in this Article is a full instance of it which is the Worship of Relicks It is no wonder that great care was taken in the beginnings of Christianity to shew all possible respect and tenderness even to the Bodies of the Martyrs There is something of this planted so deep in Human Nature that though the Philosophy of it cannot be so well made out yet it seems to be somewhat more than an universal Custom Humanity is of its side and is apt to carry Men to the profusions of Pomp and Cost all Religions do agree in this so that we need not wonder if Christians in the first fervour of their Religion believing the Resurrection so firmly as they did and having a high sense of the Honour done to Christ and his Religion by the sufferings of the Martyrs if I say Ep. Ecc. Smirn. apud Euseb l. 4. c. 15. they studied to gather their Bones and Ashes together and Bury them decently They thought it a sign of their being joined with them in one Body to hold their Assemblies at the places where they were buried Jul. Ap. Cyril lib. 6. lib. 10. Ennap in vita Aedess This might be also considered as a motive to encourage others to follow the example that they had given them even to Martyrdom And therefore all the marks of Honour were put even upon their Bodies that could be thought on except Worship After the Ages of Persecution were over a fondness of having and keeping their Relicks began to spread it self in many places Monks fed that humour by carrying them about We find in St. Austin's Works that Superstition was making a great progress in Africk upon these heads of which he complains frequently Aug. de opere monach c. 28. Vigilantius had done it more to purpose in Spain and did not only complain of the excesses but of the thing in it self Hieron adv Vigilant To. 2. St. Ierom fell unmercifully upon him for it and sets a high value upon Relicks yet he does not speak one word of worshipping them he denies and disclaims it and seems only to allow of a great fondness for them and with most of that Age he was very apt to believe that Miracles were oft wrought by them When Superstition is once suffered to mix with Religion it will be still gaining ground and it admits of no bounds So this matter went on and new Legends were invented but when the Controversy of Image-worship began it followed that as an accessary The Enshrining of Relicks occasioned the most excellent sort of Images and they were thought the best preservatives possible both for Soul and Body no Presents grew to be more valued than Relicks and it was an easy thing for the Popes to furnish the World plentifully that way but chiefly since the discovery of the Catacombs which has furnished them with Stores not to be exhausted The Council of Trent did in this as in the point of Images it appointed Relicks to be Venerated but did not determine the degree so it left the World in possession of a most excessive dotage upon them They are used every where by them as sacred Charms Kissed and Worshipped they are served with Lights and Incense In opposition to all this we think that all decent Honours are indeed due to the Bodies of the Saints which were once the Temples of the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 6.19 Deut. 34.6 But since it is said that God took that care of the Body of Moses so as to Bury it in such a manner that no Man knew of his Sepulchre there seems to have been in this a peculiar caution guarding against that Superstition which the Iews might very probably have fallen into with relation to his Body And this seems so clear an indication of the Will of God in this matter that we reckon we are very safe when we do no further honour to the Body of a Saint than to Bury it And though that Saint had been ever so Eminent not only for his Holiness but even for Miracles wrought by him by his shadow or even by looking upon him yet the History of the Brazen Serpent shews us that a fondness even on the Instruments that God made use of to work Miracles by 2 Kings 18.4 degenerates easily to the superstition of burning Incense to them but when that appears it is to be check'd even by breaking that which was so abused Hezekiah is commended for breaking in pieces that noble Remain of Moses's time till then preserved neither its Antiquity nor the signal Miracles once wrought by it could balance the ill use that was then made of it That good King broke it for which he might have had a worse Name than an Iconoclast if he had lived in some Ages It is true Miracles were of old wrought by Aaron's Rod by Elisha's Bones after his death and the one was preserved but not worshipped 2 Kings 13.21 nor was there any Superstition that followed on the other Not a word of this fondness appears in the beginnings of Christianity though it had been an easy thing at that time to have furnished the World with pieces of our Saviour's Garments Hair or Nails and great store might have been had of the Virgin 's and the Apostle's Relicks St. Stephen's and St. Iames's Bones might have been then parcelled about And if that Spirit had then reigned in the Church which has been in the Roman Church now above a Thousand Years we should have heard of the Relicks that were sent about from Ierusalem to all the Churches But when such things might have been had in great abundance and have been known not to be Counterfeits we hear not a word of them If a fondness for Relicks had been in the Church upon Christ's Ascension what care would have been taken to have made great Collections of them Then we see no other care about the Body of St. Stephen but to Bury it and not long after that time upon St. Polycarp's Martyrdom when the Iews who had set on the Prosecution against him suggested that if the Christians could gain his Body they would perhaps forsake Christ and worship him they rejected the accusation with horror for in the Epistle which the Church of Smirna writ upon his Martyrdom after they mention this Insinuation they have those remarkable words which belong both to this head and to that which follows it of the Invocation and Worship of Saints Ep. Euseb. l. 4. c. 15. These Men know not that we can neither forsake Christ who suffered for the salvation of all that are saved the Innocent for the Guilty nor worship any other Him truly being the Son of God we adore But the Martyrs and Disciples and Followers of the Lord we justly love for that extraordinary good mind which they have expressed toward their King and Master of whose happiness God grant that we may partake and that we may learn by their Examples The Iews had so
Testament answered 84 Concerning the various Readings 85 The nature and degrees of Inspiration 86 Concerning the Historical parts of Scripture 87 Concerning the Reasonings in Scripture 88 Of the Apocryphal Books 89 ARTICLE VII 91 NO difference between the Old and New Testament Ibid. Proofs in the Old Testament of the Messias 92 In the Prophets chiefly in Daniel 94 The Proofs all summed up 95 Objections of the Jews answered 96 The hopes of anotheâ— Life in the Old Testament 97 Our Saviour proved the Resurrection from the words to Moses 98 Expiation of Sin in the Old Dispensation 99 Sins then expiated by the Blood of Christ Ibid. Of the Rites and Ceremonies among the Jews 100 Of their Iudiciary Laws 101 Of the Moral Law Ibid. The Principles of Morality 102 Of Idolatry 103 Concerning the Sabbath Ibid. Of the Second Table 104 Of not coveting what is our Neighbours 105 ARTICLE VIII 106 COncerning the Creed of Athanasius Ibid. And the condemning Clauses in it Ibid. Of the Apostles Creed 107 ARTICLE IX 108 DIfferent Opinions concerning Original Sin Ibid. All men liable to Death by it 109 A Corruption spread through the whole Race of Adam Ibid. Of the state of Innocence 110 Of the effects of Adam's Fall 111 God's Iustice vindicated 112 Of the Imputation of Adam's Sin 113 St. Austin's Doctrine in this Point 114 This is opposed by many others Ibid. Both sides pretend their Doctrines agree with the Article 116 ARTICLE X. 117 THE true Notion of Liberty Ibid. The Feebleness of our present state 118 Inward Assistances promised in the New Covenant 119 The effect that these have on men 120 Concerning Preventing-Grace Ibid. Of its being efficacious or universal 121 ARTICLE XI 122 COncerning Iustification Ibid. Concerning Faith 123 The differences between the Church of England and the Church of Rome in this Point 124 The conditions upon which men are justified 126 The use to be made of this Doctrine 127 ARTICLE XII 128 THE necessity of Holiness Ibid. Concerning Merit 129 Of the defects of Good Works Ibid. ARTICLE XIII 131 ACTIONS in themselves good yet may be sins in him who does them Ibid. Of the Seventh Chapter to the Romans 132 This is not a total Incapacity Ibid. ARTICLE XIV 133 Oâ— the great extent of our Duty Ibid. No Counsels of Perfection 134 Many Duties which do not bind at all times Ibid. It is not possible for man to supererogate 135 Objections against this answered 136 The steps by which that Doctrine prevailed 137 ARTICLE XV. 138 CHrist's spotless Holiness Ibid. Of the Imperfections of the best men 139 ARTICLE XVI 140 COncerning Mortal and Venial Sin Ibid. Of the Sin against the Holy Ghost Ibid. Of the Pardon of Sin after Baptism 141 That as God forgives the Church ought also to forgive 142 Concerning Apostacy and sin unto Death 143 ARTICLE XVII 145 THE state of the Question 146 The Doctrine of the Supralapsarians and Sublapsarians Ibid. The Doctrine of the Remonstrants and the Socinians 147 This is a Controversy that arises out of Natural Religion Ibid. The History of this Controversy both in ancient and modern times 148 The Arguments of the Supralapsarians 152 The Arguments of the Sublapsarians 158 The Arguments of the Remonstrants 159 They affirm a certain Prescience 161 The Socinians Plea 164 General Reflections on the whole matter 165 The advantages and disadvantages of both sides and the faults of both 166 In what both do agree 167 The sense of the Article 168 The Cautions added to it Ibid. Passages in the Liturgy explained 169 ARTICLE XVIII 171 PHilosophers thought men might be saved in all Religions Ibid. So do the Mahometans Ibid. None are saved but by Christ 172 Whether some may not be saved by him who never heard of him Ibid. None are in Covenant with God but through the knowledge of Christ 173 But for others we cannot judge of the extent of the Mercies of God Ibid. Curiosity is to be restrained 174 ARTICLE XIX 175 WE ought not to believe that any are Infallible without good Authority Ibid. Iust prejudices against some who pretend to it 176 No Miracles brought to prove this Ibid. Proofs brought from Scripture 177 Things to be supposed previous to these Ibid. A Circle is not to be admitted Ibid. The Notes given of the true Church 178 These are examined Ibid. And whether they do agree to the Church of Rome 179 The Truth of Doctrine must be first settled Ibid. A Society that has a true Baptism is a true Church 180 Sacraments are not annulled by every Corruption Ibid. We own the Baptism and Orders given in the Church of Rome 181 And yet justify our separating from them Ibid. Objections against private judging 182 Our Reasons are given us for that end Ibid. Our Minds are free as our Wills are 183 The Church is still Visible but not Infallible Ibid. Of the Popes Infallibility 184 That was not pretended to in the first Ages Ibid. The Dignity of Sees rose from the Cities 185 Popes have fallen into Heresy Ibid. Their Ambition and Forgeries Ibid. Their Cruelty 186 The Power of deposing Princes claimed by them as given them by God Ibid. This was not a Corruption only of Discipline but of Doctrine 187 Arguments for the Popes Infallibility 188 No Foundation for it in the New Testament Ibid. St. Peter never clâ—imed it 189 Christ's words to him explained Ibid. Of the Kâ—ys of the Kingdâ—m of Hâ—â—vâ—n 190 Of binding and loosing Ibid. ARTICLE XX. 192 OF Church Power in Rituals Ibid. The Practice of the Jewish Church 193 Changes in these sometimes necâ—ssary Ibid. The Practice of the Ap stles 194 Sâ—bjâ—cts must obey in lawful things Ibid. But Superiâ—rs must not impose too much 195 The Church has Authority though not Infallible Ibid. Great Respâ—ct due to her Decisions 196 But no absâ—lute Submâ—ssion Ibid. The Church is the Depâ—sitary of the Scriptures 197 The Church of Rome run in a Circle Ibid. ARTICLE XXI 199 COuncils cannot be called but by the Consent of Princes Ibid. Tâ—e first were called by the Roman Emperors Ibid. Afterwards the Popes called them 200 Then some Councils thought on methods to fix their meeting Ibid. What makâ—s a Council to be General Ibid. What numbers are necessary 201 Hâ—w thâ—y must he cited Ibid. Nâ— Rules given in Scripture concerning their Constitution Ibid. Nazianzen's Complaints of Councils 202 Councils have been câ—ntrary to one another Ibid. Disâ—rders and Intriguâ—s in Councils Ibid. They judgâ— not by Inspiration Ibid. The Churches may examine their proceedings and judge of them 203 Concerning the Popes Bull confirming them Ibid. Thâ—y have an Authority but not absolute Ibid. Nâ—r do they need the Popes Bulls 204 The several Churches know their Traditions best Ibid. The Fathers do argue for the truth of the decisions but not from their authority Ibid. No prospect of another General Council 205 Popes are jealous of them Ibid. And the World expects little from them Ibid. Concerning the words
have put our Minds likewise under such a Subordination to some material Motions that out of them peculiar Thoughts should arise in us And though this Union is that which we cannot distinctly conceive yet there is no difficulty in it equal to that of our imagining that Matter can think or move it self We perceive that we our selves and the rest of Mankind have thinking Principles within us so from thence it is easy enough to us to apprehend That there may be other thinking Beings which either have no Bodies at all but act purely as Intellectual Substances or if they have Bodies that they are so subtilised as to be capable of a vast quickness of Motion such in proportion as we perceive to be in our Animal Spirits which in the Minute that our minds command them are raising Motions in the remotest parts of our Bodies Such Bodies may also be so thin as to be invisible to us and as among Men some are Good and some Bad and of the Bad some seem to be determinedly and as to all appearance incurably Bad so there may have been a Time and State of Liberty in which those Spirits were left to their choice whether they would continue in their Innocency or fall from it and such as continued might be for ever fixed in that State or Exalted to higher Degrees in it And such as fell from it might fall irrecoverably into a state of utter Apostacy from God and of Rebellion against him There is nothing in this Theory that is incredible Therefore if the Scriptures have told us any thing concerning it we have no reason to be prejudiced against them upon that account Besides that there are innumerable Histories in many several Countries and Ages of the World of extraordinary Apparitions and other unaccountable Performances that could only have been done by Invisible Powers Many of those are so well attested that it argues a strange pitch of Obstinacy to refuse to believe a Matter of Fact when it is well vouched and when there is nothing in reason to oppose it but an unwillingness to believe Invisible Beings It is true this is an Argument in which a fabulous Humour will go far and in which some are so credulous as to swallow down every thing Therefore all wise men ought to suspend their belief and not to go too fast but when things are so undeniably attested that there is no reason to question the exactness or the credit of the Witnesses it argues a Mind unreasonably prepossessed to reject all such Evidence All those Invisible Beings were created by God and are not to be considered as Emanations or Rays of his Essence which was a gross Conceit of such Philosophers as fancied that the Deity had Parts They are Beings Created by him and are capable of passing through various Scenes in Bodies more or less refined In this Life the State of our Minds receives vast Alterations from the State of our Bodies which ripen gradually And after they are come to their full growth they cannot hold in that condition long but sink down much faster than they grew up some Humours or Diseases discomposing the Brain which is the Seat of the Mind so entirely that it cannot serve it at least so far as to Reflex Acts. So in the next State it is possible that we may at first be in a less perfect condition by reason of this that we may have a less perfect Body to which we may be united between our Death and the General Resurrection and there may be a time in which we may receive a vast Addition and Exaltation in that State by the raising up of our former Bodies and the reuniting us to them which may give us a greater compass and a higher Elevation These things are only proposed as Suppositions that have no Absurdity in them So that if they should happen to be the Parts of a Revealed Religion there is no reason to doubt of it or to reject it on such an Account The Last Branch of this Article is The Assertion of that great Doctrine of the Christian Religion concerning the Trinity or Three Persons in one Divine Essence It is a vain attempt to go about to prove this by Reason For it must be confessed That we should have had no cause to have thought of any such thing if the Scriptures had not Revealed it to us There are indeed Prints of a very Ancient Tradition in the World of Three in the Deity called the Word or the Wisdom and the Spirit or the Love besides the Fountain of both these God This was believed by those from whom the most Ancient Philosophers had their Doctrines The Author of the Book of Wisdom Philo and the Chaldee Paraphrasts have many things that shew that they had received those Traditions from the former Ages but it is not so easy to determine what gave the first rise of them It has been much argued whether this was Revealed in the Old Testament or not some from the Plural Termination of Elohim which is joined to Singular Verbs and from that of the Lord Raining Fire from the Lord upon Sodom Iehovah from Iehovah from the Description of the Wisdom of God in the 8 th of the Proverbs as a person with God from all Eternity and from the mention that is often made of the Spirit as well as the Word of God that came to the Prophets they have I say from all these places and some others concluded that this is contained in the Old Testament Others have doubted of this and have said that the Name Elohim though of a Plural Termination being often joined to a Singular Verb makes it reasonable to think it was a Singular which by somewhat peculiar to that Language might be of a Plural Termination Nor have they thought That since Angels carry the Name of God when they went on special Deputations from him the Angels being called Iehovah could be very confidently urged That Sublime Description of the Wisdom of God in the Proverbs seems not to them to be a full proof in this Matter For the Wisdom there mentioned seems to be the Wisdom of Creation and Providence which is not personal but belongs to the Essence Nor do they think that those places in the Old Testament in which mention is made of the Word or of the Spirit ofGod can settle this Point for these may only signify God's Revealing himself to his Prophets Therefore whatever secret Tradition the Iews might have had among them concerning this from whom perhaps the Greeks might have also had it yet many do not pretend to prove this from passages in the Old Testament alone Though the Expositions given to some of them in the New Testament prove to us who acknowledge it what was the true meaning of those Passages yet take the Old Testament in it self without the New and it must be confessed That it will not be easy to prove this Article from it But there are very
the design and effect of the Sin and Trespass-Offerings among the Iews and more particularly of the Goat that was offered up for the Sins of the whole People on the day of Atonement This was a piece of Religion well known both to Iew and Gentile that had a great many Phrases belonging to it such as the Sacrifices being offered for or instead of Sin and in the name or on the account of the Sinner it s bearing of Sin and becoming Sin or the Sin-offering it s being the Reconciliation the Atonement and the Redemption of the Sinner by which the Sin was no more imputed but forgiven and for which the Sinner was accepted When therefore this whole set of Phrases in its utmost extent is very often and in a great variety applied to the Death of Christ it is not possible for us to preserve any Reverence for the New Testament or the Writers of it so far as to think them even honest men not to say Inspired men if we can imagine That in so Sacred and Important a Matter they could exceed so much as to represent that to be our Sacrifice which is not truly so This is a Point that will not bear Figures and Amplifications it must be treated of strictly and with a just exactness of Expression Christ is called the lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world he is said to have born our sins on his own body to have been made sin for us John 1.29 1 Pet. 2.24 2 Cor. 5.21 Matth. 20.28 Rom. 3.25 1 Joh 2.1 Eph 1.7 Col. 1.14 20 21. Heb. 9.11 12 13 14 26 28. it is said That he gave his life a ransom for many That he was the propitiation for the sins of the whole world and that we have redemption through his blood even the remission of our sins It is said That he hath reconciled us to his Father in his cross and in the body of his flesh through death That he by his own blood entred in once into the Holy place having obtained Eternal Redemption for us That once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself That he was once offered to bear the sins of many That we are sanctified by the offering of the body of Christ once for all And That after he had offered one sacrifice for sin he sate down for ever at the right hand of God It is said That we enter into the holiest by the blood of Christ That is the blood of the New Covenant Heb. 10.10 12 14 19 29. Heb. 13.12.20 1 Pet. 1.19 1 Pet. 2.24 1 Pet. 3.18 by which we are sanctified That he hath sanctified the people with his own blood and was the great shepherd of his people through the blood of the everlasting Covenant That we are redeemed with the precious blood of Christ as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot And That Christ suffered once for sins the just for the unjust that he might bring us to God In these and a great many more passages that he spread in all the parts of the New Testament it is as plain as words can make any thing That the Death of Christ is proposed to us as our Sacrifice and Reconciliation our Atonement and Redemption So it is not possible for any man that considers all this to imagine That Christ's Death was only a Confirmation of his Gospel a Pattern of a holy and patient suffering of Death and a necessary preparation to his Resurrection by which he gave us a clear proof of a Resurrection and by consequence of Eternal Life as by his Doctrine he had shewed us the way to it By this all the high commendations of his Death amount only to this That he by dying has given a vast Credit and Authority to his Gospel which was the powerfullest mean possible to redeem us from Sin and to reconcile us to God But this is so contrary to the whole design of the New Testament and to the true Importance of that great variety of Phrases in which this Matter is set out that at this rate of Expounding Scripture we can never know what we may build upon especially when the great Importance of this thing and of our having right Notions concerning it is well considered St. Paul does in his Epistle to the Romans state an opposition between the Death of Christ Rom 5.12 to the end and the Sin of Adam the ill effects of the one being removed by the other but he plainly carries the Death of Christ much further than that it had only healed the Wound that was given by Adam's Sin for as the judgment was of one sin to Condemnation the free gift is of many offences to justification but in the other places of the New Testament Christ's Death is set forth so fully as a Propitiation for the Sins of the whole World that it is a very false way of arguing to inferr That because in one place That is set in opposition to Adam's Sin that therefore the virtue of it was to go no further than to take away that Sin It has indeed removed that but it has done a great deal more besides Thus it is plain That Christ's Death was our Sacrifice The meaning of which is this That God intending to reconcile the World to himself and to encourage Sinners to repent and turn to him thought fit to offer the pardon of Sin together with the other Blessings of his Gospel in such a way as should demonstrate both the Guilt of Sin and his Hatred of it and yet with that his love of Sinners and his compassions towards them A free Pardon without a Sacrifice had not been so agreeable neither to the Majesty of the Great Governor of the World nor the Authority of his Laws nor so proper a method to oblige men to that strictness and holiness of Life that he designed to bring them to And therefore he thought fit to offer his Pardon and those other Blessings through a Mediator who was to deliver to the World this new and holy Rule of Life and to confirm it by his own unblemisht Life And in conclusion when the Rage of Wicked men who hated him for the Holiness both of his Life and of his Doctrine did work them up into such a fury as to pursue him to a most Violent and Ignominious Death he in compliance with the secret design of his Father did not only go through that dismal series of Sufferings with the most intire Resignation to his Father's Will and with the highest Charity possible towards those who were his most Unjust and Malicious Murderers but he at the same time underwent great Agonies in his Mind which struck him with such an Amazement and Sorrow even to the Death that upon it he did sweat great drops of Blood and on the Cross he felt a withdrawing of those comforts that till then had ever supported him when he cried out
Figuratively of the Wrath of God due for Sin which Christ bore in his Soul besides the Torments that he suffered in his Body And they think that these are here mentioned by themselves after the Enumeration of the several steps of his bodily Sufferings And this being equal to the Torments of Hell as it is that which delivers us from them might in a large way of Expression be called a descending into Hell But as neither the word descend nor Hell are to be found in any other place of Scripture in this sense nor in any of the Ancients among whom the Signification of this Phrase is more likely to be found than among Moderns So this being put after Buried it plainly shews that it belongs to a period subsequent to his Burial There is therefore no regard to be had to this Notion Othets have thought That by Christ's descent into Hell is to be understood his continuing in the State of the Dead for some time But there is no Ground for this conceit neither these words being to be found in no Author in that Signification Many of the Fathers thought That Christ's Soul went locally into Hell and preached to some of the Spirits there in Prison 1 Pet. 3.19 that there he triumphed over Satan and spoiled him and carried some Souls with him into Glory But the account that the Scriptures give us of the Exaltation of Christ begins it always at his Resurrection Nor can it be imagined That so memorable a Transaction as this would have been passed over by the Three first Evangelists and least of all by St. Iohn who coming after the rest and designing to supply what was wanting in them and intending particularly to magnify the Glory of Christ could not have passed over so wonderâ—ul an Instance of it We have no reason to think that such a matter would have been only insinuated in general words and not have been plainly related The Triumph of Christ over Principalities and Powers is ascribed by St. Paul to his Cross and was the Effect and Result of his Death The place of St. Peter seems to relate to the Preaching to the Gentile World by virtue of that Inspiration that was derived from Christ which was therefore called his Spirit and the Spirits in Prison were the Gentiles who were shut up in Idolatry as in Prison Eph. 2.2 2 Cor. 4.4 Isa. 61.2 and so were under the Power of the Prince of the Power of the Air who is called the God of this World that is of the Gentile World It being one of the ends for which Christ was Anointed of his Father to open the prisons to them that were bound So then though there is no harm in this Opinion yet it not being Founded on any part of the History of the Gospel and it being supported only by passages that may well bear another sense we may lay it aside notwithstanding the Reverence we bear to those that asserted it and that the rather because the first Fathers that were next the Source say nothing of it Another Counceit has had a great course among some of the latest Fathers and the Schoolmen They have fancied that there was a place to which they have given a peculiar name Limbus Patrum a sort of a Partition in Hell where all the Good Men of the Old Dispensation that had died before Christ were detained and they hold that our Saviour went thither and emptied that Place carrying all the Souls that were in it with him to Heaven Of this the Scriptures say nothing not a word either of the Patriarchs going thither or of Christ's delivering them out of it And though there are not in the Old Testament express Declarations and Promises made concerning a Future State Christ having brought life and immortality to light through his Gospel yet all the Hints given of it shew that they looked for an Immediate Admission to Blessedness after death So David Thou wilt shew me the path of life Psal. 16.11 Acts 2.31 Psal. 73.27 Isa. 37.2 in thy presence is fulness of joy and at thy right hand are pleasures for evermore Thou shalt guide me here by thy counsel and afterwards receive me to glory Isaiah says That the righteous when they dye enter into peace In the New Testament there is not a Hint given of this for though some Passages may seem to favour Christ's delivering some Souls out of Hell yet there is nothing that by any management can be brought to look this way There is another Sense of which these words descended into Hell are capable See Bishop Person on the Creed by Hell may be meant the Invisible Place to which departed Souls are carried after their death For though the Greek word so rendred does now commonly stand for the Place of the Damned and for many Ages has been so understood yet at the time of writing the New Testament it was among Greek Authors used indifferently for the place of all departed Souls whether good or bad and by it were meant the Invisible Regions where those Spirits were lodged So if these words are taken in this large sense we have in them a clear and literal account of our Saviour's Soul descending into Hell it imports that he was not only dead in a more common acceptation as it is usual to say a man is dead when there appear no signs of life in him and that he was not as in a deep Extasy or Fit that seemed Death but that he was truly dead that his Soul was neither in his Body noâ— hovering about it ascending and descending upon it as some of the Iews fancied Souls did for some time after death but that his Soul was really removed out of his Body and carried to those unseen Regions of departed Spirits among whom it continued till his Resurrection That the Regions of the Blessed were known then to the Iews by the name of Paradise as Hell was known by the name of Gehenna is very clear from Christ's last Words To day thou shalt be with me in Paradise â—uke 23 4â— â—6 and into thy hands do I commend my spirit This is a plain and full account of a good Sense that may be well put on the Words though after all it is still to be remembred That in the first Creeds that have this Article that of Christ's Burial not being mentioned in them it follows from thence as well as from Ruffin's own Sense of it that they understood this only of Christ's Burial ARTICLE IV. Of the Resurrection of Christ. Christ did truly rise again from Death and took again his Body with Flesh Bones and all things appertaining to the Perfection of Man's Nature wherewith he ascended into Heaven and there sitteth until he return to judge all Men at the Last Day THere are Four Branches of this Article The First is concerning the Truth of Christ's Resurrection The Second concerning the Compleatness of it That he took to him again his whole
Remission of Sins is acknowledged to be given freely to us through Jesus Christ this is that which we affirm to be Iustification though under another name We do also acknowledge that our Natures must be sanctified and renewed that so God may take pleasure in us when his Image is again visible upon us and this we call Sanctification which we acknowledge to be the constant and inseparable effect of Iustification So that as to this we agree in the same Doctrine only we differ in the use of the Terms in which we have the Phrase of the New Testament clearly with us But there are two more material differences between us It is a Tenet in the Church of Rome That the Use of the Sacraments if Men do not put a bar to them and if they have only imperfect Acts of Sorrow accompanying them does so far compleat those weak Acts as to justify us This we do utterly deny as a Doctrine that tends to enervate all Religion and to make the Sacraments that were appointed to be the solemn â—â—ts of Religion for quickning and exciting our Piety and for conveying Grace to us upon our coming devoutly to them becomes means to flatten and deaden us As if they were of the nature of Charms which if they could be come at tho' with ever so slight a preparation would make up all defects The Doctrine of Sacramental Justification is justly to be reckoned among the most mischievous of all those Practical Errors that are in the Church of Rome Since therefore this is no where mentionâ—d in all these large Discourses that are in the New Testament concerning Justification we have just reason to reject it Since also the natural consequence of this Doctrine is to make Men rest contented in low imperfect Acts when they can be so easily made up by a Sacrament we have just reason to detest it as one of the depths of Satan The Tendency of it being to make those Ordinances of the Gospel which were given us as means to raise and heighten our Faith and Repentance become Engines to encourage Sloth and Impenitence There is another Doctrine that is Held by many and is still Taught in the Church of Rome not only with Approbation but Favour That the inherent Holiness of good Men is a thing of its own nature so perfect that upon the account of it God is so bound to esteem them just and to justify them that he were unjust if he did not They think there is such a real condignity in it that it makes Men God's adopted Children Whereas we on the other hand Teach That God is indeed pleased with the inward Reformaâ—â—on that he sees in good Men in whom his Grace dwells that he approves and accepts of their Sincerity but that with this there is still such a mixture and in this there is still so much Imperfection that even upon this account if God did straitly mark Iniquity none could stand before him So that even his acceptance of this is an Act of Mercy and Grace This Doctrine was commonly Taught in the Church of Rome at the time of the Reformation and together with it they reckoned that the chief of those Works that did Justify were either great or rich Endowments or excessive Devotions towards Images Saints and Relicks by all which Christ was either forgot quite or remembred only for form-sake esteemed perhaps as the chief of Saints not to mention the impious Comparisons that were made between him and some Saints and the Preferences that were given to them beyond him In opposition to all this the Reformers began as they ought to have done at the laying down this as the Foundation of all Christianity and of all our hopes That we were reconciled to God meerly through his Mercy by the Redemption purchased by Jesus Christ And that a firm believing the Gospel and a claiming to the Death of Christ as the great Propitiation for our Sins according to the Terms on which it is offered us in the Gospel was that which united us to Christ that gave us an Interest in his Death and thereby justified us If in the management of this Controversy there was not so critical a Judgment made of the Scope and several Passages of St. Paul's Epistles and if the Dispute became afterwards too abstracted and metaphysical that was the effect of the Infelicity of that Time and was the natural consequence of much disputing Therefore tho' we do not now stand to all the Arguments and to all the Citations and Illustrations used by them and tho' we do not deny but that many of the Writers of the Church of Rome came insensibly off from the most practical Errors that had been formerly much taught and more practised among them and that this matter was so stated by many of them that as to the main of it we have no just Exceptions to it Yet after all this beginning of the Reformation was a great Blessing to the World and has proved so even to the Church of Rome by bringing her to a juster sâ—nse of the Atonement made for Sins by the Blood of Christ and by taking Men off from external Actions and turning them to consider the inward Acts of the Mind Faith and Repentance as the Conditions of our Justification And therefore the Approbation given here to the Homily is only an Approbation of the Doctrine asserted and proved in it Which ought not to be carried to every particular of the Proofs or Explanations that are in it To be Iustified and to be accounted Righteous stand for one and the same thing in the Article And both import our being delivered from the Guilt of Sin and entitled to the Favour of God These differ from God's intending from all Eternity to save us as much as a Decree differs from the Execution of it A Man is then only Iustified when he is freed from Wrath and is at peace with God And tho' this is freely offered to us in the Gospel through Jesus Christ yet it is applied to none but to such as come within those Qualifications and Conditions set before us in the Gospel That God pardons Sin and receives us into favour only through the Death of Christ is so fully expressed in the Gospel as was already made out upon the second Article that it is not possible to doubt of it if one does firmly believe and attentively read the New Testament Nor is it less evident that it is not offered to us absolutely and without Conditions and Limitations These Conditions are Repentance with which remission of sins is often joined and Faith Gal. 5.6 Luke 24.47 Acts. 2.38 but a faith that worketh by love that purifies the heart and that keeps the â—ommandments of God Such a Faith as shews it self to be alive by Good Works by Acts of Charity and every Act of Obedience by which we demonstrate that we truly and firmly believe the Divine Authority of our Saviour and his Doctrine
Conceit brought in a Superstitious Error in Practice among the Ancient Christians of delaying Baptism till Death as hoping that all Sins were then certainly pardoned A much more dangerous Error than even the Fatal One of trusting to a Death-bed Repentance For Baptism might have been more easily compassed and there was more offered in the way of Argument for building upon it than has been offered at for a Death-bed Repentance St. Peter's Denial his Repentance and his being restored to his Apostolical Dignity seem to be Recorded partly on this account to encourage us even after the most heinous Offences to return to God and never to reckon our Condition desperate were our Sins ever so many but as we find our Hearts hardened in them into an obstinate Impenitency Our Saviour has made our pardoning the offences that others commit against us the measure upon which we may expect pardon from God and he being asked What limits he set to the number of the faults that we were bound to pardon by the Day if Seven was not enough he carried it up to seventy times seven a vast number far beyond the number of offences that any Man will in all probability commit against another in a Day But if they should grow up to all that vast number of 490 yet if our Brother still turns again and repents Luk. 17.4 we are still bound to forgive Now since this is joined with what he declared that if we pardoned our Brother his offences our heavenly Father would also forgive us Matt. 18.35 then we may depend upon this That according to the sincerity of our Repentance our sins are always forgiven us And if this is the Nature of the New Covenant then the Church which is a Society formed upon it must proportion the Rules both of her Communion and Censure to those set in the Gospel A heinous Sin must give us a deeper sorrow and higer degrees of Repentance Scandals must also be taken off and forgiven when the offending Persons have repaired the offence that was given by them with suitable degrees of sorrow St. Paul in the beginnings of Christianity in which it being yet tender and not well known to the World was more apt to be both blemished and corrupted did yet order the Corinthians to receive back into their Communion the Incestuous Person 1 Cor. 5.5 whom by his own Directions they had delivered to Satan they had excommunicated him 2 Cor. 2.7 and by way of reverse to the Gifts of the Holy Ghost poured out upon all Christians he was possessed or haunted with an evil Spirit And yet as St. Paul declares that he forgave him so he orders them to forgive him likewise and he gives a reason for this Conduct from the common principles of pity and humanity lest he should be swallowed up by overmuch sorrow What is in that place mentioned only in a particular instance is extended to a general rule in the Epistle to the Galatians If any one is overtaken in a fault Gal. 6.1 ye which are spiritual restore such a one in the Spirit of meekness considering thy self lest thou also be tempted Where both the supposition that is made and the reason that is given do plainly insinuate that all Men are subject to their several infirmities So that every Man may be overtaken in faults 2 Tim 4.2 Tit. 1.13 1 Joh. 5.16 The charge given to Timothy and Titus to rebuke and exhort does suppose that Christians and even Bishops and Deacons were subject to faults that might deserve correction In that passage cited out of S. Iohn's Epistle as mention is made of a sin unto death for which they were not to pray so mention is made both there and in S. Iames's Epistle of sins for which they were to pray Jam. 5.15 16. and which upon their Prayers were to be forgiven All which places do not only express this to be the tenor of the New Covenant That the sins of Regenerated Persons were to be pardoned in it but they are also clear precedents and rules for the Churches to follow them in their Discipline And therefore those words in S. Iohn that a man born of God doth not and cannot sin must be understood in a larger sense of their not living in the practice of known sins of their not allowing themselves in that course of Life nor going on deliberately with it By the sin unto death is meat the same thing with that Apostacy mentioned in the 6th of the Hebrews Among the Iews some sins were punished by a total excision or cutting off Heb. 6.6 and this probably gave the rise to that designation of a sin unto death The words in the Epistle to the Hebrews do plainly import those who being not only Baptized but having also received a share of the Extraordinary Effusion of the Holy Ghost had totally renounced the Christian Religion and apostatized from the Faith which was a Crucifying of Christ anew Such Apostates to Judaism were thereby involved in the crime and guilt of the crucifying of Christ and the putting him to open shame Now Persons so Apostatizing could not be renewed again by Repentance it not being possible to do any thing toward their conviction that had not been already done and they hardning themselves against all that was offer'd for their conviction were arrived at such a degree of wickedness that it was impossible to work upon them there was nothing left to be tried that had not been already tried and proved to be ineffectual Yet it is to be observed that it was an unjustifiable piece of rigor to apply these words to all such as had fallen in a time of trial and persecution for as they had not those miraculous means of conviction which must be acknowledged to be the strongest the sensiblest and the most easily apprehended of all Arguments so that they could not sin so heinously as those had done who after what they had seen and felt revolted from the Faith Great difference is also to be made between a deliberate sin that a Man goes into upon choice and in which he continues and a Sin that the fears of death and the infirmities of Human Nature betray him into and out of which he quickly recovers himself and for which he mourns bitterly There was no reason to apply what is said in the New Testament against the wicked Apostates of that time to those who were overcome in the Persecution The latter sinned grievously yet it was not in the same kind nor are they in any sort to be compar'd to the former All affectations of excessive severity look like Pharisaical Hypocrisy whereas the Spirit of Christ which is made up of Humility and Charity will make us look so severely to our selves that on that very account we will be gentle even to the failings of others Yet on the other hand the Church ought to endeavour to conform her self so far to her Head and to his
Mercy And since the Scripture proposes God to us most frequently under those Ideas they think that we ought to fix on these as the primary Ideas of God and then reduce all other things to them Thus both Sides seem zealous for God and his Glory Both lay down General Maxims that can hardly be Disputed and both argue justly from their First Principles These are great Grounds for mutual Charity and Forbearance in these Matters It is certain That one who has long interwoven his Thoughts of Infinite Perfection with the Notions of Absolute and Unchangeable Decrees of carrying on every thing by a positive Will of doing every thing for his own Glory cannot apprehend Decrees depending on a foreseen Free-will a Grace Subject to it a Merit of Christ's Death that 's lost and a Man's being at one time loved and yet finally hated of God without horror These things seem to carry in them an appearance of feebleness of dependence and of changeableness On the other hand a Man that has accustomed himself to think often on the Infinite Goodness and Mercy the Long-suffering Patience and Slowness to Anger that appears in God he cannot let the Thought of Absolute Reprobation or of determining Men to Sin or of not giving them the Grace necessary to keep them from Sin and Damnation enter into his Mind without the same horror that another feels in the Reverse of all this So that the Source of both Opinions being the different Ideas that they have of God and both these Ideas being true Men only mistaking in the Extent of them and in the Consequences drawn from them here are the clearest Grounds imaginable for a mutual Forbearance for not judging Men imperiously nor censuring them severely upon either Side And those who have at different Times of their Lives been of both Opinions and who upon the Evidence of Reason as it has appeared to them have changed their Persuasions can speak more affirmatively here For they know that in great sincerity of Heart they have thought both ways Each Opinion has some Practical Advantages of its side A Calvinist is â—aught by his Opinions To think meanly of himself and to ascribâ— the honour of all to God Which lays in him a deep foundation for Humility he is also much inclined to secret Prayer and to a fixed dependence on God which naturally both brings his Mind to a good state and fixes it in it And so though perhaps he cannot give a coherent account of the Grounds of his Watchfulness and Care of himself yet that Temper arises out of his Humility and his Earnestness in Prayer A Remonstrant on the other hand is ingaged to awaken and improve his Faculties to fill his Mind with good Notions to raise them in himself by frequent Reflection and by a constant Attention to his own Actions He sees causâ— to reproach himself for his Sins and to set about his Duty to purpose Being assured that it is through his own fault if he miscarries He has no dreadful Terrors upon his Mind nor is he tempted to an undue Security or to swell up in perhaps an imaginary Conceit of his being unalterably in the Favour of God Both Sides have their peculiar Temptatiâ—ns as well as their Advantages The Calvinist is tempted to a false Security and Sloth And the Arminian may be tempted to trust too much to himself and too little to God So equally may a Man of a calm Temper and of moderate Thoughts balance this Matter between both the Sides And so unreasonable it is to give way to a positive and dictating Temper in this Point If the Arminian is zealous to assert Liberty it is because he cannot see how there can be Good or Evil in the World without it He thinks it is the Work of God that he has made for great Ends and therefore he can allow of nothing that he thinks destroys it If on the othâ—r hand a Calvinist seems to break in upon Liberty it is because he cannot reconcile it with the Sovereignty of God and the Freedom of his Grace And he grows to think that it is an Act of Devotion to offer up the one to save the other The common Fault of both Sides is To charge one another with the Consequences of their Opinions as if they were truly their Tenets Whereas they are apprehensive enough of these Consequences they have no mind to them and they fancy that by a few distinctions they can avoid them But each Side thinks the Consequences of the other are both worse and more certainly fastned to that Doctrine than the Consequences that are urged against himself are And so they think they must chuse that Opinion that is the least perplexed and difficult Not but that Ingenuous and Learned Men of all Sides confess that they feel themselves very often pinched in these Matters Another very indecent way of managing these Points is That both Sides do too often speak very boldly of God Some petulent Wits in order to the representing the contrary Opinion as Absurd and Ridiculous have brought in God representing him with indecent Expressions as Acting or Decreeing according to their Hypothesis in a manner that is not only Unbecoming but that borders upon Blasphemy From which though they think to escape by saying That they are only shewing what must follow if the other Opinion were believed yet there is a Solemnity and Gravity of Stile that ought to be most religiously observed when we poor Mortals take upon us to speak of the Glory or Attributes the Decrees or Operations of the Great God of Heaven and Earth And every thing relating to this that is put in a burlesque Air is intolerable It is a sign of a very daring Presumption to pretend to assign the Order of all the Acts of God the Ends proposed in them and the Methods by which they are Executed We who do not know how our Thoughts carry our Bodies to obey and second our Minds should not imagine that we can conceive how God may move or bend our Wills The hard thing to digest in this whole Matter is Reprobation They who think it necessary to assert the freedom of Election would fain avoid it They seek soft words for it such as the passing by or leaving Men to perish They study to put that on Adam's Sin and they take all the methods they can to soften an Opinion that seems harsh and that sounds ill But howsoever they will bear all the Consequences of it rather than let the Point of Absolute Election go On the other side Those who do once persuade themselves that the Doctrine of Reprobation is false do not see how they can deny it and yet ascribe a free Election to God They are once persuaded that there can be no Reprobation but what is conditionate and founded on what is foreseen concerning Mens Sins And from this they are forced to say the same thing of Election And both sides study to begin the
the First Innocent Ep. 1. ad Decent how much soever it is insisted on is really an Argument that proves against it and not for it For not to enlarge on the many idle things that are in that Epistle which have made some think that it could not be genuine and that do very much sink the credit both of the Testimony and of the Man for it seems to be well proved to be his The passage relating to this matter is in answer to a demand that was made to him by the Bishop of Eugubium Whether the Sick might be Anointed with the Oil of the Chrism And whether the Bishop might Anoint with it To these he answers That no doubt is to be made but that St. Iames's words are to be understood of the Faithful that were sick who may be Anointed by the Chrism which may be used not only by the Priests but by all Christians not only in their own necessities but in the necessities of any of their Friends and he adds that it was a needless doubt that was made whether a Bishop might do it For Presbyters are only mentioned because the Bishop could not go to all the Sick but certainly he who made the Chrism it self might Anoint with it A Bishop asking these Questions of another and the answers which the other gives him do plainly shew that this was no Sacrament practised from the beginnings of Christianity for no Bishop could be ignorant of those It was therefore some newly begun Custom in which the World was not yet sufficiently instructed And so it was indeed for the subject of these questions was not pure Oil such as now they make to be the matter of Extreme Unction But the Oil of Chrism which was made and kept for other occasions and it seems very clear that the miraculous power of Healing having ceased and none being any more Anointed in order to that some begun to get a Portion of the Oil of Chrism which the Laity as well as the Priests applied both to themselves and to their Friends hoping that they might be Cured by it Nothing else can be meant by all this but a superstitious using the Chrism which might have arisen out of the memory that remained of those who had been cured by Oil as the use of Bread in the Eucharist brought in the Holy Bread that was sent from one Church to another and as from the use of Water in Baptism sprung the use of Holy Water This then being the clear meaning of those words it is plain that they prove quite the contrary of that for which they are brought and though in that Epistle the Pope calls Chrism a kind of a Sacrament that turns likewise against them to shew that he did not think it was a Sacrament strictly speaking Besides that the Ancients used that word very largely both for every mysterious Doctrine and for every holy Rite that they used In this very Epistle when he gives directions for the carrying about that Bread which they Blessed and sent about as an Emblem of their Communion with other Churches he orders them to be sent about only to the Churches within the City because he conceived the Sacraments were not to be carried a great way off so these Loaves are called by him not only a kind of Sacrament but are simply reckoned to be Sacraments We hear no more of Anointing the Sick with the Chrism among all the Ancients which shews that as that practice was newly begun so it did not spread far nor continue long No mention is made of this neither in the first Three Ages nor in the Fourth Age though the Writers and particularly the Councils of the Fourth Age are very copious in Rules concerning the Sacraments Nor in all their penitentiary Canons when they define what Sins are to be forgiven and what not when Men were in their last Extremities is there so much as a hint given concerning the last Unction The Constitutions and the pretended Dionisius say not a word of it though they are very full upon all the Rituals of that time in which those Works were Forged in the Fourth or Fifth Century In none of the Lives of the Saints before the Ninth Century is there any mention made of their having Extreme Unction tho' their deaths are sometimes very particularly related and their receiving the Eucharist is oft mentioned Nor was there any question made in all that time concerning the Persons the Time and the other Circumstances relating to this Unction which could not have been omitted especially when almost all that was thought on or writ of in the Eighth and Ninth Century relates to the Sacraments and the other Rituals of the Church It is true from the Seventh Century on to the Twelfth they began to use an Anointing of the Sick Lib. Sacram Gregor Menardi Nota. according to that mentioned by Pope Innocent and a peculiar Office was made for it but the Prayers that were used in it shew plainly that it was all intended only in order to their recovery Of this anointing many Passages are found in Bede and in the other Writers and Councils of the Eighth and Ninth Century But all these do clearly express the Use of it not as a Sacrament for the Good of the Soul Bede Hist. Ang. l. 3. c. 15. Euchol Gra. p. 408 but as a Rite that carried with it Health to the Body and so it is still used in the Greek Church No doubt they supported the Credit of this with many reports of which some might be true of Persons that had been recovered upon using it But because that failed so often that the Credit of this Rite might suffer much in the Esteem of the World they began in the Tenth Century to say That it did Good to the Soul even when the Body was not healed by it and they applied it to the several Parts of the Body This begun from the Custom of applying it at first to the diseased Parts This was carried on in the Eleventh Century And then in the Twelfth those Prayees that had been formerly made for the Souls of the Sick though only as a Part of the Office Decr. Eug. in Con. Flor. Con. Trid. Sess 14. the Pardon of Sin being considered as Preparatory to their Recovery came to be considered as the main and most essential Part of it Then the Schoolmen brought it into shape and so it was decreed to be a Sacrament by Pope Eugenius and finally established at Trent The Argument that they draw from a parity in reason that because there is a Sacrament for such as come into the World there should be also One for those that go out of it is very trifling for Christ has either Instituted this to be a Sacrament or it is not One If he has not Instituted it this pretended fitness is only an Argument that he ought to have done somewhat that he has not done The Eucharist was considered by
our Saviour's speaking of giving his Flesh to them to eat it he adds They foolishly and carnally thought Lib. 20. con Faust. c. 21. in Psal. 98. v. 5. that he was to cut off some parcels of his Body to be given to them but he shews that there was a Sacrament hid there and he thus Paraphrases that Passage The words that I have spoken to you they are spirit and life Vnderstand spiritually that which I have said for it is not this Body which you see that you are to eat or to drink this Blood which they shall shed who crucifie me But I have recommended a Sacrament to you which being spiritually understood shall quicken you And tho' it be necessary that it be celebrated visibly yet it must be understood invisibly Primasius compares the Sacrament to a Pledge Comm. in 1 Ep. ad Cor. which a dying Man leaves to any one whom he loved But that which is more Important than the Quotation of any of the words of the Fathers is that the Author of the Books of the Sacraments which pass under the Name of St. Ambrose Lib. 4. dâ— Sacram. c. 5. tho' it is generally agreed that those Books were writ some Ages after his Death gives us the Prayer of Consecration as it was used in his time He calls it the Heavenly Words and sets it down The Offices of the Church are a clearer Evidence of the Doctrine of that Church than all the Discourses that can be made by any Doctor in it the one is the Language of the whole Body whereas the other are only the private reasonings of particular Men And of all the Parts of the Office the Prayer of Consecration is that which does most certainly set out to us the sense of that Church that used it But that which makes this Remark the more Important is that the Prayer as set down by this pretended St. Ambrose is very near the same with that which is now in the Canon of the Mass only there is one very Important variation which will best appear by setting both down That of St. Ambrose's is Fac nobis hanc oblationem ascriptam rationabilem acceptabilem quod est figura Corporis Sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi qui pridie quam pateretur c. That in the Canon of the Mass is Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quae sumus benedictam ascriptam ratam rationabilem acceptabilemque facere digneris ut nobis Corpus Sanguis fiat dilectissimi filii tui Domini nostri Iesu Christi We do plainly see so great a resemblance of the later to the former of these two Prayers that we may well conclude that the one was begun in the other but at the same time we observe an Essential difference In the former this Sacrifice is called the Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ. Whereas in the later it is Prayed that it may become to us the Body and Blood of Christ. As long as the former was the Prayer of Consecration it is not pofsible for us to imagine that the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence could be received for that which was believed to be the true Body and Blood of Christ could not be called especially in such a part of the Office the Figure of his Body and Blood and therefore the change that was made in this Prayer was an evident proof of a change in the Doctrine and if we could tell in what Age that was done we might then upon greater certainty fix the time in which this change was made or at least in which the inconsistency of that Prayer with this Doctrine was observed I have now set down a great variety of Proofs reduced under different Heads from which it appears evidently that the Fathers did not believe this Doctrine but that they did affirm the contrary very expresly This Sacrament continued to be so long considered as the Figure or Image of Christ's Body that the Seventh General Council which met at Constantinople in the Year 754 and consisted of above Three hundred and thirty Bishops when it condemned the Worship of Images affirmed that this was the only Image that we might lawfully have of Christ and that he had appointed us to offer this Image of his Body to wit the Substance of the Bread That was indeed contradicted with much confidence by the Second Council of Nice in which in opposition to what appears to this day in all the Greek Liturgies and the Greek Fathers they do positively deny that the Sacrament was ever called the Image of Christ and they affirm it to be the true Body of Christ. In conclusion I shall next shew how this Doctrine crept into the Church for this seems plausible that a Doctrine of this nature could never have got into the Church in any Age if those of the Age that admitted it had not known that it had been the Doctrine of the former Age and so upwards to the Age of the Apostles It is not to be denied but that very early both Iustin Martyr and Irenaeus thought that there was such a Sanctification of the Elements that there was a Divine Vertue in them And in those very Passages which we have urg'd from the Arguings of the Fathers against the Eutychians tho' they do plainly prove that they believed that the Substance of Bread and Wine did still remain yet they do suppose an Union of the Elements to the Body of Christ like that of the Human Nature's being united to the Divine here a Foundation was laid for all the Superstructure that was afterwards raised upon it For tho' the Liturgies and Publick Offices continued long in the first simplicity yet the Fathers who did very much study Eloquence chiefly the Greek Fathers carried this matter very far in their Sermons and Homilies They did only apprehend the Profanation of the Sacrament from the unworthiness of those who came to it and being much set on the begetting a due reverence for so holy an action and a seriousness in the performance of it they urg'd all the Topicks that sublime Figures or warm Expressions could help them with and with this exalted Eloquence of theirs we must likewise observe the state that the World fell in in the Fifth Century Vast Swarms out of the North over-run the Roman Empire and by a long continued Succession of new Invaders all was sackt and ruined In the West the Goths were followed by the Vandals the Alans the Gepides the Franks the Sweves the Huns and the Lombards some of these Nations but in conclusion the Saracens and Turks in the East made Havock of all that was polite or learned by which we lost the chief Writings of the first and best Times but instead of these many spurious ones were afterwards produced and they passed easily in dark and ignorant Ages All fell under much oppression and misery and Europe was so over-run with Barbarity and Ignorance that it cannot be easily
given either to Superstition or Irreverence And for the Sick or the Prisoners we think it is a greater Mean to quicken their Devotion as well as it is a closer adhering to the Words of the Institution to Consecrate in their Presence for tho' we can bear with the practice of the Greek Church of reserving and sending about the Eucharist when there is no Idolatry joyned with it yet we cannot but think that this is the continuance of a practice which the state of the first Ages introduced and that was afterwards kept up out of a too scrupulous imitation of that time without considering that the difference of the state of the Christians in the former and in the succeeding Ages made that what was at first innocently practised since a real necessity may well excuse a want of exactness in some matters that are only positive became afterwards an occasion of much Superstition and in conclusion ended in Idolatry Those ill effects that it had are more than is necessary to justifie our practice in reducing this strictly to the first Institution As for the lifting up of the Eucharist there is not a word of it in the Gospel nor is it mentioned by St. Paul Neither Iustin Martyr nor Cyril of Ierusalem speak of it there is nothing concerning it neither in the Constitutions nor in the Areopagite In those first Ages all the Elevation that is spoken of is the lifting up their Hearts to God The Elevation of the Sacrament began to be practised in the Sixth Century for it is mentioned in the Liturgy called St. Chrysostome's but believed to be much latter than his time â—erm Const. in Theor. Tit. 12. Bibl. patr Ivo Carn Ep. de Sacr Missae T. 2. Bibl. pat German a Writer of the Greek Church of the Thirteenth Century is the first that descants upon it he speaks not of it as done in order to the Adoration of it but makes it to represent both Christ's being lifted up on the Cross and also his Resurrection Ivo of Chartres who lived in the end of the 11 th Century is the first of all the Latins that speaks of it but then it was not commonly practised for the Author of the Micrologus tho' he writ at the same time yet does not mention it who yet is very minute upon all particulars relating to this Sacrament Nor does Ivo speak of it as done in order to Adoration but only as a form of shewing it to the People Dur. Rat. div offic lib. 4. de Sexta parte Can. Durand a Writer of the 13 th Century is the first that speaks of the Elevation as done in order to the Adoration So it appears that our Church by cutting off these Abuses has restored this Sacrament to its Primitive Simplicity according to the Institution and the practice of the first Ages ARTICLE XXIX Of the Wicked which eat not the Body of Christ in the Use of the Lord's-Supper The wicked and such as be void of a lively Faith altho they do carnally and visibly press with their Teeth as St. Austin saith the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ yet in no wise are they partakers of Christ but rather to their condemnation do eat and drink the Sign or Sacrament of so great a thing THIS Article arises naturally out of the Former and depends upon it For if Christ's Body is corporally present in the Sacrament then all Persons good or bad who receive the Sacrament do also receive Christ On the other hand if Christ is Present only in a Spiritual Manner and if the Mean that receives Christ is Faith then such as believe not do not receive him So that to prove that the Wicked do not receive Christ's Body and Blood is upon the Matter the same thing with the proving that he is not corporally Present And it is a very considerable Branch of our Argument by which we prove that the Fathers did not believe the corporal Presence because they do very often say That the Wicked do not receive Christ in the Sacrament Here the same distinction is to be made that was mentioned upon the Article of Baptism The Sacraments are to be considered either as they are Acts of Church-Communion or as they are federal Acts by which we enter into Covenant with God With respect to the Former the visible Profession that is made and the Action that is done are all that can fall under human cognisance So a Sacrament must be held to be good and valid when as to outward appearance all things are done according to the Institution But as to the internal Effect and Benefit of it that turns upon the Truth of the Profession that is made and the sincerity of those Acts which do accompany it For if these are not seriously and sincerely performed God is dishonoured and his Institution is prophaned Our Saviour has expresly said that whosoever eats his Flesh and drinks his Blood has eternal Life From thence we conclude that no Man does truly receive Christ who does not at the same time receive with him both a Right to eternal Life and likewise the beginnings and earnests of it The Sacrament being a federal Act he who dishonours God and prophanes this Institution by receiving it unworthily becomes highly guilty before God and draws down Judgments upon himself And as it is confessed on all hands that the inward and spiritual Effects of the Sacrament depend upon the State and Disposition of him that Communicates so we who own no other Presence but an inward and spiritual one cannot conceive that the Wicked who believe not in Christ do receive him In this Point several of the Fathers have delivered themselves very plainly Origen says Christ is the true Food whosoever eats him shall live for ever of whom no wicked Person can eat Comment in Matth. c. 15. for if it were possible that any who continues Wicked should eat the Word that was made Flesh it had never been written Whoso eats this Bread shall live for ever This comes after a Discourse of the Sacrament which he calls the typical and symbolical Body and so it can only belong to it In another place he says The Good eat the living Bread which came down from Heaven but the Wicked eat dead Bread which is Death Tom. â— Spiâ—il Sacr. d' Achâ—ry Zeno Bishop of Verona who is believed to have lived near Origen's time has these words There is cause to fear that he in whom the Devil dwells does not eat the Flesh of our Lord nor drink his Blood though he seems to communicate with the Faithful since our Lord has said He that eats my Flesh and drinks my Blood dwells in me and I in him St. Ierom says They that are not Holy in Body and Spirit do neither eat the Flesh of Iesus nor drink his Blood In cap. 66. Isaiae of which he said He that eats my Flesh and drinks my Blood hath eternal Life Tract
the concurrence of other Churches In the way of managing this every Body of Men has somewhat peculiar to it self and the Pastors of that Body are the properest Judges in that matter We know that the several Churches even while under one Empire had great varieties in their Forms as appears in the different Practices of the Eastern and Western Churches And as soon as the Roman Empire was broken we see this Variety did increase The Gallican Churches had their Missals different from the Roman And some Churches of Italy followed the Ambrosian But Charles the Great in compliance with the desires of the Pope got the Gallican Churches to depart from their own Missals and to receive the Roman which he might the rather do intending to have raised a New Empire to which a Conformity of Rights might have been a great Step. Even in this Church there was a great Variety of Usages which perhaps were begun under the Heptarchy when the Nation was subdivided into several Kingdoms It is therefore suitable to the Nature of Things to the Authority of the Magistrate and to the Obligations of the Pastoral Care That every Church should act within her self as an entire and independent Body The Churches owe only a Friendly and Brotherly Correspondence to one another but they owe to their own Body Government and Direction and such Provisions and Methods as are most likely to promote the great Ends of Religion and to preserve the Peace of the Society both in Church and State Therefore we are no other way bound by Antient Canons but as the same reason still subsisting we may see the same cause to continue them that there was at first to make them Of all the Bodies of the World the Church of Rome has the worst Grace to reproach us for departing in some Particulars from the Antient Canons since it was her ill Conduct that had brought them all into desuetude And it is not easy to revive again Antiquated Rules even though there may be good reason for it when they fall under that tacit Abrogation which arises out of a long and general disuse of them ARTICLE XXXV Of Homilies The Second Book of Homilies the several Titles whereof we have joined under this Article doth contain a godly and wholesome Doctrine and necessary for these Times as doth the Former Book of Homilies which were set forth in the Time of Edward the Sixth and therefore we judg them to be read in Churches by the Ministers diligently and distinctly that they may be understanded of the People The Names of the Homilies 1. Of the right use of the Church 2. Against Peril of Idolatry 3. Of repairing and keeping clean of Churches 4. Of Good Works First Of Fasting 5. Against Gluttony and Drunkenness 6. Against Excess of Apparel 7. Of Prayer 8. Of the Place and time of Prayer 9. That common Prayers and Sacraments ought to be ministred in a known tongue 10. Of the reverent estimation of God's Word 11. Of Alms-doing 12. Of the Nativity of Christ. 13. Of the Passion of Christ. 14. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 15. Of the worthy receiving of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ. 16. Of the Gifts of the Holy Ghost 17. For the Rogation-days 18. Of the state of Matrimony 19. Of Repentance 20. Against Idleness 21. Against Rebellion AT the time of the Reformation as there could not be found at first a sufficient Number of Preachers to instruct the whole Nation so those that did comply with the changes which were then made were not all well-affected to them so that it was not safe to trust this matter to the Capacity of the one side and to the Integrity of others Therefore to supply the Defects of some and to oblige the rest to teach according to the Form of sound Doctrine there were two Books of Homilies prepared the first was published in King Edward's time the second was not finished till about the time of his Death so it was not published before Queen Elizabeth's time The Design of them was to mix Speculative Points with Practical matters Some explain the Doctrine and others enforce the Rules of Life and Manners These are plain and short Discourses chiefly calculated to possess the Nation with a Sense of the Purity of the Gospel in opposition to the Corruptions of Popery and to reform it from those crying Sins that had been so much connived at under Popery while men knew the Price of them how to compensate for them and to redeem themselves from the Guilt of them by Masses and Sacraments by Indulgences and Absolutions In these Homilies the Scriptures are often applied as they were then understood not so critically as they have been explained since that time But by this Approbation of the two Books of Homilies it is not meant that every Passage of Scripture or Argument that is made use of in them is always convincing or that every Expression is so severely worded that it may not need a little Correction or Explanation All that we profess about them is only that they contain a godly and wholesom Doctrine This ratheâ— relates to the main Importance and Design of them than to every Passagâ— in them Though this may be said concerning them That considering thâ— Age they were written in the Imperfection of our Language and some lesser Defects they are Two very extraordinary Books Some of them arâ— better writ than others and are equal to any thing that has been writ upon those Subjects since that time Upon the whole matter every one whâ— subscribes the Articles ought to read them otherwise he subscribes a Blank he approves a Book implicitely and binds himself to read it as he may be required without knowing any thing concerning it This Approbation is not to be stretched so far as to carry in it a special Assent to every Particular in that whole Volume but a man must be persuaded of the main of the Doctrine that is taught in them To instance this in one particular since there are so many of the Homilies that charge the Church of Rome with Idolatry and that from so many different Topicks no man who thinks that Church is not guilty of Idolatry can with a good Conscience subscribe this Article That the Homilies contain a good and wholesom Doctrine and necessary for these times for according to his sense they contain a false and an uncharitable Charge of Idolatry against a Church that they think is not guilty of it and he will be apt to thâ—nk that this was done to heighten the Aversion of the Nation to it Therefore any who have such favourable thoughts of the Church of Rome are bound by the force of that Persuasion of theirs not to sign this Article but to declare against it as the authorizing of an Accusation against a Church which they think is ill grounded and is by consequence both unjust and uncharitable By necessary for these times is not to be meant
says Receive the Holy Ghost And in this sense and with this respect the use of these Words may be well justified ARTICLE XXXVII Of Civil Magistrates The Queen's Majesty hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and other her Dominions unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes doth appertain and is not nor ought to be subject to any Foreign Iurisdiction Where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the chief Government by which Titles we understand the minds of some slanderous Folks to be offended we give not to our Princes the ministring either of God's Word or of the Sacraments the which thing the Injunctions also lately set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testify but that only Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in Holy Scriptures by God himself that is That they should rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubborn and evil-doers The Bishop of Rome hath no Iurisdiction in this Realm of England The Laws of the Realm may punish Christian Men with Death for heinous and grievous Offences It is lawful for Christian Men at the Commandment of the Magistrate to wear Weapons and serve in the Wars THIS Article was much shorter as it was published in King Edward's time and did run thus The King of England is Supreme Head in Earth next under Christ of the Church of England and Ireland Then followed the Paragraph against the Pope's Jurisdiction worded as it is now To which these Words were subjoined The Civil Magistrate is ordained and allowed of God wherefore we must obey him not only for fear of Punishment but also for Conscience sake In Queen Elizabeth's time it was thought fitting to take away those Prejudices that the Papists were generally infusing into the minds of the People against the term Head which seemed to be the more incongruous because a Woman did then reign therefore that was left out and instead of it the words chief Power and chief Government were made use of which do signify the same thing The Queen did also by her Injunctions offer an Explanation of this matter for whereas it was given out by those who had complied with every thing that had been done both in her Father and in her Brother's time but that resolved now to set themselves in opposition to her That she was assuming a much greater Authority than they had pretended to She upon that ordered that Explanation which is referred to in the Article and is in these words For certainly Her Majesty neither doth nor ever will challenge any Authority other than that was challenged and lately used by the said Noble Kings of famous Memory King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth which is and was of antient time due to the Imperial Crown of this Realm that is under God to have the Sovereignty and Rule over ail manner of Persons born within these her Realms Dominions and Countries of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal soever they be so as no other Foreign Power shall or ought to have any Superiority over them And if any Person that hath conceived any other sense of the said Oath shall accept the same Oath with this Interpretation Sense or Meaning Her Majesty is well pleased to accept every such in that behalf as her good and obedient Subjâ—cts and shall acquit them of all manner of Penalties contained in the said Act against such as shall peremptorily and obstinately refuse to take the same Oath Thus this matter is opened as it is both in the Article and in the Injunctions In order to the treating regularly of this Article it is First To be proved That the Pope hath no Jurisdiction in these Kingdoms 2 dly That our Kings or Queens have it And 3 dly The Nature and Measures of this Power and Government are to be stated As for the Pope's Authority though it is now connected with the Infallibility yet it was pretended to and was advanced for many Ages before Infallibility was so much as thought on Nor was the Doctrine of their Infallibility ever so universally received and submitted to in these Western Parts as was that of their Universal Jurisdiction They were in possession of it Appeals were made to them They sent Legates and Bulls every where They granted Exemptions from the ordinary Jurisdiction and took Bishops bound to them by Oaths that were penned in the Form of Oaths of Fealty or Homage This was the first Point that our Reformers did begin with both here and every where else that so they might remove that which was an insuperable Obstruction till it was first taken out of the way to every step that could be made toward a Reformation They laid down therefore this for their Foundation That all Bishops were by their Office and Character equal and that every one of them had the same Authority that any other had over that Flock which was committed to his Care And therefore they said that the Bishops of Rome had no Authority according to the Constitution in which the Churches were settled by the Apostles but over the City of Rome And that any further Jurisdiction that any Antient Popes might have had did arise from the Dignity of the City and the Customs and Laws of the Empire As for their deriving that Authority from St. Peter it is very plain that the Apostles were all made equal to him and that they never understood our Saviour's Words to him as importing any Authority that was given to him over the rest since they continued to the last while our Saviour was among them disputing which of them should be the greatest The Proposition that the Mother of Iames and Iohn made Mat. 20.21 ver 24. ver 26. in which it was evident that they likewise concurred with her shews that they did not apprehend that Christ had made any Declaration in favour of St. Peter as by our Saviour's Answer it appears that he had not done otherwise he would have referred them to what he had already said upon that occasion By the whole History of the Acts of the Apostles it appears that the Apostles acted and consulted in common without considering St. Peter as having any Superiority over them He was called to give an account of his Baptizing Cornelius and he delivered his Opinion in the Council of Ierusalem without any strain of Authority over the rest Acts 11.2 3. Acts 15.7 ver 14 19. Gal. 2 7 8. ver 11. St. Paul does expresly deny that the other Apostles had any Superiority or Jurisdiction over him and he says in plain words that he was the Apostle of the Vncircumcision as St. Peter was the Apostle of the Circumcision and in that does rather claim an advantage over him since his was certainly the much wider Province He