the Christian Faith The one forfeiteth his interest in Heaven by the inward act of his soul refusing the common faith which saveth all Christians though outwardly holding communion with the Church The other by the inward act of the soul proceeding to the outward act of dissolving the communion of the Church which the common charity of Christians in the first place is to maintain If both these crimes may come under the the common name of Heresie because inward misbelief naturally tendeth to make a sect of such as shall profess to live according to it no marvail if all divisions of the Church be commonly called both Heresies and Schisms whatsoever be the cause upon which they divide If meer schisms that is where the cause is not any thing necessary to the salvation of all to be believed be also Heresie in the Language of the Apostles Neverthelesse there being so much difference between the two crimes and the grounds of them it is necessary to understand setting aside all aequivocation of terms that there is a crime consisting in mis-believing some Article of the faith which if you please may properly be called Heresie And another consisting in dissolving the unity of the Church which is properly called Schism when there is no further pretense for it then some Law which the Church being able to make the other part will rather depart then admit There may divisions in the Church upon pretence of such doctrines as are not necessary to the salvation of all and so no part of the rule of faith but so evidently to be deduced from it and from the rest of the Scriptures that the Church may have cause to determine the same and yet others may choose rather to depart from the Church then suffer the determination thereof to take place Which divisions that memorable observation of S. Jerome seems to call Heresies which said that all Schisms naturally devise to themselves some Heresie that is some doctrine extravagant from the doctrine of the Church that they may seem not to have departed from the Church for nothing Which is very well exemplified by S. Austine in the Donatists But whether such divisions are to be counted Heresies or Schisms both names properly signifying all divisions of the Church and only that crime which consisteth in mis-believing some Articles of faith appropriating the name of Heresie because common use hath given it no peculiar name of its own I leave to him that shall please to determine it Supposing these things it will not be requisite for me to say much to that which hath been published concerning the nature of Schism of late That being to be had onely out of the Scripture it is no where there to be had but in S. Paul to the Corinthians That there was at Corinth when S. Paul writ onely one Congregation of Christians which he calleth the Church of Corinth That therefore there is no crime of schism but in breaking one Congregation into more As for any visible society of the Catholick Church acknowledging the materials men that professe Christianity which he that sees cannot believe to the form which is that unity which is visible he is as great a stranger as if he had never heard of the Creed acknowledging notwithstanding an invisible unity in the common faith and love of Christians upon perswasion whereof he challenges as great freedom from schism as ever any member of the Catholick Church could claim For having showed how a thing which God made visible for many ages may reasonably be expected to be found in the Scriptures I am not to yield to try it by any part of them knowing that whosoever evidenceth a society of the Church by Gods Law evidenceth the crime that consists in the dissolving of it And it were fit we were told how all the Christians in a City where God had much people should sit at one Table or at least sup in one room before we believe that there was then no more Christians at Corinth then could assemble at once Which if I did believe I would notwithstanding alledge Iustine the Martyrs words Apol II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 On the day called Sunday all that dwelt in Cities or in Countries assemble themselves in one And supposing that then there were more Christians in Rome and the Territorie thereof for example for he writes to the Emperour Antoninus then could meet together in one place As Iustine means not when he saies That all in Cities or Countries meet in one that all made one Assembly but met all in common assemblies I would thereupon argue that no more does S. Paul say when he gives these rules to the Corinthians 1 Cor. XI 14. which serve any assembly that there was then but one Congregation at Corinth If in Iustines time if afore if after he can show me any Church of Rome or any City beside Rome that contained not all the Christians of that City and the Territory thereof I will believe that when Clemens writ the Letter lately published from the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth there were no more Christians at Rome or at Corinth then could meet all at once But if in all the Scripture as well as in all the Records of the Church a Church signifie the university of Christians which one City and the Territory thereof containeth it is an affront to common sense for him to deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the Church that is contained in the City and Territory of Rome or Corinth Let the learned Publisher of that Epistle take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there for Inquilinus or Peregrinus in Inmate or Pilgrim because his Greek gave him leave he that hath been showed so plentiful mention of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the subject in question for that which we now call a Diocese can have no reason to see with his eyes but because he is resolved not to use his own For in the very address of Polycarpus his Epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the Church of God dwelling beside Philippi The dative case quite spoils the construction of the words to his sense If the Church of the Philippians dwelt near Philippi then the Christians of the Territory belonged to the Church of the City As for the visible unity of the Catholick Church it was not so easie for me to evidence that which could not be questionable till the difference between Catholick Church and true Church came to be questionable As it is not hard for any Christian to question whither the Church which was Catholick for so many ages ought now to be Catholick or not For till he have destroyed the evidence which this abridgement hath been able to advance and when that is done new evidence will not be wanting so long as the records of the Church are Historically true and men continue possest of common sense it is in vain to alledge the dictate of his own
because all agreed that they transgressed therefore they were excluded the Church But Vincentius besides this advanceth another mark to discern what belongs to the Rule that is what the ground and scope of our Creed requires For it might be said that perhaps something may come in question whether consistent with the Rule of Faith or not in which there hath passed no decree of the primitive Church because never questioned by that time Wherein therefore wee shall be to seek notwithstanding the decrees past by the Church upon ancient Heresies Which to meet with Vincentius saith further that whatsoever hath been unanimously taught in the Church by writing that is alwaies by all every where to that no contradiction is ever to be admitted in the Church Here the stile changes For whereas Irenaeus Tertullian and others of former time appeal onely to that which was visible in the practice of all Churches By the time of the Council at Ephesus the dare of Vincentius his book so much had been written upon all points of Faith and upon the Scriptures that hee presumeth evidence may be made of it all what may stand with that which the whole Church had taught what may not I know this proposition satisfieth not now because I know Vincentius proceedeth upon supposition that the Church was and ought to be alwaies one Body in which that which agreeth with the Faith might be taught that which agreeth not might not Which is the question now in dispute For upon other termes it had been madnesse in him to allege and maintain the Council of Ephesus condemning Nestorius as infringing the Rule of Faith upon this presumption because ten received Doctors of the Church had formerly delivered the contrary of his doctrine It is well enough known that there are many questions in which though there may be ten Fathers alleged on one side yet there may be more alleged on the other side And it were a piteous case if Vincentius or I could tell you no wiser a way for the ending of Controversies in Religion than by counting noses The presumption lies in this That the witnesles that depose being of such credit in the Church as the quality which they beare in it presupposeth it cannot reasonably be imagined that they could teach that for truth which is inconsistent with Christianity but they must be contradicted in it and their quality and degree in the Church questioned upon it And that the Church having been alwaies one and the same Body from Christ whosoever should undertake to teach that for the Christian Faith which from the beginning had been counted false hee would have been questioned for contradicting that profession which qualified him for that rank which hee held in the Church It is the case of Nestorius who venting his Heresie in the Church gave the people occasion to check at it and the Council of Ephesus to condemn it Now Vincentius his discourse presupposeth that the doctrine of those ten whom hee allegeth had not been contradicted A thing which must needs be presupposed by him that supposed the Great Council of Nicaea had decreed no more than that which had alwaies been taught in the Church For it is plain that without questioning the Faith setled at Nicaea there is no room for the opinion of Nestorius But otherwise should ten of that quality which hee allegeth be so considerably contradicted that it must be presumed their doctrine was suffered to passe not as not taken notice of but as not contradicting the common profession of Christians it will appear a presumption that neither part is of the substance of Faith but both allowed to be taught in the Church And if it appear further that the fewer in number and the lesse in rank and quality in the Church hold that which dependeth more necessarily upon the Rule of Faith which containeth the substance of the Scriptures it will be no way prejudicial to the Unity and authority of the Church as a Corporation founded by God that a private man as I am should conclude it for truth against the greater authority in maters depending upon the foundation of the Church If it be said that this evidence supposeth the necessity of Baptisme to the making of a Christian Which not onely the Leviathaâ— is farr from granting who professeth himself bound to renounce Christ at the command of his Soveraign But the Socinians also and some of our Sectaries hold indifferent to salvation whether baptized or not I answer That the question here is not what belongs or belongs not to the Rule of Faith and Christian conversation necessary to the salvation of all Christians but whether there be any such Rule or not That the original and universal custome of Carechizing all Christians evidenceth such a Rule by the consent of all Christians as you have seen it evidenced by the frequent mention thereof in Scriptures That therefore it stands recommended to us by the same means and upon the same grounds for which wee receive the holy Scriptures And that though when the World was come into the Church and many more were baptized infants then afore it cannot be said that this order of Catechizing was so substantially performed as afore Yet the mater and theme of it remaining in the Tradition of the Creed and the sense of it in the writings of the Fathers and the decrees of the Church against Hereticks it remains still visible what belongs to it what not as I shall make appear in that which is questioned within the subject of this book Onely this is the place where I am to allege against the Leviathan why the profession of Christianity is necessary to the salvation of all Christians Whereupon it will follow without further proof that it is necessary to salvation to believe more than that Jesus is the Christ To wit whatsoever this Rule of Christianity containeth the profession whereof is requisite to Christianity Heare our Lord Mat. X. 32 33. Luke XII 8 9. Whosoever shall renounce mee before men him will I renounce before my Father which is in heaven And whosoever shall acknowledge mee before men him will I acknowledge before my Father which is in heaven And S. Paul Rom. X. 9 10. If thou confesse with thy mouth that Jesus is the Lard and believe with thy heaâ—t that God raised him from the dead that shalt be saved For with the heart a man believes to righteousnesse and with the mouth hee professeth to salvation And a Tim. II. 12. If wee deny him hee will deny us Our Lords Commission to his Apostles is Mat. XXVIII 19. Go make disciples all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Who are then Christs Disciples That wee may know what the Apostles are to make them whom they make Christs Disciples Yâ—e are my Disciples saith our Lord if yee do whatsoever I command you And John XV. 8. Herein is my Father glorified that yee heart 〈◊〉 fruit
AN EPILOGUE TO THE TRAGEDY OF THE Church of England BEING A Necessary Consideration and brief Resolution of the chief Controversies in Religion that divide the Western Church Occasioned by the present Calamity of the CHURCH of ENGLAND In three BOOKS viz. Of I. The Principles of Christian Truth II. The Covenant of Grace III. The Lawes of the Church By HERBERT THORNDIKE LONDON Printed by J. M. and T. R. for J. Martin J. Allestry and T. Dicas and are to be sold at the sign of the BELL in St PAUL's Church-yard M.DC.LIX A PREFACE To all Christian Readers IT cannot seem strange that a man in my case removed by the force of the Warr from the Service of the Church should dedicate his time to the consideration of those Controversies which cause division in the Church For what could I do more to the satisfaction of mine own judgment than to seek a solution what truth it is the oversight whereof hath divided the Church and therefore the sight whereof ought to unite it But that I should publish the result of my thoughts to the world this even to them that cannot but allow my conversing with those thoughts may seem to fall under the Historians censure Sâ—ipsum fatiganâ—o nihil aliud quâm odium quaerere extremae esse dementiae That to take pains to get nothing but displeasure is the extremity of madness Socrates if wee believe his Apology in Plato could never rest for his Genius alwayes putting him upon disputes tending to convict men that they knew not what they thought they knew The displeasure which this got him hee makes the true cause of his death The opinion which I publish being indeed the fruit of more time and leisure of less ingagement to the world than others are under will seem a charge upon those who ingage otherwise And when besides so much interest of this world depends upon the divisions of the Church what am I to expect but Great is Diana of the Ephesians My Apology is this The title of Reformation which the late Warr pretended mentioned onely Episcopacy and the Service The effect of it was a new Confession of Faith a new Catechism a new Directory all new With chapter and verse indeed quoted in the margine but as well over against their own new inventions as over against the Old Faith of the Church This burthen was as easily kicked off by the Congregations as layed on by the Presbyteries As carrying indeed no conviction with it but the Sword and what penalties the Sword should inforce it with Which failing what is come in stead of it to warrant the salvation of Christians but that the Bible is preached which what Heresie disowneth and by them whom the Tryers count godly men Make they what they can of it I from my non age had embraced the Church of England and attained the Order of Priesthood in it upon supposition that it was a true Church and salvation to be had in it and by it Owning nevertheless as the Church of England did own the Church of Rome for a Church in which salvation though more difficult yet might be had and obtained That there is no such thing as a Church by Gods Law in the nature of a Body which this state of Religion requireth is opposite to an Article of my Creed who alwayes thought my self a member of such a Body by being of the Church of England The issue of that which I have published concerning that title of Reformation which the Warr pretended was this That they are Schismaticks that concurr to the breaking or destroying of the Church of England for those causes And the objection there necessarily starting Why the Church of England no Schismaticks in Reforming without the Church of Rome My answer was that the cause of Reforming must justifie the change which it maketh without consent of the Whole Church For the pretense of Infallibility in the Church on the one side the pretense of the Word and Sacraments for marks of the Church on the other side I hold equally frivolous As equally declaring a resolution never to be tried by reason in that which wee alwayes dispute For what dispute remains iâ— the Decrees of the Council of Trent be Infallible If that form of Doctrine and ministring the Sacraments which the Reformation may pretend be marks to distinguish a Church from no Church If they were where there is no such form there are no such marks And therefore no such thing as a Church Nor is it so easie to destroy these doubts in mens judgments as the Laws by which the Church of England stood And if the salvation of a Christian consist in professing the common Christianity as I show you at large shall not the salvation of a Divine consist in professing what he hath attained to believe when hee thinks the exigent of the time renders it necessary to the salvation of Gods people How shall hee otherwise be ministerial to the work of Gods Grace in strengthening them that stand in comforting and helping the weak in raising them that are fallen in resolving the doubtfull without searching the bottom of the cause Nay how shall hee make reparation for the offenses hee may have given by not knowing that which now hee thinks hee knows The causes of division have a certain dependence upon common principles a certain correspondence one with another which when it cannot be declared the satisfaction which a man intends is quite defeated when it is declared that dissatisfaction which the consideration of particulars of less waight causeth must needs cease Whether it were the distrust of my own ability or the love of other imployment or whatsoever it were that diverted mee from considering the consequence of those principles which I alwayes had till I might come to that resolution which now I declare Neither was I satisfied till I had it nor having it till I had declared it And if I be like a man with an arrow in his thigh or like a woman ready to bring forth that is as Ecclesiasticus saith like a fool that cannot hold what is in his heart I am in this I hope no fool of Solomons but with S. Paul a fool for Christs sake Now the mischiefs which division in the Church createth being invaluable all the benefit that I can perceive it yield is this that the offenses which it causeth seem to drown and swallow up as it were that offense which declaring the truth in another time would produce For Unity in the Church is of so great advantage to the service of God and that Christianity from whence it proceedeth that it ought to overshadow and cover very great imperfections in the Laws of the Church All Laws being subject to the like Especially seeing I maintain that the Church by divine institution is in point of right one visible Body consisting in the communion of all Christians in the offices of Gods service and ought by humane administration in point
is to determine controversies of Faith And what obligation that determination produceth Traditions of the Apostles oblige the present Church as the reasons of them continue or not Instances in our Lords Passeover and Eucharist Penance under the Apostles and afterwards S. Pauls vail eaâ—ing blood and things offered to Idols The power of the Church in limiting these Traditions 178 CHAP. XXV The power of the Church in limiting even the Traditions of the Apostles Not every abuse of this power a sâ—fficient warrant for particular Churches to reforme themselves Heresie consists in denying something necessary to salvation to be believed Schism in departing from the unity of the Church whether upon that or any other cause Implicite Faith no virtue but the effect of it may be the work of Christian charity p. 163 CHAP. XXVI What is to add to Gods Law What to adde to the Apocalypse S. Pauls Anathema The Beraeans S. Johns Gospel sufficient to make one believe and the Scriptures the man of God perfect How the Law giveth light and Christians are taught by God How Idolatry is said not to be commanded by God 168 CHAP. XXVII Why it was death to transgress the determinations of the Jewes Consistory and what power this argueth in the Church A difference between the authority of the Apostles and that of the Church The being of the Church to the worlds end with power of the Keyes makes it not infallible Obedience to Superiours and the Pillar of truth inferre it not 175 CHAP. XXXI The Fathers acknowledge the sufficiencie 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—rnesse of the Scriptures as the Traditions of the Church They are to be reconciled by limiting the termes which they use The limitations of those sayings which make all Christian truth to be contained in the Scriptures Of those which make the authority of the Church the ground of Faith 181 CHAP. XXXII Answer to an Objection that choice of Religion becomes difficult upon these terms This resolution is for the Interest of the Reformation Those that make the Church Infallible cannot those that make the Scriptures â—â—ear â—nd sufficient may own Tradition for evidence to determine the meaning of the Scriptures and controversies of Faith The Interest of the Church of England The pretense of Rushworthes Dialogues that we have no unquestionable Scripture and that tâ—e Tradition of the Church never changes 192 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 198 CHAP. XXXIV The dispute concerning the Canon of Scripture and the translations thereof in two Questions There can be no Tradition for those books that were written since Prophesie ceased Wherein the excellence of them above other books lies The chiâ—fe objections against them are questionâ—ble In those parcels of the New Testament that have been questioned the case is not the same The sense of the Church 207 CHAP. XXXIII Onely the Originall Copy can be Authentick But the truth thereof may as well be found in the translations of the Old Testament as in the Jewes Copies The Jewes have not falsified them of malice The points come neither from Moses nor Esdras but from the Talmud Iewes 218 CHAP. XXXIV Of the ancientest Translations of the Bible into Greek first With the Authors and authority of the same Then into the Chaldee Syriack and Latine Exceptions against the Greek and the Samaritane Pentateuch They are helps never thelesse to assure the true reading of the Scriptures though with other Copies whether Jewish or Christian Though the Vulgar Latine were better than the present Greek yet must both depend upon the Original Greek of the New Testament No danger to Christianity by the differences remaining in the Bible 224 The CONTENTS of the second Book CHAP. I. TWo parts of that which remains How the dispute concerning the Holy Trinity with Socinus belongs to the first The Question of justification by Faith alone The Opinion of Socinus concerning the whole Covenant of Grace The opinion of those who make justifying Faith the knowledge of a mans Predestination opposite to it in the other extream The difference between it and that of the Antinomians That there are mean Opinions p. 1 CHAP. II. Evidence what is the condition of the Covenant of Grace The contract of Baptism The promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to Christs not to Johns Baptism Those are made Christs Disciples as Christians that take up his Cross in Baptism The effects of Baptism according to the Apostles 5 CHAP. III. The exhortations of the Apostles that are drawn from the patterns of the Old Testament suppose the same How the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament are the same how not the same How the new Testament and the New Covenant are both one The free-will of man acteth the same part in dealing about the New-Covenant as about the Old The Gospel a Law 12 CHAP. IV. The consent of the whole Church evidenced by the custome of catechising By the opinion thereof concerning the salvation of those that delayed their Baptism By the rites and Ceremonies of Baptism Why no Penance for sins before but after Baptism The doctrine of the Church of England evident in this case 17 CHAP. V. The Preaching of our Lord and his Apostles evidenceth that some act of Mans free choice is the condition which it requireth The correspondence between the Old and New Testament inferreth the same So do the errors of Socinians and Antinomians concerning the necessity of Baptism Objections deferred 23 CHAP. VI. Justifying faith sometimes consists in believing the truth Sometimes in trust in God grounded upon the truth Sometimes in Christianity that is in imbracing and professing it And that in the Fathers as well as in the Scriptures Of the informed and formed Faith of the Schools 30 CHAP. VII The last signification of Faith is properly justifying Faith The first by a Metonymy of the cause The second of the effect Those that are not justified do truly believe The trust of a Christian presupposeth him to be justified All the promises of the Gospel become due at once by the Covenant of Grace That to believe that we are Elect or justified is not justifying faith 37 CHAP. VIII The objection from S. Paul We are not justifyed by the Law nor by Works but by Grace and by Faith Not meant of the Gospel and the works that suppose it The question that S. Paul speakes to is of the Law of Moses and the workes of it He sets those workes in the same rank with the works of the Gentiles by the light of nature The civil and outward works of the Law may be done by Gentiles How the Law is a Pedagogue to Christ 43 CHAP. IX Of the Faith and Justification of Abraham and the Patriarkes according to the Apostles
it may be said in some regard that the Church was before the Scriptures when as in order of reason it is evident that the truth of Christianity is supposed to the being of it inasmuch as no man can be or be known to be of the Church but as hee is or is known to be a Christian And truly those that dispute the authority of the Church to be the the reason to believe the sentence of it in mater of Faith to be true are to consider what they will say to that opinion which utterly denies any such authority any such thing as a Church Understanding the Church to be a Society founded by Gods appointment giving publick authority to some persons so or so qualified by that appointment in behalf of the whole For this all must deny that admit Erastus his opinion of Excommunication to be true if they will admit the consequence of their own doctrine Which opinion I have therefore premised in staring this Question that it may appear to require such an answer as may not suppose the being of the Church in that nature but may be a means to demonstrate it But as it is not my intent to begg so great a thing in question by proceeding upon supposition of any authority in the Church before I can prove it to be a Corporation founded with such authority as the foundation of it requireth So is it as farre from my meaning to deny that authority which I do not suppose For hee that denieth the authority of the Church to be the reason why any thing is to be taken for truth or for the meaning of the Scripture may take the due and true authority of the Church to be a part of that truth which is more ancient than the authority of the Church Inasmuch as it must be believed that God hath founded a Society of them which professe Christianity by the name of the Church giving such authority to some members of it in behalf of the whole as hee pleased before it can be believed that this or that is within the authority of the Church For that there is a Church and a publick authority in it and for it and what things they are that fall under that authority if it be true is part of that truth which our Lord and his Apostles whose authority is more ancient than the Church have declared Indeed if it were true that the first truth which all Christians are to believe and for the reason of it to believe every thing else is the saying of persons so and so qualified in the Church then were it evident that the belief of that which is questioned in religion could not be resolved into any other principle But if it be manifest by the motives of Christianity that the authority of the Apostles is antecedent to it that all Scripture and the meaning of Scripture which signifies nothing beside it own meaning and Tradition of the Apostles if any such Tradition over and above Scripture may appear is true not supposing it as appeares by the premises then is the authority of the Church no ground of Faith and so not Infallible There are indeed sundry Objections made both out of Scripture and the Fathers to weaken and to shake such an evident truth which are not here to be related till wee have resolved as well what is the reason of believing in Controversies of Faith as what is not In the mean time if wee demand by what means any person that can pretend to give sentence in Controversies of Faith knowes his own sentence to be infallible or upon what ground hee gives sentence Hee that answers by Scripture or authority of Writers that professe to have learned from the Scriptures or reasons depending on the authority of our Lord and his Apostles acknowledges the authority of the Church not to be the reason of believing For what need wee all this if it were If hee say by the same means for which these are receivable that is by revelation from God It will be presently demanded to make evidence of such revelation the same evidence as wee have for the truth of the Scriptures Which because it cannot be done therefore is this plea laid aside even by them who neverthelesse professe to imbrace the Communion of the Church of Rome because they believe the Church to be Infallible But if it be destructive to all use of reason to deny the conclusion admitting the premises then let him never hope to prevaile in any dispute that holds the conclusion denying the premises For to hold the sentence of the Church Infallible when the means that depend upon the authority of our Lord and his Apostles proves whatsoever is to be believed without supposing any such thing when revelation independent upon their authority there is acknowledged to be none averreth Infallibility in the sentence of the Church denying the onely principle that can inferre it And therefore those that speak things so inconsequent so inconsistent I shall not grant that they speake those things which themselves think and believe but rather that like men upon the rack they speak things which themselves may and in some sort do know not to be true For whosoever holds an opinion which hee sees an argument against that hee cannot resolve is really and truly upon the rack and of necessity seeks to escape by contradicting what himself confesseth otherwise Which every man of necessity doth who acknowledging the reason of believing Christianity to lye in the authority of our Lord and his Apostles challengeth neverthelesse that Infallability which is the reason of believing to all sentences of the Church the mater of which sentence if it be true the reason of it must depend immediately upon the same authority upon which the authority of the Church which sentenceth dependeth But the consequence of this assertion deserves further consideration because all that followes depends upon it Suppose that the Scriptures prove themselves to be the Word of God by the reasons of believing contained in them witnessed by the common sense of all Christians For this admits no dispute If the same consent can evidence any thing belonging to the mater of Faith that will appear to oblige the Faith of all Christians upon the same reason as the Scriptures do whether contained in the Scriptures or not For who will undertake that God could not have preserved Christianity without either Scriptures or new revelations And therefore hee chose the way of writing not as of absolute necessity but as of incomparable advantage If therefore God might have obliged man to believe any thing not delivered by writing whether hee hath or not will remain questionable supposing the Scriptures to be the Word of God upon the ground aforesaid Besides there are many things so manifest in the Scriptures that they can indure no dispute supposing the Scriptures to be the Word of God Many things are every day cleared more and more by applying the knowledg
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
that was risen again it followes Then opened hee their mindes to understand the Scriptures which were onely then those of the Old Testament Surely Justine the Martyr in many places of his dispute with Typho the Jew as truly as manifestly professes that the understanding of Christianity in the Old Testament was a grace given to the Disciples of Christ among the rest of distributions of his Spirit upon his ascension into heaven shed forth upon the Church Eph. IV. 8 which being showed the Jews their eyes were darkened as their hearts hardened that they could not understand the truth in them Now it is not my purpose to say that thereby hee challenges to himself the same miraculous grace of the Spirit and that the Prophesies that concern Christ are by that grace interpreted by him in his writings and therefore as truly as those in the writings of the Apostles It is enough that the true meaning of the Scriptures in that behalf was first revealed to the Disciples of Christ by the immediate and extraordinary operation of Gods Spirit Though Christians building on that which they received from persons so inspired may have added many things inconsequent to those principles Now I suppose it is manifest to all mens reason that those things are not clear in the Scriptures to all understandings that could not be discerned in it without a miraculous operation of Gods Spirit But nothing can be more manifâ—st than those particulars of the Law which our Lord and his Apostles in the New Testament have by way of allegory expounded to be meant of his Person and Gospel and Kingdome That the first Adam was to be the figure of the second though to a contrary effect of life by Christ in stead of death by Adam and that hee took our flesh to be the Lord of all things in it as to the effect of the Gospel which the first Adam was made as to the dominion of the creature is clearly declared by the Apostles Rom. V. 12-14 1 Cor. XV. 45-49 Ebr. II. 6-15 That Noe and what befell the world hy the deluge under him was the figure of what befalls the Church under Christ by Baptisme is no lesse manifestly the doctrine of the Apostle 1 Pet. III. 20 21 22. And not onely this particular but all the rest that befell the Fathers and Prophets and Martyrs under the Old Testament is evidently made a figure of what befalls the Disciples of Christ under the Gospel Ebr. XI As it is also evident that the pilgrimages of the Patriarchs Abraham Isaac and Jacob and of their posterity the Israelites from Aegypt through the Wildernesse into the land of Promise is there declared and of all Christians received for the figure of that Journey which all professe to travail from sinne wherein it findeth them to the Kingdome of heaven and happinesse How else should the argument hold which the Apostles draw from that which befell the Children of Israel travailing through the Wildernesse to the land of Canaan to the duty of Christians in their Journey toward everlasting happinesse 1 Cor. X. 1-11 Ebr. III. 7 -IV 11. But after their coming into the land of Promise as the persecutions which the Prophets indured Ebr. XI 36 37 38. Mat. XXIII 34 evidence them to be the figures of Christs Crosse as the expiation made by all High Priests is evidently expounded by the Apostle to the Ebrewes to shadow the taking away of sinne by Christ So it is no lesse evident that all the Judges and Kings and High Priests and Prophets of Gods people anointed by God were figures of our Lord both in regard of his Church and the enemies of it than it is evident that our Lord Jesus is the Christ foretold by the Prophets Which things unlesse wee say as no man in his right senses will say that they are manifest to all that reade the Old Testament though they never heard of Christianity or the New wee cannot imagine that the substance of Christianity necessary to the salvation of all Christians is clear to all understandings in the Old Testament No lesse clear is it by the sayings and doings of our Lord recorded in the Gospels that it was not his intent freely and openly at least all waies and every where to declare the truth and substance of it by the said sayings and doings Manifest indeed it is that hee did publickly and freely declare himself to be that Christ whom the Prophets had foretold and the Nation expected and of this no doubt can be made by any man that with common reason examines all that is written in the Gospels Though not all times so free in declaring even this truth As it is evident by the words of the Jewes to him John X. 24. How long holdest thou our mindes in suspense If thou be the Christ freely tell us it And wee see Mat. XII 14 20. what difference of opinions there were about it in his life time forbidding his Disciples to declare it till his death But granting this to be manifest by the Gospels neither is it manifest by them that nothing else is requisite to salvation to be believed concerning his Person and Kingdome nor that thereby hee intended to make manifest what hee knew requisite to be believed of them that should imbrace it when it was become requisite This is enough to answer the Leviathan with pretending that it is not necessary to the salvarion of a Christian to believe any more than this that our Lord Jesus is the Christ Which if it could appear by the Gospels alone then would I not dispute any further that all the truth that is necessary to salvation is clearly delivered by the Gospels I do for my part believe that the substance of Christianity necessary to salvation is contained in the badge and cognisance which our Lord hath marked it with by his Commission to his Apostles Mat. XXVIII 19 20. Go make all nations Disciples baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you But shall I say it is clearly contained in these words about the intent and effect whereof there hath been and is so much dispute The Church it is well enough known hath alwaies rejected those that acknowledge not the Holy Trinity Father Sonne and Holy Ghost subsisting in one and the same Godhead At this day Socinus and his followers will have us believe onely that wee are to professe whether wee be baptized or not that our Lord Jesus is a man that was born of a Virgin by the power of God which is the Holy Ghost And for undertaking or for doing Gods message tendring reconcilement with God to mankinde hath by Gods gift the same power with God to govern his Kingdome and is to be honored as God for it Whether or no they would have us to believe this sense of theirs positively or would not be tyed to believe positively the sense of the
And yee shall be my Disciples And Luke XIV 26 27. Whoso cometh to 〈◊〉 and hatâ—th not father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters yea and himself cannot be my Disciple And whose taketh not up his Crosse and followeth â—ee cannot be my Disciple To the same purpose Mâ—â— X 38. XVI 24. Mark VIII 34. X. 21. Luke IX 23. And S. Paul plainly declareth the Galaâ—ians fallen from all benefit of the Gospel if to avoid the Crosse of Christ they should â—alk the profession of their Christianity to be circumcised Gâ—l V. 11. VI. 12 14. S. John charges the Churches of Pergamus and Thyatira Apoc. II. 14 15 20. to have some that hold the doctrine of Balaâ—m who taught Balak to lay a stumbling block before the children of Israel of things offered to Idols and Whâ—râ—dome which is the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes And to suffer the woman Jâ—zabel calling her self a Prophetesse to teach and lead the servants of God into the error of whoredome and eating things sacrificed to Idols S. Peter 1 Pet. II. 15. and S. Jude 11. charge the Gnosticks whom they write against in those places that they go the way of Balaams that brought the Israelites to joyn with Bâ—â—l Peâ—r taking the invitation of their mistresses to the sacrifices of their Idols Whom Ireneus Justin the Martyr Origen Clâ—mons Alexandriâ—us and Tertulliâ—â— witnesse to have made the outward act of Idolatry in eating things sacrificed to Idols an indifferent thing that they might avoid persecution by complying with the Gentiles in that as with the Jewes in being circumcised And now after sixteen hundred yeares Wee are told that all that ever suffered for Christianity since the Apostles who were to witnesse what they saw our Lord doe and heard him say were mutinous sooles in laying down their lives to testifie that which they were not obliged to witnesse or rather which they were obliged not to witnesse the secular power requiting them not to witnesse it Wee have found one that calls himself a Christian wiser than our Lord and his Apostles as they called themselves Gnosticks because they pretended to know more than the Apostles that can tell Christians a way to escape the Crosse of Christ by renouncing Christianity and not fail of the promises thereof by believing the truth of it But they were the Disciples of Simon Magus and not of Christ that did so nor did they expect salvation by the Christianity which they counterseited but by that secret knowledg which they pretended to have discovered beyond that which all Christians had learned from the Apostles Though they went for Christians among the Gentiles who knew not what Christians were so that the Name of God was blasphemed because of them as the Apostle saith 1 Pet. II. 2. because their monstrous abominations were thought to be the practices of Christians Whether any man besides before this new Dogmatist pretending to be a Christian professed a freedom to renounce Christ in any case I am yet to learn Sure I am the Jewes under Antiochus Epiphanes died freely rather than eat Swines flesh or give any occasion to think that they fell from their Law and from God that gave it as the Prophet Daniel and his Fellowes had left them example to do And therefore by the same means and upon the same grounds for which wee receive our Christianity it stands evidenced to us that wee are bound to profess it that is to say by the Scriptures and the consent of all Christians that receive the Scriptures As for Traditions regulating the order to be observed in the communion of the Church there is so little question to be made of the consent of all Church writers that it shall serve my turn to produce the noted words of Tâ—rtullian de Cor. cap. III. Plaâ—â— nâ—gabimus traditionem recipiendam si nulla example prejudicent aliarum observationum quas sine ullius Scripturae instrumento solius traditionis titulo exinde consuetudinis patrocinio vindicamus Denique ut à baptismate ingrediar Aquam aditnri ibidem sed prius in Ecclesiâ sub Antistitis manu contest amur nos renunciare Diabolo pompae angelis ejus dehinc ter niergitamur amplius aliquid respondentes quà m Domintes in Evangelio determinavit Indè suscepti lactis mellis concordiam praegustamus Exque eâ die lavacro quotidiano per totam hebdomadam abstinemus Eucharistiae sacramentum in tempore victlus omnibus mandatum à Domino etiam antelucanis coetibus nec de aliorum manu quà m praesidentium sumimus Oblationes pro defunctis pro natalitiis annuâ die facimus Die dominico jejunium nefas ducimus vel de geniculis adorare Eâdem immunitate à die Paschae ad Pentecosten usque gaudemus Calicis aut panis etiam nostri aliquid in terram decuti anxiè patimur Ad omnem progressum atque promotum ad omnem aditum exitum ad vestitum ad calceatum ad lavacra ad mensas ad lumina ad cubilia ad sedilia quaecunque nos conversatio exercet frontem crucis signaculo terimus Plainly wee must deny to receive this Tradition if there be no examples of other observations for a prejudice which without any instrument in writing the onely title of Tradition and plea of Custome from it maintaineth In fine to begin with baptisme Going into the water not onely there but somewhat afore in the Church under the hand of our President wee take witnesse that wee renounce the Devil his pomp and Angels Then wee are drenched thrice answering somewhat more than our Lord in the Gospel hath limited Being taken up from thence wee fore-taste a mixture of milk and honey And from that day wee forbear our daily bathing all the week The Sacrament of the Eucharist which our Lord commanded at the time of meat and all wee take also at our assemblies before day but at no mans hand but our Presidents Wee offer for those that dye and again upon the anniversary of their birth Wee count it unlawfull to fast or worship kneeling upon the Lords day The same privilege wee injoy from Easter to Whitsuntide Wee are troubled to have any thing even of our ordinary cup or bread scattered upon the earth At all going forth or advancing at all coming in and going out at putting on clothes or shooes at watching at lying or sitting down or to table at bringing in light whatsoever conversation wee exercise wee rub our foreheads with the sign of the Crosse I must here take notice of an exception to this authority of Tertullian that hee was a Montanist or inclining to the Montanists when hee writ it And marvail that prejudice in Religion should transport learned Christians so farre as to deny the records of the Church that credit which common sense allowes all records of historical truth and which all Learning allowes the writings of Mahumetans Jewes and Pagans And this consideration I interpose the
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
corrupted the truth As Paul also saith A man that is an Heretick after one reproof and a second avoid Knowing that such a one is perverted condemned by himself Where you see it is not I but Irenaeus that expoundeth those words of S. Paul to this purpose The same Irenaeus III. 4. Cerdon autem qui ante Marcionem hic sub Hygino qui fuit octavus Episcopus saepe in Ecclesiam veniens exomologesim faciens sic consummavit Modò quidem latenter docens modò verò exomologesim faciens modò verò ab aliquibus traductus in his quae docebat malè abstentus est religiosorum hominum conventu But this same Cerdon also that was before Marcion under Hyginus who was the eight Bishop many times addressing to the Church and confessing ended accordingly Sometimes covertly teaching his Heresie sometimes confessing And sometimes being detected by some in those bad things which hee taught was excluded the assembly of the Religious Tertullian de praescript cap. XXX informes us that Marcion though hee was at the first refused Penance by the Church of Rome as I shall show you out of Epiphanius yet afterwards was cast out of the Church there which supposeth him admitted afore with Valentinus the Father of another Heresie and having been received once again at the last for good and all For having obtained to be re-admitted upon this condition that hee should reduce with himself all that hee had seduced at length hee died before hee was able to accomplish the same These things coming to passe so soon after the Apostles as they did and the same course being held in separating those Heresies from the Church which sprung up in their several ages afterwards there is no room left for any pretense that the Church never had power to do that which there never was any time that shee did not do For it is to be noted that these Heads of Heresies being condemned and cast out of the Church in which they first appeared and which they attempted to divide were thenceforth disowned by all Churches being certified of the proceeding that had passed against them upon the place And therefore Vincentius Lerinensis Commentario I. expounding S. Pauls words Gal. I. 8 9. Let him be Anathema Anathema sit inquit id est separatui exclusus nè unius ovis dirum contagium innoxium gregem Christi venenatâ permistione contaminet That is saith hee let him be separated set aside shut out least the direfull contagion of one sheep with any mixture of poison stain the innocent flock of Christ And again afterwards handling the words of S. Paul 1 Tim. VI. 20. Keep that which is committed to thy trust avoiding profane novelties of words What is it to avoid With such one not so much as to eat What is avoid If any come to you saith hee and bringeth not this doctrine receive him not home nor bid him God speed Where you see these are none of my collections gathered out of the Apostles words but that exposition of them which the practice of the Catholick Church inferreth CHAP. X. Evidence of the Apostles act from the effect of it in preserving the Vnity of the Church Of the businesse of Marcion and Montanus That about keeping Easter That of the Novations of rebaptizing Hereticks of Paulus Samosatenus of Dionysius Alexandrinus and Arius Of communicatory leters and the intercourse of the Church under and after the Apostles THis is indeed the true demonstration and evidence from the effect that the will of God and not the consent of men is the ground upon which the Corporation of the Church subsisteth The whole number of Christians dispersed over all the Empire and beyond the bounds of it continued for divers hundred years in one communion and in the unity of one Church Those that indeavoured to alter the Rule of Faith or to impose such Lawes as were found by the greatest part not to stand with the end for which the Church was founded being by the consent of the whole excluded the communion of it for Hereticks and Schismaticks Hee that sayes this was not the work of God or the means of effecting it none of his declared will why should not hee say the like of Christianity Indeed since the Council of Ephesus the Churches of Mesopotamia and Assyria are fallen from the Unity of the whole since the Council of Chalcedon those of Aegypt and Aethiopia Since that the Eastern Churches under the Patriarch of Constantinople have been divided from the Western under the Pope of Rome And these from one another into so many parties since the Reformation that wee are now come to dispute whether they ought to be united or not That ever they will be is so hopelesse that no man would undertake to dispute that they should be were it possible to preserve that little of Christianity that remaines without re-uniting the Church I allege here the most eminent passages that fell out in the Church from the Apostles to Constantine to show that it is a question whether the evidence be more That by Gods appointment there was from the beginning and ought to be alwaies one Catholick Church Or the hope lesse that ever it will be so again I cannot begin with a better evidence than that of Irenaeus because it containes the effect of the aforesaid ordinances of the Apostles for the separating of the Heresies set on foot by Simon Magus and Cerinthus from the Communion of the Church that the Unity thereof might be preserved by remaining distinct from them Wee understand by reading his first book that Basilides at Alexandria Saturninus at Antiochia Valentinus first in Aegypt then in Cyprus afterwards at Rome Cerintbus in Asia and elsewhere others in several parts of the World indeavored to adulterate that Christianity which the Apostles had delivered That they were so unanimously rejected and excluded out of the society of the Church from East to West that hee is able to affirm I. 3. that though dispersed all over the world yet it preserves the doctrine once preached as if it dwelt all in one house believing the same faith as if it had the same soul and heart and preaching and teaching the same as if it had but one mouth And can common sense imagine that the remotest parts of the world could remaine united to one another separated from Heresies sprung in the remotest parts of it which they could not have intelligence of but by communication of it with those parts of it where they sprung without that continual correspondence wherein the actual communion of the Church consisteth But the words of Irenaeus are so vigorous that I cannot leave them out here as they stand in his original Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Unity therefore of the Church was visible Otherwise it had been senslesse for Irenaeus to assume it as an evidence of the truth of that Faith the unity whereof became visible by the
unity of the Church which professed it Thus then writeth Irenaeus This preaching and this faith the Church having received as I said afore though dispersed all over the world carefully keepeth as if it inhabited one house And believeth these things alike as if it had one soule and one heart And harmoniously preacheth and teacheth and delivereth them as if it had but one mouth For there be divers languages in the world but the Tradition signifies the same Nor do the Churches seated in the Germanies believe or deliver otherwise nor those in the Spaines nor among the Gaules nor in the East nor in Aegypt nor in Africk nor those that are seated in the middle parts of the world But as the Creature of God the Sun is one and the same in all the world so shineth the preaching of the truth every where inlightning all men that will come to the knowledge of the truth And neither will any of those that Rule in the Churches though powerfull in speaking say things diverse from these for the Disciple is not above his Master nor hee that is weak in speech abate of that which is delivered For to the same Faith neither hee that is able to say much of it addeth nor hee that is able to say little abateth of it Hee that acknowledges this to be Gods doing must of necessity acknowledge the means of it the concurrence of all Churches to the maintainance of unity in the same Faith by disowning those that pretended to break it not left to mans will but injoyned by Gods And Irenaeus his instance in the Church of Rome serves to good purpose to make out this evidence For all Churches that is as Irenaeus sayes Christians of all Churches having necessarily recourse to Rome for all occasions because it was the seat of the Empire might there inform themselves and their Churches of the perverse doctrines that might be on foot and of the consent of the Churches in refusing the same In the next place I will not forget the relation of Epiphanius concerning Marcion in the beginning of his Heresie because it is next in time and of great consequence Hee being put out of the Church by his Father Bishop of Sinope in Pontus and making sure to be admitted by the Church of Rome received this answer That they could not do it without his Fathers consent because the Faith is one and the Unity the same Compare herewith the proceeding of Synesius against Andronicus Ep. LVIII LXXIX though so much distant in time which in the first book de Synedriis Judaeorum pag. 304. is said to be of a high strain Hee saith that if any Church neglecting his Church of Ptolomais as a poor Church being the Church of a small City shall receive to communion those whom it had excommunicated hee shall be thereby guilty of dividing the Church which Christ will have to be one And tell mee how this proceeding differs from that which in Marcions case Epiphanius sayes was done at Rome so near the Apostles Certainly if one Church should receive into communion those whom another Church excommunicates there could remaine no unity in the whole Church because no distinction from those that are not of the Church When therefore it appears that the Church held it for a Rule from the beginning not to do so shall not this be evidence that the reason is that which was alleged to Marcion at Rome which Synesius alleges To wit the Unity of the Church For the same reason Montanus having as it seems by pretended revelations and inspirations such as at that time there can be no question but the Church was graced with brought the Churches of Phrygia to his intent but being rejected by the Churches of Asia went or sent to Rome to induce that Church to undertake and prescribe the same Rules to all that adheered unto it For why otherwise should hee labor for the consent of that Church before others but in hope that having induced it to receive his Rules the authority thereof might induce other Churches to do the like because they found it necessary for them to hold correspondence with the Church of Rome Now I beseech you were all Christians utterly out of their five senses to contend about the communion of the Church if there were no such thing in point of fact Were they all from the beginning possest with a frenzy that they were bound to maintain it by voiding all questions that might impeach it if there were no such obligation in point of right Is it not plain that the issue of such questions was this whether the Unity of the Church or the advantage of such Rules to the common cause of Christianity wayed most How is Tertullian otherwise counted a Montanist that is as I suppose a Schismatick Wee may believe Tertullian in a mater which all Christians at Rome then might know when hee tells us that Zephyrinus then Bishop of Rome was about to admit unto his communion the Churches of Asia and Phrygia that had acknowledged Montarus and his Prophets and Prophesies Contr. Prax. cap. I. Though Pope Soter afore Zephyrinus had writ against Montanus as well as Apollonius Bishop of Ephesus if wee believe Sirmondus his Praedestinatus Haer. XXVI When hee sayes that afterwards the contrary was resolved upon informations brought from Asia by Praxeas an Heretick That which appears that the Montanists were disclaimed wee must admit That which appears not upon what information it was done wee need not dispute Tertullian hereupon drawes after him a company which called themselves a Church at Carthage and subsisted there after Tertullian till they were reduced by S. Augustine as wee learn by Sirmondus his Praedestinatus Haer. XCVII and S. Augustine de Haeresibus This makes Tertullian a Schismatick That rather than rest content with those Rules which the rest of the Church satisfied themselves with hee departed from the Unity of it Otherwise those blasphemies for which the followers of Montanus are counted Hereticks preferring their own revelations above and against those of the Apostles hee is not chargable with Proceed wee now to the businesse of keeping Easter and the debate about it between Victor Bishop of Rome and the Churches of Asia These resolutely adheering to the custome which in all appearance they had received from their founder S. John to keep the Passion when the Jewes kept it that is upon the fifteenth day of the Moon that was the next equinoctial and the Resurrection the third after that The Church of Rome and almost all Churches beside keeping thc Passion on the Friday the Resurrection on the Ladies day following The one aiming at winning the Jewes when it was first set on foot the other to protest against them as incorrigible It is well enough known how Victor intending to withdraw his Communion from the Churches of Asia was reduced to tolerate them by the perswasions of Irenaeus then Bishop of Lions Certainly had not the Communion of the
truth as to show further how well it agreeth with the sense of the Catholick Church by which I had begun to show that wee are to examine all maters of Faith Indeed I must caution this first that I do not pretend as if this point were any part of the Rule of Faith which is the substance of Christianity to be believed but of all points concerning the knowledge of the Scriptures which is the skill of Christian Divines I hold it of most consequence And that therefore though I am not obliged to affirm that it is expresly taught by all the primitive Doctors of the Church as all maintaining the mystical â—ense it may be maintained that by consequence they do all unanimously deliver it Origen in praef de Principiis so accounts it so will it be necessary to show how well it standeth with the sense of them that it may appear that there is no consent of the whole Church against it It shall be therefore sufficient to name S. Jerome S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine the first affirming that hee reades nothing of the kingdom of heaven in all the Old Testament Epist CXXIX Mihi in Evangelio promittuntur regna coelorum quae vetus Instrumentum omnino non nominat To mee the kingdom of heaven is promised by the Gospel which the Old Testament nameth not at all The second in his Homilies de Lazaro and divers others places raising his exhortations drawn from examples of the Saints in the Old Testament upon this ground that if they did so and so when the Resurrection was not preached it behooveth us under the Gospel to do much more The last besides other places whereof some you may finde quoted in my book of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church in the book de Gestis Palestinis relating it for one of the Articles which Pelagius renounced at that Synod not onely that the Saints under the Law obtained salvation by it but even that the salvation of the world to come was preached under the Law The Article charged upon Pelagius you shall finde there to be this cap. V. Regnum coelorum etiam in veteri Testamento promissum That the kingdome of heaven was promised also in the Old Testament To which Pelagius answering That this may be proved by the Scriptures was judged by the Council not to depart from the Faith of the Church Which notwithstanding when S. Austine considers That the Old Testament in vulgar Language signifies the books of the Old Testament in which the kingdome of heaven is promised as the Gospel is fore-told But in the Scriptures the Old Covenant in which it is not promised Hee sayes as much as I have done Therefore hee saith further In illo verò Testamento quod Vetus dicitur datâ—m est in monte Sinâ non invenitur apertissime promitti nisi terrena foelicitas But in that which is called the Old Testament and was given in mount Sina none but earthly felicity is found to be very openly promised Whereupon hee proceedeth to observe that the Land of Canaan is called the Land of Promise in which the promises of the Old Testament figuring the spiritual promises belonging to the New are tendred by the Law And reason hee had to insist upon this because of another Article charged upon Pelagius of kin to this that men were saved under the Law as under the Gospel As you may see there cap. XI Which might well be understood to mean without the Grace of Christ But having cleared the ground of the difference between the literal and allegorical sense of the Scriptures of the Old Testament I hold it utterly unnecessary if not altogether impertinent to tender further proof of this position from the Fathers then the constant agreement of them in maintaining that difference Being when it is rightly understood the necessary and immediate consequence of it Indeed it cannot be maintained that they did understand expresly the true ground of this difference which had they done they would not have been found to use it impertinently and unseasonably as all lovers of Truth must avow that many times they do Notwithstanding in as much as they agree in maintaining and using of it from which use the ground of it which is this position is to be inferred it shall be enough that all of them agree in delivering that by consequence which the principal of them at least in expounding the Scriptures do expresly asfirme For nothing obliges mee to maintaine that this is a poiâ—t necessary to the salvation of all Christians to be believed And by consequence that it hath been every where taught and no where contradicted It is sufficient that I can and do hold it more generally necessary to the right understanding of the Scriptures than any other point of skill in the Scriptures Now if any man object that this is the doctrine of the Socinians I answer first That they also hold that nothing is necessary to salvation to be believed but that which is clear to all men in the Scriptures And that this position hath a necessary influence into their whole Heresie which is grounded upon the unreasonable presumption of it On the contrary the difference between the Law and the Gospel is a principle from which I hope to draw good consequences in maintainance of the Faith of the Church against the Socinians who if they did alwaies see the consequence of their owne positions would not deny the Tradition of the Church as I observed afore If they do not I am not to waive the doctrine of the Fathers because the Socinians acknowledge it But lastly I demand whether Socinus provide for the salvation of the Fathers or not If so why is his opinion blamed If not why is mine opinion that do taken for his CHAP. XIV The Leviathans opinâ—on that Christ came to restore that kingdome of God which the Jewes cast off when they rejected Samuel It overthroweth the foundation of Christianity The true Government of Gods ancient people The name of the Church in the New Testament cannot signifie the Synagogue Nor any Christian State THis position being settled in the next place I will proceed upon it to argue the vanity of that conceit of the Leviathan pag. 263. that the intent of Christs coming was to regaine unto God by a New Covenant that Kingdome which being his by the Old Covenant had been ravished from him by the rebellion of the Israelites in the election of Saul For supposing most truly that God became their King by the Covenant of the Law and that under him Moses had the Soveraigne Power to all purposes pag. 250 251 252. hee inferreth further that after Moses it was by God vested in the High Priests Aarons Successors though hee for his time was subject to Moses And this pag. 217. from that text of Exodus XIX 6. where God promiseth them that upon undertaking his Covenant they should be a Sacerdotal Kingdome which in
of the Church can be founded upon the right thereof or derived from it Neither is it otherwise with the Prophetical Office The authority whereof as I have showed was of divine right under the Law as depending immediately upon the will of God that raised them up and gave them authority by those evidences which his own Law had made legal And this that hee might tye his people the more strongly by their ministery and by the evidence of his presence among them to observe his Law And yet in as much as all Christians must believe them fore-runners of Christ sent to give notice of his coming by such meanes as God that sent him thought fit so that hee by his Office is the chief Prophet to whom the Father reserved the full declaration of his will and pleasure concerning the alliance hee intended to hold with men of necessity their office was to expire in him neither can it remaine in the Church further than hee by a new act may appear to have appointed I do not here make any doubt that S. Paul argued very well when hee said 1 Cor. IX 13 14. Know yee not that they which work holy things eat of the holy That they who wait upon the Altar take part with the Altar So also hath God appointed them that bring newes of the Gospel to live of the Gospel But hee that will understand this argument must make up the comparison by completing the correspondence between the bringing of souls to Christ by preaching the Gospel and the sacrificing of living creatures to God by executing the Law This correspondence the Apostle himself hath delared to our hands Rom. XV. 15 16. Because of the grace given mee of God saith hee that I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles exercising the sacred function of preaching the Gospel of God that the oblation of the Gentiles may be acceptable being sanctified by the Holy Ghost And Phil. II. 17. Nay though I be poured forth upon the sacrifice and ministery of your Faith I rejoyce and that joyntly with you all Where it appeareth that by submitting to the Gospel men become a sacrifice to God in as much as they dye to the world and that they who bring them to Christianity are the Priests that offer this sacrifice And by this Priesthood it is that the Apostle challengeth a right of living upon preaching the Gospel as the Priests lived by attending upon the sacrifices of the Law Which if it be true then is the Apostles office that Priesthood under the Gospel which was to remaine by the correspondence thereof with the Law and thereforâ— cannot derive any Title from the Levitical Priesthood which it maketh void As for the Office of Prophets under the Gospel it is plain by S. Pauls Epistles that it pleased God among other miraculous Graces of the Holy Ghost whereby hee evidenced his presence in the Church to stirre up Prophets in those Primitive Churches by whom besides they might be instructed in the more solid understanding of their Christianity as may appear in particular by S. Paul 1 Cor. XIV Which being supposed can any man imagine that the Office of those Prophets and the authority which it importeth can be derived from the Prophets under the Law whose Office expired in Christ His act it must be to give authority to Prophets under the Gospel and since wee have showed that the chief authority which hee left in the Church was left with his Apostles it followeth by consequence which by other Scriptures in another place I have showed to have been true that the Apostles by their Office were the chief Prophets of the Church Though as for the continuance of the gift of Prophesie under the Gospel there is no promise recorded as under the Law there is So neither any precept requiring obedience to their Office as then I have showed there was In fine God by Christ designed to raise up children to Abraham which are the new Israel according to the Spirit Hee hath given the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord that authority over them which may answer the power of the Patriarchs and Elders of his ancient people under Moses Hee hath incorporated into their Office under the Gospel the authority both of Priests and Prophets under the Law which both were to cease with the Law Therefore wee are not to derive any Poweâ— of the Church from the rights of the Priesthood under the Law not to argue that the Church hath no right to that Power which the Priesthood as then was not seised of But whatsoever power was in the Prinees of Tribes and their inferiors in the Elders and Judges of Israel for the civil Government of that people under Moses the same wee must inferre to have been in the Apostles and Disciples of Christ and by consequence in them to whom they may appeare to have committed any part of it for the government of the Church under our Lord Christ Saving the difference which the condition whereupon either people are gathered into one Society importeth Which is in them the possession of the Land of Promise upon the observation of the Law in us the Kingdome of heaven upon the Faith of Christ And therefore in them inferreth temporal Power in disposing of causes and things of this world in these onely the Power of directing in spiritual maters wherein the Church by the Covenant of Grace doth communicate This opinion may seem to some man not to agree with the doctrine of the ancientest Fathers who do many times argue what order ought to be held in the Church from that which the Law provided for the Levitical Priesthood As Clemens Ep. ad Corinthios from the order which the Law had prescribed for the Sacrifices prescribed by it argueth that the like ought to be kept in the Church pag. 53. And S. Cyprian that as Eleazar was consecrated High Priest by Moses before the Congregation of the People so ought Ordinations to be celebrated before the Assembly of the Church Which kinde of argument seems to have no force unlesse wee derive the Offices of the Church from the Levitical Priesthood Together with abundance of passages to the same purpose whereof it shall be enough to have produced these for an example But this kinde of argument is easily stopped by one instance For it is manifest that the like argument of instruction or exhortation to those that claime by and under the Apostles may be drawn from divers passages of the ancient Scriptures wherein the Prophets of the Law are exhorted to do or reproved for neglecting their Office And yet no man can go about to derive the right of their authority from the Prophets Office by the Law of Moses And then it is easily answered that nothing hinders the same reason that appeares in the Ordinances of the Levitical Priesthood to be of evident consequence in the ordering of Gods Church Not because the order of the Church depends upon
And therefore as every Church is a Body by it self and all Churches notwithstanding bound to make one Body by visible communion one with another which Body is the Catholick Church So is this common stock of the Church provided for the maintenance first of that Church whose it is then of the whole Church by defraying the charge of those correspondences whereby the unity thereof is intertained In the place afore-quoted out of my Book of the Right of the Church in a Christian State you shall finde those Scriptures alleged which speak of the Collections of other Churches for the maintenance of the Church of Jerusalem the then Mother Church of all Churches And in this Book afore Chap. X. you have evidence that the correspondence between all Churches by which the communion of all was to be maintained was instituted and set on foot by the Apostles You have therefore evidence that such a stock was requisite even in regard of correspondence between several Churches when you see upon what businesse it was spent Whether this correspondence were exercised in holding of Councils or by dayly intercourse and intelligence the case was alwaies the same as at the Council at Ariminum where the Fathers complained that they were detained against their will as to the great charge of them who were to maintaine their Representatives there And if my memory faile not the British Bishops particularly in Sulpitius Severus that their Churches were not able to maintaine them there at the charge which was requisite For Constantine indeed at the Council of Nicaea had furnished not onely the wagons of the Exchequer to convey them to the place but also the greatest part if not their whole charge during the action But his son intending by duresse to constrain them to decree that which hee intended because hee knew that if they decreed it not his authority would be of no more effect to induce the Church to receive it than the Heathen Emperors had been to induce it to renounce Christianity using his Soveraign Power in commanding his subjects to assemble and continue assembled layed for a further burthen and duresse upon them to continue their at their own charge that is at the charge of their Churches I will conclude with a memorable passage of S. Gregory Nazianzens in Julianum I. where hee tells us that among other designes os the Apostate to extinguish Christianity one was to bring the Lawes of the Church into use among the Gentiles as the means to propagate and maintain their Idolatry which was visibly the means to propagate and maintain Christianity Indeed it is a testimony that concerneth all parts of Church Law and evidences all the parts of Ecclesiastical Power that I have insisted upon But because it mentioneth partly the erecting of Hospitals for the correspondence of Christians I have put it here in the last place where I allege the practice of the Church for the corporation of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hee was ready to set up Auditories in stead of Churches in every City and Presidents of higher and lower States readings and expositions of the doctrines of the Gentiles both which compose mens manners and the more abstruse Also in part the forme of Prayers and censuring of sinners according to their measure Of Catechizing also and Baptizing and other things which manifestly belong to the good order that is among us Besides to found Hospitals to intertain strangers and convents of Virgins and Monasteries and the humanity which wee use to the poore Also beside the rest of our order that of leters of mark which wee give to those that need when they travail from Countrey to Countrey Julian believed not that these Orders came from God because hee believed not Christianity Those that can believe as hee did of these Orders why not of Christianity Those Christians whose purses maintained the charge of them would not have been so forward had they thought themselves left free to themselves without obligation from our Lord by his Apostles And to that which hath been said to make evidence of this Law and other Lawes whereby the Church was made a Corporation by the Apostles I will here desire the Reader to adde all that hee shall finde written by Epiphanius in the end of his work against all Heresies concerning the Rules and customs of that one Church which continueth so only by separating from them Perhaps they who can think the Constitutions and Canons of the Apostles meer fables because the books were not written by them to whom they are intitled will not believe that Epiphanius would have writ the same things had they not been real and visible CHAP. XVII The Power of Excommunication in the Church is not founded in the Law What argument there is of it in the Old Testament The allegorical sense thereof is argumentative It was not necessary that the Christians should incurre persecution for using the Power of the Keyes and not by virtue of the Law I Am now come to the point principally insisted on for all this is premised for a ground to that contradiction which I must frame to that which hath been said against the Power of Excommunicating in the Church To which insisting upon the premises I say That I am so farr from pretending that right to depend upon the Church by virtue of the Law that I insist expresly that there was no such thing introduced by Moses Law or in force under the Law of Nature in the time of the Patriarchs And not onely admit but as for my Interest demand all that for truth which the first book de Synedriis hath proved at large and saved all them that believe it the pains of doing iâ— again That Excommunication came in force in the Synagogue after the Captivity and in the dispersions of the Jewes when they desiring as their duty was to maintaine Gods Law by which they were to be governed and not having the Power of insticting Penalties requisite to maintaine it as not being inabled by their Soveraignes devised a course that might appear reasonable because necessary upon â—upposition of their own Law and yet lesse presuming upon the Soveraigne Power Which was to devest those that should incurr that forfeit of the privilege of a Jew and to banish him the conversation of his native people either in whole or in part as the penalty was to be measured by the offense And truly I count my self with the world obliged to him that hath imployed so much learning to show it and that it will onely become the wilfulness of them who neither understand the Scriptures themselves nor will learn of them that do to imagine an Ecclesiastical Court distinct from the Secular under the Law in which the Priesthood were Judges And to take paines to show themselves uncapable of truth by seeking to maintain that which hee hath showed to be evidently false But this being granted I do not understand what reason can be imagined why it
man mistake mee pretends not any general Rule for the interpretation of Scripture even in those things which concern the Rule of Faith but inferrs a prescription against any thing that can be alleged out of Scripture that if it may appear to be contrary to that which the whole Church hath received and held from the beginning it cannot be the true meaning of that Scripture which is alleged to prove it For the meaning even of those Scriptures which concern the Rule of Faith must be had by the same same means by which I shall come by and by to show that the meaning of all Scriptures whatsoever they concern is to be had and established But the being and constitution of the Society of the Catholick Church from the beginning is of force to prescribe this limitation to the Fansies of all men that take upon them to interpret the Scriptures that they neither admit nor impose upon any man any thing for the true sense of Scripture whereby the substance of Christianity which the Rule of Faith importeth may become questionable So that an evidence of such opposition ought to out-shine and supresse any appearance or supposed evidence of truth in any such sense The Rule of Faith Not to go about to determine in this place what it containes because it is the Master-piece of all the Divines of Christendome to say what is fundamental in Christianity and what is not but to give a grosse description of what men mean when they inquire for it consists partly in things to be believed partly in things to be done Hee that holds so much of Christian truth as may reasonably certifie him of all that is requisite to qualifie a Christian man for remission of sins and life everlasting which are the promises of the Gospel may well be said to hold the whole Rule of Faith in things to be believed Hee that holds so much of Christian truth as may reasonably certifie him of all that is requisie to preserve all Christians with consciences void of sin may be said to hold it in things to be done For the common Rule of Faith importeth not what is necessity for any Christian but for all Christians And that any thing contrary to the salvation of all Christians should be held and professed by all Christians is a grosse contradiction to common sense Whereupon it is no lesse evidently true that the Catholick Church of all ages and places is utterly infallible In as much as it is a grosse contradiction to suppose a number of men to attain salvation who all do hold some thing destructive to the salvation of any one So much difference there is between the whole Church which is the Catholick Church of all times and places and the present Catholick Church respectively to those ages in which the Communion of the whole was not interrupted by any breach but effectuated by actual correspondence For the act of the Catholick Church in this sense which I call the present Church if it be lawfull obligeth all that are of it But it self stands obliged to the Faith of the whole Church as that which the being privilege of a Church resupposeth to beâ— rofessed by it And of this I cannot conceive how any question should remain The difficulty that remains is how it may appear that all this is not a fine nothing how it may reasonably seem to signifie something towards the limitation which I prescribe to the interpretation of those Scriptures which may be alleged in mater concerning the Rule of Faith And the answer is that seeing it hath appeared that the Apostles of our Lord Christ established from the beginning one Catholick Church consisting of all Churches by the will of God and his appointment and that in consideration of that which was made to appear afore that all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians though evidently extant and discernable in the Scriptures are not neverthelesse evidently discernable by all them whose salvation they concern that therefore the unity and Communion of the Catholick Church was provided by God as the depository of his truth the acknowledgment whereof should be necessary to obtain life everlasting So that the effect of this trust deposited by God in the Church to be at least thus much That whatsoever was advanced in any part thereof as belonging to the Rule of Faith being condemned where first it was advanced and in consequence of that condemnation by all other parts of the Church to that effect as to render those that held it uncapable of the Communion of all the whole Church That this I say might be accounted a reasonable mark to discern such doctrine to be destructive to the Rule of Faith And thus were all Heresies marked for such by the Church and upon this ground those marks were receivable not onely before Constantine but so long as it may be visible that nothing hindred this correspondence wherein the actual unity of the Church consisted to operate and have effect For if this be the reason and ground which made these marks reasonable as grounded upon it then hee that supposes this reason either actually interrupted or impeached cannot presume upon the like effect And therefore the justifying of these marks requires the evidencing of this correspondence of the Church and no more And truly I could not but admire to finde it alleged by Crellius the Socinian in his answer to Grotius concerning the satisfaction of Christ where hee argues that no Ecclesiastical Writer ever profest that opinion I say I admired to finde him answer that Pelagius the Heretick maintained the same For sure it is not much more pertinent than if hee should allege that the Jewes professe our Lord Jesus not to be the Messias or that the Gentiles do not worship one true God In as much as though they be further from the faith of true Christians than Pelagius yet an Heretick is no lesse excluded from the Communion of the Church than a Jew or a Gentile And the whole reason for which the testiemonies of Ecclesiastical Writers is receivable to evidence maters concerning the Rule of Faith to which they can give no credit but are by acknowledging the same receivable for Christians is the Communion of the Church which make it evident that what such men professe in the Church is not against the Faith of the Church And this in the second place may be a reasonable presumption or evidence of that which belongeth to the Rule of Faith when a thing is so ordinarily and vulgarly taught by Church Writers that there can be no reasonable presumption made by the doctrine of any of them that the contrary was ever allowed by the Church So then I do not tye my self to this that if any thing be found in the writings of any of those whom wee call commonly Fathers it is therefore not contrary to Christianity or to the Rule of Faith that is either expresly or by consequence For
XXII The Authority of the Fathers is not grounded upon any presumption of their Learning or Holinesse How farr they challenge the credit of Historical truth The pre-eminenee of the Primitive The presumption that is grounded upon their ranks and qualities in the Church Of Arnobius Lactantius Tertullian Origen Clemens and the approbation of posterity THese things being said wee have got ground for a resolution in the dispute concerning the authority of the Fathers in maters questionable concerning Christianity and the interpretation of the Scriptures For truly did the credit of those things which they affirm consist in the reputation of their holinesse or learning whether or no the premises be true the consequence would be lame Hee that could make a question of the godlinesse and of the Christianity of those persons to whom wee owe the maintenance and propagation of Christianity under God by preserving Christs flock from the contagion of Heresies by intertaining the unity of the Church and by laying down their lives for the truth must by consequence question though not that Christianity which hee hath sansied yet that which was delivered by the Apostles Which notwithstanding if the Holy Ghost that was in them to save them by saving the common Christianity hath not given the Church evidence that hee was given them to preserve them from error in understanding the Scriptures wee wrong them and the Holy Ghost in them if wee take the truth of their doctrine upon their credit For though the having of the Holy Ghost presupposeth the profession of Christianity as I have showed yet that importeth no evidence to warrant the truth of all that they might say in defense or interpretation of it And though their learning in that which is proper to Christians that is their skill in the Scriptures be such as these ages that boast so much of learning can never equal because they made it in a maner their whole businesse of study And though some of them as Clemens Tertullian Origen and S. Hiâ—rome that looked about them for further helps to the defense and interpretation of Christianity may well challenge the curiosity of these times for great knowledg Yet because mans wit is alwaies fruitfull in that which it is imployed about and may still be well imployed in clearing the true intent of Christianity and the Scriptures so long as there are contrary opinions and sects which cannot all be true I will not create any prejudice to the learning of this time upon that score which it is evident may and doth imploy more helps of learning than they ever did imploy towards the understanding of the Scriptures Two privileges there are belonging to the Fathers of the Church which no man that writes in these dayes can pretend to how godly how learned soever hee may be The first is that of their age and time creating an infallible trust in point of historical truth concerning the state of Christianity during those ages in which they lived or which they might know This is that which neither Pagans nor Jews nor Mahumetanes can refuse them any more than Christians can refuse to believe them in maters of fact which they relate not as things done in private which themselves with a few more may pretend to have had means to know but which were visible to the world at such time as they writ and wherein had they been otherwise they might have been reproved as imposing upon the world not the belief of that which doth not appear to be true but of that which doth appear to be untrue Neither do I demand that upon this score their credit be admitted any further than that which I have premised will inforce For if I have well concluded that the Church is a Society instituted by our Lord Christ and his Apostles in trust for the maintenance and propagation of Christianity contained in the holy Scriptures which hee deposited with it then is the sense of that time which is nearest the age of the Apostles a legal presumption of the truth of that which it was trusted with And as all Writers that relate things subject to the sense of all men as well as their own have the credit of historical truth and Church writers in maters of fact concerning the Church of their respective ages the state thereof being alwaies visible So those that write under the first ages of the Church though competent authors for the truth of nothing in Christianity for then why should not Christianity be believed upon their credit yet must be admitted as unquestionable witnesses of that Christianity which came hot and tender from the forge of our Lord and his Apostles Nor do I complain that any man refuses them upon this score But when I see how many pretending to search the Scriptures and the truth of things questioned in Christianity never make use of any information they might have from them to argue thereupon the true sense of the Scriptures who if they were to expound any Author of humane learning would count him a mad man that should neglect the records of those Authors that lived nearest the same time and perhaps do themselves imploy the writings of Jewes and Pagans in expounding the very Scriptures I cannot chuse but take it as a mark of prejudice against some truth that men care not to be informed of the primitive Christianity least consequences might be framed against some prejudices of their own which supposing onely the credit of historical truth might prove undeniable And here I must needs mervail at the Cardinal of Perrons demand that the trial of what is to be thought Catholick or universally received in the whole Church of God should proceed chiefly or at least necessarily upon the testimonies of those Writers which lived about the fourth century of years from Christ as that which flourished most for number and learning of Writers For seeing the authority of Church Writers is not grounded upon presumption of their learning And that the credit of historical truth cannot be denied even the single witnesse of those that writ when they were more scarce and lesse knowing at least in Secular studies But what is primitive what accessory is not to be discovered but by the state of those times which were before additions could be made hee that demands to be tryed by the times of three hundred years distance from the original wherein what change may have fallen out not presumption but historical truth must determine I say hee that demands this tryal demands not to be tryed Not that I would deny the Writers of that age and such as follow the credit which their time in the consideration now on foot allowes But that the resolution of what is original and primitive must not come from the testimony thereof but from the comparison of it with the testimony of those ages that went afore The second consideration in which the writings of the Fathers are valuable cometh from that which is now
proved that is from the Society of the Church and the unity thereof from whence it follows that what is founâ—d to be taught in the Church by men authorized by the Communion thereof and qualified to teach and that without contradiction is not contrary to the Rule of Faith but if it be taught with one consent it is part of it Without contradiction I mean here when a man is not charged to transgresse the Faith of the Church in that which hee teacheth much lesse disowned by the Church for teaching it Not when no man is found to hold a contrary opinion which alwaies falls out in things disputable For the Communion of the Church necessarily importeth that a man qualified with authority in it professe nothing contrary to that Faith the profession whereof qualifies all to be of the Church Though other things there be many wherein a man may be allowed not onely to believe but to professe contrary to that which another professes and yet qualified not onely to be of the Church but to bear that authority which the Society thereof constituteth The name therefore of Fathers importeth at least some part of that superiority which the Society of the Church giveth And therefore belongeth not properly to those that are not so qualified though they that are not so qualified may be the authors of such writings as have the lot to remain to posterity But the authority of Fathers which is grounded upon this presumption that persons qualified in the Church teach nothing contrary to the Faith of it because their quality in the Church would become questionable if they should teach that which agrees not with the Faith of the Church This authority I say cannot appear in the writings of private Christians Because the Church is no further chargable by allowing him the Communion of the Church who declareth to believe onely that which indeed contradicts the Rule of Faith then of taking no notice what a private man professes to think out of that ignorance which may beseem a capacity of being better informed Hereupon it is that I think it no exception to the due authority of the Fathers that Arnobius or Laectantius should be utterly disdained in some particulars The one known to have been a Novice in Christianity when hee writ and writing as S. Jerom testifies to declare himself a Christian by trying his stile as being Master of a School of Eloquence in defense thereof against the Gentiles had it seems the ill chance to light upon some writings of the Gnosticks according to Saturninus or Basilides and taking them for Christians because they affected to go under that name translated their monstrous opinions into his work as points of Christianity The other whether a novice or no I cannot say marked neverthelesse by S. Jerome as one more able to refure Gentilisme than to give an account of Christianity and therefore to have been converted to Christianity but not to have learned it what presumption a discreet man can make of Christianity by his Book let every discreet man judg I will not say the like of Justine the Martyr a man who hath deserved farr more of Christianity by renouncing the world and taking upon him the profession and habit of a Philosopher among the Gentiles thereby to gain opportunity of maintaining Christianity on all occasions which the Heathen Philosophers took to maintain the positions of their several sects A resolution truly generous and Christian In the mean time having in him more of a Philosopher than of a Scholar and gathering his knowledg rather from travail and conversation than from reading it is no mervail if hee hath suffered many impostures at least in maters of historical truth which hee that should demand that the Church should answer as allowing his books to be read would be very unreasonable When as bearing no rank in the Church above that of all Christians for any thing I can perceive if hee should have mistaken himself in any thing neerly concerning the substance of Christianity his eminent merits towards the Church might have been of force to have drowned all consideration of them and given his writings passeport to posterity notwithstanding I will not extend this consideration to the writings of Clemens Alexandrinus of Origen and of Tertullian The last whereof that is Tertullian belongs not to this rank having put himself out of the Communion of the Church by making a party against the Church of Carthage upon the pretenses of the Montanists The second that is Origen whatsoever opinions hee had cannot be said either to have held them so resolutely or to have professed them so publickly that those that were nearest him could be thought accessories to them And therefore as his very great merits of the Church otherwise held him in his rank in the Church during his time so his extravagancies cannot impeach that authority which others and hee also in such things as hee agrees with them in do truly purchase by the allowance of the Church The same is to be said of his Master Clemens whose writings as they are not so many so neither his extravagancies so great and considerable But even these eccentrical Writers by being marked for positions particular to them besides the credit of historical truth which in times nearest the Apostles is of great consequence to inform us of the primitive state of Christianity and therefore of incomparable value towards the settling of a right judgment in all things now questionable I say beside that which is common to them with all Writers they get by the exceptions which are made against them the advantage of a Rule of Law in the rest that is to say that setting aside those points in which they are excepted against they are according to the Rule of Faith in things not excepted against against In fine the authority of the whole Church is found to be expresly ingaged in all things that have passed into effect either from the determination of Synods which having been assembled by the free consent thereof have been received by the like free consent whether all or part were present at the Synod or from the act of any particular Church the proceeding and grounds whereof hath been approved of and received into effect by the whole Which in some measure may be said of the writings of particular Doctors In as much as it is manifest that extravagant doctrines may have been published in several parts of the Church which particular Doctors may have imployed their pens to contradict before any Church had imployed any censure to condemn As by Epiphanius in the Heresie of the Origenists it appeareth that Origen was contradicted by Methodius If therefore such extravagances so contradicted be extinguished such writings have continued cherished by the Church it is evidence enough that the Church it self is ingaged in the condemnation of those extravagances which have been suppressed by the means of such writings And all this serves to maintain and
evidence the Society of the Church and the influence of it in those acts whereby Christianity hath been maintained and propagated from our Lord and his Apostles But for the present the question concerning onely the Rule of Faith that which hath been said shall suffice to ground this prescription that whatsoever the Church may appear unanimously to have agreed in and to have allowed no contradiction to it that may and doth as evidently appear to belong to the Rule of Faith as evidently it may and doth appear that the Society of the Church freely acted by it self hath given such consent And therefore this prescription will inferr nothing when it may by any means appear that the consent of the Church and the freedom which is requisite to the validity thereof hath been anticipated or over-swayed by any means intercepting that intercourse and correspondence by the which it appeareth In the mean time the interpretation of the Scriptures is to be confined within the bounds of that which the whole Church from the beginning hath taught when as by the means hitherto demonstrated it may be evidenced in things that become questionable CHAP. XXIII Two instances against the premises besides the objection concerning the beginning of Antichrist under the Apostles The general answer to it The seven Trumpets in the Apocalypse fore-tell the destruction of the Jewes The seven Vials the plagues inflicted upon the Empire for the ten persecutions The correspondence of Deniels Prophesie inferreth the same Neither S. Pauls Propheâ—â—e nor S. Johns concerneth any Christian Neither the opinion of the Chiliasts nor the giving of the Eucharist to Infants new Baptized Catholick BEfore I leave this point I must here take notice of two instances against that which I have said The first is the opinion of the Millenaries which is said to be the general opinion of the primitive Fathers Justine the Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus Irenaeus Tertullian Victorinus the Martyr Lactantius and I know not how many more So that universal antiquity will prescribe nothing in mater of Faith when wee see so general an error of the most ancient corrected by their successors The other in the custom of giving the Eucharist to Infants as soon as they were baptized pretended to be so general that no practice of the Church can conclude any thing to come from the Apostles to him that avoweth this to have been well and duely changed by the Church that is There is besides these a more general objection against the testimony of the Church in any mater of Christianity rising from S. Pauls Prophesie 2 Thess II. 2 7 14. that the mystery of iniquity was then on work till hee that hindred were out of the way not to be revealed Which is pretended to be the corruption of Christianity by such as professed to be of the Church then begun not to be declared till the rise of the Papacy by the fall of the Empire Or as the Socinians will have it till after the death of the Apostles at what time as Hegesippus in Eusebius witnesseth the Church that till then had continued a Virgin was defloured and defiled by mixing with adulterate doctrine This objection I have produced elswhere and repeat it here in the first place to be considered as pretending here to make fuller answer I excepted heretofore thus That unlesse they that make this objection tye themselves to demonstrate wherein that corruption consists which the Apostle sayes was then on working under-hand it will be as free for Socinians to pretend that hee means this corruption to consist in the Faith of the Trinity and the Satisfaction of Christ and Original sin as in any thing peculiar to the Papacy And that with so much the more reason because if wee make the Pope Antichrist by virtue of this Scripture wee must make him so for that which is peculiar to the Papacy whereas the corruption here spoken of concerns the whole Church as well as that of Rome Now I except more strongly that supposing the purpose of S. Paul to concern the corruption of the Church that corruption cannot consist in any thing which by sufficient testimony may appear to have been received in the Church from the beginning That is to say to this bare surmize of S. Pauls meaning I have opposed all the reason that hath been alleged to prove that whatsoever hath been received in the Church from the beginning is either of the Rule of Faith or some custome introduced by the Apostles But because still this is but an exception in bart to the objection not in resolution of the difficulty which groundeth it I will proceed further to show that neither this Prophesie nor the Revelation of S. John is meant of those that professed Christianity either in corrupting it or in persecuting Christians but of the professed enemies thereof who persecuted the profession of it to wit the Princes of the Romane Empire To which purpose having observed that the whole Prophesy of the Revelation from Chap. V. to XX. consisting in the Vision of a Book sealed with seven Seals at opening the seventh whereof seven Angels are seen to blow seven Trumpets at blowing the seventh whereof seven Angels come forth and pour forth seven viols of Gods Judgments upon the earth I now say further that the seven Trumpets signifie the Judgments of God poured forth upon the Jewes in Jewry for refusing and persecuting the Gospel The evidence hereof is first in that of Apoc. VII 4. 8. where there are sealed CXLIVM of every Tribe XII M. to be preserved from the plagues of the seven seals to wit the Christians of whom our Lord had said Mat. XXIV 31. Mar. XIII 20. that for the elects sake those dayes should be shortned For it is evident that this Vision is presented S. John upon occasion of the like which hee had read in Ezekiel IX 4 5 6. in the like case where the Angel is first commanded to mark those that should be saved from the destruction which hee prophesieth And therefore where in the beginning of the Chapter hee seeth four Angels standing at the four corners of the earth who are forbidden to hurt it till the servants of God be marked it is manifest that this earth is not the world but the land of Jewry Again when it is said XI 1 8 13. that the Gentiles shall trample the outer Court of the Temple and that therefore S. John should not measure it as hee is tyed to measure the inner Court and Temple That the carkasses of the two witnesses should lye in the streets of the great City where our Lord was crucified spiritually called Sodom and Egypt That there was a great earthquake which cast down the South part of that City and killed seven thousand hee that would see men pitifully crucifie themselves by racking the Scriptures let him look upon them that ingage themselves not to understand by all this the City of Jerusalem and the Temple there Further what is the
their sufferings under Epiphanes The purpose of these Visions toward the Jews being the same with that of the Apocalypse toward the Christians to comfort them with resolution to adhere to the Law under to great trials the good success whereof the same Prophesie which foretold the Persecutions assureth It is not my businesse here to enter into any farther exposition of the particulars presuming that the reasons which confine the Interpretation being so concluding those that will look into the writings of those that walk within the bounds of Epiphanes his time especially Grotius the latest and ablest will find a more proper sense within those times than any can be imagined otherwise If therefore the Persecutions then related be fulfilled in the sufferings of the Jews under Epiphanes then the Kingdom which there is soretold to be given the Saints and People of God after vengeance executed upon him Dan. VII 18 22 27. XII 2 3. must also of necessity be understood of that Dominion which that Nation attained by freeing themselves from the Dominion of the Macedonians under the Maccabees Now there being such correspondence not onely between the main intent of both Prophesies but also between the particulars of them in very many things which no man can read both with diligence but must observe though it is true that many figures are used in S. Johns Revelations which are found to correspondent purposes in the Visions of others of the Prophets concerning Gods ancient people I conceive no man will be able to reprove the consequence that both the Persecutions which pretended to make the Christians renounce Christ as Antiochus pretended to make the Jews renounce the Law are intended by the fifth Seal and also the coming of Constantine to the Empire whereby the Government of the world came into the hands of Christians by the sixth Seal As well as the Dominion of the Maccabees succeeding the persecution of Epiphanes by the raign of the Saints foretold by Daniel From whence I argue that S. Pauls Prophesie cannot intend any that should professe Christianity with an intent to corrupt it because of the terms which hee useth Hee that exalteth himself against all that is called God or to be worshipped so as to seat himself in the Temple of God showing himself that hee is God Being the same in which Epiphanes is described Dan. XI 36 37. And the King shall do what him list Hee shall exalt himself and magnifie himself against all that is God and shall speak marvelous things against the God of Gods and shall prosper till the wrath be accomplished For the determination is made Neither shall hee regard the God of his Fathers nor the desires of women nor care for any God For hee shall magnifie himself above all For who is it that magnifies himself above all that is called or accounted God and worshipped for God though by his own Predecessors but hee that appoints the Jews whom they shall worship for their own the true God in the Temple But hee that appoints the Christians to whom they shall sacrifice Which as of all other Princes that had the Jews in their power none did but Epiphanes so all the Emperours that raised persecution against the Christians did necessarily do For as it is manifest that both the Macedonian Kings and Roman Emperours were themselves worshipped for Gods by their Gentile Subjects so can none be said to advance himself above all that is called or worshipped for God but those that first forbid the worship of the true God then of false Gods allow or disallow the worship of whomsoever their own fansie directs which is a thing common to Antiochus Epiphanes with the Roman Emperours For the saying of Tertullian is well enough known Apolog. V. cap. Nisihomini deus placuerit deus non erit Spoken in regard of the Power that State used to allow or disallow the Religions and the Gods which they pleased Whereupon hee rests and sayes That such Gods if they have not man to friend must be no Gods And besides the Emperours by assuming the Legal power of Pontifex maximus were invested with a Civil Right of allowing or disallowing whomsoever should pretend to be worshipped for God within the bounds of the Empire Whether then that wee suppose that the Prophesie of S. Paul to the Thessalonians and the Revelations made to S. Iohn do concern Antichrist or not seeing the Scripture no where saith that either the one or the other intendeth to speak of Antichrist And for the present omitting the dispute whether that Antichrist whom S. Iohn in his first Epistle II. 18 19. IV. 1 2 3. admitteth to be appointed to come though other Antichrists were come afore whether I say that Antichrist be such a one as by persecution should seek to constrain Christians to renounce Chirst or such a one as by professing Christianity should induce Christians to admit the corruption of Christianity and thereby to forfeit the benefit of it I say omitting to dispute this for the present out of the premises I shall easily inferr that there is neither in S. Pauls Prophesie nor in S. Iohns Revelations any thing to signifie that they are intended of any that should bring in the corruption of Christianity by making profession of it Whereupon it followeth that though wee suppose the mystery of iniquity which S. Paul foretelleth to be the same that S. Iohn saw as truly I do suppose and both to begin with the preaching of Christianity yet from thence no exception can be made to the interpretation of the Scriptures and the determination of things questioned in Christianity from that which may appear to have been received by the whole Church from the beginning Onely I will adde that it is a very barbarous wrong that is done the Church whether by the Socinians or by whosoever they are that allege the testimony of Hegesippus in Eusebius acknowledging That the Church which during the time of the Apostles was a pure Virgin after their departure began to be adulterate with the contagion of pestilent doctrines to argue that this being the mystery of iniquity which S. Paul prophesieth is also the corruption of the Papacy which beginning so early leaves nothing unsuspected that can be presumed upon the consent of the Church For it is manifest that Hegesippus speaks of the abominable doctrines of the Gnosticks which as it is manifest by the writings of the Apostles that they were on foot during their time so may wee well believe Hegesippus that upon their death they spread so sarr that in comparison of what succeeded the Church of the Apostles may well be counted a pure Virgin It is also manifest from the premises that the Gnosticks could finde in their hearts to counterfeit themselves as well Christians as Jewes or Gentiles to secure themselves from punishment and winn followers But it is also manifest that as they were discovered by the Church so they were put out of the Church and forced
to range themselves among their own respective Sectaries So that to impute the corruption of their damnable inventions to the Church because they mixed themselves with the Church till they were discovered is the same justice that the Gentiles did the Christians in charging them with those horrible incests and vilainies which the Gnosticks only were guilty of because they so farr as it was for their turn affected to shelter themselves under the profession of Christians I shall have occasion in another place to inquire further concerning the riâ—ng of the Gnosticks during the time of the Apostles In the mean time because I see those who know not how to yield to the truth when it is showed them stand in the justification of the wrong that is done the Church by expounding of the corruptions of the Papacy that which Hegesippus saith of the Gnosticks it shall be enough to give you his own words in Eusebius Eccles Hist III. 32. R. Steph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hegesippus saith That till that time the Church remained a pure Virgin and undefloured Those that indeavored to adulterate the true Rule of that preaching which saveth the Rule of Faith which I said so much of afore lurking in obscure holes of darknesse till then if any such there were But the sacred quire of the Apostles having found the several ends of their lives And that generation of men being past that were vouchsafed to hear the wisedom of God with their own ears then did the confirmation of atheistical error receive beginning through the deceit of false Teachers Who now none of the Apostles remaining undertook bare-headed for the future to preach that Knowledge which is falsly so called in opposition to the preaching of the truth For here you have in expresse terms that Knowledge falsly so called from whence the Church after S. Paul calls all those Hereticks Gnosticks as pretending to have got it by such means as our Lord had not discovered to his Apostles You have also the difference between their lurking under the Apostles and their open preaching after their death in terms so expresse that hee must have a good will to it whoever oversees I shall be obliged to referr my self to these same words in another place Now to that which is objected concerning the opinion of the Millennaries I answer first that it cannot be thought ever to have been Catholick For Iustine the Martyr who first mentions it in his dispute with Trypho the Jew not many years after the Apostles expresly testifies that it was the opinion of the most orthodox Christians to wit in his judgment but withall that it was contradicted by others who were neverthelesse Christians even in his account that is of the Communion of the Church Which as it is a peremptory exception against the Universality so is it a reasonable presumption against the Originality of it Seeing that in so few years between him and the Apostles those that believed not all which they had delivered for the common Christianity can in no probability be thought to have injoyed the Communion of the Church And truely had it not been contradicted elsewhere that excellent Prelate Denys of Alexandriae that suppressed it in Egypt about CXXX after as you may see in Eusebius Eccles Hist VII 23 24 25. would have found a hard text of it For the intelligence and correspondence then in use between all parts of the Church would easily have confirmed those of his charge even against him The reason of atchieving the work was because the rest of Christendom insisted not on it Neither is the number or repute of Writers extant the reason to conclude any thing Catholick if the premises be true But the evidence which may be made sometimes from the disputes of able Writers but much more from the acts which past in the Church according or against that which they dispute that their doctrine was received or not received by the Church in whole or in part as necessary or not And therefore secondly I say that the mater of this position concerneth not the Rule of Faith commonly obliging all Christians but the interpretation of a true Prophesie indeed but the true understanding whereof whoso would make necessary to the salvation of all Christians should tye all Christians upon their salvation to understand the Apocalypse which who does To justifie this opinion it hath been showed that the Jewes have this opinion that their Christ shall raign M years when hee comes which seeing they cannot be supposed to have received from the Christians it makes a just presumption that they had it even in S. Iohns time The Jewes have a Tradition which they attribute to the School of one R. Elias mentioned in many of their writings by name in Baal haturim upon Gen. II. and which is also the conceit not onely of Lactantius VII 14. Tychonius the Donatist in his V Rule for expounding the Scripture and the Epistle anciently intitled to S. Barnabas and lately published but also as you may see in the late Lord Primates Latine Discourse of Cainan That as there passed II M years before the Law under the Law counting from Abraham II M years so the dayes of Christ should be II M years and after that the everlasting Sabbath But whether or no the Jews of S. Iohns time could expect this thousand years for the complement of the Sabbath or work of VIIM years which this Tradition promised Whether or no Christians may expect the end of the World at the end of VII M years the Sabbath that shall succeed being eternity according to that of S. Peter and of the Psalm that M years are as a day in Gods sight let them that have nothing else to do inquire Certainly it will not concern the meaning of the Apocalypse unlesse it could be said that the M years there fore-told are to begin after II M years of our Lord are finished Indeed this wee see that the Jewes whom King Alphonsus imployed to make the accounts of the Celestial motions in appointing the motion of the fixed Starrs from West to East to come rome round in XLIXM years the irregularity of that motion to come round in VII M years and that not being obliged to it by any observations made the like account of Sabbaths of thousands of years and VII thousands as the Law doth of dayes or years or Sabbaths of years But if these Jewes be pitifully put to it when to excuse their not believing in Christ who came when the World was about IVM years old according to their own Tradition they are fain to say that it hath failed a small mater of almost XVII C years for their sins Among the Christians what can be said more but that it pleased God to promise them M years of prosperity and raign which the Jews forsaking Christ promised themselves to no purpose Seing the beginning of them cannot be tyed to the end of VIM years from the beginning of the
to provide for themselves such an order in the communion of Christianity as may stand with the Scriptures and the unity of the Church though without consent of the whole Church of the present time For it is evident that this disorder may be so great in the Laws of the Church as to make them uselesse and unserviceable not onely to the profession of the true faith or to the service of God for which the communion of the Church standeth but even to the unity of the Church it selfe which is the prime precept that all which the Church does ought to aim at It is evident also that this is the true cause which the reformation hath to dispute against the Church of Rome But this I say that though particular Churches must necessarily have their particular Lawes which are the differences which severall Churches observe in the exercise of the same Ordinances yet may not any particular Church make it selfe any Law which may tend to separation by disclaiming the unity of the whole Church or either expresly or by due construction denying the same This is done by abrogating Apostolicall Traditions as inconsistent with Christianity for the mater of them not because the reason and ground of them is ceased For they who disclaim the Authority of the Apostles cannot acknowledge the unity of the Church And they who make Apostolical Ordinances inconsistent with Christianity do necessarily disclaim the Authority of the Apostles The same is done by abrogating the constitution of the Church done by virtue of the Authority left it by the Apostles For to disclaim the Church in this Authority is to disclaim the Apostles that left it And though this Authority may be so abused that particular Churches that is to say parts of the whole Church may thereby be authorized yea obliged to provide for themselves without the consent of the whole yet not against the authority of the whole that is to say of the Apostles from whence it proceedeth Nor is every abuse thereof a cause sufficient to warrant the scandals that such proceedings necessarily produce And this shall be enough for me to have said in this place Having I suppose established those principles by the right application whereof he that can make it may judge what is the true plea whereby that separation which the reformation hath occasioned must either be justified or be thought unjustifiable From that which hath been said the difference between Heresie and Schisme and the true nature of both crimes in opposition to Christianity may and ought to be inferred in this place because it ought not to be forgotten which ought daily to be lamented that at the beginning of the troubles it was questioned in the Lords House whether there were any such crimes or not or whether they were onely bug-bares to scare Children with and that hereupon every man sees England over-run with both The word Heresie signifies nothing but Choice and therefore the signification of it is sometimes indifferent importing no more then a way of professing and living which a man voluntarily chuseth as S. Paul useth it when he saith That he lived according to the most exact Heresie of the Iewes Religion a Pharisee Act. XXVI 5. For it is known that besides the necessary profession of the Jews Law there were three sects which no man by being a Jew was obliged to but by his own free choice the Pharisees the Sadduces and the Essenes which being all maintained by the Law as it was then used the common name of them cannot signifie any crime among them to whom S. Paul then spoke whatsoever we believe of the Sadduces And thus it sounds among them who use it to signifie the Sects of the Grecian Philosophers allowed by those who imbraced them not As in the Title or Lucians discourse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But because it is too ordinary for men of their own choice to depart from the rule to which they are or ought to stand obliged thereupon the word is most part used to signifie the free choice of a rule of living contrary to that rule which they stood obliged to before In which sense Adam is called by Tertullian the first Heretick as he that first departed from the will of God to live according to his own Supposing now that Christianity obliges both to the rule of faith and to the society of the Church by virtue of that rule because the beliefe of the Catholick Church is part of it as hath been declared afore it is manifest that whosoever dis-believes any part of that rule the beliefe whereof is the condition upon which a man becomes a Christian and thereby forfeits his interest in those promises which God hath made to Christians doth or may either lead others or follow in living according to that belief which he chooseth whether professing it as a Christian ought to profess his Christianity or not And in this sense it seems to be used by S. Paul when he sayes Titus III. 10. 11. A man that is an Heretick after the first and second admonition avoid Knowing that such a one is turned aside and sinneth being condemned by himselfe For when he speaks of admonishing them he signifies that he speaks not of such as had actually departed from the communion of the Church but sheltred themselves under the common profession of Christians doing every thing as they did that by such means they might inveigle such as suspected nothing to admit their infusions which I showed before to have been the fashion of the Gnosticks whose Doctrines the Apostle 1 Pet. II. 1. calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pestilent Heresies And whom S. Paul must needs speak of in this place because there were no other on foot so as to be mentioned by their writings Such a one then the Apostle saith is condemned by himselfe in the same sense as the Councills and Chuch-Writers say of one in the same case in seipsum sententiam dixit He hath given sentence against himselfe because by refusing the second admonition he hath declared himselfe obstinate in that which the common Christianity maketh inconsistent with the communion of the Church And this more proper to the circumstance of this text then S. Jeroms interpretation of those that condemn themselves to be put out of the Church by voluntarily leaving the communion of it though that also is not farre from truth concerning them who are properly signified by the generall name of Hereticks For it is very evident that when S. Paul saith 1 Cor. XI 17. There must be Heresies among you his meaning is onely of such factions as tended to Schism whereof he admonisheth them 1 Cor. I. 10. That there be Schisms among them Now it is manifest how much difference there is between him who holdeth something contrary to the faith and yet departeth not from the communion of the Church and him that departeth from the commnion of the Church though holding nothing contrary to the substance of
for God which are sacrificing burning incense pouring out drink-offerings and adoration But others there are by doing which a man cannot be concluded to worship any thing but God till he do it in that way and fashion as is one by those that professe to worship it for God If it be said that these are Jews which allow Traditions but that there is another sort of Jews called Scripturaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which admit nothing but the leter of the Scriptures I answer that those also who admit onely the Text of Scripture and pretend to determine all controversies about the Law by consequences to be drawn from it could never come to agreement among themselves what consequence should take place and what not did they not acknowledge some publick persons whose determinations the whole body of them submitteth to the consequences which they derive their observations by from the leter of the Law being so ridiculously insufficient that they could not satisfie the meanest understandings otherwise as may appear by those which the Talmudists alledge for their constitutions Which being no lesse ridiculous then the traditions which they alledge incredible would be both to no effect did not the publick power of the Nation which while the Law stood was of force by it but now it is void ought to cease put all pretenses beyond dispute And for that which is alledged out of the Apocalyps which in sound of words seems to import some such thing concerning the vvhole book of the Scriptures as these Texts of Moses import concerning the Lavv I shall desire the understanding Reader but to consider that protestation vvhereby Irenaeus conjures all that should copy his Book to collate it vvell vvith the Original that they might be sure neither to adde to it nor take from it as Eusebius relateth out of his Book de Ogdoade against the Valentinians Eccl. First V. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I adjure thee that shalt copy out this Book by our Lord â—esus Christ and by his glorious presence when he comes to judge the quick and dead to collate what thou hast transcribed and correct it by this Copy whence thou hast transcribed it with care and likewise to transcribe this adsuration and puâ—â—it in the Copy Setting aside this adjuration what is the difference between S. Iohns charge and the matter of it And finding the words of S. Iohn to import neither more nor lesse to tell me what he thinks of this argument S. Iohn protesteth in the conclusion of his Revelation that who so shall adde any thing to the true and authentick Copy of these Prophesies to him shall be added the plagues written it who so taketh from it from him shall be taken his share in the Book of life and the holy City and the good things written in that Book Therefore all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are contained in the Scriptures clearly to all understandings But strain the consequence of this Text beyond the words of it which concern onely the words of the prophesie of this Book that is the Apocalyps if you please and take it for a seal to the whole Bible forbidding to take any thing from or to adde any thing to it for some of the Ancients have so argued from it shall he that addeth the true sense to or taketh false glosses from the Bible by force of that evidence which the Tradition of the Church createth be thought therefore to adde to the Word of God or to take from it Then did God provide that his own Law should be violated by his own Law when having forbidden to adde or to take from Moses Law he provided a power to limit or to extend both the sense and practise of it and that under pain of death to all that refractarily should resist it Now I demand of them that shall alledge S. Pauls Anathema against him that should preach any other Gospel then what he had preached to the Galatians against the position that I maintain whether he do believe that the Galatians had then the New Testament consisting of the four Gospels and other Apostolicall Scriptures or whether he can maintain that they had any part of it For if this cannot as is evident that it cannot be affirmed then of necessity S. Paul speaks of the Gospel not as we have it written in the Books of the New Testament but as they had received it from the preaching of S. Paul by word of mouth which being common to all Christians unlesse we question whether all the Apostles preached the same Gospell cannot be thought to destroy either the being of the Catholick Church or the saith which it supposeth or the power wherein it consisteth and the Authority of those acts which have voluntarily proceeded from it As for the Beraeans that examined even the doctrine of S. Paul by the Scriptures is it a wonder that they should not take S. Paul for an Apostle of Jesus Christ upon his own word but should demand of him to show by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ that so they might be induced to believe him sent to preach the Gospel of Christ Therefore when they were become Christians we must believe that they understood themselves and S. Paul better then to call his doctrine under examinarion or to dispute with him about the meaning of the Scriptures which he should alledge which our illuminati which take this for an argument must consequently do because they value not in S. Paul the commission of an Apostle but the presumption they have that the Holy Ghost moved him to write the Scriptures which he hath left us though they have nothing to alledge for it but the general commission of an Apostle To the words of the Evangelist Ioh. XX. 30. 31. I answer that he speaks onely of his own Gospel And that the things written in that Gospel are sufficient to induce a man to believe that believing he may have life But that is not sufficient to inferre that therefore all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are clearly expressed either in S. Iohns Gospel or in the whole Scripture because he that is induced by the things there written to belive the truth of Christianity may seek further instruction in the substance thereof that he may attain unto life by imbracing the same So S. Iohn saith not that a man hath life by believing what is there but what by knowing it he cometh to believe As for those words of S. Paul 1 Tim. III. 16. 17. I confidently believe that S. Paul speaketh onely of the Books of the Old Testament then before the writings of the Apostles were gathered into that body which now is the New Testament known by the name of the Scriptures Being well assured that no evidence can be made to the contrary because of those alone it could be demanded that they should bear witnesse to that which the Apostles preached and taught There being no
God in Spirit and truth which the Gospel requireth is so plentifully preached in all those writings which wee call Apocrypha Whereas in our Saviors and his Apostles time and much more afterwards they promised themselves the kingdome of heaven upon the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees That is upon the outward and carnal observation of Moses Law and preciseness in all those little niceties which their Masters had fensed it with For it is no mervail that they who under persecution promised themselves a part in the resurrection of the righteous cleaving to God and his Law should finde themselves tyed to that obedience in spirit and truth which God who is a Spirit sees and allows But lesse mervail it is that having attained the carnal promises of the Law in the possession of the Land of Promise they should fall away from the like zeal and yet promise themselves the world to come upon that form of godliness which they observed being destitute of the force and power of it As an argument that this consideration is well grounded and true I will here adde the authority and practice of the primitive Church prescribing these books to be read by the Catechumeni or those that professed to believe the truth of Christianity and offered themselves to be instructed in the mater of it in order to Baptism and being made Christians For seeing these might be as well Jews as Gentiles this signifies that the doctrine of them was held by the Church a fit instruction towards Christianity even for those that were already acquainted with the doctrine of the Prophets S. Athanasius then in Synopsi testifieth that these books were read to the Catechumeni To the same purpose it is read in the Constitutions of the Apostles though the place is not at hand at present And that which the last Canon of the Apostles prescribes that besides the Canonical Scriptures the book of Ecclesiasticus be read by the youth seems to tend to the same purpose To the same purpose Dionysius de div Nom. cap. IV. calls the Book of Wisedom an Introduction to the divine Oracles But let no man think to inferr that the Apostles took these Books for Scripture inspired by God because I grant that they borrowed from them in their writings Origen hath met with this objection Prol. in Cant. where hee observeth That the Apostles have borrowed some things out of Apocryphal Scriptures as S. Jude out of the books of Enoch and the departure of Moses and yet addes that wee are not to give way to the reading of them because wee must not transgresse the bounds which our Fathers have fixed Where you see hee distinguisheth those books which the Church did not allow to be read under the name of Apocrypha from those which it did allow to be read and are therefore more properly called Ecclesiastical Scriptures which name hath particularly stuck by way of excellence upon the Wisedom of the son of Sirach though I contend not about names when wee call them Apocrypha because I see that S. Jerome hath sometimes done it And if S. Paul have alleged Aratus Menander and Epimenides heathen Poets hee did not thereby intend to allow the authors but the mater which hee allegeth If these things be so I shall not desire to abridg any mans liberty from arguing against the mater of these Books to prove them not inspired by God because not agreeing with those which wee know and agree to have been inspired by God But I shall warn them that take upon them thus to argue first to look about them that they bring not the unquestionable parts of Scripture into an undue suspicion for agreeing in something for which they have conceived a prejudice that these Books are not to be received The design of Judith and her proceeding in the execution of it is charged not to agree with Christianity neither is it my purpose here to maintain that it doth But I am more than afraid that those who object this do not know how to distinguish it from the fact of Jaell the wife of Heber the Kenite in the book of Judges which the Spirit of God in Deborah the Prophetesse so highly extolleth The like is to be said of the like passages questioned in the book of Tobit and the Maccabees and namely the fact of Razias killing himself least hee should fall into the hands of persecutors which seemeth to be related with much approbation 2 Mac. XIV 41-46 For to distinguish this fact from Samsons it will not serve the turn to say that Samson did it by inspiration of Gods Spirit supposing afore that it was contrary to Gods declared Law to do it The difficulty being greater in saying that the declared Law of God is violated by the motion of Gods Spirit when as the Spirit of God is not granted to any man but upon supposition of acknowledging Gods declared Law For howsoever Saul or Caiaphas or Balaam may be moved by the Spirit of God to speak such things as by the Scriptures inspired by God wee learn that they did speak Yet that God should imploy upon his own Commission as the Judges of whom it is said that the Spirit of God came upon them were manifestly imployed by God whom hee favored not is a thing which cannot agree with the presumption which all Christians have of the salvation of the Fathers As for the passage of Eccles XLVI 23. which seems to say that it was the soul of Samuel the Prophet and not an evil Spirit assuming his habit that foretold the death of Saul I do not understand why all this may not be said according to appearance not according to truth For it will still make for the honor of Samuel that the King whatsoever opinion hee had of this means of fore-knowledg should desire to see Samuel as him whom in his life time hee found so unquestionable But if it be said that this cannot satisfie the leter of the Scripture yet can it not be said that as Saul a wicked man did believe that hee might see Samuel so a good man at that time might not have the same Being then no part of the truth which true piety obliged all men to acknowledg In the book of Tobit there are several things besides questionable But they that imagine conjuring in the liver of a fish to drive away an unclean Spirit do not consider those exorcisms whereby it is evident both by the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles besides divers of the most ancient Fathers of the Church that the Jews both in our Lords times and after did cast out unclean Spirits For what force could they have but from the appointment of God from whom at first they were delivered for a testimony of his residence among his people Which makes me stick to condemn that relation of the Jews in the Talmud extant also in Suidas that there were admirable remedies delivered by Solomon which hee caused to be writ upon
to be in regard of the world to come what would he have Christians to be but Libertines and Rebels True it is God imposeth it not as upon his subjects but tendreth it as to his rebels for the condition upon which they may become his subjects instead of his rebels And that is a just reason why it is called a Covenant rather than a Law And that reason justly reproves the Leviathans imagination that it can oblige neither more nor less than the Law of Nature For being positive as tendred by the meer will of God and upon what terms he pleased as the Precepts thereof which are Gods Laws to his Church and the institution of the Church it selfe is meerly positive there is no reason at all to presume that the moral Precepts which are in force under it are bounded by the Law of Nature Though whether it be so or not I undertake not here to determine But we know what S. Paul saith Rom. III. 27. Where is boasting It is shut out By what Law Not by the Law of works but by the Law of Faith That is by the Gospel which requireth that Faith of which I am inquiring wherein it consists for the condition of obtaining the promises which it tendreth And S. James 11. 8. 12. If ye fulfill the Royall Law which saith Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self ye do well And So speak ye and so do ye as being to be judged by the Law of Libertie For the liberty of being Gods subjects and under Gods royall Law the Gospel giveth Neither is S. Paul otherwise to be understood when he saith Rom. VIII 2. The Law of the Spirit of Life which is in Christ Jesus hath freed me from the Law of sin and of death The imbracing of the Gospel being the Law that is the condition upon which we become partakers of the Holy Ghost free from sin and from death And truly I cannot but pity the blindness of error so oft as I remember that I have heard Antinomians alledge the words of the Prophet Jer. XXXI 31 -34. quoted by the Apostle to show the difference between the first and second Covenant Heb. VIII 8 -11. Behold the dayes come saith the Lord that I will settle with the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new Covenant not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers when I tooke them by the hand and brought them out of the Land of Aegypt for they abode not in my Covenant and I neglested them saith the Lord For this is the Covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those dayes saith the Lord Putting my Laws into their mind I will also write them upon their hearts and I will be to them for their God and tâ—ey to me for my people Neither shall they teach every man his neighbour and every man his Brother saying Know the Lord For they shall all know me from the least of them to the greatest I say I cannot but pity them that upon these words ground themselves that the Covenant of Grace is a meer free promise not onely freely made for so I say it is free for what but Gods goodness moved him to tender it but freely without condition contracted for at their hands For cannot God by his Prophet foretell the effect of the Covenant of Grace but he must be presumed to set down the terms of it And if he express them not there is he the less free to demand them when he tenders them Especially the Covenant it self being to remain a secret till Gods time to reveal it I say then that this Prophesie hath taken full effect in the lives of those who submitting themselves to the terms of Christianity have received of God the gift of the Holy Ghost to understand their profession that they might live according to it But that this gift of the Holy Ghost that is to say the habituall assistance thereof neither was due nor bestowed but upon supposition of Chnstianity professed by baptisme which God by our Lord Christ hath revealed to be the condition which he requireth of them that will injoy the same CHAP. IV. The consent of the whole Church evidenced by the custome of chatechising By the opinion thereof concerning the salvation of those that delayed their Baptism By the rites and Ceremonies of Baptism Why no penance for sins before but after Baptism The doctrine of the Church of England evident in this case BUT I am now come to the argument that is to be drawn from the practise of the universall Church to my purpose And truly he that shall consider for what reason the Apostles should require those whom they had converted to be baptized will find himselfe intangled in rendring it unless he settle the ground of it upon the obligation of professing true Christianity And the effect of it in admitting to the unity of the Church which may require the performance and maintain the exercise of it And the consequence thereof they that are or shall be imployed by the Church to preach to unbelievers will find to be such that either they must insist upon the terms which I hold with them or they shall make them but aequivocall Christians That is such as may wear the Cross of Christ to man for a cognizance but not in the obligation of their hearts to God rather to suffer death than either to profess or act against that which he hath taught The next point in the visible practice of the Catholick Church is the custome of catechizing The circumstances whereof for time and manner though no man can mantain to have been the same in all Churches yet it may be argued to have been generally a time of triall for them that had been wonne to believe the truth of Christianity how they were likely to apply themselves to live like Christians and what assurance or presumption the Church might conceive that they would not betray the profession thereof And therfore I appeal to the common sense of all men whether they that exercised this course did not admit men to Christianity and baptism upon the condition of professing and undertaking so to do Besides those things which I alledged in the first Book in the Constitutions of the Apostles in the most ancient Canons of the Church and generally in all Church writers we read of Missa Catechumenorum and Missa fidelium In English the dismission of Scholars and the dismission of Believers Because during the Psalms during the reading of the Scriptures expounding the same reason was that learners should be present as well for their instruction in Christianity as for discharge of their â—uty in the praises of God and prayers to God Though the same prayers were not to be offered to God for Learners as for believers but they were to be dismissed with peculiar prayers of the Church for their particular estate such as yet are extant in the ancient Offices of the
them qualified for Gods promises as fitly as men overtaken in sin can be And is not this that which Baptism supposeth when S. Peter saith Acts II. 38. Repent and be baptixed every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto remissin of sins The Baptism of John indeed was the Baptism of Repentance unto remission of sins Mat III. 11. Mark I. 4. Luke III. 3. But our Saviours theame as well as John Baptists when they began to preach was Repent and believe the Gospel Or Repent for the Kingdome of Heaven is at hand Mark I. 15. Mat. III. 2. IV. 17. Therefore the Baptism of Christ as well as the Baptism of John presupposeth repentance only the promise of the Holy Ghost is proper to the Baptism of Christ because that remission of sins which Johns Baptism gave presupposed not the Covenant of Grace inacted and published And therefore it is no marvell that the Baptism of John is called The Baptism of water when our Lord saith Acts I. 5. John indeed baptized with water but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost before many dayes For it will not follow any more that therefore the Baptism of water is not Christs Baptism then it will follow the Baptism of John was not the Baptism of repentance to remission of sinnes because Christs Baptism was so And because it had the promise of the Holy Ghost which Johns had not It is then to be considered that the repentance of him that hath been qualified for the Gospel promises may be only conversion from some particular sin supposing one sin of that weight as to void that title But the repentance of him that is wholly enemy to God such as the Gospel declareth Jews and Gentiles to be as you find by S. Paul in the beginning of his Epistle to the Romans necessarily signifieth conversion from all sin to all righteousnesse The repentance therefore of him who finding himselfe overtaken in sin hath recourse to Christianity for the cure of it being necessarily a motion from all sin the term wherein it resteth being Christianity is necessarily a resolution of all righteousnesse for the future Which is all that my position demandeth only this that whereas the profession of this resolution is also required therefore it be not thought sufficient to professe for Christianity that which every man that readeth and believeth the Scriptures may take to be Christianity but that which the Church being trusted with the maintenance of that Rule the profession whereof is required to salvation by the Gospel hath alwayes required to be professed of them who are baptized into the Church And that the condition without this particular is not complete may further appear by assuming for granted that which hath here been proved by the premises wherein I have demonstrated that the first Covenant which God by Moses made with the Children of Israel was and was intended by God to be the figure of the second Covenant which by our Lord Christ he hath established for all that will embrace it by undertaking Christianity The correspondence between them consisting in this That as God by the first tendered them the happinesse of the Land of Promise upon condition of governing themselves according to the Law which he gave them by Moses So by the second he tenders everlasting happinesse in the world to come to all those that shall undertake to professe the faith of Christ and live according to that which he hath taught Which being no more questionable then it can be questioned by those who professe themselves Christians whether or no the New Testament was intended and designed by the Old Whether Moses writ of Christ or not Whether Judaisme was to make way or to give place to Christianity or not And seeing it can no more be questioned whether or no the Jews were to take upon them the Law of God as their King for the condition upon which they were to expect the Land of Promise It is plaine there wants nothing that can be required duly to inferre that the condition the undertaking whereof intitles Christians to life everlasting is the profession of Christianity And the performance thereof that which is rewarded by the performance of all the promises which the Gospel tenders as the performance of the Law was that which secured the Israelites in the possession of the Land of Promise against their enemies round about Now we know that when the Covenant of God with Abraham for the Land of Promise came to be limited as to the condition required by God to the law of Moses that Circumcision which God had required of all Abrahams seed became a condition limiting the same to Israraelites the want whereof at eight dayes old was a forfeiture of that promise For The waters of the Red Sea which saved them and drowned the Aegyptians the Cloud that overshadowed them the Manna which they eate and the Waters of the Rock which they drank though according to S. Paul Sacraments answerable to the Sacraments of the Church were so but for the time of their travel through the Wildernesse If therefore by virtue of these the Israelites were intitled to the Land of Promise which of Circumcision is evident then must the Sacrament of Baptisme be necessarily requisite to the right of a Christian in the heavenly Inheritance This is the first reason drawn from that which seemes most evident in Christianity and that which I have been able to inferre and to premise from the same But I will adde another reason though it seems to be of the same nature with these that goe afore which comes from the necessity of Baptisme How much soever the licentiousnesse of this time may have debauched this wretched people from the Christianity which they were dedicated to by the Church of England no pretense of Socinians or Antinomians hath yet prevailed to make them believe that it is not necessary for men to be Christned that intend to be Christians There hath been indeed among the fruits of this blessed reformation a Pamphlet seen under the title of The doctrine of Baptismes the intent whereof is by a studied discourse to prove that it was never the intent of our Lord and his Apostles that the Baptisme of water should be used to make men Christians with Being a legal rite used by John the Baptist to continue so long as the use of Moses law was tolerated after the publishing of the Gospel but to cease therewithall when the Baptisme of the Spirit which is the Baptisme of Christ had succeeded the same This Pamphlet attributed to the Master of a Colledge in one of the Universities How that University will wash their hands of acknowledging as master of a Coledge one who cannot passe for a Christian among Christians supposing him the Author of this Book is not for this place to enquire This is visible that this opinion proceeds upon the common presumption of Antinomians Enthusiasts Quakers and the like that they have the
holy Ghost though they presuppose not in themselves the profession of that true Christianity which the Catholike Church teacheth and whether baptized or not Whether supposing themselves praedestinate to life from everlasting upon the dictate of the same Spirit or justified by that faith which consisteth in revealing to them their praedestination from everlasting Alwayes supposing they have the Spirit in consideration of the merits and satisfaction of Christ without supposing the truth of that Christianity which they professe as a condition required by God in them whom he gives his Spirit But the opinion of the Socinians having in detestation this unchristian as well as unreasonable Principle acknowledgeth the gift of the holy Ghost to be granted by God to those who believing our Lord Jesus to be the Christ resolve to live according to all that he hath taught but denieth any consideration of the merits and satisfaction of Christ either in his sending the Gospel or in his giving the holy Ghost to enable a man to perform that which it requireth Onely acknowledging the free grace of God in sending those terms of reconcilement which the Gospel importeth and the free choice of man in accepting or refusing the same But upon the accepting or refusing of them concluding the promises of the Gospel to be necessarily due And therefore presuming that it is altogether unreasonable to make them still to depend upon an outward ceremony of Baptisme by water the consideration upon which they are tendered being already performed And therefore construing the proceeding of the Apostles and the Scriptures wherein they are mentioned upon such presumptions as these they conclude the reason and intent of the Baptisme which they gave according to the Commission of our Lord to be particular to the condition of those who being Jews or Gentiles before were thereby to acknowledge their uncleannesse in that estate and to professe a contrary course for the future So that the reason ceasing why they did Baptize the obligation also of their Baptisme must necessarily cease But in this great distance between the grounds upon which these extream opinions inferre the indifference of Baptisme it is easie to observe something common to both Namely that neither of them acknowledgeth any Catholike Church or any presumption of the visible unity thereof limiting that part of the Doctrine taught by the Scriptures which it is necessary to the salvation of all Christians that they professe as received from hand to hand by the Churches of the Apostles founding to be exacted of them whom they Baptize into themselves For this being set aside why should not Enthusiasts perswade themselves that they have the Spirit of God and a title to all the promises of the Gospel depending upon it by Christ if the Socinians can perswade themselves that they may have it by the meer act of their free will accepting the tender of the Gospel by believing that our Lord is the Christ and resolving to live as he hath taught without any consideration of his merits and sufferings Both being perswaded that for their salvation they are to make what they can of the Scriptures without any regard to the Church for securing the intent and meaning of it What shall hinder them indeed supposing the way plained to them both by admitting the necessity of Baptisme to be such that all the effects and consequences thereof may be thought to be had and obtained before and without it Certainly the waving of those grounds upon which the necessity of Baptisme may appear to be consistent with the undoubted efficacy of that Christianity which the heart onely feeleth is the breach that hath made a gap for these Heresies to enter into Gods Church For if no man can be thought to have right to be baptized that hath not true and living Faith which true and living faith alone qualifies any man for Remission of sins and salvation whether it consist in believing that our Lord Jesus is the Christ because he who believes that is obliged to live as he teacheth the Scriptures according to the Socinians Or in believing that we are praedestinate to life in regard of our Lord Christ dying for us according to the Enthusiasts what remaineth for Baptisme to procure that is not assured already before a man be Baptized And therefore I conceive I demand nothing but reason For all the gaine that I demand from all this is no more but that it be freely acknowledged that justification by faith alone and that faith which alone justifieth be not so understood as to make the promises of the Gospel due before Baptisme to which the Scripture interpreted by the consent and practice of the whole Church testifieth that Baptisme concurreth A thing which can by no means be obtained but by placing that faith which alone justifieth aswell in the outward act of professing as in the inward act of believing This profession containing an expresse promise or vow to God whereby we undertake to live as those who believe the Gospel of Christ are by Gods Law to live And that promise or vow to be celebrated and solemnized by the Sacrament of Baptisme appointed by our Lord Christ to that purpose For seeing the professing of Christianity and not the believing of it is that which brings upon the Church that persecution which the Crosse of Christ the mark of a disciple signifies neither can it be reasonable that God should allow the promises of the Gospel to any quality that includeth it not nor unreasonable that he should make them depend upon it And seing it is not the profession of any thing that a man may call Christianity though perhaps grounded upon an imagination that he hath learned it from the Scriptures which God accepteth whatsoever a man may suffer for the maintenance and affirmation of it but of that which himself sent our Lord Christ to preach It is no marvel if God who esteemeth nothing but for that affection of the heart wherewith it is done should notwithstanding accept no disposition of the heart towards the profession of Christianity but that which is executed and solemnized by such an outward ceremony as himself hath limited his disciples their successors to celebrate it with For supposing that God hath founded the unity of his Church upon supposition of professing that Christianity which he gave his Apostles Commission to preach consisting in the visible communion of those offices which God is served with by Christians it will be evident why God who esteemeth the heart alone hath not allowed the promises of his Gospel to any but those who professe Christianity by being admitted to Baptisme by the Church Because as it is not any beliefe or resolution that may be called Christianity but that which the Church hath received from the Lord and his Apostles that qualifies a man for those promises which God tenders by the Covenant of Grace So it is not the profession of any beliefe or resolution that qualifies a
That they were in being during the Apostles time Where and when the Haeresie of Cerinthus prevailed and that they were Gnosticks The beginning of the Encratites under the Apostles It is evident that one God in Trinity was then glorified among the Christians by the Fullnesse of the Godhead which they introduced in stead of it I Should have propounded that evidence for originall sinne which is drawn from the necessity of the Grace of Christ before that which is drawn from the Old Testament had it not been for that exception which the Socinians make to it by questioning the state of our Lord Christ before his coming in the flesh In regard whereof I hold it the shortest course to void this issue first and then see what witnesse the necessity of the Grace of Christ renders to originall sinne And because that Tradition of historicall truth which remaines in the records of the Church evidences that meaning of the Apostles writings which I shall advance I shall not make difficulty to propound in the first place some things upon undeniable record in the Fathers that may serve to argue the intent of the Apostles in this point I say then that it is a thing undeniable to common sense that what time the Apostles writ there were divers Hereses in being whether openly divided from the church or lurking within it under the common profession to get opportunity to pervert the simple and in fine to withdraw them from the Church The first whereof was that of Simon Magus who being discovered by the Apostles to have onely counterseited himselfe a Christian to get the power of doing those miracles which the Apostles did that he might draw followers after himselfe fell away from Christianity to declare himselfe among the Samaritanes who expected the Messias no lesse then the true Jewes to be the Christ whom the Apostles preached our Lord Jesus to be But withall it is certaine that he taught his disciples that he alone could reveale unto them God whom their Fathers knew not for that the world had been at first made by Angels in opposition to him who also gave the Law and brought in among men the difference between good and bad which he by that knowledge of God which he professed undertook to teach how men should become free from and by this freedome attaine the fellowship of God in the world to come It cannot then be said that the author of this heresie continued any longer in the Church because when S. Peter saies to him Acts VIII 22. 23. Repent thee of this thy malice and beseech God if perhaps this devise of thy heart may be forgiven thee For I see thou art in the gall of bitternesse and the bond of unrighteousnesse Though he answer Pray ye to the Lord for me that none of the things which you have said come upon me For we find not that his after behaviour deserved that he should be admitted to penance and reconcilement with the Church And when he declared himself to be the Christ as did after him his disciple Menander witnesse Irenâ—us Epiphanius and Theodoret when he being dead and gone his pretense appeared vaine then was he of necessity at defiance with the Church and all Christians But this must be said which upon the faith of historicall truth is averred by the same witnesses that of him and the seeds of his doctrine came afterwards many Sects the authors whereof not pretending themselves to be the Christ pretended all to make known God otherwise unknowne to their disciples and by that knowledge to save them in the world to come through abandoning them to all licentiousnesse in this Which sects were therefore called by the common name of Gnosticks or knowers though there was one of those Sects which had no other particular name besides Among these one was set up by Nicolas one of the seven Acts VI. 5. Or at least under his name For though some in Clemens Alexandrinus seem to hold him an holy man yet no man doubts that there was a sect of Gnosticks which either because raised by him or by others upon mistake of some things that he had taught bore his name Which though it be not requisite here to decide yet it is evident by S. John Apoc. II. 6. that then the Sect was on foot And though we dispute not the time when Basâ—lides at Alexandria Saturninus at Antiochia Valentine at Rome or in Cyprus and Aegypt Carpocrates Marke the Magician or others set up so as to affirme that they were in being when the Apostles writ yet it is evident that under the Apostles there were such as counterfeited themselves Christians with an intent to withdraw the simple sort of Christians to this doctrine which these Fathers of Hereticks in their severall times were the heads of whosoever then set them on work I will use but two arguments to evidence this The first is the common infection which they brought in every where of eating things sacrificed to Idols that is to say of worshipping Idols For the feasts and entertainments of Idolaters consisting of those things which had been sacrificed to their Idols to feast with them was to communicate in their Idolatries This cannot be more evident then it is evident by S. Paul 1 Cor. X. 7. Nor be ye Idolaters as some of them were as it is written The people sate down to eat and drink and rose up to play The Idolatry of the Israrlits consisting in the feast as well as in their sacrifices And by Moses Exod. XXXIV 15 16. Least thou make a league with the inhabitants of the Land and they go a whoring after their gods and sacrifice to their gods and invite thee and thou cat of their sacrifices And thou take of their daughters to thy sons and their daughters go a whoring after their gods and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods Which you see how punctually it came to passe in the businesse of Baal Peor Num. XXV Now it is manifest by the most ancient Writers of the Church Justine the Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus Irenâ—us Tertulliane Origen that the Gnosticks did generally communicate in the Idolatries of the Gentiles whose testimonies have been produced by Doctor H. Hammond in divers of his writings And the reason is plaine by that old observation That the gods of the heathens are good fellows but the true God onely a jealous God That is to say That false gods never grutched one another the worship of God because all set up by the devil to whose service that worship redounded For the Gnosticks being themselves Idolaters and Magicians it is no marvaile that they communicated as freely in the Idolatries of the Gentiles as they in one anothers Idolatries But it is no lesse manifest that these Heresies which the Apostles writ against agreed all in teaching to eat things sacrificed to Idols and to communicate with Idolaters For the way of Balaam in which they are by the Apostles charged to go
astray Jude 11. 2 Pet. II. 15. Is interpreted Apoc. II. 15. That then were in the Church of Pergamus those that held the doctrine of Balaam that taught Balak to lay a stumbling block before the children of Israel to eat of things offered to Idols and to commit whordome So hast thou saith he those that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes Which by and by is attributed to Jezabel the Prophetesse The second argument is that both S. Peter and S. Jude in the places alledged do manifestly shew that the doctrines which they writ against tended to reconcile the licentiousnesse of the flesh with the hope of the world to come which I have shewed was the pretense of the Gnosticks And makes it very probable that the same Hereticks found accesse to those Christianes to whom S. James writes and intimated to them hope of salvation through the bare profession of Christianity without those workes whereby it is fulfilled which is the occasion that he takes James II. 14. to lay down those termes of the justification of Sinners which I have declared in due place For consider the terms in which S. Peter writes Many shall follow their corruptions for whom the way of truth shall be blasphemed For what can this signifie but that which is witnessed by so many of the Fathers that the ill opinion which the Gentiles had of Christianity was unjustly occasioned by the vilainies of the Gnosticks who though holding in secret a faith utterly destructive to Christianity neverthelesse counterfeited themselves Christians to withdraw Christians to themselves Againe Those that go after the flesh through the pollution of concupiscence And Thinking it pleasure to revel it by day spots and staines making good chere in their deceitâ— when they feast with you having eyes full of adultery not to be quieted from sinning And they beguil with the lusts of the flesh those who had truly escaped those that live in error promising them liberty but being slaves to corruption themselves For by whom a man is subdued his slave he becoms 2 Pet. II. 2 10 13 14 18 19. And S. Jude These dreaming defile the flesh And the things which they know by nature as bruit beasts in them they corrupt themselves Comparing them to Sodom and Gomorrah who went a whoring in like manner as these following after strange flâ—sh Jude 7 8 10. Which he who compares with the vilainies of the Gnosticks related by Irenaeus Epiphanius and others either he hath lost his right senses or knowing by Iraeneus that all the Gnosticks sprang from Simon Magus and that Simon Magus pretended to shew how to attain the world to come by loosing the raines to all vilainy must needs allow that they are of this traine whom these Apostles writ against Nor is the testimony of Hegesippus related by Eusebius Eccles Hist III 32. to the contrary He saith indeed that the Church had continued a pure Virgine under the Apostles and their hearers he saith that it began to be defloured in the next age Not by the coming in of Anti-Christ as some imagine unlesse they will have Simon Magus to have beene Anti-Christ which though true is not for their turne but by the coming in of the Gnosticks For though it appeare by the writinges of the Apostles that they were very busy during their time in seducing Christians by counterfeiting themselves the like yet may it well stand good that the Church continued a Virgine by casting them out according to the precept of S. Jude which I spoke of afore But that aster the death of them and their hearers they prevailed so farre that they might be said to have defloured the maidenhead of Christianity for the number of Christians whom they had seduced Besides it is easy to take notice that the relation of Hegesippus concernes particularly the Church of Jerusalem as following upon the martyrdome of Simeon and the confession of our Lord Christ to Domitian made by his kindred according to the flesh For so Eusebius expresly affirmeth And truly having related afore the Heresies of Simon Magus and Menander of Ebion of the Nazarites and of Cerinthus he must have given himself thely had he intended to say out of Hegesippus that the Gnosticks began under Adriane though being the time when Saturninus Basitides Valent ne and probably others set up for themselves But I will wish the enemies of this light which the knowledge of good learning that will surely be revenged of them who neglect it tenders to the obscure passages of the Apostles no worse punishment then to be bound to expound them without it For make use of it and all is plain and smooth before you unlesse it be a small circumstance that they tremble not to blaspheme glories 1 Pet. II. 10. Or as S. Jude 8. that they despise dominion and blaspheme glories Whereas if you put it out you will necessarily reason of the Apostles discourse as blind men do of colours And in truth there are two severall passages of Hegesippus related by Euseb the former whereof I have quoted assigning this deflouring of the Church to the time of Simeons martyrdome But the other though related by Eusebius IV. 22. at the time of Hegesippus assignes it unto his beginning immediately insuing upon the martyrdome of S. James and the choice of Simeon for Bishop of Jerusalem and that by a very expresse mark of the author thereof one Thebulis so R. Stevens copy reads it not Tâ—ebuthis that missed the Bishoprick there and upon that attempted to deflour the Church which they called then a Virgine saith Hegesippus expresly there Now it is manifest that the martyrdome of James was before the warre which the Romanes the same year that Festus left the Province as you have it in Eusebius II. 23. at which time it may be a question whither either the second Epistle of S. Peter or that of S. Jude were written at all or not Wherefore it is manifest that Hegesippus assigneth the deflouring of the Church to the time of Simeons martyrdome when none of the Apostles remained alive But so that Thebulis began to deflour it from the death of S. James and the beginning of Simeon That is the Church of Jerusalem because he was refused the Bishoprick of it But I must not forget Epiphanius his relation of Cerinthus that he was one of those that first contended with S. Peter about admitting Cornelius and his company to baptisme that afterward raised the contention about Circumcision in the Church of Antiochia which we see decided by the Apostles Acts XV. and that afterwards it was he or his disciples that troubled the Church of Corinth and the doctrine which S. Paul had taught it For the argument is undeniable that the things done under the Apostles have in them expresse markes of that which the succeeding Hereticks did and taught afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For those men stepping aside and becoming false Apostles
upon the world to be worshipped for gods the doctrines of devils must needs be those which men guided by devils do advance I must here suppose further that which I reade in Epiphanius that Marcion and Tatianus with his Scholars the Encratites who enjoyned their disciples to abstain from women and certain kindes of meats as not of Gods making had their beginning from Saturninus he from Simon Magus as Iraeneus I. 30. affirmeth Whereby it cannot seem strange that their doctrine should be in vogue during the time of the Apostles I demand then what reason can be given why they who taught the worshipping of angels should also injoyne abstinence from women and meates were there not in the case an opinion that marriage and those creatures come not from God but by some failleur of his as Simon Magus said from the beginning from the Angels To which purpose we must observe that S. Paul gives them warning of Philosophy Col. II. 8. because it is certaine that these sects took their rise from the writitings of Plato and Pythagoras and their followers whom Tertâ—llianâ— therfore stileth the Patriarchs of Hereticks But the words of Irenaeus deserve here to be considered Having promised to refute Marcion in due place Nunc autem necessario meminimus ejus ut scires quoniam omnes qui quoquo modo adulterant veritatem praeconium Ecclelaedunt Simonis Samaritani Magi discipuli successores sunt Quamvis non conâ—iâ—eantur nomen magistri sui ad seductionem reliquorum attamen illius sententiam docent Christi quidem Jesu nomen tanquam irritamentum praeferentes Simonis autem impâ—etatem varie introducentes But it was necessary that we should remember him now that thou mightest know that all those who any way adulterate the truth and wrong that which the Church preacheth are the Scholars and successours of Simon the Magician of Samaria Though to deceive others they professe not their masters name yet they teach hâ—s sense Pretending indeed for a Stale the name of Christ Jesus but divers wayes introducing Simons impious doctrines And by and by Vt exempli gratia dicamus a Saturnino Marciâ—ne qui vocantur Continentes abstinentiam a nuptiiâ— annuâ—ciaverunt frustrantes antiquam plasmationem Dei oblique accusantes eum qui masculum foeminam ad generationem hominum fecit â—orum quae dicuntur apud eos animalium abstinentiam induxerunt ingrati existentes ei qui omnia fecit Deo To speak for example from Saturninus and Marcion those that are called Encratites preach abstinence from marriage frustrating that which God framed of old and indirectly blaming him that made male and female for the procreation of mankind and introduce abstinence from those which they call living creatures being ungratefull to God that made all things If Marcion and Saturninus had this doctrine from Simon Magus of necessity it must have been on foot during the time of the Apostles Onely here will ly a difficult objection from that which I shewed a little afore that Simon Magus baited his doctrine with the pleasures of sensuall concupiscence as the meanes to gaine followers if in stead of the hardship of Christs Crosse he could perswade them that believing the secret knowledge which he taught the free use of them was the meanes to attain the world to come And of Cerinthus in particular he that shall peruse what Eusebius hath related out of Caiâ—s and Dionysius of Alexandria Ecclesiast Hist III. 28. shall easily perceive the whole aime of his Sect to have been the injoying of sensuall pleasure So that the saying of those whom Saint Paul writes against 1 Cor. XV. 32. Let us eate and drink for to morrow we shall dy exactly fits his followers And so doth the pretense of those who seduced the Galatians to observe the Law though themselves kept not the Law that they might not be persecuted with the Crosse of Christ Gal. VI. 12 13. That is that would have them comply with the Jewes in keeping the Law so farre as might save them from being persecuted by the Jews as well as with the Gentiles in their Idolatries to save them from persecution at their hand According to the common principle of the Gnosticks that it was a folly to suffer for professing the Faith To this it is easie to answer That the devil might have severall baits for severall qualities of persons even in the same common principles of Simon Magus whereof if we see some sects imbrace some others those that seem inconsistent with them being certified that both spring from the same source it is no wayes incredible that the seeds of all of them were sowen in his common doctrine That Carpocrates that Prodicus and the Gnosticks that followed Nicolas according to Epiphanius should be remarkable for unnaturall uncleannesse having the way plained for them by Simon how can it be strange that refined spirits should be taken with such grosse pretenses as brutish people are apt to be seduced with would be strange on the other side And that Magick which Simon and Menander with the Basilidians and Carpocratians frequently practised whatsoever the rest did had alwayes pretenses of austerity in discipline not onely as a meanes to obtaine influence from powers above but to seduce the simple with a colour of severity and abstinence Seeing then that Saturninus upon Irenaeus his credit derived this discipline from the doctrine of Simon Magus how can it seeme improbable that during S. Pauls time some branch of the same doctrine should spread over the parts of Asia concerned in S. Pauls Epistles to Timothy and to the Colossians Whether by Cerinthus or by whom besides him I need not dispute There is no doubt indeed but according to Epiphanius his Heresie had vogue in these parts As in Galatia besides Epiphanius Sirmondus his Praedestinatus saith that it is condemned there by S. Paules Epistle And Gaius in Eusebius III. 28. testifieth that Cerinthus pretended revelations by Angels and Tertulliane contra Marc. V. that those who seduced the Colossians did the like But whether Cerinthus or some other branch of Simon Magus the source of his doctrine is plainly from the same principle with Marcion and the Eucratites afterwards Now if any man demand what all this may conduce to the understanding of those Scriptures which speak of our Lord Christ let it be but considered that Simon Magus pretending to be the Christ and to seduce Christians from our Lord Jesus to himself and withall and to be worshipped with honours due to God doth hereby effectually suppose that our Lord was effectually so worshiped by Christians from the beginning Irenaeus saith further of the doctrine of Simon Magus I. 20. That he was glorified of many as God and taught that he was the man who had appeared among the Jewes as the Sonne that is the Messias had come in Samaria as the Father but to the rest of the Gentiles as the holy Ghost So that being indeed the soveraigne
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
to the nature of Originall sin that God might have made man from the beginning with concupiscence For Originall sinne must of necessity be that evil which we are born with in consideration of Adams sinne And therefore whatsoever we might have been born with seeing that actually and de facto we are born with concupiscence in consideration of Adams sinne who otherwise should have been born with that uprightnesse in which he was made Originall sinne must needs be that which we are now born with though supposing that we had been originally made with it it had not been Originall sinne For the absurdity of this consequence tends to shew that the supposition of meer nature is impossible and presses not me which believe it so to be And now to that novelty in the doctrine of the Church of England that hath caused so much offense because allowing some points of it not to prejudice the common â—aith it is requisite that I freely distinguish my self from that which I allow not I say briefly That if that excellent doctor and those who finde themselves offended at his doctrine will give me leave to interpret one point to distinguish one term of his opinion I shall heartily wish that the offense thereof may cease It is in that he saith that concupiscence was before the fall though much increased by it And I would have it said that all the inclinations of the sensuall appetite were before the fall but the disorder of them seeking satisfaction without rule or measure by it The word Concupiscence being capable of both significations For it is manifest that Adam as we do consisted of flesh and Spirit taking flesh for the substance not the perverse inclination of the flesh and Spirit for the substance of his own not the grace of Gods Spirit of soul and body of a spirituall and carnal substance The appetite of the principal part tending to that which is excellent by nature but the baser part having an appetite proper to the nature of it whereof reason from which all order rule and measure proceeds is no ingredient But it is necessary to say that God who requires the sensual appetite to be subject to the principal part of the soul as the reason to God had provided such an estate for such a creature wherein it might be in the power of reason to give order rule and measure to the motions of the sensuall appetite Otherwise the mortifying of concupiscence being the work of Christianity it will necessarily follow that the coming of Christ was to furnish that grace by which Christians may mortify that which God had created which our common faith admitteth not And therefore it is no otherwise to be admitted that concupiscence is increased by the fall of Adam then as that may be said to be increased which being moderate afore is since become immoderate For seeing that concupiscence being once free of the command of reason and the rule and measure which it might have from thence can have no other bounds then those which in this estate it acknowledgeth which is to be utterly boundlesse so farre as it is consistent with it self and as the satisfaction of severall passions appears not incompetible there is no reason why it should be ascribed to the fall once granting it to be the condition of Gods creature Which without the fall must needs have profited to that horrible confusion in humane affaires the contrariety whereof to the excellence of mans nature reason discerns and therefore religion reasonably introduces the fall to give a reason for it If the supposition of pure nature would indure that man though created liable to concupiscence by virtue of some contrary indowment might be preserved from the effect of it And that the effect of Adams fall were to make that frustrate and void I should not think that supposition any way prejudicial to the Christian Faith But in regard that the supposition admitteth no such indowment because it must be a gift of grace which would destroy the supposition of meer nature therefore it is denyed that God supposing that integrity in Adam which the Christian faith requireth could create him in this state of meer nature If this Doctor had said or could have said That concupiscence being a naturall consequence of mans composition was prevented of coming to act and effect by eating the fruit of the tree of life ordained to that purpose That the leaves thereof were in this regard healing to the nations And that the grace of Christ was dispensed by that meanes in that estate as now by the Sacrament of the Eucharist I might say this were a novelty among divines but I could not say that it were destructive to the Faith But if the coming of Christ be not to repaire the fall of the first Adam I cannot see how the Faith is secure As for the term of sin when he denieth that this concupiscence can be properly sin which is neither the act of sin nor any propensity created by custome of sinning but bred in our nature whereof there is no other instance but it self I confesse when the question comes to the signification of words and the property of it which may alwaies be endlesse because the question is only whether my sense shall give Law to your language or your sense to mine which it is not necessary to insist upon when the faith is secured on both sides I count it alwaies hard to charge an error in the substance of Faith Now whether we say this concupiscence is sin or not the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ his coming and the end of it remains alwaies the same and so the necessity of his grace is settled upon the right bottome And truly if we recollect the language which is used by the Greek Fathers and those that lived before Pelagius comparing it with that which hath been used since S. Austine we shall not find the term of Originall sin so frequent as the ground of it For not only death and the sorrows that bring it but even the inclination of our nature to actuall sin is by them ascribed to the fall who use not the terme of Originall sin As every one that peruseth but the termes of those passages of the Fathers which this Doctor hath produced may easily perceive Upon these terms Clemens Alexandrinus is no interruption to the Tradition of Originall sin in that difficult place Strom. III. that made Vossius say he understood it not He speaks against those that condemned Marriage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let them test us where the Child that is borne committed whoredome or how it fell under the curse of Adam that had done nothing It remains as it seems that they say that the Generation is evill not onely of the body bâ—t of the Soul for which the body is And when David saith I was conceived in sins and in iniquities did my Mother lust with me like a Prophet he calls Eve his Mother But
Eve was the Mother of the living And though conceived in sin yet was not be in sin or sinfull But whether every one that turns from sin to Faith turn from sinfull custome as from his Mother to life one of the twelve Prophets will be my witnesse saying shall I give my first-born for impiety the fruit of my belly for the sin of my Soul He traduceth not him that said Increase and multiply but he calleth the first inclinations from our birth by which we are ignorant of God impieties He saith most truly that they cannot render a reason how we are born under Adams curse but by charging God He granteth actuall sin in conception but that not the sin of the Child that is conceived He saith the custome of sin may be our Mother Eve in the mysticall sense of David But he ascribeth it to those first motions from our birth which make mankind ignorant of God till they turn to Christianity Whether this be my plea or no let him that hath perused the Premises judge This same is to be said of S. Chrysostome in his Homily ad Neophytos denying that Infants are baptized because they are polluted with sin To wit that he appropriateth the name of sin to actuall sin But as Clemens acknowledges the first motions that we have from our birth to tend to ignorance of God So S. Chrysostome Hom. XI in VI. ad Rom. Hom. XIII in VII ad Rom. cleerly ascribes the coming in of concupiscence to Adams sin or rather to the sentence of mortality inflicted by God upon it wherein he is followed by Theodoret in V. ad Rom. observing that the want of things necessary to the sustenance of our mortality provokes excesses and that sins If this reason can generally hold so that all concupiscence may be said to be the consequence of mortality Christianity will be sound the necessity of Christs coming for the repair of Adams fall remaining the same But this is the reason why the same S. Chrysostome Hom. X. in VI. ad Rom. when S. Paul saith By one mans disobedience many are made sinners understandeth by sinners liable to death Concupiscence wherein Originall sinne consisteth as I have shewed being the consequence of mortality according to S. Chrysostome As for those that censure books at Oxford if they like not this I demand but one thing what they think of Zuinglius his Writings For I suppose none of them believes that Zuinglius holds originall sinne to be properly sinne or that infants are damned for it though whether they come to everlasting life or no notwithstanding their concupiscence which they are born with I find not that he saith Let them therefore choose whether they will censure Zuinglius his bookes or professe that they have the Faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons And therefore I do not understand why I should make any more of this difference of language then of that which was on foot in the ancient Church about the terms of hypostasis in the blessed Trinity among those who haâ—tily adhered to the Faith of the Church And I conceive I may compare it with the difference between the Latine and the Greek Church about the procession of the Holy Ghost whether from the Father and the Sonne oâ— from the Father by the Sonne For though I do believe with the Western Church that he proceedeth from both Yet the Eastern Church acknowledging as it doth from the Father by the Sonne If it had been in me the matter should never have come to a breach in the Church about that difference Even so the terme of Originall sinne being received in the Western Church to exclude the heresie of Pelagius I do not intend to take offence at the using or give offence by the refusing of it But I shall not therefore condemn those times or persons of the Church that used it not as unsound or defective in the Faith the Tradition whereof is not to be derived but by that which all parts agree in professing As for the punishment of everlasting torments upon infants that depart with it it is a thing utterly past my capacity to understand how it concerns the necessity of Christs coming that those infants who are not cured by it should be thought liable to them Would his death be in vaine would the Grace which it purchaseth be unnecessary unlesse those infants that have committed no actuall sinne go into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels Shall the corruption of our nature by the fall of Adam be counted a fable unlesse I be able to maintaine that infants are there or shew where they are if not there Or will any man undertake to shew me that consent of the whole Church in this point which is visible by the premises as concerning that corruption of nature which I challenge to be mater of Faith It is not to be denied that S. Augustine and enow after him have maintained it and perhaps thought that the Faith cannot be maintained otherwise But can that therefore be the Tradition of the whole Church which Doctors allowed by the Church do not believe In this as in other instances we see a difference between maters of Faith and Ecclesiasticall doctrines of which you have a Book of Gernadius intituled dâ— dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis For such positions as passe without offense when they are held and professed by such as injoy the communion of the Church or more then so rank of authority in it must necessarily be counted doctrines of the Church And yet if it appear that the contrary hath been held other whiles and else where they do not oblige our belief as matters of Faith As for the article of the Church of England which ascribeth the desert of Gods wrath and damnation to Originall sinne â— conceive it is alwaies the duty of every sonne of the Church so to interpret so to limit or to extend the acts of the Church of England that is the sense of them that it may agree with the Faith of the Catholick Church Because all such acts serve and are to serve onely to maintaine the Church of England a member thereof by maintaining the Faith of it How much more at this time that unity and communion which these acts tendred to maintain amongst our selves being irrecoverably violated by men equally concerned in the cherishing of it For admitting the Faith and the Laws of the primitive Church what can any Church allege why they are not one with us Not admitting them what can we alledge why we are not one with others It followeth therefore of necessity that the wrath of God and damnation which Originall sin deserveth according to the Article of the Church of England be confined to the losse and coming short of that salvation to which the first Adam being appointed the second Adam hath restored us There being no more to be had either by necessary consequence from the Scripture or by Tradition
to mankind Seeing there is a reason to be given for all that fall under the same in the nature of the finall or the meritorious cause God stands as much glorified man as much obliged to worke out his salvation with feare and trembling as if he knew the bottome of Gods secret counsaile And thus the objection is void It remaineth that we consider the Tradition of the Church what it declareth concerning the truth of that which I have resolved or towards it Where we must take notice of the Monkes of Adrymetus under Valentine who received S. Agustines doctrine of Gods effectuall grace and predestination to it from everlasting in such a sense that they inferred from it all indeavours of men all exhortations reproofes instructions and prayers to be utterly fruitlesse and vaine as tending to that which dependeth upon the meere appointment of God which cannot be defeated and without which nothing can serve To rectifie this mistake S. Augustine lived to write them his book yet extant de correptione Gratia wherein he declareth all that he had said of the grace of God and the efficacy thereof to proceed upon supposition of free will in man though inslaved to sin by the fall of Adam from the bondage whereof the grace of Christ voluntarily though effectually redeemeth those that are freed by it whereby as by the rest of his writings concerning the grace of Christ against Pelagius he establisheth two points belonging to the foundation of the Christian faith The first of the freedome of mans will though not from sin since the fall of Adam yet from necessity determing the resolution of it when by the treaty which the Gospell advanceth it is invited to imbrace Christianity and to live according to it Which were all a mere nullity were not any man free to resolve himselfe upon it The second of the grace of God by Christ which if it may be purchased by the indevour of mans free will then was it not necessary to send our Lord Christ as the second Adam to repaire the breach which the first Adam had made This being the sum of the Catholike faith in this mater and the rest which is advanced to shew how those two points both stand true together belonging to the skill of a Divine not to the faith of a Christian so far as by maintayning them men destroy the foundation of Christianity on neither side Which it is no marvail that some things which S. Augustin had said in giving a reason hereof seemed to some to do seeing those that accepted of his doctrine in Africk drew from it a consequence utterly destructive to Christianity I speake of those in the parts of France about Provence and Marsailles who inferring from S. Augustines saying that in his opinion God makes the farr greater part of men on purpose to condemne them to death seemed to mainetaine the beginning of salvation to come from those indeavours of mans will born as he is under originall sin which God faileth not to second with those helps of Grace which the mater requireth There is great appearance of that which Jansenius disputeth so eagerly de Haeresi Pelag. VII 5. sâ—q that the maine ground of their opposition was the decree of predestination which S. Austine would have to be absolute As being perswaded that thereby the effects of free will become fatal in which that reason of reward and punishment which the Covenant of Grace establisheth requires contingence And herewith the occasion which Faustus pretendeth for the writing of his book de Gratia et Libero Arbitrio agreeth To wit that a certaine Priest called Lucidus is required by him in the name of a Synod held at Arles under Leontius Bishop to recant certaine positions tending to maintaine the necessity of being damned for originall sin by the foreknowledg of God in them for whom Christ dyed not dying onely for sin And this by a letter subscribed by one of the Bishops This recantation being made Faustus pretendeth to write at the intreaty of the Synod to lay forth their sense and reasons But to have added something upon the decree of an other Synod held afterwards at Lions True it is indeed which Vâ—ssius observeth Historiae Pelag. VI. Thesi XIV that whereas some of them insisted on nothing else others proceeded to deny the necessity of preventing grace For whatsoever we say of Cassianâ— who hath writ to severall purposes in severall places Faustus manifestly affirmeth that by the act of free will in beginning to believe a Christian obtaines the grace of God which his owne choice preventeth Which if we understand the Faith which he speaketh of to signifie Christianity and the act of believing to consist in becoming a Christian is nothing else but the fundamentall faith of Christianity That the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost is granted in consideration of a mans turning Christian But who believes that the actuall grace of the Holy Ghost whereby the world is converted to be as well as convicted that it ought to be Christiane is obtayned by the exaltation as purchased by the humiliation of Christ which Faustus supposing the preaching of the Gospell being the meanes which it useth no way denyeth acknowledgeth by consequence that act of faith which preventeth the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost to be prevented by the actuall helps of Grace which the preaching of the Gospel importeth And Jansenius de Haeresi Pelag VIII 1-9 acknowledgeth that they had no designe to destroy the grace of God through Christ as Pelagius had therefore did acknowledg not onely the outward preaching of the gospel but inward inspiration to make it effectuall Onely that making the effect of that grace which God appointeth to depend on free wil they fel into the heresy of Palagius which they desired to a void Now Pelagius indeed acckowledged that grace which the preaching of the gospell signifyed according to his own opinion which was false For not believing that our will is any thing the worse for Adams fall he could not allow that Christ hath purchased any help to repaire the breach and to cure the disease which he had made But as he could not deny it to be an act of bounty in God to propose the reward of everlasting life which is supernatupall So he must affirme that it is purchsed by the merre naturall act of free will without any help of grace granted of Gods mercy in Christ in consideration of his obedience And by this meanes he brought the death of Christ to no effect Seeing God might have assured the tender of his gospell to come indeed from him without it And so the merit of grace that is the reason that obliges God to give it is originally ascribed to the works of free Will according to Pelagius But according to those who acknowledging Originall sin acknowledg the cure of it by the helpe of grace purchased by Christ which the preaching of the gospell bringeth not
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
paines to make them partizans in questions which they understand not and give them the confidence to censure for Arminians those that resolve them in such termes as they comprehend not Neverthelesse at the last judgement of God they may have cause to complaine of them if not for teaching them to tye knoâ—s which they cannot teach them to loose yet for inducing them to breake the peace of the Church to obtaine freedome of professing or imposing upon others the beliefe of things thus prejudiciall to Christianity In the meane time it shall be enough for me by this short resolution to have drawn a line which they that will tread the Labyrinth of this dispute may be guided by the best that I can show from falling headlong on either side Not doubting that the skill of those who being more traded in it resolve to avoid both extremities may produce that information which may oblige me for further intelligence as well as the rest of the Church But having confidence that the denying of Gods Predetermination is not the denying of Gods effectuall Grace which I have showed that it doth stand with freewill according to the supposition that I advance though I undertake not to show how reason reconciles the parts of it And truly I am confident that when S. Austine in his book de Correptione Gratia distinguishes between that help of Grace without which we cannot obay the Gospell of Christ and that help by which we do it auxilium quo auxilium sine quo non and whensoever else he makes the efficacy of Grace to attaine the doing of that which it effecteth not onely the inabling of man to do it he never intended to determine the maner how it is effected For though S. Austin himselfe hath balked the ground which himselfe had laid for the distinction between the antcedent and consequent will of God in his book de Spiritu litera Chap. XXXIII by bringing in other expositions of S. Pauls words God would have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledg of the truth that are inconsistent with it Though I have not found him distinguish betweene necessity upon supposition and antecedent as Anselme in pursuance of his Doctrine hath don yet he that shall read what he hath said of the redemption of all mankind upon Psalm XCV besides abundance of other passages whereby he concurreth to witnesse that sense of the redemption of all mankind of Gods will that all be saved of sufficient Grace that is not effectuall which the Church generally declareth as I showed you before I say he that considereth them will find it more reasonable to reconcile him to his owne doctrine then to pretend a change in his judgement where he acknowledges none as in the mater of preventing Grace he doth not acknowledge Certainely seeing that Prosper in defending him frequently and clearely acknowledges Christ to have dyed for all mankind out of Gods will that all might be saved But the author of the book de â—â—catione Gentium never yet suspected for a partizane of the Semipelagians hath so plentifully maintained it during the time that the parties in Gaule charged one another for Semipelagians and Praedestinatians For during that time was it writ without peradventure they will never deserve well of S. Austine that defend him otherwise So far are we from being obliged by his doctrine to acknowledge grace to come to effect by Gods predetermining the wil of man to all that coms to passe when I have shâ—wed a supposition according to which it may be don without prejudice to Christianity though beyond my understanding to show how For supposing the common faith to be this That God appointeth them to life or to death whom he foreseeth to imbrace or not imbrace Christianity and to persevere or not persevere in the practice of it till death Can it not be true also that he hath appointed some and not others the meanes whereby he foresees that they will persevere Nay if some only persevere in the state of Grace when all might as the Council of Orange hath decreed what is there but Gods will to create the difference much more between them that never heare of the Gospell and those that refuse it And what hath Christianity hereupon to answer but Porphyries question why Christ came not afore That is why God suffered man to fall and sin to come into the world Why he maketh not all men true Christians when he might For one answer would serve all these questions Which if it be a scandall to Christianity that it is not answered it remaines that Christians be Porphyries disciples In the mean time absolute predestination to grace infers not absolute predestination to glory Nor obliges God to procure sin as the meanes to his end or as the meanes to that meanes to predetermine mans will to doe it But did Saint Austines doctrine in my opinion containe any thing contrary to the doctrine of the rest of the Church concerning the antecedent consequent will of God the coming of evill into the world and that the foreknowledge of God does not effect but suppose it the freedome of the will from necessity while slave to sin I would think my selfe obliged to renounce him that I might adhere to the rest of the Church Counting it a thing ridiculous and contrary to the principles of Christian truth acknowledging the tradition of Faith to come from the whole Church to advance the doctrine of a member thereof though so eminent as S. Austine against that which the rest of the Church is acknowledged to have taught If iâ— be said that the supposition of Gods foreseeing the event of mens resolutions by the objects and considerations which he appoints them to be moved with is an invention of the Jesuites or at least hath been much maintained by them I demand what advantage they have that espouâ—e the supposition of the Dominicans the first Inquisitors that is Ministers of persecution for Religion by the interest of the Church of Rome with secular powers Especially adding unto it the position of justifying faith by believing that we are predestinate so destructive to the Covenant of Grace Yet I give the reader that is willing to take the paines of being informed notice that the supposition which I advance is rather in the forme that is to be collected out of Durandus then in that which the Iesuites since have given it In fine let Maldonat and Jesuites think it their honour to professe that they like not such and such expositions of scripture because they come from the Hereticks by which names we know whom they meane Let Puritan preachers coâ—fe their simple heareâ—s with a prejudice against all that they like not as drawne from Arminians or Jesuites whose positions they understood not and when they are understood are nearer the truth then their owne I shall find my selfe never the lesse oâ—liged to follow that truth for Christs sake which I
to deny this to be the intent of that paterne which the devill thereby corrupted is to offer viâ—lence to common sense Here I come to the Prophesy of Es LIII wherein being obliged liteâ—aâ—ly to expound it with Grotius of the Prophet Jeremy I shall be thought by â—oâ—â— to make it the more difficult to prove this to be the mysticall sense of it Buâ— having given my selfe a Rule to maintaine the difference betweene these two senses in the Prophesies of the Old Testament I shall forbid Socinus any advantage against the Church by it Thus then saith the Prophet Es LIII 4 But he tooke our sicknesses and bore our greifes And we thought him plagâ—â—ed smitten of God and afflicted But he was wounded for our transgrâ—ssioâ—s and beaten for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was upon him and by his markes we are healed We all had gone astray like sheepe every one was turned his owne way and God made all our iniquities to meete him He was oppressed and afflicted yet opened he not his mouth He was ledde as a sheepe to the slaughter and as a sheepe is dumbe before him that sheares her so opened he not his mouth He was taken from restraint and judgement and his generation who shall declare For he was cut off from the land of the living he was smitten for the transgression of any people And he made his grave with the wicked and with the rich at his death for no wickednesse that he did nor deceite in his mouth yet the Lord was pleased to afflict him with sorrowes If thou make his soule an offering for guilt he shall see a seede he shall prolong his dayes and the good pleasure of God shall come to passe by his means For the labour of his soule shall he see and be satisfied By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many and he shall beare their iniquities Therefore will I give him a share with the great ones and with the mighty shall he divide the spoile because he poured out his soule to death and was counted among transgressors and bore the sins of many and interceded for transgressors That the Prophet Jeremy should be a figure of our Lord Christ in his doings and sufferings is no more then I have showed that all the Prophets were That the Prophet Esay should foretell the same for a figure of Christ is no more then that he should prophesy of our Lord Christ under the figure of himselfe which he doth many times The reason why the Prophet Jeremy is a figure of our Lord imports no more then this That being sent by God to reduce his people to his Law that they might continue injoying the Land of promise he was by them taken for an enemy of his country and used accordingly because he foretold theire ruine in case they obayed not and so God brought on him the merit of theire sinnes which he laboured to cure But so that his doctrine and the event of his Prophesies having reduced them to God and his Law theire restitution from captivity which he had foretold came to passe by his means Upon this account the Prophet Jeremy is a sacrifice for his people though no otherwise then as S. Paule exhortes the Romanes to present their bodies living sacrifice holy and acceptable to God Rom XII 1. Or as he saith to the Philippians If I be poured forth as a drinke offering upon the service and ministery of your faith Phil. II. 16. Or as to the Colossians I. 24. he supplies the remains of the afflictions of Christ in his flesh for his body which is the Church For the proportion will be just betweene that reconcilement which the Prophet procures betweene God and his people by his intercession and doctrine as to their temporall estate as a minister of God and a figure of Christ And that which our Lord Christ procures betweene God and his Church as to the everlasting estate of it Seeing then that Socinus acknowledges all this to be meant of the redemption of the world by the sufferinges of Christ what advantageth iâ— him that it is understood literally of the Prophet Jeremy For the importance of the Prophets words in him will take place according to the pretense of his coming not according to the nature of the Prophet Jeremies office And therefore what if the Evangelist say that the words of the Prophet Esay He tooke away our infirmities and caried away our diseases were fullfilled when our Lord cured the blinde and the lame Mat. VIII 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Evangelist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I confesse signify taking away as well as bearing And therefore that which the Baptist saith Mark I. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whose sâ—oe latchet I am not worthy to stoope and unty Is in S. Matth. IV. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to carry but to take away his shooes Which he that looses intends to take away Therefore Tertul. ad Marc. IV. Ipse igitur est Christus remediator valetudinum Hic inquit imbecillitates nostras aufert languores portat Therefore Christ himselfe is he that cures sicknesses He saith he takes away all infirmities and beares our diseases Portare autem Graeci pro â—o solent ponere quod est tollere Now the Greeke is wont to put bearing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for taking away And indeed the cure of bodily infirmities by Christ could not be fortold by the Prophet to come to passe by taking them upon himselfe but by taking them away from the people But if we say that he was to cure our spirituall infirmities no otherwise neither will the figure of Jeremy nor the words of Esay hold so properly which as I said afore are fullfilled more properly in the mystery then in the History For it is manifest that bearing our sins serves to amplify the sufferings whether of Jeremy or of our Lord which taking them away does not and yet it is aswell understood that they are taken from them by consequence to wit because laide on him For Jeremy bare the sinnes of the people first as our Lord on the Crosse but the cure came afterwards Besides when the Prophet sayes If thou shalt make his soule a sacrifice for guilt It is manifest that God layes the guilt on him which he takes from us Thirdly when the Prophet sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where one case of the person another of the thing follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Socinus translates it God by him met with all our iniquites I say confidently he makes it no Hebrew Had the Prophet said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it might have passed for Hebrew to signify that which he saies But as it lies at no rate Fourthly no man shall expound the Prophet but the Apostle 1 Pet. II. 24 25. Who himself took up our sinnes upon his body to the Crosse that being dead to sinnes we may live to righteousnesse by whose blew markes we
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
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
the consent of the Church But what joy they can have of S. Augustine may easily be judged by his opinion of the VII to the Romanes and the difference which I have observed betweene it and theirs For what can any man imagine to be the reason why he should understand S. Paul to speake onely of the surprizes which the regenerate are subject to remaining regenerate but because he was assured that they remaine not such when they fall away to these grosse sinnes which no man is surprized with And he that shall take the pains to peruse what S. Augustine hath written in his bookes de correptione gratia And de predestinatione sanctorum may justly mervaile how any man could come to have such an opinion of S. Augustine Besides in his worke de Civitate dei and in many other places he hath so clearly expressed himselfe that unlesse a man resolve not to distinguish betweene the state of grace and the purpose of God to bring a man to everlasting life which he that useth the common reason of all men cannot but distinguish it is a mervaile how S. Augustine should be taken to say that the state of grace cannot become voide because it is true he sayes so often that the decree of predestination cannot become voide S. Gregory is taken for one of the same opinion because expounding the words of the Prophet Jeremy Lament IV. 1. How is gold obscured the pure masse changed The stones of the Sanctuary scattered in the head of every street Concerning Christians that fall from theire profession according to the true reason of the mysticall sense he hath these wordes Aurum quod â—bscurari potâ—it aurum in conspectu dei nunquam fuit That gold which could be darkned was never gold in Gods sight But is it not easy to understand that the sight of God is that freeknowledge which the decree of predestination either supposeth or produceth And that those whom God â—oreseeth to fall from theire Christianity were never gold in his esteeme in regard of it As I said afore that he never knew them whome he ever knew that they would not ever continue his And seeing S. Austine expressely distinguished between sonnes of God according to that which they are at present and according to Gods foresight and purpose it will be necessary consequently to distinguish upon the attributes of members of Christ and of his Body ingrafted into Christ and his disciples That those are truly called such according to S. Austine that shall continue such for everlasting though those that shall not so continue are so for the present according to S. Austine As it is peremtorily evident by one exception in that he maketh the difference between some of them who have the gift of perseverance and others that have it not to consist in this That some are cut of by death while they are in that estate others are suffred to survive till they fall from it A thing many times repeated in the bookes aforenamed and which could not have been said but by him that held both for the present to be in the state of Grace Nor could he indeed dispute of perseverance not supposing the truth of that in which he requireth Grace to persevere I acknowlege to have seen the Preface to one of the Volumâ— that I spoke of and in it some pretense of making S. Austine and S. Gregory especially for the contrary purpose But I doe not acknowlege to have found any thing at all alleged there that had not been fully answered before it was alleged there in Vossiâ—â— his Collections Historiâ— Pelagianae libro VI. Thâ—sâ— XII-XV And therefore I will discharge my selfe upon him in this point rather then repeate breifly in this abridgement that which he hath fully said there For you shall find also there upon what termes and by what means Christians may and doe overcome that anxiety of mind which the possibility of falling from Grace may affect them with according to the Fathers Even the same as according to S. Paul whose assurance needed no revelation of Gods secret purpose but the knowlege of that resolution which Gods spirit had settled in his spirit which beeing assured that God will not forsake while he forsakes not God assureth him that by Gods helpe he will not forsake God And not onely he but all whom S. Paul comprises in the plurall us as grounded like S. Paul Otherwise that a Christian from the first instant of his conversion should be able to say so that whosoever is saved before death must say so out of the same confidence knowing by faith that he is predestinate as it is meere frenzy once to imagine so never did any of the Fathers maintaine Onely whereas the author of that Preface acknowledging that the Dominicans and Jansenians who hold up the Doctrine of S. Austine concerning the Grace of Preseverance suppose neverthelesse them to be regenerate that are not predestinate nor shall be saved imputes it to the abominable fictions of implicite saith and the efficacy of the Sacraments in exhibiting and convaying the Grace which they seale I would not have him thinke the efficacy of Baptisme can be counted a fiction by any but fained Christans Of the Sacraments I say nothing in this place For I need not so much as suppose what a Sacrament is And whether Baptisme be a Sacrament or not though a thing that no man questions is nothing to my present purpose That God contracteth with man for the promises of his Gospell upon condition of Christianity and that this contract is not onely solemnized but inacted by receiving Baptisme is not now to be proved having been done from the beginning of this book And he that would be free of that which he contracteth for by his Baptisme whereby he holdeth his title to all that the Gospell promiseth would make that step to the renouncing of his Christianity What implicite Faith should pervert the understanding of Doctors whose Faith is explicite in all maters of Faith I understand not unlesse he meane to acknowlege that which is most true that there never needed any expresse decree of the Church in this point as in other points questioned by Pelagius because never any man held otherwise If this be the implicite Faith which he means because the whole Church allwayes held it but never decreed it I shall agree to it but not that any Christian can be seduced by following it Jovinian we reade onely of confuted in this opinion by S. Jerome not condemned by the Church because he could never make it considerable and so dangerous to the Church But in very deed implicite Faith here signifies nothing being onely imployed to make a noise for a reason of that for which no reason can be rendred How that can be thought to be the sense of S. Austine which never any of his followers all zelous of his Doctrine in the matter of Grace could find in his writings And therefore the whole
it willingly I have a reward if unwillingly a stewardship I am trusted with What is then my reward That I bestow the preaching of Christs Gospel without charge So as not to use my right in preaching it 1 Cor. IX 15-18 The necessity of preaching the Gospell stands in opposition to the preaching of it freely which is therefore a matter of free choice The woe to S. Paul is for not preaching the Gospell therefore not for not preaching it for nothing Wherefore the reward he meanes when he saith what is my reward that is wherein lies my claime my plea or my preâ—ense to it is not that which the Gospel covenants for with all Christians For that S. Paul was not to faile of though he preached not for nothing Seneca saith that a slave may oblige his Master by doing not onely what he commands but what he knowes will please him though he command it not Such are not those whom our Lord speakes to Luke XVII 6-10 So ye also when ye have done all things that are commanded you say we are unprofitable servants we have done what we were indebted to do Ye that have faith as a graine of mustard seed that is a small seed of Christianity to whom the parable there is proposed For it speaketh of those who sit down when their master hath supped whereas there are others that must sit down with their master Luke XXII 30. others that shall sit down as soon as he comes and himself wait on them Luke XII 37. And therefore there are servants of God under the Gospel that fail not of their wages but oblige not their Masters goodnesse without promise Above these wages is the reward which S. Paul meanes which though he pretend not by discharging his trust so cheerfully as to preach the Gospel for nothing which God commanded him not he may neverthelesse obtaine his wages by giving a just account of his office Therefore the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when he saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not abusing but fully using as in Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He used not the gift aright And in S. Paul 1 Cor. VII 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that use this world as not freely using it Not as not abusing it Though it hath been so translated because the rest of the opposites before runne in the like correspondence They that have wives as having none those that weep as not weeping those that rejoyce as not rejoycing those that buy as not possessing So those that use this world as not using or not freely using it And in the Latine Saint Hierome Quâ—st Hebr in Gen. Sancti Apostoli his fere testimoniis abutuntur quae jam fuerant in gentibus divulgata The holy Apostles use I suppose no man will say Saint Herome meant that they abuse those testimonies which had been already divulged among the Gentiles And in Plautus and the civile law abuti is to spend which is the full use of things that may be spent For seeing Saint Paul in the beginning of the Chapter challengeth that he might have done otherwise as well as the rest of the Apostles either he might have done otherwise without sin or he had not that right in point of conscience to God which he saith they used without sinne If then the law of God determine not a man to abstaine from marriage to abandon the world and riches of the world which he hath just title to and yet this may be done to oblige God in point of goodnesse not in point of promise what is Saint Augustineâ— fault in saying of Saint Paul voluit S. Paulus ex Evangelio victum sibi quaerere Quod maluit operari amplius erogabat Saint Paul might have got his living by preaching the Gospel In that he choosed to work he laid out more in Gods service For this is not to say that the love of God for which he did it is not commanded but that he was not commanded to exercise that love in forbearing his due Therefore if any man shall teach the precepts of loving God above all and all for God and of mortifying the first motions of concupiscence together with the particulars unto which our Lords Sermon in the Mount brancheth those generalls to prescribe workes of superâ—rogation and maters not of precept but of counsaile as too many have been allowed I say not injoyned to do in the Church of Rome worthily in that regard is this professed in the Church of England to be a blasphemous doctrine Neither can it appear that the ancient Fathers ever intended any such sense by it who notwithstanding all with one voice agree in the difference between mater of precept and matter of counsell under the Gospel which difference Doctor Field in his learned work of the Church having acknowledged in the Church of England no man can justly charge me with novelty in maintaining of it Now though the perfection of Christianity consist as hath been showed in loving God above all and all for God or in resolving to do all in respect of Gods will and for his service Yet is not this perfection perfectly to be obtained during this life The reason is manifest Because it is not morally possible that the work of it should not be interrupted by original concupiscence the mortification whereof which proceeds by degrees is that perfection which a Christian arriveth at whatsoever he aime at Saint Paul had gone as farre as another man when he said Phil. III. 13 14 15. Brethren I count not my self to have seized Onely forgetting that which is behind and stretching at that which is before according to the mark I drive to the prize of the heavenly calling of God by Christ Jesus As many therefore as are perfect let us be so minded And 1 Cor. III. 18. We all looking as in a glasse upon the glory of God with bare face are changed after the same image from glory to glory as by the Spirit of the Lord To wit by the same degrees as the mortification of our own concupiscence makes room for Gods Spirit And therefore he saith again of himself 1 Cor. IX 26. I therefore so runne as not without appearance of going forwards so fight not as beating the aire But I cuffe and inslave my body least having preached to others I my selfe become reprobate Notwithstanding the law of Christianity which the Gospel preacheth supposing this concupâ—scence and providing a right of reestablishment into Gods grace for all that being cast down in this course shall returne by repentance manifest it is that though we are not saved by fulfilling the originall rule of that righteousnesse to which the creation of our nature on Gods behalf obligeth us Yet by undertaking and pursuing that perfection which the profession of Christianity importeth provided that we persevere in pursuing it unto the end though sometimes this pursuit consist in turning from those sinnes by which we had started aside Now the law of
give not thine heritage for a reproach Joel II. 12-17 Sure this is something more then not allowing a mans self to sinne or not liking that which he does when he sinnes which no man that ever heard of Christianity can do till he have contracted such a custome of sinning that he is not sensible of any remorse for it And it is a thing most strange that those who pretend to be the cream of Christianity should think the sinnes of the regenerate not to forfeit the state of Grace nor contract Gods displeasure because they are done with dislike Judas might have robbed the poor so oft that at length he might be without remorse but certainly he betrayed not his master without reluctation The regenerate if truly so and not hypocrites must needs find the burthen of sinne which they commit aggravated by the grace which they had received afore And therefore must needs find themselves obliged to a deeper measure of humiliation to expiate their ingratitude and to recover the favour of God which they had forfeited by abusing it afore This seems in my opinion to perswade a good Christian that workes of humiliation and Penance are requisite to recover the state of Grace and to render God againe propitious to those that have fallen from the grace of their Baptisme As that which I said afore seemes to show that it is not prejudiciall to the satisfaction of our Lord should be satisfied by such meanes Now the originall and generall practice of Gods Church punctually agreeth with that which hath been said Our Lord preacheth repentance but admitteth all that professe it to be his disciples not taking cognizance what they had been professing to become such as he requireth for the future So his Church knowing that there is no sinne so deep that his bloud cannot wash away admitteth all to Baptisme declaring that without repentance it availeth onely to their damnation but demanding no visible satisfaction of it in them that were not hitherto of the Church But those who falsify the profession upon which they were admitted to Baptisme and that so visibly that the forfeiture of Gods grace is visible by the same meanes those were so excluded the communion of the Church which ought to suppose a presumption of the state of Grace at least the possibility of it that at the first the greatest question was whether they should be admitted to any hope of reconcilement by the Church or not As it appeareth by the breaches of the Montanists and Novatians and partly of the Donatists and Meletians If this admission were granted it was onely to this effect at the beginning that they might tender the Church satisfaction of the sincerity of that sorrow wherewith they pretended to satisfy God that is to appease his wrath and to recover his grace Those who think Penance was injoyned to no other effect in the ancient Church then to make satisfaction for the scandall which the notoriousnesse of sinne had contracted are as farre wide of the truth as those who think it onely made satisfaction for a debt of temporall punishment the staine of sinne and guilt of eternall punishment being abolished by submitting it to the Keyes of the Church out of that sorrow which they call Attrition which they will have to be changed into Contrition by the humility of that confession which submitteth a mans sinne to the keyes of the Church In what sense attrition may be said to be changed into contrition by the ministery of Penance I shall have occasion to debate againe in the third Book For the present I must not forget the ground which I have presupposed that the Gosspel is presupposed to the being and constitution of the Church And therefore that remission of sinnes by the Church and the ministery of Penance in the Church supposeth the accomplishment of that condition and the production of that disposition which by the Gospel qualifieth for remission of sinne Neither can the ministery of the Church be otherwise necessary then as it may be effectuall to produce the same How in the Penitent that sorrow for fear of punishment which the first sight of sinne necessarily causeth which is attrition in their termes is changed into that sorrow for having offended God which the love of God causeth is to be understood I conceive by that which I said afore That the ministery of the Church cannot supersede or dispense with the meanes whereby that change is brought to passe as the argument proposed evidences by the Scriptures So from the Tradition of the Church I conceive I have peremptory evidence For those that deferred their Penance till danger of death then confessing their sinnes submitted to the keyes of the Church though they were not refused reconcilement in that estate though they were admitted to the communion of the Eucharist yet their salvation remained questionable in case they survived not to perform their Penance This you shall find at large in Saint Augustine Homilia XLI ex L. though some attribute it to Saint Ambrose But you have it in Saint Augustine againe de Tempore sermone LVII And when it is found in a letter of Faustus in answer to Paulinus of Nola it cannot be excepted that Faustus is a suspected author because of his opposition to Saint Augustine in a point wherein it is evident that he concurreth with Saint Augustine But in the fourth Councill of Carthage also Can. VII and VIII those that submit to Penance and receive the Eucharist in danger of death are not to think themselves acquitted of their sinne if they survive sine manus impositione That is without performing their Penance during which they were at the service of the Church prayed for with imposition of hands And therefore he who having thus submitted to Penance and received the Eucharist recovered might be promoted to the Clergy according to the IV Councill of Toledo Can. LIII and Concil Gerund can IX Whereas whosoever had done Penance in the Church could never be admitted to the Clergy afterwards Because such a one had not been properly under Penance the sinne that is supposed in the case of the former Canon not being specified but onely generally confessed for sinne Whereby it appeareth sufficiently that in regard it is possible the sorrow wherewith a man submitteth to Penance in that case should be so sincere as to obtaine pardon at Gods hands therefore the communion was not refused But in regard of the doubt that remained in the businesse the Church warranted not the pardon till satisfied of his conversion by the performance of his Penance And therefore it is manifest that the ancient Church did not believe attrition to be changed into contrition by submitting to the Keyes of the Church making question of the salvation of those upon whom the Keyes of the Church had passed because the operation of Penance injoyned was prevented by death And so the practice of the ancient Church concurreth with the doctrine of the Apostles to
any now unlesse the signification thereof be fuâ—ther limited by other terms which being added to it every man will allow may determine a sense utterly prejudiciall to it True it is divers have observed that the word merâ—râ— in good Latine especially of those later ages in which the Fathers writ signifies no more then to attaine compasse or purchase Arguing from thence that the workes of Christians merit heaven in their sense and language no otherwise then because they are the meanes by which we attaine it So Cassander observes that S. Pauls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. I. 13. is by S. Cyprian translated misericordiam merui not intending to say that S. Paul deserved that mercy which he professes to have received of Grace But onely to signify that he found mercy and attained it But though I should grant that this word may signify no more in the language of the Fathers yet the Faith and the sense out of which it is evident that they spake will inforce that it doth signify as much as I say when they speak of our coming to heaven by our workes For having once resolved that the Covenant of Grace renders life everlasting due by Gods promise to those that lâ—ve as at their Baptisme they undertook though not for the worth of their workes yet by the mercy of God in Christ which moved him to tender such a promise he that sayes a man attaines heaven by the meanes of those workes which he lives in like a Christian sayes that those workes of his do merit heaven in the sense that I challenge For as for those that will have the workes of Christians to merit heaven of their own intrinsicke value Of those I have already said that I conceive they do prejudice the Christian â—aith in not allowing the necessity of Gods grace through Christ in accepting the condition which the Gospel requires for such a reward as the intrinsick value of it cannot deserve by Gods originall law For granting those helps of Gods grace in Christ being supernaturall and heavenly to hold proportion and correspondence with the reward of life everlasting which is the same Yet will it not follow that in all regards for the purpose in that the actions which they produce are momentany the reward everlasting which is the consideration S. Paul uses Rom. VIII 18. 1 Cor. VII 17 18. the correspondence will produce an equality of value And though the first principle of them be heavenly and supernaturall which is the help which God for Christs sake allowes yet seeing that it comes not immediately to effect but by the meanes of the faculties of mans soule infected with originall concupiscence it cannot be said that they can demand a reward correspondent to heavenly grace alone when earthly weakness concurres to imbase and allay the value of that which it produceth But as it cannot be denied that the Church of Rome in which that Order which maintainâ—s this extremity hath so great credit allowes this doctrine of merit to be taught yet can it not be said to injoine it Because there have not wanted to this day Doctors of esteem that have alwayes held otherwise Among whom I may very well name Sylvius now or lately Professor of Divinity at Doway who in his Commentaries upon the second part of Thomas Aquinas his Summe expounds that meritum de condigno which the Schoole attributes to the workes of Christians to be grounded in dignatione Dei because God vouchsafes and daignes to accept them whose they are as worthy of the reward expressing also the promise of the Gospell whereby this condescension of God is declared The Schoole Doctors found out the termes of meritum ex congruo ex condigno merit of congâ—uity and condignity Some of them because they thought That the workes of meer nature deserve supernaturall grace in regard that it is fit that God should reward him that doth his best with it That works done in the state of Grace are worth the Glory of the world to come But as the former part of the position which is planted upon these terms is rejected by many So they who onely acknowledge meritum congrui in workes done in the state of grace that is to say that it is fit for God to reward them with his kingdome say no more then that it was fit for God to promise such a reward Which whoso denieth must say that God hath promised that which it was unfit for him to promise And if the dignity of our works in respect of the reward may have this tolerable sense because God daignes and vouchsafes it The Councill of Trent which hath inacted no reason why they are to be counted merits can neither bear out these high opinions nor be said to prejudice the Faith in this point For The kingdom of God is not in word but in power if S. Paul say true And therefore though I affect not the terme of merit which divers of the Reformation do not reject Yet can I not think it so far from the truth so prejudiciall to the faith as the peevish opinions of those that allow not good workes necessary to salvation but as signes of Faith For that which necessarily comes in consideration with God in bestowing the reward which the condition he contracteth for must necessarily do though it cannot have the nature of merit because the Covenant it self is granted meerly of Grace in consideration of Christs death yet it is of necessity to be reduced to the nature and kind of the meritorious cause Nor can the glory of God or the merit of Christ be obscured by any consideration of our works that is grounded upon the merit of our Lord Christ and expresseth the tincture of his bloud The end of the Second Book Laus Deo OF THE LAWES OF The Church The Third BOOK CHAP. I. The Society of the Church founded upon the duty of communicating in the Offices of Gods Service The Sacrament of the Eucharist among those Offices proper to Christianity What opinions concerning the presence of Christs Body and Blood in the Eucharist are on foot IF God had onely appointed the Profession of Christianity to be the condition qualifying for the world to come leaving to every mans judgment to determine what that Christianity is and wherein it consists which it is necessary to salvation hee professe and what that conversation is which his salvation requireth There had been no cause why I should go any further in this Dispute But having showed that God hath appointed the Sacrament of Baptisme to be a necessary means to salvation limiting thereby the profession of Christianity which hee requireth to be deposited and consigned in the hands of his Church whom hee hath trusted for the maintaining and propagating of it I have thereby showed that hee hath appointed all Christians to live in the Communion of the Church The effect of Baptisme being to admit unto full Communion in those Offices wherewith God is
is admitted to Baptism is likewise invested with a right and due title to the promises of the Gospel remission of sâ—nnes and everlasting life As it may appear to all that hâ—ve contracted with the Church of England in Gods name that continuing in that which they professed and undertook on ttheir part at their Baptism they are â—ssured of no lesse by the Church And therefore this is and ought to be accounted that power of the Keyes by which men are admitted to the House of God which is his Church as S. Paul saith At least that part of it that is seen and exercised in this first office that the Church can minister to a Christian And seeing no man can challenge the priviledge of that communion to which he is admitted upon condition of that profession which Baptism supposed unlesse he proceed to live according to it it cannot seem strange that the same should be thought to be exercised in the celebration of the Eucharist as it is done with a purpose to communicate the Sacrament thereof to those that receive I shall desire any man that counts this sâ—râ—nge to consider that which I quoted even now out of Epiphanius That the Patriarch of the Jews at Tiberias being baptized by the Bishop put a considerable sum of Gold into his hand saying Offer for me For it is written Whatsoever ye bind on â—atrh shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever ye lose on earth shall be losed in heaven For so it follows in Epiphanius And when S. Cyprian blames or forbids offering up the names or offering up the Eucharist in the names of those that had fallen away from the Church in time of persecution till they were reconciled to the Church by Penance doth he not exercise the power of the Keyes in his hands by denying the benefit of those Prayers which the Eucharist is celebrated with to them who had forfeited their right to it by failing of that which by their baptism they undertook As on the other side whosoever the Eucharist is offered for that is whosoever hath a part in those Prayers which it is celebrated with is thereby declared loose by the Church upon supposition that he is indeed what he professes And whatsoever Canons of the Church there are of which there are not a few which take order that the offerings of such or such shall or shall not be received they all proceed upon this suppoâ—â—tion that by the power of the Keys they are to be allowed or refused their part of benefit in the Communion of the Eucharist and the effects of iâ— For not to speak of what is by the corruption of men but what ought to be by the appointment of God it is manifest that the admission of a man to the communion of the Eucharist is an allowance of his Christianity as conâ—ormable to that which Baptism professeth though in no sâ—ate of the Church it is a sufficient and reasonable presumption that a man is indeed and before God intitled to the promises of the Gospel that he is admitted to the communion of the Eucharist by the Church because whatsoever profession the Church can receive may be counâ—erfeit But so that it is to be indeavoured by all means possible for the Church to use that the right of communicating with the Church in the Sacrament of the Eucharist be not allowed any man by the Church but upon such terms and according to such laws that a man being qualified according to them may be really and indeed qualified for those promises which the Gospell tendreth Which being supposed every Christian must of necessity acknowledge how great and eminent a power the Lord hath trusted his Church with in celebrating and giving of the Eucharist when he is convinced to believe that the body and blood of Christ is thereby tendred him though mystically and as in a Sacrament yet so truly that the spirit of Christ is no lesse really present with it to inable the souls of all them that receive it with sincere Christianity then the Sacrament is to their bodies or then the same spirit is present in the flesh and bloud of Christ naturally being in the heavens For suppose that by faith alone without receiving this Sacrament a man is assured of the spirit of Christ as by faith alone understanding faith alone as S. Paul meant it I shall show that he may be assured of it yet if he have determined a visible act to be done to the due performance whereof he hath annexed a promise of the participation of the Spirit of Christ by our Spirit no lesse then of the body â—nd blood of Christ Sacramentally present by our bodies And if he hath made the doing of this a part of the Christianity which under the title of Faith alone inâ—iâ—leth to promises of the Gospell for who can be said to professe Christianity that owneth not such an Ordinâ—nce upon such a promise Then hath he determined and limited the truth of that faith which onely justifieth us at the beginning of every mans Christianity to the Sacrament of Baptism but in the proceeding of the same to that of the Eucharist These being the first Powers of the Church and having resolved from the beginning that the power of the Church extends to the deterâ—ining or limiting of any thing requisite to the communion of the Church the determination or limitation wherof by such an act as ought to have the force of Law to them that are of the Church becomes requisite to the communion of Christians in the offices of Gods service in unity I cannot see any of the controversies whereby we stand now divided that can deserve a place in our consideration before that of the Baptism of Infants For as it is a dispute belonging to the first and originall power of the Church to consider whether it extend so farre as when it is acknowledged that there is no written Law of God to that purpose that it may and justly hath provided that all the Children of Christian Parents be baptized Infants so it will apear to concern their salvation more immediately then other Laws limiting the exercise of the Churches power or the circumstances of exercising those offices of God service which it tendeth to determine can be thought to do But Before I come to dispute this point I will here take notice once more of the Book called the Doctrine of Baptisms one of the fruits of this blessed Reformation commonly attributed to the Master of a Colledge in Cambridge proving by a studied dispute that it was never intended by our Lord Christ and his Apostles that Christians should be Baptized at all That John indeed was sent to baptize with water but that the Baptism of Christ is baptism with the Holy Ghost and fire And so long as the Ceremonies of the Law were not abolished in point of fact though become void in point of right so long also baptism by water was practised by the Apostles as
by John the Baptist and his Disciples But that since then the continuance of Baptism by water in the Church is nothing else but an argument that it hath been destitute of Baptism by fire which is the Holy Ghost which this Reformation or forsooth this Dogmatist pretends to Which opinion obliges to mention again that of Sâ—cinus who allows no further of Baptism then of an indifferent Ceremony which the Church may use still at pleasure to solemnize the profession of Christianity when a man is converted from Infidelity to it as it was prescribed by our Lord to signifie the washing away of sinne from those who having been Jews and Gentiles were converted to be Christians But that the obligation thereof is utterly ceased in respect of those who being born of Christians and bred up in the Church have by the exercise of that Christianity which their yeares intitles them to made continual profession of it These two opinions like Samsons Foxes though â—ied together by the tails to set the Church on fire yet may proceed upon severall grounds For we know that Socinus denying Originall sinne hath reason enough to reject the baptism of men as well as of Infants as not acknowledging any thing but the will of man requisite to make him a good Christian and consequently suspending the premises of the Gospel onely upon that act thereof which resolveth a man to become a good Christian Which how well it agrees with Sovinus his acknowledgement of the gift of the Holy Ghost promised to them that have made this resolution to â—â—able them to perform it is clear to them who shall have perused the premises to give sentence As for the other opinion last mentioned I must professe that I do not take upon me that it is his work who is said to be the Author of it though I name him upon common fame as an instance to evidence that there is no Church of God in England by the present Laws when there is no means to bring to light the Authors of such pestilent Doctrines and when those who pretend to be an University do acknowledge such a man Master of a Colledge partly of Divines as if they were an University they ought not to acknowledge as a Christian to wit belonging to the communion of the Church For though I mean not to charge him with this Book yet so long as he owns all that he is charged with by Rutherford the Scots Presbyterian I do charge him with the Heresie of the Antinomians which here I mention because it seems reasonable to conceive this opinion to be a branch of it wherein how well he is reâ—uted by his adversary how clear his adversary is of the same blame is to be judged by that which I have determined concerning the condition of the Covenâ—nt of Grace For the Heresie of the Antinomians consisting in voiding the condition of the Covenant of Grace it is free for them to make the justification of Christians to go before justifing faith being nothing else but the revelation of Gods mercy which he hath form everlasting for the Elect whom he determining to save sent Christ to redeâ—m them alone It seems therefore very consequent in reason to this position if that operation of the Spirit which they pretend admit any dispute of reason about their positions to say that the gift of the Holy Ghost being due to the Elect by virtue of Christs merits and sufferings provided for them alone and imputed to them alone from everlasting to the remission of sinnes There can be no reason why Baptism should be requisite Those that are not elect not standing in any capacity either of admitting the Gospel or attaining the promises of it those that are being from everlasting estated in the right of them Now if that Presbyterian make justifying faith to consist in the knowledgs of mans Predestination to life in consideration of Christ sent for him revealed to him by Gods Spirit but limited to take effect upon the said revelation of it as I have said that some of them do then I referre my selfe to that which I have said already to show this opinion to be no lesse destructive to Christianity then the former but not so agreeable to it self nor to reason to make remission of sins and salvation appointed them meerly in consideration of Christ to depend upon the revelation of Christ to them altogether impertinent to any act required of them to procure it But if he make justifying faith to consist in a confidence in God such as men may have that are assured of remission of sins and of life everlasting not supposing on their part any condition of turning from the world to God as requisite by the Gospel I referre my selfe still to that which I have said to show how this is destructive to Christianity But why those that have these opinions should neverthelesse maintain the necessity of Baptisme whereof they have no reason to give according to the Scriptures I confesse I am to learn For if we believe Christianity to come from God and therefore all the Laws of it how shall we believe that for one of these Laws he hath provided that all that will be saved be baptized having given assurance of remission of sins and salvation without consideration of it or dependance upon it He that comes to be Baptized either have saving faith or not if he have it he hath it never the more for being baptized being such an assurance as no man may doubt in without failing of all Gods promises If he have it noâ— can baptism bring it unlesse we say with the Church that the promise of the Holy Ghost depends upon it which he that saith if he will give a reason of what he saith must have recourse to the condition of the undertaking and professing of Christianity in consideration whereof God hath promised the gift of the Holy Ghost to inable Christians to perform that which they undertake This is then to say that though I take notice of these Heresies in this place where I purpose to speak of the power of the Church in baptizing yet I hold not my selfe obliged to say any more for the rooting of them out or preventing them then I have said in demonstrating the nature of the Covenant of Grace For I have showed on the one side that the condition required on our parts to undertake if we would be intitled to the promises which it tendreth consisteth in an act of our free choice whereby the course of our lives is dedicated to the service of God as the end for which wee were made and that this course is determined by the Law of Christianity and consequently the act whereby we undertake to professe Christianity called faith by S. Paul that which intitles us to remission of sins and everlasting life And I have showed on the other side that the nature of man being corrupted by the fall of our first Parents could not be
limited yet must not this limitation be such as shall abate any thing of the promise of the Gospel which the Sacraments bring with them to those who by a competent resolution for their Christianity are qualified for it Turn we to the Law and the Prophets and observe according to the premises that there was no expiation prescribed by the Law for the inward guilt of sinne but for outward uncleannesses or incapacities of conversing among the people of God and by consequence of injoying the benefit of the Land of promise together with some sinnes which the Law specifies but condemns not to any bodily or pecuniary punishment Wherefore seeing we read in the Law and the Prophets so many exhortations to repentance which if we suppose to come from God we cannot suppose to be void of a promise implyed tendring pardon and favour at Gods hands upon repentance it is necessary to acknowledg that inward repentance under the Law qualified for remission of sinnes Read the seaven Penitentiall Psâ—lms and tell me how men came then to be cleansed of their sinnes David affirming Psal LI. 18. Thou desirest no sacrifice else would I give it thee but thou delightest not in burnt-offerings but by that faith which moved them to seek reconcilement with God by repentance and by that conversion to righteousnesse which their faith supposed acceptable to God So the Prophets Ezek. XVIII 32. XXXIII 9-20 Esay I. 18. 1 King VIII 33. 2 Chron. VI. 24. besides infinite more For if we say that men were then bound to confesse their sinnes that they might be cleansed by the Synagogue he that confessed a capitall crime must incurre a capitall punishment and without death there was no way to cleanse him of it If we say he might be cleansed by sacrifice by the Synagogue without confessing the sin why not under the Gospel by means answerable that is by the Eucharist and the oblations out of which it is celebrated without confessing in particular to the Church I do not therefore here dispute what sins might be and what might not be purged by sacrifices not doubting by many passages of the Prophets and Ecclesiasticus that the righteous and spiritual men of that people under the Law did offer sacrifices for the expiation of those sinnes which there was no particular promise in the Law that God would pardon upon those sacrifices But first I suppose that though God allowed their conformity to his present Law in offering sacrifices that were not expresly required by it but customed by Gods people upon it yet he accepted them not for those sacrifices but for that repentance and conversion of heart from whence they came Thereupon then I argue in the second place that if without declaring the kind of sinne under the Law under the Gospel much more For seeing that there is no expiation for capital crimes without death by the Law he that should offer sacrifice for such a sinne declaring it must become liable to death And the same is the case in the second rank of offenses against the Law which it punisheth with scourging Those also belonging to that rank which the Law threatens with death by the hand of God which renders their life forfeit into Gods hands Because of the Rule which they have that if they come to be know to the Synagogue they are to be punished with scourging For who can imagine that these can be purged by the Law without undergoing the penalty of the Law And therefore if sacrifices were offered for them they were not confessed seeing that all estates in the Synagogue which was bound to punish them were also bound to bring them to punishment As for the Church it hath been already declared that the constitution thereof presupposeth in order of nature and reason the covenant of Grace that is to say the condition upon which the Gospel tendreth remission of sinnes So that as we have all the reason in the world to think that God hath founded the corporation of his Church to be the means of affecting or procuring that dispoâ—ition which qualifieth for the promises of the Gospel So if the same diâ—poâ—â—â—ion câ—n be procured without the ministery of the Church which suppoâ—â—th the knowledge of particulâ—r sinnes there can be no cause why God should injoyn that the effect whereof is to be had without it Now I suppose from the premiâ—es that those who live within the Church have sufficient helps of Gods Grace to â—â—able them to return from their sinnes by repentance As for thoâ—e helps which â—hâ—y may have by the ministery of the Church making known their â—â—nnes to it Though they may be of such virâ—ue as to make that more 〈◊〉 which is poâ—sible without them Yet when all is done that man câ—n do it exâ—â—edâ—th not the same kind of helys whiâ—h man outwardly may rendâ—râ—â—o Goâ—s inwâ—râ—â—râ—ce Which as it is more probâ—ble that Gods good providence should â—â—ke â—ffectuall then where the same outwâ—rd meanâ— are not imployed or where they are imployed in a lesse measure So is it possible that bâ—ing onâ—e â—â—ffiâ—â—â—nt they may become effectual by Gods grace though in a 〈◊〉 measure But I confesse there is nothing prevailes more with me to conclude this then that which the Scripture affords us to evidence that God hâ—â—h instituted and appointed the Ministery of his Church for the reconciling oâ— thoâ—e â—â—nnes which must or which may come to the knowledge of his Church For when God giveth first to S. Peter the Keyes of his Church Mat. XVIII 19. and afterwards to all his Disciples the power of binding and loosing sinnes Joh. XX. 19. it is evident that by this power they are able to do nothing to unbelievers but perâ—wade them by preâ—ching the Gospel to imbrace that courâ—â— by which it tendreth râ—mission of sinne untill having perswaded them to it they oblige them to enter into the Church by Baptism as that to which God hath liâ—ited that profession of Christianity which he requires to remission of sinne Thus is the power of the Keyes or of binding and loosing sinne first seen and exercised in baptizing understanding thereby not onely the ministring of the Sacrament but the bringing of a man to that disposition to which Baptism is due The same is still exercised towards those that are come into the Church by laying forth to them the doctrine of Moses and the Prophets of our Lord and his Apostles obliging them to return from sinne by Repentance So that it cannot justly be said that Preaching as we call it that is further instructing in the doctrine of Christianity those that by the preaching of the Gospell have been moved to imbrace it is a thing impertinent to the power of the Keyes not concerning the office of it Unlesse we think ministring the helps of sufficient grace imperâ—inent to effectuall grace which alwayes supposeth them Having already shewed that before conversion to Christianity the power of the Keyes is seen in ministring the same
that God is satisfied that is to say his wrath appeased and his favour regained by the means which the Church prescribeth But requireth also that he submit not onely to use the cure which the Church prescribeth but to the judgement thereof in admitting the effect of it And upon these terms and upon no other the virtue of Baptism mortified by sinne reviveth again according to the doctrine of the School For if nothing else but the sincere resolution of living and dying as a Christian can intitle any man to the promises of the Gospel what is it that must intitle him to them that hath once forfeited his title Surely nothing but the renewing of that trust which is forfeited by failing of it And surely that trust is not so easily re-established as it is first contracted I have shewed you in the second Book what reason we have to believe that the severity of the ancient Church in readmitting those that failed of their profession at their Baptism necessarily argues the difficulty of being re-estated in the favour of God There goes more indeed to the satisfying of the Church that he who had failed of his Christianity hath sincerely renewed his resolution for it then to the renewing of it But that this resolution will as well be effectuall and durable as it is sincere it is as difficult to assure a mans selfe as to satisfie the Church The power of the Church then in binding and loosing that is in remitting or retaining sinne consists not onely in declaring a sinner either bound or loose Whether in generall by preaching the Gospel or in particular by refusing or restoring him to the communion of the Church For whom the Church bindeth for sinne known to the Church his pardon is not to be had without the act of the Church But in constraining him that will be a Christian to mortifie the love of sinne in himselfe as his sin declares it to be alive in him is the power of the Church in remitting sinne exercised And in pronouncing sentence of absolution in what form soever the power of assuring the same Let us now look over these same Scriptures again for by them having no other we must judge whether this power extends to all sins so that no sinne after Baptism can be pardoned without the ministery of the Church and the use of it Whether it extend onely to notorious sinners as an abatement of the sentence of excommunication which being liable to upon demonstration of repentance they are admitted to be reconciled by it or lastly whether there be some other reason to determine the extent of it Surely he that argues because God hath given his Disciples this Power and the Church after them therefore he hath commanded all sinners to use it denying all hope of pardon to them that do not use it by declaring their sinnes to them whom the Church trusts for it makes a lame consequence For will any reason allow him to say that otherwise this power signifies nothing when it is granted to extend to the curing of all notorious sinnes That which we learn of it from S. Paul to the Corinthians without all controversie concerns no sinnes but but such The sinne of him that had maried his Fathers wife was so well known that it had raised a party in the Church of such as pretended it to be consistent with Christianity And when S. Paul is afraid that coming to them he shall be fain to put many of them to Penance for the sinnes which having committed they would have made no demonstration of conversion from them before his coming it is evident enough that he speaks of no secret sinnes because the punishment which he pretends to inflict is for standing out against his leters in their sinnes As for that sinne which the Epistle to the Hebrews seems to exclude from reconcilement with God by the Church Apostasy from Christianity it is necessarily and essentially a manifest sinne because it consists in the visible renouncing of that profession which had been visibly made But coming to S. James we find that he commands the Priests of the Church to be sent for promising forgivenesse of sinnes upon their Prayers And therefore when he proceedeth to say Confesse your sinnes to one another and pray for one another we gather that he promiseth the pardon of those sinnes which the sick person shall have confessed to the Priests of the Church For if it be requisite for obtaining the prayers of a Brother for the pardon of our sinnes that we confesse them to him he that prescribes it must needs understand those sinnes which he promises forgivenesse upon their prayers to be declared to them afore It is therefore manifest that the Apostle here delivereth a precept of confessing sinne both to one another and to the Priests of the Church supposing the cure of sinne be known to all Christians by the Tradition of our common Christianity and the visible custome and practice of all Churches by works of humiliation and mortification of devotion and mercy whereby satisfaction is made not onely to the Church which receiveth offense by visible sinne but also to God who is offended by all sinne in that sense and to that effect which hath been justified in the second Book Namely to the appeasing of his wrath to the regaining of his grace and favour to the restoring of the Covenant of Grace contracted at our Baptism which sinne had made void And therefore in virtue of that satisfaction for all sinne which was once made by our Lord Christ upon the Cross without which that which we are able to do towards this effect would all have been to no purpose Whereupon that the Church is not satisfied in such a case but supposing that God is satisfied first and that the prayers which the Church maketh for the pardon of sinne are granted and made or ought to be granted and made upon presumption that the sinner is in a way of obtaining pardon of God by those Prayers upon his submission to the use of those means which either the Priests of the Church by the authority thereof shall injoyn or a Brother by his skill and discretion shall advise This being unavoidably the meaning of the Apostles first it is manifest that all Christians being directed by the Apostle to have recourse to the Keyes of the Church for the cure of sinne in the danger of death they may be more obliged to the same course in time of health because it may then be used whereas in danger of death though it must be prescribed yet it cannot be used but by him that surviveth Secondly it is further implyed that the sinne which a man confesseth to his Brother if he be not able to advise a meete cure for it is not onely by the party but by him also to be brought to the Church And so in both cases you have an injunction of the Apostle for the submitting of secret sinne to the Keyes
the ministery appointed by God in his Church furnishes Which if it be true it will inevitably follow that the most part of Christians are for the most part bound in conscience to have recourse to the power of the Church and the Keyes thereof for the cure of those sinnes which are not of themselves notorious And that other Christians may be tied in conscience to bring them to the Church for it by making known those sinnes which otherwise are not notorious To wit when they cannot reasonably presume that of themselves they will apply themselves to the means which the cure requires And if this be true it will also follow that it is in the power of the Church to make Rules of force to bind the consciences of those who are of the Church limiting the terms upon which they shall stand bound to have recourse to the Church for that purpose Indeed had the Apostles delivered any such faith That a man is justified by believing that he is appointed by God to salvation immediately upon consideration of Christ without any disposition qualifying him for it onely limiting his right in this appointment to the time that this appointment is revealed to him which revelation is that faith which alone justifieth I would then confesse that this interpretation of Scripture would no way be receivable because indeed no such Scriptures could have proceeded from those that delivered such a faith It would then be sufficient that he to whom this predestination is revealed by justifying faith should say Lord have mercy upon me at breathing out his last Or rather it would be needlesse nay damnable for him to desire that mercy which if he were not sure of before he said it he must be damned for want of that faith which onely saveth But if all Christians be justified by sincerely undertaking the profession of Christianity and that this sincerity is inconsistent with doing contrary to that which this profession containeth then let all men of discretion and conscience judge not whether the Church hath reason to believe that every such a one will voluntarily charge himself with that humiliation which may seem to mortifie the passions that made him sin afore and make his profession sincere for the future but whether himselfe hath reason to believe that either he knows how to value it or will effectually perform it not being instructed and obliged to it by the Church Seeing then on the side that God hath provided the Ministery of the Church for the purpose the effect of it in reconciling notorious sinnes being undeniable On the other no reason can presume that all Christians either know or will supply to themselves the work and effect of that Ministery being left to themselves It followeth that though voluntary Penance is not necessary for obtaining remission of every sinne yet it is necessary for the body of the Church because there is no ground of presumption that the sinnes thereof are or can be cleansed without it CHAP. X. The Sects of the Montanists Novations Donatists and Meletians evidence the cure of sinne by Penance to be a Tradition of the Apostles So doth the agreement of primitive practice with their writings Indulgence of regular Penance from the Apostles Confession of secret sinnes in the Primitive Church That no sinne can be cured without the Keyes of the Church there is no Tradition from the Apostles The necessity of confessing secret sinnes whereupon it stands ANd this is that whch the Tradition of the Church that is the originall and universall practice of Penance evidencing that it could have no other beginning then the authority of the Apostles which onely could oblige the whole Church throughly justifieth I told you at the beginning how near Montanus his Heresie was to the death of S. John when the age of the Apostles ended And it will not be amiss to tell you here that I shall show you in another place that in all probability it is still elder by above twenty years then Eusebius his account which there I allowed doth make it The pretense thereof among other austerities which they pretended to impose for Rules upon the whole Church upon the authority of Prophesies Inspirations and Revelations which they had or pretended to have was to exclude some great crimes from reconcilement with God by the means of the Church that is to say in the language of those times from being admitted to Penance I demand now of any man that will imploy a little of his common sense upon the businesse whether there had been any subject for Montanus to pretend the introducing of greater austerity then was practised in the Church in this point if there had been no practice of Penance then in the Church capable of greater strictnesse then was commonly practised And if his common sense gives no sentence let him advise either with that which remains of Tertullian for Montanus or against him in the records of the Church and tell me whether they do condemn the reconciling of sinne by Penance prescribed in the Church or that strictnâ—sse which Montanus pretended to introduce over and above the common practice evidencing therfore the force of that Penance which as generally practiâ—ed by condemning him for indeavouring to inhanse it Thus much for certain had not Montanus pretended to impose the austerity which he affected for a Rule upon the rest of the Church the occasion for which he was excluded out of the Church had not been He had reduced the Churches of Phrygia to his sense rather by the credit of those Revelations then by any authority which he stood professed of in them so farre as I learn And from thence it came to passe that his Doctrine continued so long in force there that the sect is call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which the Phrygians follow and the Sectaries Cataphryges in Latine But when according to the strict correspondence that then was exercised between all Churches it came to be communicated to the Churches of Asia we find by Eusebius how his pretense of Revelations was rejected as counterfeit or as unsufficient and by consequence the Law which upon the authority of them he pretended to impose upon the Church That being rejected by the neighbour Churches he travailed to Rome or sent to Rome to approve them there that being so received he might upon new grounds tender them to his neighbours we learn by Tertullian That being rejected there also Tertullian out of the passion he had for them being drawn away from the Church maintained their profession in a Church erected by Schism upon that account at Carthage till the times of S. Augustine by whom they were reduced to the communion of the Catholick Church we learn by Sirmondus his Praedestinatus and the same S. Augustine But otherwise the Phrygians were counted Sectaries by the rest of the Church that is necessarily Schismaticks and perhaps Hereticks if indeed by being separated from the body of the Church they became
about to impose new Laws upon the Church But those new Laws I show you were excepted against from the beginning of pretending them Let any man show me that voluntary confession of secret sins was ever exceped against in Tertullian who writ that Book when he was of the Catholick Church earnestly perswading to it Likewise though he writ his Book de Pâ—dicitia when he was become a Montanist yet it is easie to discern what he speaks in it as a Montanist by discerning what the Catholick Church contests and what it allows of his doctrine In the seventh Chapter of that Book it is manifest that he calls those sinnes to Penance which he were a mad man that should take either for scandalous or for notorious The Novatians being a branch of the Montanists and refusing to reconcile the greatest sins are to be thought to have followed their order in reconciling lesse sins as it is manifest by S. Ambrose de Poenit. V. 2. that they did Therefore they and therefore the Catholick Church did practice the discipline of Penance upon sins neither notorious nor scandalous In S. Cyprianâ— you have severall places where he mentions Penance for those sinnes which were to be confessed according to the custome of the Church after a certain time of humiliation when they were to be admitted to imposition of hands that is to the prayers of the Church for the pardon of him whom the Bishops blessing which the â—mposition of hands signifies acknowledged hopefull for remission of sinnes Epist X. LV. The same S. Cypriane de lapsis manifestly instances in those that had committed Idolatry secretly or had resolved towards it what befel them because they revealed it not to the Church so that sometimes they did reveal it Here cometh in the fact of Nectarius related by Socrates V. 19. because the custome being to confesse to a Priest deputed to that purpose sinnes not otherwise known who was to direct what she should publickly declare when she came before the congregation a certain noble Woman whose case is there related proceeded to declare that which caused such scandall that thereupon Nectarius then Bishop of Constantinople thought fit to put down the office which that Priest then held and executed of receiving the confession of those sinnes which were afterwards in part to be made known to the Church as the Priest intrusted should direct For Socrates relating the discourse which he had with the Priest which advised Nectarius to abolish the office aforesaid saith that he told him it was to be feared that he had given occasion to bring S. Pauls precept to no effect which saith Communicate not in the fruitlesse workes of darknesse but rather reprove them Which must suppose the publishing of those sinnes which a man may pretend by brotherly correction to restore And it is manifest that secret confession of sinnes hath remained in the Eastern Church and in that of Constantinople particularly even to this time So that no man can imagine that it was abrogated by Nectarius Origen in Psal XXXVII Hom. II. advises indeed to look about you for a skilful Physitian to whom you may open the disease of your soul good reason For there being a number of Presbyters by whom every Church was governed and it being in a mans choice whom he would have recourse to were he not to blame that should not make diligent choice But when he adviseth further that if he think the sinne fit to be declared to the assembly of the Church as where it is to be cured doth he not require necessary Penance upon voluntary confessions S. Ambrose de Pâ—nit II. 7. I. 6. II. 8. 9. laboureth to abate the shame of confessing sinnes If he speak of publick sinnes there can be no reason why For what hath he to do to abate that shame that cannot be avoided That which may be avoided is that which cometh by confessing such sins as it is in a mans power to conceal The same is evident in S. Augustinâ— Hom. ult ex L. And is further cleared by this that it is evident that he who was discovered not to have discovered to the Church that sinne which he was privy to but the world was not is by many acts of the Church constrained to undergo Penance for that default And in the Eliberitanâ— Canons it is provided that he who confesseth of his own accord shall come off with a lighter Penance he who is revealed by another shall be liable to a harder censure Can. LXXVI But no evidence can be so effectuall as the introducing of the Law of auricular confession that is of confessing once a year as well as receiving the Eucharist once a year For be it granted as it is most true that this Law comes into force and effect by the secular power of those soveraignties of Christendom which complying with the interest of the Church of Rome have agreed and do agree to inact the decrees of those Councils which have been held by the authority of it or the provisions thereof during the time that no Councils are held by temporall penalties upon their iubjects Is it therefore imaginable that the Councill could have pretended to introduce this limitation and demand the secular power to inact it had it not been a custome in force before that act was done that people should submit themselves to Penance for those sinâ—es which the Church without themselves could not charge them with Could any man offer so much violence to his own reason as to affirm that which himself cannot believe he would easily be convinced by producing the fashion of Ashwednesday and the order for the greatest part of Christians to declare themselves Penitents at the beginning of Lent with a pretence of obtaining absolution to the intent of receiving the communion of the Eucharist at Easter Which being more ancient then that law sufficiently demonstrateth that the effect of it was not to introduce the confession of secret sinnes which alwayes had been in use and force in the Church but expresly to limit and determine that which had been alwayes done formerly for the future to be done by all and at the least once a year It remains now to show the originall and generall practice of the Church that there is no Tradition to evidence that no sinne after Baptism can obtain remission but by the Church speaking of such sinnes as make the grace of Baptism void which is sufficiently done already if we remenber that not only the Montâ—nists or the Novatians but the Church also did sometimes exclude some sinnes from all hope of reconciliation by the Church not excluding them neverthelesse from hope of pardon with God but not ingaging the Church to warrant it For I demand in what consideration that pardon is obtained which the Church supposes possible for them to obtain Is it not upon the same score as all Christians obtain padon of sin To wit by being qualified for it with that disposition of mind which
to the answer to the Jesuits challenge in Ireland CHAP. IX Penance is not required to redeem tho debt of temporall punishment when the sinne is pardoned What assurance of forgivenesse the law of auricular Confession as it is used in the Church of Rome procureth Of injoyning Penance after absolution performed Setting aside abuses the Law is agreeable to Gods Of the order taken by the Church of England ANd now it is time to inferre from the premises the judgement that we are to make of the law of secret confession and Penance in the Church of Rome premising in the first place that which is evident supposing the premises that the works of Penance which they call Satisfactions because they will have them to make satisfaction for the debt of temporall punishment remaining when the guilt and stain of sinne is abolished were never required by the Church but according to the word of God to render the conversion of the Penitent so sincere and resolute as may qualifie him for pardon and Gods grace It is not necessary for this purpose that I undertake here to show that God pardoning sinne cannot or ever doth reserve a debt of temporall punishment to be inflicted in consideration of it It is manifest to any man that is neither acted by passion nor by faction that the death which God inflicted on Davids child gotten in adultery and the other judgements which the Prophet pronounces against him 1 Sam. XII 10-11 were punishments inflicted in consideration of those sinnes which the nature and kind of them answers expresly for murther that the sword shall not depart from his house for adultery that his wives should be defiled before the Sun Therefore when the Prophet sayes to him The Lord hath set aside thine iniquity thou shalt not die It will be requisite to take notice that though his sinne is pardoned speaking absolutely because his life his spared which was forfeit by Gods Law though into no mans hands but Gods yet this pardon extended not to extinguish the sentence pronounced nor yet that which he proceedeth further to pronounce concerning the childs death Whither you will say that in such a case sinne is remitted because absolutely the man is restored to Gods grace or not remitted because as to the punishments allotted he suffers by Gods vindicative justice is a controversie about words which I will not spend words to determine This cannot be denied that neither Gods originall justice nor any covenant of his with man hinders him so to proceed But what is this to the intent of Penance imposed by the Church which I have evidenced both by the Scriptures and the originall practice of the whole Church to have pretended the abolishing of the guilt and stain of sinne Indeed it is not to be denied that there is something more in that Penance which the Church imposeth For he that exacts the same revenge upon himself at his own discretion and conscience which the Church by the Canons thereof should exact pretends onelp to satisfie his own discretion and conscience that God is satisfied with his repentance And there lies the danger of satisfying a mans self with a palliative cure instead of a sound one whereas he that does it upon the sentence of the Church pretends to satisfie the Church that God is satisfied with it and to assure himself of his cure But when this satisfaction to the Church presupposes satisfaction ro God at least a presumption thereof whither onely legall or also reasonable well may I without this exception make this the pretense of Ecclesiasticall Penance Neither had there been any cause to question the doctrine and practice of the Catholick Church concerning the satisfaction of Penance had not the Church of Rome suffered it to be taught for I should do them wrong to say that they have injoyned it to be taught that it tendeth to recompense the debt of temporal punishment remaining when the sinne is remitted For though under the Gospel also God may decree temporal punishment upon that sin which afterwards comes to be remitted repentance yet he who is restored to the state of Gods grace to whom all things cooperate to good as S. Paul saith Rom. VIII 28. though he suffer temporall punishment for his sin by Gods justice yet by Gods grace to which he is restored it is converted into the means of salvation and of bringing to pass Gods everlasting purpose of it Before I go further I must call you to mind that which I said of the change of attrition into contrition how it may be allowed by the covenant of Grace and how it intimateth an abusive opinion that the change which qualifieth a man for the promises which the Gospel tendreth taketh effect in consideration of the intrinsecall worth of it and not onely of Gods promise which you have seen to be false This dispute was a long time canvased in the Schools without any reference to the remission of sinne by the Keyes of the Church But the difficulty being started that Confession not made in charity that is out of the love of God above all things may satisfie the positive precept but cannot avail to the remission of sin Some sought a salve for this sore in the form of Absolution which then proceeded partly as a Prayer partly as a definitive sentence For they thought the Prayer obtained that Grace which might be a due ground for the sentence But when the opinion prevailed that the form ought to be indicative it remained to say how Confession and Absolution should render him contrite that comes onely attrite Thomas Aquinas to say how the Keys of the Church may be understood to attain the production of Grace imagined the immediate effect of them to be a certain ornament of the soul fitting it for Grace by virtue whereof that Grace which a man gets not by Penance when he is not contrite quickens in him when he becomes contrite As he that is baptized without that resolution which obtaineth the promises becomes estated in them when it is rectified And this opinion had vogue among his followers till the last age afore this when finding it more proper to raise then to resolve questions it was laid aside by Cardinall Caâ—etane first then by the rest of his followers In the mean time the dispute of the change of attrition into contrition remained most maintaining contrition to be necessary before absolution till the Council of Trent upon the decree whereof Sess XIV cap. VI. Melchior Canus first maintained sorrow conceived upon meet fear of punishment with the Keys to qualifie for pardon of sinne Whose opinion is now grown so ordinary that those who hardly satisfie themselves in giving warning of the harm their own doctrine may do go down the stream notwithstanding in yielding to an opinion that hath so great vogue I do not intend hereby to say that that the Council of Trent hath decreed this opinion and obliged all to maintain it The terms which
in the one in the other to be grounded upon a sentence of absolution that supposes it not And yet it will not be acknowledged that there is any decay of discipline any fault any defect in the Laws and Customes for what is Law but Custome what rule is there for mens actions that custome inforceth not of the Church that cause so much difference in the proceedings of it Howsoever the custome of redeeming Penance came into the Church and how prejudiciall soever the voyage of the H. Land or the like may have been to the discipline of it the application of temporall good to some spirituall end was a poor cloke for such a corruption in comparison of that zeal to Christianity which fighting for Christians against Infidels pretendeth This is the most material occasion that I find alledged for that change which the discipline of the Church hath suffered in granting absolution before Penance To wit the indulgences granted them that undertook to fight for Christians against infidels And this is enough to render the abuse and the decay of discipline by the means thereof visible But when Indulgences are proposed for a small summe of Money pre-supposing indeed such qualifications as need not the Indulgences if rightly understood and had but as not being rightly understood and had render the Indulgences dangerous delusions whither poor people will not rather be induced by our common corruption to imbrace that sense which makes the pardon of their sinnes void as so had then that which makes them to be deceived of their money to no effect by the Church I leave to the conscience of discreet Christians to judge And whither this be not horribly to abuse the Keyes of the Church I leave to God and man to judge In the mean time I onely remind you of that difficulty which the ancient Church made in believing and admitting that those were saved who being admitted to the communion of the Eucharist in danger of death died before they could accomplish that Penance upon undertaking whereof they were admitted to it For is not the case of him that steddily purposeth to perform that Penance which the Church imposeth according to Rule if he survive much more hopeful for salvation dying afore then his that thinks his sinne purged by the sentence of absolution without undertaking or performing any Penance at all in order to the pardon of it And here I summon the Consciences of the Doctors of the Church of Rome Suppose a man take revenge upon himselfe according to a good conscience that is proportionably to the weight of his sinne according to the Rules that were in force in more uncorrupt times of the Church another according to the doctrine that is current in the Church of Rome professing himselfe truly sorry for his sinne and receiving absolution presumes of pardon for it intending to satisfie for temporall punishment that remains as he is directed whether of these is upon the better ground whether of them pretends to pardon upon the better title supposing the premises concerning the Covenant of Grace He who satisfying his conscience upon the original word of the Gospel and the primitive practice of the Church that he hath appeased the wrath of God by taking revenge upon himselfe and is thereby returned to his first resolution for Christianity Or he who being touched with sorrow for his sinne and submitting the same to the Keys of the Church hath done what the current practice thereof requires him to do for redeeming the temporall punishment of iâ— For it is evident in the doctrine of the Apostles and the primitive practice of the Church that the satisfaction of Penance appeaseth the wrath of God upon this ground because it evidenceth that resolution for Christianity to be restored which a man otherwise ought not to presume of in himselfe when he knows in himselfe that it hath been interrupted much lesse ought the Church to presume of it in him when the interruption thereof hath been visible to the Church He then who having conceived sorrow for his â—â—nne submits himselfe to the Keyes of the Church to be restored to Gods grace by the ministery thereof and does as he is injoyned to do if the Church and the person whom the Church trusts for him do their duty that is supposing the Laws of the Church to be good and sufficient and well and sufficiently exercised hath a good and sufficient presumption that he is restored But he who proceedeth upon the common faith of the Gospel and the primitive practice of the Church whereby all that is doubtful in Christianity must be resolved attaineth that assurance of his restoring to the state of salvation which I have showed is attainable But not supposing the Laws of the Church to be either sufficient or sufficiently executed that presumption of pardon which can be built upon it is neither good nor sufficient but rather peremtory to salvation by palliating the crime which it ought to cure Now for the ground which the Church of Rome gives a reasonable man to presume hereof it is not to be denied or dissembled that the Council of Trent Sess XIV cap. VIII declareth that it is the duty of all Confessors to injoyn wholsome and competent Penance upon all Penitents and that by virtue of S. Pauls charge 1 Tim. V. 22. upon which the Power of the Church in imposing Penance is truly grounded seeing the blessing of the Church signifieth by imposition of hands is as much granted in Penance as in ordaining least they become partakers of other mens sinnes declaring withall the intent which they ought to aim at in imposing them But we know also and see thereby that there is no effectuall course taken to see that this be done whither it be possible to take a course that may be effectuall to be done or not And we know besides how great vogue that opinion hath which maketh attrition with the Keyes of the Church that is the shame of declaring a mans sinne to his Confessor a sufficient disposition to forgivenesse And therefore it is justly to be questioned whither the Law of secret confession with these abusive opinions and scandalous practises under which it is now exercised in the Church of Rome is for the best or not That is to say whether the greatest part of them who submit to it do not unduly perswade themselves that their sinnes are cured by it when indeed they are not For considering the ground of all superstition and counterfeit religion to be this that man sensible of the wrath of God due to his sinne on the other side yet favourable to that concupiscence which sinne pleaseth on the otherâ—side desireth a colour to perswade himself that he is reconciled to God by such means as indeed serves not the turn I know not whether perswasion is the more catching supposing the present division between the Reformation and the Church of Rome that a man is justified by believing that he is
given generally to every Church For whereas our Lord elsewhere gives unto S. Peter this power of binding and loosing there is no doubt that in Peter bearing the form of the Church he gave it to all the Apostles Proceeding to allege S. Jerome and S. Augustine to the same purpose And upon the words of our Lord Feed my sheep Quod Petro dictum est omnibus Christi discipulis dictum est Hoc namque fuerunt caeteri Apostoli quod Petrus fuit pastores sunt omnes grex unus ostenditur qui ab Apostolis tunc unanimi consensu pascebatur deincepâ— a successoribus eorum communi curâ pascitur That which is said to Peter is said to all Christs Disciples For what Peter was that were the rest of the Apostles They are all shepherds but the flock appears to be but one which as then it was fed by the Apostles with unanimous consent so is it since fed by their successors with common care These Fathers then when they give this for the reason why our Lord gives Peter onely the Keys of the Church with the charge of feeding his flock that hee bore the person and form of the Church suppose the Church to be a body compacted of all Churches ruled by the same form of Government for the preserving of unity in the whole as the colledge of the Apostles consisteth of so many persons indowed all with one and the same power for whom one answers to signifie the unity of the whole Whereby it appeareth first negatively That the Church did uot understand any Soveraign Power to be committed to S. Peter by these words Then positively that our Lord speaking to him alone signifies there by the course which he hath established for preserving unity in the Church To wit that all Churches being governed in the same form the greater go before the lesse in ordering maters of common concernment S. Cypriane from whom all the rest have this doctrine hath cleared the intent of it when he thus writeth Epist ad Jubai LXXII Manifestum est autem ubi per quos remissa peccatorum datur quae in baptismo scilicet daâ—ur Nam Petro primum dominus super quem aedificavit Ecclesiam unde unitatis originem instituit ostendit potestatem istam dedit ut id solveretur in caelis quod ipse solvisset in terris Et post resurrectionem quoque ad Apostolos loquitur dicens Sicut misit me Pater ego mitto vos Hoc cum dixisset inspiravit aâ—t illis Accipite spiritum sanctum Si cujus remiseritis peccata remittentur illi si cujus tenueritis tenebuntur Unde intelligimus non nisi in Ecclesiâ— praepositis in Evangelicâ lege dominica ordinatione fundatis licere baptizare remissam peccatorum dare Now it is manifest where and by whom remission of sinnes is given when it is given in Baptism For our Lord first gave to Peter upon whom he built his Church and in whom and from whom he instituted and declared the original of unity in it this power that it should be loosed in heaven whatsoever he had loosed on earth And after his resurrection also speaking to the Apostles he saith As my Father sent me so send I you And having said this he breathed on them saying If ye remit any mans sinnes they shall be remitted him if ye retain any mans they shall be retained Whence we understand that it is not lawful for any but those that are set over the Church and grounded in the Evangelical Law and the Ordinance of our Lord to baptize and give remission of sinnes Because Peter received the Keys therefore all and every Church that is those that are over it and none else can give remission of sinnes by admitting to Baptism Shall we think the consequence extravagant having so clear a ground for it to wit the unity of the whole Church setled upon two ingredients the same form in all Churches but with dependence of the lesse upon the greater Churches If any man say all this is disputed by Cypriane to prove that Baptism given by Hereticks is void wherein he hath been disowned by the Church And that therefore the reasons are not well grounded from whence it is inferred The answer is easie because he inferrs upon them that which though true they do not inforce That a man cannot lawfully baptize is not so much as that if he do baptize his Baptism is void S. Cypriane took both for one and therefore his reason is good though it conclude not his purpose Why not void being unlawful I refer my self to what S. Augustine since hath disputed and the Church decreed and practised And here you have one ground for that distinction between the Power of Order and the Power of Jurisdiction comparing one with another the Bishops and Priests of several Churches according to the original constitution of the Church I allow S. Hierome to say that wheresoever there is a Bishop whither at Rome or at Eugubium an obscure City near Rome he is of the same worth as of the same Priesthood Epist LXXXV For as to the inward Court of the conscience the office that is Ministred by the Bishop or Priest of a lesse Church is no lesse effectual then by one of a greater Church But as to the outward Court of the Church supposing all Churches governed in the same form but the Churches of lesse Cities subordinate to the Churches of greater Cities by the appointment of the Apostles the act of the lesse Church of the Bishop or a Priest of it cannot be of that consequence to the whole as the act of the greater Church And so though the Bishop or the Priest of a litle Church be of the same Order with the Bishop or Priest of a great Church yet the authority of the one extendeth without comparison further then the authority of the other can do And you may perhaps dispute whether this authority produce any such as Jurisdiction or not but whether there be ground hereupon to distinguish between the Order which is the same in both and the authority which it createth in which there is so great difference you cannot dispute Certainly the office of a Deacon in a greater Church may be of more consequence to the whole then many Bishops can bring to pass As the assistance of Athanasius in the office of a Deacon to Alexander Bishop of Alexandria at the Council of Nicaea was of more consequence to the obtaining of the decree of the Council then the votes of many Bishops there CHAP. XIX Of the proceedings about Marcion and Montanus at Rome The businesse of Pope Victor about keeping Easter a peremptory instance The businesse of the Novatians evidenceth the same Of the businesses concerning the rebaptizing of Hereticks Dionysius of Alexandria Paulus Samosatenus S. Cypriane and of the Donatists under Constantine AMongst the proceedings of the Church I will first alledge that of the Church of Rome
and legall whereof before the ground onely was reasonable But I do not mean this dependance to be the effect of the fourth Commandment onely which prescribeth onely bodily rest as I have showed but of these appendences of it whereby the Assemblies of the Jews and their sacrifices for that day are inacted For because they were to serve God upon the Sabbath it was certainly reasonable in regard of our Lords resurrection that Christians should serve God upon the first day of the Week If any man in this regard will call the Lords day the Christians Sabbath or the like I find no fault with it nay I find it so called by the Christians of Aethiopia in Scaliger VII de Emend Temporum Provided he conne my opinion that thanks which it deserves for leaving no further room to unstable spirits to imagine as some great Masters have done that it is in the power of Churches or of Christian Powers â—rotecting them to chuse another day of seven or of less then seven for Gods publick service For not being out of the reach of such power immediately by virtue of the fourth Commandment as I and they both have shewed it is beyond the reaâ—h of it by virtue of the Apostles authority and the act of it And now it is time to declare the sense of the Catholick Church derived from the doctrine and writings of the Apostles to be this concerning the times of Gods service That the offices thereof being alwayes acceptable to God and seasonable so that they be orderly done it is the duty of the Church to provide that they be as frequently celebrated as the occasions of the world will allow not by particular Christians alone but at the common assemblies of the Church Whereby it may appear how injurious and prejudicial to the service of God the zele of those is who challenging the whole Sunday for the service of God by virtue of the fourth Commandement seem thereupon to take it for granted that there ought to be no order for the publick service of God upon other Festivals and times of Fasting appointed by the Church nor which is more for the dayly celebration of divine service in the Church There hath been a pretense indeed that when the fourth Commandement saith Six dayes thou shalt labor and do all that thou hast to do It forbiddeth the Church to give any Rule of forbearing bodily labor for the exercise of Gods service But so ridiculous that even these who have the conscience to hold the conclusion have not the face to maintain the premises That form of speech manifestly importing no more than this That the present Law requires no more than keeping the first day of the week seeing it is manifest that by other Laws God intended to proceed further and to except other dayes from the bodily labor of his then people for his service Thereupon it is manifest that the Synagogue proceeded likewise to except other dayes for which there rose occasions for the like purpose And truly those who think it a burthen to the duty of working for mens living that there should be an Order for the dayly serving of God in the Church having all them to attend it that are not prevented of it by necessary occasions may look upon the Jews and blush to consider that they as S. Jerome Epiphanius and Justine the Martyr assure us should assemble themselves thrice a day in their Synagogues to curse our Lord Christ which their own Constitutions not mentioning do provide for the service of God nevertheless but that it should be counted superstitious for Christians to meet for Gods service in publick unless it be on the Lords day Certainly the practice of the primitive Christians at Jerusalem signifies no such thing all the contribution there raised tending to no other purpose but that the Church might hold together in the doctrine of the Apostles and the service of God and celebration of the Eucharist Though they went also into the Temple and served God with the Jews whom they then hoped and intended to reduce unto Christianity But I will referr my self in this point as in that which follows to that which I have said in my Book of the service of God at the Assemblies of the Church Chap. VIII having received from no hand any maner of satisfaction in the least of it Whereby it will appear that the Church hath power to limit the times of Gods service upon this ground Because the occasions of the world suffer not Christians alwayes to attend it which so oft as the Church shall finde it possible they are bound to do And that the use of this power as it is justified by the practice of the whole Church so it is necessary to the advancement of godlinesse according to Christianity Nor can the effect thereof be superseded without hindring the service of God whatsoever the strict keeping of the Lords day may contribute to the same Those times of persecution succeeded to the primitive Church wherein it is altogether admirable to consider how it was possible to reduce the whole body of Christians to an orderly course of so frequent service of God as appeareth The difficulties of assembling themselves being so great as under persecution must needs be Therefore when the exercise of Christianity was free and peaceable when all Nations and Languages upon their conversion to Christianity had made it their business and set aside means by which the service of God might be daily celebrated and all men have opportunity to frequent the same so farr either as their occasions would give leave or their hearts to God minde them to frame their occasions to take away this order and to destroy the means of executing it as either superstitious or superfluous what is it else but that curse which the Jews in their Synagogues would have wished Christianity when they met to curse Christ And if all difference of dayes for the service of God being taken away by Christianity so that no office of it is at any time unacceptable as the offices of Judaism were abominable not upon their legal days And the Apostles have notwithstanding for orders sake that there might be a certain time inviolably dedicated to that purpose set aside the first day of the week for it shall wee question whether it was they that instituted the solemnity of Easter Holy-days and consequently of Whitsuntide in remembrance of the resurrection of our Lord and the coming of the Holy Ghost or not For all the Lords dayes in the year have the mark that stands on them from that one on which our Lord rose again And since wee know that the difference about keeping Easter is as ancient as the Apostles and that there could have been no ground for it had not the Lords day born that mark at that time the question being onely when the Fast should end and the celebration of Easter come on can any doubt remain that the solemnity of
know the truth as men of lying spirits and teaching the doctrines of Devils speaking lies in hypocrisy with seared consciences 1 Tim. IV. 1-4 But always understanding those followers of Simon Magus and Cerinthus from whom the Hereticks that succeeded learned that this world was not made by God and that the bond of mariage came in by the spirits that made the world whom we must escape by abstaining from some kinds of creatures What Christian can dare to say with a good conscience that the rule or custome of the Church to forbear those meats and drinks that inflame the blood most for the mortification of the flesh hath any dependence upon those wicked blasphemies Nay who can read that Daniel in his fastings eat no pleasant meat but he must inferr that there is no fasting observed where men observe no difference of meats Look into the Jews Constitutions and see how they observed their Fasts and their Festivalls you shall find it more ancient then Christianity to solemnize Sabbaths and proportionably other Festivalls with the best meats the best drinks the best apparel all things of the best And on the other side as much care that there be nothing to signifie or ground any such construction upon their Fasts and Humiliations So that we may well ask those that appoint their solemn Humiliations upon the Sabbath for so they will needs call the Sunday right or wrong what Religion they intend to be of neither Judaism nor Christianity having produced any such sect till our time And therefore we must say that those who make a disference of meats for conscience sake as if all meats were not Gods creatures alike or as if we held choice of meats to be still the service of God because once it intitled the Jews to the Land of promise are justly reproved by S. Paul adding in the place afore-named as a reason of the premises For every creature of God is good and nothing to be refused if it be received with thanksgiving being sanctified by the word of God assuring us hereof and by prayer But if the meaning be further to say that it is superstitious to observe fasting with meats of less nourishment that signifie mourning that effect the mortification of the flesh and the concupisences thereof and that for conscience sake not onely in that regard but in regard the Church hath appointed it for that purpose then must I say plainly that this Doctrine in stead of reforming or maintaining the service of God is the author of that licentiousness which we see come to pass I will not here dispute that there may not be as much riot as much contradiction to the end and purpose of fasting in eating of fish as in flesh especially allowing Wine and Sweet-meats as the Church of Rome doth to those that are content to submit to other Laws of it For he who maintains that there is no fasting properly so called where there is no difference made between meats and those that provoke the appetite and inflame the blood are not laid aside those that signifie mourning best are not used maintain sthat is it not properly fasting where onely fish is served if the quality or the quantity of that which is served may serve for feasting And such customes as those are meâ—re irregularities which the rule and practice of the primitive Church no way alloweth all the dyet which it granted being onely exceptions from total absâ—inenâ— to sustain nature and to maintain health which no Religion destroyeth and therefore excepteth weak ages and constitutions from this strictness The granting of fish above bread and water and salt and herbs is an abatement of the primitive strictness which Clemens Alexandrinus reports S. Mathew Poedagg II. 1. Hegesippus in Eusebius of S. James of Jerusalem Hist Eccles II. 23. and S. Austine adversus Faustum libro XX. câ—napura in Ireneus that is to say a supper without any thing of a living creature at it being the same that parasceve or Friday And if we may reasonably imagine that the cold climate wherein we live and the spending of our bodies by the aire requireth more effectuall restauratives then the Eastern Countries from whence these practices first came yet to make fasting and forbid difference of meats will always be things contradictory To abate of that difference by litle and litle acknowledging the general ground of it will be but the same that may be observed in all exercises of Christianity that the strictness thereof decayed by degrees in succeeding times from that which was practiced from the beginning under the Apostles For the measure of Fasting in the ancient Church was also till three in the afternoon which the more devout extended with the Jews until the appearing of the Starres and that the Montanists would have imposed upon the Church for a Law declared by their Prophets Now in all these Western parts at least according to practice whatsoever be the Rule it is granted that fasting is but eating one meal a day though it be at noone not denying the collation at night nor every where no not at Rome it self a draught of drink in the morning and a bit of bread least that draught do harm And this is called the Fast of the Church in opposition to the fast of nature prescribed to those that celebrate and receive the Eucharist even from Physick and any thing that may be received afore But these are abatements which no rule or custome of the ancient Church justifieth onely when more cannot be obtained it is requisite rather to cherish such a measure as can be maintained then to let all order go under pretense of Christian liberty which is indeed abandoning our selves to sensuality by casting off the rules which oblige us to mortifie natural concupisence In the next place it is a marvail to see how ready men are to imbrace a slight plea why the solemnity of our Lords birth should not be observed though in the end they forfeit the credit of their skill in reforming by discovering their ignorance Joseph Scaliger a very learned man and much studied in Chronology thinking that he had found the true year of Christs birth which had not been preserved past question in any record of the Church for the world when it was not Christian counted not by the time of Christs coming as now it doth bethought himself that by counting the courses of the Priests in the Temple from the cleansing thereof by Judas Maccabâ—us the year and the moneth and day whereof is certain he might attain to the day that the course of Abia whereof Zachary was being the first course Luke I. 5. came on to Minister in the Temple the XXIV divisions spending XXIV times seven days in one course certain and by consequence the day of the Annunciation Vâ— moneths after and the day of our Lords birth nine moneths after that at least for the moneth and season of the year though not to a day And accordingly
the Church and to make voâ—â— the Laws which settled it they cryed up this position as much as the rest But when it came to order that confusion which they had made themselves they then found it necessary to limit both the mater and form though not the words which the offices of divine service should be celebrated with Which what was it but Plowdens case that for the form of Gods service to be prescribed by themselves it is not only lawful but requisite by the Church altogether abâ—â—inable And indeed those who must needs take upon them to appoint the persons who are to minister to the People must needs take upon them to appoint the form in which it was to be done They who make the one to depend upon the moâ—ion of Gods Spirit must make the other do the like though never able to make evidence of any such motion in any person that ever pretended it And yet is that all that ever hath been alledged so farre as I know for all opinions so new to Gods Church That S. Paul forbiddeth to quench the spirit 1 Thes V. 19. I do not deny that other texts of S. Paul have been alleged who in 1 Cor. XXI XIV discourseth so largely of the use of spiritual graces ordering also how they should be exercised and imployed in the said Church Nor that writting to the Romans VIII 23. 26. 27. he saith That the Spirit which groaneth for the resurrection in those that have the first fruits of it helpeth the infirmities of the Saints not knowing what to pray for as they ought interceding for them with grones unutterable which the searcher of hearts knowing the mind of the Spirit findeth to be made after the will of God But in these sayings there is nothing like a precept much lesse such a one as may seem to oblige the whole Church On the contrary the evidences are so frequent and so palpable in the discourse of S. Paul to the Corinthians that the Graces whereof he speaketh are miraculous Graces such as God then furnished the Church with to evidence the presence of his Spirit in it as well as 〈◊〉 their edification in Christianity assistance in Gods service that it were madnesse to require the Church to sollow the rules which suppose them which now appear no more in the Church And truly with what conscience can he alledge against the Church of Rome that miracles are ceased the grace whereof is ranked by S. Paâ—l with those which tend to the edification of the Church 1 Cor. XII 8. 9 10 28 29 30. who challengeth for himselfe or his fellows the priviledge of those Graces in Gods Church With what conscience can they hear S. Paul say 1 Cor. X. 17. That the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit with And challenge themselves the priviledge of profiting the Church by Teaching or by Praying without any manifestation of the Spirit For are they not challenged every day to make manifest that ever any of them did speak by Gods Spirit and not by the Spirit of this World inspiring the fruits of the flesh by carnal or rather diabolical pride innovating in matters of Faith and destroying the uniformity of Gods service And therefore when S. Paul having said Quench not the Spirit addeth Deipise not Prophesies what hath been alleged what can be alleged why it should not be thought that he repeateth in brief that order which he had declared so largely to the Corinthians that the grace of speaking in unknown languages should not be discountenanced in the Church and so the Spirit extinguished But that Prophesies the grace whereof he there preferreth so farr before it should no way be neglected for it Truly he that saith The manifestation of the spirit is given to all to profit with doth say in effect that the Spirit which groâ—neth for the resurrection in them which have the first fruits that is the prime graces of it makes intercession for the Saints according to God by helping that infirmity of theirs whereby they know not what to pray for of themselves For those who had not alwayes had the Apostles Doctrine sounding in their ears but onely were instructed by them and their fellows so farr as to be fit for Baptism remaining neverthelesse novices in Christianity why should we think them fit to know what to pray for in all occasions Why should we think it strange that God should give the first fruits of his Spirit to profit them with in this case But the faith of Christ with the reasons and consequences thereof being setled and the order of the Church being established as the gift of miracles ceased as well to the bodily health and support of Christians and the Church as to the demonstration of Gods presence and witnesse to the truth of Christianity As the delivering of incorrigible sinners to Satan to the destruction of the flesh by bodily diseases and death ceased when obedience to Gods Church was established so is it no marvail if the Graces of Gods Spirit which profited the Church in teaching them what to pray for should no more be granted when the Church had not onely knowledge but good order established by which those offices might be preformed to the profit and edification of Christians Let them then who find that they can cure the sick by their prayers anoint them with oyl upon that ground and to that purpose Let them who can sing Psalms extempore so as to become the praises of God because S. Paul saith When ye come together every one of you hath a Psalm hath a doctrine hath a tongue hath a revelation hath an interpretation And that may be as well suggested upon the place as afore hand S. Paul saith that if a stranger coming into the Church should hear divers speak in strange languages that which they made not their hearers understand he would say were madd 1 Cor. XIV 23. dotwithstanding that it might appear that they would not speak those languages but by Gods Spirit I will onely demand of them not to abuse and dishonour Gods Spirit by imputing â—nto it those operations which it is not for the honour of God to acknowledge And then tell them that they must be tried by our common Christianity whether that they pretend to say or to do by the same agree with it But further order of Gods service in the Church let us proceed according to the principles premised comparing that which we find extant in the Scriptures with the original and general practice of Gods Church to say That the service of God consisting of his praises the doctrine of the Scriptures read and expounded and the prayers of the Church especially those which the communion of the Eucharist is celebrated with In the first place the Psalms of David that is the Book of Psalms is necessarily by the practice of the whole Church a form of Gods praises determined to the Church Which conclusion as it
a prejudice peremptorily over-ruling all the pety exceptions that our time hath produced to dissolve this Unity which ought to have been preferred before them had they been just and true as none of them proveth CHAP. XXIV The Service of God to be prescribed in a known Language No pretense that the Latine is now understood The means to preserve Unity in the Church notwithstanding The true reason of a Sacrifice inforceth Communion in the Eucharist What occasions may dispense in it Communion in both kindes commanded the People Objections answered Who is chargeable with the abuse I Would now make one Controversie more how much soever I pretend to abate Controversies than hitherto hath been disputed between the Reformation and the Church of Rome because though wee hear not of it in our books of Controversies yet in deed and in practice it is the most visible difference between the exercice of Religion in the two professions that you can name For what is it that men go to Church for but to hear a Sermon on one side and to hear a Mass on the other side And yet among so many books of Controversies who hath disputed whether a man is rather to go to Church to hear a Sermon or not to hear a Mass but to receive the Eucharist This is the reason indeed why I dispute not this Controversie because the Mass should be the Eucharist but by abuses crept in by length of time is become something else untill I can state the question upon such terms as may make the reason of Reformation visible Whether the celebration of the Eucharist is to be done in a Language which the people for the most part understand not in Latine as the Mass supposing the most part understand it not is first to be setled before wee inquire what it is that Christians chiefly assemble themselves for Though the question concerns not the Eucharist any more than the other offices of Gods publick Service onely as the Eucharist if it prove the principal of them is principally concerned in it I am then to confesse in the beginning that those of the Church of Rome have a strong and weighty objection against mee why they ought not to give way that the Service of the Church though in a form preseribed by the Church as I require should be celebrated in the Vulgar Languages which every people understand The objection is drawn from that which wee have seen come to pass For the Service of the Church the form and terms of it being submitted to the construction of every one because in English hath given occasion to people utterly unable to judg either how agreeable maters excepted against are to Christianity or how necessary the form to the preservation of unity in the Church first to desire a change then to seek it in a way of fact though by dissolving the Unity of this Church For hee that maintains as I do that whatsoever defects the form established may have are not of waight to perswade a change in case of danger to Unity And secondly that those who have attempted the change have not had either the lot or the skill to light upon the true defects of it but to change for the worse in all things considerable must needs affirm that otherwise they could never have had the means to possess mens fansies with those appearances of reason for it which have made them think themselves wise enough to undertake so great a change And truly there is nothing so dangerous to Christianity as a superficial skill in the Scriptures and maters of the Church Which may move them that are puffed up with it to attempt that for the best which it cannot inable them for to see that so it is indeed Whereas they who hold no opinion in maters above their capacity because concerning the state of the whole are at better leisure to seek their salvation by making their benefit of the order provided Seeing then it cannot be denied that the benefit of having the Service of God prescribed by the Church in our Vulgar English hath occasioned so great a mischief as the destruction of it it seems the Church of Rome hath reason to refuse children edge tools to cut themselves with in not giving way to the publick Service of God in the Vulgar Languages Unless it could be maintained that no form ought to be prescribed which is all one as to say that there ought to be no Church in as much as there can be no Unity in the Faith of Christ and the Service of God according to the same otherwise Now that you may judg what effect this objection ought to have wee must remember S. Pauls dispute upon another occasion indeed but from the same grounds and reasons which are to be alleged for the edification of the Church in our case God had stirred up many Prophets in the Church of Corinth together with those who celebrated the mysteries of Christianity in unknown Languages and others that could interpret the same in the Vulgar partly out of an intent to manifest to the Gentiles and Jews his own presence in his Church including and presupposing the truth of Christianity but partly also for the instruction of the people novices in Christianity for a great part in the truth of it and for the celebration of those Offices wherewith hee is to be served by his Church It came to pass that divers puffed up with the conceit of Gods using them to demonstrate his presence among his people took upon them to bring forth those things which the Spirit of God moved them to speak in unknown Languages at the publick assemblies of the Church Who might indeed admire the work of God but could neither improve their knowledg in his truth nor exercice their devotion in his praises or those prayers to him which were uttered in an unknown Language This is that which the Apostle disputeth against throughout the fourteenth Chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians making express mention of Prayers Blessings which I have showed to be the consecration of the Eucharist and Psalms ver 14-17-26 and concluding v. 27 28. that no man speak any thing in the Church though it be that doctrine those prayers or praises of God which his own Spirit suggesteth unless there be some body present that can interpret Which what case can there fall out for the Church which it reacheth not For you see S. Paul excludeth out of the Church even the dictates of Gods Spirit evidencing his presence in the Church by miraculous operations unless they may be interpreted for the edification and direction of the Church What can hee then admit for the Service of God in the name of his Church or for the instruction thereof which it can neither be instructed by nor offer unto him for his service Nay what cause can there be why the Church should meet according to S. Paul if there be nothing done that is understood What
cause can be alleged why there should be a Church that is a Body and an authority to Order that Body if there be no Office for which it should assemble because that which it understandeth not is no such Office For I have laid this for a ground that the Society of the Church subsisteth for the Service of God at the common Assemblies of the Church in the Unity of the same Christianity So that though it may be alleged that the Unity of Christianity may be preserved by the Society of the Church though the Service of God be not understood yet the end for which it is preserved is not compassed when the Service of God is not performed by those who understand it not is Christianity requireth Certainly it is a question to be demanded of those of the Church of Rome why they do not preach to the people in Latine as well as they celebrate the rest of Gods Service in that Language if they be content to submit themselves to S. Pauls doctrine For whatsoever reason they can allege why that in the Vulgar and the rest in Latine will rather serve to demonstrate that it would be more visibly ridiculous than that it is any more against S. Pauls doctrine But is it any more to the benefit of Gods people toward the obtaining of their necessities of God that they should assemble to offer him the devotions which they understand not than not to assemble or offer none For whatsoever may be said that the devotions of those who do understand what they do are available to the benefit of those who do not will hold nevertheless though they were not present nor pretended to do that which the Congregation doth provided that they have as good a heart to do that which the Congregation doth as they have being present at it Unless wee suppose that God values their hearts because they are there more than hee would value them being elswhere Nor can I possibly imagine what can be said to all this but onely in abatement of that ignorance in the Latine of the Church service which the Nations of the Western Church may be supposed to attain to whether by custome of being used alwayes to the same form or because the Vulgar languages of Italy Spain and France being derived from the Latine may inable even unletered people to understand that or the most part of that which is said in Latine at the Church service which is the reason why the Jews after their return from Captivity having changed their Mother Hebrew into the vulgar tongue of the Babylonians and Châ—ldeans being indeed derived from it with lesse change then the Italian from the Latine maintained notwithstanding the service of God in their originall Hebrew so farr as we are able to understand by the circumstances produced elsewhere And though at this present some parts of it are rather Chaldeâ— then Hebrew yet they are now in such a condition that a great many of them are not able to attain either that language or the Hebrew but speak and understand onely that language where they are bred the service which they use in their Synagogues remaining in the Hebrew And the Greeks at this day having got a vulgar language as much differing from the ancient learned Greek as the Italian from the Latine notwithstanding cease not to exercise the serviceâ— of God in the learned Greek which they understand not Which the Western Nations and Nothern may continue to do with as little burthen as they voluntarily undergo least they should give the minds of rude people cause to make more doubt then they see upon a change which they see And truly I do think this consideration of preserving unity in the Church of such weight that I do not think it was requisite when the Latine tongue began to be worn out of use by litle and litle through the breaches made by the Germane Nations upon the Western Empire that the service of the Church should straight-way be put into the Languages of those Nations who were every day changing their languages and learning the Latine or rather framing new languages by mixing their own with the Latine Neither will I undertake to determine the time the state in which the Church first becomes or became obliged to provide this change for the same reason For it is evident that it had not been possible to preserve correspondence and intercourse between all these Nations with the maintenance of unity in that Christianity which while this change was making they had received had not the knowledge of the Latine among them made it reasonable to continue the use of it in the Church service But as the case is now that a totall change of the Latine into new languages hath been accomplished and that the greatest part of Christian people by many parts are by no means able to learn what is done at the service of the Church confiningit to the Latine I must needs count it strange that the example of the modern Jews in their Synagogues or those miserably oppressed Christans in Turky should be alleged as to prove that there is nothing to oblige the whole Church to provide betâ—r for all Christians then those Churches do for their people or the Jews for their Synagogues when we dispute what ought to be done We should rather look to the originall practice of Christendom which there may be reason to intitle unto the Apostles and consequently the changes that may have succeeded to a defect of succeeding ages failing and coming short of their institutions then allege the practice of the Jews which the Christians have so litle cause to envy that they may well conclude them to be a people forsaken of God by the litle appearance of Religion in the offices which they serve God with or the necessities of ignorant and persecuted Christians for a rule to Churches flourishing with knowledge and means of advancing Gods service If from he beginning when by the means of those who spoke Greek and Latine or other languages used within the Empire from whence the tidings of the Gospel came other Nations had received the service of God in those languages wherein the Churches of Rome Constantinople Alexandria or Antiochia or possibly other Churches from which their Christianity was planted did celebrate it they might with some colour of reason have argued that so it ought to continue in the Western Church But since it appeareth that the service of God hath been prescribed in the Arabick the Syriack the Ethiopick the Coptick the Sclavonian the Russe and other â—orâ—ain languages what can a man inferr from the practice of the Church of Rome not allowing the Saxons in Britain the Germanes in Almane and the North and Eastland Countries the Slavonians in Pole and Boheme and other parts the service of God in their Mother tongues towards the disputes of this time that they ought not to be allowed it but the inhansing of the Popes Power
people by virtue of the meer act of assisting at the Sacrifice which hath been called opus operaetum or the very external work done without consideration without knowledge without any intention of doing that which he is to do in it that is of concurring every one for his share to the doing of the same Supposing alwayes that this Sacrifice consists in substituting the Body and Blood of Christ to be bodily present under the accidents of the elements the substance of them being abolished and ceasing to be there any more And not in offering and presenting the sacrifice of Christ crucified here now represented by this Sacrament unto God for obtaining the benefits of his passion in behalfe of his Church And this opinion I may safely say I know to be still maintained because I have heard it maintained though as I suppose by the more licentious and ignorant sort of Priests that it concerns not the people to consider to know to intend to joyn their devotions to the effecting of that which this Sacrament pretends But onely to mind their own Prayers assisting and accompanying that which the Priest doth with those affections which they came to Church with But can I therefore say that this is the doctrine of that Church because it allows such things to be taught and said without punishment or disgrace Surely he that peruses not onely the Testimonies which Doctor Field hath produced in the Appendix alleged afore to show that the true understanding of the Sacrifice of the Eucharist was maintained in the Church even till the Reformation together with the opinions of many Divines of credit in that Church and instructions of Catechisms and devotions that have been published since the Council of Trent shall easily conclude that it is allowed though not injoyned by the Church to oppose this palliating of abuses in the Church by opinions so prejudiciall to Christianity And without doubt those who pretend no more then to excuse the Church in not reforming the abuse of private Masses by saying that the Church commands them not nor forbids any man to communicate at any time but rather exhorts them to it are farr from saying that the people are no further concerned in the Mass then to assist it with their bodily presence and the generall good intentions affections which they come to Church with imploying themselvs in the mean time at their own devotions Though it is much to be feared that this opinion is farr the more popular The opposition which the Reformation hath occasioned and the countenance given by the Sea of Rome to those who are the most zealous and extreme in opposing the Hereticks bearing down the indeavours of more conscientious Priests to maintain more Christian opinions in the minds of their people In the mean time it is visible that the resolution of this point dependeth upon the true reason of offering the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross in celebrating the Sacrament of the Eucharist Which I have showed to consist in presenting unto God the Sacrifice of Christ crucified represented here now by the elements sacramentally changed by the act of consecrating into the body and blood of Christ by those Prayers whereby the Congregation which celebrateth this Sacrament intercedeth with God for their own necessities and the necessities of his Church For if the virtue and efficacy of these Prayers be grounded upon nothing else then the fidelity of the Congregation in standing to the Covenant of Baptism as if Christianity be true it consists in nothing else and if the celebration of the Eucharist be the profession of fidelity and perseverance in it what remaineth but that the efficacy of the Sacrifice depend upon the receiving of the Eucharist unlesse the efficacy and virtue of Christian mens Prayers can depend upon their perseverance in that Covenant which they refuse to renew and to professe perseverance in it that profession being no lesse necessary then the inward intention of persevering in the same For the receiving of the Eucharist is no lesse expresly a renewing of the Covenant of Baptism then being baptized is entering into it So that whosoever refuses the Communion of the Eucharist in as much as he refuses it refuses to stand to the Covenant of his Baptisme whereby he expects the world to come I say not therefore that whosoever communicates not in the Eucharist so oft as he hath means and opportunity to do it renounces his Christianity either expresly or by construction and consequence For how many of us may be prevented with the guilt of sinne so deeply staining the conscience that they cannot satisfie themselves in the competence of that conversion to God which they have time and reason and opportunity to exercise before the opportunity of communicating how many have need of the authority of the Church and the power of the Keys not onely foâ— their satisfaction but for their direction in washing their wedding Garments white again How many are so distracted and oppressed with businesse of this world that they cannot upon all opportunities retire their thoughts to that attention and devotion which the office requires How many though free of business which Christianity injoyneth are intangled with the cares and pleasures of the world though not so farr as to depart from the state of Grace yet further then the renewing of the Covenant of Grace importeth Be it therefore granted that there is a great allowance to be made in exacting the Apostolical Rule for all that are present to communicate But be it likewise considered what a pitifull excuse it is in behalfe of the Church that it forbiddeth no man to communicate that is prepared as the rules thereof require subsisting for no other purpose but to procure the people thereof to be prepared for the service of God whereof the principal part is this office But when it is further allowed to be taught and said that it concerns not Gods people to assist the office of the Church with their actuall intentions and devotions but with their bodily presence and the generall affection which they bring with them to Church what reason can be alleged why they should go to Church to cary those affections to the Congregations which are exercised at home with their particular devotions to the same purpose Nay to what purpose subsisteth the Communion of the Church if it subsist not in order to the service of God in the publick Assembly of his people the chief office whereof is taught to be of that nature that the presence of a Christian is of no effect to the purpose of it Or what reason can be alleged why the parts of Christendom should not provide for themselves by restoring the primitive practice of Christianity without the consent of the whole forbidding them to provide for themselves but not providing for them in maters so grossely and palpably concerning our common Christianity But having cautioned that the service of God and the Eucharist be in a language
shall confirme it by so visible an instance as this Death was proposed to Adam for the mark of Gods wrath and vengeance which he was become liable to by sinne The turning of this curse into a blessing was to be the effect of Christs Crosse which was not yet to be revealed The life of the Land of Promise was proposed for the reward of keeping Gods law in stead of the life of Paradise Therefore the cutting off of that life was to be taken for a mark of that curse which mankind became subject to by the first Adam till it should be declared the way to a better life by the Crosse of Christ Therefore the Giants that left it with the markes of enmity with God upon them are described as within the dominion of Hell but not asleep unlesse we can think that it is a mark of misery to go to them that sleep when all do sleep Prov. II. 17. IX 18. XXI 17. Esay XXVI 14. For that there should be no praising of God after death holds punctually in virtue of the Old Covenant which brought no man to life and was then on foot though they who writ those things might and did know that by the virtue of the New Covenant under which they knew themselves to be they should not be deprived of the priviledge of praising God after death and before the resurrection how sparing soever they were to be in imparting this knowledge openly to all the world For how otherwise should they whom the Apostle Ebr. XI declareth to have sought the kingdom of heaven have showed themselves otherwise affected with death then the Martyrs that suffered for Christ were afterwards How could it be thought the same Spirit that moved them to such a difference of effects according to the difference of time And therefore the same Solomon that saith there is nothing to be done in the grave Eccles IX 10. saith further Eccles XII 8. that when the dust returns to the earth then the soul returns to God that gave it And when Exoch and Elias were taken away by God in their Bodies neither sleep they seeing Moses and Elias attend our Lord Christ at his transfiguration Mat. XVII 3 4. Mark IX 4 5. Luke IX 30. nor is it possible for any man that would have soules to sleep to give a reason why the Covenant by which all are ordered being the same the soules of Christians should sleep when their souls sleep not And therefore when our Lord proves the resurrection by this That God is called the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob whereas God is not the God of the dead but of the living Mat. XXII 32. Mark XII 26. Luke XX. 37. he not onely supposes that his argument is good but that his adversaries the Sadduces granted it to be good And so Saint Paul when he argues that if the dead rise not againe then are we the most miserable of all people As having no further hope then this life 1 Cor. XV. 19. For what needed more to them that owned the Law of Moses and the Gospel of Christ and yet would deny the world to come questioning the resurrection that supposes it For the rest I will not repeate that which I produced afore out of the Books we call Apocrypha which he that peruseth will find a difference between the language of the Patriarchs and Prophets speaking of themselves and the language of those Bookes speaking of them But I will insist upon this that our Lord when he proposeth the Parable of Dives and Lazarus manifestly accepts of that opinion which notwithstanding such difficulties from the Scriptures of the Old Testament had prevailed over the better part of that people by Tradition of the Fathers and Prophets To wit that the soules of good and bad are alive in joy and paine according to the qualities in which they depart hence and shall resume their bodies to give account in them for their workes here The same doth the appearance of Moses and Elias at his transfiguration the rendering of his soul into his Fathers hand the promise of bringing the thiefe into Paradise the same day signify Whereby it appeareth that whatsoever might seeme to argue either that the soules of the Fathers were in the devils hands till the death and resurrection of Christ or that all soules go out like sparks when men dy and are kindled anew when they rise againe prove nothing because they prove too much For if they prove any thing they must prove that there is no world to come as the disputes of Ecclesiastes and Job seem to say because by the accidents of this world there is no ground of a mans estate in it Which seeing it is so farre from leaving any dispute among Christians that among Jewes the Sadduces were reputed Sectaries It is evident that whatsoever may seem to look that way in the Old Testament cannot prove that the soules of the Fathers were in the Verge of Hell till Christ riseing againe the graves were opened and many bodies of Saints which slept arose and came out of the graves after his resurrection and went into the holy City and appeared to many as we read in the Gospel of Mat. XXVII 52 53. This indeed were something if the Scripture had said that those Saints who arose with their bodies when our Lord Christ was risen againe had ascended into heaven with him in their bodies Which because it derogates from the generallity of the last resurrection having no ground in the Scripture can beare no dispute Therefore seeing these Saints as Lazarus afore and the Widowes sonne of Naim whom our Lord raised restored their bodies to the grave there is no presumption from hence that their soules were brought from Hell by our Lord to be translated into the full happinesse of the world to come with his owne I do therefore allow that which is written in the Apocryphall 2 Esdras IV. 41 42. In the grave the chambers of souls are like the womb of a woman For like as a woman that travaileth maketh hast to escape the pressure of her travaile Even so do those places haste to deliver the things that are committed unto them And VII 32. And the earth shall restore those that are asleep in her and so shall the dust those that dwell in silence and the secret places shall deliver those soules that were committed unto them For in most of those writings which the ancient Church counteth Apocryphal because they are suspected to intend some poisonous doctrine excellent things are contained which the agreement of them with Canonicall Scripture and their consequence and dependance upon the truth which they settle renders recommendable even from dangerous authors And for that which is here said whether we suppose this book to be written by a Christian or not before Christ or after Seeing there is no mention of any Saints in those visions of the old Testament where God is represented sitting upon his Throne but
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
much more it were to induce particular Churches and by consent of them the whole seemes to me to renounce the advice of common reason for love of his own voluntary prejudice Can it be imagined that the Sibyls verses coming from an author of doubtfull credit could perswade the whole Church to take up a custome of praying for the dead because they have perswaded divers writers to alledg them in favour of Christianity Why could not then Montanus perswade it to imbrace the pretense of his Prophesies Why But because it was more to give Law to such a Bâ—dy then to surprise a few Scholars And yet could all this be overseen would not that serve the turne The opinion of Justine that our Lord by his prayers Psalm XXII 21. and by commending his soule to God on the Crosse teacheth us to pray that our souls may not fall into the hands of those spirit which had the fathers soules in their power is the mold in which some prayers in the Church of Rome for the dead are framed Suppose this not granting it This is not the doctrine of the Sibyls verses For they place the sons of Noae in blisse not in the devils hands though under the earth as I showed you Neither could the raigne of Christ upon earth for a thowsand years come from the Sibyls verses how many soever were transported with the conceit of it For though Montanus be found as ancient as Justine he will never be found so ancient as Papias who preached it As for the quartering of righteous soules under the earth and in Paradise I have showed you how both are true according to the dispensation of the old of the new Testament If the simplicity of the primitive Châ—istians speak some times according to the one somtimes according to the other as following the language stile of the Scriptures It is not because they followed any Montanist as a disciple of Montanus whom the Church disowned It must be because they knew him not to be Montanus or any disciple of Montanus And they knew him not by these parculars because others before and after him had committed the same mistakes for supposing they understood not the secret which I spoke of in the Scriptures they were indeed mistakes and were not by the Church disowned for it But what is it that I apeale to in the prayers of the Church for the dead That they are made for the Patriarches and prophets for the Apostles and Martyrs even for the Blessed Virgin as well as for all the departed in the communion of the Church The words of the ancient Liturgies I remit you the answer quoted afore to see p. 185. Be this in regard to the resurrection and the day of judgement so it be in regard to their resurection and judgement so that the benefit which they receive by it not which their bodies receive by it which were not prayed for be acknowledged If that be acknowledged considerable for the whole Church to pray for in behalfe of those how much more in behalfe of all others that were admitted to communion with the Church I acknowledge a scruple made in S. Austines time to the assumption which I suâ—pose de verbis Apostoli Hom. XVII Ideâ—que habet Ecclesiastica disciplina quod fideles noverunt cum Martyres eo loco recitantur ad altare â—ei ubi non pâ—o ipsis â—retur pro caeteris autem commemoratis desunctis oratuâ— Iâ—juâ—ia est enim pro Martyre orare cujus nos debemus orationibus commendari And therefore the Church hath that discipline which the faithfull know When the Martyrs aâ—e reckoned at Gods altar in that place as not to pray for them but for others departed who are reckoned For it is an injury to pray for a Martyr by whoâ—e prayers we aâ—e to be commended Thus S. Austine whereas S. Cypâ—ian in his time made no question of offering for Martyrs Epistle XXXIV The same S. Austine Enchir. cap. CX Cum sacrificia sive altaris sive quarumcunque eleemosynarum pro baptizatis defunctis omnibus offeruntur Pro valde bonis gratiarum actiones sunt pro non valde malis propitiationes sunt pro valde malis et si nulla sunt adjumenta mortuorum qualescunque vivorum consolationes sunt When sacrifices either of the altar or of whatsoever alms are offered for all the dead after Baptisme for the very good they are thankâ—givings for the not very bad propitiations for the very bad though no helps to the dead yet some kind of consolations to the living Thus S. Aust avoideth an objection How the same prayer should be a petition for some for others a thanksgiving For the custom being that the St. departed were rehearsed in one place of the Service others in an other place he takes it to be the intent of the Church to give thanks for Saints and Martyrs to pray for others The forme then used in Africk we have not neither can say why this construction may not stand with it For the very Latine Masse at this day is capable of it where you have first Mementâ— Domine famulorum famularumque tuarum N. et omnium circumstantium pro quibus tibi offâ—rimus vel qui tibi offerunt hoc sacrificium laudes communicantes memoriam venerantes inprimis gloriosae semper Virginis Mariae Remember Lord thy servants such and such and all here present for whom we offer unto thee or who offer thâ—e this sacrfice of praise communicating in and reverencing first the memory of the glorious ever Virgine Mary So proceeding to the rest Whereby the wâ—y it is manifest he that made this read in S. Paule Rom. XII 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 communicating in the memories of the Saints as S. Ambrose and other Fathers did Not as now we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the necessities But after the consideration Memmento domine famulorum samularumque tuarum qui noâ— pâ—aecesserunt cum signo fidei dormiunt in somno pacis Nâ—â—psis domâ—ne omnibus in Christo quiescentibus locum refrigerii lucis paciâ— ut indulgeas deprecamur Remember Lord thy servants such such that are gone before with the badge of faith and sleep in the rest of peace We pray thee â—ord grant them and all that rest in â—hrist a place of refreshment rest and peace This then showes that there wâ—s some ground in the maner and forme of praying for the dead in the Affrican Church for S. Austines construction That the intent of the Church was not to pray for Saints aâ—d Martyrs at all Which notwithstanding it is evident by the formes which I alleaged afore that the intent of the Church was to pray for them What account Gennadius his position would give for this difference for the prayers then used for the dead I understand not Supposing it to extend the name of St. to all that dy in the state of Grace and to intend that all such siâ—ce Christ goe
privacies yea in lâ—â—civious postures and the habits of their mistresses as promising themselves protection from them in their debauches In fine by this meanes they are come to make images of God not pictures of his apparitions in the Scripture but of the Father and of the holy Trinity A thing so expresly forbidden by the Law For the Arke of the Covenant had on it indeed the figures that signified Angels the Throne of God it self signifying Christ in whom God is propitious to mankind Therefore they were to worship towards the Ark. But the majesty of God was hereby understood to be like nothing visible they were onely taught where to find him propitious Now setting up their images and injoyning images to be worshipped the construction is so reasonable that they honour the image with the honour due to God alone that it is not possible to make any other reasonable construction of that which they doe Against the II. Councile of Nicaea all this and without any order of the present Church of Rome but so that were not men sensible by whom they were authorized it were as easily disowned on the one side as it were hard on the other side to perswade men to do it Here it will be said these are probable reasons such as in moral matters may alwayes be made on both sides for what is there concerning humane affairs that is not disputable But the decree of the Church being once interposed by the second Councile of Nicaea it behoveth all Sons of the Church to depart from their own reasons because the unity of the Church as a Body can by no meanes be maintained unlesse inferiours yeild to the judgement of superiours An objection which I must owne because I have acknowledged the argument of it hitherto and have no where been straightened by it But I say therefore that the Power of the Church hath never been exercised by a voluntary consent in any decree injoyning the worship of Images For the having of Images in Churches I acknowledge there is a clear and unquestionable consent of the Church visible though as I said afore there appeared dissatisfaction in some parts which appeares to be voided by the subsequent consent of the whole And I finde sufficient and clear reason for it the adorning of Churches for the solemnity of Gods service the instruction of the simple that cannot reade in any booke by the pictures of things related in the Bible and the acts and sufferings of the Saints and Martyrs the admonishing of all whether learned or unlearned of that which they knew before the stirring up of devotion towards God by being admonished whether of things related in the Scriptures or in the relations concerning the Saints and Martyrs which the Church justifieth In a matter subject to the power of the Church as I have showed this to be the light of common reason attesting these considerations more ought not to be demanded And therefore though the Homilyagainst perill of Idolatry contain a wholsome doctrine in this particular I must have leave to think it failes as it evidently doth in others But all those reasons are utterly impertinent to the worshipping of Images For suppose the Image of our Lord or his Crosse may reasonably determine the circumstance of place where a man may pray to God as I said of the holy Eucharist the worship so tendered will be manifestly the worship of God and have no further to do with the image then a furniture or instrument not which a man serves but whereby he serves God And therefore Saint Gregory supposing and as it seems taking no notice of him that prayes before the image of Christ upon the Crosse in his Epistle to Secundinus In another Epistle to Serenus Bishop of Marseilles forbiddeth all worshipping of Images as making them subjects capable of any worship that may be called religious as proceeding from or injoyned by that virtue For the honour of the image passeth not upon the principall any otherwise in this case then as the presence thereof may be a signe to shew why we worship the principall where it is Which the images of Saints are not fit to signify because their principals the Saints are not capable of it But setting aside all dispute what ought to be done because the question is what the Church hath decreed that it ought to be done I say the decree of the second Councile of Nicaea obligeth not the Church at present because it never had the force of a sentence I have said in due place that all decrees of Counciles are but prejudices no sentences The reason whereof is as necessary as evident supposing the premises For the consent of the whole is that which gives any decree the force of a decree as you saw by the instance of the Council of Sardica The consent of the representatives in a Council is a presumption of the consent of the whole but it is not the formall consent of it No Council ever was composed of representatives proportionable in number of votes to the weight of each part to the whole The ground of a presumption making the calling of Councils worth the while is because whatsoever may come in consideration is supposed to have been wayed there and the expresse consent had of the present against which the absent cannot weigh In the II. Councile of Nicaea the Popes Legates consented and I granted afore the West was wont to receive the conclusions from Rome but not tied so to do in case the matter required further examination as in this case For within a while after a Council of Charles the Greats Dominions then the farre greatest part of the Western Church assembled at Francford condemnes the Council of Nicaea allowes the having of images in Churches as S. Gregory had done and in like maner condemnes all worshipping of them Here was a fair stop to the recalling of the Church of Romes concurrence to it Which though it was not effected yet under Ludovicus Pius son of Charles the Great an Embassy â— comes from the Easterne Emperor with a leter yet extant signifying many orrible abuses which the decree had produced and desiring his concurrence and the concurrence of the Church under him to stop the current of them A Treaty being had hereupon by the Prelates of his dominion the resolution-is yet extant in the negative under the name of the Synod of Paris grounded upon consent with the Fathers By this and by divers particulars laid forth by the Archbishop of Spalate 7. de Republ. Eccles XII 59. 71. it appeares that the worship of images never came in force by virtue of this Conncile of Nicea And amongst them it is not to be forgotten that the acts thereof were not known in the West as appeareth by the extravagancies of Thomas Aquinas and the Schoole Doctors that followed him in determining that images and the true Crosse of Christ are to be worshipped with the same honour as their principals
of the Church or the customes thereof more anciently in being then expressely inacted by any common decree of it Whereupon it followes by vertue of the premises that the state of Monasticall life is of its owne nature subordinate to the state of the Clargy tending as a meanes by private exercise to fit men to the discharge of themselves towards the world which the Clergy obligeth every man to converse with in that manner which Monasticall life professeth Of this there is sufficient evidence by those many examples that are extant in the records of the ancient Church of such as have been taken from Monasticall life to be promoted to the service of the Church Which course expressing no dispensation in the profession of Monasticall life formerly made necessary intimateth a reasonable ground for thâ—s constâ—uction That the Church allowing men to dispose of themselves to the exercise of monasticall life intended not to part with that interest which it hath in every particular Christian to oblige those to the service thereof by promoting them to Holy Orders whomsoever she findeth fittest for it And that the allowance of Monasticall life is in order to this intent and purpose A thing still more visible by all those institutions and foundations whereby Monastâ—ties have been made and accounted seminaries of the Church and the Clergy of it This being said you see how great aquestion remaines whether the Clergy be bound to the continence of single life or not to wit Bishops Priests Deacons For the Deacons office hath indeed beene divided into severall orders of inferior Clergy sub deacons readers dore keepers waiters and that for the necessity of the Church in that estate which was before Constantine So that the consâ—uâ—ion of them cannot be imputed to any corruption that might follow upon the temporall prosperity of the Church But of these inferior Orders there is no question For as concerning Deacons you have a Canon of the Council at Aricyra the Canons whereof were afterwards part of the Canons of the whole Church allowing them not to marry being Deacons but to be made Deacons being marryed And an other of the councill of Elvira in Spaine ancienter then the Councill of Nicaea injoyning upon Bishops Presbyters Deacons and Sub-deacones to abstaire from their wives under paine of their Clergy At the council of Nicaea it was in debate to doe the same and the Council was moved by Paphnutius a Bishop of great merit in Egypt himselfe alwaies a single man to rest in the rule presently in force which was preferring those who being single should loose their ministries if they maried to all decrees of the Clergey especially Priests and Bishops to make use never the lesse of those who were married or professed an intent of marryage when there was ground by the rest of their qualities of confidence in them for the discharge of their office For this as it agrees with the Canon of Ancyra and the forme of it so it assures us that the Council of Elvira could not have taken in hand to impose so great a burthen had not the precedent practice of the Church by unwritten custome before the Canon disposed the Church to receive it And therefore I will in this point which hath beene the subject of many volumes and in which it would be endlesse to examine the Canons the precedents the authorities that concerne it discharge my selfe chiefly upon Epiphanius whose words in the LIX Haeresy of the Novatians are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moreover neither doth the Church admit him that is the husband of one wife yet living and getting Children Deacon or Priest or Bishop or sub deacon Vnlesse he abstain from that one or is become a Widower Especially where the Canons of the Church are exact But you will by all meanes say to me that in some places Priests Deacons and Sub-deacons doe still get children That is not by the Canon but by the slack disposition of mens minds sometimes and for plenties sake when men fit to minister are not found In the conclusion of his worke also he reckons this for one of the Lawes of the whole Church without mentioning this exception Now if you goe to seeke for any rule in writing to bind the whole Church to this before Epiphanius his time you will finde none But a custome you will finde in force which is more then all the Law of the world in writing whereby it will appeare that the indeavour of the Church was to be served with single men but when the best qualified were not such to balke the rule for the appearance of that common good in balkeing it for which the rule it selfe was made And so the resolution of this pointe attesteth first the Corporation of the Church when for the good of the body it presrcibes it selfe rules what sort of persons to make use of for the exercise of those offices in the communion whereof the surety of it standeth Then it eminently attests the superiority of the Bip and his Clergy in every of those Churches whereof the whole consisteth Vnlesse men be so wilfully senselesse as to attribute the wisdome which such dispensations required to the rashnesse of anymultitude Last of all â—it attests the regular pre-eminence of the Church of Rome over the rest of the Westerne Churches by the interposition whereof visible in those times when it had no help from the secular power to make it irregular and infinite so great a burthen became so far owned First then I must free the Church from the heavy charge of bringing in the doctrine of deviles foretold by S. Paul in prohibiting mariage 1 Tim. IV. 1 3. which I shall doe the more slightly because I have had oportunity else where to show that he speakes of the Heresies on foot in the times of the Apostles which made maryage the ordinance of those powers which made the world which their doctrine distinguished from the true soveraine God For what hath the rule of the Church to doe with any such supposition as this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Epipha prosecutes his purpose For the Church alwaies aiming at the most fitting as well ordered by the H. Gh decreed to indeavour that the service be performed without distraction from God and spirituall necessities effected with all the most charitable conscience I meane that it is fit in regard of suddaine ministries and necessities that the Priests the Deacons the Bishops wait upon God For if the Holy Apostle command those of the Laity saying that they may attend upon Prayer for a time 1. Cor. VII 5. How much more commandeth he the Priest the same Now I meane with out distraction that he may waite upon the Priest-hood which is performed in spirituall necessities according to God Here you have no mention for incapacity of the Priest hood or any service which it injoyneth by maryage or any thing to disparage the estate in the sense of
of the Church nor doe originally be long to it to sentence And all this not distinguishing these severall titles hath been usually understood by the name of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction or the juâ—isdiction of the Church Neither is there any doubt to be made that not onely France in their appeales from the abuse of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction which are there warranted of course but also all Christian states as England in their premunires and injunctions have alwaies provided to redresse the wrong that might be don by the abuse thereof Nor doe I doubt that Spaine it selfe hath made use of such courses as may appeare not onely â—y great volumes upon that subject by Salgado de Somoza and Jeronymo de Cevallos whom I have not seene but more lively by the letters of Cardinall de Ossat where there is so much menâ—ion of the differences between the See of Rome and the ministers of that Crowne in Italy about the jurisdiction of the Church But will all this serve for an argument that there is no such thing as a Church no such jurisdiction as that of the Church in the opinion of Christendome but that which stands by the act of Christian powers because they all pretend to limit the abuse of it When as the very name of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction in the title of those books those actions is sufficient demonstration that they acknowledge and suppose a right to jurisdiction in the Church which they pretend so to limit as neither the Church nor the rest of their subjects to have cause to complaine of wrong by the abuse of it Whether they attaine their pretence or no remaining to be disputed upon the principles hitherto advanced by any man that shall have cause to enter into any treaty of the particulars Neither is the publishing of Erastus his booke against Excommunication at London to be drawne into the like consequence that those who allowed or procured it allowed the substance of that he maintaineth so long as a sufficient reason is to be rendred for it otherwise For at such time as the Presbyterian pretenses were so hot under Queen Elizabeth it is no marvaile if it was thought to show England how they prevailed at home First because he hath advanced such arguments as are really effectuall against them which are not yet nor ever will be answered by them though void of the positive truth which ought to take place in stead of their mistakes And besides because at such time as Popes did what them listed in England it would have been to the purpose to show the English how Macchiavell observes that they were hampred at home And for the like reason when the Geneva platforme was cried up with such zeale here it was not amisse to show the world how it was esteemed under their own noses in the Cantons and the Palatinat And here I cannot forbeare to take notice of the publishing of Grotius his book de Jure summarum potestatum in sacris after his death because that also is drawn into consequence For it is well enough knowne that at his being in Eâ—gland before the Synod at Dort he left it with two great learned prelates of the Church of England Lanctlot Lord Bishop of Winchester and Iohn Lord Bishop of Norwich to peruse And that both of them agreeing in an advice that it should not be published he constantly observed the same till he was dead So that though the writing of it was his act yet the publishing was not But the act of those that would have it appeare that his younger works doe not perfectly agree with the sense of his riper yeares He that in the preface to his Annotations on the Gospels shall reade him disclaiming whatsoever the consent of the Church shall be found to refuse will never believe that he admitted no Corporation of the Church without which no consent thereof could have been observed And therefore may well allow him to change his opinion without giving the world expresse account of it I will adde hereupon one consideration out of the letter of late learned Hales of Eton Colledge from the Synod at Dort to the English Embassador at the Hague For Grotius was then every man knowes one that adhered to the Holland Remonstrants He speaketh of denying them the copie of a decree of the states read them in the Synod December 11. This at the first seemed to me somewhat hard but when I considered that those were the men which heretofore in prejudice of the Church so extreamely flattered the civill magistrate I could not but think this usage a fit reward for such a service And that by a just judgement of God themselves bad the first experience of those inconveniencies which naturally arise out of their doctrine in this behalfe It remaines onelly as concerning this point that I give account of the article of the Church of England which acknowledgeth the King Supreme Governour in all causes and over all persons as well Ecclesiasticall as Civill to this effect as having all that Right in maters of Religion which the pious Kings of Gods ancient people Christian Emperors and Princes have alwaies exercised in the Church And the account that I am to give is what the meaning of this collective which hath been exercised by the Kings of Judah and Christian Princes must be For I have showed that it is not to be granted that Christian Princes may doe that in Christianity which the Kings of â—srael did under the Law Because the Law was given to one people for a condition of the Land of promise the Gospell to all Nations for the condition of everlasting happinesse It is therefore consequently to be said That in as much as the reason and ground upon which the right which those Kings are found to exercise under the Law holds the same under the Gospell so far that power which the Church of England ascribes to the King in Church maters is the same which those Kings are found to exercise in the scriptures But wherein the reason holds not the same insomuch it is necessary to distinguish and acknowledge a difference It seemes to me that when the Law refers the determination of all things questionable concerning the Law in the last resort to the Priests and Levits and to the Judge that shall be in those daies at Jerusalem or the place which God should choose Deut. XVIII 8-12 the reason why it speaks indefinitely of Priest and Judge is because it intended to include the soveraigne whether High Priest who from after the Captivity untill the coming of Herod was chiefe of the people or Chief Judge whether those that are so called who as I said afore were manifestly soveraignes or after them the Kings so that by this Law nothing could be determined without the King either by himselfe or by subordinate Judges And the reason is evident For the penalty of transgressing this law being death otherwise we must allow inferior Judges the power of
sent into the world thou blasphemest because I said I am the Sonne of God Where they say it is manifest that he challengeth not the title of God properly but as it is communicated to creatures as here to the Judges of Israel It is to be granted that our Lord here imployes that which S. Chrysostome often calles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is good husbandry or sparingâ—esse in his language Expressing in more reserved terms that which he intends not to renounce For seeing the Jewes ready to stone him for that which they understood by it no marvaile if he abated his plea without quitting it arguing from the lesse if they to whom the Word of God came are called Gods much more he that is sanctified and sent into the World by the Father may call himself so and plead this reason too without disclaiming the property of the title because of that which immediately followes If I do not the works of my Father believe me not But if I do them though you believe not me believe the workes That ye may know and believe that the Father is in me and I in him Where it is plaine he holds up his claime by pleading the evidence of it As for that of S. Paul Phil. II. 6-11 Let the same minde be in you as in Christ Jesus who being in the form of God made it not an occasion of pride or of advantage that he was equal with God But emptied himself having taken the form of a servant and become in the likenesse of men And being found in figure as a man humbled himself becoming obedient to death even the death of the Crosse Wherefore God also hath overexalted him and given him the name that is above every name That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow both of things in heaven and upon the earth and under the earth and every tongue confesse that J. Christ is the Lord to the glory of God the Father Here I admit with Grotius the speech to be of Christ incarnate that the man Jesus is said to have emptied himself and taken the form of a slave becoming obedient to death For this man it is who when he so emptied himself was presently in the form of God of which he emptied himself thinking it no occasion of pride so I allow him to translate it though some words of Eusebius make me think it more properly translated advantage that he was â—qual to God but condescending so far to dissemble what he was as to be crucified But supposing this I demand how came Jesus to be in this forme of God before he humbled himself and wherein it consisted For if they say that in consideration of his undertaking the message of God when being thirty years old he was taken up to heaven as they say he was exalted to it then can they not say that he was indowed with it from his birth as being conceived by the H. Ghost But if as S. Paul saies he was so when he emptied himself of it then it is to be demanded by virtue of what he was so For by virtue of being conceived by the H. Ghost and born of a Virgin according to them he will no more be so then the first Adam being formed of Virgin earth and the breath of God breathed in him But if by virtue of the power and glory of God that is of God dwelling in him according to Grotius then by virtue of the hypostatical union which afore you saw he confesseth But the name above every name at which all things in heaven and earth and under the earth bow importing the honour that is proper to God which no man can give to any creature without making it God though given to the man Jesus yet signifies the reason for which it is given to stand in the Godhead that is communicated to his manhood And that alwaies due since he was man though not declared to be due nor published to the world while he was in it till he was overexalted to it upon his rising againe and the holy Ghost sent to inable his Apostles to preach it CHAP. XV. Not onely the Church but the World was made by Christ The Word was made flesh in opposition to the Spirit How the Prophets how Christians by receiving the Word of God are possessed by his Spirit How the title of Sonne of God importeth the Godhead How Christ is the brightnesse and Image of God THis is the next argument which the next words of S. John point out to us when he saith All things were made by him and without him was nothing made Which because they are peremptory in this cause so long as they are understood as all Christians have hitherto understood them That the World was made by that word of God which we believe to have been incarnate in our Lord Christ Socinus hath playd one of his Masteerpeeces upon them to perswade us to believe that they mean no more but that our Lord Christ is the Author of the Gospell whereby Christians are as it were new made and created a Church Seeing it is manifest that the Prophets do often describe the deliverances and restorings of Gods people by comparing them to the making of a new World with a new Sun and Moon and Stars and all Creatures new But when rhey do so it is first understood that they speak as Prophets for whom it is proper to express things to come in figurative speeches because it is not the intent of Gods Spirit that the particulars signified should be plain aforehand that the dependance of Gods people upon him and his word may be free Then by the consequence of the Prophesies compared with the events argument enough is to be had that these speeches are not properly but figuratively meant As for example when the Prophet Esay saith Behold I make a new Heaven and a new Earth In that very addition of new there is argument enough to conclude that he speaks by a propheticall figure which if a man read on he shall find still more to conclude But had he sayd Behold I make Heaven and Earth Either we must understand make for have made or that he means to make indeed such as these are And that supposing these destroyed In asmuch as these abiding those that might be made could not be called Heaven and Earth but a Heaven and an Earth Now in these words there is nothing added to intimate any abatement in the proper signification of all things And therefore S. John speaking in such terms as he that writeth dogmatically would be thought so to use as not to be mistaken must needs be understood to mean that the World was made at first by Gods word which by and by he will tell us that it was incarnate Especially that we may not make him to spend words to tell Christians such a secret as this That Christ is the first Author of the Gospel and Founder of his Church which they
that believe not might know by seeing Christians spring from his Doctrine Neither is that which followes any thing less clear He was in the World and the World was made by him and the World knew him not Though Socinus hath used his skill to darken it with a strange devise of three senses of this one word World in this one sentence which he conceives will be an elegant expression if we understand the World when it is sayd He was in the World to signifie his new people when it is sayd The World was made by him The Church that is all Christians When it is sayd The World knew him not the unbelievers And truly I believe most Languages will justifie the people among whom a man lives to be called the World The ordinary French sayes Il y a beaucoup de monde dâ—ns ceste ville There is a great deal of World in this Town word for word But that in the two clauses following the World should stand first for Believers then for unbelievers is such a figure without any thing added to give occasion so to understand it as nothing can be added to make it passable though something might be added to make it to be understood Besides consider what followes He came to his own and his own received him not For are the Jewes his own people onely because he was of that people Are the Jewes no otherwise his own then the English may be called mine own because being English I bring that which here I have written to the English Surely S. John meant to aggravate their fault more then by charging them to have refused a Countryman of their own To wit him that had made them and whose they were upon that score Consider what went before This is that true Light that lighteth every man that comes into the World For unless we understand this to be every man that comes into the Church which will be to deny that Christ gives any light to unbelievers at least to be signified by these words and to make them import no more then the same great secret that Christ is the Author of Christians we must understand by it as the truth requires it to be understood That our Lord came into the world because he came to live among that people called the world by that most ordinary figure of speech that is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the World so properly called and therefore all that it containeth that is the World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so called to wit that people was made by him and that neverthelesse this world being the body of that people knew him not that is owned him not being his own as all people are whom he enlightneth And what meanes the Apostle when he saies of the Sonne Heb. I. 2 3. Whom he made heir of all things by whom also he made the Worlds And Who beareth or moveth all things with his powerfull word For if any man attempt to apply the same salve to this wound also what will he have these worlds to be but those of which he saith againe Heb. XI 5. By faith we understand that the worlds were made by the Word of God To wit the world of invisible things and this visible world which by the Jewes writings we understand that their ancestors were wont co call this world and the world to come because they expected to live in it after this Whereupon the same Apostle saith againe Heb. II. 5. For he hath not subjected the world to come to Angels meaning the invisible world of Angels which to us is to come As for that which followeth whether he sustaine or whether he move all things by his word seeing it is his word that does it the same is Gods Word that made all things called his word also because incarnate And what is it lesse for him to move all things then that which S. Paul saith of God Acts XVII 28. that in him we live move and have our being And S. Paul Col. I. 16. For in him or rather through him were all things created that are in heaven and that are on earth visible things and invisible whether dominions or magistrates or powers all things were created by him and to him For what hath Christ done for the angels that he should be said to have made them suppose the redemption and reconcilement of mankinde make a new world with us is the reconciling of the Angel to us by reconciling of us to himself the making of them as it is the new making of us Is the making of him head of them the making of them If it be it is not he that made them seeing it is the Father that made him head of them But what shall become of all visible things besides man which are said here to have been created by Christ and cannot be made anew Therefore it is the whole world that S. Paul meanes was first made not men and Angels that he meanes were restored by Christ And when he saies they were made by him and to him that is for him he barres that snare which some put upon the Apostles words when he saies By whom also he made the worlds To wit that he meanes for him he made the worlds according to a common saying among the Jews which they think he points at That the world was made for the Messias I see that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both serving to signify a meane which belongs still to the effective cause As when it is said that all things subsist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. IV. 11. that the martyres overcome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. XII 11. that the false Prophet deceives 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. XIII 14. It is all one whether we understand For the will of God For the blood of the Lamb and the word which they witnesse For the signes which were granted him to do Or by and through the same because both import a mean effective cause But that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should signify 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the final cause is that which no Greek will indure And in this place S. Paul having said that all things were made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through him and to him that is for him Leaves no room to understand any thing else by these words But there is a further reason in the case and theme which S. Paul speaks to whereby it is evident that he challengeth the making of all things to Christ because he challengeth to him that worship which the Hereticks whom he writes against tendred to Angels as those by whom the World was made Which I shewed before was the doctrine of Simon Magus and Cerinthus both in the Apostles times and inferreth the abstinence from Gods creatures as proceeding from another principle from which also Moses Law came according to their doctrine the observation whereof they therefore pressed not as Moses had delivered it