Christ how farre it is declared to us by the Scriptures and original Tradition of the Church Knowing neverthelesse that this being resolved the rest of the controversie concerning the holy Trinity necessarily falls to the ground of it self as having nothing whereupon to subsist when the everlasting Godhead of Christ is once maintained afore Now the ready way that I can think of to go through so great a dispute as briefly as is possible is to take in hand first the point of originall sinne in which the dispute between Pelagius and Socinus on the one side and the Church on the other side is grounded For therefore I hope it will appear the shortest way to dispatch the whole dispute because that being decided together with that which dependeth upon it as incident to it concerning the state of our Lord Christ before his coming in the flesh the rest will appear to consist either in controversies of Divines or in mistakes and disputes about words I begin with S. Paul because he it is who having laid forth the necessity of Christianity to the salvation as well of Jewes as of Gentiles in the beginning of his Epistle to the Romanes and in the fourth chapter by the Example of Abraham confirmed the same Or if you please answered the objection concerning the salvation of the Fathers before and under the Law proceeds in the fifth Chapter to lay forth both the ground upon which it is effectuall which is the death of Christ and the ground upon which it was necessary which is the sinne of Adam Thus then saith S. Paul Rom. V. 12 13 14. Therefore as by one man sinne entered into the world and death by sinne and so death passed upon all in whome all sinned For untill the Law sinne was in the world Now sinne is not imputed where there is no Law And yet death raigned from Adam until Moses even upon them that had not sinned after the likenesse of Adams transgression who is the figure of him that is to come It is said that the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are to be translated in asmuch as all had sinned To signifie that Spirituall death came after Adam upon all that had sinned as Adam did inasmuch as they had sinned For as for bodily death they believe not no more then Pelagius that it was the punishment of Adams sinne but the condition of mans birth Onely the troubles the cares the sorrowes by which men come to their graves these as they acknowledge to be consequences as of Adams sinne so of all those sinnes whereby men follow and imitate Adam so they think to be meant by the sentence In the day wherein thou eatest thereof shalt thou die the death But this is no lesse then to deny the literall sense of the Scripture which the Church hath received for one of Origens errors in the interpretation of the beginning of Genesis What is it else to say That Adam was liable to bodily death by nature but to spiritual death by sinne For it is manifest by the premises that through all the Old Testament the second death is no otherwise preached then under the figure of the first death and that by virtue of the ground laid from the beginning that the Covenant of Grace which tendreth life and death everlasting was onely intimated under the Covenant of nature which the Law only received and limited to the happiness of the land of promise as to the Israelits tendring expresly only blessings and mercies of this life to the civil and outward obedience of Gods commandments And can it be imagined that in the very first tender that God made to man of life in consideration of obedience and death of disobedience this life and this death must be understood to be the second when the obedience was onely in abstaining from the forbidden fruit What was then that fruit of the tree of Life by eating whereof they might have preserved themselves from death I aske not what it signified but what it was For all reason will require admitting the premises that it signified that whereby the soul escapes spirituall death But the same reason will inforce that it must be the fruit of a tree which so long as they eat not of the tree of knowledge they were licensed to eat to preserve them from bodily death Neither is there any difficulty in that they aske How all the posterity of Adam should have come by the fruit of that tree that grew no where but in the garden of Eden For I suppose it had been as easie to have planted all parts of the world with the same tree as with the posterity of Adam had he continued in obedience Who being not driven out of Eden as upon his disobedience but sending his posterity to do that in the rest of the world which he did there had made all the world Eden by placing the Paradise of God wheresoever innocence dwelt In this case I see not why any man should take care for the tree of Life that no posterity of Adam might die No more then what should become of that innocent posterity which when it had so planted the World the counsel of God concerning the propagation of man kind may well be thought to have been come to ripenesse The Socinians indeed do alledge Josephus who speaking of the tree of life doth not say that it should have made man immortall but onely that it should have made him live to very great yeares But that is of no consequence In regard that it is not expressed in the Scripture that God would have had man live everlastingly upon the earth had he lived in obedience For supposing that it was a question among the Pharisees to which sect it appeares Josephus inclined most whether so or whether God would translate them to a heavenly life after a time of obedience here which to the Pharisees that acknowledge the resurrection and the world to come must needs seem credible enough it is no marvaile that Josephus should say That by virtue of the tree of life they had lived to a very great age though in case not translated they might as well have lived alwayes by virtue of it But let us hear S. Paul 1 Cor. XV. 21 22. For since by man came death by man also came the resurrection of the dead For as by Adam all died so by Christ shall all be made alive Is there any rising from bodily death but by Christ I say not any rising in the quality of those in whom the Spirit of Christ dwelleth of whom S. Paul saith that He who raised Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortall bodies through his Spirit dwelling in you Rom. VIII 11. But setting aside this quality it is the coming of Christ and his trump that raiseth againe even those that shall rise to judgement And can it for all this be doubted whether that life was lost by Adams fall which the rising of Christ shall
restore And supposing that Christ raises onely those that are Christs as S. Paul speaks it is their bodies that he raises at last and that from that death which came by Adam Seeing then it cannot be doubted that S. Paul when he saies that by one man came death meanes the death of the body and seeing death passed upon all it is manifest that Adams sin passed upon all upon whom the death passed which it brought after it For otherwise how can it be said sinne came into the world by one man Is it possible to imagine that all men should propose to themselves to imitate the sinne of Adam Not possible Supposing all Adams posterity sinners to God they may be understood all to have imitated their first Father Adam two wayes For in as much as they sinne against God as he first did they may be said to imitate him in doing the like of that which he did though they had no knowledge of what he did much lesse propose to themselves his example to do that wherein they are said to imitate him in sinning against God This I confesse may truly be said but not to S. Pauls purpose Who intends not to say wherein sinne consists as to say in doing what Adam did But from whence it proceeds that from thence he may shew how it is taken away Now if it be said that all men in sinning do imitate Adam as proposing his example to themselves in the nature of a motive so that therefore it might be said that sinne came into the world by one man and death by sin which the Apostles discourse requires This would be evidently false In as much as the greatest part of the sinnes of mankinde are and have been committed by them that never knew what Adam did so farre from proposing to themselves to do the like So that it cannot be avoided that by the sinne of Adam all sinne came into the world as well as all death And therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seemeth to signifie in whom that is through whom all have sinned as Acts V. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the faith of his name 1 Cor. VIII 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall perish through thy knowledge For if it be said that it is not a handsome manner of speech that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom should relate to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one man which it stands in such a distance from Let him be sure that there is nothing more ordinary in S. Pauls language then such transpositions And seeing death which I have shewed the Apostle speakes of hath equally passed upon all mankind it would be very impertinent to say that it passed upon all men in as much as every man had sinned And truly though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signifie in Greek in as much as all had sinned or so farre as every man had sinned or because all had sinned to wit in Adam by the same reason as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the language of the Poets signifies the same as in the beginning of Homer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet it seems to me evident that the sinne which S. Paul speakes of when he saies that Through the disobedience of one man sin came into the world and death by sinne is the sinne that every man does in the world And therefore when it followeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meaning must be through whom all men have sinned those sins which themselvs do For seeing there was mention of one man afore by whom sinne came into the world it is more reasonable that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be personall relating to that one man through whom all have sinned then reall to signifie because all had sinned And so it is not said by these wordes that all Adams posterity did commit the sinne of Adam in his committing of it But it is said that all the sinne that Adams posterity commits comes by the meanes of Adams sinne that is originall sinne is not expresly but metonymically not formally but fundamentally signified in that all sinne is affirmed to come from that of Adam and evicence also in that death is said to come by it That which hath been said makes me stand astonished to see a Doctor of the Church of England acknowledge no further signification of the Apostles words As by one man sinne came into the world and death by sinne and so sinne passed upon all in whom all have sinned But this That Adam sinned first and so all his posterity after him So that by one man sinne came into the world because coming upon all it must needs come first upon the first Not because his sinne had any influence upon others to cause their sinnes For seeing Pelagius whom it concerned so much to maintaine that Adams sinne did no harme to his posterity having made it the ground of his Heresie could not neverthe lesse put off the force of these words without a shift of imitation though so pittifully â—ame that it could not reach the farre greater part of his posterity It may justly seem strange that he who pretends not to go any thing so farre as Pelagius should not allow that sense of them which Pelagius could not refuse But if he oversee that which obliged Pelagius to grant that they intend to set forth the meanes by which sinne came into the world the observing of it will be enough to exclude his devise For to let passe that which is peremptory in them the comparison between the first and second Adam by whom this Doctor will not deny the righteousnesse of Christians to come otherwise then as the first righteous whatsoever Pelagius or Socinus doe because I cannot void that issue in this place The very processe of S. Pauls dispute having first convicted both Jewes and Gentiles of sin then Chap. IV. shewed how that faith which he preached promiseth righteousnesse requireth us to understand that he comes now to set forth by what meanes this sinne on the one side and this righteousnesse on the other comes into the world Neither will the words of the text be so satisfied wherein we find the same sense repeated in divers expressions which are not all capeable of that equivocation whereof these words by one mans disobedience are For S. Paul saith not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one man but according to the reasons premised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through whom all have sinned and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by that is through the transgression of that one and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 judgement to condemnation out of one besides on the otherside 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift through Grace Rom. V. 12 15 16. And this shall serve for the present to shew how unable this conceit is to stand against the evidence of the words Reserving that which is most peremptory in the matter and the consequence of it till I come to shew that our Lord Christ
either from Hethen writers or from the Scriptures There being nothing under the earth but that which answereth this Hemispere above the earth Which clause is added to meete with one opinion of the Gentiles that the lower hemispere is the place of soules and the torments of Hell which they call Tartara as much beneath it as heaven is above this Onely here it must be provided that the gulfe be not forgotten which our Lord fixeth between Abrahams bosome and the place of torments Dionysius Eccles Hierarch Cap. II. seemeth to agree with Gregory Nyssenâ— and so doe others whom unlesse you distinguish thus you wil not find to speak things consequent to themselvs And I am much confirmed in it first by the difference of opinions among the fathers concerning Samuels soul Which we as there be enough of them that cannot indure to yeild it to have been in the devils power to raise so are they by that meanes obliged to maintaine the rest of the Fathers souls with Samuels to have gon into Abrahams bosom with Lazarus Secondly by their agreement in acknowledging that Paradise which was shut upon man for the sinne of Adam is opened by the death of Christ to receive the righteous For to conceive that they understood this of that Paradise which Adam was expulsed would be to make them too childish But understanding it of that estate which that Paradise signified you have Saint Basil assigning Paradise to Lazarus de Jejunio Hom. I. Besides another Homily intitled to Zeno Bishop of Verona Nay you have expresly in Philo Carpathius upon Cant. VI. 2. My love is gone into his garden Or his Paradise Tunc enim Paradisum triumphator ingressus est cum ad inferos penetravit Then did he enter Paradise in triumph when he pierced into hell Making the beds of spices there to be the souls of the Fathers to whom our Lord conducted the good thiefe And Olympiodorus upon Cant. III. saith that some make Paradise under the earth and that there Dives saw Lazarus Others in heaven Whereas the letter of the Scripture placeth it upon the earth But howsoever that the righteous are both in joy and peace and also in Paradise Thinges not to be reconciled not distinguishing as I do Lastly the reason of Faith setleth me upon this ground The reason of Faith I say not the rule of Faith For I do not say that any part of the dispute belongs to that which the salvation of all Christians necessarily requireth them to believe He who understandeth that himself is saved by imbracing Christianity and living according to it I do not understand why he should be damned because he understood not by what meanes the Fathers afore Christ were saved provided he deny not their salvation to the disparagement of Christianity whereof they were the forerunners And this is the case of Hermes and Justine and Clemens and if there were any others who thought that the Fathers or the Philosophers were saved by believing in Christ at his descent into hell meerly because they understood not the ground of that difference between the litterall and mysticall sense of the Old Testament which I have said Indeed in regard it is by consequence destructive to Christianity that the Fathers should have attained salvation any wayes but as Christians in that regard I answer the position is by consequence prejudiciall to Christianity But because by that consequence which the most censorious of the error do not owne and not owning necessarily incurre some other inconvenience to Christianity I say not that they destroy the common faith who hold it but that they destroy the true reason of it which subsisteth not unlesse we grant that the Fathers obtained salvation by Christ Nor that unlesse we grant that they came not under the Devils Power by death who died qualified for salvation as that time required There remaines no question what company the soul of Christ was with for the time that it remained parted from the body nor how the descent thereof to Hell is to be understood supposing the premises The Tradition of the descent of Christs soul into hell can by no meanes be parted from the Tradition of an intent to visite the soules of the Fathers That supposes that the soules of the Fathers were disposed of under the earth whether in the intrails of the earth or in the hemisphere below us as the Heathen did imagine And infers that the intent of it was to redeem them out of the devils hands to go with our Lord Christ into his kingdome Could this be maintained to be the Tradition of the Church I might be straitned by the Tradition of the Church But as I have showed it to be by consequence prejudiciall to the Faith So I have showed that there is no Tradition of the Church for the disposing of all soules before Christ under the earth whether in the devils hands or otherwise Nor for the translating of any soule from under the earth to heaven with Christ and by Christ But for the continuance of all in those unknown lodgings where they are disposed at their death till the day of judgement whether before or after Christ Though the Latine hath no name to signify them but inferi or infernum necessarily signifying as to the originall of the word the parts beneath the earth There is therefore no question to be made as to the Tradition of the Church that the soule of Christ parting with the body went to the soules of the Fathers which the Gospell represents us in Abrahams bosom whether the death of Christ removing the debt of sin which shut Paradise upon Adam make that place known to us by the name of Paradise to which our Lord inducted the good thiefe Or whether the Jewes had used that name for the place to which they believed the soules of the righteous do go But there is therefore no Tradition remaining of the descent of Christs soul into hell to rescue the soules of the Fathers out of the Verge of Hell commonly called Limbus Patrum to go with him into his kingdome True it is which Irenaeus saith and the Tradition of the Church will justify it that our Lord Christ was to undergo the condition of the dead for the redemption of mankind And therefore the separation of his humane soul from the body was really the condition in consideration whereof we are freed from the dominion of death True it is that this dominion of death is signified in the Old Test by the returning of Adam to the earth of which he was made And that the grave is an earnest of the second death in all those that belong not to the N. Test while the Old was in force Therefore that our L. Christ was to undergo the condition common to mankinde to which the first Adam was accursed is a part of our common faith Because the curse was to be voided by his undergoing of it Accordingly therefore you shall find by the
from the beginning and therefore lay aside this principle not as false but as uselesse and not to be put in practice Wherein that men mistake not themselves they must take notice That it will not concerne my position That all original Catholick Tradition is to be supposed for unquestionable truth in deciding what is questionable concerning the truth of the Scripture that concerning most maters there is no Catholick Tradition or consent of the Church For I do professe that were not the Church or had it not been one Society one visible Body Communion or Corporation of men from the beginning the communion whereof alwaies confined the profession and conversation of Christians to some certain visible Rule I should think it impossible to make evidence of any common truth received of all Christians But if it can be made to appear that the Church was from the beginning such a Society then may such Rules as reasonably appear to be original and Catholick as it can appear reasonable to any man that hee ought to be a Christian Here I must note that concerning the State of the Church whether it be such a Society as I have said distinct from all Civil Societies of Christian Kingdomes and Common-wealths there may be two questions made The one of Fact whether indeed the Church hath been such a Society since the first being of it and the conversion of believers to Christianity The other of Right whether by the appointment of God or by humane consent of such who being converted to Christianity agreed to live in communion by whatsoever Rule it may appear they have admitted But these two are so near one another that if the question of Fact can be voided and it appear that such was the Church from the beginning it will be a presumption in a maner peremtory of the Churches Title by divine right Though there is difference made between them as appeâ—rs by the opinion related afore that the power of Excommunication was settled in the Church afore Constantine by humane consent not by Gods appointment Which by consequence of like reason extends to all other points wherein the power of the Church consists For my present purpose it were enough to make it appear that the Church was de Facto such a Society from the beginning But the proving of the point of Right will be only making the same inference which hath been alwaies concluded out of that evidence which resolveth the point of Fact And the conclusion thus inferred will be both necessary and effectual to clâ—are the positive right of the Church in deciding Controversies of Faith which will be the best satisfaction why negatively it cannot extend to create the ground upon which wee are to believe I will therefore wrap them up both together in the processe of my discourse In which I finde that difficulty which S. Augustine observeth in proving any of those things which are most manifest to common reason and sense For it shall be hard to bring arguments that are much clearer than that which they intend to prove That the Church had been from the beginning one outwardly by visible Communion as well as one inwardly by invisible Faith and love could not be questioned so long as it prevailed Neither was it foreseen at dissolving the Unity of the Western Church for the Reformation that it would ever come to this dispute whether there had been alwaies and ought to be one Catholick and Apostolick Church For each party hoped well to be so themselves as being perswaded that their adversaries ought to unite themselves unto them upon acknowledgment that the truth was on their side And truly I acknowledge that there is no clear mention of a precrpt of God commanding all Christians to hold the unity of the Catholick Church by outward communion with it For the intent of God to call the Gentiles to Christianity seemeth to be the utmost of that which is clearly declared by the Scriptures That his intent was to unite all Christians in one visible communion of the Church there is evidence by consequence to be had from the Scriptures But what the form should be before the materials were prepared it were as strange to think that the stones and timber particular Christians ought to know as that the Surveyors the Apostles and their fellowes should not know That therefore the Church was from the beginning and ought to be one visible Communion must be showed by the ingredients and principles or elements of all visible Societies Which in the Society of the Church will appear proportionable to the nature and pretense of it Supposing from common sense and experience that all Civil Societies or Common-wealthes unto which the name of Societies or Communities principally because most visibly belongeth are constituted and founded upon certain Rights of Soveraigne Power which some call in Latine Jura Majestatis being indeed the particulars wherein the Right and Power of Soveraignty consisteth For when it is once resolved in what hands that Power is to remaine then is the State and Form of Government constituted and thereby distinguished from other formes of Common-wealth according to the qualitie of those persons in whom this Power is established That being ruled by certain Lawes acknowledging certain Governors being subject to the Power of the Sword by which those Governors execute those Lawes are the effects of Soveraigne Power being the principal of the said ingredients or particulars the certain and necessary marks of a distinct Common-wealth is that which I suppose from common experience There are Societies which subsist by the Law of Nature and Nations As that which Aristotle observes among those that are imbarked in the same bottome for the same voyage That which the Jewes Law supposes among the Caravans of the East consisting of subjects and members of several Common-wealthes There are Communities and Corporations which subsist by the Act of Soveraigne Power in each Common-wealth allowing that Power over the Members to the whole ihat is such persons as are allowed to act for the whole as they think fit If the whole Church from the beginning have acknowledged certain Lawes by which they were governed in those things wherein the Communion of the Church consisteth certain Governors to whom they ought to give respect according to those Lawes a Power of putting out of the Church answerable to the Power of putting to death by the sword into which the coâ—ctive Power of Common-wealths is resolved then is the Church and alwaies was such a Society wherein the same Rule of Faith might be and was alwaies from the beginning preserved by Tradition and Custome which is my present businesse to show And if the Church alwaies was so de Facto then is it so alwaies de Jure If it did alwaies hold unity in the Faith and communion in the service of God by the meanes of certain Lawes certaine Rulers certaine Power of granting or refusing this Communion Then was there a precept of
be and was sufficient means under the Law to make them understand their obligation to that spiritual obedience which the Gospel covenanteth for though wee suppose as the truth is that the Law expresly covenanteth onely for the temporal happinesse of the Land of Promise Therefore there was also sufficient meanes to oblige them to expect the coming of the Christ as wee see by the Gospel that they did at the coming of our Lord and as all that will maintain Christianity against the Jewes are bound to maintain And therefore to the objection proposed I answer That though the words of the precept of loving God with all the heart and all the minde and all the soul and all the might may contain all that Christianity requireth to be done in consideration of duty to God and with an intent of his honor and service Yet neverthelesse that sense thereof that depends upon the Covenant of the Law is to be limited to the observation of those precepts which God should confine their civil life to in the service of him alone The intent of the Covenant being to contract with God for temporal happinesse in the Land of Promise they undertaking as a Common-wealth to live by such civil Lawes as hee should give as well as to worship him by such Ceremonies as hee should prescribe And therefore supposing they observed those precepts they were to expect the inheritance of the Land of Promise though wee suppose that they did it out of respect to that reward and not onely to God and to his honor and service Yea though wee grant that for the acknowledging of the true God alone they were bound to indure persecution and death rather than for fear of torment to deny God or sacrifice to Idols or renounce his Law as wee see Daniel and the three Children did under Nebuchadnesar and the zealous Jewes in the Maccabees time under Antiochus Epiphanes For if the Heathen had cause to believe that which is received of all as the ground of civil Society that particular persons are bound to expose their lives for the defense of their Countrey that is to no other end but that they may live and die in the Lawes under which they are bred though they had no promise of God that they should hold their inheritance of this world by maintaining them Cereainly the people that obtained their inheritance by taking upon them Moses Law shall stand bound not onely to maintain it by the sword under the conduct of their Soveraignes but also by suffering for it when they were not to maintain it by force A thing nothing strange to a man that shall consider how desâ—rable life is to him that is forced from the Lawes of his Countrey As for the other part of loving our Neighbor as our selves it is without doubt pregnant with an evident argument of this truth seeing in plain reason the extent of the precept might so argue the intent of it For it is evident by infinite Texts of the Law that a mans neighbor in this precept extends no further than to Israelites whether by birth or by religion that is to say those that are ingraffed into the Covenant by being circumcised For example Let mee ask how the Law could forbid the Israelites to seek the good of the Moabites and Ammonites if it be part of the same Law to love all men under the quality of neighbors as themselves Let mee demand of any man how Mordecai was tied not to do that honor to Haman that his Soveraigne commanded to be done How hee could in conscience disobey his Prince in a mater of indifferent nature of it self had it not been prohibited by the Law of God Whether a Jew that is commanded by the Law to professe hostility against all Amalekites could be dispensed with in this obligation by any act of his Soveraign Whether any just reason can be alleged for Mordecai but this Nay those who are called strangers in the Law That is to say those that had renounced all Idols and professed to worship the true God and thereupon were privileged to dwell in the Land of Promise out of which the Israelites were sufficiently commanded to root all Idolaters those strangers I say by the leter of Moses Law are not comprehended in the precept of loving our neighbor as our selves For hee that asked who is the neighbor that the Law speaks of Lut. X. 27-37 is not convicted by our Lord by any leter of the Law but by a Parable intimating the example of that which hee did for mankinde to be the reason of that which the Gospel requires Forsooth if the love of Christians extend to strangers and enemies because the good Samaritâ—ne which is our Lord Christ extended his so farr then not because Moses Law had convenanted for it Therefore besides this precept of loving our neighbors as our selves it was requisite that the Law should by a particular provision limit that respect and tenderness wherewith they were required to use those strangers as converts to the true God for so the Syriack translation of the Law calls them alwaies to wit in the rank of Widowes and Orphans If this be true the precept of not coveting by the immediate intent of Moses Law stands confined to that sense which the Jewes at this day give it according to the decisions of their Doctors that no man by contrived oppresion or vexation designe to force his neighbor that was by the Law inabled to make a divorce to part with his wife or any thing else that hee called his own Which sense our Lord also in the Gospel manifestly favors Mar. X. 19. where recounting the precepts that those must keep that will inherit life everlasting after thou shalt not bear false witnesse hee inserres thou shalt not take away by fraud or oppression that which is another mans for the sense of the tenth Commandement thou shalt not cover that which is thy neighbors All which extendeth no further than the over act of seeking what is not a mans own And though this be out Lords answer to him that asks what hee is to do to obtaine life everlasting yet it may well seem that our Lord intended first to propound unto him the civil Law of Moses as necessary to salvation and a step towards it because the Gospel saith that our Lord loved him that answered All these things have I kept from my youth up as acknowledging that hee said true For that hee had kept these precepts in that spiritual sense and to the intent and purpose which the Gospel requireth it was not true And by that which followes when hee askes what remained to be done namely that hee leave all to follow Christ hee inferrs in one precept the whole inward and spiritual obedience of God which under the Gospel is expresly required To wit that a man set all the world and himself behinde his back that hee may follow Christ Therefore though they be the obedience
of penance failing of that which they had undertaken by it What is reformation in the Church and what is not is the subject of this present dispute therefore I cannot here grant that which some of the reformation may have done to be well done Otherwise I am secure no man will choke me with naming a Church that had no discipline of penance But that so it was I refer my self to that which I have said in the first book I demand here what is the ground and reason that so it must be For supposing the Keys of Gods Kingdom exercised in the first place in limiting the terms upon which baptisme is granted not in ministring of it Of necessity it followeth that in the second place it be seen and exercised in limiting the terms upon which those that have failed of that which they undertook at their Baptism may be restored to the visible communion of the Church upon presumption that they are restored to the invisible communion of those promises which the Gospel tendreth Not supposing this there is no reason why it should signifie any more than a scene acted upon a stage as it is taken to signifie by those who understand not this Lastly I will mention here the expresse Doctrine of the Church of England in the beginning of the Catechism declaring three things to have been undertaken in behalfe of him that is baptized That he shall forsake the Devil and all his works the pomp and vanities of this world and the evil desires of the flesh and not to be seduced by him either from believing the faith of Christ or from keeping Gods Commandements And again in the admonition to the Sureties after Baptism you must remember that it is your parts and duties to see that these Infants be taught so soon as they shall be able to learn what a solemn vow promise and profession they have made by you For all that come to Christianity believing what promises they get right to by it and being admitted to it uppon those terms there can remain no question upon what terms they attain the said promises Nor can or ought any Doctrine of that Church to what purpose soever cautioned be interpreted to the prejudice of that wherein the salvation of all consisteth But further in the Introduction to the Office of Baptism For asmuch as all men are conceived and born in sin and that our Saviour Christ saith None can enter into the Kingdome of God except he be regenerate and born anew of water and of the Holy Ghost I beseech you to call upon God that these children may be baptized with water and the Holy Ghost and received into Christs holy Church and be made lively members of the same Proceeding to pray That they comming to thy holy baptisme may receive remission of their sins by their spirituall regeneration In the exhortation after the Gospel Doubt ye not therefore but earnestly believe that he will likewise favourably receive these present Infants that he will imbrace them with the arms of his mercie that he will give unto them the blessing of eternall life and make them partakers of his everlasting Kingdome Again Ye have heard also that our L. Jesus Christ hath promised in his Gospel to grant all these things that ye have praied for And after the Sacrament Seeing now that these children be regenerate and graffed in the bodie of Christs congregation And again We yield thee heartie thanks that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this Infant with thy holy Spirit to receive him for thine own child by adoption and to incorporate him into thy holy Congregation All this can leave no doubt of the communion of the Church of England with the whole Church in this point so nearly concerning the salvation of all Christians CHAP. V. The Preaching of our Lord and his Apostles evidenceth that some act of Mans free choice is the condition which it requireth The correspondence betwen the Old and New Testament inferreth the same So do the errors of Socinians and Antinomians concerning the necessity of Baptism Objections deferred THe whole tenor of the Scripture would afford matter of Argument to inforce this consequence But it shall be enough to have thus far pointed out the ground upon which the meaning of the rest is to proceed The reasons of this position from the principles of Christianity can be no other than those which have been touched upon occasion of treating the passages of Scripture hitherto alledged Yet to make the consequence still more evident I will here repeat first the consideration of Gods sending our Lord Christ to show the world sufficient motives why they should imbrace his Gospel as well as to teach them what it is and wherein it consisteth I will not here insist upon any supposition of the clear sufficience of the Scriptures or the necessity of Tradition besides the Scriptures But I will appeal to the common sense of all men to judge whether it be within the compass of reason that our Lord Christ should come to preach and to exhort men to acknowledge him to be come from God and to take up his Cross should show them reasons to believe that all which he preached is true that so they might be perswaded willingly to follow him Should give certain proofs of his rising again from death to inforce the same If men have no will no choice no freedom to do what he requires them or not to do it whether in other things they have it or not The same to be said of his Apostles and Disciples who were strange Creatures to expose their lives for a Warrant of the truth of what they said if they had not willingly and freely imbraced that profession themselves which they pretended to induce the world with the like freedome of choice to imbrace Thus far then we are assured by common sense that the condition required by the Covenant of Grace on our part must be some act of mans free choice the doing whereof at Gods demand must qualifie us for those promises which it tenders But this is not all that may appeare to common reason by the proceeding of our Lord and his Apostles The preaching of the Gospel-premises for a supposition upon which it proceedeth That mankind are become enemies unto God through sin and subjects of his wrath Proposing therepon the termes upon which they may be reconciled to God and intitled presently to and in due time possessed of everlasting happiness Suppose these terms purchased by the satisfaction of Christ though not granting it because all that call themselves Christians in the West do not is it possible to imagine that they who declare all mankind to be Gods enemies for sinne should have commission to declare them heires of his Kingdome not supposing them turned from sin to that righteousnesse which shall be as universally according to Gods will as their sin is against it As on the contrary supposing this do you not suppose
then if nothing were revealed CHAP. XVIII The necessity of the grace of Christ is the evidence of originall sinne How the exaltation of our Lord depends upon his humiliation and the grace of Christ upon that All the work of Christianity is ascribed to the grace of Christ Gods predestination manifesteth the same THese things thus premised the evidence which I make for originall sinne from the grace of Christ as for the grace of Christ from originall sinne consists in this proposition That not onely the preaching of the Gospel but also the effect of it in converting us both to the profession and conversation of Christians is granted in consideration of the obedience of Christ for the cure of that wound which the disobedience of Adam made Here I must note that the conversation of Christians as it requireth and presupposeth the profession of Christianity so it comprehendeth all parts and offices of a mans life to be guided and lead according to that will and law of God which his word declareth So that to prove my intent it will be requisite to shew that it is through those helps which the grace of God by Christ that is in consideration of his obedience and sufferings furnisheth that any part of a mans duty is discharged like a Christian Which otherwise would have been imployed to the satisfaction of those inclinations which the corruption of mans nature by the fall of Adam hath brought forth This to do I will begin as afore with the Epistle to the Romanes In the beginning whereof S. Paul having proved that which Pelagius and Socinus both allow that there is no salvation without Christianity and coming to render a reason for the necessity thereof from those things which I pressed afore concerning the disobedience of Adam proceeds to maintain it by the antithesis of Christs obedience thus Rom. V. 15-19 having begun to say that Adam is the figure of him that was to come But the grace is not as the transgression For if by one mans transgression many are dead much more hath the grace of God and gift through the grace of one man Jesus Christ abounded to many Nor is the gift as that which came by one that sinned For judgement came of one to condemnation but the free gift is of many transgressions to righteousnesse For if by one mans transgression death reigned through one much more shall they who receive the abundance of the grace and the gift of righteousnesse reign in life through one Jesus Christ Therefore as by the transgression of one the matter proceeded to condemnation upon all so by the righteousnesse of one to justification of life For as by the disobedience of one many were made sinners so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous Here whosoever acknowledgeth that righteousnesse comes by Christ which the free gift that brings from many transgressions to righteousnesse and the abundance of the grace and gift of righteousnesse unto life manifestly argues can neither refuse the contrary unrighteousnesse which causeth condemnation and death to come from Adams sin nor yet the grace which voids it called by S. Paul the gift which comes through the grace of one man Jesus Christ that is that grace which he hath obtained with God to be granted in consideration of Christ through whom the Apostle saies they that receive the gift of righteousnesse shall raign in life For how shall they raign in life through him and through the gift of righteousnesse but that through him they receive the gift of righteousnesse Therefore S. Paul lamenting afterwards the conflict between sinne and grace Rom. VII 22 -25 I am content with the Law of God according to the inward man But I see another Law in my members warring with the Law of my mind and captivating me to the Law of sinne that is in my members Wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from the body of this death I thank God through our Lord Jesus Christ To wit because from God in consideration of J. Christ and his obedience and not onely through the doctrine which he taught he had help to overcome in so great a conflict Wherefore it followeth immediately Rom. VIII 1-4 There is therefore now no more condemnation for them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit For the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath freed me from the Law of sinne and death For whereas the inability of the Law was weake through the flesh God sending his Sonne in the likenesse of sinnefull flesh and for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us that walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit Whether you understand the Law of the Spirit of Life or Life to come in by or through Christ Jesus if we be freed from the Law of sin and death by Christ then by the helps God gives in consideration of his obedience For how is sin condemned in the flesh but because it is executed And how executed but because we are inabled to put it to death And how by Christs death but by the helps which God grants in consideration of it Therefore it followeth a little after If man have not the Spirit of Christ he is not his But if Christ be in you the body is dead indeed because of sinne but the Spirit is life because of righteousnesse But if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwell in you he that raised Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortall bodies through his spirit that dwelleth in you That Spirit which makes righteousnesse a Law to us by Christ shall raise againe these mortall bodies which shall be destroyed because of sinne So as our rising from death is purchased by the resurrection of Christ so our rising from sin by his death which purchased his rising againe For consider what S. Paul writes againe of our Lord Christ Phil. II. 5-11 For Let that sense be in you that was also in Christ Jesus who being in the forme of God made it no occasion of pride that he was equal with God But emptied himself taking the forme of a servant becoming in the likenesse of man and being found in habit as a man humbled himself becoming obedient unto death even the death of the Crosse Therefore God also hath overexalted him and given him the name that is above every name that at the name of Jesus every knee should how of things in heaven and on earth and under the earth and every tongue confesse to the glory of God the Father that Jesus Christ is the Lord. Where seeing iâ— is manifest by the premises that our humbling of our selves is with God the consideration upon which he promises to exalt us being as hath appeared the condition of the Covenant of Grace it cannot be denied that the humiliation of Christ was the consideration for which he was
work of our Christianity and therefore to every part of it and by consequence that this grace is not given us in consideration of any thing that we are able to do towards the obliging of God to bestow it upon us But I will not take upon me to inflame this abridgment with rehearsal of the testimonies of Church Writers that went afore Pelagius in both these points The testimonies of Fathers that went afore him which S. Augustine hath produced are enough to put those to silence which would have originall sin to be a devise of his But Vossius in his History of the Pelagians having comprised as well these as the rest concerning originall sin libro 11. parte 1. Thes VI. and those which concern the necessity of Grace libro III. parte I. Thes I. II. it will not be to the purpose to do any part of that which hath been sufficiently done already over again To me indeed it seems very considerable that Pelagius acknowledging for Grace first free Will and the Law which teacheth the difference between good and bad after that for the Grace of Christ his doctrine and example first then the illumination of the mind by the Holy Ghost Yet alwaies maintained that man without the help of Grace is able to love God above all to keep his Commandments and resist the greatest temptations to the contrary And in all these points was condemned by the Church as you may see there libro III. parte II. Thes I-VIII For certainly there is a vast difference between the doctrine of Gods Laws absolutely necessary to the doing of his Will even for Adam in the state of innocency and the preaching of the Gospell convincing mankind that they are under Gods wrath by sin tendering pardon to them that imbrace it assuring of everlasting life or death according as they observe the profession of it and shewing the way by our Lords example All which the Scriptures ascribe to the coming of Christ as granted in consideration of it How much more when he granteth the illumination of the Holy Ghost to shew what is to be done must he needs transgress his own position which saith that there is no difference between that state in which we are born and that which Adam was made saving his example but the difference between a man and a Babe For were we born as Adam was made what needed Christ to have purchased by his death the gift of the Holy Ghost to enlighten us inwardly in doing that which without it man is born able to do And having granted the reasons and motives upon which Christians act as Christians to be shewed them both outwardly and inwardly by the Grace of Christ to deny the necessity of the sayd Grace to the acts which proceed from the same can have no excuse but one that Christ came only to evidence the truth of his message leaving the embracing or rejecting of it to every mans choyce Which to maintain if Socinus was fain to make our Lord Christ a meer man that there might be no more in his rising after death then a miracle to assure it Pelagius acknwledging the Trinity will be streightned by S. Pauls consequence If righteousnesse come by the Law then is Christ dead in vain supposing the death of Christ to bring that help of Grace which a miracle by evidencing the truth of the Gospel doth not And seeing God could not be moved by any thing that man could do to give our Lord Christ and the helps which his coming bringeth with it there will be no more left for Pelagius to say But that these helps are not granted of Grace but received by the works which men prevent it with The foundation therefore of the Christian Faith consisting in Gods-sending our Lord Christ of his pure free grace by vertue whereof all the effects of it are works of the same Grace Necessary it was that Pelagius should be condemned for the denying of the necessity of Grace to all acts of Christianity and for affirming that Grace is given according to mans merits as you see there Thesi IX XI that he was Both upon the doctrine of S. Paul premised afore that God was not moved by the works either of Jews or Gentiles to send them those helpes to salvation which the Gospel tendreth Nevertheless the preaching of the Gospel and all the help which it bringeth toward the imbracing of it is no less the Grace of Christ because Pelagius was forced for the better colouring of his Heresie to acknowledge it Onely it is not therefore to be sayd that it is all the help which the Grace of God by Christ furnisheth toward that salvation which Christianity tendreth But to be left to further dispute what further help is granted by God before and without any consideration of mans merit to bring to effect those acts in which the discharge of our Christianity consisteth Excluding therefore the pretense of Pelagius that Moses before the godly Fathers pleased God by the meer strength of nature and that salvation was to be had under the Law by the same Besides the good works of the Gentiles wherewith God was pleased according to Pelagius whom the Church condemned in this Article also as you may see there Thes X. And truly Pelagius acknowledging the Gospel to be no more then the declaration of that Will of God by which man is to be saved after Christ as the Law before Christ utterly overthroweth the plea of the Church derived from the Apostles that the Fathers were saved by faith before and under the Law that the New Testament was in force under the Old by vertue of that commerce which God by his word which afterwards being incarnate was our Lord Christ held with the Fathers His Spirit as naturally planted in the word going along to procure the efficacy of it Whereas Socinus though he acknowledgeth the difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Law yet making our Lord Christ a meer man the vertue of whose death could not extend to the salvation of those who lived afore his coming destroyeth the ground of that which he acknowledgeth This supposition that Christianity is more ancient then Judaâ—sme being necessary to the maintaining of the Church against the Synago ue Which is verified by Gods designing of a Church for the spouse of his Sonne before the Fall figured by the marriage between Adam and Eve according to S. Paul Ephes V. 22-33 But presently after the Fall that Word which being incarnate in our Lord Christ having declared enmity betwen the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent saying It shall break thy head and thou shalt bruise the heel of it The first Adam became the figure of the second according to the same S. Paul Rom. V. 14. Whereupon the Spirit of the second Adam in those Preachers of righteousnesse to whom the Word of God came in that Angel whom the Fathers worshipped for God strove form
stand obliged to second the same with means sufficient to bring them to everlasting happinesse For the beginning of the worke being acknowledged to require Gods preventing Grace it cannot be said that those who are supposed to be thus saved are saved by works and not by grace or that in their regard Christ is dead in vaine the said helps being granted in consideration of Christs death But though it may without prejudice to christanity be said that God may dispense the helps of that grace which Christs death hath purchased besides and without the preaching of the Gospell yet can it not be said during the Gospell that any man attaineth the kingdom of heaven which Christianty promiseth but by it Now to be saved by the Gospell requires the profession of the faith and that the Sacrament of Baptisme at least in resolution and purpose So that whether among those nations where the gospell is not preached any man be saved by this way is a thing visible to be tried by examining whom this case hath been knowne to have become a Christian Of which I assure my selfe there will be found so few instances of historical truth that a discreet man will have no pleasure to introduce a position so neerely concerning the intent of Christs coming wherof there can so little effect appear For supposing instances might be alleaged to make the mater questionable how farr would they be from rendring a reason of that vast difference that is visible between the proceeding of God towards the salvation of those that are borne within the Pale of the Church and those that live and dye without hearing of christianity The one being so prevented with the knowledg of what they are to doe to be saved that they shall have much a do so to neglect it as to flatter their own concupiscence with any color of an excuse Whereas the other whatsoever conviction we may imagine them to have of one true God of an account to be made for all that wee doe of the guilt of sin which they are under without the Gospell it will be impossible to reduce the reason of the difficulties they are under more then the former to an equall desire in God of saving all together with the difference of mens complyance with the helps of Grace which it produceth And therefore considering the antecedent will of God is not absolutly Gods will but with a terme of abatement reserving the condition upon which it proceedeth I conceive it requisite as I have don to limit the signification thereof to those effects which we see God being to passe by vertue of it The utmost whereof being the provâ—dâ—ng of means for the preaching of the Gospell it is neverthelesse no prejudice to it that the Apostles are forbidden by the spâ—rit to preach in Bithynia or Asia Acts XVâ— 6 7. not because God would not have them to be saved or because the Macedonians by their works had obliged him to set them aside for their sakes who could have provided for both But for reasons knowne to himselfe alone and not reducible to any thing that appeares to us Especially considering the câ—se of infants dying before Baptisme in whose workes it is manifest there can be no ground of difference For to say that by the universality of that Grace which God declareth by Christ wee are to believe that they are all saved as many as live not to transgresse the Covenant of grace would be a novelty never heard of in the Catholike Church of Christ tending to unâ—ermine the foundation of our common salvation laid by our Lord â—o Nicodâ—mus Vnlâ—sse ye bâ— born againe of water and of the Holy Ghost ye cannot enter into the Kingdome of God For how should the generall tender of the Gospell intitle infants to the benefit thereof because they never transgressed that in which they were never estated It were in vaine then to looke about the scripture for examples to justifie any part of this position The widow of Sarepta to whom Elias was sent Naaman the Syrian who was sent to Eliseus Cyâ—us whom many supposed to have worshipped the onely God because in the end of the Chronicâ—es and beginning of Esdras he saith the God of heaven hath given me all the Kingdoms of the earth because the Prophet Esay makes him a figure of the Messias as the Kings of Gods people were for the freedom which they attained by his government the Centurion Cornelius to whom S. Peter was sen with the Gospell are all of one case which is the case of thâ—se strangers who living in the common-wealth of Israel though not circumcised yet woâ—shiped the onely true God under those lawes which the Jews tell us were delivered by God to Noe and by him to all his posterity and so were capable of thaâ— salvation which the Israelites had the meanes of under the Law though themselves not under it But neither have we evidence that their works under the light of nature obliged God to call them to the priviledg of stâ—angers in the hâ— use of Israel nor can the workes of Cornelius be taken for the workes of corrupt nature being in the state of Gods grace which was manifested under the Law and therefore prevented with those meanes of salvation which become necessary under the Gospell to the salvation which it tendreth So far are we from finding in them any argument of a Law obliging God to grant them those helps in consideration of their works don in the state of corrupt nature And therefore whatsoever examples we may find of this nature under Christianity they are to be referred to the free grace of God which as sometimes it may come to those of best conversation according to nature to whom the words oâ— our Lord To him that hath shall be given may be applied without prejudice to Christianity Math. XXV 19. Luk XIX 26. So also it fails not to call those who for their present state are most strangers to christianity that it may appeare that no Rule ties God but that free grace which his own secret wisdom dispenseth And truly those good works which corupt nature produceth necessarily depend upon those circumstances in which Gods proâ—â—dence placeth one man and not an other though both in the state of meere nature So that the one shall not be able to do that which is reasonable without overcoming those difficulties to which the other is not lyable In which regard it hath been said that the Heroick acts of the Heâ—hen may be attributed to the spirit of God moving them though not as granted in consideration of Christ but as conducting the whoâ—e worke of providence So little cause there is to imagine that the consideration of them should oblige God to grant those helps of grace the ground whereof is the obedience of Christ and the end the happinesse of the world to come CHAP. XXVI Predestination to grace absolute to glory respective Purpose of denying effectuall Grace
to the intrinsecall value of the workes which freewill alone doth but to the promise annexed by God to the works which freewill by the help of Grace purchased by Christ produceth It was no marvaile indeed that they who had overseen the actuall helps of Grace should a scribe the merit of habituall grace so the language of that time spoke to the act of freewill in beginning to believe that is to be a Christian as not depending upon that operation of grace which themselves supposed though they oversaw it But it were ridiculous to think that he who by the preaching of the Gospel and the reasons which it letteth forth why men are to be Christians is effectually moved to become a Christian is not to impute his being so to that grace which preventeth him with those reasons How much more when those reasons are acknowledged to be the instrument whereby the Holy Ghost worketh a mans conversion at the first or his perseverance at the last is it necessary to impute it to the grace of Christ that is to those helps which God in regard to Christs death preventeth us with Surely should grace immediately determin the wil to it the effects that should be imputable to grace would be the same neither the cov of grace nor the experience of common sense remaining the same which wil not allow such a chang in a mans life as becoming a good christian of an enemy to Christs Crosse to succeed without an express change in the wil upon reasons convincing the judgement that this world is to be set behind the world to com It is now to be acknowledged that S. Austine writing against these mens positions as they were revealed to him by the letters of Prosper and Hilary his book now extant de Praedestinatione sanctorum de dono Perseverantiae hath determined the reason why one man is converted and persevereth unto death an other not to consist in nothing that can resolve into any act of mans will but ends in Gods free appointment That Pope Celestinus writing to the Bishops of Gaule upon the sollicitation of the same Prosper and Hilary in recommendation of S. Austines dostrine then so much questioned in those parts determines not onely the sufficience but the efficacy of the meanes of Grace to come from Gods Grace That the second councile of Orange determining the same in divers particulares concerning the conversion of man to become a true Christian concerning his perseverance to the end in that estate hath onely determined that by the helpe and assistance of Christ and the grace received in Baptisme a Christian may if he will faithfully labour fullfill whatsoever his salvation requireth Is there any thing in all this to signifie that a mans will before he determine is determined by God to imbrace Christianity and persevere in it to the end or not That every man is determined to everlasting glory or paine without consideration of those deeds of his for which at the last he shall be sentenced to it and either suffer or injoy it Here I must have recourse againe to Vossius his Collections finding them sufficient and my model not allowing me to say more Whether no helpe of Grace but that which takes effect be sufficient That is whether men refuse Christianity or faile of performing it because they could not imbrace and persevere in it or because they would not when they might let him that shall have perused what he hath collected in the second part of this seventh book say as to the perswasion of the whole Church Whether God would have all men to be saved and hath appointed the death of our Lord Christ to that intent let him that shall have perused the first part of the same Thesi II. III. give sentence what the Church hath allwaies believed No lesse manifest is it by that which he saith there parte II. thesi II. Parte III. thes I. II. that there is no reason to be given why any man sinneth or is damned because God would have it so On the contrary that the reason why a man is not saved to whom the Gospell is tendred is because he refuseth it which God for his part tendreth to all mankind In fine that the Catholike Church from the beginning believed no more then that those who should believe and persevere to the end good Christians were appointed by God to be saved Understanding this to be don by vertue of Gods Grace for which no reason can be rendred from any thing that a man can doe as preventing all his indeavours I acknowledg to appeare by that which he hath said Lib. VI. thes VIII When therefore S. Austine maintainneth as I have acknowledged that he doth mainetaine that the reason why one man is converted and perseveres unto death another not resolves into Gods meere appointment I will not dispute whether this be more then the whole Church delivereth for that which it is necessary to salvation to believe It is enough for me to maintaine that it seemeth to follow by good consequence of the best reasons that I can see from that sense of our Lord and his Apostles doctrine which the Church hath alwaies taught Which will allow me to maintaine as well the predetermination of the will as absolut predestination to glory and paine to be inconsistent as with the Covenant of Grace so with the Tradition of the Church I find that Gennadius being manifestly one of those in Gaule that contradicted some thing of S. Austines doctrine by his commending of Faustus and Cassiane and censuring not onely Prosper who confuted Cassianus but even S. Austine in his booke of Eclesiasticall writers in a certaine addition to that list of heresies which S. Jerom hath made reckoneth them in the list of the Heretickes condemned by the Church who teach absolute Predestination under the name of Predestinatians After him not onely Hincmarus of Rheims condemning Gotescalcus a Monk of his Province for maintayning it being transmitted to him by Rabanus of Ments who in a Synod there had condemned him for the same hath supposed it condemned for an heresy by the ancient Church but also before Hincmarus Arnobius that hath expounded the Psalms called Arnobius the younger by some and a certaine continuation of S. Hieromes Cronicle under the the name of Tiro Prosper the one contradicteth them the later mentions that they had their beginning from S. Austins writings Sirmondus also the learned Jesuite hath published a peece so ancient that pretending to make a list of Heresies it goeth no further then Nestorius reckoning next after him the Predestinatians as those who derived themselves from S. Austines doctrine To which it is well enough knowne what opposition is now made by them who believe not that there ever was any such Heresy but that the adversaries of S. Austine in Gaule do pretend that such a Sect did indeed rise upon misunderstanding his Doctrine And certainely there are properly no Heretickes
conceive maintaines the interest of Christianity best though a Iew or a Pagan much more a Jesuite or an Arminian had said it As for the opinion of Arminius and the decree of the Synod at Dort having already said why I have inlarged my considerations beyond the compasse of those termes upon which they disputed it shall suffice me to say That his opinion concerning Election and Reprobation is that which I have showed that all the Church hath alwaies held for mater of Faith To wit that God appoints them to be saved and to be damned who receive Christianity and persevere in the profession of it till death or not That in mine opinion they might have admitted some thing more To wit that God is not obliged by any workes of free will preventing the help of his Grace through Christ but by his own free pleasure to grant those helps of Grace which he knowes wil be effectuall to finall perseverance in Christianity to some which he refuseth to others And that the decree of granting them is Gods absolute predestination to Grace For I am confident that Arminius doth acknowledg the calling of Gods Grace to become effectuall by meanes of the congruity of those helps which God provideth with that disposition which God foreseeth in him whom he appointeth to be moved by the same Whether or no the decree of the Synod require further that they should acknowledg Predestination to glory to be absolute I hold not my selfe any waies obliged to dispute For I find that those persons that were â—mployed to the Synod from England have professed as well in the Synod as otherwise that they came not by any commission or instruction from the Church of England but onely as trusted by K. James of excellent memory to assist his good neighbours the states of the United Provinces in composing the differences in Religion raised among their Divines and people And therefore I cannot be concerned in the decree to which the Church of England never concurred Yet I say further that the persons that concurred to it whose opinions as Divines I cannot esteeme at an easy rate by waâ—ving the opinion of predetermination by acknowledging the death of Christ for all the operation of grace not irresistible but such as stands not with actual resistence do seem not to insist upon absolute predestination to glory And that if the decree do necessarily import it I do not know how to reconcile it with their own opinions Which whether it be also to be said of them of the reformed Churches in France who holding the decree do now acknowledg the death of Christ for all mankind let them that read their writings judge CHAP. XXVII The question concerning the satisfaction of Christ with Socinus The reason why Sacrifices are figures of Christ common to all sacrifices Why and what Sacrifices the Fathers had what the Law added Of our ransom by the price of Christs propitiatory Sacrifice HAving thus showed how the Gospel tenders a Covenant of Grace though requiring the condition of Christianity in regard of those helps which the Grace of God through Christ provideth for the performance of it I am now to show the same in regard of that right to which God accepteth that performance For if it appeare that God out of his grace in Christ and not for the worth of that which we doe accepteth it for a title duely qualifying us for remission of sinne and life everlasting then is it a Covenant of Grace which the Gospell tenders though it require the profession and practice of Christianity on our part And here I have to doe with the Socinians on the one extremity in the first place who will not allow the Gospell to continue the Covenant of grace if it be said that it tendereth remission of sins and life everlasting to those that are qualified as it requireth in consideration of the obedience and sufferings of Christ as the ransome and price of our sinnes Acknowledging allways that Christ died to settle and establish the New Covenant but not to oblige God by his death either to declare and become ingaged to it or to make it good having declared it but to assure mankind that God who of his owne free grace was ready to pardon and accept of those that should accept of the termes of reconcilment which his Gospell tendereth will not faile to make good that which by delivering his well beloved sonne to death he hath signed for his promise to us Indeed they goe about to strengthen this opinion by adding another reason and end of Christs death To wit the attaining of that Godhead wherewith God they say hath rewarded his obedience in doing the message which he trusted him with that thereby he might be able of himselfe to make good that which God by him had promised confounding all that may oppose the salvation of them that imbrace the Covenant of Grace But that it should be said that God declareth or giveth remission of sinnes and everlasting life to them that imbracâ— the same in consideration of the obedience and sufferings of Christ as satisfied thereby for that punishment which our sinne deserved of his justice this is that which they deny and the Church teacheth and therefore this it is which we must show how it is delivered by the Scriptures Which every man may observe to stand cheifely in those texts of Scripture which say that Christ died for us that he redeemed us and reconciled us to God by his death and bloud shed which being the utmost of his obedience comes most into account at all occasions of mentioning this subject in fine it is easy to be observed that the expressions of this point in holy Scripture have relation to the Sacrifices of the Old Testament as figuring the death of Christ whereby both agree we are delivered from sinne the question remaining whether ransomed or not And therefore I shall first consider how and to what effect the Sacrifices of Moses Law are figures of the sacrifice of our Lord upon the Crosse Where I must in the first place inferre from the principle premised of the twofold sense of the Old Testament that all the sacrifices thereof were figures of the death of Christ and our reconcilement with God by the same So farre I am from yeilding them that unreasonable demand that onely expiatory Sacrifices and especially that of the Solemne day of Atonement are properly so Onely I must declare my meaning to be this That whereas the sacrifices of the Fathers were so as they were pledges of Gods favour generally the sacrifices of the Law being the condition upon which that people in generall and every person thereof in particular held their interest in the land of promise expresse more correspondence with that interest in the world to come which Christians hold by Christs death on the Crosse For the land of Canaan being promised them upon condition of keeping the Law and every mans interest in the
are healed For yee were as sheep gâ—ing astray but are now returned to the Pastor and Bishop of our soules First when S. Peter repeats the very words of Esay to question whether he alledge this passage or not I suppose is ridiculous Neither will it be of consequence though we take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For wether Christ took our sinnes up to the Crosse or beare them upon the Crosse still they remain charged on Christ faâ—â—ned to the Crosse As for the Apostle Ebr. IX 25 26 28. where having said that Christ went into heaven to appear before the face of God without any intent to suffer himself any more as the high Priest entered once a year into the Holy of Holies with the bloud of a sacrifice for then must he have suffered many times since the foundation of the world But was once manifested at the end of the world to abolish sinne by the sacrifice of himself he concludes that being once offered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to take away the sinnes of many he shall appear the second time without sinne to the salvation of those that expect him It is here evident that Christ was manifested at the end of the world to such in the world as knew him not not to God in heaven that did And therefore sinne is abolished by the sacrifice of the Crosse if by his intercession in heaven in consideration of it And his second appearance is without sinnâ— because he shall have taken sinne away but he shall have taken it away by being offered Therefore if he will needs translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to take away the the sinnes of many yet can he not deny that they are taken away by being born upon the Crosse For must we not have account from the text in what consideration he takes them away And is the assuring of us that God will make good his promise or is the moving of God to make it good the pertinent reason why he is said to take away our sinnes by a sacrifice There is no doubt that S. Peter expresses the end of Christs sufferings in that which followes ye were as sheep going astray but is not therefore the consideration to be expressed upon which that end is attained As for that little objection of Socinus that when the Prophet saies For the labour of his soul he shall see and be satisfyed By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many and he shall beare their iniquities That it must meane He shall take away their iniquities because justifying went afore Neither uses the Language of the Scripture allwayes according to order of nature and reason to put that first which gives the reason of that which followes So that bearing theire iniquities not taking them away may well follow as the reason why he justifies And if insteade of and we translate for which is usuall in the scriptures we silence the objection and make the reason why he justifies to follow in due place to wit because he beares their iniquities Lastly that the Prophets and righteous in generall and the Messias in particular were to beare the sinnes of the world and expiate the wrath of God for them you may see by Grotius upon Mat. XX. 28. that the Jewes have understood out of this place of the Prophet Esay Which is prejudice enough If they who understand not the reason why and how we say our Lord expiates sinne by bearing it and whose interest it concerns not to understand it by the native sense of the Prophets words find that which Christians deny and by denying prejudice the common cause Which to acknowledge prejudices not Christianity understanding as much difference betweene that expâ—ation which they make and that which Christ makes as Christianity puts between Christ and Christians Let us now consider that reconciliation which S. Paul saith many times is wrought for us by Christs death 2 Cor. V. 18 All thinges are of God that hath reconciled us to himselfe by Jesus Christ and given us the ministery of reconcilement As that God was reconciling the world to himselfe by Christ not imputing to them their transgressions anâ— putting the word of reconciliation upon us We are therefore ambassadors in Christs stead as if God did exhort you by us we beseech you in Christs stead be reconciled to God For him that knew no sin he made sinne for us that we might become the righteousnesse of God in him Socinus mervailes how any man can imagine that Christ can proffer us reconcilement and not be reconciled to us when he proffers it An imagination as ridiculous as his that fansied he should meete his fellow before his fellow met him For if reconcilement be betweene two though one may provide the means as in our Case God though out of love yet seeing as yet he onely offers friendship that is to say seeing as yet we are not made freindes it is manifest that both are reconciled at once And doth not experience of the world show that when Princes and States are at warre the one out of a desire of peace seekes means of reconcilement but is not reconciled before the other agree So God ingages to be reconciled by publishing the Gospell while he gives man leave to deliberate but is not reconciled till man undertake Christianity by being baptized So when God seekes to be reconciled to men it is true as S. Paul sayes he imputes not their transgressions to them for if he should prosecute their sinnes by imputing them he should not seeke reconcilement But when he is reconciled it is a contradiction that he should impute them Now though the Apostles are messengers of reconcilment in Christs stead yet with this difference that he also furnished the means they onely brought the message S. Paul therefore having signified this means afore when he sayes that not imputing to the world their transgressions he sought to be reconciled with them by Christ and inferring Him that knew no sinne he made sinne for us that we might become the righteousnesse of God in him Either he makes no difference betweene our Lord and the Apostles or it is expressed by these wordes in reference to that which went afore To wit that God was willing to be reconciled with the world because he had provided Christ and Christ had undertook the sinnes of it So againe Rom. V. 10 11. For if being enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his sonne much more being reconciled shall we be saved by his life Nor onely so But we glory in God through our Lord Jesus Christ by whome we have received reconcilement From what shall we be saved by being reconciled From wrath saith the Apostle in the words next afore Therefore before reconcilement we were under wrath And surely there is a difference betweene the right and title that we have to be reconciled with God though upon condition of our conversion to Christianity and between the
Advocate with the father Jesus Christ the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sins And when David who had the spirit of God upon the same termes as Christians have it excepting that which hath been excepted prayeth Psalm XIX 13 14. Who understandeth his errours Clense me from hidden sins Keep thy servant also from presumptuous sins that they beare not rule over me Then shall I be upright and cleane from great transgressions He showeth sufficiently the difference between veniall and mortall sins as to Christians which in case of invincible ignorance and meere supprize comes to no sin as to Christians But he showeth also that Christians neglecting themselves may come to fall into sins of persumption which he prayeth against For the rest the same S. Iohn incouraging Christians to pray for the sins of Christians with this limitation as I surppose if by their advice they appear to be reduced to take the cours which may procure pardon at Gods hands acknowledgeth further that there is a sin unto death I say not that yee pray for it saith he 1. John V. 16. 17. And the Apostle to the Hebrews VI. 4 5 6. speaketh of some sin which he acknowledgeth not that it can be admitted to penance for the obtaining of forgivenesse which he protesteth again Ebr. X. 26 -31 XII 16 17. It is commonly thought indeed that to deny the true faith against that light which God hath kindled in a mans conscience is hereby declared to be a sin that repentance cannot cure Or rather that God hereby declareth that he will never grant in repentance And truly that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost which our Lord saith shall never he pardoned neither in this world nor in the world to come Mat. XII 31 32. Mark III. 28 29. Luke XII 10. manifestly consisteth in attributing the works which the holy Ghost did to convert men to Christ to the devill being convinced that our Lord came from God by the workes he did for that purpose Just as Saint Steven reproaches the Jewes for resisting the holy Ghost as their Fathers had done Acts VII 51. And that there is no cure for this sin it is manifest because it consisteth in rejecting the cure And apostasy from Christianity which is manifestly the sinne which the Apostle to the Hebrews intendeth differeth from it but as the obligation to Christianity once received differeth from that Christianity which being proposed with conviction a man is bound to receive But otherwise not onely the Church but the Novatians themselves supposed that those who had denied the Faith might recover pardon of God by repentance Nor can it become visible to the Church what is that conviction which whoso transgresseth becomes unpardonable because God hath excluded him from repentance In the meane time how difficult the Primitive Church accounted it to attaine pardon of such sinnes appeares by the excluding of the Montanists and Novatians first then by the long Penance prescribed Apostates Murtherers and Adulterers least the admitting of them to Penance might seem to warrant their pardon upon too light repentance Saint Paul admits the incestuous person at Corinth whether to Penance or to Communion with the Church But upon what termes Least the offender should be swallowed up with extream sorrow and least Satan should advantage himself against them should he refuse it And because having written out of great anguish of heart with teares for them who presumed to bear him out in it he had found them moved with sorrow according to God to repentance with all satisfaction and desire of peace with the Apostle 2 Cor. II. 1-8 VII 7-11 For we understand by Saint Paul 1 Cor. V. 2. 2 Cor. XII 21. that even the Church themselves when they shut a sinner out of the Church did make demonstration of sorrow for his case And therefore himself much more was put to mourning and to professe by his outward habit that he thought his sinne incurable without sorrow answerable to it And when Saint Paul commands the Collossians III. 5. Mortify your members that are upon earth fornication uncleannesse passion evill desire and covetousnesse which is idolatry For which the wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience It is manifest that he placeth the mortifying of these vices in the afflicting and humbling of our earthly members wherein the lusts of them reside Therefore he serves his own body no otherwise but striving for the prize of Christians like one of their Greekish Champions that would not beat the aire he beates his own body black and blew to bring it under servitude Least having preached to others himself should become reprobate 1 Cor. IX 26 27. And certainly if Christianity require this discipline over Saint Pauls body least he should fall into sinne it will require very great severity of them that are fallen into sinne to be exercised upon their bodies the lusts whereof they have satisfied by those sinnes to regain the favour and appease the wrath of God and to settle that hatred of sinne and that love of goodnesse in the heart which the preventing of sinne for the future necessarily requireth The practice of the Old Testament sufficiently signifieth the same Though David in the Psalme that I mentioned afore seem to make the pardon of his sin a thing easily obtained at Gods hands as it is indeed a thing easily obtained supposing the disposition which David desired it with but not that disposition a thing easily obtained yet you shall find the same David elsewhere wetting his bed and watring his couch with his teares so that his beauty is gone with mourning his flesh dried up for want of fatnesse and his bones cleave to his flesh for the voice of his mourning Indeed he alwayes expresseth his affliction to be the subject of his mourning But alwayes acknowledging his sins to be the cause of those afflictions which he therefore takes the course to remove by taking this course for his sinnes The Prophet Esay I. 15 16. thus calleth the Jewes to appease Gods wrath Wash ye make ye clean remove the evil of your workes from before mine eyes cease to do evil learn to do good seek righteousnesse Sure this was never intended to be done by the meer thought of doing it But the Prophet Joel having threatned a plague what doth he prescribe for the cure And now saith the Lord return to me with all your heart with fasting weeping and mourning and rent your hearts and not your garments and turn to the Lord your God for he is gracious and mercifull long-suffering great in mercy and repenteth him of evill Blow the trumpet in Sion sanctify a fast invite the assembly gather the people sanctify a Congregation make the old and young and the sucking infants meet let the bridegroom come forth of his chamber and the bride of her closet let the Priests the ministers of the Lord weep between the Porch and the Altar and say Spare Lord thy people and
of his Gospel nor the faith of their Predecessors can make any appearance of freeing them from it what madness will it be not to expect it from not to impute it to that condition which succeedeth the condition by which the children of Gods ancient people stood intitled to the Land of promise CHAP. VIII What is alleadged to impeach Tradition for baptizing Infants Proves not that any could be saved regularly who dyed unbaptized but that baptizing at yeares was a strong means to make good Christians Why the Church now Baptize Infants What becomes of Infants dying unbaptized unanswerable What those Infants gâ—t who dye baptized ANd thus from the Scriptures alone I have proved that Infants are capable of Baptism and that the Church is bound to provide them of it unlesse we will say that the Church is not bound to provide them of that means of salvation which the Church alone dispenseth And upon these terms I conceive I may safely acknowledge that there is no Precept for baptizing of the Infants of Christians written in the Scripture presuming that it is written in the Scripture that Infants are to be provided of the necessary means of salvation by the Church For though it be not necessary that all Infants be baptized because they are Infants yet will it be necessary that they be baptized before they go out of the world And therefore while they are Infants rather then they should go out of the world unbaptized But the practice of the whole Church and that from the beginning challenges the effect of S. Augustines rule that what is received of the whole Church and not by any expresse act of the Church from which the beginning of it may be demonstrable must of necessity be imputed to the Tradition of the Apostles For the judgements of men being so diverse as they are how can it be imagined that so great a body and so farre dispersed as the Church should agree to impose such a bâ—rthen upon themselves had they not understood the obligation of it by the means of them from whom they received their Christianity The testimonies of Tertullian de Bapt. cap. XVIII of S. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XL. in sanctum baptisma and of Walafridus Strabus de Reb. Eccles cap. XXVI that dehoâ—t froâ— baptizing Infants or declare that the Church in the first ages did not baptize during infancy are so farre from making any exception to this evidence that they contain sufficient evidence for the same truth if we be so considerate as to understand this Tradition not to require that all be baptized during infancy but that no Infant go out of the world unbaptized For he that will imploy a litâ—le common sense may see that there may be reasons to make men think it better that Baptism be ministred to those that can understand what it imports what they undertake provided that they go not out of the world unbaptized but that there be an effectual course taken for the baptizing of them in danger of death For that it is not my sense but the sense of the Churâ—h that makes the Baptisâ— of Infants necessary not because Infants but least they dye unbaptizâ—d I appeal to S. Austine Enchirid. cap. XLIII A parvulo enim recens nato usque ad decrepitum fenem sicut nullus prohibendus est à baptismâ— ita nullus est qui non peccato â—oriatur in baptismâ— Sed parâ—uli tantum Orginali For from the litle one new born to the decrepâ—t old man as none is to be hindred of Baptism so is there none that does not dye to sin in Baptism But little ones onely to Original He â—aith not that from young to old all are to be Baptized but none is to be refused Baptism supposing the necessity of his case and the rule of the Church to require it The same is to be said of the Canon of Neo-caesarea that allows the baptism of a woman with childe because it exâ—nds not to the baptizing of the Infant in her wombe before confession of faith And of the custoâ—â— of the Greeks to this day testified by Balfanum and Renaras upon that Canon For what need more words I acknowledge that Vives upon S. Austin de Civit. dei l. 27. gives very great reasons why it were better that the Baptism of Infants were differred till they come to the discretion of understâ—nding to what they ingage themselves But shall I therefore believe that Vives was an Anabaptist that he did not believe Original sinne that he acknowledged any cure for it without Baptism that he thought it not necessary to salvation that all should be Baptized before death A ridiculous thing once to imagine Thus much for certain so sure and evident as it is that when he writ this the custome of the Church was to baptize Infants so certain it is that when all that I have alledged was written and done that men should not be baptized in infancy there was a constant custome and practice in force in the Church whereby care was taken that no Infant should dye unbaptized And though they expresse reasons for which they had rather Christians should be baptized at years yet never any Christian expressed any opinion or any reason why Infants should not be baptized rather then dye unbaptized Never was there any opinion heard of and allowed in the Church that Gods Predestination adore without Baptism or any thing else beside it can be taken for a cure of Original sin Irenaeus is one of the next to the Apostles that we have He when he saith II. 39. Christus venit per seipsum omnes salvare omnes inquam qui per eum renâ—scuntur in deum infantes parvulos parvos juvenes seniores Christ came to save by himself all who by him are born anew unto God Infants and litle ones and children and young men and old ones If any man think fit to question whether in his language renati in deum can be understood without Baptism when he speaks of Infants must suppose that one that is not an Infant may bee regenerate without it Such a one must know that though he dare understand that which S. Paul never said when he calls Baptism the laver of regeneration Titus III. 5. yet Irenaeus with the whole Church of God never understood any regeneration without it Thus much for certain as to these words of Irenaeus if he understand the regeneration of men to be by Baptism he cannot understand the regeneration of Infants to come otherwise S. Cyprian whatsoever his reasons be when he contendeth for the baptizing of all Infants as he evidences the practice of the Church so he maintaines the same grounds upon which I have shewed that it did proceed Tertullian de Animâ cap. XXXIX S. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XLII abundantly prove mine intent The words of Tertullian Huic enim Apostolus ex sanctificato alterutro sexu sanctos procreari ait tam ex seminis praerogativâ
LXIII If a Clergy-man knowing that his wife hath committed adultery dismiss her not LXV Sodomites LXXI If a woman forsaking an adulterer whom she had married afore marry another LXXII If a Christian be slain or confiscate upon the information of a Christian LXXIII If a man accuse a Clergy-man to wit criminally as a subject a subject before secular Powers of a crime which he cannot prove LXXV We see by these very particulars an abatement of that which Tertullian stood upon that no adultery should ever be restored to communion again For here Penance is allowed adultery the first time by the VII And she that leaves her Husband and maryes another is allowed the communion in danger of death As also after her first Husband is dead by the IX And so are Virgines that turn Whores if afterwards they repent and abstain before death by the XIII So for murther a Christian Woman that kills her maid is admitted to Penance by the V. And a Catechumena that is a woman professing Christianity before Baptism that kills the childe conceived of adultery by the LXVIII So in Idolatry Those who onely wear such a Crown as those that sacrificed did wear but sacrifice not nor are at the charge of sacrificing by the LV. And truly that VII Canon which allowes Penance upon adultery onely the first time but refuses the communion of the second time even in danger of death is manifestly more severe then that Rule which divers of the Fathers Origen in Levit. XXV Hom. XV. S. Ambrose de Paenit II. 10. 11. S. Augustine Epist LIII LIV. Hanil L. do mention as in force and use at their time to wit that Penance cannot be done the second time For though a man be not readmitted to communion by Penance upon falling into the same or a more grievous crime the second time yet may be allowed the communion in danger of death Just as S. Ambrose ad Virginâ—â— Lapsam cap. VIII censures her to do Penance till death Innocent I. Pope Epist II. expresly affirms that this was done in consideration of the times because if men were lightly admitted after having fallen in persecution who would hazard life for the profession of his faith But that afterwards either the Church must be Novatians or grant Penance in danger of death And truly the breach which the Novatians made must needs oblige the Church to readmit unto communion in danger of death But if the Church were obliged to be strict when there was fear of persecution least all should fall away then was it obliged to abate when many were fallen away that the Body thereof might be recovered and restored And the words of Innocent that follow are sufficient to show how much the Church then presumed upon that Penance that Absolution that communion which a man was admitted to upon confession of sinne in danger of death For he saith Tribuetur ergo cum Poenitentiâ extrema Communio The last Communion therefore shall be allowed with Penaâ—ce Now it is evident by the Canons which Gratiane hath compiled XXVI Quaest VI. VII VIII Quaest VII cap I. that when a man was admitted to Penance upon confession in danger of death the communion was given him provisionally as well to obtain the grace of God to strengthen him in that exigent as for the quiet of his conscience but neverthelesse he stood bound over to perform the Penance which was or should be injoyned in case he recovered And therefore when Pope Caelestine I Epist I. invayes against those who refused Absolution and the communion in danger of death and Leo I. Pope Epist LIX orders that they be reconciled by giving them the Communion It is to be supposed that they understand this Penance to be injoyned in that case because the custome of the Church required it And this serves to void the doubt that may be made what the Keyes of the Church can have to do in the remitting of sinnes as soon as they are confessed which serve to loose sinne no further then they serve to procure and to create that disposition which qualifies for forgivenesse You saw afore in the second Book what difficulty the ancient Church made in warranting the salvation of those that repented upon their Death bed though they proceeded to submit themselves and their sinnes to the Keyes of the Church for their absolution and the communion of the Eucharist at their departure And though Gennadius de dogmatibus Eccles cap. LXXX say freely that he is a Novation and not a Christian that presumes not faithfully of Gods mercifull purpose to save that which was lost even in him that departs upon confessing his sinne yet still this is but a presumption of what may be not a warrant of what is which the power of the Keyes regularly used promises Otherwise what would Gennadius say to the great Councill of Arles under Constantine which denies absolution in that case Can. I. as you see the Eliberitane Canons do True it is which S. Cyprian saith Nunquam sera est poenitentia si sit vera Repentance is never late if it be true But who will maintain that to be true which the terrour of death and remorse of conscience may rack out of him in whom the love of God and goodnesse hath not formed that resolution of maintaining his professed Christianity which makes God the end of all his actions when as all that is done in such a case by common experience may be imputed to a true grounded desire of avoiding punishment for his own sake with a superficiall desire of doing well for Gods sake Though on the other side it may be presumed that such a one is not first moved with dislike of his sinne when first he submits it to the Keyes of the Church but hath first done many such acts of sincere contrition as his own judgement directed him to for the gaining of Gods grace And at length to give himselfe further satisfaction resolves to humble himselfe not onely to the declaring of his own shame but to the undergoing of that Penance upon performance whereof the Rules of the Church also warrant his forgivenesse Between these contrary presumptions the primitive severity of the Church it appears refused absolution and the communion even in danger of death to some of the most grievous sins Which afterwards was thought fit to be abated Not proclaiming dispair to any sinner but to oblige him not lightly to presume upon pardon of that sinne which the Church could never presume that a man can repent him of enough For on the other side it appears what inconvenience the granting of reconcilement to all at the point of death may produce if the intent of the Church in binding over to Penance him that escapes be not understood Namely to give men cause to presume of pardon by the Church when the Keyes thereof cannot have their operation in producing the disposition that is requisite And thus the primitive practice of the Church
against us This execution then is either upon refusing the termes of reconcilement or upon failing of that which we undertake by accepting them That is not upon those failleures which may consist with reconcilement as those who would have these words to signifie Purgatory imagine but which destroy it And therefore the limitation till thou hast paid the utmost farthing signifies as Mat. I. 15. He knew her not till she had brought fourth her first borne son though he never knew her That is to say his utmost farthing shall never be paid My opinion would allow me to accept of Tertullians and S. Cyprians sense of this text who do indeed acknowledge the voiding of those effects of sin which may remain upon those that depart in the state of Grace between death and the day of judgement to be the paying of this utmost farthing But I have shewed you why it agrees not with the intent of the words And if it did it were nothing to Purgatory because Tertullian expresseth it to be paid mâ—ra resurrectioniâ— by the delay of the resurrection that is not before tâ—e generall judgement whereby Purgatory is quite spoiled For pretending the expinting of veniall sin which consisteth with reconcilement together with satisfying the debt of temporall punishment reserved by God upon that sin which he remitteth it cannot be intended by him that gives warning of seeking reconcilement not of voiding the penalties which may remaine when it is obtained Where you may see by survaying the scriptures which have been debated that there is not the least pretense in them for paying this debt by induring the flames of Purgatory for that sin which is forgiven afore But that all satisfaction endeth in voiding the guilt of sin by appeasing the wrâ—th of God for it before wee goe hence There be other texts both of the old and New Testament that are usually alleaged in this dispute But because rather for show then substance I will rather presume that all reasonable men may see where the consequence failes then use so many words as it requires to show it He shall sit as a refiner that purifieth silver and â—â—all purifiâ— the Sons of Levi and purge them as Gold and silver that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in rightousnesse saith the Prophet Malachi III. 3. But manifestly speaking of the first coming of Christ and triall which the Gospel passes them through that turn Christians upon mature advice Whatsoever trial the second coming of Christ may bring with it correspondent to the first it will be nothing to Purgatory the day of judgement determining it As for thee also by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth the prisoners out of the pit where in was no water Saith the Prophet Zachary IX 11. speaking of the returne from the Captivity of Babylon and of the prince of Israel that should figure oâ—t our Lord Christ and rule from sea to sea and from the river to the ends of the earth Whereby it appeareth that the spiritual sense of this Prophesy ending â—n the redemption of mankind by the death of Christ and his Kingdome by the preaching of his Gospel can by no meanes be extended to any delivering out of Purgatory and if it could must not be intended to take place before the second coming Which intent would also appear groundlesse in this Because I have showed that he did not deliver the soules of the Fathers out of the Devils hands at his first coming which this text is alleaged to prove no lesse then Purgatory For this will confine it to the delivery of mankind from sin by the death of our Lord Christ and his sufferings CHAP. XXVIII Ancient opinions in the Church of the place of soules before the day of judgement No Tradition that the Fathers were in the Verge of Hell under the Earth The reason of the difference in the expressions of the Fathers of the Church What Tradition of the Church for the place of Christs soule during his death The Saints soules in secret mansions according to the Tradition of the Church Prayer for the dead supposeth the same No Purgatory according to the Tradition of the Church LEt us now consider the Tradition of the Church in these particulars Justin the Martyr in his dispute with Trypho the Jew by the example of Samuel proveth that the soules of the Fathers and Prophets were in the hands of the Powers of darkenesse And that by the prayer of our Lord Psal XXII 21. wee are taught to pray at our departure that God would not give us up to them as he at his death commends his soule into his Fathers hands It â—s wel enough known that Clemens Alexandrinus believes that both our Lord his Apostles went into Hel to deliver from thence such soules as should admit that which he came to preach He followed in it the Apocryphall vision of Hermes then in request where this is still found libro III. similitud III. and what followers he hath in this opinion you may see by the late Lord Primate his answer to the Jesuites Challenge p. 274. S. Austine de Haer. LXXIX after Philastrius de Haer. LXXIV counts this opinion in the list of Heresies Yet doubted not that he did deliver thence whom he found fit Epist XCIX de Gen. ad Lit. XII 33 34. Nor S. Jerom that he did them good who were there though how it can not be said in Ephes IV. libro II. To the same purpose in IV. Dan. I. in III. Lament II. That this opinion had great vogue in the Church and must be counted in the number of Ecclesiasticall positions cannot be denyed That it is or ever was held as of the Rule of Faith it must Marcion was the fiâ—st that placed the Fathers soules in Hell that he might assigne heaven for the part of his Christ and his God as wee learne by Tertullian IV. 3 4. to wit to entertaine his disciples For this ingageth Tertullian to oppose the Gulfe and the rich mans lifting up his eyes in Hell for arguments that Abrahams bosome is no part of it but higher then Hell though not in heaven to refresh all believers Abr. children til the resurrection for he allowes paradise onely to Martyrs which he maketh also the place under the Alâ—ar where S. Iohn saw onely Martyrs soules though else where Apolog. cap XLVII and in his Poem de Judicio cap. VIII he assigneth it to incertaine the Saints soules without any difference alleaging a revelation to Perpetua a Montanist Virgine to that purpose de Resurr XLIII And therefore de Anima LV. makes that which he made before higher then hell but not in heaven a part of hell where our Lord visited the Fathers soules to wit the upper part of it being all contayned within the entrailes of the earth To the same purpose Iraeneus V. 31. saith it is manifest that the soules of Christians goe into an invisible place the English of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
this that the body being buryed the soule goe ad Inferos For in Psalmum II. he exemplifies in Dives and Lazarus And Lactantius VII 21. Nec tamen quisquam putet animas post mortem protinus judicari Omnes in una communique custodia detinentur dones tempus adveniat quo maximus index meritorum faciat examen Yet let no man think that soules are judged straight after death They are kept in one common guard till the time come for the Soveraigne Judge to examine theire deserts He denies them to be judged whom Novatianus acknowledgeth to be prejudged or forejudged He means our common guard but intends not to deny the gulfe which it is parted with S. Ambrose de Bono Mortis X. XI saith that those lodgings which the Apocryphichall Esdras speaketh of are the many lodgings which our Lord saith are in his fathers house Iohn XIV 2. and speaking of the Gentiles Satis fuerat dixisse illis quod liberatae animae a corporibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 peterent id est locum qui non videtur quem locum Latine infernum dicimus It had been enough for them to have said that soules freed from their bodies goe to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to a place not seen which place wee call hell in Latine Signifying that according to Christianity all soules going to Esdras his lodgings may be said to goe to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Latine makes to be under the Earth But whether Christianity so understand it or no not expressing Againe Ergo dum expectatur plenitudo temporis expectant anims remunerationem debitam Alias manet paena alias gloria Et tamen nec illae interim sine injuria nec istae sine fructu sunt While therefore the fulnesse of time is expected soules also expect their own reward Some punishment some glory attendes yet neither they without hardship nor these without benefit in the meane time Yet as it followes neither grieved with cares neither vexed with the remembrance of that which is past as the wicked but foreseeing their rest and glory to come injoy the quiet of their lodgings under the guard of Angels If it be excepted that there is no mention of the Fathers soules Let it be considered how many Church-writers have made the bosome of Abraham in which Lazarus rested before our Lords death a place of rest and refreshment from death till the day of judgement Their words you may find in the answer to the Jesuits Challenge named afore p. 260-267 Where those expositions of the Gospell which goe under the name of Theophilus of Antiochia Euthymius of Lions write two opinions the one placing it under the earth the other above because the rich man lifted up his eyes From whence the second of those dialogues against the Marcionists that goe under Origens name argueth that it is in heaven So far is the ancient Church from being agreed that those store-houses wherein it is agreed that all soules are kept till the generall judgement are beneath the earth And though he was a Christian that writ the Apocryphall book of Esâ—ras II. from whom S. Ambros and S. Austine receive their store-houses of Soules yet speakes it in the person of Esdras concerning the Fathers of the Old Testament In the meane time of the removing of them by the descent of Christ out of the Verge of Hell into heaven not one word in all this which certainely may serve to evidence that there never was nor is any such Tradition in the Church In fine the descent of righteous soules in to hell and the deliverance of them from thence by the descent of our Lord Christ may be understood two severall waies Either according to the literall sense of the old Testament or according ot the mysticall sense of the New For it is manifest that Adam was condemned to labor the earth first and then to returne to the earth And this being expulsed out of Paradise The secret of Christianity consisting in this that our Lord Christ should restore the posterity of Adam from those sorrowes which brought him to the earth whence he was taken to Paradise whence he was expulsed was not to be revealed though it was to take effect in all who in effect though not in forme imbraced and held the Covenant of Grace during the old Testament The land of promise and the blessings thereof were then the pledges of this hope To leave them by death was then to acknowledge themselves liable to the second death which returning to the earth signified so long as their returne to Paradise was not revealed Though to them which understood what the Land of promise signified it was to returne into paradise The new testament succeeding to reveale the mystery of the old must it not needes seeme strange that the Fathers of the old Testament should behave themselves towards death as they who had not this hope Supposing this reason not then to be declared it neede not seeme strange not supposing the same it seems to cal in question som thing of our common Christianity The Gospel opens the secret representing Dives in Hel torments Lazarus in Abrahams bosom But our Lord Christ himselfe being brought downe to the dust of the earth to deliver mankind from the second death signified by the same did our common redemption require that he should come any further under death and them who had the power of it our common Faith might seeme maimed in not believing it But the worke of redemption being accomplished upon the Crosse the effect of it was to be tryed by the disposing of his soule Which effect whether those that belonged to the new Testament under the Old understood by the scriptures of the Law they understood it as did the Devil by theire deliverance out of his hands For the reason of their deliverance he might not understand till the rising of Christ againe taught it When therefore wee see the soules of Adam and his posterity assigned by the Fathers of the Church to the powers of darkenesse let us understand it to hold according to the Old Testament and it will comprehend also the souls of the Fathers Who belonged to the New Testament When we heare them describe them in the rest of Abrahams bosome according to that which our Lord revealeth let us understand the effect of the New Testanent in them that dyed under the Old Without distinguishing thus I conceive it will be impossible to reconcile the Fathers to themselves and the common faith For pressing that which they say on either side you will not faile to make them crosse one an other as well as the Scriptures But thus distinguishing the common faith will remaine that which Macrina in Gregory Nyssens dialogue de anima resurrectione answers to the question Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is To wit that the translation of the soule from this visible world to that which is not seen is all that can be had