be convicted of moral evil and so unconcernedly to omit the weightier matters of the Law as Judgment Mercy or Charity in Vnity and Faith what can Charity call this but meer Pharisaism and where must such Pharisaism end at length but in Sadducism even denying of the Blessings and Curses of a Future Life For as Drusius hath Si Patres nostri selvissent mâ—râ—â—â—s resurrecturâ— praemia manere â—ustos â—â—st hanc vitam nâ—n tantoperè râ—bellassent Drusius in Mat. c 3. v. 7. Item in c. 22 23. observed it was one Reason alledged by the Sadduces against the Resurrection If our Fathers had known the dead should rise again and rewards were prepared for the Righteous they would not have rebelled so often not conforming themselves to Gods Rule as is pretended by all but conforming the Rule of Sin and of Faith it self to the good Opinion they had of their own Persons and Actions which Pestilential Contagion now so Epidemical God of his great Mercy remove from us and cause health and soundness of Judgment Affection and Actions to return to us and continue with us to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. THE CONTENTS OF THE CHAPTERS Chap. I. OF the Nature and Grounds of Religion in General Which are not so much Power as the Goodness of God and Justice in the Creature And that Nature it self teaches to be Religious Chap. II. Of the constant and faithful assurance requisite to be had of a Deity The reasons of the necessity of a Divine Supream Power Socinus refuted holding the knowledge of a God not natural Chap. III. Of the Unity of the Divine Nature and the Infiniteness of God Chap. IV. Of the diversity of Religions in the World A brief censure of the Gentile and Mahumetan Religion Chap. V. Of the Jewish Religion The pretence of the Antiquity of it nulled The several erroneous grounds of the Jewish Religion discovered Chap. VI. The vanity of the Jewish Religion shewed from the proofs of the true Messias long since come which are many Chap. VII The Christian Religion described The general Ground thereof the revealed Will of God The necessity of Gods revealing himself Chap. VIII More special Proofs of the truth of Christian Religion and more particularly from the Scriptures being the Word of God which is proved by several reasons Chap. IX Of the several Senses and Meanings according to which the Scriptures may be understood Chap. X. Of the true Interpretation of Holy Scriptures The true meaning not the letter properly Scripture Of the difficulty of attaining the proper sense and the Reasons thereof Chap. XI Of the Means of interpreting the Scripture That they who understand Scripture are not for that authorized to interpret it decisively The Spirit not a proper Judge of the Scriptures sense Reason no Judge of Scripture There is no Infallible Judge of Scripture nor no necessity of it absolute The grounds of an Infallible Judge examined Chap. XII Of Tradition as a Means of understanding the Scriptures Of the certainty of unwritten Traditions that it is inferiour to Scripture or written Tradition No Tradition equal to Sense or Scripture in Evidence Of the proper use of Tradition Chap. XIII Of the nature of Faith What is Faith Of the two general grounds of Faith Faith divine in a twofold sense Revelation the formal reason of Faith Divine Of the several senses and acceptations of Faith That Historical Temporarie and Miraculous Faith are not in nature distinct from Divine and Justifying Faith Of Faith explicite and implicite Chap. XIV Of the effects of true Faith in General Good Works Good Works to be distinguish'd from Perfect Works Actions good four wayes Chap. XV. Of the effect of Good Works which is the effect of Faith How Works may be denominated Good How they dispose to Grace Of the Works of the Regenerate Of the proper conditions required to Good Works or Evangelical Chap. XVI Of Merit as an effect of Good Works The several acceptatations of the word Merit What is Merit properly In what sense Christians may be said to merit How far Good Works are efficacious unto the Reward promised by God Chap. XVII Of the two special effects of Faith and Good Works wrought in Faith Sanctification and Justification what they are Their agreements and differences In what manner Sanctification goes before Justification and how it follows Chap. XVIII Of Justification as an effect of Faith and Good Works Justification and Justice to be distinguished and how The several Causes of our Justification Being in Christ the principal cause What it is to be in Christ The means and manner of being in Christ Chap. XIX Of the efficient cause of Justification Chap. XX. Of the special Notion of Faith and the influence it hath on our Justification Of Faith solitary and only Of a particular and general Faith Particular Faith no more an Instrument of our justification by Christ than other co-ordinate Graces How some ancient Fathers affirm that Faith without Works justifie Chap. XXI A third effect of justifying Faith Assurance of our Salvation How far a man is bound to be sure of his Salvation and how far this assurance may be obtained The Reasons commonly drawn from Scripture proving the necessity of this assurance not sufficient c. Chap. XXII Of the contrary to true Faith Apostasie Heresie and Atheism Their Differences The difficulty of judging aright of Heresie Two things constituting Heresie the evil disposition of the mind and the falsness of the matter How far and when Heresie destroys Faith How far it destroys the Nature of a Church Chap. XXIII Of the proper subject of Faith the Church The distinction and description of the Church In what sense the Church is a Collection of Saints Communion visible as well as invisible necessary to the constituting a Church Chap. XXIV A preparation to the knowledge of Ecclesiastical Society or of the Church from the consideration of humane Societies What is Society What Order What Government Of the Original of Government Reasons against the peoples being the Original of Power and their Right to frame Governments Power not revocable by the people Chap. XXV Of the Form of Civil Government The several sorts of Government That Government in general is not so of Divine Right as that all Governments should be indifferently of Divine Institution but that One especially was instituted of God and that Monarchical The Reasons proving this Chap. XXVI Of the mutual Relations and Obligations of Soveraigns and Subjects No Right in Subjects to resist their Soveraigns tyrannizing over them What Tyranny is Of Tyrants with a Title and Tyrants without Title Of Magistrates Inferiour and Supream the vanity and mischief of that distinction The confusion of co-ordinate Governments in one State Possession or Invasion giveth no Right to Rulers The Reasons why Chap. XXVII An application of the former Discourse of Civil Government to Ecclesiastical How Christs Church is alwayes visible and how invisible Of the communion
inconditionate and absolute on mans part is to blaspheme the immutable Justice of God and withall destroy the use of Faith in order to our Justification For it is impossible any thing bearing the name of a cause or condition as Faith certainly doth when we say We are Justified by â—aith should be posteriour to the thing it so relates unto The promise indeed of pardon and Justification of a sinner is actually made to those who do not actualâ—y believe and repent but promise answerably and covenant to believe and repent Non enim ut fâ—â—â— eat ignis cal facit sed quia fervet Nâ—c ideo benâ— currit roâ—a ut rotunda sâ—t sed quia rotunda Aâ—g ad Simplic Qu. 1. but the Execution and performance of this promise is not made before there be an actual fulfilling of our Covenant with God But then on the other side there must be perfect Justification before there can be that perfect Sanctification which we all aspire unto and God expects from us For then are we truly Sanctified when our works are holy and acceptable unto to God which they are not untill they proceed from a person so far Justified as to be accepted of God Whence may be resolved that doubt about Gods acceptation of the person for the works sake or the work for the persons sake For wisely and truly did the wife of Manoah inferr Gods acceptation of their sacrifice from the favour and grace he bore unto their persons and at the same time prove the favour God bore to their persons from the Acceptance of their sacrifice saying If the Lord were pleased to kil us he Judg. 13. 23. would not have received a burnt-offering and a meat-offering at our hands neither would he have shewed us all these things nor would as at this time have told us such things as these That God therefore accepted their Burnt-offering it is a sign he approved their persons but the reason antecedent of Gods acceptation of their sacrifice was because he first approved their persons And yet notwithstanding the goodness of the person is the original of the goodness of the work nothing hinders but the goodness of the work may add value favour and estimation unto the person As to use Luthers comparison and others after and before him the tree bears the fruit and not the fruit the tree And the goodness of the tree is the cause of the goodness of the fruit and not the goodness of the fruit the cause of the goodness of the tree Yet the fruit doth procure an esteem and valuation from the owner to the tree and endears it to him to the cultivating the ground and dressing it and conferring much more on that than others In like manner the Person Sanctified and Justified produces good works and not those good works him but some actions accompanied with Gods grace antecedent and inferiour to the fruit it self Yet doth the fruit of good Works add much of esteem and honour from God to such a person and render him capable of an excellent reward for St. Paul to the Philippians assureth them and us when he saith I desire fruit that may abound to your account Phil. 2. 7. CHAP. XVIII Of Justification as an Effect of Faith and Good Works Justification and Justice to be distinguished and How The several Causes of our Justification Being in Christ the Principal Cause What it is to be in Christ The means and manner of being in Christ. TO the informing our selves aright in the much controverted point of Justification which whether it be a proper effect of Good works or not doth certainly bear such a relation â—o them as may well claim this place to be treated of it seemeth very expedient after we have distinguished and illustrated it by Sanctification explained to proceed to distinguish it likewise from Justice For as Righteousness or holiness the ground of Sanctification is to be distinguished from Sanctification it self so is Justice the ground to be distinguished from Justification its complement and perfect on This being omitted or confusedly delivered by diverse hath been no small cause of great obscurities For Righteousness or Justice seems to be nothing else but an exact agreement of a mans actions in general to the true Rule of Acting and that Rule is the Law or word of God For he that offends not against that is undoubtedly a Just man of himself by his own works and needs nothing but Justice to declare and ackowledg him for such no mercy nor favour As that thing which agrees with the square or Rule is perfect But notwithstanding such supposed perfect conformitie to the Law of God be perfect righteousness yet is not this to be Justified Neither can any man in Religion be said more to Justifie himself than in civil cases where it is plainly one thing to be innocent and to be an accurate unreproveable observer of the Law in all things and to have sentence pronounced in his behalf that so indeed he really is For this is only to Justifie him though in pleading his own case in clearing and vindicating himself a man is vulgarly said to Justifie himself And no otherwise if we will keep to the safe way of proper and strict speaking is it in Religion Supposing that which never happen'd since Christ that a man should have so punctually observed every small as well as great precept of Gods Law that no exception could be taken against him yet is he not hereby Justified though he may be said to be the true Cause of his Justification and that he hath merited it Which St. Paul seems to implie unto us saying For I know 1 Cor. 4. 4. nothing by my self yet am I not hereby Justified For in truth Justification is an act of God only as Judge no less then author of his own Laws upon the intuition of due Conformitie to it or Satisfaction of it And as a man may possibly be just and yet never be Justified taking things abstractly so may a man be unjust and guilty and yet be justified doth not the word of God as well as common reason and experience certifie so much He that Justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the Just even Prov. 17. 15. they both are abomination unto the Lord. This then surely may be No man then can be justified by himself or any Act or Acts of him no not through Christ But though he cannot thus Judicially and formally Justifie himself it is not so repugnant to reason or Scripture to be said Materially and Causally to act towards his Justification Nay he cannot come up to the rigour of the Rule nor excel so far in Justice and holiness as to demand at Gods hands his absolving sentence yet that he cannot contribute towards it is not only false but dangerous doctrine leading men into a sloathfull despondencie and despair so that they shall do nothing at all because they cannot do all that is required of
end of all St. Pauls Epistles to the Romans to the Colossians to the Galatians to the Hebrews especially not excluding the other where he most expresly and zealously urges Faith against works and he shall soon perceive that his intention and drift is not absolutely to oppose works of Faith to the doctrine or Grace of Faith but the works of the Law which infirmer Christians newly entred into the Faith of Christ had so venerable an opinion of that they imagined Christ could profit nothing without the works either Ceremonial or Moral of the Law of Moses For whereas they for instance depended absolutely on Circumcision for their Justification and thought that without so sacred and solemn a Rite they could not be profited by Christ himself St. Paul on the other side resolutely and positively determineth thus Behold I Paul say unto you that if you be circumcised Gal. 5. 2. v. 4. Christ shall profit you nothing And presently after Christ is become of no effect unto you whosoever of you are Justified by the Law ye are fallen from Grace Can any thing be more manifest then here it is that Grace is opposed to the Law And that to trust in that is to fall from Christ And when it followeth We through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by Faith is it not v. 5. as plain as need be that Faith is here taken for that doctrine and not Act of Faith whereby men are instructed in Christ believe in Christ adhere to him relinquishing the imperfect and antiquated doctrine of the Law and its practises which by St. Paul are all called Flesh in opposition to the spiritual worship of the Gospel as to the Philippians For we are the Circumcision Phil. 3. 3. which worship God in the Spirit and rejoyce in Christ Jesus and have no confidence in the flesh Though I might also have confidence in the flesh c. 4. Rom. 3. 21. And to the Romans But now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested that is surely now is the doctrine of Righteousness published through Christ without the Law being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all 22. 20. 27. and upon all that believe And verse the twentieth By the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified c. And verse the twenty seventh the Anti thesis or opposition doth most evidently declare the Apostles intention Where is boasting then It is excluded By what Law Of Works Nay but by the Law of Faith The Law of Works then is the Law of Moses and the Law of Faith is the Law of Christ And to be Justified by Faith in Jesus of which immediately before is to be understood of the whole Covenant of Grace or Faith which is made to us in Christ Jesus and revealed in the Gospel as contradistinct to that Covenant of Works given by Moses and not of any special Grace or Act of Faith as Faith is sometimes distinguished from other Evangelical Graces It may be said that the works of the Law are excluded expresly and therefore no competition is to be made between them and Faith in the case of our Justification To which my answer is That though I grant that not only the works of the Law though moral do not Justifie but not the works of Faith of themselves yet I may confidently say None of these places commonly alleadged by the Exalters of Faith and Depressors of Good works to null the merits of works done even in Faith of Christ do according to the literal meaning really perform so much yet I rather choose to affirm That the works excluded by St. Paul are not works of the Law moral so much as Mosaical For the morality of the Old Law was not properly of Moses but the Ceremonial only and consequently the Law from these taking its denomination of Mosaical when works of the Law are mentioned in the New Testament we are to understand Mosaical Works rather than Moral but not at all works of Faith So that whatsoever is contended or pretended our being justified freely by Grace and justified again by Faith do Rom. 3. 24. Gal. 2. 16. not at all deny our Justification by works of Faith or that the efficiency of such a Faith is quite of another nature from that of works done in Faith But yet it is plain from the whole design of the Epistle of St. James the Quoniam haec opinio fuerit exerta sine operibus justificari hominem aliae Apostolicae Epistolae Petri Joannis Jacobi Judae contra eum maximâ— dirigunt intentionem ut vehementer astruant fidem sine operibus nihil prodesse c. Aug. de Fide Operibus c. 14. second Epistle of St. Peter the Epistle of St. Jude that divers of Old did so mistake St. Paul as of late dayes he hath been understood which moved St. Austin to say directly that these Epistles were on purpose contrived and published to obviate such a misconstruction of the Blessed Apostle as if he had intended when he often sayes We are Justified by Faith only a separate notion of Faith from works and effects of Faith which was far from him from whence we have a very compendious solid and clear reconciliation of St. James his Epistle especially with those of St. Paul For as is shewed already certain it is that it being his principal end to oppose and void the pretensions of the Jews to Justification without believing in Christ or as a more moderate sort of them weak in the Faith of Christ admitting no sufficiency in Christ to justifie them without a dash as least of Moses's Law he declared freely for an absolute sufficiency in the Faith of Christ to justify and save such as believe in him This doctrine of St. Paul was quite mistaken by some who supposed that the act of believing simpâ—y taken or the Grace of Faith specially used was it whereby they were in a certain way of being justified leaving out the fruits and effects of that lively Faith and making it a dead Faith as St. James calleth it who thus argueth against such a fond and dangerous presumption What doth it profit my brethren though a James 2. 14. 17. man say he hath Faith and have not works can Faith save him Faith without works is dead For the use and end of knowledge and Faith being only obedience and a life according to Faith what a monstrous and ridiculous thing would it be to divide the Cause from the effects proper to it But it is usually replied No God forbid we should divide Faith from good Works Where there is true justifying Faith there will be there must be good works and that for several other reasons but not for our Justification This is most true whereever there is a Justifying Faith there will be good Works but what do they there in order to
faithful servants For in truth this latter sense is scarce maintained or allowed by any Good Christian or if it be we shall not account it worth the expence of so much paâ—ns and time to refute them any further than the thing it self doth rightly considered For merit as is said effect is the just right that a man hath to a thing in possession of another there being no difference in such cases between what man enjoys and what he doth not enjoy but that the one is in the possession of himself and the oâ—her of another both being of right his own the one by ancient and the other perhaps by moderner purchase And this is founded upon the equity of Commutative Justice whereby one thing is exchanged for anoâ—her as about for reward such a commensurateness of the Action of a Christian being never to be found in order to the end promised For alâ— that we can do is our duty to God and not our desert And though God may have seem'd to have receeded in some manner from his original Râ—ght over us in that he stipulates with his servants and Covenants with them for such imâ—ense â—ecompence for such light labours yet this doth not extinguish his dominâ—on absolute over us nor extenuate or bring down the vaâ—ue of the reward it self so far as to ballance the account between God and man so that they should relate to one another as do Debtor and Creditor Because whether man contracts or not whether he promises or not Justice in behalf of the Servant claims a proportionable reward and a Debtor he is really though perhaps Legally he be not But between God and man theâ—e is no such natural mutual obligation before a free promise on Gods part issued out And therefore after such promise made impossible it is that any or many Acts on mans part should be commensurate to the goodness of the reward expected but it must all depend upon favour and grace For who hath pâ—evented Job 41. 11. me saith God in Job that I should repay him And St. Paul to the Romans Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of Grace but Rom. 4. 4. of debt The principal enquiry then is about the works of such as acknowledge a Freeness of promise in God as most or all Christians do what proportion they may bear to the reward so freely promised And in truth there seems no less then a contradiction after an acknowledgement of the freeness of a promise infinitely exceeding the labour or work made to impute the reward rather to the work than to the promise For he that cannot merit the cause absolutely required to the effect cannot be said to merit the Effect so that he who protests against the sufficiency of his work to merit the promise can have no tolerable pretension to merit the effect Hence it is that Paul saith against such as may glory in their works Where is boasting Rom. 3. 27. then It is excluded By what Law Of works Nay But by the Law of Faith And yet in the two more favourable and less proper senses above specified may a man without prejudice to Gods free Grace or Faith on Christ be said to merit there being more exotiqueness to Scripture Phrase and harshness to ears tender of Gods free Grace than guilt in that word For first who can denie that he is the servant of God that he is according to the vow in baptism a Souldier of Jesus Christ that he serves under him in the work of the Gospel against the world and flesh and Devil to the encrease of Grace and vertue according to Godliness This is to merit many times with the ancient without any implication of obligation upon God or Christ towards us for our service The second acceptation then is cheifly to be discussed which allows not only a service but an efficacie to Good works so far as to render them capable of such a term as Merit For there is a wide difference between a sufficiencie of a work to obtain a thing and the efficiencie The former indeed is absolute The latter not so St. Paul saying to the Corinthians 2 Cor. 6. 1. We therefore as workers together with him i. e. God doth certainly impâ—ie somewhat of activeness and efficiency by way at least of Instrument subordinate to that of God towards the great work of advancing the Gospel but he disavows a sufficiencie when he saith Who is sufficient for these 2 Cor. 2. 16. 1 Cor. 3. 5. things and when he saith Who then is Paul and who is Apollos but Ministers by whom ye believed even as the Lord gave to every man and so then neâ—ther is he that planteth any thing neither he that watereth but God that giveth the 7. increase No man can be a minister or instrument to another but he must act Non est tamen alienum nâ—c arrogans si etiam David remunerâ—tionem à Domino Deo suo pro egregiis latoribus posâ—ulet Praerâ—gativa est fâ—dâ—i atque justitiae de Domini favore mercidem usurpare Ambros in Psal 119. 1. Et tamen si bene cogites ipse dedit fidem primò qua cum promeruisii non enim de tuo promeruisti ut tibi aliquid deberetur c. Aug. Tract 3. in Joan. Ipsa vita aeterna quae utique in fine sine fine habebitur ideo meâ—itiâ— praecedentibus redditur quia ea merita quibus redditur non a nobis parata sunt per nostram suffâ—cientiam sed in nobis facta per gratiam etiam ipsa Gratia nuncupatur non ob aliud nisi quia gratis dâ—tur Aug. Ep. 105. â— together with him Again No man that is an instrument or minister to another can intitle himself absolutely or principally to the effect So then supposing that upon works evangelical reward certainly follows of course of Gods promise vet this glory is not to be assumed to the Instrument but Principal causes moving thereunto which are three principally arising and over-ruling a Christian The inward Grace of Gods spirit in respect of man working The Indulgence of God in remitting the rigour of the Law according to whose exactness the work is to be but seldom or never is performed And the promise of God condescending to such low and favourable terms in bestowing his rewards So that notwithstanding as is said there be certainly an efficacy which sometimes the holy Fathers call merit in Good works there is never found a sufficiencie or such a worth in the best Christians actions which may be commensurate to our Salvation For though as many of the reformed have truly spoken we be saved by our Good works we are not saved for our Good works no more then being saved and Justified by our Faith we are Justified for our Faith as shall be seen by and by So then all the merit of a true Christian consists in this That being by Faith built upon that sure and
Justice But to arrive in this doubtful and perplexed way to the right end of this Dispute it will be necessarie to pass briefly through all the several Causes of our Justification and so much the rather because divers before have so done and failed in their Divinity because of a mistake in Logick in miscalling Causes And first we must know otherwise then some have taught That the Material Cause of our Justification is not the graces in us nor the pardon without us nor remission of sins nor obedience of Christ nor of our selves but the person justified is the subject of Justification For who with good sense can say Our sins are justified our good works are Justified Acts. 13. 3â— True it is St. Paul saith by him Christ all that believe are justified from all things from which ye could not be Justified by the Law of Moses Shewing hereby that we are Justified from our sins but not that our sins are Justified And so where St. James speaks so often of which hereafter that we are Justified by Works he intendeth not to say our Works are Justified For t is the person not the qualities of him that is Justified And if any speak otherwise they must be helpt out by recurring to Figurative not proper speaking In such cases as these if ever we would judge aright we must hold as precisely as can be to propriety of speech About the Final cause of our Justification I find nothing singular but in common with all the Acts of God towards man and all the Actions of Man towards God viz The glory of God Neither is there any difference of parties herein But concerning the Formal Cause of our Justification before God some discord is found yea concerning a Formal Cause in General what it is and wherein it consisteth which is very necessarie to be understood to attain to the true notion of being Formally Justified A Formal Cause then is that whereby a thing is what it is subsists in it self and is distinguished from other things being always essential and intrinsecal to the thing so by it constituted that it cannot be so much as conceived without it and cannot possibly but be with it This whether artificial or not I weigh not much but is a true description of that Cause For instance sake A man is a man properly by his soul and not by his body his soul being his Inward form and as it is impossible that he should be so without it so is it impossible but that he should be so with it whatever outward visible defects or imperfections may appear otherwise So in the present cause it must necessarily be that the Formal Cause of our Justification be intrinsecal to the Justified person and that not being that he should not be justified Contrary to what some have affirmed upon this occasion who from an instance of an Eclipse would show that the formal Cause is not alwayes intrinsecal to that which it formeth For say they as it should seem by the autority of Zabarel In an Eclipse of the Sun the Moon interposing is the formal Cause of the Darkness of the Earth and yet it is not intrinsecal to it but separate But the mistake is plain that the Moon being not the cause of the earth it self but of the darkness of the earth only it is not the Formal Cause of that and so may be extrinsecal to it and intrinsecal to the darkness as the formal cause but whether this be so or not we are here only to show that no cause formal can be external to the thing of which it is the form and by consequence that nothing without us can be the formal cause of our Justification or that whereby we are denominated Just before God So that neither Christ nor his merits do render us so Justified And therefore they who to magnifie the mistery of our Justification do object to themselves How a man can be Just by the justice of another and how righteous by another persons righteousness any more than a man can hear with another mans ears or see with another mans eyes do tie such a knot as they can by no means loose For in plain truth neither the one nor the other can formally be But they may say As it is Christs righteousness indeed and rests only in him so we cannot be said to be justified formally by it but as it is made ours especially by Faith and is applied unto us so we may be formally Justified by it To which I say that if that individual formal Righteousness which is in Christ were by any means so transferred formally unto us and infused into us that we should in like manner possess it as did Christ then indeed the argument would hold very good that by such application we were Justified formally by Christs righteousness but no such thing will be granted neither is any such thing needfull For though the Scripture saith directly that Christ is The Lord our Phil. 3. 9. righteousness and St. Paul desireth to be found in Christ not having his own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by Faith Yet we are not to understand hereby that the formal righteousness of Christ becomes our formal Righteousness but that he is by the Gospel he revealed unto us the teacher of Righteousness and that far different from that Righteousness of the Law which St. Paul calls his own as that which he brought with him to Christ and he is Justification is neither but a certain action in God applied unto us or a certain respect or relation whereby we ar acquit of our sins and accepted to life everlasting Perkins Gal 2. 16. Rom. 8. 30. the Prime Cause of our Righteousness sending his holy Spirit unto us and by his merits appeasing the wrath of God and satisfying his Justice for us all which is not the formal cause of our Righteousness or Justification For neither is that formal righteousness in us which is inherent Righteousness the formal Cause of our Justification But our Justification formal is an Act of God terminating in Man whereby he is absolved from all guilt reputed Just and accepted to Grace and favour with God When God hath actually passed this divine free and gracious sentence upon a sinner then and not before is he formally Justified This is the end and consummation of all differences between God and man and the initiating him into all saving Grace here and Glory hereafter as St. Paul writing to the Romans witnesseth in these words Whom he predestinated them he also called and whom he called them he also Justified and whom he justified them he also glorified CHAP. XIX Of the Efficient Cause of Justification IT remains therefore now that we proceed to the means causes and motives inducing God Almighty thus to Justifie Man a sinner whom he might rather condemn for his unrighteousness And these as
many and divers in kind as they are may all be reduced unto the Efficient causes so often mistaken for the formal And truly to proceed herein regularly and clearly we must begin with the Cause of all Causes God himself For though Christ be the Cause of all Causes visible and in the actual administration and execution yet he is not the first but subordinate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys Hom. 27. in Joan. Cause of Mans reconciliation to God his Justification and Salvation For as holy Chrysostom divinely and sublimely enquiring into the reason that might incline God to restore Man being fallen and lost by his Apostasy from God unto a state of bliss again to admit of any terms of Reconciliation with him determines it it is nothing but the divine Philanthropie of God his free undeserved unscrutable love towards man springing as it were from his own breast beginning within himself and of himself absolutely irrespectively to any outward motives but to show as St. Paul saith He would have mercie on whom he would have mercie and he Rom. 9. 15. would have compassion on whom he would have compassion and because as the Psalmist hath it Whatsoever the Lord pleased that did he in heaven Psal 135. 6. and in earth in the seas and in all deep places He pleased to leave the fallen Angels and he pleased to restore fallen man and that because it so pleased him For not so much as any consideration of Christ could dispose him to decree so favourably on the behalf of man but first this decree passed and then followed the determination of the means most convenient thereunto which was to send his son to give him to be Incarnate and to be the great and powerful Mediator between God and Man mighty to save Christ then was that which in general moved God Externaly to the Justification of Man after he had conceived of himself a purpose to reconcile man to himself as S. Paul clearly asserteth in his second Epistle to the Corinthians All things are of God who hath reconciled us to himself 2 Cor. 5. 18. by Jesus Christ and hath given to us the ministery of reconciliation To wit that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself not imputing 19. their trespasses unto them and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation And more particularly elsewhere he describeth unto us the several parts of our reconciliation to God saying But of him are ye in Christ Jesus 1 Cor. 1. 30. who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness Sanctification and redemption Therefore it is that so often in Scripture Christ is called a Gal. 3. 20. Heb. 8. 6. 1 Tim. 2. 5. Heb. 9. 15. Heb. 12. 24. Mediator between God and man for the bringing to pass and causing to take effect the General decree of God for the redemption of Mankind For through Christ we were by God predestinated as is taught us by St. Paul to the Ephesians Having predestinated us unto the adoption of Children by Jesus Christ unto himself according to the good pleasure of his will Where Eph. 1. 5. we see plainly that Christ was not the Cause that we were predestinated in Christ but the Good pleasure of his Absolute will Again we were called in Christ as St. Jude implieth saying To them that are sanctified Jud. 1. by God the Father and preserved in Jesus Christ and called And as we are called and sanctified so certainly are we justified freely by Christ And there is nothing more requisite for us to be fully justified in the presence of God then to be made partakers of Christ and as St. Paul saith To be found in Christ not having our own righteousness which is of the Law Phil. 3. 9. whether of Nature or Moses but that which is through the Faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by Faith From whence and several other texts of Holy Scripture testifying the absolute necessity of Christ to the Justifying and saving of us it appeareth that nothing can be more contrary to the Eternal purpose of saving man through Christ yea nothing indeed more tidiculous then to but imagine that there can be any Act in man contradistinct from Christ and not receiving all its worth and vertue from Christ which can avail any thing towards the salvation or Justification of him Or that a man being grafted into Christ and partaking of his graces and merits can fail of being accepted of God unto Justification and salvation For as St. Paul saith to the Romans All have sinned and come short Rom. 3. 23 24 25. of the glory of God Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through Faith in his blood to declare his Righteousness for the Remission of sins that are past through the forbearance of God c. Now there are three things in General which truly denominate us to be in Christ and partakers of him To be partakers of the benefit of his Passion satisfying for us To be partakers of his spirit and graces thereof renewing and sanctifying us and thirdly to be partakers of his Intercession before God on our behalf For as the Scripture tells us He ever liveth to make intercession for us And this Heb. 7. 25. his intercession an Act of his Sacerdotal office is it whereby Christ properly meriteth for us For the Passion of Christ doth sufficiently discharge us of our former Obligations and obnoxiousness to the Law of God and the punishments therein denounced against the contemners and violaters thereof and so may be said having fully satisfied all the Law justly demanded of us to have merited pardon and remission of what is passed doth not thereupon entitle us to any graces or blessings from God but yet putteth us into a capacity of them but the actual collation of them is rather owing unto the uncessant mediation of him before God in behalf of us And this the Scripture intends when it saith We have a great high Priest Heb. 4. 14. that is passed into the Heavens Jesus the son of God And thus we have made a second step towards the clearing our Justification in its Efficient Causes viz That it is wholly effected by Christ made righteousness sanctification and Redemption unto us But a third thing and that of no mean necessity and difficulty both is behind how we come to be so entirely partakers of Christ how Christ so becomes ours as that God should upon the intuition hereof freely Justifie us For as St. Austin hath observed of the giving of the Holy spirit of God to those that ask aright whereas none can ask aright but by the Holy spirit herein is a great mysterie that a man can be said to be capable of the Spirit before he hath the Spirit In like manner can no man be said to be capable of Christ and
particular defects and exigencies each man is subject unto in a separate condition And this Society thus combining or concurring together is commonly called a Republick the word signifying The common good it being the design and end of all Republicks or Common-wealths for men first in order to seek the common interest and good of the whole Society and so through that to derive particular and private benefit to each member thereof and not as some blindly and brutishly addicted to their private personal profits to begin at home and not to secure the Publick stock These are no better than such Pilferers and Thieves who being in partnership with others pocket up in the first place all that they can lay hold on and contribute no more to the common stock than they are by force constrained unto Now this Society may be divided into three sorts Natural Civil Divine or Ecclesiastical Natural is that Order and Regiment constituted Ordâ— est parium disparium rerum sua cuique loco triâ—uens dispositio Aug. Civ Dei 19. 13. Bernardus Gerson entitiloquio Gubernare est movere aliquos indebitum finem sicut nanta gubernat navem emendo eam ad portum Thomas 22. Q. 102. 2. co by God in every mans soul which consisteth of the Superiority of the Rational faculties and the Subjection and Obedience of the Inferiour or Sensitive Affections For Order as several of the Ancient have described it is nothing else but The Disposition or placing of equal and inequal things into their proper places which Order is the foundation of Government And Government according to Thomas is the moving of men to their due end There being therefore a twofold end of man secular and spiritual Government likewise must be answerable And both agree in this viz. to be the Administration of the Weal Publick to ends agreeable unto them In which we are yet farther to consider these things 1. The Original of Government 2. The Form of Government 3. The Rule and Reasons of Government 4. The Obligation upon Men under Government And of these briefly as a necessary Introduction to the Doctrine of the Church And concerning the first the Cause and Fountain of all Government Some pretending to fetch the Fountain head of all humane Rule from its first rise have quite forgot what they went about and inverting the order of nature have begun at the end which is rather the effect then cause For now we do not enquire why or to what end it is but who made it and whose hand it was that framed this Tool to bring to pass such a work as humane safety and tranquility That this must be the same cause with that of man himself seems reasonable to me to conclude from the necessity of the same and the wisdom of Divine Providence which having given generally such instinct and common prudence unto Creatures to do nothing which shall serve for nothing nor to erect any thing but with competent provision to conserve and continue the same in that being so far as the Supream Wisdom shall not oppose the same How is it credible that God should make that Master-piece of his Man upon earth and not at the same time provide for that subsistance and continuance Sevorum bestiarum inquit Aristoteles Polit. 3. cap. 6 non est Civitas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are necessary But it is plain that man though as brutish and a sensible creature he may wear out possibly an unhappy ignoble life yet without society and community and unity through the bands and ligaments of sound and reasonable Laws cannot subsist as civil or rational or as easily improvable to perfection of natural state upon earth but must necessarily degenerate into the rank of Brutes Therefore sure Divine Wisdome left him not destitute of such helps as were proper to this end but together with his very nature instills into him an inclination to Society and by his own Act and Ordinance whereby he ordained that man should propagate and multiply prescribed the best and only manner of civil Regiment investing some with a natural right of dominion over others As the man over the woman and the parents over the children from whence it is ready and easie to approach to a community and that with a subordination This is so plain that the perspicuity and simplicity doth rather then any thing else offend the unsatisfied acuteness of rarer wits and move them to pry farther to confound themselves others and the Order God hath set in the world beginning at the feet and ending in the head and putting counsel into the tail to teach the head how it should rule the body and empowring children to enact Laws for Parents how they ought to govern which they certainly do who affirm that the grosser body of the people did first of all agree upon Government and constitute their Ruler which dogmes have no fewer nor higher arguments to confute and oppress them than these First they are Ridiculous Secondly Sacrilegious and Impious Thirdly Impossible Fourthly Pestilential and Pernicious to all Government It is first ridiculous as that opinion which inverts all order and contrary to a much more sound and sober Rule in Politicks viz. That no man can create one greater than himself And if it be said that therefore no single one can confer greater power than he himself is possessed of on another but Many who are greater than one may I answer This is true where the supposition which is here false and taken for true is granted viz. That many men have in such cases as these any more power then one For I wholly deny that any are or altogether have any right whatsoever power they may usurp to create such Powers And it still remains absurd to suppose that any or all whose only place and capacity it is to serve should more then command For 't is a true saying It is more to make a King than to be a King For still I hold this which I have not found shaken by the many attempts of innovating Wits that there is a real Paternal Power in lawful Princes And though we should suppose that which was rarely if ever done that a man should adopt any man into the place of a Father as men usually did some as their sons yet can we not suppose that hereby any paternal Power is really conferred on such an one but only imaginary and impediments removed whereby Paternal power which hath an acknowledged common right to Rule take place over such a person as hath so submitted unto it So in like manner it cannot be denyed against innumerable instances to be given that the People in certain exigencies and faileurs have as it were adopted one man specially as their civil Parent whom we call commonly a King and hereupon absurdly and proudly conclude they have made a King but we know this to be nothing so For 't is not choice but Power that makes a King and
but I said that Cook reports them as heard from Diodates own mouth and I there give him the very Page where those words are to be found and this simple Quarreller and Vindicator of Puritans hath no other way to evade this then by a bold and sensless denial of the thing so apparent Now to that excellently learned person Bochartus what is it I say against him but that he would needs be medling where it concerns him not as the too common practise hath constantly been both of French and Dutch Divines What have they to do to interpose so often and uncharitably in behalf of Puritans as they have Is it not sufficient that they are not disquieted by us in their singularities and inconformities to the perpetual constitution and orders of Christs Universal Church but they must needs seek all occasions pragmatically to animate Sectaries to give them counsel and assistance to give them Communicatory Nisi me mea fallat opinio afhâ— mare auâ—â—â— quamum familtaris congress is gratiâ lâ—pâ—re vâ—nour à Duâ—â—llor antua illum à me superari crationis scriptae nitâ—re utilitate cun ejus scriptio â—â—ta prolixitate ariditate pariat fastidium taedium lectori hand dubium mea etiam ad aperturam libri detmebit cum amaena fincifera voluptate capietque desiderio alteriora legendi nullis offuciis Strephis paralogismis imprimis diverticulis cum à proposiio tum à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cardine litis quaestioniquâ— quae inter Hiâ— raâ—chic â—â— Puritanos vertitur deterritus conâ—â—â—sâ—â— ad aljiciendas chartas ut in lectione vindiciarum Durellianarum Lud. Molin ante Durel Patroni p. 2. 3. Letters in the height of their Seditions and Schisms to write Apologies and Vindications for them as Bochartus hath In which besides this I think he was in an error to suppose that that great Truth he defends of Subjects not to take up Arms against their Soveraign can be made good from the Cabbalistical and Talmudical sayings of the Rabbies upon which that Thesis is chiefly built and may be as easily pull'd down by rejecting such Ornaments rather then Arguments of Speech And this is all he objects against me in that bold Work of his saving several reproachful tearms which I will not trouble any body with Only concerning the Canina facundia i. e. Dogged Eloquence he taxeth me with I may tell him I am not fit to be his or his Brethrens Scholar in such Speeches And yet as * Turpe est contra ardenter perversa assâ—rentes 〈◊〉 pra veritaâ—â— frgidi res inveno i. Rusâ—ic Diac. Advers Acephâ—l Rusticus Diaconus hath it against the Acephali or headless Schismaticks in his days It 's very absurd for us to be found more cool for the Truth when we write against such as vehemently assert the contrary And concerning the barbarousness and unevenness of my stile though I want not matter of defense from several heads I shall pass them over and also his most polite and elegant stile for which he praises himself so worthily and wisely and only refer the Reader to that one instance which he may find Page 2 and 3 of his Patronus against Monsieur Durell where this great and vain-glorious Latinst while he magnifies his singular Talent of Elegance in the Latin Tongue offends in his tedious and ill-joynted Period against the Rules of Rhetorick and in worse concordance against the common Rules of Grammar So unluckie is this man and that in more ways then I will object to him And now I must touch a farther occasion of my present undertaking and that was the many errors vented by dissenting persons in our Church with which our Adversaries commonly revil'd us as shall be seen by and by in the mean time least any should suppose I go out Perkinsius qui in Aâ—li◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—he legiae 〈◊〉 â—xiulâ—â— â—ujus 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 Vortius Biâ—lioth l. 2 c. 3. of the common road of forreign Reformers so much trod by many Dissenters amongst us because I was not well skill'd in Calvins Bezas and Ursins Works I must tell them they were the Authors first of all recommended unto me and read by me more then those of our own Church And because I knew well of what great account as well abroad as at home Mr. Perkins his works were I would be no stranger in them but finding in them a servile and credulous spirit so far addicted to such Modern Divines that scarce any thing so new harsh or inconsistent with the judgment of Antiquity fell from them but Perkins presently took it up for Scripture and Catholick Doctrine and transcribed the same into his Works I have here collected in brief what I observed as Heterodox in his Works apt to corrupt young and injudicious Readers But here I shall say nothing of his known monstrous sense of Gods Decrees and Predestination but what a Learned Person his great friend and defender hath said before me Bishop * Abbot in Thompson Diâ—â— c. 1. Perkinsius vir alt quin eruditur pius 〈…〉 quam ille centra 〈◊〉 câ—ntra veteris Ecclesiae fidâ—m cura lâ—psâ—â— Alani absoluâ—â— dâ—cretam 〈…〉 non levem erravit Perkins on Gal. 3. v. 12. Abbot Perkins saith he otherwise a very learned and godly man in describing Divine Predestination which contrary to our and the Ancient Church he hath determined to be decreed without the fall of Adam hath committed no small Error 1. The first I observe is his sense of Justification by Faith thus expressed The Gospel promiseth life to him that doth nothing in the cause of his Salvation but only believeth in Christ and promiseth Salvation to him that believeth yet not for his Faith nor for any Works but for the Merits of Christ The Law then requires doing unto Salvation and the Gospel believing and nothing else Both ends of this sentence are utterly false and scandalous to Christianity it self and most of all as he there explains Non apprehendi potest quod promittitur nisi custoditu a fucrit 〈◊〉 jubetur Leo M. Ser. 9. ad jejun 7. Mensis V. 18. himself thus Believing and doing are opposed in the Article of Justification in our good conversation they agree Faith goeth before and Doing follows but in the work of our Justification they are as fire and water To the same effect he speaketh afterward All which we have refuted shewing that in no place of Scripture are the works of Faith opposed to Faith in Christ in any consideration but only the works of the Law as opposite to or not done in Christ nor in Faith 2. Secondly he saith A third benefit to them that believe in Id. ib. cap. 3. p. 320. Christ is That they have liberty to live and serve God without fear of damnation or any other evil 3. Thirdly God never gave to any man power to effect a Chap. 3. 5. Miracle
it Chap. V. Of the proper Acts of God Creation and Preservation or Providence What is Creation That God created all things And how Of the Ministers of Gods Providence towards Inferiour Creatures the Angels of God Their nature and office towards man especially Chap. VI. Of the Works of God in this visible World Of the Six dayes work of God All things are good which were made by God Chap. VII Of the Creation of man in particular according to the Image of God Of the Constitution of him and of the Original of his Soul contrary to Philosophers and the Errors of Origen concerning it The Image wherein it consists principally Chap. VIII Of the Second General Act of God towards the Creature especially Man his Providence Aristotles Opinion and Epicurus his rejected What is Providence Three things propounded of Providence And first the Ground of it the knowledge of God How God knoweth all things future as present Of Necessity and Contingencies how they may consist with Gods Omniscience Chap. IX The method of enquiring into the Nature and Attributes of God Vorstius his grounds of distinguishing the Attributes of God from his Nature examined Of the Decrees of God depending on his Understanding and Will Of knowledge of Intelligence Vision and the supposed Middle knowledge The Impertinency of this middle knowledge invented in God How free Agents can be known by God in their uncertain choice Indifferent actions in respect of Man not so in respect of God All vision in God supposes certainty in the thing known Chap. X. Four Doubts cleared concerning the Knowledge and Decrees of God and free Agents and contingent Effects How man that infallibly acts is responsable for his Actions The frivolous Evasion of the said difficulties by them of Dort Chap. XI Of the Execution of Gods Providence in the Predestination and Reprobation of Man How the Decrees and Providence of God are distinguished The Reason and Method of Gods Decrees Righteousness is the effect and not cause of Predestination to Life Predestination diversly taken in Scripture as also Election and Vocation God predestinates no man simply to Death without consideration of Evil foregoing as Calvin and some others would have it Chap. XII Of Gods Providence in the Reprobation and Damnation of Man Preterition is without any cause personal but the corruption of the Mass of Humane Nature Damnation alwayes supposes sin Chap. XIII The occasion of treating of sin here What sin is What Evil Monstrousness in things natural and Evil in moral things illustrate each other Sin no positive or real thing God the direct cause of no evil St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans makes nothing for the contra-Remonstrants literally and primarily taken Chap. XIV Of Sin more particularly And first of the fall of Adam Of Original Sin wherein it consisteth and how it is traduced from Father to Children The Proofs of it The nature and evils of it And that it is cured in Baptism That Natural Concupiscence hath not the nature of Sin after Baptism Chap. XV. Of the Restitution of Man after sin The Means and Motives thereunto In what manner Christs Mediation was necessary to the reconciling of Man to God Socinus his Opinion of Christs mediation refuted That Christ truely and properly satisfied by his Death and Passion for us Chap. XVI Of the Nature and Person of the Mediatour between God and Man In the beginning was the Word proved to be spoken of Christ and that he had a being before he was incarnate The Union of two Natures in Christ explained Christ a Mediatour by his Person and by his Office and this by his Sacrificing himself The Scriptures proving this Chap. XVII How Christ was Mediatour according to both Natures Calvins Opinion and others stated Of the effect of Christs Mediation and the extent thereof Of the Designation and Application of Christs death Of the sufficiencie and efficacie of Christs death How Christs death becomes effectual to all The necessity of Gods Grace to incline the will of man to embrace Christ Of the efficacie as well as sufficiencie of Gods Grace on the Will of Man Several Gradations observed in the Grace of God Chap. XVIII Of the effect and benefit of Christs Mediation in suffering and rising again seen in the Resurrection of Man The necessity of believing a Resurrection The Reasons and Scriptural Testimonies proving a Resurrection Objections against the same answered Chap. XIX Of the most perfect effect of Christs Mediation in the salvation of man Several senses of Salvation noted That Salvation is immediately after death to them that truly dye in Christ And that there is no grounds in Antiquity or Scripture for that middle State called Purgatory The Proofs answered Of the Consequent of Roman Purgatory Indulgences The novelty groundlesness and gross abuse of them The Conclusion of the first part of this Introduction The Contents of the Second Part c. Chap. I. OF the worship of God wherein the Second Part of Christian Religion consists Of the necessity of worshipping God It is natural to worship God Socinus holding the contrary confuted Of the name of Religion the Nature of Religious worship wherein it consisteth Chap. II. Of the two parts of Divine worship Inward and Outward The Proof of Outward worship as due to God and that it is both due and acceptable to God Several Reasons proving bodily worship of God agreeable to him Wherein this bodily worship chiefly consists Certain Directions for bodily worship Exceptions against it answered Chap. III. Of the second thing considerable in Divine worship viz. The state wherein we serve God What is a state The formal cause of a state Divine Vowes What is a Vow The proper matter of Vows Evangelical Councils That it is lawful and useful to make Vows under the Gospel contrary to Peter Martyr The nature of Vowes explained Chap. IV. Of the matter of Vows in particular And first of the Virginal state that it is both possible and landable And that it is lawful to vow Celibacie or Widowhood No Presidents in the Old Testament favouring Virginity The Virgin Mary vowed not Virginity no Votary before the Annunciation Chap. V. Of the second State of special serving God the Clerical State or Ministerial Of the necessity and liberty of singleness of Life in a Clergy-man The Opinion and custom of Antiquity concerning it That it is in the power of the Church at this day to restrain or permit the marriage of Priests The Conveniences and Inconveniences of wedded Life in Priests Chrysostom's Judgment of Marriage and Virginity recited Chap. VI. Of the third State of serving God a Life Monastical That it is not only lawful but may be profitable also The Exceptions of Mr. Perkins against it examined The abuses of Monastical Life touched That it is lawful to vow such a kind of Life duly regulated Chap. VII Of Religious worship the third thing considerable in it viz. The Exercise of it in the several kinds
which we have shewed they have not as Jews and he will undoubtedly conclude against their antiquated Religion and Innovated Superstitions CHAP. VII The Christian Religion described The General Ground thereof The Revealed Will of God The Necessity of Gods Revealing himself AFTER the consideration of Religion in General and the reasonableness thereof with the Exclusion of the principal false pretenders of worshipping the true God it follows to treat of the Christian Religion and the Reasonableness and several incomparable Prerogatives thereunto proper And first it is to be known what we mean by Christian Religion and what it is Christian Religion is the worship of the only true God in the unity of nature and trinity of persons through one Mediatour between God and man the Man Christ Jesus according to his Will and Laws revealed in his holy Word commonly called the Scriptures This description whether artificial enough I will not contend but full enough I suppose it is to declare as well What it is in it self as Wherein it is distinct from others And therefore omitting to treat of the more curious and formal part thereof we shall here shew briefly What great advantages it hath above any other to the obliging us to a more faithful and devout observation thereof and that this only and no other can truly please God and lead us to him and crown us hereafter with eternal bliss and glory And it having been proved that by the consent of all Nations there is a God and it following more strongly upon that ground supposed that such a Supream and Infinite being is to be worshiped and that this worship is that which we call Religion and that of the Religions pretending to be divine the others have been found vain and deficient the Right of being received as the only proper worship of God must of necessity devolve upon the Christian Religion as that which is least obnoxious to the same or like exceptions and hath many more sober and rational inducements to perswade the same to any equal judgment Which argument might well be drawn from the very Body of this Religion and the several parts whereof it consisteth together with manifold Pregnant Circumstances attending the same But because this would ask a far longer time and more tedious labour both to Writer and Reader then can consist with this intended Compendium it may abundantly suffice to give such probable and credible proofs of the Scriptures That they are the revealed will of God as Christians do believe without question For the summ and substance of all Christian religion so far as it is truly so called and professed being founded on the Holy Scriptures and there expresly contained if it be evinced that they are of divine Original it will follow That what they deliver is so likewise and consequently the Religion built upon them But because it is one Principle which Christian Religion is built upon in common with all Religions that somewhat must so be believed that no natural reason or Mathematical can invincibly demonstrate And the reason hereof is because the ground of all such demonstations is setled upon the order of Nature between Cause and Effect in point of right rather than matter of fact But that the Scriptures are so the word of God as to be revealed by his Holy Spirit to certain select Persons to that end is altogether matter of fact and that not proceeding from such a necessary and natural Agent as that according to the course of Causes and Effects it could be no otherwise but from a free Agent which certainly might have suspended such acts of Revealing his Will And the same Reason holds against all proper Demonstration from Effect For as it cannot be demonstrated that such a Cause must necessarily have such an Effect it cannot be infallibly proved that such an Effect must have such a Cause For unless it could be proved that fire must necessarily burn it could not be proved that what we see burnt must necessarily proceed from fire For before this can be don it must be shewed that nothing in the world has the same virtue but fire and this supposes that we have a perfect and exact knowledg of every thing and the nature of it in the world Take we an instance yet nearer to our present subject It is a common Maxime amongst the Schoolmen That no Creature can work a Miracle of it self but it must have the Supernatural power of God either immediately or mediately and That whatsoever Effects are wrought by any Spirit inferiour to God deserve not the name of a Miracle And yet it is confessed withall that diverse such works which appear to us as extraordinary and above nature are not of God but some perhaps evil Creature Must it not then first be known what those extraordinary acts are and how they are wrought before it can be concluded that they are of God And how can this infallibly be discern'd but by another miracle and this by a third a third by an infinity of which there can be no knowledg So that in truth the received doctrine of the Schools being thorowly examined the contrary will appear the more reasonable of the two and that we must rather first of all acknowledg a Divine Power precedent and effecting this extraordinary stupendious work before we may call it a Miracle than first admit this to be a Miracle and then and thence infer a Divine Power So that it seems very difficult and dubious to make scientifical conclusions of any thing divine And that after all there may be sufficient presumptions to render a thing credible without lightness and rashness yet the Arguments perswading shall not be so pressing and cogent but due place should remain for a Faith or assent which may not be properly humane and natural which it must needs be if it proceeded simply from sense or reason natural but divine and an admirable temperament be found in that we call The true Christian Faith wherein the Grace of God inwardly moving and inclining the Will to embrace that to which it might notwithstanding all reasons to the contrary not altogether unreasonably have dissented and yet with reason doth assent the Grace of God pulling down 2 Cor. 10. 4 5. strong holds casting down imaginations and every high thing that exalteth it self against the knowledg of God and bringing into Captivity every thought unto the obedience of Christ As St. Paul excellently saith speaking of the carnal warfare of humane ratiocinations either for or against Divine Faith and Doctrine which have no might but through God as he suffers by his justice the reasonings and eloquence of men to take place against his doctrine or to prevail towards the receiving of the truth by the superadded Power of his Holy Spirit as to this end St. Paul speaks in his first Epistle to the Corinthians thus And my speech and my preaching was not 1 Cor. 2. 4 5. with enticing words of mans
private reason perswade him That he hath found out the truth and yet at the same time assure him That he is no less fallible than another man and therefore may possibly embrace and hug a false conception with as much fondness as a true and withal That private Judgements are not in themselves so safe as publique nor single as many What violence were this to his reason nay how much more rational than the first simple Act to comply with the Reason of others whom reason also requires to listen to and obey and Scripture much more From hence we may rightly conclude against both extremes in these days who yet agree in this very ill-grounded opinion That there must be an Infallible Director or Judge or we cannot submit to them in matters of Faith and our Salvation This is absolutely untrue both in humane and divine matters Who sees not indeed that it were to be wished for and above all things desired Who sees not the great inconvenience for want of such a standard of opinions as this But can we rationally conclude therefore that so it is Or hath God or ought he of his necessary goodness and wisdom as some have ventured to affirm to grant all things that are infallibly good for man Is it not sufficient that a fair though not infallible way is opened to attain the truth here and bliss hereafter but every one must find it Is it little or no absurditie That infinite never come to means of truth and so great that many who enjoy them do not receive the benefit by them Again Are good manners and virtues no less essential to Salvation than Faith and is there no infallible Judge of manners Is there no infallible Casuist And must there be of points of Faith How many have the infallible Rule of holy Life and yet mistake either in the sense or application of it so far as to perish in unknown Sins And yet none have to prevent that great and common evil call'd for an infallible Censour whose determinations might settle doubtful consciences in greatest safety and silence all apologies which are wont to be made for our sins and errors and so bring us nec essarily to truth or leave us under self and affected condemnation But The Ground of this mistake being farther searched into will be found very weak and fallacious An infallible Faith say they must have an infallible Judge And of these some assume thus There is no man infallible Therefore no man can be Judge of Faith Others assume thus But there is and must be an infallible Faith Therefore there must be an infallible Judge So that we see both would have infallible Judges but differ only in their choice of them For The former would have the Scriptures Judge and Rule which is very honest but very simple The later would have some external Judge which hath much more of reason in it And fails only in the choice of this Judge or in the description of him For There is nothing more unreasonable than to ordain that which is under debate to be Judge of it self besides the great absurdity of confounding the Rule or Law and the Interpreter and Judge And There is nothing more fallacious than to confound Causes and occasions together as the later opinion doth For If the Church or whatever Judge may be supposed were the true direct cause of our Faith then indeed it would necessarily follow That our Faith could no wayes be infallible unless the Judge were also infallible the effect not exceeding the cause nor the Conclusion the Premises or propositions from whence it was deduced But Because the Church is only on Occasion or a Cause without which we should neither believe the Scriptures in general to be the Word of God nor any sentence to be duly drawn from the same there is no necessity at all of such a consequence For The Infallibility now spoken of is either the thing believed which is the Word of God of which the Church I hope is no Cause or the Grace of Faith excited and exercised by us through the Spirit of Grace in us the mynistery of the Church serving thereunto acording to St. Paul saying We therefore as workers together with 2 Cor. 6. 1. him beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain For as in things natural He that applies Actives to Passives that is the Cause proper to the matter about which the Action is is not the proper or natural cause of the Effect but the occasion only yet is said vulgarly so to be as when a man applies fire to combustible matter he may though improperly be said to burn it when it is the fire and not he that burns it So the Church or Judge of Scriptures sense applying the same to a capable subject the effect is true and infallible Faith but it is not the effect of the Church or instrument or mean rather but of the Holy Spirit of Grace which taketh occasion from thence to produce Faith and that infallible For Were this Infallibility we now speak of the Churches then when ever the Church should so propound and urge points of Faith they must needs have an effect in the Soul For if they say The Church teaches in an humane way they say she teaches in a fallible way which overthrows all And from this is cleared that difficulty which opposeth a Judge of Scripture and Faith because none could be found infallible For not making the Judge the cause of Faith but occasion he may be necessarily required to Faith God who is the only principal cause with his holy word seldom or never concurring without those outward means And therefore though I readily enough grant That the Scriptures are so plainly written that a single simple person wanting greater helps to attain to the abstruser sence of them and using his honest and simple endeavour may easily find so much of the Rule of Faith and holy Life as to be saved by them yet I cannot say the same of any men who presuming on Gods power against his promise which includeth the use of outward meanes or mistaking his promise for absolute when it is conditional shall look no farther than their own wits shall lead them Now The outward meanes to which God hath annexed his promise of Grace may be these First That which we have here handled a general and sober submission to the Guides of our youth and our spiritual Fathers and Pastors in Christ which to forsake is the part of a wanton and fornicating Soul according to Solomon This common Reason and nature it self seem to require of all Prov. 2. 17. under Autority by the disposition of Almighty God That they in the first place hearken unto the voice and explication of the Church wherein they are educated until such time as a greater manifestation of truth shall withdraw them unwillingly from the same For so long as Senses are equally probable on both
it is no man can tell further then from the negative notion viz. That it is not true Faith and so no Justifying Faith but a shadow of it not the thing but the foremention'd Faiths are or may be real and Good but Hypocritical can never be so as Hypocritical But we shall conclude this Chapter with an other observation we conceive has occasion'd misbelief concerning Justifying Faith For it is too commonly believed That all Justifying Faith must and doth necessarily and actually Justify all in whom it is But that is not so but that is truly Justifying Faith which in its own nature tendeth thereunto though peradventure defeated of its effect For if natural causes have not alwayes their proper effects through outward impediments may it not be much rather the case of spiritual things which work not naturally but freely To the former distinctions of Faith may be well added another and that of Faith Explicite and Implicite much insisted on and therefore here to be considered And it cannot be neither is it denied but really such cases there are in which good Christians have not that plenitude of Faith desirable and in some cases necessarie For otherwise we must condemn the Faith of St. Peter himself so much commended by Christ himself Mat. 16. 16 17 18. when he openly professed the Deitie of our Saviour Christ For not long after Christ sharply rebuked him for his ignorance of this Passion of him Mat. 16. 23 saying Get thee behind me Satan thou art an offence unto me And so were the Disciples ignorant of the Resurrection of Christ and of the Ascension of Christ supposing his Kingdom should be rather a Temporal than Spiritual and eternal as appeareth by their Question Wilt thou at this time restore Act. 1. 6. again the Kingdom unto Israel And I make no doubt after so much evidence from the Histories of the Primitive times that many Eminently holy persons suffering martyrdome for Christ were very meanly seen and setled in divers of those Articles of Faith which have been since imposed as necessarie on the Church and indeed ought to be How this can be allowed is therefore to be inquired into And to this end First it must be determin'd what may be meant by Implicit and Explicit Faith That we call Explicit Faith which clearly distinctly and expresly believs an article of Faith or any divine truth revealed Implicit then must be such a Faith that believs obscurely and confusedly only Secondly it is necessarie to distinguish this distinction it self For Faith may be said to be Implicit either in respect of its object or of its Act. The First Impliciteness consisteth in this That a Christian believing some one material article of Faith clearly and expressly may be said to believe that which is included in that and necessarily follows from it As he that shall believe that Christ consisteth of a divine and humane nature may be said to believe that article contained as it were under it viz. That Christ had a humane will as well as divine though his ignorance be such as never to have particularly considered the same But the Act of Faith I call implicite is when a man being as they say a Christian or Believer at large and liking that Religion very well shall without search without knowledge of the principal points of Faith shuffle all together and conclude all as he thinks sufficiently in this That he believes as a good Christian or Catholick believes as the Church believes The First of these kinds of Faith must necessarily be allowed as good and laudable provided it be not accompanied with an affected ignorance or sloth hindering a mans proficiencie in the Extent and Intention or degrees of it For surely this means the Holy Scripture when it saith I have fed you with Milk and not with meat for hitherto ye were not able to bear it 1 Cor. 3. 2. 1 Cor. 2. 6. neither yet now are ye able And again Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect yet not the wisdom of this world c. Which intimate unto us That the servants of Christ imitating their Master herein did not presently pour forth all the several Mysteries of the Kingdom of God and of Faith but proceeding gradually laid first the foundation Christ Jesus and according to the capacitie of their Converts opened the rest more Explicitly afterward And I make no doubt but the obscure and narrow Faith of the unlearned being generally more sincere and firm than that of the knowing and inquisitive shall lead them to Heaven no less than that more ample Christs equal proceedings being such as not to require the same of all in quantitie of measure but of proportion to their state and his Gifts and Graces conferred on men But that other sort of Faith which satisfies it self with the sincerity and Catholickness of it and that it is of such a sort not attending to or endeavouring after any further illumination or information in the branches arising from that root we cannot see how men can speak reasonably or conscionably in the commendation of it or such who are owners of it can hope to receive any greater benefit than to be numbred amongst true Believers without the reward For it is expresly against Gods word which requireth that the Word of God should dwell in you richly in all wisdom c. And Col. 3. 16. Ignea res fies est ubicunque ociosa est non est Sed quemadmodum in lucerna oleum alit flammam ne extinguatur ita Charitatis opera fidem alunt ne deficiant Fides gignit bona opera Sed illa vicissim nutriunt Parentem Erasmus in Symbolum the reason hereof is because the obedience of Faith of which before is generally proportionable to the Faith it self from whence it springs How then can any man act as all men are tied with an universal obedience who know not nor believe what they are obliged to do but by that Faith which is wanting in them And rudely and effectedly to rest quietly under the immaginarie protection of believing as the Church believes may indeed keep men which is all commonly lookt after here from being Hereticks but it doth not secure them from being Heathens For what ever is said and pretended such ignorant persons do not believe as the Church believes For when the Church believes Expresly and they believe confusedly do they believe as the Church believes When the Church believes she knows what and they believe they know not what do they believe as the Church believes Lastly when the Church believes directly and positively things as they are propounded and these believe negatively that is no otherwise then the Church not oppositely to the sense of it do they believe as the Church believes May not a Heathen believe no otherwise then the Church and yet be an Heathen Nay the more naturally stupid and indocil men are the safer Catholicks they should be because
his Benefits before he be in some manner actually in Christ For if all our works are Sanctified by Gods Spirit and acceptable to God only as they are done in Christ how can any such Acts lead us unto Christ or make us capable of him seeing it is one of the greatest perfections and excellencie of good Works or Faith for unless it and we be in Christ it cannot be a saving Faith i. e. leading us to Salvation to make us effectual partakers of and one with him These difficulties constrain us to distinguish both Faith and being in Christ into I cannot say properly two kinds as two eminent Periods and Degrees of Faith and being in Christ The one is initial and preparatory as a foundation which is not a distinct building from the house finished and furnished but a part of it and material Cause thereof The other is consummate and formed yet not so but addition of perfection though not of Parts may be made all mens Faith being capable of farther degrees in this life And from hence that mystical sense of our Saviours words in St. Johns Gospel may both give and receive illustration For in the sixth of John Christ hath these words No man can come unto me except the Joh. 6. 44. Father which hath sent me draw him And in the fourteenth of John he saith I am the way and the truth and the life no man cometh unto the Father but by Joh. 14. 6. me Teaching us That notwithstanding God is the First cause to bring us to be in Christ and that by his Predestination before time and his Calling and Electing us in time to the knowledge and Faith in Christ yet he is not reconciled unto us he doth not pardon us nor justify us before Christ brings us unto him and offers us to him as a new lâ—mp and as capable of his grace and favour which obtained we are then truly justified by Christ And as there are two distinct acts of God the one of his good Providence in bringing us to the Covenant made with mankind in Christ and the other of his special Grace in accepting us through Christ being in the Covenant So are there two principal Periods as I said of being in Christ and the First is when we are taken within the Covenant of the Gospel of Grace by baptism whereby we are made members of Christs mystical Body and inheritours of the Kingdom of Heaven Not that immediately and necessarily All baptized persons are sure to go to heaven but all baptized persons are thereby put into a capacity and Right to heaven To this St. Paul Gal. 3. 27. to the Galatians gives us his fair suffrage saying For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ And the same is implied in this his salutation Salute Andronicus and Junias my kinsmen and my Rom. 16. 7. fellow Prisoners who are of note among the Apostles who also were in Christ before me Where doubtless these persons are said to be in Christ before St. Paul because they were baptized and made profession of Christ before St. Paul And so when he speaks of the Churches of Judea which are in Christ Gal. 1. 22. he meaneth no more than such who were become of Jews Christians in Judea not intending that every one who so professed Christ should be infallibly Justified and saved by Christ as they shall who are arrived to the more perfect state of being in Christ of which the Apostle thus speaketh to the Colossians Whom Christ we preach warning every man and teaching every Col. 1. 28. man in all wisdome that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus Now what is or wherein this perfection in Christ doth consist is I suppose past any mans apprehension or Judgement precisely to determine that is what degree of holiness in Christ God will accept to our Justification but in general these two States of a Christian are plainly deseribed thus by St. Paul to the Corinthians If any man be in Christ Jesus he is a new creature 2 Cor. 5. 17. Where being a new Creature and being in Christ are distinguished as Cause and Effect our being in Christ Jesus being the reason and cause of becoming New creatures So that we may well observe in this case a twofold Conversion requisite to make a man truly in Christ A conversion to Christ by renouncing false Religions and false opinions of a Deity and assenting to and embracing the doctrine according to Godliness This every man doth who takes on him the name profession and mitiating Sacrament of a Christian of this is to be understood what is spoken of the conversion of the Gentiles And this conversion is rather to speak properly Acts 15. 3. a conversion to the truth of Godliness than to true Godliness Or a conversion to the Truth of Faith rather then to the life of Faith of which St. Paul to the Galatians The life which I now live in the flesh I live by the Faith Gal. 2. 20. of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me The summ then of all this is this That to be in Christ effectually to our Justification and Salvation is so to be converted unto him as to believe the Faith of Christ and to Live the life of Christ This being cleared nearer access is made unto the solution of the prime Doubt which is What is that which so farr and fully enstateth us in Christ that thereupon God doth freely justifie us For it is now supposed and granted that our so being in Christ making us partakers of the merits mediation and Righteousness of Christ doth immediately and absolutely qualifie to Justification and secondarily that which brings us into Christ may properly enough be said to be it whereby we are Justified And here comes in the grand dispute about the vertue of Faith Whether that only and wholly performeth this For in what sense Faith may be said to bring us unto Christ or thus to lay hold as they say of Christ in the same may it be truly affirmed that next under God and Christ we are Justified by it This I know not how it can be effected better then by the help of a most obvious and necessary but most neglected distinction of the use and notion of Faith in holy Scripture omitting that threefold Faith above-mentioned and several others impertinently invented and ill imployed in this case For Faith is taken in Scripture either Complexly and Generally for the whole Body of Christian divinity and Graces contained in the New testament Or it is taken Simply and distinctly for a special Grace separate I mean in nature not in Operation from Hope and Charity which together constitute the three Theological Graces Instances of the former have been given already in the twelfth Chapter and need not here be repeated in particular For let any man of common equity and understanding weigh the subject and
Justification Just as much as the fair gay train of a Peacock to the bird that draws it after it make a fine show and that is all that we know of But the difficulty is yet very strong behind And that is seeing it is granted that some Faith in Christ is Justifying and some is not Justifying whence comes this about Is it not because one is a lively and operative Faith and the other is drie and unactive and unfruitful So that Faith which is said to Justifie is it self first Justified by its works For though as hath been said Faith doth absolutely produce good Works and not good Works Faith yet good Works are they in which its goodness consists next unto its object Christ and consequently render it Justifying actually And whereas they would evade his and elude St. James's autority by distinguishing the Cause and Sign of our Justification saying That we are Justified only by Faith effectivè effectually but by works as St. James saith ostensivè declaratorily as signs that we are Justified it is a sense meerly obtruded upon the Apostle there being no more grounds or occasion given by St. James why they should understand him that works justifie only declaratorily than are given by St. Paul that I should interpret that Justification which he ascribes to Faith to be only Declaratorily For though Faith received in the mind is not apparent yet when it is professed then it may be said no less to declare our Justification then good works as the Scripture it self testifies saying With the heart man believeth unto righteousness Rom. 10. 10. i. e. to the doing of works of righteousness which proceed from a true Faith and with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation CHAP. XX. Of the Special Notion of Faith and the Influence it hath on our Justification Of Faith Solitary and Onely Of a Particular and General Faith Particular Faith no more an Instrument of our Justification by Christ than other co-ordinate Graces How some Ancient Fathers affirm that Faith without Works Justifie ALL this while we have treated of the complex notion of Faith or at least as it is that first general Grace whereby we are inserted into Christ and justified by it together with its blessed retinue of subordinate Evangelical Graces which are reduced to these three Faith Hope and Charity where Faith standeth by its self and is a peculiar Grace of it self and hath in this acceptation a more then common prerogative attributed unto it in order to our Justification or the bringing us to Christ and partaking of Christ For that is it whereby we are only properly justified and all Graces serve for no other end here than to adopt us for the benefit of Justification through Christ and for Christ's sake alone So that no man can as yet complain That though I derogate somewhat from the vertue and value of Faith in reference to our Justification as it is explained by moderner Divines some I mean I do not in the least detract from the sufficiencies freeness and absolute necessity of Christ's Merits and Grace towards us Yea I establish it nay I augment and commend more the Free Grace of God then do they who have chose another way to express it For all this while I do not compare Works with Christ nor Hope nor Charity nor Obedience with Christ as is plain but I compare now one Grace with another and Faith simply considered with the obedience of Faith For Faith taken as in general for the embracing of the Fundamentum ergo esi justitiae Fides Ambr. Offic. Lib. 1. cap. 29. Lib. 2. cap. 2. Habet vitam aeternam fides quia est fundamentum bonum Habet facta quia vir justus dictis factis probatur c. Id. de Basilicis non Tradendis Fides quae est justitiae fundamentum quam nulla bona opera praecedunt sed ex qua omnia procedunt ipsa nos à peccatis nost◠is purgat c. Prosper Lib. 3. de Vita Contemplativa cap. 21. Fides est omnium bonorum fundamentum humanae salutis initium c. August in Vigilia Pentecostis whole Body of the Gospel hath this undoubted prerogative to be the Grace of all Graces the Mother of all the Fountain from which all flow and as the Fathers generally do justifie because it is the foundation of all access to Christ Which assertion of theirs however later Wits have slighted and contemned as not giving Faith its due in order to our Justification doth in my opinion with much greater perspicuity and simplicity and soundness express its proper office then those newly invented and several distinctions and sub-distinctions confunding rather than setling the judgment of a good Christian And first They ascribe this virtue of Justifying to a special Faith Then they say this Faith doth not justifie as a Work or Act but Grace Then they proceed to affirm That not as a principal cause but only as an instrument created by God in the heart to that end And yet farther Not as an Instrument active and operative but as an Instrument rather receptive and passive as appears by the example given of an Hand which is no true cause of an Alms given but yet it properly receives it But first What a disorder must these multiplyed niceties needs breed in the minds of the simpler sort who are not able to comprehend them and so are brought into great troubles of conscience whether their Faith be directed to Christ under the true relation it ought to bear How much more clear and easie is that Doctrine that teaches First That neither our Faith nor Works proceeding from thence can avail any thing without Christ and that all their sufficiencie is of Christ And next That this Faith and good Works do but qualifie us according to the Free Covenant of Grace for Christ Secondly If it be denyed as in truth it is That Faith is any more an Instrument whether active or passive or a Hand as it is called to lay hold especially in another kind of Christ than Hope or Charity I do not find how they can prove it For I may and do yield a greater degree of vertue in Faith special well founded on God than in other Graces distinct from it but I do not yield that this is the Faith properly by them contended for For It is a mixt compound Grace consisting of Hope and Love which they call Fiducia Confidence and resting upon God This indeed is a special Grace as considered in subordination to the general Grace whereby we assent and submit to the Gospel of Christ but it is not special as distinct from other co-ordinate Graces with it Calvin Inst Petrus Mart. Lo. Com. class 3. cap. 4. num 6. But what manner of Faith say they do we suppose that which goes so ill attended alone First I suppose there is such a Grace distinct from others and that which was set up against
with Christians denying them all outward conversation as well as spiritual in matters of Religion Now this seems to be a branch of the Old Greater Excommunication and not in all places disusâ—d And sometimes is unlawful and otherwhile lawful according to the extent and application of them For to inflict the same to the dissolving of ties of nature is not agreeable to the simplicity of the Gospel And Natural Ties we call such as are between Subjects and Soveraign Parents and Children Husband and Wife which by no Ecclesiastical Excommunication can be broken or nulled The reason whereof besides the monstrous effects ensuing upon their evacuation not here to be treated of is this That Ecclesiastical Power can take away no more than it gave nor Christianity destroy what it never builded But Christianity did never simply confer such Rights on men but the Law of Nature only it regulated and directed the same therefore can it not null it It is therefore unchristian for any pretending Ecclesiastical Power to absolve subjects from obedience Civil or Children from natural and the like But every Christian in that he is adopted of God by baptism and admitted into the Society of Christians doth receive thereby certain Rights and power to communicate with it in all things which power may be forfeited and lost by breach of Covenant as well with the Body of the Church to live and believe according to the Received Faith and practice thereof as with the Head Christ And this being so judged by those who are over the Church in the Lord it is very consonant to Christian Religion to deny such of what order or rank soever they be the signs of outward communion Prayer and Communication of the Holy Sacraments of Christ The Church hath power to declare even soveraign Princes uncapable of such Communion and deny it them which we call the Lesser Excommunication Yet because as we said No natural Right can be extinguished upon unchristian misdemeanours If a Supream Prince of a Place should disdain to be denied or opposed in such cases and would make his entrance into the Church by vertue of his Civil Right to all places under his Dominion the most that the Church could do justly in such cases were to diswade him but by any force to resist his entrance into any Church were unlawful as it would be also to minister in a Christian manner in his presence for this cannot be commanded by him but in such cases suffering must be put in practice as for the Faith it self sought to be destroyed Some there are yet who call in question the peculiar and incommunicable Right of decreeing this Censure of Excommunication to those called the Clergy which is very strange seeing this Power is part of that of the Keys delivered by Christ himself to such only as he constituted Governors of the Church and that in Christs days their was a distinction between the Members of his Body as to Inferiority and Superiority Obedience and Command Teacher and Learner and much more in the Apostles days after Christs Assention and much more yet after their days according as the matter of the Church Christians encreasing and improving became more capable of a more convenient form and fashion For as it is in the production of natural things though the Form be certain and constant and the very same at the first production as in its perfection yet it doth not appear so fully and perfectly as afterward So was it with the Body of Christs Church It is certain therefore that from the beginning this Act of Excluding from the Communion was never executed but by the Rulers and Presidents of Congregations though the people might concurr thereto Now that these Rulers whom we may call Bishops or Presbyters were not created by the People nor by the Prince we have shewed already and therefore did nothing in their Right but in the Power of Christ whose Ministers alone they properly were And this being essential to right Administration of the Church how can it be supposed either to be separable from the Church in General or from those persons who are the proper Administrators of it For to say with some It is needless Selden de Jure Gentium apud Bibliander apud Erastum wholly where Christian Magistrates rule whose proper office it is to rebuke and punish vice and scandalous misdemeanors which say they can only be just cause of Excommunication is to destroy the subject of the question which supposes it needful and upon this enquires after the Persons which should Execute the same And spitefully to defeat the Church of all Authority from Christ doth indeed translate this Power to the Civil Magistrate And is not the absurdity the very same which endowes the Christian Governor with Civil Power and which endows the Civil Magistrate with Christian If it be not absurd for a King to be a Philosopher it is not absurd for a Philosopher to be a King If it be not absurd for a Civil Magistrate to have Priestly power it is not absurd for him that hath Priestly power to be a Magistrate There is certainly no inconsistency on either side For things of a far different nature and intention may easily meet in the same person though the things themselves can never be the same Here therefore the things differing so egregiously it is no more than nacessary that a different cause be acknowledged necessary which not appearing the Effect must be denied Now the Cause of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as Ecclesiastical must needs come from him from whom the Church it self hath its Original and being And it is a certain Rule that a man is born to nothing that comes from Christ as Head of his Church but is made and instituted Which whoever is not cannot lay any just claim to any Office under him I know it is objected that Preaching being an Ecclesiastical Act hath without contradiction been practised by diverse and to this day may be no ordination preceeding To which I thus answer by distinguishing first between doing a thing Ex Charitate and Ex Officio out of Charity and out of duty Preaching was ever permittedin the Church especially taken in the larger sense wherein it signifies all declaration of the Gospel out of Charity But the office of Preaching was never suffered but upon antecedent qualifications And these two differ yet farther For he that doth a thing out of Office doth it so that it is not lawful for him absolutely to omit it but he that doth it out of Charity and only by connivance not by commission may cease at his pleasure and as he made may suspend himself when he will Again he that teaches without Autority upon bare permission nay be silenced without any other cause renderd but the will of him that hath the Jurisdiction or if a reason be given because He hath no autority is sufficient But he that is orderly instituted to that end cannot without
thus spoken of the Political Power of the Church which we so call because it imitates that which is so more properly called in directing the visible Body of the Church to its proper end as the Pilot doth the ship to its proper Haven and hath both Visible Acts and Effects We are now to treat of that Power We in distinction to that other do call Mystical because the End and Effect thereof is not outward or visible but inward spiritual and Mysterious and therefore also call it Sacramental Sacrament and Mystery being the same in the Original Phrase of the New Testament For to the Church as they are more peculiarly called who are Officers in the same doth it of Right appertain to celebrate these Mysteries Wherefore first we shall speak of the Sacraments in General as the manner is and then in Particular The word Sacrament is rather of Gentile than Christian original there being no word in the New Testament proper to it but the vulgar Translation Sacramentum est invisibilis gratiae invisibilis forma ita ut ejus similitudinemgerat et causa existat Gulielmus Antissiodorensis Sum. Lib. 4. Cap. 1. thinking fit to render Mystery Sacrament in Latin the Antienter Latin Church hath made use of it to express certain Mysterious Rites of sacred and necessary use in the Church of God about which word so long since received no contention ought to be had The Nature Number Minister and Use of them deserving principal enquiry A Sacrament is defin'd as is commonly known by St. Augustine a Visible sign of an Invisible Grace which being taken rigorously seemeth not to comprehend the whole nature of it therefore Antissiodorensis would have its defect supplied thus A Sacrament is a visible form of an Invisible Grace whereof it is also the Cause But considering the many and sharp disputes upon this subject I suppose it may be more fully described to be A visible sign ordained by God to produce an invisible effect of Grace in the soul of Man This definition may be collected from the several parts of it contained in the word of God as first from St. Paul to the Romans speaking of Circumcision a prime Sacrament given by God to Abraham and his seed And he received the sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness Rom. 4. 11. of Faith which he had being yet uncircumcised For there are three special properties of a Sacrament commonly acknowledged To Signifie To Seal To Effect Grace but in strickness of speech these make but two Acts. For either a Thing doth barely signify and declare another or it concurreth to the being of another where things are Related one to another For seals are no more than signs binding more firmly to the fulfilling of the contents of an Instrument or Conveyance For as in such Cases the Free good will of the Donour is the only cause of an inheritance given the Instrument of Conveyance consisting of so many words are the signs of the inward will the seals are but signs of the signs of words that is an assurance that what was signified in the said Instrument should hold good And the Actual Delivery of this is the immediate Cause of entring into possession or enjoyment of this Gift In like manner The word of God promising his Graces to us signifies the will of God to that end The Sacraments superadded do likewise sensibly signifie unto us the earnest God is in when he made promises unto us as Seals And the actual exhibiting of these signs or seals on Gods Part by his Proxy or Ministers and the due receiving of them on our Part do put us into a fruition of those things which were so signified and promised First then They must be a sign that is a Representation of a thing and not the thing it self and that to add to our knowledge and Faith for if there were no agreement between the thing signifying and the thing signified the word of God alone had sufficed to that end Secondly they must be ordained of God For if no man in common justice can give away another mans estate but the true owner of it how should it be possible or equal or credible that any other besides God himself the Owner of his graces should by instruments of his own forging convey such heavenly benefits to mankind which properly belong to God This were supream folly and presumption to attempt Or can any man know Gods mind or methods of working before he hath revealed them Therefore it is said that God gave Abraham the Sign and Seal of Circumcision Thirdly they must rather be ordained Arbitrarily of God and by special Institution then Naturally least the Free Grace of God therein contained should suffer and the effect be ascribed rather to natural than supernatural Causes For though the cutting off of the foreskin of the flesh by explication intimate the cutting off of the filth of the Soul yet naturally it could not be so well understood And God might if he had pleased ordained the cutting off of the tip of the ear to serve the same ends And so in baptism Water doth naturally cleanse bodily filthiness but without notice given of Gods will and grace it could never have been believed possible to affect the soul and purify it Fourthly as there must be some agreement between the thing signifying and signified there must also be a real difference in their nature For nothing in nature or reason can signify it self because nothing can be clearer than it self For when a thing is obvious to our senses or otherwise apparent Sicut Signum et res ipsa aliquando possint esse diversa ita saepenumero et in multis eadem esse possunt Tunstal 9. de Eucharistia fol 16. we do not say we have a sign of such a thing but the thing it self Yet this most certain Rule is sought to be bafled and overthrown by Cavillers who would bring in their false doctrine of the Eucharist and would shew from bread on a Stall or Cloath which signifies bread and Cloath as well as is bread and Cloath that the same body of Christ may be a sign of it self But their attempts in their Instance fail them because that Bread which is exposed to be sold or that Cloath is not a sign of it self viz. That it is cloath or bread but is so only but it is only a sign that either it is to be sold which is quite another thing from Cloath it self or it is a sign of other cloath which doth not appear And so the body of Christ in the Eucharist is not a sign of that Body which doth appear but of that which doth not appear And therefore a Fifth condition of a Sacrament is That it should visibly signify something invisible and spiritual Lastly that Sacraments are to be not only significant or which comes to the same Sealing but efficacious in themselves upon the souls of men which may deserve further explication
A thing may be said in its self efficacious though it doth not attain the proper end of its working it misses of its effect because the conditions required are not kept For fire it self as active and operative an Element as it is doth not work effectually upon any thing but its proper matter nor upon that at too great a distance So may it be with the Sacraments which though indeed they are the power of God and not of nature unto salvation yet through some defect in the object or indisposition may fail of their proper and wonted Effect but not from any insufficiency in themselves or indignity of the Minister of them For if in this sense that old barbarous Rule be taken viz. That Sacraments have their virtue Ex Opere Operato viz. From the work done i. e. that they are Efficacious means of Grace in themselves and their vertue doth not depend upon the Ministers unworthines or worthiness provided he doth work according to Christs institution and intention it is true For what St. Paul speaks of the Ministers of the Gospel is true of the Ministers of the Sacraments Not that we are sufficient of our selves to think 2 Cor. 3. 5. any thing as of our selves but our sufficiency is of God The Officers of God in the delivering of these means of salvation not swerving from the Rule and Prescription given by God these Instruments themselves have their due and proper effect As when a King of his Free Grace sendeth by a leud and vain fellow a Grant of some great Favour to any of his subjects whom he pleaseth to raise out of a poor and base estate to riches and honour 't is not the unworthiness or wickedness of the bearer so long as he is true in his Office that can void the Grant so neither can the evil manners of the Ministers of the word and Sacraments null the power and promises of God made in them But though evil manners and vitiousness of the person do not corrupt or destroy the nature and end of the Sacrament yet it is believed that the actual aversation of the mind of him who consecrates and administers not only not intending actually to Consecrate but actually intending not to consecrate may evacuate the whole Action But this is shown by the former example to be very false because still God hath inserted his will and annexed his promises to the thing it self and not to the Persons disposition or indisposition either of understanding or manners It is true some of the Antients have said that Intention is necessary to a Sacrament and this hath given occasion to that gross Error in the Church of Rome which hath mistaken the intention of such Fathers as have spoken of Intention For Intention is twofold The Intention of Christ or God and the Intention of Man or the Minister They may say that Intention is necessary to a Sacrament taking their Intention for the will and mind of God which if it be not observed in all necessary thing at least the Sacrament is not perfect or valid but if it be whatever mans intention be it hinders not the Sacrament is the same And whereas they would sosâ—en this harsh and moderate this erroneous doctrine by distinguishing of Intention in the Priest into Actual Habitual and Vertual First we may well except against this distinction it self because they are forced in the explication of it to make Habitual and Vertual Intention the same in all material things only they cause them to differ in that Habitual is only a general intention without any actual consideration at the time of Consecration of what they are about Vertual that there is at the entrance upon that Action an actual purpose to do what Christ and the Church intended should be done at that time but this passeth a way suddenly and all the remaining Action is performed by vertue of that first good thought But this cannot serve the turn For the form of the Sacrament consisting chiefly in the words of Consecration according to their own doctrine if such an Intention be wanting at that time there can be no consecration and if no consecration no Sacrament So that there are two notorious inconveniences following upon this Error the one that the most sacred and Comfortable Instruments of Gods Grace and our Salvation are left to the lusts of malitious and vain man to be bafled at his pleasure and the Communicant defeated of the blessings God hath consigned to him thereby Another that upon supposition that the Sacraments were duly administred and so by consequence effectual to their proper ends yet this being not certainly known to the Partaker thereof his mind must be in perpetual disturbance and conflict fearing that the Priest had an inward intention contrary to the outward appearance But they say there is at least a Moral certainty And what is a Moral certainty Can they tell They have not yet And all I suppose they can say is no more then to make it a good degree of Probability which will not serve this Case But in truth many Cases fall out so that there is that they call a Moral Certainty on the contrary when spite and malice boll high in the breasts of men and their happiness consists in doing all the mischief they can to them they malign which we know by several Instances is not seldom found in those Countryes where this doctrine flourishes most And to what they are wont here chiefly to oppose That there can be no probability of an effect where the cause is not real but jocular ludicrous and Histrionical as it must be where there is no intention but only a fiction of doing a thing as if one in mockery upon the Stage should baptize one in derision of the Faith and Church of Christ We answer That if this Ludicrous Action be so fictitious and false that the thing only seems to be done but is not done and one seems to be baptized but is not It matters not what his intention may be For we now suppose the thing to be done as Christ and the Church intends For if this be wanting surely nothing is really performed But the question is whether when the thing is really done saving the due intention this defect voids all the rest For let an Officer of a King mock what he pleases and act what he pleases in scorn and derision of the thing he hath in Charge to deliver and declare it is contrary to his resolution to deliver it yet if he really doth deliver it his contrary purposes and actions cannot hinder the effect nor the benefit accruing from thence For as St. Paul saith Neither he that 1 Cor. 3. 7. planteth is any thing nor he that watereth is any thing but God who giveth the encrease We see this in marriage more apparently than in other Sacraments if we may call this a sacrament of which by and by that let the Minister intend what he pleases
nay the Parties Jest with that Sacred Rite never so lightly if there be a performance of such things as are outwardly required to that solemnity it holds good to all intents and purposes even against the resolutions of the persons principally concerned therein Yet must we acknowledge a vast difference between those two most properly called Sacraments Baptism and the supper of the Lord. For undoubtedly where in either of these there is a repugnancy of the will to them their effect is nothing upon the person receiving them because this is the principal obstacle of all to the efficacy yet is the Sacrament never the less valid and truly performed as to the Nature of it And concerning the Efficacy of the Sacraments it is worth our enquiry especially for their sakes who ascribing very injudiciously and injuriously the Grace of Sanctification and Justification absolutely to a special Faith thought of but lately amongst Christians or to the unsearchable Decree of Almighty God to justifie and save such persons as are ordained to Life and Salvation affirm this Decree and good purpose of God to effect all things necessary to salvation and that the Sacraments are received only as so many pledges and seals of the good will of God in our Justification and Salvation long before concluded immutably towards us but are of no efficacy or vertue to bring them about This though Calvin Cartwright Perkins plainly and directly asserted by some eminent Reformers is no better than a pestilent Errour contrary to all Antiquity of Ecclesiastical and Scriptural Writers Of which latter it suffices to instance in those obvious places which directly inferra necessity of them and ascribe a vertue to them of effecting and not only signifying Grace or sealing it unto us For Matthew the 3. v. 11. St. John distinguishing his Baptism Mat. 3. 11. from the Baptism of Christ assureth that Christ should Baptize with the Holy Ghost and not only with Water Now if water alone signifies or seals for there is no such great difference between these as commonly is supposed and therefore the Baptism that Christ used having more in it than so it follows that it must be the efficacy and grace of the Holy Spirit And they who take notice of this argument to answer that the difference between Johns Baptism and that of Christ here prophesied of consists in this That Johns was an outward washing Christs an inward doth confirm what I said For surely this inward being invisible can be no outward sign or seal whose natures are to be visible and apparent And therefore it must be that Baptism of Grace wrought in the inward man And doth Christ when he saith Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is Baptized Mark 16. 16. shall be saved doth he mean no more than It is a sign he shall be saved Or he hath his salvation which came onely by believing sealed unto him Or are they not rather equally conjoyned to the same effect Salvation So that no more can a man expect to be saved by believing without being Baptized than he can by being Baptized without believing And this is manifest from the Baptism of Infants which puts tham into a state of salvation even before actual faith in them Again Being born of Water and the Holy Ghost of which Christ John 3. 5. speaks in St. John meaning thereby Baptism must needs be more than certain indications and signs of life Christ sayes there expresly we are born by Water and not that we are known to be born by Water only And where as Calvin with diverse followers of the Reformation presume to interpret this Water as elswhere Fire of the Holy Ghost and not of the proper Element Water I make no scruple to accuse them of extreme insolence for so doing as well because they needlesly and more immodestly oppose the unanimous consent of the Ancient Interpreters expounding it of Water-Baptism than I do contradict them whom I alwayes set in a lower form to them as also because the thing it self declares the contrary sense to be more agreeable to the mind of the Holy Ghost For Water and the Holy Ghost are put here not exegetically as they speak but distinctly as two several things concurring to the same end For though John in St. Matthew addeth to the Holy Ghost Fire as Water is in S. John Acts 2. 3. seeing there is found a real and proper verification of this baptism of fire which was at the day of Pentecost when the Apostles and Disciples were visited with fiery Tongues from above there is no necessity of fleeing to a meer metaphor and if there be none here there is none in that place where water is joyned with the Holy Ghost And reading no where that even the Holy Ghost appeared in the likeness of water we are constrained to take this properly of external water Furthermore when an effect is ascribed to a thing why should we make doubt to ascribe an efficacie or agencie to that reputed Cause But to Baptism is ascribed remission of sins as Acts 2. 38. Repent ye saith St. Peter Acts 2. 3â— and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins c. And elsewhere in the Acts God commandeth St. Paul Arise Acts 22. 16. and be baptized and wash away thy sins Can any thing but a fond partiality to the new glosses of Modern Divines incline any man to think otherwise of Baptism here than of force to take away sins Here they demand with a Passion What Ex Opere Operato From the work of Baptism done I answer The work done of it self is not thus efficacious as is said but the Co-operation of the Holy Spirit which God hath set over that work and its influence effecteth thus much Lastly The Introducers and Defenders of this opinion of the ineffectualness of the Sacraments allowing an efficacie to excite and nourish Faith which with them does all things why should they be so nice and timorous in granting another effect of the same nature For to encrease and confirm Faith being a spiritual effect is as much in nature as washing away sins or communicating new Graces I see no difference worth the noting besides that from themselves and an illaudable pronity to vary from Tradition expounding holy Writ where wit and wantonness of Judgment can find the least footing to stand out against Antiquity But whereas some argue for the efficaciousness of Baptism and the other Sacraments out of Reason and some out of Reason argue against it it is hard to see how either side can attain their ends seeing whatever efficacy the Sacraments have they derive from the Institution of God which Institution can be no otherwise known to us then from his word and therefore as Divine reason proceeding upon Scripture grounds may inform us we may conclude and no otherwise Wherefore they argue very prophanely and according to Scripture grounds ridiculously
fruits on Gods part signifying his favour towards such truly penitent Persons by the comfortable testimony of his Spirit of Grace in their Consciences witnessing the remission of sins and reconciliation to God in the face of Jesus Christ The Parts of Repentance are commonly made these three Contrition Confession and Satisfaction which to speak properly cannot so be called For of all these only Contrition is of the very nature of Repentance but Confession and Satisfaction to which we may adde Reformation or Renovation are rather the Effects than Parts of Repentance but these two are never the same in proper language And therefore in vain do they go about to justifie that description as proper of Repentance which both Chrysostome and Ambrose do give us That it is such a change which committeth not the same things again And an act whereby we lament sins passed and commit not sins to be lamented There can be nothing done more indiscreetly against a mans self or injuriously against the Fathers than to make every true saying of theirs a definition or to deny them the liberty of their Rhetorical pen sometimes when they write what is true though not so accurately as the laws of Logick may require If we mistake not this abuse of the Fathers hath done great mischief in the Schoolmens works and especially Thomas's as may appear in his Summes where a bare and secure asseveration of some Father is taken for a very sufficient definition and turns the controversie quite another way then reason according to Scripture would have it go We all know that the Fathers as all other Writers even the Scriptures themselves spake not alwayes Definitions and the Definitions they gave were not alwayes according to the Rules and Practise of Logicians but Rhetoricians with whom it is most frequent to describe a thing from the proper and most commendable effect If a man should say he is a Souldier indeed who never yieldeth till he hath gotten the victory should speak very true but this were no true definition of a Souldier For a Souldier may loose the Victory And so Repentance is that which repeateth not former sins before sorrowed for but this doth not prove that to be no repentance which ceasing a man returns to his former evil course or that repentance persever'd in which was broken off might not have carryed him to heaven For who knows not that all habits moral and graces spiritual such as are Faith and Repentance have their proper seat in the inward man affect the mind and heart immediately and from thence are known primarily and described Outward acts are but the effects and the effects may illustrate but cannot be of the essence of the Cause Therefore Repentance exactly considered is nothing more than a thorow change of the mind and heart from things contrary to Gods will and to the obedience of the same This is true repentance and if it be not effectual it is because it is not that is perseveres not in that good nature It were ridiculous to say A man never went towards London it was no real motion because he turned back again and never came at that place And no less that a man never truly repented because he gave over and reaped not the fruits of Repentance For the nature of Repentance might be the same though vastly different as to the end Once true Grace and alwayes true Grace say they but what word of God what judgment of the wisest and holiest Christians have they to bear witness to their presumptuous assertion Their own authority is too inconsiderable and their argument most vain which is taken from the event and begs the question when they thus talk If it be true Grace it will persevere and if it persevere it is true So that give the highest instance that ever was or any mans mind can imagine possible to be of Grace which failed they answer very safely if as wisely It was not true for it faild But this is no place to argue this point We except not against the things themselves in Repentance Contrition Confession Satisfaction but against the order they are set in though Mr. Bradford that holy and learned man sticks not at that accurateness in his former Sermon speaking thus We say penance hath three parts Contrition if you understand it for an hearty sorrow for sin Confession if ye understand it for faith of free pardon in Gods mercy by Jesus Christ and Satisfaction if you understand it not to Godwards but to Manwards in restitution of things wrongfully and fraudulently gotten of name hindred by our slaunders and in newness of life And Perkins makes our consent with the Roman Perk. Reform Cath. Church to consist in this That Repentance stands especially for practise in Contrition of heart Confession of mouth Satisfaction in work or deed Of these therefore we shall speak briefly and distinctly CHAP. XXXVIII Of the Proper affections of Repentance Compunction Attrition and Contrition Attrition is an Evangelical Grace as well as Contrition Of Confession Its Nature Grounds and Vses How it is abused The Reasons against it answered COmpunction is a general word comprehending Contrition and Attrition the proper parts of Repentance and according to Bernard is an humiliation of the mind proceeding from the remembrance of sin and the fear of Gods Judgment c. But Bernard de modo bene vivendi Serm. 10. if we take Compunction generally it may be rather described An humiliation of mind proceeding from an apprehension of the Evil of sin Now the Evil of sin being twofold doth divide this Compunction into two kinds Contrition and Attrition Contrition being according to the most received distinction of it from Attrition A sincere and hearty sorrow of mind upon the sight and sense of the Evil of sin in it self and the offence thereby committed against Almighty God his goodness chiefly But there is another mischief in sin and that doth principally concern the Offender himself who thereby having violated Gods most just and holy Laws and incurred his displeasure has made him self obnoxious to the curses denounced against the breakers thereof and therefore is a Terrour of Conscience conceived upon the apprehension of Gods wrath justly due to him and impending over him These by some are made not only different as in truth they are but contrary too so that Attrition should be rather an addition to former Guilt than a method of evading Gods wrath and being reconciled unto him and their reason is because it is not done in Faith Hence they distinguish between Legal and Evangelical humiliation Perkins making the former quite distinct from the latter and opposite to it Legal contrition say they which is Attrition is nothing but a remorse of Conscience for sin in regard of the wrath and judgment of God and it is no grace of God at all nor any part or cause of Repentance but only an occasion thereof and that by the mercy of God for
me meaning by that sin dwelling in him the pronity natural which impelled him to sin with such particular dissent and reluctancy of judgment that he could scarce be accounted the principal author of it To these we may add a fourth general event of this original pravity Viz. An hatred and indignation conceived in God against the person so depraved contrary to his institution and mind Now Baptisms efficacy may have relation to all those but not in like manner For it washes away the filthiness of the soul original and actual Secondly It reconciles to God and obtains remission of sin Thirdly It doth not remove or wholly redress the depravation of the soul and the evil tendencies and disposition of it to sin which is the effect of Adams sin and cause of our own actual transgressions This is not destroyed by Baptism but lurks in the soul and like fewel is apt to take fire upon the least spark of temptations which shall be cast into it from outward objects and occasions And though it be so far done away that until such new risings and agitations of the mind it be not imputed yet upon such kindlings it putteth on a new guilt Another effect it hath in reference to actual sins For first by weakning though not destroying absolutely the principle of sin in us a stop and curb is put to sin in its future progressions And not only so but proper means of which by and by are provided in Baptism for the resisting and putting away all actual sins too For repentance being according to the Doctrine of the Ancients a second Plank to save such as are shipwrackt after Baptism either in their holy Faith or holy Life doth effect this no otherwise than by vertue of that principle of life remaining in the soul infused at first by Baptism For as Baptism hath no power to procure mercy at the hands of God towards them that sin after they are so washed and sprinkled without repentance So neither hath repentance sufficient vertue to restore us to innocency and Gods favour unless Baptism goes before because all remission of sins depends upon the Covenant made in Baptism which on our part is either to absolute holiness without sinning after Baptism or to true Repentance for the same A third Effect of Baptism is our Regeneration and new birth or being born again by this Water and the Holy Ghost For as St. Paul saith According Joh. 3. Tit. 3. 5. to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renuing of the Holy Ghost A fourth Effect is an incorporating into the body of Christ as well visible as invisible which together with the former is declared in the form of baptism contained in our Liturgy where it is said Seeing now dearly Beloved that this Child is regenerate and grafted into the body of Christs Church let us give thanks c. Which the Apostle intimates when he saith For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Gal. 3. 27. Christ And upon both these followeth a Fifth Effect which is an intitling the Baptized unto an inheritance in heaven For as St. Paul saith If Children Rom. 8. 17. then heirs heirs of God and joint heirs of Christ Lastly As we in baptism are all baptized into one body of Christ so are we into one Spirit For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body saith St. Paul And again There is one body and one Spirit 1 Cor. 12. 13. Eph. 4. 4. 5. even as ye are called in one body of your calling One Lord One Faith One Babtism For the Baptism of our Saviour Christ being the Patern of ours what in a more glorious and visible manner followed upon his Baptism in an inferiour manner attendeth our Baptism It is said by St. Mark And straitway coming up out of the water he saw the Heavens opened and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him Which Spirit doth likewise upon the moving of those waters of New Life descend and inspire the person Baptized In which sense is St. Paul to be understood when he saith If any Rom. 8. 9. man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his That is if he be not partaker of the Spirit given in common to all Christians at the time of their Baptism From the foresaid necessity of Baptism is inferred the opinion of the Minister of Baptism making it a work in it self common to all Christians For all things most necessary as in Nature so in Grace are most easie and common As therefore Water is the most necessary thing in the world next to air without which no man can live so long as without water to mans natural substance and therefore is made by God most common to all persons and cheapest of all things to mans Life so doth it agree well with Gods divine Goodness in Religion to make that most common and freest to be attain'd which he hath made so necessary to Life and Salvation The first thing that is necessary to our Salvation is the breath of Gods mouth as the Scripture teaches us to speak the word of God which Psal 33. 6. sanctifies both the person and the Element of Baptism Water which is the Second Therefore I make no great question but as it was free at the very first Publication of the Gospel and so at this day is still in some Cases and in some manner for those called Lay-men to declare the word of God and instruct Unbelievers in the truth of the Gospel which afterward it was restrained to the Sacerdotal Office So upon the foundation of Faith before laid by preaching in all capable persons and incapable by others in whose power they are that it is lawful for them who are no Priests to baptize And the answer to this doth rather explain and confirm than deny it For the Opposers of Lay-mens baptizing say That Preaching is twofold Private and Ministerial and that a man may in Private as Master of a Family instruct others but not Ministerially The distinction it self is ill set together for surely both are Ministerial Acts and more especially that which is denied to be so Private Baptism as having less of Visible power so to do or authority and therefore of an inferiour Ministration But this is just the Case of Baptism For we say not that Lay-men may baptize as Publick and Legal Ministers out of Office but as Private ministers and in extraordinary Cases We bring the example of Zipporah circumcising Moses his son justifying the like power Exod. 4. 28. of Baptizing under the Gospel And they reply nothing hereunto but what makes more against themselves For if she did it as they say in the presence of her husband when there was no need she did it in haste that she might prevent her husband she did it in anger And yet this Circumcision held good and was accepted How much more might it have been
a man never was inserted into that Stock is more properly called Atheism or Heathenism or Privative and then is called Apostasie which is a professed renunciation of the Faith once received Or this Division is Partial and so it takes the name of Heresie upon it Schism then must needs be an outward Separation from the Communion of the Church But when we say Schism is a Separation we do not mean so strictly as if it consisted in the Act of Separating so much as the State For we do not call any man a Schismatique who sometimes refuses to communicate with the Church in its outward worship though that done wilfully is a direct way to it as all frequented Actions do at length terminate in habits of the same Nature but it is rather a State of separation and of Dissolution of the continuitie of Church in a moral or divine sense not natural which we seek into at present This Separate State then being a Relation of Opposition as the other was of Conjunction the Term denominating and signallizing both is to be enquired unto And that is insinuated alreadie and must needs be the Church and that as that is united unto Christ or the true Church For there is no separation from that which really is not though it may seem to be It must therefore be a true Church from whence Schismatical separation is made So far do they confute and confound themselves who excuse their Schismaticalness from that which principally constitutes Schism and Schismaticks viz. an acknowledgement of that to be a true Church from which they divide themselves and separate Again We are to note that Separation is either of Persons and Churches in Co-ordination or subordination according to that excellent and ancient distinction of Optatus saying It is one thing for a Bishop to communicate Optatus Mileviâ—â—â— Cont. Parmen Lib. 3. Aldâ— with a Bishop and another for a Lay man or the Inferiour Clergy to communicate with the Bishop And this because what may perhaps justifie a Non-communion with Co-ordinate Persons or Churches which have no autority one over another wil not excuse Subordinate Persons or Churches owing obedience to their Superiours from Schism From whence it is manifest that though all Schism be a Separation yet all Separation is not a Schism And though there may be many and just causes for a Separation there can be no cause to justifie a Schism For Schism is in its nature A studious Separation or State Separate against Christian Charity upon no sufficient Cause or grounds It must be affected or Studious because if upon necessity or involuntary the Diâ—junction of Churches is rather a punishment than a sin and an Infelicity rather than Iniquity as in the dayes of Anastatius the Emperour as Evagrius relates it Who so violently persecuted the Catholick Church in behalfe of the Eutychian Evagrius Hist Eccl. L. C. 30. Heresie that it was crumbled as it were into several parcels And the Governours could not communicate one with another but the Eastern and Western and African Churches were broke asunder Which farther shews that all Criminal Separation which we make Synonimous with Schism must likewise be an Act proceeding from the persons to separated and not the Act of another For no man can make another a Schismatick any more than he can make him a Lyar or a drunkard without his consent For if the Governours of one Church expeâ— out of Communion another upon no just grounds the Church thus separated is not the Schismatick but the other as appears from the words of Firmilianus Bishop of Cappadocia in St Cyprian concerning Pope Stephen advising him he should noâ— be too busie or presumptious in separating others lest he thereby separated himself so that if the Schism had broke out upon no good grounds he who was the Architect of it Separated himself as all others do and it is impossible any man should make though he may declare another a Schismatique any more than he can make him erre without his consent or be uncharitable Yet do they err also that from hence conclude that the Formal reason of Schism consists in Separating a mans self for it is rather the material Cause than formal The formal Cause being as in all other things the very Constitution it self with unreasonableness and uncharitableness No man can make another involuntarily an Heretick And therefore no man can make another a Schismatick All the Guilt redounding to the Agent noâ— Patient in such cases So that it is scarce worth the Enquiring Who began the breach of unity as it outwardly appears but who is actually and Really First divided from Christs Church For they surely are the proper Schismaticks though the name may stick closer to others To understand this we may consider that there is a Vertual Schism and a Formal Schism A Vertual Schism I call real division from Christs Church though it comes not to an open opposition to it or Defiance of it so that where ever is any heresie or considerable Errour nourished or maintained in a Church there is to be found a Schismatick also in reality though not in formality the reason hereof is well expressed by and may best come from the hand of an Adversary to u thus judiciously enquiring It is demanded first saith he Whether Schismaticks be Hereticks Answer The Common opinion Azâ—rius Inst Moral Tom. 1. Lib. 3. C. 20. of the Interpreters of the Canon Law and of the Summists is that the Heretick differs from the Schismatick in that Every Heretick is a Schismatick but not on the contrary Which they prove because the term Shismatick signifies Division But every Heretick turns away separates divides himself from the Church This is very plain and reasonable and so is the consequence from hence That where the Body is so corrupt as to be really infected with notorious errors there it is really so far as it is erroneous separated from the true Church and where it is so far separated from the true Church so far it is Schismatical And when a Church is thus far really Schismatical little or no Scruple is to be made of an outward Separation neither can a guilt be affixed unto it And on the other side if no such real separation and antecedent Guilt can be found in a Church in vain do diverse betake themselves to that specious Shift and evasion that they were cast out and went not out willingly from a Church and that they are willing to return but are not suffered For undoubtedly the very supposition is insincere and faulty that they forsook not the Church before they were ejected And the expulsion followed separation and dissention from it and was not rather the Effect than Cause of them as are all excommunications rightly used For to those that pretend they were turned out do not the doors stand open to receive them and that with thanks if they please to re-enter and re-unite themselves What do they here
and Beasts neither can there many as different in kind as Man and Beast are distinct nor in number as men differ one from another so neither can there be One differing as it were from it self in Parts or other like composition of nature as man doth For seeing as Boetius hath observed God Boetius Consoâ—â—â— Lib. 3. â—â—os 10. is that which is most absolute and perfect and than which nothing more excellent can be conceived by the mind of man If more than one could be in nature or number there could not be one most absolute but One more absolute and simple might by the Understanding of Man be conceived which necessarily must be thought to be God rather than those diverse ones And if we should suppose the Nature Individual of God to be made up of several sorts of things and naturesas the Body of man then did we not pitch upon the true Notion of God which we must alwayes suppose to be most perfect But we have more than conjectural knowledge that some things in the world are not compounded at least as we are but of a more pure and simple substance such as we call Spirit And we maâ— well believe that all of that nature are not of equal perfection or if possibly they should that still there is a possibility of a more transcendent purity of subsisting than they are of until we come to the most absolute pure and perfect Being than which nothing can be or conceived to be more Pure and Perfect and that must of necessity be God Again such a composition would destroy the nature of God because such it must be that nothing either in act or Cogitation can possibly precede it but where there are distinct parts or humors concurring to make one Entire thing there a real priority at least of nature must needs be because it cannot be supposed but the Cause must in some manner go before the Effect and such supposed compositions have of the nature of a material Cause to such a thing as they so constitute Thirdly all things of a differing nature concurring to make One cannot move themselves nor of themselves meet with such concord as to make one thing without the power and wisdome of some third Superiour Agent bringing them so together So that to suppose such a God is to suppose one Above and before him who should Effect all this which is repugnant to the nature of God Lastly nothing can be so well set together but it may be supposed to be undone and dissolved again either by the nature of things themselves tending to separation or by the same power or if they will fortune as some have called it which brought them together This is yet further confirmed unto us from the Holy Scriptures which were best able to reveal the nature of God unto us so far as was expedient or perhaps for us in this life possible to understand where God most admirably describeth himself thus I am that I am which is his name for Exod. 3. 14 15. ever which no created thing can claim to it The like to which is that name Jehovah whereby he calls himself signifying an absolute essential Being For nothing besides God can define God Every thing but he is defined by another thing which differs in some manner from it but God is defined by himself because nothing can be Higher than he and nothing in him is really distinct from him as in other things And therefore truly may it be said of God The Lord thy God is one Lord i. e. One in number nature Deut. 6. 4. and Simplicity of Being And therefore such definitions of God as Joh. 4. 24. 1 Tim. 1. 25. Psal 90. 2. Jer. 23. 23. 34. Psal 130. v. 7. 1 Tim. 6. 16. this God is a Spirit or Substance Spiritual Uncreated Most Pure Eternal Infinite Incomprehensible Immutable Everliving c. Are rather to be understood Negatively than Positively that is that God is so a Spirit that he is infinitely above the nature of Corporeal Beings though he be not so a Spirit as to be of the Nature of Angels or such like Spirits but much more transcends them in excellency than they do the most gross and earthly Bodies And said to be Infinite because no limitation of his Being or Power or Presence can be supposed which is commonly called the Negative way of attaining knowledg of Gods nature viz by removing or excluding all imperfections of the Creature from God the Creatour And Positively ascribing all things to him which appear to humane understanding most Perfect and Excellent CHAP. III. Of the Vnity of the Divine Nature as to the Simplicity of it And how the Attributes of God are consistent with that Simplicity BUT against the fore said Simplicity seem to make several things ascribed unto God and believed of him as First Attributes of God as Most Holy Most Wise most Just Most Merciful and such like Secondly the descriptions made of God in Holy Scripture Thirdly The Existence of God in a triplicity of Persons Of the first we shall here speak most briefly as no difficulty For we are to understand them not as really distinct things from the Nature of God himself which is most simple but only Relatively and after the manner of mans conception who being able no otherwise than from sensible and natural occasions to understand God must of necessity frame to himself such affections and severally distinguish them for to exercise the several Acts of Service due to God For if Man consider'd God altogether under one manner of Being then could he not sometimes humble himself under his wrath and displeasure conceived for his sins Then could he not at other times rejoyce in his mercy and express his thankfulness for his grace and Goodness received Then could he not implore his aid against unjust dealings and injuries suffered in the world Then could he not Pray unto him to relieve him in his necessities and straits none could crave supply from his bounty and fulness in his wants These distinct conceptions therefore of God are requisite though God be absolutely the same And God having vouchsafed to express himself in such manner in his Word doth thereby give warrant for us to be affected alwayes provided that we proceed not to any gross imagination of him as really so affected and compounded but according to a Metaphorical or Metonymical sense familiarly used in all authors as well as in the Scriptures For it is to be noted the Scriptures do choose to speak 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost Homil. 15. in Joann in compliance with mans capacity not according to the dignity of the subject of which it treats nor according to the Splendour and illuminated state of the Understandings receiving divine Revelations but according to the proportion of mens ordinary apprehensions to which they are directed as Philosophy hath observed that All Agents do work agreeable to the condition of the
prophesieth Isa 61. The Spirit of the Lord is upon me for that he hath annointed me to c. which Christ himself applied to himself Luk. 4. 18. Secondly The Attributes of the same Spirit infer a Deity as Omniscience 1 Cor. 2. The Spirit searcheth all things yea the deep things of God 1 Cor. 2. 10 11. And lest this should be understood of a search without success or full knowledge it followeth For what man knoweth the things of man save the spirit of a man which is in him Even so the things of God knoweth no man but the Spirit of God Creation The Spirit of God hath made me and the Job 33. 4. breath of the Almighty hath given me life saith holy Job And Christ casting out Devils by the Spirit of God and the Apostles miraculous acts demonstrating Mat. 12. 28. 1 Cor. 2. 4. the Spirit of God in them the preaching of St. Paul being in the demonstration of the Spirit and of power i. e. being so powerful in outward acts and miracles that it was sufficient conviction that he spake and wrought by the Spirit but miracles cannot be wrought by any thing less than a divine Power And by St. Peter it is called The Spirit of Glory 1 Pet. 4. 14. 1 Cor. 3. 16 17 and of God By St. Paul it is called God himself where he saith Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you If any man defile the Temple of God him shall God destroy for the Temple of God is holy which Temple are ye Here we plainly see how the Temple of God and the Temple of the holy Ghost are the same thing And thus we see confirm'd what St. John very plainly and positively 1 Joh. 5. 7. asserteth of this Mystery That there are three that bear record in Heaven the Father the Word and the holy Ghost and these three are one And this may suffice to have spoken according to our purpose compendiously as well of the Unity as Trinity of these Persons in the God-head only adding without any long or curious enquiry the several Notions and Idioms whereby they are distinct in our Faith The Property of the first Person is to be the Fountain and after the manner of first Principle of the other to whom therefore some ascribe a dignity of order above the other two though not of time or duration being all co-eternal and the one not to be conceived anterior to the other Nor of Nature as if the divine Nature were unequally communicated to them but that they are coequal in Being and in Power or Acting externally Another Property of the first Person is to be a Father in respect of the Son the second Person and together with the Son to bear such a relation to the third the holy Spirit for which no proper name hath been yet found out and whether it be possible to express the same aptly in one word I much question It is commonly called Procession on the part of the holy Ghost and in general on the parts of the other two Persons Production which yet is â—imited to the excluding of such a Production as answers Generation and much more of Creation besides which natural Reason can comprehend no other But Christian Faith obliges us to contain our selves modestly in the general Notion of Proceeding Some have indeed presumed to distinguish the production of the Son by the Father from the production of the holy Ghost by the Father and the Son in that the Son proceeds from the Father Intellectually as a word is conceived in the mind but the holy Spirit as act of the joynt will of Father and Son by way of Love Of which explication I shall suspend all sentence leaving others to judge CHAP. V. Of the proper Acts of God Creation and Preservation or Providence What is Creation That God created all things and how Of the Ministers of Gods Providence towards inferior Creatures the Angels of God Their Nature and Office towards Man especially THAT God is the proper Object of Christian Faith or Divinity not only as principal but as all other things therein treated relate to him is before shewed Now therefore we proceed from the Creator to the Creature to which the two hands of God are more visibly and eminently extended or stretched out The first In the Creation it self The other In the Providence of God over the works of his hands as the Scriptures phrase is And first Of Creation we understanding it to be after the nature of an Act must find out the proper term or object of it which is contained in that received definition thereof Creation is the production of a thing out of nothing or more plainly a making something of nothing In which we are not so grosly to conceive of Gods Act as if he made the world so of nothing as a man makes a Statue of something but of nothing or out of nothing is as much as from nothing or nothing concurring by way of pre-existent matter to produce such an effect For if any thing had been which had not its first Being from the first Cause of all God that must have been God also or there could not be said to have been any God at all because there could be no order where was no first and second and where matter is supposed to have been eternal there no priority of time can be admitted So that either such thing must have been God as we have seen in the Relations in the Trinity or no God at all because that is not God to which an equal in any respect distinct in nature from him may be found for Gods Nature is to be above all Neither can any reason be possibly alledged whereby it should appear that if simple matter as some call it might have subsisted before it was made simply by God the Sun and Moon and other compound bodies in Nature might not have pre-existed and prevented Gods workmanship or why an imperfect Being should have the dignity denied to a more perfect but at the pleasure and will of the supream Agent disposing all things For that which was not at all produced by another must necessarily 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanasius dâ— Incarnat spring out of nothing or of it self And why might not a Man or Horse or any other thing do so as well as infamous Matter Furthermore Unless there were a productive Power in God of something out of nothing the Power of God would not answer the Nature of God The Nature of God is infinite so therefore must his Power be but the Power of God could not be known to be infinite if such an infinite effect were not producible by him Lastly This denial of Gods Power to produce even the first imaginable matter would also destroy his Power in creating any thing not consisting of such matter and so should the production of Spirits utterly be
most certain and inevitable event even not inferiour to any of those necessities we have touched and the reason is plain because here is supposed the same will and same power to effect this as them and the variety and uncertainty of the means whereby a thing is brought about makes nothing at all against this because this proceeds only form the relation such means have to our understanding and apprehension which not being able to descern any connexion natural between the Cause and the Effect do look upon the effect as meer chance For instance that a fly should kill a man by choking him is as contingent a thing as can ordinarily happen And who could believe it that should be told that such a fly moving lightly and wildly it knows not whether it self perhaps a mile off from the place where this falls out and many dayes before the fact should certainly be the death of such a man yet no man of reason and conscience can deny but Gods providence and decree may impose an inevitable necessity upon this creature so opportunely and fitly to move as that it should certainly kill him and that at such a time and in such a place And if any should hereof doubt the express asseveration of our Saviour Christ in the Gospel may satisfie him herein saying One Sparrow shall not fall on the ground without your Father If any should so Matth. 10. 29. contrive our Saviours words as to understand without Gods will to be contrary only to Gods will and not of Gods will concurring and his knowledge noting the same St. Luke will instruct him otherwise who renders Luke 12. 6. the same speech Not one is forgotten which implies Observation and Providence That therefore those things which seem to us most free irregular and contingent may have a tacit and unknown determination from God which should fix and infallibly limit them to some special ends I may presume no man can piously doubt and especially after that great Opposer of Gods Providence over humane actions hath been constrained to acknowledge so much I mean Socinus who granteth God the liberty and power so to determine Praelâ—ct car 6. the Salvation as well as the acceptation and improvement of Grace offered to Peter and to Paul that the effect should inevitably follow which being allowed all the arguments usually brought by him and others not of his rank of the inconsistency of such inevitable decrees with the freedom of Mans will will lie as heavy upon him to solve or answer in his cases as on any other who should extend the same to many more than he pleases to do For can we any more conceive that Gods good will to them should first make them brutes before it made them Saints in limiting their choice and determining the same to one side rather than others or that he should extinguish a natural humane principle in them to bring them to salvation but secure it to others I hope not Therefore if a necessity destroyed not their humane Liberty how can it be concluded that it doth it in others Oâ— that there is no possible concord between Necessity and Contingencie Indeed in the same respect it must necessarily be true whether we regard God or Man For neither to God nor to Man can the same thing be allowed to be necessary and contingent at the same time but there appears no reason why the same thing which is necessarily to follow on the part of God may not be said on the part of man to be fortuitous free and chance as it is called For we indeed vulgarly call that only necessary where there appears a necessary connexion in nature between cause and effect and according to the degree of evidence and assurance to us we hold a thing necessary or contingent in which sense we hold it necessary that an heavy body out of its natural place should left to it self descend to it and possess it And we hold it not so necessary that the Sun going down in a cleer red evening towards the West should portend the day following to be fair and cleer Our Saviour when he affirmed this spake after the observations and opinion of men which generally herein fail not So that the being of a thing reaâ—y and the appearing of it so to be being so far different in nature it follows not at all that so it is intrinsecally and of it self because we can make no other judgment of it than in such a manner and that because we perceive no natural connexion between the cause and effect necessitating it therefore there neither is nor can be any Some things God hath ordained so openly inseparable one from the other that we easily and readily infer the one from or by the other and this is all we call necessity in nature But if God more covertly and subtilty hath likewise ordained the like connexion not by a Law of constant Nature but his singular will for which we can find out no reason this we presently call Contingent though it be as certain as the other And names being given to things by man according as they are apprehended the distinction of things into Necessary and Contingent is very reasonable and serviceable to man as signifying to him such a diversity of Effects in the world that some have apparent natural necessary cause to produce them and these things we call Necessary and some things have no such natural causes but more immediately are ordered by God bringing causes by his special Providence together besides their nature to produce such an Effect and that certainly though not naturally and this we call Contingent That this manner of proceeding of the Providence of God is possible is impossible to be desired And in many things seeming to us as casual as may be that actually they are all granted For to us considering all circumstances it was a thing meerly indifferent and undetermined whether Peter should believe unto Salvation or not but considering the resolute Providence of God disposing certainly outward causes it was certain and infallible The great question must then be about the General viz. Whether God hath two immutable Laws whereby a necessity doth attend all effects as well such as we tearm free and contingent as such as are necessary with this difference only that on some things he hath laid a Law natural which ordinarily and necessarily moveth to one certain effect and end as are seen in natural generations and corruptions as that as St. Paul saith Every seed should have its own body i. e. produce it And 1 Cor. 15. that whatever is so generated should by a Law of Nature also incline to dissolution again And that by a private invisible Law which reserves to him or particular decree he certainly bringeth to pass even those things of which we can give no reason and there appears to us no connexion or order of causes but causes are by his special hand brought to
effect such things as in their general nature they had no tendencie unto The distinction common amongst Philosophers of Fortuna and Casus i. e. Fortune and Casualty and calling that Fortune which contingently falls out to free Intelligent Agents acting and that Casualty which besides natural intention happens to fall out may seem to clear this For if we should affirm that in natural things there were no such indifferencie really but all things were precisely and particularly determined by God in his private counsel however a wide latitude seemeth to us to be left them to move and act or not to act or to move and act thus or not thus but contrariwise no great absurdity or inconvenience would follow For what absurdity could be inferred if a man should say That the Eagle letting fall a Tortoise upon the bald head of the Philosopher of Syracuse walking in the field and so beating out his brains was determined necessarily so to do of God or that the tree that fell down in a wind and killed him that walked out to preserve himself from the fall of his house which he feared was inevitably appointed so to do These effects did not proceed from the nature of these causes themselves but a Superiour hand and yet might be no less necessary than such effects of which the common reason of man can give an ordinary and easie account And if this be granted in some things it doth lye upon them who deny it in all to render a reason of the difference and not on them who affirm a paritie by infinite instances to prove it being sufficient to say There can nothing be shown to the contrary But in things rational and endowed with a power of Election and Rejection it must be confessed that the difficulty is much greater because there seems to be a repugnancie to free will in such tacit necessity and God should seem to take away with one hand what he had given with the other And therefore of this in a more convenient place after we have spoken somewhat preparatory thereunto concerning the Decrees of God which are internal acts of the Providence of God CHAP. IX The method of enquiring into the Nature and Attributes of God Vorstius his grounds of distinguishing the Attributes of God from his Nature examined Of the Decrees of God depending on his Vnderstanding and Will Of knowledge of Intelligence Vision and the supposed Middle knowledge The Impertinencie of this Middle knowledge invented in God How Free Agents can be known by God in their uncertain choice Indifferent Actions in respect of Man not so in respect of God All Vision in God supposes certainly in the thing known IF the Holy Scriptures leaving us many precedents have thereby warranted or at least permitted us to speak of God after the manner of Mans body ascribing unto him head eyes mouth hands and feet and the better to perceive the things of God much more may we be allowed if at all to search into Gods nature to regulate our enquiry of God from the nature of mans mind and the more supream acts of his soul The first Act of which is his apprehension and knowledge with judgment following thereupon The next in order is the Act of his will and this Order we may best follow in the enquiry into Gods Providence which is constituted according as we can judge of knowledge and will whose proper act it is to decree And here first It is requisite that we take notice of the folly and gross impiety of Vorstius a late Pragmatick in Divine Mysteries who would needs distinguish God from himself and taking him at his word wherein speaking after the manner of men such diversity is mentioned concludes that God and his Attributes are really distinct in nature one from another And why did he not by the same rule conclude that Gods very Being his Essence was distinct really from it self as well as from the supposed Accidents he Epicurean-like feigns to God For God is no less affirmed to have heart hands and feet than to have Understanding and Will And if it be granted there is a figurative and no proper sense in the one case why may it not be in the other And that God is all these things Eminently but not after the formality of mankind The matter will be cleared better by examining his prime arguments taken from the Decrees of God our present subject First sayes he The decrees of God are various and many but the Essence of God is but one therefore they must be really distinct To which the answer is as obvious as the argument presumptuous That if the Decrees were really many they must of necessity be really distinct as well from themselves as God But their plurality is rather Relative than Absolute All the Acts of God being but one pure simple Act as in him but denominated divers from the event or relation they bear to the Creature This is one of the first principles in his Christian Catechise and why did he pretending to reason leap over this and not first disprove it and then proceed to his arguments It was a great piece of folly therefore in him to prove a real distinction of Gods Attributes before he had proved that the Nature of God was compounded or would admit of any such opposition For they who deny this will certainly deny that Another of his reasons is The decrees of God are free because they might have not been as well as have been But Gods nature is not so Answ There is a twofold freedom in the Decrees of God The one in respect of the Nature of God as God is precisely considered which abstracting from all Acts was indifferent to others as well as those Decrees made And the other in respect of the Creature or object which was capable of other Decrees and therefore were Gods Decrees said to be free but we all know that distinction of Instants in Order and Nature do not infer a necessary distinction in duration but that both Nature and Decrees might be coequal in eternity Now all things that are eternal are in some case necessary And the Schools have such a distinction of Decrees as they have of nature viz. Decretum Decretans and Decretum Decretatum meaning that the Decrees of God are sometimes used for the Act of God decreeing and sometimes for the thing decreed And of this latter it may be said That the Decree of God is produced and made which is a third special argument of Vorstius but of the other it cannot so be affirmed but it may flow from him by an eternal Law or Volition within himself and not at all occasioned by the Creature And it is therefore said to be free because it was not imposed upon him and therefore necessary because not accessary to him or contingent but proceeding from him as a natural and necessary yet voluntary Agent For we must not look upon God as subject to the condition of the
one way which such self-determination being known to God renders him truly Prescient and Omniscient and that without errour But this will not stand the encounter For Gods knowledge about the Creature being wholly conditional as we have shewed supposing the application of natural Causes in natural Effects and free Causes to free Effects there will be no Cause to be found or imagined in nature why two equally by nature Free shall extreamly differ in their choice of the same object How can that be known which neither hath a being in it self nor its Causes But the Case in hand is such For the Object being the same to both and the Subject being the same in both Freedom of Will to chose it is not intelligible how it should be fore-seen that one will certainly tend this way and the other the Contrary And if there be a difference in the Wills St. Augustines question so often and pressingly urged against the Pelagians out of St. Paul will put them hard to it to answer viz. Who made thee to differ and what hast thou that thou hast not received Comes it from a mans self as free If so then it should come from all alike where all are alike free and if all be not alike free then there is difference made to their hand and not by themselves Again the common Argument will be of no ordinary force upon them which layeth this undeniable and unshaken foundation That God is the Cause of all Causes and the First mover in all natural actions and motions but here as some of the Schoolmen and amongst others Suarez by name hath it God should stand still look on Suarez in 1. 2dâ— Thom. Disput 6. Tract 4. and await for a time the first self-motion of the Creature without any prae-moving vertue effectual to the end and see whether he will turn to the right hand or to the left before he knows any thing of certainty concerning that But they proceed farther and say That God having indued the Free Agent with sufficient abilities to Act the original cause of Acting must be himself and so his universasity of Cause â—aâ—ved to him But to this we reply That three things are to be considered in indifferent Actions The Power to Act which is indifferent The Determination of this power to one which takes off the indifferencie and the Action it self which in the execution is necessary because as the Axâ—ome hath it Every thing when it is necessarily is Now the latter indeed may be ascribed to God as likewise the first as the true Author upon general concessions of power but the second cannot because what I think hath not been considered there is a distinction to be made between the power of Acting or not Acting and Acting this or the contrary to it and the power of determining it self to one rather than the other For if as in an equal ballance the two Scales of mans Free-will are so evenly posited that they are no more propense to one than the other side the Affirmative or Negative doth it not necessarily follow there must be the help of a finger or such thing to make a difference though the least touch will do it So that the power of moving up or down is plainly one thing and the power of determining the same quite another here and so likewise in mans Free-will made free and thus indifferent by Grace which they call sufficient though this will not be allowed by such as require a particular and immediate converse of God to all Actions as did likewise the most Philosophical Heathens as I could show From whence we may collect that God seeing nothing but what has a real being in it self or Causes and the Power of Acting being not sufficient to give a being to an effect but the Execution of that Power if this Execution hath no cause it cannot be known and it hath no immediate cause until man hath actual being according to that opinion that makes man the absolute cause of determining his actions and not God For surely man cannot determine before he hath existence and therefore it cannot be and therefore neither known to be so much as future For man before he is can give no causality to this determination and they say God doth give none Therefore it is not at all and cannot at all be known of God Neither can it be said That things future are Real Beings though not Actual and Present and so may be known of God because that which is future cannot be actually known but as it is actual and not simply future and therefore is the knowledge of God by more accurate speakers truly called Vision rather than Praevision And those things that are future as to their proper Existence are present as to their Causes in Gods counsels but if there be no such to be found with God then can there be no such Causes at all For that cannot be said to be the Cause of a thing which at the same time is the Cause equally of the contrary or contradiction to that thing but the undetermined will of Man is indifferent to both sitting still or walking at the same time no cause inclining to one more than other which should found a certain knowledge of one and not of the other CHAP. X. Four doubts cleared concerning the Knowledge and Decrees of God and Free Agents and Contingent Effects How man that infallibly acts is responsable for his Actions The frivolous Evasion of the said difficulties by them of Dort TO the vindicating the former Discourse from just reprehension it will here be expected that we explain our selves in answer to these following Quaeries First Whether the knowledge of God be the Cause of things future or things future the Cause of his knowledge or otherwise Whether God knows a thing because it shall come to pass or It shall come to pass because God knows it In answer to which we must distinguish a twofold knowledge in God An Ideal knowledge and a Real knowledge as we may be allowed to speak after the manner of Men reserving still to God his absolute simplicity The Ideal knowledge of God is that whereby he perfectly knows all things in their proper forms which are possible and intelligible And this doth not depend at all upon his Decrees which we make the Cause of all Existence in the Creature but the Decrees of God depend upon this God decreeing nothing to be future which he first by simple intuition beholds not in its proper Nature and Circumstances as men of Contemplation first weigh the nature means and ends of things before they resolve upon them But the Real knowledge which we signally so call because it relates to the Real Existence of the thing so known does certainly depend upon the antecedent Decree of God no possible reason being to be rendred why God should know a thing to be but because it is certainly and not fallibly to him to be And no
indifferently Repent and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift 39. of the Holy Ghost For the promise is unto you and your Children and to all that are far off even as many as the Lord your God shall call And St. Paul to the Romans Now the Righteousness of God without the Law is manifested Rom. 3. 21 22. being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets Even the Righteousness of God which is by Faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe for there is no difference And to these many other like places of Scripture may be added declaring no man destined to incredulity or impenitency aforehand until such time as he hath declared against both and that to the end of his Life But on the other side rather that God puts no difference Now if St. Pauls argument held good as certainly it did that a wife should not put away her husband who was an Infidel nor the believing husband his wife upon the grounds of ignorance of a good event Should a man put away his Soul For what knowest thou O wife Rom. 7. 16. whether thou shalt save thy husband Or how knowest thou O man whether thou shalt save thy wife So what knowest thou O man who doubtest of Gods Decrees whether thou shalt save thy soul Whence we may conclude That it is no ground of discomfort that the event is determined for it is equal on our side as much as against us but it is the ground of all reasonable satisfaction from the General Law requiring obedience Evangelical and from the Promises made without any discrimination which a man cannot apply to his disadvantage or discouragement without being first guilty of unreasonableness and unnaturalness to himself Now Religion and the designs thereof do suppose a man a true natural man to himself before it attempts to draw him to an higher good or nobler ends So that if a man will deny his own natural reason and self-love due to himself such a man is indeed no fit person to be treated with any more than a direct mad man but this natural reason suggests to him that where he knows it not to be an invincible Evil which he is to contend with and knows not but that the way is as easie the door as open the means as effectual to him as any man living to attain happiness he is to take heart and courage and resolution to effect his desires For to omit a certain duty of Faith and Hope upon an obscure and uncertain ground is monstruous and ridiculous I conclude therefore that as almost all the actions of mans life yea and his life it self which are no less determined with God then the state of Grace or Wickedness Glory or Misery do not cause him to suspend endeavours leading to the end propounded to himself so neither in the Concernments of his soul keeping his natural Reason to himself entire can he obstinately refuse to act according to the ends of Religion Yet I might adde this also which is most true that if it were revealed to a man that he should never escape damnation do he what he can or what he will yet that desperate carelesness and loseness could not be but greatest stupidity because God doth certainly proportion salvation and damnation as to the degrees of them to the degrees of Holiness and Sins in this Life and therefore it were more than worth a mans time and diligence by a more restrained and Christian conversation to obtain a mitigation of the evil he so fears And yet that part of the argument commonly used which saith That it is in vain for a man who is so determined to strive to free himself and to abound in religious acts is directly false and to be denyed For no good works shall go unrewarded And this is no less infallibly true That to him that hath shall Matth. 13. 20. Rom. 2. 8 10. more be given and to him that doth righteousness and to them who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and honour and immortality eternal life And that the external acts and means are effectual to these great ends Christ tells us saying To you that hear shall more be given than Mark 4. 24. that Gods Grace is necessarily required to all true Conversion and Holyness I know those of Dort following Calvine and Peter Martyr and such of eminencie in Reforming answer otherwise But in truth their Reply is no Answer For granting an invincible state of unregenerateness and a total insufficiencie in Man to free himself without the effectual Grace of God yea and an irreversibleness in Gods Decrees so that all endeavours and acts should be frustrated to the obtaining the blessed end generally promised and the terrour of those under this Necessity they oppose only good counsel to this and much more and reprove them lightly at least that meditate too much on the severer part of Gods Decrees the abstruser Counsels of him and determinations to the taking them off from those good duties which God without exception requires of all But all this and the like to this is very little or nothing to the purpose For they certainly hereby betray their Cause and grant the whole argument to be good and duly to infer all that is intended by it only they oppose barely the Conclusion and would not have it take place though they can find no fault with that it is grounded on What a miserable shift is it for any who are not able to deny that upon their own reason such a thing follows to say Yea but this ought not to be and to perswade contrary to conviction of themselves as well as others But occasion will be given of these matters more fully in what follows CHAP. XI Of the Execution of Gods Providence in the Predestination and Reprobation of Man How the Decrees and Providence of God are distinguished The Reason and Method of Gods Decrees Righteousness is the Effect and not Cause of Predestination to Life Predestination diversly taken in Scripture as also Election and Vocation God praedestinates no man simply to Death without consideration of Evil fore-going as Calvin and some others would have it GOD having in his secret mysterious Counsels ordained all things according to his Divine will and pleasure without being lyable to that saucie expostulation of any Creature Why hast thou made me thus or What doest thou For 't is as certain Rom. 9. 20. Job 9. 12. as there is a God that God neither doth nor can do any injury to the Creature though man may and often doth injure him and himself too in mis-representing him he proceedeth next to the execution of his Decrees and Counsels which are so many acts of his Providence And because it would be much too long and extravagant to turn to the more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Protagoras
that is in the sense even now Jude 4. explained given over to condemnation by God If we may make humane methods of any use to us in arriving at the knowledge of Gods proceedings as hath been generally received why may we not judge thus of Gods order of Causes Especially having the consent of the Scripture which thus speaks frequently according to the several occasions given And if it be said to be absurd thus to judge of God as unsetled in his knowledge and judgment and being regulated by emergencies We can well answer as in other points of Anthropapathie or Gods complyance with Mans capacity in speaking after humane manner And if God condescends on purpose that we should understand something of him to our edification shall we transcend unnecessarily the limits of modesty and content our selves with no other order or less knowledge than God himself hath of himself and wayes Gods acts several in respect of us may be simple in respect of himself and one but denominated and discriminated variously from the divers habitude of the Object The simple eternal Will and Law of God is this that the Righteous shall be saved and the Unrighteous damned This is his Predestination in general of all mankind subordinate to this are the several intermediate changes the first being immutable And it concerneth not to enquire What kind of Righteousness this is or whence or how man comes by it Whether he hath it as original Justice given him immediately of God at his first institution or whether he hath it superadded and derived from Christ This is certain which St. John saith He that doth righteousness is righteous even as he is â— John 3. 7. righteous whether this Righteousness comes by Nature or Grace And this is another infallible Rule which St. Peter delivereth in his Sermon to Acts 10. 34 35 Cornelius That God is no respecter of Persons But in every Nation he that feareth him and worketh Righteousness is accepted of him Which is his most immutable Counsel and Decree of saving men and the consideration whereof we should firmly and immoveably stick to and put in practise But because it is one principal part of our Righteousness to agnize the Author and ground of it that famous doubt ought here to be touched Whether Righteousness be an effect of Predestination and Election or the Cause thereof with God The answer to this doth require that we be first satisfied in these three things Predestination Election and Vocation and the importance of them and principally to note in order hereunto that however later Authours especially from St. Austins time downward have invented and that usefully and reasonably enough several significations and importances of them which are not to be neglected yet the Scriptures use them promiscuously as may be seen from these instances amongst many Ephesians the first the fourth and fifth the Apostle saith According as he hath chosen i. e. Elected us in him before the foundation Ephes 1. 4 5. of the world that we should be holy and without blame before him in love Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his will Where Beza himself in his Annotations will allow Election in the fourth verse to signifie the same as doth Predestination in the fifth And that Vocation is taken for both 1 Pet. 1. 10. may be gathered from St. Peters words saying Who hath called us unto his eternal glory And it is as certain that St. Austine also so confounds them diverse times nevertheless they have their distinct conceptions which may be these For first Predestination or Fore-ordination according to Scripture it self will admit of a contrary object And there is a Predestination to Evil as well as to Good but in a different sense For as we have shown when God is said to ordain to Evil it must be rather understood in the Negative sense when he ordains not to Good but delivers over men to the commission of sin But Election is alwayes in a good sense as is also Vocation and are but so many progressions of Divine Providence in the salvation of the Faithful and not specifically distinct Species or kinds of acts as doth appear from St. Pauls accurate use and Rom. 8. 25 30 placing of them in his Epistle to the Romans Whom he did foreknow he also did predestinate to be conformed to Moreover whom he did predestinate them he also called and whom he called them he also justified and whom he justified them be also glorified Where the Apostle explaining the order of Gods proceeding in the saving of man makes a commutation of tearms expressing it For here Fore-knowledge is not that simple Intuition whereby he knows all things but that effectual knowledg founded on a precedent Decree which is the same with Predestination as now commonly used And that Predestination here is the same with Election is probable from that it is added to be conformed to the image of his Son and Calling is actuating of that Election and Predestination So that Predestination is alwayes understood as an act of Gods counsel and Election when taken properly as distinct from that is an act outward whereby it pleaseth God to take to his special favour certain persons and pass over others And Vocation seemeth to be nothing else strictly taken than that outward means or ministry whereby such are chosen to God As a man first propounds several objects to himself next he pitches upon one and determines to take it thirdly he actually makes choice of the same by some special signal of his will And this God commonly doing by word of mouth calling him to him hath given ground to that form of speech in Scripture of being called and calling the publication and ministration of the Gospel of Grace being that word of Gods mouth by which a man is selected from the rout and refuse of the World to the means of Grace Justification and Glory This I take to be the simplest and soberest state of this perplexed mystery In which I suppose it necessary to be advised how we stick too religiously to the tearms Predestination Election and Vocation because of their mutable signification in Scripture which must needs confound an immutable adherer to any one sense precisely and that such words must be understood rather from the relation they have one to another and the matter treated of as also the occasions than according to any simple sound of them And therefore to return to the Question moved concerning Righteousness as an effect or cause of Predestination Election and Vocation it must be answered from the distinct consideration of these tearms For when all these as sometimes are Synonymous and the same with that Pre-determination of Almighty God to Grace For there is a Predestination and Election and Vocation to Grace as the means as well as to Glory the End then it can be in no tolerable sense said
That grace is the cause of such special acts of God Neither doth any prevision in God of acceptation of grace of complyance with and obedience to Gods will move to Elect or Call any man and that upon that sure ground of Thomas because Thom. 3. Q. 2. 11. c. there can be no possible way of meriting without Grace for Grace is the first Principle or beginning of all merit and nothing can be a cause or so much as conduce to its own being But the inclining of God to such a thing must come under the notion of meriting or to speak more agreeably to our ears doing well before God And therefore they much more truly may be said to be the direct cause of Grace And this not as some Pelagian Hereticks supposed at last by constraint of argument for the more ready and easie operation of mans will but simply to will that which is good Nay St. Austine saith and that truly the same of mans Understanding De Spir. Litera ca. 7. as Will. For he holds forth his mercy not because they do know but to the end they may know Neither because they are of a right heart but that they may be right of heart doth he hold forth his Righteousness whereby he justifieth the ungodly So that provision of good Works or Faith as the reason inclining God to confer Grace simply is altogether inconsistent with the Holy Scriptures and the freeness of Gods grace asserted plentifully therein But there is another and farther tearm of Gods Predestination Election and Vocation which is to his Kingdome of Glory and the Reward not of the merit but work of Faith and Holiness And to these no doubt but we are ordained and elected and called as the end by those means This is that St. Paul intended in that place to the Romans above quoted and in the second chapter telling us God will render to every man according Rom. 2. v. 6. 10. to his deeds and glory honour and peace to every man that worketh good to the Jew first and also to the Gentiles Christ tells us in the twentieth chapter of St. Matthew that to set on his right hand and on his left in Matth. 20. 23. Matth. 25. 34 35 36 37 38. his Kingdom shall be given to them for whom it is prepared and in the 25th who they are for whom it is so prepared from the foundation of the world viz. the Righteous and moreover who are the Righteous namely such who abounded in good works there particularly mentioned And to this may be referred most of those speeches at large falling from the most eminent Fathers of the Church before the time of Austine wherein they affirm that God elected some and not others upon the fore-sight of good works in them and obedience others rejecting for their disobedience Thus spake Origen thus Chrysostome Nazianzene Ambrose and Hierome too who wrote as expresly as Austine against such a freedom of the will which should give any occasion to God to confer his first Grace on man all meaning no more than the election of man to glory upon the intuition of Grace Now if this opinion should be strained to the highest it would not rise to this that God did choose any man simply and primarily for his works sake or his faith fore-seen for as is shewed God elected simply to that and not for that but the most may be wrung out of it is too great a propinquity to Merit But neither doth this follow seeing they who say God in such an order i. e. after grace upon such an occasion as those good works of which God is no less a principle cause than Man doth choose to confer glory on a man or ordain him to life do not say that such fore-seen works bear a proportion to such glory or reward The Scriptures which plainly affirms the former exclude the latter making it a matter of free promise in the original and the gift of God together with mans work as especially to the Romans St. Paul doth Now being made free from sin and become Rom. 6. 22 23. servants to God ye have your fruit unto holiness and the end everlasting life For the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ There is nothing therefore more consonant to reason nothing better reconciles the seeming jarrs of the ancient Fathers before and about the time of Austin with that more wary and exact state and defence of the Question concerning Gods election of man upon pre-vision of Faith and Obedience alwayes including Christs obedience and merits and the freeness of his Grace in electing And nothing reconciles the Scriptures more clearly than the opinion which allows God to be the sole reason of his own will and the author of his Grace of Sanctification and Salvation also and yet holdeth such an order between these that God doth not choose any man to his free and immerited Grace of Salvation but through and upon consideration I do not say valuable and proportionable in weight and worth but in nature of the state of Sanctification going before Does not St. Paul render it as a reason why God was to be glorified in his Saints when he came to take vengeance of his adversaries Because our testimony among you was believed And did not the Master of 2 Thes 1. 10. Mat. 20. 2. the Vineyard who is Christ fore-ordain a penny to the Labourers in consideration of their labour foregoing Doth not St. James say the very Jam. 1. 12. same in these words Blessed is the man that endureth temptations for when he is tried he shall receive the Crown of life which the Lord hath promised to them that love him Surely that which man promiseth upon a condition he doth not ordinarily bestow before that condition be performed but ordains it to follow upon it And to the same purpose speaks St. John too in the Apocalypse Be thou faithful unto death and I will Rev. 2. 10. give thee a Crown of life But perhaps they think there remains some force in Calvins argument still against this and that God must be obnoxious to that imprudence that ordinary men are not if he did not first propound the end and then make all means to conform and conduce to it so that man should first be ordian'd to his end of glory or misery before he is All this I grant and yet grant them nothing and this is all they are like to get from confounding the inward and secret acts of God with his outward or the Decrees of God with the execution of them as Twiss notoriously doth in Twissius Animadvers in Collat. Arm. cum Jun. p. 1 2. his entrance to the Animadversions on the Conference between Arminius and Junius It is certain that God doth decree a man to his end before he is but doth he ordain him to such an end before he ordains him to
be at all or doth God give him possession of Glory before he gives him capacity The summe of what I am to say is this That First Gods Providence ordaineth that man shall be and then ordaineth that he shall be of such a condition and to such an end and then he giveth him an actual Being and then according to the state he is found in brings him to his proper end and not in that unnatural preposterous and irrational method determines him absolutely to an end before he determines his Being at all And those places of Scripture alledged to defend this presumption do rather overthrow it as that amongst others The children being not yet born Rom. 9. 11 12. neither having done any good or evil that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of works but of him that calleth It was said unto her The elder shall serve the younger I readily here grant a parity between Gods electing to spiritual and temporal ends which this argument supposeth but I do not grant That it was Gods purpose that the elder should serve the younger before it was his purpose that they both should be or that the execution of this Decree did not depend upon the execution of means leading unto it So that when it is said God first as man ordains the end and then the means conducing unto it it is true only when it relates to the end of the Ordainer not of the thing ordained which hath its end really distinct from that general one Man propoundeth to himself profit and then ordains some proper means tending to it He purposes to make a Statue and then purposes to make him a Tool proper to that piece of work He purposes indeed first that such work shall be done by a Tool but he doth not purpose that this individual Tool shall do it before it hath a Being So God first purposeth his Glory as the ultimate end next he decreeth that man shall contribute to that end in the several methods of accomplishing it but he doth not purpose that any individual man as Jacob and Esau shall proceed this way or that way before he hath conceived a purpose to give them a Being And thus farre of the first part of Gods Providence in ordaining acts of Grace and Mercy CHAP. XII Of Gods Providence in the reprobation and damnation of Man Preterition is without any cause personal but the corruption of the Mass of humane Nature Damnation alwayes supposes Sin AS the former proceedings of God with mankind declared his Mercy so do these here celebrate his Dominion and Justice in order to the Creature And as St. Chrysostome well observes in a certain Homily As in a well-ordered City it is as necessary there should be Prisons and places of Execution as places of honour and bountiful rewards propounded so is it in the world Gods wisdom nay Chrysostome in another place sayes his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Chrysost Homil. 7. Antioch mercy is as truly seen in ordaining Hell as Heaven in that upon the thoughts of its torments many are reduced to sober and good life whom vertue or promises of happiness would not reclaim But here we are to consider the manner and reason of Gods severity towards his Creature in these two formidable acts of his just Providence Before we can make any tolerable description of which it will be very necessary to distinguish them For the total neglect hereof as with the author of Gods Love to Mankind in the very entrance of his Book confounding miserably these two or the mistake in the due division which error Petavius falls into where he tells us Divines are commonly wont Petavius Dogmat Theolog. l. 9. c. 9. To. 1. to make a two fold Reprobation One negative as they call it which is as much as Praeterition or not electing The other Reprobation is Positive whereby he not only passes by those persons and relinquishes them but also adjudges them to eternal punishment And this displeases him so far as to the ground of it that he strains hard by the help of Tertullian to make this a branch of Marcions Heresie but in vain for the things are in themselves really and worthily by many learned Divines distinguished but who are they that bungle so in the framing of such a distinction I believe he no more can than he doth tell Reprobation we do indeed make Positive and Negative but we make Damnation none of them for we may distinguish a two-fold act in God and in Man the one opposed to good wanting in the object to be chosen and that may be called Reprobation or refusal Negative which refuses the object either upon meer absolute pleasure or some such absence or want of good which might make it eligible The other is more Positive when there is found somewhat in the object which addeth unto the want of good the presence of evil opposite and odious unto the chooser Now taking Reprobation as it is opposed to Predestination as some do then as they say Predestination supposeth nothing in the object to move God to ordain a thing simply or respectively to such an end So may it be said of Reprobation that it necessarily supposes nothing in the object causing God to turn from it whereupon Picus Mirandola determines thus according to Thomas A reason may be Joan. Picus Mirandol Coâ—â—lus 6. secund Thom. given from the divine goodness of the Predestination of some and the Reprobation of others and the divine will is the only reason that those he rejects and chooses others unto glory This may well be allowed from the supream and absolute dominion of G d over all things so far especially as may amount to a denial of beatitude to the Creature capable of it and a withdrawing of not only the Grace but common influence of God from the Creature upon which it should return from whence it came to nothing But it grates hard upon the natural goodness of God to affirm that the divine will should indulge so much to its absolute Soveraignty as no cause preceding to conceive an hatred or indignation against the work of its own hands as to sentence it directly to everlasting or indeed momentany pains seeing God cannot be unjust or properly cruel one moment any more than he can be eternally Neither can he unreasonably afflict the body or damnifie a man in his estate any more than he can punish the soul in Hell Of all these therefore the Question is but one What ground can be assigned of Gods pleasure or rather displeasure herein To this therefore according to the distinction mentioned answer may be That of the negative will of God seen in Preterition or not electing some to some high ends which we also call here negative Reprobation no reason can be given or ought to be sought out of Gods divine will as Picus hath rightly determined But as commonly it is seen when the Master of the
Family is gone out the house falls into disorder and so finding it he sentences his servants to their several punishments or may turn them out of doors So God having the liberty to depart from his Creature at his pleasure in this way of Preterition whether Supralapsarian or Sublapsarian there doth upon that spring up from it evil and disorder in the soul contrary to Gods will revealed which he reflecting upon may safely and justly decree to entertain it in his favour no longer but reprobating it adjudge it to the punishment deserved God doth not therefore primarily as some have boldly delivered propound to himself the positive pains and ruine of any Creature no inducement no grounds going before but he may very well in a negative sense be said to reprobate it not affording those preservatives needfull to its security This doth sufficiently appear in the first act of his Reprobation of men and Angels whom without all doubt he could have preserved in their original state but he freely refused and they both freely chose to leave him and expose themselves to his severest judgement which was by this positive Reprobation to bring them under the effects of their sins damnation So that they who deny any cause out of God of his first Reprobation do not deny a cause sufficient of his second and positive but the Devils and those men as are signaliz'd Reprobates are undoubtedly the free and full authors of Gods reprobating them and condemning them in this manner Of the Angels St. Peter and Jude speak expresly rendring 2 Pet. 2. 4. their offences a reason why God proceeded so against them and not the simple will of him God spared not the Angels that sinned but cast them down to Hell and delivered them to chains of darkness to be reserved unto judgment And the same is repeated by St. Jude And when God saith Jude 6. Gen. 2. 17. in hie Covenant with Adam In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye he implyeth the reason of his Decree to punishment to be sin And when the Wise man exhorteth saying Seek not death in the error of your life Wisd 1. 12. and pull not upon your selves destruction with your own hands he doth necessarily imply a direct cause in Man of his own ruine And the words 13. following exempt God from any hand in such things as the Author For God saith he made not death neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the living And here come in that in its due place though it were not intended of a spiritual or eternal destruction O Israel thou hast destroyed thy self For though without any supposition taken from the Creature God may pass him over and deny him grace and glory yet doth he not design any man directly to damnation but upon supposition of sin going before And from this state of things may competent reconciliation be made to the seeming oppositions of Scripture and to St. Austin himself The Scriptures say Because thou hast rejected knowledg I will also reject thee And Hos 4. 6. Mat. 23. 37. Luk. 8. 18. by St. Matthew How often would I have gathered thy children together even as a Hen gathereth her chickens under her wings and ye would not And Whosoever hath not from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have And St. John Ye will not come unto me that ye might have life And in the Joh. 5. 40. Act. 13. 46. Acts Paul and Barnahas It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken unto you but seeing ye put it from you and judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life And St. Peter God is not willing that any 2 pet 3. 9. Isa 5. 3 4. should perish c. And amongst others that of the Prophet Esay must not be forgot And now O Inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah judge I pray you betwixt me and my Vineyard What could I have done more to my Vineyard that I have not done in it All which places and divers more do charge man altogether with his own misery On the other side in that Gen. 1. 26. the Scriptures tell us how God made man according to his own image whereof freedom of will was no small portion And in Deuteronomy Ye Deut. 29. 2. have seen all that the Lord aid before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharoah and unto all his servants and to all Land Yet the Lord hath not 4. given you an heart to perceive and eyes to see and ears to hear unto this day And in Jeremy Turn thou me O Lord and I shall be turned And Ezekiel Jer. 31. 18. Lam. 5. 41. Ezek. 36. 26. I will give you a new heart also and a new spirit will I put into you and will take away the stony heart of your flesh and will give you an heart of flesh And St. Matthew All men cannot receive this saying save they to whom it Mat. 19. 11. Joh. 6. 44. Joh. 12. 39 40. is given And Christ in St. John saith No man can come unto me except the Father who hath sent me draw him And elsewhere Therefore they could not believe because Esaias said again He hath blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts And the whole ninth Chapter to the Romans mightily Rom. 9. 16. favours this side of which the substance seems to be contained in this one Verse So then it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy And to the Philippians To will and to do is of Phil. 2. 13. God These with others seem to deny liberty of will to man and to ascribe the reason of good and evil to which man is subject to God as the author making man rather passive under both To that of Free-will we may speak by and by To the present case taking in also what St. Austin saith God doth not forsake but where he is forsaken which may ill consist with what he so largely and often delivers on the other side we answer by the help of the former distinction of simple Preterition and direct Reprobation and the effect of it damnation viz. That the foresaid places suppose an evil affection in the parties so rejected by God and are to be interpreted of his just determination to punish sin and hard-heartedness in them But the incapacity of Grace and Conversion and Salvation are meant by the latter Texts proceeding from the sole Preterition of God refusing to prevent the evil and malignity of mens wills which for want of that preventing Grace do certainly tend to evil and are incurable of themselves But upon this I see divers shrewd Objections to arise as First That by this with-holding of Gods Grace his Preterition there is brought a necessity upon mans will to evil and his indifferency to life and death quite taken away as all use of the means of Grace To this
discriminating note made between the incorrigible reprobates destined to destruction and the corrigible offender ordained to life then indeed much more colour would appear to justifie the refusal of dispensing the means of salvation to such and the denial in the reprobate to give ear to such offers but flesh and bloud cannot reveal this to us and the Spirit of God hath not Doth not God send his Prophet Ezekiel with Ezek. 3. 4. 7. express commission to warn the house of Israel though he expresly assures him They will not hearken unto thee for they will not hearken unto me If the child in the womb being certainly determin'd to one sex long before it is brought forth yet this certainty being hid from our eyes though but for such a small time is thought by Parents a matter of prayer many times that it may be a Son How should not we much rather take the just occasion of applying our selves to acts of Religion though possibly the event with God is determined The summe then of this Chapter comes to this That God by his soveraign dominion and by his inscrutable counsels doth out of the corrupted and forlorn mass of fallen man elect whom he pleases to effectual Grace and from thence brings them to infallible Glory but never without their own acts of embracing his offers and persevering faithfully in his service So that though he purely chooses them to the means of Grace without consideration of their worth or fruitfulness yet he never ordains any or elects them to Glory but upon an intuition of faith and obedience to his will And on the other side he passes by others leaving them in great part as he found them from whence spring works of wickedness freely invented and acted and tending infallibly unto damnation So that God doth not in like manner influence the wicked as he doth the righteous that is for no other cause but his own will taking occasion justly from that common deformity wherein he finds them but never simply destinates any man to damnation but upon beholding the deserts of their sins But how it can come to pass that God thus ordaining the end damnation should not also appoint the means sin without which he condemns no man shall be answered in a more proper place Here only I add for their sakes who measure opinions by famous Patrons to which they are addicted that as I have said nothing to comply with or spitefully to oppose Calvin and his followers so neither to cross Arminius But this I must say that though I look upon Arminius as a much more modest man and more judicious Disputant than Calvin in these deep points yet in their followers we shall easily see a great disparity to the disadvantage of the Remonstrants For very many of Calvins followers have mitigated and fairly interpreted his too harsh and scandalous expressions and opinions and I think none have gone beyond him But on the other side what Arminius with much modesty and gravity delivered erroneously his abettors and followers have pursued and improved many of them to such an intollerable height that they fall often into direct Pelagianism and from thence which is much worse into Socinianisin as experience plainly sheweth And to that Dutch Physician Emperick in this part of Divinity who Beverovicius protested against all ministration of Physick to sick persons unless he could be assured of a mutability in the term of his Patients life for I must openly profess the same reason of Gods Providence and pre-determination to temporal life and death as spiritual and eternal and they are equally fixt and moveable both of them it suffices to answer Then he may let it alone and no absurdity follows But because a very learned and grave Divine of ours seemeth to have given some weight to the argument by citiug him to our present purpose I answer further That no such thing is said to be so precisely and simply â—ecreed â—ut it is as necessary the means should be determined as the end God hath determined no effect but he hath determined the proper cause thereto conducing And it is as false that God hath determined that such a man should recover his health as that he shaâ—l do it without such proper means The means comming under the decree as well as the end It will be said that this takes away all liberty from man as well in the way as to the end And probably Beverovicius if he had thought on this though he had been assured that the tearm of mans life was moveable but the means-thereto unmoveable would never have read book about physick nor stir'd off his seat to any patient because whatever he did or not did the means should have been applyed and succeeded to the sick party But because we are sure we cannot go out of our Island on foot shall we not stir out of doors at all Because we cannot do what we would and go as far as we would shall we not do any thing at all Because our Liberties do not reach beyond Gods Mannor and priviledge the second cause from the autority and influence of the first shall we be sulle in and dogged and refuse that which we Certainly whatever plausible suggestions may of late have been instilled into the common peoples minds of a free subjection it can never be rightly and honestly understood of a freedom from the Supream Power and Justice And so whatever liberty of will may be claimed to man in his actions must be interpreted rather in relation to his fellow creatures and subjects and outward causes which cannot impose upon his will but the first cause may in that cannatural way we before mentioned and in the next place shall have occasion offered farther to explain CHAP. XIII The Occasion of treating of Sin here What sin is What Evil. Monstrousness in things natural and Evil in Moral things illustrate each other Sin no positive or real Thing God the direct Cause of Evil. St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans makes nothing for the contra Remonstrants literally and primarily taken THE near respect that Sin hath to what is passed and the aspect it hath to what is before us concerning the Providence of God in the Fall of Man from his native Righteousness oblige us here to enquire farther into the nature of it And slightly passing over that doubt of some Philosophers and Ancient Hereticks How if there were a God who is supreamly and infinitely good and no more but one Evil should find any being amongst the beautiful works of God its nature being so foul monstrous and contrary to God because it is touched above and in truth do adde rather a greater beauty and lustre to God works than if no such thing were to be found and because as the glory so the power of God is much more manifested thereby in that he curbs and checks its excess and exorbitancie at his pleasure and forces it by his providence to
a good event in general if not particular we are now to satisfie our selves What that we call Evil and Sin is And what relation God hath to it First then we are to note that Evil and Sin differ only as Genus and Species so that all Sin is Evil but all Evil is not Sin Evil is that which is contrary to nature or natural Good Sin is that which is contrary to grace and moral good And that which is contrary to the order rule and form of Nature is called Monstrous that which is contrary to the Rule of Justice and Holiness is called Sin And as monstrosity in nature is divided into defects and excesses So Sin in morality is divided into Omissions and Commissions And of neither of these can God be said to be the Authour or Nature under him For if Nature according to Philosophers which is but Gods Instrument doth not intend monstrous effects much less may God be said so to do whose acts are alwayes more constant and steady the higher they are and nearer to himself For to give an instance when we see a want of a limb in a monstrous birth it may so far be imputed to Divine Providence that it could not so happen without the knowledge and consent of the Supream Cause in whose power it was to have disposed outward and second causes to the effecting of a regular and perfect work yet directly and with a positive purpose to have assisted in the production of such a Monster we cannot safely nor wisely say seeing the denyal of that ordinary and more necessary concurrence to such an end is altogether sufficient to it and such defects arise not from Gods positive Will to have them so but from his not willing to have them otherwise There may seem somewhat more difficulty in Monsters in excess when any Creatures have more parts than are naturally proper to them as four hands or three leggs and the like But this proves not any direct intention to this but only an intention not to keep things in their proper limits and to their Rule A Master or Father when he holds not a severe hand over his child or servant cannot but by inference and consequence be said to be the cause of the exorbitant carriages of them because though he wills not to prevent such mischiefs he doth not will they should be God in like manner willeth redundance of matter as a thing real and positive but that it should meet together as to constitute such an unnatural effect is rather the suspence and with-holding his Providence then the exercising of the same This I premise as leading to the due apprehension of Moral Evil which to hold as such to have a positive Existence in the world is inevitably to become Manichean and to make God the Authour of sin as St. Austin in these words declareth Here we are to be careful that we fall not into the Herisee of the Manichees who said there was a certain Nature of Evil and a certain people of darkness with their Princes And afterward So they erre so they are blinded so they make themselves the people Gentem Tenebrarum of darkness by believing that which is false against him who created them for every Creature is good but it is corrupted by the depraved will of Man Thus he and were it so that Evil had a positive being from whom could it proceed but from God And it is repugnant to the Nature of the good God to be the Author of any thing simply Evil so far the Manicheans were in the right therefore they that hold this must with the Manichees invent and introduce another God I know the modern defenders of the positive nature of sin alledge several Schoolmen and some Fathers for the same but I know there are more express testimonies of the Ancient against it and the Modern of any account had either another sense than we now state the doubt in or must be rejected with their Relater It is not a place here to examine and encounter all nor to alledge the Reasons or Authorities to the contrary which might easily be done Only that Argument taken from the distinction of Sins of Omission and Commission deserves to be considered For say they if Sins of Omission consist only in defect of duty and are thereby distinguished from of Commission which are such as not only fall short of what is due but act the quite contrary as when a man instead of praying and praising God contumeliously abuses his Name and Worship this hath more in it than a meer negation or privation of good Thus indeed it seems but thus it is not For both these are evil upon the account of privation and the absence of good the difference only is in this that in sins of Omission the privativeness or negation is immediately seated in the Subject owing such an Act and in such a manner and here in no Action at all but the absence of it which renders a man and denominates him immediately evil or defective But in sins of Commission the case is far otherwise for here privation or defect relateth not immediately to the Subject as the Man himself but to the Action it self and by that is the Man made guilty and evil because though the act be in its nature positive yet is defective as to its circumstances according to which it ought to be performed For when God hath appointed and Justice and Reason directeth that a man should observe in his action such a time and season and such a place and have respect to such a person such a manner and measure and he neglecteth all or any of these doth he not plainly offend in the negative though the act it self be in nature positive But in the case we are about the Nature as we said of things is not to be valued but the Morality and the Morality may be evil when the Nature is good and the Morality may be privative when the Act is positive Hatred of God is an act of Man than which none can be instanced in to contain more evil or malice Therefore as this is an act Natural and Vital it is good and hath God for its direct and first cause but as this act is directed to God and so relates to a wrong object so it is evil and hath neither countenance nor concurrence from him For as is above-touched we are to distinguish Omne bonum viva substantia est vita est Vita autem Christus Omne autem malum sine substantia est nihil est tamen perdere protest Opus Imperf in Matth. Hom. 41. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost Homil 2. in Act. Apost Anselmus de Casu Diaboli Tom. 3. the Act of Sin from the Sin of the Act and that upon the received Maxime amongst the Philosophers That all Evil is in somewhat that is Good for having no subsistence of it self it must rest upon some other thing that hath a
or equity of it or not saying Nay but O man What art thou that replyest against God Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it Why hast thou made me thus Hath not the Potter power over the clay of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour and another unto dishonour No man that acknowledges and every Christian must acknowledge the like and greater power and prerogative in God over Man than the Potter hath of his clay can deny that God may order the work of his hands as he pleases neither can he deny but the drift of the Apostle in this comparison was to show the absolute power and dominion of God over all Creatures and therefore let them see how they aggravate matters of this nature and multiply fond ratiocinations which they cannot but know agree not with St. Pauls stating and decision of this Question I do freely grant the adverse Party that St. Paul doth not at all concern himself with that kind of Predestination Election or Vocation as very many confidently presume he doth in his Eighth and Ninth Chapters to the Romans I mean not particular or personal Prae-determination and the like the whole letter and the occasion of his discourse there being concerning the Election of the Gentile Church and the uncessant protection thereof against all threatnings and Oppositions and disputing the equity of Gods deserting the Jewish Church yet thus far his argument being general holds good in particular persons that if it be free to God without any just exceptions to choose and leave a Church or Nation at his pleasure and according to the counsel of his own will it is also reasonable and just for him to favour or show disfavour to any single person in like acts of his Providence without being called in question for what he doth or not doth CHAP. XIV Of Sin more particularly And first of the Fall of Adam Of Original sin wherein it consisteth and how it is traduced from Father to children The Proofs of it The Nature and Evils of it And that it is cured in baptism That Natural Concupiscence hath not the Nature of Sin after baptism BY what is said competent satisfaction may be had in that mystery of Gods Providence in the fall and sin of the first Man created as we have shewed in such perfection of natural Faculties and divine Grace the reason absolute and demonstrative whereof cannot be rendred by the witâ— of Man viz. Why God should make such a fine and exquisite piece and deliver it over presently to ruin and loss It may suffice that God was not the direct cause of such his Fall by impelling him though his Free-will embracing the Temptation he was privy to his errour As it was in that memorable case of the death of Benhadad King of Syria in the second of the Kings when Hazael was sent to enquire Whether he should recover 2 Kings 8. 10. of that Sickness The Prophet Elisha answered Go say unto him thou mayest certainly recover how be it the Lord hath shewed me that he shall surely dye And this was the true case of Adam whom God knew to have full power certainly to stand and yet he knew he would surely fall As therefore God in that case spake after the method and manner of mans apprehension so he here acted In that he first said the King might surely recover and this was according to the common order of natural Causes which then were upon him in his sickness which were such as were easily resisted and like to have no such effect But then God withal beholding that which was not seen of man perhaps not thought on by the Actour himself at that time he saw withal a necessary dependencie and connexion between another cause and that effect which followed and so declared surely the contrary to the other In like manner God beholding Adam in that integrity and vigour of gifts and Graces with which he had furnished him saw him in a certain condition to persevere in that state but seeing withal the future outward cause of Temptation he might well see the effect what it would be infallibly So that when we say a thing is contingent we cannot say so in respect of all causes but in respect of some special cause to which in our opinion and observation such an effect may seem properly to belong For it is a true Axiome amongst Logicians All causes accidental are reducible to proper and direct causes So that there was no necessity by Gods appointment of Adams Fall as he was framed of God but somewhat might occurr outwardly which by Gods permission might have as certain effect upon the will of Man though Free of it self and indifferent as had the wet cloath laid by Hazael 2 Kings 8. 15. upon the face of Benhadad this only excepted That what natures simple Act did in this the will of man combining freely against himself with those outward causes suffered in that The thing therefore principally to be here enquired after is rather about the Nature of this Sin in Adam and the Effects thereof And as to the former it is to be observed That what was in him an Actual sin became in us an Original and what was free to him to be subject to it or void of it becomes necessary to us and inevitable It might be called in some sense an Original sin in him as it was the first in nature and time he stood guilty of but not as if his Nature was from the beginning so corrupt as to dispose him unto it Again in him it was of it self purely sinful and a transgression of Gods Law upon which followed evil effects but in us it seems to partake originally of both sin and punishment but chiefly of this latter For though they speak truly in the larger sense who make three things proper and inseparable from Sin Guilt Stain and Punishment yet restraining our selves to the true Nation of it there are these two things only essential to it The matter it self which is the evil act committed against the Law of God or which commeth to the same omitted contrary to the same And the manner or formality of it which consisteth in the perversness and pravity of the will which is so essential to it that it both distinguishes the errours of rational men from them of beasts and mad-men and them of the same Man from one another so that what was done voluntarily and freely differs wholly from that done with incogitancie so not affected for then the will concurs with it and infects it and without any intention so to do as to point of moral Goodness or Evil. And according to the bent or averseness of the will to evil commonly are estimated the degrees of evil But though in Adam all these things concurred to the heightening of his Actual sin yet in those that inherit that evil from him the sin must needs be much less in Nature and lighter because
of no personal concurrence to such deformity Yet not so neither but that it justly is denominated Sin from the very nature and effects of it For seeing whatever is in the Will must be good or evil and if the Will be found crooked perverse or averse to that it ought to incline to this is contrary to Gods institution and Law and whence ever this proceeds from an immediate act of our own or by traduction from others seeing it is found in the Will it must needs be contrary and consequently odious to God and in conclusion sinful Again as the fountain poisons and corrupts all streams flowing from thence so the Will being thus corrupt and naturally thus ill inclined all the other defects even in his body as well as soul contracted by this fall are as so many deformities in man which render him deservedly hated of God seeing such disparity and unlikeness to the worse to that which he first fram'd Thirdly Original sin in Man hath this more of disorder in it that it not only is a corruption of the will and thereby a deformity and vitiosity in the inferiour parts and faculties but it is of ill consequence For if this depravation went no farther than that evil born with us if it stand there and wrought no more evil the nature of it had been less sinful and more tolerable but being of an active nature and having taken up the chiefest room in the soul of Man it disposeth and impelleth to more mischief in actual transgressions As a Garrison held by a Rebel doth not only offend Sacred Majesty by standing out against him it self but when it finds it self strong enough and hath opportunity sallies out and makes invasion upon its proper Soveraign and offers actual and active violence against him So by this Original Evil first possessing the Soul doth Concupiscence stir and act by outward practises contrary to the Law and Will of God And therefore when St. Austin saith alledged by the corrupters of this Doctrine of Original Corruption They are born not properly but originally evil he no wayes contradicts his own Doctrine whereby he most of all farther explained and maintained this Original sin being the first that gave the name Original to that Pravity in man For true it is that that only is called properly Original Sin which Adam and Eve in person committed and were not subject to by nature as their Posterity are because it was the first in respect of mankind as well in order of time as nature and causality Again though this be traduced unto us his Off-spring and be the cause and fountain of all other sins actually committed afterward and for the same causes may rightly be called Original yet considering that this Evil thus vitiating our nature had no consent of our personal will we neither understood it nor any wayes affected it it cannot be so properly called sin as others which we act knowingly and willingly our selves For nothing is in strict way a sin which we do not consent unto in some manner either immediately or in its remoter causes And this doth yet farther appear because no man is bound to repent properly of Original sin Proper Repentance being an Act contrarying and reversing so far as in us lyes some evil by us done and not suffered involuntarily But Original sin is rather suffered than acted by the children of Adam Yet though in the severst sense we cannot be said to repent of Original sin we are bound to exercise some Act of Repentance for the same As grief and sorrow of mind and heart for the evil we lye under Confession and Recognition of our sad state before God Imploration of his mercie and favour to remove the same from us and restore us to our pristine innocencie and integrity For this those many places of Scripture describing this Evil do seem to require at our hand And no where doth the Scripture more fully declare this unto us than in the Fifth Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans which because Socinus and such as plough with his Heifer and are tickled with his pretty phansies in eluding the Apostles meaning and the constant interpretation of the most Ancient and Modern Expositours we shall more particularly consider It is undeniable that St. Paul Rom. 5. amplifying the grace of God and benefits unto mankind even the Gentiles by Christ Jesus doth there make a comparision from the Twelfth verse to the end of the Chapter of the first and second Adam and of the Evil we sustained by the first Man Adam and the benefits we receive by the second Man Christ To this he supposes the ground of his Comparison which is this that By one v. 12. man Sin entred into the world and death by Sin and so death passed upon all men for that all have sinned This is made no more of than that Adam being the first Man in the world and sinning Sin must needs enter first into the world by him if he sinned first and that death followed upon that sin of Adam But if this be all how come the effects to exceed the cause and death to extend farther than sin For it is not only said that death entred into the world in seizing upon that single Malefactour Adam but So death passed upon all men for that all have sinned where two things are to be noted First the note of dependance and consequence So. For if St. Paul had meant that Adam by himself and only for himself introduced death wherefore serves the tearm So which is a certain indication of the manner how death came into the world upon all persons and as much as if it had been said Adam first sinning and bringing death into the world so it was that this death fell upon all men for that all have sinned Now it is certain that all that dye have not sinned personally and therefore Secondly the Note So must also ralate to the Cause of that death which was sin and is as much as Adam sinning his Posterity also sinned and became obnoxious to death For to say as some eminently learned and useful otherwise in their Doctrine of Repentance Death passed upon all i. e. say they Upon all the whole world who were drowned in the floud of Divine vengeance and who did sin after the similitude of Adam is as much as if another Scholiaâ—t like him had said That is upon all Senacheribs Armies before Jerusalem in the dayes of Hezekiah or Upon all the Romans in the battle of Canna with Hannibal For it is certain that all men dye and it is no less certain that all men without exception died not in the floud And therefore what is added upon these words In as much as all have sinned that by them is meant All have sinned upon their own account we have already shown that it is not absolutely true and therefore cannot be St. Pauls meaning For all that dye have not as did Adam or following Adams
which Seneca noted but could give no reason of No man saith he is of a good mind before he is of a bad one we are all prevented And in the same place he saith No body is with difficulty reduced to Nature but he that hath made a defection from it Now supposing that God made all things perfect and instituted the nature of man more inclinable to acts agreeable to that perfection than to the contrary whence can it come that contrariwise Man naturally inclineth to that which is base and unworthy and is hardly taken off that corrupt way of acting contrary to reason and vertue and reduced to a perfection becoming his Institution and End but that the very principle of his nature is hurt and the root corrupt And because nothing can be Author of its own Principles by which it subsists no man can be said by his own act to have corrupted them Indeed we say a Man is of corrupt Principles when he hath contracted some evil habits disposing to wickedness but that is accessorie and not innate to him And if it be farther urged That no man can be guilty by anothers fault nor corrupted by anothers principle it is answered as before so long as it is only that others and not his own in some degree For as Thomas hath distinguished There is a Principle of Nature and a Principle of a Person and a Sin of Nature and a Sin of a Person Adam had not only principles whereby he himself subsisted but also was the principle of all his Successours So that Original sin was as well the sin of the one as the other So that from the depraved will of Adam as the first principle of all came the corruption of the Will of all Whereupon speaking strictly as we have said this Original sin is not properly sin in the Infant but a want of Original Justice seizing him and exposing him to destruction as Thomas and Catharinus also have taught which two are the effects of the sin of Adam upon himself and children but the very formal Reason of sin in his Posterity For where as some say It is natural Concupiscence moving to Evil and others That it is the absence of Divine Justice and Grace they differ rather in the niceties of speech than in the matter it self For to me it seems that the loss of Divine Perfection and Grace superadded to the nature of Man whereby he was abundantly able to secure himself and glorifie God in that state of happiness most neerly expresses the nature of it as in the sons of Adam For in Adam himself it was actual disobedience but Concupiscence inordinate doth rather express the consequence of it For upon that desolation in the soul of Man quickly arose a disorder of the inferiour Affections which by a general name is called Concupiscence or Lust by the Apostle in his Seventh Chapter to the Romans And Natural it is called because as out of the cursed ground sprang up briers thorns weeds and thistles where more useful fruit of the earth was intended so upon this curse of mans soul Evil motions arose to the hurrying him to Actual sin being themselves really sinful Again it is observable for the true resolution of the Question That there is commonly an ambiguity in this tearm Concupiscence it being sometimes taken for the act and exercise of that vitious principle in man fallen and sometimes for the Pravitie and degenerate temper of the soul making it prone to actual sins This latter is that which is properly called Original Sin though more properly Original unholiness or want of that instituted Integrity with which man was at first endowed and in it three things are to be considered First the privation of Supernatural Good Secondly Proneness to unnatural Evil against God Thirdly Odiousness and Culpableness before God who must needs be offended at the sight of so much deformity in his Creature contrary to his first Institution of it and Intention though this evil habitude should never break out into actual Rebellion against him by the exercise or putting it in execution by actual Concupiscence against the Law of God St. James seemeth Jam. 1. 14. to justifie this distinction where he saith Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lusts and enticed This gives us the original Lust or Concupiscence which inclines and moves to sin and to this is it to be imputed that a man so easily is withdrawn from truth and righteousness and noble acts becoming his high nature He goeth on Then when Lust hath conceived it bringeth forth Sin c. that is when the Radical Concupiscence or Concupiscibleness in man becomes impregnated and matured by outward opportunities and occasions of sinning it bringeth forth into outward act sin and the event and consequence of this sin is death So that the innate Lust lurking in the Soul and not actuated by outward occasions either inwardly to effect and desire or outwardly to act sin is not properly sin but metonymically only either as it is the effect of Adams sin or the cause of our sins but it is properly odious to God and exposing us to his heavy wrath so far at least as is seen in the deprivation of that be atitude to which man was at first designed And this exactly agrees with the nature of that sin For as that which was in Adam was actual disobedience in his Posterity is only want of that perfection which was due to their nature So Adam not only incurred the loss of that bliss he was capable of and in the ready way to enjoy but likewise the punishment of Sense answerable to his Sin of Commission and his Posterity was made subject to the punishment and loss of Gods favour and that bliss they were in Adam once ordained unto But when their Sins become Actual they are subject to punishment of Pain and torment for the same And by this the way is well prepared to make answer to that common doubt concerning the effect of Baptism and the state of the Regenerate in reference to Original sin and Concupiscence viz. whether Concupiscence remaining after Baptism in the Regenerate be sin or not Scriptures are alledged with great colour on both sides It is observed by Bishop Davenant that St. Paul calls Original Concupiscence sin in fourteen Davenant Deâ—â—rm â— several places in his sixth seventh and eighth Chapter to the Romans which if so Original sin it self must needs be oftner mentioned in Scripture than will be granted by many For mine own particular I see none of those places so exprest in the description of it that the law of Sin the Body Lex Peccati est violentiâ— consuctudinis qua trabit tenetur etiam invitus animus â—â— merito quo in cam volens illabitur Aug. in Confess Lib 3 c. 5. of Sin the Law of the Members the Lust of the Mind and Flesh and some other expressions to the same effect may not be
of the World And elsewhere to this effect CHAP. XVII How Christ was Mediatour according to both Natures Calvin's Opinion and others stated Of the effect of Christs Mediation and the extent thereof Of the Designation and Application of Christs death Of the Sufficiencie and Efficacie of Christs death How Christs death becomes effectual to all The Necessity of Gods Grace to incline the will of man to embrace Christ Of the Efficacie as well as Sufficiencie of Gods Grace on the Will of Man Several Gradations observed in the Grace of God BUT from the Evidence of the evidence of the Fact that so it was that Christ suffered to satisfie for our sins let us pass to the Manner how it was and the Effects and Extent for whom he so suffered and satisfied because no small stir and contention hath been touching both but briefly For there seems not to me to be such great cause as is apprehended for such differences For first surely Christs mediation was an Act of his Person and not of his Natures either of them separately considered So that there seems the same reason for this as for all other Acts and Attributes given to him some whereof are naturally proper to the Divine Nature and some to the Humane and yet both these predicable of Christ personally considered by that received rule amongst Divines which maintaineth a communication of Idioms or the ascribing the property of one nature to the entire Person and so denominatively to the other In which sense Christ is said to dye to suffer to hunger to thirst to be weary and Christ is said to be Omniscient Omnipotent Omnipresent yet not according to both Natures but as they are united into one Person So that all Acts and Offices of Christ as Mediatour have a twofold consideration Formal and Real or Vertual and Interpretative as they speak Some Acts are so formally Divine in him that they pertain to the Humane Nature only Vertually and some Acts are so formally and properly Humane that they pertain to the Divine Nature only by way of imputation or interpretation and not immediately or properly So that the Word Incarnate Christ is the immediate cause of his Mediation and our Reconciliation but all the Acts in particular tending tending to Christs mediation as his preaching and travelling and Passion did not proceed equally or alike from both Natures For two things are to be distinguished in the Actions or Passion of Christ mediating for mankind The Act it self and the value and vertue of that Action in order to the reconciling of man to God That the Acts conducing hereunto are only proper to the Humane Nature is true according to Stancarus his opinion See Melancthon Epist ad Mathesium though called Heretick for the same and opposed by Calvine and many of his Equals who held that Christ was Mediatour according to his Divine and Humane Nature And that Calvine and his Company must needs erre is proved because they reject Lombard and those that follow him who are the Romanists Lombards Opinion was That Christ was Mediatour as the Word Incarnate but not according to both Natures For they distinguish Principium Quod and Principium Quo That Principle or Cause of mediation from that Whereby he mediated The first they confess to be the Person of Christ consisting of Divine and Humane Nature The second they make the Humane Nature alone And that Calvine and the rest meant any more it is past the power of their Adversaries to make good however according to their wont they strain all they can and more than honestly they can to make their Opinions foul and odious For in substance they speak the same thing with Lombard though not altogether after the same manner but the Deformer suspected him as justly for restraining Christs mediation and the value thereof to his Humanity as the Romanists do them for comprehending the Divinity in it And rightly do they distinguish between the Thing and the Efficacie of the thing and that according to Lombard himself whom they dislike because he restrained to their apprehension the whole business of mediation to the Humane Nature whereas though the Divine Nature did not formally act or suffer to that end yet it was by vertue of the Hypostatical Union with the Divine Nature that the Humane Nature was in a capacity to mediate and merit for man as St. Austin hath taught us in these words It was requisite that the Mediatour between Mediator autem inter Deum homines oportebat ut haberet Aug. Confes 10. c. 42. Nec tamen ob hoc Mediator est quia Verbum maxime quippe immortate Id. Civitat Dei lib. 9. cap. 15. 1 Tim 2. God and Man should have somewhat like unto God and somewhat like unto Men lest being like God in all things he should be too far from men or being like unto Man in all things he should be too far from God And yet indeed in another place he doth determine the mediation more properly to the Humanity of Christ than to the Word thus speaking Yet he is not for this a Mediatour because he is the Word and that especially because he is immortal and the most blessed Word is far from miserable Mortals But he is Mediatour in that he is Man showing thereby that we ought not to seek any other Mediatours to that not only blessed but beatifical Good by whom we should have access c. And to this agrees that of St. Paul to Timothy There is one God and one Mediatour between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus And this is the chiefest place founding this Opinion yet not simply seeing it is an easie matter by a distinction to avoid the same if one would be contentious but if Charity nay if Justice were done to each side the ground of contention might fairly be removed in this But with much more difficulty do we meet in the effect and extent of the mediation of Christ by his Death and Passion viz. Whether it concerns all Mankind in general or Whether all those who are called to the knowledge faith and profession of Christ and Christian Religion or lastly Whether it was properly and specially so designed and intended for such as were to be infallibly saved that others were capable of no benefit of the same but rather were determined to hardness and impenitencie and persistance in unbelief Concerning the last and harshest part of this doubt we have heretofore answered that though the Holy Scriptures which cannot be denyed do ascribe Exod. 4 21. 14. 17. Rom. 9. 18. Isa 6. 10. Deut. 2. 30. Isa 63. 17. unto God in positive tearms hardening of some yet the meaning can be no more than that from certain persons he so withdraws his mollifying and maturing Grace to Repentance and Faith that an effect of Obduration doth thereupon in such manner follow as if God himself were the proper and direct Author of it For all egregious things are according
to him as were his Disciples for whom he there particularly prays the argument would be of the greater force but it is not so any more then it is true in all respects what Christ saith of himself in St. Matthew I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel So Matth. 15. 24. that as Christ before his resurrection shewed himself very nice how he dealt the Word of Life to the Gentiles so might he at the same time declare a more special desire of the salvation of his elected Servants than of others For we know which is another answer how the Scripture frequently by a note of Denyal doth not intend an absolute exclusion of a thing but comparative only as where God says I will have mercy and not sacrifice Christ prayed not for the world so intensly and particularly or at that time Therefore he prayed not at all is no good consequence And no more is that which is made from an adequateness of the Death of Christ to the actual application of the merits of the same death by such intercession as Prayer So that though Christ did not actually pray for all yet he might dye for all according to the distinction of a twofold Quantum in Medico est sâ—nare merit aegrotum Ipse se interimit qui pâ—aecepta Medici â—â—servare non vult Aug. in Joan. cap. 3. 17. Exhibition of Christ abovesaid For Christ was exhibited as an efficacious Means of Salvation and as an efficacious Cure A precious Antidote or Salve is in its own nature and the intention of the Compounder equally operative and effectual to all Persons in like manner affected All men naturally were involved in the same evil alike affected and infected And Christs Death and Passion alike soveraign to all persons and ordained for all And the difference in the first Case and the second is only in the actual Application thereof For as many as receive that are certainly cured And the Scripture tells us As many as receive him Christ to them gave John 1. 12. he power to become the Sons of God to them that believe in his name Therefore the main enquiry is much more about the difference and variety outward then in the means it self And how and whence it comes to pass that the Death and Passion of Christ are so applyed to one above another that to one they become actually efficacious and to another in aptitude and general institution only If in answer to this doubt we shall say That by Faith and Repentance we are made partakers of Christ we shall answer most truly but not sufficiently because the same difficulty returns upon us How some believe and embrace Christ and are made partakers of his benefits and not others seeing so great salvation is tendered to all Here it is absolutely necessary to take in the Grace of God and his free love towards Mankind in some sense at least by all that will be accounted Christians and not by wisdome make void the Cross of Christ For supposing that God hath made a free and general Covenant with Mankind which Covenant neither is nor can as it is a Covenant be simple and inconditionate so far as nothing should be required thereby of Man to the being capable of the benefit of it it will of necessity follow that the knowledge of this Covenant of Grace must be had by such as receive any benefit thereby For else how is it possible that they should fulfill in any manner the Condition required were it no more than some will make it to receive it by Faith without any more ado then to believe themselves into Gods Grace and Favour by a tacite internal act And this and no more being supposed that such love and gracious purpose for which no natural Cause can be found out to certifie or satisfie any man in the truth thereof were ordained for any specially it must be known by Revelation and not Ratiocination And all extraordinary Revelations besides and above what Nature can discover are purely Acts of Grace and not of Work And therefore why God doth reveal his Gospel to one people or person and not to another can have no other original Cause then the Beneplacitum Good pleasure of God as is plainly Matth. 11. 27. affirmed by Christ himself Neither knoweth any man the Father but the Son and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him And before I thank v. 25. thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth because thou hast hid those things from the wise and prudent and revealed them unto babes And in St. Peters Matth. 16. 11 1 Cor. 2 14. case Flesh and bloud hath not revealed this unto thee And St. Paul saith The Natural man cannot know the things of God because they are spiritually discerned From whence it is manifest that though God hath decreed the Salvation of a man by Christ yet this general intention cannot possibly take effect without a super-added Act of Free Grace whereby this Reparation is made known Again it follows That there is no obligation upon God antecedent to his own will and inclination moving him to reveal the same and that only out of Congruity not of Justice or Necessity as supposing a decree given to Man which would be wholly unprofitable and vain without such revelation But why one Man or Nation should be blessed with this gift rather than another there is not so much as congruity to be fairly alledged or reasonably offered And as this is the first act of God on the understanding of Man towards his restitution so is the second act of Man flowing mixtly from his Will and Understanding both altogether owing to Gods Grace and that is believing what before he knew For that this is necessary no doubt can be made or that this is the true cause of being profited or not by Christ St. Paul thus writing For unto us was the Gospel preached as well as unto them Hebr. 4. 2. but the word preached did not profit them not being mixed with Faith in them that heard it This diversity is very great but what is the cause of it is not agreed upon For if any shall say It comes from the difference found in Christ as Mediatour he is known to be mistaken by what is said If any one shall say It proceeds from the will and free Election of Man he falls into a worse absurdity for the will of man as free acts or works nothing at all but as determined either by its self or by some other And if by it self either simply and absolutely or joyntly with another cause And this cause must be either taken from somewhat outward as the object duly propounded or inward by way of efficiencie But it cannot be any outward object presenting it self only as a final cause which hath only a moral and not natural influence For if it be demanded to what end such an inward act of the will
is exercised it may very properly and truly be said because of the good discerned and affected in the object But if it should be asked How the Will is moved and by vertue of what ability it so moves to that object there could be no greater incongruity than to affirm That the object was the cause of it For here the efficient cause is sought after As when a man goes to Church if doubt should be made why he goes to Church it were easily answered because he apprehends a spiritual good in that act this is the final cause but doth this give his leggs strength and his nerves and sinews power to walk Sure no man will say so This then is that we enquire concerning the wills inclination to and election of spiritual things not why or to what end for the end is the same to all mens wills but by what means it is fitted and enabled to move thitherward rather than the contrary ways The answer to this must if a man will speak appositely be taken from the efficient cause Now this sufficiencie or efficacie in the will is either natural and common to all which all modest Divines explode or adventitious and of free undeserved and undesired Grace and Gift of God Hence another ascent is made towards the Question of the manner of acceptation of grace and mercy objectively taken For as it is plain that God putteth a difference and not Man between the understanding of one man and another revealing that to one which he doth not to another And of those that know the truth putting a difference between the wills of men in that some that have known the saving truth have rejected it and others embraced it as is yet farther manifest from St. Paul to the Romans What Rom. 11. 7. then Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for but the Election hath obtained To some then who know the truth God gives Grace to some he doth not or scarce discernable A third step to this then must be about the degree and essicacie of this first Grace of God preventing and preparing the will to such noble ends which it could never of it self affect or desire And whether God doth give the like Grace at least in proportion to all he hath so far called illuminated and affected as to have spiritual principles of Life and Motion or not It were too curious to enquire here about the Arithmetical proportion or quantity because that all mens constitutions and dispositions are not alike and therefore like more even timber or plyant clay may be wrought into due form by less forcible means but Whether considering all disparities and disproportion in the matter the influence fashioning the same be of it self sufficient to any one called and outwardly elected to the truth Or whether there be any sufficient Grace which is not efficacious and consummative of the end which is the thing denyed by Jansenius against a stream of Adversaries But Thomas who next to Augustine ruled these Disputes most of all and that upon Austin's doctrine and grounds sayes no less and so do such as stick close to him notwithstanding the strong opposition made by a Modern Order who think to change the world and make it take all doctrines from them to the contempt of their Predecessors and the recalling the exil'd Tenets of Pelagians and such as serve though at a distance under him They profess against him and hold for him They deny his Conclusions but approve and justifie his Principles and Premisses from which they certainly follow Neither can they give St. Augustine a good word whom none openly before them ever presumed to confront in that manner Or if they do speak kindly of him yet they take their own course and speak their own upstart sense For do they not place God as an idle Spectatour yea a servile Attender of the wills self-determination first and then bring him in as Auxiliarie to its Actions This is rancide Divinity yea and Philosophy too Do they not fall directly into that Opinion of Origen confuted by Thomas against the Gentiles thus Certain men not understanding Thomas cent Gent. l. 3. c. 89. how God causeth the motion of the will in us without prejudice to the liberty of the will in us have endeavoured to expound these Autorities above-mentioned in his former Chapters amiss as to say God causeth in us To will and to do in that he giveth us power to will but not so as to cause us to do this or that as Origen expounds it in his Third Periarchon defending Free will against the foresaid Autorities And from hence the Opinion of some seemeth to have proceeded who said Providence was not concerned in those things which related to Free will that is Elections but external matters only who are confuted by that one place of Esay Thou Isaiah 26. 12. also hath wrought all our works in us Whether these words of the Prophet may not be eluded I will not dispute but they plainly declare that according to Thomas his mind All our inward motions as well as outward acts and effects are governed by God For the immediate concurse of God being generally granted by Philosophical Divines necessary to the Act of limited and necessary causes whose principle is more certain and operative then Free Agents are What honest or sober doubt can be made of the immediate hand of God in moving the will free and void of such natural Laws and Propentions as irrational Agents are compelled by There seems much less use of it here than there It may be they fear Gods hand should light so heavy upon the will of Man as to hurt the Freedome of it Which were to be feared indeed if God so concurred with Free Agents as with Natural and proportioned not his Influences agreeable to the subject but surely God worketh not so rudely Or if the Act of God being as natural to the Creature as its own yea unseparable from that of the Creature were not a Total cause together with the Creatures of such Elections But as Thomas saith It is apparent that not in the like 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. 70. manner an effect is ascribed to the Natural Cause and to the Divine Power as if it proceeded partly from God and partly from the Natural Agent but it is wholly from both in a diverse respect as the whole effect is attributed as well to the Principal Agent as the Instrument Thus he From whence we conclude the Grace of God is not given in a common manner or competently to leave the will still separately without particular excitations and prae-motions effectually and immutably as Thomas speaks inclining it to embrace Christ exhibited in the Means of Grace And that no man originally causes himself to differ from another in electing good But supposing the like proportion of Grace given to two persons equally otherwise qualified the reason why one refuses the Good and chooses the Evil is not
and for ought doth appear accepted well the said Commemorations of his signal mercies and deliverances at the Jews hands until the coming of Christ when the case was wholly altered as that Service but not so as to all future For an invincible argument it is to the contrary that one day of the week is still continued to serve God in a peculiar manner notwithstanding after the strong attempts made especially of late and never before later days either by Eastern or Western Christians or by Reformed or Unreformed to make the Lords day a Sabbath and obliging Christians by vertue of the fourth Commandment in the Decalogue nothing to that end is effected Indeed if men will tenture and extend Gods word to that extream as thereby to draw every thing out of any thing they may reduce all moral duties unto the Ten Commandments according to the custom of expounding them viz. That where the Effect is commanded or forbidden there the Cause likewise and where the Outward act the Inward and where the Genus there the Species and where the Thing there the Circumstances and where one kind there all of like kinds are forbidden or commanded then were there some colour for what they say of all moral duties to be found in the Decalogue and sins interdicted But there is no more ground for the expounding of this so than any other part of Scriptures And if there were this would make Eight of the Ten Commandments superfluous all sins and all duties being reducible at this rate to those two our Saviour in the Gospel refers to viz. Love of God and Love of our Neighbours And surely most essential to all actions are the circumstances of time and place and nothing can be done by Man in Religion or out of it without them therefore it should seem superfluous expresly to enjoyn a time to serve God in and distinctly from the act which unavoidably implyes it And if it be said that not so much a time simply as a time precisely so determined viz. to a Seventh Day and that in such and such manner to be observed is instituted of God then do fall to the ground the supposed naturalness and morality of the time there commanded and that by natural light or law no more is commanded then time or at most a day but not a Seventh Day Now if we are being Christians under the Law no farther than in these two respects First as some of it is repeated and enforced by the Law of the Gospel given us by Christ Secondly as it is consonant to the Law of Reason or Nature And that a seventh part of our time should be dedicated constantly to God is no where so positively delivered in the New Testament as it was in the Old nor doth the light of Nations or Nature suggest any such determinate time for that only and not of time in general is all the question How can a Seventh Day be commanded of God It is not to be denyed but some of the ancient heathen Philosophers and Poets did talk of somewhat of sacredness in the Seventh Day But first whence had they such opinions from the thing it self No surely it was a superstitious and blind admiration of the number Seven of which we find so much in their writings and especially the consideration of the Seven Planets in the Heavens which made them think better of the Seventh Day or cause the week to consist of so many days and no more But what real opinion they had of that above other days doth appear in their practise Philo In Decalog pag. 585. Id. De Opificio Mundi pag. 15 16. 21. Genevae which no monuments declare to have been in more sacred or solemn esteem than any other And the reputed sacredness of the number seven is that which Philo Judaeus playeth upon so handsomly in his commendation of the Jewish seventh day as may be seen in his works And Chrysostome from thence takes a better argument to prove that a Seventh day is not moral from whence several have endeavoured to prove that it is and that in a more sacred manner than any other of the Commandments For to perswade to a precise observation of it these say that God hath set a Memento a Remember upon it such as upon no other Commandment Therefore there should be somewhat extraordinary in it And so there is indeed For saith Chrysostome whereas all other Commandments are very agreeable to the Reason of man and are in some degree known to him by natural light and so need not the like intimation and advice this of a Seventh Day to be kept holy to God cannot be discerned by Natures light at all and therefore needeth such a Memento and Remembrancer as this to bring that to his mind which is so apt to slip out 'T is granted moderner Jews in despight of Christ and Christians have asserted a naturalness and immutability of this Command and an extent of it to all Nations but this concludes not Christians knowing from whence such Antichristian Dogmes proceed Now here lyes the labour to infer a Seventh Day from the Law obliging Christians I say from the letter of the Law and not from the reasonableness of the thing it self to which they flee who find their other proofs too weak and here I will not contend much with them But all their Old Testament testimonies being more easily evaded and nulled then they are alledged by this one answer That they speak only of Jewish Sabbaths and so have no force at all upon us or the same in all respects that they have upon the Jews they must be constrained to repair only to Gospel for the Confirmation of any day separate from civil affairs and dedicate to God And here they are altogether to seek for any one direct or positive Precept not one in all the New Testament can be found for any either Seventh or First Day of the week Whereupon they are compelled to betake themselves to the uncertain way of arguing from Example to a Rule viz. That because they read several instances in the New Testament of things done on the first Day of the week in reference to Religion and the Service of God therefore that day ought specially and religiously to be observed they will perhaps say That the infinite blessing of our Redemption by Christ and his Resurrection is the ground of our observation as the Creation was of theirs This I grant to be a just and sufficient cause but it doth not from thence follow that therefore actually it was so constituted upon that ground We now are in quest of the Constitution it self and not of the Reason why it should be so ordained For many things that seem to us very reasonable are not certainly actually ordained And many things for which in the New Testament we may find presidents of the Apostles or Apostolical persons do not necessarily infer a Rule or Precept But in the New Testament there
to do another a mischief must he necessarily speak conformably or do conformably and make good his bad intentions If a man intends to do one a kindness and give him an estate may he not carry himself towards him and all others as if he never intended any such thing But it may be he would restrain this to positive Speeches and Acts which he would have alwayes conformable to inward conceptions And so they are when a man intends to deceive and doth deceive But that the general appearances must conform to the reality of the Intention his own concessions above-noted will not admit It is true therefore only when it is justly required And this suffices to cut the throat of all as they are now called deservedly Jesuitical Aequivocations and Mental Reservations and External dissimulations viz. because none of their real or pretended Superiours can give them any power not to answer according to the serious intention and expectation of legal Enquirers and legal Enquirers they are who have legal Authority in that Nation Again unless their Superiours can give them power of Life and Death as it is an opinion amongst them they may especially the Pope over free Princes and their Subjects they can give them no power to deceive by positive acts or words lawful Powers contrary to the common and received sense and meaning of Enquiries and Answers Thirdly neither of a mans self nor by any Civil Authority how great or good soever nor upon any Case how important soever can a man lawfully use the Name of God in attestation of what is false or confirmation of what his Conscience and Judgment assures him is otherwise than he declares it to be Neither can any man give instance that God ever permitted it or any good or holy man in Scripture presumed to do so And therefore oequivocation in any oaths whether lawfully or unlawfully administred is directly unlawful and to be detested of all men as it is of God The Vertue then which this Commandment requires in opposition to bearing false witness is first a love and veneration of Truth as the sacred daughter of God himself and that in all things and at all times not excepted but more especially Authority and publick Justice requiring it The Inducements hereunto abbreviated Perkins hath collected thus to my hands in the forementioned place 1. Gods command James 3. 14. 2. Lying is a conformity to the Devil 3. We are sanctified by the word of truth John 17. 17. 4. Truth is a Fruit of Gods Spirit Galat. 5. A mark of Gods children Psalm 32. 2. and 15. 2. 5. Destruction is the reward of a Lyar Psal 5. 6. And thus far of the Ninth Commandment The Tenth is Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house Thou shalt not covet § X. thy neighbours wife nor his servant nor his maid nor his Ox nor his Ass nor any thing that is his Which the modern Roman Church having carefully turned the second out of doors as a quarrelsome and troublesome companion are necessitated to divide into two to make up the compleat number of Ten For which fact they have no ground but St. Austin and them who precisely followed him But none of these or any ancient proceeded on their grounds viz. because the Second Commandment gave offence Now seeing many more in number and antiquity have otherwise than Austin considered this Commandment as one entirely The Reasons why they so judge of it are worth enquiring For some eminently learned among them especially in the Scriptures have declared expresly against it as Oleaster and Mercerus Petrus Galatinus inclining that way as Buxtorf hath observed Buxtorf de Decal num 74. 59. And as a little before he hath noted the Jewish Doctours who are to sway much in this Case unless the Papists please to distinguish the Decalogue as they have audaciously the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Testament into Jewish and Christian or Ecclesiastical have unanimously conspired to make this but one Commandment Aben Ezra and Abarbenel mentions indeed such an opinion as the Roman Church maintains but rejects the same as a very fond and vain conceit And the like may be said Estius in Sentent l. 3. Dist 40. §. 3. of Estius his answers and evasions of the reasons on our side which are First That the object of the sin here forbidden is not to distinguish the Command so much as the Act Concupiscence of the mind or heart united in one because then we should have more than two One prohibiting lusting after another mans wife another lusting after his Servants another lusting or coveting his cattle and a fourth his possessions and moveables But St. Paul speaking of this Concupiscence maketh it but one where he Rom. 7. saith I had not known lust except the Law had said Thou shalt not covet The other Precepts therefore having provided against the Acts outward of sin This in the Conclusion goeth as it were over all of them again and interdicteth all inward motions towards any of the sins before forbidden To say therefore with Estius St. Paul saith Thou shalt not lust is as much as if a man should say Thou shalt love which doth not make all the Commandments but one is very idle seeing the word Lust is there taken in an evil sense and may reasonably extend to all the Negative precepts at least as Love doth concern them all and is the sum of the Decalogue But we find no such particular Precept as Love indefinitely taken And besides we are not so much to enquire after matter of Right what might be or ought to be but of fact what is And to collect what is done we are not so much to consult the holy Writ of the New Testament which uses no precise or determinate speech in reference to the number or order of these Commandments but the thing it self which ever amongst the Jews was thus distinguished as we do and generally the Greek Church and the Latin likewise until Austin's dayes And it is certain the Holy Spirit here doth not affect Logical Divisions or Rhetorical Partitions or Methods but delivers things grosly to a rude people inculcating the same thing under diverse forms of speech For according to one of the Rules of expounding the Decalogue viz. That where the outward act is forbidden the inward act is also forbidden and where the Effect there the Cause is also forbidden this should rather seem to be none other Precept than what went before in the seventh and eighth Commandments forbidding Adultery and Theft and by Implication the inward acts of Lusting after the Persons or Possessions of others For that is the beginning and cause of those outward Effects and scandalous sins Another Reason for the entireness of that we call the Tenth Commandment is the order observed in Exodus where Lusting after our Neighbours House is set before Lusting after his Wife or other Persons and then again follow his Goods which shows that