Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	body_n	nature_n	power_n	1,617	5	4.8157	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46699	A second part of The mixture of scholasticall divinity, with practical, in several tractates: wherein some of the most difficult knots in divinity are untyed, many dark places of Scripture cleared, sundry heresies and errors refuted ... Whereunto are annexed, several letters of the same author, and Dr. Jeremy Taylor, concerning Original Sin. Together with a reply unto Dr. Hammonds vindication of his grounds of uniformity from 1 Cor. 14.40. By Henry Jeanes, minister of Gods Word at Chedzoy in Somersetshire.	Jeanes, Henry, 1611-1662.; Taylor, Jeremy, 1613-1667.	1660 (1660)	Wing J508; ESTC R202621	508,739	535

sinne be not of the nature of man sor that is all I meane by essentiall if it be not how came Adam to sinne his first sinne if it be I aske whether shall the Saints in the resurrection be raised up with it or no If yea then you blaspheme God's full glorification of the Saints in the resurrection for impeccability is certainly a part of their full glorisication If nay then it is no blasphemy to say that in the resurrection the Saints shall be raised up without something that is essentiall to them or to their nature Jeanes That possibility to sinne is essentiall unto every rationall creature I grant and hereupon 〈◊〉 that 't is not separated from the Saints in 〈◊〉 full 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall I 〈◊〉 your charge of blasphemy herein having the 〈◊〉 of Schoolemen both Thomists and Scotists and reason too on my side Indeed the Saints of Heaven do constantly and interruptedly shun and decline sinne yet 't is an 〈◊〉 possible unto their nature considered in it selfe 〈◊〉 they are 〈◊〉 therefrom by their glorisied state and 〈◊〉 for though sinne and a fullnesse of glory 〈◊〉 inconsistent yet ' 〈◊〉 no 〈◊〉 or repugnancy that their natures abstractly considered secluding the consideration of their glory should be sinfull Yea but you say 〈◊〉 is certainely a part of the full glorification of the Saints and what is impeccability but an impossibility of sinning if God then make the Saints impeccable he 〈◊〉 away from them all 〈◊〉 of sinning For answer 1. There is a twosold impeccability 1. By nature 2. By the grace and 〈◊〉 of God 〈◊〉 by nature takes away all possibility of sinning but it is received generally as a rule among the School-men that a creature cannot be made 〈◊〉 per 〈◊〉 that is such a one as cannot by nature sinne And if you please you may view the proofes thereof in 〈◊〉 lib 2. Dist 22. quaest 1. 〈◊〉 by the gift and grace of God doth not eradicate the remote power of sinning but only keeps it from being actuated and 't is this impeccability only that is part of the Saints glorification 2. A thing may be said to be impossible sensu diviso or sensu 〈◊〉 In sensu diviso 't is not impossible but possible for the Saints in Heaven to sin for that considered in themselves without the custodient grace of God alwayes underpropping them they are liable unto sin the lamentable fall of the Angels of darkenesse is an evident proofe But now 〈◊〉 composito 't is indeed impossible for glorified Saints to sinne that is 't is impossible for them to sinne considered under this reduplication as fully glorified because fullnesse of glory and sinne cannot stand together This answer is in Scotus lib. 4. dist 49. quaest 6. whose words I shall insert for the sake of some Readers who may not have him in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 patet quod beatus est impeccabilis in sensu compositionis hoc est non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beatus peccare sed in sensu divisionis quod manens beatus 〈◊〉 habeat potentiam possibilitatem ad peccandum potest 〈◊〉 duplicitèr vel per aliquid sibi 〈◊〉 quod excludit potentian talem vel per causam 〈◊〉 quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propinquam ab illo c 〈◊〉 est causa intrinseca in 〈◊〉 Michaelis 〈◊〉 beati per quam 〈◊〉 potentia ad peccandum pro alias in sensu divisionis non est autem causa intrinseca 〈◊〉 istam 〈◊〉 omnino reduci ad actam sed per causam 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illa propinqua ad peccandum 〈◊〉 per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 semper 〈◊〉 actum fruendi it a 〈◊〉 possit 〈◊〉 suam remolam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad actum siquidem 〈◊〉 causa secunda praeventa à causâ superiori agente ad 〈◊〉 oppositum potest 〈◊〉 propinqua exire in aliud oppositum Concedo ergo quod infert quod 〈◊〉 beatus sit peccabilis in sensu divisionis loquendo de 〈◊〉 remotâ Dr. Taylor But Sir 〈◊〉 think you of Mortality is that essential or of the nature of man I suppose you will not deny it But yet I also believe you will 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 we are sown a corruptible body yet we shall be raised an incorruptible and the mortal shall 〈◊〉 on immortality Ieanes For answer I shall propound a distinction of mortality that is very obvious and ordinary A thing may be said to be mortal either respectu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propinquae 1. In respect of a remote power of dying which hath in it the remote cause of dissolution an elementary matter 2. In regard of a near power of dying arising from the actual conflict and 〈◊〉 influence of the Elements and their contrary qualities The latter Mortality is separable but then it is not essential As for the former Mortality which alone is essential I think very few doubt but that 't is also inseparable from the nature of a man body for the 〈◊〉 and incorruption of the bodies of the Saints in the resurrection will not be by taking away out of their bodies the remote causes of corruption the Elements and their contrary qualities for then their bodies would not be mixt and so not for substance the same that they were but by an hinderance or prevention of the corruptive influence of the Elements and their contrary qualities That I am not singular in this I shall manifest by transcribing the Testimonies of some few School-men who though they differ one from another in assigning the cause and reason of the impassibility and 〈◊〉 of glorified Bodies yet they all agree with Durand in this That glorified Bodies are not impassible per privationem 〈◊〉 passivae sed per aliquod 〈◊〉 impedimentum actualis 〈◊〉 nè siat The first shall be of Scotus lib 4. dist 49. quaest 13. Dico ergo quod causa impassibilitatis est voluntas divina non 〈◊〉 causae secundae corruptivae per hoc est illud impassibile 〈◊〉 potentia remota sed propinqua non à causâ 〈◊〉 sed 〈◊〉 impediente 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est de 〈◊〉 supra c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de 〈◊〉 in camino qui non 〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉 trium puerorum non 〈◊〉 per aliquam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pueris 〈◊〉 ex carentiâ potentiae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex contrario 〈◊〉 impediente sed quia Deus ex voluntate suâ non 〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The second is of Durand lib. 4. dist 44. quaest 4. Restat ergò quod 〈◊〉 gloriosa non 〈◊〉 impassibilia simplicitèr absolutè per privationem principii 〈◊〉 cùm natura corporum gloriosorum sit 〈◊〉 eadem quae prius sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aliquid praestans impedimentum actualis passionis nè siat Quid autem sit illud utrum sit aliqua forma 〈◊〉 an solum virtus divina 〈◊〉 duplex 〈◊〉 opinio 〈◊〉 enim quidam quod talis impassibilitas 〈◊〉 per aliquam forman inexistentem c. Alius modus est quod impassibilitas corporum gloriosorum

in his manhood yet whether he shall judg according to his manhood is made a controversie betwixt the 〈◊〉 and the Scotists Not so much for the state of the question it selfe as for Aquinas his proofes of it the validity of which Scotus according unto his usuall wont questioneth and disputes against the place of Scripture that is chiefly quoted for the affirmative is John 5. 27. And hath given him authority to execute judgment also because he is the Son of man Here Beza noteth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 saies that the Authours of this interpretation Hereticks render it infamous and he quotes in the margent Calvine and Beza upon the place but their great and subtile Suarez in tertiam partem Thom quaest 59. artic 2. cites Tertullian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cap. 22. for the very same thing and he takes notice of it as a thing very remarkable illud observatione dignum non legere quia sed qua but now as is here to be taken not reduplicativè for then authority to execute judgment would be essentiall to and reciprocall with man but specisicativè so that it only determines the subject in which this derived authority is seated unto this purpose speaks Suarez in the place but now quoted according to this exposition saith he in those words because he is the son of man is not rendered the adequate cause whence this power of Judging ariseth but that nature is designed which was necessary unto Christ that he might be capable of the gift of this power for as God he could not receive this power anew but because he was the Son of man he was capable of it but we may well stick unto our own translation and render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because for the humane nature hath not only a concomitancy with but also a causality in respect of the act of execution of judgment But then we must not abstract and sever the humane nature from the grace of Head-ship and the grace of personall union but Consider them 〈◊〉 jointly This Aquinas hints when he saith par 3. quaest 59. art 2. that the Father hath given authority unto the Son to execute Judgment because he is the Son of man 〈◊〉 propter conditionem naturae not meerly because of the condition of his nature for then as Chrysostome objects all men should have this authority sed hoc pertinet ad gratiam capitis quam Christus in humanâ naturâ accepit but this appertaineth to the grace of head-ship which he received in the humane nature the words then may be thus glossed he hath given him authority to execute judgment also because he is the Son of man because as he is Mediator King and head of his Church so also he is qualified for discharge of this his office by being not only God but man in one person God-man and it we take this way the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated also will not be redundant but emphatick and Maldonate makes the Emphasis to stand thus the Father hath not alone the power of judging but he hath transferred it also upon the Son because he is the Son of man and so fitted for the audible and visible administration of judgment Aquinas his reasons are by Capreolus thus summed up judgment agreeth unto Christ according unto that nature in regard of which he hath as Mediator Redeemer and head of his Church a Lord-ship over men but this Lord-ship agreeth unto him not only according to his God-head but also according to his man-hood for to this 〈◊〉 Christ both dyed and rose and revived that he might be Lord both of the d ad and living Rom. 14. 9. and therefore he shall judge according to his man-hood Next followes the object of this judgment and that is twosold personall and reall 1. Personall the persons to be judged men although men be here expressed indefinitely yet we may by warrant of the Scriptures adde the universall signe and say God will judge the secrets of all men of all sorts ranks and degrees of men of all individuals of men we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ Rom. 14. 10. we must all appeare before the judgment seat of Christ 2 Cor. 5. 10. Gorran hath a Conceit that by the naming of men the evill angels are excluded he shall judge the 〈◊〉 of men not divels saith he but that the wicked angels shall come unto judgment also at the last day the scripture is very plaine know yee not that we shall judge the Angells 1 Cor. 6. 3. For if God spared not the Angels that sinned but cast them down to 〈◊〉 and delivered them into chaines of darknesse to be reserved unto judgment 2 Pet. 2. 4. And the Angels which kept not their first estate but left their own habitation he hath reserved in everlasting chaines under darknesse unto the judgment of the great day Jude 6. 2. Reall the secrets of men their secret state election and reprobation their most secrets actions their chamber their midnight and closet sins that have no witnesses but such whose partnership in guilt will render silent Eccles. 12. 14 1 Cor. 4. 5. the most hidden and darkest musings of the mind those purposes desires nay wouldings and wishings of the will unto which no vent was given either by language or action those passions of the heart which have been smothered from outward notice with the greatest care and cunning nay those first motions and inclinations unto sinne that were never consented unto which arise so thick in the soule as that 't is impossible for the most watchfull Conscience to take an exact survey of the most of them and therefore may be deservedly ranked ámongst those errors and secret faults of which David speakes Psal. 19. 12. Who can understand his errors cleanse 〈◊〉 me from secret faults Lastly we have an adjunct the circumstance of time when this judgment shall be in the day which is so called saith Gorran propter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because then shall be a manifestation of all secret things sometimes 't is cald midnight Matth. 25. 6. propter improvisionem because of the suddennesse and unexpectednesse of it it is cald the even Matth. 20. 8. propter sinem temporis because then shall be the finall period of time and t is stiled the morning as he inferreth from a mistranslation of the Latine Interpreter Zeph. 3. 5. propter initium aeternitatis because 't will be the beginning and as it were dawning of eternity but these are but curious niceties that have no footing in the text for doubtlesse the day is here taken for time indesinitely as 't is usually in many other places of Scripture Esa. 49. 8. 2 Cor. 6. 7. Luk. 19. 42. Joh. 8. 56. So that there is no need to make any inquiry touching that opinion of some Millenaries that the day of judgment shall last a thousand yeares because

that is wholly depraved and defiled with lust he thinkes then that lust might be seated in the will nay 〈◊〉 himselfe though he thinke that concupiscence hath it's chiefe residence in the flesh by which he meanes the body and the sensuall powers of man yet he withall 〈◊〉 that there is something like unto it in the superiour part of the soule for even that is prone immoderately to desire honours vaine glory and the like vanities and therefore Paul Gal. 5 having said that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lusteth against 〈◊〉 spirit he nameth not only fornication drunkennesse and the like carnall sinnes but also idolatry heresies envyings c which were spirituall sinnes sinnes of the upper region of the soule thus you see that a great part of concupiscence is placed in the supreme the rationall faculties of man and extended unto spirituall and immateriall objects and hereupon it will follow that at least this part of concupiscence cannot 〈◊〉 from the condition 〈◊〉 the matter A third argument is because this assertion that the resultancy of this concupiscence from the nature and matter of man would have been besides the intention of God strikes against either the omniscience or omnipotency of God for either God foresaw this resultancy or not to say that he did not foresee it takes away the infinitenesse of his knowledge if he foresaw it then I demand whether he could not or would not prevent it to say that he could not prevent it denieth the infinitenesse of his power if he could but would not prevent or stay it then it followeth that this resultancy was not besides but agreeable unto his purpose and intention Secondly this answer is repugnant unto Bellarmine his own principles I shall instance in two First it is apparent that he maketh this concupiscence to be chiefly the naturall and necessary propension of the sensitive faculties unto their proper and naturall object and from this I thus argue Naturall and necessary propensions of the naturall faculties of any thing unto their naturall and proper object cannot be besides the intention of God the creatour for such propensions must needs be positive qualities and of every positive being God is the cause and author But now concupiscence is by Bellarmines discourse the naturall and necessary propension of the sensitive faculties of man unto their proper and naturall objects And consequently t is not besides the intention of the Creatour flowing as a naturall defect or disease only from the condition of the mould or matter of man A second thing in Bellarmine with which this his answer clasheth is his confession that concupiscence is contrary to the nature of man de gratiâ primi hominis cap. 7. From hence I thus argue Nothing that is against the nature of man can 〈◊〉 naturally and necessarily from the principles of his nature But Bellarmine confesseth that this concupiscence is against the nature of man And therefore he contradicts himselfe when he affirmeth that it results from the principles of man's nature the condition of his matter As for the similitude of the Smith and the Iron sword that will be nothing unto the purpose for First no Smith whatsoever can make Iron that is the matter of a sword but God alone is the author of the matter of man and consequently is the cause of all the naturall sequels thereof Secondly a Smith if he could would frame such a sword as might not be subject or inclined unto rust but it is not a thing in his power for he cannot alter the nature of Iron so that if he will produce an Iron sword it will be lyable unto rust The Papists seeme to ascribe such an impotency unto God himselfe for they suppose all along that God cannot make man to be compounded of a reasonable soule and sensible matter but that besides the intention of God the naturall and necessary result of such a composition will without supernaturall prevention be a headlong inclination unto sensible objects against the dictates of right reason but the falshood of this supposition I shall anon at large detect A second answer of Bellarmin's which we frequently sind also in Dr. Taylor is that this concupiscence is not a sinne but only a disease languer infirmity or 〈◊〉 of nature and therefore though God had been the cause of it it would not yet have followed that God was the author of sinne Unto this I shall oppose the cleare testimony of Paul who in 6 7 8. chapters of his Epistle unto the Roman's cal's it sinne fourteene times as Bishop Davenant and Dr. Francis White after Bishop of Ely calculate the places But unto all these places Bellarmine replyeth in which reply he is seconded by Dr. Taylor that concupiscence is called sinne by the Apostle not properly and formally but 〈◊〉 because it is the effect and cause of sinne the effect of Adam's first sinne and the cause of our sinne But that concupiscence is properly and formally a sinne I shall prove against both Bellarmine and his confident second Dr. Taylor from it's influence subject adjuncts opposites First from it's influence mediate and immediate First from it's mediate influence it is the cause of all actuall sin whatsoever whensoever we are tempted to any sinne we are enticed and drawne away by our own lust this is the mother that conceiveth and bringeth forth all sinne Jam. 1. 14 15 and doubtlesse the daughter resembleth the mother the cause and the effect have the same nature that which as a habit or quality is the cause of sinne must needs be sinne too but concupiscence or the originall pronesse of our natures unto sinne is the roote of all sinne and therefore to use the Apostles expression 't is exceeding sinfull Rom. 7. 13 for nil dat quod non habet vel formalitèr vel eminenter But for confirmation of this argument we have the testimony of him who is the truth it selfe Mat. 7. 17 18. A corrupt tree bringeth forth evill fruit a good tree cannot bring forth evill fruit now concupiscence or an inclination unto sinne bringeth no fruit but that which is morally evill and corrupt and therefore 't is a tree morally evill and corrupt but this argument I shall insist on more fully hereafter in opening Jam. 1. 14 15. Secondly from it's immediate influence it naturally and directly produceth as it 's immediate effects those first motions unto sinne which are without consent and therefore if we can prove these first motions unto sinne to be sinne our adversaries will confesse that concupiscence is sinne also now that they are sinne may be concluded from the Apostles description of sinne 1 〈◊〉 3. 4. Sinne is the transgression of the law for the first motions unto sinne trespasse against that which our Saviour cal's the first and great commandement thou shalt love the Lord with all thy soule might mind and strength for if sinne God's greatest enemy hath any motions or inclinations of the soule any thoughts of the

that evill Conscience which doth but now whisper will then roare and thunder the peace of a good Conscience here in this life passeth all understanding and that joy which is the result of it is unspeakeable and full of Glory but compared with those ravishing sweets and Comforts with which the Conscience shall be filled in the day of judgment it beares not unto them halfe that proportion which a Cluster of grapes cut downe at the brook 〈◊〉 had unto the whole vintage of Canaan Numb 13. Secondly The influence of Conscience will then be greater and 〈◊〉 more irresistable and unobstructed then now for now it may be silenced or out-noised by our louder pleasures but then nothing will be able either to stoppe or drowne its voice it will speake in as loude and shrill an accent as the voice of the Arkeangel and the trump of God as these shall awaken the dead out of their Coffins so shall that raise in the memory of Reprobates those sins which their impenitency had buried in a grave of forgetfulnesse and put fresh life and vigour into them to torment and terrifie unto all eternity Thirdly In the day of judgment there will be a clearer evidence in the testimony of Conscience then now for now it is many times undiscerned by any but our selves for what man knoweth the things of a man save the spirit of man which is in him 1 Cor. 2. 11. but then it will be made as legible as if it were written with the glorious beames of the Sunne upon a wall of the purest Chrystall in conformity hereunto 't is that some think that there is an Elipsis in the words which they thus supply their Conscience also bearing witnesse and their thoughts in the meane while accusing or else excusing one another as shall be manifested in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ. Estius quotes Stapulensis for another interpretation to wit that in the day is as much as against the day and why may not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be translated here against the day as well as verse the 5 th 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against the day of wrath and thus the coherence will be fluent and 〈◊〉 and afford us this note That Conscience will bind over against the grand assises of Jesus that day wherein God will Judg the secrets of men by Jesus Christ c. the tribunall of Conscience is a prognostick and representation of Christ's throne it 's verdict a presage and preoccupation of Christ's sentence futuri judicii praejudicium as Tertullian phraseth it what are the terrors of a bad Conscience but slashes of Hell fire what are the triumphs and Consolations of a good Conscience but a glimpse and dawning of Heaven-happinesse But I dwell too long upon the Coherence In the words themselves wee have three things considerable First A prediction 2ly A Description 3. A Confirmation of the last and generall Judgment First A prediction of it shall Judg. Secondly A description of it and that 1. By its causes 1. Principall God shall judg 2. Instrumentall by Jesus Christ. Secondly By its object and that both personall and reall 1. Personall men 2. Reall secrets of men Thirdly By an adjunct the Circumstance of time when in the day Lastly we have the Confirmation of this prediction from a testimony of undenyable authority the testimony of the Gospel according to my Gospel From the words I shall take occasion to handle the Common place of the last and generall judgment and it is a point that I shall briefly explaine confirme and apply 〈◊〉 In the explication of it I shall confine my selfe to the opening of the text the act of judgment is an aggregate action containing many distinct and particular acts some formally and others by way of concomitancy a description of which you may see at large Matth. 25. vers 31 32 c. usque ad finem 2 Thesal 1 vers 6 7 8 9 10. Jude 14. 15. Rev. 20. 11 12 13 14 15. here in the text 't is set forth by its causes object and adjunct 1. By its causes principall and instrumentall 1. Principall God shall Judge God is taken in Scripture either 〈◊〉 or personally 1. Essentially for the three persons in the Trinity and so it may be taken here because the act of judicature is an outward worke and therefore common unto them all 2. Personally for the first person the Father and the act of judging may in a speciall manner be ascribed unto the Father by that manner of speaking which the Schoolemen call appropriation for hereby the Son and holy Ghost are not excluded but only the order of the Fathers concurrency shewn to wit that being the fountaine of the Trinity he judgeth of himselfe by the Son and Holy Ghost But against this that saying of our Saviour may be objected John 5. 22. The Father Judgeth no man but hath committed all judgment unto the Son Unto this there are usually given two answers 1. The Father Judgeth no man separately without the Son but hath communicated all Judgment unto the Son non largiendo sed generando saith Ambrose not by temporary donati n but by eternall generation but if any think that to say that Judgment is given or committed unto the Son by eternall generation is too harsh a Catachresis 2. In a second place therefore 〈◊〉 answer may be returned to wit that the Father Judgeth no man in that manner that he hath committed all Judgment unto the Son to wit as 〈◊〉 as God man as subsisting in the 〈◊〉 he Judgeth no man in a visible and externall manner for thus judgment is ascribed unto the Son not per appropriationem but per proprietatem 2. Instrumentall by Jesus Christ to wit as man and Mediator for as God he is a principall cause but the judiciary power conferred upon Christs manhood though in comparison of other creatures it be a power singularis 〈◊〉 of singular and transcendent excellencie unto which no creature can have an equall power yet in respect of the judiciary power of his Godhead 't is but a secundary subordinate and ministeriall power which he hath by delegation and Comission so that as man he is but a deputy Judg the Father hath committed all Judgment unto the Son John 5. 22. that Christ shall Judg in the humane nature the Scripture is expresse the Son of man shall come in his Glory c. Matth. 25. 31. chap. 24. v. 30. He hath appointed a day in which he will Judg the world c by that man whom he hath ordained c. Acts 17. 31. Every eye shall see him and they also which 〈◊〉 him Rev. 1. 7. Even Reprobates shall see him but they cannot behold his Godhead for the sight of that would make them happy and banish all sadnesse in his manhood then it is that he shall be visible and conspicuous unto them but though the Scripture be thus cleare that Christ shall judge

you do not you have no reason to presse me with their sayings 3. You say out of Athanafius that by the signe of the Crosse all the Idoll Temples were layd waste and empty I could wish that you had exemplified this by some instances that we might have considered of what weight they had been The Papists of the Seminary of Rhemes have referred us unto a famous story in Theodoret which saith Fulk pag 694. is a Miracle wrought by Marcellus Bishop of 〈◊〉 in setting the Temple of Jupiter a fire with sprinkling of water after he had signed it with the 〈◊〉 and prayed when it would not burn with fire This is a pretty story if true and will serve aptly for your purpose But Sir wee shall hope for so much charity from you that you will 〈◊〉 brand for Infidels all that have not faith strong enough to swallow these Miracles of the Crosse. Theodoret might have this at the second hand and hee himself might be deceived though he were unwilling to deceive and in all ages devout and wel meaning persons have been over-credulous in entertaining 〈◊〉 it and fained Miracles As for the places quoted out of Augustine I cannot find them in Frobenius his Edition of Augustine and I have no other and therefore I think you follow some other Edition but the thing is not material for I hope that what I have said already will be a satisfactory answer unto them Dr. Hammond sect 27. And then Baptisme being the exorcising of Devils the ancient Catechists wee know were called Exorcists the rescuing of a person from the power of 〈◊〉 into Gods Sonship and family what can 〈◊〉 more proper or agreeable or exactly symbolical than the use of this in 〈◊〉 according to that of Tertullian de Resurr Carn Caro signatur ut anima muniatur the flesh or body is signed that the soul may be desended or 〈◊〉 Jeanes Your ordinary Readers will thinke you Conjure when they hear you term Baptisme an exorcising of Devils for they never heard of any Exorcisne in Baptisme save of the Papists which our Divines brand for Magical and whether this expression might not have been forborn to avoyd all appearance of evill in complyance with Papists in their use of 〈◊〉 I shall 〈◊〉 determine but leave it unto your own prudence to think of Whereas you say that the ancient 〈◊〉 were called Exorcists the reason of this may probably be because the Catechumeni were exorcised before Baptisme Aquin. Sum. part 3. quaest 71. artic 2. But I shall not contend about this with you for fear I should bee thought as very a fool as the Philosopher who read a Lecture of Warre before Hannihal There is a passage in Augustine that seemes to 〈◊〉 somewhat what you 〈◊〉 Tom 7 pag. 〈◊〉 Ab hac igitur 〈◊〉 tenebrarum quarum est Diabolus princeps id est à 〈◊〉 Diaboli angelorum ejus quisquis erui cum baptizantur negaverit parvulos ipsorum ecclefiae sacramentorum veritate convincitur c. In veritate itaque non in salsitate potestas diabolica exorcizatur in parvulis eique renunciant quia 〈◊〉 sua non possunt per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gestantium ut eruti à potestate 〈◊〉 in regnum sui Domini transferantur Unto this testimony I beleeve it is easie for you to adde many more But yet notwithstanding all this it is very well known by all that know the difference 〈◊〉 the Predicaments that the Sacrament of Baptisme cannot be said to be the Exorcising of Devils the rescuing of a person from the power of Satan the delivery of him from the 〈◊〉 otherwise than in an improper tropicall and metonymicall praedication viz. as it is a sign and seal and if you will a moral instrument of the conditionall promise thereof But what advantage reap you unto your cause by this why unto this Exorcising of Devils the rescuing a person from the power of Satan into Gods family the use of the Crosse in Baptisme is exactly symbolical Your argument if there be any argument in your words as I conceive stands thus That which is so exactly symbolical unto any thing signed sealed conveighed and exhibited in Baptisme is so decent as that the omission thereof would be undecent but the use of the Crosse in Baptisme is exactly symbolical unto that which is signed sealed and conveighed or exhibited in Baptisme viz. the Exorcising of Devils the rescuing a person from the power of 〈◊〉 into Gods Sonship and Family therefore the use of it is so decent as that the omission thereof would be undecent you cannot but expect that the Major will be denled and 't is very strange that you leave it destitute of all proof for you cannot be ignorant if you have read the Non-conformists whom you oppose that their great quarrell against our Ceremonies was their symbolicalnesse and mystical signification their arguments against which you may read at large in the Abridgement page 41 42 c. usque 〈◊〉 49. Ames his Reply to Mortons Generall Def. page 33 34 c. usque ad 58. As also in his Triplication to Dr. Burges Disp. about humane Ceremon page 209 210. usque ad 336. Parker Treat of the Crosse part 1. page 97 98 c. usque ad 112. Didoclave page 522 523 c. usque ad 536. But Sir you may thinke to blow off all the Arguments with a silent scorne and contempt and this indeed many doe with those arguments which they cannot answer but if you will not vouchsafe to read these Authors if you please to accept of my service I will abridge the substance of their arguments and attend your answer unto them Then for the Minor I have four things to say unto it 1. Baptisme it self is more proper agreeable or exactly Symbolical unto the rescuing of a person from the power of Satan into Gods Sonship and Family than the signe of the Crosse and therefore the sign of the Crosse in Baptisme is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like the dimme and smoakie light of a candle in the presence of the clear and glorious light of the Sun at noon-day 2. The Popish Exorcisme and 〈◊〉 are as if not more proper agreeable and exactly symbolical unto the Exorcising of Devils as the use of the Crosse in Baptisme and they have not been so much abused as it and may as 〈◊〉 be purged from all Superstition and Idolatry and therefore you may as well conclude concerning them as the Cross that they are so decent as that the omission of them would be undecent 3. I much question whether or no two crosse motions of a finger or a thumb 〈◊〉 so proper agreeable and exactly symbolical unto so high dreadfull and profound a mystery as the delivery of us from the power of Satan and darknesse and the translation of us into the kingdome of the dear Son of God as you affirm and I shall hardly beleeve you unlesse you bring other proofs besides the Hyperbolies of the