the world of Judgement because the Prince of theis world is condemned by the conversion of those who forefook him to become Christians Therefore S Steven upbraideth the Jews saying Ye stisnecked and uncircumcised in hearts and eares ye do alwaies resist the Holy Ghost even you also as did your fathers Acts VII 51. Because being convicted by the Holy Ghost which spoke in him that he spoke from God neverthelesse they submit not to his message Therefore our Lord Mark III. 28. 29 30 All sins shall be forgiven the sons of men and blasphemies which they shall blaspheme But whoso shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath no remission for ever but is liable to everlasting damnation Because they said he hath an unclean spirit which you have againe Math. XII 31 32. Luke XII 10. Because being convicted that our Lord spoke did his miracles by the Holy Ghost they blasphemed saying that he spoke and did them by an uncleane spirit For these words and these workes are the meanes by which our Lord accomplished â—his promise Iohn XIV 23. If any man love me he will keep my word and my Father will love him and we will come to him and abide with him For before the condition If any man love me be fulfilled the case is that which our Lord expresseth Apoc. III. 20. Behold I stand at the dore and knock And if any man heare my voice and open the dore I will come in to him and sup with him â—e with me But being fulfilled the words of our Lord take place Iohn XVI 15 16 17. If yee love me ye will keep my commandements And I will aske the Father and he will give you an other Advocate to abide with you for ever even the spirit of truth which the world cannot receive because they â—ee it not nor know it but you know it because it abideth with you and is in you For seeing it is manifest by the premises that the undertaking of Christianity is the condition upon which the Holy Ghost is granted as a gift to abide with Christians the preaching of Christianity that is the proposing of those reasons which God by his word hath shewed us why wee should be Christians is the knocking of our Lord Christ by the spirit at the dore of the heart that he may enter and dwell in us by the same spirit according to the words of S. Paul 2. Cor. II. 16. For ye are the Temple of the living God as God hath said To wit I will dwell and converse among them and will be their God and they shall be my people That which some Philosophers say of the naturall generation of man That the soule frames its owne dwelling being fulfilled in the worke of generation by grace when the Holy Ghost by his actuall assistance frameth the man to be fit for the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost by becoming a true Christian If then we believe that the Holy Ghost was given by God and obtained by Christ as well to make the Gospell effectuall as to move the Apostles to preach it there can no doubt remaine that the preaching of the Gospell that is to say the meanes which the Holy Ghost provideth to make it either sufficient or effectual to convince the world of it is the instrument whereby he frameth himself that invisible house of true believers in which he dwelleth And therefore the meanes whereby Gods grace becomes effectuall to those who imbrace it is the same that renders it sufficient for those who refuse it the difference lying as well in the disposition which it meets with for which the man is accountable as in the spirit of God that presenteth it which renders God the praise when it takes effect and leaves men accountable when it does not If this reason had been in consideration with Socinus and perhaps with Pelagius he would have found it necessary acknowledging as all that read the Scriptures must needs acknowledge that which they find so frequent and so cleare in the Scriptures that the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost is granted to inable those who undertake Christianity to performe it to acknowledge also that the actuall help of it is necessary to make the motives of Christianity effectuall to subdâ—e men to it And by consequence that the coming of the second Adam was necessary to restore the breach which the first had made seeing it was not to be repaired without the same Nor is it to be marveled at that naturall meanes conducted by the grace of Christ should produce supernaturall effects such as I have shewed the obediencâ— of Christianity to be which supposing the Covenant of grace and freedome of mans will cannot be otherwise The reasons which appeare to the understanding and move the will to act contrary to the inclination of originall concupâ—scence in professing Christianity and living according to the same being sufficient to convict it to give sentence that so the man ought to doe And the circumstances in which the spirit of Christ conducteth these motives to the heart which it knocketh at by their means being able to represent them valuable to take effect with him who is moved to the contrary by his originall concupiscence And though meanes naturall because they move a man to proceed according to right reason which nature requires him to doe yet as they are brought to passe and conducted by a supernaturall cause nothing hinders the effect to be supernaturall in such a nature as is by them made capable of acting above nature I do much approve the discourse of some that have indeavoured to shew how this comes to passe thus supposing the covenant of the Law to be the renewing of that which was made with Adam in Paradise for the maintaining of him in the happnesse of his naturall life Which we may suppose though we suppose not that God covenanted not with him at all for the life to come For the dispensation of those blessings of this life which the covenant of nature limited by Moses Law to the happinesse of the land of promise tendreth may well be the advantage which God taketh to make the covenant of Grace acceptable especially to those who by Gods blessing failing of the blessings of the first covenant by that meanes becoming out of love with this present worlâ— meeâ— with the Covenant of Grace in such a disposition as may render it acceptable For so long as things goe well with men in this world it seemes haâ—sh to require them to takeup the Crosse of Christ that they may obtain the world to come But when the comforts of this world faile it is no marvell if any condition that tenders hope in the world to come be welcome If it be said that this renders the grace of Christ effectuall onely to the poore and men oâ— meane condition in the world who have cause to be weary of their estâ—te in it It is answered that it is no marvell if the
principles to spirituall good can no way impeach it as coming from the constitution of our nature supposing the ornaments and additions of grace to be removed The opinion of the fulfilling of Gods Law by Christians supposes that the remaines of concupiscence in the regenerate and the immediate effects thereof in the first motions to sinne which cannot be prevented are not against Gods Law but onely besides it From whence it will follow that he who of his free will imbraces Christianity and perseveres in the good works which it injoyneth meriteth of justice the reward of the Life to come And truly for my part I cannot deny that all this is justly pleaded against those that are of this opinion and cannot by them justly be answered But that this opinion is injoyned by the Church of Rome I cannot understand seeing divers learned Doctors of the Schools alledged by Doctor Field for the opposition which he maketh to this opinion and that very truly and justly shewing infallibly that the contrary opinion is allowed to be maintained in the communion of the Church of Rome And that nothing hath been done since the authors whom he alledgeth to make this unlawfull to be held amongst them I suppose it will be enough to produce the decree of the Council of Trent since which it is evident that it is lawfull among them to maintaine that concupiscence is originall sinne For though the decree declareth that the Church never understood concupiscence in the regenerate to be truly and properly sinne but to be so called as proceeding from sinne and inclining to sinne Yet in as much as it is one thing to speak of concupiscence in the regenerate another in the unregenerate and in as much as it is one thing to declare the sense of the Church according to the opinion of the Synode another to condemn the contrary sense as opposite to the Faith it is manifest that this declaration condemns not those that hold originall concupiscence to be originall sinne but onely shewes that they could not answer the difficulty of originall sinne in the regenerate On the other side it cannot be justly said so farre as I understand that those of the Reformation do affirme that the grace given to Adam at his creation was due to his nature in this sense and to this effect as if they did intend to deny that he was created in such an estate and to such a condition of happinesse as the principles and constitution of his nature do not necessarily require But onely this That the gifts which by his creation he stood indowed with were necessary to the purchase of that happinesse which he that is to say his nature was created to whereupon they are justly called the indowments of nature Here I must not omit the opinion of Catharinus in the Council of Trent That Adam received originall righteousnesse of God in his own name and the name of his posterity to be continued to them he obeying God Whereupon his disobedience iâ— in Law their disobedience though in nature onely his and the act of his transgression imputed to them is their originall sinne as personall as the penalties of it No otherwise then Levâ— paid Tithes in Abraham Many passages of S. Augustine he had to alledge for this as also a Text of the Prophet Osee and another of Ecclesiasticus But especially the expresse words of S. Paul That by the inobedience of one man many are made sinnerâ— And That by sinne death came into the world which surely came into the world by the actuall transgression of Gods commandment Alledging that Eve found not her self naked till Adam had eaten the forbidden fruit Nor had originall sin been had the matter rested there And by this reason he thought he avoided a difficulty not to be overcome otherwise how the lust of generation can give a spirituall staine to the soul which must needs be carnall if it come from the flesh And by this meanes nothing but an action which transgresseth Gods Law shall be sinne which all men understand by that name This opinion the History saith was the more plausible among the Prelates there as not bred Divines but Canonists or versed in businesse and so best relishing that which they best understood to wit the conceit of a civile contract with Adam in behalfe of his posterity as well as himself To give a judgement of this opinion I shall do no more but remit the reader to those Scriptures which I have produced to shew that there is such a thing as originall sinne concluding that the nature of it wherein it consists must be valued by the evidence of it whereby it appeares that it is It will then be unavoidable that when death is the effect of sinne because righteousnese is the cause of life as Adams sinne is the cause of his death so the death of his posterity depends upon their own unrighteousnesse Why else should Christianity free us from death as hath been shewed Why should S. Paul complain of the Law that he found in his members opposing the Law of righteousnesse why should the flesh fight with the Spirit and the fruits of the flesh be opposite to the fruits of the Spirit but that the same opposition of sinne to righteousnesse is to be acknowldged in the habituall principles as in the actuall effects which proceed from the same As for that onely text of S. Paul in which he could find any impression of his meaning if the reader observe the deduction whereby I have shewed that S. Pauls discourse obliged him to set forth the ground whereupon the coming of Christ and his Gospel became necessary to the salvation both of the Jews and Gentiles he will easily find that the question is of the effective not of the formall cause that S. Paul is not ingaged to shew wherein that source of sinne which our Lord Christ came to cure consisteth but from whence it proceedeth True it is when the posterity suffers losse of estate and honour for the Fathers treason it may properly be said that the Fathers crime is imputed to the posterity Not because any reason can indure that what is done by one man should be thought to be done by another but because the effect of what one man does may justly be either granted to or inflicted upon another whether for the better or for the worse As in a civile state suppose the Laws make treason to forfeit lands and honours which every man sees are held by virtue of the Lawes that posterity which hath no right to them but from predecessors and the obligation which they had to maintaine the state should forfeit them by the act of predecessors is a thing not strange but reasonable Though so that the forfeiture may transgresse the bounds of reason and humanity if the Law should not allow posterity or kindred to live in that state to which predecessors have forfeited when there is so much cause to believe that the
from the whole Church For to require me to believe them to be in the torments prepared for the devil and his angels because I cannot say where they are were a reason too unreasonable for a Christian CHAP. XXI The opinion that makâ—s the Predetermination of mans will by God the sourse of his freedom And wherein Jansenius differs from it Of necessity upon supposition absolute The necessity of the Will following the last dictate of the understanding is onely upon supposition As also that which Gods foresight creates The difference between indifferent and undetermined These things thus premised as concerning that estate wherein the Gospell overtaketh the will of man to whom Christ is tendered being under original sin I say that it findes him not void of that freedome of choice in doing or not doing this or that which stands in opposition to necessity But that which stands in opposition to the bondage and servitude of sin This position is intended to contradict an opinion which seemeth to be very ordinary among Divines as well of the Reformation as the Church of Rome though more ingeniously professed and maintained by these Who pretending to derive the efficacy of Gods Predestination and the grace which it provideth from that decree of his Will whereby he determineth the will of his creature to do or not to doe watsoever is indeed don or not don in order of nature before it determine it selfe do consequently professe that notwithstanding this Predetermination of the will is no lesse effectuall then Gods omnipotence whereof it is the immediate and indefeasible consequence and effect yet there is no freedome in the creature no contingence in the effects of it but that which followeth upon this will of God determining understanding Creatures to do that which they do freely as it determining understanding Creatures to do that which they do necessarily This position though I intend not to admit yet I count it a point of ingenuity in them who think they free themselves of great dificulties by supposing it expressely to maintaine the truth of that supposition whereof they make so much advantage For they who not daring to incounter the difficulties wherewith it is chargeable do claime the consequences of it without premising the expresse supposition of it do as good as say nothing where they advise not the reader of those difficulties which the prime principle that they proceed upon is burthened with But he that sees how particular instances depend upon generall principles shall not stick to judge of their positions by the dependance they have upon this supposition so soon as they are informed of the credit which it deserves Now this predetermination Being the immediate effect of Gods omnipotency as for the cause of it as for the nature of it troubles very much those that maintaine it to say wherein it consists as indeed it may very well trouble any man to say of what colour a Chimaera is being in rerum natura just nothing For if they say it is a principle infused by the immediate worke of grace into the Will it is straightwaies evident that the having of it is not to make the Will able which all habituall indowments tend to but to make it actually to worke It must therefore consist in a certain motion or impulse immediately wrought by God in the Will which though it is not in the will to have depending meerely upon the Will of God yet that neither good nor ill can be don without it being necessary as they think to the effectuall determining of the will upon two accounts First as the will is a secondary cause that cannot worke unlesse moved by the first cause Secondly as the Will not being determined of it selfe cannot be determined to any act but by the same first cause But these two accompts seem to me both one For nothing can determine the will to act speaking of that which determines it formally or in the nature of a formall cause but the act of it For supposing the will to act and excluding whatsoever else might be considered the will remaines determined Not suposing that it may further be questioned what determines it The question then being onely what it is that determines the will in the nature of the effective cause the difficulty that causeth the question is but one because it is presumed that the second cause can not act if not acted that is determined to act by the first The nature then of this motion received lodged in the Will is imagined neverthelesse to be successive such as is the being of colours in the aire when they goe to the eye or that impulse which a handicraft-man moves his tooll with And the necessity of it standeth upon a generall account not of originall sine but of Gods creature such as the will in all estates is requisite to the acts of the will because nothing can be don by the creature but that which God shall determine it to do But there is of late an other opinion started in the Church of Rome by Jansenius in his Augustinus which maintaines that the Will in all actions that are goâ—d according to Christianity is determined by grace effectually inclining the will by the love of true good preventing not expecting the motion thereof and producing that influence of the will whereby formally it acteth The nature of it then consists in that very act of life whereby the reasonable creature exerciseth its choice no waies requisite to the actions of nature which man is able to do under originall sin but meerely upon that account as the cure of it restoring the due command over that concupiscence wherein originall sin consisteth and not extending to the state of innocence Which notwithstanding the will is no lesse naturally determined by it then by that principle which the other opinion advanceth For they say both that the will is not determined by the object howsoever proposed but morally as he that outwardly adviseth or perswadeth determines him that resolves upon that consideration which he advanceth to that which he proposeth And therefore this determination both agree satisfies not that efficacy of grace which the scriptures proposed in the premises require Therefore as the former opinion determineth the will naturally by a principle really lodged in the nature of the wil so this by the very vitall act of vvilling really subsistng in the nature of the Will though produced by God a cause above nature which when the delight in good which it importeth is so great as to swallow up all contradiction it determineth to the same preventing the determination of it selfe when otherwise acknowledging that though of the same nature with that which overcometh it is never the lesse defeasible From this ground there flowes an other difference between these two opinions we goe further from the fountaine head still more visible For the former admitting free will to be a faculty able to act or not to act supposing all
children as a henne gathers her chickens under her wings and ye would not Behold your house is left unto you desolate And S. Steven Acts VII 51. Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in hearts and ears you do alwaies crosse the holy Ghost as did your Fathers And the Scribes and Pharisees in the Gospel made void the counsel and purpose of God towards them Luke VII 30. But above all you have the purpose of God manifested by the Gospel of sending our Lord Christ for the salvation of the World as John the Baptist sayes John I. 29. Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sinne of the World And our Lord to Nicodemus John III. 16 17. God so loved the world that he gave his onely begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him may not perish but have life everlasting For God senâ— not his Son into the World to condemn the World but that the world by him might be saved And S. Paul commandeth Timothy that prayers be made by the Church for all men even for the Powers of the World then their enemies as a thing pleasing to God Who saith he would have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth For there is one God and one Mediator between God and man the man Christ Jesus who gave himself an expiation for all to be witnessed in his own time 1 Tim. II. 4 5 6. And if there be any other passages of the New Testament as others there are to witnesse that Christ is given by God for the reconciliation and salvation of all mankind One I will not omit because the mistake which is alledged to divert the sense of it is remarkable 2 Pet. III. 9. God slacketh not his promise as some men count slacknesse but is slow to wrath in our regard not willing that any should perish but all come to repentance Which they will have to signify that he would have none of us that is of the elect to perish because it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he is patient towards us the elect They might have seen that this is not the meaning of the words by Luke XVIII 7. Shall not God avenge his elect that cry to him day and night though slow to wrath in regard of them I tell you he shall avenge them speedily 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though slow to take vengeance in regard of them upon their oppressors Is here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 slow to take vengeance upon our oppressors for us which he hath promised to take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek of the New Testament signifying the delaying of vengeance due to them that oppresse Christians as you see by S. Luke the Apostle attributes to the desire of saving those whom he spares Nor will I stop here to shew you the insufficience of those expositions which in despite of the words are fastned upon these texts to avoid the difficulties which they create to prejudicate opinions For it is manifest that the consequence of them is no more but the very same that arises from any Scripture that testifies the meanes which God uses for the good of any man to become frustrate through his fault In consideration whereof that God shall call them to account at the last day who either being convict of the truth of his Gospel or having meanes offered to be informed of the same imbrace it not or having imbraced it notwithstanding persevere not in it by living as Christ requireth Or on the contraty that he shall reward them who imbrace it and persevere in it Which being so many that they are not to be avoided without setting a great part of the Scripture upon the rack I count it not worth the while to insist here that S. Pauls meaning is not that God would have some of all estates to be saved or that he would have many to be saved or those that are saved to be saved or upon any other of those lame expedients which have been applied to plaister the wound which these plain texts do make But I insist upon this that the meaning of them cannot be That God would have those onely to be saved that shall be saved Having such a swarm of Scriptures to evidence how many things there are which God would have done and are not done having all the importunities and complaints which God useth by his Prophets to assure us that he would have found that obedience at the handes of his ancient people which he found not all the preachâ—ng of his Gospel all the motives of believing all the exhortations to accept and perform the Covenant of Grace in the New Testament ready to witnesse what men are to give account for at the day of judgement All which must be satisfied before there can be cause to balk the plain meaning of S. Pauls words which cannot seem inconvenient in any other regard but because they make God to will that which comes to passe all the Scripture witnessing that all that shall be condemned shall be condemned for not doing that which God would have them do For wheresoever Gods justice punishes there is it of necessity that man had sufficient meanes to do otherwise Where it rewardes there was possibility of transgressing there was a capacity of indifference and a will actually undetermined to do or not to do this or that notwithstanding originall sinne But first to declare what I understand this antecedent will of God to be I must distinguish with some divines that God must not be said to will this because of that or for that but may be said to will that this be because of that or for that Deus non vult hoc propter hoc sed vult hoc esse propter hoc When I say because of that or for that I extend the observation to two kindes of causes To the finall cause for which a thing is said to be done and to the motive or impulsive cause because of which a thing is said to be done when we speak of the doings of understanding and free causes For these having something in consideration to move them to do what they do this motive which they consider holds on the side of the effective cause in as much as there had been no proceeding without the consideration of it Though it is also true that the motion which consideration produces being so called but out of that resemblance which it holdeth with the motions which naturall things are visibly transported with importeth no more then the appetite of some good thing the want whereof they apprehend which is nothing else but the effect of the finall cause So that the motive cause is no other then the finall cause in respect of that effect which it hath indeed moved the effective cause to produce So then when I say that God willeth not this for that or because of that I say that God can have no ends upon his creatures being
meanes that makes the grace of Christ effectuall addresse it selfe especially to that estate o men in which our Lord Christ to whom they so become conformable appeared in the world And for that very reason to figure that estâ—te of mind which the Gospell requires the people of â—sraell were by Gods Law left unâ—uâ—nished of many helps of policy and force by which other nations maintain themselves free from servâ—tude that they might remaine obliged to depend upon Gâ—dâ— immediate assistance providence But it is to be said further That the greatest estates of the world being subject to the greatest crosses through want of successe and those great changes to which they are liable this way of preparation to the kingdome of heaven can no way seeme wanting to any estate when a begger is seen no lesse to doâ—e upon this world then an uncleane person is seen to doâ—e upon that whore by whom he is abused It is moreover to be said That the remembrance of death which must and the inconstancy of this world which may deprive us of all the benefits thereof being by Gods judgement the punishment of sin soures all the content of them that drench themselves deepest in the pleasures of this life and gives them just cause to forsake them all in case they stand not with the hope of the world to come And the very injoying of them being injoyed with that conscience which all Châ—â—stians have of Gods providence and the sense of his hand from whence they come is reasonably an advantage to those who injoy the best successe that can be expressâ—d in the course of this world both to become thankfull to God for it and also to prefer â—â—ernity before it Whereby it may appeare that the course of this world disposed by God upon the terms of the covenant of nature containes â—â— it those opportunities and advantages which the act of Gods providence by the grace of Christ knowes easily how to makâ— effectuall to the supernaturall purposes of it This is the place for the rest of that which I am to say of the opinion of Jansenius setling the efficacy of saving grace upon other grounds then those which I use The ground of it seems to stand upon the observation of S. Augustin de corrept gratia Chap. XI XII Distinguishing between the help of grace without which the worke of grace is not don that by which it is don auxilium sine quo non and auxilium quo and comparing the grace of Christ which cometh to effect notwithstanding originall concupiscence with the grace given Adam which might have come to effect had he pleased but came not notwithstanding his innocenâ—e as more powerfull in our weakenesse then that in his strength For hereupon he will have the grace of Christ to be onely that which takes effect confining that help without which the worke of grace cannot be don to the state of innocence as ouâ— of date now under oâ—iginall sin So that the freedome of the will is so far from being râ—quisite to â—he effects â—hereof that it hath no being but bâ— the meanes of it consisting in that free love of that which God commandeth because he commandeth it which it inspireth As on the other side the counâ—erfeit of it in them that sin without reluctation bâ—cause free from righteousnesse is nothing but the free lâ—ve of sin for the saâ—isfaction of concupiscence It is therefore in his opinion impertinent how necessarily the grace of Christ determineth the wil to imbrace the true good seeing it is the love of it the delight in it which grace worketh in the wâ—ll that determines it willingly and freely to imbrace it To tâ—ke the more distinct view of this plea let us put the case in him who running full speed in a course of sin is caâ—led by the preaching of the Gospell to become a Christian Or to the same purpose in him who being a Christian and runnâ—ng the same race is summoned by his profession and the grounds thereof to reâ—urne to it In this case can any man imagine that the reasons which move us all to be Christians shâ—uld raise no love of true good no dislike to sin no feare of vengeance no desire of everlasting hapâ—iâ—esse in him that considers them as they deserve Especially being managed by the spirit of God which knocketh at the dore of the heart by that meanes Or can any man question as it is â—he feare of vengeance that beginneth so it is the love of good for Gods sâ—ke that conâ—ummateth the resolution of becoming a true Christiâ—â— But the quâ—stâ—â—n being put about changing the chief end of a mans whole life and doings can it be supposed that any man is prevented with such a delight in true gooâ—nesse as iâ—stâ—ntly to abandon the lust which his bâ—sâ—nesse hath been hitherto to satisfie without demurre or regret I doubt not that God can immediatly crâ—aâ—e in any man that appearance of true good that shall without debate or looking back transport him to the prosecution of it That notwithstanding the Covenant of grace he may doe it Which though a rule to his ordâ—nâ—ry proceeding is no Law to his Soveraigne perogative But him that is thus sâ—ved though sâ—ved by grace yet we cannot count to be saved by the Covenant of grace Which proposeth a reward to them who are led by motives thereof notwithstanding the difficulties to the contrary though implying the worke of grace in him that overcometh And this no man more câ—earâ—ly acknowledgeth then Jansenius de gratia Christi VIII 2. where â—â— conâ—esseth that the predetermination of the will by the grace of Christ is not indefeasible but onely when it overcomâ—s as Gods predetermination according to the Dominicans is For by this difference whâ—ch in statiâ—g of this opinion I have not neglected afore the efficacy thereof cannot be attribuâ—ed to â—e â—aâ—ure of that help which overcometh aâ— of an other kind then that which pâ—oveth frustrate And therefore notwithstanding that large and elaborat work of his he hath left us to inquire further whence the efficacy of it proceedeth As having in effect onely resolved us wherein the efficacy of Grâ—ce consisteth in the nature of the formall cause Not from whence it proceedâ—th in the nature of the effective cause which the question indeed demandâ—th And truly the very consideration premised That as freedome from sin coâ—sists in the determination of the will to righteousnesse which the Grace of Chrâ—st effecteth so freedome from righteousnesse in the determination of it to sin which it acteth Inâ—orceth an other kind of freedome common to both estates not importing praise or dispraise but a capacity of either by doing that which no necessity determineth a man to doe And therefore that though the grace of Christs Crosse be the medecine yet till it be freely taken it worketh not the cure This is that freedome from necessity by the present condition of our nature the use whereof
delivering mine opinion what is true not in confining the parties to a mean Wee have seen two men of repute now amongst us cenâ—ure Grotius his labors upon the Scriptures from which I acknowledg to have received much advantage The one of them hath made him a Socinian the other a Papist Both could have given us no better argument that hee was neither than this that hee cannot be both It is not my intent to bring mens persons into consideration with the common concernment of Christianity and of Gods Church To his own Master hee stands or falls I do but instance in an eminent person that must needs be a Papist though never reconciled to the Church of Rome That must needs be a Socinian though appealing to the Original consent of the whole Church Upon which terms how should there be any such thing as Papists or Socinians I remember an admonition of his bitter adversary Doctor Rivet That the Sea of Rome will never thank him for what hee writ And from thence I inferred as charity obliged mee to inferr That the common good of Christianity and of Gods Church obliged him to that for which hee was to expect thanks on no side This for certain Grotius never lived by maintaining division in the Churcâ— Whether any body doth so or not I say not Their Master will judge them for it if they do Now to show the world that I am in a capacity to recall any thing that I have said upon due information I will here pass a Review upon that which I have said to the hardest point that I have spoke to the agreement of Gods fore-knowledg and providence with contingence For I conceive it had need be limited a little further to be free from offenâ—e That the consideration of the object which providence presents a man with determines the Will to every choice that it makes which I argue at large II. 24. may be understood two wayes in the nature of an object which belongs to the formal cause when wee speak of faculties habits and acts which are specified by their objects as the Scholes speak or in the nature of an effective cause Not as if the object were not the effâ—ctive cause in respect to the act of deliberation But because in respect to the act of resolution or choice it determineth onely as an object without consideration whereof the choice could not be made not as a motive effectively producing the choice For I acknowledg in point of reason that there may be such contingencies as the School calls ad utrumlibet where a man is no more inclined to this side than to that And in point of Faith I acknowledg that setting aside the temptations by which the Angels and our first parents that â—ell might be said to incline rather to fall than to stand as they were created by God they were not inclined to fall but to stand Besides should I say that the object â—ffâ—ctively determineth the choice how should I say that which I take express notice of pag. 200. that those contingenciâ—s wherein the will inclineth to the one side as balanced by a propensity of disposition towards it not as every faculty is inclined to the object to which it naturally tends remain uncertain as nevertheless contingencies whatsoever probability that propensiâ—y may create And indeed though it is a perfection in mans knowledg rising from the consideration of the object to say what is like to come to pass though it fail yet to Gods which â—â—â—â—th from God alone it were blasplemy to suppose it to fail because then God should fail The infallibâ—lity therefore of it no being deâ—ivable from the object must necessarily be resolved into the infinity eternity immensity of that perfection which is his nature comprehending the future inclination and resolution of that will moved with a consideration capable to determine it which nothing but the native freedom thereof effectively determineth And if it be further demanded how that reason can stand which resolveth into that which no man understands The answer is necessary that it is an argument of infidelity to demand how in â—â—â—â—rs of Faith It is and ought to be sufficient that it involveth no manner of contradiction that the thing which may not be shâ—ll certainly be and therefore may be known and revealed by God that it shall come to pass For if it be a point of perfection rather to know this than not to know it of necessity God must have it how little soever wee understand how And therefore what appearance soever there may be in the motives which the object preâ—enteth agreeing with the present disposition of the Will that choice wiâ—l follow yet so long as it continueth undetermined though not indifferent by reason of the agreement between the inclination thereof and the motives tendred it is alwayes able to determine it self to the contrary of that which it is moved to though not without appearance of a motive determining it otherwise And the tender of that motive is that act of providence in which I say pag. 201. that Gods determining of future contingencies ends consisting with another whereby hee maintains the will in that ability of taking or refusing which the creation thereof constituteth In which case hee who maintaineth that it is not impossible for the infinite wisedom of God comprehending all things to see what man will do shall not derive his fore-sight from the object but from his very Godhead Onely supposing that it hath proceeded to the work of providence in purposing to place every man in an estate so circumstanced as at each moment hee comprehendeth For as man cannot procâ—ed to chuse this and not that not supposing the consideration upon which the choice proceeds which also must make it a good or a bad choice so neither doth God fore see his choice not fore-seeing the motive which the object presenteth him with Which seeing hee fore-seeth in the purpose of his providence supposing that perfection of his Godhead which his proceeding to the same requireth It is manifest that according to this saying that which hee seeth hee seeth in himself and not in his creature Wherefore I confess it may be said that seeing a Divine when hee is come thus farr must stay here and resolve the rest of his inquiries into the vast and bottomless chaos of Gods infinite perfections it had been better to have said so at the first and never have troubled the Reader with a discourse to prove by the Scriptures that God considereth the state wherein his providence placeth men for the ground upon which hee fore-seeth what they will do which that XXIV Chapter containeth For why should not our ignorance be as learned at the first as at the last But that which hath been said will serve to make the discourse no way superfluous For contingencies that shall be though they be nothing before they câ—me to pass yet is God something and the purpose of his pâ—â—â—â—â—ence
The nature and intent of it renders it subordinate to the Clergy How farre the single life of the Clergy hath been a Law to the Church Inexecution of the Canons for it Nullity of the proceedings of the Church of Rome in it The interest of the People in the acts â—f the Church And in the use of the Scriptures 368 CHAP. XXXII How great the Power of the Church and the offect of it is The right of judging the causes of Christians ceaseth when it is protected by the State An Objection If Ecclesiastical Power were from God Secular Power could not limit the use of it Ground for the Interest of the State in Church matters The inconsequence of the argument The concurrence of both Interests to the Law of the Church The Inâ—erest of the state in the indowment of the Church Concurrence of both in matrimonial causes and Ordinations Temporall penalties upon Excommunication from the State No Soveraigne subject to the greater Excommunication but to the lesse The Rights of the Jewes State and of Christian Powers in Religion partly the same partly not The infinite Power of the Pope not founded upon Episcopacy but upon acts of the Secular Powers of Christendom 381 OF THE PRINCIPLES OF Christian Truth The First BOOK CHAP. I. All agree that Reason is to decide controversies of Faith The objection that Faith is taught by Gods Spirit answered What Reason decideth questions of Faith The resolution of Faith ends not in the light of Reason but in that which Reason evidenceth to come from Gods messengers THe first thing that we are to question in the beginning is Whether there be any means to resolve by the use of reason those controverâ—â—es which cause division in the Church Which is all one as if we undertook to enquire whether there be any such skill or knowledg as that for which men call themselvs Divines For if there be it must be the same in England as at Rome And if it have no principles as no principles it can have unlesse it can be resolved what those principles are then is it a bare name signifying nothing But if there be certain principles which all parties are obliged to admit that discourse which admits no other will certainly produce that resolution in which all shall be obliged to agree And truely this hope there is left that all parties do necessarily suppose that there is means to resolve by reason all differences of Faith Inasmuch as all undertake to perswade all by reason to be of the judgment of each one and would be thought to have reason on their side when so they do and that reason is not done them when they are not believed There are indeed many passages of Scripture which say that Faith is only taught by the Spirit of God Mat. XVI 17. Blessed art thou Peter son of Ionas for flesh and blood revealed not this to thee but my Father which is in the heavens II. 25. I thank thee O Father Lord of heaven and earth that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them unto babes 1 Cor. I. 26 27 28. For Brethren you see your calling that not many wise according to the flesh not many mighty not many noble But the foolish things of the world hath God chosen to shame the wise The weak things of the world hath God chosen to shame the strong The ignoble and despicable things of the world hath God chosen and the things that are not to confound the things that are John VI. 45. It is written in the Prophets And they shall be all taught of God Heb. VIII 10. Jer. XXXI 33. This is the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel in those dayes saith the Lord I will put my Laws in their mindes and write them in their hearts These and the like Scriptures then asâ—ribing the reason why wee believe to the work of Gods Spirit seem to leave no room for any other reason why wee should believe But this difficulty is easie for him to resolve that diâ—â—inguishes between the reason that moveth in the nature of an object and that motion which the active cause produceth For the motion of an object supposes that consideration which discovers the reason why wee are to believe But the motion of the Holy Ghost in the nature of an active cause proceeds without any notice that wee take of it According to the saying of our Lord to Nicodemus John 111. 8. The winde bloweth where it listeth and a man hears the noise of it but cannot tell whence it cometh nor whither it goeth So is every one that is born of the spirit For wee must know that there may be sufficient reason to evict the truth of Christianity and yet prove ineffectual to induce the most part either inwardly to believe or outwardly to professe it The reason consists in two things For neither is the mater of Faith evident to the light of reason which wee bring into the world with us And the Crosse of Christ which this profession drawes after it necessarily calls in question that estate which every man is setled upon in the world So that no marvel if the reasons of believing fail of that effect which for their part they are sufficient to produce Interest diverting the consideration or intercepting the consequence of such troublesom truth and the motives that inforce it The same is the reason why the Christian world is now to barren of the fruits of Christianity For the profession of it which is all the Laws of the world can injoyn is the common privilege by which men hold their estates Which it is no marvel those men should make use of that have neither resolved to imbrace Christ with his Crosse nor considered the reason they have to do it who if they should stick to that which they professe and when the protection of the Law failes or act according to it when it would be disadvantage to them in the world so to do should do a thing inconsequent to their own principles which carried them no further than that profession which the Law whereby they hold their estates protecteth The true reason of all Apostasy in all trials As for the truth of Christianity Can they that believe a God above refuse to believe his messengers because that which they report stands not in the light of any reason to evidence it Mater of Faith is evidently credible but cannot be evidently true Christianity supposes sufficient reason to believe but not standing upon evidence in the thing but upon credit of report the temptation of the Crosse may easily defeat the effect of it if the Grace of Christ and the operation of the Holy Ghost interpose not Upon this account the knowledg of Gods truth revealed by Christ may be the work of his Grace according to the Scriptures for that so it is I am not obliged neither have I any reason here to suppose being to come in
nothing but sufficient evidence that they came from God could have brought to passe Here if any man should say I know I have the Writings of Homer Aristotle or Tully by the Writings themselvs he might be convicted by tendering them to one that knowes nothing of Tully or Homer or Aristotle and asking him whether hee can say by those books whether they be Homers or Aristotles or Tullies Writings Bu◠he that first understands what account the world alwaies hath had their Writings in and studying them finds the marks in them may well say that hee knows the authors by their Writings So tender the Scripture in Ebrew or Greek to a savage of the West-Indies and ask him whether they be the Word of God or not who believes not in God as yet do you believe hee can tell you the truth But convict him of that which I have said how and by what means they came to our hands how they have been and are owned for Lawes to the hearts and lives of Gods people and hee will stand convict to God if hee believe not finding that written in the Books which the men own for the rule of their conversations So by the same means that all records of Learning are conveyed us are the Scriptures evidenced to be mater of historical faith But inasmuch as the mater of them had never been received but by the work of God in that regard they become mater of supernatural faith in regard of the reason moving in the nature of an object to believe as well as in regard of Gods grace moving in the nature of an effective cause I know there have been divers answers made to assoile this difficulty by those that dispute Controversies That the Scriptures authority is better known in order of nature the Churches in that order by which wee get our knowledg as Logicians and Philosophers use to distinguish between notius naturâ and notius nobis because our knowledg rises upon experience which wee have by sense of particulars and yet the general reason being once attained by that means is in some sense better known than that which depends upon it That the authority of the Scripture is the reason why wee believe but the authority of the Church a condition requisite to the same creating in the mindes of men that discreetly consider it a kinde of inferior Faith though infallible which disposes a man to accept the mater of that Faith which God onely revealeth though the reason why we believe is only the act of God revealing that which he obligeth us to believe But all this to no purpose so long as they suppose the foundation of the Church in the nature of a Corporation for the ground of admitting the mater of Faith not the credit of all believers agreeing in witnessing the motives of Faith I remember in my yonger time in Cambridge an observation out of Averrois the Saracene his Commentaries upon Aristotle which as I finde exactly true so may it be of good use That in Geometry and the Mathematicks the same thing is notius naturâ and nobis to wit the first principles and rudiments of those sciences which being evident as soon as understood produce in time those conclusions which no stranger to those studies can imagine how they should be discovered For being offered to the understanding that comprehendsthe meaning of them they require no experience of particulars with sense time brings forth to frame a general conceit of that in which all agree or to pronounce what holds in all particulars Because it is immediately evident that the same holds in all particulars as in one which a man has before his eyes The like is to be said of the processe in hand though the reason be farre otherwise Hee that considers may see that the motives of Faith assured to the common sense and reason of all men by the consent of believers are immediately the reason why wee believe the Scriptures in which they are recorded to be the Word of God without so much as supposing any such thing as a Church in the nature of a Corporation indowed with authority over those of whom it consists The consent of Christians as particular persons obliging common reason both to believe the Scriptures and whatever that belief inferres As this must be known before wee can believe the Scriptures so being known it must be if any be the onely reason why we believe either the Scriptures or that Christianity which they convey unto us And if it be the onely reason why wee believe then is it better known in order of reason as well as of sense to be true than the authority of the Church the knowledg whereof must resolve into the reason why wee are Christians And if this be true then is not the authority of the Church as a Corporation to be obliged by the act of some members so much as a condition requisite to induce any man to believe All men by having the onely true reason why all are to believe being subject to condemnation if they believe not But not if they believe not the Corporation of the Church unlesse it may appeare to be a part of that Faith which that onely reason moves us to believe Neither doth the credit which wee give to all Christians witnessing the motives of Faith to be true by submitting to Christianity in regard of them create in us any inferior Faith of the nature of humane because the witnesse of man convayes the motives thereof to our knowledg But serves us to the same use as mens eyes and other senses served them when they saw those things done which Moses and the Prophets which our Lord and his Apostles did to induce men to believe that they came from God For as true as it is that if God have provided such signs to attest his Commission then we are bound to believe So true is it that if all Christians agree that God did procure them to be done then did hee indeed procute them to be done that men might believe For so great a part of mankinde could not be out of their wits all at once Let not therefore those miracles which God hath provided to attest the Commissions of Moses and the Prophets of our Lord and his Apostles be counted common and probable motives to believe unlesse wee will confesse that wee have none but common and probable motives For what reason can wee have to believe that shall not depend upon their credit Unlesse it be the light of natural reason which may make that which they preach more evidently credible but never evidently true If these works were provided by God to oblige us to believe then is that Faith which they create truely divine and the work of God Though had all men been blinde they had not been seen and had all men been out of their wits wee might presume that they had agreed in an imposture And now it will be easie to answer the
words of S. Augustine contra Epistolam fundamenti cap. V. which alwaies have a place in this dispute though I can as yet admit S. Augustine no otherwise than as a particular Christian and his saying as a presumption that hee hath said no more than any Christian would have said in the common cause of all Christians against the Manichees Ego Evangelio non crederem saith hee nisi me Ecclesiae Catholicae moveret authoritas I would not believe or have believed the Gospel had not the authority of the Catholick Church moved mee For some men have imployed a great deal of learning to show that moveret stands for movisset as in many other places both of S. Augustine and of other Africane Writers And without doubt they have showed it past contradiction and I would make no doubt to show the like in S. Hierome Sidonius and other Writers of the decaying ages of the Latine tongue as well as in the Africane Writers if it were any thing to the purpose For is not the Question manifestly what it is that obligeth that man to believe who as yet believeth not Is it not the same reason that obliges him to become and to be a Christian Therefore whether moveret or movisset all is one The Question is whether the authority of the Church as a Corporation that is of those persons who are able to oblige the Church would have moved S. Austine to believe the Gospel because they held it to be true Or the credit of the Church as of so many men of common sense attesting the truth of those reasons which the Gospel tenders why wee ought to believe What is it then that obliged S. Austine to the Church The consent of people and nations that authority which miracles had begun which hope had nourished charity increased succession of time settled from S. Peter to the present the name and title of Catholick so visible that no Heretick durst show a man the way to his Church demanding the way to the Catholick So hee expresseth it cap. 111. And what is this in English but the conversion of the Gentiles foretold by the Prophets attested by God and visibly settled in the Unity of the Church Whereupon hee may boldly affirm as hee doth afterwards that if there were any word in the Gospel manifestly witnessing Manes to be the Apostle of Christ hee would not believe the Gospel any more For if the reason for which hee had once believed the Church that the Gospel is true because hee saw it verified in the being of the Church should be supposed false there could remain no reason to oblige us to take the Gospel for true All that remaines for the Church in the nature and quality of a Corporation by this account will be this That it is more discretion for him that is in doubt of the truth of Christianity to take the reason of it from the Church that is from those whom the Church trusteth to give it than from particular Christians who can by no means be presumed to understand it so well as they may do For otherwise supposing a particular Christian sets forth the same reasons which the Church does how can any man not be bound to follow him that is bound to follow the Church So that the reasons which both allege being contained in the Scriptures the Church is no more in comparison of the Scriptures than the Samaritane in comparison of our Lord himself when her fellow-citizens tell her John IV. 12. Wee believe no more for thy saying For wee our selves have heard and know that this is of a truth the Saviour of the World the Christ For the reasons for which our Lord himself tells us that wee are to believe are contained in the Scriptures But by the premises it will be most manifest that the same Circle in discourse is committed by them who resolve the reason why they believe into the dictate of the Spirit as into the decree of the Church For the question is not now of the effective cause whether or no in that nature a man is able to imbrace the true Faith without the assistance of Gods Spirit or not Which ought here to remain questionable because it is to be tried upon the grounds upon which here wee are seeking And therefore that Faith which is grounded upon revelation from God and competent evidence of the same is to be counted divine supernatural Faith without granting whatsoever wee may suppose any supernatural operation of Gods Spirit to work it in the nature of an effective cause which must remain questionable supposing the reason why wee believe the Scriptures But in the nature of an object presenting unto the understanding the reason why we are to believe it is manifest by the premises that no man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit that knoweth not the truth of the Scriptures If therefore hee allege that hee knowes the Scriptures to be true because Gods Spirit saith so to his Spirit hee allegeth for a reason that which hee could not know but supposing that for granted which hee pretendeth to prove To wit That the dictate of his own Spirit is from Gods Spirit Indeed when the motives of Faith proceed from Gods Spirit in Moses and the Prophets in our Lord and his Apostles witnessing by the works which they do their Commission as well as their message who can deny that this is the light of Gods Spirit Again when wee govern our doings by that which wee believe and not by that which wee see who will deny that this is the light of Faith and of Gods Spirit But both these considerations take place though wee suppose the mater of Faith to remain obscure in it self though to us evidently credible for the reasons God showes us to believe that hee saith it If any man seek in the mater of Faith any evidence to assure the conscience in the nature of an object or reason why wee are to believe that is not derived from the motives of Faith outwardly attesting Gods act of revealing it hee falls into the same inconvenience with those who believe their Christianity because the Church commends it and again the Church because Christianity commends it As for that monstrous imagination that the Scripture is not Law to oblige any man in justice to believe it before the Secular Powers give it force over their subjects Supposing for the present that which I said before that it is all one question whether Christianity or whether the Scriptures oblige us as Law or not Let mee demand whether our Lord Christ and his Apostles have showed us sufficient reasons to convince us that wee are bound to believe and become Christians If not why are wee Christians If so can wee be obliged and no Law to oblige us supposing for the present though not granting because it is not true that by refusing Christianity sufficiently proposed a man comes not under sin but onely comes not from under it but
disputed by degrees that they are not true There would be nothing in my way to hinder the resolution of a positive Rule to distinguish between true and false in all things concerning the Christian Faith Notwithstanding because by that which already wee have said and that which appears to all men in the Scriptures there is sufficient means to conclude so much as I have proposed and that the proof of it will be an advantage to that which shall follow I shall undertake it supposing no more than I have said I do remember the Argument made against Tradition by Marinaro the Carmelite at the Council of Trent Which as it was thought so considerable there that order was taken that hee should appeare no more in the Council so seemed to mee when I reade it not easie to answer Now upon further consideration I make it my ground to prove the conclusion which I have advanced Hee argued That it was not possible to give a reason why God should provide that some of those truths which are necessary to salvation should be recorded in Scripture others equally obliging not For if you interpose the terme clearly and argue That there is no reason why God should deliver some things clearly by writing others not the argument will be the same To mee it seems manifest that hee who once holds that all things necessary to the salvation of all are clearly contained in the Scriptures adding onely clearly to his terms to all understandings ties himself by giving the reason why they ought to be clear because necessary to maintain that all truths are delivered by Scripture in the same degree of clearnesse to all understandings as they are in degree of necessity to the salvation of all souls For that every cause every reason should inferre the consequence produce the effect answerable in degree to that degree which the reason or cause is supposed to hold is a thing that all reason inforces every understanding justifies But that all things are not clear by the Scriptures in the same degree as they are necessary to salvation is clear to all in point of fâ—ct Inasmuch as there are infinite truths which Christians diffâ—r not about in the Scriptures because they think not their salvation concerned in the mater of them those which are thought to concern it remaining in dispute because not so clear Neither is it for a Christian to prescribe a reason why it ought to be otherwise because that were to prescribe unto Almighty God a rule not depending upon his will declared otherwise This is the issue upon which I demonstrate my intent Neither Gods act in general of declâ—ring his will in writing not his particular acts of declaring his will in such several maters as the several writings of the Prophets and Apostles which make the Body of the Scriptures contain do any way import the declaring of an intent in God thereby to manifest all things necessary to the salvation of all clearly to all understandings therefore that any thing is necessary to salvation is no presumption that it is clearly declared in Scripture to all understandings Inasmuch as it is manifest that no man can give Law to God what hee ought to declare but all men may presume that and that onely to be declared which by dealing with mâ—n under such or such a profession hee hath of his free goodnesse tied himself to declare For it being in the free choice of God whether to declare any will concerning mans salvation or none and that choice being made it remaining yet in his choice whether hee would declare his will by writing or not as it was in his power for so many years before Moses to save men without Scripture it cannot be said that either before declaring an intent to save men hee was bound to declare all that was necessary unto it by writing or by declaring it And this I hold enough to demonstrate to all understandings that the declaring of an intent to deliver us by writing things concerning our salvation imports not in God an intent to declare thereby all things necessary to the salvation of all clearly to all understandings Which will yet be cleâ—rer by proving the other part of my proposition that by the intent of writing the several Books whereof the Scripture consists clearly declared God hath not clearly declared the intent so often said The proof of this by the particulars I hold the sufficientest satisfaction that can be tendred here where the pretense is to proceed onely upon that which all Christians receive The particulars consist in the writings of the Prophets the sayings and doings of our Lord recorded in the four Gospels and the writings of the Apostles For the Gospels pretending to contain the doings and sayings of our Lord but to be written by his disciples It followes by the nature of the busâ—nesse that they must contain some thing as from the person of the Writer and of his sense over and above what they pretend to record Which properly will belong to the writings of the Apostles though contained in the Gospels And thus farre to avoid cavil I have thought fit here to distinguish Now that all mater of salvation is not clearly contained in the writings of the Prophets that is in the Old Testament written by Moses and his Scholars the Prophets I prescribe upon that which all Christians suppose as the ground upon which Christianity is justified against Judaisme That the Old Testament delivereth but the figure and shadow of the New For unlesse a man will have the figure and shadow to be all one with the body and substance hee must confesse that the substance of Christianity which is shadowed in the Old Testament is not clearly declared by the same unless he will have to be shadowed and unshadowed that is clear to be all one Let mee demand if Christianity be clearly declared by the Law to be that profession which God would have all to be saved by that should be saved from the time of prescribing it what need the miracles of our Lord and his Apostles what need the Resurrection and so his Sufferings as to the account of evidencing the truth of his Doctrine For the Law being once received upon necessary reasons it is impossible to say why any new reasons should be requiâ—ite to inforce the truth or the obligation of the Gospel if it were clearly declared by it Again it is manifest that our Lord being risen again and giving the Holy Ghost unto his Disciples by breathing on them John XX. 22. gave them also a spiritual grace of understanding the Scriptures as you finde Luke XXIV 32 45. Where first the Disciples that went to Emmaus confesse with admiration Did not our hearts burn within us when hee talked with us on the way and opened us the Scriptures declaring unto them how hee was foretold in the Old Testament as you have it afore Then having perswaded them all that it was even hee
show were it worth the while as also from whence they took their rise to do it And if he please to step over the water again into France I can show him a more lively picture of an Empire erected within an Empire when the Reformed Churches their had there Civil Assemblies to order the businesse which should arise upon the privileges which they had purchased by their arms for the maintaining of their Religion by force Whether by right or by wrong I say not here But this is the thing which hee calleth Imperium in Imperio the Popes temporal Power making him rather Soveraign above than within other Soveraignties But I have showed you already that this opinion never was the Faith of the Catholick Church but the position of the Papal Faction disclaimed at this day by the farre greater part of that communion though the contrary being countenanced the more make the greater appearance For my own opinion I have delivered it so clear in my book of the Right of the Church in a Christian State that these Authors might if they pleased to oversee all other Divines that deliver the same by that alone have seen what they had to refute And truly I do not believe that any of them can allege a more convicting reason against those that build a Soveraignty within a Soveraignty upon the Title of the Church than that which there is alleged from the Unity of the Church prophesied of in all the promises of the calling of the Gentiles which the constitution of one visible Church of all Christians fulfilleth For if the Church of several Soveraignties is to be one and the same Body by communicating in the Service of God upon supposition of the same Faith then cannot the foundation of it create any title of temporal right to the prejudice and disturbance of those Soveraignties from whence all force within their respective territories is derived If it be said that the supposition is impossible to wit that the Church should have power to Ordain Excommunicate decree and yet be indowed with no force to constrain those that are obliged to stand to the acts thereof The reason now alleged to the contrary is evident For if the obligation of the inward man be of force to resolve a Christian to part with his life to maintain the profession of it If it be part of that obligation which Christianity createth to hold communion with Gods Church is not this obligation enough to inforce the acts of the Church and that excommunication which inforces the same And for experience from the effect it is but alleging the subsistence of the Church till the time that Gregory II and III Popes withdrew their obedience and the obedience of those parts of Italy that followed them from the Emperor Leo Isaunus upon pretense of his erring in the Faith in putting down Images For that is the first example which Christendom hath brought forth of temporal freedom from allegiance due to the Soveraigne founded upon the Title of Christianity If yet it be evident that this was the case in which I see there is some difficulty made But before this time it can neither be said that the Church was not the same after Constantine as before nor that the power of it ever produced any rebellion against the Soveraign upon this Title more than when the Martyrs suffered for their Christianity without defending themselves by force And therefore when this Doctor for the ground of his opinion as visible to his imagination as the common notions in Euclide alleges that all Power all Jurisdiction all Lawes all Punishment all Government all Appeales all Councils are derived first and do lastly resort to the Secular Power no lesse in Ecclesiastical than in Secular Causes and concerning Ecclesiastical as well as Secular Persons because all force which constrains obedience is vested in it his imagination is meerly imbroyled with equivocation of words For all Power is nothing else but a moral quality consisting in the right of obliging other mens wills those in respect of whom the Power holds by the act of his or their wills that have it And what shall hinder God to create such an obligation upon the consciences of Christians by virtue of their Christianity not allowing them any force to inact it but the denial of the communion of the Church Whether the Rules of the Church be called Laws or Canons hee that is tied to hold communion with the Church is tyed to observe those Rules by which it subsists and if hee do not deserves to be set aside rather than the Unity thereof perish Whether yee call them Magistrates or Elders that are appointed to govern the Church it maters not if by virtue of Gods Law the obligation of obeying them be evident in the Scriptures Whether it be properly called Jurisdiction or not when a Christian is censured to be put out of the Church it shall have the same effect with that Jurisdiction whereby a malefactor is put out of the world according as the correspondence between the Church and the State will bear it How this may be counted punishment how not I will not say again having said it already In all causes and concerning all persons I acknowledge there lies an appeal to the Soveraign the Church having to do onely in Ecclesiastical causes concerning men as they are members of the Church and so accidentally when the Church is as large as the State all acknowledging the same Church the Jurisdiction thereof whether properly so called or not extending to as many as that of the State For the last appeal is one of those Jura Majestatis or Prerogatives wherein Soveraignty consisteth neither is it alienable though it is limitable by those termes which Christianity when it is acknowledged to come from God establisheth On the other side the Power of the Church though never so evidently settled by Christianity may be abused not only when it is extended to some temporal effect but also when it is extended beyond the ground and reason of that Christianity which it presupposeth Instances you have of both in the claimes of temporal Power and Infallibility in behalf of the Church And as there lies an appeal to a Heathen Soveraign professing not to persecute his Subjects for their Christianity but to protect them in it upon pretense that it is extended to a temporal effect so may there by an appeal to a Christian Soveraign upon pretense that it is extended beyond the bounds which Christianity alloweth So the Council of Aâ—tiochia appealed Aurelian because Paulus Samosatenus protected himself in his House belonging to the the Church by power derived from him But hee alloweth them that trial which Christianity settleth So Constantine received the appeal of the Donatists but referred the trial to the Church in a Council at Rome and again another at Arles representing all the West But of the bounds of Secular and Ecclesiastical power I must speak again That the
should follow that under the Gospel there should be no such Power in the Church For had it been never so clear never â—o much granted that such a Power was in force under the Law yet could it not be derived upon the Church mediately or immediately from some act of our Lord Christ founding his Church it would not have served the turne The Law of Moses continuing Scripture to the worlds end but Law to none but to those whom it was given to oblige That is the people that subsisted by receiving it and that for that time when it was intended to be in force But if it may appear that the Church is made one Society and Communion by the act of them that founded it and that such it cannot be without a Profession limiting or uniting the right of that Communion to him that makes it nor stand such without power of denying the same to him that visibly makes that Profession and visibly failes of it Whether any such thing were in force under the Law or not under the Gospel it shall not therefore fail to be in force True it is that this cannot be true unlesse a competent reason may be made to appear of something answerable to it under the Law in the same proportion as the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel between the Synagogue and the Church holds But such a one will not be wanting in this case They that argue from the excluding of Adam out of Paradise to the putting of sinners out of the Church if they argue no more than a figure discernâ—ble by the truth when competent evidence of that truth is made conclude not amisse For though this be before the Law yet not before the purpose of God in figuring Chriâ—â—ianity was set on foot And that Paradise as it is a figure of heaven and the joyes thereof so likewise is a figure of the Church upon earth is necessarily conâ—equent to the reason upon which the mystical sense of the Old Testament is grounded So likewise under the Law the shutting of Lepers out of the camp of Israel answerable in the Jewes Law to the City of Jerusalem and supposing the truth of the Gosâ—el a figure of the visible Church neither signified any cause nor produced any effect but of a legal incapacity of conversing with Gods people But supposing a spiritual people of God intitled by their profession to remission of sins and life everlasting a visible failleure of this profession is the cause which producing inviâ—ble separation from God is competent to produce a visible separation from the Church which is visibly that people The penalty allotted to the neglect of circumcision is The childe to be cut off from his people Which penalty beginning there is afterward much frequented by the Law in many cases the penalty whereof is to be cut off from Gods people Signifying as hee hath learnedly showed and saved mee the pains of doing it again that such a forfeiture should make him that incurred it lyable to be suddenly out off by Gods hand from the land of his people And because it was an evident inconvenience that a civil Law should leaye such faults to Gods punishment who never tied himself to execute the punishment though hee made the transgressor lyable to it therefore the Antiens of Gods people according to Gods Law have allotted to such faults the punishment of scourging as next in degree to capital for grievous But there are several other crimes mentioned in the Law which who incurres is by the same Law cut off from Gods people by being put to death I demand now what correspondence can be more exact supposing the Law that tenders the happinesse of this life in the Land of Promise to them that undertake and observe it to be the fore-runner of the New Covenant that tenders remission of sins and life everlasting upon the same terms than is seen betwixt the invisible and visible forfeiture of the privileges of Gods people in the Land of Promise and the invisible and visible forfeiture of the Communion of Gods people as the sin is notorious or not Nor will it serve his turn to scorn S. Cyprian urging as you may see by my book of the Right of the Church that Origen and S. Austin do pag. 27. that Excommunication in the Church is the same as putting to death under the Law As proving that by a meer allusion which if it have not other grounds is not like to be received For S. Paul saith well that the Scriptures are able to make a man wise unto salvation through Faith in Christ Jesus 2 Tim. III. 15. speaking of the Scriptures of the Old Testament Because without faith in Christ upon the motives which his coming hath brought forth to the world they are not able to do it but supposing those motives received do inable a Christian to give a reason of that different dispensation whereby it pleased God to govern things under the Law and so not onely to attain salvation but with wisedom to direct others in it and take away stumbling blocks oâ—t of their way to it And in this case should a man go about to perswade Christians to admit such a Power over them by no other argument than this well might the motion be scorned by them to whom it were tendred But there being no pretense in this allegation but of rendring a reason for a Power of the Church from that of the Synagogue and the Fathers so well stated in the difference between the Law and the Gospel as not easily chargeable of the indiscretion to use ridiculous arguments it is to be maintained that they have given such a reason from the Old Testament as is to be required by such as would be wise to salvation by it Indeed I could not but observe in the late History of Henry the Eight p. 157. where the Writer imagines what reasons Cardinal Woolsey gave the Pope for his consent to the dissolving of some little Monasteries for the erection of his Colleges at Oxford and Ipswich that hee alleges among others That the Clergy should rather fly to Tropes and Allegories if not to Cabbala it self than permit that all the parts of Religious worship though so obvious as to fall easily within common understandings should be without their explication The intent whereof may justly seem to charge the Clergy to have advanced the mystical sense of the Scripture as a means to make the Religion they maintaine more considerable for the difficulty of it But I would there were not too much cause to suspect from other writings of the same Author a compliance with Porphyry Celsus Julian and other enemies of Christianity that have not spared to charge our Lord Christ and his Apostles with abuse and imposture in alleging the Scriptures of the Old Testament impertinently to their purpose though here hee charge onely the Clergy for that wherein they follow his and their steps To mee I confesse
be baptized who cannot make or are tied to any such promise To these I say no more but this that it is one thing to answer arguments and to give grounds of a contrary truth another thing to object difficulties which even the truth is not clear of especially that which comes by revelation from without as Christianity doth Because to the verifying of revealed truth it is not necessary that all things should be alike clearly revealed that are necessary to the clearing of objections The obligation of sticking to that which is revealed taking place no lesse though something belonging to the clearing of it be not so clearly expressed And generally that which is evident is never the lesse evident because there is something else evident the evidence whereof I cannot reconcile with it But this I say not as though I meant to dismiss these difficulties without that which I conceive ought to satisfie But because I have learned of Aristotle that it is the fashion of the unlearned to demand at once both the grounds of the truth and the clearing of difficulties A thing which might be done here but so that another place would require it to be done againe and not without balking the order which I intend My designe will bring me in due time to speak with the Pelagians first and afterwards with the Anabaptists To those points I will remit the answer to these objections Onely for the present to the former of these doubts I would say this That all that hath been said hitherto concerns onely that disposition which he that will come to salvation by Christianity must be firmly qualified with as the condition which the Covenant of Grace requireth All which being supposed it may and doth still remaine questionable how and by what meanes in the nature of an effective cause a man becomes qualified with the disposition so required To wit whether by the meer force of free will or by the help of Gods Grace And that being resolved upon what consideration in the nature of a meritorious cause those helps of Gods grace are furnished To wit whether by the free Grace of God or in consideration of the merits and satisfaction of Christ provided by Gods free Grace as the reason for which and the measure by which the helps of his Grace are dispensed To the latter of them I would onely say here That I conceive I have here maintained that reason for the necessity of Baptisme to the salvation of all Christians upon which the necessity of the Baptisme of Infants is to be tied Which is to say in plain English That I have by the premises re-established that ground for the necessity of Baptisme in generall the unsetling whereof was the onely occasion to make the necessity of Baptizing Infants become questionable CHAP. VI. Justifying Faith sometimes consists in believing the truth Sometimes in trust in God grounded upon the truth Somtimes in Christianity that is in imbracing and professing it And that in the Fathers as well as in the Scriptures Of the informed and formed Faith of the Schools NOW for those Scriptures wherein the nature of justifying faith is described by those effects which the promises of the Gospel tender I must here observe that which all observe that faith is many times made by the Scriptures to consist in believing the truth of Christs Message which he came to preach Otherwhiles neverthelesse in a grounded trust and confidence in the goodnesse of God declared through Christ For what is more manifest then that of S. Paul Rom. X. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe with thy heart that God raised him from the deád thou shalt be saved Where first that which the heart believeth is the rising of Christ from the dead signifying by one Article the rest of the Faith then that which the mouth professeth is nothing but the same truth Therefore neither the inward nor the outward act of faith reacheth any further then the acknowledgment of the said truth So the Apostle 1 John V. 15. 10. Every one that believeth that Jesus is the Messi as is begotten of God Who is he that overcomes the World but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God He that believeth in the Son of God hath the witnesse in himself He that believeth not God hath made him a liar because he believeth not the witnesse which God beareth of his Son Where it is plain that no difference is made between believing God and believing in the Son of God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no more then to believe Gods witnesse Mat. IX 28. Jesus faith to the blind Believe you that I am able to do this They say unto him yea Lord. Then touched he their eyes saying according to your faith be it unto you That faith which consisted in believing that he was able to do it So of John the Baptist our Lord Mat. XXI 32. John came to you in the way of righteousnesse and ye believed him not but the publicans and harlots believed him Which you seeing repeated not afterwards that ye might believe him And sure they obtained the grace of Christ that believed John the Baptish Our Lord to the father of the Lunatick Mat. IX 23. 24. If thou caust believe all things are possible to him that believeth And straight the father of the childe crying out said Lord I believe help my unbeliefe If thou canst believe that I am able to do this as afore Mat. XI 23. 24. He that shall say to this mountaine be thou removed and cast into the sea and doubt not in his heart but believe that what he sayeth cometh to passe is shall come to passe to him as he sayeth Therefore I say unto you all things that ye ask by prayer believe that ye shall receive and they shall come to passe to you John V. 24. He that heareth me and believeth him that sent me hath eternal life and cometh not into condemnation but is passed from death to life XX. 31. These things are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believeing ye may have life through his Name Acts VIII 37. Philip said to the Eunuch If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest be baptized He answered and said I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God Upon which faith he is baptized Rom. IV. 3. Abraham believed God saying to him Thy seed shall be as the stars of heaven Gen. XV. 5. and it was impâ—â—â—ed to him for righteousnesse On the other side it is no rare thing to finde faith described by trust and confidence in God and the effects of saving faith ascribed to it as in the description of the Apostle Heb. XI 2. Now faith is the substance of thing hoped for the evidence of things not seen That which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is that which the Hebrew expresseth by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
hand that the nature of that faith to which the Scriptures of the Apostles and the most ancient Fathers of the Church ascribe remission of sins and that righteousnesse which the Gospel holdeth forth together with other promises of the same is no way declared by this resolution but darkned For it is manifestly requisite for a due account of the sense as well of the most ancient Fathers as of the Scriptures that the nature of faith be understood to consist in that to which the said promises may duely be ascribed which in both are so oft so plainly and so properly ascribed to faith not to any thing which may stand with it or necessarily follow it Now though no man can resolve to professe Christianity without true love to God above all things yet the Scriptures of the New Testament plentifully shew that the holy Ghost the Spirit of love is not given to reside habitually with any but those that are baptized and so become Christians however necessary the actuall assistance of the same holy Ghost is to go before and to induce them to become Christians by undertaking what that profession requires Therefore it will be necessary to distinguish not onely the faith but the love but the hope the fear the trust in God and all other graces begun in him that beginneth to believe the Gospel to be true but is yet not resolved to undergo the profession of it and the condition which it supposes From the same as they are in him who upon such resolution is become a Christian And if any man upon this distinction will say that the faith which he believed with afore is faith without forme but formed afterwards he shall easily have me to concurre with him in it Alwayes provided that whatsoever it is the Scripture attributes the procuring of the promises of the Gospel to that be understood to belong to the nature of that faith which alone justifies according to the Scriptures CHAP. VII The last signification of Faith is properly justifying Faith The first by a Metonymy of the cause The second of the effect Those that are not justified doe truly believe The trust of a Christian presupposeth him to be justified All the promises of the Gospel become due at once by the Covenant of Grace That to believe that we are Elect or Justified is not Justifying Faith FOR now it is time to draw the argument which I purposed at first from these premises and to say That the name of faith by the effects which by virtue of the Gospel promises it produceth being attributed first to the bare belief of the Gospel secondly to that trust which a Christian enters into by being Baptized and lastly to that trust in God through Christ which Christianity warranteth And the second of these naturally presupposing the first as the third both of them the reason can be no other then this Because the middle is that which entitleth Christians to the promise of the Gospel in respect whereof both the name of Faith and the effects of these promises are duly and reasonably ascribed both to that which it supposeth and to that which it produceth both to the cause and to the effect of it For in all manner of language it is as necessary to use that change of words and the sense of them which is called Metonymy by Humanists and by some Philosophers and Divines of the Schooles denominatio ab extrinseco as it is impossible for any man to expresse his minde without that change of speech which they call a Trope in any manner of Language It is not to be imagined that those fashions of speech are onely used for ornament and elegance of language The Humanists themselves having taught us that they are as our clothes as well to cover nakednesse as for comelynesse For as long as the conceits of the minde may be infinitely more then the words that have ben used it will be absolutely necessary to straine the use of customary speech as the conceit is not customary which we desire to expresse It will not therefore be strange that the name of faith should be used to signifie three conceptions distinct but depending one on the other so long as there are more conceptions then words It will not be strange that the effects of that trust which a man entreth into by undertaking the profession of a Christian should be attributed both to that Faith which believeth the Gospel to be true being a thing necessarily presupposed to induce a man to undertake that ingagement and to that confidence which a Christian hath in God through Christ being a thing necessarily insuing upon the undertaking of it with a sincere and effectuall purpose But this would be strange and no just reason to be given for it were it not granted that the second to wit that sincere undertaking the trust of a Christian is that which really intitleth him to the promises of the Gospel For is it not manifest to all Christians that there are too many in the world whom we cannot imagine to have any due title to those promises and yet do really and verily believe the faith of Christ to be true and Him and His Apostles sent from God to preach it If therefore we will have these Scriptures which ascribe the promises of the Gospel to believing the truth of it to be true we must understand them by way of Metonymy to be attributed to it as of right belonging to the consequence which it is naturally apt to produce Nor is there any reason that convinceth me in this point more then that which Socinus giveth why justification should be attributed to that act of faith alone whereby a man believes the Gospel to be true His reason is because he that throughly believes the true God and his providence which will bring all mens doings to judgement and render them their due reward of life or death that believes our Lord Christ truly tendereth everlasting happinesse to all that take his yoke upon them and draw in it as long as they live must needs stand convict that he is to proceed accordingly I say no lesse And I say that the preaching of the Gospel tenders motives sufficient to convict all the world of so much But I say further that so long as notwithstanding sufficient conviction tendered notwithstanding a mans faith engaged and his own sentence past against himself if he faile we see men either not embrace Christianity or not performe it having imbraced it So long right to Gods Promises cannot be ascribed to this belief though in reason whosoever is convict of the truth cannot deny but he ought to engage in Christianity and hold it The reason is because we see men not alwayes do that which resonably they ought to do And therefore it is not enough to have submitted to conviction what we ought to do And the promises of the Gospel are not properly ascribed to the belief of those truths which convince men
revealed from heaven upon all ungodlinesse and unrighteousnesse of men that hold the truth in unrighteousnesse For the preaching of the Gospel is that revelation which here he meanes And by S. Augustine de Catechizandi Rudibus we understand that by the order of the Church there was no instruction in Christianity without conviction of the judgement to come as that which obligeth to have recourse to Baptisme for the avoiding of it But when God condescends to tender to those whom he holds liable to his justice terms of reconcilement plainly he comes down from his Throne of judgement to deale with his obnoxious creatures upon equall terms or rather terms of disadvantage supposing what no Christian can deny that the Gospel tenders terms of our advantage Nay he is content to go before and to declare himself tied before hand if we accept expecting our choice whether we will be bound by accepting or not which is a difference between the Law and the Gospel not unworthy to be observed For the Covenant of the Law was struck once for all with all those whome it concerned to wit the whole people of Israel at once their posterity being by birth subject to it But when the Gospel is preached the Covenant of Grace is tendered indeed but not inacted till some man consent to become a Christian and therefore God first binds himself to stand to the termes which he tenders expecting whether man will accept them or not And though it be called the Covenant of Grace while it is but tendered yet it is not a Covenant till it be inacted between God and every one that is baptized Seeing then that no justification of sinners takes effect but by virtue of the Covenant of Grace and that the act of Gods meer Grace inacts and gives force to that Covenant manifest it must needs be that justification imports the act of God admitting him for righteous who setting aside that Covenant could not challenge so to be held and dealt with But if justification import this act of God shall it not therefore imply shall it not suppose some condition qualifying him for it For what challenge can he whom the Gospel overtaketh in sinne pretend for reward by it being engaged by Gods law to the utmost of his power otherwise shall a mans conversion from sinne past to righteousnesse to come challenge both the cancelling of his debts and a reward beyond all proportion of that which he is able to do being obliged to do it But shall that Gospel which pretends to retrive righteousnesse into the world allow the reward of righteousnesse without any consideration of it How then shall it oblige man to righteousnesse being a law that derogates from any law of God that went afore it allowing all the promises it tenders without any consideration of righteousnesse For I will not here stand to dispute whether the Covenant of Grace be a law or not because every contract is a law to the parties and this being between God and man and supposing the transgression of Gods Originall law necessarily abates the extent and force of it But I will demand what is or what can be the righteousnesse of a sinner but repentance Which as it is part of righteousnesse so farre as it is understood to be conversion from all sinne so as it is understood to be the conversion of sinners to Christianity is all righteousness because all sinners are called to Christianity Only with this difference that repentance is the way to that end which is righteousnesse Repentance in fieri righteousnesse in facto esse according to the terms of the Schoole And is it not righteousnesse for a sinner to desire to purpose to resolve to be righteous for the time to come Or can he that is truly qualified a sinner be any other way truly qualified righteous Therefore that resolution of righteousnesse which he that sincerely undetakes Christianity must needs put on the first part whereof is the profession of God by Christ the author and rewarder of it This I say is that which qualifies a Christian for the promises of the Gospel but alwayes by virtue of Gods free act in tendring the Covenant of Grace not by any obligation which his creature can prevent him with And this is manifestly S. Pauls sense in Rom. IV. 3 11 22 23 24. where he alleges Moses that Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse and David pronouncing him blessed unto whom God imputeth no sinne To shew that the Gospel declareth Christians to be justified by faith no otherwise then the Fathers understood men to become Righteous by Gods grace accepting that which nothing could oblige him to accept for righteousnesse For no man is so wilfully blinde as to imagine that the Apostle speakes here of our Lord Christ the object not of the act of faith whose words are That Faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse and blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne And sinne as I take it stands not in opposition to the object of faith And when the Scripture saith Psal CVI. 30 31. Then stood up Phineas and exercised judgement and so the Plague ceased And this was imputed to him for righteousnesse among all posterities for evermore It is manifest that doing vengeance upon malefactors is accounted a righteous thing for Phineas to do though by Gods command yet without processe of law And 1 Mac. 11. 52. Was not Abraham found faithfull in temptation and it was counted to him for righteousnesse And shall not faith be said to be imputed to him for righteousnesse in the same sense as we see evidently induring temptation is imputed to him and doing vengeance to Phineas for righteousnesse That is to say that the act of faith not the object of it which act what it is and wherein it consists I suppose is decided by the premises is imputed to Abraham and his Spirituall seed for righteousnesse I have said nothing all this while concerning that opinion which makes that faith which alone justifieth to consist in believing that a man is justified or predestinate to life in consideration only of Christs obedience imputed to him And truely having said so much why it cannot consist in having trust and confidence in God through Christ I do not think I need say much more to it First whether or no a Christian can have the assurance of faith that he is for the present justified or that he is from everlasting predestinate to life is a thing that I intend not here either to grant or to deny Nothing hindring me supposing for the present but not granting that such assurance may be had upon that supposition to dispute that he is not justified by having that assurance but that by being justified he obtaines it For were it not the strangest thing in the world that any knowledge should produce the object of it which it supposeth Can any reason allow the effect to produce the cause or any thing
how turn ye back againe to those weake and beggarly rudiments to which ye desire to be in bondage againe Ye observe dayes and monthes and seasons and yeares For the observation of legall Festivals according to the moneths and seasons of the yeares is indeed obedience to that God by whose Law the difference is made But when their conceits of themselves transports them to imagine that God esteems them for these things whereby he hath differenced them from other nations and that it cannot stand with that esteem that he should receive the Gentiles into favour upon undertaking that spirituall obedience which Christ publisheth not tying that to the same Worthily are they called by the Apostle weak and beggerly rudiments that did onely prepare them to this obedience by tying them to the true God and his outward service And is not the precept of circumcision in the first place which obliges to all the precepts and intitles to all the promises of this nature Hear S. Paul to the Philipians III. 3. 6. among whom this leaven began to spread◠We are the circumcision saith he that serve God in the Spirit and glory in Christ Jesus and have no confidence in the flesh Though I have confidence in the flesh also If any other man seem to have confidence in the flesh I more Circumcised the eighth day of the race of Israel of the tribe of Benjamin an Hebrew of Hebrews also concerning the Law a Pharisee as concerning zeal one that persecuted the Church as concerning righteousnesse that is by the law blamelesse Are not all these priviledges of that nation by virtue of Moses Law and of circumcision which obliges to it And is not that confidence of righteousnesse which is by the Law which S. Paul disclaimes though he claime as good a title to it as any Jew beside I say is not that it which moved the Jews out of zeal to the Law to persecute the Church And can that righteousnesse which moveth to persecute Christianity be thought to presuppose it Therefore what S. Paul meanes by confidence in the flesh we must learn from the Epistle to the Hebrews IX 9. 10. Where the tabernacle is called a Parable or figure for the then present time in which gifts and sacrifices were offered which could not profit him that ministred as to conscience being onely imposed upon meates and drinkes and severall Baptismes and righteousnesses of the flesh untill the time of reformation came Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are those carnall and bodily rites which obtaine that carnall righteousnesse which answereth the carnall and earthly promises of the Law and were mistaken by them for meanes of obtaining resurrection unto life and the world to come which under the Law so given they had neverthelesse just cause to expect though not in consideration of such observations Another argument hereof we have from S. Paul which to me seems peremptory in that he opposeth that grace and faith whereby Christians are justified to those works which Gentiles by the Law and light of nature were able to do Which works certainly do not suppose Christianity Ephes II. 8 9. For by grace are ye saved through the Faith and that not of your selves it is Gods gift Not of workes least any man should glory There is nothing moremanifest then that the Church of the Ephesians when S. Paul wrote this Epistle was gathered of those that had been Gentiles as you may see by Ephes II. 11 12. III. 1 6. Wherefore when S. Paul sayes to them being presently Christians that they were not saved by works least they should glory it is manifest that his meaning is that their conversation before the Gospel came could not move and oblige God to provide them the meanes of Salvation which it tendereth Againe S. Paul exhorting Timothy to suffer hardship for the Gospel according to the power of God who saith he hath saved us and called us with an holy calling not according to our works but according to his own purpose and the grace that is given us in Christ Jesus before everlasting ages 2 Tim. I. 9. speaketh of the same Ephesians whose Pastor Timothy was at that time But most fully Titus III. 4 7. But when the goodnesse and love to men of God our Saviour appeared not of workes which we had done in righteousnesse saved he us but according to his own mercy by the laver of regeneration and renewing of the holy Ghost which he shed upon us richly through our Saviour Jesus Christ that being justied by his grace we might become heirs of everlasting life according to hope For that those whom Titus had in charge were Christians converted for the most part of Gentiles appeares by the Apostles words Titus I. 10. For there be many and those rebellious vaine talkers and cheaters especially they of the circumcision whose mouthes must be stopped And in the words that goe next afore the passage alledged there is a lively description of the conversation of the Gentiles For of Jewes he could not have said We also were once foolish disobedient wandring out of the way in slaved to divers lusts and pleasures living in malice and envy hatefull and hating one another Titus III. 3. Seeing then that it concerns the Gentiles as well as the Jews which the Apostle argues that men are not justified by works but by grace and by faith it is manifest that he meanes such works as the Gentiles might pretend to no lesse then the Jews and that while they were Gentiles because he speakes of that estate in which the Gospel overtook them And therefore when S. Paul denies that men are justified by works he meanes those works which men are able to do before they are acquainted with the preaching of the Gospel whether by the light and Law of nature or by the meere instruction of Moses Law For though the law of Moses containe in it many morall precepts of true and inward and spirituall obedience the observation whereof is indeed the worship of God in Spirit and in truth Yet we must consider that the same precepts are part of the law of nature written in the hearts even of Gentiles And we must consider further that these precepts may be obeyed and done two severall wayes First as farre as the outward work and the kinde and object of it goes and further as farre as the reason of it derived from the will and command of God and the intention thereof directed to his honour and service Which purpose of heart cannot be in any man but him that loves God above this world making him the utmost end of all his actions I say then that of those morall precepts of Moses law which are parts of the law of nature the outward and bodily observation goes no further then the observation of other rituall and civil precepts of the same law And therefore is to be comprised in the account of those works of the Law by which S. Paul denies deservedly that we
them in the world to come that should heartily and faithfully serve him in this Which adding to it the profession of the Name and warrant of Christ as the Author of that contract whereby we undertake so to do is Christianity I have yet said nothing of the passage of S. James II. 14 where he disputes expresly that faith alone justifieth not but Faith with works for it seemes to make a generall argument by it self though in truth the reason which he brings that Abraham was justified by works necessarily depends upon the true reason why S. Paul saith That Abraham was justified by faith Which reason they that will not admit deserve to crucifie themselves everlastingly to find how he can be truly said to be justified by workes that is justified by faith alone without works afore were it not pitty that the Scriptures should be set on the rack to make them confesse a meaning which the words in no language by any custome of humane speech will bear For if the Faith of him that hath no good works will not save him not justifie him as the Apostle expresly affirmeth can the workes that are said to do this be said to do it Metonymicalâ—y because they are signes or effects of Faith which doeth it when it is said that faith without them doth it not And though by the way of Metonymy the property or effect of the cause may be attributed to the effect of that cause Yet when that property or effect is denied the cause and attributed to the effect will any language indure that it should be thought properly to belong to the cause which is denied it and attributed to the effect only by Metonymy that is in behalf of the cause that is denied it Is there any need to come into these straits when by saying that a man is justified by faith alone according to S. Paul meaning by undertaking Christianity a man will be obliged to say that he is justified by works also according to S. James to wit by performing that which he undertaketh unlesse you will have him justified by undertaking that which he performes not For when it is said that a man is justified by undertaking Christianity it is supposed that he undertakes it sincerely and heartily Which sincerity containing a resolution of all righteousnesse for the future justly qualifies him for those promises which overtake him in sinne so that for the present he can have nothing to justifie him but the righteousnesse of this faith alone which the Gospel tells us that God accepteth But for the time to come just ground is there to distinguish a second justification which proceeds upon the same consideration but supposes the condition undertaken to be performed from that first which though done by faith alone inferreth the necessity of making good what is undertaken that it may be available Is not this that the Apostle saith James 11. 15 16 17. If a brother or sister be naked or want daily food and one of you say to him Go in peace be warmed and fed and yet give them not things fit for his body what is he the better So also faith if it have not workes is of it self dead Where lies this comparison but in this that he who professeth Christianity but doth not according to it is like him that professeth love to his brother but relieves not his necessities And so when it followes But a man may say thou hast faith and I have workes shew me thy workes by thy faith and I will shew thee my faith by my workes For he that liveth like a Christian it is plaine he sheweth his Faith by his workes which is evidence that he professeth Christianity sincerely but he that onely professeth is yet to make evidence by his workes that his profession is sincere As for the example of Abraham the Apostles words are these Abraham our Father was he not justified by works when he offered Isaac upon the altar Thou seest that faith wrought with his workes and by works was his saith perfited And the Scripture which saith Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousnesse was fulfilled and he was called the sonne of God What is this but that which we read 1 Mac. 11. 52. Was not Abraham found faithfull in triall and it was counted to him for righteousnesse For it was counted to him for righteousnesse that not being weak in saith he considered not his own body already mortified as being a hundred years old nor the mortification of Sarahs wombe nor doubted through want of belief in Gods promise but was strengthened in faith giving glory to God and being satisfied that he is able to do what he hath promised As S. Paul saith Rom. IV. 19 20 21. And therefore much more must it needs be counted to him for righteousnesse that by faith he offered Isaac when he was tempted and that he who had received the promises offered his onely begotten sonne of whom it had been said In Isaac shall posterity be counted to thee Reckoning that God was able to raise him from the dead Whence also he received him in a parable As the Apostle saith Heb. XI 17 18 19. For here as I shewed afore it is the act of faith and not the object of it that is imputed to righteousnesse And in that obedience whereby this temptation was overcome though there was a good work yet there was an act of that faith And therefore the Apostle deservedly addeth that his faith wrought with his workes But the faith that moved him to travail after Gods promise was perfected by this work wherein that faith moved him to tender God obedience And therefore the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse Because that which Moses had said that God counted Abraham righteous for his faith was made good and proved not to have been said without cause but that he was righteous indeed as righteous he must be whom God so accounts that obeyed God in such a triall as this So that which S. James addeth of Rahab Likewise Rahab also the harlot was she not justified by works receiving the messengers and sending them out another way How shall it agree with that of the other Apostle Heb. XI 31. Through faith Rahab the harlot perished not with the unbelievers receiving the spies in peace But by virtue of the same reason that having conceived assurance of the promises of God to his people that she might have her share in them she resolved to become one of them upon such terms as the case required wherein certainly the preservation of their spies was required So if by Faith then by Workes if by Workes then by Faith I must not leave this point till I have produced another sort of Scriptures in which the promises of the Gospel are made to depend upon workes which Christianity requireth AS namely when forgivenesse of sinners is promised upon condition that we
Church which they corrupted by denying these attributes to the man Jesus attributed the same things to him which they denying were therefore excluded out of the Church When S. John proceedeth saying We saw his glory as the glory of the onely begotten Sonne of God he refers to that which went afore he dwelt among us Now seeing it is so ordinary for the Jewes to call the majesty of God dwelling among men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the very word that S. John uses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are obliged thereby to understand that the majesty of God dwelling among us in the tabernacle of Christs flesh bodily as figuratively it had done in the Tabernacle or Temple of the Jews declared it self notwithstanding by those glorious works which it wrought in his flesh to be what it was For the title of Sonne of God is given in the Old Testament to the Angels first and to the Messias when David saith Ps LXXXIX 18. I will make him my first born higher then the Kings of the earth Whereby it is evident that this title in the Literall sense belonged first to David Of whom also he that will maintaine the difference between the literall and the Spirituall sense upon that ground which I setled before must maintaine those words of David Psal II. 7. Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee To be said Now I suppose that those who expected the Messias to come as a temporall Prince to deliver the people of Israel from the yoke of their oppressors into the free use of that Law which they had received from God as did not onely the rest of the world when Christ came but even his own disciples before his rising againe could by no meanes be informed of that Spirituall kingdome which by the dwelling of the Word in our flesh was intended to be raised Which if it be true though they called the Messiah the Sonne of God as well as the Sonne of David yet is it impossible that they should conceive the same ground for which he is so called and by consequence understand the title in the same sense as we do And this difference of signification is necessary even in the understanding of the Gospel For when the Centurion saith at our Lords death Mark XV. 39. Of a truth this man was the Sonne of God It is not reasonable to imagine that he who dreamed not at all of his rising againe but was a meer heathen should call him the Sonne of God in that sense which we believe But either as Heathenisme allowed Sonnes of the Gods as some thinke or as by conversing with the Jews they had understood them to hold the Messias whom they expected to be the Sonne of God as Prince raised by God What shall we say then of the Apostles demand Vnto which of the angels said he at any time Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee When we find the title of Sonnes of God in the Old Testament attributed to Angels Surely it is necessary to have recourse to that sense in the which it was then known that Christians attributed this title to our Lord Still known by the honour which then and now the Church tendereth him according to it For what will all that Socinus acknowledgeth availe to make good the Apostles assumption when he saies that our Lord is the Sonne of God because conceived without man by the holy Ghost in the womb of a Virgine Is this any more then Adam may challenge for which he is called the Sonne of God Luke III. 38 For the effective cause entereth not into the nature of that which it produceth Neither importeth it any thing to the state of our Lord that he was conceived of the holy Ghost if we suppose nothing in him but a soul and a body which those that are born of man and woman have How then is the title of the Sonne of God incompetible to the Angels which Adam thus farre challenges If you look back upon the premises there remaines no doubt nor any way to escape it otherwise The holy Ghost overshadowing the blessed Virgine not onely workes the conception of a Sonne but dwells for ever according to the fullnesse of the Godhead in the manhood so conceived as by the nature of the Godhead planted in the Word which then came to dwell in the manhood so conceived Therefore that holy thing which is borne of the Virgine being called the Sonne of God is made so much above the Angels as the esteem which this name imports is above any thing that is attributed to them in the Scriptures Therefore is this Sonne of God honoured as God during his being upon earth by them that were instructed to understand the effect of it though they that were not disciples but took it onely for a title of the Messias which they knew he pretended to be perhaps conceived not so much by it Therefore our Lord himself poses the Pharisees how they would have David to understand the Messias to be his Lord whom they knew to be his Sonne Mat. XXII 42 45. Mark XII 35 37. Luke XX. 41 44. This is then that which S. Paul saith Col. I. 19. For in him it pleased God that all the fullnesse should dwell And Col. II. 9. 10. For in him dwelleth all the fullnesse of the Godhead bodily And Ye are filled through him Speaking of Christ I shewed you before that the heresies of that time some whereof it is manifest were then seducing the Colossians did all agree in preaching God the Father of all things to be unknown together with all that belonged to the compleating of the Godhead till they made him known And all this contrived by the devil to subvert the Faith of Christ by counterfeiting something like it in sound like false coyne to cozen the simple with Whereas therefore S. Paul here saith that the fullnesse of the Godhead dwelleth bodily in Christ And our Lord so often in S. Johns Gospel that the Father dwelleth in him and he in the Father And the fullnesse of the holy Ghost dwelleth in the Word incarnate as I shewed even now It is manifest that they laboured to introduce a counterfeit Fullnesse of the Godhead of their own devising into that esteem and worship which the fullnesse of the Godhead contained in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost preached by our Lord Christ and his Apostles challengeth And therefore that the fullnesse of the Godhead challenged by S. Paul to dwell in the flesh of Christ must stand in opposition to that fullnesse which these sects worshipped Being challenged by S. Paul as vindicating the Christian Faith from that corruption wherewith these Sects pretended to adulterate it And being challenged by those Sects in opposition to S. Paul and the Christian Faith which he vindicateth to rest in those whom they severally preached not in the Sonne and holy Ghost together with the Father as he maintaineth For when the fullnesse of
that is requisite to inable it in particular the helps of Gods grace assoiles all dificulties by distinguisting the compound sense of those sayings which expresse contradiction between predetermination and freedome from the divided sense of the same For example if it be said That to which the Will is predetermined must needs come to passe Therefore the will cannot be free to choose whether it shall be done or not the answer is That the will is able to do otherwise in sâ—nsu diviso non in sensu composito dividing it from the determination of it that is not being determined but not putting it and the determination of it together that is being determined So the will hath as they say simultatem potentiae not potentiam simultatis That is in their barbarous latine a power of doing this as well as that at one the same time not a povver of chusing or acting both this and that at one the same time For the ability of doing may well stand with the actuall choice of not doing but actually at the same time to choose to do and not to doe are terms inconsistent as it may be truely said that a white wall may be black though not supposing it continue white This distinction I cannot see how Jansenius can imploy though he think he may whether it serve or the other opinion to any purpose not For or that in difference wherein the first opinion maintaineth the very nature of freewill to consist at least in words whether they signifie any thing or not the second maintaineth to be so far from the nature of it that the freedome of the Will is not to be had and obtayned without either abating or extinguishing all indifference in it The will being free from sin and slave to righteousnesse which is an addition making the slavery of the will no slavery but the freedome thereof perfect freedome or else free from righteousnesse and slave to sin which slavery is perfect slavery but imaginary freedome according as it growes of in different determined to righteousnesse or to sin which he pretendeth to be the onely freedome whereof it is capable And how then should Jansenius imploy the distinction premised to salve that in difference of the will which he disavoweth And therefore in consequence hereunto they can neither admit that any help of grace is sufficient that is not effectuall and so that he who keeps not the covenant of grace was ever able to keep it Nor that our L. Christ shed his blood for any but them who are and shall be actually saved by it As for those of the Reformation amongst whom it is manifest that this great question of the agreement between Grace and freewill is as hotly disputed as in the Ch. of Rome upon the whether of these opinions they ground themselves who reject Arminius and the Lutherans it is not so easy to say as it may clerly be said that they must chuse the one or the other if they wil speake things consequent to their own principles It is manifest that Doctor Twisse hath imbraced the former which he that should say that any of the rest have forborne to imploy either because they could not make it popular to the capacity of vulgar understandings or because they found not themselves able to manage it perhaps should not conjecture much amisse But we have of laâ—e a work of one Doctor Strang late of Glascowe De voluntate actionibus Dei circa peccatum wherein he maintaines at large against Doctor Tuisse in particular that it makes God the author of all sin and by consequence plucks up all Christianity by the roots For the rest professing to imbrace the opinion of Jansenius as concerning the predetermination of mans will to all works of supernaturall Grace though not undertaking to maintaine it he hath added unto it that wherein it is certainely defective To wit an account how evill can be foreknowne by God not determining the will of the creature to act it For this being done the same account will serve to reconcile the freewil of the creature both to the activity of providence in generall and to the efficacy of predestination in matters concerning the world to come Which how securely soever Jansenius passe by he may think that he hath secured the point of faith concerning the grace of Christ but he cannot think that he hath satisfied any divine that the rest of the question can be resolved according to his opinion as the reason of Christianity requireth I am much in feare that our Puritan Preachers when they swagger over the Arminians in their pulpits do neither inform them how great a part of the reformation as all the Lutherans make is on their side neither the Church of England nor that of Rome having given sentence in the whole question nor what difficulties their own opinion is liable to which it would make theire hearts ake to overcome For my part finding the determination of the Synod of Dort against Arminius not to reach the whole question concerning the reconciling of mans freedome as well to Gods foreknowledg and providence as to his predestination and grace I have thought best to propose the opinion of predetermination which pretends to do it but does it not as I suppose together with that wherein Jansenius varies from it to make such a resolution as I am able to propose in so difficult a businesse the better to be understood Now for that which I propose that the will of man though under Originall sin is free from necessity though not free from bondage which is to say that neither as a second cause nor upon the account of Adams fall it is determined to do or not to doe that which indeed it doth I must distinguish that necessity upon supposition is not that necessity which the will of man is free from and which the contingence of the effects thereof is opposite to For if any thing be said to be necessary upon supposition not of the cause which necessarily produceth it but of it selfe which is supposed to be well may it be said necessarily to be because it is upon necessity as every thing that is must needs be because that you suppose that it is In like maner if you suppose any thing which implyeth the being of another thing as if a man see London-stone because no man sees that which isnot this supposition inferres not that necessity which destroyes freedom because it imports the being of that which you suppose that it is That necessity that destroieth freedom contingence is antecedent to the being of contingencies in the nature of an effective cause though not alwaies absolute For he which will speak properly and safely must not call any thing absolutely necessary but God alone and his perfections from whose freewill all the necessity that is found in his creatures proceedeth But in regard that we see the Sun rise and set alwaies in one constant order the
standeth still or the heavens why they move For it is not the nature of heaven and earth that makes them stand still or move but the will of God that made it their nature and creates all the necessity that followes upon it as I said afore If therefore a man can do nothing till God determine him to do it and cannot but do that which he determines him to do then is there the same necessity for that which he doth as for the heavens moving or the earth standing still Here a difficulty is made in regard of the merits of Jesus Christ who for the joy set before him underwent the crosse despising the shame and sate down at the right hand of God Heb. XII 2. And Humbled himself becoming obedient to death even the death of the Crosse Wherefore God also hath over-exalted him Phil. II. 8 9. As if because the merits of Christ are the acts of a will by the hypostaticall union utterly determined to the will of God it were not requisite that the promises of the Gospel should be obtained by performing the Covenant of Grace when a man might not have performed it The answer is not to be cleared more then the mystery of the holy Trinity is to be comprehended For of a truth how should it be understood how the will of God the Father freely tendered how the same in the Sonne undertook to assume our nature to perform the work of our redemption in it But upon this freedom depends the consideration which makes the Grace of Christ due by Gods promise For though the will of man in Christ were utterly determined to that which the will of God should choose yet because it became so determined by the divine will in Christ freely assuming our nature the influence of that freedome into all that he freely did in virtue of that choice makes the acts thereof meritorious of the rewards of his Crosse Nor is there any use to be made of the distinction between the compound and divided sence of any propositions but those that speak of that necessity which followes upon a supposition of the being of those things which are said to be necessary That necessity and onely that it reconcileth with contingence Necesse est praedestinatum salvari Non necesse est praedestinatum salvari In English for we must suppose the property of each language it must needs be or it is necessary that he who is predestinate should be saved It is not necessary not of necessity it must not needs be that he who is predestinate should be saved Compounding or twisting in your minde the quality of predestinate with salvation that is supposing a man to be predestinate the affirmative is true necessity is attributed to the salvation of a man so qualified dividing them that is not supposing the man to be praedestinate the negative Because Christianity supposeth praedestination to preserve freedome and contingence But if you say in Latine Praedestinatus necessario salvatur In English He that is praedestinate is saved necessarily or by necessity it must be utterly denied for the same cause The same distinction may be used when the necessity is not upon supposition of the being of that which is said to be necessary but to no purpose For it is necessary that the fire burne or the Sunne show us light if wood be put to it if it be above our hemisphere It is not necessary if otherwise But this makes not that which is necessary upon such a supposition ever a whit the more contingent Nay it were ridiculous to expresse it because a limitation so unnecessary may be understoode No lesse necessary will that act of the will be to which God determines though otherwise the being of it were not onely not necessary but impossible Nor will it be true to say that he who doth what God determines him immediately to do hath power to do the contrary at the same time though not to do it at the same time simultatem potentiae ad oppositum not potentiam simultatis For if the will cannot act still so determined it were a contradiction to say that it hath power to do that which you say it cannot doe Wherefore if God from the beginning ever gave the reasonable creature a will actually not determined to do or not to do this or that the same will by which God does this continuing for all that time that he maintaines it there is no more roome left for a will of determining the same in God untill by virtue of his first will it determine it selfe then there is roome in God not to will that which actually and presently he willeth It is therefore too late to say That God determining as well the maner by which all things come to passe as what shall come to passe can as well determine the acts of his reasonable creatures to be done freely as the acts of naturall things to be done necessarily Having supposed afore that he determines these acts by determining immediately the will to do them For though I count it necessary to grant that God by his providence determines all future contingences for the reason to be shewed in due time yet should he determine the will to doe them without supposing it to determine it selfe there could remaine neither contingence in the effect nor freedome in the cause And therefore I say that God determines those thinges that come to passe freely and contingently so to come to passe but he cannot determine this by destroying freedome and contingence Therefore not by determining immediately the will of man to doe or not to doe this or that For this determination produceth not that necessity which stands upon supposition of an act freely done and therefore contingent as that which neede not have beene done or of the foresight of it or of effectuall meanes to bring it to paâ—â—e which cannot be defeated because they are supposed to take effect but that which stands onely upon supposition of the cause which being the determination of God and therefore indefeasible the necessity which it produceth whatsoever it be for the kind will be stronger then any necessity that is antecedent to the being of any thing in the creature And though I said before absolutely that the action of the creature cannot be imputed to God yet upon an impossible supposition as this I can and must inferre that nothing can be imputed to the creature as good or evill to reward or punishment but all to God Which is a consequence that Christian ears must not indure For I suppose no Christian ears can indure to heare that God should infuse any inclination to malice into the heart of his creature because when it comes to effect the effect will be imputable to God and because before it comes to effect the work of God must be called evill as inclined to evill How then shall we indure to heare it said that God by his indefeasible omnipotence determines the creature
to doe all the evill that it does and that without this determination no evill can be done with it no evill can but be done For alas the covering will be too shortâ—â— to say that God produceth onely the positive action of sinne the malice incident to it consisting in the meere want of conformity to the rule which it ought to follow proceeding from the imperfection of the creature For the difference between the action of sinne and the sinne which it acteth consisteth meerely in the conceit of mans understanding not apprehending at once all the particulars wherein the action consisteth No action possibly being so badde that in some generall considerations common to those which are good it may not be counted good But those generall considerations expresse not the particular act which is supposed to be sinne So soone as the nature thereof is sufficiently expressed so soone it will appeare to be essentially sinne Therefore if God determine the creature to the act or sinne he determines it to sinne And though upon these termes there can neither be sinne nor vertue good nor evill Law nor Gospel providence nor judgment to come yet upon these termes the actions of the creature will be imputable to God alone though not as good or badde or as the actions of God yet as the actions of him that is supposed to be God in wordes but denied to be God in effect As for that which was said as if otherwise the efficacy of Gods praedestination and that grace which by it he appointeth for those that shall be saved could not subsist or as if otherwise God could not be maintained to be the first cause I will say no more now then what I said of the ground for Gods foreknowledge of future contingences That when I come to say how God determines future contingences I will doe the best I can to render such a reason as may maintaine him to be the first cause and so to foresee all future contingences by the same meanes by which he determines that they shall come to passe without giving just ground to inferre that there is neither contingence in the effect nor freedome in the cause no providence no judgment no Christianity appointed by God But if I faile of giving such a reason I disclaime it here before I give it and will rather allege that I have none to give and yet beleeve both Gods effectuall providence and the freedome and contingence of mens actions then beleive the determination of mans will by the immediate operation of Gods providence to be the sourse of freedome and contingence which I have shewed leaves no roome for contingence or providence And now I may freely grant that Jansenius hath avoided the charge of telling what it is that comes between the last instance of deliberation and the first of resolution by the immediate act of God to inable a man to do that which he that is able to deliberate and act both is not able to bring to passe Which is the same Chimaera with the imagination of infallibility in every sentence of the present Church when it comes to pronounce though the premises upon which it proceedeth do not appear even to them that pronounce infallible Nor will I envy him the advantage that he may make of the distinction between the sense of that which is said to be necessary including this praedetermination and not necessary setting it aside For having shewed that it is to no effect but to destroy contingence that is Christianity and to multiply contradiction to that common sense which all own I may well bid much good do it But I am not therefore bound to believe that it will serve his turn proceeding upon the account of indifference in the creature and the necessary effect of a secondary cause who standeth upon that necessity of Grace which Originall sinne introduceth For how shall he say that setting aside Gods praedetermination the Will may have Grace sufficient to do the work of Grace including the same it cannot but do it who makes the will utterly unable to do it till it be determined to do it And therefore takes away all difference between effectuall and sufficient Grace all intent of Christs dying for them that shall not be saved Indeed if he extend his opinion to the reconciling of mans free will with Gods Providence in matters not concerning the work of saving Grace he may make use of praedetermination in giving account how sinne is foreknown and the rest which hitherto he resolveth not But grounding himself upon the exigence of Originall sinne it were not wisdome for him to scandalize his own opinion by making sinne as necessary by Gods act as he makes the work of Grace There is extant a briefe resolution of the whole question by that learned Gentleman Thomas White where he concludeth Paragr X. That God determineth every man so to determine himself in whatsoever he does by the love of good infused and the causes which his Providence useth to represent it desirable that he cannot do otherwise How he would answer concerning evil is not so plain by his words He sayes indeed it is not the same thing to determine and cause to determine as for the Ammonites and David to kill Vrias But if the murther be duly imputed to David for procuring meanes towards it that might have failed would he have God procure meanes that cannot fail It cannot be allowed but thus that though of themselves they might fail yet supposing the foreknowledge of God that imployeth them that is supposing them to take effect which supposition all the experience in the world concludeth cannot be cleared till the effect follow they cannot fail And the nature of freedome the ground of the account to come consisteth in this that determining a man to act he might not have acted till the act was done For certainly it were a contradiction to say that which determines the will to act speaking not of the thing without but of the consideration thereof in the minde may not be extant when a man determines himself in virtue of it Nay were this consideration whereby God determineth indefeasible of its own nature for as imployed by Gods Providence that is supposing the effect to follow it is it were that very predetermination which I have infringed by the premised discourse coming from God in order of reason first and in the very next instant producing that choice wherein the determination of the will formally consisteth I will therefore conclude that wheresoever through the whole Bible God calls any man or his ancient people or by the Gospell all people to yeild him that inward obedience and worship in spirit and truth which Christianity requireth all this proceeding supposing the corruption of mans nature by the fall of Adam there he will take account of his disbursements by that which the creature shall have done not finally determined to do it by any thing preceding the choice Putting you
it may be said that a thing comes to passe necessarily and that sense in which it may be said that it must necessarily come to passe For I suppose that the property of our English will help me here to distinguish these two senses to all that consider their mother tongue and may discerne a severall meanâ—ng when a man saies the fire burnes necessarily Peter must necessarily deny our Lord supposing that our Lord had fore told it For when the necessity is understood to be in the cause which the nature thereof though by Gods will determines it is proper to say thaâ— it comes to passe necessarily But when the necessity is understood to stand upâ—n a supposition of the effect either being or knowne to be which knowledg presupposeth it to be being supposâ—d to be true or the like it is proper to say this must needs come to passe or it must of necessity come to passe but not that it comes to passe necessarily because then the necessity must noâ— fall upon the coming of it upon passe but upon the manner by which it comes to pâ—sse I say then if any can inferr upon my saying that the necessity which it infers is antecedent to the being of it I grant I am faln into the inconvenience which I would a void and will disclaime the position upon which it followes But if it be onely consequent upon supposition either that it is or that it is taken to be it is no more then that necessity which is found in all coâ—tiâ—gencies according to all opinions that must allow all things necessarily to be â—hough not to be necessarily supposing that they are Now when I say that God determines the evenâ—s of future contingencies I say not that he doth it by determining their causes to do them speaking of free causes for the contingâ—â—cies which come to passe by the concurrence of naturall causes I grant â—o be meere necessities in regard it is necessary that when every cause actâ— to the uâ—most of his strength that must not onely needs come to passe but come to passe necessarily which the concurrence of severall forces produceth and must needâ— appear in the causes to any that comprehends the force of them all buâ— that this act of his ends in determining the motives which present themâ—elves to such causes Which act is consistent with an other act whereby he mâ—intaines the cause in an ability of doing or not doing that which it is movâ—d to do But that comprehending the inclinations thereof and the force oâ— the motives which it is presented with he comprehends thereby that it will proceed to act though comprehending that it might doe otherwiâ—e shâ—uld it regard those appearances which either habitually it hath or actuâ—lly â—t â—â—ght to have Now I confesse againe it is hard for me to show how it ought actually to have those appearances which habitually it hath But seeing thaâ— supposing this I show evidently how the providence of God iâ— unceâ—easibâ—â— the will remaining free and the effects thereof contingent I will rathâ—r conâ—esse that I cannot shew where their freedome might or ought to move when it does not then destroy the ground of all Christianity Thus much is evident supposing my saying that the certainty of the event includes the supposition of the will acting freely therefore infers no necessity antecedent to it the knowledge upon which providence decrees foreseeing that it will freely proceed being so moved CHAP. XXV The grounds of the difference between sufficient and effectuall How naturall occasions conduce to supernaturall actions The insufficience of Jansenius his doctrine Of sufficient grace under the Law of Moses and Nature ANd now I shall not use many words to declare what it is that makes those helps of grace which of themselves are sufficient effectuall For if all particulars are contayned in their generalls that which is said of all the works of providence must hold in those helps of supernaturall grace whereby it conducteth to the happinesse of the world to come And therefore the efficacy of Gods grace taking efficacy to imply the effect consists in the order which providence useth that the motives of Christianity whether to imbrace or performe the profession of it be presented in such circumstances as may render them accepted of the will to whose judgement for the preâ—ent they so appeare So that the same for nature and kind prove effectall to one which to an other prove void and frustrate For it is manifest that those helps are the grace of Christ even as they are sufficient and supposing them not to take effect And it ought to be manifest that the circumstances in which they are present to every particular person are brought to passe by the conduct of Gods spirit which filleth the world and attaineth from the beginning to the end of all things which come to passe And this spirit and the coming thereof being purchased by our Lord Christ and granted in consideration of his obedience it is easy to bee seen how it is the grace of Christ not onely as sufficient but also as effectuall This resolution then presupposeth two things as proved Chap. XVIII The first That the preaching of the Gospell is the grace of Christ That is to say A Grace granted by God in consideration of Christs merits and sufferings The second That the grace of Christ attaineth and reacheth the very effect of conversion and new obedience and resteth not in having inabled man to doe it of himselfe without the influence of it To make this part of faith better to be understood among believers better to be maintained against unbelievers that which this resolution advanceth is this That the Grace of the H. Ghost purchased by the humiliation of Christ and by his exaltation obtained as it is the meanes which God hath provided for the publishing of his Gospell to the conviction of all who understand it that they ought to submit to the faith and live according to it so it is the meanes to make it effectuall to the conversion of the Nations to Christianity that conversion effectuall in their lives and conversations by presenting the reasons and grounds thereof being of themselves sufficient for the worke to every mans consideration in those circumstances procured by the providence of God which it executeth in which his wisdome â—oresaw that they would takâ— effect and become to the purpose And truly when our Lord saith Iohn XVI 8 9 10. And when he cometh he will convict the world of sin of righteousnesse of judgement Of sin because they believe not in mee Of judgement because the prince of this world is condemned we must understand that the H. Ghost convinced the world of sin because those miracles which the Apostles did by the holy Ghost convincing the world that they spoke the word of God shewed the world that they were under sin and liable to Gods wrath if they became not Christians And that he convinced
with are the effects of his justice which consisteth in keeping promise Though Originally the effects of meere Grace because it was meere Grace that moved him to make that promise Those that hold absolute predestination to life or to death and justifying faith to be nothing but the revelation of a mans predestination to life can no more allow that such a one may fall from the state of Grace then that Gods promise can faile or Christs death be to no purpose So that not onely the sins which they doe are to them occasion of good as S. Paul saith that all things cooperate for good to them that love God Rom. VIII 28. but the permission which in that opinion is the procuring of them is an effect of their predestination to life according to this opinion also the helps of Geace are the effects of that Justice which consisteth in keeping as well as of that grace which was seen in making Gods promise though the condition of that promise be cleared in this opinion at the first instant that a man believeth in the other not till the last instant that he liveth Though I have already laid aside both the suppositions upon which this opinion standeth yet I suppose it not refuted as yet because there must be a time on purpose to consider the arguments which it pretendeth But because one of the contradictions which it involveth is this that making justification to consist in remission of sins it alloweth the regenerate to become guilty of sin and yet maintaineth him justified at the same time an other contradiction that it involveth must needs be this That the helps of Grace requisite to the saving of him that is justified which as I said afore according to this opinion are due to the elect by the justice of Gods promise are granted of meere grace to the Justifying of him who being justifyed is notwithstanding acknowledged to need remission of sin For to tye God by promise to helpe any man out of sin as often as he shall please to fall back into sin who of Grace may allow waies freely to do it is to make the Gospel a passeport for sin And therefore notwithstanding this opinion I shall not let to presume here before I have spoken to it that the helps of grace requisite to the recovering of him that is falne from the state of grace come not by the vertue of the promise wherein the Covenant of Grace consisteth the right whereof is forfeited in that case but by vertue of that meere grace which first moved God to tender it though in consideration of the merits and suffering of our Lord Christ which purchased it Whereupon the truth is that the helps of grace that are requisite to maintaine them in the state of grace which have attained it are due by that justice of God which consisteth in keeping promise And though Gods cleare dealing with man requires that from the first heareing of the Covenant of grace that is from the first preaching of the Gospell or from the first calling of him that is fallne from the state of grace a man be inabled to imbrace that which is tendred yet that he shall effectually imbrace it will alwaies remaine the effect of meere grace So the gifts of nature and the death of Christ for mankind are provided by God for the salvation of all not as Gods end but as the end of the said meanes which he provideth But that by providing the death of Christ for the salvation of mankind he oblâ—geth himself to grant them who never heard of Christ inspirations and revelations convicting them that they are to be Christians as he obligeth the Church to cause them to heare of Christ I grant not though I find it not to be prejudiciall to the Faith Because then must all men be judged by the Gospell of Christ reason being showed that they to whom it is not preached shall be judged by the Law of Nature And upon these termes S. Paul may reject the demand Why God should complaine seeing no man can resist his will but he may make whomsoever he shall please a good Christian But God to have absolutely appointed all men to life or to death and so to be ingaged by the interest of his Soveraigne Majesty not to see his designe defeated but to provide the meanes by which he designeth to bring his appointment to passe S. Paul might allow the demand and his Gospell to have no answer for it And therefore the comparison of the potter that followes though it hold thus farre that God indeed makes the vessels that come to honour and shame in the world to come by the government of him that made them yet it holdeth not in this that Gods glory is interested to procure them to be saved that shall be saved and them damned that shall be damned as it concerneth the potters trade to be furnished aswel with vessels for dishonourable as for honourable uses Nor wil the instance of Pharaoh bear it according to S. Pauls words For had God spared Pharaohs life out of a designe to bring him to those torments which his obstinacy in refusing the plagues that succeeded should deserve he could not be said to beare with much long-suffering the vessells of wrath that are fit to be destroyed though intending at length to show wrath and make his power known The decree then of predestination proceeding partly upon the terms of the gospell but in those things to which the Gospell extendeth not and in those men that shall be judged by the law of Nature upon the Soverainty of God the reasons whereof either we cannot understand or God will not declare contayneth all the decrees whereby the motives upon which God foresees a man will imbrace and persevere in his Christianity to the end or not persevere to the end whether he imbrace it or not or finally not so much as hearing of it will resolve for the better or for the worse from the beginning of his life to the end of it which our understanding necessarily distinguisheth by the objects which they bring to passe The order of them is the same with the reasons which the Sripture inableth us to give for the effects which they produce either in the nature of the finall or meritorius cause speaking onely of that which comes from Gods declared will not from his secret pleasure Which as it alwaies verifieth his declared will so extends to that which the other compriseth not And it is as easy to comprise in the same decree which is the pure essence of God willing to glorifie it selfe by doing that which it might have glorified it selfe by doing otherwise the order of the reasons upon which all mankind comes to that estate in which they shal continue everlastingly in the world to come Seeing then all the effects of it fall not under Gods revealed will there can be no reason given for the whole decree whether respective to any man or
that the Grace whereby we are justified is a quality habitually informing the soule of man as supernaturally infused by God into it But onely that Faith Hope and Charity are infused into them that are justified and inherent in them as shed into theire hearts by the Holy Ghost Which they say may all be understood supposing that a man is justified by the acts of Faith Hope and Love infused or shedde into the hart by the Holy Ghost as well as by habites supernaturally created to reside in the soule For you may see by Morinus in his Late worke de Administrationâ— Pâ—nitentiâ— VIII 2. 3. 7. that for MCC yeares after Christ a good while after the Schoole Doctors were come in there was no question at all made whether we are justified by an infused habit of grace or not and that it was about the yeare MCCL that this opinion intirely prevailed in the Schooles Whereby it appeareth that as this opinion containes nothing destructive to the faith if it be understood in that sense which the Church of Rome allowes that it is not the naturall worth of it which justifies but Gods accepting of it to that effect So if it did yet could not the Church of Rome be said to teach any thing destructive to the faith But onely to allow since â—uch things to be taught For the Council of Vienna under Clement V. determines it not as matter of faith but as the more probable opinion as you may see Clement de summa Trin. Fide Cathol Tit. I. Cap. VII And therefore Albertus Pâ—ghius de libero Arbitrio lib. V notwithstanding this decree stickes not to count this doctrine forged without any authority of Scripture And those that speake of it with more respect then he thinke not themselves tied to that which the Council holdâ— the more probable It is indeed manifest by the experience of all Christians that the custome and practice even of supernaturall actions to which the inclination of corrupt nature is utterly averse breedes in a man an habituated disposition of doing those things with â—ase and pleasure which at the beginning of his Christianity he could not doe without offering himselfe much violence But that habit which custome and practice leaves behind it though supernaturall for the cause or effect of it because the acts upon which it accrues as also those which it produces cannot accrue from meere nature without the helpe of Christs grace is notwithstanding for that wherein it consists a disposition really qualifying the nature and substance of the soule and inclining it to act otherwise then without it Besides the Gospell promising the Holy Ghost for a Gift to abide with and dwell in those that are baptized nothing hinders the Gift thereof to be held and termed an habituall grace In these regards I find it neither prejudiciall nor inconsequent to the Christian faith to acknowledge habituall grace though neither scripture nor tradition of the Church owne any habit of grace created by God and infused into the soule in a moment as the Schoole imagineth But they seeme to have committed another mistake in that the Church having decreed against Pelagius that the Grace of Christ is necessary to all truly good actions and therefore that man cannot merit the first grace this infused habit of grace they have made to be that First grace which God giveth before man will indeavor any thing towards it For so the Master of the Sentences determineth that grace which preventeth mans indevors to be faith with Love libro II. distinct XXVI D. which though it be capable of a very good sense That the motion to beleeve the truth of Christianity out of the love of God is that which Gods grace prevents all mans compliance with yet in what sense they swallowed it will appeare by the difficulties and dispuâ—es they were intangled with about that sorrow which the heart conceives for sinne out of meerâ— love to God not feare of punishment which the love of our selves breedeth For this sorow being necessarily a disposition preparing him for justification that cometh to God in regard the first grace which God preventeth all manâ— indeavors with is to them this infused habit of Faith and love which formally justifieth how he should come prepared for justification by that contrition which without Gods grace man cannot have who is justified by that infused habit of grace which he was first prevented by God with hath been among them the subject of endlesse jangles Whereas it is manifest the maintenance of the Faith against Pelagius requireth no more then that the resolution of persevering in Christianity to the â—nd be thought necessarily to depend upon the motion to imbrace it which God first preventeth man with without respect to any act of man obliging God to grant it And therefore it is manifest that the Church decreed no more against Pelagius but that the first motion to become a good Christian that every man is prevented with must be ascribed to Gods free grace through Christ not ingaged by any act of mans goeing afore Now requiring onely the actuall assistance of Gods preventing grace it is easy enough to say not how attrition that is sorrow for sinne in regard of punishment accompanied with slavish feare is changed into contrition that is sorrow for sinne out of the love of God whome it offendeth For it is not possible that he who loveth God should be sory for sinne for the same reason which he was sorry for while he loved the world But how the man that was attrite becomes contrite For when first the Gospell reveales unto a man his desperate estate in and by the first Adam it is not possible that he should remaine uâ—touched either with sorrow for the present or apprehension for the future And yet no lesse unpossible is it according to Gods ordinary way of working even by his Grace that he should in an instant resolve to imbrace the onely way to give him peace in that exigence But while he neither casts off the motion of grace nor resigneâ— his interest in himselfe and the world to it but considers upon what reason it behoves him to resolve this consideration by the worke of Gods Spirit disâ—overing to him how much God and the next world is to be preferred before himselfe and this as the love of God and the world to come prevailes in him above the love of himselfe and this accordingly of necessity must the greife of having offended God afore prevaile in him above all that he can conceive for the misery he hath incurred And all this by virtue of those helpes which God grants though allwayes in consideration of our Lord Christ yet not by virtue of that Covenant which is not contracted till â— man be baptized but of his owne free goodnesse dispensing the effects of Christs coming according to the reason of his secret wisdome which the Covenant of grace discovers not I neede say no more to show how a
and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist is a very great miracle taking that to be miraculous which requires the infinite power of God to effect it not that which contains a visible effect thereof apt to bear witnesse to that truth which it is done to confirm I must remit you to that which hath been already said to judge whether the miracle consist in abolishing the substance of the Elements and substituting the body and bloud of Christ in their stead Or in placing the substance of Christs body and bloud under the same dimensions in which the substance of the Elements subsisteth Or rather then either of both that it be enough to ingage the infinite power of God that by his Spirit hee tendreth the flesh and bloud of Christ so Sacramentally present in the Elements that whoso receiveth them faithfully thereby communicates as truly in the Spirit of God according to his Spirit as according to his body hee communicates Sacramentally in his body and bloud Here is the place for mee to allege those Scriptures which inform us of the true nature and properties of the flesh and bloud of Christ remaining in his body even now that it is glorified For if in the proper dimensions thereof hee parted from his Disciples and went was carried or lifted and taken up into heaven Acts I. 2 9 10. 1 Pet. III. 22. Luke XXIV 50 51. Mark XVI 19. If in the same visible form and dimensions hee shall come again to judgement Acts I. 11. 1 Thes IV. 16. if the Heavens must receive him till that time for sure no man will be much tempted with that frivolous conceit that S. Peters words Acts III. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are to be construed whom it behoveth to contain the Heavens but whom it behoveth that the Heavens contain Unlesse it could appear how S. Peter should understand the body of Christ to contain the heavens not the heavens it sitting at Gods right han◠till his Enemies be made his foot-stool Psal CX 1. if to that purpose hee leave the world John XVI 28. no more to be in it XVII 11. so that wee shall have him no more with us Mat. XXVI 11. it behoveth us to understand how wee are informed that the promise of his body and bloud in the Eucharist imports an exception to so many declarations before wee believe it Indeed there is no place of Gods right hand by sitting down at which wee may say that our Lords body becomes confined to the said place But seeing the flesh of Christ is taken up into Heaven to sit down at Gods right hand Though by his sitting down at Gods right hand wee understand the man Christ to be put into the exercise of that divine power and command which his Mediators Office requires Yet his body wee must understand to be confined to that place where the Majesty of God appears to those that attend upon his Throne Neither shall the appearing of Christ to S. Paul Acts XXIII 11. be any exception to this appointment Hee that would insist indeed that the body of Christ stood over Paul in the Castle where then hee lodged must say that it left Heaven for that purpose For that is the miracle which the Text expresseth that hee was there whose ascent into Heaven it had reported afore But seeing the very body of Christ might in a vision of Prophesie appear to Paul in the Spirit without any contravention to that determination which the Scripture otherwise had expressed Were it not madnesse to go about to limit the sense and effect of it upon pretense of a promise altogether impertinent to the occasion in hand and every whit as properly to be understood without so limiting the sense of it This is all the argument that I pretend to maintain upon this consideration Knowing well enough that it is said indeed that the flesh of Christ remaining in Heaven in the proper dimensions thereof which the Exaltation allowes nothing hinders the same to be present under the dimensions of the Elements whether the substance of them be there which Consubstantiation allowes or whether they be abolished as Transubstantiation requires Which hee that would contradict must enter here into a Philosophical dispute whether or no the infinite power of God can bring to passe either or neither of these effects That is to say whether it imply a contradiction that the body and bloud of Christ which is as sure in Heaven as the faith of Christ is sure should at the same time be present in the Sacrament of the Eucharist under the dimensions of the Elements whether wee suppose the substance of them to be abolished or to remain present This dispute I am resolved not to touch at this time Partly for that reason which I have alleged upon other occasions Because I desire to discharge this Book being written in our mother tongue of all Philosophical disputes tending rather to puzzle than to edifie the main of those that speak English Partly for a reason peculiar to this point because it hath been argued that if wee deny Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation as contradictory to reason there can be no cause why wee should cleave to the Faith of the Trinity which every man sees to be no lesse contradictory to humane reason than either of both For though I do no ways admit this consequence because it is evident that the nature of bodily substance is far better comprehended by mans understanding than the incomprehensible nature of God which it is impossible to apprehend any thing of but under the resemblance of something belonging to sensible substance yet I am willing to go to issue without drawing this dispute into consequence referring to judgment whether the evidence for Consubstantiation or Transubstantiation be such as for the holy Trinity out of the Scriptures That is to say whether the presence of the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist is so to be understood as to void the confining of them to those dimensions which the Scripture allowes them in Heaven And this as necessarily by the Scripture as the Scripture necessarily obligeth to believe the Holy Trinity When as it may be more properly to the nature of the businesse understood mystically as in a Sacrament intended to convey the communion of his Spirit In the mean time allowing any man that submits his reason to all that Christianity imports the sober use of it in disputing whether the presence of the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist as Consubstantiation or as Transubstantiation requires be contradictory to the evidence of reason or not CHAP. IV. The opinion which maketh the Consecration to be done by rehearsing the operative words That our Lord consecrated by Thanksgiving The Form of it in all Liturgies together with the consent of the Fathers Evidence that there is no Tradition of the Church for the abolishing of the Elements COming now to consider wherein the Consecration of the Eucharist consists I find
consideration of their being changed into the Body and Bloud of Christ represented sacrificed upon the Crosse makes them properly no Sacrifice In the former consideration being properly Oblations let them be improperly Sacrifices For in this sense in the Canon of the Masse Te igitur Clementissime Pater per Jesum Christum filium tuum Dominum nostrum supplices rogamus ac petimus uti accepta habeas ac benedic as hâ—c dona haec munera haec sancta sacrificia illibata Wee therefore humbly beseech and desire thee most mercifull Father through Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord to accept and blesse these gifts these presents these holy unstained Sacrifices And not onely here before the Consecration but just before the Lords Prayer and the Communion Per Christum Dominum nostrum Per quem haec omnia semper Domine bona creas sanctificas vivificas benedicis praestas nobis Through Christ our Lord Through whom thou O Lord alwaies createst sanctifiest quickenest and furnishest us with all these good things The repetition of which consideration shows that they are presented to God to be consecrated and made the Eucharist as Oblations out of believers goods According to the form used in divers Greek Liturgies from the words of David 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wee give thee thire own of thine own But when our Lord sayes This is my body which is given for you This is my bloud which is poured out for you Will any man of sense understand That is now by that which here I do offered up to God for you and the bloud as poured forth Or rather this is that body and bloud that is given to be crucified and poured forth for you shortly upon the Crosse Let it therefore have the nature of a Sacrifice so soon as the Consecration is past It shall have that nature improperly so long as it is not the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse Though truly so long as the Sacrament is not empty of that which it signifieth And accorâ—ing to this truth true Altars they are true Temples true Sacrifices though improperly where and by whom it is ministred But I will not therefore grant that this Sacrificing that is this consecrating the Elements into the Sacrifice is an action done in the person of Christ Though they are agreed that it is done by the rehersing of the words of Christ For the rehersing of Christs words is not an act done in the person of Christ Nor do I take upon mee his person whose words I recite And I have showed that the Consecration is done by the Prayers of the Church immediately though these Prayers are made in virtue of Christs order commanding to do what hee did and thereby promising that the Elements shall become that which hee saith those which hee conâ—ecrated are As for the other opinion which I am not to be the more in love with because I am not satisfied with this it is to be considered that the Elements are offered thrice in the Canon of the Masse The first is that offering which I rehersed last beginning Te igitur going before the Consecration as â—â— agree The second is that which this opinion intendeth agreeing with the other that the Consecration is past by rehersing the words of institution But mine opinion allows not this For I conceive the Consecration is yet in doing till that Prayer be past Vt quotquot ex hâc Altaris participatione Sacro-Sanctum filii tui corpus sanguinem sumpserimus omni benedictione coelesti gratiâ repleamur That as many of us as shall have received the Holy body and bloud of thy Son by this communion of the Altar may be filled with every heavenly blessing and grace Which is the later of the two in which I conceive the Consecration to consist as in all other Liturgies in something correspondent to it And truly the very words of the second offering do bear that the Elements are by it offered to God not as consecrated but as to be consecrated supposing the blessing of them to be the consecrating of them as I proved afore Therefore the offering and the presenting of them to God as consecrated is that which is done by the Prayer which follows Memento Domine famulorum famularumque tuarum And nobis quoque peccatoribus famulis tuis whereby the several estates of Christs Church are recommended to God in virtue and consideration of Christs passion here represented and commemorated Not that I intend here to justifie that Prayer for the dead which this containeth but because referring that to consideration in due time all Liturgies have a place where according to S. Paul intercession is made for all States of Christs Church in consideration of the Sacrifice of Christs Crosse represented by this Sacrament And because this intercession is properly the offering up of the the said Sacrifice to God for their necessities And therefore this opinion saith well that the Consecration exhibiteth onely the Sacrifice to be offered up to God by the Prayers of the Church But not by the Prayer which desireth the blessing of the Elements wherein the consecating of them is contained which is that of the elevation in the Canon of the Masse but by those Prayers whereby the effects of Christs Crosse are prayed for in behalf of his Church According to which opinion the consecrating of the Elements will be the Sacrificing of Christ no further than as the body and bloud of Christ are thereby represented as Sacrificed But there will be no further cause of complaint in this then there is cause to complain that there is not such ground for division as the parties would have For though there be onely a general reason of offering no particular consideration of destroying seen in the act of the Church offering either the Elements to be consecrated or the consideration of Christs Crosse represented to render God propitious to his Church Yet are the consecrated Elements no lesse the Sacrifice of Christs Crosse than the presence of Christs body and bloud in them will allow though in order to that Evangelical banquet upon them at which and by which the Covenant of Grace is renewed For the Apostles having made the Eucharist a Sacrifice in this regard I must not count the making of it one offensive I say then that having proved the consecration of the Eucharist to be the production of the body and bloud of Christ crucified or the causing of them to be mystically present in the elements thereof as in a Sacrament representing them separated by the crucifying of Christ And the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse being necessarily propitiatory and impetratory both it cannot be denied that the Sacrament of the Eucharist in as much as it is the same Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse as that which representeth is truly said to be the thing which it representeth is also both propitiatory and impeâ—ratory by virtue of the consecration of it whereby it becometh the
with virgines and once maried people And shall thy sacrifice freely ascend And among other affections of a good minde wilt thou desire chastity for thee and thy wife I dispute not here how lawfull it is to pray for the dead which Tertullian touches again de Monogamiâ X. de Animâ LVIII This Tertullian supposes that if a Christian have two wives hee must offer that the Eucharist may be celebrated and that at the celebrating of it the Priest may pray for those whom hee mentions as the occasion of celebrating it The birth-dayes of Martyrs that is the Anniversaries of their sufferings was another occasion of celebrating the Eucharist as in Tertullian so in S. Cyprian Epist XXXIV Sacrificium pro eis semper ut meminiâ—â—is offerimus quoties Martyrum passiones dies annuâ commemoratione celebâ—an us Wee alwaies offer sacrifice for them as you remember when wee celebrate the yearly commemoration of the Martyrs suffering dayes Therefore where the â—ame S. Cyprian forbids offering the names of those that had fallen away in persecution and offering for them Epist IX XI hee forbids the receiving of their offerings and by consequence praying for them at the Eucharist Epiphanius Haer. XXX speaking of the Patriarch of the Jewes baptized in private 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The said Patriarâ—â—â—aâ—inâ—â—â— his hand a very considerable summ of gold streâ—ched out his hand and gave it to â—â—e Bishop saying Offer for mee S. Cyril of Jerusalem Catech. Mystag V. Eâ—roe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Then that spiritual sacrifice that unbloudy service being done consecrâ—tâ—â— over that propitiatory sacrifice wee beseech God for the common peace of the Churches for the State of the world for the Kings their armies and allies for the sick c. adding that praying for the departed wee offer to God Christ cruciâ—â—ed â—or our sins to render him propitious to them and to us Of which effect in due place the intent hereby appears For here as hee calls it a Sacrifice upon the Consecration so hee plainly sets down wherein the propitiation which it effecteth consists according to the Catholick Church For to say truth to the purpose in hand I can produce nothing like that which I have said already in my Book of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church to which I remit you for the rest pag. 370-382 that in all the Liturgies there is a place where mention is to be made of all States of the Church for whom the Oblations out of which the Eucharist is consecrated are offered And likewise a place where the Eucharist being consecrated prayer is made in behalf of all States in the Church that is to say the Sacrifice of Christ his Crosse there present is offered up to move God to grant them all that is desired by the regular and continual prayers of the Church And among them there is a special place for those that offer at present If any man be moved to imagine that any part hereof is prejudicial to that Reformation which the Church of England professeth for I professe from the beginning not to be sâ—rupulous of offending those that offend it I remit him to that learned Appendix of Dr Field to his third book of the Church the purpose whereof in answer to the question where the Reformed Church was before Luther is to show that in this point as in others there handled the sense of the whole Church of Christ even to the time of Luther and to the Council of Trent was no other than that which the Church of England embraceth and cherisheth Thereby to show that the Reformation thereof never pretended to found a new Church but to preserve that which was by taking away those corruptions which time and the enemies of Christianity had sown in the Lawes and customs of it Which hee doth so evidently perform in this point that I must needs challenge any man that hath a minde to blast any thing here said with the staâ—e calumny of Popery to consider first Whether hee can prove those things which the Authors past exception there quoted declare to be the sense of the Catholick Church at that time to contain any thing prejudicial to the Gospel of Christ and that purity thereof which the Reformation pretendeth And because I know hee cannot do it I rest secure of all blasphemies or slanders that can be forged upon this occasion Openly professing that those who will not acknowledg that condition of the Gospel and the promises thereof which I have demonstrated to be essential to Christianity it is for their interest to defame the sense of the Catholick Church with the slanderous aspersions of Popery that so they might seduce miserable creatures to believe that there is a faith which inâ—itles them to the promises of the Gospel not supposing them converted to the Christianity which it rendereth For seeing that propitiation which the Sacrifice of the Eucharist pretendeth is grounded upon this condition of the Covenant of Grace as I have showed it is no mervail if they who pretend to reconcile the promises of the Gospel to the lusts of the flesh by which this world is injoyed indeavor to slander the purity of Christianity with those aspersions which they have seduced wretched people to count odious In fine it is not that consideration of a Sacrifice in the Sacrament of the Eucharist which the sense and practice of the Catholick Church inforceth but the violent interpretations of it which are made on both sides to both extremities that can give the leass pretense for division in the Church For while on the one side the sacrificing of Christ a new is so construed as if to doubt of the virtue of it in behalf of all that assist in it whether they communicate in it or not whether their devotions concurr to it or not were to doubt of the virtue of Christs Crosse it is no mervail if this create so great offense that the receiving of the Eucharist nay the assisting of it with the devotions of Christian people comes to be a mater of indifference On the other side while the renewing of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse by that representation thereof which the Eucharist tendreth for the redressing of the Covenant of Grace between God and those which receive is construed as prejudicial to that one Sacrifice whereby our Lord for ever hath perfected those whom hee sanctifieth no mervail if the very celebrating of it come to be a mater of indifference the effect whereof by believing that a man is predestinate or justified is had before and without it The mater of the Sacrifice then being so great a subject for the diviâ—ion upon so litle cause it is time for good Christians to awake and look about them and see that the lesse cause there is the greater good will the parties have to continue at distance In the mean time it is the common interest of Christianity even the means of their salvation by the
and ruled the whole Church and might as easily make his corruptions generall as Christ Christianity But if it were meerly their saying to make it a Tradition of the Apostles what shall we say of Pelagius For they must pardon me who think that the hatred of his Heresie brought the baptism of Infants into force More generall it might deservedly make it For by the condemning of his Heresie the danger of Infants going out of the world was conâ—eâ—â—ed But it was the Baptism of Infants being in force afore that made his opinion an Heresie as making the necessity of Baptism visible as supposed by all Christians and therefore the truth of Original sin Pelagius was not so very a fool as they imagine If all the knowledge that a man of his time could get by seeing all parts of the Church would have served for an exception to the authority of the baptism of Infants he might have wrangled with his adverse party about the exposition of those Scriptures which are alleadged in the point till this day and his opinion have found footing in the Church But because he could not sâ—op mens eyes so as not to see what they saw we may for wantonnesse betray the cause of God by letting the interpretation of the Scriptures loose to every mans fancy which God had appointed to be confined within the Tradition of his Apostles but they could not chuse but condemn that position which the visible practice of the Church proclaimed to be Heresie Thus farre then I proceed upon the Tradition of the Apostles to make the Baptism of Infants necessary in case of necessity that is of danger of death But I that condemn not the ancients for disputing that it ought not to be generall nor the Greek Church for reserving it till years of discretion supposing the means of it reasonably secured in that case am not like to attribute the necessity of baptizing all Infants which the present Laws of the Church do introduce to the tradition of the Apostles but to the original power of the Church founded upon the constitution thereof in determining the circumstances of those offices which being incumbent upon the Church are not determined by any law of either of his Apostles For though I take not upon me to say that there can no reason be given why this particular should not now be so determined as we see it is who do acknowledge great reasons to have been alleadged by the ancients to the contrary for their time yet I see so many ways for the misunderstanding and the neglect of Christianity to creep upon the Church that I cannot see sufficient reason why the Church should trust the conscience of particular Christians whom it concerned to see to the baptism of all Infants that might come into that case now that the world was come into the Church and that therefore the Church could not have the like presumption of the conscience of all that professed Christianity in the discharge of an office of that concernment to that which it might reasonably have while it was under persecution and men could not be thought to imbrace Christianity but for conscience sake And therefore as I do maintain it alwaies to have been within the lawfull power of the Church to make a generall Law as now it is so I must averre that there was just reason and ground for the exercise of that power in determining this point whither as in the East with some toleration of those whom they had confidence in for seeing to the baptizing of their Infants in danger of death or generally as in the West to see the occasion of mischiefe and scandall prevented by doing it presently after birth And therefore those that forsake the unity of the Church â—ather then be subject to a Law which it may lawfully make as I have showed if that which hath been resolved of the difference between Heresie and Schism be true cannot avoid being schismaticks As for the ground of that opinion which moves them to break up the seal of God marked upon those that are baptized unto the hope of salvation upon the obligation of Christianity by baptizing them anew to the hope of salvation without the obligation of Christianity whether they are to be counted Hereticks therefore or not let who will dispute This I may justly inferre they take as sure a course to murther the souls of those whom they baptize again as of those whom they let go out of the world unbaptized There remains two questions which seem to make this resolution hard to believe If there be no salvation without Baptism no not for the Infants of Christians it is demanded what becomes of their souls and whither they go I must needs allow that those ancient and later Divines alledged by Cassander and our Hooker after him had reason to entertain a charitable hope of the happinesse of those who being prevented by the inevitable casualties of mans life of attaining the Sacrament of Baptism are accompanied out of the world by the prayers of Christian Parents commending them to God with the same affections wherewith they alwaies vowed them to God by bringing them to Christianity so soon as they should become capable to be instructed in it But if I will stand to the bounds of Gods revealed will I must also say that this hope is presumed without book that is without any Law of God to warrant the effect of it For if God promise the Kingdom of heaven to Infants that depart after Baptism as the reasons premised and the practice of the Church make evidence nothing hindreth the mercy of God to extend to those that depart without it where nothing hindreth the power of his grace to regenerate without the Sacrament those whom he hath not expressed that he will not regenerate But this shall not proceed from any obligation of his Covenant of Grace nor tend to make good the evidence thereof which the practice of the Church createth And therefore shall make onely a presumption of what may be and not of what is I find that Arminius had further a doubtful conceit that all Infants departing without Baptism are to be saved by the virtue of Gods second Covenant and the death of Christ upon which it is grounded God having extended both as farre as sinne by the first Adam extendeth But the publication of the second Covenant and the intent of Christs death upon which it is grounded being conditional as hath been showed I suppose it is not enough to intitle Infants to the benefit thereof that they never did any thing to refuse it Otherwise what cause is there why all the Gentiles that go out of the world without hearing of Christianity should not be saved by virtue of it notwithstanding all that they sinne against the Law of nature Because the New Covenant is to take effect where it is not refuted and sinnes against the Law of nature cannot be constrained as a refusall of the
and alwaies have maintained that which you see I dare not affirm but he dares namely that all Infants who dye unbaptized go into everlasting fire It is demanded in the second place what is that regeneration by the Holy Ghost and wherein it consists whereof Infants that are baptized can be thought capable For the wild conceits of those that imagine them to have faith in Christ which without actuall motion of the mind is not require miracles to be wrought of course by baptizing that the effect thereof may come to passe And if the state of Grace which the habituall grace of Gods spirit either supposeth or inferreth is not to be attained but by the resolution of imbracing the covenant of Grace as by all the premises it is not otherwise attended it will be every whit as hard to say what is that habituall Grace that is said to be poured into the souls of Infants that are baptized being nothing else but a facility in doing what the covenant of Grace requireth But if we conceive the regeneration of Infants that are baptized to consist in the habituall assistance of Gods spirit the effects whereof are to appear in making them able to perform that which their Christianity requires at their hands so soon as they shall understand themselves to be obliged by â—it we give reason enough of the effect of their Baptism whither they dye or live and yet become not liable to any inconvenience For supposing the assistance of Gods spirit assigned them by the promise of Baptism to take effect when their bodily instruments inable the soul to act as Christianity requireth if the soul by death come to be discharged of them can any thing be said why originall concupiscence which is the Law of the members should remain any more to impeach the subjection of all faculties to the law of Gods spirit Or will it be any thing strange that when they come to be taught Christianity the same spirit of God should be thought to â—way them to imbrace it of their own choice and not onely in compliance with the will of their Parents yet is this no more then the regeneration of Infants by water and the Holy Ghost importeth that the spirit of God should be habitually present to make those reasons which God hath given to convince the world that they ought to be Christians both discernable to the understanding and waying down the choice whereas those that are converted from being enemies to God that is to say at those yeâ—rs when no man can be converted to God that is not his enemy before though the spirit of God knock at their hearts without striving to cast out the strong man that is within doors and to make a dwelling for it selfe in the heart are possessed by a contrary principle till they yield Gods spirit that entertainment which God requireth If this habituall assistance of Gods spirit by the moral effect of Gods promise not by any natural change in the disposition of that minde which never used reaâ—on to make choice of it can be called habitual grace as for certain it is a grace of God in consideration of our Lord Christ and no lesse habitual then any quality which the soul of man or the faculties thereof can be indowed with I shall not need to quarel the decree of the Council of Vienna which hath determined the giâ—t of habitual grace to be the effect of Baptism in Infants Onely I exprâ—sse more distinctly and to the preventing of the inconveniences mentioned wherein it conâ—isteth But I shall inferre as a consequence of this resolution that we are not to look upon Christians that are baptized in their Infancy as thoâ—e who are all of them necessarily enimies to God before they â—e converted again to become true Christians For though that very age when they come first to years of discretion obliging them to act as Christians be liable to â—o many and so great temptations that few câ—n pass through it without falling away from the profession of Christians yet because it is not incredible that there are many cases in which the Ministry of education blessed by Gods providence as acted by his grace brings it to pass it is by no means to be supposed that all those who are baptized Infants are necessarily to passe through the state of Gods enemies And therefore that as many as come into that state do fall from the state of Gods grace into which they are baptized Which is none of the least demonstrations of that which hath been maintained in due place that the state of Gods grace is as well lost and forfeited as it is to be recovered again by Christians And upon this ground and to this purâ—ose it was that the ancient Church at such time as the solemnity of Baptizing became tied to Easter and Whitsuntide and the young were baptized with the old not absolutely Infants but according to the opinion of Gregory Nazianzene related afore at three or four years of age used to give them alâ—o the Eucharist as soon as they were baptized For the Eucharist being nothing but the confirming and seconding of the covenant of Baptism the reason why they were baptized inferred the giving of them the Eucharist Which reason being rendred by the supposed Dionysius in the end of his Book de Ecclesiasticâ Hierarchia where he tells us that litle ones received the Eucharist as soon as they were baptized as I do here that they might be alwaies from thence forwards in the state of Grace The Eucharist being the Body and Blood of Christ because the means to convey his Spirit may well be judged the means to secure and confirm that promise thereof which Baptism importeth Yet doth not this inferre that since it is become necessary for the Church to baptize all in the state of meere Infants it is not for the best to deferre the communion of the Eucharist till litle ones may know what they do though in my opinion it is deferred farre longer then it ought to be nothing but a disposition positively opposite to Christianity defeating the effect of it which may prevent the said disposition in innocents much lesse that this can be any just ground for division in the Church so that the division which shall be raised upon this ground necessarily renders those who are the cause of it Schismaticks In fine seeing it is excellently said by S. Gregory Nazianzene in sanctum Bapt. Orat. XLII 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That we are to think the force of Baptizing to consist in the Covenant of a second life and purer conversation with God And that the Eucharist is nothing else but the seconding of this Covenant where Baptism in that regard is necessary to salvation there the Eucharist though not necessary as the ancient Church never held it cannot be unlawful Whether expedient or not he that contents himselfe with the practice of the Church for Unities sake will prove the best Christian I
of Christians that is of the whole Church occultae quoque conjunctiones id est non priâ—s apud Ecclesiam professae juxta maechiam fornicationem judicari perclitantur Among us even clandestine mariages that is not professed before the Church are in danger to be censured next to adultery and fornication And therefore Ad uxorem II. ult Unde sufficiamus ad senarrandam faelicitatem ejus matrimonii quod Ecclesia conciliat How may we be able to declare the happinesse of that mariage which the Church interposeth to joyn de Monogamiâ cap. XI Quale est id matrimonium quod eis a quibus postulas non licet hahere What maner of mariage is that saith he speaking of marying a second wife which it is not lawfull for them of whom thou desirest it to have Because it was not lawful for the Clergy who allowed the people to mary second wives themselves to do the same Ignatius Epist ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It becometh men and women that mary to joyn by the consent of the Bishop that the mariage be according to the Lord and not according to lust It hath been doubted indeed whether we have the true Copy of Ignatius his Epistles or not whether this be one of them or not But that Copy being found which Eusebius S. Jerome and others of the Fathers took for Ignatius his own and hath all that the Fathers quote just as they quote it nothing of that which stood suspected afore to refuse them now is to refuse evidence because it stands not with our prejudices Not that this power of the Church stands upon the authority of two or three witnesses These were not to be neglected But the Canons of the Church and the custome and practice of the Church ancientâ—r then any Canons in writing but evidenced by written Law which could never have come in writing had it not been in force before it was written suffer it not to remain without evidence In particular the allowance of the mariages of those who were baptized when they were admitted to Baptism evidenced out of S. Austine the Constituions and Eliberitane Canons evidenceth the Power of the Church in this point unquestionable And therefore against the Imperiall Lawes I argue as against the Leviathan that is if any man suppose that they pretend to secure the conscience of a Christian in marying according to them upon divorce Either the Soveraign Power effects that as Soveraign or as Christian If as Soveraign why may not the Christians of the Turkish Empire divorce themselves according to the Alâ—oran which is the Law of the Land and be secure in point of conscience If as Christian how can the conscience of a Christian in the Eastern Empire be secured in that case wherein the conscience of a Christian in the West cannot be secured because there is no such Civil Law there the Christianity of both being the same For it cannot be said that the Imperiall Lawes alleged were in force in the West after the division of the Empire I argue again That they cannot secure the conscience but under the Law of our Lord as containing the true interpretation of fornication in his sense And can any man be so senselesse as to imagine so impudent as to affirm that the whole Church agreeing in taking the fornication of maried people to signifie adultery hath failed but every Christian Prince that alloweth and limiteth any other causes of divorce all limiting severall causes attaineth the true sense of it Will the common sense of men allow that Homicide Treason Poysoning Forgery Sacriledge Robbery Mans-stealing Cattle-driving or any of them is contained is the true meaning of Fornication in our Lords words That consent of parties that a reasonable cause when Pagans divorced per bonam gratiam without disparagement to either of the parties can be understood by that name For these you shall find to be legall cause of divorce by those acts of the Emperours Lastly I argue If these causes secure the conscience in the Empire by virtue of those Laws why shall not those causes for which divorce was allowed or practiced amongst the ancient French the Irish the Welch the Russes do the like For that which was done by virtue of their Lawes reported there cap. XXVI XXX is no lesse the effect of Christian power that is Soveraign He that could find in his heart to tell Baronius reproving the Law of Justine that allowed divorce upon consent that Christian Princes who knew their own power were not so easily to be ruled by the Clergy p. 611. can he find fault with the Irish marrying for a year and a day or the Welch divorcing for a stinking breath Had he not more reason to say that knowing their power they might chuse whether they would be Christians or not The dispute being What they should do supposing that they are Christians And therefore it is to be maintained that those Emperours in limiting the infinite liberty of divorces by the Romane Law to those causes upon which dowries should be recoverable or not being made for Pagans as well as for Christians did as it were rough hew their Empire to admit the strict law of Christianity in this point And that this was the intent and effect of their acts appears by the Canons which have been alleged as well in the East as in the West made during the time when those Laws were in force For shall we think the Church quite out of their senses to procure such Canons to be made knowing that they could not take place in the lives and conversations of Christians to the effect of hindring to mary again If we coulde so think it would not serve the turn unlesse we could say how S. Basil should testifie that indeed they did take place to that effect and yet the Civill Law not suffer them to take effect From our Lord Christ to that time it is clear that no Christian could mary again after divorce unlesse for adultery some not excepting adultery In the baseâ— times of that Empire it appears by the Canons of Alexius Patriarch of C P. and by Matthaeus Blastares alleged by Arcudius p. 517. that those causes which the Imperiall Lawes allowed but Gods law did not took place to the effect of marrying again But that so it was alwaies from Constantine who first taxed legall cause of divorce nothing obliges a man to suppose For though the Emperours Law being made for Pagans as well as for Christians might inable either party to hold the dowry yet the Christian law might and did oblige Christians not to mary again The Mileuitane Canon showes it which provideth that the Emperour be requested to inact that no Christian might mary after divorce For this might be done saving the Imperial Laws But when we see the Civil Law inforce the Ministers of the Church to blesse those Mariages which the Civil Law allows but Gods Law makes adulteries the party that is put away
and not for adultery remaining alive Then we see what a horrible breach the civil Power hath made upon Christianity by hindring the Power of the Church to take place For on the one side the blessing of the Church seems to concur to the securing of the consciences of particular Christians that they forfeit not their interest in the promises of the Gospell by doing that to which the Church for avoiding greater mischiefe is constrained to concurre On the other side that which is done is not onely by the consent of the whole Church in the sense of our Lords Law but by those Divines of the Eastern Church which writ during time that this corruption is pretended as Euthymius and Theophylact upon Mat. V. condemned for adultery Now supposing the Law to part Wedlock the Canon not suffering to mary again S. Pauls alternative is whole Either not to part or parting to be reconciled but not to mary again And therefore the Church had no more reason to interpose in that case then to censure who does wrong in going to sute For wrong is alwaies done but because it is between two it is not censurable onely S. Pauls aim of reconciling them is harder to be attained when the dowry is recovered then when cohibitation onely is parted And therefore as that licentiousnesse in divorcing which the ancient French the Irish the Welch the Russes and Alysimes did or do use is an evidence that Christianity was not so fully received or did not totally prevail amongst them So when the Greek Church yielded to allow those divorces which the Civil Law allowed which at the first it did not do then was their Christianity imbased and corrupted Which though it cannot have come to passe without the fault of the Clergy yet it is most to be charged upon the secular power the interesse whereof it inlargeth to the prejudice of Christianity For as in times of Apostacy and factions in the Church it hath been many times constrained to receive or retain those of whose salvation it cannot presume at the peril of their own souls So when it seems lesse evill to yield to that violence which the secular Power offers then to abandon the protection thereof those that impose violence are far more chargeable with the souls that perish by the means thereof then those that yield to iâ— for the best And that this may serve for a great part of excuse for the Greek Church we have great argument to believe Because since the taking of Constantinople being no more tied by the Civil Laws of the supream Power they allow no divorce but for adultery Neither is there any further difference between them and the Latin Church but whither Gods law upon divorce for adultery allow marying again or not Which the Council of Trent hath no further impeached then in case it be maintained that the Church erreth in saying that the bond of mariage remains insoluble notwithstanding adultery on either side Conc. Tied Sess XXIV cap. VII least the subjects of the State of Venice should be condemned unheard who had alwaies maried after divorce for adultery as the History relateth CHAP. XIV Another opinion admitting the ground of lawfull Impediments What Impediments arise upon the Constitution of the Church generally as a Society or particularly as of Christians By what Law some degrees are prohibited Christians And of the Polygamy of the Patriarchs Mariage with the deceased wives Sister and with a Cousin Germane by what Law prohibited Of the Profession of Conscience and the validity of clandestine Mariages The bounds of Ecclesiasticall Power in Mariage upon these grounds I Am now to propose another opinion pretending to justifie the Imperiall Laws examined concerning divorce the moderation whereof I do much esteem above these novelties tending to cast one Article concerning the Holy Catholick Apostolick Church out of the common faith of all Christians It saith that the secular Power is able to limit the conditions upon which mariage is contracted as being indeed a civill contract so that mariage contracted contrary to the conditions limited by the secular Power shall be ipso facto void the persons being by the Law rendred uncapable of contracting the same And that by the same reason the same Power is able to prescribe such conditions as coming to passe after mariage are of force to void it by virtue of the provision going before declaring it void whensoever such conditions should come to passe As in case of murder poysoning treason forgery robbery sacriledge in case of impotence absence of long time and the like for in case of mutual consent or upon reasonable cause without disparagement themselves dare not take upon them to say that the secular power can make any lawfull divorce This opinion is indeed considerable in regard of those impediments which Canonists and Casuists declare to have the force of avoiding mariage consummate by carnall knowledge For if they or some of them may appear to be well grounded there can be nothing more effectuall to clear my first intent to wit what is the true interesse and right of the Church in determining Matrimonial causes I say then that upon the suppositions premised that the Church is a Society founded by God and that there is a peculiar Law of our Lord concerning the mariages of Christians it necessarily followeth that as there are diverâ—e things which make mariages void or unlawfull so the Church is to be satisfied that there is none of them to be found in those mariages which it alloweth If we consider the Church generally as a Society of reasonable people certainly those things which render the contracts of all reasonable people either void or unlawfull in what Society soever they live must needs be thought to render either void or unlawfull those mariages that are so contracted in the Church As for the purpose Whatsoever is contracted either by fraud or by force is of it selfe originally void supposing that fraud or that force to have been the cause why it was contracted The reason being the same that ties a man to any thing which ever he contracted which is his own free consent in what he is not limited to by the law of God and Nature For if this be the reason that obliges where this reason fails the obligation of necessity ceaseth And shall it then be thought that any solemnity which the Church may celebrate a mariage contracted by force with can avail to make that contract binding Or that a cheat which had it not been believed a man would not have maried nor the mariage have been solemnized when it is solemnized shall have force to oblige This to those who believing that mariage is a Sacrament do think it consequent that the solemnizing of mariage renders those mariages of force to bind the parties which otherwise are not onely unlawful but also void For though I cannot here balk my order and resolve how many Sacraments there are and whether mariage
not that those Imperial Laws took place which made this profession a lawful cause of dissolving mariage in being per bonam gratiam as the Romane Law called it whether the party so deserted were allowed to mary elsewhere or not And indeed we find S. Basil qq fusius explicat XII and S. Chrysostome in Mat. hom LXIX ad pop Ant. in 1 Tim. hom XIV together with Cassiane in the example of Theonas Collat. XXI 9. 10. in their zeal to monasticall life advising maried persons not to stay for the consent of their parties in making such a profession as this At such time as the West where monasticall life was not yet so originally spread S. Hierome Epist XIV and S. Augustine Epist XLV CXCIX de adult conjugiis maintain the contrary opinion Which to me I confesse seems faâ— more probable For granting single life duely ordered to be the ordinary way and means of attaining perfection in Christianity according to the promises this state of eminence necessarily supposeth that which is necessary to the being of Christianity Therefore the way to perfection must be grounded upon justice Now in justice the contract of mariage among Christians gives each party that interesse in the others body which mariage exerciseth Which interesse noting but consent seems to dissolve And therefore seeing there is no Tradition of the whole Church to inforce this right not onely particular Churches not allowing it shall not seem to me to depart from the Unity of the whole in so doing But also Soveraign Powers through their severall dominions in regard of the interesse which all States have in the mariage or single life of their subjects shall lawfully use their Power to limit the force of it But as for mariage consummate and used I cannot see how the party deserting upon such pretense is excused from the guilt of adultery which the deserted may commit either single or maried again As for the question that may be made whither the mariage of one that hath professed single life be void or valid supposing the profession of single life to be agreeable to Christianity as I conceive I have showed sufficient reason to believe there is no consideration sufficient to make mariage after it valid but the abuse of the profession it selfe amounting to such a height as may serve to satisfie a Christian that in consideration thereof it is it selfe in the first place become void Another impediment yet remains questionable whether it be of force to dissolve those mariages which are called clandestine whither for want of consent in the Parents or the solemnities of the Church Some think that want of consent of Parents not onely makes the act unlawfull which all agree in but the mariage void As if the reverence due to Parents by Gods law did make a mans contract with a thirdperson void who is no waies bound to inquire whither his free consent be lawfully exercised or not In the Scriptures we see Gods people proceed by consent of Parents and daughters especially S. Paul supposes to referre themselves to their Fathers 1 Cor. VII 36. But neither was Esaus mariage taken to be void because it was made without such consent Geâ— XXVII 45. Nor was there any particular consent of Iacobs Parents to his mariages Gen. XXIX nor were the Fathers of Iudah or of Tobias made acquainted with their mariages And as for the Romane Laws which void mariages for want of this consent in some cases it is no more an argument of the Law of nature then the power of the Father by the same Laws which neverthelesse allow the Mother none when as Gods Law alwayes as well as the Law of Moses gives them equall interesse It is therefore manifest that there is ground in Gods Law to make this impediment of force to dissolve mariage contracted without it And that either for the Church as the reverence of Parents is a part of Gods law now in being which the power of the Church pretendeth to preserve Or for the secular Power as the interesse of Parents in the mariages of their children is of consequence to the publick peace and wealth The same may be said of those mariages that are made without witness or without solemnities of the Church saving that those solemnities which contain the approbation of the Church arising upon the account of the Church it is evidently more proper for the Church to make this impediment of force to dissolve mariage For the secular power to inâ—ct the Law of the Church by force of arms and temporall penalties There remains one cause more to hinder mariage so as to dissolve it when consummate being made notwithstanding it the condition of slavery in either of the parties at such time when as the rights of bondage subsisted This cause stands now by the Canon Law and is inâ—orced and limited by the Casuists But it was not the Canon Law that first voided the mariage of a slave taken for free but the Laws of the Empire as Ivo himselfe a Collector of the Canons witnesseth Epist CCXLIII where having produced the Law of Iustiniane he thus proceedeth In tali ergo contractu quod lex damnat non homo sed iâ—stitia separat quia quod contra leges praesumitur per leges solui meretur In such a contract then that which the law oondemns it is not man but justice thâ—â— separates Because what is presumed against Law by law deserves to be dissolved Which reâ—son takes place also in legall kindred according to the Imperiall Lawes whereby an adopted Brother is disabled to mary his sister by adoption In imitation whereof an opinion of the publick honesty of Christianity so prevâ—iled in that Church afterwards that being once Gossips came to be an hindrance of mariage which opinion howsoever grounded notwithstanding introduced the same kind of burthen and no other then that of legall kindred by adoptions These reasons though not admitted by all professions in Religion that shall meet with this yet seeing they proceed upon one and the same common ground the effect and consequence whereof cannot be admitted in some and refused by the rest And seeing that some of them are admitted on all sides there being no other reason sufficient why they should be admitted may serve to evidence the interesse of the Church in Matrimoniall causes And that evidence may serve to inferre that though the secular Power hath also an interess in the same yet in regard of the trouble which concurrence may cause in civill Government Christian Princes and States have done wisely as well as in regard to the interess of the Church they have done Christianly in referring the conduct of Matrimonial causes almost wholly to the Church Especially supposing that they take good heed that the laws thereof neither trench upon the Interess of their Crown not the wealth of their subjects But whither secular Power can make laws by virtue whereof that which a man voluntarily acts afterwards
shall be of force to void mariage contracted afore upon wich ground the opinion which I propounded last would justifie the divorces which the Imperiall Laws make to the effect of marrying again will be a new question Seeing that if any thing bâ— to be accepted it will be in any mans power to dissolve any mariage and the law of Christ allowing no divorce but in case of adultery will be to no effect Neither will there be any cause why the same Divines should not allow the act of Justine that dissolves mariage upon consent which they are forced to disclaim allowing the rest of those causes which the Imperial Laws create Indeed whither any accident absolutely hindring the exercise of mariage and falling out after mariage may by Law become of force to dissolve it I need not here any further dispute For so the securing of any Christian mans conscience it is not the act of secular Power inacting it for Law that can avail unlesse the act of the Church go before to determine that it is not against Gods Law and therefore subject to that civil Power which is Christian The reason indeed may fall out to be the same that makes impotence of force to do it and it may fall out to be of such force that Gregory III Pope is found to have answered a consultation of Boniface of Mence in the affirmative XXXII q. VII c. Quod proposuisti But this makes no difference in the right and power of the Church but rather evidences the necessity of it For though as Cardinall Cajetane sayes the Canon Law it selfe allows that Popes may erre in determining such maters cap. IV. de divortiis c. licet de sponsa duorum which every man will allow in the decree of Deuededit Pope Epist unicâ yet the ground of both Power witnessing the Constitution of the Church as a necessary part of Christianity as it determines the true bounds of both so it allows not the conscience of a Christian to be secured by other means And were it not a strange reason of refusing the Church this Power because it may erre when it must in that case fall to the secular Powers who have no ground to pretend any probable cause of not erring For he that proceedeth in the simplicity of a Christian heart to use the means which God by Christianity hath provided for his resolution may promise himselfe grace at Gods hands even when he is seduced by that power which is not infallible But he that leans upon that warrant which God by his Christianity hath not referred him to must answer for his errors as well as the consequences of the same CHAP. XVI Of the Power of making Gouernours and Ministers of the Church Upon what ground the Hierarchy of Bishops Priests and Deacons standeth in opposition to Presbyteries and Congregations Of the Power of Confirming and the evidence of the Hierarchy which it yieldeth Of those Scriptures which seem to speak of Presbyteries or Congregations NOw are we come to one of the greatest Powers of the Church For all Societies according as they are constituted either by the act of Superiors or by the will of members are by their constitution either inabled to give themselves Governours or tied to receive them from those by whose will they subsist The Society of the Church subsisting by the will of God is partly regulated by the will of men voluntarily professing themselves Christians If God having limimited the qualities and the Powers by which his Church is to be Governed do referre the designing of persons to bear those qualities and powers to his Church it must needs appear one of the greatest points that he hath left to their choice Therefore I have made it appear from the beginning that the originall of this Power was planted by our Lord Christ in his Apostles and Disciples to whom immediately he committed the trust of propagating it And now that I may further determine within what bounds and under what terms those his immediate Commissaries did appoint it to be propagated to the end of the world I say that by their appointment the bodies of Christians contained in each City and the territory thereof is to constitute a several Church to be governed by one cheif Ruler called a Bishop with Presbyters or Priests subordinate to him for his advice and assistance and Deacons to minister and execute their appointment The said Bishops to be designed by their Clergy that is their respective Priests and Deacons with consent of neighbour Bishops ordaining them and by the assent of the people whom they are to govern I say further That the Churches of greater Cities upon which the Government of the lesse dependeth are by the same Rule greater Churches and the greatest of all the Churches of the chiefe Cities So that the chief Cities of the Christian world at the planting of Christianity being Rome Alexandria and Antiochia by consequence those were by this Rule the chief Churches and in the first place that of Rome This position excludeth in the first place that of Independent Congregations which maketh a Church and a Congregation to be all alone so that the people of each Congregation to be able first to give themselves both Laws and Governours then to govern and manage the Power of the Keyes according to Gods word that is according to that which they shall imagine to be the intent of it For whatsoever authority they allow their Ministers or Elders seeing they are created out of the people by the meer act of the people and that the consent of the People is required to inact every thing that passeth it will be too late for them to think of any authority not subordinate to the people upon whom they have bestowed the Soveraign On the other extreme this position excludeth that of the Romanists who will have the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall Power to have been first setled upon S. Peter as sole Monarch of the Church and from him derived upon the rest of the Apostles as his Deputies or Commissaries So that the Power which other Bishops Priests and Deacons have in their respective Churches being granted by the successors of S. Peter Bishops of Rome is therefore limitable at their pleasure as no otherwise estated by divine right then because God hath setled it in S. Peter and his successors as the root and source of it Between these extremes there remain two mean opinions whereof one is the platform of the Presbyteries in which every Congregation is also a Church with a Consistory to rule it consisting of a Minister with his Lay-Elders whom now they call Triers referring to them the â—riall of those who come to communicate and Deacons Of these Congregations so many as they without Rule or Reason so farre as I know think fit to cast into one resoâ—t or division they call a Session or Class and as many of those as they please a Synod and of Synods a Province So that as the
vulgarly understood and that for the communion as well as for the sacrifice it must further be provided that this Communion be complete in both kinds in which the Sacrament is celebrated not barring the people of the Cup as it is the custome in the Church of Rome to do And truly there is not so much marvell at any thing in difference as there is why it hath been thought fit to make this the cause of so great a breach For the precept running in those terms which take hold of them who are obliged by it that is of the whole Church consisting of Clergy and people both alike because I have showed that do this in remembrance of me concerns the whole Church by the prayers whereof it is consecrated How will it be possible to make any humane understanding capable to comprehend that when our Lord saith take eat drinke do this the people shall stand charged onely with part of it Indeed had there been any limitation of the Law-givers intent expressed either by way of precept as this lies or by the practice of the Church originally under the Apostles and generally throughout Christendom there might have been pretense for dispute And it must not be denied that there have been those that have attempted to show that the Apostles so used it even in the Scriptures But by such means as if they meant not indeed to prove it for a truth but to show how willingly they would gratifie those who would be glad to see it proved whether true or false And do therefore sort to no other effect then to make it appear that their desire to prove it out of the Scripture was farr greater then the Scripture gave them cause to cherish For were breaking of bread put a thousand times in the Scripture for celebrating the Eucharist as sometimes it is put Act. II. 42. 45. XX. 7. at least for those Suppers at which the Eucharist was celebrated what would this avail unlesse we could be perswaded that as oft as breaking of bread is put for eating there we are to understand that there was no drink Or unlesse we could understand by one and the same term of breaking bread that all Priests had drink as well as bread but the Lay people none Therefore whatsoever advantage it may be in regard it is certain that the greatest part of the world will never be wise to make a noise with any plea though never so unprobable rather then be thought to have nothing to say men of judgement and conscience must needs take it for a confession that there is no ground for it in the Scriptures to see things alleged so farr from all appearance of truth As for the practice of the Catholick Church I may very well remit all that desire to inform and not to scandalize themselves to those things which Cassander hath which much learning collected as sufficient to make it appear if any thing that men are unwilling to see can be made to appear that as to this day there is no such custom in the Eastern Church so in the Western Church it is not many ages since it can be called a custom And that by so visible degrees introduced as may be an undeniable instance to make evidence that corruption may creep into the Laws and customs of the Church though by those degrees which are not alwayes visible Indeed it is alleged that there are some natures found in the world that can by no means indure the taste of wine which therefore some men call abstemious without casting it back again â—nd induring as great pangs as men are seen to indure that are forced or couâ—ened to eat things which they hate So that to force such natures to receive the Sacrament in both kinds were to destroy the reverence due to it both in them who receive it and in them that shall see it used with no more reverence It is alleged again That Christianity goes further than wine That is That some Christian Nations dwell in Countries so untemperately cold that wine will not keep in their Countries but changes as soon as it comes Now as no reason appeareth why the Sacrament should not be celebrated for the use of those people who cannot receive it in both kinds Neither can any reason appear why other people receiving it in one kinde should not receive the same benefit by it which they do Last of all it is alleged that in the primitive Church it was many times received by the people in one kinde upon several occasions For in regard that Christians could not alwayes be prâ—sent at the celebrating therâ—oâ— when there was not such means as have since been provided especially those who were maried to unbelievers it was a custom to send them the Communion who were known to joyn with the devotion of the Church though hindred to joyn therewith in bodily presence as wee learn by Justiâ—e Martyrs second Apology And because in the quality of wine a litle quantity is not to be preserved as preserve it they did besides other reasons to take it Fasting therefore it was sent onely in the other kinde as wee finde by Tertullian writing to his wife Again if a man that was under Penance fell in danger of departing this life before hee was reconciled to the Church by receiving the Communion again which by this one instance wee may see how much the primitive Christians abominated to do As the Law of the Church was that they should not be refused the Communion in that case So the custom was for the same reason to send it them onely in one kinde as appeareth by an eminent example related from Dionysius of Alexandria by Eusebius Hist Eccles VI. 44. But these instances if they be looked into will appear to be of the same consequence as if it should be alleged to a Jew that if two Jews should turn back to back and go one of them East the other West till they came to meet again howsoever this may be possible to be done seeing when they meet again if the one count Saturday the other must needs count Sunday as appears evidently by the reason of the Sphere and the dayly motion of the Sun round the earth therefore they cannot both keep the Sabbath upon the day which the Law appoints therefore it is in the power of the Synagogue to appoint that no Sabbath be kept Or because during the forty years travail of the Israelites through the Wilderness to the Land of Promise their children were not circumcised by reason that they knew not when they should be summoned to remove by the moving of the cloud that was over the Tabernacle which they were alwayes to be ready to do Therefore it was in the power of the Synagogue to dispense with the circumcision of male children under the Law of Moses Positive precepts they are all that of circumcision and that of the Sabbath as well as this of the Eucharist Neither can it
thinne That the Ministers of the Church should performe the service thereof in their ordinary aparrel when they ministred it in grottes and caves to a few I marvaile not but count it reasonable That when all assemble wheat and chaffe good fish and bad all should be summoned to that apprehension of the work in hand which our common Christianity inforceth by the habit in which it is ministred it seemeth to me very unreasonable that any man should marvaile Imposition of hands is necessarily an act of authority Booz may say to the reapers The Lord be with you And they answer him The Lord blesse thee Ruth IV. 4. they may blesse him as well as he them And as the Priest saith to the people the Lord be with you so may they to him and with thy Spirit where there is nothing but matter of common charity in band But if Abraham pay Melchisedeck Tithes acknowledging his superiority and Melchisedeck thereupon blesse Abraham then the saying of the Apostle Heb. VII 7. without question the lesse is blessed by the better takes place Of this kinde is Jacobs blessing his Nephews by laying his hands on their heads Moses his blessing of Joshua the Priests blessing of the people The Israelites laying hands on the Levites Numb VIII 10. seems rather to signify the charging of the sinnes of the Congregation upon them that by them they might be expiated according to the Law But our Lord layes hands on the little children whom he blesses and his Apostles lay hands on them whom they cure Mark XVI 18. as Naaman thought that Elizeus would have laid hands on him praying for him So our Lord lifts up his hands over his disciples to blesse them because he could not lay hands on them all The Apostles laying hands on the seven Acts VI. 6. and the imposing of the hands of the Presbytery 1 Tim. IV. 14. signifieth the authority that inchargeth them with their office And it is strange that any man pretending learning can attribute the ordinations made by Paul and Barnabas Acts XIV 23. to the votes of the people signified by holding up their hands The act of constituting them being expresly ascribed to Paul and Barnabas And therefore by imposition of their hands not by holding up the peoples hands Imposition of hands therefore as it is used by the Church succeeding the Apostles in that use signifieth that authority which the Church blesseth or prayeth for blessing in behalf of those whom she presumeth to be qualified for the blessing by so blessing which she prays for at Gods hands I am not to forget the signe of the Crosse though a ceremony which I cannot say the Church hath either precept or precedent for in the Scripture having prescribed that there is no presumption that it cometh not from the Apostles because no mention of it in Scripture Justine the Martyr mentioning the use of it Tertulliane and Saint Basil testifying that it was common to all Christians all times all parts of the Church whereof there is remembrance using it Chuse whether you will have Saint Paul when he saith In whom ye were sealed by the holy spirit of promise Ephes I. 13. and againe by whom ye are sealed to the day of redemption Ephes IV. 30. to intimate that the holy Ghost was given by Baptisme which was solemnized by signing with the signe of the Crosse Or that the Church took occasion upon those words to appoint that Ceremony to be used in baptizing it will neverthelesse remaine grounded that the use of it on all occasions in all times over all parts of the Church is to be ascribed to the Apostles And certainly there are many occasions for a Christian to have recourse to God for his grace upon protestation of his Christianity which is the condition upon which all grace of God becomes due when there is neither time nor opportunity to recollect his minde unto a formall addresse by praying to God All which this ceremony fitly signifieth What then if it be used by those who bethinke not themselves at all of that Christianity by which alone we may expect any benefit of Christs Crosse Who may seem to hold their Christianity needlesse promising themselves the benefit of it by the opus operatum of making a signe of the Crosse Does this hinder any man to use it as it ought to be used does it prejudice him that so uses it I will not say that there cannot nor did not consist any Reformation in laying this ceremony aside But I will say as of Prayers for the dead We know well enough whom there was a desire to content when this ceremony in the Eucharist was laid aside under Queen Elizabeth having been prescribed under Edward VI. Which seeing it hath not served the turne but that the unity of the Church is dissolved and so much more demanded of them that would be thought Reformed if yet any man man can say what is demanded I think my self obliged to maintaine in this point as in all the rest That the Reformation of the Church consists not in abolishing but in renewing and restoring the orders of the Catholick Church and the right intent of the same He that will take the paines to adde hereto that which I have said in the place quoted afore shall comprehend the reasons upon which I remaine satisfied in this whole point seeing there is no cause why I should either recede from any part of it or repeate it here againe That which remaineth for this place is the consideration of the nature and number of the Sacraments which being essentially ceremonies of Gods service the right resolution of the controversy concerning it must needs consist in distinguishing the grounds upon which and the intents to which they are instituted the difference whereof must make some properly Sacraments the rest either no Sacraments at all or in a severall sense and so to a severall purpose And truly of all the Controversies which the Reformation hath occasioned I see not lesse reason for either side to stand upon their terms then in this which stands upon the term of a Sacrament being not found in the Scriptures attributed either to seven or to two For being taken up by the Church that is to say by those Writers whom the Church alloweth and honoureth what reason can deny the Church liberty to attribute it to any thing which the power given the Church inableth it to appoint and to use for the obtaining of Gods blessing upon Christians Why should not any action appointed by the Church to obtaine Gods sanctifying grace by virtue of any promise which the Gospel containeth be counted a Sacrament At least supposing it to consist in a ceremony fit to signify the blessing which it pretendeth to procure For it is manifest that Baptisme also and the Eucharist are ceremonies signifying visibly that invisible grace wherewith God sanctifieth Christians But there will be therefore no consequence that Baptisme and the Eucharist should
be counted Sacraments for the same reason and in the same nature and kind for which any thing else is or can be counted a Sacrament No not though they may all in their proper sense be truly called Sacraments of the Church because the dispensing of them all is trusted with the Church For Baptisme by the premises enters a man into the Covenant of Grace as the visible solemnity whereby it is contracted with the Church in behalfe of God which unlesse in case of peremptory necessity cannot be invisibly contracted So it intitleth to all the promises which the Gospel pretendeth And so also doth the Eucharist being the visible ceremony which God hath appointed for the renewing of it and of our profession to stand in it and to expect the promises which the Gospel pretendeth upon supposition of the condition which it requireth not otherwise And truly the flesh and bloud of Christ mystically received by our bodies necessarily importeth his spirit received by our soules supposing them qualified as the Gospel requireth and in and by the Spirit whatsoever is requisite to inable a Christian to performe his race here or to assure him of his reward in the world to come And yet the necessity thereof not so undispensable but that supposing a man cannot obtaine the communion thereof from the Church but by violating that Christianity which it sealeth neither can a man obtaine it by the Sacrament nor without the Sacrament need he faile of it that is standing to his Christianity as well in all other things as in not transgressing his Christianity for communion in the Eucharist with the Church And this is the case of those which are unjustly excommunicate Seeing in matters indifferent he that yeilds not to the Church that is to them who have the just power to conclude the Church when they judge it for the common good for him to do that which otherwise he is not obliged to do must needs seem justly excommunicable So these two Sacraments have the promise of grace absolutely so called that is of all the grace which the Gospel promiseth which it is to be acknowledged and maintained that no other of those actions that are or may be called Sacraments of the Church doth or can doe upon the like terms as they doe For of a truth it is granted that both these Sacraments are actions and consist in the action whereby they are either prepared or used though with so much difference between the two For Baptisme is of necessity an action that passes with the doing of it Whereas in the Eucharist there is one thing done in the preparing another in the using of it insomuch that the effect of consecrating it which I suppose here to be signified in the Scriptures as well as the most ancient of the Fathers by the name of Eucharistia or Thanksgiving remaines upon the thing consecrated so that the bread and the wine over which God was praised and thanked are metonymically called the Eucharist And yet in regard the consecration in reason tends to the use of receiving it and that the Church is not trusted or inabled to do it with effect but to that intent the totall of both is necessarily understood by the name of that Sacrament For supposing the ancient Church might have cause to allow the use of receiving this Sacrament to them who were not present in body though in spirit at the celebrating of it which I for my part in point of charity find my self bound to suppose even when I am not able to alledge any reason why my self would have done the same in the same case So long as by reasonable construction which the practice of the Church alloweth or groundeth the consecration tendeth to the use of receiving it is reasonably called the Sacrament or the Eucharist in order to that use If it be consecrated to any other intent either expressed or inforced by construction of reason upon the practise of the Church such practice bordering upon sacriledge in the abuse of the Sacrament the Church hath nothing to do to answer for it Nor is it my meaning that the Sacrament of Baptisme or the Eucharist doth or can consist in the outward action of washing of the body or of praying over the elements and reciting the Institution of our Lord. It is true the very bodily action were able in a great part to interpret the intent of doing it to those who are already Christians and know what Christianity requireth But seeing that can never be enough much lesse allwayes It is necessary that the intent be declared by certain words signifiying it But these words with the bodily action which they interpret will by this discourse concurre to make but one part of the Sacrament which containing the solemnizing of the Covenant of Grace will necessarily containe that which all this signifieth of invisible and spirituall grace conveighed to those who are qualified for it by that which is said and done in virtue of Gods promise He that will speak properly of these two Sacraments must make the matter of them to consist in one of these two parts The form of them being not the signification which is the same in all ceremonies but the promise which tieth to them the whole effect of the Covenant of Grace to which purpose it were well if the world would understand them to be seals of it This createth a vast difference between these two and any of the rest which are called Sacraments Which whether the Councile of Trent sufficiently expresse by providing an Anathema for those who shall say that the seven Sacraments are so equall one to the other that none is more worthy then another Sess VII Can. III. or not let them look to it I dispute not Thus much we see a difference is hereby acknowledged But the difference is vast in this regard that whereas both these Sacraments take effect in consideration of every particular mans Christianity and the promises annexed to that end the rest all of them take effect in consideration of the Communion of the Church and that which it is able to contribute towards the effect of Grace Which necessarily consists in that which the Church is able to contribute toward the effecting of that disposition which qualifieth for it So whereas these two immediately bring forth Gods grace as instruments of his promise by his appointment the rest must obtaine it by the meanes of Gods Church and the blessing annexed to communion with it He that believeth not Gods Church in the nature of a Society grounded upon profession of the true faith and consisting in that communion which separateth it not from the whole may promise himself the benefit of his Baptisme and of the Eucharist whomsoever he communicateth with professing himself a Christiane He who believeth every Church to be a part of the whole Church as he must acknowledge it requisite to the effect of Baptisme and the Eucharist that they be ministred neither
the same effect there is no cause why he should be excused of Idolatry for his paines But withall he cannot be excused of contradicting himselfe as grossely as he that maintaines those Saints or Angels to be that one true God whom he acknowledges not to be that God but his creatures If there be reason to presume that they who acknowledge Saints or Angels their Mediators Intercessors or advocates to God intend to commit Idolatry by contradicting themselves thus grossely there may be reason to thinke that they count them their Mediators Intercessors or Advocates to God to that effect to which Christ alone is our Mediator Intercessor or Advocate But if whosoever is accepted to pray for an other is necessarily by so doing his Mediator Intecessor or Advocate to him with whom he is admitted to deal on his behalfe by his prayers then will it be necessary to limite the worke of mediation to that effect which may be allowed to the intercession of the Saints or Angels for us if we will have them to be to purpose Certainely neither could Iob intercede for his friends nor Samuel for the Israelites nor Abraham for Abimelech or Pharao nor any of Gods Prophets for any that had or were to have recourse to them for that purpose but they must be by so doing Mediators intercessors and Advocates for them with God For neither can the mediation of Saints or Angels nor of any prophet or other that can be persumed to have favour with God be to any effect but that which the termes of that reconciliation which our Lord Christ hath purchased for us doe settle or allow But he that saith the Saints and Angels pray for us saith not that we are to pray to Saints or Angels nor can be say it without Idolatry intending that we are to do that to them which they do to God for us On the other side though that which we doe to them and that which they doe to God be both called praying yet it wil be very difficult for him that really and actually apprehendeth all Saints and Angels to be Gods creatures to render both the same honour though supposing not granting the same Christianity to injoyn both But to come to particulars I will distinguish three sorts of prayers to Saints wheâ—her taught or allowed to be taught in the Church of Rome The first is of those that are made to God but to desire his blessings by and through the merits and intercession of his Saints I cannot give so fit an example as out of the Canon of the Masse which all the Westerne Churches of that communion do now use There it is said communicantes memoriam venerantes omnium Sanctorum tuorum quorum meritis precibusque concedas ut in omnibus protectionis tuae muniamur auxilio Communicating in and reverencing the memory of such and such and of all thy Saints by whose merit and prayer grant that in all things we may be guarded by thy protection and helpe There is also a short prayer for the Priest to say when he comes to the Altar as he findes opportunity Oramus te Domine per merita sanctorum tuorum quorum reliquia hic sunt omnium sanctorum ut indulgere digneris omnia peccata mea We pray thee Lord by the merits of the Saints whose reliques are here and all Saints that thou wouldest vouchsafe to release me all my sins And on the first Sunday in Advent mentioning the Blessed Virgin they pray Vt qui vere eam matrem Dei credimus ejus apud te intercessionibus adjuvemur That we who believe her truely the mother of God may be helped by her intercessions with thee The second is that which their Litanies containe which though I doe not undertake to know how they are used or how they ought to be used by particular Christians that is how far voluntary how far obligatory yet the forme of them is manifest that whereas you have in them sometimes Lord have mercy upon us Christ have mercy upon us Holy Trinity one God have mercy upon us You have much oftner the Blessed Virgine repeated again and againe under a number of her attributes you have also all the Saints and Angels or such as the present occasion pretends for the object of the devotion which a man tenders named and spoken to with Ora pronobis that is Pray for us The blessed virgine some saie with te rogamus audi nos We beseech thee to heare us One thing I must not forget to observe that the prayers which follow those Litanies are almost alwaies of the first kind That is to say addressed directly to God but mentioning the intercession of Saints or Angels for the meanes to obtain our prayers at his hands The third is when they desire immediately of them the same blessings spirituall and temporall which all Christians desire of God There is a Psalter to be seen with the Name of God changed every where into the Name of the blessed Virgine There is a book of devotion in French with this title Moyen de bien seruir prier adorer la Vierge Marie The way well to serve pray to and adore the blessed Virgine There are divers forms of prayer as well as excessive speeches concerning her especially and other Saints quoted in the Answer to the Jesuites Challenge pag. 330-345 Of those then the first kind seems to me utterly agreeable with Christianity importing onely the exercise of that Communion which all members of Gods Church hold with all members of it ordained by God for the meanes to obtaine for one another the Grace which the obedience of our Lord Jesus Christ hath purchased for us without difference whether dead or alive Because we stand assured that they have the same affection for us dead or alive so farre as they know us and our estate and are obliged to desire and esteem their prayers for us as for all the members of Christs mysticall body Neither is it in reason conceivable that all Christians from the beginning should make them the occasion of their devotions as I said out of any consideration but this For as concerning the terme of merit perpetually frequented in these prayers it hath been alwawes maintained by those of the Reformation that it is not used by the Latine Fathers in any other sense then that which they allow Therefore the Canon of the Masse and probably other prayers which are still in use being more ancient then the greatest part of the Latine Fathers there is no reason to make any diffficulty of admitting it in that sense the ground whereof I have maintained in the second Book The third taking them at the foot of the leter and valuing the intent of those that use them by nothing but the words of them are meer Idolatries as desiring of the creature that which God onely gives which is the worship of the creature for the Creator God blessed for evermore And were we bound to make
is what course the Law of the Church should take And therefore the profession of that continence which single life requireth grounding a reasonable presumption of eminence in Christianity above those that are marryed there was all the reason in the world why the Church should indeavour to put the governement thereof into such hands by preferring them before others On the other side as all truth in morall and humane maters is liable to many exceptions it cannot be denyed that more abstinence from riot and from riches both more attendance upon the service of God is found some times in those that live marryed then in those that live single In which consideration it may well seem harde to conclude all them that are marryed unserviceable for the Church The moderation therefore of the Easterne Church seemeth to proceed upon a very considerable Ground not excluding marryed persons from a capacity of Holy orders but excluding persons ordayned from any capacity of mariage For those who were promoted to the Clergy being single knowing that they were not allowed mariage what can they pretend why they should hold their estate not performing the condition of it As for the promoting of those who are already maried it is the triall of their conversation in wedlock that may ground a presumption as well for that conscience which their fidelity in dispensing the goods of the Church as for that diligence in setting aside the importunities of marriage which their attendance upon the service of the Church requireth It was therefore to be wished that the Westerne Church had used the limitation which the Nicene councill by resting contented with confirmed to admit of persons maryed before orders preferring before them those that are single But it must be granted that as well in the West as in the East though the aime was to perfer single life yet here and there now and then those that were maryed were not excluded It is not to be thought that one Spanish councill which had no effect at all without the bounds of it could as easily be reduced to effect in practice as couched in writing Especially the Generall councill of Nicaea having waived the motion of inacting the same But this demonstrates the credite of the Church of Rome in the Westerne Church at that time that the Rescripts of Syricius Innocent Popes are found the first acts to inforce the same which that Spanish council had inacted For the African and other Westerne Canons that injâ—ine the same are for time after Syricius Whereby it appeareth though they doe not use that exception which the councill of Nicca had supposed yet that the rule of single life for the Clergy was so troden under foot that it was found requisite to seeke meanes by the Synods of severall parts and by the concuâ—rence of the See of Rome to bring it into force For let no mâ—n think that those Canons took effect so soon as they were made which were made on purpose to restraine the mariages of the Clergy Who for the most part had from the beginning lived single but neither before nor after could be totally restrained from maryage It would be too large a worke in this place to repeate either the particular Canons which were made and the discourses of the Fathers to inforce them on the one side or on the other side the saying of the Fathers and other records in point of fact whereby the in execution of them doth appeare Those that would be satisfied in it may see what the Arch-Bishop of Spalato hath collected and find Epiph. his saying still take place during the flourishing time of the Church But all this while you heare nothing of any vowe annexed to the undertakeing of Holy Orders by vertue whereof maryage contracted under them should become voide For the vowe of single life being an act that disposeth of a man and his estate in this world to a totall change of his courses if he mean to observe it what reason can admit any ground for presuming of it when it is not expressed And the custom of the Eastern Church reduceth the penalty thereof unto the ceasing ofâ— that ministry by consequence of that maintenance which the order intitleth to which is not the penalty of breaking a vowe But the effects of these rules and indeavours of the Western Church was never such as to exclude the Clergy from marryage how much soever they might exclude maryed persons from the H. orders When Greg. the seventh undertook to bring them under a total restraint from maryage it is manifest that other maner of meanes were imployed to make that restraint forcible then the constitution of the Church indowes it with For that was the time when the Church undertooke to dispose of Crownes and scepters and to extend the spirituall power thereof to the utmost of temporall effects And therefore it is to be granted that by such meanes indeed it might and did come to effect But in point of fact onely not in point of right as being a rigor which the practice of all parts was sufficient protestation that the Church in that estate was not able to undergoe For the horrible and abominable effects thereof have beene so visiblâ— that it is not possible the cause of them should seeme the production of that reason which the being of any law requireth and supposeth Nor can the See of Rome justly be admitted to charge that no bounds have been observed in releasing of it which it cannot be denyed that the ancient Church in all places did observe For I truely for my part have granted that even Lawes given by the Apostles for the better governement of the Church though written in the scriptures may be dispensed in by the Church when the present constitution of things shall make it appear to the Governours thereof that the observation of that rule which served for that state in which it was prescribed â—ends to the considerable visible harme of the Church in the present state of it And therefore I will not take upon me to say that the state of bigamy which S. Paul I have showed maketh an impediment to some Orders can by no means be dispensed with But the See of Rome which dispenseth with it as of course paying the ordinary fees I conceive cannot in justice charge the releasing of the rule of single life to all the Clergy though in some measure a Law of the whole Church And how many Canons of the whole Church besides are there which must be trampled under foot by bringing that unlimited power into effect which now it exerciseth I could therefore earnestly wish for mine owne parte that some reservation had beene used in the releasing of it that the respect due to single life by our common Christianity might have remained visible to Christian people by the priviledge of it in the Church Nor doe I thinke my selfe bound by being of the reformation to maintaine the acts by
such thing as a Councill according to the supposition of the congregations And therefore in the acts of Counciles which are the Lawes whereby the Church is to be ruled the people can have no further satisfaction then to see them openly debated under the knowledge of the people Indeed the interest of Soveraigne powers in Church maters which I allow not onely in order to the publicke peace but as they are members of the Catholicke Church and so trusted with the protection of all that is Catholicke in behalf of the people gives them that power over the acts of Counciles which by and by I shal declare Which though grounded upon another account and belonging to them in an other quality then that which the constitution of the Church createth is notwithstanding provided by God to secure his people of their Christianity together with the unity of the Church But the suffrage of the people of every Church that is their acknowledgment that they know no exception against the persons in nomination for Bishops or other orders of the Church as it agreeth with the proceedings of the Apostles and primative Church so must it needs be a most powerfull meanes to maintaine that strict bond of love and reverence between the Clergy and the people in the recovery whereof the unity of the Church consisteth And supposing publick penance retrived without which it is in vaine to pretend Reformation in the Church there can be no stronger meanes to maintaine Christianity in effect then the satisfaction of the people though not in the measure of penance to be injoyned yet in the performing of it Alwaies provided that this interest of the people be grounded upon no other presumption that any man is the child of God or in the state of Grace and indowed with Gods spirit then that which the law of the Church whereby he injoyes communion which the Church createth For this presumption must needs be stronger concerning the Clergy by their estate then it can be concerning the people Because by their estate they are to be the choice of the people And though as all morall qualities are subject to many exceptions some of the people may be better Christians then some of the Clergy yet a legall presumption that any of them is so must needs be destructive to the Unity of the Church But no disorder in religion can be so great as to justifie the obdurate resolution of the Church of Rome to withdraw the scriptures from the people There is nothing more manifest then that the lamentable distractions which we are under have proceeded from the presumption of particular Christians up on their understanding in the scriptures proceeding to think their quality capable of reforming the Church Onely those that can have joy of so much mischief to our common Christianity can thinke otherwise But I am not therefore induced to thinke our Christianity any other then the Christianity of those whom our Lord whom S. Paul and other Apostles and Prophets exhort and incourage to the study of the scriptures Whom S. Chrysostome and others of the Fathers so earnestly deale with to make it their businesse All the offense consists in this that private Christians observe not the bounds of that which is Catholike when they come to read the scriptures For if they be not content to confine the sense of all they read within that rule of faith in which the whole Church agreeth because they understand not how they stand together If they thinke the Lawes of the whole Church can command things contrary to that which God by scripture commandeth It is no marvaile they should proceed to make that which they think they see in the Scripures though indeed they see it not a Law to the Church For they think it is Gods will that ties them to it But if the Church be the Church as I have showed it is then was the Scripture never given private Christians to make them Judges what all Christians are bound to believe what the Church is to injoine the Church for the condition of communion with the Church If any man object the inconvenience that it appeareth not who or where that Church is and so we are confined to those boundes that cannot appeare This inconvenince is the clearest evidence that I can produce for the Catholike Church For unlesse we grant this inconvenience to come by Gods institution and appointment we must confesse the unity of the Church to be Gods appointment because the dissolution thereof produceth this inconvenience For were the unity of the Church in being I could easily send any man to the Catholike Church by sending him to his owne Church Which by holding communion with the whole Church must needs stand distinguished from those which hold it not though under the name of Churches And he who resorts to the Church for resolution in the Scriptures supposes that he is not to break from the Church for that wherein the whole Church is not agreed Now that the unity of the Church is broken in pieces it remaines no more visible to common sense what it is wherein the whole Church agrees as the condition for comunion with it But the meanes to make it appear againe having disappeared through disunion in the Church is that discourse of reason which proceeds upon supposition of visible unity established by God in the Church And the meanes to make it appear againe to common sense is the restoring of that unity in the Church by the interruption whereof it disappeareth Then shall the edification of particular Christians in our common Christianity proceed without interruption by meanes of the Scriptures every one supposing that his edification in the common Christianity dependeth not upon the knowledge of those things wherein the Church agreeth not but of those things wherein it agreeth In the mean time it remaineth that offenses proceed to be infinite and endlesse because men giving no bounds to their studies in the Scriptures imagine the edification of the Church to consist in that wherein themselves not regarding the consent of the Church have placed their own edification in the Scriptures CHAP. XXXII How great the Power of the Church and the effect of it is The right of judging the causes of Christians câ—aseth when it is protected by the State An Objection If Ecclâ—siasticall Power were from God Secular Power could not limit the use of it Ground for the Interest of the State in Church matters The inconsequence of the argument The concurrence of both Interests to the Law of the Church The Interest of the State in the indowment of the Church Concurrence of both in matrimoniall causes and Ordinations Temporall penalties upon Excommunication from the State No Soveraigne subject to the greater Excommunication but to the lesse The Rights of the Jewes State and of Christian Powers in Religion partly the same partly not The infinite Power of the Pope not founded upon acts of Episcopacy but upon the Secular Powers
Catechising which the Church tendered those who stood for Baptisme the subject of that Thanksgiving which the Eucharist was consecrated with do more effectually evidence the common sense of Christians in the mater of our common Christianity then the sayings of divines being solicitous so to maintaine the grace of God that the free will of man which the interest of our common Christianity equally obligeth us justly to maintaine may suffer no prejudice How much more when it is to be justified that those sayings of divines expounded by other sayings of their owne and principles evidently acknowledged by themselves can create no other sense then the necessity of preventing grace might the Church be able and obliged to proceed to those decrees Though as for the persons whom we do not find involved in any further censure then the mark set upon their writings by the See of Rome as there is cause to think that respect was had to them because their principles did not really ingage them in any contradiction to the faith of the Church So is there cause to think that being better informed in it by the treaty of that Council they surceased for the future all opposition to the decrees of it For the evidence of that which hath been said in the point of fact I remit the reader to my author so oft named with these considerations pointing out the consequence of each particular His ingenuity learning and diligence is such that I have neither found my self obliged to quarrel at any thing that he hath delivered in point of historicall truth nor to seek for more then he hath laid forth And by that which hath been said we presume not that the preaching of the Gospel is not the grace of Christ which Pelagius acknowledged necessary to salvation but that the determination of the will to imbrace that grace which the grace of the gospel tendereth is not effected by the will alone without those helps of grace which are granted in consideration of Christ though depending upon the preaching of the Gospel and the reasons and motives which it tendereth to imbrace it Here then you see I might have made a great book to set forâ—h those things which are commonly alledged by those that write of the great dispute between grace and free will now on foot to show what the Church insisted upon and what reasons it did proceed upon against Pelagius But because there is no question made of all this by those that deny the consequences of it it shall serve my turne to have pointed out the reasons of those consequences and now to take notice of this great dispute which is come in my way so crosse that it is not possible for me to voide the difficulties which I have undertaken concerning the Covenant of Grace without voiding of it For having first shewed that the condition which the Covenant of Grace requires on our part consists in an act of mans free will to imbrace and persevere in Christianity till death And now that man is not able to perform this condition without the help of Gods grace by Christ The question is at the height how the act of free will depends upon Gods free grace and a man becomes intitled to the promise for doing that which without the help of Gods grace he cannot do And this the greater because if the help of grace determine the free will of them that imbrace and persevere in Christianity so to do then it seems the sinne and damnation of those that do not so is to be imputed to the want of those helps and Gods appointment of not giving them to those that have them not CHAP. XX. Wherein Originall sinne consisteth What opinions are on foot That it is not Adams sinne imputed to his posterity Whether man were at the first created to a supernaturall end or not An estate of meer nature but innocent possible Originall sinne is Concupiscence How Baptisme voids it Concerning the late novelty in the Church of England about Originall sinne THIS inquiry must begin with the question about originall sinne wherein it consists because thereupon depends the question of the effect and consequence thereof which is to say what is the estate wherein the Gospel of Christ overtakes the naturall man For it is well enough known that there is a question yet on foot in the Church Whether Originall sinne do consist in Concupiscence or in the want of Originall righteousnesse which having been planted in our first parents their posterity ought to have And whosoever thinks there can be little difficulty in this dispute little considers the difficulty that S. Augustine found in satisfying the Pelagians how Concupiscence can be taken away by Baptisme which all Christians find to remaine in the regenerate Seeing there can be no question made that Originall sin is taken away by Baptisme Christianity pretending to take away all sinne and Baptisme being the solemn execution of Christianity that is the solemn profession of the Christian faith This is evidently the onely difficulty that driveth so many of the Schoole Doctors to have recourse not onely to S. Anselms devise of the want of originall righteousnesse but to another more extravagant speculation of a state of pure nature which God might have created man in had he not thought more fit of his goodnesse to create him in a state of supernaturall grace that is to say indowed with those gifts and graces that might inable him to attaine that happinesse of the world to come which is now promised to Christians This state of pure nature they hold to be liable to concupiscence as the product by consequence of the principles of mans nature compounded of a materiall and spirituall a mortall and immortall substance and originally inclined the one to the sensual good of the body the other to the spiritual good of the soul here which the eternal good of it is consequent to in the world to come The nature of man liable to this condition they say was prevented by supernaturall grace as a bridle to rule and moderate the inclination of nature not to come into effect so long as so over-ruled But so that this grace being forfeited by the rebellion of Adam consequently it came into effect without more adoe and that by consequence originall sinne cannot consist in this opposition between the inclinations to sensuall and spirituall good which man hath but in the want of that grace from whence it proceedeth This controversie Doctor Field in his learned work of the Church counteth to be of such consequence that he maintaineth all the difference which the Reformation hath with the Churche of Rome about Justification free will the merit of good works and the fulfilling of the Law and the like to be grounded upon it so that there can be no cause of difference supposing it to be set aside His reason is because the opinion of Justification by inherent righteousnesse supposes that the reluctation of our sensuall
to mankind Seeing there is a reason to be given for all that fall under the same in the nature of the finall or the meritorious cause God stands as much glorified man as much obliged to worke out his salvation with feare and trembling as if he knew the bottome of Gods secret counsaile And thus the objection is void It remaineth that we consider the Tradition of the Church what it declareth concerning the truth of that which I have resolved or towards it Where we must take notice of the Monkes of Adrymetus under Valentine who received S. Agustines doctrine of Gods effectuall grace and predestination to it from everlasting in such a sense that they inferred from it all indeavours of men all exhortations reproofes instructions and prayers to be utterly fruitlesse and vaine as tending to that which dependeth upon the meere appointment of God which cannot be defeated and without which nothing can serve To rectifie this mistake S. Augustine lived to write them his book yet extant de correptione Gratia wherein he declareth all that he had said of the grace of God and the efficacy thereof to proceed upon supposition of free will in man though inslaved to sin by the fall of Adam from the bondage whereof the grace of Christ voluntarily though effectually redeemeth those that are freed by it whereby as by the rest of his writings concerning the grace of Christ against Pelagius he establisheth two points belonging to the foundation of the Christian faith The first of the freedome of mans will though not from sin since the fall of Adam yet from necessity determing the resolution of it when by the treaty which the Gospell advanceth it is invited to imbrace Christianity and to live according to it Which were all a mere nullity were not any man free to resolve himselfe upon it The second of the grace of God by Christ which if it may be purchased by the indevour of mans free will then was it not necessary to send our Lord Christ as the second Adam to repaire the breach which the first Adam had made This being the sum of the Catholike faith in this mater and the rest which is advanced to shew how those two points both stand true together belonging to the skill of a Divine not to the faith of a Christian so far as by maintayning them men destroy the foundation of Christianity on neither side Which it is no marvail that some things which S. Augustin had said in giving a reason hereof seemed to some to do seeing those that accepted of his doctrine in Africk drew from it a consequence utterly destructive to Christianity I speake of those in the parts of France about Provence and Marsailles who inferring from S. Augustines saying that in his opinion God makes the farr greater part of men on purpose to condemne them to death seemed to mainetaine the beginning of salvation to come from those indeavours of mans will born as he is under originall sin which God faileth not to second with those helps of Grace which the mater requireth There is great appearance of that which Jansenius disputeth so eagerly de Haeresi Pelag. VII 5. sâ—q that the maine ground of their opposition was the decree of predestination which S. Austine would have to be absolute As being perswaded that thereby the effects of free will become fatal in which that reason of reward and punishment which the Covenant of Grace establisheth requires contingence And herewith the occasion which Faustus pretendeth for the writing of his book de Gratia et Libero Arbitrio agreeth To wit that a certaine Priest called Lucidus is required by him in the name of a Synod held at Arles under Leontius Bishop to recant certaine positions tending to maintaine the necessity of being damned for originall sin by the foreknowledg of God in them for whom Christ dyed not dying onely for sin And this by a letter subscribed by one of the Bishops This recantation being made Faustus pretendeth to write at the intreaty of the Synod to lay forth their sense and reasons But to have added something upon the decree of an other Synod held afterwards at Lions True it is indeed which Vâ—ssius observeth Historiae Pelag. VI. Thesi XIV that whereas some of them insisted on nothing else others proceeded to deny the necessity of preventing grace For whatsoever we say of Cassianâ— who hath writ to severall purposes in severall places Faustus manifestly affirmeth that by the act of free will in beginning to believe a Christian obtaines the grace of God which his owne choice preventeth Which if we understand the Faith which he speaketh of to signifie Christianity and the act of believing to consist in becoming a Christian is nothing else but the fundamentall faith of Christianity That the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost is granted in consideration of a mans turning Christian But who believes that the actuall grace of the Holy Ghost whereby the world is converted to be as well as convicted that it ought to be Christiane is obtayned by the exaltation as purchased by the humiliation of Christ which Faustus supposing the preaching of the Gospell being the meanes which it useth no way denyeth acknowledgeth by consequence that act of faith which preventeth the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost to be prevented by the actuall helps of Grace which the preaching of the Gospel importeth And Jansenius de Haeresi Pelag VIII 1-9 acknowledgeth that they had no designe to destroy the grace of God through Christ as Pelagius had therefore did acknowledg not onely the outward preaching of the gospel but inward inspiration to make it effectuall Onely that making the effect of that grace which God appointeth to depend on free wil they fel into the heresy of Palagius which they desired to a void Now Pelagius indeed acckowledged that grace which the preaching of the gospell signifyed according to his own opinion which was false For not believing that our will is any thing the worse for Adams fall he could not allow that Christ hath purchased any help to repaire the breach and to cure the disease which he had made But as he could not deny it to be an act of bounty in God to propose the reward of everlasting life which is supernatupall So he must affirme that it is purchsed by the merre naturall act of free will without any help of grace granted of Gods mercy in Christ in consideration of his obedience And by this meanes he brought the death of Christ to no effect Seeing God might have assured the tender of his gospell to come indeed from him without it And so the merit of grace that is the reason that obliges God to give it is originally ascribed to the works of free Will according to Pelagius But according to those who acknowledging Originall sin acknowledg the cure of it by the helpe of grace purchased by Christ which the preaching of the gospell bringeth not
trample Paganisme under feet after the conversion of Constantine Certainely nothing can be named so correspondent to that honour which is prophesied for them that suffered for Gods law under Antiochus Epiphanes Dan. XII Is not all this honour properly derivative from the honour of God and our Lord Christ and relative to his service For that is the worke for which Christians assemble and for those assemblies the Church stands as I have often said The honour of the Saints but the occasion circumstance or furniture for it Neither is it to be doubted that the Saints in happinesse pray for the Church militant and that they have knowledge thereof if they goe not out like sparkles and are kindled againe when they resume their bodies which I have showen our common Christianity allowes not For is it possible to imagine that knowing any thing that is knowing God and themselves they should not know that God hath a Church in the world upon the consumation whereof their consummation dependeth Or is it possible that knowing this and being disposed towards this Church as they ought to be disposed towards it in respect to God they should not intercede with God for the consummation of it and the meanes thereof which is all we can desire I will not use the text of Jeremy XI 1. and Ezek. XIV 13-19 because it is manifest that Moses and Samuel that Noe Daniel and Job are named in them but to put the case that if those men were alive and made intercession for their people they should not prevaile Which is not to say that which I have showed that the Old Testament speakes not out plaine that being alive they doe intercede Therefore they make no consequence I will not use the text of the Gospell Luke XVI 9. Make ye friends of the unrighteous Mamon that when yee faile they may receive you into everlasting Tabernacles Though S. Austine de Civit. I. 27. makes a doubt whether it be by the intercession of his friends that such a man is received Because he makes no doubt that it is in consideration of the charity by which he made them his friends that he is received And therefore in that consideration it must be that they are said to receive him not in consideration of their prayers Of which therefore this text saith nothing But I must needs use the text of the Apoc. V. 8. VIII 3. whereby it appeareth as much that the Church triumphant prayeth for the Church militant as that the saints of the Church triumphant are alive And I wil use these texts of the Old Testament where Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and David are in consideration alleged to God in behalf of his people Gen. XXVI 5 24. Ex. XXXII 13. Deut. IX 27. 1. Kings XI 12 32 33 34. XV. 4. 2. Kings VIII 19. XIX 34. XX. 6. Es XXXVII 35. 1. Kings XVIII 36 1 Chron. XXIX 28. For as our Saviour argueth well that Abraham Isaac and Jacob are alive and shall rise againe because God is not the God of the dead So is the consequence as good that what God doth for their sakes he doth it for their mediation or intercession unlesse he meane to set that on their score which they desire not at his hands The Angels of little children alwaies see the Fathers face in heaven Math. XVIII 10. And there is joy in the presence of Gods Angels over one sinner that repenteth Luke XV. 10. And David saith that the Angell of the Lord pitcheth his tent round about them that feare him and delivereth them Psalme XXV 8. And they are all ministring spirits sent forth to attend upon them that shall be heires of salvation Heb. I. 14. and have they not that affection for those whom God so affecteth as to provide them such attendance not to mediate with their desires to God the effect of that goodnesse which he is so affectionate to bestow upon us An imagination so barbarous cannot possesse any man till he think himselfe beloved of God for hating those that honour Saints and Angels above measure Let them looke to the measure and let them looke how they hate them that observe it not Let them not ground their measure upon a supposition of as little affection in the Saints and Angels for us as in themselves for the Saints and Angels unlesse it be because such a supposition may deserve to deprive them of the benefit of such relations For as for the Church S. Cyprian doubts not when he desires that those who shall happen to depart first be mindfull of them that remaine in their prayers to God Epist I. And the Saints in heaven that are secure of their owne salvation he saith are solicitous for us in his booke de mortalitate S. Jerome saith the same of Heliodorus Epist I. nor is any thing to be faulted of that which he writes against Vigilantius to that purpose S. Austine supposeth that Nebridius prayed for him being dead Confess IX 3. and expects benefit from S. Cypryans prayers de Bapt. V. 7 17. He said afore that we are to be commended by the prayers of the Martyrs and de sanctis Serm. XLVI Debent Martyres aliquid in nobis recognoscere de suis virtutibus ut pro nobis dignentur domino supplicare The Martyrs must take notice of something of their owne vertues in us that they may vouchsafe to become petitioners to God for us And againe contra Faustum XX. 21. the reason why they celebrated the memories of the Saints he assignes that they might be partners in their merits and be helped by their prayers Both which Leo in S. Lam. considers as well the helpe as the example of the Saints and S. Gregory Epist VII 57. Indict II. Rogo omnipotentem Deum ut sua te gratia protegat beati Petri Apostolorum principis intercessione a malis omnibus illi sum servet I beseech Almighty God to protect thee with his grace and through the intercession of S. Peter Chiese of the Apostles keep thee unharmed by any evill It were to no purpose to show what I allow by bringing more for this cannot be disallowed allowing the premises But this being supposed whatsoever may be disputed whether Saints or Angels in this regard may be counted Mediators intercessors or Advocates between God and us will be meere contentions about words holding to the termes hitherto supposed For the intercession of our Lord Christ being grounded upon the worke of redemption the effects of it must be according To make all mankind acceptable to God under the condition which the Gospell declareth To obtain for every man those helps of Grace by which he may or by which he is effectually resolved to undergoe the condition requisite He that knowes the God-heade of Christ to be the ground in consideration whereof the obedience of Christ is acceptable by God to this effect and yet will needs say that Saints or Angels are our Mediators Intercessors or Advocates to