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
can be attributed to the spirit of God speaking of Gods own people in the mouth of David And without doubt as Idolatry was the originall of the most gross customes of sinne as appeares by the premises So can there be no greater argument of the corruption of mans nature then the departure of all nations from the worship of one true God to the worship of they knew not what That all nations coming of one blood from one God which at their first apostasy was so well known to them and not able to blot out of their own hearts the conscience of the service they ought him should imagine themselves discharged of that obligation by tendring it to what they pleased saving a small part of mankinde whom he reserved to himselfe by making them acquainted with himself through the familiarity which he used them with if all other arguments of a common principle of corruption in our common nature were lost is enough to make the apostasy of our first forefathers credible which the relation of Moses makes truth Wherefore when David attributes to himselfe by nature that which the people of God attribute to the Gentiles it must needs be understood in regard of a principle common to both which the Grace of God suffereth not to come to effect but preventeth in his people And when he attributeth the same to his malicious enemies Jewes onely by the first birth he warranteth us to say the same of those that are Jewes by the second birth so farre as the birth of both is the same I will not forbear to alledge here the Law of Leviticus that appoints a time of impurity for women that have brought forth as no lesse fit to signifie the evil inclination to which our nature by the fall of Adam is become liable then the ceremonies of the Law are fitly used by God to shadow the truth of the Gospel Not that I make any doubt that this impurity of it self is but legall as the impurity contracted by touching a dead man or a living creature that was unclean or that of the leprosie or by the custome of women or the like Which I am resolved amounts to no more then an incapacity of freely conversing with Gods people or an obligation to a sacrifice which is there called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it purged this incapacity which in regard of that positive Law may be called sinne But this being granted and these Legall incapacities being by the correspondence of the Law with the Gospel to signifie the cause for which men are uncapable of heaven As the leprosie of the body and the touching of a dead man or a living creature that is unclean by the law necessarily signifieth that incapacity which cometh by the custome of sinne So that uncleannesse which ariseth from those things which come from our own bodies seemeth by necessary correspondence to signifie that incapacity of coming to heaven which ariseth from the inward inclination of our nature to wickednesse Neither will I omit to allege the saying of the Prophet David alleging the reason of Gods compassion to his people in their sinnes to be their mortality Psal LXXVIII 40. For he considered that they were but flesh and even as a wind that passeth away and cometh not againe And Psal CIII 14-17 For he knoweth our frame he remembreth that we are dust The dayes of man are as of grasse as the bud of the field so springeth he For a wind passeth upon it and it is not And the place knoweth it no more But the goodnesse of the Lord is from generation to generation upon them that fear him and his righteousnesse upon childrens children For having shewed that the bodily death to which Adam was sentenced implied in it spritituall death and supposed the same according to S. Paul I may well say that he could not expresse that reason which Christians alledge to God for his compassion upon their infirmities more properly to the time and state of the Law then by alleging the death which our bodies are subject to as an argument of sinne which it is allotted to punish And the antithesis which follows between our short life and the continuance of Gods mercies to his servants of their posterity comes corespondently to set forth the grace of the Gospel though sparingly signified as under the Law And here I must not forget the Wise mans exhortation Wisdome I. 12 Affect not death through the error of your life nor purchase destruction through the workes of your hands For God made not death nor taketh pleasure in the destruction of the living For he made all things to indure And the beginnings of the world were healthful and no deadly poyson among them nor any dominion of hell upon the earth For righteousnesse is immortall But the wicked with their words and works purchased it And thinking it their friend decayed and made a covenant with it because they are worthy to be on the side of it Here it is evident that the speech is of temporall death but so that by it is intimated spirituall death according to that which hath oft been observed and will oft come to be observed that the mystery of Christianity intimated in the old Testament begins more plainly to be discovered in these books then in the canonicall Scriptures And therefore though the purchase of death is attributed to the evil words and works of the wicked yet seeing it hath taken place over all the world contrary to the first institution of God thereby he leaves us to argue the corruption of nature which moveth mankinde to take pleasure in those workes by which death takes place Last of all I will allege not the authority of the Book of Job which is not questionable but the authority of the Greek Translation of it Be the author thereof who may be be the authority thereof what it may be it is manifest how ancient it is and that it came from the people of God while they continued the people of God and hath passed the approbation of the Apostles When therefore it is said that no man is clear of sin no not the infant of one day old upon earth It remaineth manifest that this was the sense of the then people of God As it appeares also by Philo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That to sinne is a property born with all that are born in as much as it is come to birth And divers sayings of the Heathens might be alledged as obscure arguments of that truth which the Gospel is grounded upon But that I conceive the disorders of the world the greatest whereof that can be named is that which I named even now of the worship of Idols are greater and more evidences of the same then any sayings of Writers Which therefore it will not be requisite to heap into this abridgement CHAP. XII The Haeresie of Simon Magus the beginning of the Gnosticks
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
Councile The calling of a generall Councile I yeilded to the Empire during the time that it contained the whole Church Now that it is broken into severall Soveraignties and the Pope and Church of Rome subject to none of them but soveraigne of considerable dominions how should it not depend on him with the consent of the Soveraignties whereof Christendome consisteth How should not the consent of their Churches be involved in the same Indeed if by that originall intercourse the Churches understood one another there could arise no cause to complaine that any vote should be unduely obtained when it should be known afore that it could have no further effect then the voluntary consent of those who receive it which the free carriage of the debate must produce What prejudice the See of Rome could imagine to any regular preeminence that it may challenge by such proceeding as this it would be difficult to evidence As for the prejudice that matters in difference may create to the common Christianity which are at present the pretenses why this moderation cannot seeme rightfull and necessary when the parties are sufficiently wearied with prosecuting the extreamities which they pretend then will it appear though too late for the preserving of the common Christianity that the preservation of the common Christianity doth indeed consist in abating the extreme pretenses on both sides I have showed my opinion at least in grosse how and to what point they ought to be abated And I shall impute it to the common Christianity whatsoever offence I procure my selfe by showing it The end of the Third Book Laus Deo A CONCLUSION To all CHRISTIAN READERS BY the premises though I must not take upon me to determine that which the whole Church never did nor never will undertake to declare what is necessary to be believed for the salvation of all Christians as the meanes without which it is not to be had what is necessary to the salvation onely of those who become obliged by their particular estate Yet I conceive my self inabled to maintaine that onely those things which concern a Christian as a Christian are necessary to be known for the salvation of all Christians Those things which concern a Christian as a member of a Church becoming necessary to that salvation of every member of the Church according as the obligation which the Communion of the Church createth taketh place by virtue of his particular estate in the Church For it is not the same obligation that takes hold on the young and the old on the ignorant and the wise on those that have liberall education and those that live by their hands on Superiors and Inferiors on the Clergy and the People But the profession of that Christianity which our Lord Christ delivered to his Apostles to preach when he gave them authority to found his Church being the condition without undergoing whereof no man was to be admitted a member of the Church by being baptized a Christian as it is supposed to the being of the Church so must it of necessity containe whatsoever the salvation of all Christians requireth What a mans particular estate will require him to know that by his knowledge he may be inabled to discharge the obligation of it becomes necessary to his salvation by virtue of that particular estate But whatsoever obligation the acts and decrees of the Church can create is necessarily of this nature taking hold upon every estate as it stands bound to be satisfied that they injoyne nothing to be believed or done that is not necessarily either dependent upon or consistent with that which the necessity of salvation requireth all to professe It is therefore necessary for the salvation of all Christians to believe that there is one true God who made all things with all mankind having immortall soules and all Angels to indure for everlasting That governing all things by his perfect Providence which supposes the maintenance of them in acting according to their severall natures he shall at the end of the world which he hath determined bring the actions of all men and angels to judgement and assigne them their respective estate for everlasting as it shall appear their actions have deserved according to his Law For all this it was necessary to the salvation of all those that were saved under the Law to believe and therefore it is all presupposed to that wherein Christianity properly consisteth The people of God therefore held it when our Lord came neither had he any thing to reforme them in saving that pernicious opinion which the Pharisees had perverted it with that the Law of Moses whether Civile or Ceremoniall was the Law by which that people was to be saved or damned The incongruity whereof was so grosse that the Sadduces on the contraryside took advantage thereupon to deny the World to come The corruptions therefore which these Sects had brought in being cleared The Faith of Gods ancient people remaines thus far the Faith of his Church If any question may remaine concerning the end of the World whether or no necessary then expressely to be believed it is not considerable here But further in regard the coming of Christ which brought Christianity must be maintained necessary to the salvation of all It is necessary to salvation to believe that our first parents being seduced from the obedience of God by apostate Angels neither themselves nor their posterity would have been able of themselves to recover that amity with God here which might bring them to happinesse in the world to come That therefore God by his Word diversly ministred before and under the Law indeavored to reconcile mankinde to himselfe againe But with so little successe the greatest part thereof being swallowed up in Idolatry and of his own people the greater part being carried away with the hope of salvation by outwardly keeping Moses Law that at length it appeared requisite that the Word of God should become incarnate by the holy Ghost of the Virgine Mary And by his obedience to God in preaching the termes of reconcilement with God to his People and suffering death at their hands for so doing should voide the interest which God had allowed the apostate Angels in mankind whom they had cast down And by rising againe and going up to the right hand of God should give the holy Ghost the fullnesse whereof dwelt in his manhood as planted in the Word incarnate both to reduce them to Christianity and to inable them to persevere in it Undertaking to give whomsoever shall professe Christianity by being baptized into the Church and live according to it remission of sinnes here and everlasting life in the world to come in consideration of the obedience of Christ provided by him for that purpose For by his second coming raising all from death to life he that was judged here afore shall then judge the world and rendring them that have disobeyed God everlasting punishment shall render everlasting happinesse to them whose
spirit of Christ hee is none of Christs So hee had premised Rom. V. 1-5 Being justified by Faith wee have peace towards God through our Lord Jesus Christ together with the joy of hope by the love of God poured out in our hearts through the Spirit of God which is in us The Kingdome of God consisting in righteousnesse and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost Rom. XIV 17. If it be here objected that the Grace of the Holy Ghost is necessary to bring a man to Christianity and therefore cannot suppose it Supposing this for the present but not granting it because it is in controversie and must be resolved by the grounds which wee seek It will be easie to distinguish between the grace of the Holy Ghost and the gift of the Holy Ghost For hee that is converted to believe the truth of Christianity may acknowledge it to be of Grace but must not presume of the gift of the Holy Ghost that it is bestowed on him for his own till his conversion be complete by undertaking the profession of Christianity If it be further alleged that Cornelius and his company received the Holy Ghost before they were baptized The answer is ready from that maxime of Law That every exception against a Rule establishes the Rule in cases not excepted Cornelius no Jew but converted from Idols to worship the true God under the promises which the Jewes expected with his company of the same Faith being in the state of Gods grace upon that account receives the Holy Ghost before Baptisme because God knew him ready to undertake the profession of Christianity so soon as it could appear to be commanded by God And this for the satisfaction of S. Peter and the Jewes in that secret which hereby begâ—n to be declared that the Gentiles as well as the Jewes belonged to the Church It is true the graces of the Holy Ghost are of two kindes For some of them are given for the benefit and salvation of those in whom they are Some for the benefit and edification of the Church And it is true that both kindes are meant and expressed by these Scriptures But it is no lesse true that neither of them is to be had but supposing the truth of Christianity and of the Scriptures For the first kinde is granted to none but those that imbrace Christianity with a sincere intention of living according to that which they professe Being indeed the help that God by his Gospel promises and allowes them to go thorough with that high and difficult profession which they undertake Wee see the Apostles forsake their Lord and make a doubt of his resurrection before the coming of the Holy Ghost Whom having received they are ready to professe Christ in the midst of utmost dangers And S. John as hee giveth the reason why the righteous sin not because their â—eed abideth in them that is the word of the Gospel by which they were ingendred anew to be Christians 1 John III. 9. So hee giveth the reason why they were not to be seduced by the Heresies of that time because the unction which they had received from the Holy One taught them to know all things 1 John II. 20 27. Thus the Unction of the Spirit supposes the seed of the Word and the seed of the Word inferres the Unction of the Spirit And as when the Word of God came to the Prophets they were withall possessed by Gods Spirit moving them to deliver it to the people So when the word of Faith is established in the heart of a Christian as David saith the Spirit of God possesseth him with an inclination both to professe it and to live according to it As for the second kinde it is true they are granted to those that are not heires of Gods promises as it appeares by the instances of Saul surprised with the Spirit of Prophesie when hee intended the death of David 1 Sam. XIX 23 24. Of those that have prophesied and cast out Devils and done miracles in our Lords name to whom hee shall say I know you not Mat. VII 22 23. Of Caiaphas who prophesied of our Lords death when hee was compassing of it John XI 49 -52. And of Balaam in the last place as all know But as the former kinde supposeth true Christianity in him that hath it so doth this correspondently suppose the profession of it as under the old Law the profession of the true God The tryal of a Prophet under the Law was not the doing of a miracle alone If hee seduced from God in stead of taking him for Gods messenger they were to put him to death Deut. XIII 1-5 So the tryal was the doing of a miracle under the profession of the true God Under the Gospel No man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus anathema nor can any man call Jesus Lord but by the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. XII 3. Supposing that a man speaketh such things as must come either from Gods Spirit or from evil Spirits the tryal is whether hee professe Christ or not And 1 John IV. 2 3. Every Spirit that confesseth Jesus come in the flesh to be Christ is of God And every Spirit that confesseth not Jesus Christ that is come in the flesh is not of God Every Spirit that is every inspiration which a man of himself cannot have God will not have his people so tempted that under the profession of the true Religion the Devils instruments should have power to work miracles to seduce them from it Upon these terms prophesied Saul under the Law and upon the same terms prophesied those under the Gospel whom our Lord will not own having done miracles in his name As for Caiaphas it doth not appear that hee spoke those words whereby S. John saith hee prophened of our Lords death by revelation or inspiration from God For the reason is given why hee prophened because hee was High Priest that year Now when the High Priests declared Gods orders to his ancient people there is no appearance that they were inspired by revelation with that which they declared But that putting on the Pontifical robes Gods will appeared by the brest-plate of Urim and Tummim though now wee know not how Accordingly to were Caiaphas his words ordered this gift being ceased many ages afore as to containe a Prophesie of our Lords death by Gods intent but without his But Balaams case is farre otherwise Arnobius advers Gent. I. tells us that Magicians in their operations met with contrary Gods whom hee calls Antitheos that would not suffer them to proceed Balaam met with the true God and knew him to be so and all his Inchantments controlable by him and yet sacrifices to false Gods that by their help hee might curse Gods people In this case Balaam though commanded as a subject is not as a friend inspired by God when God forces him to speak what hee would not If any man then resolve the credit of the Scripture into the
of the Languages and of Historical truth to the text of the Scripture And many things more may be cleared by applying the light of reason void of partiality and prejudice to draw the truth so cleared into consequence No part of all this can be said to be held upon any decree of the Church Because no part of the evidence supposes the Church in the nature and quality of a Corporation the constitution whereof inableth some persons to oblige the whole Because there are maters in question concerning our common Christianity and the sense of the Scriptures upon which the great mischief of diviâ—â—on is fallen out in the Church it is thought a plausible plea to say that the decree of the present Church supposing the foundation of the Church in that nature and the power given to every part in behalf of the whole of which no evidence can be made not supposing all that for truth which I have said obligeth all Christians to believe as much as the Scriptures supposing them to be the Word of God can do Which they that affirm do not consider that it must first be evident to all that are to be obliged Both that the Church is so founded and whoâ—e Act it is and how that Act must be done which must oblige it Seeing then that the Scriptures are admitted on all sides to be the Word of God let us see whether it be as evident as the Scriptures that the act of the Pope or of a General Council or both oblige the Church to believe the truth of that which they decree as much as the Scriptures I know there are texts of Scripture alleged First concerning the Apostles and Disciples Mat. X. 14 15 40. Luke IX 5. X. 10 11 16. where those that refuse them are in worse estate than Sodom and Gomorrha And Hee that heareth you heareth mee Hee that neglecteth you neglecteth mee Mat. XXVIII 19 20. Go make all Nations Disciples teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you and behold I am with you to the worlds end 1 Thess II. 13. Yee received the Gospel of us not as the word of man but as it is indeed the word of God Then concerning S. Peter as predecessor of all Popes Mat. XVI 18 19. Vpon this rock will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it And I will give thee the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever thou loosest on earth shall be loosed in heaven Luke XXII 32. I have prayed for thee that thy Faith fail not and thou once converted strengthen thy brethren John XXI 15 16 17. Simon son of Jonas lovest thou mee Feed my lambs feed my sheep Again concerning the Church and Councils Mat. XVIII 17-20 If hee heare them not tell the Church If hee hear not the Church let him be to thee as a Heathen or a Publican Verily I say unto you whatsoever yee binde on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Again I say unto you If two of you agree on earth upon any thing to ask it it shall be done them from my Father in heaven For where two or three are assembled in my name there am I in the midst of them John XVI 13. The Spirit of truth shall lead you into all truth Acts XV. 28. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us 1 Tim. III. 15. That thou mayest know now it behoveth to converse in the house of God which is the Churchof God the pillar and establishment of the truth You have further the exhortations of the Apostles 1 Thess V. 12 13. Now I beseech you brethren to know them which labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you And esteem them more than abundantly in love for their works sake Heb. XIII 7 17. Bee obedient and give way to your Rulers for they watch for your souls as those that must give account That they may do it joyfully and not groaning Which is not for your profit And afore Rememeer your Rulers which have spoken to you the Word of God And considering the issue of their conversation imitate their Faith Those that spoke unto them the Word of God are the Apostles or their companions and deputies whom hee commandeth them to obey no otherwise than those who presently watched over them after their death In the Old Testament likewise Deut. XVII 5-12 Hee that obeyeth not the determination of the Court that was to sit before the Ark is adjudged to death Therefore Hag. II. 12. Thus saith the Lord the God of Hosts Ask the Priests concerning the Law Mal. II. 7. The Priests lips shall preserve knowledge and the Law shall they require at his mouth For hee is the messenger of the Lord of Hosts The answers of the Priests resolved into the decrees of the said Court therefore they are unquestionable And this Power established by the Law our Lord acknowledging the Law allowes Mat. XXIII 2. The Scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses chair whatsoever therefore they command you that do But according to their works do not This is that which is alleged out of the Scriptures for that Infallibility which is challenged for the Church If I have left any thing behinde it will prove as ineffectual as the rest In all which there are so many considerations appear why the sense of them should be limited on this side or extended beyond the body of the Church that it is evident they cannot serve for evidence to ground the Infallibility of it For is it not evident that the neglect of the Apostles in questioning their doctrine redounds upon our Lord who by sending them stamps on them the marks of his Fathers authority which hee is trusted with Not so the Church For who can say that God gives any testimony to the lie which it telleth seeing Christianity is supposed the Infallibility thereof remaining questionable Is it not evident that God is with his Chu ch not as a Corporation but as the collection of many good Christians Supposing that those who have power to teach the Church by the constitution thereof teach lies and yet all are not carried away with their doctrine but believe Gods truth so farre as the necessity of their salvation requires If there were any contradiction in this supposition how could it be maintained in the Church of Rome that so it shall be when Antichrist comes as many do maintain Besides is it as evident as Christianity or the Scriptures that this promise is not conditional and to have effect supposing both the teaching and the following of that which our Lord lud taught and nothing else Surely if those that refuse the Gospel be in a worse state than those of Sodom and Gomorrha it followeth not yet that all that refuse to hear the Church without the Gospel are so For the truth of the Gospel
supposeth that there is no means but the Gospel to save us But if wee be saved by believing the Gospel wee may be saved not believing that which the Church teacheth without it For that which the Gospel obligeth us to believe unto salvation it is agreed already that wee cannot be saved without believing it Suppose now the Church to continue till the last day not as one visible Body but broken into pieces as wee see it so that alwaies there remain a number of good Christians for whether or no they that communicate not with the Church of Rome may be good Christians is the thing in question not to be taken for truth without proving shall the gates of hell be said to prevail against the Church all that while Besides Grotius expounds those words to signifie no more but this That death and the grave which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Hell in the stile of the Old Testament signifies shall never prevail over Christians That is that they shall rise again And I suppose it is not so evident that this exposition is false as that the Gospel is true As for the Keyes of Christs Kingdom let him that saith they argue Infallibility say also that they cannot be abused But hee will have more shame if not more sense than to say it The Thessalonians received the Gospel as the Word of God because they supposed it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word which God sent them newes of Would they therefore have received the decrees of the Church with the same reverence not supposing them the Word of God till some body prove it But suppose the promises made S. Peter to import as much as the power of the Apostles is it as evident that the present Pope succeeds S. Peter as that Christianity is from God That hee succeeds him in the full right of that Power which is given the Apostles Certainly wheresoever two or three are assembled in the name of Christ there is not the Infallibility of the Church Therefore it cannot be founded upon the promises made to all Assemblies of Christians as Christians It is very probable that the Council of the Apostles at Jerusalem had a revelation upon the place signifying how they should order the mater in question because there are many instances in the Scriptures of inspirations at the very Assemblies of Gods people as I have showed in the Right of the Church Therefore it is not evident that all Councils may say the like Therefore they cannot presume that the Holy Ghost will lead them into all truth whatsoever they take a humor to determine because it was promised that hee should lead the Apostles into all truth concerning our common Christianity But if the Church be the pillar and foundation that upholdeth the truth then must that truth first be evidenced for truth before the effect of the Churches office in upholding it as pillars uphold an house can appear The exhortations of the Apostles 1 Thess V. 14 15. Hebr. XIII 7 17. to yield obedience to the Rulers of the Church are certainly pertinent to this purpose But it is evident that this obedience is limitable by the grounds and substance of Christianity delivered afore as it is evident that all Power of the present Church presupposeth our common Christianity As for the obedience required in the Old Testament to the Governors of the Synagogue and Priests confirmed by our Lord Mat. XXIII 2. I am very willing to grant the Church all Power in decreeing for truth that can appear to have belonged to the Rulers of the Synagogue because I am secure that those who could put malefactors to death as they could were not therefore able to tye men to believe that which they say to be true But the great subtilty is the Prophesie of Caiaphas John XI 48-52 who because High Priest could not but truly determine that our Lord must die least the people should perish even in resolving to crucifie him Indeed at the beginning God was wont to conduct his people by Oracles of Urim and Tummim in the High Priests brest-plate And though this was ceased under the second Temple as wee have reason to believe the Jewes yet was it no marvail that God should use the High Priests tongue to declare that secret which himself understood not being the Person by whom hee had used to direct his people in former ages But hee that from hence concludes the Church infallible must first maintain that Caiaphas erred not in crucifying our Lord Christ Now if it be said that the consent of all Christians though not as members of the Church because as yet it appeareth not that the Church is a Corporation and hath members determines the sense of these Scriptures to signifie Infallibility which they may but do not necessarily signifie Let him consider the disputes that succeeded in the Church upon the decree of the Great Council at Nicaea the breaches that have succeeded upon the decrees of Ephesus and Chalcedon the division between the Greek and the Latine Church between the Reformation and the Church of Rome For is it imaginable that all Christians holding as firmly as their Christianity that the acts of the Pope and a Council that is the greater part of the present Church is to be believed as much as the Scriptures not onely the decree of Nicaea should be disputed again but breaches should succeed rather than admit their decrees retaining the common profession of Christianity What disputes there have been betwixt the Court of Rome and the Paris Doctors whether it be the act of the Pope or of a General Council that obligeth the belief of the Church is as notorious to the world as that they are not yet decided And yet the whole question is disputed onely concerning the Western Church The East which acknowledgeth not the Pope appeareth not in the claim of this Infallibility were both East and West joyned in one and the same Council Now among them that maintain the Pope it is not agreed what acts of the Pope they must be that shall oblige the Church to believe as it believes the Scriptures For it is argued that Popes have decreed Heresie Liberius Honorius Vigilius and perhaps others And though I stand not to prove I may presume that the contrary is not so evident as our common Christianity or the Scriptures And that some of them have held Heresie seems granted without dispute Is it then as evident as our common Christianity what act of the Pope obliges us to believe That hee cannot decree that error to be held by others which it is granted himself holdeth Besides how many things are requisite to make a true Pope whose Power unlesse it be conveyed by the 〈◊〉 act of those that are able to give it the acts thereof will be void which it does not appear that the present Pope is qualified with as it appeareth that the Scriptures are true And may not the same question be
as the Evangelist and our Lord both affirm that these things were prophesied concerning the cures which our Lord did upon their bodies so can it not be doubted that the cure of our soules is spiritually signified by the same whether you consider the promises whereby the ground of this correspondence is settled or the expresse words of the Apostle 1 Pet. II. 24. where that which S. Matthew expoundeth of the cures which our Lord did upon their bodies is referred to the taking away of sâ—nne by the sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse Which if it cannot be denied I shall make no difficulty to inferre that the words of the Prophet Esay VII 14. Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and yee shall call his name Emmanuel which the Evangelists referreth to our Lord Mat. I. 22. and by the premises were fulfilled when they were first said as in the figure are still accomplished in the children which by Gods grace are still â—orn of the holy faith of his Church by grace Nor that the words of the Prophet Osee XI 1. Out of Egypt have I called my Son which being manifestly said of the Israelites coming out of Egypt the same Evangelist II. 15. affirmeth to be fulfilled in our Lords coming back out of Egypt are still accomplished in those which out of the darknesse of this world are brought to Gods Church which is spiritually the Land of Promise Nor that the words of the Prophet Jeremy XXXI 15. which the same Evangelist expoundeth of the Innocents which were slaine by Herod at Bethlehem but the correspondence hitherto established requireth us to understand of the captive Jewes at Ramah in that Prophets time are still fulfilled in all that suffer persecution and death for Christianity Nor lasâ—ly that the words of the Psalmes XXII 8 18. Hee trusted in God that hee would deliver him let him save him seeing hee loveth him They pierced my hands and my feet And They part my garments among them and cast lots upon my vesture XLI 9. Hee which did eat of my bread hath lift up the heel against mee XLIX 9 21. The zeale of thine house hath eaten mee up And They gave mee gall to eat and in my thirst they gave mee vineger to drink VIII 2. Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise CIX 8. His Office let another take XVI 10. Thou shalt not leave my soul in Hell nor suffer thine holy One to see corruption which the New Testament will have to be fulfilled in those things that befell our Lord Christ in the flesh in his crucifying Maâ— XXVIII 18 35 43. Mark XV. 22 23 24. John XIX 17 29. in Judas betraying him John XIII 18. in his purging the Temple John II. 17. in the children that praised him Mat. XXI 16. in Matthias chosen in Judas stead Acts I. 20. in the resurrection of Christ Acts II. 31. XIII 35. But the correspondence premised and the reason of it require us first to understand of those things which befell David and Gods ancient people are still spiritually verified and accomplished in those things which befall the children of God and his Church under the state of Grace Neither shall I make any question that the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel which wee have settled being supposed it will not follow neverthelesse that all the Old Testament ought by virtue thereof to be so fulfilled in the life of our Lord Christ But that the Spirit of God in the Evangelists showeth that the Spirit in the Prophets so directed their words that they were intended to be farre more properly fulfilled in our Lord Christ than in those whom they were spoke of in the literal sense For wee do not finde that the Text that is to say that which went before and that which followes after those words which the Gospels say were fulfilled in our Lord Christ is answered by any thing which wee reade to have befallen him in the flesh And the general correspondence between Israel according to the flesh in the Old Testament and Israel according to the Spirit in the New being sufficient to justifie our Lord to be the Christ whom they expected and by consequence that twofold sense of the Old Testament which here wee maintaine there is no cause why they should be said to be impertinently alleged though by ordinary reason supposing this correspondence that could not be proved from those Texts which the Gospels say that they signifie Indeed such of them as are used by our Lord and his Apostles to prove him to be the Christ must be said and well may be maintainâ—d to do it by the perpectual correspondence of Gods earthly promises made good to his carnal people through the meanes of their Kings Priests and Prophets with the promises of the world to come made good by the means of our Lord Christ to the Church Therâ— is yet another kinde of our Lord Christs sayings and of things that befell him in the flesh in which there appears at the first view that difference of literal and mystical sense which hath been settled between the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments The Parable of the Prodigal childe for example seems not onely to contain a plain song of Gods earnest desire to be reconciled with penitent sinnerâ— but also a descant of the rejection of the Jewes and the calling of the Gentiles figured by it In like maner the Parable of him that fell among theeves as hee went down to Jericho Luke XI seemeth not onely to instruct who is the neighbor that wee are to love as our selves but also to figure the fall of man and the sending of our Lord for the restoring of him intimated as the ground of it So the acclamations of them that went afore and them that came after our Lord at his entrance into Jerusalem Mat. XXI agreeing in the same note of Hosanna to the Son of David I cannot tell whether any Christian could be so moroâ—e as to doubt but that it fell out on purpose to signifie the agreement of the Old and New Testament concentring in our Lord Christ But as it cannot be reasonably denied that these Parables and the like are mystical significations of the purpose of God in sending Christ or the event of it in the rejection of the Jewes and calling of the Gentiles So is all this nothing to the two senses of the Old Testament in which it is twice fulfilled once according to the Leter and again according to the Spirit I have thus farre inlarged this point concerning the correspondence and difference between the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament between the Ancient and New people of God to show how I conceive the scruples are to be resolved which may be made against an assumption of more efficacy and consequence than any other wheresoever any point of Christianity is to be showed from the Old Testament Yet so much more protection I owe the
manifest to those that dedicate themselves to the examining of the Word according to the rate of that leisure and forwardnesse which they bestow upon their exercise in it Athanasius Disp. cum Ario in Conc. Nic. if it be his speaking of the Godhead of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Holy Scriptures clearly declare all things And not onely that which was in debate S. Chrysostome in Lazarum Hom. III. incourages to reade the Scripture because it is not obscure the Gentiles that sought vain-glory by writing books affecting obscurity as the way to be admired but the Holy Ghost seeking the good of all contrariwise In â—oan Hom. II. hee compares S. Johns doctrine to the Sun as shining to all not onely men of understanding but women and youths In Mat. Hom. I. to the same purpose Epiphanius Haer. LXXVI 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For all is clear in Gods Scriptures to those that will come to the Word of God with godly reason and turn not themselvs down the precipices of death through lust wrought in them by the devil To the same purpose Haer. LXIX Gregory Nyssene in Psalm Inscriptiones I. commendeth the Psalms for rendring deep mysteries easie and pleasant to men and women young and old Cyril in Julianum VII answering his scorn of the Scriptures for their vulgar language saith it was so provided that they might not exceed any mans capacity Fulgentius according to S. Austine Sermde Confessoribus Ita suae moderationis tenet temperiem ut nec ovibus desint pabula nec pastoribus alimenta The Scripture holds this moderation in the temper of it that neither the sheep wants food nor the shepherd nourishment in it S. Chrysostome observes that when S. Paul sayes 2 Cor. III. 14. Their senses are blinded in reading the Scriptures Hee makes the cause to be in the Jewes blindenesse when they understand not in the Scriptures Again Origen in Mat. Tract XXV in Rom. III. S. Basil Moral definitione XXV S. Chrysostome in Psal XCV S. Cyril Catech. IV. Rufinus in Symb. agree in affirming that whatsoever is taught in Christianity is to be proved by the Scriptures S. Jerome in Mic. I. Ecclesia Christi quae habitat bene in toto orbe Ecclesias possidens spiritus unitate conjuncta est habet urbes Legis Prophetarum Evangelii Apostolorum non est egressa de finibus suis id est de Scripturis sanctis The Church of Christ being well seated and having Churches all over the world it hath the Cities of the Law the Prophets the Gospel and the Apostles goes not out of her bounds which are the Holy Scriptures Optatus V. putting the case of the Church with the Donatists to be the case of children about their Fathers inheritance sends them to his Will as the Judge of their pretenses And so S. Austine also in Psalmum XXI The Constitutions of the Apostles II. 19. Leo Epist XXIII S. Cypr. Epist LXVIII and many more agree that the People are to answer for themselves if they follow bad Pastors S. Austine adversus Maxim III. 14. Neque ego Nicenum nec tu debes Ariminense tanquam praejudicaturus proferre Concilium Scripturarum authoritatibus non quorumcunque propriis sed utriusque communibus testibus res cum re causa cum causâ ratio cum ratione decertet Neither am I to produce the Council of Nicaea nor you that of Ariminum for a prejudice With authorities of the Scriptures as witnesses common to both not proper to either let mater contend with mater reason with reason cause with cause De Vtilitate credendi VI. hee saith the Scripture of the Old Testament ità esse modificatam ut nemo inde haurire non possit quod sibi satis est si modò ad hauriendum devotè ac piè ut vera religio poscit accedat Is so tempered that any man may draw out of it that which is enough for him if hee come devoutly and piously as true religion requires to draw Vincentius Commonit I. confesseth that inveterate Herâ—â—es and Opus imperfectum in Mat. Hom. XLIX that the corruptions of Antichrist are not to be convinced but by Scripture The same Vincentius Commonit I. and Sulpitius Severus Hist II. acknowledg the Arians to have over-spread the greatest part of the Church Theâ—efore Nazianzene Orat. advers Arianos scorns them that measure the Church by number And Liberius in Theodoret Eccles Hist II. 16. answers Constantius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The cause of the Faith hath never a whit the worse because I am alone But truly I know nothing in all antiquity more peremptory against the Infallibility of the Church than that of Vineentius denying that the Rule of Faith can ever increase or Councils do any more in it than determine that expresly and distinctly which was simply held from the beginning Commonit I. And S. Austine de Vnitate Ecclesiae cap. XVI challenges the Donatists to demonstrate their Church out of the Scriptures S. Ambrose de Incarnatione cap. V. S. Hilary de Trinitate VI. Victor in Marcum cap. III. agree that the Faith is the foundation of the Church by virtue whereof the gates of Hell prevail not against it Therefore S. Austine de Bapt. contra Donat. II. 3. acknowledges that not onely particular Councils are corrected by General but that of General Councils the later may and do correct them that went afore Again Irenaeus III. 1. affirms that the Apostles writ what they preached by the will of God for the foundation and pilar of our Faith Tertulliane de Prâ—script cap. VIII Cùm credimus nihil ultrà desideramus credere Hoc enim prius credimus non esse quod ultra credere debeamus When wee believe wee desire to believe nothing else For first wee believe that there is nothing further which wee ought to believe So cap. XIV XXIX contra Hermog cap. XXII Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis Officina that the world was made of mater preexiâ—ent Si non est scriptum timeat vae illud adjicientibus aut detrahentibus definitum Let the shop of Hermogenes show it written If it be not written let it fear the wo decreed for them that adde or take away Apollinaris in Eusebius Eccl. Hist V. 10. is afraid to write least hee should seem to write or injoyn more than the Gospel to which nothing is to be added or taken from it S. Basil de Fide sayes it is plain apostasie to bring in any thing that is not written And in Asceticis Reg. LXXX proves it because faith is by Gods Word and that which is not of faith is sin So likewise S. Ambrose de Paradiso cap. XII alleging Apoc. XXII 19. S. Austine de Bono Viduitatis I. Sancta Scriptura doctrinae nostrae Regulam figit The Holy Scripture prescribes a Rule to our doctrine To the same purpose de peccatorum remiss II. 36. S. Cyril de Trinitate personâ Christi whose words Damascene uses de Orthod Fide
of the Holy Ghost Where you see that upon inlightning that is Baptism we become partakers of the Holy Ghost And this consideration utterly voides the only reason why our Lord when he sayes to Nicodemus John III. 5. Verily verily I say unto thee unlesse a man be born again of waâ—er and of the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God should not seem to speak of the Sacrament of Baptism For at that time neither was the Sacrament of Baptism instituted nor the promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to it The Holy Ghost that is to say the gift of the Holy Ghost is no where promised before the ascension of Christ For besides that which I alledged in the beginning to show that it presupposeth Christianity When it is said John VII 37. The Holy Ghost was not yet because Christ was not yet glorified The dependance thereof upon the glorifying of our Lord is plainly expressed And that according to S. Paul Ephes IV. 8. 12. Shewing out of Psal LXVIII 18. that the graces of the Holy Ghost by which the Church is united and compacted into one Body are sent down by God as a largess in consideration of the advancement of our Lord to the right hand of God as in honour of that triumph Wherewith agreeth S. Peter Acts II. 33. Being then exalted to or by the right hand of God and having received the gift of the Holy Ghost as it is also called Acts X. 54. he hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear Now let any man say that these visible operations of Holy Ghost whereby the world was to be convinced of the presence of God in the Church of Christians these indeed depend upon the ascension of Christ But without the invisible operation of the Holy Ghost no man ever to salvation from the beginning supposing this for the present but not granting it if any man that is a Christian demand proof for it Though this be true yet it was not expresly promised by God nor expresly Covenanted for by man till the publishing of Christianity upon the ascension of Christ Therefore the Baptism of repentance which John preached was without question effectuall to the remission of sins as the Gospels propose it Mark I. 4. Luke III. 3 For if I maintain the salvation of those who living under the Law understood the Covenant of Grace to be folded up in it by the preaching of the Prophets much more easily can I maintain the salvation of those who have imbraced the Baptism of Repentance for remission of sins which Joâ—n Preached provided that they came to Christ to whom John Baptist sent his Disciples so soon as the command of Christianity should take place and not otherwise But not by vertue of the Covenant of Grace published which it was not to be till the ascention of Christ but by vertue of the Covenant of Grace vailed under the Law which was not unvailed as yet during the time of passage from the Law to the Gospel when the baptism of John might take place Neither was the baptism of John in the name of the Father Son and the Holy Ghost which baptism our Lord never established till after his rising again Mat. XXVIII 19. but in the name of him that was comming as S. Paul saith to the Disciples Acts XIX 4. John truly baptised the baptism of repentance saing to the people that they should believe on him that was comming after him that is in Christ Jesus which words some have endeavoured to set upon the rack and to pull them from those which follow but they hearing this were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus as if they were not S. Lukes words but S. Pauls speaking of S. John's hearers that they were baptized by him in the name of the Lord Jesus A thing altogether unreasonable to imagine that the Disciples of John should make a question whether our L. Jesus were the Christ or not as Mat. XI 2. Luke VII 18. if they had been from the beginning baptized in his Name And the words might have served to represse this conceit in them that had submitted to take the meaning from the words For it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which their meaning were it the meaning of the text would require Nor is it strange that they who had been baptized into the profession of admitting him that was comming for the Christ in hope by him to have remission of sins as their Fathers had alwayes hoped acknowledging our Lord Jesus not only to be the Christ but further sent by the Father to send the Holy Ghost should be baptized again in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost For the receiving of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of S. Pauls hands which followeth in S. Luke is sufficient evidence that it is the baptism of Christ and not of John Baptist whereof he speaketh Let us hear then the Commission of our Lord Christ to his Apostles Mat. XXVIII 19. Go make Disciples all Nation babtizing them in the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek in the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if we insist upon the property of the word must necessarily signifie make Disciples But who are Christs Disciples Those that take up his Crosse to follow him Those that will do whatsoever he commandeth Those that bear much fruit Those of whom our Lord saith John VIII 34. If ye abide in my Word then are ye truly my Disciples As I shewed you before speaking of the profession of Christianity This before Christs death and the institution of Baptism Afterwards who are his Disciples Acts XI 26. It came to passe that the Disciples were first called Christians at Antivchia First at Antiochia but afterwards all over that Book as well as afore they are oftner called Disciples then Christians Neither is the name given to any but Christians saving those Disciples which I spoke of just now who under the baptism of John had given up themselves to our Lord Jesus as the Christ but through invincible ignorance knew not yet that the gift of the Holy Ghost presupposed Christs Baptism being ready as we see to receive it so soon as they understood it by the means of S. Paul Now there is nothing more manifest than that the gift of the holy Ghost is promised by our Lord in the Gospel to supply the want of his bodily presence and therefore when he declared unto them his departure and not much afore it Which things if they be true of necessity the promise of the Holy Ghost is annexed to the precept of being baptized given by our Lord at his departure and from that time to take place Neither is the meaning of his commission in the words alledged that they should first teach and then baptize though teaching that which Christianity professeth
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
thus proceedeth Heb. IX 13 14. For if the blood of Bulls and Goats and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkled sanctify the polluted to the purifying of the flesh how much more shall the blood of Christ who through the everlasting spirit offered himself to God blamelesse cleanse our conscience from dead works to serve the living God For though the Soul of Christ raised from the dead have immortality which is life indissoluable yet it hath not the virtue of it which is to be ascribed to the Spirit which raised him from the dead as vvell as us according to S. Paul Rom. VIII 10. 11. If Christ be in you though the body be dead because of sin yet the Spirit is life because of righteousness But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you he that raised Iesus from the dead shall quicken your mortall bodies also through his Spirit that dwelleth in you And whether the cleansing of sin can be ascribed to any gift bestowed upon the humane Soule of Christ as here they vvould have it ascribed to the immortality thereof let all the World judge I deny not indeed that Christ offers the Sacrifice of himself to the Father in the Heaven of Heavens as the Priest offered him the blood of those Sacrifices which were burnt without the Camp in that Holy of Holies But if I should deny that he offered himself to God vvhen he vvas crucified I might as vvell deny that the Priests offered therein Sacrifices to God when they killed them at the Altar and burnt them upon it So manifest so certain it is that the eternall Spirit by virtue whereof the blood of Christ being offered cleanseth sin was in Christ before his rising again And this is that which S. Paul saith 1 Tim. III. 16. And without crontroversie Great is the mystery of Godliness God was manifested in the Flesh justified in the Spirit preached to the Gentiles seen of Angels believed of the World taken up into Glory It is sayd indeed that the Syriack the Vulgar Latine the Arabick and the Commentaries under S. Ambrose his name all want 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here and understand S. Paul to speak of the Gospel all the while And that the Gospel being sayd to be preached before it is sayd to be taken up into Glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be no more then that it is exalted and glorified As if the order of the words did inforce that which is first sayd to have been first done or as if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not signifie the taking of him up to God but the making of the Gospel famous Such violence will a prejudicate supposition offer even to Gods words rather then to quit an argument For to what sense can the Gospel be sayd to be manifested in the flesh because preached by the man Christ And suppose it may be sayd to be justified by the Spirit as Wisdome is justified by the Children of Wisdome Mat. XI 9. Luke VII 35. how much more proper is it to understand that God who appeared in the flesh should be sayd to be justified so to be in or by the Spirit the Works whereof shewed him so to be as afore Neither shall we need to make any greater doubt of the reading of those vvords of S. Paul Acts XX. 28. Look therefore to your selves and to the whole Flock ever which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to feed the Church of God which he hath gotten with his blood Though the written Copy at S. James and the Syriack read here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because that the Church over which the Holy Ghost makes Bishops it bought with the blood of Christ is the same with that of the Apostle afore that the blood of Christ offered by the eternall Spirit cleanseth sin Neither is it so easie to avoyd the words of the Apostle Heb. XI 16. as some imagine For he took not Angels but the Seed of Abraham he took Suppose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be to challenge which is done by laying hands on that which we challenge Is the ground therefore void upon which he challenges these to life as his own that through feare of death were in bondage does not the whole Epistle argue that this is done by the offering of our flesh saith he not expresly that it behoved him to become like his Brethren in all things and that he is not ashamed to call them Brethren because he that sanctifieth and those who are sanctified are all of one Heb. XI 11. 14. 17. does Christ vindicate mankind or the Seed of Abraham For though this is written to the Hebrews alone yet it was written at such time as all christians understood that it belongs no less to the Gentiles Wherfore it is manifest that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which might seem to signifie Christs challenging mankind or vindicating them into freedome from death as well here as elswhere is restrained by the Text and consequence of the Apostles discourse to signifie the assuming of mans nature by the means whereof he won mankind into freedome and maintains it in the same In fine when the Apostle sayth 1 Pet. I. 11. That the ancient Prophets did search against what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ that was in them did declare and profess the sufferings to come upon Christ and the glories following the same He sheweth plainly that the same Spirit by which they spake by fits dwelt in the flesh of Christ for ever having once assumed it Of which Spirit the Evangelist sayth Marke XI 8. That Jesus knew by the Spirit how the Pharises reasoned of him within themselves For as I sayd afore that when it is sayd in the Old Testament that the word of God came to this or that Prophet an Angel appeared unto him speaking in the person of God vvho vvas therefore vvorshiped as God because the Word of God for vvhich being incarnate our Lord Jesus is for ever to be Worshiped as God vvas in that Angel at the present for that Service So I must further note here that upon such Word of God coming to a Prophet he became inspired that is possessed and acted by the Spirit of God for the time of that Service vvhich God by such a message imployed him about Not that all Prophets did receive such Word by such message from God before they spake those things which we believe still they spake by the Spirit of God For there is a great deal of appearance in the Scripture for that which the Jewes doctors deliver unto us Abarbanel by name alleging Maimoni for his saying upon Numb XI that there are inferior degrees of Prophesie which comes not by apparitions in which a man saw one that spake to him in Gods Name but sometimes meerly by inspiration of Gods Spirit inwardly moving either to act or to speak as
possessed by still silence and night was at the middle of her course thy almighty Word came from thy Royall Throne in heaven strong as a man of Warre into the midst of a Land to be destroyed bringing thy unâ—ained command like a sharp sword and standing filled aâ— with death while reaching to heaven he stood upon the earth The like you have in the Wisdome of the Sonne of Sirach when he proclaimeth that Wisdome which God brought forth and by which he made all things to be the Author of that Wisdome which he teacheth And in the additions to Jeremy under the name of Baruch in the Greek Bibles shewing the Israelites that they were in bondage for deserting that way of Wisdome which unknown to the Idolatrous Nations he that founded the Earth and ordained the rest of the World by Wisdome hath seen and made known to them addes immediately Baruch III. 12-15 this is our God nor shall any other be valued besides him He found out the way of Knowledge and gave it to Jacob his servant and to Israel his beloved Afterwards he appeared on â—arth and conversed with men Which words I much marvaile to see stand suspected to some great Scholars as foisted in by Christiane Copyists For what do they import more then that the Wisdome of God which dealt with men by the flesh of Christ dealt with them afore by the Prophets Which the Jewes themselves who deny the Wisdome of God to be incarnate in our Lord Christ cannot refuse This Wisdome of God this Word of God this Spirit of God this image of his glory this mirror of his substance by which he made the World coming to holy men by the ministery of Angels in whom it was resident for that service made them Gods friends and Prophets as coming to us in the flesh of Christ which he took never to let go it hath made us the children of God that is Christians This is indeed that great figure in which the eloquence of the Old Testament consisteth and may be called as by the Greek Fathers many times it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or good husbandry of language intimating the way of Gods dispensing the knowledge oâ— himself which that time was capable of by such sparing expressions as being expounded by the appearance of our Lord Christ in the flesh may well make all doubt of the true intent of them to vanish And therefore I must needs applaude the practice of the Primitive Church related afore out of S. Athaâ—asius in Synopsi Scripturâ— and others to instruct the learners of Christistianity out of those books which we now call Apocrypha For by this point which cantaineth the summe of Christianity it doth appear as also by divers others it may appear that the Secret of Christianity folded up in the writings of the Prophets unfolded in the writings of the Apostles though the same for substance yet without disparagement to the Prophets because the counsaile of God required it is more clearly and plainly set forth in them then in the writings of the Prophets as the twilight is a degree to the light which the sun-rise bringeth with it What impressions of this sense may yet be discerned in the Jews writings I will not stand to inquire here where I write to all English so farre as they are capeable of those things wherein they are all concerned whether capable or not remitting the Readers that are capable to those that maintaine the truth of Christianity against the Jewes And to those things which Grotius upon the beginning of S. Johns Gospel whereof hitherto I maintaine the true meaning and upon other Texts which I have imployed to that purpose hath observed ouâ— of the Chaldee Paraphrase Philo the Jew and others of that nation besides diverse Heathen Philosophers whose sayings otherwise ungrounded seem to come from the sense of that people One thing I will observe which is very ordinary among their Ancient Doctors to call the Angel which speakes to the Fathers under the proper Name and in the person of God Metatron signifying neither more nor lesse then Metator in Latine as you may see in Buxtorfius his great Lexicon that is an harbinger or quartermaster of lodgings Whereof it is impossible to give so fit a reason as this That they understood him to be the fore-runner or harbinger of the Messias and therefore the Messias is our Lord Jesus The ancient Fathers of the Church having declared from the very mouth of the Apostles that those dispensations were managed by the Word of God now dwelling in our flesh as prefaces and praeludes to the incarnation of our Lord making way for it by the Ministery of the Prophets as Saint John the Baptist did at a nearer distance before his coming CHAP. XVII Answer to those texts of Scripture that seem to abate the true Godhead in Christ Of that creature whereof Christ is the first-borne and that which the Wisdome of God made That this beliefe is the originall Tradition of the Church What meanes this dispute furnisheth us with against the Arrians That it is reason to submit to revelation concerning the nature of God The use of reason is no way renounced by holding this Faith I Have in this defense given the true meaning to very many texts of Scripture that are alledged against the Faith of the Church Some remaine which I thinke fit to repeate and answer in this abridgment There be those that lay a great waight upon that of our Lord John XVII 3. This is eternal life to know thee the onely true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent But the same exclusive onely or something of the same force is found in many other places 1 Cor. VIII 4 5 6. There is no other God but one Ephes IV. 6. One God and Father of all 1 Tim. II. 5. There is one God and one Mediator of God and man the man Christ Jesus And wheresoever we read the onely God or the onely wise God or the like The rest are not many that I shall name Mat. XXIV 36. Of that day and hower knoweth no man nor the Angels of heaven nor the Sonne but the Father alone Col. â— 15. The first-born of the whole creature Seemeth to ranck Christ with the creatures being of the same birth John XIV 28. The Father is greater then I. For answer to the first I will not insist that the words are to be construed thus This is eternall life to know thee and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent to be the onely true God Or thus To know thee onely to be the true God and to know Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent For the Greek article which the Latine wanteth the English punctually answereth determines the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the onely true God to go together as agreeing in the same case with thee that went afore But this I say that the exceptive onely can by no reason be understood to exclude the attribute of the true
in the stream then it was in the fountaine And therefore though the terms of the Scripture agreeing with those which the most ancient Fathers of the Church use may justly authorize and bring into use those expressions which have not been usuall upon a due understanding of the intent to which they are used yet is there no power in the Church to render those terms which have passed for Christian and Catholick in the Primitive times of the Church suspected of Heresie in these times Origen is strongly charged by the ancient times in particular by Epiphanius as the Seminary of the Arians And that the Arians might not have advantage by many of his sayings were too much to undertake and that which my businesse no way requires The Socinians have made their advantages of Erasmus his writings And is any man so silly as to imagine that Erasmus was therefore of Socinus his Faith Have they not made the like use of Maldonate and his Commentaries upon the Gospels And is there any appearance that his meaning should be that of Socinus I will not therefore deny that the Cardinall du Perron in his answer to King James pag. 633. does acknowledge that Arius were able to maintaine himself within compasse of Tradition were he to be tried by the Fathers before the Council of Nicaea But I give the Reader notice that this is the consequence and the interest of that position which deriveth Tradition of Faith from an expresse act of the present Church supposing the matter of it not to have been of force and effectually acknowledged in all ages of the Church Which if it were true in this case then could no man be obliged to believe the Trinity as matter of Faith Though it might remaine questionable whether or no a man may be obliged to conform to it as consistent with the Faith and not to scandalize the unity of the Church by rejecting the act and decree of it according to the Position setled in the first book I will further acknowledge that I have seen an answer to Crellius the Socinians book de Deo by one Botsaccus now of Danzick I take it in the end whereof I find a number of exceptions made by the Socinians in their writings which I have not seen against the Faith of all that writ before Constantine in particular as inconsistent with that of Nicaea the particulars whereof because I have not seen the books and therefore cannot presume to answer particularly I could not here repeate would the model of my book give leave In general whosoever will take the paines to peruse that which is there alledged shall perceive First that those who alledge them fall out among themselves perpetually sometimes and for some sayings challenging Tertulliane for example or Clement or Origen for one of them that believe not the Trinity otherwise disowning them as those that helped to introduce the Faith of it But no where remembring themselves concerned to make good that which they maintaine out of the words of Hegesippus in Eusebius that the Faith of the whole Church was defloured presently upon the death of the Apostles and to shew that such a change did indeed come to passe in the Faith of the holy Trinity Secondly that there is no more difficulty in reducing the sense of their sayings there questioned to the sense of the Church after the Councile of Nicaea then in reducing the sense of Athanasius when he alloweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be understood of the proceeding of the Sonne from the Father of everlasting Or the sense of all these Fathers that understood the Father is greater then I of the priviledge of the originall and author which the Father of necessity hath personally above the Sonne and the holy Ghost the Godhead being one and the same to the same sense One passage of Tertulliane I have thought worth the clearing because it seems to containe a remarkable conceit of his in expounding the words of Solomon in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the sense of the Church so many years before Arius built his heresie in a manner upon it The words are in his book contra Hermogenem Cap. III. Quia pater Deus est judex deus est non tamen ideo Pater semper judex semper quia Deus semper Nam nec Pater potuit esse ante Flium nec judex ante delictum Fuit autem tempus cum delictum filius non fuit quod judicem qui patrem Dominuâ— facâ—reâ— For God also is Father and God is judge and yet not alwayes Father and judge because alwayes God For neither could he be Father before a Sonne nor judge before sinne But there was a time when neither sinne was to make God a judge nor Sonne to make God a Father He that reads this onely would think at a blush that it is the very marke of Arius his haerâ—sie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a time when the Son was not But the answer is in his book contra Praxeam Cap. V. Ante omnia enim Deus erat solus ipse sibi mundus locus omnia Solus autem quia nihil aliud extrinsecus prâ—ter illum Caeterum ne tunc quideâ— solus Habebat enim secum quam habebat in semetipso Rationem suam scilicet Rationalis enim Deus ratio in ipso prius ita in ipso omnia Quâ— ratio sensus ipsius est Hanc Graeci 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicunt quâ— vocabulâ— sermonem etiam appellamus Ideâ—que in usu est nostrorum per simplicitatem interpretationis Sermonem dicere in primordio apud Deum fuisse cum magis rationem competat antiquiorem â—aberi quia non sermonalis a principio sed rationalis Dâ—us etiam ante principium Et quia ipse quoque sermo ratione consistens priorem eam ut substantiam suâ—m â—stendat Tamen sic nihil interest Nam â—tsi Deus nondum sermonem suum miserat proinde â—um cum ipsa in ipsa ratione intra semetipsum habebat â—acite cogitando disputandâ— secum quae per sermonem mox erat dicturus Cum ratione enim sua cogitans atque disponens sermonem eam efficiebat quâ—m sermone tractabat For before all things God was alone to himself both World and place and all But alone because without there was nothing besides him otherwise even then not alone For he had with him that which he had in him his reason forsooth For God is reasonable and reason was in him before and so all things This reason is his sense This the Greek calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which name also we call speech Therefore our people use for one translation to say that speech was in the beginning with God Whereas it is more pertinent that reason should be counted more ancient because God spokâ— it from the beginning but had reason even before the beginning And
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
principles to spirituall good can no way impeach it as coming from the constitution of our nature supposing the ornaments and additions of grace to be removed The opinion of the fulfilling of Gods Law by Christians supposes that the remaines of concupiscence in the regenerate and the immediate effects thereof in the first motions to sinne which cannot be prevented are not against Gods Law but onely besides it From whence it will follow that he who of his free will imbraces Christianity and perseveres in the good works which it injoyneth meriteth of justice the reward of the Life to come And truly for my part I cannot deny that all this is justly pleaded against those that are of this opinion and cannot by them justly be answered But that this opinion is injoyned by the Church of Rome I cannot understand seeing divers learned Doctors of the Schools alledged by Doctor Field for the opposition which he maketh to this opinion and that very truly and justly shewing infallibly that the contrary opinion is allowed to be maintained in the communion of the Church of Rome And that nothing hath been done since the authors whom he alledgeth to make this unlawfull to be held amongst them I suppose it will be enough to produce the decree of the Council of Trent since which it is evident that it is lawfull among them to maintaine that concupiscence is originall sinne For though the decree declareth that the Church never understood concupiscence in the regenerate to be truly and properly sinne but to be so called as proceeding from sinne and inclining to sinne Yet in as much as it is one thing to speak of concupiscence in the regenerate another in the unregenerate and in as much as it is one thing to declare the sense of the Church according to the opinion of the Synode another to condemn the contrary sense as opposite to the Faith it is manifest that this declaration condemns not those that hold originall concupiscence to be originall sinne but onely shewes that they could not answer the difficulty of originall sinne in the regenerate On the other side it cannot be justly said so farre as I understand that those of the Reformation do affirme that the grace given to Adam at his creation was due to his nature in this sense and to this effect as if they did intend to deny that he was created in such an estate and to such a condition of happinesse as the principles and constitution of his nature do not necessarily require But onely this That the gifts which by his creation he stood indowed with were necessary to the purchase of that happinesse which he that is to say his nature was created to whereupon they are justly called the indowments of nature Here I must not omit the opinion of Catharinus in the Council of Trent That Adam received originall righteousnesse of God in his own name and the name of his posterity to be continued to them he obeying God Whereupon his disobedience iâ— in Law their disobedience though in nature onely his and the act of his transgression imputed to them is their originall sinne as personall as the penalties of it No otherwise then Levâ— paid Tithes in Abraham Many passages of S. Augustine he had to alledge for this as also a Text of the Prophet Osee and another of Ecclesiasticus But especially the expresse words of S. Paul That by the inobedience of one man many are made sinnerâ— And That by sinne death came into the world which surely came into the world by the actuall transgression of Gods commandment Alledging that Eve found not her self naked till Adam had eaten the forbidden fruit Nor had originall sin been had the matter rested there And by this reason he thought he avoided a difficulty not to be overcome otherwise how the lust of generation can give a spirituall staine to the soul which must needs be carnall if it come from the flesh And by this meanes nothing but an action which transgresseth Gods Law shall be sinne which all men understand by that name This opinion the History saith was the more plausible among the Prelates there as not bred Divines but Canonists or versed in businesse and so best relishing that which they best understood to wit the conceit of a civile contract with Adam in behalfe of his posterity as well as himself To give a judgement of this opinion I shall do no more but remit the reader to those Scriptures which I have produced to shew that there is such a thing as originall sinne concluding that the nature of it wherein it consists must be valued by the evidence of it whereby it appeares that it is It will then be unavoidable that when death is the effect of sinne because righteousnese is the cause of life as Adams sinne is the cause of his death so the death of his posterity depends upon their own unrighteousnesse Why else should Christianity free us from death as hath been shewed Why should S. Paul complain of the Law that he found in his members opposing the Law of righteousnesse why should the flesh fight with the Spirit and the fruits of the flesh be opposite to the fruits of the Spirit but that the same opposition of sinne to righteousnesse is to be acknowldged in the habituall principles as in the actuall effects which proceed from the same As for that onely text of S. Paul in which he could find any impression of his meaning if the reader observe the deduction whereby I have shewed that S. Pauls discourse obliged him to set forth the ground whereupon the coming of Christ and his Gospel became necessary to the salvation both of the Jews and Gentiles he will easily find that the question is of the effective not of the formall cause that S. Paul is not ingaged to shew wherein that source of sinne which our Lord Christ came to cure consisteth but from whence it proceedeth True it is when the posterity suffers losse of estate and honour for the Fathers treason it may properly be said that the Fathers crime is imputed to the posterity Not because any reason can indure that what is done by one man should be thought to be done by another but because the effect of what one man does may justly be either granted to or inflicted upon another whether for the better or for the worse As in a civile state suppose the Laws make treason to forfeit lands and honours which every man sees are held by virtue of the Lawes that posterity which hath no right to them but from predecessors and the obligation which they had to maintaine the state should forfeit them by the act of predecessors is a thing not strange but reasonable Though so that the forfeiture may transgresse the bounds of reason and humanity if the Law should not allow posterity or kindred to live in that state to which predecessors have forfeited when there is so much cause to believe that the
24. Col. III. 9 10. Therefore man was first created in that righteousnesse and true holinesse to which Christians are renewed which renewing is called therefore the new man by S. Paul To this it may be answered on behalf of the other part That the dominion over the creatures belonges to the image of God in man according to the words of Moses Let us make man after our image and likenesse and let him bear rule over the fishes of the Sea and therefore God requireth a mans bloud of his brother and of beasts because he was made in the image of God Gen. IX 6. So that the image of God remaineth true righteousnes and holines being lost And therefore it seemeth that according to the natural state of man he is made according to Gods image in regard of this dominion over the creatures But according to that spirituall estate which the Gospel calleth us to much more in regard of the dominion over sin and concupiscence which the spirit of righteousnesse and true holinesse bringeth with it Though both derivative from the image of God in Christ to whom the Apostle Heb. II. 6-9 ascribeth that dominion as to the second Adam which the Psalmist setteth forth in the first Psal VIII 5-8 And if it be said as I said it may be that the precept given to them forbidding the fruit of the tree of knowledge is manifestly carnall and concerning their nature it is easie to say on the other side that the garden and those trees and therefore the precept concerning them are not understood if they be not taken as Symbolicall and mysticall to signifie that which S. Augustine in two words of free will and Christ comprehendeth That as the source of death is to satisfie the appetite of our owne particular profit or pleasure so to satisfie the appetite of that true goodnesse which that Word or Wisdome of God which now incarnate is our Lord Christ teacheth is the fountain of Life Not as if there were not two such fruits one granted to preserve life the other forbidden on paine of death But because they not onely did signifie which the other opinion may grant but also were understood by Adam to signify more as I have said As for the giving of names to living creatures which is commonly made an argument of more then humane wisdome in Adam to wit from Gods Spirit I conceive the other side may say That no names can signify the natures of things but some sensible properties by which they are known and discerned So that to give names ingeniously argues no more then taking due notice of those things which sense discovers to be most remarkable in each kinde And that not above the pitch of nature But when Adam saies This is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh And Therefore shall a man leave father and mother and cleave to his wife and they two shall be one flesh And S. Paul thereupon Ephes V. 30. This mystery is great but I mean as to Christ and the Church There is appearance that the Fathers have reason to suppose Adam a Prophet not onely to say the words which foretell the coming of Christ and the effect of it but also to understand the meaning which they contained Not as if he foresaw the incarnation of Christ which supposed his own fall But because by that word of God which spoke to him in his transe he understood that his posterity should be united and maried to God And yet on the other side it may be said without prejudice to Christianity that though this is certainly the mysticall sense of these words yet it is no more necessary that Adam when he spoke them should understand it then that the rest of those who were figures of Christ by their actions in the Old Testament did understand that they were so much lesse wherein that figure consisted Last of all it seems strange that Adam should so easily be cast down with so slight a temptation supposing that he was indowed with that divine wisdome which Gods Spirit giveth which will be no such marvaile if we suppose him to know no more then the conduct of his naturall life in Paradise might require Which notwithstanding this is no such advantage as it may seem For as the description of Paradise and the two trees and the precept concerning them so is also the temptation delivered in Symbolicall terms under the figure of that which concerned the preservation of their life representing all that may move the Sons of the first Adam to fall away from God And whatsoever be the reason that it is called the tree of knowledge to be like unto God and that by a way of such knowledge as should not depend on Gods will but their own choice may easily be understood to be the most dangerous temptation that an estate of so much advantage was capeable of how difficult so ever it be to understand by the words how they might believe it to depend upon eating the forbidden fruit And as the state of meer nature requiring the knowledge of so few things as the leading of such a life in obedience to God required must needs inferre that simplicity and innocence that made them more liable to be tempted So a state of supernaturall knowledge by the Spirit of God withdrawing their consideration from inferior things of this world to be conversant about the matters of God they might be exposed to temptation as well by not attending as by not apprehending the things of the world As on the other side they were fortified against it no lesse by that innocence and simplicity which made them not sensible of that which provoketh it then by that resolution of Gods Spirit which set them above it These being the considerations which appear to me in those things which the Scriptures propose unto us of this estate I will not stick to say that I hold the common opinion to be the more probable for two reasons The first Because it seemeth to me farre more consequent to the effect of mans fall which is the losse and want of spirituall grace necessary to the conduct of him in his spirituall life here to eternall life in the world to come that he should have transgressed and forfeited the meanes thereof then onely that innocence that should have inabled him to yeeld God obedience onely in an estate of meer nature and to the purpose of it Secondly because I find it to be received by the Fathers of the Church after S. Irenaeus who seemeth to have delivered it in expresse and clear terms And yet I must say on the other side that I find it no reason to count it a matter of Faith but onely the more reasonable supposition among divines So that the matter of Faith concerning originall sinne is more easily understood to depend upon it and more reasonably inferred from it and maintained by it Not onely because you see the reasons out of the Scriptures
himselfe in heaven immortall upon his resurrection free from the punishments of sinne which he had upon him here on earth you have seene that the everlasting Spirit is the Godhead of Christ And had the apostle meant the presentation which is now in doing he would have spoken in the time past 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he that considers that all sacrifices were visited before they were killed whether legall or blemished which is called in one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must beleive that he is called here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as found spotlesse and so fit to be slaine And does he not make the death of Christ the Sacrifice when he makes the New Covenant in correspondence to the Old to be inacted by it It is true the same Apostle Ebr. IX 2 -6. showing the highest heavens to be the Holy of Holies where the Priest-hood of Christ is exercised addes That if he were upon earth he should not be a Priest there being other Priests to offer gifts according to the Law But this is onely to say that his Priest-hoode is not earthly who hath caried his owne bloude into the heavenly Tabernacle not medling with the sonnes of Levi or theire office For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is according to the Ebrew which for want of composition expresses adjectives by praepositions for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If â—e were upon earth signifies if he were an earthly Priest as those of the Leviticall Priesthood It is true he was to learne compassion for us by his sufferinges here Ebr. II. 17 18. V. 1 7 8. but might he not as well as other high Priests learn that compassion by sacrificing himself for us here which he hath for us to the end of all things In fine every sacrifice is a sacrifice from the time that it is consecrated to God as the Paschal Lamb from the tenth day of the moneth Ex. XII 2. thence it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 due and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a gift Or let any Jew say if it might not many ways become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reprobate before it came into the Holy of Holies because a sacrifice or Offering before And was not Christ consecrated when he was the Lamb of God Of himself he saies John XVII 19. For their sakes do I sanctify my self To wit to be a spotleâ—â—e sacrifice This is therefore no exception to the generall argument the force whereof consisteth in this That seeing it cannot be denied that the inheritance of the Land of Promise and each mans share in the goods and and rights of it is assigned the Jewes in consideration of their sacrifices to wit as the condition of that Covenant by which they were prescribed It must not be doubted that the inheritance of the kingdome of heaven is assigned to Christians by the Covenant of Grace in consideration of the obedience and sufferings of Christ which they figure But this is still more evident by the termes of ransome and price and buying attributed to the sacrifice of Christ The heathen had sacrifices that they called Lustralia and lustrare signifies to expiate among the Romanâ—s to wit By paying a price For Ennius translating into Latine a Greek Tragedy called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of Homer where he speakes of Priamus ransoming Hectors corpes from Achilles intituled it Hectoris lustra Therefore it is the Latine of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies deliverance by paying a ransome In the words of the Prophet Daniel III. 57. IV. 24. Redeem thy sinnes by repentance and thy misdeeds by having mercy on the afflicted Many blame the vulgar Latine and would translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 breake off But the words of Solomon Prov. XVI 6. By mercy and truth iniquity is redeemed showe that it is truly translated And having showed afore that such considerations do qualify us for remission of sinnes I may well argue from hence that the terme of ransome imports the consideration for which it is bestowed Wherefore let the sweet smelling sacrifice of Christ Ephes V. 2. be understood in the same notion as the good workes of Christians are called a sweet savour Phil. IV. 18. Ebr. XIII 16. Seeing Socinus will have it so Provided that it be understood that the sacrifice of Christ is accepted to purchase mankind the right of coming out of sinne into everlasting life the sacrifices of Christians to the quallifying of their persons for the benefit of the same To the same sense Prov. XIII 8. The ransome of a mans life is his wealth For literally a mans wealth is the saving of his life with the world that spares a mans life in consideration of his wealth or sets not upon him in regard of it which the Psalmist saith God does not Psal XLIX 6 7 8. mystically it is the same that Solomon said in the place afore quoted But when Solomon saith Prov. XXI 18. The wicked is a ransom for the upright and the sinner comes instead of the righteous And the Prophet Esa XLIII 3. I have given Egypt for thy ransom Cush and Seba instead of thee God signifyeth by a Parable that having imployed Sennacherib to execute his judgements upon those nations he had given him the Aegyptians and Aethiopians that he might spare the Israelites So he paies him his hier which discharges his own people of that which they had suffered otherwise So in the words of Otho Tacit. Hist IV. Hunc animum hanc virtutem vestram ultra periculis objicere nimis grande vitae meae pretium duco I hold it too great a price for my life to cast this courage and valour of yours any more upon dangers It is manifest that a ransome or price imports the consideration of that for which it is laid out The blood of his soludiers for their Generalls life And shall it be otherwise when the Apostle saith that Christs death intercedes for the redemption of those transgressions that remained under the Old Testament Ebr. IX 15 when S. Paul saith that the man Christ Jesus gave himself a ransome for all to be witnessed in due time 1 Tim. II. 5 6 When our Lord saith the same Mat. XX. 28. Mat. X. 45 and S. Paul againe 1 Cor. VI. 20. Ye are bought with a price glorify therefore God with your body and with your Spirit which are Gods And againe 1 Cor. VII 23. Ye are bought with a price Be not servants of men And of Christ Titus II. 14. Who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purify to himself a peculiar people zealous of good works The same Apoc. V. â— Rom. III. 24. Gal. III. 13. Ephes I. 7. Acts XX. 28. Where I must needs call it meer impudence in Socinus to say that God redeemed his Church by his own bloud because Christs blood which it was redeemed with was as Christ Gods own It is not here to be denied that these terms may by figure of
people without expressing any consideration in regard whereof he would doe it And likewâ—se our Lord in the Parable of the master that forgave his servant ten thousand talents Mat. XIIII 23 Seemes to expresse Gods pardon which his Gospell publisheth to be free from any consideration in which it is either proclaimed or granted But as I said to our Antinomians who will needes beleive upon the warrant of the Prophets words that their sinnes are pardoned meerely in consideration of Christ without regard to any disposition requisite to qualify them for it by the Gospell That it was neither requisite nor fit that the termes upon which the blessinges promised by the Gospell are granted should be expressed by the Propheâ—y that onely foretelleth the coming of it being to be gathered from that proportion which the Law in regard of the land of promise holds to the Gospell in regard of the world to come So say I to the Socinians who will needs have the same wordes to signify That supposing the disposition that qualifies for the promises of the Gospell they suppose no consideration of the obedience of of Christ That though the termes of the Gospell are not expressed by the Prophet foretelling the coming of it as being included in those of the Law by virtue of the proportion aforesaid it were strange to thinke that the coming and death of Christ is not sufficient since to determine the meaning of the Prophets words to it And so likewise to the Parable that if our Saviour found it not fit to expresse the consideration upon which the pardon which the Gospell publishes is passed yet his death and suffringes coming after to interpret the intent of that which he hâ—d said before that was to be declared it is strange that they should not be thought sufficient to adde that consideration which before he had neither expressed nor denyed As for the free grace of the Gospell I challenge all the reason in the world to say If Gods free act in providing the means of salvation by Christ and sending him to publish the conditions upon which he is ready to be reconciled to those that accept them tendering withall sufficient help so to doe be not a valuable reason for which the Gospell is to be called the Covenant of grace though granted in consideration of thâ—t ransome by Christ which the free grace of God provideth Whether our Antinomians have not as good reason to say that the promises of the Gospell are not free if they require the condition of Christianity as the Socinians if they suppose Christ and his obedience Here followes I confesse a very valuable reason of Socinus so long as that satisfaction of Christ which the Church teacheth is not understood which it is no mervaile if it cary them aside not understanding the faith and doctrine of the Church aright They allege that there can be no ground in reason upon which one man may be punished for another mans sinne Guilt being a morall consequence of an act that is naturally past and gone that is for the present nothing in rerum natura upon a due ground of reason which imputes the acts of reasonable creatures to their account because they are under a Law of doing thus and not otherwise But that thâ— sinnes of one man should be imputed to another who cannot be obliged for another to doe or not to doe that which redounds to the others account if done or not done is no more possible then that he should have done or not done that which the other is supposed to have done or not done If it be said that Christ voluntarily took upon him the punishment of our sinnes as a surety answeres for his freinds debt It is acknowledged that this way turnes off the Debt from him that it is payd for to the surety but extinguishes it not as the undergoing of punishment extinguishes the crime in all the Justice of the world so that he who had right to punish can exact that no more for which he hath received satisfaction once Which is to say that the sufferinges of Christ are not the punishment of our sinnes And I truely doe freely acknowledge that the instances which have been brought either out of the scriptures to show that one man hath been punished for another mans sin among civil people so that it is not to be thought against the light of nature are either insufficient or impertinent to the case For I have learned from my beginning in the Schooles that God when he visits the iniquities of the fathers upon the children does not inflict upon them more punishment then their owne sinne deserues but makes their sinnes his opportunity of bringing to passe his judgements against the sinnes of their predecessors or those who in regard of other relations are reasonably taken to be punished by their punishment And this I will here prove no further but taking it for granted inferre that it comes not home to the case of our Lord Christ purchasing us by his death remission of sinnes everlasting life But my reason is because it is evident to me that one mans doings or sufferings may be understood or said to be imputed to another two wayes First immediately and personally supposing that there is a ground in reason for it And this that opinion requires which holds that faith which alone justifieth to consist in beleiving that a man is praedestinate to life meerely in consideration of Christs death suffering for the elect alone For how should we be justified by beleeving this but supposing that Christ suffered upon this ground to this purpose But having showed this opinion to be utterly false by showing that the Gospell supposes the condition of Christianity in that Faith which alone justifieth I must here presume that this sense of the imputation of Christs merits and therefore this intent of his death is meerely imaginary And the supposition whereupon it proceedes to wit that one mans doings or sufferings may be personally and immediately imputed to another mans account utterly unreasonable And therefore must and doe say that as it is sufficient so it is true that the sufferings of Christ are imputed unto us in the nature of a meritorious cause moving God to gâ—ant mankind those termes of reconcilement which the Gospell importeth This is evident by the opposition which S. Paul maketh betweene the disobedience of Adam and the obedience of Christ Rom. V. 12. 18. 19. Where discovering the ground of our reconcilement with God whâ—ch the Gospell publisheth he imputeth it to the obedience of Christ in the rest of his discourse attributing it to his death For having said that Christ died for us being sinners and that we are justified by his bloud and reconciled by the death of his sonne being enimies he inferreth therefore as by one man sinne came into the world and death by sinne and so death passed upon all Signifying by the other part of the comparison which he rendreth not
his Law was transgressed But the act of a Master of a houshold or the Prince and Soverraigne of a Comonwealth which you please disposing of mankind as his subjects or houshold servants Not denying that a man considered as free from all obligation of civile Society and a member of no Common-wealth that a Soveraigne in respect of another Soveraigne yea in some sort the subject of one Soveraigne in regard of another Soveraigne and his subjects may have right to exact punishment which he may as freely remit but resolving that whatsoever can be said of such cases is impertinent to ours God being necessarily and essentially Soveraigne Prince over his own subjects his creatures and master of them as his houshold goods And this act whereby he dispenseth in the effect of his originall Law so as to introduce another in stead of it being such that his glory must necessarily consist in the consideration upon which it is done as the principall act that can be done in the government of the principall creature And therefore I say on the other side that the cases of Damon and Phintias the great freinds whereof the one suffered or would have suffered for the other under Dionysius the Usurper of Sicily and of Zaleâ—cus who having made a Law for his Countrey to punish adulterers with losse of both eyes and his sonne being taken in adultery pulled out one of his own and one of his Sons to satisfy the Law are not pertinent to our case Suppose a friend had right to lay down his life for a friend Suppose the Usurper had right to take away one life and to accept another for it Suppose Zaleucus had right to dispose of his own eye to his sons interest suppose the people that inacted the Law did dispense so farre in it The effect of a civile Law is utterly satisfied by the evil once suffered proportionable to the forfeit in the judgement of the Law not considering out of what intent of mind it was suffered nor claiming any thing further when it is suffered But I have shewed that the sufferings of Christ were accepted of God to the redemtion of mankind in consideration of that free and pure obedience to God wherewith they were tendered to God not to satisfy his wrath against us by the evill which he indured for the time of meer punishment is not till the World to come but that he might shew that virtue and that obedience which is not to be showed but through the difficulty of afflictions And this not to the effect of making personall and immediate recompense for the sinnes of so many as shall be saved which were it made God could not in any justice impose upon them any condition for obtaining remission of those sinnes which he had received satisfaction for But to give God that satisfaction by so undue and so perfect obedience in such trials that the world can never see the like virtue as might move him in consideration thereof abating that debt of punishment which we are ingaged to by transgressing his Originall Law to publish an act of Grace admitting all to remission of sinnes and right to life everlasting that will undertake to live true Christians And this consideration I conceive I may say redounds as much to the glory of God as it is possible to conceive that any can do There being nothing more valuable then this obedience nothing more acceptable in him that is a sinner then new obedience for the future But the consideration in the meane time not personall but in the nature of the meritorious cause to which all satisfaction is reducible as purchasing freedome from evil though not right to good For no mans debt is immediately paid by the paine which Christ suffered but in consideration of his obedience to God in undergoing such trials all that will undergo the condition are admitted to remission of sins and everlasting life Therefore the punishment which Christ indures for our sinnes importeth not that there was any ground of reason why he should be accounted to have done them or we accounted to have undergone his sufferings But in regard of the evill which he suffered in consideration of our sinnes with an intent to take them away in freely offering himself to undergo what God should think fit to that purpose neither can it be pretended that any thing is wanting to manifest the justice of Gods proceeding with him nor the reason why it redounds to our benefit Now Socinus having in detestation that opinion which places justifying faith in believing that we are predestinate in considesideration of the merits of Christ suffering onely for the elect And abhorring as much the doctrine of the Church which he took to be tainted with the levain of Antichrist from the Apostles time It remained that he should runne into another extreme making the Gospel an act of Gods Grace excluding all consideration of Christ which could not be brought in but by voiding the Faith of the holy Trinity into the bargaine But though I allow Socinus to dispute whether the sufferings of Christ be properly the punishment of our sinnes or not because I have showed that they are not the punishment which civile Lawes require though not allowing him to blame S. Augustine or other Church Writers that have so called them much lesse to depart from the Faith of the Church for the signification of a word yet can it not be denied that the death of Christ is properly satisfaction upon the premises For satisfaction is properly a payment that may be refused as not in the nature and kind of that which was due Suppose for the purpose when a band is forfeit the forfeit incurred recompense satisfies not Indeed it is contrary to naturall equity in man to refuse to be satisfied with such a recompense as makes up his interest But between God and man it is otherwise For the forfeit of sin consisting in this that the act is done which cannot be undone Suppose the sufferings of Christ supposing his divine nature from everlasting both voluntary and meritorious of themselves and that to an unvaluable value even in justice yet are they refutable in point of Gods justice because he iâ— not to be obliged by any thing as receiving advantage by it But being accepted by him they become a full recompense to the purpose for which they are tendered that is for the obtaining of pardon and salvation for them that imbrace Christianity and that in the strict and rigorous estimate of justice for the infinite value of the person from whom they proceed And this according to Vlpiane 46. ff III. L. 52. Satisfactio est pro solutione Satisfaction is that which succeeds in stead of payment not made And according to Caius 2 ff VIII 1 Satisfacere est desiderium alicujus implere To satisfie is to fulfill a mans desire For that God cannot be obliged but by his own will to accept it to this effect whereas man is
the same state with him that contracteth upon articles But there is as much said when our Lord saith onely This is my body which is given for you if it be rightly understood that is supposing the body of Christ to have been given to be sacrificed for us upon the Crosse For hee that tenders this to eat thereby declares that hee incites to the profession of that Covenant which otherwise appears to have been inacted by that which hee tenders The same sense is contained in S. Pauls words 1 Cor. V. 8 9. Christ your Passeover is slain for you Let us therefore feast not with old loven nor with the leven of malice and deceit but with the unlevened bread of sincerity and truth For if wee consider the circumstance of time and place which our Lord took to institute the Sacrament of the Eucharist just when the Paschal Lamb was eaten how shall wee deny the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse to have been as presently received there as the Sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb was the subject and occasion of the Feast at which hee ordained it But the discourse by which the Apostle perswades Christians to separate themselves from the Jewes Ebr. XIII 10-16 is most pertinent to this purpose as that which is not to be understood otherwise Though when hee saith Wee have an Altar whereof those that serve the Tabernacle have no right to eat I allow that by an Altar hee means metonymically a Sacrifice For proving his intent by instancing in those Sacrifices for sin the bloud whereof was carried within the vail being by the Law appointed to be burnt without the Camp or City Jerusalem hee supposes them to figure our Lord Christ who suffered without Jerusalem Inferring thereupon that they ought to go forth of the communion of the Synagogue though they were to suffer persecution at the hands of their brethren for it But when hee proceedeth By him therefore let us offer to God the sacrifice of praise continually that is the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his Name And to do good and to communicate forget not for with such sacrifices God is well pleased Either wee must conceive him to return to his purpose and to show what Sacrifice hee meant when hee said Wee have an Altar of which they that wait upon the Tabernacle have no right to eat Or wee can give no reason what hee meant to argue that the Jewes have no right to the Sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse which Christians pretend not to eat of in any Sacrifice but in the Eucharist And surely if wee consider but the name of Eucharist wee cannot think it could have been more properly signified than by calling it the sacrifice of praise the fruit of the lips that confesse the Name of God For when hee proceeds to exhort not to forget communicating their goods do wee not know and have wee not made it to appear that this must be by their oblations to the Altar the first-fruits of their goods whereof the Eucharist being first consecrated the rest served the necessities of the Church Which as hath been showed was the original of all Consecrations and Dedications that have been made in Christianity If therefore the eating of the Sacrifice of the Crosse in the Sacrament of the Eucharist mean no more but the signifying and the figuring of that eating of the Sacrifice of the Crosse which is done by a lively Faith that is by every one that considers the death of Christ with that Faith which supposing all that the Gospel sayes of it to be true resolves faithfully to professe Christianity the question is why the Sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted by God why in those elements and to what purpose seeing without Gods appointment men could have done it of themselves to the same effect But if it be manifest that by the Sacrament of the Eucharist God pretends to tender us the communion of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse then is there another presence of the body and bloud of our Lord in the Sacrament beside that spiritual presence in the soul which that living faith effecteth without the Sacrament as well as in the receiving of it Which kinde of presence you may if you please call the representation of the Sacrifice of Christ so as you understand the word representation to signifie not the figuring or resembling of that which is onely signified But as it signifies in the Romane Laws when a man is said repraesentare pecuniam who payes ready money Deriving the signification of it à re praesenti not from the preposition re Which will import not the presenting of that againe to a mans senses which once is past but the tendring of that to a mans possession which is tendred him upon the place That this is the intent of the Sacrament of the Eucharist one peremptory argument there remains in the words of S. Paul when hee sayes Whoso eateth this bread and drinketh this cup unworthily is guilty of the body and blood of Christ For neither can it be said that the Apostle by way of hyperbole calls the slighting of Gods ordinance which hee hath appointed to signifie Christs death the crucifying of our Lord again Because it is manifest that his menace is grounded upon a particular consideration of the nature of the crime not upon that which is seen in every sin Renouncing Christianity indeed is truly the crucifying of Christ again as the Apostle shewes Ebr. VI. 6. and unworthily receiving the Eucharist is by just construction the renouncing of Christianity because that is it which renews the bond of observing it But otherwise it were too cold an expression to make S. Paul call it the crucifying of Christ for that which is common to all sins Nor would it serve the turn For when it follows Hee that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords Body Unlesse a man discern the Lords Body where it is not of necessity it must there be where it is discerned to be not made to be there by being discerned to be there It will now be objected that I hold things inconsistent and state such a sense of our Lords words as makes contradictories true For if bread and wine remaining bread and wine can be also the body and bloud of Christ that is unlesse granting them to be that which they are wee deny them to be that which is not that which wee grant them to be there will be no cause why wee should believe any thing to be that which it is more than that which it is not All difference being a sufficient ground of that contradiction which denies any thing to be that which differs from it that is which it is not The difficulty of answering this is the same which every man findes when hee is put to prove that which is most evident or to make that clear by words which all mens common sense admits Supposing
because though it have the stamp of primitive Christianity upon it yet it makes nothing to that purpose And yet the Mâ—sse is never celebrated but they heaâ— the Oblations of the faithfull called Sacrifices in the words quoted afore and that for the redemption of their souls for the hope of salvation for the discharge of their vowes All which understanding the renuing of the Covenant of grace by the Communion is properly true in order to it As for the sayings of the Fathers whereby the Eucharist is declared to be a Sacrifice in regard of the Consecâ—ation I do no way doubt that they are utterly innumerable For wheresoever the whole action including the propitiation which the Church intends to procure by it is called a Sacrifice which is most ordinary in the language of the Fathers there the Consecration cannot be excluded though referring it to the Communion not the Communion to it as some would have For if it be conâ—idered on the other side that they were all said at such time as the Communion was no lesse usual than the Consecration thereof that is to say when it was a strange thing to hear of the Eucharist celebrated and none but the Priest to receive it will not be strange that I demand it to be understood in order to the communion of the same Especially when the Liturgies themselves that is the form of Consecration used in the most eminent Churches from whom the lesse must necessarily be thought to have received their pattern do limit the being and presence of Christs body and bloud in the Elements to the benefit of them that shall communicate As it appears by the forms of Consecration that have been alleged And though the Fathers divers times â—all the celebrating of the Eucharist the death and passion of our Lord which it commemorates and the Sacrifice of his Crosse S. Cyprian Epist LXIII S. Chrysostome in Mat. Hom. LXXXIII in Aâ—la Hom. XXI in Epist ad Heb. Hom. XVII S. Austine in Psal XXI yet the addition of words which they use of reasonable and unbloudy oâ— commemorative of symbolical of signe and image are necessary evidence of an abarement in the property of the words according to their meaning Constitutiones Apost VI. 23. S. Cyprian Ep. LXIII Eâ—sebius demonst Evang. VIII 1. S. Ambrose de Oâ—â—ic I. 48. Macariuâ— Hom. XXVII S. Aâ—stine Quâ—st LXI ex LXXXIII contra Faâ—stum XX. 21. de Civ X. 5 20. XVII 17. Dionysius Hierar Eccles cap. III. and even the Canon of Mâ—â—sse calling it a Sacrifice of Praise for the redemption of souls that pay their vowes And therefore S. Ambrose de iâ—s qui initiantur mysteriis cap. VIII sayes that Christians then seeing the Altar prepared cried out Thou hast prepared â— Table before mee And in the Fathers that which is sometimes called an Altar is other while called a Table especially with the additions of mystical holy spiritual divine and others All abating the property of a Sacrifice or rather the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse when speech is of the Eucharist The words of S. Austine Epist XXIII are expresse Nonne semel immolaâ—us est Christus in sâ—ipsâ— Eâ—â—amen in Sacramento non solâ—m per omnes Paschâ— solemnitates sed omni dis populis imâ—olaâ—â—r nec utique menâ—itur qui interrogatus â—um respondet immâ—laâ—â—â— Was not Christ in person sacrificed once and yet in mystery not onely all the Easter Holidayes but every day is he sacrificed for the people Nor shall hee lye who being asked answers that hee is sacrificed That truth of a Sacrifice which serves but to â—â—vâ—â—â—lye makes not a proper Sacrifice And the words of S. Chrysostom in Epist ad Heb. Hâ—â— XVII are not to be oâ—itted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What then do wee noâ— offer every day Wee offer indeed but making commâ—moration of his death And this is one and not many How one and not many Because he was once offered not as that which was carried into the Holy of Holies That is the figure of this and this of that For wee offer alwaies the same not now one Lamb and another to morrow but alwaies the same Therefore the Sacrifice is one Otherwise by that reason being offered in many places there should be many Christs But by no means But there is one Christ every where here full and there full One Body As therefore being offered in many places hee is one Body and not many Bodies So is hee one Sacrifice Hee is our High Priest who offered the Sacrifice that cleanseth us The same wee also offer that then was offered that is invincible This is done in remembrance of that which was then done For dâ— this saith hee in remembâ—ance of mee Wee make no other Sacrifices as then the High Priest but the same alwaies or rather the remembrance of a Sacrifice Now that in the sense of the Catholick Church the Sacrament of the Eucharist is a Sacrifice propitiatory for the Church and impeâ—ratory of the necessities thereof in regard of those prayers wherewith it is offered and presented to God in virtue of the Sacrifice of the Crosse which it is mystically that is representeth and commemorateth a few words will serve to persuade him that knowes the practice and custom of the Church in all ages at the solemn and regular times and occasions of celebrating the Eucharist to make mention of all states and qualities belonging to the Church And not only so but upon occasions incident of going to God for the necessities either of the Church or of particular Christians to celebrate the Eucharist with an intent of presenting and offering the Crosse of Christ there present for their necessities You had afore out of Tertul de Cor. cap. V. Oblationes pro defunctâ—s pro natalitiis annuâ die facimus Wee make Oblations for the dead for the birth of Martyrs on the anniversary day And further de Exhor Castit XI speaking of him that had maried a second wife Neque enim pristinam poteris odisse cui etiam religiosiorem reservas affectionem ut jam receptâ— apud Dominum pro câ—jus spiritâ— postulas pro quâ Oblationes annuas â—eddiâ— Stabis ergo ad Dominum cum tot uxoribus quot in oratione commemoras Et offeres pro dâ—abus commendabis illas duas per sacerdotem de monogamiâ ordinatum aâ—t etiam de virginitate sancitum circundatum virginibus ac univiris Et ascendet sacrificiâ—m tuum liberâ fronte Et inter caeteras voluntates bonâ— mentis postulabis tibi uxori tuâ— castitatem For the former thou canst not hate for whom thou reservest a more religious affection as received already with the Lord for whose spirit thou makest request for whom thou rendrest yearly oblations Wilt thou then stand before the Lord with as many wives as in thy prayers thou mentionest And wilt thou offer for two And commend those two by a Priest ordained after one wife or confirmed of a virgine compassed
incursions of Satan upon such persons then visible and so I understood it afore But I must not therefore omit that sense of these words which the ancient Church frequeneth understanding this destruction to be the mortification of the flesh by works of Penance For this is that sense which Tertullian then a Moâ—tanist labours to confute but Origen in Levit. Hom. XXIV Pacianus Paraenesi ad Paenitenâ—iam S. Basil ad Aâ—philochium C. VII S. Ambrose de Paenitentià I. 12. S. Austine de fide operibus cap. XXVI suppose and use Neither is it any way inconsequent that the excommunicate believing themselves to come thereby under the power of Satan should betake themselves to those demonstrations of humiliation and mortification whereby the Church might be moved to admit them to the means of their reconcilement And in this there is more then preaching the Gospel or taking away offence There is authority obliging to use the cure and granting reconciliation upon the same Again when S. Paul saith to them again 2 Cor. XII 20. 21. I am afraid least when I come I find you not such as I would and be found of you such as you would not least there be strifes envies animosities conâ—enâ—ions back-bitings whisporings inflasions commotions Least when I come to you again God humble me in regard of you and I mourn for many that have sinned afore and have not repented of the uncleanesse and whoredome and wantonnesse which they have done How should S. Paul be humbled in regard of or mourn for many of them but in regard of the necessity which he feareth to find of putting them out of the Church or to penance in case they adhere to the Church And if by appearance and demonstration of their repentance S. Paul was to be moved not to do this is it not evident that this is the means which he imployes to procure repentance and assure pardon by discharging them of it I do here repetâ— that which I said afore to show that it is the Apostles intent Heb. VI. 4. 5 6. X. 26 27. XII 15. 16 17. to deterre them from falling away from Christianity to Judaism for fear of persecution from the Jews by puting them out of hope of being readmitted to the communion of the Church Not as pronouncing sentence of damnâ—tion against them but as demonstrating it so difficult to be presumed upon in behalfe of him that had once violated the profession of Christianity that the Church was not to become the warrant for it If this be the case of those whose interest in the promises of the Gospel the Church warrants not then the warrant of the Church either in pronouncing sentence of absolution formally or in admitting really unto the communion of the Eucharist proceeds oâ— ought to proceed upon supposition of that disposition which qualifies for pardon wrought in the penitent by the censure of the Church And that this is the case I have further inferred from the words of the Apostle 1 Joh. V. 16. 17. If a man see his Brother sinne a sin â—â—t to death he shall pray and life shall be given to them that sinne not to death There is a sinne to death I say not that ye pray for it All unrighteousnesse is sinne But there is a sinne not to death For seeing it is manifest that the Church is to pray for all sinners be they never so great enemies to the Church it cannot be understood that absolutely the Church is not to pray for the sinne to death but that as he forbiddeth not so he obligeth not the Church to pray for the sinne unto death those prayers which tend to reconcile the sinner to the Church upon supposition and for a warrant of the reconcilement thereof with God If this seem not to agree with the words because S. John seems to speak to particular persons and not to the body of the Church when he sayes If any man see lâ—t him ask Let him consider the words of anoâ—her Apostle James V. 14. 15 16 For when he promiseth forgivenesse of sinnes to him that shall call for the Priests of the Church and they pray over him Adding immediately Confessâ— your sinnes to one another and pray for one another that ye may be healed It is necessary that we make good a reason why this admonition follows upon that which went before Why the Apostle having taken order for the cure of their sinnes who are here ordered to send for the Priests of the Churâ—h proceeds to say Confesse your sinnes to one another Namely because the way of curing sinne is the â—ame when a man confesses his sinne to a Brother that is a private Christian and when hâ— submits it to the authority of the Church For as here the Apoâ—tle maketh the means of obtaining pardon to consist in the prayers of the Priests in whom the authority of the Church resteth â—o there in the prayers of one Christian for another that confesses his sinne to him And hâ—reupon it is necessarily to be presumed both that the Apostle means that the Priests of the Church impose upon him that course of câ—re which his sinne requireth in case he survive And also that a private Christian by his advice reduce his Brother to use the same means Otherwise to what purpose should the one or the other declare his sinne seeing he might be prayed for at large without declaring the same It is therefore no marvail that the words of S. John manifestly concerning particular Christians should extend to the Keyes of the Church and the publick office thereof For though in the beginning when he saith If a man see his Brother sinne a sin not to death he addresseth onely to particular Christians yet the â—nd there is a sinne unto death I say not that ye pray for it manifestly addresseth to the Body of the Church implying that it is to be acquainted therewith by him that sees this if the case require it Whereupon S. Paul thus exhorteth Gal. VI. 1. Brethren if a man be overtaken in any transgression ye that are spiritual restore such a one with the spirit of meeknesse considering your selves least ye also be tempted Here the title of spiritual may extend to particular Christians But there is a presumption concerning publick persons in the Church that they are such because it is the opinion that they are such which qualifies them to be made publick persons in the Church Now when he speaks to the brethren in generall to do this he showes that it may concern the Body of the Church as well as particular Christans But when he speaks of the spirit of meeknesse it is manifest that the intent of his speech concerns those Penances which were imposed upon sinners for trial of their convesions in which he requires that meeknesse which the consideration of a mans own meeknesse recommends And therefore the same thing is taught by S. Iames by and by after the words afore quoted James V. 19. 20.
of the Church But you have also a possibility for the cure of sinne without the authority of the Church in as much as it had been too impertinent for the Apostle to have given a Precept of confessing sinne to one another if no sinne could be pardoned without having recourse to the Church The same is the effect of S. Johns words If a man see his Brother sinne a sinne not unto death For it is manifest that that sinne which one man sees is not notorious to the Church And yet the distinction which S. John maketh between the sinne which he commandeth a private Christian to pray for and the sinnes which he commandeth not the Church to pray for with the difficulties which the primitive Church had about it show that those sinnes which private advice cannot cure he would have brought to the Church And S. Johns meaning is that a man should pray for such sinnes of his Brother as he is sure are not to death Supposing first his Brother disposed by himself or by his advise to take the course that may qualifie him for forgivenesse But if it prove doubtful whether to death or not the Apostle by saying that there are some sinnes which he referreth to the Church whither to pray for pardon of them to wit in order to restoring them to the communion of the Church or not supposeth that they are reported to the Church by him that saw them when the Church saw them not But first supposing that they might possibly have been cured without bringing them to the Church And if these things be true then is the bringing of a sinner back from the error of his way according to that Precept of S. James which followeth an obligation that is to be discharged not onely by the office of a private Christian in convicting a private Christian of his sinne and of the means that he is to use for his recovery but also by bringing him to the Church if the case require it Which obligation will necesâ—atily lie upon the sinner himself in the first place But so that his own skill and fidelity to his own salvation may possibly furnish him his cure at home The tenor of our Saviours words throughly inforceth the same according to that which I observed in the first Book p. 140. that all Christians may be said to bind sinne by showing a Christian his sinne in case he refuse that cure which he that convicts him of his sinne convicts him that is to use And to loose sin in case he imbrace it But this in the inner Court of the Conscience between God and the soul For though the words of our Lord If thy Brother offend thee tell him of it between him and thee extend to private injuries obliging a Christian first to seek reparation by the good will of his party upon remonstrance of the wrong Then not to seek it out of the Church but by the Church yet they necessarily comprehend all sinnes which another man knows which to him are offences And therefore when our Saviour saith If he hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother it is manifest that the effect of his promise which followeth Whosoever ye bind on earth shall be bound in heaven is obtained by the act of a private Christian without recourse to the publick authority of the Church And who will believe that the skill and fidelity of some private Christian may not furnish him as good a cure as he can expect to learn from any private Christian to whom he can have recourse And yet the process of our Lords discourse showes that the intent of it concerns in chiefe the exercise of the Keyes of Gods Church even upon those sinnes which are not notorious Which who so considers cannot refuse to grant that S. Pauls injunction for the restoring of him that is surprised in sinne concerns both the office of private Christiaâ—s and also of a whole Church and the Body of it And truly considering what hath been said concerning Scripture and Tradition it cannot seem strange that the Apostles leaving such authority with the Churches of their founding with generall instructions to those whom they trusted them with writing to the Bodies of those Churches things respectively concerning all Christians should give directions concerning all in generall terms which the visible practice of the said Churches might determine to the respective office of each quality and estate in those Churches No more then that our Lord finding the power of the Keyes not yet visible before Christianity should propose his instructions in that generality which onely his Apostles orders and the practice of their Churches upon their instructions determineth For the power of the Keyes in the Church inables it further untill the worlds end to limit further whatsoever shall appear to require further determination to the end of binding and loosing of sinne which it importeth according as the present state of the Church in every age shall require Let us now consider that though I have made evidence by consequence from the writings of the Apostles that remission of sinnes committed after Baptism may be obtained without the Keyes of the Church yet it is hard to find any expresse promise to that effect in their writings unlesse it be that of S. Johns first Epistle In which notwithstanding a limitation of that confession which the Apostle requires to the Church and to those that are trusted by the Church may reasonably be understood supposing the way of curing sinne by the ministery of the Church to have been customary and therefore known at that time And on the contrary though I do believe these consequences to be unreproveable yet it is to be considered that S. Pauls indulgence seems to be granted upon a particular occasion incident to distemper the ordinary course of the Church Namely the prevailing of some sinne to a faction of some great or the greatest part of the Church Which as it necessarily intercepted the use of the power of the Keyes though provided and ordained by God for the curing of the said sinnes so can it by no means argue that God hath not appointed it for the ordinary means of curing them As for the consequence which was made from the testimonies of the Law and the Prophets and of the Gospels before the establishment of the Covenant of Baptism to show that they take effect also in sinnes after Baptism It may easily be considered that they take place no further then that disposition which is requisite to the forgivenesse of those sinnes whereby the grace of Baptism is violated may be supposed to be produced without helpe of the Church Which as I conceive I have proved to be possible so I conceive no man living can prove to be so easie that all those who stand in need of the remedy can presume upon so good ground as the safety of the soul requires to obtain it or to have obtained it of themselves without that helpe which
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
reconcilement with God For where there is means for those that are detected of notorious sinnes to be restored to the Communion of the Church without the hardship of Penance there can be no reason to imagine that those whose sinnes are secret will of themselves submit themselves to the Keyes of the Church to procure pardon or to assure themselves of it I find great reason to believe that at the first those sinnes which were brought under publick Penance by the primitive Church were onely those three great crimes of Murder Adultery and Idolatry which the Montanists and Novatians excluded from reconcilement by Penance and the branches that were reducible to the same For Pacianus Paraenesi ad Poenitentiam speaking expresly of this mater expresses no more But when the Empire was Christian and the Church became ingraffed into the State then was the Rule inlarged to all crimes that the Laws of the State made capital to which in point of conscience those that are infamous by Civil Law are not inferiour though being not so pernicious to the world they are not by Civil Law punished with death The Reformation of Ecclesiastical Law intended here under Edward VI. hath taken notice of these terms As for the Presbyterians that would so fain be authorized by the State to swagger domineer over the consciences of their poor Neighbors that they have not been ashamed to submit the Original power of the Church to an appeal to the secular which is in English to let Parliament men live as they list so themselves might be inabled to do what they listed with litle ones to give them the power of the Church is to destroy the Church the power whereof they pretend not to exercise to the curing of sin but onely to the abolishing of scandall which the Church never pretended to abolish but by curing the sinne And yet they must give me leave to ask further either how that conscience can be cured of sinne that is not wounded with it or how it can be wounded with it that is bound to believe the pardon of sinne before repentance So necessary it is that they be required to disclaim the remission of sinne and the opinion of saving faith without supposing repentance and the same to be procured by the Keys of the Church before we suppose them to be a Church CHAP. XI The Unction of the sick pretendeth onely bodily health upon supposition of the cure of sinne by the Keyes of the Church Objections answered The Tradition of the Church evidenceth the same BEfore I leave this point I am here to consider what Ecclesiasticall power it is and how well grounded which the Church of Rome pretendeth to exercise in extream Unction so called because it belongeth to the sick in extremity and being accounted by them in the number of the seven Sacraments is applyed unto the sick over and above the Sacraments of Penance and of the Eucharist The question of the Sacraments wherein the nature of them consisteth and by consequence how many of them there are I wholly set aside from the present discourse Because I conceive it will be determined more briefly upon more setled grounds all at once when I shall have discovered what powers they are which the Church indeed exerciseth by those actions which are or which may be pretended to be Sacraments But it is plain enough that the Church of Rome pretendeth also to exercise the power of the Keys in extream unction because according to the words of S. James afore quoted they assign the effect of it to be the remission of sinne On the contrary they who by the promise of bodily health to be restored to the sick upon the unction which the Apostle prescribeth do gather that the whole office there commanded was temporary as only intended for those ages when the miraculous grace of healing was in force in the Church by consequence do not admit any office to be incharged or any power estated upon the Church by it That which hath been premised to show that the circumstances of the Apostles words together with the originall and generall practice of the Church argueth aloud his intent to concern the exercise of the Keyes of the Church and the power of them towards those that are in danger of death ingageth my resolution to be this That the unction of the sick together with the prayers of the Church for the recovery of their bodily health which Christianity alloweth not without praying principally for the health of the soul is no way commanded by S. James but as an appertenance or an appendant to the exercise of the power of the Keyes in reconciling the sick to the Church whereupon the prayers thereof become due and therefore without further promise of remission of sinne or grace then that generall promise which the injoyning of prayer for the sick presupposeth The reason of this assertion is now to be deduced out of the Scriptures supposing for grounds those things which hitherto have been setled When our Lord sent his Disciples to preach the Gospel and to do those works that might witnesse them to be the Disciples of him that was sent by God it is said Mark VI. 13. That they cast out many Devils and annointed many sick with oyl and healed them Now it is evident that the miracles of the Apostles as did their Masters tended to one generall purpose by bodily cures to intimate the cure of sinne and the recovery of life and health to the soul which our Lord pretended to bring and tender them though by his works convincing them that he was the Messias whom they expected to bring them deliverance from their bodily enemies and the happinesse of injoying freely the Land promised by their Fathers Whereby we may see what consideration those Writers of Controversies have of the Scriptures that ground the unction of the sick which they will have to be a Sacrament of the New Testament upon this action of the Apostles when as the Gospel though now in preaching by the Apostles as well as our Lord yet was not established till his death past and accepâ—ed by God and by his resurrection declared to be accepted as the ratification of that ambassage of reconcilement and peace which he came to publish Far more discreet is that which the Council of Trent hath said that being intimated by S. Mark it is published by S. James At least if we understand the ground whereupon we maintain that the cure of sin is intimated by that bodily health which S. Mark relateth to have been restored by the Apostles For so indeed it is The bodily cures which the Apostles then did seemed to intimate that the imbracing and undertaking of Christianity is from Christs death forwards in consideration thereof the cure of the soul and the restoring of it from death to life Which if it be so then hath the Church no further power in the pardoning or abolishing of sinne then the absolute
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
course of life as he thinks may give him best meanes and opportunity of discharging the common profession of Christians though all Christians are not tied to professe the same shall he not stand bound to make it good upon the same ground for which Ananias and Sapphira are condemned in withdrawing that which they professed to consecrate to God But Saint Pauls instruction to refuse the younger widdows hath no answer Because when they grow wanton against Christ they will marry Having damnation as having set their first faith at nought 1 Tim. V. 11 12. For what can that first faith be but their promise ingaged to the Church whereby they dedicate themselves to the service thereof in the state of widows Under the Old Testament it is no mistake of the Jewes to believe that all Gods people were ordinarily under the precept of increase and multiply requiring of them the state of marriage Saint Angustine and other Fathers of the Church have found markes of it in the Old Testament It is not therefore to be imagined that there is either precept or precedent for the state of Monkes in the Old Testament Nor yet to be denied that Nazarites especially from the mothers womb that those women who kept guard at the Tabernacle Exod. XXXVIII 5. 1 Sam. II. 22. as Anna the daughter of Phanuel that departed not from the Temple serving God with fasting and prayer day and night Luke II. 37. that the Rechabites are instances and precedents of some principles and ingredients of their profession even under the Old Testament For if man and wife should now dedicate themselves to attend upon the poor sick and helplesse in hospitals or the like they would be no lesse The Prophets though under no perpetuall tye lived in a kind of Community with their disciples not for that knowledge of the Law which the Rulers of the people professed whom they were ordinarily in difference with and often times persecuted to death by them but for those rudiments of Christianity which by their meanes were kept alive under the Law The Rechabites being of the race of the Kenites which it seems upon Moses invitation to Jethro tooke part with the Israelites in the Land of Promise under the condition of worshipping onely the true God knowing what all strangers are subject to living under the dominion and protection of strangers received a Law from their predecessors not to have further to do in the world then their subsistence by the simplest sort of life by being shepherds required And being commended for obeying their Rule by the Prophet Jeremy from Gods mouth have much justified them who under Christianity do voluntarily put themselves under the like Rule out of a pretense the better to discharge their Christianity by that meanes During the time of our Lord there was a third sect of people among the Jewes whom we find no mention of in the Scriptures of the New Testament because they lived retyred out of the world some married others in single life both under a most strict observation of their Rule which you have in Josephus under the name of Essanes It is well enough known that Eusebius finding a relation written by Philo the Jew of that manner of life which they used in Egypt hard by Alexandria hath reported them for Christians and how this report hath been disowned of late yeares as a meer mistake of Eusebius or an ungrounded conjecture I who have showed that it is possible Philo himself may have been a Christian must not reject the opinion of those who think they might really be Christians converted by the first arrivall of Christianity in Aegypt For in the case which I spoke of there is no cause why they might not be both Jewes and Christians the separation of the Church from the Synagogue not being yet formed and when it was formed continue Christians forsaking the Synagogue And truly the mention of Virgines as of a peculiar order visible in the Church is so ancient in the writings of Tertulliane Methodius whose Book of Virginity is published of late and Saint Cypriane that it must needs be impossible to find any beginning for it For Tertulliane writing his Book De velandis Virginibus to prove that Order not exempt from Saint Pauls injunction that women vail their faces at divine service appeales to the custome of the Church at Corinth to which Saint Paul writ it as having alwayes observed it in Virgines And therefore the same Saint Paul directing him who had resolved to keep his daughter a Virgine 1 Cor. VII 37. seems to suppose this resolution to imply that education whereby she might be inabled so to continue For it is true the profession is difficult but not impossible for him to go commendably through with that by Gods grace undertakes it with that zeal which the end requires I do much admire the resolution of Gennadius De ' Dogmat. Eccles cap. LXIV that it is not the meer love of a continent estate which Christianity esteems unlesse it be chosen as the meanes and opportunity of serving God with the more freedome otherwise signifying rather the declining of mariage then the love of Chastity For. so it is indeed he that chuses a continent estate to avoid the difficulties of mariage seems rather to tempt God and to expose himself to many desertions waving the remedy which he hath provided But he who trusts to Gods assistance for the accomplishment of that intention which Christianity commendeth though it command not may assure himselfe of it not destituting his prayers of the indeavours which he may and is to contribute This being the case of particular persons that withdraw themselves from the world to make their salvation the more assured the interesse which accrues to the Church in them that do so seems to be no more then may be grounded upon the profession of such a purpose For so long as it is secret between God and the soul the Church can have nothing to do in it But being once professed and known to take hold the transgression thereof becoming notorious is a sinne which owes an account to the Church Not that the manner of this profession is any way provided for but by the custome of the Church For he that should actually and visibly declare such an intention by really entering upon the course and living according to it would become necessarily liable to that account for the transgressing of it which the solemnity renders due And therefore that solemnity reduceth it self to the nature of those ceremonies whereby actions of great consequence wherein the authority of the Church is exercised ought in reason to get reverence For by that meanes the parties concerned receive a due impression of the charge they undertake when God and his Church become rather parties then witnesses to it In the mean time they remaine in the Church what they were before private Christians onely professing such a course of life onely ingaged to God in
Brethren if any man of you go astray from the truth and some body bring him back let him know that he who brings back a sinner from the errâ—r of his way shall save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sinnes For it is plain by S. Paul that this extendeth to the recovery of a sinner by the Keyes of the Church as they were managed during the Apostles time Certainly if we understand S. Pauls words 1 Tim. V. 22. 24. of imposition of hands in Penance as I have showed in my Book of the Right of the Church p. 23. that they may and ought to be understood it is necessarily to be inferred seeing they who admit those sinners to be reconciled unto God by the Prayers which the Church makes for them with imposition of hands signifying thereby that it alloweth them to be sâ—ncerely penitent are partakers of their sinnes which shall follow upon the readmitting of them to the Church being not worthy qualified for it Therefore the Church is to see that a man be qualified for reconciliation with the Church upon supposition of his reconciliation with God before he be reconciled to the Church And in first procuring him and then judging him to be so qualified consists the right use of those Keyes which God hath given the Church towards them that transgresse the profession of Christianity after they have made it The reason of all this is derived from those things which have been setled by the premises The condition which the Gospel proposeth for the remission of sinnes to them who stâ—nd convict by it that they are under sinne is that they return from sinne â—nd believing that our Lord Châ—iâ—t was senâ— by God to cure it undertake to professe that which he taught and to live according to the same Those which professe so to do the Church accepteth of wiâ—hout exception because this being the first account she hath of them she cannot expect more at their hands then that they submit the rest of their lives to that Christianity which she obligeth them to If by trâ—nâ—gressing this obligation which they have undertaken they forfeit the right which they obtainâ—d thereby is it in the power of the Church to restore them at pleasurâ— In vain then is all that hath been said to show that the Gospel and Christianity in order of nature and reason is more ancient then the constitution of the Church and the corporation of it And that all the power of the Chuâ—ch presupposeth the condition upon which those blessings which it tendreth are due And certainly our Lord when he saith to his Diâ—ciples Joh. XX. 23. Whosesoever sinne ye remit they are remitted intended not to contradict the sense of the Sâ—râ—bes when they say Who can forgive sinnes but God alone Mark II. 7. Luk. V. 21. Much lesse to reverse the word of his Prophets ascribing this power of him alone Esay XLIII 25. Mich. VII 18. Psal XXXII 5 What is then the effect of this promise to them that have forfeited the right of their Baptism supposing that when men first become Christians the Disciples of Christ and his Church remit sinnes by making them Christians according to that which hath been declared Surely the same observing the difference of the case For he who being convict of his disease and of the cure of it by the preaching of Christianity is effectually moved by the helpe of Gods Spirit to imbrace that cure which none but the Church which tenders it can furnish attains it not but by using it That is by being baptized But he who being baptized hath failed of his trust and forfeited his interest in Christ cannot so easily be restored I have showed you what works of mortification of devotion and mercy the recovering of Gods grace and favour requirâ—s Let no man therefore thinke that the power of remitting sinnes in the Church can abate any thing of that which the Gospel upon which the Church is grounded requiteth to the remission of finne done after Baptism The authority of the Church is provided by God to oblige those who are overtaken in sinne to undergo that which may satisfie the Church of the sincere intent of their returne And the Church being so satisfied warranteth their restitution to the right which they had forfeited upon as good ground as it warranteth their first estate in it But this presupposeth the wrath of God appeased his favour regained and the inordinâ—te love of the creature which caused the forfeit blotted out and changed through that course of mortification which hath been performed into the true love of goodnesse for Gods sake The Church therefore hath received of God no power to forgive sinnes immediately as if it were in the Church to pardon sâ—nne without that diâ—poâ—ition which by the Gospel qualifieth a man for it Or as if the act of the Church pardoning did produce it But in as much as the knowledge thereof directeth and the authority thereof constraineth to use the means which the Gospell prescribeth in so much is the remission of sinnes thereby obtained truly ascribed to the Church Lazarus was first dead before he was bound up in his Grave clothes And when he was restored to life he remained bound till he was loosed by the Apostles The Church bindeth no man but him that is first dead in sinne If the voice of Christ call him out of that death he is not revived till the love of sin be mortified and the love of God made alive in him by a due course of Penance performed If the motion of Gods spirit upon the preaching of the Gospel convincing a man that there is no means but Christianity to escape out of sinne and prevailing with him to imbrace it be effectuall to obtain the promises of the Gospel Much more shall the actuall operation of the same moving him that is dead in sinne to put sinne to death in himself that he may live a Christian for the future be effectuall to regain the grace of God for him who hath not yet the life of grace in him but is in the way of recovering it by the helpe of Gods grace But he who is thus recovered to life by the ministery of the Church is not yet loosed of the bands of his sinne till he be loosed by the Church because he was first bound by it as our Lord having raised Lazarus to live commands him to be loosed by his Apostles For if he who accepteth of the Gospel and the terms of it remain bound to be baptized by the Church for the remission of his sinne Is it strange that he who hath forfeited his pardon obtained by the Church even in the judgement and knowledge of the Church should not obtain the restoring of it but by the act of the Church And therefore the Church remitteth sinne after Baptism not onely as a Physician prescribing the cure but as a judge admitting it to be effected And the satisfaction of the Church presupposeth