a good while after So that the same difficulty is in reference to the Sabbath and it and is thus solved by Calvin himself That there were certain previous injunctions given Calvin Harmon in Pent. particularly and more rudely by God concerning the observation of certain Rites before that more exact delivery of them by God to Moses on Mount Sinai And as alwayes a day or time was allotted so likewise some special place separated from common uses as that called here the Tabernacle to the service of God For had there been any proper weakly day appointed by God before Moses surely we should have found some little mention thereof in the History of Moses from the Creation to his days but not a word of any such thing do we find to that purpose CHAP. XIII Of the Institution of the Lords Day That it was in part of Apostolical and partly Ecclesiastical Tradition Festival Days and Fasting derived unto us from the same Fountain and accordingly to be observed upon the like grounds Private Prayers in Families to the neglect of the Publique Worship unacceptable to God Of the Obligation all Priests have to pray daily according to their Office Of the Abuse of Holy days in the Number and unjustifiable occasions of them Of the Seven Hours of Prayer approved by the Ancient Church and our First Reformers Mr. Prinne's Cavils against Canonical Hours refuted THAT the Institution of the Lords day hath no known foundation from the Command of God or Christ may be collected from what is said But that the Apostles and Church Apostolical did by their example and practice commend it to following generations of Christians I acknowledge most true But still there remains a knot to be untied about the force of that Constitution whether it was only of Custom or Precept or all the Obligation proceeded from the decrees of the Church after the Apostles For direct Precept we find little or no Grounds in Scripture For Practice Apostolical and Custom upon that descending to posterity also the accession of the Laws Ecclesiastical and Imperial we make no scruple to acknowledge them to be very solemn and obligatory upon all good Christians But seeing all things practis'd by the Apostles are not Obligatory it will be worth the enquiry under what Capacity they so acted whether as Apostles or as Governors of the Church in such a large sense as might be communicable to their successours That it was not meerly and precisely an Apostolical Act to establish such a Festival seems to appear from the grounds found in the Law of Nature moving men to celebrate a day to God again that the first day of the week being the day of our Lord and Saviours Resurrection seems to be no other than Common Ecclesiastical Prudence as that which agreeth most with the End it self viz. The due commemoration of Christs resurrection on that day but that Christ should be so Commemorated and God so glorified seems to me to be specially Apostolical and so Divine that it is not alterable by the Counsel or Decrees of the Church any time after from whence may conveniently be reconciled the opposite opinions of both School-men and Canonists some of whom have asserted the divine Right of the Lords day and others the Ecclesiastical or Canonical only For that a day be Festivally observed to God is Natural that on such a Festival or Thanksgiving day Christ should be magnified and God praised is Apostolical but that on the First day of the week Christian Prudence and the necessary power of the Church may seem to suffice Which appeareth from the manner of celebrating the Christian Sabbath which hath been always left to the Authority and wisdom of the Church varying according to occasions given For that Christians very anciently met to treat of divine matters to communicate to celebrate the Eucharist and to sing Psalms Hymns and Spiritual Songs Justine Justin Apol. 2. Tertul. Apologer Martyr and Tertullian and the famous Epistle of Pliny witness And to this end they had a vacation from all worldly servile matters as many proofs of Antiquity demonstrate And for the dignity of this day it was that on it and none other Bishops were to be consecrated by the constitution of Leo 1. And what are the Prerogatives of this First Leo 1. Distinct 75. c. 1. Quod die c. day of the week are explained at large by the Ancient Fathers and Councils here not to be rehearsed From this Fountain of Ecclesiastical power resident in the Church springeth the Act of instituting other days to the Glory and Praise of God of two sorts viz. days of Humiliation and Exultation or joy For it is certain that after it was agreed upon that Christs Resurrection should be weekly celebrated it was consented to also that a Yearly Thanksgiving should be kept for the same which was the Christians Passover and our Easter day is immemorially practised and without interruption derived to this present age And therefore as well because it is the greatest matter of joy that at any time befell the Church of Christ as because it regulateth other principal Feasts and Fasts of the Church as lastly because thence is plainly inferred a power in the Church of ordaining Feasts and Fasts to the worship of God it is called by the Ancient The Mother of Feasts And surely upon this the Fathers of the Church produced many other Daughter-Feasts not all in a year nor an age but according to their power to maintain and defend them which was very difficult for them to do as becomed under Gentile persecution who were most severe against such Celebrities instituted by Christians to the overthrow and contempt of Gentile worship which according to the Light of nature consisted much in this as Seneca Legum Conditores Festùm instruerunt dies ut ad hilaritatem homines cogerent c. Seneca de Tranquil Aninai c. 15. hath said in these words The Founders of Laws ordained Festival days to the end that men might meet publiquely in Jollity puting some moderation to Labours as necessary for them These Gentile Institutions prevailing not only to Idololatrical service but corruption of manners contrary to nature it self The Ancient Fathers of the Church knew no better Antidote against such poison than to introduce Christian Festivals whereby all the natural and Civil benefit of Vacation from Labours friendly conversation and such like might be enjoyed and due worship and praise be given unto God in Christ Jesus And therefore Theodoret. Serm. 7. de Sacrificiis Theodoret with other Fathers is not ashamed to profess as a very laudable and religious occasion of Christian Feasts That they succeeded the Idolatrous and lewd Feasts of the Gentiles which some but in vain would turn against the use of them But they stand upon surer foundations than to be blown down with the wind of vain doctrines blustering against them For First as is said Nature it self directs to them
of it And first of Prayer the chiefest act of Gods worship contrary to Sectaries who are enemies to it in three respects And first by their vain conceit of Preaching wherein consisteth not the proper worship of God as in Prayer Chap. VIII A second Corruption of the worship of God not especially in Prayer by opposing Setforms of publick worship Reasons against extemporary Prayers in publick The places of Scripture and Reasons and Antiquity for Extemporary Prayers answered Chap. IX A third abuse of the worship of God by Sectaries in neglecting publick Prayers without Sermons censured That Prayer in a publick place appointed for Gods worship ought at all times to be offered to God Scripture and Universal Tradition require it above that in private places The frivolousness of such reasons as are used against it The Reasons for it Chap. X. A fourth Corruption of the worship of God by confining it to an unknown Tongue Scripture and Tradition against that custom A fifth abuse of Prayer in denying the People their Suffrage contrary to the ancient practise of the Church Chap. XI Of the Circumstances of Divine worship and first of the proper place of Divine worship called the Church the manner of worshipping there Of the Dedication of Churches to God their Consecration and the effects of the same That no man can convert any part of the Church to his private use without profanation of it and Sacriledge Against the abuse of Churches in the burial of dead bodies erecting Tombs and enclosing them in Churches or Chancels Rich men have no more Right to any part of the Church than the Poor The Common Law can give no Right in such Cases Chap. XII Of the second Circumstance of Gods worship Appointed times Of the Sabbath or Seventh-day how it was appointed of God to the Jews but not by the same Law appointed to Christians Nor that one day in Seven should be observed The Decalogue contains not all moral duties directly Gentiles observed not a Seventh day The New Testament no where commands a Seventh day to be kept holy Chap. XIII Of the Institution of the Lords Day That it was in part of Apostolical and partly Ecclesiastical Tradition Festival dayes and Fasting derived unto us from the same fountain and accordingly to be observed upon the like grounds Private Prayers in Families to the neglect of the publick worship unacceptable to God Of the Obligation all Priests have to pray daily according to their Office Of the abuse of Holy-dayes in the Number and unjustifiable occasions of them Of the seven Hours of Prayer approved by the Ancient Church and our first Reformers Mr. Prins Cavils against Canonical Hours refuted Chap. XIV The third thing to be considered in the worship of God viz. The true object which is God only That it is Idolatry to misapply this Divine worship What is Divine worship properly called Of the multitude and mischiefs of New distinctions of worship Dulia and Latria though distinct of no use in this Controversie What is an Idol Origen s criticism of an Idol vainly rested on What an Image What Idolatry The distinction of Formal and Material Idolatry upon divers reasons rejected The Papists really Idolatrous notwithstanding their good Intentions pretended Intention and Resolution to worship the true God excuses not from Idolatry Spalato Forbes and others excusing the Romanists from thence disproved That Idolatry is not always joyned with Polytheism or worshipping more Gods than one How the Roman Church may be a true Church and yet Idolatrous Chap. XV. Of Idolatry in the Romish Church particularly viz. In worshipping Saints Angels Reliques and especially the supposed Bloud of Christ No good foundation in Antiquity or the Scriptures for the said worship Chap. XVI Of the fourth thing wherein the worship of God consisteth viz. Preaching How far it is necessary to the Service of God What is true Preaching Of the Preaching of Christ wherein it consisteth Of painful Preaching That the Ministery according to the Church of England is much more painful then that of Sectaries The negligence of some in their duty contrary to the rule and mind of the Church not to be imputed to the Church but to particular Persons in Authority Chap. XVII The fifth general Head wherein the exercise of the worship of God doth consist Obedience That Obedience is the end of the Law and Gospel both That the Service of God principally consisteth therein Of Obedience to God and the Church The Reasons and Necessity of Obedience to our Spiritual as well as Civil Governours The frivolous cavils of Sectaries noted The severity of the Ancient and Latter Greek Church in requiring obedience The folly of Pretenders to obedience to the Church and wilfully slight her Canons and Laws more material than are Ceremonies Chap. XVIII Of Obedience to the Church in particular in the five Precepts of the Church common to all viz. 1. Observation of Festival dayes 2. Observation of the Fasts of the Church Of the Times Manner and Grounds of them Exceptions against them answered 3. Of the Customs and Ceremonies of the Church 4. Frequentation of the publick worship 5. Frequent Communicating and the due preparation thereunto Chap. XIX A Preparation to the Explication of the Decalogue by treating of Laws in General What is a Law Several kinds of Laws Of the obligation of Laws from Justice not Force only Three Conditions required to obliging Of the Ten Commandments in special Their Authour Nature and Use Chap. XX. Of the Ten Commandments in Particular and their several sense and importance Chap. XXI Of Superstition contrary to the true Worship of God and Christian Obedience AN INTRODUCTION TO THE Knowledge of the true Catholick Religion Part the First Book the First CHAP. 1. Of the Nature and Grounds of Religion in general Which are not so much Power as the Goodness of God and Justice in the Creature And that Nature it self teaches to be Religious RELIGION is the supream act of the Rational Creature springing from the natural and necessary Relation it beareth to the Creatour of all things God Almighty Or a due Recognition of the Cause of all Causes and Retribution of service and worship made to the same as the fountain of all Goodness derived to inferiour Creatures For there being a most excellent order or rather subordination of Causes in the Universe there is a necessary and constant dependance one upon another not by choice but natural inclination And the Perfection of all Creatures doth consist in observing that station and serving those ends and acting according to those Laws imposed by God on all things Thus the Heavenly Bodies moving in a perpetual and regular order and Psal 148. the Earth being fruitful in its seasons and the course of the Waters observing the Laws given them by God may be said to worship and obey him Which worship being performed according to that more perfect state of the Rational Creature and the prescriptions given to it may
Secondly Religion of all sorts ever acknowledged Festival worship Thirdly Apostolical practice and Prescription commend them and Fourthly our Church Homilies one reason possibly they have suffered Homily of the time and place of Prayer pag. 125. so many reproaches of ungodly men tell us that Holy days were appointed by the same Authority that the Lords day was which as sorely as it may vex these dissenters to hear is most true For though it sayes with the same Authority it doth not from thence follow that they by that Authority were instituted with the same sacredness And Mr. Perkins is Perkins Preparat to Problem pag. 681. deceived who tells us Not a Feast except Easter can be proved for 300 years after Christ Indeed Socrates whom he quotes saith the Apostles did not much concern themselves in Feasts but his meaning plainly is not about such punctilio's or Circumstances of Feasts as gave him occasion to write about them such as were the Contentions between the Eastern and Western Church about the day of keeping Easter But that Easter was Apostolical can be no more doubted then that Sunday was so And that fifty days after Easter to Whitsuntide were kept Festivally Tertullian witnesseth And therefore Cartwright whom nothing Tertul. Advers Psychicos cap. 14. could hold but his own fansie and the Genevan Plat-form thought it safer to say being urged with Antiquity I appeal from the examples of the Ancient Church to the Scriptures There were other grosser Errors countenanced by Antiquity There were so or there were none at all But what greater errour did Antiquity generally assert to then this of Innovatours denying all Holy days lawful but the Lords day Do you appeal to Scripture to prove this So do we Show one place against them if ye can Or show that the Church where there is no precept of Scripture in particular may not ordain such times of Worship When will these Scriptures appear For the places commonly alledged against set days viz. Rom. 14. 5. I leave Mr. Perkins to answer sufficiently though not absolutely in his Cases of Conscience Lib. 2. cap. 16. And that of Galat. 4. 10. to his Comment on the words And that of Colos 2. 16. to the now quoted place of his Cases of Conscience intending here no formal disputation though this Author falls into many pitiful suspicions and imaginations of his own in these places As for instance on Galatians 4. 10. he saith Indeed the Church of England observes Holy days but the Popish superstition is cut off This is true but the reason he gives very false which is this For we are not bound in conscience to the Observation of those days For Conscience binds every good Christian from singularizing Conscience binds to embrace all convenient opportunities to praise and honor God Conscience likewise binds to faithful obedience to our Ecclesiastical Superiours in such pious exercises as these and against which no more then the rude Effects of their private opinions and passion hath been alledged notwithstanding I know how much Gelaspie and after him Voctius have travailed in this subject and notwithstanding his answers Davenant on Coloss 2. v. 16. I hold the Reasons of Bishop Davenant to be strong and Pious given us for the observation of Holy days in his Comment upon the Colossians to which I refer the Reader for brevity sake And for the same reason I reduce what may be said about Fasts to what is already said of the Feasts of the Church For there is the very same reason of Antiquity Apostolical for the observation of both power and Liberty of the Church just occasions offered Conformity to the Primitive state of the Church Advantages of such exercises Characteristicks of Christian from unchristian societies and professions which all equally infer the duty of Fasting on set days as of Feasting and the madness and wickedness of such Christians as dare open their mouths against them because no doubt but both one and other have been much abused by Roman superstition Yet not Fasting so much as Festival days The abuses may here be noted to be these 1. Multitude whereby works of Nature and Civil necessities should be so far impeded Origen Hom. 10. in Genes and retarded that no small prejudice should befall the Common-wealth thereby Indeed Origen saith Every day is to be a Festival to a Christian calling them Jews who observe some now and then but his meaning is not that every day a man should cease from his labour wholly and only wear his best cloaths walk about and do nothing but worship God but as there he expresses himself should go to Church daily and not content himself with his domestique devotion but appear before God in publique place though not in that publique manner as with the assembly of Christians This still binds as a Councill at least if not Command and that which as hath been shewed already is much better then that which is performed within the walls of our Bucerus de Regno Christ lib. 2. cap. 10. own house or Closets if we will take Bucers judgment who speaketh thus When as all that we have and are and our very lives we have received and do receive daily from the free bounty of God is it not very meet also that we should assemble daily also to render him thanks and to renew our devotion to him and our worship of him by his Word and Sacraments which he hath for this purpose appointed for us and by daily Prayers which he requireth of us Your Majesties therefore he speaketh to Edward the sixth Part it is to inforce the authority of the Divine Law against this so great abuse of God and unbridled profanation of Holy days And therefore if Sectaries Religion be examined duly which hath procured them so much credit and esteem amongst unknowing people it will be found to fall short by much of that which is approved and established by our Church They are said to be frequent and constant in duties as they call them of their Families meaning prayers perhaps morning and evening this is very good and laudable But consider we a little whence this practice hath arisen whither it tendeth and it is rather a defrauding God of that due which we plead for then out-doing others The Church the publique house of God is the proper place of Gods worship and that he is more glorified in than by home-made worship Therefore for them to translate the Service of God out of the Church at all times but when a Sermon calls them forth into their own houses and to offer the morning and evening sacrifice at home when it ought and may be offered in his own house is so far from deserving the name of extraordinary Pieties that it deserves rather the name of Sacriledge And this I speak meaning when this proceeds either from that brutish opinion that all places are alike to God which is only true in sensu diviso and
there be no Sermon there to offer their Prayers unto God and be instructed and edified out of the Word of God But I hold it best considering the many prejudices and superstitious surmises that are bred in the minds of too many simple Christians concerning the use of Gods house and the worship therein to propound what might more accurately be spoken of that subject from the opinion of Chrysostome that devout and judicious Father in an Homily against such as absented themselves too much from the House of God in these words so near as I could translate them He that loves doth not only desire to see his friend Chryâ—ostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Pag 1. 2 103. Tom. 8. whom he loveth but the very house only and the gate yea not only the gate of the house but the very holes and passages thereunto And if he sees but the garment or pantofle of his beloved he imagines himself to be present Such were the Prophets because they saw not God who is incorporeal they beheld his House and by his House imagined they had him present I should choose to be prostrate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the House of God rather then to dwell in the Tents of sinners Every place Every Room Psal 84. compared with the House of God is the Tent of sinners though it be a Court of Justice though it be a Council-house though any mans private House For though there should be Prayers though Supplications there yet must there necessarily be strifes and contentions and evil language and debates about secular cares But this House is clear from all these Wherefore they are the Tents of wicked men but this the House of God And as the shore free from winds and waves affords great safety to the Barks which put into them In like manner the House of God drawing such as enter into it from the stroms of outward businesses causeth them to abide in great calmness and security and to hear the Oracles of God This place is the Foundation of Vertue the School-house of Philosophy or wisdome and that not only at the time of assembling when the Word of God is heard and spiritual Doctrine and the Reverend Fathers are assembled but likewise at every other time Enter into the Porch only and suddainly as it were a spiritual Brees incloses thy soul And this quietness leads thee to trembling and teaches thee to be wise It elevates the mind and suffereth thee not to mind these present things It transports thee from Earth to Heaven And if so great benefit doth aâ—crue unto thee being there when there is not any Congregation what great profit must they needs reap who are then present and what great dammage must they suffer who are absent when the Prophets on all sides sound forth when the Apostles are preached when Christ stands in the midst when the Father disposes matters there done when the Holy Spirit affordeth its own joyes Would ye know where such persons spend their time who despise the Congregation what witholds them and what withdraws them from this sacred Table and of what is there discoursed Or rather I know clearly For rather they prate of absurd and ridicuious matters or are fix'd on worldly cares But both these exercises fail of pardon and have extream punishment And for the former there is no need so much as of a word or demonstration Yea that they who pretend the affairs of their house and alledge the unsupportable necessity from thence can by no means obtain pardon being called once aweek and even not then enduring the preferring of Spiritual before Earthly things is apparent from the Gospels For they who were called to the spiritual Marriage made such excuses as these One that he had bought a yoke of Oxen one that he had purchased a field another that he had married a bride but they were all alike punished They may be necessary causes but when God calls they are no Apology For after God all things are necessary After his honour let all other things be regarded For what servant I pray tell attends the affairs of his own house before he hath finished his Lords service c. And in another place he as plainly and zealously contendeth for the Time as here he doth for the Place of Gods worship directly refuting the vain imaginations of them in his days who contented themselves in appearing in Gods Chrys Proaem in 6. Orat. in Annam Tom. 5. p. 78. To. 8. p. 8. House on Festival days only I would we had not them that had learnt worse Doctrine then this Such saith he are to be perswaded to communicate according to every Festival assembly For though saith he Whitsuntide is passed yet the Feast is not over For every coming together is a Feast Whence doth this appear From the very words of Christ himself Matth. 18. 20. whereby he saith Where two or three are gathered together in my Name I am there in the midst of them But when Christ is in the midst of them assembled what other proof of a Feast would ye have greater than this Where there is teaching and praying where are the Benedictions of the Fathers the hearing of Laws where the assembling of Brethren is and the bond of sincere Charity where there is conversing with God and God discourses with men why should we not call that a Feast and Solemn meeting c. Thus he And are not all these to be had many dayes even when there is no Sermon And have not men been of late taught to despise and prophanely deride such incomparable daily blessings as these and the benefits flowing from them the more is the shame and the more is the pity God of his great mercy and grace teach us better and better settle us and incline us delivering us from that prophane imposture which hath of late been wrought into the minds of Christians most unchristianly that it is needless nay perhaps worse superstitious in publick or private manner to visit Gods House by Prayers and Praises offered there to him but when a Sermon is at hand A second Precept of the Church is to all conscientious Christians and obedient Children of God and the Church To observe the Fasts of Directions after the Kalendar and Rubrick after the Nicene Creed the Church which Fasts the Church makes fourfold The Fourty Days of Lent Ember Days at the four Seasons being the Wednesday Friday and Saturday after the first Sunday in Lent after the Feast of Pentecost after September the Fourteenth and after December the Thirteenth The Three Rogation days being the Monday Tuesday and Wednesday before Holy Thursday or the Ascension of our Lord. In all which we must note and suppose that Fasting it self in general is the Ordinance of God himself and not of the Church this duty in a manner contrary unto that of rejoycing unto God and Feasting standing upon the same Grounds that Festivals and Days of
only to signifie how Christ was lifted up on the Cross but as practised in the Roman Church to the intent direct and divine Worship be given it 7. Wicked men eat not the Body of Christ Sure enough in a proper sense not denominatively only as the consecrated Elements are called the Body of Christ very often and currently 8. That they who communicate not are to be put out of the Church This is such an Error as the Ancient Church was guilty of as well as we as your own Vicecomes sheweth at large Vicecomes Vol. 3. l. 1. c. 18. 9. The Keys of the Church consist only in opening the Word of God No such thing is held by us 10. Private Confession is to be taken away Not so much as Sectaries say this absolutely 11. The Ceremonies of the Church are to be abrogated Simply and falsly said and directly contrary to the Articles of our Artic. 20. Church 12. Prayers in the Latin Tongue are barbarous and against St. Pauls Precept Very true where they are at first so instituted and understood by very few or none and so are they in the English Tongue or any other 13. No man can fulfill the Law This is true or false as it may be taken 14. More Masses then one cannot be said in one day in one Church Here our Accuser saith he knows not what For neither doth our Church inhibit more then once to officiate Liturgically neither did the Ancient Church practise if permit it for above four hundred years after Christ as appears from Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria consulting with Leo the first Bishop of Rome what he should Leo 1 Epist 79 or as some So. See also Grecian consecr Dist c. 51. do when Christians were so numerous that they could not all be received into the Church at once who answered In such cases he might safely reiterate the office And the Council of Antisiodorum or Auxere held about the Year 578 decreed that but one Mass should be said upon one Altar in one day which is as much observed by the Church of Rome now-a-days as other Canons of Councils which lye in their way thrown out And where in the Ancient Church do you read of above one Altar in one Church 15. Unity is no Note of the Church Discords and Divisions are certain signs of Errors but Unity is no certain sign of Truth nor so much as of a Church how then can it be of a true Church 16. Universal Councils may be repeal'd by Particular This See Petrus Gregorius Syntagm l. 15. c 3. is nothing he might have said by particular persons as the Popes who may according to that Church null Acts of Councils Oecumenical But we only hold that in things mutable according to the condition Article 34. of Time Place and other Circumstances rendring some Decrees prejudicial to some Churches contrary to the intention of the first Ordainers of them a Provincial Church may make alterations 17. The Church may erre in Faith And what of that meaning any one Individual single Church as the Roman hath according to our Articles 18. The Precepts of the Church concerning set Fasts are A Doctrine of Devils It is rather a Doctrine of Devils to teach so 19. Peter was not the Prince of the Apostles Peter was A or if you will The Principal Apostle but he was not the Prince of any one of them much less of all 20. The Bishop of Rome is Antichrist We are not so much agreed about this point as to give in a full verdict but we agree he is Antichristian 21. The difference concerning Leaven and Easter is inconsiderable Where no danger of Schisms or confusions may alter the case it is true 22. It is Heathenish to invoke Saints that reign with Christ Whether heathenish or no may be doubted they never worshipping any relating to Christ But for all that it may be and is superstitious and idolatrous in the sense very current in the Roman Church 23. The Reliques of Saints are not to be worshipped We hold so indeed though we hold they are to be respected relatively 24. The Saints in Heaven have no merits It is true taken strictly and properly 25. Indulgences of the Church are vain They are not only vain but wicked and generally blasphemous and ridiculous as mangâ—ed by the Church of Rome contrary or at least without all Precedents of the Christian Church for many hundred years viz. in remitting Sins or Punishments after this life and that divers times before they are committed Is not this fine and wonderful ancient and Catholick 26. Nothing is to be read in the Church besides Canonical Scripture This is rank Puritanism contradicted by themselves in their practise who read their Sermons as well as others and pray which is aequivalent to reading in this case out of their own heads rather than Scripture 27. In Oecumenical Councils and Private for the explaining of the Doctrine of Faith the consent of Lay-Princes is necessary It is necessary for the orderly assembling of such Councils It is necessary for the giving any Secular enforcement unto them 28. That it is lawful for Lay-men alone the Clergy opposing to introduce the Ancient Religion This is true no farther then that of Gerson which is alledged to this purpose A Lay-man with Scripture on his side is to be preferred before a Council without it Supposing a monstrous Proposition no wonder if a monstrous conclusion follows 29. He is no Bishop that teacheth not This is also a Puritan strain It being only true that he is no faithful conscientious Pastor but either proud or treacherous or sloathful or basely prudent who doth not in person discharge his Office so far as he is able without turning the care of his flock over to others using that for an argument of keeping close in his Cabin which is rather an argument of appearing in his charge viz. storms on the Church Opposition the Faith and Orders of the Church meet withal and difficulties obstructing the truth It being both shameful and ridiculous both in Bishop and Priest to censure others for enemies to the Church and for them so to wast it in all mens esteem in deserting it and delivering it up to the care of others themselves seeking little else then their temporal Harvest and case These men are over the Church indeed but 't is as the Extinguisher is over the Candle to put it out They pretend for themselves they have been sufferers for the Church and so it should seem indeed by their carriage to it in that through their scandalous negligence as to their charge they take a course to revenge themselves of it by making it suffer as much or more for them 30. Faith alone justifies How this is held we have even now as also we shall hereafter more fully explain 31. There are no Merits in Good works There are none properly so called 32. Priests and Monks may marry 'T is true where the
of Christ and his Members The Church of Christ taken specially for the Elect who shall infallibly be saved never visible But taken for true Professours of the Faith must alwayes be visible though not conspicuous in comparison of other Religions or Heresies Chap. XXVIII Of the outward and visible Form of Christs Church Christ ordained One particularly What that was in the Apostles dayes and immediately after The vanity of such places of Scripture as are pretended against the Paternal Government of the Church Chap. XXIX Of the necessity of holding visible communion with Christs Church Knowledge of that visible Church necessary to that communion Of the Notes to discern the true Church how far necessary Of the nature or condition of such Notes in general Chap. XXX Of the Notes of the true Church in particular Of Antiquity Succession Unity Universality Sanctity How far they are Notes of the true Church Chap. XXXI Of the Power and Acts of the Church Where they are properly posited Of the fountain of the Power derived to the Church Neither Prince nor People Author of the Churches Power But Christ the true Head of the Church The manner how Christs Church was founded Four Conclusions upon the Premisses 1. That there was alwayes distinction of persons in the Church of Christ 2. The Church was alwayes administer'd principally by the Clergy 3. The Rites generally received in the Church necessary to the conferring Clerical power and office 4. All are Usurpers of Ecclesiastical power who have not thus received it In what sense Kings may be said to be Heads of the Church Chap. XXXII Of the exercise of political power of the Church in Excommunication The Grounds and Reasons of Excommunication More things than what is of Faith matter sufficient of Excommunication Two Objections answered Obedience due to commands not concerning Faith immediately Lay-men though Princes cannot Excommunicate Mr. Selden refuted Chap. XXXIII Of the second branch of Ecclesiastical Power which is Mystical or Sacramental Hence of the Nature of Sacraments in general Of the vertue of the Sacraments Of the sign and thing signified That they are alwayes necessarily distinct Intention how necessary to a Sacrament Sacraments effectual to Grace Chap. XXXIV Of the distinction of Sacraments into Legal and Evangelical Of the Covenants necessary to Sacraments The true difference between the Old and New Covenant The Agreement between Christ and Moses The Agreements and Differences between the Law and the Gospel Chap. XXXV Considerations on the Sacraments of the Law of Moses Of Circumcision Of the Reason Nature and Ends of it Of the Passover the Reason why it was instituted It s use Chap. XXXVI Of the Evangelical Sacraments Of the various application of the name Sacrament Two Sacraments univocally so called under the Gospel only The others equivocally Five conditions of a Sacrament Of the reputed Sacraments of Orders Matrimony and Extream Unction in particular Chap. XXXVII Of Confirmation What it is The Reasons of it The proper Minister of it Of Unction threefold in Confirmation Of Sacramental Repentance and Penance The effects thereof Chap. XXXVIII Of the proper Affections of Repentance Compunction Attrition and Contrition Attrition is an Evangelical Grace as well as Contrition Of Confession its Nature Grounds and Uses How it is abused The Reasons against it answered Chap. XXXIX Of Satisfaction an act of Repentance Several kinds of Satisfaction How Satisfaction upon Repentance agrees with Christs Satisfaction for us How Satisfaction of injuries necessary Against Indulgences and Purgatory Chap. XL. Of Baptism The Authour Form Matter and Manner of Administration of it The general necessity of it The efficacie in five things Of Rebaptization that it is a prophanation but no evacuation of the former Of the Character in Baptism Chap. XLI Of the second principal Sacrament of the Gospel the Eucharist Its names Its parts Internal and External It s Matter Eread and Wine and the necessity of them Of Leavened and Unleavened Bread Of breaking the Bread in the Sacrament Chap. XLII Of the things signified in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the Body and Bloud of Christ How they are present in the Eucharist How they are received by Communicants Sacramentally present a vain invention All Presence either Corporal or Spiritual Of the real Presence of the signs and things signified The real Presence of the signs necessarily infer the Presence of the Substance of Bread and Wine Signs and things signified alwayes distinct Chap. XLIII The principal Reasons for Transubstantiation answered Chap. XLIV Of the Sacrifice of the Altar What is a Sacrifice Conditions necessary to a Sacrament How and in what sense there is a Sacrifice in the Eucharist Chap. XLV Of the form of consecrating the Elements Wherein it consisteth Whether only Recitative or Supplicatory Chap. XLVI Of the participation of this Sacrament in both kinds The vanity of Papists allegations to the contrary No Sacramental receiving of Christ in one kind only How Antiquity is to be understood mentioning the receiving of one Element only The pretended inconveniences of partaking in both kinds insufficient Of adoration of the Eucharist Chap. XLVII The Conclusion of the Treatise of the subject of Christian Faith the Church by the treating of Schism contrary to the visible Church Departure from the Faith real Schism not formally as to the outward Form Of the state of Separation or Schism Of Separation of Persons Co-ordinate and Subordinate Of Formal and Virtual Schism All Heresie virtually Schism not formally Separation from an Heretical Society no Schism From Societies not heretical Schism Heretical Doctrine or Discipline justifie Separation How Separation from a true Church is Schism and how not In what sense we call the Roman Church a true Church Some Instances of heretical Errors in the Roman Church Of the guilt of Schism Of the notorious guilt of English Sectaries The folly of their vindications That th Case of them and us is altogether different from that of us and the Church of Rome Not lawful to separate from the Universal Church The Contents of the Second Book of the First Part. Chap. 1. OF the formal Object of Christian Faith Christ An Entrance to the treating of the Objects of Faith in particular Chap. II. Of the special consideration of God as the object of Christian Faith in the Unity of the Divine Nature and Trinity of Persons in that Chap. III. Of the Unity of the Divine Nature as to the simplicity of it And how the Attributes of God are consistent with that simplicity Chap. IV. Of the Unity of the Divine Nature as to number and how the Trinity of Persons may consist with the Unity and Simplicity of the Deity Of the proper notions pertaining to the Mystery of the Trinity viz. Essence Substance Nature Person The distinction of the Persons in the Trinity Four enquiries moved How far the Gentiles and Jews understood the Trinity The Proof of the Doctrine of the Trinity from the New Testament and the explication of
reason together with their rejecting of so eminent a Servant of God as was Samuel that God 1 Sam. 8. 10. said of the People they had rejected him rather than Samuel From Saul to the Captivity it is manifest what their Government was and from thence it matters not as to our present purpose how they governed themselves seeing they were ruled by the Regal Power of Foreign Princes until shaking off that yoke they were brought under that form by their own Deliverers which was again extorted from them by usurping Tyrants So that when Philo-Judeus and Josephus seem to write of an Aristocratical Government instituted by Moses they can no otherwise be understood to write faithfully but in reference to Ecclesiastical Courts and Cases of Religion purely wherein the Counsel of many was to take place but not to the administration of Civil Justice unless as is above-said when they were themselves subject to Forrain Princes The Objections against this Form thus asserted I leave to be answered from the positive grounds thus laid down And commend the Reader to the learned Disputations of others which are many concerning the excellencie and benefits of one Form above another But as to Hereditary and Elective Governments what is convenient may be gathered from the general discourse now made Now we proceed to the Third thing in Government the mutual Obligation of Governour and Governed CHAP. XXVI Of the mutual Relations and Obligations of Soveraigns and Subjects No Right in Subjects to resist their Soveraigns tyrannizing over them What Tyranny is Of Tyrants with a Title and Tyrants without Title Of Magistrates Inferiour and Supream the vanity and mischief of that distinction The Confusion of Co-ordinate Governments in one State Possession or Invasion giveth no Right to Rulers The Reasons why THAT we read not in the New Testament of any Rules or Advice given to Kings and Princes how to govern the people under them the reason is plain viz. Because in those dayes there were none Christian and St. Paul says What 1 Cor. 5. 12. have I to do to judge them that are without the Church For doubtless had any been of the Society of Christians they had fallen under the Christian Discipline and Precepts of the Apostles But that occasion of instructing Kings in the due administration of their power failing we are to seek for satisfaction from the old Testament where not much is found besides general moral Precepts of Sobriety Temperance Justice and the like enjoyned Solomon by David his Father and left by Solomon in his Book of Proverbs for Rules to succeeding Princes Moses likewise not without Gods appointment hath drawn up some special Precepts for Kings to follow in the real and cordial embracing of Gods word and worship and taking the defense and protection thereof Of which to speak it little behoves us at present Neither purpose we out of Humane Arguments and Autority to prescribe to Supreams what they ought to do or how to govern any farther than the known Rules of Justice in common do require For no doubt there is a mutual Obligation between Soveraign and Subject and that he is tyed and circumscribed in the exercise of his power by God as really as this is in his Obedience to him and that upon the common duties expressed by St. Paul of Masters to Servants and Husbands to Wives and Parents to Children For it doth not at all follow That because Princes are not subject to their Subjects therefore they are free from all subjection Ephes 6. 8. No St. Paul's Rule holds good to Kings as well as to Masters viz. That they should know that their King and Master is in heaven and that Kings are to be subject as well to the Laws of God as their Subjects are to the Laws of Man And though Children ought to obey their Parents in all things yet there is tacitly understood certain Laws of Limitation restraining the boundless tyranny of both civil and natural Parents For Subjects and Children are to know that they have a higher Lord and a more powerful Father to whom in the first place obedience must be paid And we must withdraw our selves from the commands of our Earthly Soveraign when our Heavenly who is his Soveraign doth require it as all rational Kings do grant as well as People But neither ought we to restrain the will of Princes to the literal and express will of God only but even to the most just and reasonable Laws of Humane Authority but only we must distinguish the vast difference between the obligation of Subjects to the just and equal Laws prescribed and imposed on them and that of Princes in relation to those Laws concerning their governing For all Laws contain two special causalities in them The one Exemplary whereby a Form and Rule is prescribed directing such as are to be guided thereby to the observation of Justice Equity and Reason as well to the publick as private good And to this so far as it is reasonable Kings are no less bound than Subjects they ought to observe entirely and religiously these sound and profitable Laws and that under pain of Gods displeasure The other causality which Laws have is Efficient and Compulsive whereby a Civil penalty being denounced and impending over the head of the infringers thereof they are better guarded from transgressions by either loss of outward good or life it self according to the merit of the Offense It cannot either consist with the Law of God or Nations to inflict punishments on Princes Soveraign Not but that for instnace murder adultery unjust spoil and robbery of the Subjects may no less considering the nature of the Crime deserve such punishment of Princes as they do of People but because there is none in such cases that can or ought duly and regularly to execute such Laws because there can be no such execution without the power of the Sword and there can be but one proper subject of that power in any one Republick Every man must not put to death him that is a notorious offender no not though he be justly and legally condemned to dye but he or they only who are thereunto rightly impowred and authorized by the Supream And though every man may in his own mind and judgment sentence a malefactour whose crime is high and apparent to death yet cannot he in civil judicature render him obnoxious to it And the reason hereof is plain because Justice must be done justly or else there is incurred no less guilt than is sought and intended to be revenged And of all guilt I know not whether any be greater than the assuming of such a power which no wayes belongs to a man For better it were to take away ones horse or to ravish another mans wife or to extort unjustly anothers estate than to devest a Prince of his Right of Rule and usurp it to himself and that first because no mans estate or any thing that is his doth descend
may be a falling away It could never appear which is the true Church if judgment were to be made not from the outward Forms and Faith professed but from the affection and inclination of Persons or from the invisible decrees of God of granting or denying persevering Grace to persons in the Church So that it is manifest from hence how lurious frivolous vain and sophistical disquisitions must needs be which are founded and managed upon the ground of an invisible Church properly so called The improper acceptation then of Invisible can only occasion a just controversie i. e. as it is taken comparatively and in relation to a much more conspicuous and glorious Society and that either of Infidels who may by numbers much exceed in outward glory much out-shine it in power over-rule it and by persecution and oppression so far straiten lessen and crush it that it may be termed obscure and invisible Or otherwise compared with the Societies of much more publick and outwardly glorious Hereticks and Schismaticks pretending the Catholick Church And truly if acute and exact Geographers computing the several professions of Religion and their possessions of the earth deceive us not the Church of Christ may comparatively with other superstitions Mahometan Jewish and Gentile be not unaptly said to be invisible Christian Religion being allowed but Five parts of Thirty Mahometan six and Idolaters nineteen parts of the earth But if we shall divide Christian again into Catholick according to the Judgment of several See Brerewoods Inquiries Chap. 14. Writers there will not remain at present above two parts of all the Thirty parts of the earth to be possessed by the Catholicks and if so what will become of the visibility of the Church thus understood And if a moderate sense of visibility be admitted signifying a real and apparent being only of the Church though inferiour in pomp and number unto others how doth the great end and benefit for which chiefly the Church is to be maintained Catholick and Visible shrink up into little or nothing when it cannot commend it self for any such glory to the beholder nor signalize it self to the doubter of the true Faith in the Church as may hereafter appear more fully when we shall come to speak of the Notes of the Church It may suffice to conclude this Point with these two First That Christs Church is essentially and so long as it is at all must necessarily be a Society or a communion of many For so we are taught to believe out of the Apostles Creed which speaking of the Catholick Church exegetically interpreteth what we are to understand by that term viz. The Communion of Saints And therefore we are to distinguish between being of the Catholick Church and being Christians A man may be a Christian and yet not be of the Church For no man can be of the Church who doth not hold communion with it For to deceive himself and say though he be not of the visible Communion or visible Church he may be or is of the invisible and mystical is to take for granted that which he ought to prove but never can be able but from somewhat external and the ordinary method and most effectual means of being mystically united unto Christ is by being Politically united which must be visibly unto the Body of Christ the Church It hath been therefore ever matter of greatest wonder to me to hear and read how freely all struglers and Factions of Christians how inconsiderable soever do assert to and confidently to assert that common Rule Without the Church there is no salvation and are so obscure nice or absurd in their sense of it having very little or nothing to secure themselves from self-condemnation besides an ill grounded presumption that they are inwardly united to Christ and are of the invisible Church which in truth is no Church but a certain state wherein there is no administration or order that we can learn now all Society must necessarily have order and administrations for their regulating but none such do we read of to be in Christs invisible Body Christ himself being all in all and therefore improperly called a Church And therefore all such being infallibly saved who are so of Christs Body they that so abruptly and peremptorily assure themselves they are of that invisible State do in effect contradict themselves and mean they shall be saved without being of the Church For surely the Authour of that saying meant nothing else but that before one could be according to Gods ordinary dispensation revealed in his word of Christs mystical Body called abusively the Invisible Church he must belong to the visible communion of Christs Political Body or Church So that it is not sufficient to comfort our selves with an opinion that we are good Christians and hold the same Faith entirely and purely that is required of us unless we hold outward communion And therefore secondly as Christs Church must necessarily be a Society communicating so must it be a visible communion and outward For how is it possible that such communion which constitutes a Society should be entred into unless it be visible There shall therefore as well out of the very nature of the Design God and Christ had to establish a Church as from the many promises fortifying that Resolution and perfecting that Design be evermore an outward visible company of Professours of Christian Religion in the world which shall retain the Faith of Christ and the necessary effects of it in Worship to that degree of perfection which shall or may lead a Believer certainly to Salvation as will more plainly appear from what is now to succeed viz. the outward Form of the Church CHAP. XXVIII Of the Outward and Visible Form of Christs Church Christ ordained One particularly What that was in the Apostles dayes and immediately after The vanity of such places of Scripture as are pretended against the Paternal Government of the Church FOR the Church to be and to be visible or appear to be I reckon the same thing and therefore thought good to speak of that and premise it to what in order follows on this subject viz. The Visible Form 2. The Adjuncts or Affections And 3. the Power of the Church of Christ By the Form of the Church we mean that frame and outward constitution whereby the Society of Christian believers are not only united mystically and inwardly to Christ as their proper Head and universal nor as agreeing in the substance of one Faith and Worship but as conventing and consenting in one outward Discipline or Administration of this Body so collected So that Discipline otherwise called Government is by principal Sectaries themselves rightly affirmed to be an essential ingredient into the nature of a Church which will manifestly appear if we distinguish between the nature of a Christian or many Christians separate in themselves from any Jurisdiction and the nature of a Church For a Christian or a true Believer differeth from
a Church in two things principally First in the matter The material part of a believer as he is a Christian not as he is a man is his Faith consisting of its several Articles and Branches But the matter of the Church is the Christians themselves whereof it consisteth Secondly they differ in their Form too For no man is properly a Christian though he believes all the Articles of a Christian and lives accordingly unless he be formed and fashioned Formale autem Ecclesiae Catholicae est professio fi dei Christi intâ—gra sub suis Legitimis Rectoribus à Christo institut â—â— ministris cum Sacramentorum obsignatione participatione Sec. Marcus Anton. Spalat Lib. 7. cap 10. §. 26. by the Sacrament of Regeneration which is Baptism But the Form of Christs Church doth consist in that outward disposition and order of Superiour and Inferiour communicating mutually in all Christian Acts and Offices necessary to the conservation of the whole Body and the edification and encrease of every Member thereof This Description of Christs Church is warranted us from St. Paul to the Ephesians who expresly maketh * Eph. 4. 15 16. Colos 2. 19. Christ the Head of his Church From whom the whole Body fitly joyned together and compacted by that which every joynt supplyeth according to the effectual working in the measure of every Part maketh increase of the Body unto the edifying its self in Love The like words to which we find to the Colossians chap. 2. 19. It must therefore from hence be granted That there is to be Government in Christs Church and that the Government ought to be proportionable to the Body thereby ordered and ruled To the Internal Body of Christ or Mystical Church not visible to us an Internal Mystical and Invisible administration is very agreeable and sufficient from Christ the Head and by the influence of the Holy Spirit but the external Church standeth in need necessarily of external Rule and Direction as much as it doth of external Doctrine Instructions and Sacraments though it be inwardly informed by the Spirit of Christ Now if it be enquired what that Government is whereby Christ would have his Church directed which is the most famous Question of late dayes though scarce ever call'd in question for some hundred years after Christ the resolution will be facilitated from what we delivered concerning Government civil For first if Government Ecclesiastical be so essential to the subsistence of a Church that without it it cannot be of any continuance without a Miracle it cannot be imagined with any probability of Reason that God or Christ should make one part of his Church and leave it to the liberty and pleasure of Man to make the other but least of all can they be of this opinion who think so sacredly of all Ecclesiastical Orders that to admit any of humane invention or prudence is to prophane the whole Systeme Again upon the grounds laid down in civil Government If Christ be the Author of Government Ecclesiastical in General he must also be the Cause of some one Government in Particular otherwise he could not be the Authour of any at all seeing Institution Political as well as Creation Natural must of necessity have some Object to terminate it as its effect Generals in all cases following Particulars in the things themselves though the way of knowledge or learning these things is to begin with the General and so to descend to Particulars Thirdly to understand what kind of Government Christ instituted in his Church what more certain and compendious way what more equal than to judge rather from matter of Fact than long and uncertain Disputations built on Arguments which are subject to diverse casualties from mans Passion and Interests prosecuted thereby whereas there is evidence sufficient from the thing it self to settle belief in that Point Fourthly we are here to note That when we speak of Government we intend not to comprehend therein all Accruments Ornaments or Additions which happened after the thing it self For these may be and doubtless oftentimes have been the effects of humane Prudence regulated by general Precepts but we speak of the Form it self or the Kind of Government For though we said God was the Author of All well grounded Government and do not mean that every particle thereof or inferiour additional Grace must proceed from the same hand For God having permitted if not ordered that every nation should conform it self in outward matters to the condition of the time and place God must have made for several Ages and several Places several Regiments which no man hath presumed to affirm the Divine Right or Institution extending only to those things wherein all at first agreed So that as children receive from the Nature of man at first created by God in Adam their fouls and bodily shape with the several parts necessarily thereunto belonging but their behaviours gestures gates favour and complexions are commonly derived from their immediate Pareâ—â—s So doth every true Body of Christ every Church receive common forms and shapes from the first Institution of Christ extant in the Primitive times but their particular modifications and customes are owing to to their Spiritual Fathers whether mediate or immediate Which frowardly and peevishly to reject or disobediently to oppose without higher warrant what is it else but to imitate such graceless and unnatural children who are ashamed of their own Parents Fifthly A distinction ought to be put between the nature and degrees of any thing and especially of the Church which had its conception in the womb of the Jewish Church its infancy during our blessed Saviours Tum maxime Deus ex memoria hominum labitur cum beneficiis ejus fruentes honorem dare divinae indulgentiae deberent Lactantius lib. 2. cap. 1. de Origine Erroris 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazienz Orat 1. contra Julianum abode upon the earth its minority during the Apostolical Age of One hundred years its perfect state soon after the first Christian Emperours advanced it and augmented it with secular strength and glory And it is certain that as the Roman Empire became more corrupt and declined so Christs Empire degenerated in many things contracting deformities in Doctrine and Discipline even from secular advantages granted unto it by the Devotion and Bounty of the best Wishers to it We are not then to be so narrow in our judgment of the Churches state to allow no more to it then when it but just crept out of the womb or when having gathered a little strength it could stand alone but not act according to the prime Institutours intention but as it was habited and affected in its riper years when we may behold that in more conspicuous manner which at first was obscurer yet essentially the same For as nothing is more evident to all but such as resolve they will understand nothing that they dislike than that in nature the Father is made before
From all which we may gather both the Efficient and Exemplary cause of the several orders in Christ For first we read how he called unto himself twelve Apostles as well to minister under him during his abode upon earth as to Preside and inform his Church after his departure out of this World which according to St. Hierome were prefigured by the twelve fountains the twelve Patriarchs the twelve Tribes the twelve Princes of Exod. 15. 27. Mark 3. 14. the Tribes There he not only elected but ordained also as St. Mark testifieth that they should be with him and that he might send them out to preach naming them Apostles as St. Luke writeth After the choice and Luk. 6. 13. Mat. 10. 1. Luk. 9. 2. Math. 10. 1. Math. 10. 10. Ordination of them he gave them actual Mission as it appeareth by St. Mathew and Commission to preach and to work miracles to the confirmation of his Doctrine and to receive a reward for their pains And when the Harvest was too great for so few Labourers as twelve St. Luke tells us he added Adjutants to them seventy Disciples answerable to Luk. 10. 1. Numb 11. 10 the seventy Elders by Gods appointment set over the children of Israel and the seventy Souls that went with Jacob into Egypt These two orders Gen. 46. Eph. 3. 5. are thought to be intended by St. Paul to the Ephesians where he maketh mention of Apostles and Prophets by Prophets meaning such who bare that part of the Prophetical office which consisted in ordinary instruction of the People of which in other places likewise he speaketh Now adding to these the common sort of Christians or Disciples which were if not at the time of Christs abode upon earth yet afterward Christians as St. Paul intimateth where he affirmeth Christ was seen after his resurrection of 1 Cor. 15. 6. above five hundred brethren at once We have three distinct orders of Christians First Apostles secondly Evangelists or the seventy Thirdly simple Believers or Christians And it is most certain that as the Apostles did not so much as choose their Lord nor the Evangelists the Apostles so the Common sort did not then constitute or choose their Preachers or Evangelists but while Christ continued on earth he kept the power of Ordination of whom he pleased in his own hands and never is it so much as insinuated that upon his departure he left any power in their hands to dispose Ecclesiastical Affairs or Persons therein but that with his Apostles as succeeding him in visible Administration he deposited this power many arguments are offer'd us out of Scripture For in the Person of St. Peter he gave power to all the Apostles saying Feed my sheep And that this same power Joh. 21. 15 resting in them was by them transmitted unto others the very same form of words almost used by St. Peter himself to be the Governours of the 1 Pet. 5. 2. Church do prove where he saith Feed the Flock of God which is among you taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly And St. Paul in the Acts of the Apostles likewise And that the whole Ecclesiastical Acts. 20. 28. Jurisdiction was entirely in the Apostles and Apostolical Persons doth appear from the enumeration of the most principal parts of which such Jurisdiction doth consist which may be these as we find them in Scripture recorded 1. Power of determining Controversies of Religion as appeareth from the Question agitated about keeping the Law of Moses Acts. 15. and concluded by the Apostles and Elders which were of the second Order after the Apostles And in the eleventh of the Acts the same resolved Acts. 11. the doubt concerning the Conversing with Gentiles 2. Of imposing Laws and orders for the due and sober conversation in matters of Moral nature as may be gathered from St. Paul to the Thessalonians where he adviseth That Christians study to be quiet and to do their own business and to work with 1 Thes 4. 11. their own hands as we commanded you And so in the second Epistle he thus writeth Now we command you brethren in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ 2 Thes 3. 6. that ye withdraw your selves from every brother that walketh disorderly and not after the tradition which he received of us And so verse the twelfth of the same Chapter Thirdly Censurings and Punishments of the refractory and disorderly and that of two sorts First of suspension and interdicting as did the Disciples of Christ suspected Preachers of him in St. Luke John answered Luk. 9. 49. and said Master we saw one casting out Devils in thy name and we forbade him because he followeth not with us And so others they restrain who preached without their command or exceeded their commission as may be read in the acts of the Apostles by vertue of the same censuring Power St. Paul Acts. 15. 24 25. 1 Tim. 2. 12. interdicts women from preaching in the Church Secondly the Censure of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and separation of 〈◊〉 and notorious offendors in the Church from communion in the Church For St. Paul writing to the Corinthians in this manner What will ye shall I come unto you with a rod or in Love and in the spirit of meekness doth evidently distinguish a twofold 1 Cor. 4. 21. power resident in him of severity to chastise and meekness to comfort and support And this power is more plainly expressed in the exercise thereof upon the scandalous offendor in incestuous marriage As also 1 Cor. 5. 3 4 5. in the formidabâ—e proceedings against Hymeneus and Alexauder whom St. Paul delivered unto Satan that they might learn not to blaspheme and several other things more proper for some other place A Fourth instance of Jurisdiction is seen in the power of Ordination pertaining to the Apostles by imposition of hands For they did ordain those Deacons mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles And St. Paul to Timothy exhorting Acts. 6. 5 6. 2 Tim. 1. 6. him to Stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the putting on of his hands doth declare the Act of Ordination used by himself From alâ— which these four conclusions do necessarily follow First that by Christ and his Apostles intention there were alwayes in their dayes distinction of persons in the Church some having the power of Rule and some being subject according to the Comparison of St. Paul to the Corinthians of the natural order and superiority of and subjection of the 1 Cor. 12. Members in a natural Body to one another and coming to application v 28. be saith And God hath set some in the Church First Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers after that Miracles And by demanding and Questioning v. 29 30. doth vehemenâ—ly deny a Parity in the Church And this distinction of Persons was no otherwise known at first but by the common name of Brethren given to
Eucharist and especially going upon the grounds of Luther Calvin Perkins and some others of Great note that all Sacerdotal they may call them if they please Ministerial Acts done by him who is no true Minister are really null and void Fourthly we conclude that seeing all Ecclesiastical power as Ecclesiastical doth proceed from Christ and his Successors and that by Ordinary and visible means they who have not received the same by such Ordinary Methods are usurpers of the same whether Political or Mystical And that to deny this to the Church is to deny that which Christ hath given them and such a Principle of the Churches well Being without which it cannot subsist and it not subsisting neither can the Faith it self And to the reason above given we may add Prescription beyond all memory For from Christs time to this day a perpetual and peculiar power hath ever been in the Clergy which hath constantly likewise born the name of the Church to assemble define and dispose matters of Religion And why should not Prescription under Unchristian as well as Christian Governours for so many Ages together be as valid sacred and binding to acknowledgment in the Case of Religion as Civil Matters will ever remain a question in Conscience and common Equity even after irresistible Power hath forced a Resolution otherwise It is true such is the more natural and Ancient Right Civil Power hath over the outward Persons of men than that which Religion hath over the Inward man that it may claim a dominion and disposal of the Persons of even Christian subjects contrary to the soft and infirm Laws of the Church because as hath been said Men are Men before they are Christians and Nature goeth before Grace And Civil society is the Basis and support to Ecclesiastical Yet the grounds of Christianity being once received for good and divine and that Religion cannot subsist nor the Church consist without being a Society and no Society without a Right of counsel and consultation and no consultation without a Right to assemble together the Right of assembling must needs be in trinsique to the Church it self Now if no man that is a Christian can take away the essential ingredient to the Church how can any deny this of Assembling For the practise of it constantly and confidently by the Apostles and brethren contrary to the express will of the Lawful Powers of the Jews and Romans and the reason given in the Acts of the Apostles of obeying God rather then man do imply certainly a Law and Charter from God so to do and if this be granted as it must who can deny by the same Rule necessity of Cause and constant Prescription that they may as well provide for the safety of the Faith by securing the state of the Church as for the truth and stability of the Church by securing the true Faith by doctrine and determination The Great question hath ever been Whether the Church should suffer loss of power and priviledges upon the Supream Powers becomming Christian Or the Supream power it self loose that dominion which it had before it became of the Church For if Christianity subjected Kings necessarily to the Laws of others not deriving from them then were not Kings in so good a Condition after they were Christians as before when they had no such pretences or restraints upon them and so should Christs Law destroy or maim at least the Law of God by which Kings reign But there may be somewhatsaid weakning this absurdity For Granting this That there is a God and that he is to be worshipped and that as he appointeth all which we must by nature believe it seems no less natural to have these observed than the Laws of natural Dominion Now granting that at present which if we be true to our Religion we must not deny viz. That Christian Religion is the true Religion and that God will be worshipped in such sort as is therein contained For any Prince absolute to submit to the essentials of that Religion is not to loose any thing of his Pristine Rights which he had before being an Heathen for he never had any Right to go against the Law of God more then to go against the Law of Nature but it doth restrain his Acts and the exercise of his Power And if the Supream after he hath embraced Christianity shall proceed to exert the same Authority over the Church as before yet the Church hath no power to resist or restrain him Civilly any more than when he was an Alien to it Now it being apparent that Christian Faith and Churches had their Forms of believing and Communion before Soveraign powers were converted and that he who is truly converted to a Religion doth embrace it upon the terms which he there finds not such as he brings with him or devises therefore there lies an Obligation upon such powers to preserve the same as they found it inviolate And truly for any secular Power to become Christian with a condition of inverting the orders of the Church and deluting the Faith is to take away much more than ordinary accrues unto it by such a change It is true the distinction is considerable between the Power of a Christian and unchristian King exerted in this manner because taking the Church in the Largest sense in which all Christians in Communion are of it what Christian Kings act with the Church may in some sense bear the name of the Church as it doth in the State acting according to their secular capacity but much more improperly there than here because there are no inferiour Officers or Magistrates in such a Commonwealth which are not of his founding and institution whatsoever they do referr to him and whatsoever almost he doth is executed by them But Christ as we have shewed having ordained special Officers of his own which derive not their Spiritual Power at all from the Civil and to this end that his Church might be duly taught and governed what is done without the concurrence of these can in no proper sense bear the name of the Church But many say the King is a Mixt person consisting partly of Ecclesiastical and partly Civil Authority but this taken in the ordinary latitude is to begg the Question and more a great deal than at first was demanded For who knows how far this Mixture extends and that it comprehends not the Mystical Power of the Church as well as the Political And how have they proved one more than the other by such a title It were reasonable therefore first to declare his Rights in Ecclesiastical matters as well as Civil and thence conclude he is a Mixt Person and not to affirm barely he is a Mixt Person and from thence inferr they know not what Ecclesiastical power themselves And if he hath such power whether it is immediately of God annexed to his Natural Right or by consent of the Church is attributed unto him For by taking this course we
consent and sentence is the same in effect with Excommunication and therefore breeders of separation and divisions are no less subject to excommunications than are Hereticks though they hold nothing directly contrary to the Faith But if men will say that What St. Paul did we may do and no more because he did no more this is invented only to destroy but will not hold strong enough because the examples of the Governours of the Church our Rules are not to be restrained to the very same Cases only but to them of like general nature St. Paul justifyes by his practice the excluding out of the communion of the Church such as bred causeless contentions and divisions and from hence the succeeding Governors are justified in doing the like For nothing can be said less to the question in hand than to recite many places out of St. Paul commanding to bear one anothers burdens and that we should not judge one another and that the strong should bear with the weak and such like For all these Texts speak either of Churches not Formed or constituted but rather breeding or of single persons amongst themselves coming to Christian Religion with the strong prepossessions of the Excellency of certain Rites before Religiously observed wherein all Reason Justice and Religion require that no man should impose his conceit upon another without autority But do we find in any place of the Holy Scriptures that St. Paul denied this Right of Judging censuring and commanding to the whole Church Nothing less yea nothing more than the contrary as may more fully appear when we are to speak of Rites and Ceremonies But it is commonly and as they think accutely said that they are the Authors of divisions and Schisms who will not do what they may to prevent them And therefore if Governours impose more then is necessary to salvation or Faith upon others they must answer for the divisions arising from this I may marvel who before late years I may say rather dayes ever understood the Scriptures in this manner but they will wonder perhaps again I should think they are no better interpreters and appliers of Scriptures than are to be found in times and societies of old Let that pass But so must not their mistake either of the power of the Church or the nature of Charity and common Justice The power of the Church being meerly ministerial and servile as to Christ and the Rule of all Christianity the Scripture but Magisterial in relation to inferiour members extendeth only to things of Christian Prudence and extrinsecal to Faith and the things uncommanded in Scripture properly For in other things it is determined without any power to vary from thence this done utterly destroyes all Right and Autority as to outward matters which they can never themselves approve of in the practise nor have done But this is not all for we say that those Governors are not the cause of Divisions and Schisms who do not suspend and withdraw all Injunctions extrinsecal to Faith or good life but they rather who do not receive and obey such as are not contrary to either This is the state of the controversie then between us supposing there is Order and Legitimate autority constituted amongst us whether this is more or so much bound for peace and unity sake to gratifie such as are in their rank subject in the Lord to them in all things possible according to the Scripture or these on the contrary are obliged to receive and observe all such decrees and constitutions which are indeed much accused and traduced but cannot be proved to be any wayes contrary to the word of God or any Analogy of Faith which is not devised by themselves And granting there were somewhat of Charity in reluxing of the rigour of Orders to be observed is there not much more of Charity to be expected from them in obeying How can they so vehemently urge that upon others which they are much more bound to keep and practise themselves but never reguard it Does not Charity much more bind them to obey their Superiours then their Superiours them Nay can they lay any claim to a thing upon the account of Charity who deny the same thing upon the account of Justice Justice and a debt of obedience flowing from subjection requires no less than Charity a compliance of the Wills of the Inferiour with that of the Superiour But only Charity can be pretended and that only pretended where there seems to be an indifference in the thing commanded For if they betake themselves to the inward temper and bent of particular consciences opposing or approving things they must needs come off Loosers by such trials For there will soon be found consciences on the contrary that will be as stiff and resolute for the defense as theirs are for the abrogations of such indifferent things No reason is possible to be given why one conscience may not think as well of them finding them not forbidden as another doth evil finding them not commanded For the too vulgar doctrine which teacheth That what is not commanded is forbidden in Scripture is as notorious a falsity as any thing can be pretended upon the Scripture But farther we absolutely declare against all such tryals of Publick Laws and Customes as Particular and especially private consciences as unjust and unreasonable and in trut intollerable in all Churches This is the Rule we maintain and hold to That nothing ought to be ordained or imposed which may justly offend the conscience and that is only evil If therefore the thing it self be acknowledged or may reasonably be proved to contain nothing sinfull which only may offend the conscience it is one of those evils which cannot be avoided and such of which Christ speaketh in the Gospel of St. Luk. 17. â—1 Luke It is impossible but that offences will come For either the dissenting or Assenting conscience must suffer and which should in such cases suffer who should determine but Autority Was ever that chosen for a Rule which is infinite in uncertainties So are mens consciences in particular But still they are Instant and say We grant such things may be left undone without prejudice to the Faith And to the same argument we return the same answer in effect as before viz And they grant they may be done without prejudice to the Faith But their Case is little less than ridiculous if it be truly considered what they lay down and what they crave at our hands For Peace sake say they we ought to yield what is not unlawful and all indifferent things As if they much more were not so bound to do But that we now add is That there being two Parties diversly constituted yet as 't is supposed differing only in things of a middle nature between Good and Evil. If the one Partie should come unto the other promising to have peace and be at unity with it on condition that it would yield all things that they
with Christians denying them all outward conversation as well as spiritual in matters of Religion Now this seems to be a branch of the Old Greater Excommunication and not in all places disusâ—d And sometimes is unlawful and otherwhile lawful according to the extent and application of them For to inflict the same to the dissolving of ties of nature is not agreeable to the simplicity of the Gospel And Natural Ties we call such as are between Subjects and Soveraign Parents and Children Husband and Wife which by no Ecclesiastical Excommunication can be broken or nulled The reason whereof besides the monstrous effects ensuing upon their evacuation not here to be treated of is this That Ecclesiastical Power can take away no more than it gave nor Christianity destroy what it never builded But Christianity did never simply confer such Rights on men but the Law of Nature only it regulated and directed the same therefore can it not null it It is therefore unchristian for any pretending Ecclesiastical Power to absolve subjects from obedience Civil or Children from natural and the like But every Christian in that he is adopted of God by baptism and admitted into the Society of Christians doth receive thereby certain Rights and power to communicate with it in all things which power may be forfeited and lost by breach of Covenant as well with the Body of the Church to live and believe according to the Received Faith and practice thereof as with the Head Christ And this being so judged by those who are over the Church in the Lord it is very consonant to Christian Religion to deny such of what order or rank soever they be the signs of outward communion Prayer and Communication of the Holy Sacraments of Christ The Church hath power to declare even soveraign Princes uncapable of such Communion and deny it them which we call the Lesser Excommunication Yet because as we said No natural Right can be extinguished upon unchristian misdemeanours If a Supream Prince of a Place should disdain to be denied or opposed in such cases and would make his entrance into the Church by vertue of his Civil Right to all places under his Dominion the most that the Church could do justly in such cases were to diswade him but by any force to resist his entrance into any Church were unlawful as it would be also to minister in a Christian manner in his presence for this cannot be commanded by him but in such cases suffering must be put in practice as for the Faith it self sought to be destroyed Some there are yet who call in question the peculiar and incommunicable Right of decreeing this Censure of Excommunication to those called the Clergy which is very strange seeing this Power is part of that of the Keys delivered by Christ himself to such only as he constituted Governors of the Church and that in Christs days their was a distinction between the Members of his Body as to Inferiority and Superiority Obedience and Command Teacher and Learner and much more in the Apostles days after Christs Assention and much more yet after their days according as the matter of the Church Christians encreasing and improving became more capable of a more convenient form and fashion For as it is in the production of natural things though the Form be certain and constant and the very same at the first production as in its perfection yet it doth not appear so fully and perfectly as afterward So was it with the Body of Christs Church It is certain therefore that from the beginning this Act of Excluding from the Communion was never executed but by the Rulers and Presidents of Congregations though the people might concurr thereto Now that these Rulers whom we may call Bishops or Presbyters were not created by the People nor by the Prince we have shewed already and therefore did nothing in their Right but in the Power of Christ whose Ministers alone they properly were And this being essential to right Administration of the Church how can it be supposed either to be separable from the Church in General or from those persons who are the proper Administrators of it For to say with some It is needless Selden de Jure Gentium apud Bibliander apud Erastum wholly where Christian Magistrates rule whose proper office it is to rebuke and punish vice and scandalous misdemeanors which say they can only be just cause of Excommunication is to destroy the subject of the question which supposes it needful and upon this enquires after the Persons which should Execute the same And spitefully to defeat the Church of all Authority from Christ doth indeed translate this Power to the Civil Magistrate And is not the absurdity the very same which endowes the Christian Governor with Civil Power and which endows the Civil Magistrate with Christian If it be not absurd for a King to be a Philosopher it is not absurd for a Philosopher to be a King If it be not absurd for a Civil Magistrate to have Priestly power it is not absurd for him that hath Priestly power to be a Magistrate There is certainly no inconsistency on either side For things of a far different nature and intention may easily meet in the same person though the things themselves can never be the same Here therefore the things differing so egregiously it is no more than nacessary that a different cause be acknowledged necessary which not appearing the Effect must be denied Now the Cause of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as Ecclesiastical must needs come from him from whom the Church it self hath its Original and being And it is a certain Rule that a man is born to nothing that comes from Christ as Head of his Church but is made and instituted Which whoever is not cannot lay any just claim to any Office under him I know it is objected that Preaching being an Ecclesiastical Act hath without contradiction been practised by diverse and to this day may be no ordination preceeding To which I thus answer by distinguishing first between doing a thing Ex Charitate and Ex Officio out of Charity and out of duty Preaching was ever permittedin the Church especially taken in the larger sense wherein it signifies all declaration of the Gospel out of Charity But the office of Preaching was never suffered but upon antecedent qualifications And these two differ yet farther For he that doth a thing out of Office doth it so that it is not lawful for him absolutely to omit it but he that doth it out of Charity and only by connivance not by commission may cease at his pleasure and as he made may suspend himself when he will Again he that teaches without Autority upon bare permission nay be silenced without any other cause renderd but the will of him that hath the Jurisdiction or if a reason be given because He hath no autority is sufficient But he that is orderly instituted to that end cannot without
same in publick and clearly in the Church seeing we could not do this when we were baptized Mast How are ye confirmed Schol. By publick blessing intercession of the Church with imposition of hands Mast But how art thou assured of this Schol. We have Word of God when he sayes Let little Children come unto me c. Thus that Catechise Another reason may be the danger from the multitude of Hereticks which possibly might have corrupted such young beginners in the Faith therefore as well for the better securing such persons as for the satisfaction of the Church that they who were once enter'd into communion with it did so persevere inviolate in the same this excellent Rite was instituted And surely because it notably discriminates Schismaticks and Erroneous persons from sober and faithful Members of Christ and his Church it is by vain ignorant and ungodly persons scoffed at railed at and contemned A third Reason respecteth the time to come wherein a man foreseeing the many and great temptations of the World Flesh and Devil which he had renounced in Baptism to increase upon him as he converses more with the World doth thereby fortifie himself by a renewed profession of his Faith and Obedience to Christ Fourthly to this conduceth very much the Benediction of his Ghostly Father the Bishop and the joynt prayers of all the Congregation which ought devoutly to be put up to God for the descent of his Grace to preserve the persons so confirmed in that holy profession which should be most earnestly desired by every pious heart that likes his Religion and fears his own frailties And it is to me an infallible argument of desperate unchristian prophaneness or a new superstition instilled into men alienating them from the truth of that Religion in which they were educated who carp at this so godly Constitution their best ground being that which is to all their frivolous reasonings Because no express place of Scripture commands it directly and because it is possible to be saved without it It is possible that we may be saved without many things which we daily use in Religion and yet they contemptuously and wilfully omitted may be a just and certain cause of our condemnation the Scriptures having not limited God to those means of saving us which they have if we would be saved And yet again they have not so particularized our duties that there should be nothing accepted by God from us which they have not expressed I find it disputed on both sides whether this Rite be of Divine Institution or not and shall not determine it but in this both Ancient and Modern Eastern and Western Churches are agreed that it is of Divine use and therefore I may determine it to be pious and profitable and them who oppose it to speak evil 2 Pet. 2. of the things they understand not for which they may utterly perish in their own corruption But I suppose the proper Minister of this Solemnity who alwayes was the Bishop of the Church hath much turned the stomach of those who very unhappily have none or most wickedly endeavour to have none against it For considering how little is to be said against it how much for it the principle ground why they are bent against it must be to defend themselves from notorious defects To understand this as likewise the manner of performing this Sacramental Rite it is to be noted there was a threefold use of Unction called also Chrism in the ancient Church whereof one pertained to the Presbyter or Priest who in the time of Baptism was wont to anoint the party baptized on the crown of the Head The other two were properly belonging to the Bishop the one being done presently Hieremias Patr. Cap 7. Censure O. rieâ—tal after Baptism on the forehead after the Priest had anointed him on the crown of the Head which custom the Greek Church retain to this day as their Patriarch Hieremias witnesseth and when this was done I suppose there followed no other Confirmation but after the deferring of Baptism ceased and the appointed times of Easter and Pentecost for that Sacrament were laid aside and children and that at all times and in all places of Divine worship were admitted to Baptism and not alwayes as most anciently in the presence of the Bishop then it became necessary that a peculiar time and proper services should be appointed to this Solemnity wherein the Party to be confirmed was signed in the forehead by the Bishop only as before in substance but with variation of circumstances In Gregory Gregor M. Epist Lib 3. 9. the Great 's days it should seem the brest was anointed by the Priest What need we trouble ourselvs in such things aswere alterable in that unalterable solemnity our Churches moderation endeavouring to prevail upon the modesty of some dissatisfied persons in it have incurred the censurre of other Churches in paring that Ordinance to the Quick from unnecessary excrescencies without any effect upon her own undutiful children but pertinacy and petulancy in their private morosities which at length may teach us how vain such charms of Charity are used upon such deaf Adders and unnatural Vipers whom nothing will satisfie but the tearing to pieces the womb that conceived them And that they may do with it what they list they make the Church speak what they list many times And therefore though it hath wisely declared and plainly but for two Sacraments ordinarily necessary to salvation they are wont to exclaim against it thereby inferring contumeliously that she holds more though not so necessary which had been no slander if they at the same time had used that candour which became them in stating the mind of the Church as they might and ought but to do this here or in other cases were to do themselves or Cause wrong and to be just to us were to be cruel to themselves A fifth pretended Sacrament is that of Repentance sometimes also called Penance with us For so I read Mr. Bradford in his Sermon on the Fourth of Matthew and the seventeenth to speak saying Penance is a sorrowing or forethinking of our sins past an earnest purpose to amend or turning to God with a trust of pardon Which description may suffice us at present For the first thing in Repentance is a sound judgment of the evil of the Facts committed or omitted the next is a belief and sense of the evil of punishment incurred by such enormities A third degree or act of the mind is a change of the resolution for the time to come to act more reasonably and faithfully A fourth is an apprehension of the Grace and Mercy of God towards him upon his humiliation and return A fifth the real execution and putting in outward practise the good purposes of heart in effects proper to Repentance A sixth is not to repent of Repentance or return to the offenses for which he was so grieved and which he renounced A seventh is the
and this is to our brethren whom we have wronged and scandalized And is either publick when we have done any thing against the Church in general by unchristian practises as Murders Sacriledge Uncleanness and such like It was constantly required that such should satisfie the will of the Church of which they were members and undergo penalties or penances judged meet for such offences and not be admitted into brotherly communion until they had suffered for their folly to the content of the Church A laudable necessary practise to be retained still as well that the offender being put to publick shame for publick sins might amend his life and the Church may be preserved from the like contagion of sin For notorious offenders being excluded from the Communion were not restored to it until such satisfaction as this was made Another satisfaction much of the same nature with this is that which ought to be made to the utmost of our power to them whom we have wronged by unjust words or deeds against them which is necessary for the obtaining of Gods mercy and pardon to us For if we must forgive the injuries done unto us if we would have God forgive us our trespasses ought we not much more to give every man his due in point of justice The first seems to be a Law purely Evangelical but the second Natural supposed to the Gospel as imperfect yet most necessary The Rule therefore amongst Divines is most certain The sin is not pardoned until the thing Non remittitur peccatum nisi restituatur ablatum cum restitui potest Aug. Epist 54 taken away be restored Now we take away a mans Good name and we take away his Estate unjustly and before we can say we have repented we must be careful to our utmost to make this Satisfaction or Restitution Where we take away a mans life we cannot indeed ever satisfie the Party no though we should dedicate our own lives to him yet so far as we can even outwardly humble our selves by afflicting our bodies and purses and especially endeavouring by extraordinary acts of bounty and Charity to preserve the lives of such who stand in need of our assistance and relief It was no satisfaction to him whose eye was put out or tooth broken to have the eye or tooth of his Adversary to be struck out for it Yet it shewed in the Moral sense thus much that our utmost indeavour must not be wanting to make satisfaction to them we have wilfully spoiled oppressed defrauded or otherwise injured For otherwise it doth not appear how a man dying conscious of such apparent injustices as these can escape the damnation of hell A new stupifying notion of Faith freely justifying may perhaps be so ministred to him as to quiet his Conscience but save his Soul it cannot where it is in a mans power to make recompence and satisfie injuries and injustices But because man is naturally so partial unto himself as for his ease and self-love to make the best construction of Gods mercy inconditionate to him and his sins against God It was never in open notorious scandalous sins permitted to the offender to judge for himself but his actions were subject to Ecclesiastical censures and proper punishments imposed upon him to bring him by those outward censures to inward remorse Which severe censures when they were observed to have a great effect upon the Penitent were divers times remitted in part lightened and shortened by the favour of the Church which were called therefore Indulgences Following herein the precept and example of St. Paul in the like case of the incestuous Corinthian excommunicated out of the Church who demonstrating sincere and extraordinary repentance for such his fact St. Paul with a 2 Cor. 2. 6 7. fatherly affection puts a stop to the utmost process of his Penance saying Sufficient to such a man is this punishment which was inflicted of many So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him and comfort him lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with over-much sorrow c. Lest the punishment imposed on grievous offenders meeting with a tender spirit should break the heart rather then humble it and cast him away whom they intended to save thereby a seasonable relaxation was alwayes at hand to the restauration of such an one But as for that sense and gross abuse of Indulgence whereby it is turned to remit sins aforehand without due humiliation passed and not only so but to reach the torments supposed to be inflicted on Christians after this life in Purgatory it is so absurd in it self so unknown to all ancient Christian ages so inconsistent with the doctrine of the Gospel and nature of Repentance that as it is impudence in that Church to pretend any of these to favour it so is it stupidity in any person to lend any credit to it or have any relvance upon it It is usually said That few souls going out of this life so pure and thorowly cleansed as to be fit presently to enter into the holy place of heaven where no unclean thing shall come it is requisite there should remain some place to perfect the purgation of the Soul begun here And that the power of the Church especially the reputed Universal Father of it extendeth in like manner to the mitigating and shortning of those purgative torments as to the penances inflicted upon Penitents on earth Truly if they could but prove what they as yet have not taken the boldness so much as to say that they or the Church inflicted the torments of Purgatory upon sinners there detained I should be apt to believe they could take off the Rod they laid on but never pretending to that I marvel they should pretend to this any more than they dare to the removal of a Fever by an indulgence only because they judged the Party so ill affected to have suffered and been sick long enough There being not the least ground in holy Scripture to enable them so far nor any argument out of Scripture to perswade themselves of this power so great as temporal gain and filthy cursed lucre more like to damn the pretenders to it then save the tormented out of misery But this is upon supposal made of such a Purgatory but that it is only supposed and no real existence appears from most ancient Tradition retained to this day in the Church of Greece which indeed taking occasion from Origen's singular opinion doth affirm a Purgation and that by fire at the last day of the general Resurrection when by an unknown manner God shall cause a purgation and change of the corruptible body of man into an incorruptible condition more fit for heaven and glory Austin sometimes Aug. Civ Dei lib. 21. c. 24. doubted whether any such place or state after death were wherein Souls were detained for their emendation and preparation for Heaven He grants it possible and that it is all but actually and positively so to
doth not distinguish there men ought not to distinguish or limit For if it be alleadged that Instruction and Faith ought to go before this Sacrament according to Christs Intention and institution in St. Matthew It is sufficiently answer'd that seeing the Law General by which baptism is made necessary to Salvation hath no exception or condition annexed to it which may concern Infants Infants are therein contained And this implies an exemption from that naturally impossible preparation of Instruction and Faith properly so called And as Calvin well notes Believing Calvin Institut to infant-Baptism is no more requisite than working to their eating and drinking by vertue of the Apostles precept If any will not work neither 2 Thes 3. 10. should he eat Faith and repentance both are required necessarily of such who are capable of them or able to oppose them but of them who are not capable and have no actual sin to be repented of the Act of them who have the Care of them and Tuition joyned with the passiveness or non-remitency of the Infants found a capacity in them But where a Personal power of Willing is found there is exacted a personal knowledge and consent to that Sacrament This will appear from those several reasons built upon the Scriptures First That the Primest antiquity ever so understood the Scripture and practised accordingly Not that Baptism was presently as now administred to Children at their coming into the world seeing Antiquity gives us many instances of such who were not baptized till they came to years of discretion though they were born of Christian Parents For some continued Catecheumenes together with them who were young and Converted from Heathenism unto Christianity Others of purpose and design protracted the time of their baptism upon an opinion that all their Actual as well as Original sins were washed away in Baptism and concluded they had the less to answer for if they were baptized towards the latter end of their dayes Yet though this abuse of Baptism prevailed not upon that opinion only but upon the occasion which was taken of educating and instructing Infidels in the Faith for some good time before they were baptized which custome divers born of Christian Parents imitated yet we find none that the Church wilfully suffered to die without Baptism who were descended of true believers or had been competently instructed in the Faith of Christ which was alwayes according to Christs words intended towards them who had None to resign them up to God and compromise for their due perseverance in the Faith So that there is not the least evidence of Autority ancient in the Church rejecting the baptism of children or denying them to be subjects capable of it And none opposed the same until the year 1030 when Guimund Bishop of Aversa in Campania accused Berengarius Deacon of Anjou for denying Infant-baptism though that opinion was not found directly to be Berengarius's But about the year 1130 this Heresie began to discover it self in France and Germany and was Headed by Peter Bruis and Henricus his Scholar From whom that Faction was called Petrobrusians and Henricians denying withal a Capacity of Childrens entring into the Kingdom of Heaven affirming That only they who were baptized and believed could enter into Heaven But the Waldenses who succeeded them in many of their opinions rejected this their Dogme and so the controversy ceased until the year 1522. when one Nicolas Stork and Thomas Muncer two desperately Phanatical men stirred Sleiden Comment up this opinion and other wicked fancies concerning Civil Government wherein this Latter perished miserably Yet this error was not so soon or easily suppressed but spread farther and continued by the great industry and zeal of Melchior Rinck and Balthazar Hebmaier until about the year 1532 it received its complement from the tongue and hand of Melchior Hofman a Leather-dresser of Germany and so hath been propagated to other places and to this day But not only did none of the ancients oppose Pedobaptism but have declared and proved the use of it As did Irenaus Tertullian Origen Cyprian Augustine and others downward were this a proper place to shew so much We shall rather proceed to those Scriptural reasons inferring this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athan. cont Arium pag. 147. Tom. â— Secondly either all Children must be damned dying unbaptized or they must have baptism The consequent is plain from that Principle in Christian Religion which Anabaptists have been constreined to deny to uphold their other That all sin not washed away or expiated exposes to damnation and the Principle in Christian Religion is That Children come into the world infected with Originalâ—sm and therefore if there be no remedy against that provided by God all Children of Christian Parents which St. Paul sayes are Holy are liable to eternal death without remedy Now there is no remedy but Christ and his death and Passion are not communicated unto any but by outward Signs and Sacraments And no other do we read of but this of Water in Baptism And the invitation of Christ of infants in St. Mathew doth imply a capacity in them of Grace For Mat. 19. when Christ saith Suffer little Children to come unto me and forbid them Mar. 13. 14. not for of such is the Kingdome of God he doth not mock meaning literally that Infants who are not able to go or stand should come unto him on their own leggs So neither doth he mean in the spiritual sense that Children who have neither reason nor Faith should come unto him by Faith before they be baptized but be brought to him by the Faith of others which may profit them who resist not though they seek not that Grace Thirdly They that are of the Covenant and of the Body of the Church really ought also to be formal partakers of that Body and this they only can obtain by being admitted solemnly into the congregation of Christs Faithful and Elect Church As the children of the Israelites were of necessity to be admitted into the number of that Church by circumcision Gen. 17. 14. or be cut off in wrath from them For St. Paul telleth us how the children of the Believers are sanctified by their Parents And how are they 1 Cor. â—7 14. holy but by being separated from unbelievers and solemnly dedicated to God by the Laver of Regeneration And as in the same place the Apostle saith to the Romans If the first fruit be holy the Lump is holy and if the root be holy so are the branches drawing this Literal to an Evangelical sense and meaning thereby that the Parent being of the Election the Child is so and being so ought to receive the sign of Evangelical circumcision Fourthly The Analogy and apt correspondence between the Sacrament of the Law called Circumcision and that of the Gospel warranteth this For that is not true which they say against this That the Precepts of the New Testament
necessary to Salvation are as clear as those under the Old But this is not so clear as Circumcision To which we answer That this is as true taking in the whole manifestation of Gods will For the clearness of the Sacraments enjoyned in the Old Testament do conduce to the clearness of them signified by them And there needs nothing more be said for the clearing of the necessity of these than to admit them to have succeeded those two in the Old Testament And we find not such necessity particularly imposed upon us of receiving the Eucharist as was upon the Israelites of receiving the Paschal Lamb but general necessity without determination of time or place the Gospel expresseth unto us upon the hope of salvation which is sufficient The vertue and Efficacie of this Sacrament above-touched proves this farther but it needs it self be proved according to those extravagant opinions brought by Modern Divines into the Church that it is only a seal of our Faith and eternal Favour of God in Predestinating us to Glory As if First all according to their judgements that were baptized were ordained to Glory and this were assured them by that Seal Or Secondly that God had Predestinated any to Life without the necessary means to it Or that remission of sins Actual and the expiation of Original were not necessary to the entring into Life or that God had so simply and absolutely ordained us to heaven that he had not ordained these two as Means to obtain Perkins on Gal. 2. v. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod Haret Fabul 5. c. 2. this For what can be a more horrible prophanation of this Sacrament then to say with one upon the Galatians We are born Christians if our Parents believe and not made so in Baptism Which is contrary to the Doctrine of our Catechism and the whole stream of Primitive Doctors of the Church from whom we may Gather this threefold Effect of Baptism First it is not only a sign as the same Persons say of our Covenant but it is the Covenant it self made between God and Man For God indeed doth make a Promise but he maketh no Covenant otherwise than by Baptism God made a Promise to Abraham that his seed should be blessed before Circumcision but he made no Covenant with him but by Circumcision nor is any actually in the Covenant of Faith but by being baptized Doth not the Scripture expresly say that God gave Abraham the Covenant of Act. 7. 8. Circumcision Circumcision then was not only a Sign of that Covenant though that it were but an Essential part of it Circumcision therefore was a sign in a twofold sense First in respect of the Covenant under the Law as words whereof the Covenant consists are signs of the Will of the Covenanters to the ear and works outward are in like manner signs of the same to the Eye which sort of signs are not distinct from the thing it signifies For God Covenanted with Abraham that he should use those Ceremonies Now this outward visible Covenant was a sign of an inward and invisible relating to the righteousness of Faith as St. Paul saith of Abraham And he received the Sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness Rom 4. 11. of Faith So that is the Second way in which Circumcision may be said to be a sign viz. As the whole Sacramental Covenant of which it was a part signified the Covenant of Faith into which we are entred by Baptism as the Jews into the other by Circumcision A Second effect of Baptism is to wash away all sins as well Original as Actual of which that Prophesie of Zacharie is generally understood In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and Zechar. 13. 1. to the inhabitants of Jerusalem For sin and for uncleanness To which St. Paul agrees in his Epistle to the Ephesians speaking of the Church That Eph. 5. 26. he might sanctifie it and cleanse it by the washing of water by the word Where the Word sanctifieth the Water and the water sanctifieth the Person which it can no otherwise do then by washing off the sins of the Soul As St. Peter hath it Not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but the answer 1 Pet. 3. 21. of a good Conscience towards God That is at the time of baptism whereby the filth of the Spirit necessarily implied to make up the correspondence is put away And St. Paul telleth the Corinthians They were washed 1 Cor. 6. they were Sanctified viz. By Baptism But whether Original sin be so far extinguished in the baptized as no more remains should be found is much doubted to which we briefly and clearly answer from the distinction of Sins For sometimes the Cause of sin is termed sin Sometime the Effect of Sin is called Sin whereas Sin is properly the Evil Act it self or the omission of an act due from us Original Sin in us is not so properly called Sin as it was in Adam who actually sinned and that with a consent of his own will But it is rather the Effect of his Actual transgression which doth originally adhere to us and is called sin upon this threefold account First because it is the necessary effect or consequence of Adams Sin as we find Moses to speak in Deuteronomy And I took your sin the Calfe which ye made The Calfe was the fruit of their Sin and Deut. 9. 21. not their sin it self So is that evil Effect the Sin Original because it is the evil consequence of it Secondly It is Sin because it doth partake of the nature of sin in one of the principal parts making up sin They are two The Obliquity of the Act or Deformity and disagreement to the accurate Law of God and the disobedience of the will and pravity thereof This latter original sin as it was actual in Adam had as well as the former but so is it not with us There can be no such disobedience in the Will where there is no Will. There is no will in Infants besides the remote faculty it self and therefore all sin yea all humane acts requiring consent of the Will original sin cannot be sin in this sense But taking sin for a dissonancy from 1 Joh. 3. 4. the Law and Rule as St. John doth and that conformity as is justly required by the Law certainly that Original depravation and corruption found generally in our natures at our first entrance into the World may truly be called sin because it makes us to differ so much from that God made us and intended us to be Thirdly Original sin hath this likewise denominating it sin that it is the cause of sin that original inclination to sin being that which moves us all unto the actual commission of sin which St. Paul surely aimeth at where he saith Now then it is no more I that do Rom. 7. 17. it but sin that dwelleth in
of Christ also Must not they be necessitated here to slee to an unknown Concomitance the one of the other and not a coexistence And if thus the blood hath the flesh of Christ concomitantly as well as the â—lesh the blood and so for this reason might the Cup be received without the Bread But we positively deny both such Carnal Capernaitical Coexistence as is here presumed and such necessary Concomitance too that with the receiving of one alone the other should be necessarily taken also but hold rather where both are not Present both are absent and no Sacramental Receiving of Christ can possibly be hoped for And though I have been long of this opinion before I found any authority express to this purpose besides the very intrinsique nature of the Sacrament it self now touched Yet am I not alone For thus speaks a Reverent and Learned Father of our Church In all compounded things the moiety of the matter is the moiety of substance Bishop Whites Reply to c. pag. 483. And whatsoever Jesuited Romanists teach I see not how their Laicks can truly say that they have at any time in all their Lives been partakers of this Sacrament for if half a man be not a man then likewise half a Communion is not a Communion But were there more colour for nothing of reality do we find in their Offers to vindicate themselves in what is said for the possibility of a Sacrament in one Kind received What can be said for their gross abuse of their and our Lords Institution and their Relinquishing the unanimous practice of the Catholick Church for so many Ages together Did not Christ equally institute both Did he not equally communicate both to his Disciples Or supposing that they were then all Priests which may be well doubted of seeing they were not compleatly consecrated then by the descent of the Holy Ghost nor commissioned to Go teach and Baptise all nations until after this doth this give any likelihood that therefore it is the sole Right for Priests to receive in both Kinds Did Christ any where make two Institutions One For Priests and another for Laicks If but one Who should presume to alteâ— or adulterate his Prescriptions He said Drink ye all of Mat. 26. 27. this which is more than we find he said of the Bread And the shift is sad and pitiful which some who have nothing better to say yet must say something adde that Christ said This do as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of 1 Cor. 11. 25. Fisher against White me As if he excepted sometimes from drinking when he commanded to eat Ridiculous The meaning of Christ being as plain as any thing need be that there should so often be had a devout remembrance of him as we communicate and not imply as is most boldly insinuated that sometimes we may not communicate in the Sacramental bloud of Christ For it followeth As Often as ye eat this bread and drink this cupp ye do shew the Lords death 1 Cor. 11. 26. till he come Never are they separated in the Scripture No ground at all for the omitting of one rather than the other The Church hath power to denie one as much as the other The Church hath no power to denie either or any thing else of such divine Institution The Church of God for above 1200 years did constantly and universally practise both And until the Council of Constance about the year 1415 many in the Roman Church so received but then it was violently taken away But to this very day all Churches not subdued to the Roman continue the Ancient form And do a companie of paltry reasons drawn from possible inconveniences in Lay-mens taking the Cup countervail so great a cloud of witnesses and so strong arguments to the contrary What if sometimes the Ancients did permitt the exportation of the one without the other to such as were sick or unable to receive in Publique Does this come home to the Case which requireth that the Publique Ministration should be changed also And how doth it appear I am sure not by their demonstrations that such Persons so receiving in half were ever reputed to have Sacramentally received Christ Nay not half of the Autorities or Instances commonâ—y given of such Communications do concern this subject for most are to be understood of the Panis Benedictus or the Bread blessed by the â—riâ—â—â— upon 〈◊〉 offering of it by the People which was not all consecrated Sacramentally and so given unto Christians to be imparted to such as were of the same Communion in token that they were in Communion with them though absent This I grant was sometimes performed by the sending to such the Consecrated Element of Bread in the Eucharist Not with an opinion of the Fathers of the Church however possibly same vulgar and ignorant Christians might have too high a conceit of it that such receiving was tantamount to the receiving in both Kinds Sacramentally But to their inconveniences which are many of them more fit to make sport than to sway in so grave a Controversie we shall only reply that all they can alleadg was no newes to their and our Predecessours and yet never could it enter into their hearts to attempt so monstâ—ous a change upon such frivolous pretences But the truth is the Errour of transubstantiation being throughly received occasioned this by way of common prudence as well as Christian devotion For it being firmly and clearly believed the Consecrated Elements became Christs Bodie and Blood forsaking wholely their own Nature Common Reason required that all possible respect and Care should be taken as far as the wit of man could reach that no detriment or indignity should be done to them and that then became indecent and prophane which before was not To have the Least Crum fall aside must be accounted a grand prophanation though in voluntary and therefore humane wit invented Wafers and preferred them before bread according as Christ used it In breaking of the Host some possible waste might happen therefore though Christ and following Christians communicated of 1 Cor. 10. 17. one Bread according to St Paul For we are one Bread and one bodie and we are all partakers of one Bread undoubtedly literally meaning the participation by many of the same Loaf in the Sacrament now superstition hath better instructed us than the holy Spirit St Paul and there must be no more breaking of bread amongst Christians of which the Scripture speakes so often though I confess not alwayes meaning the Eucharist but yet that too many times and which is so lively and proper a Ceremony and signification of Christs passion lest somewhat should fall out amiss toward the supposed Body of Christ in their sense To give Respect to use reverence to it to take all convenient and devout Care about it is verie reasonable and pious for the Relation it hath to Christ and his Proper Bodie and the Virtue to
a man never was inserted into that Stock is more properly called Atheism or Heathenism or Privative and then is called Apostasie which is a professed renunciation of the Faith once received Or this Division is Partial and so it takes the name of Heresie upon it Schism then must needs be an outward Separation from the Communion of the Church But when we say Schism is a Separation we do not mean so strictly as if it consisted in the Act of Separating so much as the State For we do not call any man a Schismatique who sometimes refuses to communicate with the Church in its outward worship though that done wilfully is a direct way to it as all frequented Actions do at length terminate in habits of the same Nature but it is rather a State of separation and of Dissolution of the continuitie of Church in a moral or divine sense not natural which we seek into at present This Separate State then being a Relation of Opposition as the other was of Conjunction the Term denominating and signallizing both is to be enquired unto And that is insinuated alreadie and must needs be the Church and that as that is united unto Christ or the true Church For there is no separation from that which really is not though it may seem to be It must therefore be a true Church from whence Schismatical separation is made So far do they confute and confound themselves who excuse their Schismaticalness from that which principally constitutes Schism and Schismaticks viz. an acknowledgement of that to be a true Church from which they divide themselves and separate Again We are to note that Separation is either of Persons and Churches in Co-ordination or subordination according to that excellent and ancient distinction of Optatus saying It is one thing for a Bishop to communicate Optatus Mileviâ—â—â— Cont. Parmen Lib. 3. Aldâ— with a Bishop and another for a Lay man or the Inferiour Clergy to communicate with the Bishop And this because what may perhaps justifie a Non-communion with Co-ordinate Persons or Churches which have no autority one over another wil not excuse Subordinate Persons or Churches owing obedience to their Superiours from Schism From whence it is manifest that though all Schism be a Separation yet all Separation is not a Schism And though there may be many and just causes for a Separation there can be no cause to justifie a Schism For Schism is in its nature A studious Separation or State Separate against Christian Charity upon no sufficient Cause or grounds It must be affected or Studious because if upon necessity or involuntary the Diâ—junction of Churches is rather a punishment than a sin and an Infelicity rather than Iniquity as in the dayes of Anastatius the Emperour as Evagrius relates it Who so violently persecuted the Catholick Church in behalfe of the Eutychian Evagrius Hist Eccl. L. C. 30. Heresie that it was crumbled as it were into several parcels And the Governours could not communicate one with another but the Eastern and Western and African Churches were broke asunder Which farther shews that all Criminal Separation which we make Synonimous with Schism must likewise be an Act proceeding from the persons to separated and not the Act of another For no man can make another a Schismatick any more than he can make him a Lyar or a drunkard without his consent For if the Governours of one Church expeâ— out of Communion another upon no just grounds the Church thus separated is not the Schismatick but the other as appears from the words of Firmilianus Bishop of Cappadocia in St Cyprian concerning Pope Stephen advising him he should noâ— be too busie or presumptious in separating others lest he thereby separated himself so that if the Schism had broke out upon no good grounds he who was the Architect of it Separated himself as all others do and it is impossible any man should make though he may declare another a Schismatique any more than he can make him erre without his consent or be uncharitable Yet do they err also that from hence conclude that the Formal reason of Schism consists in Separating a mans self for it is rather the material Cause than formal The formal Cause being as in all other things the very Constitution it self with unreasonableness and uncharitableness No man can make another involuntarily an Heretick And therefore no man can make another a Schismatick All the Guilt redounding to the Agent noâ— Patient in such cases So that it is scarce worth the Enquiring Who began the breach of unity as it outwardly appears but who is actually and Really First divided from Christs Church For they surely are the proper Schismaticks though the name may stick closer to others To understand this we may consider that there is a Vertual Schism and a Formal Schism A Vertual Schism I call real division from Christs Church though it comes not to an open opposition to it or Defiance of it so that where ever is any heresie or considerable Errour nourished or maintained in a Church there is to be found a Schismatick also in reality though not in formality the reason hereof is well expressed by and may best come from the hand of an Adversary to u thus judiciously enquiring It is demanded first saith he Whether Schismaticks be Hereticks Answer The Common opinion Azâ—rius Inst Moral Tom. 1. Lib. 3. C. 20. of the Interpreters of the Canon Law and of the Summists is that the Heretick differs from the Schismatick in that Every Heretick is a Schismatick but not on the contrary Which they prove because the term Shismatick signifies Division But every Heretick turns away separates divides himself from the Church This is very plain and reasonable and so is the consequence from hence That where the Body is so corrupt as to be really infected with notorious errors there it is really so far as it is erroneous separated from the true Church and where it is so far separated from the true Church so far it is Schismatical And when a Church is thus far really Schismatical little or no Scruple is to be made of an outward Separation neither can a guilt be affixed unto it And on the other side if no such real separation and antecedent Guilt can be found in a Church in vain do diverse betake themselves to that specious Shift and evasion that they were cast out and went not out willingly from a Church and that they are willing to return but are not suffered For undoubtedly the very supposition is insincere and faulty that they forsook not the Church before they were ejected And the expulsion followed separation and dissention from it and was not rather the Effect than Cause of them as are all excommunications rightly used For to those that pretend they were turned out do not the doors stand open to receive them and that with thanks if they please to re-enter and re-unite themselves What do they here
their friends after their death supposing that by proxie a man might receive the benefit of Baptism And yet some of these denyed the Resurrection Now St. Paul argues thus If there be no Resurrection of the dead to what end do they baptize the living instead of the dead what can it avail them according to their own judgments and opinions And thus what becomes of Purgatory But lastly The words of Christ in St. Matthew and St. Luke agree Matth. 5. 25 26. Luke 1258. with c. Verily I say unto thee thou shalt by no means come out thence till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing are thought of no mean force to infer a Purgatory But alas such havock do men make who would so have it of the words such hooks and tenters do they apply to wring and draw them to their purpose so do they play fast and loose with Antiquity about them that a man had need be well setled in a perswasion of the thing it self before he can brook such a reason as this affords The plain and simple sense therefore shall suffice to ward off all force against it viz. That Christ meant no more than they who made not their peace and reconciliation with God before they go out of this world shall be cast into Hell from whence they shall never return until they have paid all the punishment they ow to God for their sins to a farthing that is absolutely satisfied which by a Periphrasis or in many words as much as to say in one Never Besides they that are such stout defenders of the Virgin Maries perpetual Virginity against the ill sense given by Helvidius and his followers of those words in St. Matthew Until she had brought forth her First-born know very well how to give another sense to Until then a certain inference of somewhat to ensue that Period so fix'd and that it implies not necessarily that ever such payment of the utmost Farthing shall be made but upon supposition that it be paid such event as is there mentioned should follow But Antiquity and that of both Eastern and Western Churches are is alledged in confirmation of the present Roman Purgatory To which we oppose this assertion That Purgatory as now defended was never heard of in the Latin Church for four hundred years together after Christ nor received into it with common approbation until six hundred years after Christ Austin began to doubt of it and is scarce constant to himself in it Gregory the Great set it up upon its leggs and advanced it far if so be that the Dialogues bearing his name were truly his as 't is most probable they are not or that they are corrupted For how could Gregory who flourished about the year of our Lord 590. and was succeeded by Boniface Greg. M. Dial. l. 3. c. 2. the third about the year 606. take notice of Justinian the elder as elder unless he had known Justinian the younger who was Emperour about the year 685. long after the true Gregory was dead But from about that time this erroneous opinion got footing and began to spread but was never thoroughly setled in the Church of Rome it self until the time of John the Seventeenth or as others compute it the Nineteenth about the year 1003 when he instituted the Feast of All-Souls in which men were enjoyned to pray for the deliverance of Souls out of Purgatory But the Council of Florence in the year 1439. put it out of all future dispute when it decreed it so to be But the Greeks who were there present refused that sense however they gave way to the Name Purgatory Neither do they admit it unto this day so vain and bold a task doth Bellarmine undertake with other Pontificians to bring and that of old the Greek Church to consent with the Latin herein upon whose attempts we find modern Assertours of the Roman Cause to call them to witness too and when diligent search proves prejudicial to them to bring Osiander a man of small judgment and no command of his passions in his free censures of Antiquity wherever his History leads him to observe any thing there which he likes not and many times understands not and Sir Edwin Sands a Gentleman of excellent abilities as an Historian but finding the word Purgatory among Grecian Authours of modern times concluded that it was the same with the Roman but was much mistaken For 't is well known some modern Greeks as Nilus Thessaloniensis have writ purposely against the Roman Purgatory And this will farther appear from the two general defects running through almost all the Arguments brought by Romanists to prove Purgatory from the ancient Fathers and Councils of both Churches which being noted may suffice for Answers to them in this point especially in this place For first they argue from the word Purgatory where-ever they find it in Greek and Latin Fathers But Purgatory fire with them was quite another thing from that now in credit amongst us Origen and he the first that we meet with invented a Purgative fire and divers Fathers catching at that discoursed dubiously upon that subject but with this Fivefold difference from Roman Flames First They exempted no man from this Purgation not Saints or Martyrs but supposed all should be purged before they entred entirely into Heaven the moderner Purgatory frees eminent Saints from that fiery tryal Secondly They held this purgation principally useful to the purification of the gross matter of the body to a finer substance before it could be meet to enter into heaven together with the soul but these make it to seize principally if not only on the soul separate from the body and to cleanse that Thirdly They never intended theirs to purge off the stain of sins or satisfie for what souls were behind in going out of this world but the Romanists affirm and defend it in this sense Fourthly They never maintained any immediate purgation or torments from the departure of the soul from the body but affirmed only a general and momentaneous transmutation by Fire at the Day of Judgment to be fitted the better for Heaven Fifthly They never imagined that the Prayers of Living did relieve the miseries of the afflicted in Purgatory as do these or that there was any such passing from that state to Heaven before the Day of Judgment And what need we travel on this subject when we have the testimony of chief men against them herein Roffensis Artic. 18. against Luther says directly Amongst the Ancient there is little or no mention made of Purgatory and that the Greek to this day hold it not The very same says Alphonsus de Castro contr Haeret. lib. 8. tit De Indulgentia But the second Argument of Romanists will clear this drawn out of many Fathers to prove they held Purgatory because they held Prayer for the dead of which Prayer none they suppose can be capable but such as are in this middle state between
Heaven and Hell But we deny not that the Ancients prayed for the Dead nor do we dissent much from them in that pious act our selves however there are quarrellers amongst us well known by their other affected and morose follies who oppose it because they have no express Scripture for it but we deny they ever prayed for the pardon of their sins or ease of torments so anciently but for an happy rest and restauration in a Resurrection So that we peremptorily deny and well may notwithstanding all proofs brought to the contrary that Prayer for the Dead necessarily infers Roman Purgatory And for the Consequence of this Opinion of Roman Purgatory Indulgences it is so rank a Corruption such a novel and impudent invention as the Church of Rome under that defection it now is never did so great a miracle as to get it any place in sober and knowing mens minds both thing it self and the abuse of it being such as alone may suffice to disgrace the Authours of it and make their pretenses to infallibility alwaies false very ridiculous We know indeed that scarce any thing was of ancienter use in the Church then some Indulgences but no more like these than Earth is like Purgatory Indulgences were made by such who were in autority in the Church towards Penitents who had their Penances allotted them for scandalous Crimes committed against the Faith and Church which Penances were often relaxed and mittigated by the favour and indulgences of the Fathers of the Church good cause appearing for to do so But that ever it was in the power of the Church to give ease to such as were punished in that other Life to come was never heard of for above a thousand years after Christ Alphonsus de Castro is worth the Alphonsus de Castro lib. 8. Adv. Haer. de Indulg reading upon this who is positive for Indulgences but going about to prove them prepares his Reader with a long Preface for such a short Discourse telling him that He ought not to expect for all points of Faith Antiquity or express Scripture For many things are known to the moderner which those ancient Writers were altogether ignorant of For seldome any mention is made in ancient Writers of the transubstantiation of the Bread into Christs Body of the Spirits proceeding from the Son much rarer of Purgatory almost none at all especially among Greek Writers for which reason Purgatory is not believed of the Greek to this day c. The ancient Church caused men to satisfie in this life and would leave nothing to be punished in the Life to come and therefore there is no mention of Indulgences Thus he But adds Amongst the Romans the use of them is said to be very ancient as may in some manner be collected from their stations And it is reported of Gregory the First of whom we even now spake that he granted some in his dayes It is said and reported by where and by whom he could not tell us But he tells us indeed how Innocent the Third that great Innovator and Corrupter of the Church constituted it in the Latherane Council and the Council of Constance after that much which was not before the Year 1200. Judge we from hence what great account is to be made of the many sayings of the Fathers pretended to approve this devise And judge we farther what great Reason or Scripture there is for the Popish faction to derogate so far as they do from the efficacy of Gods Holy Spirit of Grace in the repenting sinner though straitened of time in the exercise and demonstration of his true Conversion and from the fullness of Christs mediation and merits which are ordained for the remission of all sins upon true Repentance For the bloud of Christ cleanseth from all sin saith St. John and so say they understood as in this Life and the Life to come but St. John nor any other holy Writer of Scripture gives us the least intimation of any other season of pardon then that of this Life Therefore here to end this First Part with the end of Man in this world seeing Gods Promises are so liberally revealed unto penitent sinners in this Life without exceptions of matter time or place of venial or mortal sins Seeing Christs merits are absolutely sufficient to acquit the sinner and no limitation is to be found upon Faith and Repentance in Scripture Seeing lastly that Gods Spirit of Grace is of vertue sufficient to sanctifie to the washing away of all filthiness both of flesh and spirit and this life is only mentioned in Scripture for the exerting of this work and perfecting this cure of the soul Let us rather thankfully embrace so great salvation and work it out for St. Paul supposes we may with fear and trembling in this life that so as St. Peter hath 2 Pet. 1. 11. it An entrance may be ministred abundantly unto us into the everlasting Kingdem of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ The End of the First Part. THE Second Part OF THE INTRODUCTION To the Knowledge of the True Catholick Religion CHAP. I. Of the worship of God wherein the Second Part of Christian Religion consists Of the Necessity of worshipping God It is natural to worship God Socinus holding the contrary confuted Of the Name of Religion the Nature of religious worship wherein it consisteth REligion we have defined to be A due Recognition and Retribution made by the Creature to God the Fountain of all Being communicating himself freely to inferiour Beings And this description we have in substance given us by David in his last and most serious charge to Solomon his Son saying And thou Solomon my Son know thou the God of 1 Chron. 28. 9. thy Fathers and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind c. From whence we take the ground of our distinction of Religion into two Parts The true knowledge of God which is attained by the Doctrine of Faith revealed in Gods holy Word and the worship of him there in likewise contained Of the former having already spoken we now proceed more briefly to treat of the second The worship of God And that God is to be worshipped is such an inseparable notion from the acknowledgment of God as nothing can follow more necessarily then that doth from this And it were more reasonable though that be brutish for to deny God absolutely then to deny him worship and service And therefore Seneca saith well The first worshipping of God is to believe there is a God The next to yield to him his Majesty to yield him Sen. Epist 95. his Goodness to understand that he or they governs the world And afterward He sufficiently worships God who imitates him And Tully The Cicero de Natura Deor. lib. 2. worship of God ought to be most excellent and pure and holy and full of piety so that we may constantly worship him with a pure intire and uncorrupt mind and voice
possibly they can and then to say They are not for doing any more or going any farther Which yet we might without censure of stupidity believe but that they stand to their Arms still though it be no time to use them yet and their reasons which in brief are these they hold not yet unreasonable They say First it was alwayes permitted to the Minister to modifie their own word the worship of God And therefore they ought not to be prescribed now any such Forms as are propounded and enjoyned Will they stand to their principle viz. That nothing is now to be altered which hath prevailed much more generally and anciently than this pretended Liberty of the Minister Alas it will not be endured by themselves it will prove too hot for them it will make too much havock amongst their best Innovations But we pardon and pass by their incogitancies in that and the like grounds in ordering which they are seldom so sollicitous how to secure themselves as intent how to wound their Enemies But we more openly profess the contrary to that they take here for granted and say It was never permitted Ministers to make any private Chrysost in Rom. 8. Prayers of their own in the publick Assemblies of Christians since there was a cessation of those miraculous gifts which St. Chrysostome affirms upon this occasion to have been extinct so long before his dayes that St. Paul's words to the Romans from whence some would fetch extemporary prayers were very obscure it being unknown what was the practise of the Church then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gifts he grants there were at the first but knew nothing of such in his dayes nor well understood as himself professes what manner of ones they were when they were in use In the next place we shall enquire farther after them Here we stick to this unshaken foundation That there is no footstep of Record or Monument in the Church of God whereby they can make it probable that in the solemn and set Assemblies of Christians constantly observed for as for inferiour and voluntary and undetermined meetings they can be no rule to us at all though something more than we can find should be alledged against us it was never allowed the Priest whom I suppose they mean by Minister though this word before they were pleased to reform the language as well as manners of the Church signified properly the Deacon to utter any thing of his own or indeed others composing whether premeditated or extemporary without the approbation of his Bishop first had I mean in the matter of Prayer which we now speak of So that I wonder much how any such bold and untrue Axiome could ever enter into their minds as that Ministers might of themselves modifie the worship of God But the second argument of theirs taken from Scripture may perhaps a little relieve them where we read in St. Paul to the Romans That the Spirit Rom. 6. helpeth our infirmities for we know not what we should pray for as we ought but the Spirit it self maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered And the same Apostle to the Corinthians saith I will pray with the 1 Cor. 14. 15. Spirit and I will pray with the understanding also I will sing with the Spirit and I will sing with the understanding also To both which we answer wondering with what presumption they take for granted that where ever the Spirit of prayer is mentioned is intended conceived prayer and not that formed to our hands We grant not only that there is a Spirit of prayer but that this Spirit is necessary to have our prayers well ordered and accepted But we are far from granting that the Spirits office must be so pitiful as to suggest words and eloquent affecting phrases No such matter The Spirit assisteth and enableth us to pray in sanctifying our minds and hearts in giving us the grace of prayer and causing us to put up fervent and spiritual cries to God even in such words as we may have prayed over a thousand times without spiritual affections which alone can render a prayer accepted And when the Spirit thus enables us to pray it self is said to make intercession for us as being the principal Agent But it is said also We know not what we ought to pray for and therefore surely there must Rom. 8. be more in the work of the Spirit than giving the due manner and grace of prayer I may well say that St. Paul speaks not at all of publick prayer as I confess he doth in his words to the Corinthians but of private single and occasional Ejaculations which I shall grant as much as they modestly can demand may be the gift of the Spirit as well as the Grace as they are wont not very warrantably to distinguish as we may see by and by but we are now speaking and the Controversie is wholly about set and constant and publick occasions and common to the whole body of the Church assembled together and concerning this we deny utterly that either St. Paul ever intended we should depend upon the motions of Gods Spirit to frame a Prayer for that use or that a prayer unform'd and unknown is so much as to be endur'd in the Church where Christian communion is to be enjoyed But secondly we answer That the Spirit doth sufficiently teach them to pray who never pretend to pray extemporary yea perhaps that never pray at all We know not what we should pray for as we ought Therefore the Spirit which hath given us the Word of God and thereby revealed unto us the hidden things of God and what his will is hath withal sufficiently assisted in that particular our Ignorances and Infirmities and taught us what we should pray for What more can we expect reasonably from these words I am sure not Extemporariness And to the praying with the understanding and praying with the Spirit also and singing with the Spirit and singing with the understanding also whence they infer there is a praying by the Spirit above the ordinary reason and apprehension of men we answer First It is certain the words are not well rendred according to the drift of the Apostle which was to argue that both in preaching and praying in publick men should not abuse the gift of tongues granted them by the Spirit as to sing pray or preach before the assembly of Christians in such tongues as were not by them understood And therefore as the Original will warrant it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be translated To the understanding not of himself that spake but of them that heard For amongst the Spiritual persons of the Gospel were not to be found such as amongst the heathens were inspired to speak they knew not what they understood not but undoubtedly all knew what they said who spake by the Spirit of Tongues but others often did not and therefore St. Paul exhorteth there that whoever were so
of grace Now every child of God though he hath an honest heart hath not these gifts And therefore in want of them may lawfully use a Set form of prayers as a man that hath a weak back or a lame legg may lean upon a Crutch This is the meaning and very expression of the modern Puritan when he is in the best humour and would be more generous than ordinary in his concessions For which we requite him saying That it was never lawful nor is lawful at this day for any Minister in publick service to bring in his own conceived prayers besides the intention of the Church And that Thomas Cartwright who at Hartford was the first that dar'd to do so to the offense of both the Queen and Church then did very wickedly and none that imitated him though men no enemies otherwise to the Church did well unless upon a perswasion of an implicit consent of the Church through tract of time But if memory utterance knowledge to which some that have ridiculously written upon the subject of conceiving prayers as if they would teach the Spirit how to speak do adde Fansie and Industry be required how comes this gift to be owing to the Spirit more than Demosthenes his Orations of whom Plutarch writes what great pains he took with himself to pronounce well and to compose aright But let us hear Perkins a little farther answering an Objection It is alledged that Set forms of Prayer do limit and bind the Holy Ghost Answer If Perkins ubi supra we had a perfect measure of Grace it were somewhat but the Graces of God are weak and small in us This is no binding of the Holy Ghost but an helping of the Spirit which is weak in us by a Crutch to lean on It had been much more reverently spoken if it had been said An helping us in whom the Spirit is than the weak and lame Spirit in us It had been much more soundly answered to deny the supposition both of the Spirit and the gift thereof in men praying extempore and by consequence clear'd all fears and suspicions of injuring the Spirit at all Why do they so weakly and lamely take that for granted that the Spirit informs men generally to such ends and nothing wants a Crutch or Staff to support it more than that We deny it we deny it And wonder how they will go about the making it credible But we deny the fact that so it is and not the possibility that so it may be or that the Spirit is able to do such wonderful things Nay we deny they are such wonderful things as are pretended or any more than for a very simple man to become an excellent workman in a curious craft by applying his wits and labours to the mysteries of it And seeing they talk so often at this day of Crutches and Stilts making all creeples and lame in Christianity who cannot or out of humility and obedience to the Discipline which justly interdicts such pretended abilities will not vaunt what they can do they should do well to procure Stilts and Crutches for such halting and weak reasons as these are to make men insolent Here they are wont to come forth with their ill applyed distinction of Gifts and Graces of prayer and tell us that the gift of prayer is to be sought after whereby we edifie the Church as well as the Grace whereby we edifie our selves To which I answer by denying still what they take for granted viz. that such presumed gifts are necessary to the edification of a Church I grant indeed that the Church was at first setled by gifts or I should rather have said founded but continued and edified to this day so I deny I deny as a notorious and pernicious untruth that such is to be the constitution of Churches that they should be managed and maintained by the gifts of men above what by the ordinary industry with Gods blessing may be common to all men Yet more expresly I deny that any Society ought to depend upon any thing extraordinary in men as this gift is cryed up for For that which carries on the mysteries and majesty of Gods worship must be grave sober regular safe and easie even such as they in indignation report children women and Turks may perform and not such as are high staggering uncertain deceitful as are these extraordinary gifts For this barbarous argument is ill grounded supposing that it is more the natural or supernatural parts that qualifie the Ministry than the power of the Keys given which if we may suppose given to such persons we shall declare to be more fit persons to minister in the publick worship of God than such gisted persons I say in the worship of God because there may be much more skill and ability required to the service of God For though preaching and travelling in the conversion of souls to God be to serve God as an act of obedience unto his will it is not as we have often said the proper worship of God as is prayer And to serve God in this manner being an address unto men who must be informed with great skill and industry and then reformed in their lives and conversations by sedulity of Exhortation more is necessary than a commission so to act Moreover to their distinction of gift of prayer and grace we add That we acknowledge no gift of prayer besides the grace of prayer There may be a gift of speaking and that notably with fluencie and readiness and this is vulgarly mistaken and admired for a gift of prayer but it is no such matter For all the gift of prayer as of prayer is nothing but the grace of prayer coming from the truly devout and spiritual heart and not from the operation of the brain as Elocution doth And besides those that have spoken most soberly truly of gifts have determin'd the use of them particularly to the Church and its edification and not to have God for their proper object but God is the object of prayer therefore it is fully compleated in the grace of it which in a larger sense is Gods gift too and is as conspicuous in Set forms as Extemporary But they argue farther in behalf of this manner of prayer That it is a great edification of the people much greater than Set forms which custom hath made ineffectual To which I answer That there is a great deal of truth in what they speak First because not out of Grace or the Spirit but corrupt nature man is much more apt to be affected with variety that is inferiour both in kind and use to constant fare as with a strange monster rather than with a well proportion'd creature to which he hath been accustomed And he that shall pass by in a fools-coat party-colour'd shall have more eyes after him a great many than he that walks in a much more comely costly and grave habit Men therefore should rather correct their judgments and
mend their hearts and bring them to conform to sound forms of words than to please them in their carnal appetites after novelties no new occasions requiring But this is not all We except much more against the matter and manner of their prayers in that they have quite lost and depraved the nature of prayer For that they give such loose rains unto their tongues generally that instead of Confession Petition and Thanksgiving of which prayer ought principally to consist they fly out into preaching and jumble and confound those duties so together that many times in preaching they mourn and pray and this is with the wondering multitude accounted the best Sermon They likewise in their prayers fall on preaching and this is the powerful praying But they are to consider that to convert men is not the office of prayer but of preaching I shall add but one of their Objections more the rest being easily solved out of the premises They say If a prescribed Form or Liturgy had been good or profitable for the Church Christ without question would have delivered one for his Church To which on the contrary I return If extemporary conceived prayer had been so necessary as is pretended surely Christ would some where or other have ordained that we should use extemporary prayers and conceive that Sacrifice just as we offer it But the misery of these Arguers is that whereas the Scripture commends and commands nothing so much as prayer not one the least precept have they been able to find through the whole Scripture requiring prayer extemporary And then is not this an humane invention Is it not Will-worship But that Christ hath prescribed a form and matter of prayer too we hold it proved out of the two Evangelists I know well they hold the contrary What more equal and just way to find out the truth than to hear both ancient and modern Interpreters upon that doubt to their dayes Do they find any that say the Lords Prayer is so a Rule or Form that it is not to be the very matter of our prayer too in terms If not Is not this another humane invention hammer'd out of the Crowns of perverse and unskilful men What would they say if this very Lords Prayer as we call it was by Christ himself drawn from some received forms amongst the Jews before Christs time This is affirmed by divers very learned men in Judaical Antiquities They were set against it enough and more than enough before this surely would turn their stomachs worse Yet shall we take leave here to recite that sober and most probable Judgment of the Magdeburgenses concerning the use of the Lords Prayer Without Magdeburgens Centur. 1. lib. 2. cap. 4. doubt the Apostles propounded the form of prayer delivered by Christ to the Churches and required all to pray after that manner although they themselves used other forms of prayers Much may be said in the defense and confirmation of the received forms of communicating in publick But what more than what answers the vain cavils against it which is done Or the general concurrence of Heathen Jewish and Christian practise all which where it can be shewed they had any common service show that it was constantly determined and of one form and never changed but by advice of Authority Which to prove because the Affirmative is insinite we here put in a challenge to give any one instance to the contrary viz. of any one Church Jewish or Christian where the publick Service was arbitrary and left to the private Priest or Minister to form or model as he pleased He that shall advise with Gennadius Massiliensis shall find that one solemn point in his Gennad Massil Eccles Dog cap. 30. dayes for the administration of the publick Worship was this to keep to the solemnities of Sacerdotal Prayers which from the Apostles were deliver'd to the whole world and were celebrated in all the Catholick Church uniformly that there might be an agreement between the Law or Rule of believing and praying And where there is a liberty to pray what men list in publick manner there will soon spring up a liberty to preach what men list and upon that for the common sort to believe what they list unless that Law of Arms which themselves have exclaimed against in Religion keep them in awe For if we should speak truly and properly they who have no publick known received form of Worship amongst them can have no Christian Communion one with another and therefore they desire they know not what and we should do we know not what if we should joyn with them I prove it thus All Communion properly so called is in prayer and administration of Sacraments therefore signally called the Communion and not at all or least of all in Faith or Sermons because a man may believe as much as any Church or Preacher requires of him and yet be a cursed Schismatick and Alien from the Church But he that communicates in Prayers and the Sacraments hath full conjunction with that Body with which he so communicates Now farther to the intent that men may agree in one they certainly must first know that one thing For what is Communion but a common union in One thing which is a bond so to unite them But where this is uncertain moveable and new as the day and hour in which it is produced how is it possible men should know it or agree to it And if not How can they be said to enjoy communion in it Communion is much mistaken if it be look't on as a thing transient or consisting only in the act and passing away with it and ending and coming again at the returning of the like act but it is a thing habitual and permanent So that if we should suppose a man hath heard and approved for no man but he that means to be guilty of worse than Popish implicit Faith can approve a thing meerly future as extemporary prayers are such prayers and thereupon freely assented to them How can this last longer than the very instant of having passed such a sentence for before he heard them he could by no means yield rational assent and after he hath heard them it can last little longer than the sound doth in his head for at the next meeting he is as far behind and to seek as before and suspends communion But in forms once heard judged and compared with the Rule of Faith and Worship a man holds constant real though not actual Communion exercised with that Body of which he is a member And upon common humane probability may with general devotion joyn with and in such service of God though he be out of hearing especially which is most easie being acquainted with the method of the Liturgy and the purport of the several Actions Postures and Gestures relating to the several parts thereof And can these men in consciscience require that we should joyn with them who are so ill set together
amongst themselves as to have nothing more than a blind presumption and credulity that all is or will be well But what should we protract an argument of this nature any longer against them who are arrived to such an unnatural height of admiring fresh phrases inverted numbers of words when the matter is much the same that their own uttered conceptions to day affecting themselves and others wonderfully and lookt on as spiritual and divine tomorrow nay on the afternoon nay next hour shall be sentenced by themselves and auditors as an humane invention and injurious to God and Man Nay which is yet more The form which Christ gave his Disciples and left to all to be practised who would be his Disciples hath met with such hard entertainment amongst these illuminated ones that 't is well it escapes a reproach when it is rehearsed Tell them here how the ancient and eminent Saints and Servants of Christ did use it in terms and that daily and that frequently every day and that often in the service of the Church in publick you make the matter worse for them Tell them how diverse of our own holy Martyrs blessed God for what they saw that day wherein they were redeemed not only from blind obedience but worship had the comfortable opportunity of worshipping God according to this manner so contemned they stick a little and premise some small respect to such good men as would dye against Popery but for such devout and constant adherence to the Liturgy of the Church they have no good words for them But it must be either their unhappiness that they knew no better their weakness they were so fond of that their want of zeal for a thorow reformation and of light to see what they did so clearly as they at this day And many such pieces of tattle have they in readiness having neither truth nor judgment nor charity in them but declare plainly they who thus discourse and practise to the contrary are not of the same Religion with them as to speak what I hold my self bound to profess I am not of theirs who refuse such publick communion with our Church and hold it utterly unlawful to give so much as ear to them in their will-worship and especially such as use that way in dislike of opposition to the established And so let this end CHAP. IX A third abuse of the Worship of God by Sectaries in neglecting publick Prayers without Sermons censured That Prayer in a publick Place appointed for Gods Worship ought at all times to be offered to God Scripture and Vniversal Tradition require it above that in private Places The frivolousness of such Reasons as are used against it The Reasons for it WE come now to take notice of another instance of their injuriousness to the Glory of God in their vile and low opinion of publick Prayer in Gods House Whither it should seem they would scarce ever invite Christian people but for the Sermons sake And this they may do for their own sakes because they love to be encouraged as who doth not by a full appearance of Auditors For whoever saw a Sectary at prayers alone in the Church as was the manner and ought to be the practise at this day of devout Christians even upon all occasions to visit Gods house of Prayer to pour out their hearts before him to put up the private requests of their soul to God there as the properest place I am ashamed to hear and much more to utter what they have to say against this excellent practice 'T is out of one of their Common-places which fights against most of what they approve not amongst us and there 's an end of it It makes I am sure ten times more for the reputation of them whom they bitterly enough hate then they are aware of Shall all Jews be not only permitted but excited to frequent Gods house even at those hours of Prayer in which the publick Sacrifice was not offered Shall the Apostles of Christ after the Resurrection as did Peter and John Acts 3. 1. in express manner and without all peradventure the rest who are not expressed observe the publick place as well as common time of prayer Shall our Saviour Christ himself often resort to the Temple and that of the corrupt Jews to pray Nay shall this end be especially mention'd as to which the Temple was ordained by Solomon that men in private may offer 1 Kings 8. 38 39 c. up their Prayers to God And shall it not become Christians much more We know not of any publick prayers the Jews had in their Temple at all but he that shall prove they had any even at their offering Sacrifice which I neither positively deny nor know of but should gladly learn from others must I am confident prove it a Set form But every man likely pray'd for himself as his own heart and occasions moved him but commonly in a Set form For when I doubted of prayer in the Temple it was of any which was common publick or general as with Christians So that the principal end of Gods house then next to sacrificing was that particular men might come and worship God and pray to him And to this end the Temple doors were not then only opened when the Sacrifice was made and that ended clap'd to again presently to shut men out from praying there at any time of the day Nay the doors of the Gentile Temples were not shut up against commers in to worship And much less they of the ancient Christians when a publick and peculiar place was appointed for their worship whatever they were before If it were so that in the infant and extreamly persecuted state of the Church before Christian Religion dar'd to show its face abroad the doors of places appointed for Gods worship were shut from the time the service was over nay and at the very time of assembling will John 20. 19. they bring us back to that again We find it indeed to be their Negative use of Antiquity and Prescriptions That if it cannot be prov'd that such a thing was in use from the first beginning of Christians they hold themselves sufficiently exempted from the same but if it can they will not hold themselves bound to do it One of their fair dealings But we think it altogether sufficient in unquestionable Presidents to alledge them as imitable and binding that such were so early and general as could well consist with the safety and advantage of Christianity it self and its Professours And this we have beyond all doubt to favour and commend to us an open Church even when there were no publick prayers though that was daily and much less a Sermon which was rarely and yet God serv'd I speak modestly as well as any where since the Reformation and free and frequent access was had to the House of God to pray in This was continued in all Ages and all Christian Countries
till some extraordinary Pastours as they call'd themselves made the alteration much for the worse God knows and would have no man enter the proper place of worship unless it were to hear the Word that is their word This custome God be thanked was never quite laid down in our English Church and I trust in God never will but gain strength countenance and encouragement knowing that the Mother Churches or Cathedrals being Precedents to all inferiour Churches pertaining to them do by their example of daily prayers and a free access at all convenient times of the day granted for men to pray to God their private particular prayers not only approve but commend to and invite her daughter Churches to the like most godly practise All Eastern as well as Western Churches out of the Precincts of the Reformation herein very unhappy set us the like example And all Churches at first by great prudence and piety of the founders and promoters were there placed where they might be most convenient for the Parish to resort to at all times and also to the best advantage of Roads that so travellers passing by might have an opportunity to enter them and do the devotions to God But now a thing to be lamented such a godly custom would be censur'd for superstition as the Devil and the Enemies of God never want words to traduce where they want reason to disprove what is good and commendable And being born to an errour have a certain horrour of leaving it though no reason can possibly be picked up to retain it Besides Popish and Superstitious what have any man I would fain hear to say against private prayers in Churches And those tearms are now so bald and generally so boldly and ignorantly applyed that they prove nothing more many times than the profaneness of the user and have done the Church of Rome more credit and service in that many excellent things have been made proper and singular to that Church which in truth are not then all the franck language and most averse practises of such men have done them discredit or hurt But it were very strange if they could here find nothing in Scripture to colour their cause or credit this ungodly opinion Christ saith say they or at least may Thou when thou prayest enter into thy closet and when thou hast Matth. 6. 6. shut thy door pray to thy father which is in secret and thy father which is in secret shall reward thee openly But do they who turn these words thus to their purpose really think that Christ hereby advised men to pray rather at home than in the publick When I can believe it I will shew the contrary and before For Christ spake not against the publickness but the hypocrisie of this prayer It is not probable indeed that a man should be so hypocritical in private as he may in publick And therefore to obviate that mortal evil to all divine prayer our Saviour both confutes and redresses it shewing it is far better for such and more acceptable to God to be take themselves to their closets where no Man but God and their own Consciences can see them than with such vain ostentation to beg applause of men And if all the world were such Hypocrites as Christ reproved it were better no man should ever come to Church at any time But there is the contrary vice to be shun'd and that is Profaneness For that is no less scandalous yea much more and must be so accounted But they who out of undue reasons refuse the publick place of Gods worship are to be noted as Prophane It is most certain that they who keep to St. Pauls precept in his Epistle to Timothy That men pray every where lifting up holy hands c. cannot pray 1 Tim. 2. 8. Ephes 6. always in one place especially if we add that other precept of St. Paul Pray always for no man can be always in that most common place of prayer And therefore it may be inferred from hence that it is lawful and acceptable to God to pray privately but not that prayer in publick is not to be preferred before private For would it not as well hold against prayer in families which is not in the closet And if to every house there were a place dedicated specially to Gods worship as there is in every parish I should hold that prayers generally in the family and particularly of persons singly were more laudably performed in that publick place than in a private chamber But it is further to be noted That when St. Paul saith we should pray every where he never intended to equalize all places in fitness to Gods service he intended not to take off distinction of Christian places to that end but Judaical as the Temple of the Jews which diverse green Christians supposed was to be the special if not only place assigned of God for his worship St. Paul informs them better assures them that they should pray every where as well as at Jerusalem meaning nothing less then that where there were Christian Temples to which they might resort they should not need go to them but may keep at home as well being God is every where and they must pray every where but that a place of worship solemniz'd by Christians was altogether as proper as that Temple of the Jews Isidore saith indeed Prayer is most opportunely made in private places and is more pleasing to God viz. so qualified as before A sincere prayer at home is better many degrees than an hypocritical one in publick And the Gloss upon St. Pauls words â—â—ith In every place that is where ever you are and not only in the Church And the like it saith upon Christs words in St. John to the woman of Samaria That neither John 4. 21. on that mount nor yet at Jerusalem men should worship God But who sees not that it is to be understood signally and not so superstitiously as that a Temple might not be as pleasing to God in any other place as at Jerusalem or Mount Gerizzim And I know he addeth as divers other Fathers the Temple of the heart which is worthily said to encourage such persons to inward and chamber-devotion whose leisure or labours will not suffer them to repair to Church not to erect an alter in heart house equal to that in the Church And for my part I see no reason to except unclean places from Gods worship as some Casuists do when a more comely and convenient cannot be had For there is no place unclean in such Cases But we are now enquiring about the right a place hath to our Services other things being equal As if a man hath as good an heart as simple intention as pure charity as laudable matter petition'd for whether the place of Gods worship be not it he ought to offer his Sacrifice in rather than any other And whether publick is not required rather than private And here
say Amen at thy giving of thanks seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest These words are plain enough one would think to declare that the Apostle intended publick prayer as well as preaching or prophesying Therefore no arts are omitted to obscure and pervert his meaning but with such ill success that it is thereby much more illustrated and confirmed to the loss of such corrupters of Scripture to make it agree with their doctrine and practise For Bellarmine confesses 't is very hard to make it good that the Aposte means Bellarm. de Verbo D. lib. 2. cap. 16. only preaching and so in truth it must needs be but that there is nothing to necessity and a willing mind And therefore to mend the matter he says The Apostle there treateth not of Divine Offices but of Spiritual Songs which Christians were wont to compose to praise God and give him thanks And what if this were so For that they had any formed Liturgies in those early unsetled dayes of the Church while the gifts of the Spirit were so ordinary I much question excepting the Lords Prayer which was ever in publick use as well as private if it be not undoubtedly true what is affirmed by no mean Authors That St. Peter celebrated the Mass taking here Mass in the ancient and innocent signification with the Lords prayer only Doth not the argument of the Apostles hold altogether as valid in the ordinary as extraordinary Praises and Service But when the same Authour can bring scarce any ancienter than himself who are of his opinion and doth bring Haymo Primasius Lombard Thomas and others that he means the Ordinary service what worth can there be in such an evasion Hence it is that another is invented in the same Authour which acknowledges that there is meant Common worship But that the whole Congregation is not thereby to understand but only the Clerk of the Parish who is instead of the unlearned or Idiot to say Amen For Papists make no doubt but such an one there was who should in such manner answer for the rest of the people But I make no doubt but they are miserably mistaken For no records among the Jews from whom most customs of the ancientest Christians descended report any such thing No custom of the primitive Christians warrant this but the contrary whatever Ledesima the Jesuit saith For as shall by and by shewed the people in general without any such discrimination of persons made their solemn returns unto their Bishop or Priest who so celebrated in publick And therefore Bellarmine honestly and learnedly rejecteth this interpretation showing that the phrase of the Apostle which we render Supplyeth the place of the unlearned comprehendeth no less all the vulgar then the pretended Clerk And reason good he should so think because questionless by Unlearned is not there meant general ignorance of men but ignorance of that language which was spoken so extraordinarily For as Salmeron noteth upon the place of St. Paul by Place is meant the order of setting in such Assemblies where the Teachers had one place and the Hearers who for that were called Unlearned had another Hence it is that Salmeron would make clearer work affirming Salmer Com. in 1 Cor. 14. Disp 30. That it is not the end of Divine Service that the people should be instructed but the worshipping of God This Bellarmine approveth but betrays his cause in another point granting that of old prayers publick were for the instruction of the people but now is not this to own a forsaking of antitiquity the chief use of prayers is not the edification or consolation of the people but the worship of God And the Reason which Bellarmine gives is exactly the same which Sectaries amongst us give to silence the people in publick Devotion because The Minister speaketh not to man but unto God To both which we answer briefly and against both viz. The Priest speaketh unto God only in prayer as the proper object and to the people only in preaching as the proper object of that But he also in prayer speaks to the people instrumentally i. e. as to so many instruments or causes concurring to the same end and effect and therefore ought to understand what is petitioned for and obliged to concur with the principal Agent the Minister of God in such worship For though we are far from denying what the Papists and Puritans may say That any prayer is unfruitful or unnecessary which is not understood by the people in whose behalf it is put up for it may avail them who are many miles distant we all grant and consequently a prayer not heard may be useful as well not understood when heard Yet this holds only when inconveniencies or impossibilities obstruct the due exercise of prayer For as to such who are deaf and cannot hear yet come with general reverence to the publick place and so far as they can joyn with the prayers of the Church I make no question but considerable benefit to accrew so such as shall ignorantly scornfully or uncharitably neglect to give their general consent and suffrage to the publick communion in prayer I make no doubt but they bereave themselves of the benefit both of the publick service and their own private worship But this cometh not home to the purpose For of extraordinary acts in Religion as of particular things in Philosophy there is no knowledge and nothing can be determined but this may That generally and ordinarily publick prayers are more prevalent with God when understood and concurred to by publick devotion And herein doth consist the vulgar errour of the Romish Doctours that they suppose St. Paul should mean which I confess as I have said before our Translation too much favours that when he saith The understanding is unfruitful the understanding of the speaker in an unknown tongue whenas the context will certainly inform us he meant the understanding of the hearer who knew nothing of what was so delivered which some of their own Expositors agree to as also they do to the great expediencie as well as antiquity of that custom of the peoples bearing a share in the publick Worship To demonstrate which I shall here at large transcribe what I find in sober and learned Cassander It were to be wisht that according to the precept of the Cassand Defens Lib. De Officio Pii Viri p. 865. Op. Apostle and the ancient Rite of the Church that some consideration were had of the people in the publick prayers of the Church singings and lessons which are undertaken for the peoples sake and that the common sort of Believers should not wholly and constantly be driven from all communion of prayers and divine lessons St. Pauls words are manifest that what is said cannot be understood unless you express it by a tongue signifying your speech and that he who through ignorance understandeth not what is said can by no means answer Amen at the giving of thanks of another
And that Oraculum by notice whereof the Bishop of Rome with the Senate of Cardinals granted to the Sclavonian Nation that they should use the tongue of their Country in sacred actions seemeth to pertain to all Nations named Christians Omnis spiritus laudet Dominum omnis lingua confiteatur ei Let every spirit praise the Lord and every tongue confess to him And Thomas Cajetane a man doubtless most learned and acute wrote in a certain place It were better for the edification of the Church publick prayers to be said in the vulgar tongue in the Church which the people may hear than in the Latin tongue And when he was for this reproved by some he answered He built upon the foundation of the Apostles in his fourteenth Chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians c. Thus far and much more followeth out of that grave man to this purpose So that in one of those things which convince the Church of Rome of Innovation and obstinacie in novelties as nothing need more be said against it to that end nothing being said more for it in the upshot of all Disputes but that for some time it hath been in use there and the Trentine Convention hath Azorus Institut Mor. l. 8. c. 26. Salmer in 1 Cor. 16. Disp 30. made all sure according to their manner by decreeing it inconvenient that Divine Offices should commonly be in the vulgar tongue as Azorius writeth and as Salmeron It anathematizes such as will not be content with the three tongues in which the super scription was written upon the Cross of Christ Which is a fansie without any firmness at all it being certain no such thing was intended thereby and evident that the Hebrew tongue was scarce ever used in Christian services though the Syriack hath been And it is not agreed whether of the two was the Language but this we rest not on nor can the Romanists But when they have turned every stone to little purpose they come to that which will never fail them in this or any other point the determination of their Church and practise of the same which upon no accounts must be violated for that were to loose or hazard all as Azorius in the place fore-cited doth with little modesty and less advantage to his cause profess and answering this question Whether the vulgar tongue might not be indulged to Hereticks petitioning for it and for the peace of the Church saith I answer Councils and Fathers and the Church were never wont to yield to such like Hereticks demands But this he proves in matters quite of a different nature as if when the Fathers would hear of no accommodation with Arius Eutycheus Nestorius holding notorious heresies against Christ even when they would have introduced some verbal agreement they could be precedents to oppose that wherein if it were false can consist no heresie but is true and most generally was practised by all the Fathers and Churches at first and so continued for eight hundred years And therefore he speaks more to this purpose in these words following If it should be granted to Lutherans and Calvinists that they should celebrate Divine Service in their vulgar tongue they would afterward give out that they had got their wills yea that the Church had changed her opinion and left off her ancient custom as contrary to Scripture and so charge the Church with erring and would exult with incredible joy and gladness over it c. This is in truth the very same reason which our grave Puritans render why they conform not to the Church in her Service whenas they confess they have nothing of sin to object against the thing it self viz. They should be judged of mutability and levity should thereby weaken their Ministry in the esteem of their people which in all probability they borrowed from their Father Calvin one of whose reasons against the moderation Calvin Epist of Melancthon was that if they should make any correction in that Reformation which was so hastily hudled up they should weaken their Ministry The reasonableness of which I leave to others to judge of But rejecting the common reasons all of which we are not here to examine of Papists we shall freely oblige them to give better grounds of the Liturgies in unknown tongues than may be ordinarily found amongst them though no sufficient can be given And one is the great veneration had to the traditions of the Ancients in worshipping God not that anciently any instance can be given that may be a precedent to the corruptions of these times but that having with sober grave and holy advice framed a Liturgy in any one tongue they were very scrupulous how they made any alteration therein though of words only and therefore that which is vulgarly spoken altering daily and that which was written remaining altogether unchanged in words tract of time bred a diversity between the one and the other But this we demand of our Adversaries what one president for many hundred years together they can produce where at the first institution of publick Service it was so contriv'd that nothing of the vulgar language should be taken into it There is a vast difference between a passive and an active and purposed inconvenience The ancient predecessours of the Roman Church never intended that their Latin Service should be hid or unknown from the common people which many generations after followed yet so it must needs fall out in time But they who at this day plant Churches in both Indies and obtrude their Latine tongue upon the people there and who deny liberty to other Provincial Churches in Europe and elsewhere to celebrate in their known Language do purpose mischief unto such Christians and become Schismatical in not only not redressing themselves according to the Rule of their fore-fathers whom they should much more imitate in ordering their service so that the Common Christian might understand the same as primitively and for a long time they did than in sticking so severely to the bare Letters and Syllables they used not making conscience of far more scandalous practices in altering the service it self in matter by absurd additions and detractions but with denunciation of Excommunication against such Churches as shall presume to redress that evil of ignorance and render Christians intelligent of what they do But I have been of opinion that the vulgar have been no small cause of this great superstition and inconvenience to themselves In that in process of time their devotion slacking in timely repairing to the Church and in due demeanor in the Church neglecting to concur with the Minister of God and to reciprocate with him and almost deserting the Service by coldness sloth and indevotion the Priest was constrained perhaps with a Deacon or Clerk only to perform the service alone And truly let such people look to their modern teachers who have instilled such ungracious opinions into them as to take them off
from an hearty and diligent answer and reply to the Minister and thank themselves if ever they be denied the understanding the publique worship of God For is there not much reason that the service should forsake them who forsake that And that they who will not concern themselves reverently and devoutly as they ought to do in it should be made uncapable of so doing by such an invention as this I know they of the Sectaries as their writings testifie can be content the Common people should say Amen at the last as if St. Paul had indeed intended no more than that one word whereas in all probability he intended not that word at all in terms but such a constant and general suffrage as might be implied in that word and yet that word very laudably used in the conclusion of several prayers It may I should think put them to the blush to consider how herein they vary from the whole practice of ancient Churches as I could particularly show and give us no reason why they presume so sacrilegiously to defraud the People I have I confess met in some of their writings such an one as can scarce be wondred at enough coming from them For they say it may give some occasion Account of the Conference at c. to the Laity to invade the Office of the Minister Priest they would have said if they dar'd to speak so in Publique And is not this wonderful and ridiculous both that they who have by their own Principles quite destroyed the ancient Hierarchy of the Church so far as power would enable them and by their practice opened a way for all comers into the Ministry by defending Extraordinariness of Vocation should be more zealous than any Hierarchical persons in either Ancient or Modern days for the Dues and Rights of the Ministry This surely can have no good meaning as it hath no good reason seeing all that the Laity doth in such cases is only to follow and not to lead as Pastours do and to answer the call of others and not to give any law or word to any Is there any fear that the common people should ascend to the throne when they give their approbation by shout and applause to the Oration of their King made from thence There ciprocation of the people was never looked upon otherwise than a suffrage and an â—â—â—â—ance and argument of the inward affection born by them to the worship of God performed by the Priest and a proof of their communion with him So that very early in the Church it was constituted that no such publick Service should be performed in the Church where Consecrat Dist 1. there were not two at least to make answer to the Priest And as there was never before these prevaricating Sectaries any fear that the Deacon should invade the Priests office because he made answer to him so neither that the people should usurp either because they replyed to both as innumerable instances may prove take this amongst many which I could add to them already collected by Vicecomes In the Aethiopian Mass which bears the name of Joseph Vicecom Observ Eccl. Tom. 3. l. 1. c. 14. the Universal Canon thus speaks the Deacon Bow the knee People Before thee O Lord we bow it and praise thee The Assistent to the Priest saith as followeth Lord Lord c. The People replyes the same Then the Assistent of the Priest or rather Bishop for so the word Sacerdos and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly used signifies follow the Prayer Lord c. The Deacon says Arise to Prayer The People Lord have mercy upon us c. Thus and much more anciently Now for the credit of the Roman Church and much more for the Puritan who agrees with it herein hear what follows in Vicecomes This custom is long since antiquitated in the Latin Church a custom being brought in that some one of the number of Clerks should answer to the Priest in the sacred ministration of the Mass Which when it first began may well be doubted by reason of the scarcity of Writers who treat of it But if I may use my conjecture it was but a little before Beroaldus his dayes which Beroaldus I take to be him who lived about the year 1480 because he is the first that I can find who makes mention thereof in a Manuscript of Ceremonies which is extant in the Library of the Canons of the great Church c. By which it may be seen which are most popish the Church of England in its publick Liturgy commending and prescribing this ancient custom and laudable or Sectaries who have conspired with Papists to abolish it and exclude it out of their Service CHAP. XI Of the Circumstances of Divine Worship and first of the proper Place of Divine Worship called the Church the manner of worshipping there Of the Dedication of Churches to God their Consecration and the Effects of the same That no man can convert any part of the Church to his private use without profanation of it and Sacriledge Against the abuse of Churches in the Burial of dead Bodies erecting Tombs and enclosing them in Churches or Chancels Rich men have no more right to any part of the Church than the Poor The Common Law can give no Right in such Cases THERE are two very considerable circumstances in most Moral and Divine Actions Place and Time which have great influence upon the goodness and evil of an action And we have already so far touched the former as to assert the Excellencie of a Place Publick above the Private Closet or Domestick Rooms Now it is requisite we should enquire into the condition of such publick places as we call Temples or Churches omitting here Sic ergo appellamus Ecclesiam Basilicam quâ continetur populus c. Aug. Ep. 157. the various names and significations and acceptations as more proper for larger and learneder Treatises And yet we must not omit the distinction of Church into Proper and Improper as Austin doth thus use it For so saith he we call the Temple Basilica the Church wherein is contained the people which are truly called the Church as that by the name Church that is The place is called Gods Temple or Church because the company and congregation of Gods people which is properly called the Church doth there assemble themselves on the days appointed Homil. Ch. of Engl. Of the place c. p. 126. the people contained in the Church we should signifie the place which contains c. And to prevent all mistakes we confess we here mean that opprobriously called The Steeple-house as no bodies house but as we believe the House of God by institution and designation however it proves many times by Hereticks and Schismaticks intrusion and usurpation the House of the Enemy to God But the Kings Palace is still the Kings though Rebels and Usurpers possess themselves by violence and injustice of the same And that
is nothing but Examples and they not peculiar to that day From whence I would conclude no more than this That the true ground of dedicating a day to the Service of God is to be fetch'd from the light of Nature in which all Nations religious consent but the ground of keeping the Seventh Day as Chrys Homil. 12. pag. 542. Antioch the Seventh was meerly Mosaical and Judaical as Chrysostome also hath well gathered from the reason annexed unto it For in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth and rested the Seventh day whereas saith he God hath given us no reason why we should not commit Murder or Adultery c. because the command is so agreeable to nature Again the ground of keeping that Seventh Day which we do is to be taken wholly from Christian Principles Thirdly the form or manner of observing that Day is to be taken from the Prescriptions of the Apostles so far as they stand recorded in the New Testament and from Apostolical practises shining successively in the following Ages of the Churches Yet not so as if it were not lawful for this Age of the Church to keep it more strictly and sacredly than did the very first Age of the Church and some following it and the rather because it is certain that the Primitive Christians did keep two days Festival in one week to the honour of God the ancient Seventh Day of the Jews and the newly instituted day of the Christians as might here be made apparent Centur. 1. l. 2. cap. 6. But I shall here only add the judgment of the Magdeburgenses concerning the first Century of years where they write thus Mention is made of the Lords Day Apocaâ— 1. 7. but at what time Christians separated themselves from the Jews and began to rest on the Lords Day is no where mentioned in Records but that some rested on the Lords Day and some on the Saturday in this Age the contentions in the following Age do witness Thus they And for the Translation they speak of to be made of the Service of God from the Saturday to the Sunday they speak altogether without the Book of God or of the ancient Historians of the Church For that had had little of Christianity in it and could serve to no end so much as to spite and reproach the Jews as Calvin hath noted For it had made indeed both against the Jews and Christians too Them to have the precise command of God to them so directly violated These to retain the same thing which could not consist with Christianity imposed upon them with the Circumstance of time only varied For they who speak of Translation of a thing cannot mean here the natural day it self translated or more properly adjourned to the First nor can they mean the worship of that day transmitted to this For that was Judaical and Antichristian And if neither of these can be allowed what mean they to talk of changing or translating of one day to another And why do they not speak the truth roundly and dare to say That Christians instituted the First Day of the week in commemoration of the Benefits they received by Christ without any consideration at all of any command in the Old Testament and that it was a cessation of the Jewish Sabbath and an introduction of a Christian quite of another nature And that so it is appeareth from the concessions made by the greatest defenders of a Sabbatical Lords Day which I shall here contract as necessary to satisfie the Scruples and Doubts bred by careless handlers of this subject Things temporary in the Sabbath are these saith Mr. Perkins First the Jew might not go forth on the Sabbath day or take any journey or do any Perkins Cases of Conscien lib. 2. cap. 16. other business of his own Exod. 16. 29. 2. He might not kindle a fire on the Sabbath day Exod. 25. 3. 3. Nor carry a burden Jerem. 13. 21. These things are temporary altogether and do not concern the times of the New Testament c. Secondly It was temporary and ceremonial as it was a special sign between God and his People of the blessings that were propounded and promised in the Covenant Exod. 31. 13. Thirdly The set Day namely the Seventh was temporary Deut. 5. 14. Numb 28. 9 10. Fourthly That it was to be observed in remembrance of their deliverance out of Egypt Deut. 5. 15. Thus he of things not moral in the Fifth Commandment Now hear we what he accounts Moral They are these three First a Day of Rest This we also account Moral but not so much by the Fourth Commandment as by a Superiour Law as we have said and so of the Second That it be sanctified and of the Third That a Seventh Day should be sanctified to an holy rest is meerly craved and believed before it be proved from any text of Scripture Yea in his following Discourse he granteth that St. Paul wrought with Aquila and Priscilla on the Sundays and observed the Jews Sabbath out of Acts 18. 3 4. but he adds That it was out of Charity and necessity of the Salvation of them with whom he so conversed and answereth secondly That though he did not keep the Sabbath he meaneth the Lords Day for he constantly calls the Lords Day The Sabbath and too many have imitated his phrase publickly he might privately He might indeed but such privacie of which we have no knowledge can be no Rule or Law to us It is said by Perkins in another place and by his blind Followers That Perkins his Digest or Harmony p. 766. Vol. 2. the Sabbath of the Old world is the Seventh Day from the Creation which was consecrated for Divine Service in Paradise before the Fall And from hence they have drawn an argument for the Morality and that worthily could it be proved what they presume But others that have sifted the matter more Curcelleus diatrib de Sabbato c. 6. narrowly and accurately deliver the contrary for a certain truth viz. That the first Sabbath observed by the Jews in the Desart was not reckoned from the beginning of the creation but from the day in which Manna was first rain'd down as may be seen out of Exod. 16. v. 4 5 13. which two are supposed to meet together but upon no good foundation But this is certain that we find a breach of the Sabbath and severe punishment executed upon the breakers of it before the promulgation of the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinah But to this the best argument I find for the Antiquity of it it is well answered That the same reason is for the Antiquity of the Tabernacle too which most certainly was not made till a long time after the first mention we have of it For Exod. 33. 7. Moses is said to take the Tabernacle and pitch it without the Camp whenas the history following relateth the particular materials and form and solemn erection of it to be
not Composito viz. before some one place be determined and dedicated especially to his worship and not after or from the contempt of Gods house or from dislike of the Publique worship or from admiration of our own Gifts and a delight to show them or lastly a design to breed a faction in private against the publique profession I know likewise and grant that several just Impediments there are to the publique service and in such Cases most necessary it is that Gods service should be performed within doors But it is not necessary that this should be performed as the affected manner is in a service quite distinct from the publique yea often quite contrary What men speak in prayer and spiritual devotion between God and their own souls privately they are the only proper judges of and Christian not Liberty only but piety requires they should so be But surely when Men speak before others as well as God and there is nothing so much as the Place which diversifies the worship in a Family from that in the Church that of the Church is most proper And not to say any thing of the Laity no Priest or Minister of our Church ought upon common occasions to officiate in Prayers in Private Families any otherwise than he is bound to do in Publique especially if they to whom he officiates and himself have not performed their duties in that manner before in Publique which when they have then only is the proper place for another free-will offering unprescribed I shall not here insist on the obligation all Priests have to recite their Office as I could but only give this general reason That every Priest is ordained of God by man as a constant intercessour between God and Man in behalf of the People and especially them of whom he hath a Pastoral charge and not only the nature of his Office but condition of his Benefice requires that this he doth constantly or daily twice the old rule being very reasonable viz. Beneficium requirit officium the temporal benefits received by the Clergy require spiritual office The first is daily and so should the second also be And this is no such innovation as the contrary that the Priest should have nothing to do but when he preaches or that he should pray and offer to God as liketh best every single Christian which is impossible and ridiculous and an intolerable presumption in any man to prescribe to their Minister how he should minister to them when he is lawfully prescribed his duty before and if he were not he ought to prescribe to others not of the same order with himself and not take Laws from them which is the corruptest and modernest of all Innovations But the Recitation of the Office by the Priest is a constitution of above a thousand years standing according Barthol Gavantus in Rubricam Brev. Tom. 2. Sect. 2. c. 5. Tit. 1. Compilatio Chronolog ad An. 490. to the account of them who set it Jowest Sigebert in his Chronicle affirmeth it began in the year 540 as Gavantus out of him But I find another Chronologer to place it in the year 490 saying Anastasius the fifty second Pope ordained that no Clergyman should omit his Divine Office the office of the Mass or Eucharist only excepted And therefore with excellent wisdom and advice it is in these words prescribed by the Church before the Liturgy All Priests and Deacons are to say daily the Morning and Evening Prayer either privately or openly not being let by sickness or some other urgent cause And surely as there is an Obligation upon Priests to use these prayers there must be implied an obligation in all the true sons of the Church to be present at them and to joyn with the Priest Which because it cannot be expected that all men well inclin'd should be always in a capacity to do the Priest doubtless may comply with the exigencies of others so it be not to the pre judice of the Publique And now considering also the many extraordinary days of Festivals and ordinary days of Fasting wherein especial obligation lies upon all Good Christians so far as they can without justifiable impediment to appear in the house of God and worship him not omitting their personal and private devotions at home and comparing the same with the practice of Puritans who are so strangely deluded with the great vertue of a Sermon and extemporary prayers at home that it goes quite against the hair if not conscience of them to visit Gods house upon the account of prayers and adoration only let it be fairly judged whether they have such cause to insult over our Religion and not be ashamed of their gross defects and dissonancy from all that ever professed Christianity before their days Will their bold pretences to Giftedness think they in their rare way of worship cover these foul blemishes from God when they do not from men But this upon the occasion of the contrary abuse of times in order to Religion wherein the Româ—n Church hath exceeded and departed from the practice of the Ancient Church which indeed had some other solemn times of worship before the fourth Century besides Sundays and Easter day but very Erasinus in Matth. 11. v. 30. Id. in Romanos cap. 14. 5. few Truly and learnedly saith Erasmus upon Matthew The Age of Hieromne knew very few Feasts except the Lords day And in another place he writes thus With the Jews some days were prophane and some days holy but with the Christians every day is equally this he speaks according to the sense of Origen not excepting the Lords day holy Not that Festivals are not to be observed which the holy Fathers instituted afterward to the more commodious assembling of Christian People and to the worship of God but that they were very few to wit The Lords day Easter and Pentecost and some such like reckoned up by Hieromne But I know not whether it be expedient to add Feast upon Feast especially since we see the manners of Christians to come to that pass that so much reason as there was of old to institute them for pieties sake so great seems there to be to antiquitate them Thus he And this hath been the opinion of the Church of England and the course taken in the Reforming the abuse in the number of them And a second abuse hath been pared off by us seen in the end of them which is rather to the honour of Saints than of God or Christ among Papists I know at the long run as we may so speak they ascribe in their doctrine all to God but not half of them have this sense and little or nothing many times comes from them but what is directed to the Saint they then worship Bishop Whitgift doth distinguish ours from theirs many ways This one shall suffice at present out of him Neither Whit gifts Answer to the admonition pag. 175. are they Holy days called by the name
of any Saint in any other respect then that the Scriptures which that day are read in the Church be concerning that Saint and contain either his calling preaching persecution martyrdom or such like A third and yet worse abuse in the Roman Church is that they celebrate the memory of some who have been no Saints and of others who have been no good Christians as their highly applauded Thomas a Becket who indeed was villanously slain and with gross Circumstances but by no better authority than a man may be murther'd upon the high-way and that for none of his vertues but for sticking closser to the usurping Pope than to Christ or his Prince to whom he was a much greater Rebel than was Cranmere which a very late impudent railer hath in print so termed to disgrace him and the Reformation so far as naked lies can prevail without the least instance against which of those Princes he lived under or in what he died an impenitent Traitor as he calls him This we know the Hall of the Jesuites Seminary in Rome is hung round almost with such Saints as have died convicted of treason against their Prince and Country as Judicially as ever any were But no more of this There yet remains somewhat to be said under this head of Times and Seasons of Prayer and that is concerning Hours of Prayers called Canonical which were retained and published by our Church at the beginning of the Reformation by the confession of that unsatisfied and unquiet Puritan Mr. Prinne himself who wrote against them and the Prinne against Consens pag. 32. excellent design of the Reverend Publisher of them with great wrath and bitterness and all the reason he could which was little enough God knows In the year saith he 1560 was printed Orarium or a Book of Prayers which mentioned Canonical Hours But in the second impression in the year 1564 these hours were quite obliterated and so in the Edition 1573. But if these things be so the First Edition is with me much more Authentique than the following unless it can be proved that such alterations were made with the like authority with the first For we have divers instances of Puritans busie zeal to make alterations in impressions of such books as offend their corrupt humor and that upon their private heads watching Presses that print any thing that troubles them and purging them Hath not the late Arch-bishop Laud in his Lauds speech in the Star-chamber An. 1637. pag. 64 65 66 67 c. solid and judicious refutations of their contumelies and scurrilous slanders against their Governors found out their falseness in contriving the expunging of that clause in the twentieth of the nine and thirtieth Articles of Queen Elizabeth viz. The Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and authority in matters of Faith And having caused the Article with this rasure to be printed to argue from that Copy and flie most boldly in the faces of the Prelates as forgers of Articles in latter Editions when there were so many ancienter Copies retaining that Clause as that of the year 1593 and 1563 and 1605 and in the publique Records of them And having so done to say the Article was never so printed before the year 1628 But the reason there given makes the matter more clear For many scrupling such Right in the Church refused to swear to the Articles so framed and thereupon made no scruple to purge them of such troublesom matter and having so done to cover their wickedness the better to begin to clamour loudly against the Bishops as if in their Edition they had foisted as they speak that into them of their private heads And what can be a greater or more bold presumption in them to attempt than in the Title of the Singing Psalms which never had the least approbation of either Civil or Ecclesiastical Authority to print these words Set forth and allowed to be sung in all Churches of all the people together before and after Morning and Evening prayer and also c whereas they could never yet produce the least colour of Authority more than gross connivance at that will-worship of their own heads For the Church never owned any other Psalms or Singing but what she warranted by her practice in Cathedrals which as it was much more ancient and solemn so much more easie also for common people to learn and more easie to be understood by those who are not able to joyn with them that so sing And yet what will not affectation of mens own invention and spite against others drive men to say they boldly argue against that manner of singing as not easily intelligible or to be learnt and also as a way most unfit to address ones self to a Prince in and much more to God as if their contrived Psalming of it were not much more obnoxious to these exceptions and more ridiculous to be used towards any man than the other The only advantage these have above the Churches grave plain and chearful way of Reciting the Psalms being that they are fallen into this their own way but cannot tell how or why and admire it infinitely But to return Can we knowing they have been guilty of such vile Artifices make any great scruple to think that they might play false with the said Orarium too of which Mr. Prinne speaks Such doings and the disuse of these might give occasion to the Rhemists in their Comments to affirm that The Church of England hath utterly rejected Canonical Hours of Prayers Which is not so Indeed she doth not impose them with that rigour as doth the Roman Church but commendeth the same as very godly and profitable And there is not one book in more esteem with her next to the Office of the Liturgy it self than that book to that end published by the late Reverend Bishop of Durham Dr. Cosens notwithstanding all the dirt cast in the face of it and him by Mr. Prinne And notwithstanding the three notable abuses noted amongst the Papists by Master Perkins in the use of the Canonical Hours First Perkins Cases of Conscience p. 79. in binding to them upon mortal sin This we acknowledge to be an abuse unless the persons have brought themselves under any Rule or Order which requires such services as such may lawfully be and wilfully neglect the same Secondly binding only to those hours whereas those hours differ not from others But here we are to distinguish first between binding to those hours only as if it were not permitted to use them at any other hours which I know none do and not binding them to any others but them only this is lawful secondly between binding to hours for the Hours sakes and for Orders sake Indeed Hours as is solidly and very philosophically argued differ not in nature one from another But emergencies and occasions may diversifie them and the devotions belonging to them without any just objection to be made to the
contrary A Third abuse noted by Mr. Perkins is That a man may say the Canonical hours of one day for another which may be an abuse or no abuse as the matter is ordered To neglect wilfully ones usual prayers is certainly ill but having so done to double his prayers the next day is no such error as may be supposed Much besides this may be said out of the Authority of the Church and more out of Scripture than may be found for some things by Puritans religiously observed Much likewise is here wont to be said about the Hours themselves the reason and number of them but I cut off all them at present and resolve all into the general reasonableness and piety of such a practice and the manifold benefit which may accrue unto the serious and devout user of them though he ties not himself to any one form strictly and so shall rest till I can hear what can be objected worthy of a Christian against them more than I have found already which may be as well objected against Morning and Evening prayer as them CHAP. XIV The Third thing to be considered in the Worship of God viz. The true Object which is God only That it is Idolatry to misapply this Divine Worship What is Divine Worship properly called Of the multitude and mischiefs of New distinctions of Worship Dulia and Latria though distinct of no use in this Controversie What is an Idol Origen's criticisme of an Idol vainly rested on What an Image What Idolatry The distinction of Formal and Material Idolatry upon divers reasons rejected The Papists really Idolatrous notwithstanding their good Intentions pretended Intention and Resolution to worship the true God excuse not from Idolatry Spalato Forbes and others excusing the Romanists from thence disproved That Idolatry is not always joyned with Polytheism or worshipping more Gods than one How the Roman Church may be a true Church and yet Idolatrous FRom the nature kinds acts circumstances of Place and Times of Prayer we pass to the object of this worship of Invocation and Adoration which is the most important of all and which as duly observed is the end complement and perfection of all Religion so mistaken is the foulest of all errors and the highest of all provocations and affronts of almighty God who Isa 42. 8. protesteth by his Prophet upon this occasion I am the Lord that is my name and my glory will I not give unto another neither my praise unto graven Images This therefore it were superfluous to prove which all Christians yea almost all the world as well Unchristian as Christian doth readily and unanimously assent to That God only is the proper object of Divine or Religious worship And they that glory that they stick firmly to this what do they more than do Infidels and Heathens who all hold that God is to be worshipped with supreamest worship and that Idolatry is a notorious errour and offence against him This I say all rational men assent to in the notion that the worship of the true God or which seems to be the very same the true worship of God is to be given only to God and yet fall flat into the Practice of that great sin For though Idolatry be so odious in its name yet in its nature it is very pleasing and ravishing of our senses and hath of late days been so fairly and neatly trimmed up by the fine wits and curious hands of men and they especially Christians and they more especially Catholiques God bless us that now there is either no such thing to be found in the world or that the least sin one of them in the world And this is brought about by the ministry and help of innumerable distinctions which I think may be reduced to these two heads viz. to those concerning the Act of worshipping and those concerning the Object of worship Concerning the Act we find such as these very common and current first Natural and Civil and Divine and Religious And these again Properly Divine or Improperly supream and Inferior Direct and Indirect Absolute and Relative Ultimate and subalternate or subordinate Mediate and Immediate For it s own sake or for anothers sake Again for its own sake which we worship as a thing in it self or as a Representation of another All these but these are not all to be found in Learned Authors books to rectifie the worlds errours in its Religion And besides these more may be found concerning the Object but this one shall I only name which is their strongest Hold and Refuge That to secure them from all assauls of Adversaries this to receive them when they shall by strong hand at any time be beaten out of their fastnesses And that is that modern but very famous distinction of Material and Formal So that some of no mean knowledge have thus defended themselves What if for instance in the Mass we should by errour worship that as God which is not God yet this would be but Material Idolatry at the most and not Formal seeing we believe that to be very God which we so adore and Material Idolatry with such circumstances we must suppose is one of the least sins that we can be subject to Thus have some discoursed to me though 't is well known some others of them as Costerus do acknowledge that if Costerus Enchirid Catholicks miss their mark and that be not really God which they with divine worship adore in the Sacrament they are gross Idolaters Of this we shall speak more by and by Now are we to consider first of the first sort of distinctions to pass over all which by a particular examination would be too tedious a task for my self and Reader too I shall therefore only examine the most reasonable and comprehensive of them and them I take to be that of Worship Civil and Divine and of Absolute and Relative not omitting altogether others And to understand clearly what is meant by Divine Worship we are to enquire whether the Act makes the Worship or the Object For all worship as other Acts moral takes it specification from the Object as Philosophers say then unless the Object be Divine or God himself cannot the Worship be Divine and so by consequence a man cannot give Divine Worship though he would never so fain unto an object not Divine and so cannot though he would commit Idolatry because the worship it self is not Divine but much inferior because the object is such which constitutes not Divine Worship being some Creature But if the Act in its own nature be intrinsecally Divine it would be known what is that which makes it so For they say all acts external are equivocal and dubious in themselves and indifferent to Civil Religious Inseriour or Supream worship and that nothing can be concluded from thence Idolatrous For we bow the head we bend the knee we fall down at the feet of men many times whom we give no Idolatrous worship unto
the matter before such as they find startled and impatient at such plain derogation of Gods honor But they who openly profess to give Divine honor to Saints thus state the matter as doth Azorius Hoeretiques Azor. Instit Moral l. 9. c. 10. Quinto quaeritur c. saith he no wayes deny that Saints are to be honoured with that worship and honor which men eminent for vertue power wisedom nobility and Authority may be worshipped with for such honor as this is altogether civil and human but they tax Catholiques for worshipping them as God that is that they give divine honor to them But greatly are they mistaken For Catholiques worship them not as God but for Gods sake worship and honor them For as before Minime cols pro Deo sâ—d propter Deum c. we said Catholiques worship not the Image for God but for Gods sake So in like manner we honor not Saints only with that honor wherewith we honor vertuous wise and noble men but with divine honor and worship which is an Act of Religion But we give not divine honor to them for their own sakes but for Gods sake Thus he Against which we object sacriledg and Idolatry thus loosly delivered For as for the distinction it serves their turn nothing at all It implies with us a contradiction For to give Divine honor to any Creature is Idolatrous for what reason or for whose sake soever it be given Neither is it possible a man should give it to a Creature for Gods sake meaning as I suppose they do for the honor of God For divine worship being proper to God and incommunicable to any but him can no more be given for his sake to the Creature than supream honor to a Villain for the Kings sake And therefore as he goes on to erect Temples and Altars and offer Sacrifices in honor of Saints which is to tell us more plainly what they mean by Divine worship and this as they say for Gods sake is with us Idolatry who deny that any such things can be done really to Gods honor and much more that God would have them so honour'd or himself by them And whereas a little before he saith It was the Heresy of Eustathius as Socrates writeth in his History l. 2. c. 33. That Saints were not to be worshipped but God alone as being against the first Commandment There is no such thing to be found in that place but this we find which expresses the dealing of the Romanists in this and other controversies viz. how that Sccrat l. 2. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eudoxius being in Julians dayes placed in the Episcopal Throne of Constantinople he uttered these words in publique God the Father is impious but God the Son is pious at the hearing whereof the minds of all present being much troubled and beginning to mutiny He added Let not this saying trouble you For 't is true thus God the Father is impious because he worshippeth none but God the Son is pious because he worshippeth the Father Which being heard the tumult was appeased and instead of it they all fell out into laughter and so was that saying ever after look'd on as ridiculous In like manner when these new Divines come with great swelling language of divine honor to be given to the Creature in their interpreting themselves they must be very heretical and prophane or very ridiculous Or rather it is both to say We must give divine honor to Saints for Gods sake yea an abomination yet greater to make God the author of his own injury and degradation as it were to set up a competitor to a King against his will or at least without his will for his sake But suppose what may not be granted that there is a favourable interpretation and tolerable practise in the Church of Rome of these things I am sure this is not tolerable that such sayings as these and many more should pass untouched or uncersur'd by them yea are kept and nourished and preferred much by the most Visible autority of their Church and the other softer inferior sense allowed and made use of chiefly to dispute with and to decline the force of a resolute accuser and to satisfie green proselytes with who are not able to digest the stronger and ranker Divinity they have for them in store when it shall be too late to see the truth and must have their mouths stopt and all objections and scruples answered with this The Church cannot err It is most apparent that God neither in Old nor New Testament hath given any such warrant as Ahasuerus did to Haman to exalt Mordecai or Pharaoh to honor Joseph for us to honor Saints in exhibiting any thing of divine worship to them I shall not need therefore trouble this place with their citations to that purpose which is not to the purpose when it was there manifest to all that such honor was the honor not of a King but a principal subject and Minister of state Neither do Scriptural reasons advance their cause Whereof some are so parabolical and forced that they fall to nothing before they come to us as that of Mat. 24. 26. and that of Saint Peter 2 Pet. 1. 14. 15. being plainly intended of the records he would leave with them he wrote to to bear in memory what he delivered to them as Cajetane hath noted And the Power promised Rev. 2. 26. to them that overcome is not as they violently give out a power to dispense blessings and therefore to be sought to by Invocation but a power to be victorious in the Faith against all persecutions And those reasons drawn from Apoc. 5. 8. and 6. 10. and 8. 3 4. Are all besides the vanity of the form of the argument it self upon a false foundation and supposition viz. as if those things there related were acted in Heaven and not upon earth True it is as hath been noted before that the Vision of the Apostle is implyed to have been in Heaven concerning things there revealed to him but it was of things only to be fulfilled on earth And though it is most easie fit and obvious to interpret the Angel offering incense as the servent prayers of the holy Saints upon earth to God the Father yet it is I conceive more literal and agreeable to the intent of the Revelations made to interpret them partly as descriptions of things doing then in the Church and partly as prophesies of the future condition of the Church in the publique Service of God where by the Angel we are to understand the Bishop who in the first dayes of the Church was wont in presence and behalf of the people to offer up the common prayers of the People at the golden Altar viz. The special place of his ministration which prayers and worship did like incense ascend unto the holy Throne of God And the fire which is said to be cast from the Censer and Altar unto the earth is
There is no necessity of this and yet may be unlawful by vertue of that Precept For saith he nothing void of Reason is capable of adoration that is Veneration external nor worship that is Internal Veneration And when he saith If a man kiss the Crucifix without superstition he offendeth not but as the Case standeth now a dayes and as worship is described by Romish Authors and as they expound the definitions of their Councils upon this subject it cannot be done without superstition And himself seems to be of my mind in these words following That Images should be in Churches no human order requires And as it is easier it is safer also to take away all Images out of Churches than to prevail that no excess should be committed nor superstition mingled therewith And how dull and damnable superstition is constantly committed yea publiquely tolerated yea countenanced and encouraged in the use of Images I could easily and undeniably evidence were it my business For however I am not ignorant there is a warier and soberer sense given of the use of Images yet this is chiefly in the ears of such as will not be gained to them but by drawing the sense current of that Church with Azor. Instiâ— Mor. l. 9. c. 6. Thomas Sum. Par. 3. Quaest 25. artic 3. a fairer face but this we find in their writings It is the common opinion of Divines Imagines in eodem honore c. That the Image is to be worshipped and honoured with the same worship and honor wherewith the thing it self is to be worshipped And he that sayes this should know the mind of that Church as well as any other and the rather because he hath many of the same mind with himself Thomas the Great leading them But I had almost forgotten the mad or merry conceit of Baronius to Baron Ann. 34. §. 275. draw Image worship from Gods own institution He says God appointed the use of Images by Peters shadow whereby he cured sick persons I marvel much seeing such great use might be made of it that among so many rare and curious Reliques of Saints retrived or secured perpetually by the Church of Rome they could never happen upon a limb of the shadow of St. Peter whereby sick folk were cured to be shown for Images and worshipped For until that I shall not trouble my self to answer Baronius his argument for them and then I wil profess I cannot Now for the ancient use of Images it is certain out of St. Austin quoting Aug. Civit. Dei. Varro to that purpose that the Heathen Romans had no Images which they worshipped for the space of an hundred and seventy years and that Varro's opinion was that the Gods were more purely worshipped before the use of Images was introduced then afterwards And it is evident that until Origens dayes Christians made no religious use of Images And Origen cont Celsum l. 5. p. 255. l. 7. p. 374. See Fox Act Mon. Vol. 3. p 464. in Gregory the Great his dayes who commended Images in some sense they were prohibited and that by himself as objects of worship though not as helps which Bishop Latimer approved in this manner Images of Saints are called Saints and so are not to be worshipped taking worshipping of them for praying to them For they are neither Mediators by way of Redemption nor yet of Intercession And yet they may be well used when they may be applyed to that use they were first ordained for to be Laymens books for remembrance of heavenly things About the year 700 unto the year 800 of Christ many and bitter contentions arose amongst the Grecians concerning the use of Images then receiving another construction than former ages approved of Many turns happened for and against them till at length that ambitious and unnatural Beast Irene who put out her own son Constantines eyes for standing up for his right upon which he died and then to fortifie her self took in with the Popes Faction of the West and calling that numerous but sacrilegious Synod called the second of Nice concluded the point for ever â—fter and so grosly That Charles the Emperor in a Synod of the West-Bishops when the Popes Legates were also present condemned their decisions about Images Which hath so galled the greatest defenders of them that it is a pitiful thing to see what shifts and evasions directly false in themselves and contradictory one to another are invented by them The most current is that the Synod of Francfort mistook the meaning of them at Nice and this surely for no good end is received by some of the Reformation as Grotius who was the first that was not of that Church who could flatter the Church of Rome so far as to accept that answer for good Another of our Church of no less knowledg in divinity hath since him I cannot say from him owned that excuse but by their leaves upon very ill advice and no sufficient grounds at all as I could make appear but there needs nothing more though much more might be said than the Incredibleness of the thing it self that so many of them should not be able to understand the meaning of that Synod of Nice which spake plain enough that they worshipped the Image not for its own matter and form but for its sake which it represented But neither did this Synod decree so grosly as is commonly taught and practised by the Church of Rome which though diverse in it of late dayes do condemn for Idolatrous in that point some of late among us would have spared for no other reason than that by all means and as it should seem in all senses they must be maintained a true Church the latter of which is as stoutly denyed as affirmed and more easily proved And that from another head viz. Their opinion and use of Reliques Concerning which We as Dr. Rainolds hath observed all agree that honor Rainold de Roman Eccles Idolat l. 1 c. 9. §. 1. is due unto the bodies of Saints yea even the Calvinists and this especially in decent interrment of them And upon certain and well grounded information of any Relique of Saints or Martyrs Body sound with all civil respect we commit it to its proper place or reserve it in much esteem But what that esteem ought to be may be and much is controverted This the Church of Rome saith conformable to their doctrine of Images that the supposed Parts of Saints are no less to be worshipped then the Saints to whom they belong and that any Part of Christs garment and especially his Cross is capable of divine worship as that which received we know not what divine vertue from thence And lastly that the blood of Christ shown in many places and believed to be such is to be adored with the same worship that Christ himself is And here we may convict them of flat Idolatry out of their own confessions supposing this to be Idolatry
to be cordially addicted to the Good of the Church or Glory of God would use more civility and common Ingenuity if not conscience towards both then purposely and industriously to involve and cumber themselves with multiplicities of inconsisting Cares and Cures and then use it as sufficient excuse for their ill discharge of their Duty in all or most of them That they have so many occasions as that they cannot attend on them all as they confess they should and say they would For this is plainly to mock God and the Church too But experience proveth this to be too true that they who are most engaged in multitude of imploiments or charges seldom perform so much service to all of them put together as he that hath but one single Charge doth to it alone Chap. XVIII Of Obedience to the Church in Particular in the Five Precepts of the Church common to all viz. 1. Observation of Festival Dayes 2. Observation of the Fasts of the Church Of the Times Manner and Grounds of them Exceptions against them answered 3. Of the Customs and Ceremonies of the Church 4. Frequentation of the Publick Worship 5. Frequent Communicating and the due preparation thereunto IT was well said by a Reverend Person of our Church even where he argues against the blind obedience of the Roman Church Certainly Donnes Pseudomartyrs chap. 6. p. 180. the inestimable benefits which we receive from the Church who feeds us with the Word and Sacraments deserves from us an humble acknowledgment and obedient confidence in her yea it is spiritual treason not to obey her And though I dare not say with Catharinus against Cajetan The In eâ—dem gradu habenda sunt pracepta Ecclesiae si bona sunt quo ipsius Dei quoad hoc quod similiter ligant c. Catharinus Annotatin Com. Cajet lib. 2. Precepts of the Church are to be received with the same degree of honor yet I may say with as real reverence as the Precepts of God if they be good thus far that they both bind alike under pain of eternal damnation So that there could scarce any doctrine be devised more pestilent to the Church or pernicious to the souls of Men then that which infuses into mens heads to obey the Church as little as they can possibly without danger from the Civil Magistrate or express and particular violation of some text of Holy Writ alwayes excepted that more then Antichristian Dogme That men should refuse to do any thing enjoyned by any lawful Authority because it is commanded least forsooth their Christian liberties should be invaded But Bernard was certainly a much better Christian in this subject then these men to whom none in their own opinions are to be compared who tells us Whatever of Obedience is yielded unto them that are set over us is given Bernard de Virtute Obedientiae unto him who saith He that heareth you heareth me c. especially when the things so injoyned tend so directly to the service of God as doth those particularly commended unto our practise by our Church against which the Adversaries arguments are taken from the general quarrel they have against such Governours whom they would not have to rule at all but come under them or from the things themselves which they give out are against the Word of God because against their Negative Superstitions When we therefore propound to them and all faithful servants of God and true obedient and humble children of the Church the Five Precepts of the Church we suppose them to whom they are directed to be free from the leven and infection of Schism and Stubbornness we suppose them to be bred and educated in the bosome of the Church and to have no other Fathers in Christ than the Fathers of the Church For when they have made defection from that body of which they are or were Members either in heart and affections or outward declaration against it then no wonder if a thousand malicious reasons be at hand to enervate the commands upon them and defie all Authority But they who hold to their sound profession and have any honour for their spiritual Parents as well as natural or respect 〈◊〉 the Fifth Commandment which themselves generally interpret to extend to Religious as well as Moral Obedience and Offices whose interest will not suffer them to observe it cannot boggle at the reasonable use of Power in requiring such things nor at the Piety of the Precepts themselves Now the Five Precepts of the Church are these which have been with long continuance as to time and with great conscience as to all good Christians observed drawn out of our Liturgy by the Authour of the Collection Church Calendar of Private Devotions or Hours of Prayers First to observe the Festival or Holydayes appointed Of the reasâ—nabless whereof we have before spoken The manner of keeping them is by suspending all humane businesses wherein Justice and Mercy which are to be preferred before Sacrifice do not principally consist inconsistent with that due service of God on that day celebrated It is plain that before distinction of days set apart in special manner to the praise of God which we now call Holidayes there was a daily publick worship solemnly used by the Church and Christians held themselves bound to be present at the same For Origen upon Leviticus affirms That to Christians every day was an Holiday and Festival And to Chrys To. 5. Serin 88. p. 602 603. the same purpose St. Chrysostome in whose age the special Memory of Saints was frequent saith that Every day is a Feast to a Christian And out of Austin and others it is manifest that there was wont to have been a daily communication by Christians of the Eucharist But this so solemn and constant attendance on Gods worship ill agreeing with mens daily civil imployments it was the wisdom and piety of the Church to restrain the more solemn Service of God to some special days which was signalized with the memory of Christ or his eminent Servants and Saints So that if Sectaries would but keep to the grounds of Christianity rather than natural Policie and Interest they might find the contrary to that Calumny against the Church viz. That it restrains men in their callings For the Church hath rather made a Relaxation and Indulgence to men in order to their worldly affairs than laid any new restraints upon them in that it hath much lessened the number of Festivals to what they were twelve or thirteen hundred years ago and much more in the later days of the Roman Church It is a gross and prophane Errour of modern Sectaries to imagine that there is no obligation upon Christian people to repair to the house of God every day whether to publick or private Devotion as we have said before but much greater to imagine that the obligation is not yet stronger when the Authority of the Church determines the time and place though
say out of the Decalogue Six days shalt thou labour and do all that thou hast to do Therefore 1 Tim. 4. 3. must thou not keep any Holy-day to Gods Service but Sunday So say they God hath created all Meats to be received with Thanksgiving Therefore you must not abstain from them Indeed one place excellently well interprets the other For just as God hath said Six days shalt thou work so hath he said All Meats shall be eaten under the Gospel And as it would be unlawful under that supposed command to rest on any of the Six days from labour so is it unlawful under the Gospel to fast or abstain from meat any one day How can or dare any man if such arguing as this will hold good cease any one day from eating and drinking if it be a command that we must eat and drink all meats now not hurtful to our bodies and that without any exception or limitation of time Do not they much more offend against Christian liberty and Gods command who will not eat at all those creatures that God hath commanded or sanctified to our use by his Word than they who eat some sort of Gods good creatures but omit others But undoubtedly God never intended to enact a formal Law or give a Precept that the one or other should be done but to grant a liberty and indulgence so to do Now no Indulgences are Commands nor being not accepted generally offend the Donor God in the Decalogue had chosen one day to himself and for the six remaining left them free to do that which he forbad to do on the Seventh And this is all that is meant by Thou shalt labor six days God under the Gospel hath taken of the distinction of meats clean and unclean legally and freely pronounces us at liberty to eat what of them we please for none of them can hurt or defile us naturally as the Manichaeans held nor any Legally as the Jews held But they may Evangelically and Morally I hope when we commit gluttony with them may they not Yes excess they except but their Argument excepts not excess taken from the natures of things For ten pounds of meat and many quarts of wine are as clean as an ounce or a pint and God hath made all alike And so fish is as clean and as much Gods creature as flesh and flesh as fish Have they heard of any so blockish as to deny it of late dayes But what saith St. Paul They are evil to that man who eateth with offence Offence of whom Rom. 14. 2â— Of a mans own self no surely but offence of others And to eat against lawful commands fish or flesh is an offence to Superiours and that is much more an offence than to offend ones equal ones brother or inferiour as it would be for a man to strike his Master or Father than his Brother or Fellow servants Whence then I wonder to astonishment should it proceed to credibility that the Conscience of an obscure and inferiour Christian no doubt but an extraordinary person in his own eyes and opinion should preponderate the outward Laws and inward Consciences of his Governours according to which restrictions were devised and concluded Against such Aegyptian Pursuers of the Israel of God the Church a cloud of Witnesses may be opposed but they who dare consult ancient Presidents know it too well to put it to that issue That of the resolute and conceited man in the Commedian sitting their purpose much better Ego mihi video Ego mihi sapio Ego mihi credo plurimum Plautus I see for my self I am wise for my self I believe my self exceedingly And therefore to finall purpose is it to use allegations here which for the Observation of the Lenton Fast hath been so amply and exactly handled by a late Right Reverend and Learned Hand And for the Vigils Septuagesima Sexagesima Ember and Rogation weeks sufficient Authority and Reason are produced before their distinct Offices in the above-mentioned Collection of Private Devotions of old composed and by Authority instituted to the benefit of such as pretend to be of the Reformation established But those that are taught solemnly to quarrel at the whole no wonder they oppose it in such parts of it But yet something to their fears of superstition in distinction of Meats besides what is already said What if they be mistaken and the Church distinguishes not fish from flesh Undoubtedly at the first Institution of Fasts Christians were equally interdicted both and this custom is to this day retained in the Greek Church Our Christian Ancients not distinguishing between the flesh of fishes and the flesh of beasts properly so called living on the earth Imitating in their Fasts the perpetual Abstinence of the Fathers before the Floud eating neither one nor other but contenting themselves with the fruits of the earth and of trees flesh and wine being brought into the World together by Noah for the use of man For as Clemens Alexandrinus hath observed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. Strom. 7. p. 717. Origen in Gen. 1. v. 29. Hieronym in Jovin lib. 1. Munsterus in Gen. 3. 17. Man before the Floud was an eater of Grain rather than of Flesh And Origen after him upon Genesis saith This History plainly declares that God at first only permitted hearbs and the fruits of Trees for mans food But afterward license was granted to Noah to eat flesh And St. Hierome about the beginning of his Treatise against Jovinian saith the same and of late Munster and others which to cite here were needless The Western Church for ought can be perceived at first abstained equally from fish and flesh And therefore St. Hierome where he states the case of the Church making choice of Meats and shows the difference between the judgment of it and Hereticks such as were Marcion and Tatianus of whom he understandeth the Apostle to speak in his Second Epistie to Timothy addeth Nec hoc dicimus quòd negamus Pisces caetera si 2 Tim. 4. Hieron in Jovin lib. 2. cap. 1â— voluntas suerit in cibo esse sumenda whereby it may seem as if no less scruple had been made about the eating fish then of flesh But it is evident that about that time some distinction in Use not in Nature of Meats was made by the Church nothing scarce more frequently occurring in the decrees of Councils and Fathers writings than the defense of the Church her practise in discriminating Meats and yet condemning and anathematizing such Hereticks as abstaâ—ned from any Meats proper for mans use out of opinion of uncleanness that should be naturally in some more than others But the Western Church through favour and indulgence hath for many Ages permitted the use of fish to all obedient Sons as also of wine at such times as her Fasts are observed It is therefore a great mistake in her Enemies and Accusers to judge her of rigour in limiting
Christians to such sort of Meats as are now allowed For it was rather her act of Grace and Lenity to remit the one half of that ancient Severity commonly submitted unto in the earlier days of Christian Religion And who but ignorant and ill natur'd and nurtur'd children could turn her Lenity into Tyranny and make her curtesie a matter of calumny Nay which hath more disingenuity and absurdity while they fret and complain grievously that the Yoke as it is lyes too heavy upon them and presses them too hard to invert their spite and malice against it by arguing from the lightness and contemptibleness of such Fastings as consists only in abstinence from flesh saying It is no Fast which abstains not absolutely from all Meat This were indeed somewhat to the purpose if so be that the Church did at the same time command any man to eat fish or so much as hearbs or bread when she forbids flesh to be eaten Or that they who were able and did wholly abstain from Meats at such seasons did not more fulfill the intention of the Church then they who took the liberty left them of eating in some manner What temper and spirit do these men discover to themselves to be of who are alwayes in readiness to charge their Superiours either with folly or tyranny or impiety upon the same occasion and never been able to prove any one them Scotus and Biel Scotus lib. 4. Distinct 8. Biel Lect. 8. in Canon Missae after him distinguish of a Fast of Nature which is a total abstinence from all eating and drinking and of a Fast of the Church when a man eats but once a day and that according to the precept and mind of the Church Now if the Church hath invented a favourable distinction and sense to gratifie murmurers at the rigour of her Laws do they not requite her ingenuously who turn that also to her reproach Nay if another distinction be found which makes a Fast a Toto a Tanto and a Tali from the Whole from the Quantity and from the Quality of the Meats eaten hereby willing to condescend and bring down her Rules so low that all men may have somewhat to exercise themselves in according to their ability in the graces of Abstinence and Obedience who but such whose Religion impels them to be the worse for good usage and resolve to hear of nothing but their own inventions would clamour against their Governours for such moderation But when they are disappointed in their arguments and expectations to reduce all men and things to their own model their last Effort is to humble this kind of Fasting into a civil Constitution only and for a civil End according as an Act of Parliament misconstrued as hath more plainly and fully been declared by others hath misled them conceiving that the Fastings of our Church tend only to the encrease of Navigation or are intended for the good of beasts not of men But what hinders that the Church may have one end in her decrees and the Common-wealth another and that which the Church designed for the exercise of Christian vertues may be embraced by Secular Politicians to promote Secular benefits to the Publick Nothing is so manifest to him that knows any thing in Church History as that such a reason was never dreamt of by the Propounders of such Fastings in our Church nor in any part of the Christian world before that Act. And if the words of that Act were intended for an ease to the tender Consciences as those of dissenters are mis-called and to draw them by little and little upon consideration of Civil ends which they less hated than the Ecclesiastical to some good order and submission this is not to be drawn to a perpetual Rule nor made the only universal end of such a Constitution For the Church still keeps to the most ancient and general sense received amongst Christians A third Precept of the Church is The Observation of the Ecclesiastical Canon 6. Preface of Ceremonies c. Customs and Ceremonies of the Church and that without frowardness and contradiction as appears from her Canons and the Preface before the Common-Prayer Of which obligation that which we have before spoken of the Power of the Church and even now of Fasting may here be applyed and suffice A fourth Precept is Constantly to repair to the Publick Service of the Preface to the Book of Common-Prayer Church for Mattens and Evening Song with other holy Offices at times appointed unless there be a just and unfeigned cause to the contrary And this we have before also treated of extending it to the worship of God in his House especially when there is an assembly of Christian people together to that purpose though there be no Sermon and also to the humbling a mans self and putting up his private Devotions there alone when occasion and opportunity shall be offered so to do according to the most ancient and godly custom of good Christians ever since there were Temples built for Gods Service For the disuse of which excellent acts not the least reason hath been or can be alledged by those that would be thought to be the only Rule of Reformation which we have not sufficiently refuted before Lastly To receive the blessed Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ Second Exhortation to be read before the Communion with frequent Devotion but at least Thrice a year whereof Easter is to be one And in order hereunto as occasion shall be to open our souls by due Confession and disburden and quiet our troubled Consciences by some learned and discreet Minister of God from whom Ghostly counsel and comfort may be received with the benefit of Absolution Of the use of which we have also before spoken where we shewed that such Confession was not of such absolute Divine Right either of Precept or Means that Salvation could not be otherwise obtain'd but as an Ecclesiastical Expedient very effectual as well for the bringing Impenitent sinners to repentance as for the due restoring of them that are Penitent to a comfortable assurance of Gods favour towards them and direction and encouragement in holy living which the foul abuses in those Churches where it is excessively magnified should by no means abolish For besides them above noted doubtless it is no mean abuse to make that which undoubtedly should be an act of Judgment in Gods Minister discerning between the hopeful state of some and desperate of others and accordingly suspending or applying the Free Grace of the Gospel and the Power left by Christ to his Church an act of custom formality and course or perhaps common civility which kind of rashness and profuseness the ancient Churches were altogether ignorant of When grievous offenders against God and the Church had fallen justly under the censures of the Church it was permitted to absolve them at the point of death so far as concerned their restitution to the Communion of
give offense to the people contrary to the use of that Church And why so It it not because their doctrine and practise are quite contrary to it Is it not because the native sense of those words is so manifest and obvious that they would certainly understand them aright could they be suffered to come to the true knowledge of them And this is the scandal and offence would be given them And in the Reign of Henry the Eighth of England who opened the Hatches a little whereby men were kept in hold from discerning the clear light above and about them when they could no longer conceal the Second Commandment from the people but it must appear in its own entireness in the English tongue Gardiner and other Romanists would have added for safety sake their own gloss to the Word of God viz. to Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image nor the likeness Antiquit. Brittan 1 ag 338. of any thing c. with that intent to give to them Divine Worship Which sufficiently betrayes the guilt to which they are conscious in their false dealing with this Precept and the common people about it But neither of these being likely to take effect a more effectual and bold coarse is invented and defended That this Commandment was Ceremonial and Judicial and Temporary only ordained to prevent the Jews from falling into Idolatry to which they were so prone 'T is true they were so prone then to Idolatry and however they are now-a-dayes more than enough averse from it yet would they at this day be as prone as ever were but the liberty given of the use of Images in the sense of the Roman Church This they have found by experience of their Forefathers and others of succeeding Generations and therefore hold it safest and best to set a less Superstition to keep at a distance a far greater and to make a scruple of all use of images which can scarce amount to the nature of sin at all though it may of folly to secure themselves from the contagion of the other extream in the superstitious use of them It is controverted between the ancient Hebrew Doctours of which you Petavius Theolog. Dogmati To. 4. l. 15. cap. 6. Grotius Exposst Decal may read Petavius and Grotius whether Gods intent it was here wholly to deny the Jews the use of Images as Philo and Josephus suppose or the use only in a Divine manner as others this later Opinion is chosen by Petavius and the Adversaries to the Iconoclasts or Image-breakers But my opinion is First That all Jews concur in this and all Christians not led by the nose by the Pope of Rome that to make the Image of God at all under what pretence soever is absolutely forbidden And therefore I wonder more at Gerson than at them who lived with and after him that he should endeavour to excuse the Latin Church thus Before the Incarnation when the Law was given there appeared no Image of the Incorporeal God either in wood Gerson To. 2. De 10 Praecept in Praec 1. or stone because the Image of a Spirit cannot be made And therefore all Images were then to be rejected but because that may be now done since the Incarnation of the Son of God therefore from that time it is allowed to be done by him who might dispense Thus he And how weakly who may not see First Why could not the Image of God be made as well before the Incarnation as after And why might not the Image of the Son of God be made before he was Incarnate therebeing some knowledge of the same as we may well suppose amongst the Jews before the Incarnation and some Umbrages and Representations of it in Apparitions made to the ancient Patriarchs without the view of his Colour Stature and Lineaments as well as after when we have certainly lost the truest form of Christ and go by guess and uncertain tradition Again could not there be drawn the Image of a Spirit before Christ and can there now I would fain see how where or by whom What Because Christ who is a Spirit who is God may be drawn according to his Humane nature may be also according to his Divine The Divine Person may indeed but the Divine Nature can no more now than before be resembled and that Deity only by concomitance and implication and not in form at all When the Image of a Man is made the Image of him is made who hath a spiritual and divine Soul but the Image of his Soul is not at all made and much less is the Image of God made unless metonymically as Man is said to be the Image of God when Christ is figured unto us But could this be which neither can nor ought to be what warrant at all can it be to make the Image of God in contradiction to Christ as is pleaded for and usual among Roman Catholicks when they upon a vile fansie occasioned from a vision in Daniel make God the Father like a decâ—epit old man well clothed indeed and most like to the Picture of Winter we have seen but that he wants a pan of coals by him to warm his old and cold fingers over and as it were his Grandchild standing by him Could not all this foul daubing of the Deity have been made before Chrusts Incarnation Or ought it in any sober mans judgment to be made now Lastly because they speak of some special Dispensation to do this now which was never allowed formerly let them be so ingenuous and courâ—eous to show us if not the Original lest they should be cousened of it the Copy or but one word of it and it will satisfie us otherwise we think they have said much more already than they needed For we should have been as well satisfied altogether if they had said only It ought to be so as to give such a Reason which is as incredible as the thing it self viz. that It is dispensed with now under the Gospel Nay in that they say it is dispensed with under the Gospel they impty it was more than Mosaical and Ceremonial under the Law because Rites and Ceremonies are not so much dispensed with as directly abolished and destroyed Secondly I hold it absolutely forbidden the Jews by the same Law to make use of any Images in the worship of God though not to that degree as to worship them but only By them and that for fear of Idolatry and if not in passing by or neglecting God himself and directing and fixing the mind and heart on the visible Object yet by help of that For that contradicts the mind of God as may appear by the whole Body of Gods worship and every part thereof instituted by himself without the least insinuation of such manner of worship Nay it is very strange what Erasmus hath observed That though indeed in practice it hath been connived at yea Nam ut Imagines sint in Templis â—ulla
shalt not kill thy neighbour or another man but simply Thou shalt not kill And though indeed about the earliest dayes of the Persecution of the Church of Christ some men and more especially young women to prevent the abuses of their bodies cast themselves away and this was connived at by the Church yet upon more mature discussion and consideration of the notoriousness of the Fact it was condemned expresly by the Church nay for men needlesly and voluntarily to declare and publish themselves to be Christians and so to offer themselves to the Sword of the Magistrate was judged wicked and the practisers of it denyed to be Christians any farther than in name as appears in Clemens Alexandrinus And those Noble Persons Clem. Alex. l. 4. Strom. p. 481. 504. who are recorded in Scripture to have affected such deaths can be no more presidents for to justifie this sin than others other scandalous sins unless as St. Austin inclineth to believe answering the furious Donatists who out Aug. 1. c. 26. Civ Dei of mad zeal rather against the Church than for God were wont to destroy themselves they had some special instinct so to do from God as Sampson might be thought to have in that he was divinely assisted above his ordinary strength to pull down the house And besides his intention was not out of weariness or discontent of his life principally to destroy himself but the Enemies of God of himself and the people of God And there seems no great difficulty or inconveniencie to grant that a man may run himself into apparent danger of his life to bring a most notorious dammage to the Enemies of God and his Country though not upon his own head but by just Authority So that I make no doubt but Voetius determined the Voetius Select Disp Part 4. p. 256. Case of Conscience amiss denying that a man in desperation of saving himself and his ship of War from falling into the hands of his Enemies may with a good Conscience blow it up and all in it For all his arguments prove no more than that this a man may not do of himself because no man must slay himself but they prove not that a man may not do this by command and injunction of his Superiours in whose power his life is and to whom belongs his Vessel And what is said against a mans destroying his own life or his neighbours makes also against any maiming or mutilation of the body of himself or others though not ending in death The true reason of all which Recte dicitur inquit Socrates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Plato in Phaedone is First because it is against a Law of Nature imprinted deeply by God himself in the minds of men yea all living creatures to study and endeavour their own preservation which Law is hereby directly broken Secondly No man is absolute Master of himself but first as Plato hath noted is as it were the Goods of God and then a Servant to his Country and therefore without Gods consent or his Countries by the Soveraign power discharges him of his duty and service towards it he is an Offender against both And hereunto pertains the high Crime of causing Abortion and Miscarriages of Women to hide their former sin And as the Fact it self is forbidden so all ordinary Causes tending thereunto as all evil and provoking language All evil affections as hatred anger malice and such like All assistance by conspiring counselling or acting outwardly are certainly forbidden Lastly as the thing it self and all evil acts and offices are forbidden so because the Righteousness of Christians must exceed that of Scribes and Pharisees as our Saviour Christ saith in St. Matthew therefore Christians Matth. 5. are obliged hereby to all reasonable and charitable acts of love friendship piety as well as justice conducing to the support and preservation and comfort of their brethren especially in Christ as St. Paul advises to the Galatians As we have therefore opportunity let us do good unto all men especially Gal. 6. 10. unto them who are of the houshold of Faith And herein he followed the Precept of Christ I say unto you Love your enemies bless them that curse Matth. 5. 44 you do good to them that hate you and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you That ye may be the Children of your Father which is in 45. heaven for he maketh c. And therefore by this Commandment are requiâ—ed of us all acts of Mercy as Visiting the sick and imprisoned Feeding the hungry Clothing the naked Ministring assistance by counsel and action to the oppressed Comfort to the dejected and such like Knowing and considering that they who as Goats stand at the Left hand of Christ at the last Day of Judgment shall not be condemned only for injuries and injustices done to others but because Christ in his members was an hungred and ye gave him no meat was thirsty and ye gave him no drink Matth. 25. 42 43. Was a stranger and ye took him not in naked and ye clothed him not sick and in prison and ye visited him not The Seventh Commandment interdicteth all uncleanness in these §. VII words Thou shalt not commit Adultery Which Philo Judaeus following herein the Septuagint and having no skill in the Hebrew or Original Tongue as hath been observed by learned men and is easily to be discerned by any Reader placeth before the Commandment Thou shalt not kill though in the Fifth Chapter of Deuteronomy where the Decalogue is repeated the order of the Original is observed which implyeth some Errour happening in Exodus For neither is the reason of Philo or Grotius inclining to that opinion valid viz. because Adultery is the greatest sin a man can commit against his neighbour For undoubtedly Murder is more heinous There is some variety in the New Testament in the reciting of this Command For Mark 10. 9. and Luke the 18. 20. the order of the Septuagint in Exodus is kept Matthew 19. 18. the order of Deuteronomy is followed which teaches that the diversity was ancient and that not stood scrupulously on But the putting of Thou shalt not steal before Thou shalt not commit adultery in Exodus 20. not approved by Philo or his Followers should make that place of Exodus more suspected of alteration than that of Deuteronomie But the matter not being great and that only concerning the Greek Translation the End and Contents of this Law are more seriously to be attended which may be conveniently reduced to these following heads First unclean thoughts and inward motions and dispositions and most of all Resolutions to offend in act being not hindered For this Christ our most pure President and holy Doctour condemns for adultery in the Heart Matth. 5. I say unto you that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust Matth. 5. 28. after her hath committed adultery with her in his