word of God that it is his will and direct command that we should have this assurance in us For as saint John saith Hereby we know that we are of the truth and shall assurt 1 John 3. 19 20. our hearts before him For if our heart condem us God is greater than our heart and knoweth all things i. e. the hearts and consciences of the children of God do frequently condemn them but their comfort is that God is greater than their hearts and doth not judge according to what opinion good or evil we have of our selves but according to his own Wiâ—dom and Grace So that it is no just inference at all I do not believe I shall be saved therefore I shall not be saved Nor this I do believe I shall not be saved therefore I shall not be saved Only they have great cause thus to argue and conclude against themselves who are wont on the contraâ—y to reason I believe I shall be saved therefore I shall be saved abusing and corrupting the Doctrine of Faith two wayes most dangerously First In making it the simple and direct cause or means unto Justification and then a reason of a Reflex act whereby they stand assured that they are so acquitted and justified before God But St. John in the former words cited reasons much otherwise For having in the 18. verse exhorted to and urged the duty of mutual Christian Charity he inferreth from thence in the 19. verse Hereby we know that we are of the truth c. i. e. from the Indication of Love and Charity to the Brethren â—ere is then an assurance and that before God and yet as we have seen there resteth and consisteth withall a diffidence and doubting as we have shewed The reconciliation of this seeming opposition doth lead us to a necessary distinction tending to the resolving of the principal Querie and it is between the State of Justification and the Act of Justification And again as to Assurance here spoken of It is one thing to be assured of our Justification and another of our Salvation as shall hereafter appear First then I hold it sufficiently demonstrable out of Scripture That a man may and every good Christian ought to be assured that he is in a state of being justified and saved likewise This we teach well in our Church Catechise in answer to this Question Doest not thou think that thou art bound to believe as they have promised for thee thus Yes verily and by Gods help so I will and I heartily thank our heavenly Father that he hath called me to this State of Salvation through Jesus Christ our Saviour Every Christian that in Baptism hath put on Christ and is entred into a Covenant of Grace with God is bound to believe assuredly that thereby he is in a state of Salvation and Justification For thereby God hath especially elected him to salvation of which Election the Scriptures chiefly if not only speak which are drawn to signife the Eternal Decree of God choosing not only men estranged from God to the Covenant of Grace but such as are first within the Covenant to an infallible Justification and Salvation This I say is rarely if at all intended by any of those many Texts of Scripture alledged to
consent and sentence is the same in effect with Excommunication and therefore breeders of separation and divisions are no less subject to excommunications than are Hereticks though they hold nothing directly contrary to the Faith But if men will say that What St. Paul did we may do and no more because he did no more this is invented only to destroy but will not hold strong enough because the examples of the Governours of the Church our Rules are not to be restrained to the very same Cases only but to them of like general nature St. Paul justifyes by his practice the excluding out of the communion of the Church such as bred causeless contentions and divisions and from hence the succeeding Governors are justified in doing the like For nothing can be said less to the question in hand than to recite many places out of St. Paul commanding to bear one anothers burdens and that we should not judge one another and that the strong should bear with the weak and such like For all these Texts speak either of Churches not Formed or constituted but rather breeding or of single persons amongst themselves coming to Christian Religion with the strong prepossessions of the Excellency of certain Rites before Religiously observed wherein all Reason Justice and Religion require that no man should impose his conceit upon another without autority But do we find in any place of the Holy Scriptures that St. Paul denied this Right of Judging censuring and commanding to the whole Church Nothing less yea nothing more than the contrary as may more fully appear when we are to speak of Rites and Ceremonies But it is commonly and as they think accutely said that they are the Authors of divisions and Schisms who will not do what they may to prevent them And therefore if Governours impose more then is necessary to salvation or Faith upon others they must answer for the divisions arising from this I may marvel who before late years I may say rather dayes ever understood the Scriptures in this manner but they will wonder perhaps again I should think they are no better interpreters and appliers of Scriptures than are to be found in times and societies of old Let that pass But so must not their mistake either of the power of the Church or the nature of Charity and common Justice The power of the Church being meerly ministerial and servile as to Christ and the Rule of all Christianity the Scripture but Magisterial in relation to inferiour members extendeth only to things of Christian Prudence and extrinsecal to Faith and the things uncommanded in Scripture properly For in other things it is determined without any power to vary from thence this done utterly destroyes all Right and Autority as to outward matters which they can never themselves approve of in the practise nor have done But this is not all for we say that those Governors are not the cause of Divisions and Schisms who do not suspend and withdraw all Injunctions extrinsecal to Faith or good life but they rather who do not receive and obey such as are not contrary to either This is the state of the controversie then between us supposing there is Order and Legitimate autority constituted amongst us whether this is more or so much bound for peace and unity sake to gratifie such as are in their rank subject in the Lord to them in all things possible according to the Scripture or these on the contrary are obliged to receive and observe all such decrees and constitutions which are indeed much accused and traduced but cannot be proved to be any wayes contrary to the word of God or any Analogy of Faith which is not devised by themselves And granting there were somewhat of Charity in reluxing of the rigour of Orders to be observed is there not much more of Charity to be expected from them in obeying How can they so vehemently urge that upon others which they are much more bound to keep and practise themselves but never reguard it Does not Charity much more bind them to obey their Superiours then their Superiours them Nay can they lay any claim to a thing upon the account of Charity who deny the same thing upon the account of Justice Justice and a debt of obedience flowing from subjection requires no less than Charity a compliance of the Wills of the Inferiour with that of the Superiour But only Charity can be pretended and that only pretended where there seems to be an indifference in the thing commanded For if they betake themselves to the inward temper and bent of particular consciences opposing or approving things they must needs come off Loosers by such trials For there will soon be found consciences on the contrary that will be as stiff and resolute for the defense as theirs are for the abrogations of such indifferent things No reason is possible to be given why one conscience may not think as well of them finding them not forbidden as another doth evil finding them not commanded For the too vulgar doctrine which teacheth That what is not commanded is forbidden in Scripture is as notorious a falsity as any thing can be pretended upon the Scripture But farther we absolutely declare against all such tryals of Publick Laws and Customes as Particular and especially private consciences as unjust and unreasonable and in trut intollerable in all Churches This is the Rule we maintain and hold to That nothing ought to be ordained or imposed which may justly offend the conscience and that is only evil If therefore the thing it self be acknowledged or may reasonably be proved to contain nothing sinfull which only may offend the conscience it is one of those evils which cannot be avoided and such of which Christ speaketh in the Gospel of St. Luk. 17. â—1 Luke It is impossible but that offences will come For either the dissenting or Assenting conscience must suffer and which should in such cases suffer who should determine but Autority Was ever that chosen for a Rule which is infinite in uncertainties So are mens consciences in particular But still they are Instant and say We grant such things may be left undone without prejudice to the Faith And to the same argument we return the same answer in effect as before viz And they grant they may be done without prejudice to the Faith But their Case is little less than ridiculous if it be truly considered what they lay down and what they crave at our hands For Peace sake say they we ought to yield what is not unlawful and all indifferent things As if they much more were not so bound to do But that we now add is That there being two Parties diversly constituted yet as 't is supposed differing only in things of a middle nature between Good and Evil. If the one Partie should come unto the other promising to have peace and be at unity with it on condition that it would yield all things that they
alledge in there excuse and Defence They are readie to return but they cannot be admitted but upon unreasonable Terms and conditions How does this appear if it should be denied as without all peradventure it will Must not the Defendents be here forced to take their grounds of Apologie and Justification from the very things themselves under debate and put in their exceptions against the terms upon which they are to be receiv'd or condemn themselves Neither will it suffice to say We shall be hardly used or beaten if we return to such severe Masters and therefore we will keep out For they may deserve it and though nature teacheth a man as it did Hagar to flee from her Mistris Sarahs Tents for fear of blows yet God and Justice and Christian Charity advise us to return to our Duty It must then be necessarily alledged and made good That we deserve not to be so ill used or rather that it is ill usage which we fore-see shall befall us and that the case so standing it is not our duty to return and all this can no waies possible be made good but by examination of the matter it self And that which will Justifie us from not returning will also warrant our free Separation at first T is the cause then that makes the Separation Schism or not An Instance whereof we have in the famous Schism of the Donatists which almost all Christians now adays confess to have been notorious Schismaticks because they could not make good their Reasons which induced them for could they they had not been Schismaticks as a sober Author notes upon Optatus thus If those things were true which Albaspinus Observat In Optat pag. 3. the Donatists laid to Caecilianus and Mensurius and Caecilianus had polluted themselves with Idolatry The Donatists had offended nothing against the Discipline and Canons of the Church refusing to communicate with Caecilianus and his Companions That is they had not been Schismaticks if so be they could have made good their Principal Charges against the Church And this we may bring home to our selves as now we stand devided from other Churches and particularly that of Rome For if the Corruptions in doctrine and Practice be not sufficient to justifie our present posture of opposition if they had not before we left them departed from the true faith if they were not really and materially Schismatiques before we were divided from them then surely we were at our separation and so continue For to say We have a willing mind to unity we have Charity so great that we earnestly desire Reconciliation with them is to deceive the world and our selves and encourage and justify Schism in others who no doubt will all pretend to so much charity as to declare themselves willing to embrace unity upon their own terms But in such cases we cannot be said to go to them though in outward apparence we may seem so to do as they come to us The question therefore is to be put under the circumstances as now they are and as the Case is now with them And in that it ought and may be roundly and resolutely answer'd We neither can nor ought nor will re-unite and yet well enough free our selves from Schism upon the account of the Justness of the occasions and Causes there found and given us to divide from them Then ought it to be enquired for this they passionately call for what are those errors which that Church is subject to for which a Separation may be Legitimated and not participate of the nature of Schism It is commonly and with general consent averted and that even by leaving Schismaticks amongst us That Corruption in Act or manners is not sufficient to warrant a Separation from a Church subject to them and so infected no not perhaps though Idolatry it self should be too common amongst them in it when no necessity lies upon the particular Members to be obnoxious to the same the doctrine of Christ bearing up its head above it and obeyed truly by others But when Evil actions and notorious errours in Fact shall come to that height as to be reduced to doctrine and formed into an heretical or Idolatrous proposition as in time it must of necessity be it being natural as well to all Churches as persons to defend by argument what they choose to practise and be taught publickly then doth that Church become truly Heretical and Idolatrous and from that Church which hath so far departed from the Faith any Church or person may lawfully depart without Scruple of Schism though such separation be not absolutely necessarie because though the infection be common it is not necessarily so general that all should be obliged to espouse it and be corrupted by it but when to this degree of doctrine shall be added a third which is of Precept and such unsound and pernicious opinions shall be imposed on others and exacted of all there it is not only lawful but necessary to salvation to divide from such a pretended Church of Christ I mean a necessity of Precept though not of Means as if it were not possible that a man should be saved who liveth in an Heretical or Idolatrous Church though with those many circumstances of a general Right Intention humble walking with God and invincible ignorance of the more pure and Christian Faith and worship For there is undoubtedly a Mean between these two Necessity to Salvation and Necessity of Damnation Well might Athanasius say Whosoever will be saved it is necessary that he hold the Catholick Faith and add yet farther Which Faith except a man do keep whole and undefiled without doubt he shall perish everlastingly and so give us the particulars of that Faith so necessary For he means no more than that such Errors are in themselves damnable But heresies do not work after the manner of such natural Causes which have such effects infallibly but may be said notwithstanding naturally to tend to such events which yet may be prevented by various Allayes of Circumstances both inward and outward impeding such Effects The Consideration of which possibility of escaping the ordinary danger can no ways excuse a man or confirm him in such errours but the common and as you may say natural tendence of them to ruine and perdition strongly oblige him to relinquish that Church wherein it is only possible by vertue of some extraordinarie indulgence of God to come to salvation and whose errours are of themselves damnable So if the Question be put as generally it is Whether for example a man may not be saved in the Roman Church The answer is abundantly sufficient within Religion and Divinitie though perhaps not so formal in Logick That they certainly may be damn'd and that for holding the Faith and worship there commanded and received with full approbation And this is sufficient to call any sober Christian off from that communion though there may occur so many mitigating Circumstances as to a Person of
may clear our selves thus First by putting a difference between the Church so united as is here supposed to rightly denominate it the Catholick or Universal Church and the Church disunited and divided long before any Reformation came to be so much as called for in these western Parts with attempts to put such desires into practice The division or Schism between the Western and Eastern Churches happened about the years 860 and 870 under Nicholas the first of Constantinople and Adrian the Second Bishop of Rome Where the guilt was is of another subject But the Schism rested not here but infested the Greek Church also subdividing the Armenian from the Constantinopolitan Now in such Case as this which is as much different from that of the Donatists who divided from all these entirely united together as may be who can conclude a Division from the Church so divided long before a Schism ipso facto because a Division was made from one Part of it calling itself indeed the Catholick Church Had therefore Reformers so divided from the Catholick Church united as did the Donatists it were more than probable that their division might from thence be known to be Schism without any more ado but it is certain it was quite otherwise And therefore some other Conviction must be expected besides that Characteristick And what must that be The Infallibility of any one Eminent Church which like a City on a Mountain a Beacon on a Hill a Pharus or Lighttower to such as are like to shipwrack their Faith may certainly direct them to a safe Station and Haven And all this to be the Church or See of Rome But alas though this were as desirable as admirable yet we have nothing to induce us to receive it for such but certain prudent inferences that such there is because such there ought to be for the ascertaining dubious minds in the truth and therefore so say they actually it is and lest humane reason should seem too malapert to teach what divine Autority ought to do therefore must the Scripture be canvas'd and brought against the best Presidents in Antiquity to the Contrary to Patronize such necessary Dogms The matter then returns to what we at first propounded viz. the Judging of Schism from the Causes and of the Causes from the Scriptures and the more Genuine and ancient Traditions of Christs Church before such Schism distracted the same These two things therefore we leave to be made Good by Romanists in which they are very defective First that there is any One Notorious infallible Judge actually constituted whereby we may certainly discern the Schismaticalness or Hereticalness of any one Church varying from the truth and this because It were to be wish'd a Judg were somewhere extant Secondly that what ever Security or Safety of Communion is to be found in the Visible Church properly and inseparably belongs to the Roman Church because some of the Ancients tell the time when it did not actually err But if our proofs be much more strong and apparent which declare that actually it doth err and wherein it doth err what an empty and bootless presumption must it needs be to invite to its communion upon her immunity from Erring or to condemn men of Schism for this only That they communicate not with it which is the bold method of Roman Champions THE Second BOOK OF THE FIRST PART CHAP. I. Of the Formal Object of Christian Faith Christ An Entrance to the treating of the Objects of Faith in Particular AND Thus far have we treated of Religion in General and specially of Christian Religion or Faith in its Rule the Scriptures Its Causes its Effects its Contraries its Subject the Church in its several Capacities Now we are briefly to treat of the Particular Object Christian Faith That as God is the true and proper Author of Christian Faith he is also the principal Object is most certain and apparent and is therefore by the Schools called the Formal Object that is either that which it immediately and most properly treats of or for whose sake other things spoken of besides God and Christ are there treated of For other Religions as well as Christian treat of God and the works of God but none treat of God or his works as consider'd in Christ his Son but the Christian For the two Greatest Acts which have any knowledge of of God being Creation and Redemption both these are described unto us in Holy Writ to be wrought by God through Christ Jesus as the Book of Proverbs and of Wisdom intimate to us when they shew how God in Wisdom made the Worlds Christ being the true Wisdom of the Father And more expresly in the entrance into the Gospel of St. John Joh. 1. 2 â— the Word of God being Christ is said to be in the beginning with God and All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made And St. Paul to the Ephesians affirmeth All things to be created by God Eph. 3. 9. Col. 1. 15 16. by Jesus Christ And to the Colossians speaking of Christ the Image of the Invisible God addeth For by him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in the Earth Visible and Invisible c. This therefore discriminates the treating of things natural in Christian Theologie from all other Sciences and Theologies that all is spoken of in relation to Christ Jesus Therefore having in the beginning of this Tract spoken of God in General as supposed rather than to be proved in Divinity viz. of his absolute Being his Unity being but one His Infiniteness being all things in Perfection and Power we are here to resume that matter and continue it by a more particular enquiry into the Nature Attributes Acts and Works of God here supposing what before we have spoken of the First notion of Gods Being and those immediately joined with them His Unity and Infiniteness which Infiniteness necessarily inferreth all other Attributes proper to him as of Power Prefence in all places and all times and Omniscience and therefore here we shall speak only of the Nature or Being of God in the more peculiar sense to Christians that is being distinct in Persons as well as One in Nature CHAP. II. Of the special consideration of God as the object of Christian Faith in the Vnity of the Divine Nature and Trinity of Person FROM the Unity or singularity of Gods nature as to number doth flow an Unity and Simplicity of that one Individual Nature in it self For as the Nature of God cannot be found in several and separate Persons subsisting by themselves as may the nature of man so neither ought we to imagin that there is multiplicity of natures constituting the same God For as there are not many Gods differing Generically as there are Bodies Celestial and Podies Terrestial and again of Terrestial some Bodies Elemental and uncompounded naturally Other Mixt and compounded and such are Fish Foul
effect such things as in their general nature they had no tendencie unto The distinction common amongst Philosophers of Fortuna and Casus i. e. Fortune and Casualty and calling that Fortune which contingently falls out to free Intelligent Agents acting and that Casualty which besides natural intention happens to fall out may seem to clear this For if we should affirm that in natural things there were no such indifferencie really but all things were precisely and particularly determined by God in his private counsel however a wide latitude seemeth to us to be left them to move and act or not to act or to move and act thus or not thus but contrariwise no great absurdity or inconvenience would follow For what absurdity could be inferred if a man should say That the Eagle letting fall a Tortoise upon the bald head of the Philosopher of Syracuse walking in the field and so beating out his brains was determined necessarily so to do of God or that the tree that fell down in a wind and killed him that walked out to preserve himself from the fall of his house which he feared was inevitably appointed so to do These effects did not proceed from the nature of these causes themselves but a Superiour hand and yet might be no less necessary than such effects of which the common reason of man can give an ordinary and easie account And if this be granted in some things it doth lye upon them who deny it in all to render a reason of the difference and not on them who affirm a paritie by infinite instances to prove it being sufficient to say There can nothing be shown to the contrary But in things rational and endowed with a power of Election and Rejection it must be confessed that the difficulty is much greater because there seems to be a repugnancie to free will in such tacit necessity and God should seem to take away with one hand what he had given with the other And therefore of this in a more convenient place after we have spoken somewhat preparatory thereunto concerning the Decrees of God which are internal acts of the Providence of God CHAP. IX The method of enquiring into the Nature and Attributes of God Vorstius his grounds of distinguishing the Attributes of God from his Nature examined Of the Decrees of God depending on his Vnderstanding and Will Of knowledge of Intelligence Vision and the supposed Middle knowledge The Impertinencie of this Middle knowledge invented in God How Free Agents can be known by God in their uncertain choice Indifferent Actions in respect of Man not so in respect of God All Vision in God supposes certainly in the thing known IF the Holy Scriptures leaving us many precedents have thereby warranted or at least permitted us to speak of God after the manner of Mans body ascribing unto him head eyes mouth hands and feet and the better to perceive the things of God much more may we be allowed if at all to search into Gods nature to regulate our enquiry of God from the nature of mans mind and the more supream acts of his soul The first Act of which is his apprehension and knowledge with judgment following thereupon The next in order is the Act of his will and this Order we may best follow in the enquiry into Gods Providence which is constituted according as we can judge of knowledge and will whose proper act it is to decree And here first It is requisite that we take notice of the folly and gross impiety of Vorstius a late Pragmatick in Divine Mysteries who would needs distinguish God from himself and taking him at his word wherein speaking after the manner of men such diversity is mentioned concludes that God and his Attributes are really distinct in nature one from another And why did he not by the same rule conclude that Gods very Being his Essence was distinct really from it self as well as from the supposed Accidents he Epicurean-like feigns to God For God is no less affirmed to have heart hands and feet than to have Understanding and Will And if it be granted there is a figurative and no proper sense in the one case why may it not be in the other And that God is all these things Eminently but not after the formality of mankind The matter will be cleared better by examining his prime arguments taken from the Decrees of God our present subject First sayes he The decrees of God are various and many but the Essence of God is but one therefore they must be really distinct To which the answer is as obvious as the argument presumptuous That if the Decrees were really many they must of necessity be really distinct as well from themselves as God But their plurality is rather Relative than Absolute All the Acts of God being but one pure simple Act as in him but denominated divers from the event or relation they bear to the Creature This is one of the first principles in his Christian Catechise and why did he pretending to reason leap over this and not first disprove it and then proceed to his arguments It was a great piece of folly therefore in him to prove a real distinction of Gods Attributes before he had proved that the Nature of God was compounded or would admit of any such opposition For they who deny this will certainly deny that Another of his reasons is The decrees of God are free because they might have not been as well as have been But Gods nature is not so Answ There is a twofold freedom in the Decrees of God The one in respect of the Nature of God as God is precisely considered which abstracting from all Acts was indifferent to others as well as those Decrees made And the other in respect of the Creature or object which was capable of other Decrees and therefore were Gods Decrees said to be free but we all know that distinction of Instants in Order and Nature do not infer a necessary distinction in duration but that both Nature and Decrees might be coequal in eternity Now all things that are eternal are in some case necessary And the Schools have such a distinction of Decrees as they have of nature viz. Decretum Decretans and Decretum Decretatum meaning that the Decrees of God are sometimes used for the Act of God decreeing and sometimes for the thing decreed And of this latter it may be said That the Decree of God is produced and made which is a third special argument of Vorstius but of the other it cannot so be affirmed but it may flow from him by an eternal Law or Volition within himself and not at all occasioned by the Creature And it is therefore said to be free because it was not imposed upon him and therefore necessary because not accessary to him or contingent but proceeding from him as a natural and necessary yet voluntary Agent For we must not look upon God as subject to the condition of the
possible reason being to be found why a thing should so infallibly be to him but because he hath resolved decreed that so it shall be From whence may be reconciled the frequent sayings of the Ancient and some Modern Divines who have said That God fore-sees a thing because it is to be and not that it is because God sees it For the seeing of a thing absolutely and the seeing it to be are vastly distinct notions And most true is that observation to be found as I remember amongst Philosophers concerning the difference between the Understanding of God and its Object and the Understanding of Man or Angel and its object For in the Intellectual Part for I use the word Understanding now and not for the Act as even now of the Creature Understanding is caused from and by the Object to the faculty represented and the Object makes the knowledge and not the knowledge the Object But on the contrary the Understanding of God is many times operative and makes its object A Second capital Doubt will be How such a perpetual and infallible Causation in the Creatour upon the very Understanding and Will of the Creature Rational can consist with the native Prerogative of Liberty of Will given by the same hand to it The Answer to this hath cost many a Volume with no great satisfaction and therefore how little may be expected from this Compendium every equal Judge will easily see I shall forbear Citations of other mens opinions and autorities for brevity sake And endeavour first by a description of Liberty of Will and next by a Distinction of Necessity which is commonly lookt on as the cut-throat of Liberty to contribute something to the easing this difficulty And first we are to distinguish of Free-will as in Mankind in General from that which may be found in any one Individual man For when the noted place of Ecclesiasticus which I will not quarrel at because it is only Ecclesiasticus tells us God made man from the beginning and Eccles 15. 14. left him in the hand of his Counsel What doth it more say Then that God dealt not so straitly with mankind as with other kinds of Creatures inferiour to him He left it undetermined in the nature of man to do this or that And humane nature had such a measure of Wisdom Understanding Reasâ—n and Counsel put into it of God that there was such a power of choosing and refusing as no other Creature could claim and there was not the like natural restraint upon Mans will as upon Beasts will considered still in the general Notion And surely this is no small difference whereof man may glory above beasts which is not wholly lost to man though in particular there should be found a determination of Mans will to one Secondly Liberty is made up of two things necessarily the Acts of Reason and the Acts of Will If any such determination were made of Mans actions in the Individual that Reason were lockt up and could not stir or move in man or when reason out of its native power remaining did argue and debate things variously there were no power left in the Will to follow the Dictates of it but was driven like an horse in a Cart by the fierce voice and whip of the stander-by then indeed all pretense to true Liberty must needs perish because here were a Co-action of the Agent moving him to one thing Co-action as hath been granted by the strictest defenders of Grace is against Liberty and they show by most numerous Autorities and sufficient Reasâ—ns that this is the only enemy to Freedom For as St. Austin hath it This a man is said to have in his Power which if he wills he may do Aug. de Spiritu Litera cap 31. If he wills not he may not do And Hugo de Victore doth yet more expresly define Liberty to be An Ability of the Rational Will whereby through the Co-operation of Grace it chooseth Good and it deserting it Evil. By which it should appear that there is no inconsistencie with the Co-operation of God though infallibly moving to one and the Election of the Will as will yet be more clear in the second thing here principally to be distinguished viz Necessity which I make either in Co-ordinate or Subordinate Causes and directly deny That Necessity in Causes subordinate one to another doth quite destroy Liberty or Free-will especially if we subdivide Necessity of things in subordination into subordination to the first Cause of all and of second Causes I grant that in Causes co-ordinate as Man and Beast or Man and Man acting upon distinct principles and ends Necessitation from the One quite ruins the Freedom of the other and is unnatural and violent being purely an external cause giving no power to the Will to move but exciting and impelling it against the judgment and more rational conclusion of the understanding to accept the terms given But Necessity proceeding from the First and Supream Cause God himself to whom all inferiour Causes are subordinate doth not take away the native Freedom of Man The Reason whereof is because the concurse of the First Cause is not extrinsecal to the Natural Agent but really intrinsecal to it and essential And therefore the division of Causes by Logicians into Internal as Matter and Form and External Efficient and end holds good only in secondary Efficients and not in the first and universal Agent For though it be most true that the Absolute nature and Being of God is quite distinct from created being and extrinsecal yet it is not so as he is a Cause The reason of this will make it undenyable because as is agreed by Christian Philosophers the act of Creation in God is essential to the Creature so produced and the act of Conservation is a perpetuation of that act creative in God and therefore also must needs be intrinsecal to the Creature and the act of Gods concurse moving the Creature and so determining it is no other but a branch of that conservative act in God and so is intrinsecal to the Creature that what the Creature doth by vertue of such influence it may no less be said to do of it self there being a Coalition of both acts created and increated in one than it may be said to subsist of it self by its matter and form of which it consists And this St. Pauls doctrine declares to us where he puts no difference between our living moving and having our being in God all alike depending on him Acts 17. 28. and be equally intrinsecal to all And therefore Gods action terminated in man becomes his as much as those which we conceive to proceed from his own being and notwithstanding to this act of God primarily may be ascribed the turning as it were of the Scales of the Will yet may man also be said herein to determine himself the reason whereof is That both the first Cause and the second are
Apostle speaks of the state of Evil or Condemnation in the next of the state of Restitution and Justification For as all persons were included in the Condemnation of Adam so were all included in the Justification of Christ But as of all them only some many were through his disobedience made Sinners that is became such sinners as not to return to actual Righteousness and Salvation so by the obedience of Christ not all who were called and chosen came to Life and Holiness but many only were made Righteous actually and not all Or if we take the word Sin as he of whom we speak doth not so much for the real inward vitiousness of the soul but for any outward defect and which is yet more for the Punishment of Sin in which sense the Sacrifice for sin was called Sin in the Old Law and Christ in the New Testament is said to be made Sin for us that is a Sacrifice for Sin so that to be made sinners should import as much as to be made lyable to the punishment of sin the matter is the same But because this Authour not only inclines to the Opinion of Pelagius and of Socinus after him making the corruption of nature nothing and therefore exempting Infants from any such natural infection as we here suppose but uses the same evasion of Imitation of Adams sin and not propagation as the original of all Evil to us therefore let us hear what St. Austins argument was against that Opinion If saies he the Apostle spake Aug. Epist 87. of Sin by imitation and not propagation entring into the world he could not have said that by one Man Sin entred into the world but rather by the Devil for he sinned before man and as the Wiseman saith Through envie Wisd 2. 24. of the Devil came death into the world And Christ tells us how aptly the Devil may be said to propagate sin by imitation as well as Adam thus reprehending the Jews Ye are of your Father the Devil and the Lusts of John 8. 44. your Father ye will do he was a murderer from the beginning and abode not in the truth because there is no truth in him when he speaketh a lye he speaketh it of his own for he is a lyar and the Father of it And when St. Paul saith We were by nature the children of wrath as well Ephes 2. 3. Psalm 51. 5. as others And the Psalmist Behold I was shapen in iniquity and in Sin did my mother conceive me that these places must be accounted hyperbolical and not to have a proper sense is the special evasion of Modern Wits not comparable to Ancienter Judgments more simply understanding them I know a more colourable interpretation is made by others who interpret Conceiving in sin as relating to the Parents and not to the Children But this is less probable than the ordinary and obvious sense applying it to David For though it may be probable enough that Parents may offend in acts of Procreation and so the child may be said to be conceived by them in sin yet David being at the speaking of these words in deepest repentance for his own sins cannot be said to leave off that subject and to confess the sins of others and charge his parents with that which concerned him not Again when he says He was shapen in iniquity nothing could he say more intimately to signifie his proper state at the time of his first conception But the Scriptures do not only barely say we are originally thus infected and sinful but by the effects and certain other indications declare the same The first and chiefest of which may be Death and punishments sticking close to infants at their birth and even before they come into the world Now the Law of God being unalterable that punishment should follow and not go before sin it must be that somewhat of the nature of sin must prepare the way for such sufferings Secondly That all men come to years of discretion are effected with Actual sin few of the opposers of Original sin deny But according to Reason and Scripture both the fountain being so infected and corrupted whatever flows from it must of necessity partake of the same evil For Job 14. 4. Jam. 3 11 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Anâ—ae Gazaei Thâ—â—â—hrastus Biblioth P P. pag. 392. To. 8. Non eniâ— es ex â—â—lis qui modo nova quaedam gannire câ—perunt dicentes nullum reatum esse ex Adam tractum qui per baptisâ—um in infante sâ—lvatur Aug. Epist 28. Hieronymo Ad neminem ante bona mens â—enit quam mala Omnes prâ—â—ccupati sumus Sen. Ep. 50. Nemo difficulter ad naturam reducitur nisi qui ab â—a defecit ibid. who saith Job can bring a clean thing out of an unclean not one And St. James Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter Can a fig-tree my brethren bear olive-berries either a vine figs so can no fountain yield both salt water and fresh From whence it follows by way of just Analogy That the Fountain being corrupt there must be derived to the Rivolets the like unsoundness And thirdly we see this by experience that both bodily and mental infirmities and disorders are traduced from Father to Son in actual Evils as the Gout Stone and Leprosie are transinitted to posterity from the Father and Anger and other passions in like manner It may as well be said That the Son hath the Gout and halts by imitation and not by propagation as that such other affections which are common to Father and Son so proceed Fourthly The Argument which St. Augustine could never by the Pelagians be answered taken from Baptism For this they could not deny but the Church universally practised Paeda-baptism that is held an opinion manifested in practise that Children were capable of that Sacrament and received the benefit of it however some particular persons deferred the same and held it of use unto them for the entring into the Kingdom of Heaven Therefore surely there must be some impediment and that impediment could be nothing but what hath the nature of sin in it therefore they bring sin with them into the World Pelagius had a good mind indeed as Austin observed to have denyed the use of Baptism but as bold as he and his great second Julian of Capua was the general Judgment of the Church declared in the practise of it put a stop to his inclinations but Socinus bolder than any Heretick before him sticks at no such thing but flatly denyes the use of it to all but such as are converted newly to the Christian Faith as in the times of the Apostles This was freely and roundly invented and uttered and which suffices alone to convince us of the former errour denying Original Sin which was alwayes held a principal cause of Baptism Lastly Thus much may be observed by natural Reason to the confirmation of Original Sin
of the World And elsewhere to this effect CHAP. XVII How Christ was Mediatour according to both Natures Calvin's Opinion and others stated Of the effect of Christs Mediation and the extent thereof Of the Designation and Application of Christs death Of the Sufficiencie and Efficacie of Christs death How Christs death becomes effectual to all The Necessity of Gods Grace to incline the will of man to embrace Christ Of the Efficacie as well as Sufficiencie of Gods Grace on the Will of Man Several Gradations observed in the Grace of God BUT from the Evidence of the evidence of the Fact that so it was that Christ suffered to satisfie for our sins let us pass to the Manner how it was and the Effects and Extent for whom he so suffered and satisfied because no small stir and contention hath been touching both but briefly For there seems not to me to be such great cause as is apprehended for such differences For first surely Christs mediation was an Act of his Person and not of his Natures either of them separately considered So that there seems the same reason for this as for all other Acts and Attributes given to him some whereof are naturally proper to the Divine Nature and some to the Humane and yet both these predicable of Christ personally considered by that received rule amongst Divines which maintaineth a communication of Idioms or the ascribing the property of one nature to the entire Person and so denominatively to the other In which sense Christ is said to dye to suffer to hunger to thirst to be weary and Christ is said to be Omniscient Omnipotent Omnipresent yet not according to both Natures but as they are united into one Person So that all Acts and Offices of Christ as Mediatour have a twofold consideration Formal and Real or Vertual and Interpretative as they speak Some Acts are so formally Divine in him that they pertain to the Humane Nature only Vertually and some Acts are so formally and properly Humane that they pertain to the Divine Nature only by way of imputation or interpretation and not immediately or properly So that the Word Incarnate Christ is the immediate cause of his Mediation and our Reconciliation but all the Acts in particular tending tending to Christs mediation as his preaching and travelling and Passion did not proceed equally or alike from both Natures For two things are to be distinguished in the Actions or Passion of Christ mediating for mankind The Act it self and the value and vertue of that Action in order to the reconciling of man to God That the Acts conducing hereunto are only proper to the Humane Nature is true according to Stancarus his opinion See Melancthon Epist ad Mathesium though called Heretick for the same and opposed by Calvine and many of his Equals who held that Christ was Mediatour according to his Divine and Humane Nature And that Calvine and his Company must needs erre is proved because they reject Lombard and those that follow him who are the Romanists Lombards Opinion was That Christ was Mediatour as the Word Incarnate but not according to both Natures For they distinguish Principium Quod and Principium Quo That Principle or Cause of mediation from that Whereby he mediated The first they confess to be the Person of Christ consisting of Divine and Humane Nature The second they make the Humane Nature alone And that Calvine and the rest meant any more it is past the power of their Adversaries to make good however according to their wont they strain all they can and more than honestly they can to make their Opinions foul and odious For in substance they speak the same thing with Lombard though not altogether after the same manner but the Deformer suspected him as justly for restraining Christs mediation and the value thereof to his Humanity as the Romanists do them for comprehending the Divinity in it And rightly do they distinguish between the Thing and the Efficacie of the thing and that according to Lombard himself whom they dislike because he restrained to their apprehension the whole business of mediation to the Humane Nature whereas though the Divine Nature did not formally act or suffer to that end yet it was by vertue of the Hypostatical Union with the Divine Nature that the Humane Nature was in a capacity to mediate and merit for man as St. Austin hath taught us in these words It was requisite that the Mediatour between Mediator autem inter Deum homines oportebat ut haberet Aug. Confes 10. c. 42. Nec tamen ob hoc Mediator est quia Verbum maxime quippe immortate Id. Civitat Dei lib. 9. cap. 15. 1 Tim 2. God and Man should have somewhat like unto God and somewhat like unto Men lest being like God in all things he should be too far from men or being like unto Man in all things he should be too far from God And yet indeed in another place he doth determine the mediation more properly to the Humanity of Christ than to the Word thus speaking Yet he is not for this a Mediatour because he is the Word and that especially because he is immortal and the most blessed Word is far from miserable Mortals But he is Mediatour in that he is Man showing thereby that we ought not to seek any other Mediatours to that not only blessed but beatifical Good by whom we should have access c. And to this agrees that of St. Paul to Timothy There is one God and one Mediatour between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus And this is the chiefest place founding this Opinion yet not simply seeing it is an easie matter by a distinction to avoid the same if one would be contentious but if Charity nay if Justice were done to each side the ground of contention might fairly be removed in this But with much more difficulty do we meet in the effect and extent of the mediation of Christ by his Death and Passion viz. Whether it concerns all Mankind in general or Whether all those who are called to the knowledge faith and profession of Christ and Christian Religion or lastly Whether it was properly and specially so designed and intended for such as were to be infallibly saved that others were capable of no benefit of the same but rather were determined to hardness and impenitencie and persistance in unbelief Concerning the last and harshest part of this doubt we have heretofore answered that though the Holy Scriptures which cannot be denyed do ascribe Exod. 4 21. 14. 17. Rom. 9. 18. Isa 6. 10. Deut. 2. 30. Isa 63. 17. unto God in positive tearms hardening of some yet the meaning can be no more than that from certain persons he so withdraws his mollifying and maturing Grace to Repentance and Faith that an effect of Obduration doth thereupon in such manner follow as if God himself were the proper and direct Author of it For all egregious things are according
made of being raised again and of a Resurrection which as is said must relate to the Body fallen And in the same Book He that offered Chap. 12. 43. for the dead is commended in that he was mindful of the Resurrection But none convince us more of a Catholick opinion amongst the Jews received doubtless as a Tradition from their Fathers and supposed to their more express prescriptions in Gods worship then that of Martha to Christ I know that he shall rise again in the Resurrection at the last day And now-a-dayes John 11. 24. the Jews are so well settled in the Doctrine of the Resurrection that they envie the faith of it to any but themselves saying as Buxtorf hath it Buxt Synag cap. 3. There are four things which the Isralites have from God in especial manner above other Nations The Land of Canaaenan The Law Prophesie and The Resurrection of the Dead But in my judgment St. Paul puts it out of all question that the Jews believed of old a Resurrection and that of the Body of which we now speak For thus in the Acts of the Apostles he Acts 24. 15. speaks And have hope towards God which they themselves also allow that there shall be a Resurrection of the dead both of the just and unjust And this Doctrine seemed so essential to St. Paul that without it all Christian Faith were lost as appears out of that most sublime and eloquent Chapter concerning it to the Corinthians where first he layes down his 1 Cor. 15. ground of Christian Faith Christs Death and Resurrection as that upon which all other Articles are founded and without which all preaching and v. 2. all Faith would be in vain And from hence he infers at least a possibility that our bodies being of flesh and bloud of the same nature shall also rise again And that Christs Resurrection was but as the first fruits to the harvest 20. or vintage which in order must necessarily follow And having asserted and confirmed the truth he answers the objections which may seem to disprove it which method we here choose briefly to imitate and follow 35 c. Tertul. Adver Marc. l. 5. c. 9. And first we argue from the term Resurrection which must needs imply somewhat fallen or dossolved as is said as Tertullian against Marcion doth affirm Secondly From the Example of Christ the exemplary cause of our Resurrection For according to St. Pauls disputation at large there is the v. 12 13. same reason for the Resurrection of us as of Christ But Christs body was raised up in that individual substance that was laid in the Grave and therefore must ours likewise And this is it which is affirmed and promised by the Apostle to the Thessalonians For if we believe that Jesus dyed 1 Thess 4. 14. and rose again even us also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him And no doubt can be made but Christ had flesh and bloud after his Resurrection the signs and marks show'd to that purpose convincing not only incredulous Thomas but all of like difficulty of Faith Luke 24. 19. John 20. 27. Thirdly It appeareth from the comparison made by St. Paul to the Corinthians As in Adam all dye even so in Christ shall all be made alive But 1 Cor. 15. 22 23. every one in his own order c. But in Adam all men died corporally therefore in Christ shall all be raised corporally or in their own bodies as Tertullian Tertull. ubi supra Fourthly If immortality be promised to this body then must this body arise and not another But to this mortal body is promised immortality therefore it must rise because there is no imaginable way to have that verified but by a Resurrection And St. Paul saith This corruptible must put on ib. v. 53. incorruption and this mortal must put on immortality And what can we suppose the Apostle aimed at in those words but his own flesh and others And how shall they that are in the Graves hear Christs voice as he saith in St. John unless they be raised by him John 5. 28. Sixthly An argument may be drawn from the truth and justice of God copiously prosecuted by the ancient Fathers and their Followers grounding themselves upon the word of God which saith We must all appear before the Judgment Seat of Christ that every man may receive the things done in his 2 Cor. 5. 10. body according to that he hath done whether it be good or evil But without Iniquuâ— enim Deus si non per id punitur quis aut juvatur per quod operatus est Id. Tert. cap. 12. the Resurrection of the body this distribution of Justice cannot be made And so what will become of those new and bold Philosophers and their Dogmes unchristian who liberally grant and this is more than we have reason to expect from them that there shall be a special time of Restitution of all things and so the soul shall enter again into a body but not that individual substance which before was united to it but yet one making the same individual Person which was before And how so Why the Form according to Aristotle is all and all as to the constituting the same thing and therefore it alone can denominate a man the same though the matter be various But how then can it be said with any truth that every man shall give an account for what he hath done in such a body when according to this sacrilegious phansie it is not the same but another body Lastly Such as was the Resurrection of men miraculously wrought in the Old and New Testament is to be the Resurrection in substance the last day But the child raised by Elisah and that other by Elisha And the 1 Kings 17. 23 2 Kings 4. 34. cap. 13. 21. Matth. 27. 52. man rising to life who was cast upon the bones of Elisha and all those raised by Christ in his life time and at his death When the dead bodies of the Saints arose out of their graves arose all in their bodies in which they dyed Therefore surely such is our Resurrection to be Now because there remain some sore objections to be cleared before Faith can have its perfect work on Christian minds I shall not expatiate contrary to my general purpose to answer all but only that which is all and that out of St. Chrysostomes words thus rendered But there are some Christ in 1 Thess Sern 7. Eth. saith he that disbelieve this thing because they are ignorant of God For pray tell me which is the easier of the two to bring a thing out of nothing or to restore again things that have been dissolved But what say they They say such a man hath suffered shipwrack and is drown'd and so fallen many fishes have devour'd him and every one hath eat some part of those fishes Afterward of those very
say Amen at thy giving of thanks seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest These words are plain enough one would think to declare that the Apostle intended publick prayer as well as preaching or prophesying Therefore no arts are omitted to obscure and pervert his meaning but with such ill success that it is thereby much more illustrated and confirmed to the loss of such corrupters of Scripture to make it agree with their doctrine and practise For Bellarmine confesses 't is very hard to make it good that the Aposte means Bellarm. de Verbo D. lib. 2. cap. 16. only preaching and so in truth it must needs be but that there is nothing to necessity and a willing mind And therefore to mend the matter he says The Apostle there treateth not of Divine Offices but of Spiritual Songs which Christians were wont to compose to praise God and give him thanks And what if this were so For that they had any formed Liturgies in those early unsetled dayes of the Church while the gifts of the Spirit were so ordinary I much question excepting the Lords Prayer which was ever in publick use as well as private if it be not undoubtedly true what is affirmed by no mean Authors That St. Peter celebrated the Mass taking here Mass in the ancient and innocent signification with the Lords prayer only Doth not the argument of the Apostles hold altogether as valid in the ordinary as extraordinary Praises and Service But when the same Authour can bring scarce any ancienter than himself who are of his opinion and doth bring Haymo Primasius Lombard Thomas and others that he means the Ordinary service what worth can there be in such an evasion Hence it is that another is invented in the same Authour which acknowledges that there is meant Common worship But that the whole Congregation is not thereby to understand but only the Clerk of the Parish who is instead of the unlearned or Idiot to say Amen For Papists make no doubt but such an one there was who should in such manner answer for the rest of the people But I make no doubt but they are miserably mistaken For no records among the Jews from whom most customs of the ancientest Christians descended report any such thing No custom of the primitive Christians warrant this but the contrary whatever Ledesima the Jesuit saith For as shall by and by shewed the people in general without any such discrimination of persons made their solemn returns unto their Bishop or Priest who so celebrated in publick And therefore Bellarmine honestly and learnedly rejecteth this interpretation showing that the phrase of the Apostle which we render Supplyeth the place of the unlearned comprehendeth no less all the vulgar then the pretended Clerk And reason good he should so think because questionless by Unlearned is not there meant general ignorance of men but ignorance of that language which was spoken so extraordinarily For as Salmeron noteth upon the place of St. Paul by Place is meant the order of setting in such Assemblies where the Teachers had one place and the Hearers who for that were called Unlearned had another Hence it is that Salmeron would make clearer work affirming Salmer Com. in 1 Cor. 14. Disp 30. That it is not the end of Divine Service that the people should be instructed but the worshipping of God This Bellarmine approveth but betrays his cause in another point granting that of old prayers publick were for the instruction of the people but now is not this to own a forsaking of antitiquity the chief use of prayers is not the edification or consolation of the people but the worship of God And the Reason which Bellarmine gives is exactly the same which Sectaries amongst us give to silence the people in publick Devotion because The Minister speaketh not to man but unto God To both which we answer briefly and against both viz. The Priest speaketh unto God only in prayer as the proper object and to the people only in preaching as the proper object of that But he also in prayer speaks to the people instrumentally i. e. as to so many instruments or causes concurring to the same end and effect and therefore ought to understand what is petitioned for and obliged to concur with the principal Agent the Minister of God in such worship For though we are far from denying what the Papists and Puritans may say That any prayer is unfruitful or unnecessary which is not understood by the people in whose behalf it is put up for it may avail them who are many miles distant we all grant and consequently a prayer not heard may be useful as well not understood when heard Yet this holds only when inconveniencies or impossibilities obstruct the due exercise of prayer For as to such who are deaf and cannot hear yet come with general reverence to the publick place and so far as they can joyn with the prayers of the Church I make no question but considerable benefit to accrew so such as shall ignorantly scornfully or uncharitably neglect to give their general consent and suffrage to the publick communion in prayer I make no doubt but they bereave themselves of the benefit both of the publick service and their own private worship But this cometh not home to the purpose For of extraordinary acts in Religion as of particular things in Philosophy there is no knowledge and nothing can be determined but this may That generally and ordinarily publick prayers are more prevalent with God when understood and concurred to by publick devotion And herein doth consist the vulgar errour of the Romish Doctours that they suppose St. Paul should mean which I confess as I have said before our Translation too much favours that when he saith The understanding is unfruitful the understanding of the speaker in an unknown tongue whenas the context will certainly inform us he meant the understanding of the hearer who knew nothing of what was so delivered which some of their own Expositors agree to as also they do to the great expediencie as well as antiquity of that custom of the peoples bearing a share in the publick Worship To demonstrate which I shall here at large transcribe what I find in sober and learned Cassander It were to be wisht that according to the precept of the Cassand Defens Lib. De Officio Pii Viri p. 865. Op. Apostle and the ancient Rite of the Church that some consideration were had of the people in the publick prayers of the Church singings and lessons which are undertaken for the peoples sake and that the common sort of Believers should not wholly and constantly be driven from all communion of prayers and divine lessons St. Pauls words are manifest that what is said cannot be understood unless you express it by a tongue signifying your speech and that he who through ignorance understandeth not what is said can by no means answer Amen at the giving of thanks of another
and for ought doth appear accepted well the said Commemorations of his signal mercies and deliverances at the Jews hands until the coming of Christ when the case was wholly altered as that Service but not so as to all future For an invincible argument it is to the contrary that one day of the week is still continued to serve God in a peculiar manner notwithstanding after the strong attempts made especially of late and never before later days either by Eastern or Western Christians or by Reformed or Unreformed to make the Lords day a Sabbath and obliging Christians by vertue of the fourth Commandment in the Decalogue nothing to that end is effected Indeed if men will tenture and extend Gods word to that extream as thereby to draw every thing out of any thing they may reduce all moral duties unto the Ten Commandments according to the custom of expounding them viz. That where the Effect is commanded or forbidden there the Cause likewise and where the Outward act the Inward and where the Genus there the Species and where the Thing there the Circumstances and where one kind there all of like kinds are forbidden or commanded then were there some colour for what they say of all moral duties to be found in the Decalogue and sins interdicted But there is no more ground for the expounding of this so than any other part of Scriptures And if there were this would make Eight of the Ten Commandments superfluous all sins and all duties being reducible at this rate to those two our Saviour in the Gospel refers to viz. Love of God and Love of our Neighbours And surely most essential to all actions are the circumstances of time and place and nothing can be done by Man in Religion or out of it without them therefore it should seem superfluous expresly to enjoyn a time to serve God in and distinctly from the act which unavoidably implyes it And if it be said that not so much a time simply as a time precisely so determined viz. to a Seventh Day and that in such and such manner to be observed is instituted of God then do fall to the ground the supposed naturalness and morality of the time there commanded and that by natural light or law no more is commanded then time or at most a day but not a Seventh Day Now if we are being Christians under the Law no farther than in these two respects First as some of it is repeated and enforced by the Law of the Gospel given us by Christ Secondly as it is consonant to the Law of Reason or Nature And that a seventh part of our time should be dedicated constantly to God is no where so positively delivered in the New Testament as it was in the Old nor doth the light of Nations or Nature suggest any such determinate time for that only and not of time in general is all the question How can a Seventh Day be commanded of God It is not to be denyed but some of the ancient heathen Philosophers and Poets did talk of somewhat of sacredness in the Seventh Day But first whence had they such opinions from the thing it self No surely it was a superstitious and blind admiration of the number Seven of which we find so much in their writings and especially the consideration of the Seven Planets in the Heavens which made them think better of the Seventh Day or cause the week to consist of so many days and no more But what real opinion they had of that above other days doth appear in their practise Philo In Decalog pag. 585. Id. De Opificio Mundi pag. 15 16. 21. Genevae which no monuments declare to have been in more sacred or solemn esteem than any other And the reputed sacredness of the number seven is that which Philo Judaeus playeth upon so handsomly in his commendation of the Jewish seventh day as may be seen in his works And Chrysostome from thence takes a better argument to prove that a Seventh day is not moral from whence several have endeavoured to prove that it is and that in a more sacred manner than any other of the Commandments For to perswade to a precise observation of it these say that God hath set a Memento a Remember upon it such as upon no other Commandment Therefore there should be somewhat extraordinary in it And so there is indeed For saith Chrysostome whereas all other Commandments are very agreeable to the Reason of man and are in some degree known to him by natural light and so need not the like intimation and advice this of a Seventh Day to be kept holy to God cannot be discerned by Natures light at all and therefore needeth such a Memento and Remembrancer as this to bring that to his mind which is so apt to slip out 'T is granted moderner Jews in despight of Christ and Christians have asserted a naturalness and immutability of this Command and an extent of it to all Nations but this concludes not Christians knowing from whence such Antichristian Dogmes proceed Now here lyes the labour to infer a Seventh Day from the Law obliging Christians I say from the letter of the Law and not from the reasonableness of the thing it self to which they flee who find their other proofs too weak and here I will not contend much with them But all their Old Testament testimonies being more easily evaded and nulled then they are alledged by this one answer That they speak only of Jewish Sabbaths and so have no force at all upon us or the same in all respects that they have upon the Jews they must be constrained to repair only to Gospel for the Confirmation of any day separate from civil affairs and dedicate to God And here they are altogether to seek for any one direct or positive Precept not one in all the New Testament can be found for any either Seventh or First Day of the week Whereupon they are compelled to betake themselves to the uncertain way of arguing from Example to a Rule viz. That because they read several instances in the New Testament of things done on the first Day of the week in reference to Religion and the Service of God therefore that day ought specially and religiously to be observed they will perhaps say That the infinite blessing of our Redemption by Christ and his Resurrection is the ground of our observation as the Creation was of theirs This I grant to be a just and sufficient cause but it doth not from thence follow that therefore actually it was so constituted upon that ground We now are in quest of the Constitution it self and not of the Reason why it should be so ordained For many things that seem to us very reasonable are not certainly actually ordained And many things for which in the New Testament we may find presidents of the Apostles or Apostolical persons do not necessarily infer a Rule or Precept But in the New Testament there
being two general motives to all duties Love and Ingenuity and fear of evil and necessity it is not so prudent nor so powerful to hang all upon one as on both 'T is true God hath put power into the hands of Parents and Princes and Governours to constrain and exact the duty of Obedience from their respective Subjects but he hath put a natural principle of Love into their hearts also inclining them to goodness towards them which notwithstanding is neither so general nor effectual but many fail egregiously in it wherefore God by his holy Word advertiseth and exhorteth to the exercise of it and as it were the better to dispose and bow those in subjection to them to perform their duty with cheerfulness And therefore St. Paul after the duty of Obedience imposed upon Children layeth a duty upon Parents on their Children saying And ye Fathers provoke not your Children but bring them up in the admonition Ephes 6. 4. of the Lord That is Exercise not imperiously and impertinently that power God hath given you over your Children rather be known ye can do it and so when it is discerned that it is rather the Lust of a tyrannous nature than of natural care love or kindness which urges them to rule with vain rigour the Children be provoked to break their bonds and pass the bounds which otherwise might have been observed to the glory of God and comfort of both Yet doth not the Apostle justifie such excess in children more than the extream of Parents but only foretels the evil event of such unchristian rigour And the like may be said of Servants and Masters mentioned next by the Apostle who having prescribed an Evangelical principle of demeanor Ephes 6. of Servants towards their Masters doth subjoyn the like Precept to Masters And ye Masters do the same things unto them forbearing threatning knowing that your Master also is in Heaven neither is there respect of persons with him Intimating the ground of hearty ingenuous and faithful service of Children and Servants to proceed commonly from the Fountain of love and kindness in the Parents and Masters and therefore if they would be well served they should first serve God themselves in educating them according to Gods gentle Law and be careful to instruct them in the fear of God And so where the Apostle stateth the mutual obligation between Eph. 5 21 25. Man and Wife he tempereth his counsel with reciprocal kindnesses that as the Wife is to submit her self to her own Husband the Husband is to love his Wife and that by vertue of this Commandment which can never be well kept according to Gods mind where there is a faileur on either hand though St. Peter tells us like a true Evangelical Preacher that with good Christians and true Believers it is no exemption from duty and proper subjection that our Superiours transgress the laws of modesty sobriety and moderation towards us But Servants and by the same rule Subjects and Children ought to be subject with all fear not only to the good and gentle but also to the froward and that for reasons immediately following And the 1 Pet. 2. 18 19 20. Titus 2. 9. same requireth St. Paul to Titus But here it is queried by some Why St. Paul having taken occasion to adjust the duties between Masters and Servants Parents and Children Husbands and Wives omitteth wholly to restrain and regulate the power of Princes towards their Subjects leaves no Rules for them as if they might offend or offending might not be informed of their duty by Christian Doctrine To this we say First what some have well observed and affirmed before us The reason hereof is because in St. Pauls dayes there were no Soveraign Powers of the Christian Religion and therefore it might have seemed unseasonable and vain to offer counsel and rules to them who were not capable of them For had there been such Princes no doubt is to be made but he would have seasoned them and sanctified them with his wholsome documents And yet Secondly He doth not absolutely dismiss them without advice who may be well reduced to the Head of Parents of Countries and Masters of their Subjects And thus much for the principle of honouring our Superiours from the benefit of their duties towards us Now the Principles of Obedience more immediately obliging us unto them are in brief The Fear and Honour of God whose Image Representatives and Instruments they are for our Good No man after so many Reasons and Precepts given us in holy Luke 10. 16. Scripture of faithful and conscionable submission to our Superiours can be said to fear God who doth not honour his Superiours For of all Civil Parents or Governours St. Paul saith They are the Ministers of God to thee Rom. 13. 4. Eccles 7. 27 28. for good And of our Natural Parents well admonisheth the Wise-man Honour thy Father with thy whole heart and forget not the sorrows of thy Mother Remember that thou wast begot of them and how canst thou recompence them the things they have done for thee And of our Ecclesiastical Parents Hebr. 13. 17. 1 Thess 5. 12 13. to the Hebrews Now the Act Honour doth imply all inward affection and proper humility of mind and all outward demonstrations of the same by sober modest humble respect and reverence unto them As also service assistance obedience attendance relief in straits feeding clothing and comforting them in their wants weaknesses and distresses and finally contributing all we are able to their well being who next under God were the Causes of our Beings in the world But of the manner or extent of our Obedience especialâ—y to our Civil Parents and of the contrary evil Resistance we have spoken before The last motive to this duty is expressed in the Reason annexed to this Commandment viz. That thy dayes may be long in the Land which the Lord thy God shall give thee Intimating a signal blessing of God upon them that so reverence his Deputies whether Natural Civil or Ghostly and a malediction Ephes 6. 2. unto such as deny the same upon false wicked fleshly or vain pretences See Part 1. Book 1. ch 26 But of the vertue and duty of Obedience we have spoken before The Sixth Commandment followeth Thou shalt do no murder as it is well §. VI. rendred in our English Translation For Murder is that which imports the killing of Man only and so doth the Hebrew word here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in opposition as it were to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 common to all killing whether of Man or Beast Which though it might not be an argument to the Superstitious Heathens of the Pythagorean or rather Indian strain the Gymnosophists from whom Pythagoras borrowed his opinion denying it lawful to take away the life of any thing in so much as Aristotle tells us that Empedocles the ancient Aristotel Rhetor. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plin.
to do another a mischief must he necessarily speak conformably or do conformably and make good his bad intentions If a man intends to do one a kindness and give him an estate may he not carry himself towards him and all others as if he never intended any such thing But it may be he would restrain this to positive Speeches and Acts which he would have alwayes conformable to inward conceptions And so they are when a man intends to deceive and doth deceive But that the general appearances must conform to the reality of the Intention his own concessions above-noted will not admit It is true therefore only when it is justly required And this suffices to cut the throat of all as they are now called deservedly Jesuitical Aequivocations and Mental Reservations and External dissimulations viz. because none of their real or pretended Superiours can give them any power not to answer according to the serious intention and expectation of legal Enquirers and legal Enquirers they are who have legal Authority in that Nation Again unless their Superiours can give them power of Life and Death as it is an opinion amongst them they may especially the Pope over free Princes and their Subjects they can give them no power to deceive by positive acts or words lawful Powers contrary to the common and received sense and meaning of Enquiries and Answers Thirdly neither of a mans self nor by any Civil Authority how great or good soever nor upon any Case how important soever can a man lawfully use the Name of God in attestation of what is false or confirmation of what his Conscience and Judgment assures him is otherwise than he declares it to be Neither can any man give instance that God ever permitted it or any good or holy man in Scripture presumed to do so And therefore oequivocation in any oaths whether lawfully or unlawfully administred is directly unlawful and to be detested of all men as it is of God The Vertue then which this Commandment requires in opposition to bearing false witness is first a love and veneration of Truth as the sacred daughter of God himself and that in all things and at all times not excepted but more especially Authority and publick Justice requiring it The Inducements hereunto abbreviated Perkins hath collected thus to my hands in the forementioned place 1. Gods command James 3. 14. 2. Lying is a conformity to the Devil 3. We are sanctified by the word of truth John 17. 17. 4. Truth is a Fruit of Gods Spirit Galat. 5. A mark of Gods children Psalm 32. 2. and 15. 2. 5. Destruction is the reward of a Lyar Psal 5. 6. And thus far of the Ninth Commandment The Tenth is Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house Thou shalt not covet § X. thy neighbours wife nor his servant nor his maid nor his Ox nor his Ass nor any thing that is his Which the modern Roman Church having carefully turned the second out of doors as a quarrelsome and troublesome companion are necessitated to divide into two to make up the compleat number of Ten For which fact they have no ground but St. Austin and them who precisely followed him But none of these or any ancient proceeded on their grounds viz. because the Second Commandment gave offence Now seeing many more in number and antiquity have otherwise than Austin considered this Commandment as one entirely The Reasons why they so judge of it are worth enquiring For some eminently learned among them especially in the Scriptures have declared expresly against it as Oleaster and Mercerus Petrus Galatinus inclining that way as Buxtorf hath observed Buxtorf de Decal num 74. 59. And as a little before he hath noted the Jewish Doctours who are to sway much in this Case unless the Papists please to distinguish the Decalogue as they have audaciously the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Testament into Jewish and Christian or Ecclesiastical have unanimously conspired to make this but one Commandment Aben Ezra and Abarbenel mentions indeed such an opinion as the Roman Church maintains but rejects the same as a very fond and vain conceit And the like may be said Estius in Sentent l. 3. Dist 40. §. 3. of Estius his answers and evasions of the reasons on our side which are First That the object of the sin here forbidden is not to distinguish the Command so much as the Act Concupiscence of the mind or heart united in one because then we should have more than two One prohibiting lusting after another mans wife another lusting after his Servants another lusting or coveting his cattle and a fourth his possessions and moveables But St. Paul speaking of this Concupiscence maketh it but one where he Rom. 7. saith I had not known lust except the Law had said Thou shalt not covet The other Precepts therefore having provided against the Acts outward of sin This in the Conclusion goeth as it were over all of them again and interdicteth all inward motions towards any of the sins before forbidden To say therefore with Estius St. Paul saith Thou shalt not lust is as much as if a man should say Thou shalt love which doth not make all the Commandments but one is very idle seeing the word Lust is there taken in an evil sense and may reasonably extend to all the Negative precepts at least as Love doth concern them all and is the sum of the Decalogue But we find no such particular Precept as Love indefinitely taken And besides we are not so much to enquire after matter of Right what might be or ought to be but of fact what is And to collect what is done we are not so much to consult the holy Writ of the New Testament which uses no precise or determinate speech in reference to the number or order of these Commandments but the thing it self which ever amongst the Jews was thus distinguished as we do and generally the Greek Church and the Latin likewise until Austin's dayes And it is certain the Holy Spirit here doth not affect Logical Divisions or Rhetorical Partitions or Methods but delivers things grosly to a rude people inculcating the same thing under diverse forms of speech For according to one of the Rules of expounding the Decalogue viz. That where the outward act is forbidden the inward act is also forbidden and where the Effect there the Cause is also forbidden this should rather seem to be none other Precept than what went before in the seventh and eighth Commandments forbidding Adultery and Theft and by Implication the inward acts of Lusting after the Persons or Possessions of others For that is the beginning and cause of those outward Effects and scandalous sins Another Reason for the entireness of that we call the Tenth Commandment is the order observed in Exodus where Lusting after our Neighbours House is set before Lusting after his Wife or other Persons and then again follow his Goods which shows that
God himself is his Knowledg or Omniscience which the better to judge of we may distinguish according to the Object of it into knowledg of it into knowledg of things within himself or of himself which is more Internal and things without himself external For if we should speak more Properly God knoweth nothing by an ababsolute direct knowledg but himself and all other things Relatively rather according as they bare relation to him in being or not being in being â—ike him as that which is Good or dislike him by which manner he understandeth Evil. And nothing but God himself can perfectly know God no not the highest and most divine Spirits attending him more immediately in the state of Glory because perfect knowledg doth not consist in an Apprehension that God is or that he is infinitely glorious and Perfect but in comprehension to know him as he is True St. John saith 1 Joh. 3. 2. We shall know him as he is meaning that in the state of glory we should have a much nearer and clearer access unto his divine nature than we can have here by the Organ of our Faith And that so we shall see him that there will be no more use of Faith or outward information from revealed doctrines but Inward Revelations and illuminations shall immediately flow into us from God to the fuller apprehension of him and satisfaction of the restless mind of man But to know him as he is is the Property of himself incommunicable to any Creature For to comprehend a thing saith Austin is nothing else but so to know it that nothing of it should be unknown to the Knower As a Vessel is said to contain such a quantity of liquor that nothing should be left out And thus God only and no Created being conceiveth God comprehensively The Relative knowledg of God in order to things external is to be estimated according to the Variety of things so known by him yea not only the knowledg but even the very Being of God is described unto us according to the manner of outward things All things of reality and not merely imaginary are by general consent divided into three sorts according to the three distinctions of time Into things Past Future and Present And therefore God is said to be He which is and which was and Rev. 1. 4. 8. which is to come Therefore surely the distinction of Gods knowledge most agreably to the nature of God and things known too is into that of things Past Present and to Come And there being no great difficulty or difference among Christians concerning the two former viz. Knowledge of things past and present all concurring that the knowledge of things passed never passes with God nor of things present nor of future but the Knowledge of all these being immediately and immoveably present with God so that many more warily will have all understanding in God to be rather Science than Prae-science and Knowledge rather than fore-knowledge It were needless as well as endless to enlarge thereupon The third about things to come deserves more accurate enquiry For as to the distinction of Gods knowledge into that of Vision whereby he beholds all really existent things whether in themselves past present or future And that of Intelligence it may be questioned as common as it is For we speak not of possible but actual knowledge but that which may possibly be but never shall be the object of the supposed Intelligence of God is only a possible knowledge and not a real and therefore not to be matched with real knowledge For to say God knows the possibilities is no more than to say not that he knows the things but himself in whom and to whom all things are possible Therefore confining our Discourse only to things future we are to observe such to be either necessary or contingent there being no mean between these two And here first What is that which denominates a thing necessary and what contingent or accidental and then in what respect they are so called and distinguished And here first we are to distinguish of necessity it self with the Schools For there is a simple and absolute Necessity the contrary to which is altogether impossible and so nothing but God is of Necessity For God being absolute and supream over all things as nothing can by way of anticipation lay a necessity upon him so neither can any thing afterward obstruct or necessarily impede his will For as St. Paul saith Who hath resisted his will It neither hath been at any time nor can possibly be That Gods resolute Will should be opposed so as not to obtain its designed end But there is a conditional Necessity which they call Hypothetical which hath no such simple and original certainty but dependent upon somewhat else And this Dependance or Conditionalness is either upon The first Cause which is God or some second Cause the Creature For there was no such absolute Necessity that this visible world should have a Being but this Being depended upon the Will and Pleasure of God And this world being there was no necessity that it should consist of so many parts or several kinds of things but this depended upon the wisdome and pleasure of God also The other Hypothetical Necessity was founded by the First Cause God in the Creature upon supposition that it had a Being that such should be the nature of it As that supposing the Sun it necessarily followed it should give light and supposing there be such a thing as Fire in the world there is a necessity it should heat and burn Of all which there can no other reason be render'd but that which Scotus gives Because this is this and that is that And because the Creatour of them and all things else hath imposed such a Law unalterable upon the very natures of things themselves that upon supposal they have a Being such and such it should be And this I take to be that Necessity which Philosophers call a Necessity of Consequent viz. that which is immediately consequent to the being of a Thing that of Consequence as they call it being nothing else but a rational Inference following upon some Particular supposed As the Genus is alwayes supposed to the Species and not on the contrary For example He that runs must of necessity move and he that moves must of necessity be but not on the contrary And the ground of these and all such things Necessity is taken from the immutable decree of God who hath so determined that things should be And not only is this true in things apparent and visible to us but must necessary be no less true in things invisible and to us obscure and uncertain viz. That upon supposal Nihil est adâ—o contingens quin in se aliquid necessarium habe it Thom. 1. Q. 86. art 3. co of such a peremptory Decree and Cause from God that which seems to us most contingent and casual must have a
most certain and inevitable event even not inferiour to any of those necessities we have touched and the reason is plain because here is supposed the same will and same power to effect this as them and the variety and uncertainty of the means whereby a thing is brought about makes nothing at all against this because this proceeds only form the relation such means have to our understanding and apprehension which not being able to descern any connexion natural between the Cause and the Effect do look upon the effect as meer chance For instance that a fly should kill a man by choking him is as contingent a thing as can ordinarily happen And who could believe it that should be told that such a fly moving lightly and wildly it knows not whether it self perhaps a mile off from the place where this falls out and many dayes before the fact should certainly be the death of such a man yet no man of reason and conscience can deny but Gods providence and decree may impose an inevitable necessity upon this creature so opportunely and fitly to move as that it should certainly kill him and that at such a time and in such a place And if any should hereof doubt the express asseveration of our Saviour Christ in the Gospel may satisfie him herein saying One Sparrow shall not fall on the ground without your Father If any should so Matth. 10. 29. contrive our Saviours words as to understand without Gods will to be contrary only to Gods will and not of Gods will concurring and his knowledge noting the same St. Luke will instruct him otherwise who renders Luke 12. 6. the same speech Not one is forgotten which implies Observation and Providence That therefore those things which seem to us most free irregular and contingent may have a tacit and unknown determination from God which should fix and infallibly limit them to some special ends I may presume no man can piously doubt and especially after that great Opposer of Gods Providence over humane actions hath been constrained to acknowledge so much I mean Socinus who granteth God the liberty and power so to determine Praelâ—ct car 6. the Salvation as well as the acceptation and improvement of Grace offered to Peter and to Paul that the effect should inevitably follow which being allowed all the arguments usually brought by him and others not of his rank of the inconsistency of such inevitable decrees with the freedom of Mans will will lie as heavy upon him to solve or answer in his cases as on any other who should extend the same to many more than he pleases to do For can we any more conceive that Gods good will to them should first make them brutes before it made them Saints in limiting their choice and determining the same to one side rather than others or that he should extinguish a natural humane principle in them to bring them to salvation but secure it to others I hope not Therefore if a necessity destroyed not their humane Liberty how can it be concluded that it doth it in others Oâ— that there is no possible concord between Necessity and Contingencie Indeed in the same respect it must necessarily be true whether we regard God or Man For neither to God nor to Man can the same thing be allowed to be necessary and contingent at the same time but there appears no reason why the same thing which is necessarily to follow on the part of God may not be said on the part of man to be fortuitous free and chance as it is called For we indeed vulgarly call that only necessary where there appears a necessary connexion in nature between cause and effect and according to the degree of evidence and assurance to us we hold a thing necessary or contingent in which sense we hold it necessary that an heavy body out of its natural place should left to it self descend to it and possess it And we hold it not so necessary that the Sun going down in a cleer red evening towards the West should portend the day following to be fair and cleer Our Saviour when he affirmed this spake after the observations and opinion of men which generally herein fail not So that the being of a thing reaâ—y and the appearing of it so to be being so far different in nature it follows not at all that so it is intrinsecally and of it self because we can make no other judgment of it than in such a manner and that because we perceive no natural connexion between the cause and effect necessitating it therefore there neither is nor can be any Some things God hath ordained so openly inseparable one from the other that we easily and readily infer the one from or by the other and this is all we call necessity in nature But if God more covertly and subtilty hath likewise ordained the like connexion not by a Law of constant Nature but his singular will for which we can find out no reason this we presently call Contingent though it be as certain as the other And names being given to things by man according as they are apprehended the distinction of things into Necessary and Contingent is very reasonable and serviceable to man as signifying to him such a diversity of Effects in the world that some have apparent natural necessary cause to produce them and these things we call Necessary and some things have no such natural causes but more immediately are ordered by God bringing causes by his special Providence together besides their nature to produce such an Effect and that certainly though not naturally and this we call Contingent That this manner of proceeding of the Providence of God is possible is impossible to be desired And in many things seeming to us as casual as may be that actually they are all granted For to us considering all circumstances it was a thing meerly indifferent and undetermined whether Peter should believe unto Salvation or not but considering the resolute Providence of God disposing certainly outward causes it was certain and infallible The great question must then be about the General viz. Whether God hath two immutable Laws whereby a necessity doth attend all effects as well such as we tearm free and contingent as such as are necessary with this difference only that on some things he hath laid a Law natural which ordinarily and necessarily moveth to one certain effect and end as are seen in natural generations and corruptions as that as St. Paul saith Every seed should have its own body i. e. produce it And 1 Cor. 15. that whatever is so generated should by a Law of Nature also incline to dissolution again And that by a private invisible Law which reserves to him or particular decree he certainly bringeth to pass even those things of which we can give no reason and there appears to us no connexion or order of causes but causes are by his special hand brought to