forfeiture may be an instruction to them if once they believe that it was by just Law This justice then and the ground of it is the onely reason why the predecessors fault is truly said to be imputed to his posterity But between God and mankind in the forfeit of Adam by the precept given him there cannot be understood any contract by virtue whereof posterity that did not the act can be liable to the punishment of it And therefore we must distinguish between the imputing of one mans sinne to another formally so as to punish a man for another mans sin which if he concurred to the act may be just otherwise not And effectively in the nature of a meritorious cause which reduceth it self to the effective when in consideration of one mans sinne another is made subject to that evil which he should have been free from otherwise And according to this distinction though the posterity of Adam is liable to much evill in consideration of his sin yet is not this evil properly the punishment of it but the effect of the same will of God in propagating mankind with the staine of concupiscence which takes place in maintaining understanding creatures to do all that sinne which God might have hindred them from doing had he not thought it better to draw good out of evil then utterly to prevent it And this is no more then the correspondence between the first and second Adam which S. Paul proceeds upon Rom. V. inferreth For I have shewed already that the righteousnesse of Christ is not imputed to any man formally and immediately so as to say that any man is justified by Gods deputing our Lord Christ for his benefit personally excluding those for whom he was not deputed And I have shewed againe that the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed to all Christians effectively and in the nature of a meritorious cause In as much as have shewed that those helps of grace without which no man is able to imbrace Christianity as it is to be imbraced are granted by God in consideration of his merits and sufferings laid out to that purpose And that which remaineth for me to shew in due place is this That that disposition which qualifieth for the promises of the Gospel being brought to passe in any man by those helps obliges not God to grant those promises which the Gospel rewards it with by any worth in it self but by virtue of Gods grace in consideration of Christs merits and sufferings laid out to that purpose By which correspondence it may appear that those who can perswade themselves that the posterity of Adam are bound to answer for the sin of his fall as their own act cannot stand bound to acknowledge a Christian to whom the merits of the sufferings of Christ are imputed upon the same terms obliged to any condition upon which his right to the promises of the Gospel can depend being once due to him by virtue of Christs merits and sufferings deputed to be personally his As on the contrary those that acknowledge the merits and sufferings of Christ to be justly imputed to the persons of those whom he was sent to redeem cannot stand bound to acknowledge the posterity of the first Adam to be liable to concupiscence by his fall seeing the coming of Christ for the redemption of those whom God thereby should please to exempt from the common imputation thereof would be no lesse effectuall to the voiding of that condemnation which it contracted then supposing what ever disease of our nature concupiscence coming in by his fall may signifie So that supposing the immediate and personall imputation of the fall of Adam to all his posterity of the merits and suffering of Christ to all those for whom they are appointed the evil which mankind suffereth by the meanes of Adams fall is properly the punishment of his sinne the good which it receiveth by the meanes of Christs sufferings is the reward of it nor can have any dependance upon any act of his free will Otherwise then as that which God worketh by him not as that which he requireth at his hands But supposing the meritorious imputation of Adams fall and Christs righteousnesse the evil which his posterity lies under by meanes of it will not be properly the punishment of sinne because not the recompense of the evill which a man does by the evil which he suffers though properly a penalty because an evil inflicted in consideration of sinne Now supposing that Adam understood the precept In the day thou eatest thereof shalt thou die the death to condemn his posterity as well as himself it is manifest notwithstanding that the obligation thereof was not by virtue of his accepting of it and contracting upon it but originall by virtue of that being which God had bestowed and therefore taking hold of all his posterity on whom he meant to bestow it Wherefore though it is handsomly called by S. Augustine and others a Covenant of God with mankind which being transgressed by Adam forfeited the benefit thereof to his posterity Yet to speak properly it was the meer appointment of God in that which lay in his power and right to appoint that the uprightnesse wherein Adam was created should descend to his posterity he continuing in it otherwise the propagation thereof should be maintained the uprightnesse failing Nor can any man think strange that Christianity should oblige us to believe this if we consider the many and strange extravagances which those who either acknowledge not Christianity or have fallen from it do runne into by not resting in it The Epicureans and as some think the Peripateticks denying Providence the Stoicks Free-will and so the same providences The Pythagoreans whom the Platonicks are intangled with and the ancient Gnosticks Marcionites and Manichees manifestly imitate setting up two Gods one the author of evil the other of good the Heathen worshipping in effect the devil whom those Sects set up under the Name of author of evil the Jews and Mahumetanes if they have any thing to say to the originall of evil in mankind to whose use God hath commended the world being obliged to say that it comes from the fall of Adam Pelagians and Socinians not confessing what Jewes and Mahumetanes cannot deny but not able to give any account why the noble creature of mankind should be so overspread with evil coming from a good God and accountable for his own actions The question thus stated and Christianity tendring first the fall of bad angels and the seducing of Adam by their malice and in consequence thereunto of the greatest part of mankind to the worship of evil angels by whom they were seduced excepting those whom God dealt with by his word ministred by angels first then by his Sonne whose Gospel now is preached I suppose there is nothing wanting to evidence either the truth or obligation of it though those that preach it are not inabled to evidence why God pleased to suspend the
his Law was transgressed But the act of a Master of a houshold or the Prince and Soverraigne of a Comonwealth which you please disposing of mankind as his subjects or houshold servants Not denying that a man considered as free from all obligation of civile Society and a member of no Common-wealth that a Soveraigne in respect of another Soveraigne yea in some sort the subject of one Soveraigne in regard of another Soveraigne and his subjects may have right to exact punishment which he may as freely remit but resolving that whatsoever can be said of such cases is impertinent to ours God being necessarily and essentially Soveraigne Prince over his own subjects his creatures and master of them as his houshold goods And this act whereby he dispenseth in the effect of his originall Law so as to introduce another in stead of it being such that his glory must necessarily consist in the consideration upon which it is done as the principall act that can be done in the government of the principall creature And therefore I say on the other side that the cases of Damon and Phintias the great freinds whereof the one suffered or would have suffered for the other under Dionysius the Usurper of Sicily and of Zaleâ—cus who having made a Law for his Countrey to punish adulterers with losse of both eyes and his sonne being taken in adultery pulled out one of his own and one of his Sons to satisfy the Law are not pertinent to our case Suppose a friend had right to lay down his life for a friend Suppose the Usurper had right to take away one life and to accept another for it Suppose Zaleucus had right to dispose of his own eye to his sons interest suppose the people that inacted the Law did dispense so farre in it The effect of a civile Law is utterly satisfied by the evil once suffered proportionable to the forfeit in the judgement of the Law not considering out of what intent of mind it was suffered nor claiming any thing further when it is suffered But I have shewed that the sufferings of Christ were accepted of God to the redemtion of mankind in consideration of that free and pure obedience to God wherewith they were tendered to God not to satisfy his wrath against us by the evill which he indured for the time of meer punishment is not till the World to come but that he might shew that virtue and that obedience which is not to be showed but through the difficulty of afflictions And this not to the effect of making personall and immediate recompense for the sinnes of so many as shall be saved which were it made God could not in any justice impose upon them any condition for obtaining remission of those sinnes which he had received satisfaction for But to give God that satisfaction by so undue and so perfect obedience in such trials that the world can never see the like virtue as might move him in consideration thereof abating that debt of punishment which we are ingaged to by transgressing his Originall Law to publish an act of Grace admitting all to remission of sinnes and right to life everlasting that will undertake to live true Christians And this consideration I conceive I may say redounds as much to the glory of God as it is possible to conceive that any can do There being nothing more valuable then this obedience nothing more acceptable in him that is a sinner then new obedience for the future But the consideration in the meane time not personall but in the nature of the meritorious cause to which all satisfaction is reducible as purchasing freedome from evil though not right to good For no mans debt is immediately paid by the paine which Christ suffered but in consideration of his obedience to God in undergoing such trials all that will undergo the condition are admitted to remission of sins and everlasting life Therefore the punishment which Christ indures for our sinnes importeth not that there was any ground of reason why he should be accounted to have done them or we accounted to have undergone his sufferings But in regard of the evill which he suffered in consideration of our sinnes with an intent to take them away in freely offering himself to undergo what God should think fit to that purpose neither can it be pretended that any thing is wanting to manifest the justice of Gods proceeding with him nor the reason why it redounds to our benefit Now Socinus having in detestation that opinion which places justifying faith in believing that we are predestinate in considesideration of the merits of Christ suffering onely for the elect And abhorring as much the doctrine of the Church which he took to be tainted with the levain of Antichrist from the Apostles time It remained that he should runne into another extreme making the Gospel an act of Gods Grace excluding all consideration of Christ which could not be brought in but by voiding the Faith of the holy Trinity into the bargaine But though I allow Socinus to dispute whether the sufferings of Christ be properly the punishment of our sinnes or not because I have showed that they are not the punishment which civile Lawes require though not allowing him to blame S. Augustine or other Church Writers that have so called them much lesse to depart from the Faith of the Church for the signification of a word yet can it not be denied that the death of Christ is properly satisfaction upon the premises For satisfaction is properly a payment that may be refused as not in the nature and kind of that which was due Suppose for the purpose when a band is forfeit the forfeit incurred recompense satisfies not Indeed it is contrary to naturall equity in man to refuse to be satisfied with such a recompense as makes up his interest But between God and man it is otherwise For the forfeit of sin consisting in this that the act is done which cannot be undone Suppose the sufferings of Christ supposing his divine nature from everlasting both voluntary and meritorious of themselves and that to an unvaluable value even in justice yet are they refutable in point of Gods justice because he iâ— not to be obliged by any thing as receiving advantage by it But being accepted by him they become a full recompense to the purpose for which they are tendered that is for the obtaining of pardon and salvation for them that imbrace Christianity and that in the strict and rigorous estimate of justice for the infinite value of the person from whom they proceed And this according to Vlpiane 46. ff III. L. 52. Satisfactio est pro solutione Satisfaction is that which succeeds in stead of payment not made And according to Caius 2 ff VIII 1 Satisfacere est desiderium alicujus implere To satisfie is to fulfill a mans desire For that God cannot be obliged but by his own will to accept it to this effect whereas man is
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
primo calore Fidei Catholicae In the first zeal of the Catholike faith That is of his professing it being reconciled to the Church for these things are properly attributed to the profession of Christianity But to barely believing that it is true afarre off and at a great distance Cornelius in his letter to Fabius Bishop of Antiochia concerning Novatianus in Eusebius Eccles Hist VI. 43. Thus describeth Celerinus having been persecuted for the Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A man who having most stontly through the mercy of God passed through all tortures and confirmed the weaknesse of his flesh by the strength of his faith which strength is not in the mind that judgeth Christianity to be true but by the resolution of the will to stick to it Clemens Alexandrinus Strom. II. alledges Plato that in civil commotions the greatest virtue a man can meet with is Faith To wit in him whom a man trusts though the greatest happinesse be Peace which makes it needlesse Inferring thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whereby it appears that the greatest of wishes is to have peace the greatest of virtues faith Which he would not have alleged for the commendation of the Christian Faith had he not understood it to consist in that trust which a man sincerely engageth as well as in that credit which a man giveth Whereby we may understand why in another place he will have the title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the faithfall for Christians to hold the same reason with that of Theognis when he commends a faithfull friend 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he is worth gold and silver in a civil dissension Because he places the faith of a Christian in the obligation of Christianity which he undertakes when he expresseth that the honour which it imports lies in the performing of it As Lydia when she intreateth S. Paul in these terms Acts XVI 15. If ye judge me faithful to the Lord come into my house and abide there presseth him if he think her a true Christian as she had professed her self That is faithfull to God and his Church which she must be oblieged to upon the trust that she had taken upon her in becoming a Christian Therefore disputing not long afore against Basilides and Valeutinus the Hereticks who made mens faith to depend necessarily upon the frame of their natures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore is faith no longer the achievement of choice if it be the advantage of nature nor shall he that believes not be justly recompensed being blamelesse he that believeth being no cause Nor shall the property or otherwise of faith or unbeliefe be subject to praise or dispraise And by and by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But where becomes the repentance of unbelievers through which comes remission of sins So that neither shall Baptisme be any more reasonable nor the blessed seal the gift of the holy Ghost by Baptisme nor the Son nor the Father from whom it is expected Onely the distribution of natures according to them will be found utterly without God not having for the foundation of salvation voluntary Faith So the voluntary engagement which Baptisme expresly inacteth is that Faith whereby a Christian claimes the promises of the Gospel I know the words of S. Augustine may here be objected Enchirid. Cap. XXXI De hac enim fide loquimur quam adhibemus cum aliquid credimus non quam damus cum aliquid pollicemur Nam ipsa dicitur fides Sed aliter dicitur non mihi habuit fidem Aliter non mihi servavit fidem Nam illud est non credit quod dixi Hoc non fecit quod dixit For saith he we speake here of the credit which we give when we believe something not of that which we engage when we professe something For that also is called Faith But a man meants one way when he sayes he did not give me Faith Another way when he sayes he kept not faith with me For that is he believed not that which I said This he did not what he said As if the consideration of trust to be kept or not to be kept were utterly impertinent to the nature of justifying faith For why were those that were not yet baptized never called Fideles or Believers in the primitive Church though they professed never so much to believe the Christian faith but onely Catechumeni Hearers or Scholars or at the most Competentes or Pretenders when they put themselves forth actually to demand their Baptisme Why but to signifie that the Church had not yet conceived confidence of their Christianity because they had not yet engaged themselves in the profession of it Which having solemnized by Baptisme they were thenceforth called Faithfull the Name signifying as well trusty as Believers having proceeded so farre as to engage themselves to live as Christians because they believed believed Christianity to come from God as it pretendeth There would be no end if I should go about to produce the Fathers for this name of Christians one place or two shall serve for example Tertullian De Exhort castitatis Cap. IV. Spiritum quidem Dei etiam fideles habent sed non omnes fideles Apostoli Ergo qui se fidelem dixerat adjicit postea Spiritum Dei se habere quod nemo dubitares etiam de fideli And truly even Christians have the Spirit of God yet are not all Christians Apostles Therefore S. Paul having called himselfe faithful or a Christian he adds afterwards that he hath the Spirit of God which no man would question in a Christian Whereupon in his Book De Jejuniis Cap. XI you find an Antithesis or opposition between Spiritualis and Fidilis or a meere Christian and one that had extraordinary indowments of Gods Spirit As on the other side de praescript Cap. XII Quis Catechumenus quis Fidelis incertum est Speaking of the hereticks among them It is uncertain who is a Professor who a Scholar And truly he who considers all virtue to consist in the affection of the will not in the perfection of the understanding Considering withall that faith is according to Clemens Alexandrinus where afore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a voluntary assent of the soul Or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a voluntary presumption and assent unto piety Shall find great reason to consider what affection of the will it is wherein he places the virtue of faith in a good Christian Especially experience on the one side shewing that hereticks schismaticks and badde Christians who cannot be thought to be endowed with that faith which recommends good ones do really and truly believe all that truth which their Sect or their lust is consistent with And reason on the other side shewing how the believing of it becomes reconcileable with the interest of their sect or of their lust I suppose here that the reason which makes the motives of saith though sufficient to become defeisible is the Crosse of Christ attending the profession of Christianity in
what they ought to do but to the consequence thereof which naturally and reasonably they are apt to produce but do not necessarily produce Againe on the other side Trust and confidence in God through Christ obtaines the promises of the Gospel who denyes it But is this trust alwaies well grounded and true Is it not possible for a man to imagine his title to the promises of the Gospel to be good when it is not I would we had no cause to believe how oft it comes to passe I grant that at the first hearing and believing the Gospel all the world have ground enough for that confidence that may save them from despairing to attaine the promises of it But hath he that hath ground not to despaire of being justified by faith ground to conside as justified by faith Or is that all one as to have ground enough for that confidence that they have right to the said promises I suppose there is a great gulfe between both For when the preaching of the Gospel convinceth a man that he is lost unlesse he accept it upon whatsoever condition it tendereth it is enough to keep any man that is in his wits from dispairing to know that there is a condition tendered by God the accepting whereof will intitle us to his promises Because being sincerely tendred in Gods name there can be no barre but on our part to the accepting of it But to have a well grounded confidence of our own right and just title to the promises it behoveth that the Spirit of a man which is in him know that there is in him a sincere resolution of accepting the conditions Which how much the better it is grounded and setled so much more shall his confidence be secure And to this confidence to bring a man from this former confidence is as great a work as to induce a man that believes the world to come to preferre it before this For I demand Is he that sins against God for love of this world enemy to God as the Apostle saith James IV. 4. or not Are not all men enemies to God when the Gospel calls them to become his friends If not why may they not be saved without it If so can they have confidence in their enemy by being discovered to be his enemies Indeed the Gospel tendring conditions of peace they have confidence that they may become friends with God by imbracing the same But the confidence of friends till they have imbraced them they cannot have It is therefore a dangerous a imposture to invite an unregenerate man so soon as he is descovered so to be to the confidence of a Christian in God through Christ As not to invite him to that confidence who may be a Christian is to drive him to despaire For not presupposing his conversion from sinne to God it is necessarily carnal presumption not the confidence of a Christian And if the Spirit of God should seal to any heart the promises of the Gospel not presupposing this ground it were not possible for any man to discern the illusions of the evil Spirit from the dictates of Gods The conscience of our submission to those terms being the onely test by which the difference is discernable For all they that trust in thee shall not be ashamed but such as transgresse without a cause shall be put to confusion Psal XXV 2. To transgresse without a cause and to put trust in God are terms incompetible So that wheresoever we are bid trust in God being implicitely forbid trust in the world or our selves which all that love the world or themselves not in order to God necessarily do there is supposed the ground of this trust inconsistent with the conscience of sinne And though this ungrounded confidence importeth carnal presumption yet may it occasion dispaire For when the guilt of sinne in the conscience stronger then all prejudicate opinion and imposture of false doctrine discovers that there is no ground for the confidence of a Christian and prejudice on the other side admits no recourse to that condition which is the ground of it no marvaile if it seem impossible to attain peace of conscience which appearance is the very horror of despair Seeing then that trust in God as reconcileable and for the attaining of remission of sinnes is the immediate fruit of the Gospel believed but trust in God as reconciled which is confidence of remission of sinnes obtained is necessarily the consequence of that faith which justifieth the justification of a Christian being a sinner before a Christian necessarily implying remission of sins what remaineth but that the professing of faith to God for the undergoing of Christianity be the condition upon which the promises of the Gospel become due that is to say that faith which alone justifieth For it is true the Gospel tendereth severall promises remission of sinnes in the first place because the first thing a man convict and sentenced to death seeks is his discharge But no man can have this discharge but upon the same terms he must become the sonne of God whether as regenerate by grace or as adopted to glory that is to the right and title of it and upon the same terms be sanctified by the holy Ghost which as I shewed before is promised as a gift that is habitually to be possessed onely to Christians and to all Christians And therefore it is impossible to imagine a man discharged of his sinnes that is not for the very same reason and therefore at the same instant of nature as well as of time regenerate adopted and sanctified It is indeed to be granted that justification signifies something different from all these promises in as much as it is manifest that in the language of the Scriptures it importeth not making of a man righteous but declaring him and accounting him righteous treating him and dealing with him as righteous All this is true And yet I shall not grant that it is so properly understood to be the act of God as sitting upon his throne of judgement whether according to mercy or justice as the act of God contracting with mâ—n for everlasting life upon condition of submitting to the Covenant of Grace and the terms of it Indeed the preaching of the Gospel premises the generall judgement to come as tendering the way to come clear of it to wit by Christ whom it declareth judge of quick and dead For S. Paul thus proposeth it to the Athenians Acts XVII 30 31. God who eversaw the times of ignorance now chargeth all men every where to repent Because he hath appointed a day wherein he will judge the world righteously by the man whom he hath appointed making faith hereof to all by raising him from the dead And of the overture thereof which he made to Felix S. Luke saith Acts XXIV 25. As he discoursed of righteousnesse and temperance and judgement to come And S. Paul speaking of the Gospel Rom. 1. 18. The wrath of God is
can be attributed to the spirit of God speaking of Gods own people in the mouth of David And without doubt as Idolatry was the originall of the most gross customes of sinne as appeares by the premises So can there be no greater argument of the corruption of mans nature then the departure of all nations from the worship of one true God to the worship of they knew not what That all nations coming of one blood from one God which at their first apostasy was so well known to them and not able to blot out of their own hearts the conscience of the service they ought him should imagine themselves discharged of that obligation by tendring it to what they pleased saving a small part of mankinde whom he reserved to himselfe by making them acquainted with himself through the familiarity which he used them with if all other arguments of a common principle of corruption in our common nature were lost is enough to make the apostasy of our first forefathers credible which the relation of Moses makes truth Wherefore when David attributes to himselfe by nature that which the people of God attribute to the Gentiles it must needs be understood in regard of a principle common to both which the Grace of God suffereth not to come to effect but preventeth in his people And when he attributeth the same to his malicious enemies Jewes onely by the first birth he warranteth us to say the same of those that are Jewes by the second birth so farre as the birth of both is the same I will not forbear to alledge here the Law of Leviticus that appoints a time of impurity for women that have brought forth as no lesse fit to signifie the evil inclination to which our nature by the fall of Adam is become liable then the ceremonies of the Law are fitly used by God to shadow the truth of the Gospel Not that I make any doubt that this impurity of it self is but legall as the impurity contracted by touching a dead man or a living creature that was unclean or that of the leprosie or by the custome of women or the like Which I am resolved amounts to no more then an incapacity of freely conversing with Gods people or an obligation to a sacrifice which is there called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it purged this incapacity which in regard of that positive Law may be called sinne But this being granted and these Legall incapacities being by the correspondence of the Law with the Gospel to signifie the cause for which men are uncapable of heaven As the leprosie of the body and the touching of a dead man or a living creature that is unclean by the law necessarily signifieth that incapacity which cometh by the custome of sinne So that uncleannesse which ariseth from those things which come from our own bodies seemeth by necessary correspondence to signifie that incapacity of coming to heaven which ariseth from the inward inclination of our nature to wickednesse Neither will I omit to allege the saying of the Prophet David alleging the reason of Gods compassion to his people in their sinnes to be their mortality Psal LXXVIII 40. For he considered that they were but flesh and even as a wind that passeth away and cometh not againe And Psal CIII 14-17 For he knoweth our frame he remembreth that we are dust The dayes of man are as of grasse as the bud of the field so springeth he For a wind passeth upon it and it is not And the place knoweth it no more But the goodnesse of the Lord is from generation to generation upon them that fear him and his righteousnesse upon childrens children For having shewed that the bodily death to which Adam was sentenced implied in it spritituall death and supposed the same according to S. Paul I may well say that he could not expresse that reason which Christians alledge to God for his compassion upon their infirmities more properly to the time and state of the Law then by alleging the death which our bodies are subject to as an argument of sinne which it is allotted to punish And the antithesis which follows between our short life and the continuance of Gods mercies to his servants of their posterity comes corespondently to set forth the grace of the Gospel though sparingly signified as under the Law And here I must not forget the Wise mans exhortation Wisdome I. 12 Affect not death through the error of your life nor purchase destruction through the workes of your hands For God made not death nor taketh pleasure in the destruction of the living For he made all things to indure And the beginnings of the world were healthful and no deadly poyson among them nor any dominion of hell upon the earth For righteousnesse is immortall But the wicked with their words and works purchased it And thinking it their friend decayed and made a covenant with it because they are worthy to be on the side of it Here it is evident that the speech is of temporall death but so that by it is intimated spirituall death according to that which hath oft been observed and will oft come to be observed that the mystery of Christianity intimated in the old Testament begins more plainly to be discovered in these books then in the canonicall Scriptures And therefore though the purchase of death is attributed to the evil words and works of the wicked yet seeing it hath taken place over all the world contrary to the first institution of God thereby he leaves us to argue the corruption of nature which moveth mankinde to take pleasure in those workes by which death takes place Last of all I will allege not the authority of the Book of Job which is not questionable but the authority of the Greek Translation of it Be the author thereof who may be be the authority thereof what it may be it is manifest how ancient it is and that it came from the people of God while they continued the people of God and hath passed the approbation of the Apostles When therefore it is said that no man is clear of sin no not the infant of one day old upon earth It remaineth manifest that this was the sense of the then people of God As it appeares also by Philo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That to sinne is a property born with all that are born in as much as it is come to birth And divers sayings of the Heathens might be alledged as obscure arguments of that truth which the Gospel is grounded upon But that I conceive the disorders of the world the greatest whereof that can be named is that which I named even now of the worship of Idols are greater and more evidences of the same then any sayings of Writers Which therefore it will not be requisite to heap into this abridgement CHAP. XII The Haeresie of Simon Magus the beginning of the Gnosticks
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
fire alwaies burn the earth alwaies keep the place truly we distinguish these things as necessary from those that come to passe either so or otherwise as having a presumption from so much experience of the wil of God which all things must obey already part upon the course of their nature bythe causes which being thereby produced cannot but by the same will be defeated But of this I do not see what question can remaine One kind of determination I shall grant upon the premises that the will of man is liable to that necessity which it inferreth not prejudicing the freedom of it I grant that the will necessarily followeth the last and ultimate dictate of the practick understanding setting this grant aside as impertinent to the question in dispute imports more then a judgement that it is best to doe or not to doe this or that For the last dictate of the understanding that advises about doing or not doing this or that or that it ought to be done or not don by him that will do as he ought For it is manifest that a man many times does not doe that which he is resolved that he ought to do And so it may fall out that such a dictate or sentence shall not be the last or ultimate dictate of the understanding because falling to advise anew after that sentence it may find some new consideration whereupon it may resolve to proceed otherwise then afore Therefore the last or ultimate dictate of the understanding cannot be understood to be any other then that which is effectuall that is to say when it is supposed that the effects followe upon it And upon these terms I grant that the will is necessarily determined by the last dictate of the understanding in as much as it is supposed to be necessary that the will be determined by some judgement of the understanding either expressely pronouncing or implicitly resolving that this or that is for the best to be done or not done So that he that saies that the will is necessarily determined by the last judgement of the understanding saies no more but this that the will is necessarily determined by that judgement which determines it For supposing it is the last you suppose that the will proceeds to action upon it So that the necessity which all this inferrs is no prejudice to freedome or contingence being only the necessity of that which must needs be because you suppose that it is The like is to be said of the foreknowledge or foresight which God hath of whatsoever shall at any time come to passe and the necessity which though it causeth not yet it inferreth For no man can know that which is not true nor see that which is not in being neither can that be foreseen which is not to have being at that time when it is foreseene to come to passe And therefore all foresight necessarily implies a supposition of the future being of that which is foreseen A thing necessarily true howsoever we suppose the will to be determined to do whatsoever it doth that is to say whatsoever we suppose to bee the ground of Gods foresight For supposing that God from everlasting foresaw that S. Paul should be converted at such a moment of time because he had a purpose from everlasting to determine his will freely to imbrace Christ at that moment of time yet was not S. Paul converted because God foresaw that he should be converted but because he was to be converted therefore God foresaw that he should be converted Indeed we are to distinguish three instances in the knowledg of God concerning future contingencies In the first he sees what may come to passe In the second what shall come to passe In the third what is come to passe The first by the perfection of his nature The second by the decree of his will giving stedy order to things of themselves moveable as Boethius says that is to contingencies For we suppose contingence to stand with providence and we inquire how that consistence may appeare The third by the act of freedome seene from everlasting before the will that doth it have being in those very decrees in the execution whereof providence consists There is in an architect or survayor of buildings a certain knowledg of that which he designeth before he goe to work consisting in a certaine Idea or form which his businesse is to copy out of his mind into the materialls But when his worke is done he sees that in being before his eyes which he saw in his own designe afore The wisdome of God is that soverain art which directed him in making heaven and earth and ordaining whatsoever comes to passe in both The decree of his will whether immediate or mediate distinguishes between that which may be and that which is at the present and therefore in the same sort between that which may be and that which shall be for the future But though his knowledge increase not when he sees that in being which formerly he saw was to be because he goes not beyond himselfe for the knowledge of it yet to see that it supposeth the act of the freedome which doth it past to see that it shall be to come In like maner therefore whilst the act of the creature appeareth to God as to come he seeth what shall be But if all future contingencies be present to God from everlasting then consequently he sees also from everlasting the act of that freedome which produceth them as don in the due time of it and in this sight consisteth the effect of the same presence of future contingencies in and to Gods eternity from everlasting There is therefore in God a certaine kind of knowledge of that which is to come which Divines call scientiam visionis whereby God sees from everlasting thegreatest contingencies to come to passe at that moment of time when we see them come to passe which whatsoever is the ground of it whether it be posible for us to say how it is possible or not yet this we must say of it that it presupposeth the future being of that which it foreseeth and therefore is no way the cause of it Though the future being thereof presupposeth also that knowledg in God which directeth that freedome which bringeth it to passe So that the Fathers of the Church had cause to insist against those Heretickes that derived the â—ourse and originall of sin in the world from some other cause then the freewill of the creature and the abuse of it that future contingencies come not to passe because God foretells that they will come to passe But that God foretells that they will come to passe because they are future contingencies that is things which though contingent yet shall come to passe therefore that Gods foresight infers no necessity in those things which he foresees shall come to passe by the free choice of the creature For though there remaineth yet a further question concerning
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
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
Advocate with the father Jesus Christ the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sins And when David who had the spirit of God upon the same termes as Christians have it excepting that which hath been excepted prayeth Psalm XIX 13 14. Who understandeth his errours Clense me from hidden sins Keep thy servant also from presumptuous sins that they beare not rule over me Then shall I be upright and cleane from great transgressions He showeth sufficiently the difference between veniall and mortall sins as to Christians which in case of invincible ignorance and meere supprize comes to no sin as to Christians But he showeth also that Christians neglecting themselves may come to fall into sins of persumption which he prayeth against For the rest the same S. Iohn incouraging Christians to pray for the sins of Christians with this limitation as I surppose if by their advice they appear to be reduced to take the cours which may procure pardon at Gods hands acknowledgeth further that there is a sin unto death I say not that yee pray for it saith he 1. John V. 16. 17. And the Apostle to the Hebrews VI. 4 5 6. speaketh of some sin which he acknowledgeth not that it can be admitted to penance for the obtaining of forgivenesse which he protesteth again Ebr. X. 26 -31 XII 16 17. It is commonly thought indeed that to deny the true faith against that light which God hath kindled in a mans conscience is hereby declared to be a sin that repentance cannot cure Or rather that God hereby declareth that he will never grant in repentance And truly that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost which our Lord saith shall never he pardoned neither in this world nor in the world to come Mat. XII 31 32. Mark III. 28 29. Luke XII 10. manifestly consisteth in attributing the works which the holy Ghost did to convert men to Christ to the devill being convinced that our Lord came from God by the workes he did for that purpose Just as Saint Steven reproaches the Jewes for resisting the holy Ghost as their Fathers had done Acts VII 51. And that there is no cure for this sin it is manifest because it consisteth in rejecting the cure And apostasy from Christianity which is manifestly the sinne which the Apostle to the Hebrews intendeth differeth from it but as the obligation to Christianity once received differeth from that Christianity which being proposed with conviction a man is bound to receive But otherwise not onely the Church but the Novatians themselves supposed that those who had denied the Faith might recover pardon of God by repentance Nor can it become visible to the Church what is that conviction which whoso transgresseth becomes unpardonable because God hath excluded him from repentance In the meane time how difficult the Primitive Church accounted it to attaine pardon of such sinnes appeares by the excluding of the Montanists and Novatians first then by the long Penance prescribed Apostates Murtherers and Adulterers least the admitting of them to Penance might seem to warrant their pardon upon too light repentance Saint Paul admits the incestuous person at Corinth whether to Penance or to Communion with the Church But upon what termes Least the offender should be swallowed up with extream sorrow and least Satan should advantage himself against them should he refuse it And because having written out of great anguish of heart with teares for them who presumed to bear him out in it he had found them moved with sorrow according to God to repentance with all satisfaction and desire of peace with the Apostle 2 Cor. II. 1-8 VII 7-11 For we understand by Saint Paul 1 Cor. V. 2. 2 Cor. XII 21. that even the Church themselves when they shut a sinner out of the Church did make demonstration of sorrow for his case And therefore himself much more was put to mourning and to professe by his outward habit that he thought his sinne incurable without sorrow answerable to it And when Saint Paul commands the Collossians III. 5. Mortify your members that are upon earth fornication uncleannesse passion evill desire and covetousnesse which is idolatry For which the wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience It is manifest that he placeth the mortifying of these vices in the afflicting and humbling of our earthly members wherein the lusts of them reside Therefore he serves his own body no otherwise but striving for the prize of Christians like one of their Greekish Champions that would not beat the aire he beates his own body black and blew to bring it under servitude Least having preached to others himself should become reprobate 1 Cor. IX 26 27. And certainly if Christianity require this discipline over Saint Pauls body least he should fall into sinne it will require very great severity of them that are fallen into sinne to be exercised upon their bodies the lusts whereof they have satisfied by those sinnes to regain the favour and appease the wrath of God and to settle that hatred of sinne and that love of goodnesse in the heart which the preventing of sinne for the future necessarily requireth The practice of the Old Testament sufficiently signifieth the same Though David in the Psalme that I mentioned afore seem to make the pardon of his sin a thing easily obtained at Gods hands as it is indeed a thing easily obtained supposing the disposition which David desired it with but not that disposition a thing easily obtained yet you shall find the same David elsewhere wetting his bed and watring his couch with his teares so that his beauty is gone with mourning his flesh dried up for want of fatnesse and his bones cleave to his flesh for the voice of his mourning Indeed he alwayes expresseth his affliction to be the subject of his mourning But alwayes acknowledging his sins to be the cause of those afflictions which he therefore takes the course to remove by taking this course for his sinnes The Prophet Esay I. 15 16. thus calleth the Jewes to appease Gods wrath Wash ye make ye clean remove the evil of your workes from before mine eyes cease to do evil learn to do good seek righteousnesse Sure this was never intended to be done by the meer thought of doing it But the Prophet Joel having threatned a plague what doth he prescribe for the cure And now saith the Lord return to me with all your heart with fasting weeping and mourning and rent your hearts and not your garments and turn to the Lord your God for he is gracious and mercifull long-suffering great in mercy and repenteth him of evill Blow the trumpet in Sion sanctify a fast invite the assembly gather the people sanctify a Congregation make the old and young and the sucking infants meet let the bridegroom come forth of his chamber and the bride of her closet let the Priests the ministers of the Lord weep between the Porch and the Altar and say Spare Lord thy people and
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
limited yet must not this limitation be such as shall abate any thing of the promise of the Gospel which the Sacraments bring with them to those who by a competent resolution for their Christianity are qualified for it Turn we to the Law and the Prophets and observe according to the premises that there was no expiation prescribed by the Law for the inward guilt of sinne but for outward uncleannesses or incapacities of conversing among the people of God and by consequence of injoying the benefit of the Land of promise together with some sinnes which the Law specifies but condemns not to any bodily or pecuniary punishment Wherefore seeing we read in the Law and the Prophets so many exhortations to repentance which if we suppose to come from God we cannot suppose to be void of a promise implyed tendring pardon and favour at Gods hands upon repentance it is necessary to acknowledg that inward repentance under the Law qualified for remission of sinnes Read the seaven Penitentiall Psâ—lms and tell me how men came then to be cleansed of their sinnes David affirming Psal LI. 18. Thou desirest no sacrifice else would I give it thee but thou delightest not in burnt-offerings but by that faith which moved them to seek reconcilement with God by repentance and by that conversion to righteousnesse which their faith supposed acceptable to God So the Prophets Ezek. XVIII 32. XXXIII 9-20 Esay I. 18. 1 King VIII 33. 2 Chron. VI. 24. besides infinite more For if we say that men were then bound to confesse their sinnes that they might be cleansed by the Synagogue he that confessed a capitall crime must incurre a capitall punishment and without death there was no way to cleanse him of it If we say he might be cleansed by sacrifice by the Synagogue without confessing the sin why not under the Gospel by means answerable that is by the Eucharist and the oblations out of which it is celebrated without confessing in particular to the Church I do not therefore here dispute what sins might be and what might not be purged by sacrifices not doubting by many passages of the Prophets and Ecclesiasticus that the righteous and spiritual men of that people under the Law did offer sacrifices for the expiation of those sinnes which there was no particular promise in the Law that God would pardon upon those sacrifices But first I suppose that though God allowed their conformity to his present Law in offering sacrifices that were not expresly required by it but customed by Gods people upon it yet he accepted them not for those sacrifices but for that repentance and conversion of heart from whence they came Thereupon then I argue in the second place that if without declaring the kind of sinne under the Law under the Gospel much more For seeing that there is no expiation for capital crimes without death by the Law he that should offer sacrifice for such a sinne declaring it must become liable to death And the same is the case in the second rank of offenses against the Law which it punisheth with scourging Those also belonging to that rank which the Law threatens with death by the hand of God which renders their life forfeit into Gods hands Because of the Rule which they have that if they come to be know to the Synagogue they are to be punished with scourging For who can imagine that these can be purged by the Law without undergoing the penalty of the Law And therefore if sacrifices were offered for them they were not confessed seeing that all estates in the Synagogue which was bound to punish them were also bound to bring them to punishment As for the Church it hath been already declared that the constitution thereof presupposeth in order of nature and reason the covenant of Grace that is to say the condition upon which the Gospel tendreth remission of sinnes So that as we have all the reason in the world to think that God hath founded the corporation of his Church to be the means of affecting or procuring that dispoâ—ition which qualifieth for the promises of the Gospel So if the same diâ—poâ—â—â—ion câ—n be procured without the ministery of the Church which suppoâ—â—th the knowledge of particulâ—r sinnes there can be no cause why God should injoyn that the effect whereof is to be had without it Now I suppose from the premiâ—es that those who live within the Church have sufficient helps of Gods Grace to â—â—able them to return from their sinnes by repentance As for thoâ—e helps which â—hâ—y may have by the ministery of the Church making known their â—â—nnes to it Though they may be of such virâ—ue as to make that more 〈◊〉 which is poâ—sible without them Yet when all is done that man câ—n do it exâ—â—edâ—th not the same kind of helys whiâ—h man outwardly may rendâ—râ—â—o Goâ—s inwâ—râ—â—râ—ce Which as it is more probâ—ble that Gods good providence should â—â—ke â—ffectuall then where the same outwâ—rd meanâ— are not imployed or where they are imployed in a lesse measure So is it possible that bâ—ing onâ—e â—â—ffiâ—â—â—nt they may become effectual by Gods grace though in a 〈◊〉 measure But I confesse there is nothing prevailes more with me to conclude this then that which the Scripture affords us to evidence that God hâ—â—h instituted and appointed the Ministery of his Church for the reconciling oâ— thoâ—e â—â—nnes which must or which may come to the knowledge of his Church For when God giveth first to S. Peter the Keyes of his Church Mat. XVIII 19. and afterwards to all his Disciples the power of binding and loosing sinnes Joh. XX. 19. it is evident that by this power they are able to do nothing to unbelievers but perâ—wade them by preâ—ching the Gospel to imbrace that courâ—â— by which it tendreth râ—mission of sinne untill having perswaded them to it they oblige them to enter into the Church by Baptism as that to which God hath liâ—ited that profession of Christianity which he requires to remission of sinne Thus is the power of the Keyes or of binding and loosing sinne first seen and exercised in baptizing understanding thereby not onely the ministring of the Sacrament but the bringing of a man to that disposition to which Baptism is due The same is still exercised towards those that are come into the Church by laying forth to them the doctrine of Moses and the Prophets of our Lord and his Apostles obliging them to return from sinne by Repentance So that it cannot justly be said that Preaching as we call it that is further instructing in the doctrine of Christianity those that by the preaching of the Gospell have been moved to imbrace it is a thing impertinent to the power of the Keyes not concerning the office of it Unlesse we think ministring the helps of sufficient grace imperâ—inent to effectuall grace which alwayes supposeth them Having already shewed that before conversion to Christianity the power of the Keyes is seen in ministring the same
the Gospel requires which therefore may be obtained without the Ministery of the Church For if it be said that these persons would willingly undergo Penance upon condition of being restored to the Communion of the Church upon supposition that by the Ministery thereof they are restored to Gods grace and that therefore the desire of reconciliation by the Church supplies it as the desire of Baptism is accepted when it cannot be had If this be said I will allow that he who refuses the Ministery of the Church tendring him a reasonable presumption of attaining reconcilement with God by the means of it according to the just Laws of Christianity can have no cause to promise himselfe pardon without it In the mean time it is not the desire of reconcilement by the Church that qualifies him for remission of sinne but onely takes away the barre that hinders Gods grace to work that disposition in him which qualifies for it For if it be a part of Christianity to be a member of the Catholick Church then are not they capable of the promises made to Christians that will not seek them by the Ministery of the Church when and how farre and according as their Christianity shall oblige them to seek them To the same purpose I alledge also the second reason of S. Pauls indulgence and the effects of it in the practice of the primitive Church To wit the admitting of those that had committed Idolatry in time of persecution or who were otherwise born out in their sinnes by faction in the Church to communicate with the Church when in such cases there could be no presumption of sufficient disposition in the parties for forgivenesse from God but onely to avoid a breach in the Church of all things most prejudiciall to the generall good of the Body For can there be any appearance that the Church in such cases could be satisfied of the true and sufficient conversion of those that are admitted upon such terms when it is manifest that they are not admitted of choice but to avoid a further inconvenience Wherefore seeing the Church could not justifie the doing of it if there were not possibility of their being qualified for the Communon of the Church it follows that this possiblity consists in that the means of grace being sufficient for all within the Church may be effectual without the ministery thereof provided it be within the unity of it Here I must alledge the custome even of the primitive Church imposing no Penance upon Clergy-men â— that weae degraded for those crimes for which Laymen were reduced to Penance I remember the first Book de Synedris alledges this for an objection against the necessity of excommunication seeing it was not necessary for the Clergy Not considering that excommunication is abated by Penarice as Penance is abated by degradation in the Clergy But casting a foul aspersion upon the whole Church for imposing Penance upon the people when as nothing required it if the Clergy needed it not And this upon a mistake whether in point of fact or in point of right For it is not true that the Clergy were not subject to Penance especially in the first times of Christianity either when the crime was of a deeper nature then such as ordinary Laymen did Pehance for Or when a Clergy-man having been censured to communicate among the People which was degradation at that time relapsed Though afterwards they were remitted to do their Penance in private not bringing them before the Congregation for the prayers thereof with imposition of hands Neither is the reason which the ancient Canons give to be neglected in point of right For the losse of their rank in the Church being to them a rebuke whereof Lay Christians are not capable it is necessary that a difference should be made between them and the people Especially the interest of the Church requiring it in regard of another rule that no man that had done Penance should ever be admitted to the Clergy because of the common Christianity imbased in them who have done Penance which in those who are promoted to the Clergy is required of the best For those who for their qualities might best serve the Church if they had done Penance were ever after unserviceable iâ— not might be restored Whereby it appeateth that the Church presumed of them who knew their duty better then ordinary Christians that the loss of their rank would be sufficient to reduce them to true repentance without further constraint from the Church As afterwards they were trusted to do their Penance in private But this is full evidence that the Church did not think all sin incurable without the Keys of the Church For then the Church could not have referred the applying of the means of pardon which they procure to any presumption of any mans good conscience The like appears in the reconciling of Hereticks and Schismaticks to the unity of the Church by sholes that is by whole Churches at once upon whom as it is impossible to imagine that the discipline of Penance should passe so is it known upon evidence of Historicall truth that those who were not to be baptized again as some Heresies were by the Canons in force were admitted onely with Imposition of hands that is with the blessing of the Church acknowledging thenceforth to pray for them as Christians not as those for whom she prayes that they may become Christians Which not supposing possibility of pardon for them not undergoing the discipline of the Church could not have been granted I avow it to be truly said in this case that the Baptism received among Hereticks revives and comes to effect by this blessing of the Church For seeing that the onely necessary barre to the effect of it was the denying of that point of Christianity which distinguishes every Heresie from the Catholick Church or the destroying of the unity of the Church speaking of Schismaticks those that so return professing thenceforth the whole faith and maintaining the communion of the Church cannot be said to want any thing necessary to qualifie them for the promises of Christianity Seeing then this possibility is not grounded upon the Ministery of the Church which passes not upon them but upon the common profession of Christians made by them when they were baptized and the taking away of that barre which made it ineffectuall afore by returning to the unity of the Church though without any ministration of Penance neither can it be said that the disposition qualifying for remission of sinne is not to be attained in the Church without the Ministery of the Church by the discipline of Penance nor that it is attained by the desire of it but onely that the barre is removed by submitting to it A visible instance hereof I will propose in the reconciling of England to the Church of Rome in Q. Maries days an act of the highest nature that the power of the Keys could do And yet it is notorious that