Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n great_a place_n see_v 2,893 5 3.1798 3 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A40807 Libertas ecclesiastica, or, A discourse vindicating the lawfulness of those things which are chiefly excepted against in the Church of England, especially in its liturgy and worship and manifesting their agreeableness with the doctrine and practice both of ancient and modern churches / by William Falkner. Falkner, William, d. 1682. 1674 (1674) Wing F331; ESTC R25390 247,632 577

There are 10 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Minister for our good according to our Petitions Ep. 120. c. 22. Ep. 121. c. 9. This sense is oft expressed by S. Augustin and in the Book under his name De diligendo Deo and seemeth well to agree with the expressions of others of the ancient Fathers and with the notion of the ancient Jews as it is mentioned by Philo Phil. de Plant. Nae de Gigantibus and thus much seemeth to be encluded in these words of the New-Testament Heb. 1.14 Are they not all ministring spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be Heirs of Salvation And Mat. 18.10 Take heed that you despise not one of these little ones for I say unto you that their Angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in Heaven And this notion expresseth an honourable ministration of the holy Angels De Cu. Dei l. 9.6 15. which hath respect to the Church of God but doth not allow them as S. Aug. would not to be accounted Mediators nor to receive Religious worship from us but to be honoured by us Charitate non servitute De Ver. R●elig c. 55. by an high degree of respectful love but not by Religious service and subjection 10. As to that passage of Ecclus. 46.22 Which mentioneth Samuel prophecying after his death it is sufficient here to observe that that that part of that Chapter is by our Kalendar directed to be omitted And from all this it may appear that nothing is in our service appointed to be read out of the Apocrypha which being rightly understood is any way hurtful or of ill influence upon practice Yet it is to be further noted that he who shall acknowledge that there is much good contained and no evil or sin advised in any of the Apocryphal Books is still far from admitting them to be equal to the Canonical Scriptures For though there may be divers Books free from actual error yet it is the Prerogative of the holy Scriptures alone to be immediately indited by that holy Spirit who can never err and to be tendered of God and received of his Church as the perpetual and infallible rule to manifest the will of God and the Doctrines of Faith SECT VII Considerations about that Translation of the Psalms used in the Liturgy 1. The next thing to be treated of is the ue of the Psalms according to the version in the Common-Prayer-Book concerning which Consid 1. The use of this Translation doth not require us to judge it the best English Translation For as formerly the sentences out of the Psalms before Morning Prayer and at the Communion were expressed according to another ancient and distinct translation so both the Epistles and Gospels and the sentences out of the Psalms at the beginning of Morning and Evening Prayer are now altered according to our last allowed English Translation which alteration seemeth to prefer that Translation as the best 2. Cons 2. The Translation of the Psalms used in our Liturgy is from the Hebrew to which it generally agreeth sometimes using the liberty of a paraphrastical stile And the Hebrew being the Original is doubtless more pure than any Translation which differeth fromit And though the Septuagint in the Book of Psalms which of all other hath been of most frequent publick use in the Christian Church doth vary less from the Hebrew than in any other Poetical Book of holy Scripture yet a Catalogue may be given of at least an hundred and fifty places wherein the Septuagint differeth from the Hebrew not in any Christian Doctrine but in the manner of expressing the sense of those Texts in all which the version in the Liturgy accordeth with the Hebrew and dissenteth from the Septuagint Indeed in some phrases and clauses our version followeth the Septuagint where the matter is unblameable and three entire verses which are not in the Hebrew Chaldee or Syriack are in the fourteenth Psalm added in this English Version according to the ordinary Copies of the 70 Grot. in Ps 14. and of many but as Grotius intimateth not all of the Aethiopick Vulgar Latin and Arabick and which are not in the Greek Manuscript from Alexandria but these Verses being the same with what is cited by the Apostle out of the Old Testament Rom. 3.12 13 18. cannot be disallowed as to the matter of them and the Psalms in the Liturgy being chiefly used as Hymns of praise or our words of blessing God agreeably to the practice of the Jewish and ancient Christian Church may well admit in that use of such a variation from the Hebrew Text. 3. If we observe the practice of the ancient Christian Churches we shall find that the Greek Church publickly used the Psalms according to the Septuagint and the Latin Arabian and Aethiopick Churches V P. Pithaeum de Latin Biblior Interpret had their Psalms of publick use translated from the Septuagint or with a little tincture from Lucian the Martyr wherein they also followed some evident corruptions of the Greek Copies as the Arabick in admitting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ps 17.14 the Aethiopick in reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ps 39.5 Ps 92.10 and the Vulgar in translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Syriack Version was translated out of the Hebrew but hath suffered some alterations by being revised according to the Septuagint from whence among other things it received its frequent use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but this Version hath many imperfections as chiefly its leaving out sometimes a whole verse as in Ps 34.9 and sometimes some part thereof as Ps 58.9 The result of this consideration is this that the Psalms publickly used in the Church of England are more fully agreeing to the Original Hebrew than any of those known Versions were which were used in the ancient Christian Churches and he who thinketh that he may not lawfully join or Minister in the Church of England because of our use of this version of the Psalms might have discerned greater cause in this very particular to have kept him at a greater distance from all the famous ancient Christian Churches in the World 4. Cons 3. The particular places most blamed in this Version of the Psalms do afford no sufficient cause when our superiours enjoin the use of this Translation to withhold our hearty consent thereto I shall instance in three places which are chiefly urged 1. One is Ps 106.30 where this Translation readeth it then stood up Phinees and prayed and so the Plague ceased But the Version in our Bibles rendreth it Then stood up PHinehas and executed judgment The word in the Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Verbs of which Root being most used in the form Hithpahel do generally signifie to pray and in this form of Pihel they are rarely used and do sometimes signifie judging or the judge interposing between men and men to end their strife But
them but this as some other ways of reserving them as found to be of ill use Hesych in Lev. 8. Hesychius speaketh of a custom of burning them which custom I suppose took its original from those Commands of God whereby he enjoyned the remainder of the Jewish Passcover and of the Sacrifices of thanksgiving and some others to be burnt with fire Exod. 12.10 Lev. 7.15 16 17. The Council of Mascon directed them to be given in the Church Conc. Matisc 2. c. 6. to such Christians as kept their Fasts there on the fourth and sixth days of the week which were the old stationary days The direction in our Rubrick is ordered with as much prudence as any of these if it be not to be preserred before them all for as there is no reason to doubt but that they may be eaten so can there be no reason produced why the Communicants may not as well eat them as any other persons 3. The eating these Elements in the Church by the Communicants out of a reverent respect to the Sacrament for which they were consecrated is allowable and no way blameable Both our Articles and our Rubrick after the Communion Service do acknowledge that the sacramental Bread and Wine even in the Sacrament do remain in their proper substances which with other expressions in our Liturgy sufficiently exclude the Romish corruptions Yet since we believe this Sacrament to be an excellent Gospel Ordinance I suppose that out of respect thereunto devout Christians do generally acknowledge that even the Vessels particularly appointed for the Bread and Wine at the Communion and the Communion Table should not be used at mens ordinary meals and certainly a due respect to Gods Ordinance for which they are set apart will not allow this which was also condemned by the ancient Canons and it appears very reasonable that those Elements which were consecrated for the Sacrament may be used with at least as much reverence as the Communion Cup or Patine De Consc l. 4. c. 31. Sect. 3. And when Amesius truly asserteth that it necessarily followeth from the Religious honour of God that those things which have any respect unto Gods Worship ought to receive from us a privative honour even when they are not used to a holy use as heh instanceth in Bread and Wine left at the Communion which is to be honoured privatively that is care ought to be taken that it be not used contemptibly and sacred Phrases as sacramental words c. not to be used in sport even hence it will follow that they may be used with a relative honour that is so used as to express a reverence to those holy Ordinances to which they bear relation SECT III. Of the saving Regeneration of Infants in Baptism and the grounds upon which it may be asserted 1. THE next Office in the Book of Common Prayer is that of Baptism where that which requireth principal consideration is that every baptized Infant is declared Regenerate and thanks is returned to God after Baptism that he hath regenerated this Infant by his holy Spirit and the beginning of the Catechism declareth that the Child in Baptism was made a Member of Christ a Child of God and an Inheritor of the Kingdom of Heaven These expressions have been somewhat differently understood some applying them to a saving Regeneration of every baptized Infant others to a federal Regeneration or a Regeneration Sacramento tenus And I suppose it evident that if it can be certainly proved that every baptized Infant is savingly regenerated or if on the other side all the expressions in the Liturgy can be fairly and probably interpreted of a federal Regeneration which is generally acknowledged there can be then no doubt but all these expressions may be fitly and allowably used shall treat of both these senses because they both plead an allowance in our Church and indeed the latter doth not necessarily destroy but may well consist with the former 2. Beginning with the former I shall first shew what evidence there is that the acknowledging a saving regeneration of every Infant baptized hath been the Doctrine publickly received in this Church ever since the Reformation This is the more probable sense of that Rubrick before the Catechism in the former Book of Common Prayer and that at the end of Baptism in the present Book both which declare that Children baptized are undoubtedly saved that is as the first Book of Edw. VI. and our present Book do express it if they dye in their infancy and before they commit actual sin And our Book of Homilies declareth Hem. of Salvation of Mankind by Christ Part. 1. that Infants being baptized and dying in their infancy are by his Christs Sacrifice washed from their sins brought to Gods favour and made his children and inheritors of his Kingdom of Heaven To these I shall and what Bishop Cranmer who was a great Instrument in our Reformation and Bishop Juell a principal Defender thereof write concerning Baptism complying with the sense here expressed Bishop Cranmer saith Of the Lords Supper lib. 1. c. 12. For this cause Christ ordained Baptism in water that as surely as we see feel and touch water with our bodies so assuredly ought we to believe when we be baptized that Christ is verily present with us and that by him we be new born again spiritually and washed from our sins and graffed in the stock of Christs own body so that as the Devil hath no power against Christ so hath he none against us so long as we remain graffed in that stock Def. of Apol. Part. 2. c. 11. Sect. 3. c. Bishop Juell declareth the Doctrine of the Church of England thus We confess and have evermore taught that in the Sacrament of Baptism by the death and blood of Christ is given remission of all manner of sin and that not in half or in part or by way of imagination or by sancy but whole full and perfect of all together so that now was S. Paul saith There is no condemnation to them that be in Christ Jesus 3. But it must be here noted that by the saving regeneration of baptized Infants it is not intended that their understandings or wills are guided to an high esteem and love of God and the Christian life which the Infant state is not capable of but this regeneration is mainly relative so that being regenerated by Baptism they are no longer the Children of wrath and under the curse due to original sin but are brought into a new state to be members of the body of Christ and thereby partakers of the favour of God And though some small seeds of gracious disposition may be in Infants who are capable thereof in the same manner as they are of corruption yet that regeneration or renovation of an Infant in Baptism whereby he is received into a state of remission and Salvation is very different from the regeneration of an adult person whereby his
Libertas Ecclesiastica OR A DISCOURSE Vindicating the lawfulness of those things which are chiefly excepted against in the Church of England especially in its LITVRGY and WORSHIP And manifesting their agreeableness with the Doctrine and practice both of Ancient and Modern Churches By WILLIAM FALKNER Preacher at St. Nicholas in Lyn Regis LONDON Printed by J. M. for Walter Kettilby at the Bishops-Head in St. Pauls Church-Yard 1674. IMPRIMATUR Jan. 23. 167● ● Sam. Parker TO The most Reverend Father in God Gilbert by Divine Providence Lord Archbishop of Canterbury Primate of all England and Metropolitan and one of His Majesties most Honourable Privy Council c. May it please your Grace YOur Grace being a Person of such singular Eminency in the Church of England I humbly crave leave to present to your hands this following Discourse which contains a Vindication of the Publick Worship of our Church from those Exceptions which by Dissenters have been made against it And the main Design of this Treatise being to promote Christian Vnity by representing the evil consequences of such unnecessary Discords and Schisms and the great unreasonableness of those pretences which have been alledged for their Justification it will n●t I hope be judged incongruous that it should address it self to your Grace whose high Office in the Church tendeth to advance the Vnity thereof and entitleth you to the publick Patronage of Peace and Truth I cannot doubt your Graces approbation of this design which is at all times useful but more especially in this present Juncture of Affairs if God please to grant success which is my earnest prayer For as all good men who prefer Truth and the sincere practice of Piety before their own prejudices wills and passions cannot but approve of such honest endeavours to rectifie mistakes and compose the minds of men to peace so all who are pious and wise cannot but discern a greater necessity and a more particular obligation at this time to silence all these little janglings and quarrels if they have any respect to the main interest and concerns of the Reformed Profession And I hope My Lord that the late Alarum we had from our common Enemies may open mens eyes to see the mischief of rending the Church into so many Factions and may dispose them to receive just and reasonable satisfaction And though what hath been excellently performed by former Writers upon this Subject be sufficiently satisfactory yet my labour herein may not be wholly useless considering the humour of this Age which is more apt to read new Books than to seek for old ones But though the cause I have undertaken deserves your Graces Patronage yet my own personal defects might justly have discouraged me from presenting this discourse to one of so high Dignity and so great a Judgment had not the cause it self been so good that it needed no Art and Colours to set it off but is sufficiently justified when it is rightly represented and understood and your Graces Candour and Clemency so well known as to encourage me to hope for a favourable Acceptance which is the only thing I beg in this humble Address unto your Grace favourably to accept of this small Present from him who unfeignedly prayeth for your Graces prosperity and is intirely devoted to the service and interest of Truth and Peace and Humbly honoureth your Grace with all due Observance W. Falkner THE PREFACE TO THE READER Christian Reader THE design of this discourse being to remove or at least to allay those fierce contentions about the external forms of worship to which we owe all those unhappy Schisms which good men so heartily bewail it was necessary in order to this end to rectifie those mistakes and prejudices which abuse well-minded men who have not throughly consider'd things and to correct those corrupt passions that quarrelsom and contentious humour which perverts others To these two causes we owe most of our present disorders it is too evident what hand the latter of these has had in them while divers Persons wanting a due sense of the evil and danger of these discords and a due regard to the Peace and Unity of the Church have been too zealous and forward to maintain and promote such dissensions thereby to serve the Interest of their own parties and to oppose the settlement of the Church upon sure and lasting principles now I had no other way of dealing with these men but to convince them of the great evil of such contentions and how much it is the duty of every Christian to study Peace and Unity For there is nothing more evident than that mens minds are strangely byassed by their affections and Interests and clouded by passion and therefore while they are so peremptorily resolved upon their way while they are so fond of their own Inventions while they are devoted to the service of a Party and account those men their Enemies who should rule and govern them and inform them better there is no expectation that reason and argument should prevail with them And if those arguments which I have made use of for this purpose should be effectual to calm the passions of men and to work in them a Christian and peaceable temper of mind I can easily foretel the success of my following discourse the design of which is to rectifie those mistakes and misapprehensions which some men labour under which either concern the particular Rites and offices of our Church or the General rule of duty or Ecclesiastical liberty by which the Church must be directed and guided in matters of order The first hath occasion'd various exceptions against some Rites and Ceremonies and particular passages in our forms of Prayer and I have spent great part of this Treatise in answering such objections by which I hope it will appear what little reason there is to disturb the Peace of the Church and to separate from our Communion upon such pretences Concerning the General Rule which ought ever to be observed in the Church about matters of order there are some who will allow nothing except some few circumstances to be determined by the Authority of the Church unless it be directly enjoined by a particular divine Institution and for a more plausible colour they reject all such rules of order or regular administration under the terms of unscriptural conditions of Communion But in answer to this I have made it appear to be an unjust and unreasonable exception against the establisht order of any Church that there are some things determined and appointed by the Authority of Superiours which have always been accounted of an Indifferent nature and are indeed the proper matters of Ecclesiastical Liberty And I hope I have abundantly proved to the satisfaction of all sober inquirers that prudent and well ordered Ecclesiastical Constitutions and appointments for the promoting order and decency and the advancement of Religion and Piety are very allowable and unblameable nay that it is impossible that
Tom. 2. Athanas where he purposely declareth them to be no part of the Canon of Scripture And amongst the Protestants Dr. Reinolds who wrote so largely against the authority of the Apocrypha Books Censura de Lib. Apocr Prael 7. in his Censura yet in one of his Praetections declareth of some of them chiefly Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom valde bonos utiles esse omnibus tractationibus praeferendos that they are exceeding good and profitable and to be preferred before all Treatises of other Writers Prael 74. and in another Praelection expressing his judgment of the same Books saith proximum illis locum deberi post scripturam sacram that they ought to have the next place after the holy Scripture in the former of which expressions he followeth the steps of S. Aug. de praedestin Sanctorum Exam. post 1. de Scrip. Can. And Chemnititus alloweth them to be Books quae à fidelibus in Ecclesiis leguntur Which are read in the Churches by the faithful and non esse abjectos damnatos that they are not condemned writings and off-casts but may be received in the number of the holy writings or sacrae scripturae sobeit they be not reputed the Canon of Faith and this saith he we willingly both yield and teach 5. Cons 4. And it is in this Case especially to be considered that in our Church no Apocryphal Chapter is appointed for any Lords Day throughout the Year not is any directed for any Holy-day but only out of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus which are Books of great esteem with all those who have well considered them And also upon those Week-days when some Apocryphal Chapters are read there are always other Canonical Scriptures read likewise Directory of reading the holy Script whereas they who do oppose Conformity so far as we may take the Directory for their rule did never appoint or direct any Scriptures to be ordinarily and publickly read upon any of these week days but ordered that where the reading on either Testament endeth on one Lords day it should begin on the next Wherefore it is to be well noted and observed that our Church doth not herein differ from the dissenters as if they did require the Canonical Scriptures to be more frequently read in publick than our Kalendar appointeth but our Kalendar requireth the Holy Scriptures to be much more frequently read in publick almost six Chapters for one besides the Epistles and Gospels than the Directory did and besides them these Apocryphal Lessons for profitable instruction 6. But if any persons shall decry in the general the hearing any thing in the Church besides the holy Scriptures of immediate infallible inspiration this would either from unadvisedness or from what is worse reject and disown to the great disadvantage of Religion the use of Sermons Exhortations and Catechism Nor is it any sufficient cause to condemn the reading Apocryphal Chapters because they are read as one of the Lessons For our Church manifestly declareth these Lessons not to be Canonical Scripture nor can any command of God be produced which either directly or by consequence requireth that in every daily Assembly of Christians there must be two Lessons read out of the Canonical Scripture or that none may be taken out of any other approved Book And it is manifest that the censuring this practice condemneth divers if not all the ancient Churches before the decaying and degeneracy of the Christian Profession V. Bishop Durhams Schol. Hist of Can. of Scrip. Sect. 60. For though it be admitted that the Laodicean Council did appoint that none but the Canonical Books should be read in the Church and that Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy there mentioned are intended for parts of the Prophecy of Jeremy yet long before that did even the Greek Church read the Epistles of Clemens c. above mentioned and the Book of Hermas And it is not to be wondered that there should be different practices observed in the Church in matters of order and liberty 7. Cons 5. Whereas this Church is the more blamed for using some Apocryphal Chapters while some others acknowledged to be Canonical Scripture are not appointed to be read by the Kalendar which are mostly either some Prophecies hard to be understood or matters of Genealogy or Jewish Observations or some Histories for the mostpart expressed in other Scriptures appointed to be read it must be considered that even hence it is evident that the Kalendar was never intended to be a Determination or Declaration of what is Canonical Scripture and of certain divine authority but only a direction for useful and profitable reading Nor was it the Custom of the ancient Christian Church Conc. Laod. c. 60. that the Canon of the Scripture should be described by what was publickly read the rule of the Laodicean Council which cometh nearest thereto did not direct the Revelation to be read The ancient Jews who divided the Old Testament into the Law the Prophets and the Hagiographa Bux Syn. Jud. c. 11. Salian Annal Eccl. A. M. 3447. n. 16. did for a long time only read the Law in the Synagogues after which only a Section of the Prophets was added but that the Hagiograph●a which included all the Books from the beginning of the Chronicles to the end of the Canticles besides Ruth Lamentations and Daniel were not read in the Jewish Synagogues Hor. Heb. in Joh. 4.15 hath been observed from the Talmudists and this is agreeable to divers passages of the New Testament Luk. 4.16 Act. 13.15 27 Act. 15.21 Yet Christ and his Apostles blamed not the Jews but joined with them in this service 8. Cons 6. That which is objected from the matter of these Apocryphal Chapters which are appointed to be read is not sufficient either to prove them hurtful or not useful as will appear from the following Section SECT VI. The Objections from the matter of the Apocrypha disoussed 1. Among the particular Objections from the matter of these books Obj. 1. Judith Susanna Bel and the Dragon are thought to be sabulous because no certain time can be easily fixed for Judith S. Hierome calleth the other susannae Belis Draconis fabulas Prol. in Dan. Com. in Dan. 13. 14. and Josephus maketh no mention of them But first if these Books should be admitted to be parabolical discourses to express the great opposition of many wicked men against God and his Worship the Vanity and Folly of their Pride and evil designs and the mighty protection that God can give to his people by his Almighty Power they might still be allowed to be of very considerable use The frequent use of Parabolical Instructions among the Jews is both manifest from their Talmudical Writers and allowed by the practice of our Saviur And besides this they had another Custom of Clothing real Histories under different names which expressed a resemblance of the things intended Targ. in Cant. c. 6. v. 7
of God in the Ordinance of Baptism and therefore this Salvation would not be an advantage slowing from their Baptism But if it be said that by Baptism the Covenant of grace is sealed to such Infants we must here further consider that Gods Covenant by reason of his faithfulness goodness and Soveraignty cannot be sealed as mens Covenants are to make it firm and binding when it would otherwise be void and of no force Wherefore there remain two ways whereby the Sacraments as they are on Gods part Seals of the Covenant of Grace may be of great advantage unto us the one is as they give further assurance of the priviledges of that Covenant for our comfort but of this benefit these infants are not capable partly because the receiving this comfort requireth the exercise of judgment and consideration and partly because the evident sureness of Gods Covenant can be no cause of consolation to them unless we admit that there is some ordinary means appointed of God whereby they may attain the blessings so assured the other way of advantage is by the benefits of Gods Covenant being sealed or surely conveyed as the present interest and priviledge of the persons rightly receiving these Seals and in this way which encludeth saying regeneration infants are indeed capable of receiving wonderful benefit thereby 8. 5. And omitting other arguments even the Prayers of the Church with faith and confidence upon the other grounds above-mentioned not doubting but earnestly believing that God will favourably receive those infants and embrace them with the arms of his mercy doth give further assurance of forgiveness of sin and a state of salvation for baptized Infants For God who hath declared his favour towards them and encluded them in his Covenant doth direct 1. Joh. 5.16 that if any man see his Brother sin a sin which is not unto death he shall ask and shall give life for them that sin not unto death and this general command encludeth Gods gracious answer to such Prayers and Prayer which is a general means to obtain Grace is used for the obtaining saving benefits in Baptism with the greater encouragement because the blessings prayed for are tendred in this Ordinance and by Gods promise unto Infants who receive Baptism To this purpose S. Augustine saith that remission of sins in Baptism is obtained per orationem De Bapt. cont Don. l. 3. c. 18. i. e. per columbae gemitum by the Prayers and groans of them who live in Peace Love and Vnity and our Church in the Prayer before the words of the Gospel in the Baptismal Office urgeth Gods promise Ask and you shall receive seek and you shall find c. the usefulness and benefit of Prayer being here the same in Baptism as it is in the most religiously prepared person for receiving the benefits of the Communion SECT IV. The Doctrine of the ancient and divers Reformed Churches herein observed 1. In observing the Doctrine of the ancient Church Conc. Milev c. 2. I shall begin with Councils The Council of Milevis condemned those who denyed infants to be baptized for the remission of sin or who asserted that they did not draw that original sin from Adam which is purged by the laver of regeneration and they declare that by the rule of the Catholick Church Infants are baptized for the remission of sin that that may be cleansed by regeneration which was derived by generation And this Canon of Milevis is the more considerable Conc. Carth. c. 124. because it was taken into the African Code and with that-Code was confirmed by the sixth General Council Conc. Trul. c. ● The sixth general Council in another Canon requireth that those infants should be baptized without any scruple concerning whom there can be no sufficient testimony given that they were baptized before Conc. Trul. c. 84. and this it enjoineth lest such scruple should deprive them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of this Baptismal purging for sanctification Conc. Constant And whereas the Creed of the second general Council expresseth a belief of one Baptism for the remission of sins the Council of Milevis above mentioned avoucheth Conc. Mil. ubi supra those expressions to have been always so understood in the Church as to acknowledge that baptized Infants did thereby obtain actual pardon and remission And that African Synod whose Epistle is extant amongst S. Austins Works declared Aug. Ep. 90. that whosoever shall deny that little Children are delivered from perdition and do obtain Eternal Salvation by the Baptism of Christ let him be an Anathema 2. If we consult the ancient Fathers it is beyond all contradiction evident that real remission and regeneration of all baptized Infants is acknowledged by S. Aug. Ep. 23. de peccat Merit Remis l. 2. c. 28. passim by Optatus Advers Parm. l. 5. Fulgentius de fide ad Petr. c. 30. by Prosper and generally by the suceeding Writers of the Church But some have pretended Gatak de Bapt. Infant vi effic p. 268. that this position sprung from their eager opposition of the Pelagians who denied Children to be guilty of original sin for the removing of which pretence it will be requisite to give some testimony of the judgment of the Ecclesiastical Writers who lived before the appearing of the Pelagian tares S. Cyprian night two hundred years before Pelagius did not only express the mighty sensible efficacy of his own Baptism for conferring Grace to him in his Epistle to Donatus but in his Epistle to Fidus he declareth that Infants by their Baptism do obtain the grace and favour of God Cyp. Ep. 59. and the remission of their sins and several expressions of that Epistle do intimate that this is the end for which they are baptized and comparing the state of an Infant coming to Baptism with an adult person embracing Christianity and the true Faith he doth in this respect prefer the state of the Infant because ad remissam peccatorum hoc ipso facilius accedit c. he doth upon this account the more readily obtain the remission of sins because the sins forgiven to him were not his own acts but anothers or Original sin Orig. in Luc. Hom. 14. Origen in his Homilies upon S. Luke which were undoubtedly his and translated by S. Hierome saith that Children are baptized for the remission of sins but saith he of what sins and when did they sin and a little after answereth that by the Sacrament of Baptism nativitatis sordes the sins and defilements with which they were born are laid aside and for this cause saith he little ones are baptized for unless a man be born again of Water and of the Spirit he cannot see the Kingdom of God The same Doctrine is also asserted by Nazianzen in his 40th Oration Naz. Orat. 40. as the comparing some things not far from the beginning with others towards the middle thereof will manifest and this he
this was the Element which was set apart for the admitting Disciples unto Christ himself under the Gospel and for the conveying to them remission of sins was manifested by Jesus coming to be baptized therewith from whence forward all who came to be his Disciples were baptized with water in the Baptism of Christ To this purpose the ancients frequently speak of Christs Baptism sanctifying the water of Baptism Tertul. adv Jud. c. 8. So Tertullian Baptizato Christo i. e. sanctificante aquas in suo baptismate And the Author de Cardinalib Christi operibus Veniebat Christus ad baptismum De Bapt. Christi ut Sacramento perennis daretur authoritas To the same purpose also Nazianzen Orat. 38. 39 and S. Bernard de Epiph. Serm. and even the Annotations under the Assemblies name express this as one end of Christs Baptism to sanctifie the flood Jordan In Mat. 3.15 and all other waters to the mystical washing away of sin 9. The use of the sign of the Cross in Baptism I here purposely omit because it will be more fitly discoursed of in the following Book where also I shall discourse of the Imposition of hands in confirmation and of the Ring in Marriage SECT VIII Of the Office for Confirmation and that for Marriage 1. The main things referring to Confirmation being considered in the following Book and some things in the Catechism which are most impugned being sufficiently cleared from the five foregoing Sections I shall here only observe that though our Catechism Hom. of Com. Pray and Sacr. Art 25. Homilies and Articles do sufficiently declare that Christ ordained only two Sacraments in his Church yet some have taken exceptions at those words of the Catechism which express that there are two only Sacraments generally necessary to salvation as if these words did intimate the contrary which exception doth manifest how innocent words may be wrested by the force of suspicions 2. And some like not that these Sacraments are said to be generally necessary to Salvation which as it was the Doctrine of the ancient Church so is it also of the Protestant Churches Conf. Boh. c. 11. the Bohemian Confession expresseth it to be their Doctrine that Sacraments are necessary to Salvation Catech. Genev. de Sacram. and the Geneva Catechism declareth that he who despiseth the use of the Sacraments is to be accounted of as one who tacitly denyeth the name of Christ and he who thinking not meet to profess himself a Christian ought not to be ranked among Christians And concerning Baptism when our Saviour saith Mar. 16.16 he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved doth not that besides other Scriptures express it to be ordinarily part of the condition of Salvation And touching the Lords Supper if the obeying the great commands and institutions of the Gospel and the attending to and receiving those excellent means of Grace and of Communion with Christ which he appointeth in the Gospel be ordinarily necessary to Salvation then must the receiving the holy Communion be acknowledged to be so And let it be considered without prejudice whether when our Saviour declared Joh. 6.53 Except you eat the stesh of the Son of man and drink his bloud ye have no life in you these words though they cannot be confined to that Sacrament not then instituted do not sufficiently declare that he who hopeth for eternal life by Christ may not safety neglect the careful attendance on that Ordinance which Christ hath particularly appointed to be the Communion of his body and bloud 3. Concerning the Office for Matrimony the words of contract will be most fitly discoursed of in another place where I treat of the use of the Ring I shall here only consider such Phrases which some disrelish that our Liturgy calleth it an holy Estate of Matrimony and saith that God consecrated the state of Matrimony to such an excellent Mystery that in it is signified and represented the spiritual marriage and Vnity between Christ and his Church Now it is manifest that the Apostle expressing the Marriage institution and Union Eph. 5.30 31 32. calleth it a great Mystery not as it referreth to the Husband and Wife but as it mystically representeth Christ and his Church saying We are members of his flesh of his body and of his bones For this cause shall a man leave his Father and Mother and shall be joined unto his Wife and they two shall be one flesh This is a great mystery but I speak concerning Christ and the Church And to these words of the Apostle the Phrase of our Liturgy hath manifest reference 4. And when it is said to be consecrated or to be a holy estate this is as much as to say that it is designed for a holy and religious end and purpose Though the Gentiles lived in lasciviousness and all uncleanness the Christian marriage as well as the whole Christian life is to be a holy estate separate from these pollutions of which the Apostle speaketh This is the will of God even your sanctification that you abstain from fornication that every one of you may know how to possess his Vessel in sanctification and honour not in the lusts of concupiscence 1 Thes 4.3 4 5. for God hath not called us to uncleanness but unto holiness 5. Christian marriage is also an holy estate as it is the lawful way set apart and ordained according to the will of God for the increase of his Church Thus Children born within the Church and under the Covenant are called Sons and Daughters which are born unto or for God Ezek. 16.20 holy Children 1 Cor. 7.14 and with reference hereunto that the Children may be holy and within the Church the Apostle saith the unbelieving Husband is sanctified by the believing Wife and the unbelieving Wife is sanctified by the believing Husband and upon this account the Christian marriage may well be esteemed holy and sanctified as being a marriage in the Lord 1 Cor. 7.39 and is fitly called as S. Ambrose expresseth it Amb. Apol. Dav. c. 11. Sancta copula a holy bond 6. And whereas S. Paul declareth how all things are sanctified by the word of God and Prayer we have concerning marriage a more especial word of Divine Institution whereby two are made one flesh Gen. 2.24 and that no man may put them asunder because it is God who joineth them together Mat. 19.6 and also a particular divine benediction which God gave unto the estate of marriage Gen. 1.28 And this Marriage Union hath been generally attended with the use of Prayers in the Christian Church 7. Wherefore Christian Marriage which as well as the Christian life is designed for the service of God and for holy ends and an holy use is upon that account the more fit to represent the Vnity and Marriage between Christ and his Church and this Union being hereby resembled is both an argument to the more holy deportment in Christian Marriage and
complyance to the mind of others to neglect due reverence to God or Rules of order in the Church of God is not allowable And there lieth a much higher obligation upon us to please others where we are engaged thereto by the bond of justice subjection and obedience than where we are only enclined thereto by the influence of love and common kindness whence the Child or Servant who will provoke his Father or Master by acts of disobedience contrary to his duty meerly to please other persons acteth irregularly and sinfully and upon the same account he who will displease and disobey his Rulers and Governours whether Civil or Ecclesiastical to gratifie other persons of inferiour capacity acteth contrary to Christian duty 4. Secondly The Plea of scandal must then necessarily be ill used when what is undertaken under pretence of avoiding offence doth it self become the greater offence In the Case mentioned in the Epistles to the Romans and the Corinthians there was no giving offence to the Jews Gentiles or the Church of God by their present forbearance of any sort of meat under the circumstances in which they then were and therefore this forbearance out of charity to others became a duty But when S. Peter and Barnabas at Antioch did for a time forbear to eat with the Gentiles which seemingly encluded an urjust censure of the way of Christianity as it was embraced among the Gentiles and was like to be a great offence to the Gentiles this action though undertaken out of an appearance of charitable respect to the Jews that they might not be offended was sinful and contrary to the Gospel And upon the like account the disobeying Ecclesiastical Constitutions but of respect to some other persons while it encludeth an appearance of ungrounded censuring of our Rulers who appointed them and the Church who practiseth them and a want of care of its order Peace and Unity besides other ill consequents above expressed is not allowable nor can it be justified by the rules of Religion but by the bad example of neglect of duty it giveth the greatest occasion of offence 5. And if any persons shall in such a case take offence so far as to distast the Religious worship of God V. Tertullian de Virgin Vel. c. 3. because others observe established Orders this is an offence taken but not given For in matters indifferent and left altogether to our liberty he who without any care of his Brothers good acteth what he knoweth will occasion him to fall is guilty of a scandal against the rule of charity but he who acteth nothing but what is his duty lawfully commanded by his superiour or undertaken with respect to the greater good and order of the Church is guilty of no scandal nor breach of charity though others may take occasion to fall thereby 22 ae qu. 43. Art 2. It is well resolved by Aquinas that every scandal or offence encludeth sin that which is a scandal given or an active scandal is the sin of him who giveth the occasion but the scandal taken or the passive scandal is the sin of him only who taketh the occasion to fall Thus there were divers things which our Saviour spake and did at which the Pharisees were offended the sin of which must be charged upon themselves in being alienated thereby from the Doctrine of Christ 6. Thirdly The duty of forbearing the use of some things lawful and expedient because others account them sinful hath likewise peculiar respect to that case when the erring persons have not had sufficient opportunity of being fully instructed and stedfastly established in the truth Thus in the time of the Apostles when the Doctrine of the Gospel was first divulged the Jews could not be presently satisfied concerning the liberty and freedom of Christians from the rites of the law of Moses and many of the Gentiles were not so firmly established in all the Doctrines of Christianity that they might not be led aside by mistaking the practices of other Christians and in such cases the use of things lawful and indifferent must be restrained from the consideration of others weakness But where there hath been sufficient means and opportunity for better instruction if some still retain their erroneous opinions they who understand the truth are not obliged in this case to forbear their practising according to their true principles in matters of indifferency and Christian liberty because this practice is in this case a profession of truth against errour and the forbearance thereof may frequently be interpreted a complyance with errour Vrsin Loc. Theol in 3m. Prac. And it is truly observed by Vrsin that it is scandalum datum in rebus adiaphoris errores in animis infirmorum confirmare to add confirmation to erroneous opinions in the minds of the weak about indifferent things is a giving offence or being guilty of an active scandal Upon this account though our Saviour knew that his heating and commanding the man who was healed to take up his bed on the sabbath day his eating with Publicans and Sinners and his Disciples eating with unwashen hands were things in the highest manner offensive to some of the Jews he practised and allowed these things in opposition to the Scribes and Pharisees who in their censures of him proceeded upon erroneous and corrupt Doctrines vented by them for divine dictates 7. But it may deserve a more full enquiry whether Ecclesiastical Constitutions and legal Injunctions may be allowed concerning things which either are or may become matter of dispute and opposition Commis Papers passim because this is a thing which is in the substance of it much insisted upon In order to the resolution hereof I shall assert 1. The peace and Vnity of a Church which must both respect the Union of its members among themselves and with the Vniversal Church is of so great value that to that end it would be very desirable that any particular constitution about matters meerly indifferent should be altered where peace with a well ordered state of the Church can only by that means be firmly secured because the principal end of them is to promote Unity order and edification 8. Assert 2. Where minds are prone to raise disputes and entertain prejudices and jealousies about matters of Gods worship the most innocent things cannot be long secured from being opposed and scrupled For in this case when men of greater parts do without just cause propound doubts and arguments against a thing which may easily be done about any subject men of lesser understanding if they have also unsetled and unestablished minds are apt either out of weakness of judgment to take their fallacies to be solid reasons or from the earnestness of their affections to esteem such persons to be the ablest and faithfullest guides And he who observeth the World will discern that there is scarce any truth of Religion even in matters most Fundamental which hath not been disputed and opposed by men
lawful and expedient to be unlawful upon such evidence which they apprehend to be full and sufficient and thereupon cannot yield to practise these things it must be considered that it is but the common attendant of mans being fallible that he should out of respect to a greater good bear some outward inconvenience as the result even of his most innocent errours Thus in secular matters he who meerly mistaketh the right way of legal proceedings about his own cause may suffer some damage thereby and though his case may herein deserve pity yet it is better he should sustain this consequent of his own mistake than that no rules and orders of Law should be observed And the same may be said of matters Ecclesiastical 25. 2. If the Rules above-mentioned be observed they will direct how men may generally practise things lawfully enjoined according to right principles of Conscience But if they be not observed men must either resolve to follow their own imaginations in things they understand not which is a manifest way of errour and walking in the dark or else they must in these things practise according to the directions of those who speak most plausibly and takingly to their affections and are also strict in their lives but this both over-looketh the duty of obedience and the due relation to guides and teachers and is a very probable way to misguide men both in this and in other Cases By following this rule or rather by being taken in this snare many anciently embraced the monstrous positions of manicheism perswaded thereto by Faustus who had eloquium seductorium as S. Aug. ealleth it the enticing eloquence of seducing Aug. Conf. l. 6. c. 3 6 13. and whose words were observed by the same Father to have a more pleasing and delightful sweetness than the eloquence of S. Ambrose which was more learned and substantial Baron ad An. 377. n. 7. and those who embraced that impious Heresie were always talking of God and Christ and the holy Spirit the Comforter And to be guided in opinions or doctrines by such respect to persons can be no safe way of conduct because God hath not directed Christians thereto for as to expression Luther accounted Julian the Pelagian to be a better speaker and Orator than S. Augustine Luther Judicium de Erasmo Tom. 2. and as to practice Nazianzene declared even of the Macedonians who denyed the Divinity of the Holy Spirit Naz. Orat. 44. that they were persons whose lives were to be admired though their Doctrines were not to be allowed And therefore that more ancient rule of Tertullian is of necessary use Non ex personis probamus fidem sed ex fide personas that we are not to examine and esteem the Faith by the persons but the persons by their Faith Therefore the best way to be rightly established is by having a Conscientious regard in the first place to the evidence of manifest truth clearly discerned and in the next place to spiritual guides and teachers it being one end why God appointed Church Officers Eph. 4.11 14. that we be henceforth no more Children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of Doctrine SECT IV. Of Ecclesiastical Rites which have been abused in any corrupt way of worship 1. It is acknowledged that some gesture garment and action though not the same individually but of the like kind or physical nature established in the Church of England hath been ill used in the Church of Rome and this hath been much of old and by some of late objected against these appointments Now we do assert that the worship of God who is a jealous God is to be preserved pure and not mixed with any sinful defilement whatsoever whether of Idolatry or superstition and that things otherwise indifferent which either in the design of them who use them or in their own present tendency do directly promote or propagate such corruptions do in that Case become things unlawful Hence that which was in it self indifferent and was used in the Pagan Idolatry might upon good grounds be disclaimed as unlawful to Christians by Tertullian and other ancient Writers where the present use among Christians might appear to countenance and confirm those Idolatrous practices But that the use of things in themselves lawful and expedient and known to be ordered to a lawful end and purpose should be condemned as sinful because these things or the like are or have been otherwhere sinfully abused is a position by no means to be admitted Concerning which in general besides what shall be added concerning our particular Rites Ch. 4. I shall content my self with these three Observations 2. Obs 1. This position is not consistent with the principles of Christian practice It is a ground of hope in the Gospel Regeneration that those bodies and Souls which were once abused to the service of false Gods and Devils as according to Gr. Nazianzen was once the Case of S. Cyprian Naz. Orat. 18. and according to S. Paul of the Corinthians Thessalonians and others 1 Cor. 12.2 1 Thes 1.9 and to the service of sin as were the members of the Roman Church Rom. 6.17 18 19. may yet find acceptance with God in serving him Surely none can think that S. Pauls tongue was not to be allowed to preach the Gospel because it had been abused to blaspheme nor is it amiss observed by Durandus Dur. Rational l. 1. c. 1. Sect. 33. that among other Scriptures there is a principal use made in the Church of God of what was written by David who was guilty of Adultery S. Matthew who was a Publican and S. Paul who was a persecutor and blasphemer and among the Fathers of S. Augustine who was a Manichee And surely it is much more incredible that through the ill use of some the whole Species of actions gestures and things should become unlawful and unclean Can any possibly imagine that if other men have or do lift up their Eyes to Heaven to adore the Sun or Moon or bow down their knees to give religious worship to an Idol or to Saints and Angels this must render our lifting up our eyes to Heaven in the worshipping of God or bowing our knees in Prayer to him to be sinful Or may not one man lawfully make use of the light of the Sun to read the holy Scriptures because another maketh use of it to commit Villanies or did Judas his Kiss make the kiss of Charity sinful 3. As Sozomen reporteth Sozom. Hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 single Mersion in Baptism was used by Eunomius who disowned the Trinity and the threefold Mersion which was the more general ancient Custom was abused in Spain as Walafridus Strabo relateth to express thereby a denyal of one Essence in the three Persons of the Trinity upon which occasion the Council of Toledo enjoined single Mersion in Spain Conc. Tol. 4. c. 5. still declaring according to S.
contended for amongst us I shall observe that this hath been many ways also grosly abused First it was the ordinary gesture of worship in the Romish Pagan Idolatry The ancient laws of their Pagan worship required ut adoraturi sedeant which as Plutarch affirmeth Plut. in Numa was appointed by Numa Pompilius and Tertullian informeth us that at their Gentile solemnities even in his time they worshipped their images sitting Tertul. de Orat. c. 12. adoratis sigillaribus suis residendo 11. And in the Romish Church it is by some asserted and appeareth very probable that the Pope himself at some solemnities receiveth the Eucharist sitting When the Emperour receiveth his Coronation their Master of Ceremonies telleth us that at the time of Mass the Pope with the Emperour following him in the place of a Sub-Deacon goeth to the Altar whence Pontifex ad sedem eminentem communicaturus revertitur Sacr. Cerem l. 1. Sect. 5. Cap. 3. the Pope who at that time doth himself celebrate goeth to his seat of eminency therein to receive the Communion And a Book called the Quench-Coal written many years since as an Answer to Dr. Heylins Coal from the Altar produceth this testimony from William Thomas in his History of Italy who declared himself an eye witness thereof in the year 1547. that the Altar in the Cathedral Church of Rome Quench Coal p. 12. even in the time of Mass when the Pope received the Sacrament was standing in the midst of the Quire and the Pope sitting in a Chair of State about it And Didoclavius telleth us which is the only instance he produceth out of any History for sitting at the Sacrament and he may be mistaken in that that the Benedictine Monks receive the Sacrament sitting upon the Thursday before Easter Altar Damasc c. 10. and yet I suppose if his observation be true he will not imagine that they receive it with less adoration of the Host than other Papists do 12. And sitting at the Sacrament hath yet been much more abused by the Arians in Poland as their Synods called the Socinians who as denying the Divinity of Christ In Synodis Cracoviens Petricoviens Wlodislav Toruniens in Corp. Confessionum and not giving due reverence to him were the first Authors known to those Churches of this sitting gesture upon which account the Churches both of the Bobaemian Augustan and Helvetick Confessions residing in Poland and Lithuania disclaimed the use of that gesture though they esteemed it lawful in it self as being upon this occasion scandalous Wherefore to assert that every gesture grosly abused by others ought to be utterly relinquished is not only contrary to truth and to the practice of the Church of England but is herein opposite to the use of all the reformed Churches and it would make void Christs institution of the Sacrament by admitting no gesture to be lawful to communicate therein 13. Yet that we may discern the various working of mens minds in their arguments against this kneeling gesture and how copiously every thing affordeth matter to them who will take up with any thing we may observe Div. Right of Ch. Gov. Ch. 2. q. 1. p. 195. that as kneeling is sometimes disliked as having been Idolatrously abused so sitting is sometimes pleaded for as being the gesture practised and allowed by Christ because it was the gesture say they in the Idols Temple Thus Mr. Rutherford in these strange expressions undertaketh to prove that Christ did sit at the Lords Supper because sitting at the Idols Table 1 Cor. 8.10 declareth that in Religious Feasts sitting was ordinary and a sign indicant of honouring the spiritual Lord of the Banquet and a religious Communion with the Lord of the Feast was hence signified 14. Another thing urged against kneeling at the Sacrament Obj. 5. Rutherf Divine Right of Ch. Govern Ch. 1. Qu. 5. Sect. 1 3. which of the others is most strange and uncharitable is this that kneeling at the Sacrament is Idolatry and is parallel with worshipping god by an Image and even with the Pagan Idolatry it self upon this ground Altar Damasc c. 10 p. 801. because to kneel before any Creature as a memorative object of God though there be no intention of giving divine adoration to that Creature is Idolatry in the opinion of some men 15. Ans 1. This rash position tendeth to make the Jews worshipping God before the Ark or mercy Seat and before the Temple at Jerusalem or the Tabernacle in the Wilderness to have been equally Idolatrous with the serving Jeroboams Calves or worshipping Baal which was so far from that great sin that it was then a necessary duty of Religion And the cause of this gross mistake is the want of considering the vast difference of worshipping a false God or making use of a memorative object to represent the likeness of the divine being which is contrary to his nature and forbidden by his Precepts and of using such a memorative object in worship as is to be a memorial of the Covenant and grace of God and Christ and his Communion with us being to that end appointed and instituted as a remembrance of him If these things be not accounted vastly different it must be concluded not very considerable whether we do things appointed of God or forbidden of him and things agreeable to the nature of God or apposite thereto And besides this to worship God alone making use of such memorative objects as an help thereto which do properly call to our minds Gods mighty works and glorious Attributes is far from being either Idolatrous or blameable If a pious man taking a view of the mighty works of Gods Creation or any part thereof should upon this sight be put in mind of the power and wisdom of their Creator and thence should glorify admire and worship not the Creature but God alone such actions are not evil but devout and religious 16. 2. This assertion is of so dangerous consequence as to disown this holy Sacrament from being an Ordinance of Christian worship and to hinder the principal duties therein to be performed For it is directly contrary to the duties of this Sacrament to condemn the worshipping of Christ as sinful at the view of this memorial of Christs Death in this Sacrament when Christians here ought to magnifie his grace mercy and love to glorifie him for the wonderful Salvation and Atonement effected by his Death to implore his grace and spirit with all the blessings and benefits of the New Testament to acknowledge him and submit to him as our only Soveraign Lord with other such like which are proper actions of our worshipping and inwardly adoring him And it is unreasonable as well as uncharitable where these inward acts of Religion are necessary and a duty to condemn the outward expression thereof as either Idolatrous or any was sinful being directed to him who is Lord both of our Souls and Bodies 17. And though some mens
that such Confirmation with Imposition of hands might be restored 9. But it remaineth to be inquired how the Church can certifie the persons confirmed by the sign of Imposition of hands of Gods favour and gracious goodness towards them For the answering of which waving other considerations I shall observe two things First that as this imposition of hands is a testimony of admitting persons to a higher rank of Christian Professors who ratifie their baptismal Covenant by their own action intimating also an approbation of this profession it includeth the power of the Keys whereby the Officers of the Church are enabled by Gods authority to declare particularly his favour and gracious goodness to them who embrace the conditions of Christianity and to direct them thereunto and to this purpose was Imposition of hands on the Penitents at divers times used in the ancient Church And to testifie Gods gracious acceptance either by our words or actions of mens undertaking the exercise of Christianity is a thing greatly different from the tendering the divine grace of Gods Covenant as exhibited by any sign as a means to convey the same which is the proper nature of a Sacrament 10. Secondly This Imposition of hands is a sign of a Benediction in Gods name from the Officer of Gods Church The Levites and especially the Priests under the Law were required to bless the people in the name of God Deut. 10.8 1 Chron. 23.13 which blessing was performed in a way of benedictory prayer or supplication Numb 6.23 and this blessing in Gods name was a testimony of Gods giving his blessing to them supposing them not to render themselves uncapable thereof Num. 6.27 The external testimony of their general blessing all the people Targ. Jonath in Num. 6.23 was most probably by lifting up their hands towards them as is declared by one of the Chaldee Paraphrasts and is observed by Baronius Baron Annal Eccl. An. 34. n. 220. and we have an instance of this Rite attending the Priestly benediction Lev. 9.22 and our Saviour made use of the same Luk. 24.50 But in their solemn particular benedictions in the Old Testament they used Imposition of hands of which we have an example Gen. 48.14.16 in Jacobs blessing the Sons of Joseph this Rite was also used in their Ordination of their Elders and the constant use hereof in the particular benedictions by persons of great eminency among the Jews is reasonably esteemed the cause why the Jews brought little Children to Christ that he might put his hands on them and pray Mat. 19.13 Gret in Mat. 19.13 And from the frequent practice of this Rite Junius and Tremellius have ventured to admit a Paraphrase into their Translation concerning the Priestly benediction wherein they express the use of Imposition of hands in Num. 6.27 which can only be allowed concerning particular benedictions The end and design of imposition of hands in benediction 〈…〉 voc 〈◊〉 J●n in Num. 6. c. 7. is declared by Ravanellus to be in testimony of the help favour and grace of God to be given to him who receiveth imposition of hands and Junius saith by this sign they were to testifie to the people Gods grace which are Phrases much like those in this Prayer at Confirmation in our Liturgy Yet this Rite was only a sign of Gods favour in this use with respect to the Benediction or Prayer for that person supposing and hoping him to be duly qualified for the receiving the benefit therein desired and therefore is of no Sacramental nature 11. Now ●lessing including nothing Ceremonial and peculiar to the Law and the Ministry of the Old Testament is very suitable to the Gospel which is in an especial manner a Dispensation of Blessing And this benediction or praying 〈◊〉 for Gods blessing was the 〈…〉 designed in this Apostolical 〈◊〉 of hands with prayer and from their time this use hath been continued in the Christian Church as hath been shewed and it would be a strange unreasonable and uncharitable thing if those who come to renew their baptismal Covenant might not receive the Churches blessing in Gods name with prayer for their Christian growth and perseverance And the dignity of Office in the Church chiefly giving authority to bless according to that rule of the Apostle Heb. 7.7 without all contradiction the less is blessed of the greater this solemn benediction at Confirmation hath thereupon been justly reserved to the Bishop or chief Officer of the Church by whom alone it was performed in the time of S. Cyprian and S. Hierom. 12. Confirmation in our use thereof is called by Bishop Whitgift Bishop Whitg Defence p. 785. Eccl. Pol. l. 5. Sect. 66. The Bishops benediction by laying on of hands by Mr. Hooker This special benediction the Rite or Ceremony of Confirmation and when Confirmation was restored in Scotland in the fourth Article of the Assembly of Perth it was declared concerning children who had been catechized that the Bishop should bless them with prayer for the increase of their knowledge and the continuance of Gods heavenly grace with every one of them And the ancient Confirmation was accounted a Benediction by Tertullian Tertul. de Bapt. c. 8. Conc. Eliber c. 77. and a Benediction of the Bishop by the Council of Elvira And since the Gospel-dispensation is a Ministration of Blessing and the great blessing of the Gospel is to receive the promise of the Spirit Gal. 3.14 This benedictory prayer upon a solemn occasion for the grace and strength of that Spirit was suitably accompanied in the practice of the Apostles and the Christian Church with the ancient and proper token of benediction the Imposition of hands 13. Presbyt Except p. 29. But it hath been urged that the Articles of our Church declare imposition of hands in Confirmation to be a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice and that Confirmation hath no visible sign appointed by God Artic. 25. and therefore Imposition of hands cannot therein certifie children of Gods favour and gracious goodness towards them and thus contradictions are injuriously imposed upon the Church The words of the Article to which they refer are these Article 25. Those five commonly called Sacraments that is to say Confirmation Penance Orders Matrimony and Extreme Vnction are not to be counted for Sacraments of the Gospel being such as have grown partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles partly are states of life allowed in the Scriptures but yet have not like nature of Sacraments with Baptism and the Lords Supper for that they have not any visible sign or Ceremony ordained of God The sense of the former part of which words is That the Church of Rome accounting Confirmation Penance Orders and Extreme Vnction for proper Sacraments of the Gospel their errour herein proceedeth from their corrupting those things which were practised by the Apostles but their esteeming Marriage to be a Sacrament is a mis-representing a state of life allowed in the