ground upon which Ceremonies are to be used in the service of the Church Instances out of the Scriptures and Tradition of the Apostles Of the equivocation of the word Sacrament in the Fathers The reason of a Sacrament in Baptisme and the Eucharist In extreme Vnction In Marriage In Confirmation Ordination and Penance NOW to come to the reason for which Ceremonies are to be used in the publick service of God I must here rest in that which I have rendred in my Book of the service of God at the assemblies of the Church being satisfied that it pointeth at the very ground for the use of them from the beginning among Gods people Man is compounded of soule and body and the worship of God and prayer to God is an act of the soule which the body by the senses thereof may diverte the mind from but cannot help forwards it till by the motion and gesture of the body the soul be ingaged to attend on that which the mind proposeth Therefore the people of God in the Scripture pray alwaies either standing or kneeling unlesse some speciall cause move them to prostrate themselves That their ordinary posture was standing appeares by Mat. VI. 5. Mark XI 25. Luke XVIII 11. Neh. IX 5. Jerem. XV. 1. XVIII 19. Job XXX 20. And they have reason who derive the Stations of the primitive Christians and the use of not kneeling on Lords dayes and between Easter and Whitsontide from their custome But therefore they kneeled in Lent and ' Daniel kneeled when he fasted IX 20. and Moses fell prostrate before God Deut. IX 18 25. but Esdras upon his knees Esd IX 5. X. 1. as Daniel also VII 11. to what purpose but to cast down the mind by the posture of the body that being sensible of his wants a man may attend upon God with deep devotion and reverence The Publicane durst not lift up his eyes to heaven Luke XVIII 13. which showes that otherwise they did lift up their eyes and spread their hands to heaven as Lam. III. 41. 1 Kings VIII 54. 1 Tim. II. 8. But the Publicane smote upon his brest because he exacted Penance of himselfe He was a foole for his paines if that be Reformation which is pretended to claime familiarity with Almighty God by talking with him negligently to signify that we are sure of him having Faith that we are predestinate to life as of the number of those for whom Christ died exclusively to the rest of mankind Or if it be Reformation to sit and censure with how fit and pertinent conceptions in how proper and choice terms a man expresses his necessities and the necessities of his people to God But praying to God is something else than all this and not onely the ancient people of God but those who have no sense of religion but that which nature forceth them to show us by their practice that lowlinesse of the body stirreth as well as testâ—fieth reverence in the minde to God in his service All this holdeth taking a man by himselfe as a single Christiane But supposing the society of a Church and an assembly of Gods people for his service there is more to be said The people of God spoke much by visible signes not all by words Jeremy might have said to them of Jerusalem take example by the Rechabites who drink no wine upon the order of their Patriarch But that was not enough He must bringe them to the Temple and set wine before them that having formally refused it he might thereupon protest to his people The same Jeremy might have told the Jewes as Saint Paul doth the Romanes that men are as clay in the Potters hands without going down to the Potters and seeing him spoile a vessell that he was making that he might thereupon take his rise and say that God was framing evil against them whom he had made Jer. XVIII 1-5 without buying an earthen vessell and breaking it before the ancients of the People and of the Priests to tell them that God would break them likewise Jer. XIX 1 11 12. when he makes all that businesse on purpose he showes what force visible signes have to make impression upon the minde of that which words signify neverthelesse The Law would never have appointed to sit still on the Sabbath in remembrance of the creation of the world or the deliverance from Egypt to carry a bundle of branches in the hand and to dwell in booths in remembrance of the voiage through the wildernesse otherwise And is not this reason fit to be applied to the assemblies of Christians Witnesse the Prophet Joel Why must they weep and mourne with their fasting why must the children and sucklings assemble why must the joy of the bride chamber be superseded but to make impression of sorrow upon particulars from that which the publick expresseth Joel II. 13-16 The people of Niniveh and the King thereof put on sackcloth and sat in ashes nor man nor beast must tast foode or drinke water at the preaching of Jonas III. 5. 6. 7. On the contrary at the bringing of the Arke into the City of David Chron. XIII 8. XV. 28. They have seen thy goings O God even the goings of my God my King into the sanctuary The singers went before those that played on instruments followed amongst them were the damsels playing on timbrells And the solemnity which the wall of Jerusalem was dedicated with you may read in Nehem. XII 27-43 The Festival of our Lords Resurrection presupposeth the Fast of the Passion makes all the Lords dayes of the year festivall by renewing weekly that joy which it solemnizeth The Fast which goeth before it by the institution of the Apostles agreeing in it because not agreeing when it should end in Tertullians time was inlarged to those dayes on which the Bridegroome was not missing but by just use of the Churches Power is inlarged to fourty dayes Shall it be superstitious for the Church to professe solemn Penance and mourning for that time which gained the Ninivites that grace which the Gospel tendereth the Gentiles that repent according to their example If it be Reformation to abolish all ceremonies let it be Reformation for Gods people to understand any difference between an humiliation and a thanksgiving Saint Paul disputeth hard that the women of Corinth ought to be vailed the men unvailed Not for any consideration of reverence to God which the uncovering of the head did not signify in those times But to signify the humility and modesty of the sex which had he spoken of serving God in private he need not have stood upon and therefore in regard to the Church Which if it be true if consideration ought to be had of the Church in celebrating the service of God at the assemblies thereof then it is requisite that when the World is come into the Church and all assemble those ceremonies should be used which were not requisite when the numbers were small and the assemblies thereof
The image of Christ therefore and his true Crosse with the honour due to God alone though in reference to God Had the Acts of the Councile been known in the West as they would have been had it been admitted these men would never have gone about to bring in an opinion so extravagant from the doctrine of the Councile Which shewes plainly that it is the See of Rome that hath imployed the whole interest thereof right or wrong to give that force to the decree which of it self it had not You have besides a work of Jonas Bishop of Orleans against Claudius Bishop of Turin you have the testimony of Walafridus Strabo allowing images but disallowing all worship of them Nay in the time of Fredrick Barbarussa Nicetas relating how he took Philippopolis notes that the Armenians stirred not for the taking of the City having confidence in the Almans as agreeing with them in religion because neither of them worshipped images De Imperio Isaaci Angeli II. Therefore in removing the force of this decree it is not the authority of the whole Church but the will of the See of Rome that is transgressed And that power of the See of Rome by which this is done is not that regular preeminence thereof over other Churches which cannot decree any thing in the matter of a generall Councile but by a generall Councile either expresly assembled or included in the consent of those Churches whereof it consists But of that nothing is or can be alledged It remaines therefore that it is come to effect by that infinite power thereof which the whole Church acknowledgeth not and therefore in effect by the meanes which it imployeth to justify such a pretense I say no more of the ceremonies of Gods service I maintaine no further effect of them then the ground for them warrants The composition of our nature makes them fit and necessary meanes to procure that attention of mind that devotion of Spirit which God is to be served with even in private much more at the publicke and solemn assemblies of the Church Whatsoever is appointed by the Church for the circumstance furniture solemnity or ceremony of Gods service by virtue of the trust reposed in it is thereby to be accounted holy and so used and respected The memories of Gods Saints and Martyrs are fit occasions to determine the time and place and other circumstances of it And the honour done them in recording their acts and sufferings with the conversation of our Lord upon earth whether out of the Scriptures or otherwise a fit meanes to render his solemne service recommendable for the reverence which it is performed with If in stead of circumstances and instruments the Saints of God or Images or any creature of God whatsoever become the object of that worship for which Churches were built or for which Christians assemble by that meanes there may be roome to let in that Idolatry at the back door which Christianity shutteth out at the great gate Whether or no it be a fault in Christians that they cannot do violence to their senses and count those things holy as instruments of Gods service because so they should be which they are convinced in common reason that they are used to his disservice I dispute not now But without dispute woe to them by whom offences come And they who prosecute offences given without measure are they by whom offences come The charge of superstition is a goodly pretense for abolishing ceremonies But when not onely the reverence of Gods service but also the offices of it are abolished withall then is there cause to say that the service of God it selfe seeems superstitious To fit and sleep out a sermon or censure a prayer is more for a mans ease then to fall down on his knees to humble his soul at Gods footstool and to withdraw his minde from the curiosity of knowledge or language to the sense of Gods majesty and his own misery It is then for our ease but not for Gods service that the ceremonies thereof should be counted superstitious CHAP. XXXI The ground for a Monasticall life in the Scriptures And in the practice of the primitive Church The Church getteth no peculiar interest in them who professe it by their professing of it The nature and intent of it renders it subordinate to the Clergy How farre the single life of the Clergy hath been a Law to the Church Inexecution of the Canons for it Nullity of the proceeddings of the Church of Rome in it The interest of the People in the acts of the Church And in the use of the Scriptures I Cannot make an end by distinguishing the bounds of Ecclesiasticall and Secular power in Church matters till I have resolved whether or no the body of it the materials of which it consists be sufficiently distinguished by the estates of Clergy and People Or whether there be a third estate of Monkery constituted by Gods Law intitling the Church to a right in those who professe it upon the ground of Christianity and in order to the effect of it For the resolution hereof opens the ground as well of that reverence which the people owe the Clergy as of that instruction and good example which the Clergy owe the people the neglect whereof is that which forfeiteth the very being of the Church that is the unity of it I am not now to dispute whether it be lawfull for a Christian to vow to God the vow of continence or not having proved in the second book that it is And showed in what sense the perfection of a Christian may be understood to consist in the professing and performing of it The case of Ananias and Sapphira hath been drawn into consequence not onely by Saint Basil as I showed you in the first book but also by Saint Gregory of Rome Epist I. 33. quoted by Gratiane XVII Quaest I. Cap. III. though acknowledging that community of goods was a part of the profession of the Christians then at Jerusalem it cannot be said that they who professed this community of goods did professe that which is strictly called Monkery For they letted not to continue married all Monks professing continence But I have besides made it to appear that all were not tied then at Jerusalem to give up all their goods to the stock of the Church but onely what the common Christianity should prompt every man to contribute to the subsistence of the Church and Christianity which what it required was visible But I do not therefore yield that the argument is not of force so far as the case and therefore the reason drawn from it takes place All Christians consecrate themselves to the service of God by being Baptized and made Christians By that they stand obliged to consecrate their goods to the subsistence of his Church as the necessities thereof become visible If it appear to be part of this Christianity to consecrate a mans self to God further by professing such a
AN EPILOGUE TO THE TRAGEDY OF THE Church of England BEING A Necessary Consideration and brief Resolution of the chief Controversies in Religion that divide the Western Church Occasioned by the present Calamity of the CHURCH of ENGLAND In three BOOKS viz. Of I. The Principles of Christian Truth II. The Covenant of Grace III. The Lawes of the Church By HERBERT THORNDIKE LONDON Printed by J. M. and T. R. for J. Martin J. Allestry and T. Dicas and are to be sold at the sign of the BELL in St PAUL's Church-yard M.DC.LIX A PREFACE To all Christian Readers IT cannot seem strange that a man in my case removed by the force of the Warr from the Service of the Church should dedicate his time to the consideration of those Controversies which cause division in the Church For what could I do more to the satisfaction of mine own judgment than to seek a solution what truth it is the oversight whereof hath divided the Church and therefore the sight whereof ought to unite it But that I should publish the result of my thoughts to the world this even to them that cannot but allow my conversing with those thoughts may seem to fall under the Historians censure Sâ—ipsum fatiganâ—o nihil aliud quâm odium quaerere extremae esse dementiae That to take pains to get nothing but displeasure is the extremity of madness Socrates if wee believe his Apology in Plato could never rest for his Genius alwayes putting him upon disputes tending to convict men that they knew not what they thought they knew The displeasure which this got him hee makes the true cause of his death The opinion which I publish being indeed the fruit of more time and leisure of less ingagement to the world than others are under will seem a charge upon those who ingage otherwise And when besides so much interest of this world depends upon the divisions of the Church what am I to expect but Great is Diana of the Ephesians My Apology is this The title of Reformation which the late Warr pretended mentioned onely Episcopacy and the Service The effect of it was a new Confession of Faith a new Catechism a new Directory all new With chapter and verse indeed quoted in the margine but as well over against their own new inventions as over against the Old Faith of the Church This burthen was as easily kicked off by the Congregations as layed on by the Presbyteries As carrying indeed no conviction with it but the Sword and what penalties the Sword should inforce it with Which failing what is come in stead of it to warrant the salvation of Christians but that the Bible is preached which what Heresie disowneth and by them whom the Tryers count godly men Make they what they can of it I from my non age had embraced the Church of England and attained the Order of Priesthood in it upon supposition that it was a true Church and salvation to be had in it and by it Owning nevertheless as the Church of England did own the Church of Rome for a Church in which salvation though more difficult yet might be had and obtained That there is no such thing as a Church by Gods Law in the nature of a Body which this state of Religion requireth is opposite to an Article of my Creed who alwayes thought my self a member of such a Body by being of the Church of England The issue of that which I have published concerning that title of Reformation which the Warr pretended was this That they are Schismaticks that concurr to the breaking or destroying of the Church of England for those causes And the objection there necessarily starting Why the Church of England no Schismaticks in Reforming without the Church of Rome My answer was that the cause of Reforming must justifie the change which it maketh without consent of the Whole Church For the pretense of Infallibility in the Church on the one side the pretense of the Word and Sacraments for marks of the Church on the other side I hold equally frivolous As equally declaring a resolution never to be tried by reason in that which wee alwayes dispute For what dispute remains iâ— the Decrees of the Council of Trent be Infallible If that form of Doctrine and ministring the Sacraments which the Reformation may pretend be marks to distinguish a Church from no Church If they were where there is no such form there are no such marks And therefore no such thing as a Church Nor is it so easie to destroy these doubts in mens judgments as the Laws by which the Church of England stood And if the salvation of a Christian consist in professing the common Christianity as I show you at large shall not the salvation of a Divine consist in professing what he hath attained to believe when hee thinks the exigent of the time renders it necessary to the salvation of Gods people How shall hee otherwise be ministerial to the work of Gods Grace in strengthening them that stand in comforting and helping the weak in raising them that are fallen in resolving the doubtfull without searching the bottom of the cause Nay how shall hee make reparation for the offenses hee may have given by not knowing that which now hee thinks hee knows The causes of division have a certain dependence upon common principles a certain correspondence one with another which when it cannot be declared the satisfaction which a man intends is quite defeated when it is declared that dissatisfaction which the consideration of particulars of less waight causeth must needs cease Whether it were the distrust of my own ability or the love of other imployment or whatsoever it were that diverted mee from considering the consequence of those principles which I alwayes had till I might come to that resolution which now I declare Neither was I satisfied till I had it nor having it till I had declared it And if I be like a man with an arrow in his thigh or like a woman ready to bring forth that is as Ecclesiasticus saith like a fool that cannot hold what is in his heart I am in this I hope no fool of Solomons but with S. Paul a fool for Christs sake Now the mischiefs which division in the Church createth being invaluable all the benefit that I can perceive it yield is this that the offenses which it causeth seem to drown and swallow up as it were that offense which declaring the truth in another time would produce For Unity in the Church is of so great advantage to the service of God and that Christianity from whence it proceedeth that it ought to overshadow and cover very great imperfections in the Laws of the Church All Laws being subject to the like Especially seeing I maintain that the Church by divine institution is in point of right one visible Body consisting in the communion of all Christians in the offices of Gods service and ought by humane administration in point
of fact to be the same For the Unity of so great a Body will not allow that the terms should be strict or nice upon which the communion thereof standeth But obligeth all tâ—at love the general good of it to pass by even those imperfections in the Laws of it which are visible if not pernicious But where this Unity is once broken in pieces and destroyeâ— and palliating cures are out of date the offense which is taken at showing the true cure is imputable to them that cause the fraction not to him that would â—ee it restored For what disease was ever cured without offending the body that had it The cause of Episcopacy and of the Service is the cause of the whole Church and the maintenance thereof inferreth the maintenance of whatsoever is Catholick Owning therefore my obligation to the Whole Church notwithstanding my obligation to the Church of England I have prescribed the consent thereof for a boundary to all interpretation of Scripture all Reformation in the Church Referring my â—pinion â—n point of Fact what is Catholick to them who by their Title are bound to acknowledg that whatsoever is Catholick ought to take place While all English people by the Laws of the Church of England had suffiâ—iâ—nâ— and probable means of salvation ministred to them it had been a fault to acknowledg a fault which it was more mischief to mâ—nd than to bear with But when the Unity that is lost may as well be obtained by the primitive Truth and Order of the Catholick Church as by that which served the turn in the Church of England because it served to the salvation of more I should offend good Christians to think that they will stand offended at it In fine all variety of Religion in England seems to be comprised in three parties Papists Prelatical and Puritanes comprehending under that all parties into which the once common name stands divided All of them are originally as I conceive terms of disgrace which therefore I have not been delighted with using This last I have found some cause to frequent when I would signifie some thing common to all parties of it If with eagerness at any time the English Proverb says Loosers may have leave to speak I finde my self disobliged by the Papists in that desiring to serve God with all Christians they barr mee their CoÌ„munion by clogging it with conditions inconsistent with our common Christianity I finde my self disobliged by the Puritanes in that desiring to serve God with all Christians but acknowledging the Catholick Church I stand obliged by the Rule of it not to communicate with Hereticks or Schismaticks I complain for no Benefice or other advantage That desiring to communicate with all Christians I am confined for opportunity of serving God with his Church to the scartered remains of the Church of England is that for which I complain If owning this offense I suffer mine indignation at the pretense of Inâ—allibility or of Reformation to escape from mee I do not therefore intend to revenge my self by words of disgrace Let him that thinks so call mee Prelatical let him use mee with no more moderation than I use In the mean time I remain secured that the offense which my opinion may give is imputable in the sight of God to those that cause the division One offense I acknowledg and cannot help That I undertake a design of this consequence and am not able to go through with it as it deserves I should not have set Pen to paper till my materials had been prepared in writing that no term might have escaped mee unexamined Till the quotations of mine Authors had been all before mee so as to need no recourse to the Copies A labor which I have not been able every where to undergo In fine till I had cleared all pretense of obscurity or ambiguity in my language For the obscurity of my mater I am not sory for If writing in English because here the occasion commences the reasons by which I determine the sense of the Scriptures in the Original if the consequence oâ— it in some maters seem obscure I conceive it ought to teach the World that the people are made parties to those disputes whereof they are not able to be judges And I am willing to bear the blame of obscure if that lesson may be learned by the people The desire of easing my thoughts by giving them vent hath resolved mee to put them into the world â—ough-baked on purpose to provoke the judgments of all parties â—or the furnishing of a second Edition if God grant mee life with that which shall be missing in this I am therefore content to confine my self to the model of an abridgment and referr my self for the consent of the Church to those books which I am best satiâ—fied with in each point When that could not be done I have alleged authorities which I may call translatitias because I lay them down as I finde them alleged Not doubting that I justifie my opinion so farr as I desire to do here that there is no consent of the Church against it What the sense of the Church is positively and hath been into which I conceive that which here I say hath made mee a fair entrance I shall upon examination of particulars indeavor to give satisfaction in that which may be found missing here In the mean time it shall suffice to have advanced thus much towards the common interest of Christianity in the re-union of the Church But let no man therefore barre mee the lot of Reconcilers To be contradicted on all sides I profess no such thing It is enough for the greatest Powers in Christendom to undertake If it be an offense for a man of my years equally concerned with all Christians in our common Christianity to say his opinion upon what terms the parties ought to reconcile themselves it remains that offenses remain unreconcileable But contradiction from all parties I shall not be displeased with Hee that will tell mee alone in writing what hee findes fault with and why shall do a work of charity to mee alone Hee that will tell the world the same shall do mee the same charity that hee does the world in it Hee who can delight in that barbarous course which Controversies in Religion have been managed with among Christians by casting personal aspersions Let him rather do it than be silent provided the stuff hee brings be considerable to bear out such inhumanity among civil people But let him consider the dependences and concernments of the point hee speaks to let him not say for answer that these things are answered by our Divines It is easie to make â—bjections but not easie to clear difficulties And whether or no these difficulties were clear already I must referr it to the Reader to judge In the mean time though no arbitrator to chuse a middle opinion for partiâ—s to agree in I take upon mee the person of a Divâ—ne in
God delivered to the Church by the Apostles commanding them so to live For that which was as difficult as impossible to have been introduced without conviction of the will of God as the rest of Christianity of necessity must go for a part of it But that in such variety of mens fannies reasons and inclinations the Church consisting from the beginning of all Nations and dispersed all over the world should of their own inclination not swayed by any information of Gods will received with Christianity agree in the same Lawes and Rulers submitting to the exercise of the same Power upon themselves is as impossible as that the world should consist of the casual concurse of atomes according to Democritus and Epicurus The name of the Church without peradventure was first used to signifie the whole body of Gods people in the Wildernesse when they might be and were called together and assembled upon their common occasions which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies After which time the people continuing still one and the same by virtue of the same Lawes then received and the Powers placed in their Ruler Not onely the whole people but such parts of it as resorted to the same Government have still born and do bear the same name The Synagogue of Libertines Cyrenaeans Alexandrians Cilicians and Asians by example Acts VI. 9. which name first belongs to the respective Bodies of Jewes that subsisted at Rome Cyrene or Alexandria in Cilicia or Asia And consequently by Metonymy to the Places where such of those Bodies as chanced to be at Jerusalem might assemble themselves And to so many of those Bodies as being at Jerusalem did assemble at those Places Now no Christian can doubt that the Body of Christians succeeds in the stead of Gods ancient people And therefore the name of Gods Church when it stands without limitation signifies no lesse As when our Lord saith Mat. XVI 18. Vpon this rock will I found my Church Whatsoever the Disciples then conceived the Church should be our Lord that knew all by the name of it meant all that duly beares the name And therefore when hee saith once again Mat. XVIII 17. Tell it to the Church It is strange there should be Christians that should think hee means the Jewes and their Rulers And that the precept concernes Christians no longer now they have left the Jewes Though it is true a man cannot tell his cause to the whole Church but to that part of it to which hee can resort which is called by the name of the Whole as I said even now of the Synagogue S. Paul to the Colossians II. 24 25. calling the Church the Body of Christ saith That hee by the dispensation of God towards them which hee is trusted with is become the minister of the Church to wit as Angels are ministers of the Church because ministers of God towards it And therefore minister of the whole Church which is the Body of Christ not of any particular Church as if an Apostle could be bound to execute his office according to the discretion of any Church which for Gods cause hee attends As all Ministers are bound to execute their Office according to the will of them whose Ministers they are It is therefore the whole Church in which God hath set Apostles Evangelists Prophets and the use of the Graces rehearsed 1 Cor. XII 28. Eph. IV. 11. Because the Office of these Graces can by no means be confined either to any particular Church or to any part of the whole Church The name of the Church signifies the same thing again Eph. I. 22. III. 21. V. 23-32 While all Christendome was contained in the Church at Jerusalem the name of the Church is so used Acts II. 47. V. 11. VIII 1 3. that it is no mater whether wee understand by it the whole Church or the Church of Jerusalem The reason Because all right and power that can at any time be found vested in the whole Church was then as fully in the Church at Jerusalem as it can be at any time in the whole Church though in respect of a Body never so much greater than it As a childe is as much a man the day of his birth as the day of his death and a tree as much as a tree when it growes one as when it is come to the height But Christianity being propagated among Jewes and Gentiles as wee reade of the Churches of Judaea Samaria and Galilee Acts IX 31. and must needs understand the Epistles to the Ebrewes to have been written to Churches consisting onely of Ebrewes as those of S. Peter and that of S. James which mentions the Elders of the Church James V. 14. So the Churches of the Gentiles in S. Paul Rom. XVI 4. wee easily understand to be the Churches of Asia 1 Cor. XVI 9. Apoc. I. 11. the Churches of Galâ—â—ia 1 Cor. XVI 1. the Churches of Macedonia 2 Cor. VIII 1. and the rest that were visible in S. Paâ—ls time Now suppose for the present that these Churches mentioned by the Apostles were no more than so many Congregations as our Independents would have it Seeing they deny not so many Churches to be so many Bodies what reason can they give why the name of the Church when it stands for the whole Church should not signifie the like There is a prerogative attributed to the whole Church by S. Paul 1 Tim. III. 25. when hee calls it the base and pillar of Truth For that this should be said of any particular Church it were too ridiculous to imagine Can the Church bear this attribute if it be not capable of doing any act that may verifie it And if it be not a Body what act can it do In fine the correspondence between Gods ancient people and his new Israel according to his Spirit seems to require That as the Religion of the Jewes and not any Civil Power of the Nation makes them all one Body at this day in point of fact by sufferance of Soveraignes because they were once so in point of right So the Religion of Christians should make them one Body in point of right how many Bodies soever they are burst into in point of fact by their own wantonnesse For the Independents exception which I spoke of can be of no force unlesse they will make it appear that all those Churches that are mentioned in the writings of the Apostles did assemble in one place Not that if this could be made to appear they had done their businesse But because if it do not appear their plea is peremptorily barred Wee reade then of M M M soules added in one day to CXX of the Church at Jerusalem Acts I. 15. II. 41. To these were added or with these they became VM Acts IV. 4. To whom were added multitudes of men and women Acts II. 47. V. 14. These assembled daily in private to serve God as Christians as well as in
it is manifest that the authority which S. Paul giveth Timothy and Titus as his Epistles to them evidence is respective to the Churches of Ephesus and Creet or at the most those Churches which resorted to them Yet are they inabled thereby to constitute Bishops for the service of the said Churches as also their Deacons and to govern the same 1 Tim. II. 5. Titus I. 6-9 The Elders of the Church which S. Paul sent for to Ephesus had authority respective to the Church there meant but received from S. Paul as his directions and exhortations intimate Acts XX. 17 28-21 So did the Elders which hee and Barnabas ordained in the Churches Acts XIV 28. The like wee finde in the Churches of the Jewes Heb. XIII 7 17. James V. 14. 1 Pet. V. 1-5 and of the Thessalonians and Philippians 1 Thess V. 12 13. Phil. I. 1. And the seven Churches of Asia have their seven Angels which the Epistles which the Spirit directs S. John to write them do show that they were to acknowledge his authority Apoc. I. 20. II. III. So as long as the Scriptures last it is evident that there was a common authority whether derived from or concurrent with the authority of the Apostles which must needs make the Church one Body during that time whatsoever privilege can be challenged on behalf of the people and their concurrence to the acts either of each particular Church or of the whole And for the continuance of this authority after the Apostles I see no cause why I should seek farr for evidence It shall susfice mee to allege the Heads of the Churches of Rome Alexandira Antiochia and Jerusalem recorded by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical Histories from the time of the Apostles Adding thereunto thereunto the protestations of Irenaeus III. 3. that hee could reckon those rhat received their authority from the Apostles in all Churches though for brevities sake hee insist onely in the Church of Rome And of Tertullian de Praescript cap. XXXII who also allegeth the very Chaires which the Apostles sate upon possessed by those that succeeded them in his time as well as the Originals of those Epistles which they sent to such Churches extant in his time I will also remember S. Augustine Epistolâ CLXV and Optatus lib. II. alleging the same succession in the Church of Rome to confound the Donatists with for departing from the comminion thereof and of all Churches that then communicated with it For what will any man in his right senses say to this That this authority came not from the Apostles Or that it argues every one of these Churches to be a Body by it self but not all of them to make one Body which is the Catholick Church Hee that sayes this must answer Irenaeus alleging for a reason why hee instances onely in the Church of Rome Ad hanc enim Ecclesiam propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam hoc est eos qui sunt undique sideles For to this Church it is necessary that all Churches that is the Christians that are on all sides should resort because of the more powerfull principality What is the reason why it is enough for Irenaeus to instance in the Church of Rome but this That all Churches do communicate with the Church of Rome when they resort to Rome and all resort thither because it is the sear of the Empire So that which is said of the Faith of the Church of Rome is said of the Faith of all Churches And potentior principalitas is not command of the Church over other Churches but the power of the Empire which forces the Christians of all sides to resort to Rome Again the cause of the Church against the Donarists stands upon this ground that the Church of Rome which the Churches of Africk did communicate with communicated with all Churches besides those of Africk But that Church of Rome which the Donatists communicated with for they also had set up a Church of their own at Rome the rest of the Church did not communicate with How this came to passe you may see by the cause of the Novatians being the same in effect with that of the Donatists By the IV Canon of Nicaea it is provided that every Bishop be made by all the Bishops of the Province some of them as many as can meeting the rest allowing the proceedings under their hand This provision might be made when there were Churches in all Cities of all Provinces but the I Canon of the Apostles onely requireth that a Bishop be ordained by two or three Bishops For when Christianity was thinner sowed if two or three should take the care of providing a Pastor for a Church that was void their proceeding was not like to be disowned by the rest of the neighbouring Churches nor in particular by that of the chief City to which the Cities of the rest resorted for justice The Churches of these chief Cities holding intelligence correspondence and communion with other Churches of other principal Cities those Churches which they owned together with their Rulers or whosoever they were that acted on behalf of them must needs be owned by them in the same unity and correspondence The Bishop of Rome being dead while the question depended whether those that had fallen away in the persecution of Decius should be readmitted to communion or not And the neighbour Bishops being assembled sixteen of them ordain Cornelius three of them Novatianus who stood strictly upon rejecting them whatsoever satisfaction they tendered the Church Whether of these should be received was for a time questionable especially in the Church of Antiochia and those Churches which adheered to it Untill by the intercession of Dionysius of Alexandria they were induced to admit of Cornelius without dispute All this and much more you have in Eusebius Eccl. Hist VI. 42-46 Which being done there remained no further question that those who held with Cornelius were to be admitted those that held with Novatianus remaining excommunicate Whereby it appeares that by the communication which passed between the greatest Churches and the adherence of the lesse unto them whatsoever Church communicated with any Church communicated with the whole And in what quality soever a man was known in his own Church in the same hee was acknowledged by all Churches And therefore the succession of the Rulers of any Church from the Apostles is enough to evidence the unity of the Catholick Church as a visible Corporation consisting of all Churches I must not here omit to allege the authority of Councils and to maintain the right and power of holding them and the obligation which the decrees of them regularly made is able to create to stand by the same authority of the Apostles Which if I do there can no further question remain whether the Church was founded for a Corporation by our Lord and his Apostles when wee see the parts ruled by the acts of the whole That is to say
Church which they corrupted by denying these attributes to the man Jesus attributed the same things to him which they denying were therefore excluded out of the Church When S. John proceedeth saying We saw his glory as the glory of the onely begotten Sonne of God he refers to that which went afore he dwelt among us Now seeing it is so ordinary for the Jewes to call the majesty of God dwelling among men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the very word that S. John uses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are obliged thereby to understand that the majesty of God dwelling among us in the tabernacle of Christs flesh bodily as figuratively it had done in the Tabernacle or Temple of the Jews declared it self notwithstanding by those glorious works which it wrought in his flesh to be what it was For the title of Sonne of God is given in the Old Testament to the Angels first and to the Messias when David saith Ps LXXXIX 18. I will make him my first born higher then the Kings of the earth Whereby it is evident that this title in the Literall sense belonged first to David Of whom also he that will maintaine the difference between the literall and the Spirituall sense upon that ground which I setled before must maintaine those words of David Psal II. 7. Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee To be said Now I suppose that those who expected the Messias to come as a temporall Prince to deliver the people of Israel from the yoke of their oppressors into the free use of that Law which they had received from God as did not onely the rest of the world when Christ came but even his own disciples before his rising againe could by no meanes be informed of that Spirituall kingdome which by the dwelling of the Word in our flesh was intended to be raised Which if it be true though they called the Messiah the Sonne of God as well as the Sonne of David yet is it impossible that they should conceive the same ground for which he is so called and by consequence understand the title in the same sense as we do And this difference of signification is necessary even in the understanding of the Gospel For when the Centurion saith at our Lords death Mark XV. 39. Of a truth this man was the Sonne of God It is not reasonable to imagine that he who dreamed not at all of his rising againe but was a meer heathen should call him the Sonne of God in that sense which we believe But either as Heathenisme allowed Sonnes of the Gods as some thinke or as by conversing with the Jews they had understood them to hold the Messias whom they expected to be the Sonne of God as Prince raised by God What shall we say then of the Apostles demand Vnto which of the angels said he at any time Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee When we find the title of Sonnes of God in the Old Testament attributed to Angels Surely it is necessary to have recourse to that sense in the which it was then known that Christians attributed this title to our Lord Still known by the honour which then and now the Church tendereth him according to it For what will all that Socinus acknowledgeth availe to make good the Apostles assumption when he saies that our Lord is the Sonne of God because conceived without man by the holy Ghost in the womb of a Virgine Is this any more then Adam may challenge for which he is called the Sonne of God Luke III. 38 For the effective cause entereth not into the nature of that which it produceth Neither importeth it any thing to the state of our Lord that he was conceived of the holy Ghost if we suppose nothing in him but a soul and a body which those that are born of man and woman have How then is the title of the Sonne of God incompetible to the Angels which Adam thus farre challenges If you look back upon the premises there remaines no doubt nor any way to escape it otherwise The holy Ghost overshadowing the blessed Virgine not onely workes the conception of a Sonne but dwells for ever according to the fullnesse of the Godhead in the manhood so conceived as by the nature of the Godhead planted in the Word which then came to dwell in the manhood so conceived Therefore that holy thing which is borne of the Virgine being called the Sonne of God is made so much above the Angels as the esteem which this name imports is above any thing that is attributed to them in the Scriptures Therefore is this Sonne of God honoured as God during his being upon earth by them that were instructed to understand the effect of it though they that were not disciples but took it onely for a title of the Messias which they knew he pretended to be perhaps conceived not so much by it Therefore our Lord himself poses the Pharisees how they would have David to understand the Messias to be his Lord whom they knew to be his Sonne Mat. XXII 42 45. Mark XII 35 37. Luke XX. 41 44. This is then that which S. Paul saith Col. I. 19. For in him it pleased God that all the fullnesse should dwell And Col. II. 9. 10. For in him dwelleth all the fullnesse of the Godhead bodily And Ye are filled through him Speaking of Christ I shewed you before that the heresies of that time some whereof it is manifest were then seducing the Colossians did all agree in preaching God the Father of all things to be unknown together with all that belonged to the compleating of the Godhead till they made him known And all this contrived by the devil to subvert the Faith of Christ by counterfeiting something like it in sound like false coyne to cozen the simple with Whereas therefore S. Paul here saith that the fullnesse of the Godhead dwelleth bodily in Christ And our Lord so often in S. Johns Gospel that the Father dwelleth in him and he in the Father And the fullnesse of the holy Ghost dwelleth in the Word incarnate as I shewed even now It is manifest that they laboured to introduce a counterfeit Fullnesse of the Godhead of their own devising into that esteem and worship which the fullnesse of the Godhead contained in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost preached by our Lord Christ and his Apostles challengeth And therefore that the fullnesse of the Godhead challenged by S. Paul to dwell in the flesh of Christ must stand in opposition to that fullnesse which these sects worshipped Being challenged by S. Paul as vindicating the Christian Faith from that corruption wherewith these Sects pretended to adulterate it And being challenged by those Sects in opposition to S. Paul and the Christian Faith which he vindicateth to rest in those whom they severally preached not in the Sonne and holy Ghost together with the Father as he maintaineth For when the fullnesse of
figure in saying That God would have that done which he will not do because he knowes sufficient reason to the contrary whether he declare it or not but setting that reason aside would have done Or that he would have that done which he provideth sufficient meanes to bring to passe But that all should signify some and the world the elect because God will not do all he can to save those whom he would have to be saved is a figure in Rhetorick called Mendacium when a man denies the Scripture to be true The same is the difficulty when our Lord Christ who saith to the Father John XVII 9. I ask for them I ask not for the world but for them whom thou hast given me for they are thine prayes upon the Crosse Father forgive them for they know not what they do For though he ask not that for the world which he askes for his disciples yet he would not have prayed for that which he knew not that God would have done His prayer being the reason moving God to grant meanes effectuall to bring to passe that which it desireth But had there been in God a purpose to exclude the Jews from the benefit of Christs death considering them as not having yet refused the grace which Christ prayed for it could not have been said that he would have our Lord Christ dy or pray for them and therefore that he would have them to be saved This is then my argument that the will of man is neither by the originall constitution of God determinable by his immediate operation nor by mans originall sinne subject to a necessity of doing or not doing this or that Because God treats with the posterity of Adam concerning the Covenant of the Law first and since concerning the Covenant of grace no otherwise then originally he treated with Adam about not eating the forbidden fruit For in conscience were it for the credit of Christianity that infidels whom we would perswade to be Christians should say True if you could shew me that God by his immediate act determines me to do as you require me without which you tell me I cannot do it and with which I cannot but do it Or that by the sinne of Adam I am not become subject to the necessity of doing or not doing this or that But supposing either of these if you move me to do what you professe I cannot do you are either a mad man your self or take me for one Do they take their hearers for men and Christians or for beasts who having first taught that man can do nothing but what God determines him to do inferre thereupon that they must indeavour themselves to do what God commands and what their Christianity requires Or that they are obliged by their Christianity to do that which their corruption from Adam necessitates them not to do Is it for the honour of Gods justice that it should be said that he intends to damne the most part of men for that which by their originall corruption they were utterly unable to do without giving them sufficient help to do it no help being sufficient which the determination of the will by the immediate operation of God makes not effectuall as they think Do they not make the Gospel of Christ a mockery that make it to require a condition impossible to be performed by any whom God determines not to perform it having resolved not to determine the greatest part of them that know it to performe it Certainly this is not to make the secret will of God contradict the declared will of God but to make the declared will of God a meer falshood unlesse the declaring will make contradictions true For to will that this be done for an end which God that willeth will not have come to pass makes contradictions the object of that will and that for the same consideration at the same time God from everlasting determining meerly in consideration of his own will that the condition of that which he would have to come to passe conditionally will not come to passe What is it then to declare all this to the posterity of Adam already lapsed without tendring help sufficient to inable them to imbrace what he tendereth For it is manifest that Adam had sufficient grace to doe what God commanded and it is as manifest that God tenders both the Law to the Israelite and the Gospell to the World in the same form as he tendred Adam the prohibition of eating the forbidden fruit Nor can it be denied that this prohibition contained in the force of it all the perswasions all the exhortations all the promises all the threatnings which either the Law or the Gospell to their respective ends and purposes can be inforced with It must therefore be concluded not that they suppose in Adams posterity an ability to do what they require as did the origiginall prohibition of eating the forbidden fruit but that they bring with them sufficient help to perform it not supposing any thing that may barre the efficacy thereof till the will of him to whom it is tendered makes it void And truly speaking of that which the naturall indowment of freedom necessarily imports in the reasonable creature it is utterly impossible that any thing should determine the will of man to do or not to do this or that but his own action formally or in the nature of a formal cause which therefore in the will cannot be the action of God nor be attributed imputed or ascribed to him to whom it were blasphemy to impute that which his creature is honoured with That God should immediately act upon the soul of man or his will is no inconvenience Because that act must end in the will or soul and not attaine that effect which the imperfection of the creature bringeth to passe Ending therefore in the creature and not in that which the action of the creature produceth it leaveth the same of necessity in the state wherein God first made it And I may well suppose here and will suppose that Gods act of creation continues the same for all the time that he maintaines the creature in that perfection of being that is to say in that ability of acting which from the beginning he gave it This discourse I confesse extendeth to the voiding of the immediate concurrence of God to the actions of his creature which my purpose necessarily requires me not to maintaine For concurrence-supposeth the creature to act without help of God that concurreth and therefore cannot be requisite on behalf of the cause being supposed to act of it self but on behalf of the effect wherein it endeth Which having a being is supposed necessarily to require immediate dependance upon the first being which is God A strange subtlety acknowledging the creature able to act and supposing it to act of it self to imagine that this act can end in nothing as that which it effecteth without Gods concurrence Which immediately attaining the
that the Grace whereby we are justified is a quality habitually informing the soule of man as supernaturally infused by God into it But onely that Faith Hope and Charity are infused into them that are justified and inherent in them as shed into theire hearts by the Holy Ghost Which they say may all be understood supposing that a man is justified by the acts of Faith Hope and Love infused or shedde into the hart by the Holy Ghost as well as by habites supernaturally created to reside in the soule For you may see by Morinus in his Late worke de Administrationâ— Pâ—nitentiâ— VIII 2. 3. 7. that for MCC yeares after Christ a good while after the Schoole Doctors were come in there was no question at all made whether we are justified by an infused habit of grace or not and that it was about the yeare MCCL that this opinion intirely prevailed in the Schooles Whereby it appeareth that as this opinion containes nothing destructive to the faith if it be understood in that sense which the Church of Rome allowes that it is not the naturall worth of it which justifies but Gods accepting of it to that effect So if it did yet could not the Church of Rome be said to teach any thing destructive to the faith But onely to allow since â—uch things to be taught For the Council of Vienna under Clement V. determines it not as matter of faith but as the more probable opinion as you may see Clement de summa Trin. Fide Cathol Tit. I. Cap. VII And therefore Albertus Pâ—ghius de libero Arbitrio lib. V notwithstanding this decree stickes not to count this doctrine forged without any authority of Scripture And those that speake of it with more respect then he thinke not themselves tied to that which the Council holdâ— the more probable It is indeed manifest by the experience of all Christians that the custome and practice even of supernaturall actions to which the inclination of corrupt nature is utterly averse breedes in a man an habituated disposition of doing those things with â—ase and pleasure which at the beginning of his Christianity he could not doe without offering himselfe much violence But that habit which custome and practice leaves behind it though supernaturall for the cause or effect of it because the acts upon which it accrues as also those which it produces cannot accrue from meere nature without the helpe of Christs grace is notwithstanding for that wherein it consists a disposition really qualifying the nature and substance of the soule and inclining it to act otherwise then without it Besides the Gospell promising the Holy Ghost for a Gift to abide with and dwell in those that are baptized nothing hinders the Gift thereof to be held and termed an habituall grace In these regards I find it neither prejudiciall nor inconsequent to the Christian faith to acknowledge habituall grace though neither scripture nor tradition of the Church owne any habit of grace created by God and infused into the soule in a moment as the Schoole imagineth But they seeme to have committed another mistake in that the Church having decreed against Pelagius that the Grace of Christ is necessary to all truly good actions and therefore that man cannot merit the first grace this infused habit of grace they have made to be that First grace which God giveth before man will indeavor any thing towards it For so the Master of the Sentences determineth that grace which preventeth mans indevors to be faith with Love libro II. distinct XXVI D. which though it be capable of a very good sense That the motion to beleeve the truth of Christianity out of the love of God is that which Gods grace prevents all mans compliance with yet in what sense they swallowed it will appeare by the difficulties and dispuâ—es they were intangled with about that sorrow which the heart conceives for sinne out of meerâ— love to God not feare of punishment which the love of our selves breedeth For this sorow being necessarily a disposition preparing him for justification that cometh to God in regard the first grace which God preventeth all manâ— indeavors with is to them this infused habit of Faith and love which formally justifieth how he should come prepared for justification by that contrition which without Gods grace man cannot have who is justified by that infused habit of grace which he was first prevented by God with hath been among them the subject of endlesse jangles Whereas it is manifest the maintenance of the Faith against Pelagius requireth no more then that the resolution of persevering in Christianity to the â—nd be thought necessarily to depend upon the motion to imbrace it which God first preventeth man with without respect to any act of man obliging God to grant it And therefore it is manifest that the Church decreed no more against Pelagius but that the first motion to become a good Christian that every man is prevented with must be ascribed to Gods free grace through Christ not ingaged by any act of mans goeing afore Now requiring onely the actuall assistance of Gods preventing grace it is easy enough to say not how attrition that is sorrow for sinne in regard of punishment accompanied with slavish feare is changed into contrition that is sorrow for sinne out of the love of God whome it offendeth For it is not possible that he who loveth God should be sory for sinne for the same reason which he was sorry for while he loved the world But how the man that was attrite becomes contrite For when first the Gospell reveales unto a man his desperate estate in and by the first Adam it is not possible that he should remaine uâ—touched either with sorrow for the present or apprehension for the future And yet no lesse unpossible is it according to Gods ordinary way of working even by his Grace that he should in an instant resolve to imbrace the onely way to give him peace in that exigence But while he neither casts off the motion of grace nor resigneâ— his interest in himselfe and the world to it but considers upon what reason it behoves him to resolve this consideration by the worke of Gods Spirit disâ—overing to him how much God and the next world is to be preferred before himselfe and this as the love of God and the world to come prevailes in him above the love of himselfe and this accordingly of necessity must the greife of having offended God afore prevaile in him above all that he can conceive for the misery he hath incurred And all this by virtue of those helpes which God grants though allwayes in consideration of our Lord Christ yet not by virtue of that Covenant which is not contracted till â— man be baptized but of his owne free goodnesse dispensing the effects of Christs coming according to the reason of his secret wisdome which the Covenant of grace discovers not I neede say no more to show how a
Law cousened and slaine as enimy to Christianity which tenders the onely cure of sinne Whereunto the conclusion agrees well enough For when having questioned Miserable man that I am who shall deliver me out of the body of this death He answereth I thank God by Jesus Christ our Lord He seemeth to declare that the Gospel having overtaken him in this estate and discovered him to himself in it the imbracing of it cured him and gave him cause to thank God through our Lord Jesus Christ for his deliverance from it All the rest that followeth between these terms in the discourse of Saint Paul serving for a very lively description of that mans estate who being convinced of the truth of Christianity findeth difficulty in renouncing the pleasures which sinne furnisheth for the obtaining of those promises which the Gospel tendreth There remaineth yet one difficulty concerning the Polygamy of the ancient Fathers before and under the Law which to me hath allways seemed an argument for the truth which I maintaine rather then an objection against it If any soule sensible of the feare of God can imagine that Gods Jewells his choice ones the first fruits of his creatures knowing themselves to be under the Law of having but one wife not to be parted with till death should notwithstanding take many and those many times so qualified as the Law much more Christianity allows not as Jacob two sisters Abraham his neece and so Amram and to outface the Law hold them till death and never come short of Gods favour whose Law they transgresse with bare face as the Scripture speakes let him believe that a Christian living in sinne can be in the state of grace But he that sees the Law to have restrained marying with the neice which he sees practiced afore and sees withall that plurality of wives is not forbidden by the Law for besides wives of an inferior ranke which may be called concubines a captive Deut. XXI 11. and an Ebrew maid sold for a slave Ex. XXI 8. 9. 10. there can be no question in the Law of two wives whereof the one is beloved the other not Deut. XXI 15. besides that the Law restraining the King from having many wives seemes to allow him more then every man hadde and therefore that David might be within compasse of the Law though Solomon trode it under foot I say he that considers these things will be moved to be of opinion that the Pharises interpretation of Levit. XVIII 18. is true and that before that Law there was no prohibition for a man to marry two sisters which is there first introduced and yet with an exception in Deuteronomy in the case of a brother deade without issue which before the Law was also in force as by the story of Judah Gen. XXXVIII doth appeare I will therefore conclude that as the knowledge of God increased by giving the Law so was the posterity of Abraham restrained from more by the Law then the posterity of Noe upon the promises given them had been restrained from after the deluge From whence in all reason it will follow that the posterity of Abraham according to the spirit which is the Church of Christ should be still restrained from more then the posterity of Abraham according to the flesh by the law And so that the Fathers before and under the Law living in Gods grace did not withall live in open violation of Gods Law but that they knew themselves not to be under the Law of one wife to one husband though intended in Paradise by virtue of Gods dispensation in it till Christianity should come For unlesse we presume that not onely all thinges necessary to our salvation but all thinge necessary to the salvation of all men since the world stood are recorded in the Scriptures there can be no reason to presume that they could not understand what Lawes they were under but by those Scriptures which for our salvation have been granted us I argue yet further that it will be impossible for true Christians and good Christians to attaine unto assurance of the state of Grace if it be to be had for them that commit such sinnes as Christianity consists not with And this upon supposition of the premises for the ground of this assurance For without doubt were not some thing in the condition which the Gospell requireth impossible for flesh and blood to bring forth it were not possible for him that imbraceth the Gospell to assure himselfe that he doeth it out of obedience to God not out of those reasons which hypocrites may follow But I having declared afore and maintaining now that no man by the force of flesh and blood that is to say of that inclination to goodnesse which a man is born into the world with is able to profess Christianity out of a resolute and clear intention to stand to it am consequently bound to maintaine that he who soe doeth not onely may but must needes assure himselfe of the favour of God in as much as he cannot but assure himself of that which himselfe doeth For in as much as he knowes what himselfe means and what he does as S. Paul sayes that no man knowes what is in man but the spirit of a man which is in him so sure it is that a mans selfe knowes what he means and what he does as it is sure that another man knowes it not But not allowing nor presupposing this ground of a mans knowledge how shall he know it Shall a man by having a perswasion that he is in the number of Gods elect or by having in himself an assurance of Gods love to the effect of everlasting happinesse be assured that his assurance is well grounded and that he is of that number which is elected to life everlasting As if it were not possible for the temptations of Satan and carnall presumption to possesse a man as much even to this effect as the Spirit of God can do Where is then the effect of Christianity seen if not in limiting such grounds and such termes as he that proceedeth upon shall not faile of that grace of God whereof he assureth himself upon those grounds But he that placeth that faith which alone justifyeth in believing that he who believeth is predestinate to life everlasting Or in the confidence of Gods grace in attaining the same I demand upon what ground he can pretend to distinguish this faith from that which he cannot deny that it may be false For if it be said that the Spirit of God that is in him assureth him that his perswasion is well grounded It is easie for me to say that the question to be cleared that is to say whether it be the Spirit of God that tells him so or not cannot be the evidence to clear it self And therefore that he standeth obliged to bethink himself of some meanes whereupon he may assure himself that it is the Spirit of God not the temptation of Satan or carnall
bloud as understanding themselves aright all Christians must needs do Unlesse wee can maintain that wee receive the body and blood of Christ not onely when wee receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist but also by receiving it there is no cause why our Lord should say This is my body this is bloud when hee delivered onely the sign of it to good and bad and therefore not out of any consideration of the quality of them that received it And what a grosse thing were it to say that our Savior took such care to leave his Church by the act of his last will a legacy which imports no more than that which they might at all times bestow upon themselves And let mee know whether the Church could not devise signes enow to renew the memory of Christs death or if that be likewise included to expresse their profession also of dying with Christ by bearing his Crosse if our Lords intent had been no more than to appoint a Ceremony that might serve to commemorate our Lords death or to expresse our own profession of conformity to the same For certainly they who make no more of it whom I said wee may therefore properly call Sacramentaries cannot assign any further effect of Gods grace for which it may have been instituted and yet make it a meer sign of Christs death or of our own profession to dy with Christ or for Christ But if I allow them that make it more than such a sign to have departed from a pessilent conceit and utterly destructive to Christianity I cannot allow them to speak things consequent to their own position when they will not have these words to signifie that the elements are the body and bloud of Christ when they are received but become so upon being received with living faith which will allow no more of the body and bloud of Christ to be in the Sacrament than out of it For the act of living faith importeth the eating and drinking of the flesh and bloud of Christ no lesse without the Sacrament than in it Certainly it is no such abstruse consequence no such farr fetched argument to inferr If this is my body this is my bloud signifies no more than this is the sign of my body and bloud then is the Sacrament of the Eucharist a meer sign of the body and bloud of Christ without any promise of spiritual grace Seeing that being now a Sacrament by being become a Sacrament it is become no more than a sign of the body and bloud of Christ which though a living faith spiritually eateth and drinketh when it receives the Sacrament yet should it have done no lesse without receiving the same I will here allege the discourse of our Lord to them that followed him to Capernaum John VI. 26-63 upon occasion of having been fed by the miracle of five loaves and a few little fishes Supposing that which any man of common sense must grant that it signifies no more than they that heard it could understand by it and that the Sacrament of the Eucharist not being then ordained they could not understand that hee spake of it but ought to understand him to speak of believing the Gospel and becoming Christians under the allegory of eating his flesh and drinking his bloud But when the Eucharist was instituted the correspondence of the ceremony thereof with the allegory which here hee discourseth is evidence enough that as well the promise which hee tendreth as the duty which hee requireth have their effect and accomplishment in and by the receiving of it I must here call you to minde that which I said of the Sacrament of Baptisme that when our Lord discoursed with Nicodemus of regeneration by water and the Holy Ghost John III. not having yet instituted the Sacrament of Baptisme in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost nor declared the promise of giving the Holy Ghost to them that should receive the same it must needs be thought that hee made way thereby to the introducing of that Ordinance the condition and promise whereof hee meant by the processe of his own and his Apostles doctrine further to limit and determine In like maner I must here insist and suppose that hee speaks not here immediately of eating and drinking his flesh and bloud in the Eucharist which his hearers could not then fore-tell that hee meant to ordain but that the action thereof being instituted with such correspondence to this discourse the intent of it may be and is to be argued from the same Now I have showed in due place that the sayings and doings of our Lord in the Gospel are mystical to signifie his kingdome of Glory to the which hee bringeth us through his kingdome of Grace So that when our Savior fed that great multitude with the loaves and the fishes which hee multiplied by miracle to the intent that they might not faint in following him and his doctrine it is manifest that hee intimateth thereby a promise of Grace to sustain us in our travail here till wee come to our Countrey of the Land of Promise When therefore hee proposeth the theme of this discourse saying Yee seek mee not because yee have seen miracles which serve to recommend my doctrine but because yee have eaten of the loaves and were filled Labor not for the meat that perisheth but for that which indures to life everlasting hee showes two things First that his flesh and bloud sustain us in our pilgrimage here because hee showes the Manna which the Fathers lived on in the Wildernesse to be a figure of it Secondly that they bring us to immortality and everlasting life in the world to come by expounding the figure to consist in this that as they were maintained by manna till they died so his new Israelites by his flesh and bloud by eating his flesh and drinking his bloud which hee was giving for the life of the world never to dye Now wherein the eating and drinking of his flesh and bloud consisteth hee showes by his answer to their question upon this Warning them to work for the meat that lasts unto everlasting life which hee tenders and not for that which perisheth The question is What shall wee do to work Gods works And the answer The work of God is this to believe in him whom hee hath sent I have showed in due place that the condition which makes the promises of the Gospel due is oâ—r Christianity to wit to professe the faith of Christ faithfully that is not in vain Therefore when our Lord saith The work of God is this To believe on him whom hee hath sent hee means this fidelity in professing Christianity For indeed who can imagine otherwise that hee should call the act of believing in Christ that work of God which Christ came to teach Gods people Hee then that considers the death of Christ that is to say the crucifying of his flesh and the pouring out of his bloud with that faith which supposes all
the same state with him that contracteth upon articles But there is as much said when our Lord saith onely This is my body which is given for you if it be rightly understood that is supposing the body of Christ to have been given to be sacrificed for us upon the Crosse For hee that tenders this to eat thereby declares that hee incites to the profession of that Covenant which otherwise appears to have been inacted by that which hee tenders The same sense is contained in S. Pauls words 1 Cor. V. 8 9. Christ your Passeover is slain for you Let us therefore feast not with old loven nor with the leven of malice and deceit but with the unlevened bread of sincerity and truth For if wee consider the circumstance of time and place which our Lord took to institute the Sacrament of the Eucharist just when the Paschal Lamb was eaten how shall wee deny the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse to have been as presently received there as the Sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb was the subject and occasion of the Feast at which hee ordained it But the discourse by which the Apostle perswades Christians to separate themselves from the Jewes Ebr. XIII 10-16 is most pertinent to this purpose as that which is not to be understood otherwise Though when hee saith Wee have an Altar whereof those that serve the Tabernacle have no right to eat I allow that by an Altar hee means metonymically a Sacrifice For proving his intent by instancing in those Sacrifices for sin the bloud whereof was carried within the vail being by the Law appointed to be burnt without the Camp or City Jerusalem hee supposes them to figure our Lord Christ who suffered without Jerusalem Inferring thereupon that they ought to go forth of the communion of the Synagogue though they were to suffer persecution at the hands of their brethren for it But when hee proceedeth By him therefore let us offer to God the sacrifice of praise continually that is the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his Name And to do good and to communicate forget not for with such sacrifices God is well pleased Either wee must conceive him to return to his purpose and to show what Sacrifice hee meant when hee said Wee have an Altar of which they that wait upon the Tabernacle have no right to eat Or wee can give no reason what hee meant to argue that the Jewes have no right to the Sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse which Christians pretend not to eat of in any Sacrifice but in the Eucharist And surely if wee consider but the name of Eucharist wee cannot think it could have been more properly signified than by calling it the sacrifice of praise the fruit of the lips that confesse the Name of God For when hee proceeds to exhort not to forget communicating their goods do wee not know and have wee not made it to appear that this must be by their oblations to the Altar the first-fruits of their goods whereof the Eucharist being first consecrated the rest served the necessities of the Church Which as hath been showed was the original of all Consecrations and Dedications that have been made in Christianity If therefore the eating of the Sacrifice of the Crosse in the Sacrament of the Eucharist mean no more but the signifying and the figuring of that eating of the Sacrifice of the Crosse which is done by a lively Faith that is by every one that considers the death of Christ with that Faith which supposing all that the Gospel sayes of it to be true resolves faithfully to professe Christianity the question is why the Sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted by God why in those elements and to what purpose seeing without Gods appointment men could have done it of themselves to the same effect But if it be manifest that by the Sacrament of the Eucharist God pretends to tender us the communion of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse then is there another presence of the body and bloud of our Lord in the Sacrament beside that spiritual presence in the soul which that living faith effecteth without the Sacrament as well as in the receiving of it Which kinde of presence you may if you please call the representation of the Sacrifice of Christ so as you understand the word representation to signifie not the figuring or resembling of that which is onely signified But as it signifies in the Romane Laws when a man is said repraesentare pecuniam who payes ready money Deriving the signification of it à re praesenti not from the preposition re Which will import not the presenting of that againe to a mans senses which once is past but the tendring of that to a mans possession which is tendred him upon the place That this is the intent of the Sacrament of the Eucharist one peremptory argument there remains in the words of S. Paul when hee sayes Whoso eateth this bread and drinketh this cup unworthily is guilty of the body and blood of Christ For neither can it be said that the Apostle by way of hyperbole calls the slighting of Gods ordinance which hee hath appointed to signifie Christs death the crucifying of our Lord again Because it is manifest that his menace is grounded upon a particular consideration of the nature of the crime not upon that which is seen in every sin Renouncing Christianity indeed is truly the crucifying of Christ again as the Apostle shewes Ebr. VI. 6. and unworthily receiving the Eucharist is by just construction the renouncing of Christianity because that is it which renews the bond of observing it But otherwise it were too cold an expression to make S. Paul call it the crucifying of Christ for that which is common to all sins Nor would it serve the turn For when it follows Hee that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords Body Unlesse a man discern the Lords Body where it is not of necessity it must there be where it is discerned to be not made to be there by being discerned to be there It will now be objected that I hold things inconsistent and state such a sense of our Lords words as makes contradictories true For if bread and wine remaining bread and wine can be also the body and bloud of Christ that is unlesse granting them to be that which they are wee deny them to be that which is not that which wee grant them to be there will be no cause why wee should believe any thing to be that which it is more than that which it is not All difference being a sufficient ground of that contradiction which denies any thing to be that which differs from it that is which it is not The difficulty of answering this is the same which every man findes when hee is put to prove that which is most evident or to make that clear by words which all mens common sense admits Supposing
consideration of their being changed into the Body and Bloud of Christ represented sacrificed upon the Crosse makes them properly no Sacrifice In the former consideration being properly Oblations let them be improperly Sacrifices For in this sense in the Canon of the Masse Te igitur Clementissime Pater per Jesum Christum filium tuum Dominum nostrum supplices rogamus ac petimus uti accepta habeas ac benedic as hâ—c dona haec munera haec sancta sacrificia illibata Wee therefore humbly beseech and desire thee most mercifull Father through Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord to accept and blesse these gifts these presents these holy unstained Sacrifices And not onely here before the Consecration but just before the Lords Prayer and the Communion Per Christum Dominum nostrum Per quem haec omnia semper Domine bona creas sanctificas vivificas benedicis praestas nobis Through Christ our Lord Through whom thou O Lord alwaies createst sanctifiest quickenest and furnishest us with all these good things The repetition of which consideration shows that they are presented to God to be consecrated and made the Eucharist as Oblations out of believers goods According to the form used in divers Greek Liturgies from the words of David 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wee give thee thire own of thine own But when our Lord sayes This is my body which is given for you This is my bloud which is poured out for you Will any man of sense understand That is now by that which here I do offered up to God for you and the bloud as poured forth Or rather this is that body and bloud that is given to be crucified and poured forth for you shortly upon the Crosse Let it therefore have the nature of a Sacrifice so soon as the Consecration is past It shall have that nature improperly so long as it is not the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse Though truly so long as the Sacrament is not empty of that which it signifieth And accorâ—ing to this truth true Altars they are true Temples true Sacrifices though improperly where and by whom it is ministred But I will not therefore grant that this Sacrificing that is this consecrating the Elements into the Sacrifice is an action done in the person of Christ Though they are agreed that it is done by the rehersing of the words of Christ For the rehersing of Christs words is not an act done in the person of Christ Nor do I take upon mee his person whose words I recite And I have showed that the Consecration is done by the Prayers of the Church immediately though these Prayers are made in virtue of Christs order commanding to do what hee did and thereby promising that the Elements shall become that which hee saith those which hee conâ—ecrated are As for the other opinion which I am not to be the more in love with because I am not satisfied with this it is to be considered that the Elements are offered thrice in the Canon of the Masse The first is that offering which I rehersed last beginning Te igitur going before the Consecration as â—â— agree The second is that which this opinion intendeth agreeing with the other that the Consecration is past by rehersing the words of institution But mine opinion allows not this For I conceive the Consecration is yet in doing till that Prayer be past Vt quotquot ex hâc Altaris participatione Sacro-Sanctum filii tui corpus sanguinem sumpserimus omni benedictione coelesti gratiâ repleamur That as many of us as shall have received the Holy body and bloud of thy Son by this communion of the Altar may be filled with every heavenly blessing and grace Which is the later of the two in which I conceive the Consecration to consist as in all other Liturgies in something correspondent to it And truly the very words of the second offering do bear that the Elements are by it offered to God not as consecrated but as to be consecrated supposing the blessing of them to be the consecrating of them as I proved afore Therefore the offering and the presenting of them to God as consecrated is that which is done by the Prayer which follows Memento Domine famulorum famularumque tuarum And nobis quoque peccatoribus famulis tuis whereby the several estates of Christs Church are recommended to God in virtue and consideration of Christs passion here represented and commemorated Not that I intend here to justifie that Prayer for the dead which this containeth but because referring that to consideration in due time all Liturgies have a place where according to S. Paul intercession is made for all States of Christs Church in consideration of the Sacrifice of Christs Crosse represented by this Sacrament And because this intercession is properly the offering up of the the said Sacrifice to God for their necessities And therefore this opinion saith well that the Consecration exhibiteth onely the Sacrifice to be offered up to God by the Prayers of the Church But not by the Prayer which desireth the blessing of the Elements wherein the consecating of them is contained which is that of the elevation in the Canon of the Masse but by those Prayers whereby the effects of Christs Crosse are prayed for in behalf of his Church According to which opinion the consecrating of the Elements will be the Sacrificing of Christ no further than as the body and bloud of Christ are thereby represented as Sacrificed But there will be no further cause of complaint in this then there is cause to complain that there is not such ground for division as the parties would have For though there be onely a general reason of offering no particular consideration of destroying seen in the act of the Church offering either the Elements to be consecrated or the consideration of Christs Crosse represented to render God propitious to his Church Yet are the consecrated Elements no lesse the Sacrifice of Christs Crosse than the presence of Christs body and bloud in them will allow though in order to that Evangelical banquet upon them at which and by which the Covenant of Grace is renewed For the Apostles having made the Eucharist a Sacrifice in this regard I must not count the making of it one offensive I say then that having proved the consecration of the Eucharist to be the production of the body and bloud of Christ crucified or the causing of them to be mystically present in the elements thereof as in a Sacrament representing them separated by the crucifying of Christ And the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse being necessarily propitiatory and impetratory both it cannot be denied that the Sacrament of the Eucharist in as much as it is the same Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse as that which representeth is truly said to be the thing which it representeth is also both propitiatory and impeâ—ratory by virtue of the consecration of it whereby it becometh the
of the Church not onely of divine right as provided for by the Apostles but holding the rank of an end to which particular provisions of the Apostles in this mater seem but as means It is true I am farre from believing that had the Reformation retained this Apostolical Government the Church of Rome would thereby have been moved to joyn in it But when I see the Schisme which it hath occasioned to stand partly upon this difference When I see so many particulars begun by the Apostles as the Scriptures themselves evidence others determinable by the Church When I see those that correct Magnificat introduce instead of them those Lawes which have neither any witnesse from the Scriptures nor any footing in the authority of the whole Church I must needs conclude those that do these things in as much as they do them to be causes of the Schism that is Schismaticks For what authority upon earth can introduce any form reconcileable with that which the Apostles first introduced to procure the vanity of the Church being to continue one and the same Body from the beginning to the end but he must give cause of dissolving the unity of the said Body unlesse he can convince the rest of the Church that it is Gods act to whom all the Church is to be subject whereas to him they are not Wherâ—fore let not Presbyterians or Independents think that they have done their work when they can answer texts of Scripture so as not to be convinced that Bishops are of divine Right Unless they can harden themselves against the belief of one Catholick Church they must further give account why they depart from that which is not against Gods Law to introduce that which it commandeth not For that is to proclaim to the Church that they will not be of it unlesse they may be governed as they list themselves Whereas they cannot be of it by being governed otherwise then the whole Church from the beginning hath been Let them not marvail that those who go not along with them in it forewarn others of making themselves Schismaticks by communicating in their innovations But against the Independants I must further take notice that by the supposition of one Society of the whole Church the whole pretense of the Congregations is quite excluded For if God appointed all Churches to make one Church by the communion of all in the service of God supposing the same faith then did not God appoint all Congregations to be chief within themselves but to depend upon the whole both for the Rule of Faith and for the order of Gods service Again it is evident to common sense that the people of one Church can pretend no interess to give Law to another Church Whereas whomsoever we inable to preserve the unity of the whole those persons must eithâ—r have right to oblige those that are not of their own Congregations or else God shall hâ—ve provided that the Church shall be one but excluded the onely means by which it can be preserved one And therefore to all those texts of Scriptures which are alleged to prove the chief Power of the People in the Church which is the ground of the Congregations I give here this general answer which elsewhere I have applied to the said several passages First by way of exception that they can inferre no more now against the Clergy then they could thâ—n against the Apostles So that seeing the Apostles were then chief notwithstanding all that those Scriptures contain the Clergy also remain now chief in the Church Secondly and directly that they import no more then the tesâ—imony consent and concurrence of the people by way of suffrage or agreement and applause to the Acts of the Clergy the interess whereof is grounded upon the sensible knowledge which the people have of the persons concerned in Ordinations Censures or other Acts of the Church in regard whâ—reof it is no more then reason requires that they be duly satisfied of the proceedings of the Church without making them Judges of maters of Right in it So that to make the people chief in Church maters upon account of this Title is to make the people of England Soveraign because English Juries have power to return evidence in mater of fact either effectual or void Another reason I here advance upon supposition of the force and weight of the Tradition of the Church in evidencing the reason and intent of the sayings and doings of the Apostles recorded in the Scriptures Philip one of the seven having preached and converted and baptized the Samaritanes the Apostles at Jerusalem send down to them Peter and John at whose prâ—yers with â—â—ying thâ—â—r 〈◊〉 on them they receive the Holy Ghost Act. VIII 14-17 And so S. Paul â—â—yes hâ—nds upon the twelve men that were baptized afore at Ephesus â—â—â—â—hey receive the Holy Ghost Act. XIX 1-8 For what reason shall we imagine why they that were inâ—bled to baptize were not â—â—abled to give the Holy Ghost baptism being the condition upon which the Holy Ghost was due by the promise of the Gospel but to show that they were baptized into the uniâ—y of the Church out of which they were not to expect the Holy Ghost Thâ—refore that their Baptism may have effect that is give the Holy Ghost the allowâ—nce of the Apostles upon whose government the unity of the Church dependeth is requite Whiâ—h allowance their prayers for the Holy Ghost and Impoâ—â—â—ion of hands implâ—eth and presupposeth It cannot be doubted that the visible Grace of â—peaking in strâ—nge languages the great works of God was then given for an evidence of the presence of the Holy Ghost with Gods people whereupon it is called by S. Paul 1 Cor. XII 7. The manifestatioâ— of the Spirit But evâ—n of this kind of Graces S. Paul saith again 1 Cor. XIV 32. 33. The Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets For God is not the author of unsetlednesse but of order as in all Churches of the Saints If therefore there come no confusion upon Prophets Prophesying one by one because God who is the Author of Order grants such inspirations and revelations to inferiours that they cease not therefore to be subject to those which he grants to Superiours How much more re asonable is it that the Gift of the Holy Ghost promised to them that are baptized should neverthelesse deâ—end upon the blessing of the Apostles So that when S. Peter sayes to them that were convâ—rted at Pentecost Act. II. 38. Repent and be Baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto remission of sinnes and yâ— shall receive the gift of the Holy â—host It seems to me no more then reason requires that he â—upposes the same blessing As also S. Paul in those of whom he saith That having believed in Christ they were sealed by the Holy spirit of promise And again Grieve not the holy spirit of God whereby ye are sealed to the day
be said that those ever concerned the salvation of a Jew more nearly than this earnest of our common salvation concerns that of a Christian And why the Synagogue should not have more power in those precepts than the Church in this nothing can be said But to the particulars Suppose some fansies may be possest with such an aversness to wine that no use of reason at years of discretion when they come to the Eucharist will prevail to admit that kinde without such alteration in them as the reverence due unto it can stand with for I have seen the case of one that never had tasted wine in all his life and yet by honest endeavors when hee first came to the Eucharist receives it in both kindes without any maner of offense doth it therefore fall under the power of the Church to prohibite it all people because there may fall a case wherein it shall be necessâ—ry to dispense with some though not comprehended in the case For there is nothing but the meer necessity of giving order in cases not expressed by the Law that gives the Church power to take order in such cases Therefore without those caâ—â—â— it hath none And so in the case of those Nations where wine will not keep yet the people are Christians For neither was the reason otherwise supposing that the ancients did reserve the Eucharist in one kinde onely for the absent or for the case of sudden death to those that were under Penance For this reservation was but from Communion to Communion which in those dayes was so frequent that he who caried away the Body of our Lord to eat it at home drinking the Bloud at present might reasonably be said to communicate in both kinds Neither can that sacramental change which the consecration works in the elements be limited to the instant of the assembly though it take effect only in order to that CoÌ„munion unto which the Church designeth that which it consecrateth And so farr as I can understand the condition of the Church at that time in these cases there may have been as just cause to give it then in one kind in these cases as now to the abstemious or to those Nations where wine will not keep But shall this necessity be a colour for a Power in the Church to take away the birth-right of Christian people to that which their own prayers consecrate If the Power of the Church be infinite this colour need not If it he onely regular as I have showed all along that it is there can be no stronger rule than that of common reason which forbids servants to make bold with their Masters ordinances where no other act of his obliges For all necessity is the work of providence and excuses or if you will justifies where it constrains not where it constrains not The Greek Church hath an ancient custom not to consecrate the Eucharist in Leâ—t but upon Sabbaths and Lords days on the other five dayes of the week to communicate of that which was consecrated upon those dayes by the Council of Laodicea Can. XLIX And this Communion is prescribed by the Council in Trullo Can. LII But that they held the Communion to be completed by dipping the elements consecrated afore in wine with the Lords Prayer it will to him that shall peruse that which is found in Cassanders works pag. 1020 1027. Whereby you shall perceive also that the same was formerly done in the Church of Rome on good Friday on which days the same course was and is observed and that with an intent to consecrate it as the Eucharist is consecrated though at this day it is not so believed in the Church of Rome For the custom of the Church determining the intent of those Prayers whereby the Eucharist is consecrated to the elements in which it is communicated Because wine presently consecrated being in so small a quantity was not fit to be kept there is no reason why the Communion should not be complete Though how fit this custom is I dispute not But there is a new device of Concomitance just as old as the with-holding of the Cup from the people that you may be sure it would never have been pleaded but to maintain it for in the Greek Church that allows both kinds who ever heard of it It is said that the bloud in the body accompanieth the flesh neither can the Body of Christ as it is or as it was upon the Cross be eaten without the Bloud Seeing then that hee who receiveth the body must needs receive the bloud also what wrong is it for the people to be denied that which they have which they have received already And now you see to what purpose Trâ—nâ—â—â—sâ—â—ntiation serves To make it appear that our Lord instituted this Sacrament in both elements to no purpose seeing as much must needs be received in onâ—â—inâ—â—â— as in both And yet by your favor even Transubstantiation distinguisâ—â—th between the being of the flesh of Christ naturally in the body of Christ upon the Cross for so it was necessarily accompanied with the bloud of Christ not yet issued from it and between the flesh of Christ being sacramentally in the element consecrated into it And thus it cannot be otherwise accompanied with the bloud than because hee that consecrates is commanded to consecrate another kinde into the bloud And so hee that receives the body being commanded as much to receive the bloud the body may be said to be accompanied with the bloud But otherwise if hee receive not the bloud then is it not accompanied with the bloud as it ought to be For seeing the command is to receive as well as to consecrate several elements into the body and bloud of Christ it is manifest that the body and bloud of Christ are received as they are consecrated apart Under one element the body under another the bloud Indeed upon another ground which the Church of Rome will have no cause to own I do conceive it may well be said that the body is accompanied with the bloud to them that receive the Sacrament in one kinde in case it may or must be thought that they who in the Church of Rome thirst after the Eucharist in both kindes do receive the whole Grace of the Sacrament by the one kinde through the mercy of God giving more than hee promiseth in consideration that they come not short of the condition required by their own will or default Which is necessarily to be believed by all that believe the Church of Rome to remain a Church though corrupt and that salvation is to be had in it and by it Though whether this be so or not I say nothing here because it is the last point to be resolved out of the resolution of all that goes afore For since it is no Church unless the Grace of this Sacrament be convayed by the Sacrament ministred as the Church ministreth the same And seeing the precept of receiving the Eucharist
began to make some question of it upon some disputes which he met with That S. Gregory first professed an opinion of it granted upon no scripture no nor Tradition of faith but upon aparitions and revelations That there is great appearance that Venerable Bede having received it from S. Gregorys Scholars who planted Christianity here added much to it by his credulity in such maters And yet that they had yet assigned no quarter in the Verge of Hell for this purpose but onely believed it of certaine soules in some places of this earth untill the Schoole hammered out a debt of punishment to which souls acquited both of the guilt and staine of sin may remaine lyable The extending of indulgence to the voyding of this how properly soever it may be counted purging of soules made the position a mater of great jelousy for the interest of profit which our common Christianity abhorreth And indulgence indeed of Canonicall penance I have showed hath the first ground in S. Pauls example and necessary use in the Church But when redeeming of penance was come into practice in the Church it was granted upon considerations with Christianity and the safety of poore soules allowed not Of paying a rate of taking the Crosse against Infidels of moderne Jubiles But that there should be a stock of merit in the Church upon account of works of supererogation done by the Saints which theire owne reward answereth not and that the Church in granting indulgence of penance may allow it to his account that receives indulgence is a conceite as injurious to the merits of Christ the consideration of all pardon and to the Covenant of Grace the condition whereof it abateth so that hath no evidence from any rule or practice of the ancient Church But that they should be thought to be of force to redeeme soules out of Purgatory and that taxing the time which they grant and the like for which neither there is nor can be any ground The best that is said or can be said in defense of them who publish them to poore people by whom they are frequented is that they get themselves mony the account whereof being almes they charge themselves with And that people are by this meanes imployed in the works of devotion which if not available to the effect which they imagine are how soever good for their soules health As for the translating of soules to heaven before the day of judgement it is so diametrally contrary to all antiquity that the very naming of it takes away all pretense for Traditon on behalfe of Purgatory It is acknowledged indeed that a number of the ancient Fathers during the flourishing times of the Church doe believe that the fire which the world is to be burnt up with as it shall involve the wicked and cary them to be everlastingly tormented in the sink of the world so it shall touch and scorch even the Saints themselves to try if their works be such as Gods vengeance can take hold of and to purge away that drosse which the love of the world they dyed with importeth This is by divers called Origens Purgatory because they conceive his credit might move S. Hilary S. Basil S. Ambrose Gregory Nyssene and Nazanizain S. Jerome S. Austine and S. Chry. with divers others to follow it But Blondel having observed that it is found in the Sibyles verses will needs have them all to have taken it up from thence Which as I have no reason to yeild to having showed already that the credit of that book was not the foundation of other particular opinions which had vogue in the Church So do I not find those famous Doctors so affected to Origen whose writings concerning the exposition of the scriptures they were necessarily obliged to frequent as to admit an opinion so neere concerning the faith upon this recommendation on whom they declare so much jelousy in mater of Faith For my part as I find it very agreeable to the words of S. Paul when he saith that they whose works are burnt up shall escape themselves but as through fire So how mens works should be tryed or burnt up by that fire I find it not easy to be understood And therefore without taking upon me to censure so great persons for innovating in the Church or to maintaine that in which there is no concurrence of any Scripture with any consent of the whole Church I leave the truth of this to judgement as secure that it will not concern the common Faith But this I say peremptorily that admitting it there remaines no pretense for Purgatory in the Tradition of the Church unlesse it be by equivocation of words For this coming to passe at the day of judgement admitteth no release before And without release before Purgatory fire goes quite out No Indulgences no Jubilies no stock of merit to be dispensed by the Church to such workes of devotion as it limiteth can be any of any request if they take not effect afore the day of judgement Take away the opinion of translating souls from the Verge of hell which Purgatory to the sight of God and the Clergy of the Church of Rome shall no more eat the sins of the people as the Prophet complaines of the Priests under the Law For while the people are perswaded that their sins are cured by the sentence of absolution once pronounced Penance serving onely to extinguish the debt of temporall punishment remaining and that to be ransomed by the services which they pay for in the name of their friends which are dead the Clergy live by those sins of which the people dy because they are not duly cured For the lusts for which men sin not being cured by that hardship of Penance which the case requireth to change attrition into contrition the guilt of sin remaines upon the head of him in whose heart the love of sin remaines alive notwithstanding the keyes of the Church mistaking in that case Besides take away the opinion of translating soules from hell to heaven since the coming of Christ and there will remaine no ground for the translating of the Fathers souls from the verge of hell which is Limbus Patrum to the sight of God by the descent of our Lord into hell and his rising from the dead againe There will be no cause why that reason which I tender for that vanity of immaginations rather then opinions or belief in the Fathers which that which all agree in is intangled with should not be admitted For the translating of Christian soules from Purgatory to heaven not being believed why should the translating the Fathers souls remaine Why should not the simple Faith in which all Christians agree revive and take the place of Tradition in the Church which indeed it hath that between death and the day of judgement the good are in joy the bad in paine both incomplete till both be fulfilled after both shall have received their finall doome CHAP. XXIX The
it under the knowledge of his Church And when those that have spent their time in this kind of life out of their experience and knowledge undertake to direct others the way of governing themselves in it when others joyning themselves to them undertake to order their life according to such directions neither hath the Church any thing to do in the matter of them further then to take account that they be according to Christianity nor do the parties enter into any new obligation but that of performing that profession which is become notorious The consequence whereof is this that the profession being â—ransgressed by an act that creates a new state as that of mariage the bond whereof is insoluble the obligation which is violated being to God and not to the Church the Church shall have no power to free him from the obligation contracted whatsoever censure the transgression of his profession may require John Cassians who lived in the Monasteries of Aegypt wherein this exercise seems to have received first that forme with other parts according to their capacities imitated mightily justifies the Apostolicall originall of the profession by the antiquitie of their Monasteries and the Traditions by which they lived received from age to age without expresse beginning But above all the three severall formes of them extant in Aegypt during his time seems to demonstrate by what degrees it came to that height The first of them called in his time Sarabaitae professing no communion with others but at each mans discretion seems to him a defection from the common profession But signifies that at the first the profession did stand without living in comon though it could not stand so long without abuse To avoid which abuse first Convents began then Anchorites left them to live alone in the wildernesse You may see what he writeth De Instit Mâ—n II. 3 5. Collat. XVIII 3-7 The orders of their Convents which he describes as also Saint Basils instructions make the work of their life to be the service of God by prayer and fasting with the praises of God But so that labouring with their hands in some bodily work and living in so much abstinence they were able to contribute the greatest part of their gaine for almes to the poor Though not at their own discretion but at the discretion of their superiours to whose guidance they had once given up themselves How farre this is distant from any form of this profession extant in the West is easie enough to imagine For all this while they remaine meer Laies without all pretense of that superiority over the people in the Church which the Clergy signifieth That superiority which they have one over another standing onely upon that voluntary consent and profession the solemnizing whereof signifieth that it is approved by the Church Nor is there any thing of indowment in all this their profession to give almes of their labours rendring them uncapable of any such But it must not be denied that the Monasteries of the West have been the meanes to preserve that learning which was preserved alive during the time at least the knowledge of the Scriptures and other records of the Church upon which the knowledge of the Scriptures depends And certainly the knowledge of the Scriptures is more dangerous then a sword in a mad mans hand unlesse it be joyned with that humility which onely Christianity teacheth A thing more rare in them that think themselves guilty of learning then pearles or diamonds A thing so difficult for them to attaine that it ought to be counted a sufficient price for all the exercise a man can bestow in this profession all his life long That sobriety of mind that gravity of manners that watchfullnesse over a mans thoughts and passions which is absolutely requisite for the discharge as of all Christians so especially of them that are liable to the temptation of spirituall pride for knowledge in matters of God is a competent reward for all that retirement from the world which this profession can require This being the designe of Monasteries it cannot be denied that the goods which they may be indowed with are consecrated to the service of God as estated upon his Church But not therefore upon the Church of Rome The pretense of allowing the Rule of Monasticall Orders which ought indeed to be approved of by the Church and of reducing them into severall bodies under one Government in severall dominions and the Churches of them a thing no way concerning the foundation of the Church or any right thereof derived from the same hath been the means for the Church of Rome to exempt them from the government of their Ordinaries and to reduce them to an immediate dependence upon it by whose Charter each Order subsisteth But there is no manner of ground in the profession for this nor was it so originally but is come to be so by the swelling of the Regular Power of that See to that height which the pretense of Infallibility speaketh For why should not every Church or every Synode to which any Church belongs and the respective heads of the same be capable of visiting regulating or correcting whatsoever may concerne the common Christianity in bodies of meer Lay people as I have showed all Monaâ—â—eriâ—s or Convents of Monkes originally to be subsisting within the respective Diocesse of every Church Unlesse the case of a Monke falls out to be a cause that concerns the whole Church as that of Pelagius For then there will be no marvaile that it should resort to the same triall that determines the like causes of other Christians And upon these terms though the Church of England hath no Monasteries as not essentiall to the constitution of the Church but advantagious for the maintainance of that retirement from the world in the reasons of our actions wherein our common Christianity consisteth by that visible retirement wherein this profession consisteth For the constitution thereof succeeding that horrible act of abolishing the Monasteries under Henry VIII it is no marvaile if it were difficult to agree in a forme which the Reformation might allow and cherish yet is no son of the Church of England bound to disown the whole Church in maintaining Monasticall life as agreeable with Christianity and expedient to the intent of it They that understand the intent of Monasticall life to be contemplation do not seem to consult with the Primitive custome and practice of it in the Church For when bodily labour was by the Rule to succeed in the intervals of Gods service and as soon as it was done I cannot conceive how a man should imagine a more active life That the activity thereof is exercised not in any businesse tending to advantage a man in this world but to keep him imploied so as to live free to serve God maketh it not the lesse active though not to the ordinary purpose The case is the same supposing that in stead of bodily labour men give
which it stands upon other termes But this I say that when the extremity of one party occasions the other to fall into the opposite extreme neither party seemes clearely excusable of the fault which the other commits in betaking it selfe to the opposite extreme And then I say further that when secular force was applyed to impose a burthen which the experience of more in corrupt times had showed that they could not bear the issue must needs be the treading down of Christianity for maintaining of the â—edge that should sense it And therefore the proceedings being voide in all reason of Law it is no marvaile if that moderation which the argeement of both sides might have preserved could not take place I am yet indebted to those of the congregations in a short account of the right of the people in Church maters I have acknowledged that during the time of the Apostles they were present at ordinations at inflicting of penance at Councils that the resolution of maters in debate passed under their knowledg that their consent concurred to put them in force But I have also maintayned that the unity of the Church is the soveraine Law to which all other Lawes though never so much inacted by the Apostles never so evidenty couched in the scriptures are necessarily subordinate as tending onely to maintaine unity by maintaining order in the exercise of those offices for communion wherein the Church subsisteth That in order hereto every Church is a body tending to constitute one body of all Churches consisting of all Christians contayned in one city and the territory of it howsoever cities and their territories may be distinguished as some times meerely upon this account and to this intent and purpose they have been distinguished And by this means I have prescribed that the consent of the people of each Church was never requisite in this consideration because they usually meet together for the service of God â—ut as part of the people of that Church who were to be acquainted with proceedings concerning their Church that they might have reason to rest satisfied in the same I have provided in due place that Lawes expressely provided by the Apostles and recorded in the scriptures for that state of the Church which they saw may and ought to be superseded by the Church in case they prove uselesse to that purpose for which they were provided by that change which succeeds in the state of the Church For how should the soveraign Law of unity take place how should the Church continue one and the same body from the first to the second coming of Christ otherwise Now this interest of the people in maters concerning their Church though related in the scriptures and known by them in point of fact to have had the force of law during the time of the Apostles and accoâ—ingly in the primative Church of the ages next the Apostles yet cannot be said to be any where commanded in point of right for a Law of God to take place in all ages I must therefore prescribe upon this account and doe prescribe That when the world is come into the Church and the whole people of England for example have declared themselves Christians it cannot be any more for the unity of the Church that the consent of the people be required to the validity of those acts which concerne the community of their respective Churches For then would it be no lesse unpossible to constitute one Church of all Churches then it is for all Independents to constitute a Body that may be called the Church of all their congregations each whereof they call a Church And therefore there is no cause why they should demand the same regard to be had to each one of the people when all the people of a City and the bounds thereof concur to constitute the Church of a City and when the chiefe part of Christians within the boundes of a City assembling at once for the service of God might also be acquainted with the proceedings of maters concerning their Church But all this while I am not so simple as to grant that the consent of the people then required to the validity of things done in the Church did consist in plurality of votes having easily huffed out that ridiculous imagination that S. Paul and Barnabas created Elders by votes of the people testified by lifting up their hands the action of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being attributed to themselves not to the people But the consent of the people I meane in body as the people that is a quality distinct from the Clergy in the Church as their superiours and guides in maters concerning the community of it For is there any example in the Scripture that ever they went to the poll or counted noses in passing of maters concerning the Church which the people were acquainted with Is there any such example in all the practice of the primitive Church in which it is acknowledged the same course continued as under the Apostles Ordinations were held in presence of the people that if there were cause they who knew every mans person might object against those who were in nomination if not they might consent by one vote of all that was called their suffrage This being the maner upon this occasion they might did sometimes step before their leaders and demand such as liked them best But so that if they forgot themselves the Clergy was bound not to admit their demand And in case of a Bishop the neighbour Bishops were bound by S. Pauls instructions to Timothy not to lay hands on any for whom they could not answer Tertullian testifieth that mater of excommunication was handled at the assemblies of the Church that is with the knowledge of the people as the case of the incestuous person at Corinth in S. Paul is But neither were all maters handled before the people if the mater of S. Pauls communicating with the Jewes were handled with the Elders before the people were acquainted with it Acts XXI nor is it posible to imagine supposing a Church not to be a congregation but that which I have said that the people can have satisfaction in all maters of that nature when all the world is come into the Church As for Councils it is a thing ridiculous to demand because the people concurred to the resolution of that at Jerusalem Acts XV. therefore that the acts of Councils should passe the people For when the Church of Jerusalem and the whole Church were both the same thing it was no marvaile that the people was to be satisfied in the conclusion of it And by the forme of holding the Spanish Counciles which you have at the begining of the Councils â—â—t appeares that there was provision made for the people to assist and see what was done at their Councils But so unreasonable is it to demand that the people consent to the acts of Councils that it is manifest that there can be no