is held and practised convincing where the truth is and on which side especially if wee content our selves with what is probable from it expecting from Tradition what is definite and certain For supposing so great a Congregation as the Church to take this for the ground of their Faith that nothing is to be believed for revealed truth but what they have received from hand to hand from the Apostles it must be granted First that they had the same perswasion from the beginning Because having never declared to their successors what are the particulars they are to receive either they had from the beginning this principle to distinguish mater of faith from that which is not or could never introduce it without grosse imposture And besides that holding this perswasion they could never admit any thing as received from their Fore-fathers which was not so indeed Because whole Nations can never agree so to deceive in a mater subject to sense as to say that they received this or that from their Fore-fathers when they did not the reason being the same in all ages since Christ as in our own For the Christian Faith being so repeated so inculcated by the preaching of the Apostles how long soever wee suppose the remembrance of their doctrine to have remained certain in the Church so long wee may inferre that age which had this certain remembrance must convey it as certain in a sensible distance of time and by the means of such distances that it must needs come no lesse certain to us Neither can any breach have been made upon the Faith without contesting the common principle of Tradition in the first place and secondly the consequence and correspondence which the Articles of Christianity have one with another by means whereof hee that questioneth one must needs by consequence prejudice others And Religion being a bond by observing which people are perswaded they shall attain happinesse the same motives to enter into this bond in general the same grounds of embracing Christianity in particular remaining how should wee imagine any part of it should be either lost or changed which necessarily must concurre to the effect of the whole For being dispersed as from the beginning it hath been over so many Nations whose authority can be a sufficient reason to perswade them all that which hee sayes to have been received from the Apostles not that which they were possessed of afore Who is able to move them with hopes and fears answerable to those which wrought them to imbrace it either to silence or to change it And yet so long as it can appear that the contrary was received so long time must the change require to prevaile and so much more to leave the truth forgot and yet subject to be evidenced by any Records that may remain So that there is no appearance that the principles producing such a change should so long time prevail as those motives that first evidenced the truth And further upon all this appearance in point of fact it is argued à priori and as it were in point of Right That God having provided so many possibilities to make the preservation of Christianity so easie the effect must needs have followed lest the means should have been provided in vain if no effect should insue All possibility being to no purpose when no effect followes and no effect but this answering the means that render it so possible CHAP. XXXI That the Scriptures which wee have are unquestionable That mistakes in Copying are not considerable to the sense and effect of them The meaning of the Hebrew and Greek even of the Prophets determinable to the deciding of Controversies How Religion delivered by Tradition becomes subject to be corrupted THis is the summe of this new account which to my understanding maintains the Infallibility of the present Church upon as high terms as those that resolve the reason of their Faith into it and yet not upon any gift of Infallibility intailed upon any visible act of any persons however qualified on behalf of the Church but upon a pretense of evidence made to common sense that those who acknowledge Tradition cannot receive any thing not onely which they believe to be but which is indeed inconsistent with it Wherein I shall protest in the first place that I have nothing to do with the terms of great error or Christianity so as to say here that either Christianity which hee calleth Christs Law or any part of it either hath been or may be renounced by them that pretend to admit nothing as revealed truth but what they believe was received from the Apostles and that so great an error as this may have crept into the Church For the present purpose being general to try how any thing in debate may be tryed whether agreeable to the Faith or not I should count it a great impertinence and the ruine of all that I design to infer upon sufficient principles which I pretend those which I reject not to be to be ingaged to show how great any error may be before I have a ground to inferre whether it be an error or not But if I may proceed to settle such a ground I shall make no doubt to convince all that remain convict of the truth thereof how great the error is which it convicteth It shall therefore suffice mee for the present to state the opposition which I make to this pretense upon these termes That the common sense of all Christians determineth those who pretend to admit nothing as of Faith but what they receive from our Lord and his Apostles to be subject neverthelesse under that pretense to receive things really inconsistent with it and which may be discerned so to be by the means which wee have to decide such questions The Scriptures interpreted by the Original and Catholick Tradition of the Church The evidence of this position necessarily consists in that which is to be said for Scripture and Tradition joyntly as the onely sufficient means to evidence Christian truths that is to say that having showed the arguments made against Scripture alone and for Tradition alone to be ineffectual and void That which remains for the truth will be this that the Scripture with Tradition to determine the meaning of it do both together make a sufficient means to determine the truth of any thing questioned concerning Christianity I say then in behalf of the Scripture which this plea so undervalueth as not to acknowledge any such thing but in favour to them whom they dispute with that it is a mervail to see how the greater difference with common enemies is forgot upon lesse quarrels among our selves For if there be any such men as Atheists that deny the beginning of the world and the marks of Gods providence expressed in the government of it as I would there were none I demand how they could be more gratified than by making it beleeved that we are no more tied to beleeve Moses writings
rather here to prevent the objection that may be made that I ground my selfe upon the authority of men when I allege the testimonies of Church Writers For those that may abuse themselves with such a fond imagination as this are to consider that I claime as yet no other credit not onely for Tertullian who after hee turned Montanist was not of the Church but for the Fathers of the Church but that which common sense allowes men of common sense in witnessing maters of historical truth To wit that they who published writings that are come to posterity would not have alleged things for true which every man might see to be false in point of fact Because by so doing common sense must needs tell them that they must of necessity utterly discredit the cause which they meant to promote As in the case in hand If wee say that Tertullian being a Montanist alleged against the Church things so notoriously false that all the world might see and know them to be false wee refuse him the credit of a man in his right senses For what were hee but a mad man that would tell the Church that such or such Customes you know are practised among Christians knowing that they were not practised by the Catholick Church though they might be among the Montanists Therefore though I put a great deal of difference between the authority of Tertullian and S. Basil in regulating the Church yet in witneshng mater of fact I can ascribe no more to S. Basils testimony in his book de Sp. S. cap. XXVII than I do to this of Tertullian His words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of things decreed and preached that are kept in the Church some wee have from written doctrine some wee have received as delivered in secret down to us from the Tradition of the Apostles both of the same force to godlinesse And this will no man contradict that hath but a little experience in the rules of the Church For if wee go about to refuse unwritten customes as of no great effect wee shall unawares wound the Gospel in the dangerous part or rather turn the Faith preached into a bare name As first to mention the first and commonest Who taught us by writing to mark with the figure of the Crosse those that have hoped in the name of our Lord Christ Jesus What Scripture taught us to turn to the East when wee pray Which of the Saints left us by writing the words of invocation upon discovering the bread of Thanksgiving and the cup of Blessing For wee are not content with those which the Apostle or the Gospel mentions but promote and inferre others as of great force toward the Sacrament which wee have received by unwritten doctrine Wee also blesse the water of Baptisme and the oile of anointing and besides the man himself that is baptized from what Scripture and not from silent and secret Tradition And indeed what written word taught the very anointing of oile And that a man is drenched thrice whence comes it And other things about Baptisme renouncing Satan and his Angels from what Scripture come they And not from this unpublished and secret doctrine I will not here dispute the saying of S. Basil that these orders are of the same force toward Christian piety as the Scriptures And that Christianity would be but a bare name were it not for these unwritten customes how the truth of it holds Nay it were easie to instance against him as well as against Tertullian that among the particulars which they name there are those which never were in force through the whole Church but onely in some parts of it My present purpose demands onely this that Christians had rules which they observed for Lawes in the exercise of their communion And therefore by the intent of those who inforced those rules do constitute a Society or Corporation by the name of the Church Which Corporation Tertullian whether a Montanist or not when hee writ the book which I quote claimeth to belong to in reckoning himself among those that observed the Rules of the Catholick Church If wee suppose the Church to be one Body consisting of all Churches which are all of them several Bodies it will be not onely reasonable but absolutely necessary by consequence to grant that some orders there must be which shall have the force of the whole others onely in some parts of it And though S. Basil or Tertullian mistake local customes for general yet had there not alwaies been a Body capable of being tied by general customes there had been no room for this mistake No prejudice shall hinder mee to name here the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles Not as if I meant to maintain that the writings so called were indeed penned by them But because they contain such limitations of customes delivered the Church by the Apostles as were received and in use at such times and in such parts of the Church where those who penned those writings writ For though I should grant that those limitations are not agreeable to that which was brought in by the Apostles no man would be so ridiculous as to demand that there were never any orders or customes delivered the Church by the Apostles which succeeding times did limit otherwise The book of Canons which was acknowledged by the representatives of the whole Church in the Council of Chalcedon if it be survayed shall be found to contain onely particular limitations of general orders held by the Church before those Canons were made by the several Councils either the same with those in the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles or differing onely according to several times and places For wee have yet extant a book of Canons made out of the Africane Councils containing the like limitations of the same customes and orders which though not the same yet served to preserve the Churches of Africk in unity with the rest of the Church This Code wee finde added to the former by Dionysius Exâ—guus in his translation of the Canons together with the Canons of the Council at Sardica And Cassiodore who lived the same time with Dionysius affirmes that this collection was in use in the Church of Rome at that time Divin lect cap. XXIII But there is extant a later Collection of Canons under the title of the Church of Rome consisting of the same Canons together with some of the Rescripts of Popes which were come into use and authority in the Western Church at such time as the said Collection was made Of the same Canons consisteth another Greek collection printed by du Tillet and commented by Balsamon which addeth hereunto the Canons of the sixth and seventh Synod in use in the Greek Church but not acknowledged by the Latine Where instead thereof the collections of Martinus Braccarensis and Isidorus Mercator of Burchardns Bishop of Wormes and Ives of Chartres where last of all the collection of Gratiane the Dominican Monk was in
The Word shines upon all and is hid to none saith Clemens to the Gentiles But it is enough for his purpose that they may be convinced of Christianity whether the Scriptures contain it clearly to all understandings or not Tertullian prescribeth that when once wee believe wee are to believe that wee have nothing else to believe because the Gnosticks pretended secrets which our common Christianity they confessed contained not Claudius Apollinaris is afraid that our common Christianity might be thought unperfit if hee should write against Montanus And does not Christians writing one against another cast a mark of imperfection upon it in the opinion of unbelievers though Christians ought to know that God is not tyed to prevent offenses Assuredly the Gospel of which hee speaks is neither any one Gospel nor all four Nor can the word Gospel signifie either the New Testament alone or the Old and New both Nor could hee be thought to adde to them by expounding them and thereby maintaining the Church Therefore hee inferrs a good consequence that because it is forbidden to adde to or take from the Law therefore our common Christianity is not unperfit nor ought wee to do that whereby it may seem unperfit Now as for the sayings alleged out of S. Austine that import as much as the words which wee had afore Ego Evangelio non crederem having showed what is the effect and intent of them I shall not be very solicitous to show how all that is said to the same effect is answered For as there is no head so hard that cannot distinguish between the authority of the Church as it is a visible Body of men that could never have been cozened into the beliefe of Christianity upon pretended motives whether sufficient or not and as it is supposed by Christians to be a Body founded by God So is there no heart so hardned with prejudice as to refuse this demand That the authority of the Church as the Church presupposes the truth of Christianity and therefore proves it not And by consequence no truth that Christianity either containeth or inferreth Which being admitted if any thing be ascribed to the Church which seems not to suppose any part of Christian truth it must be referred to the authority and credit of the Church as a visible Body of men moving others to imbrace the Christian Faith For though this credit contribute to the making of those men Christians which are won to the Church already setled and so the Church is the Church before they are Christians Yet is the ground and reason which makes the Church a Body founded by God to wit the profession of Christianity more ancient in order of reason and nature than the being of the Church And upon supposition of this ground that is that the Church hath true reasons as well as sufficient to believe proceeds all that authority of the Church which S. Austine allegeth to the Manichees upon so high terms that hee would not believe were hee not moved by it to believe Neither was it the authority of the Church vested in the rest of the Apostles that gave S. Paul the authority of an Apostle over the Church though I have said afore that all the authority which the Church can ever have was in the Apostles and disciples of our Lord for the time And though it is manifest that S. Paul could not have had the Authority of an Apostle over the Church had he not been owned by the rest of the Apostles but the Authority of our Lord Christ in the Apostles of the same effect in obliging the Church to receive S. Paul for an Apostle as to receive that which they preached for the Faith Nor is the mater much otherwise in the receiving of any Scripture for Canonital For neither can any mans writing be owned for Canonical Scripture not supposing his person owned by the Apostles And his authority being so owned is necessarily before any authority of the Church and the very being of it That some Scriptures may be received in some Churches and not in others is not because any Church can have authority to reject that which another is bound to receive but because some Church may not know that some Scripture comes from a man so owned by the Apostles though another may know it and yet be a Church and salvation be had in the communion of it such knowledg depending meerly upon evidence in point of fact And therefore the act of the Church in listing the Scripture hath no authority but that which the presumption of such evidence createth As for the rest of that which is alleged for the authority of the Church if S. Jerome resolve to stand to the Church of Rome it is not because hee takes the sentence thereof to be infallible but because hee had reason to presume that it were in vain for an Angel in heaven to preach any other Faith to it than that which once had been received Nor doth S. Cyprian make the not believing the Popes infallibility the sourse of all Heresie and Schism but the neglect of authority derived from the Apostles upon the Heads of particular Churches in the consent of whom the visibility of the true Faith and Church both consisteth For it is meer slight of hand to take the Rock which the Gates of Hell vanquish not in S. Austine for the Church of Rome because hee spoke of it in the words next afore Being meant of the Vine which hee had speech of a little afore that to wit the Christianity which our Lord Christ preacheth For in S. Bernards time I grant the stile was changed and it might passe for good doctrine to say That the Faith cannot suffer any failleur in the Church of Rome As for all those passages of the Fathers which are alleged in recommendation whether of Tradition for the Rule of Faith or of Traditions which are the Lawes of the Church they are all mine own They cannot serve the turn of any opinion but that which I pretend That the Tradition of the Church witnessed and evidenced by the continual exercice and practice of the Church extant in the records of the Church not constituted and created by any expresse act of those that have authority in behalf of the Church as it giveth bounds to the interpretation of the Scripture in such things as concern the Rule of Faith So it discovereth what Lawes the Church received from the Apostles and by consequence what is agreeable and consequent to the intent of the same in future times according to the difference between that and the present state of the Church Let those things therefore which have been produced here be added to that which I alleged in the beginning to make evidence for the Corporation of the Church from the Lawes given it by the Apostles Irenaus shall serve both for the authority of the Scripture antecedent to the authority of the Church and for the Tradition of the Church bounding
and sending other false Apostles as I said afore in thebeginning to Antiochia and other places saying that unless ye be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses ye cannot be saved there came no small trouble as I said afore and these are they that in Paul are called false Apostles deceitfull workers transforming themselves into Apostles of Christ. For here Epiphanius distinguishing two kinds of false Apostles one that pretended to be sent by our Lord Christ another by his Apostles applyes unto them the words of S. Paul 2 Cor. XI 23. by virtue of that of the Synodicall Letter of the Apostles Acts XV. 24. to whom we gave no such charge and sayes that whatsoever they pretended they were neither sent by our Lord Christ nor yet by his Apostles commission from Christ Herewith agrees all that which the Apostle writes against eating things sacrificed to Idols in the VIII and X. Chapters of this first Epistle For there is no question to be made that the Sect of Cerinthus was one of the Gnosticks because it is expressed in Epiphanius that they also taught the unknown God whom they pretended to make known And therefore when S. Paul saith in the beginning of that eighth chapter As concerning things offered to Idols we know that we all have knowledge knowledge indeed puffeth up but charity edifieth It is manifest that he civily reproveth that pretense of knowledge which some weak Christians were then in danger to be carried away with to believe That those who knew the true God whom their masters pretended to teach and the Idols of the Gentiles to be nothing might without scruple of conscience communicate in the worship of those whom they scorned and thought to be nothing Intending in the X. Chapter to protest that they could not communicate in the same without renouncing their Christianity And if any man say that Cerinthus according to Epiphanius saith That our Lord Christ is not to rise againe till the last day and therefore that the opinion of those that deny the resurrection which S. Paul disputes against 1 Cor. XV. can neither be imputed to Cerinthus nor the Câ—rintâ—ians It is answered that Epiphanius himself declares that the Cerinthians were not all of a minde Some of them denying the resurrection of Christ and by consequence of Christians against whom the maine of that Chapter argues Others affirming that Christ was not to rise again till all should rise againe at the worlds end And truly I see not why S. Paul should argue that it is necessary that we should believe the resurrection of Christ saying If Christ be not risen againe then is our preaching vaine and we are found false witnesses then is your faith vain and yâ— are yet in your sinnes 1 Cor. XV. 14-17 Unlesse among those whom he argues against the resurrection of Christ had been questioned which is Epiphanius his argument And I would faine hear who can give a better account of that everlasting difficulty in S. Pauls words that follow 1 Cor. XV. 29. For what shall those that are baptized for the dead do if the dead rise not againe why are they baptized for the dead then Epiphanius gives according to this supposition and that upon the credit of Historical truth not of any conjecture of his owne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 .. For in this countrey I mean Asia and Galatia this Sect flourished much Among whom a point of Tradition is come to us how some of them dying before Baptisme others are baptized for them in their name that rising at the resurrection they may be liable to no sentence of punishment as not having received Baptisme and become obnoxious to the power of him that made the world Where by the way you see the Cerinthians were Gnosticks because by baptisme they pretended to free men from the bad principle which made the world This being the doctrine of the Gnosticks Now if it be true as Epiphanius understood that the Cerinthians in Asia and Galatia baptized others for those that were dead without baptisme shall we think it strange that those false Apostles who transformed themselves into Apostles of Christ as Satan into an Angel of light should teach the Corinthians to do the same And what need S. Paul stand to condemne this condemning all their impostures by the dispute of both Epistles Neither is it more difficult to discerne those whom S. Paul disputes against in the second Chapter of his Epistle to the Colossians to be of the same stamp if we observe two points of his reproofe The one the worship of Angels the other abstinence from certaine meats and from women which S. Paul couches in these words Colos II. 21. Touch not taste not come not nigh those things which all tend to perish in the using This you may perceive by the warning he gives Timothy of the like men who afterwards should depart from the faith giving â—eed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of devils who should forbid marriage and injoyne abstinence from meats which God hath made to be received of those that know him with thanksgiving 1. Tim. IV. 1 2 3. I know there is a plausible opinion abroad that these doctrines of devils as I translate it are the Traditions which have crept into the Church for the worshiping of the souls of holy men departed which some Christians have brought into the ranke of those secondary gods which the Gentiles call daemones or daemonia But this opinion cannot be true First because it is plaine that the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serves to interpret the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now it is manifest that by seducing spirits S. Paul can mean nothing but those inspirations true or pretended which the devil and his ministers corrupted Christianity with And therefore when he declares himself further by adding and doctrines of devils He meanes doctrines taught by devils Secondly because the word daemones or daemonia is never used in a good sense among Christians as it is among Pagans For those that knew not the difference between good spirits and bad but in effect as S Paul saith 1 Cor. X. 20 21. worshiped devils it is not to be expected that they should expresse a meaning to scorne or detest those whom they worshipped And whatsoever opinions those Philosophers which followed Plato and Pithagoras had of the vulgar Idolatries of their countryes seeing there is so much appearance as I have shewed in another place that they were Magicians it is no marvaile that they make not the difference between good and evil spirits which Christianity alone fully declareth The Jewes themselves not having sufficiently discovered it in and by the Scriptures of the Old Testament But as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Idol signifying of it self indifferently any image or representation to Christians and Jewes who understand the Gentiles to worship false gods signifies the image of those Gods in an ill sense So to those that understand the devils to put themselves
to the intrinsecall value of the workes which freewill alone doth but to the promise annexed by God to the works which freewill by the help of Grace purchased by Christ produceth It was no marvaile indeed that they who had overseen the actuall helps of Grace should a scribe the merit of habituall grace so the language of that time spoke to the act of freewill in beginning to believe that is to be a Christian as not depending upon that operation of grace which themselves supposed though they oversaw it But it were ridiculous to think that he who by the preaching of the Gospel and the reasons which it letteth forth why men are to be Christians is effectually moved to become a Christian is not to impute his being so to that grace which preventeth him with those reasons How much more when those reasons are acknowledged to be the instrument whereby the Holy Ghost worketh a mans conversion at the first or his perseverance at the last is it necessary to impute it to the grace of Christ that is to those helps which God in regard to Christs death preventeth us with Surely should grace immediately determin the wil to it the effects that should be imputable to grace would be the same neither the cov of grace nor the experience of common sense remaining the same which wil not allow such a chang in a mans life as becoming a good christian of an enemy to Christs Crosse to succeed without an express change in the wil upon reasons convincing the judgement that this world is to be set behind the world to com It is now to be acknowledged that S. Austine writing against these mens positions as they were revealed to him by the letters of Prosper and Hilary his book now extant de Praedestinatione sanctorum de dono Perseverantiae hath determined the reason why one man is converted and persevereth unto death an other not to consist in nothing that can resolve into any act of mans will but ends in Gods free appointment That Pope Celestinus writing to the Bishops of Gaule upon the sollicitation of the same Prosper and Hilary in recommendation of S. Austines dostrine then so much questioned in those parts determines not onely the sufficience but the efficacy of the meanes of Grace to come from Gods Grace That the second councile of Orange determining the same in divers particulares concerning the conversion of man to become a true Christian concerning his perseverance to the end in that estate hath onely determined that by the helpe and assistance of Christ and the grace received in Baptisme a Christian may if he will faithfully labour fullfill whatsoever his salvation requireth Is there any thing in all this to signifie that a mans will before he determine is determined by God to imbrace Christianity and persevere in it to the end or not That every man is determined to everlasting glory or paine without consideration of those deeds of his for which at the last he shall be sentenced to it and either suffer or injoy it Here I must have recourse againe to Vossius his Collections finding them sufficient and my model not allowing me to say more Whether no helpe of Grace but that which takes effect be sufficient That is whether men refuse Christianity or faile of performing it because they could not imbrace and persevere in it or because they would not when they might let him that shall have perused what he hath collected in the second part of this seventh book say as to the perswasion of the whole Church Whether God would have all men to be saved and hath appointed the death of our Lord Christ to that intent let him that shall have perused the first part of the same Thesi II. III. give sentence what the Church hath allwaies believed No lesse manifest is it by that which he saith there parte II. thesi II. Parte III. thes I. II. that there is no reason to be given why any man sinneth or is damned because God would have it so On the contrary that the reason why a man is not saved to whom the Gospell is tendred is because he refuseth it which God for his part tendreth to all mankind In fine that the Catholike Church from the beginning believed no more then that those who should believe and persevere to the end good Christians were appointed by God to be saved Understanding this to be don by vertue of Gods Grace for which no reason can be rendred from any thing that a man can doe as preventing all his indeavours I acknowledg to appeare by that which he hath said Lib. VI. thes VIII When therefore S. Austine maintainneth as I have acknowledged that he doth mainetaine that the reason why one man is converted and perseveres unto death another not resolves into Gods meere appointment I will not dispute whether this be more then the whole Church delivereth for that which it is necessary to salvation to believe It is enough for me to maintaine that it seemeth to follow by good consequence of the best reasons that I can see from that sense of our Lord and his Apostles doctrine which the Church hath alwaies taught Which will allow me to maintaine as well the predetermination of the will as absolut predestination to glory and paine to be inconsistent as with the Covenant of Grace so with the Tradition of the Church I find that Gennadius being manifestly one of those in Gaule that contradicted some thing of S. Austines doctrine by his commending of Faustus and Cassiane and censuring not onely Prosper who confuted Cassianus but even S. Austine in his booke of Eclesiasticall writers in a certaine addition to that list of heresies which S. Jerom hath made reckoneth them in the list of the Heretickes condemned by the Church who teach absolute Predestination under the name of Predestinatians After him not onely Hincmarus of Rheims condemning Gotescalcus a Monk of his Province for maintayning it being transmitted to him by Rabanus of Ments who in a Synod there had condemned him for the same hath supposed it condemned for an heresy by the ancient Church but also before Hincmarus Arnobius that hath expounded the Psalms called Arnobius the younger by some and a certaine continuation of S. Hieromes Cronicle under the the name of Tiro Prosper the one contradicteth them the later mentions that they had their beginning from S. Austins writings Sirmondus also the learned Jesuite hath published a peece so ancient that pretending to make a list of Heresies it goeth no further then Nestorius reckoning next after him the Predestinatians as those who derived themselves from S. Austines doctrine To which it is well enough knowne what opposition is now made by them who believe not that there ever was any such Heresy but that the adversaries of S. Austine in Gaule do pretend that such a Sect did indeed rise upon misunderstanding his Doctrine And certainely there are properly no Heretickes
bound by natural equity to accept that for full satisfaction which makes up his whole intresse when civile Law obliâ—es him not Makes the tender of Christ no lesse the substitute to our payment of that debt which Gods Law requireth for how is it lesse fit to be tendred when it is not due to be accepted then when it is no lesse able to fulfill Gods desire seeing nothing can be imagined more acceptable to him then the voluntary obedience of his own sonne consisting in those sufferings wherein the greatest virtue that mans nature is capable of was seen and tending to the redemption of mankind which his love to his creature inclined him so much â—o desire as his wisdome found to comport with his native goodnesse and the exercise of his justice I shall not here as in other points stand to clear the Faith of the Catholike Church When Pelagius is alleged for one that held not the satisfaction of Christ it is plain enough that it can have no footing in or allowance from the authority of the Church which hath disclaimed Pâ—lagius Onely we may take notice how well the evidence which the witnesse and practice of the Church renders to the rule of Faith is understood by them who in stead of alledging some allowance of the Church by some person of noted credit openly professing it and nevertheless esteemed to be of the Church name us one that was cast out of the Church for holding it whether expresly or by consequence As for Lactantius who alleging the suffering of Christ for our example addes further neverthelesse pro crimine nostro for our crime Instit IV. 23 24 26. Though I might safely have said as afore that a word of his upon the by may well have past without censure because his credit was not such in the Church as to create appearance of offense Yet I shall not need to have recourse to this answer his own words having given so much advantage for a fair interpretation of his meaning in the sense of the Church As for Pâ—trus Abailardus that is thought to have said something to the same purpose I shall not need to insist what his opinion was For as I allow that he lived in such an age when something that is true might be entertained with the censure of the Church So when it is said to be in a point wherein he is pâ—rtizane with Pelagius the Church that condemned him must needs in condemning him for iâ— be partizane with the Church that condemned Pelagius I will onely allege here a doctrine which I take to be generally received by the ancient Fathers of the Church That the devil by bringing Christ to death that had not sinned forfeited that power of death which the Apostle speakes of Heb. II. 14. to wit that which he had over man that had sinned in bringing him to death And I allege it because the Socinians seem to take it for granted that the Church is now ashamed to maintaine this which I confesse I am not For if the devil be Prince of this World as our Saviour calls him John XIV 30. because he is imployed by God as his Goaler or the executioner of those judgements to which he abandons those that forsake him by giving them up to his temptations shall we not understand the justice of God to be seen towards him in limiting this imployment as under the grace of Christ we believe it is limited in consideration of his attempting upon Christ beyond his commission because without right he being without sinne And therefore the justice of God having appointed him this imployment and this justice satisfied by the obedience of Christ it is but due consequence that this imployment in which the principality of this World consisteth should become forfeit and voâ—de so farre as the Grace of Christ determineth it By virtue of which reason our Lord Christ rising from death because not having sinned he could not be â—â—ld by death drawes after him all that upon the sound of his Gospel imbrace the profession of Christianity CHAP. XXX God might have reconciled man to himself without the coming of Christ The promises of the Gospel depend as well upon his active as passive obedience Christ need not suffer â—ell paâ—nes that we might not The opinion that maketh justifying Faith to be trust in God not true Yet not prejudiciall to the Faith The decree of the Council of Trent and the doctrine of the Schoole how it is not prejudiciall to the Faith As also that of Socinus I Will not leave this point till I have inferred from that which hath been said the resolution of two or three points in question necessarily following upon it And first that though as I have said it is impossible for the wit of man to propose any course for the reconciling of men to God by which the glory of God in the exercise of his divine perfections should have been more seen then is that which it pleased God to take Yet was it not impossible for his divine wisdome to have taken other courses to effect the same his glory remaining inâ—â—re according as S. Augustine hath long since resolved Though to the great displeasure of all them who distinguish not the imagination of immediate satisfaction by the death of Christ for the sinnes of them that shall be saved from that dispensation in the Originall Law of God which the Gospel declareth to all that imbrace the terms of it To the effect whereof I have showed that God provided and accepted it For if God did not provide noâ— accept de facto the death of Christ for immediate satisfaction to his vindicative justice in behalf of their sinnes that shall be saved Then was he not tied in point of right to seek that satisfaction for the same either from Christ or from us And truly this opinion that God was tied to execute his vindicative justice either upon Christ or us seems to represent God to the fansies of Christians as taking content in the evils and torments which Christ suffered that being the onely recompense that vindicative justice seeks without consideration of that perfect obedience and zeale to Gods glory in the saving of his creature together with his justice and holinesse in regard whereof God indeed accepteth the same Now though it be necessary for the maintenance of Christianity to say that the course which God takeâ—h for the reconciling of man to himself according to it preserveth his glory intire as being agreeable to his divine perfections For to say that man cannot propose a course more for his glory then that which it advanceth is rather honourable for Christianity then necessary for the maintenance of the truth of it yet to say that Gods wisdome in designing this course according to the exigence of all his perfections is so exhausted and equalled by the work of it as it were that his own wisdome could have designed no other course to attaine tâ—e same end preserving
Covenant of Grace and by that Faith whereby we undertake that Christianity wherâ—into we are baptized they who make the office oâ— Faith in justifying no more then beleeving the Gospell to be true seeme as voide of the truth in that as those who place it in reposing trust and confidence in God upon it For as the Gospell gives sufficient ground of trust and confidence in God from the first moment that any man heares of it what state soever it is and how sinfull in which it overtakes him if we speak of confidence that we may or shall obtaine remission of sins upon condition of imbracing and performing the condition which it advanceth So if wee speake of trust and confidence in God as indeed and actually reconciled to God seeing it supposeth justification it must needes suppose that Faith which justifieth And so justifying Faith cannot be said to consist in it but by consequence of nature to produce it On the other side whereas all the works that a man can doe after he sincerely beleeves the truth of the Gospell but before he hath made profession of Christianity by being baptized cannot availe to the forgivenesse of sinne much lesse to intitle him to everlasting life according to the doctrine of the Apostles It can by no means be imagined that when they attribute justification to Faith whether alone or in opposition to workes or to the Law they doe attribute it to that Faith whereby he remains not justifyed not to that which he iâ— necessarily justifyed as soone as he hath And this is the true end of that endlesse dispute between Faith and good workes when it is questioned whether true Faith can be without Good workes or not For it is manifest that Hereticks Schismaticks and sinfull Christians doe as truely beleeve either the whole Gospell so farre as the Common salvation of Christians requireth or at least that part which their Heresy or Schisme contesteth not as a good Christian really doth It is nolesse manifest that not onely Heretickes and Schismatickes but even badde and sinfull Christians also not onely may but really have a true and reall confidence in God as to the world to come without which those that beleeve the world to come could not live and dy in that course which indeed renders them uncapable of it But the Faith which whosoever is baptized plighteth to God to professe the Faith which he hath taught to the death and to live according to it must needes either be counterfeite and so produce no effect but the damning of him that is baptized with it or produce the workes of Faith so long as it is and continues sincere And thus is the Tradition of the Church concerning justification by the good works of Christians reconciled not onely with the doctrine of the Apostles that a man is not justified by the workes that go before Christianity But also with the Tradition of the Church concerning the ingredience of Baptisme into the same work And with the doctrine of the Fathers manifestly distinguishing that true Faith which produceth good workes from that dead faith which doth not not by the accession of Love but by marks intrinsecall to the nature of it manifestly distinguishing those good workes which indeed doe justify from those which for the mind which they are done with doe not justify but for their kind might had they been done by Christians by the boundary between them which is baptisme But so that the workes themselves are but the materiall part that is the thing which the Covenant of Grace requireth But the reason and consideration in which they are accepted by God to that effect is not the influence of our free will though cured of concupiscence as cured it may be in this life and acted by Gods Spirit but the Grace of God moving him in consideration of our Lord Christs sufferinges first to publish the Gospell then to accept the profession and life of Christians according to it for a condition qualifying them for that which he promiseth by it Which is but the English of that which is commonly said that God accepteth of our workes as dipped in Christs bloud which he accepteth not if he accept them not to that effect which his Gospell promiseth having as he doth if the Gospel be true all that he accepteth not to that purpose Having said this in common as it were to both these opinions in particulare to that which I propose last or rather to the rest of it I say three things First that it may be understood two wayes To wit that this holds Either by virtue of the originall Law of God or by virtue of that dispensation in it that abatement of the penalty of it which the Gospell imports For so long as it is onely said that God infuseth into him that receives the Sacrament of Baptisme out of a resolution of Loving God above all an habit of supernatuall righteousnesse which is formally the remission of sinnes as extinguishing them by contrary dispositions and that this is the righteousnesse which he pleades to God for the reward of the world to come I say all this while it is not said whether the nature and kind of the quality thus produced oblige God to give him that happinesse of the world to come in recompense of it or whether the promise of the Gospell decreed and declared out of his meer goodnesse render that due by way of recompense which otherwise this disposition could no way claime For he that sayes that the naturall worth of the qualities here supposed claimes the reward as due by Gods justice must needes say that they justify by Gods originall Law But he that sayes by Gods promise and onely by that justice which consists in keeping promise by the Covenant of Grace Now then I say if that this opinion proceed upon first ground it is destructive to the Christian faith For I have shewed that the Gospel containes a Covenant of Grace not onely in regard of helpes of Grace to fulfill the condition which it requires which I have shewed that God grants in consideration of our Lord Christ and his obedience but also because in the same consideration he accepteth of the condition both to extinguish the debt of sinne and to intitle us to everlasting life which otherwise it inables us not to claime And both these regards I have showed belong to the Christian Faith Now he that affirmeth that the righteousnesse which God infuses into those that are baptized challengeth remission of sinnes and everlasting life or rather challengeth everlasting life because it extinguisheth sinne by Gods originall justice acknowledges indeed the Grace of God in granting those helps by which we attaine the said righteousnesse and that in consideration of our Lord Christ and his obedience But acknowledgeth not the Grace of God through Christ in accepting of it to such purpose and therein as I suppose denies the Covenant of Grace which the Gospel containâ—s Secondly I
then I said before to show you that the ancient Church from the beginning held the happinesse of the Saints souls to continue imperfect till the resurrection of their bodies Gennadius de dogmat Eccles LXXVIII LXXIX will have us to take it for the doctrine of the Church that the soules of the Fathers before Christ were in hell tiâ—l they were delivered thence by Christ That since Christ they go straight to Christ expecting the resurrection of their bodies that with them they may attaine intire happinesse And that this doctrine had for some time great vogue in the Church I deny not Nor intend to deny that the Saints are with Christ some whereof the Apocalypse represents before the Throne But that there is no Tradition for the translating of the Fathers souls that the saints are in Abrahams bosom or Paradise with them till the resurrection I conceive I have showed by clearing the sayings of the most ancient Christians from the misprisions which they are intangled with He that shall consider the premises may find Tertul. Lactant. and Victorinus whom Cardinal Bellar. acknowledgeth to detaine all soules in their store-houses till the resurrection De S. Beat. I. 5. good company among the rest of the Fathers And therefore I will referre it to the reader to judge between that exposition that he fits the passages of the Fathers with which he produces and that which my opinion requires Especially having Doctor Stapleton Defens Ecclesiast Authorit â— 2. to confesse with others of that side that all the ancients in a manner do hold the contrary of that which is since defined by the Councile of Florence Saint Bernard I must not omit because it is he who considering the text of the Apocalypse which you may see by the premises sayes more then all the Scripture besides hath so pertinently observed out of it that they are but in the Court as yet but at the consummation of their blisse shall enter into Gods house Therefore he maketh three states of the soule The first in tents the second in the Courts the third in Gods house into which neither the Saints shall enter without the common people of the Church nor their soules without their bodies De omnibus Sanctis Serm III. And Serm. IV. the Saints which now see onely the manhood of Christ under the altar he saith shall be lifted upon the altar to see the essence of God The Schoole since his time upon occasion of the contest with the Greek Church believing with Saint Bernard hath stated the dispute upon this terme of seeing God And John XXII Pope is questioned whether intending to determine with Saint Bernard he held heresy heretically or not For his successor Bennet XII first and after him the Councile of Florence hath decreed that for matter of Faith which before the decree was not matter of Faith And therefore if that be true which I said in the first book can never become matter of Faith For my part I see Saint Augustine de cura pro mortuis cap. IX resolve the question how the dead can know what is done here three wayes By the report of those who go hence and by the will of God remember what is done here by the ministery of Angels and by the revelation of Gods Spirit And if Saint John being in the Spirit saw by vision of Prophesy God sitting upon his throne in heaven as well as the Elders and Martyrs soules did I can easily grant that those souls which should have such revelations of Gods Spirit whether by the ministery of Angels or without it might see God upon his Throne as Saint John and the Prophets did and and as the Elders and Martyrs are there described to do But this would be no more that sight of God in which Saint Paul and Saint John seem to place the happinesse of Gods kingdome then that sight of God which Moses had when he communed face to face with God before the Ark was that sight whereof God said to him Thou shalt not see my face For no man shall see my face and live This for certain S. Augustine deriving the knowledge of our maters which blessed soules may have from the ministery of Angels and revelations of Gods Spirit and perhaps from report from hence was farre enough from owning Saint Gregories consequence Quae intus omnipotentis Dei claritatem vident nullo modo credendum est quod foris sit aliquid quod ignorent Those who see within the brightnesse of Almighty God it is not to be thought that there is any thing which they are ignorant of without Moral XII 14. For supposing the Saints see the essence of God it followeth not that thereby they see what is done here because it is not the essence of God but his will by which it may appear So farre it is from any appearance of truth that he who hath recourse to soules that go hence to the ministery of Angels to revelations of Gods Spirit to inform the saints departed of that which is done here should believe them to have that sight of God wherein the happinesse of his kingdom consisteth In fine by the Arch-bishop of Spalato de Rep. Ecclesi VIII 110-120 you shall find the opinion of Calvine to be the same I here maintaine though his followers it seemes are afraid of the evidence for it or the consequence of it Let us see whether justly or not It hath been a custome so general in the church to pray for the dead that no beginning of it can be assigned no time no part of the Ch. where it was not used And though the rejecting of it makes not Aerius an Heretick as disbelieving any part of the faith yet had he broke from the Ch. upon no other cause but that which the whole Church besids him owned he must as a Schismatick have come into Epiphanius his lift of Heresies intending to comprise all parties severed from the Church All that I have known pretended is that which the learned Blondel in a French work of the Sibyls verses hath conjectured that it had the begâ—nning from that book Which book as divers before him have showed reason why it should be thought the worke of a Christian intending to advance Cristianity by such meanes So I confesse I can not see whence it should come more probably then from Montanus or some of his fellow Prophets as he conjectureth For though he hath failed of his usuall diligence in clearing the difficulties which the account of time raiseth how Justine Martyrs Apology and Hermes his Pastor should borrow from Montanus yet doe I not see why Montanus might not begin to declare himselfe by it before the date of them But neither doth my businesse require or my modell allow me to debate it For supposing Justine Martyr or Clemens or Tertullian or Lactantius or many more particular writers were induced to allege it as for the advantâ—ge of the common Christianity He that sees not how
mentioning the Devil and his Angels nor of that not mentioning the creation of Angels The knowledge then requisite to save a Christian containeth the Apostasy of the evil Angels whether it be in the Creed or not because neither the Creed as it is nor Baptisme in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost can be understood to have any sense without supposing it And therefore Irenaeus I. 2. could not deliver this Rule without mentioning the Devil and his Angels though I intend not thereupon to argue that it was contained in the words of the Creed at that time By S. Cyrils Catechises you shall understand that those who pretended to Baptisme at Easter were to be instructed in the sense and grounds of their Creed during the Lent And S. Augustine in his book de Catechizandis rudibus where hee acquaints his friend that had writ to him about something of that office with the form that hee was wont to use instructs him to begin with the beginning of Genesis and setting forth what course God had taken with mankinde before and under the Law to bring down his discourse to the coming of Christ and from thence to his second coming to Judgment Which is to the very same purpose onely taking opportunity to mixe the motives of Faith which the Old Testament containeth with the mater of Faith which the New Testament requireth Whatsoever then is said of the Rule of Faith in the writings of the Fathers is to be understood of the Creed Whereof though it be not maintained that the words which Pretenders were required to render by heart were the same yet the substance of it the reasons and grounds which make every point necessary to be believed were alwaies the same in all Churches and remaine unchangeable I would not have any hereupon to think that the mater of this Rule is not in my conceit contained in the Scriptures For I finde S. Cyril Catech. V. protesting that it containes nothing but that which concerned our salvation the most selected out of the Scriptures And therefore in other places he tenders his Scholars evidence out of the Scriptures and wishes them not to believe that whereof there is no such evidence And to the same effect Eucherius in Symb. Hom. I. Paschasius de Sp. S. in Praef. and after them Thomas Aquinas secunda II. Quest I. Art IX all agree that the form of the Creed was made up out of the Scriptures Giving such reasons as no reasonable Christian can refuse Not onely because all they whose salvation is concerned have not leisure to study the Scriptures but because they that have cannot easily or safely discern wherein the substance of Faith upon the profession whereof our salvation depends consisteth Supposing that they were able to discern between true and false in the meaning of the Scriptures To which I will adde onely that which Tâ—rtullian and others of the Fathers observe of the ancient Hereticks that their fashion was to take occasion upon one or two texts to overthrow and deny the main substance and scope of the whole Scriptures Which whether it be seen in the Sects of our time or not I will not say here because I will not take any thing for granted which I have not yet principles to prove but supposing it onely a thing possible I will think I give a sufficient reason why God should provide Tradition as well as Scripture to bound the sense of it As S. Cyril also cautioneth in the place aforenamed where hee so liberally acknowledgeth the Creed to be taken out of the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For saith hee the Faith was not framed as it pleased men but the most substantial maters collected out of the Scripture do make up one doctrine of the Faith For I beseech you what had they whosoever they were that first framed the Creed but Tradition whereby to distinguish that which is substantial from that which is not Heare Origen in the Preface to his books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cùm multi sum qui sentire se putent quae Christi sunt nonnulii eorum diversa à prioribus sentiant servetur verò Ecclesiastica praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens Illa sola credenda est veritas quae in nullo ab Ecclesiasticâ discordat traditione Illud tamen scire opor tet quoniam sancti Apostoli fidem Christi praedicantes de quibusdam quidem quaecunque necessaria crediderunt omnibus credentibus etiam his qui erga inquisitionem divinae scientiae pigriores videbantur manifestissimê tradiderunt Rationem scilicet assertionis relinquentes eis inquirendam qui Spiritûs dona excellentia praecipuè sermonis sapientiae scientiae per ipsum Spiritum Sanctum percipere merebantur De aliis verò dixerunt quidem quia sint quomodo autem aut unde sint siluerunt profectò ut studiosiores quoque l. quique ex posteris suis amatores sapientiae scientiae exercitium habere possent in quo ingenii sui fructum ostendere valerent Hi videlicet qui dignos se capaces sapientiae praepararent Species verò eorum quae per praedicationem Apostolicam manifestè traduntur hae sunt There being many that think their sense to be Christian and yet the sense of some differs from their predecessors But that which the Church preaches as delivered by order of succession from the Apostles being preserved and remaining the same in the Churches That onely is to be believed for truth which nothing differs from the Tradition of the Church This notwithstanding wee must know That the holy Apostles preaching the Faith of Christ delivered some things as many as they held necessary most manifestly to all believers even those whom they found the duller in the search of divine knowledge Leaving the reason why they affirmed them to the search of those that goe to receive the eminent gifts of the Holy Ghost especially of utterance wisedom and knowledge by the Holy Ghost Of other things they said that they are but how or whereupon they are they said not Forsooth that the more studious of their Successors loving wisedom and knowledge might have some exercise wherein to show the fruit of their wit To wit those that should prepare themselves to be worthy and capable of wisedom Now the particulars of that which is manifestly delivered by the preaching of the Apostles are these Which hee proceedeth to set down But Vincentius Lerinensis hath writ a Discourse on purpose to show that this Rule of Faith being delivered by succession to the principal as S. Paul requires Timothy to do and by them to those that were baptized was the ground upon which all Heresies attempting upon the Faith were condemned So that so many Heresies as historical truth will evidence to have been excluded the Church from the Apostles time for mater of belief so many convictions of this Rule Which
Circumcision John VII 22. Such was the Law of mourning for the dead so much in force at giving the Law that upon the death of Aarons sons it was necessary that a Law should presently come forth incerdicting the Priests to mourne for them upon paine of death the rest of the people remaining under that Law Though Aaron thereupon excuses himself that they did not feast upon the sinne offering upon that day of mourning and is accepted Levit. X. 5 to 19. This the Law introduceth not but was in force under the Fathers as wee see Gen. L. 2 10. XXVII 41. The same is to be said of the seven dayes in which Marriages were celebrated under the Law as wee see in Sampson Judg. XIV 12 15 17. which is doubled Tobâ— VIII 22. no where introduced by the Law no more than the seven dayes or seventy dayes or thirty dayes of mourning Gen. L. 2. Deut. XXXIV 8. The like of answering adjurations which the Law Levit. V. 1. presupposes as also Prov. XXIX 24. as a duty then received that if a man conjure all that know any thing of his businesse to declare what they know all that heare him stand bound to declare their knowledge in it For for this cause it is that the Law supposing him guilty of perjury that conceals his knowledge in that case makes him liable to the sacrifice for expiâ—tion of perjury as you may see Levit. V. 1. And by virtue of this custome among Gods people not onely stood they bound to answer the High Priest as our Lord answers Caâ—aphas Mat. XXVI 63. or the King 1 Kings XXII 18. 2 Chron. XVIII 15. Jos VII 19. Job IX 24. but also private men in the Coâ—â— where their cause was hearing adjuring all that were present to testifie their knowledge in their causes if wee believe the Jewes Constitutions In like maner wee have nothing ordained in the Law that Tithes should be payed or that it should be lawfull or acceptable to God to consecrate any other part of their goods to the service of God or to make Vowes of abstinence from things otherwise lawfull But wee have it determined by the Law what kindes shall be Tithable what Vowes shall stand good what sacrifice shall be offered by him that transgresses his Vow how every thing that a man freely consecrates to the service of God shall be valued in money Levit. XXVII 1-30 Psal XV. 4. Gen. XIV 20. XXVIII 22. Numb XVIII 29. The like is to be said of many other Lawes which being in the Old Testament mentioned as in force by custome and no where introduced by the Lawes of Moses must be presumed to descend by Tradition from the Fathers Which hee that believes as it cannot be doubted must of necessity acknowledge that not onely the principles and grounds of spiritual and inward obedience to God for Gods sake but also the precepts wherein it consists are rather presupposed by the Law than introduced by it And therefore may well be said to be translated out of the Law of Nature into Moses Law when they are mentioned by it Though hereunto I must adde this That they had not onely the doctrine of their Fathers afore the Law to introduce and to regulate this inward obedience but also the Prophets under the Law The intent of whose Office was not onely to reclaime them from Idol to their own true God but also to instruct them wherein consisted not so much that civil and outward observation of his Law which it promiseth to reward with temporal happinesse in the Land of Promise as that spiritual and inward obedience to God from which they might conceive competent ground of hope toward the world to come Every man knows how ready they were to fall from God all the time whereof wee have the records in the Scriptures before the Captivity of Babylon After that time wee do not finde that ever they â—ell to the worship of Idols but wee finde abundantly by the reproofs of the Scribes and Pharisees by our Lord in the Gospels that the next sinne to it of Superstition and Hypocrisie was soon come in insâ—eaâ— of it When by the outward observation of the Ceremonial and Judicial Lawes they promised themselves the favor of God and the reward of the world to come As by paying Tithes precisely Mat. XXIII 23. Luc. XI 42. XVIII 12. by washing their hands and vessels according to the Tradition of their Predecssors Mar. VII 4 8. Mat. XXIII 25 26. Luc. XI 39. by punctually observing the Sabbath Mat. XII 1-12 Mar. II. 23-28 Luc. VII 1-9 XIII 10-16 XIV 1-5 Joh. V. 9 inlarging their Phylacteries and fringes Mat. XXIII 5. by many things more which are to be read up and down the Gospels This disease could not have been reproved by our Lord by the testimony of the Prophet Esay Mat. XV. 9. Mar. VII 7. Esa XXIX 13. had it not taken root even before the Captivity when as yet they were so subject to fall to the worship of false Gods Therefore wee finde the reproof of this superstitious and hypocritical confidence in the Sacrifices which they thought to bribe God with and other outward performances of the Law to be the ordinary work of the most part of the Prophets David Psal XL. 7 12. Psal L. 8-13 LI. 18. The Prophet Samuel 1 Sam. XV. 22. The Prophet Esay of Sacrifices and Festivals Esa I. 11-20 Of their Fasts Esa LVIII 3-10 Of their serving God by Traditions Esa XXIX 13. The Prophet Jeremy that God required not Sacrifices but obedience Jer. VII 21 22 23. and concerning patience and hope in the afflictions which hee sendeth Lam. III. 25-33 The Prophet Hosea in the Calves of our lips Hos XIV 2. The Prophet Micah when hee teacheth what they should come before God with Micah VI. 6 7 8. The Prophet Zachary of celebrating their Fasts Zac. VII 3-10 VIII 16 19. In fine all the Prophets in their instructions and exhortations to the inward obedience of God in spirit and in truth have showed themselves true fore-runners of our Lord Christ and his Apostles Not onely in preaching the principal intent of the Law to be the same which the Gospel pretends to covenant for but in suffering as well for this as for reproving Idolaters at the hands of those that taught for doctrines the Traditions of men the like things as our Lord and his Apostles suffered for the same cause at the hands of the Scribes and Pharisees First then the acknowledgment of one God that disposeth of all things and knowes the secrets of all hearts expresly covenanted for by Moses Law by consequence of right reason infers the duty of spiritual obedience to him in all his commands Secondly the Fathers before the Law had delivered the Prophets after the Law did preach the same no lesse than they did the acknowledgment of the true God but more principally than the outward observation of the Ceremonial or Civil precept of it Therefore there might
Earl of Arundels Library appeareth not at all that therefore the whole translation was made then when it saith this leter came Nor that if it were then made it had any relation to or dependance upon their Schism or the sacrilege of it For though Josephus sayes that Onias found Priests and Levites of his minde to serve God there and though hee sayes elsewhere that Onias did this out of contention which hee had with the Jews at Jerusalem having banished him Thinking to draw the multitude from them to the Temple which hee had built de Bello Jud. VII 37. yet these are rather arguments that the Body of the Jews at Alexandria did not submit to his premises whatsoever his credit with the King might oblige them to permit particular men to do And Josephus Ant. XIII 6. immediately after the building of this Temple telleth us of a trial between the Samaritanes and Alexandrian Jews before the same Philometor whether the Temple at Jerusalem or that on Mount Gerizim were according to Gods Law And that those Jews were so zelous in the cause that they consented what side were cast those that pleaded for it to be put to death Which accordingly was executed upon Sabbaeus and Theodosius that pleaded for the Samaritanes Now though Josephus say not that this which hee relateth presently after the building of the Temple came to passe after it in time yet it is utterly incredible that those who had showed such zeal for the Temple at Jerusalem should the next day as it were that is in the same Kings raign run into the same crime whereof they had convicted the Samaritanes Certainly when the addition to Esther saith that the leter which hee had inserted was translated into Greek by Lysimachus son of Ptolomee a Jew of Jerusalem it is no sign that there was any pretense of Schism between the Jews of Jerusalem and those of Alexandria on foot And therefore this aspersion takes away nothing from the credit of the Greek Bible I am further confirmed in this opinion by considering the writings of Philo the Alexandrian Jew though I am not moved by them to think hee was a Christian but onely to conclude that hee cannot be convinced to be no Christian Three things I allege out of him as steps which hee hath made beyond the rest of the Jews towards a Christian The first That hee hath followed the Gospels in reproving the Tradition of the Elders for which they neglected to honor their parents as the Law commandeth The Tradition was this as wee finde by him in his book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If a man vow that his Father or Mother shall never be the better for any thing that is his it shall not be lavvfull for him to maintain them out of his goods For Korban signifies anathema And hee that said Be it Korban whatsoever thou maiest be the better for of mine In his anger to Father or Mother said in effect Be it anaâ—hema That is be hee accursed that touches it In this point then Philo follovvs the doctrine of Christ against the Tradition of their Elders The second is his exposition of Deut. XXVIII 46. The stranger that is within thee shall get above thee more and more And thou shalt come under him more more in his book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The stranger truly lifted aloft with good success shall be gazed at as admired and counted happy for two the greatest excellences That having turned to God hee hath received the most proper reward a firm rank in heaven not lawfull to be expressed But the right born imbasing and counterfeiting the coin of his birth shall slide down till hee come to the very depth of darkness That all men seeing these examples may grow sober considering how God accepts that virtue which springs from an enemy stock bidding the root farewell but the shoot welcome that is grown to a stock because by tillage it is changed to bear good fruit For hovv vvould a Christian expound this text against the Jevv in the mystical sense but by making the Christian the stranger vvhom this text prophesieth of that hee shall have the upper hand of the Jevv as Origen more than once if my memory fail mee not out of this place of Philo hath done The third consists of those things vvhich hee hath said in so many places concerning the Word of God agreeable to those passages of the Wisedome of Solomon Ecclesiasticus and Baruch vvhich I compared afore vvith the doctrine of the Apostles concerning that Wisedom of God vvhich is his Word of vvhich you have enovv in Grotius his annotations upon those texts but much more might be produced For vvhosoever compares them together shall finde that he vvho said them vvas not far from the Christian Faith For if it be objected and said that there is no evidence that ever this Philo professed Christianity vvithout vvhich he cannot be counted a Christian It may reasonably be ansvvered that during the time vvhen the Synagogue vvas at a bay vvhether to receive Christianity or not at vvhat time it is plain they did not persecute it nothing can be said vvhy it might not be professed by any Jevv of those Synagogues vvhich stood so affected to it not onely vvithout any mark of apostasie upon him among his fellovvs but even vvith that trust vvhich vvee knovv this Philo had among the Jevvs of Alexandria being deputed by them to Caligula in business concerning their vvhole subsistence For if those vvho vvere baptized by John the Baptist vvere not thought to depart from the Lavv vvhy should those vvho vvere baptized into Christ vvhether the effect of both Baptisms vvere the same or diverse the Lavv continuing in practice long after that time I must therefore professe to allovv the opinion those that vvill have this vvork to have been done by the Jews of Alexandria of which wee know there was a very great Body from the time of the first Ptolomee who having taken up the Greek in stead of their Mother tongue necessarily required that they should have the Scriptures in it It is then agreeable to reason that this translation being made so soon after the study of the Law came in request and so farr from Jerusalem should acknowledg more difference of sense arising from the divers wayes of determining those words that are written without vowels than those that are of a later date when the reading was better determined by custome and practice Which accordingly wee see is come to pass For the translations into the Greek that were made after the time of our Lord by Aquila Symmachus and Theodotion no Christians and the Chaldee of Onkelus and Jonathan who whatsoever time they were made in are later than so though wee cannot say that they do alwaies and in all things agree either with one another or with the Ebrew Copies which wee use yet must wee needs say that there is a great deal more agreement between them visible
through the body of it upon what grounds the Gentiles are invited to the Covenant of grace which the Jewes began then to refuse This being the businesse of the Epistle the drift of it is manifest whether righteousnesse and salvation come by the Law or the Gospel by Judaisme or by Christianity The subject of the Epistle to the Hebrews is this The Jews being priviledged by the laws of the Empire in the exercise of their Religion disclaiming those of their nation that had professed Christianity found means by the power of the Romanes to constrain them by persecution to return to Judaisme The question is whether they can obtaine salvation turning Jews againe which they perswade themselves they might obtaine being such before they imbrace Christianity That this is the question let him that will take the paines to compare the proposition of it in the the beginning of the II. Chapter and the reasons which it is pursued with untill the sixth with the conclusion of the dispute in the thirteenth Considering also that discourse which followes of the intent and effect of the Law Let him I say give sentence If he refuse me I will be bold to say of him That no man is so blind as he that will not see With the Churches of Galatia when S. Paul writ to them the case was somewhat otherwise It is manifest that they consisted partly of Gentiles partly of Jews The words of the Apostle require it Gal. IV. 8 9. But then truly not knowing God ye served those which indeed are no Gods But now having known God or rather being known of God how turn ye back to those weak and beggerly elements to which ye desire to be in bondage againe For neither could they serve those that were not Gods indeed unlesse Gentiles nor unlesse Jewes returne to those elements It is manifest that to avoid persecution for the profession of Christianity those whom S. Paul writes against would have them be circumcised and so conforme themselves so farre to the Law that those who raised that persecution might be satisfied at their hands Those that would make a fair shew in the flesh constraine you to be circumcised onely that they may not be persecuted with the Crosse of Christ For neither themselves that are persecuted do keep the Law But would have you circumcised that they may glory in your flesh Saith S. Paul Gal. VI. 12 13. And againe Gal. V. 11. But I brethren if I still preach circumcision why am I still persecuted For then the scandall of the Crosse is void And is not the question then between the Law and the Gospel between Judaisme and Christianity whether of them intitles to salvation and righteousnesse And shall the excluding of the Law exclude those works which suppose Christianity or rather include what ever the Gospel includes or inferres Consider what opinion the Jews had then entertained to alienate them from Christianity then and to divide them from it ever since So long as the nation stood it is manifest how much adoe there was to hold them to the worship of the true God which was the ground of that Law by which they held the Land of promise Being carried to Babylon and seeing the menaces of the Law come to passe and revolving within themselves those things which Isaiah and other Prophets had preached against the worship of Idols upon that occasion it seems but certaine it is they never departed from the worship of one true God afterward But then with the study of his law after their returne from captivity came in a curioâ—ity of learning and keeping all punctillos which the observation of it could require As supposing the wisdom of the Nation which the Law it self magnifieth Deut. IV. 6 8. together with their righteousnesse and holynesse to consist in these niceties Whereas this was indeed but the civile and outward observation of those precepts of the externall worship of one God and civil conversation among themselves to which the civil happiness of the land of promise was tied as I shewed in the first book Hereupon our Lord to his disciples Mat. V. 10. Vnlesse your righteousnesse exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdome of heaven And again to shew that the disease began long afore though then it was come to the height he reproves his hearers with these words which the Prophet Esay had charged upon his time Es XXIX 13. In vain they worship me teaching for doctrines the Traditions of men Mat. XV. 9. Mar. VII 7. Where he instanceth in the washing of cups and pots according to the Law of brasse vessels and beds of the hands before meat and after they came from market according to the tradition of the Elders which the Apostle 1 Pet. I. 18. calls their vain conversation delivered from their fathers This is manifestly that righteousnesse whereof S. Paul sayes Rom. X. 3. That the Jewes not knowing the righteousnesse of God and willing to establish their own righteousnesse were not subject to Gods righteousnesse For as it is evident that not to be subject to the righteousnesse of God is neither more nor lesse then to refuse the Gospel of Christ So their own righteousnesse which they would establish in opposition to the same must needs be that righteousnesse which they might be possest of by virtue of the Law And indeed it is not possible to imagine that the Jewes should so punctually and superstitiously reverence all these nice observations traditions and customes which the Scribes and Pharisees brought in to limit the generality of Moses Law and to determine every clause circumstance and tittle according to which it should be observed which now that vast bulk of their Talmud containes if they did not thinke that true wisdome and righteousnesse before God is placed in the nice keeping of these curiosities Nor can it be doubted that the undervaluing of them by reason of Christianity is that which first occasioned them to take offence at the Gospel and to this day maintaines them in contradiction to it It can therefore by no meanes be doubted that this is the Law and therefore the workes which S. Paul means when he argues that we are not justified by the Law nor the workes of the Law but by grace and by Faith For it is most manifest that he instances diverse times in those precepts which are not of the law of nature nor can the workes of them be counted to belong to the inward obedience of God and his worship in Spirit and truth But meerely formes which God had tied them up to his service with that they might have no occasion to seek after strange Gods And customes whereby he had so limited their civil conversation to one another that being divided thereby from other nations they might have no occasion to learn their Gods So S. Paul Gal. IV. 9. 10. But now having known God or rather being known of God
Irenaeus expresly maintaineth him one and the same God with the Father and true God and his generation ineffable without beginning and from everlasting Clemens makes him God â—quall to God as his Sonne Origen not in any work now extant that may be questioned but as he is alledged by Athanasius de decretis Synodi Niceâ—ae saies of him that if there be any image of God who is invisible that image must also be invisible with a great deal more to the same purpose where he also quotes Theognostus in secundo hypopseon affirming the same at large to set aside those that are questioned And shall we not think our selves obliged so to understand their words which the importunity of Heresies have made questionable that they may consist and agree with those which remaine unquestionable Especially all of them agreeing in this That the world was made and is governed by Christ And that the whole dispensation of God tending to the salvation of mankinde whether before the Law or under the Law as well as since his appearing in the flesh was executed by him as a preface and prologue to his coming in the flesh a supposition which all seem to ground themselves upon especially against the Jewes in giving account of our common Christianity That our Faith is in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost That we are to glorifie to worship and to be baptized in the Name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost And in counting all Hereticks that denied it For communion with the Church not communicating with those who believe it not because they believe it not is an evidence which no words of doubtfull construction can obscure in the judgement of any man that is reasonable Nay among the very heathen that have made any mention of the Christian Faith doth not Plinies Epistle concerning the Christians acknowledge that they sung hymns to Christ as to God Doth not Lucian in his Philopatris manifestly expresse the Faith of the Trinity as the cognizance of Christians at that time hath it not appeared by these inventions wherewith the Gnosticks sophisticated it that the Fulness of the Godhead consists in the Trinity according to the Christian Faith as according to the severall Sects of them in their severall inventions That the Christians honoured and worshipped the blessed Trinity as those Sects did those imaginatitions of their own which they call the Fullnesse of the Godhead When Ebion Cerinthus Artemon Theodorus and after them Sabellius Noetus Praxâ—as and Paâ—lus Samosatenus were disowned by the whole Church and excluded the communion of all Christians did not all Churches that agreed in refusing them find themselves possessed of a contrary Faith as the reason for which they were refused Were all Christians out of their simplicity cunning enough to assoile all the reasons whereby these and Arius to boot did or might argue their pretenses from texts of Scripture Or did they think themselves bound to rest in the visible consent of the whole Church whether they were able to do that or not In fine the learned Jesuite Petavius in the Preface to his books de Trinitate and the beginning of the first as he hath evidently shewed that the substance of the faith of the Trinity is acknowledged by these ancient Christians some of whose words seem to disparage the Godhead of our Lord Christ So he indeavoureth to shew that they did it out of a desire to reconcile the faith with the doctrine of Plato and his followers If his opinion be admitted there will remaine evidence enough for the Tradition of Faith even in their writings whose skill in the Scriptures goes not the right way to maintaine it The plain song will be good musick though the descant transgresse Though for my part having seen what he hath said I repent me not of that which I had conceived out of Tertullianâ— That out of a desire to reconcile the creation of wisdome in the Proverbs according to the Greek not the doctrine of Plato with the rule of Faith they conceived this a supposition fit to do it That by Gods proceeding to create the World his mind or wisdome which incarnate is our Lord Christ attained not the essence and being which it had in God from everlasting but the denomination and quality of his Word and Sonne For you shall find there that most of them concurre in the speculations of Tertulliane Whereby you may see that this learned Jesuite is not agreed with the Cardinall du Perron to deny the reason why we hold the Faith of the holy Trinity originally from the decree of the Council of Nicâ—a and from that authority of the Church which maintaineth it But from the reason whereupon that decree was grounded and made That is from the meaning of the Scriptures expressed and limited by the Tradition of the Church And therefore not burthening my self here with the expounding of all those passages of their writings before Arius which may seem to derogate from the Tradition of the Church in that point I shall referre the Reader to those things whereby he showeth that they do unanimously concurre in maintaining the same Faith For if there be amongst them that have had speculations tending to reconcile some Scriptures to it which are not onely ill grounded as I dispute not but this of Tertulliane is but also prejudiciall to the Faith as some of Origens whom I have mentioned already That this is to be imputed to the inconsequence of their severall discourses not to any difference in their common Faith I remit you to that which he hath said to judge Onely whereas he de Trinitate II. 2. hath given you a full account of those Fathers which expound the words of our Lord The Father is greater then I to be meant of his Godhead which I have onely named in gross I will advise you again hereupon that many things which are said of the Sonne as inferior to the Father as when he is said to Minister unto the Father in creating the World may be imputed not to any inequality in that Godhead which is the same in all the Trinity but unto the manner of having it the Father originally as the Fountaine the Sonne and the holy Ghost as from him wherein the difference of the persons consisteth To the same Petavius de Trinitate VIII 2. I remit them that would be satisfied of the sense of the Fathers in that which I alledged for the reason why our Lord is called the Word by S. John To wit that the intercourse between God and man after the fall was executed and managed by his Ministry Not because I think this name of the Word unfit to signifiy the originall proceeding of the Sonne from the Father much lesse his concurrence in and to the creation of all things But because believing as I do that the mystery of the Trinity is revealed by the coming of our Lord I find great reason to conceive that his Apostle intended thereby to intimate