Testament answered 84 Concerning the various Readings 85 The nature and degrees of Inspiration 86 Concerning the Historical parts of Scripture 87 Concerning the Reasonings in Scripture 88 Of the Apocryphal Books 89 ARTICLE VII 91 NO difference between the Old and New Testament Ibid. Proofs in the Old Testament of the Messias 92 In the Prophets chiefly in Daniel 94 The Proofs all summed up 95 Objections of the Jews answered 96 The hopes of anotheâ— Life in the Old Testament 97 Our Saviour proved the Resurrection from the words to Moses 98 Expiation of Sin in the Old Dispensation 99 Sins then expiated by the Blood of Christ Ibid. Of the Rites and Ceremonies among the Jews 100 Of their Iudiciary Laws 101 Of the Moral Law Ibid. The Principles of Morality 102 Of Idolatry 103 Concerning the Sabbath Ibid. Of the Second Table 104 Of not coveting what is our Neighbours 105 ARTICLE VIII 106 COncerning the Creed of Athanasius Ibid. And the condemning Clauses in it Ibid. Of the Apostles Creed 107 ARTICLE IX 108 DIfferent Opinions concerning Original Sin Ibid. All men liable to Death by it 109 A Corruption spread through the whole Race of Adam Ibid. Of the state of Innocence 110 Of the effects of Adam's Fall 111 God's Iustice vindicated 112 Of the Imputation of Adam's Sin 113 St. Austin's Doctrine in this Point 114 This is opposed by many others Ibid. Both sides pretend their Doctrines agree with the Article 116 ARTICLE X. 117 THE true Notion of Liberty Ibid. The Feebleness of our present state 118 Inward Assistances promised in the New Covenant 119 The effect that these have on men 120 Concerning Preventing-Grace Ibid. Of its being efficacious or universal 121 ARTICLE XI 122 COncerning Iustification Ibid. Concerning Faith 123 The differences between the Church of England and the Church of Rome in this Point 124 The conditions upon which men are justified 126 The use to be made of this Doctrine 127 ARTICLE XII 128 THE necessity of Holiness Ibid. Concerning Merit 129 Of the defects of Good Works Ibid. ARTICLE XIII 131 ACTIONS in themselves good yet may be sins in him who does them Ibid. Of the Seventh Chapter to the Romans 132 This is not a total Incapacity Ibid. ARTICLE XIV 133 Oâ— the great extent of our Duty Ibid. No Counsels of Perfection 134 Many Duties which do not bind at all times Ibid. It is not possible for man to supererogate 135 Objections against this answered 136 The steps by which that Doctrine prevailed 137 ARTICLE XV. 138 CHrist's spotless Holiness Ibid. Of the Imperfections of the best men 139 ARTICLE XVI 140 COncerning Mortal and Venial Sin Ibid. Of the Sin against the Holy Ghost Ibid. Of the Pardon of Sin after Baptism 141 That as God forgives the Church ought also to forgive 142 Concerning Apostacy and sin unto Death 143 ARTICLE XVII 145 THE state of the Question 146 The Doctrine of the Supralapsarians and Sublapsarians Ibid. The Doctrine of the Remonstrants and the Socinians 147 This is a Controversy that arises out of Natural Religion Ibid. The History of this Controversy both in ancient and modern times 148 The Arguments of the Supralapsarians 152 The Arguments of the Sublapsarians 158 The Arguments of the Remonstrants 159 They affirm a certain Prescience 161 The Socinians Plea 164 General Reflections on the whole matter 165 The advantages and disadvantages of both sides and the faults of both 166 In what both do agree 167 The sense of the Article 168 The Cautions added to it Ibid. Passages in the Liturgy explained 169 ARTICLE XVIII 171 PHilosophers thought men might be saved in all Religions Ibid. So do the Mahometans Ibid. None are saved but by Christ 172 Whether some may not be saved by him who never heard of him Ibid. None are in Covenant with God but through the knowledge of Christ 173 But for others we cannot judge of the extent of the Mercies of God Ibid. Curiosity is to be restrained 174 ARTICLE XIX 175 WE ought not to believe that any are Infallible without good Authority Ibid. Iust prejudices against some who pretend to it 176 No Miracles brought to prove this Ibid. Proofs brought from Scripture 177 Things to be supposed previous to these Ibid. A Circle is not to be admitted Ibid. The Notes given of the true Church 178 These are examined Ibid. And whether they do agree to the Church of Rome 179 The Truth of Doctrine must be first settled Ibid. A Society that has a true Baptism is a true Church 180 Sacraments are not annulled by every Corruption Ibid. We own the Baptism and Orders given in the Church of Rome 181 And yet justify our separating from them Ibid. Objections against private judging 182 Our Reasons are given us for that end Ibid. Our Minds are free as our Wills are 183 The Church is still Visible but not Infallible Ibid. Of the Popes Infallibility 184 That was not pretended to in the first Ages Ibid. The Dignity of Sees rose from the Cities 185 Popes have fallen into Heresy Ibid. Their Ambition and Forgeries Ibid. Their Cruelty 186 The Power of deposing Princes claimed by them as given them by God Ibid. This was not a Corruption only of Discipline but of Doctrine 187 Arguments for the Popes Infallibility 188 No Foundation for it in the New Testament Ibid. St. Peter never clâ—imed it 189 Christ's words to him explained Ibid. Of the Kâ—ys of the Kingdâ—m of Hâ—â—vâ—n 190 Of binding and loosing Ibid. ARTICLE XX. 192 OF Church Power in Rituals Ibid. The Practice of the Jewish Church 193 Changes in these sometimes necâ—ssary Ibid. The Practice of the Ap stles 194 Sâ—bjâ—cts must obey in lawful things Ibid. But Superiâ—rs must not impose too much 195 The Church has Authority though not Infallible Ibid. Great Respâ—ct due to her Decisions 196 But no absâ—lute Submâ—ssion Ibid. The Church is the Depâ—sitary of the Scriptures 197 The Church of Rome run in a Circle Ibid. ARTICLE XXI 199 COuncils cannot be called but by the Consent of Princes Ibid. Tâ—e first were called by the Roman Emperors Ibid. Afterwards the Popes called them 200 Then some Councils thought on methods to fix their meeting Ibid. What makâ—s a Council to be General Ibid. What numbers are necessary 201 Hâ—w thâ—y must he cited Ibid. Nâ— Rules given in Scripture concerning their Constitution Ibid. Nazianzen's Complaints of Councils 202 Councils have been câ—ntrary to one another Ibid. Disâ—rders and Intriguâ—s in Councils Ibid. They judgâ— not by Inspiration Ibid. The Churches may examine their proceedings and judge of them 203 Concerning the Popes Bull confirming them Ibid. Thâ—y have an Authority but not absolute Ibid. Nâ—r do they need the Popes Bulls 204 The several Churches know their Traditions best Ibid. The Fathers do argue for the truth of the decisions but not from their authority Ibid. No prospect of another General Council 205 Popes are jealous of them Ibid. And the World expects little from them Ibid. Concerning the words
of Paul The Conversion of St. Paul himself was so clearly from a Preventing Grace that if it had not been miraculous in so many of its Circumstances it would have been a strong Argument in behalf of it These words of Christ seem also to assert it Without me ye can do nothing ye have not chosen me but I you and no man can come to me except the Father which hath sent me draw him Joh. 1.13.15.5 16. Phil. 2.13 Those who received Christ were born not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of the will of God God is said to work in us both to will and to do of his own good pleasure The one seems to import the first beginings and the other the progress of a Christian Course of Life So far all among us that I know of are agreed though perhaps not as to the force that is in all those places to prove this Point There do yâ—t remain Two Points in which they do not agree the one is the Efficacy of this Preventing Grace some think that it is of its own nature so Efficacious that it never fails of Converting those to whom it is given others think that it only awakens and disposes as well as it enables them to turn to God but that they may resist it and that the greater part of Mankind do actually resist it The examining of this Point and the stating the Arguments of both sides will belong more properly to the Seventeenth Article The other Head in which many do differ is concerning the Extent of this Preventing Grace for whereas such as do hold it to be Efficacious of it self restrain it to the number of those who are Elected and converted by it others do believe That as Christ died for all Men so there is an Universal Grace which is given in Christ to all Men in some degree or other and that it is given to all Baptized Christians in a more eminent degree and that as all are corrupted by Adam there is also a general Grace given to all Men in Christ. This depends so much on the former Point that the discussing the one is indeed the discussing of both and therefore it shall not be further entred upon in this place ARTICLE XI Of the Justification of Man We are accounted Righteous before God only for the Merit of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ by Faith and not for our own Works or Deservings Wherefore that we are justified by Faith only is a most wholsome Doctrine and very full of Comfort as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Iustification IN order to the right understanding this Article we must first consider the true meaning of the Terms of which it is made up which are Iustification Faith Faith only and Good Works and then when these are rightly stated we will see what Judgments are to be passed upon the Questions that do arise out of this Article Iust or Iustified are words capable of two senses the one is a Man who is in the Favour of God by a mere Act of his Grace or upon some Consideration not founded on the Holiness or the Merit of the Person himself The other is a Man who is truly holy and as such is beloved of God The use of this word in the New Testament was probably taken from the term Chasidim among the Iews a designation of such as observed the external parts of the Law strictly and were believed to be upon that account much in the Favour of God an Opinion being generally spread among them that a strict observance of the external parts of the Law of Moses did certainly put a Man in the Favour of God In opposition to which the design of a great part of the New Testament is to shew that these things did not put Men in the Favour of God Our Saviour used the word saved in opposition to condemned Job 3.18 and spoke of Men who were condemned already as well as of others who were saved St. Paul enlarges more fully into many Discourses in which our being justified and the righteousness of God or his grace towards us are all terms equivalent to one another His design in the Epistle to the Romans was to prove that the observance of the Mosaiâ—al Law could not justifie that is could not put a Man under the grace or favour of God or the righteousnâ—ss of God that is into a state of acceptation with him as that is opposite to a state of wrath or condemnation He upon that shews that Abraham was in the Favour of God before he was Circumcised upon the account of his trusting to the Promises of God and obeying his Commands and that God reckoned upon these Acts of his as much as if they had been an entire course of Obedience Gen. 15.6 Rom. 4.3.22 for that is the meaning of these words Aâ—d it was imputed to him for righteousness These Promises were freely made to him by God when by no previous Works of his he had made them to be due to him of debt therefore that Covenant which was founded on those Promises was the justifying of Abraham freely by grace upon which St. Paul in a variety of Inferences and Expressions assumes That we are in like manner justified freely by grace through the redemption in Christ Iesus Rom. 3.24 That God has of his own free Goodness offered a new Covenant and new and better Promises to Mankind in Christ Jesus which whosoever believe as Abraham did they are justified as he was So that whosoever will observe the Scope of St. Paul's Epistles to the Romans and Galatians will see that he always uses Iustification in a sense that imports our being put in the Favour of God The Epistle to the Galatians was indeed writ upon the occasion of another Controversy which was Whether supposing Christ to be the Messias Christians were bound to observe the Mosaical Law or not Whereas the Scope of the first part of the Epistle to the Romans is to shew that we are not justified nor saved by the Law of Moses as a Mean of its own nature capable to recommend us to the Favour of God but that even that Law was a Dispensation of Grace in which it was a true Faith like Abraham's that put Men in the Favour of God yet in both these Epistles in which Iustification is fully treated of it stands always for the receiving one into the Favour of God In this the Consideration upon which it is done and the Condition upon which it is offered are two very different things The one is a Dispensation of God's Mercy in which he has regard to his own Attributes to the Honour of his Laws and his Government of the World The other is the Method in which he applies that to us in such a manner that it may have such Ends as are both perfective of Human Nature and suitable to an infinitely Holy Being
Remission of Sins is acknowledged to be given freely to us through Jesus Christ this is that which we affirm to be Iustification though under another name We do also acknowledge that our Natures must be sanctified and renewed that so God may take pleasure in us when his Image is again visible upon us and this we call Sanctification which we acknowledge to be the constant and inseparable effect of Iustification So that as to this we agree in the same Doctrine only we differ in the use of the Terms in which we have the Phrase of the New Testament clearly with us But there are two more material differences between us It is a Tenet in the Church of Rome That the Use of the Sacraments if Men do not put a bar to them and if they have only imperfect Acts of Sorrow accompanying them does so far compleat those weak Acts as to justify us This we do utterly deny as a Doctrine that tends to enervate all Religion and to make the Sacraments that were appointed to be the solemn â—â—ts of Religion for quickning and exciting our Piety and for conveying Grace to us upon our coming devoutly to them becomes means to flatten and deaden us As if they were of the nature of Charms which if they could be come at tho' with ever so slight a preparation would make up all defects The Doctrine of Sacramental Justification is justly to be reckoned among the most mischievous of all those Practical Errors that are in the Church of Rome Since therefore this is no where mentionâ—d in all these large Discourses that are in the New Testament concerning Justification we have just reason to reject it Since also the natural consequence of this Doctrine is to make Men rest contented in low imperfect Acts when they can be so easily made up by a Sacrament we have just reason to detest it as one of the depths of Satan The Tendency of it being to make those Ordinances of the Gospel which were given us as means to raise and heighten our Faith and Repentance become Engines to encourage Sloth and Impenitence There is another Doctrine that is Held by many and is still Taught in the Church of Rome not only with Approbation but Favour That the inherent Holiness of good Men is a thing of its own nature so perfect that upon the account of it God is so bound to esteem them just and to justify them that he were unjust if he did not They think there is such a real condignity in it that it makes Men God's adopted Children Whereas we on the other hand Teach That God is indeed pleased with the inward Reformaâ—â—on that he sees in good Men in whom his Grace dwells that he approves and accepts of their Sincerity but that with this there is still such a mixture and in this there is still so much Imperfection that even upon this account if God did straitly mark Iniquity none could stand before him So that even his acceptance of this is an Act of Mercy and Grace This Doctrine was commonly Taught in the Church of Rome at the time of the Reformation and together with it they reckoned that the chief of those Works that did Justify were either great or rich Endowments or excessive Devotions towards Images Saints and Relicks by all which Christ was either forgot quite or remembred only for form-sake esteemed perhaps as the chief of Saints not to mention the impious Comparisons that were made between him and some Saints and the Preferences that were given to them beyond him In opposition to all this the Reformers began as they ought to have done at the laying down this as the Foundation of all Christianity and of all our hopes That we were reconciled to God meerly through his Mercy by the Redemption purchased by Jesus Christ And that a firm believing the Gospel and a claiming to the Death of Christ as the great Propitiation for our Sins according to the Terms on which it is offered us in the Gospel was that which united us to Christ that gave us an Interest in his Death and thereby justified us If in the management of this Controversy there was not so critical a Judgment made of the Scope and several Passages of St. Paul's Epistles and if the Dispute became afterwards too abstracted and metaphysical that was the effect of the Infelicity of that Time and was the natural consequence of much disputing Therefore tho' we do not now stand to all the Arguments and to all the Citations and Illustrations used by them and tho' we do not deny but that many of the Writers of the Church of Rome came insensibly off from the most practical Errors that had been formerly much taught and more practised among them and that this matter was so stated by many of them that as to the main of it we have no just Exceptions to it Yet after all this beginning of the Reformation was a great Blessing to the World and has proved so even to the Church of Rome by bringing her to a juster sâ—nse of the Atonement made for Sins by the Blood of Christ and by taking Men off from external Actions and turning them to consider the inward Acts of the Mind Faith and Repentance as the Conditions of our Justification And therefore the Approbation given here to the Homily is only an Approbation of the Doctrine asserted and proved in it Which ought not to be carried to every particular of the Proofs or Explanations that are in it To be Iustified and to be accounted Righteous stand for one and the same thing in the Article And both import our being delivered from the Guilt of Sin and entitled to the Favour of God These differ from God's intending from all Eternity to save us as much as a Decree differs from the Execution of it A Man is then only Iustified when he is freed from Wrath and is at peace with God And tho' this is freely offered to us in the Gospel through Jesus Christ yet it is applied to none but to such as come within those Qualifications and Conditions set before us in the Gospel That God pardons Sin and receives us into favour only through the Death of Christ is so fully expressed in the Gospel as was already made out upon the second Article that it is not possible to doubt of it if one does firmly believe and attentively read the New Testament Nor is it less evident that it is not offered to us absolutely and without Conditions and Limitations These Conditions are Repentance with which remission of sins is often joined and Faith Gal. 5.6 Luke 24.47 Acts. 2.38 but a faith that worketh by love that purifies the heart and that keeps the â—ommandments of God Such a Faith as shews it self to be alive by Good Works by Acts of Charity and every Act of Obedience by which we demonstrate that we truly and firmly believe the Divine Authority of our Saviour and his Doctrine
doubt of the Testimony of our Senses Another presumptive Proof that the Ancients knew nothing of this Doctrine is that the Heathens and the Iews who charged them and their Doctrine with every thing that they could invent to make both it and them odious and ridiculous could never have passed over this in which both Sense and Reason seemed to be so evidently on their side They reproach the Christians for believing a God that was Born a God of Flesh that was crucified and buried They laughed at their belief of a Judgment to come of endless Flames of a heavenly Paradise and of the Resurrection of the Body Those who writ the first Apologies for the Christian Religion Iustin Martyr Tertullian Origen Arnobius and Minutius Felix have given us a large Account of the Blasphemies both of Iews and Gentiles against the Doctrines of Christianity Cyril of Alexandria has given us Iulian's Objections in his own Words who having been not only initiated into the Christian Religion but having read the Scriptures in the Churches and being a Philosophical and Inquisitive Man must have been well instructed concerning the Doctrine and the Sacraments of this Religion And his Relation to the Emperor Constantine must have made the Christians concerned to take more than ordinary Pains on him When he made Apostacy from the Faith he reproached the Christians with the Doctrine of Baptism and laughed at them for thinking that there was an Ablution and Sanctification in it conceiving it a thing Impossible that Water should wash or cleanse a Soul Yet neither he nor Porphiry nor Celsus before them did charge this Religion with the Absurdities of Transubstantiation It is reasonable to believe that if the Christians of that time had any such Doctrine among them it must have been known Every Christian must have known in what Sense those Words This is is my body and This is my blood were understood among them All the Apostates from Christianity must have known it and must have published it to excuse or hide the shame of their Apostacy Since Apostates are apt to spread Lies of them whom they forsake but not to conceal such Truths as are to their Prejudice Iulian must have known it and if he had known it his Judgment was too True and his Malice to the Christian Religion too Quick to overlook or neglect the Advantages which this part of their Doctrine gave him Nor can this be carried off by saying that the eating of human Flesh and the Thyestean Suppers which were objected to the Christians relate to this When the Fathers answer that they tell the Heathens that it was a downright Calumny and Lie And do not offer any Explanations or Distinctions taken from their Doctrine of the Sacrament to clear them from the mistake and malice of this Calumny The Truth is the execrable Practices of the Gnosticks who were called Christians gave the Rise to those as well as to many other Calumnies But they were not at all founded on the Doctrine of the Eucharist which is never once mentioned as the Occasion of this Accusation Another Presumption from which we conclude that the Ancients knew nothing of this Doctrine is that we find Heresies and Disputes arising concerning all the other Points of Religion There were very few of the Doctrines of the Christian Religion and not any of the Mysteries of the Faith that did not fall under great Objections But there was not any one Heresy raised upon this Head Men were never so meek and tame as easily to believe things when there appeared strong Evidence or at least great Presumptions against them In these last Eight or Nine Centuries since this Doctrine was received there has been a perpetual Opposition made to it even in dark and unlearned Ages In which implicite Faith and blind Obedience have carried a great sway And though the Secular Arm has been employed with great and unrelenting Severities to extirpate all that have opposed it Yet all the while many have stood out against it and have suffered much and long for their rejecting it Now it is not to be imagined that such an opposition should have been made to this Doctrine during the nine hundred Years last past and that for the former eight hundred Years there should have been no Disputes at all concerning it And that while all other things were so much questioned that several Fathers writ and Councils were called to settle the Belief of them yet that for about eight hundred Years this was the single Point that went down so easily that no Treatise was all that while writ to prove it nor Council held to establish it Certainly the Reason of this will appear to be much rather that since there have been Contests upon this Point these last Nine Ages and that there were none the first Eight this Doctrine was not known during those First Ages and that the great Silence about it for so long a time is a very strong Presumption that in all that time this Doctrine was not thought of The last of those Considerations that I shall offer which are of the nature of presumptive Proofs is that there are a great many Rites and other practices that have arisen out of this Doctrine as its natural Consequences which were not thought of for a great many Ages but that have gone on by a perpetual progress and have increased very fruitfully ever since this Doctrine was received Such are the Elevation Adoration and Processions together with the Doctrine of Concomitance and a vast number of Rites and Rubricks the first occasions and beginnings of which are well known These did all arise from this Doctrine it being natural especially in the Ages of Ignorance and Superstition for Men upon the supposition of Christ's being Corporally present to run out into all possible Inventions of Pomp and Magnificence about this Sacrament and it is very reasonable to think that since these things are of so late and so certain a date that the Doctrine upon which they are founded is not much ancienter The great Simplicity of the Primitive Forms not only as they are reported by Iustin Martyr and Tertullian in the Ages of the Poverty and Persecutions of the Church but as they are represented to us in the Fourth and Fifth Century by Cyril of Ierusalem the Constitutions and the pretended Areopagite have nothing of that Air that appears in the latter Ages The Sacrament was then given in both kinds it was put in the hands of the Faithful they reserved some portions of it It was given to Children for many Ages The Laity and even Boys were imployed to carry it to dying Penitents what remained of it was burnt in some places and consumed by the Clergy and by Children in other places the making Cataplasms of it the mixing the Wine with Ink to sign the Condemnation of Hereticks are very clear Presumptions that this Doctrine was not then known But above all their not adoring the Sacrament which
Saviour's words Ibid. The discourse Joh. 6. explained 312 It can only be understood spiritually 313 Bold Figures much used in the East Ibid. A plain thing needs no great proof 314 Of unworthy Receivers and the effect of that sin 315 Of the effects of worthy receiving Ibid. Of Foederal Symbols 316 Of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ Ibid. Of the like Phrases in Scripture 317 Of our Sense of the Phrase Real Presence Ib. Transubstantiation explained 318 Of the words of Consecration 319 Of the Consequences of Transubstantiation Ibid. The grounds upon which it was believed 320 This is contrary to the Testimony of all our Faculties both Sense and Reason Ibid. We can be sure of nothing if our Senses do deceive us 321 The Objection from believing Mysteries answered 322 The end of all Miracles considered Ibid. Our Doctrine of a Mystical Presence is confessed by those of the Church of Rome 323 St. Austin's Rule about Figures Ibid. Presumptions concerning the belief of the Ancients in this matter 324 They had not that Philosophy which this Doctrine has forced on the Church of Rome 325 This was not objected by Heathens 326 No Heresies or Disputes arose upon this as they did on all other Points 327 Many new Rituals unknown to them have sprung out of this Doctrine Ibid. In particular the adoring the Sacrament 328 Prayers in the Masses of the Saints inconsistent with it Ibid. They believed the Elements were Bread and Wine after Consecration Ibid. Many Authorities brought for this 329 Eutychians said Christ's Humanity was swallowed of his Divinity 330 The Fathers argue against this from the Doctrine of the Eucharist Ibid. The Force of that Argument explained 331 The Fathers say our Bodies are nourished by the Sacrament Ibid. They call it the Type Sign and Figure of the Body and Blood of Christ 332 The Prayer of Consecration calls it so 333 That compared with the Prayer in the Missal Ibid. The progress of the Doctrine of the Corporal Presence 334 Reflection on the Ages in which it grew 335 The occasion on which it was advanced in the Eastern Church 336 Paschase Radbert taught it first 337 But many wrote against him Ibid. Afterwards Berengarius opposed it 338 The Schoolmen descanted on it Ibid. Philosophy was corrupted to support it 339 Concerning Consubstantiation Ibid. It is an Opinion that may be born with 340 The Adoration of the Eucharist is Idolatry Ibid. The Plea against that considered Ibid. Christ is not to be worshipped though present 341 Concerning reserving the Sacrament Ibid. Concerning the Elevation of it 342 ARTICLE XXIX 343 THE wicked do not receive Christ Ibid. The Doctrine of the Fathers in this Point Ibid. More particularly St. Austin's 344 ARTICLE XXX 345 THE Chalice was given to all Ibid. Not to the Disciples as Priests Ibid. The breaking of Bread explained 346 Sacraments must be given according to the Institution Ibid. Nâ— Arguments from ill consequences to be admitted unless in cases of necessity 347 Concomitance a new Notion Ibid. Vniversal practice for giving the Chalice Ibid. The case of the Agrarii 348 The first beginning of taking away the Cup Ibid. The Decree of the Council of Constance 349 ARTICLE XXXI 350 THE term Sacrifice of a large signification Ibid. The Primitive Christians denied that they had any Sacrifices Ibid. The Eucharist has no virtue but as it is a Communion 351 Strictly speaking there is only one Priest and one Sacrifice in the Christian Religion 352 The Fathers did not think the Eucharist was a Propitiatory Sacrifice 353 But call it a Sacrafice in a larger sense Ibid. Mâ—sses without a Communion not known then 354 None might be at Mass who did not communicate Ibid. The Importance of the Controversies concerning the Eucharist 355 ARTICLE XXXII 356 NO Divine Law against a Married Clergy Ibid. Neither in the Old or New Testament but the contrary 357 The Church has not Power to make a perpetual Law against it Ibid. The ill consequences of such a Law 358 No such Law in the first Ages Ibid. When the Laws for the Celibate began 359 The practice of the Church not uniform in it Ibid. The progress of these Laws in England 360 The good and the bad of Celibate balanced Ibid. It is not lawful to make Vows in this matter 361 Nor do they bind when made Ibid. Oaths ill made are worse to be kept 362 ARTICLE XXXIII 363 A Temper to be observed in Church Discipline Ibid. The necessity of keeping it up Ibid. Extremes in this to be avoided 364 Concerning the delivering any to Satan Ibid. The Importance of an Anathemea 365 Of the effect of Church-Censures Ibid. What it is when they are wrong applied 366 The causless jealousy of Church-Power Ibid. How the Laity was once taken into the exercise of it 367 The Pastors of the Church have Authority Ibid. Defects in this no just cause of Separation 368 All these brought in by Popery Ibid. A Correction of them intended at the Reformation 369 ARTICLE XXXIV 370 THE Obligation to obey Canons and Laws Ibid. The great Sin of Schism and Disobedience 371 The true Notion of Scandal Ibid. The fear of giving Scandal no warrant to break established Laws 372 Human Laws are not unalterable Ibid. The Respect due to Ancient Canons 373 The Corruptions of the Canon Law Ibid. Great Varieties in Rituals Ibid. Every Church is a compleat Body 374 ARTICLE XXXV 375 THE occasion of compiling the Homilies Ibid. We are not bound to every thing in them Ibid. But only to the Doctrine 376 This illustrated in the Charge of Idolatry Ib. What is meant by their being necessary for those times Ibid. ARTICLE XXXVI 377 THE occasion of this Article Ibid. An Explanation of the words Receive ye the Holy Ghost 378 ARTICLE XXXVII 379 QVeen Elizabeth's Injunction concerning the Supremacy Ibid. The Popes Vniversal Iurisdiction not warranted by any of the Laws of Christ 380 Nor acknowledged in the first Ages 381 Begun on the occasion of the Arian Controversy Ibid. Contested in many places 382 The Progress that it made Ibid. The Patriarchal Authority founded on the division of the Roman Empire sunk with it 383 The Power exercised by the Kings of Judah in Religious Matters Ibid. That is founded on Scriptures 384 Practised in all Ages Ibid. And particularly in England 385 Methods used by Popish Princes to keep the Ecclesiastical Authority under the Civil Ibid. The Temporal Power is over all persons 386 And in all causes Ibid. The Importance of the Term Head 387 The Necâ—ssity of Capital Punishments Ibid. The measure of these 388 The Lawfulness of War Ibid. Our Saviour's words explained Ibid. In what cases War is juâ—t 389 Warranted by the Laws of God 390 How a Subject may serve in an unlawful War Ibid. ARTICLE XXXVIII 391 COncerning Property and Charity Ibid. The Proportion of Charity to the Poor 392 ARTICLE XXXIX 393 THE Lawfulness of Oaths proved Ibid. From Natural Religion and
some of every sort of men Yet they declared openly against the other and said that if men were Circumcised or were willing to come under such a Yoke Christ profited them nothing and upon that supposition he had died in vain From this plain Precedent we see what a difference we ought to make between the holding Errors in Doctrinal Matters 5. Gal. 3. 2. Gal. 21. and the Imposing them as Articles of Faith We may live in Communion with those who hold Errors of the one sort but must not with those of the other This also shews the Tyranny of that Church which has imposed the belief of every one of her Doctrines on the Consciences of her Votaries under the highest pains of Anathema's and as Articles of Faith But whatever those at Trent did This Church very carefully avoided the laying that weight upon even those Doctrines which she received as true and therefore though she drew up a large Form of Doctrine yet to all her Lay-Sons this is only a Standard of what she teaches and the Articles are to them only Articles of Church-Communion The Citations that are brought from those two great Primates Laud and Bramhall go no further than this They do not seem to relate to the Clergy that subscribe them but to the Laity and Body of the People The People who do only join in Communion with us may well continue to do so though they may not be fully satisfied with every Proposition in them Unless they should think that they struck against any of the Articles or Foundations of Faith and as those Great men truly observe there is a great difference to be observed in this particular between the Imperious Spirit of the Church of Rome and the modest freedom which ours allows But I come in the next place to consider what the Clergy is bound to by their Subscriptions The meaning of every Subscription is to be taken from the design of the Imposer and from the words of the Subscription it self The Title of the Articles bears That they were agreed upon in Convocation For the avoiding of diversities of Opinions and for the stablishing consent touching true Religion Where it is evident that a Consent in Opinion is designed If we in the next place consider the Declaration that the Church has made in the Canons we shall find that though by the Fifth Canon which relates to the whole Body of the People such are only declared to be Excommunicated ipso facto who shall affirm any of the Articles to be Erroneous or such as he may not with a good Conscience Subscribe to yet the 36 th Canon is express for the Clergy requiring them to Subscribe willingly and ex animo and acknowledge all and every Article to be agreeable to the word of God Upon which Canon it is that the Form of the Subscription runs in these words which seem expresly to declare a man's own Opinion and not a bare consent to an Article of Peace or an Engagement to silence and submission The Statute of the 13 th of Queen Elizabeth cap. 12. which gives the Legal Authority to our requiring Subscriptions in order to a man's being capable of a Benefice requires that every Clergyman should read the Articles in the Church where he is to serve with a Declaration of his Unfeigned Assent to them These things make it very plain that the Subscriptions of the Clergy must be considered as a Declaration of their own Opinion and not as a bare Obligation to silence There arose in K. Iames the First 's Reign great and warm Disputes concerning the Decrees of God and those other Points that were setled in Holland by the Synod of Dort against the Remonstrants Divines of both sides among us appealed to the Articles and pretended they were favourable to them For though the first appearance of them seems to favour the Doctrine of Absolute Decrees and the Irresistibility of Grace yet there are many expressions that have another face and so those of the other Persuasion pleaded for themselves from these Upon this a Royal Declarations was set forth in which after that mention is made of those Disputes and that the men of all sides did take the Articles to be for them order is given for stopping those Disputes for the future and for shutting them in God's promises as they be generally set forth in the Holy Scriptures and the general meaning of the Articles of the Church of England according to them and that no man thereafter should put his own Sense or Comment to be the meaning of the Article but should take it in the Literal and Grammatical Sense In this there has been such a general acquiescing that the fierceness of these Disputes has gone off while men have been left to Subscribe the Articles according to their Literal and Grammatical Sense From which two Things are to be inferred The one is that the Subscription does import an Assent to the Article and the other is that an Article being conceived in such general words that it can admit of different Literal and Grammatical Senses even when the Senses given are plainly contrary one to another both sides may Subscribe the Article with a good Conscience and without any Equivocation To make this more sensible I shall give an instance of it in an Article concerning which there is no Dispute at present The Third Article concerning Christ's descent into Hell is capable of Three different Senses and all the Three are both Literal and Grammatical The First is that Christ descended locally into Hell and preached to the Spirits there in prison and this has one great advantage on its side that those who first prepared the Articles in K. Edward's Time were of this Opinion for they made it a part of it by adding in the Article those words of St. Peter as the Proof or Explanation of it Now though that period was left out in Q. Elizabeth's Time yet no Declaration was made against it so that this Sense was once in possession and was never expresly rejected Besides that it has great support from the Authority of many Fathers who understood the descent into Hell according to this Explanation A Second Sense of which that Article is capable is That by Hell is meant the Grave according to the Signification of the Original Word in the Hebrew and this is supported by the words of Christ's descending into the lower parts of the Earth as also by this That several Creeds that have this Article have not that or Christ's being buried and some that mention his Burial have not this of his Descent into Hell A Third Sense is That by Hell according to the Signification of the Greek Word is to be meant the Place or Region of Spirits separated from their Bodies So that by Christ's descent into Hell is only to be meant that his Soul was really and entirely disunited from his Body not lying dead in it as in an Apoplectical Fit nor
Sacraments  MS. the Injunctions also lately set forth  Pr. the Injunctions also set forth  MS. and serve in the Wars  Pr. and serve in lawful Wars Art 38. MS. every man oughteth of such things  Pr. every man ought of such things Art 39. Edw. 6. qui sequuntur non sunt in MS. WE Th' archbishops and Bishops of either Province of this Realm of England lawfully gathered together in this Provincial Synod holden at London with Continuations and Prorogations of the same do receive profess and acknowledge the xxxviii Articles before written in xix Pages going before to contain true and sound doctrine and do approve and ratify the same by the subscription of our hands the xi â—h day of May in the year of our Lord 1571. and in the year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lady Elizabeth by the Grace of God of England France and Ireland Queen Defender of the Faith c. the thirteenth Matthue Cantuar. Rob. Winton Jo. Heref. Richarde Ely Nic. Wigorn. Jo. Sarisburien Edm. Roffen N. Bangor Ri. Cicestren Thom. Lincoln Willhelmus Exon. From these Diversities a great difficulty will naturally arise about this whole Matter The Manuscripts of Corpus Christi are without doubt Originals The hands of the Subscribers are well known they belonged to Archbishop Parker and were left by him to that College and they are Signed with a particular care for at the end of them there is not only a Sum of the number of the Pages but of the Lines in every Page And though this was the Work only of the Convocation of the Province of Canterbury yet the Archbishop of York with the Bishops of Duresme and Chester Subscribed them likewise and they were also Subscribed by the whole Lower House But we are not sure that the like care was used in the Convocation Anno 1571. for the Articles are only Subscribed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and Ten Bishops of his Province nor does the Subscription of the Lower House appear These Articles were first Printed in the Year 1563. conform to the present Impressions which are still in use among us So the Alterations were then made while the thing was fresh and well known therefore no Fraud nor Artifice is to be suspected since some Objections would have been then made especially by the great Party of the Complying Papists who then continued in the Church They would not have failed to have made much use of this and to have taken great advantages from it if there had been any occasion or colour for it and yet nothing of this kind was then done One Alteration of more Importance was made in the Year 1571. Those words of the 20 th Article The Church hath power to Decree Rites or Ceremonies and Authority in Controversies of Faith were left out both in the Manuscripts and in the Printed Editions but were afterwards restored according to the Articles Printed Anno 1563. I cannot find out in what Year they were again put in the Printed Copies They appear in two several Impressions in Queen Elizabeth's Time which are in my hands It passes commonly that it was done by Archbishop Laud and his Enemies laid this upon him among other things That he had corrupted the Doctrine of this Church by this addition but he cleared himself of that as well he might and in a Speech in the Star-Chamber appealed to the Original and affirmed these words were in it The true account of this difficulty is this When the Articles were first setled they were Subscribed by Both Houses upon Paper but that being done they were afterward Ingrossed in Parchment and made up in Form to remain as Records Now in all such Bodies many Alterations are often made after a minute or first Draught is agreed on before the matter is brought to full Perfection so these Alterations as most of them are small and inconsiderable were made between the time that they were first Subscribed and the last Voting of them But the Original Records which if extant would have cleared the whole matter having been burnt in the Fire of London it is not possible to Appeal to them yet what has been proposed may serve I hope fully to clear the difficulty I now go to consider the Articles themselves ARTICLE I. Of Faith in the Holy Trinity There is but one living and true God everlasting without bodie parts or passions of infinite power wisdom and goodness the maker and preserver of all things both visible and invisible and in the unity of this godhead there be three persons of one substance power and eternity the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost THE Natural Order of Things required That the First of all Articles in Religion should be concerning the Being and Attributes of God For all other Doctrines arise out of this But the Title appropriates this to the Holy Trinity because that is the only part of the Article which peculiarly belongs to the Christian Religion since the rest is Founded on the Principles of Natural Religion There are Six Heads to be Treated of in order to the full opening of all that is contained in this Article 1. That there is a God 2. That there is but One God 3. Negatively That this God hath neither Body Parts nor Passions 4. Positively That he is of Infinite Power Wisdom and Goodness 5. That he at first Created and does still Preserve all things not only what is Material and Visible but also what is Spiritual and Invisible 6. The Trinity is here Asserted These being all Points of the highest consequence it is very necessary to state them as clearly and to prove them as fully as may be The First is That there is a God This is a Proposition which in all Ages has been so universally received and believed some very few Instances being only assigned of such as either have denied or doubted of it that the very consent of so many Ages and Nations of such different Tempers and Languages so vastly remote from one another has been long esteemed a good Argument to prove that either there is somewhat in the Nature of Man that by a secret sort of Instinct does dictate this to him or that all Mankind has descended from one common Stock and that this belief has passed down from the first Man to all his Posterity If the more Polite Nations had only received this some might suggest that wise men had introduced it as a mean to govern human Society and to keep it in order Or if only the more barbarous had received this it might be thought to be the effeâ—t of their Fear and their Ignorance but since all Sorts as well as all Ages of men have received it this alone goes a great way to assure us of the Being of a God To this Two things are Objected 1 st That some Nations such as Sâ—ldania Formosa and some in America have been discovered in these last Ages that seem to acknowledge no
full and clear proofs of it in the New Testament And they had need be both full and clear before a Doctrine of this Nature can be pretended to be proved by them In order to the making this Mystery to be more distinctly Intelligible different Methods have been taken By one Substance many do understand a Numerical or Individual Unity of Substance and by Three Persons they understand Three distinct Subsistences in that Essence It is not pretended by these that we can give a distinct Idea of Person or Subsistence only they hold it imports a real diversity in one from another and even such a diversity from the Substance of the Deity it self that some things belong to the Person that do not belong to the Substance For the Substance neither begets nor is begotten neither breathes nor proceeds If this carries in it somewhat that is not agreeable to our Notions nor like any thing that we can apprehend to this it is said That if God has Revealed that in the Scripture which is thus expressed we are bound to believe it though we can frame no clear apprehension about it God's Eternity his being all one single Act his Creating and Preserving all things and his being every where are things that are absolute riddles to us We cannot bring our Minds to conceive them and yet we must believe that they are so because we see much greater Absurdities must follow upon our conceiving that they should be otherwise So if God has declared this inexplicable thing concerning himself to us we are bound to believe it though we cannot have any clear Idea how it truly is For there appear as strange and unanswerable difficulties in many other things which yet we know to be true so if we are once well assured that God has Revealed this Doctrine to us we must silence all Objections against it and believe it Reckoning that our not understanding it as it is in it self makes the difficulties seem to be much greater than otherwise they would appear to be if we had light enough about it or were capable of forming a more perfect Idea of it while we are in this depressed State Others give another view of this Matter that is not indeed so hard to be apprehended But that has an Objection against it that seems as great a prejudice against it as the difficulty of apprehending the other way is against that It is this They do hold That there are Three Minds That the first of these Three who is from that called the Father did from all Eternity by an Emanation of Essence beget the Son and by another Emanation that was from Eternity likewise and was as Essential to him as the former both the first and the second did jointly breathe forth the Spirit and that these are Three distinct Minds every one being God as much as the other Only the Father is the Fountain and is only self-originated All this is in a good degree Intelligible but it seems hard to reconcile it both with the Idea of Unity which seems to belong to a Being of Infinite Perfection and with the many express Declarations that are made in the Scriptures concerning the Unity of God Instead of going farther into Explanations of that which is certainly very far beyond all our apprehensions and that ought therefore to be let alone I shall now consider what Declarations are made in the Scriptures concerning this Point The First and the Chief is in that Charge and Commission which our Saviour gave to his Apostles to go and make Disciples to him among all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Mat. 28.19 By Name is meant either an Authority derived to them in the virtue of which all Nations were to be Baptized Or that the Persons so Baptized are Dedicated to the Father Son and Holy Ghost Either of these Senses as it proves them all to be Persons so it sets them in an equality in a thing that can only belong to the Divine Nature Baptism is the receiving Men from a State of Sin and Wrath into a State of Favour and into the Rights of the Sons of God and the Hopes of Eternal Happiness and a calling them by the Name of God These are things that can only be offered and assured to Men in the Name of the Great and Eternal God and therefore since without any Distinction or Note of Inequality they are all Three set together as Persons in whose Name this is to be done they must be all Three the True God otherwise it looks like a just Prejudice against our Saviour and his whole Gospel That by his express Direction the first entrance to it which gives the Visible and Foederal Right to those great Blessings that are offered by it or their Initiation into it should be in the Name of Two Created Beings if the one can be called properly so much as a Being according to their Hypothesis and that even in an equality with the Supream and Increated Being The plainness of this Charge and the great occasion upon which it was given makes this an Argument of such Force and Evidence that it may justly determine the whole Matter A Second Argument is taken from this That we find St. Paul begins or ends most of his Epistles with a Salutation in the Form of a Wish Rom. 1.7 Rom. 16.20 24. 1 Cor. 16.23 1 Cor. 1.3 2 Cor. 1.3 Gal. 1.3 Gal 6.18 Eph. 1.2 Eph. 6.23 Phil. 1.2 Phil. 4.23 Col. 1.2 1 Thes. 1.1 1 Thes 5.28 2 Thes. 1.2 2 Thes. 3 18. 1 Tim. 1.2 2 Tim. 1.2 Tit. 1.4 Philem. 3.25 2 John 1.3 which is indeed a Prayer or a Benediction in the Name of those who are so Invocated in which he wishes the Churches Grace Mercy and Peace from God the Father and the Lord Iesus Christ which is an Invocation of Christ in conjunction with the Father for the greatest Blessings of Favour and Mercy That is a strange Strain if he was only a Creature which yet is delivered without any mitigation or softning in the most remarkable parts of his Epistles This is carried further in the Conclusion of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians The Grace of the Lord Iesus Christ the Love of God 2 Cor. 13.14 and the Fellowship of the Holy Ghost be with you It is true this is expressed as a Wiâ—h and not in the nature of a Prayer as the common Salutations are But here Three great Blessings are wished to them as from Three Fountains which imports that they are Three different Persons and yet equal For though in order the Father is first and is generally put first yet here Christ is first named which seems to be a strange reversing of things if they are not equal as to their Essence or Substance It is true the Second is not named here The Father as elsewhere but only God yet since he is mentioned as distinct from Christ and the
Holy Ghost it must be understood of the Father for when the Father is named with Christ sometimes he is called God simply and sometimes God the Father This Argument from the Threefold Salutation appears yet stronger in the Words in which St. Iohn addresses himself to the Seven Churches in the beginning of the Revelations Rev. 1.4 5. Grace and Peace from him which is which was and which is to come and from the seven Spirits which are before his Throne and from Iesus Christ. By the Seven Spirits must be meant one or more Persons since he wishes or declares Grace and Peace from them Now either this must be meant of Angels or of the Holy Ghost There are no where Prayers made or Blessings given in the Name of Angels This were indeed a worshipping them against which there are express Authorities not only in the other Books of the New Testament but in this Book in particular Nor can it be imagined that Angels could have been named before Iesus Christ So then it remains that Seven being a Number that imports both Variety and Perfection and that was the Sacred Number among the Iews this is a Mystical Expression which is no extraordinary thing in a Book that is all over mysterious And it imports one Person from whom all that variety of Gifts Administrations and Operations that were then in the Church did flow And this is the Holy Ghost But as to his being put in order before Christ as upon the supposition of an Equality the going out of the common order is no great matter so since there was to come after this a full Period that concerned Christ it might be a natural way of Writing to name him last Against all this it is objected That the Designation that is given to the first of these in a Circumlocution that imports Eternity shews that the Great God and not the Person of the Father is to be meant But then how could St. Iohn writing to the Churches wish them Grace and Peace from the other Two A few Verses after this the same Description of Eternal Duration is given to Christ and is a strong Proof of his Eternity and by consequence of his Divinity So what is brought so soon after as a Character of the Eternity of the Son may be also here used to denote the Eternal Father These are the Chief Places in which the Trinity is mentioned all together I do not insist on that contested Passage of St. Iohn's Epistle There are great doubtings made about it 1 Joh. 5.7 The main ground of doubting being the Silence of the Fathers who never made use of it in the Disputes with the Arians and Macedonians There are very considerable things urged on the other hand to support the Authority of that Passage yet I think it is safer to build upon sure and undisputable grounds So I leave it to be maintained by others who are more fully persuaded of its being Authentical There is no need of it This matter is capable of a very full Proof whether that Passage is believed to be a part of the Canon or not It is no small Confirmation of the Truth of this Doctrine that we are certain it was universally received over the whole Christian Church long before there was either a Christian Prince to support it by his Authority or a Council to establish it by Consent And indeed the Council of Nice did nothing but declare what was the Faith of the Christian Church with the addition only of the Word Consubstantial For if all the other Words of the Creed settled at Nice are acknowledged to be true that of the Three Persons being of one Substance will follow from thence by a just consequence We know both by what Tertullian and Novatian writ what was the Faith both of the Roman and the African Churches From Irenaeus we gather the Faith both of the Gallican and the Asiatick Churches And the whole proceedings in the Case of Samosatenus that was the solemnest business that past while the Church was under Oppression and Persecution give us the most convincing Proof possible not only of the Faith of the Eastern Churches at that time but of their Zeal likewise in watching against every Breach that was made in so Sacred a part of their Trust and Depositum These things have been fully opened and enlarged on by others to whom the Reader is referred I shall only desire him to make this Reflection on the state of Christianity at that time The Disputes that were then to be managed with the Heathens against the Deifying or Worshipping of Men and those extravagant Fables concerning the Genealogies of their Heroes and Gods must have obliged the Christians rather to have silenced and supprest the Doctrine of the Trinity than to have owned and published it So that nothing but their being assured that it was a Necessary and Fundamental Article of their Faith could have led them to own it in so publick a manner since the Advantages that the Heathen would have taken from it must be too visible not to be soon observed The Heathens retorted upon them their Doctrine of a Man's being a God and of God's having a Son And every one who engaged in this Controversy framed such Answers to these Objections as he thought he could best maintain This as it gave the Rise to the Errors which some brought into the Church so it furnishes us with a Copious Proof of the common Sense of the Christians of those Ages who all agreed in general to the Doctrine though they had many different and some very Erroneous ways of explaining it among them I now come to the special Proofs concerning each of the Three Persons But there being other Articles relating to the Son and the Holy Ghost the Proofs of these Two will belong more properly to the Explanation of those Articles Therefore all that belongs to this Article is to prove that the Father is truly God but that needs not be much insisted on for there is no dispute about it None deny that he is God many think that he is so truly God that there is no other that can be called God besides him unless it be in a larger sense of the word And therefore I will here conclude all that seems necessary to be said on this first Article on which if I have dwelt the longer it was because the stating the Idea of God right being the Fundamental Article of all Religion and the Key into every part of it this was to be done with all the Fulness and Clearness possible In a word to recapitulate a little what has been said The liveliest way of framing an Idea of God is to consider our own Souls which are said to be made after the Image of God An attentive Reflection on what we perceive in our selves will carry us further than any other thing whatsoever to form just and true Thoughts of God We perceive what Thought is but
much from the Blessed Virgin on the one hand as she had been over-exalted on the other So they said that Christ had only gone through her But this Impiety sunk so soon that it is needless to say any thing more to refute it The Third Branch of the Article is That these two Natures were joined in one Person never to be divided What a Person is that results from a close Conjunction of Two Natures we can only judge of it by considering Man in whom there is a Material and a Spiritual Nature joined together They are Two Natures as different as any we can apprehend among all created Beings yet these make but One Man The Matter of which the Body is composed does not subsist by it self is not under all those Laws of Motion to which it would be subject if it were mere inanimated Matter but by the Indwelling and Actuation of the Soul it has another Spring within it and has another Course of Operations According to this then to subsist by another is when a Being is acting according to its Natural Properties but yet in a constant dependance upon another Being so our Bodies subsist by the Subsistence of our Souls This may help us to apprehend how that as the Body is still a Body and operates as a Body though it subsists by the Indwelling and Actuation of the Soul so in the Person of Jesus Christ the Human Nature was entire and still acted according to its own Character yet there was such an Union and Inhabitation of the Eternal Word in it that there did arise out of that a Communication of Names and Characters as we find in the Scriptures A man is called Tall Fair and Healthy from the state of his Body and Learned Wise and Good from the qualities of his Mind So Christ is called holy harmless and undefiled is said to have died risen and ascended up into Heaven with relation to his Human Nature He is also said to be in the form of God to have created all things Phil. 2.6 Col. 1.16 to be the brightness of the Father's glory and the express image of his person with relation to his Divine Nature The Ideas that we have of what is Material and what is Spiritual Heb. 1.3 lead us to distinguish in a Man those descriptions that belong to his Body from those that belong to his Mind so the different apprehensions that we have of what is created and uncreated must be our Thread to guide us into the Resolution of those various Expressions that occur in the Scriptures concerning Christ. The design of the Definition that was made by the Church concerning Christ's having one Person was chiefly to distinguish the nature of the Indwelling of the Godhead in him from all Prophetical Inspirations The Mosaical degree of Prophecy was in many respects superior to that of all the subsequent Prophets Yet the difference is stated between Christ and Moses in terms that import things quite of another nature the one being mentioned as a Servant the other as the Son that built the House It is not said that God appeared to Christ or that he spoke to him but God was ever with him and in him Joh. 1.14 and while the Word was made flesh yet still his glory was as the glory of the only begotten Son of God The Glory that Isaiah saw was called his Glory and on the other hand God is said to have purchased his Church with his own Blood If Nestorius in opposing this meant only as some think it appears by many Citations out of him that the Blessed Virgin was not to be called simply the Mother of God but the Mother of him that was God and if that of making Two Persons in Christ was only fasten'd on him as a Consequence we are not at all concerned in the Matter of Fact whether Nestorius was misunderstood and hardly used or not but the Doctrine here asserted is plain in the Scriptures That though the Human Nature in Christ acted still according to its proper Character and had a peculiar Will yet there was such a constant Presence Indwelling and Actuation on it from the Eternal Word as did constitute both Human and Divine Nature one Person As these are thus so entirely united so they are never to be separated Christ is now exalted to the highest degrees of Glory and Honour and the Characters of Blessing Honour and Glory are represented in St. Iohn's Visions as offered to the Lamb for ever and ever It is true St. Paul speaks as if Christ's Mediatory Office and Kingdom were to cease after the Day of Judgment Rev. 5.13 and that then he was to deliver up all to the Father But though when the full number of the Elect shall be gathered the full End of his Death will be attained and when these Saints shall be glorified with him and by him his Office as Mediator will naturally come to an end yet his own Personal Glory shall never cease And if every Saint shall inherit an everlasting Kingdom much more shall he who has merited all that to them and has conferred it on them be for ever possessed of his Glory The Fourth Branch of the Article is concerning the Truth of Christ's Crucifixion his Death and Burial The Matter of Fact concerning the Death of Christ is denied by no Christian the Iews do all acknowledge it the first Enemies to Christianity did all believe this and reproached his Followers with it This was that which all Christians gloried in and avowed so that no question was made of his Death except by a small number called Docetae who were not esteemed Christians till Mahomet denied it in his Alcoran who pretends that he was withdrawn and that a Iew was crucified in his stead But this corruption of the History of the Gospel came too late afterwards to have any shadow of credit due to it nor was there any sort of Proof offered to support it So this Doctrine concerning the Death of Christ is to be received as an unquestionable Truth There is no part of the Gospel writ with so copious a Particularity as the History of his Sufferings and Death as there was indeed no part of the Gospel so important as this is The Fifth Branch of the Article is That he was a true Sacrifice to reconcile the Father to us and that not only for Original but for Actual Sins The Notion of an Expiatory Sacrifice which was then when the New Testament was writ well understood all the World over both by Iew and Gentile was this That the Sin of one Person was transferred on a Man or a Beast who was upon that devoted and offered up to God and suffered in the room of the offending Person and by this Oblation the Punishment of the Sin being laid on the Sacrifice an Expiation was made for Sin and the Sinner was believed to be reconciled to God This as appears through the whole Book of Leviticus was
The Stile and Matter of the Revelation as well as the designation of Divine given to the Author of it gave occasion to many Questions about it Clemens of Rome cites it as a Prophetical Book Clem. in Ep. ad Coâ— Justin cont Tryphon Irenaeus l 5. c. 30. Eus. Hist. l. 4. c. 24 26. l. 5. c. 18. l. 7. c. 27. Iustin Martyr says it was writ by Iohn one of Christ's Twelve Apostles Irenaeus calls it the Revelation of St. Iohn the Disciple of our Lord writ almost in our own Age in the End of Domitian's Reign Melito writ upon it Theophilus of Antioch Hyppolitus Clemens and Dennis of Alexandria Tertullian Cyprian and Origen do cite it And thus the Canon of the New Testamentseems to be fullymade outbythe concurrent Testimony of the several Churches immediately after the Apostolicaltime Here it is to be observed that a great difference is to be made between all this and the Oral Tradition of a Doctrine in which there is nothing fixed or permanent so that the whole is only Report carried about and handed down Whereas here is a Book that was only to be copied out and read publickly and by all Persons between which the difference is so vast that it is as little possible to imagine how the one should continue pure as how the other should come to be corrupted There was never a Book of which we have that reason to be assured that it is genuine that we have here There hapned to be constant Disputes among Christians from the Second Century downward concerning some of the most important Parts of this Doctrine and by both sides these Books were appealed to And though there might be some Variations in Readings and Translations yet no question was made concerning the Canon or the Authenticalness of the Books themselves unless it were by the Manichees who came indeed to be called Christians by a very enlarged way of speaking since it is justly strange how men who said that the Author of the Universe and of the Mosaical Dispensation was an Evil God and who held that there were Two Supreme Gods a Good and an Evil one how such men I say could be called Christians The Authority of those Books is not derived from any Judgment that the Church made concerning them but from this That it was known that they were writ either by men who were themselves the Apostles of Christ or by those who were their Assistants and Companions at whose Order or under whose Direction and Approbation it was known that they were written and published These Books were received and known for such in the very Apostolical Age it self so that many of the Apostolical men such as Ignatius and Polycarp lived long enough to see the Canon generally received and settled The suffering and depressed state of the First Christians was also such that as there is no reason to suspect them of Imposture so it is not at all credible that an Imposture of this kind could have passed upon all the Christian Churches A man in a Corner might have forged the Sibylline Oracles or some other Pieces which were not to be generally used and they might have apâ—â—ared soon after and Crâ—dit might have been given too easily to a Book or Writing of that kind But it cannot be imagined that in an Age in which the belief of this Doctrine brought men under great Troubles and in which Miracles and other extraordinary Gifts were long continued in the Church that I say either False Books could have been so early obtruded on the Church as True or that True Books could have been so vitiated as to lose their Original Purity while they were so universally read and used and that so soon or that the Writers of that very Age and of the next should have been so generally and so grosly imposed upon as to have cited Spurious Writings for True These are things that could not be believed in the Histories or Records of any Nation Though the Value that the Christians set upon these Books and the constant use they made of them reading a parcel of them every Lord's Day make this much less supposable in the Christian Religion than it could be in any other sort of History or Record whatsoever The early spreading of the Christian Religion to so many remote Countries and Provinces the many Copies of these Books that lay in Countries so remote the many Translations of them that were quickly made do all concur to make the Impossibility of any such Imposture the more sensible Thus the Canon of the New Testament is fixed upon clear and sure Grounds From thence without any further Proof we may be convinced of the Canon of the Old Testament Christ does frequently cite Moses and the Prophets he appeals to them and though he charged the Iews of that time chiefly their Teachers and Rulers with many Disorders and Faults yet he never once so much as insinuated that they had corrupted their Law or other Sacred Books which if true had been the greatest of all those Abuses that they had put upon the People Our Saviour cited their Books according to the Translation that was then in Credit and common Use amongst them When one asked him which was the great Commandment he answered How readest thou And he proved the chief things relating to himself his Death and Resurrection from the Prophecies that had gone before which ought to have been fulfilled in him He also cites the Old Testament Luke 24.44 by a Threefold Division of the Law of Moses the Prophets and the Psalms according to the Three Orders of Books into which the Iews had divided it The Psalms which was the first among the Holy Writings being set for that whole Volume St. Paul says That to the Iews were committed the Oracles of God Rom. 3.2 He reckons that among the chief of their Privileges but he never blames them for being unfaithful in this Trust and it is certain that the Iews have not corrupted the chief of those Passages that are urged against them to prove Jesus to have been the Christ. So that the Old Testament at least the Translation of the LXX Interpreters which was in common use and in high esteem among the Iews in our Saviour's time was as to the main faithful and uncorrupted This might be further urged from what St. Paul says concerning those Scriptures which Timothy had learned of a Child these could be no other than the Books of the Old Testament Thus if the Writings of the New Testament are acknowledged to be of Divine Authority the full Testimony that they give to the Books of the Old Testament does sufficiently prove their â—uthority and Genuineness likewise But to carry this matter yet further Moses wrought such Miracles both in Egypt in passing through the Red-Sea and in the Wilderness that if these are acknowledg'd to be true there can be no question made of his being sent of God and authorized by
all impure Desires being enjoined as indispensably necessary for without holiness no man can see the Lord. And thus every thing relating to this Article is considered and I hope both explained and proved ARTICLE VIII Of the Three Creeds The Three Creeds Nice Creed Athanasius Creed and that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed ought throughly to be received and believed for they may be proved by most certain Warrants of Holy Scripture ALthough no doubt seems to be here made of the Names or Designations given to those Creeds except of that which is ascribed to the Apostles yet none of them are named with any exactness Since the Article of the Procession of the Holy Ghost and all that follows it is not in the Nicene Creed but was used in the Church as a part of it for so it is in Epiphanius In Anchoreto before the Second General Council at Constantinople and it was confirmed and established in that Council Only the Article of the Holy Ghost's proceeding from the Son was afterwards added first in Spain Anno 447. which spread it self over all the West So that the Creed here called the Nice Creed is indeed the Constantinopolitan Creed together with the Addition of Filioque made by the Western Church That which is called Athanasius's Creed is not his neither â—or as it is not among his Works so that great Article of the Christian Religion having been settled at Nice and he and all the rest of the Orthodox referring themselves always to the Creed made by that Council there is no reason to imagine that he would have made a Creed of his own besides that not only the Macedonian but both the Nestorian and the Eutychian Heresies are expresly condemned by this Creed and yet those Authorities never being urged in those Disputes it is clear from thence that no such Creed was then known in the World as indeed it was never heard of before the Eighth Century and then it was given out as the Creed of Athanasius or as a Representation of his Doctrine and so it grew to be received by the Western Church perhaps the more early because it went under so great a Name in Ages that were not Critical enough to judge of what was genuine and what was spurious There is one great difficulty that arises out of several Expressions in this Câ—â—ed in which it is said That whosover will be saved must believe it That the Belief of it is necessary to Salvation and that such as do not hold it pure and undefiled shall without doubt perish everlastingly Where many Explanations of a Mystery hard to be understood are made indispensably necessary to Salvation and it is affirmed That all such as do not so believe must perish everlastingly To this two Answers are made 1. That it is only the Christian Faith in general that is hereby meant and not every Period and Article of this Creed so that all those severe Expressions are thought to import only the necessity of believing the Christian Religion But this seems forced for the words that follow And the Catholick Faith is do so plainly determine the sâ—gnification of that word to the Explanation that comes after that the word Catholick Faith in the first Verse can be no other than the same word as it is defined in the third and following Verses so that this Answer seems not natural 2. The common Answer in which the most Eminent Men of this Church as far as the Memory of all such as I have known could go up have agreed is this That these Condemnatory Expressions are only to be understood to relate to those who having the Means of Instruction offered to them have rejected them and have stifled their own Convictions holding the Truth in Unrighteousness and chusing darkness rather than light Upon such as do thus reject this great Article of the Christian Doctrine concerning One God and Three Persons Father Son and Holy Ghost and that other concerning the Incarnation of Christ by which God and Man were so united as to make one Person together with the other Doctrines that follow these are those Anathâ—maes denounced Not so as if it were hereby meant that every man who does not believe this in every tittle must certainly perish unless he has been furnished with sufficient means of conviction and that he has rejected them and hardned himself against them The Wrath of God is revealed against all sin and the wages of sin is Death So that every Sinner has the Wrath of God abiding on him and is in a state of Damnation yet a sincere Repentance delivers him out of it even though he lives and dies in some sins of Ignorance which though they may make him liable to damnation so that nothing but true Repentance can deliver him from it yet a general Repentance when it is also special for all known sins does certainly deliver a man from the guilt of unknown sins and from the Wrath of God due to them God only knows our hearts the degrees of our knowledge and the measure of our obstinacy and how far our Ignorance is affected or invincible and therefore he will deal with every man according to what he has received So that we may believe that some Doctrines are necessary to Salvation as well as that there are some Commandments necessary for Practice and we may also believe that some Errors as well as some Sins are exclusive of Salvation all which imports no more than that we believe such things are sufficiently revealed and that they are necessary Conditions of Salvation but by this we do not limit the Mercies of God towards those who are under such darkness as not to be able to see through it and to discern and acknowledge these Truths It were indeed to be wished that some express Declaration to this purpose were made by those who have Authority to do it But in the mean while this being the Sense in which the Words of this Creed are universally taken and it agreeing with the Phraseology of the Scripture upon the like occasions this is that which may be rested upon And allowing this large Explanation of these severe words the rest of this Creed imports no more than the Belief of the Doctrine of the Trinity which has been already proved in treating of the former Articles As for the Creed called the Apostles Creed there is good reason for speaking so doubtfully of it as the Article does since it does not appear that any determinate Creed was made by them None of the first Writers agree in delivering their Faith in a certain Form of Words every one of them gives an Abstract of his Faith in Words that differ both from one another and from this Form From thence it is clear that there was no common Form delivered to all the Churches And if there had been any Tradition after the Times of the Council of Nice of such a Creed composed by the Apostles the Arians
Such a Faith as this justifies but not as it is a Work or meritorious Action that of its own nature puts us in the Favour of God and makes us truly just But as it is the Condition upon which the Mercy of God is offered to us by Christ Jesus For then we correspond to his design of coming into the World that he might redeem us from all Iniquity Tit. 2.14 that is justify us And purifie unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works that is sanctify us Upon our bringing our selves therefore under these Qualifications and Conditions we are actually in the Favour of God Our Sins are pardoned and we are entitled to Eternal Life Our Faith and Repentance are not the valuable Considerations for which God pardons and justifies that is done meerly for the Death of Christ which God having out of the Riches of his Grace provided for us and offered to us Justification is upon those accounts said to be free There being nothing on our part which either did or could have procured it But still our Faith which includes our Hope our Love our Repentance and our Obedience is the Condition that makes us capable of receiving the benefits of this Redemption and Free Grace And thus it is clear in what sense we believe that we are justified both freely and yet through Christ and also through Faith as the Condition indispensably necessary on our part In strictness of words we are not justified till the final Sentence is pronounced Till upon our Death we are solemnly acquitted of our Sins and admitted into the Presence of God this being that which is opposite to Condemnation Yet as a Man who is in that state that must end in Condemnation is said to be condemned already Joh. 3.18 and the wrath of God is said to abide upon him tho' he be not yet adjudged to it So on the contrary a Man in that state which must end in the full Enjoyment of God is said now to be justified and to be at peace with God because he not only has the Promises of that state now belonging to him when he does perform the Conditions required in them but is likewise receiving daily Marks of God's Favour the protection of his Providence the Ministry of Angels and the inward Assistances of his Grace and Spirit This is a Doctrine full of comfort for if we did believe that our Justification was founded upon our Inherent Justice or Sanctification as the Consideration on which we receive it we should have just cause of Fear and Dejection since we could not reasonably promise our selves so great a Blessing upon so poor a Consideration but when we know that this is only the Condition of it then when we feel it is sincerely received and believed and carefully observed by us we may conclude that we are justified But we are by no means to think that our certain persuasion of Christ's having died for us in particular or the certainty of our Salvation through him is an Act of saving Faith much less that we are justified by it Many things have been too crudely said upon this Subject which have given the Enemies of the Reformation great Advantages and have furnished them with much matter of Reproach We ought to believe firmly That Christ died for all Penitent and Converted Sinners and when we feel these Characters in our selves we may from thence justly infer That he died for us and that we are of the Number of those who shall be Saved through him But yet if we may fall from this state in which we do now feel our selves we may and must likewise forfeit those hopes and therefore we must work out our Salvation with fear and trembling Our believing that we shall be Saved by Christ is no Act of Divine Faith since every Act of Faith must be founded on some Divine Revelation It is only a Collection and Inference that we may make from this general Proposition That Christ is the propitiation for the Sins of those who do truly repent and believe his Gospel and from those Reflections and Observations that we make on our selves by which we conclude That we do truly both repent and believe ARTICLE XII Of Good Works Albeit that Good Works which are the fruits of Faith and follow after Iustification cannot put away our Sins and endure the severity of God's Iudgment yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively Faith insomuch that by them a lively Faith may be as evidently known as a Tree discerned by the fruit THat Good works are indispensably necessary to Salvation that without holiness no man shall see the Lord is so fully and frequently exprest in the Gospel that no doubt can be made of it by any who reads it And indeed a greater disparagement to the Christian Religion cannot be imagined than to propose the hopes of God's Mercy and Pardon barely upon Believing without a Life suitable to the Rules it gives us This began early to corrupt the Theories of Religion as it still has but too great an influence upon the Practice of it What St. Iames writ upon this Subject must put an end to all doubting about it and whatever Subtilties some may have set up to separate the consideration of Faith from a holy Life in the point of Iustification yet none among us have denied that it was absolutely necessary to Salvation And so it be owned as necessary it is a nice curiosity to examine whether it is of it self a Condition of Justification or if it is the certain distinction and constant effect of that Faith which justifies These are Speculations of very little consequence as long as the main Point is still maintained That Christ came to bring us to God to change our Natures to mortify the Old man in us and to raise up and restore that Image of God from which we had fallen by Sin And therefore even where the Thread of Men's Speculations of these Matters may be thought too fine and in some Points of them wrong drawn yet so long as this Foundation is preserved that every one who nameth the name of Christ does depart from iniquity 2 Tim. 2.19 so long the Doctrine of Christ is preserved pure in this Capital and Fundamental Point There do arise out of this Article only two Points about which some Debates have been made 1st Whether the Good Works of Holy Men are in themselves so perfect that they can endure the severity of God's Judgment so that there is no mixture of imperfection or Evil in them or not The Council of Trent has decreed That Men by their Good Works have so fully satisfied the Law of God according to the state of this Life that nothing is wanting to them The second Point is Whether these Good Works are of their own nature meritorious of Eternal Life or not The Council of Trent has decreed that
a piece of the Fiction of the Parable which cannot enter into any part of the Application of it Col. 1.24 What St. Paul says of his filling up that which was behind of the afflictions of Christ in his flesh for his body's sake which is the Church is as appears by the words that follow whereof I am made a Minister only applicable to the Edification that the Church received from the Sufferings of the Apostles It being a great confirmation to them of the Truth of the Gospel when those who preached it suffered so constantly and so patiently for it by which they both confirmed what they had preached and set an Example to others of adhering firmly to it And since Christ is related to his Church as a Head to the Members it is in some sort his suffering himself when his Members suffer and that Conformity which they ought to express to him as their Head was necessary to make up the due Proportion that ought to be between the Head and the Members So St. Paul rejoyced in his being made conformable to him And this as it is a Sense that the words will well bear so it is certain they are capable of no other sense for if the sufferings of the Apostles were meritorious in behalf of the other Christians some plain account must have been given of this in the New Testament at least to do honour to the Memory of such Apostles as had then died for the Faith If it is suggested that the living Apostles were too modest to claim it to themselves that will not satisfy all runs quite in a contrary Stile The Mercies of God and the blood of Christ being always repeated whereas these are never once named Now to imagine that there can be any thing of such great use to us in which the Scripture should be not only silent but should run in a strain totally different from it is not conceivable For if in any thing the Gospel ought to be full and explicite in all that which concerns our Peace and Reconciliation with God and the means of our escaping his Wrath and obtaining his Favour There is another Doctrine that does also belong to this Head which is Purgatory that is not to be entred on here but is referred to its proper place Thus it appears how ill this Doctrine of Works of Supererogation is founded and upon how many accounts it is evidently false and yet upon it has been built not only a Theory of a Communication of those Merits and a Treasure in the Church but a Practice of so foul a nature that in it the words of our Saviour spoken to the Iews My house is a house of Prayer Mark 11.17 but ye have made it a den of Thieves are accomplished in a high and most scandalous manner It has been pretended that this was of the nature of a Bank of which the Pope was the Keeper and that he could grant such Bills and Assignments upon it as he pleased This was done in so base and so crying a manner that all who had any sense of Probity in their own Church were ashamed of it In the Primitive Church there were very severe Rules made obliging all that had sinned publickly and they were afterwards applied to such as had sinned secretly to continue for many Years in a state of Separation from the Sacrament and of Penance and Discipline But because all such general Rules admit of a great variety of Circumstances taken from Mens Sins their Persons and their Repentance there was a Power given to all Bishops by the Council of Nice to shorten the time and to relax the severity of those Canons and such Favour as they saw cause to grant was called Indulgence This was just and necessary and was a Provision without which no Constitution or Society can be well governed But after the Tenth Century as the Popes came to take this Power in the whole extent of it into their own hands so they found it too feeble to carry on the great Designs that they grafted upon it They gave it high Names and called it a plenary Remission and the pardon of all Sins which the World was taught to look on as a thing of a much higher nature than the bare excusing of Men from Discipline and Penance Purgatory was then got to be firmly believed and all Men were strangely possessed with the terror of it So a deliverance from Purgatory and by consequence an immediate admission into Heaven was believed to be the certain effect of it And to support all this the Doctrine of Counsels of Perfection of Works of Supererogation and of the Communication of those Merits was set up and to that this was added That a Treasure made up of these was at the Pope's disposal and in his keeping The use that this was put to was as bad as the Forgery it self Multitudes were by these means engaged to go to the Holy Land to recover it out of the hands of the Saracens Afterwards they armed vast Numbers against Hereticks to extirpate them They fought also all those Quarrels which their ambitious Pretensions engaged them in with Emperors and other Princes by the same Pay and at last they set it to Sale with the same Impudence and almost with the same Methods that Mountebanks use in the venting of their Secrets This was so gross even in an Ignorant Age and among the ruder sort that it gave the first Rise to the Reformation and as the progress of it was a very signal Work of God so it was in a great measure owing to the Scandals that this shameless Practice had given the World And upon this single reason it is that this matter has been more fully examined than was necessary for the thing is so plain that it has no sort of difficulty in it ARTICLE XV. Of Christ alone without Sin Christ in the truth of our nature was made like unto us in all things sin only except from which he was clearly void both in his flesh and in spirit He came to be a Lamb without spot who by sacrifice of himself once made should take away the sins of the World and sin as St. John saith was not in him But all we the rest although baptized and born again in Christ yet offend in many things and if we say we have no sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us THis Article relates to the former and is put here as another Foundation against all Works of Supererogation for that Doctrine with the Consequences of it having given the first Occasion to the Reformation it was thought necessary to overthrow it entirely and because the Perfection of the Saints must be supposed before their Supererogation can be thought on that was therefore here opposed That Christ was holy without spot and blemish harmless undefiled and separate from sinners Heb. 7.26 that there was no guile in his mouth that he never did amiss but
taught a Middle Doctrine Asserting an inward Grace but subject to the freedom of the Will And that all things were both decreed and done according to the Prescience of God in which all future Contingents were foreseen He also taught that the first Conversion of the Soul to God was merely an effect of its free choice so that all Preventing-grace was denied by him which came to be the peculiar distinction of those who were afterwards called the Semi-Pelagians Prosper and Hilary gave an account of this System to S. Austin upon which he writ against it and his Opinions were defended by Prosper Fulgentius Orosius and others as Cassian's were defended by Faustus Vincentius and Gennadius In conclusion St. Austin's Opinions did generally prevail in the West only Pelagius it seems retiring tâ— his own Country he had many followers among the Britans But German and Lupus being sent over once and again from France are said to have conquered them so intirely that they were all freed from those Errors Whatever they did by their Arguments the Writers of their Legends took care to adorn their Mission with many very wonderful Miracles of which the gathering all the pieces of a Calf some of which had been drest and the putting them together in its Skin and restoring it again to Life is none of the least The Ruin of the Roman Empire and the disorders that the Western Provinces fell under by their new and brabarous Masters occasioned in those Ages a great decay of Learning So that few Writers of Fame coming after that time St. Austin's great Labours and Piety and the many vast Volumes that he had left behind him gave him so great a Name that few durst contest what had been so zealously and so copiously defended by him And though it is highly probable that Celestine was not satisfied with his Doctrine yet both he and the other Bishops of Rome together with many Provincial Synods have so often declared his Doctrine in those Points to be the Doctrine of the Church that this is very hardly got over by those of that Communion The chief and indeed the only material difference that is between St. Austin's Doctrine and that of the Sublapsarians is That he holding that with the Sacrament of Baptism there was joyned an inward Regeneration made a difference between the Regenerate and the Predestinate which these do not He thought Persons thus regenerate might have all Grace besides that of Perseverance but he thought that they not being predestinated were certainly to fall from that state and from the Grace of Regeneration The other differences are but forced Strains to represent him and the Calvinists as of different Principles He thought that overcoming Delectation in which he put the Efficacy of Grace was as Irresistible though he used not so strong a word for it as the Calvinists do And he thought that the Decree was as Absolute and made without any regard to what the Free-Will would chuse as any of these do So in the main Points the Absoluteness of the Decree the Extent of Christ's Death the Efficacy of Grace and the Certainty of Perseverance their Opinions are the same though their ways of expressing themselves do often differ But if St. Austin's Name and the Credit of his Books went far yet no Book was more read in the following Ages than Cassian's Collations There was in them a clear Thread of good Sense and a very high Strain of Piety that run through them and they were thought the best Institutions for a Monk to form his Mind by reading them attentively So they still carried down among those who read them deep Impressions of the Doctrine of the Greek Church This broke out in the Ninth Century in which Godescalcus a Monk was severely used by Hincmar and by the Church of Rheims for asserting some of St. Austin's Doctrines against which Scotus Erigena wrote as Bertram or Ratramne wrote for them Remigius Bishop of Lyons with his Church did zealously assert St. Austin's Doctrine not without great sharpness against Scotus After this the matter slept till the School-Divinity came to be in great Credit And Thomas Aquinas being counted the chief Glory of the Dominican Order he not only asserted all St. Austin's Doctrine but added this to it That whereas formerly it was in general held That the Providence of God did extend it self to all things whatsoever he thought this was done by God's concurring immediately to the Production of every Thought Action Motion or Mode so that God was the First and Immediate Cause of every thing that was done And in order to the explaining the joint Production of every thing by God as the First and by the Creature as the Second Cause he thought at least as his Followers have understood him That by a Physical Influence the Will was predetermined by God to all things whether good or bad so that the Will could not be said to be free in that particular Instance in sensu composito though it was in general still free in all its Actions in sensu diviso A distinction so sacred and so much used among them that I chuse to give it in their on Terms rather than translate them To avoid the consequence of making God the Author of Sin a distinction was made between the Positive Act of Sin which was said not to be Evil and the want of its Conformity to the Law of God which being a Negation was no positive Being so that it was not produced And thus though the Action was produced jointly by God as the first Cause and by the Creature as the Second yet God was not guilty of the Sin but only the Creature This Doctrine passed down among the Dominicans and continues to do so to this day Scotus who was a Franciscan denied this Predetermination and asserted the Freedom of the Will Durandus denied this Immediate Concourse in which he has not had many Followers except Adola and some few more When Luther began to form his Opinions into a Body he clearly saw that nothing did so plainly destroy the Doctrine of Merit and Justification by Works as St. Austin's Opinions He found also in his Works very express Authorities against most of the Corruptions of the Roman Church And being of an Order that carried his Name and by consequence was accustomed to read and reverence his Works it was no wonder if he without a strict examining of the matter espoused all his Opinions Most of those of the Church of Rome who wrote against him being of the other Persuasions any one reading the Books of that Age would have thought that St. Austin's Doctrine was abandoned by the Church of Rome So that when Michael Baius and some others at Louvain began to revive it that became a matter of Scandal and they were condemned at Rome Yet at the Council of Trent the Dominicans had so much credit that great care was taken in the penning their Decrees to avoid all
Austin's Doctrine So the Breach was formed in Holland But when the Point of State was no more mixed with it these Questions were handled with less heat Those Disputes quickly cross'd the Seas and divided us The Abbots adhered to Austin's Doctrine while Bishop Overal but chiefly Archbishop Laud espoufed the Arminian Tenets All Divines were by Proclamation required not to preach upon those Heads But those that favoured the new Opinions were incouraged and the others were depressed And unhappy Disputes falling in at that time concerning the extent of the Royal Prerogative beyond Law the Arminians having declared themselves highly for that they were as much favoured at Court as they were censured in the Parliament which brought that Doctrine under a very hard Character over all the Nation Twisse carried it high to the Supralapsarian Hypothesis which grew to be generally followed by those of that Side But that sounded harshly and Hobb's grafting afterwards a Fate and Absolute Necessity upon it the other Opinions were again revived and no Political Interests falling in with them as all prejudices against them went off so they were more calmly debated and became more generally acceptable than they were before Men are now left to their liberty in them and all Anger upon those Heads is now so happily extinguished that diversity of Opinions about them begets no Alienation nor Animosity So far have I prosecuted a short View of the History of this Controversy I come now to open the chief Grounds of the different Parties And First for the Supralapsarians They lay this down for a Foundation That God is Essentially Perfect and Independent in all his Acts So that he can consider nothing but himself and his own Glory That therefore he designed every thing in and for himself That to make him stay his Decrees till he sees what free Creatures will do is to make him Decree dependently upon them which seems to fall short of Infinite Perfection That he himself can be the only End of his Counsels and that therefore he could only consider the Manifestation of his own Attributes and Perfection That Infinite Wisdom must begin its designs at that which is to come last in the Execution of them and since the Conclusion of all things at the Last Day will be the Manifestation of the Wisdom Goodness and Justice of God we ought to suppose that God in the Order of Things designed that first though in the Order of Time there is no First nor Second in God this being supposed to be from all Eternity After this great Design was laid all the Means in order to the End were next to be designed Creatures in the sight of God are as nothing and by a strong Figure are said to be less than nothing and Vanity Now if we in our Designs do not consider Ants or Insects not to say Straws or Grains of Sand and Dust then what lofty Thoughts soever our Pride may suggest to us we must be confessed to be very poor and inconsiderable Creatures before God therefore he himself and his own Glory can only be his own End in all that he designs or does This is the chief Basis of their Doctrine and so ought to be well considered They add to this That there can be no certain Prescience of future Contingents They say it involves a contradiction that things which are not certainly to be should be certainly foreseen For if they are certainly foreseen they must certainly be So while they are supposed to be contingent they are yet affirmed to be certain by saying that they are certainly foreseen When God decrees that any thing shall be it has from that a certain futurition and as such it is certainly foreseen by him An uncertain foresight is an Act of its nature Imperfect because it may be a mistake and so is inconsistent with the Divine Perfection And it seems to imply a contradiction to say that a thing happens freely that is may be or may not be and yet that it is certainly forseen by God God cannot foresee things but as he decrees them and so gives them a futurition and therefore this Prescience Antecedent to his Decree must be rejected as a thing impossible They say further That Conditionate Decrees are imperfect in their nature and that they subject the Will and Acts of God to a Creature That a Conditionate Decree is an Act in suspence whether it shall be or not which is inconsistent with Infinite Perfection A general Will or rather a willing that all Men should be Saved but also plain Characters of Imperfection in it As if God wished somewhat that he could not accomplish so that his Goodness should seem to be more extended than his Power Infinite Perfection can wish nothing but what it can execute and if it is fit to wish it it is fit also to execute it Therefore all that Stile that ascribes Passions or Affections to God must be understood in a Figure so that when his Providence exerts it self in such Acts as among us Men would be the effects of those Passions then the Passions themselves are in the Phrase of the Scriptures ascribed to God They say we ought not to measure the Punishments of Sin by our Notions of Justice God affâ—cts many good Men very severely and for many Years in this Life and this only for the Manifestation of his own Glory for making their Faith and Patience to shine and yet none think that this is unjust It is a method in which God will be glorified in them Some Sins are punished with other Sins and likewise with a course of severe Miseries If we transfer this from Time to Eternity the whole will be then more conceivable for if God may do for a little time that which is inconsistent with our Notions and with our Rules of Justice he may do it for a longer duration Since it is as impossible that he can be unjust for a Day as for all Eternity As God does every thing for himself and his own Glory so the Scriptures teach us every where to offer up all Praise and Glory to God to acknowledge that all is of him and to humble our selves asbeing nothing before him Now if we were Elected not by a free Act of his but by what he foresaw that we would be so that his Grace is not efficacious by its own force but by the good use that we make of it then the Glory and Praise of all the good we do and of God's purposes to us were due to our selves He designs according to the other Doctrine equally well to all Men and all the difference among them will arise neither from God's Intentions to them nor from his Assistances but from the good use that he foresaw they would make of these Favours that he was to give in common to all Mankind Man should have whereof to glory and he might say That he himself made himself to differ from others The whole strain of the
particular for themselves is That the Scripture has not declared any thing concerning the Fall of Adam in such formal terms that they can affirm any thing concerning it A Liberty of another kind seems to have been then in Man when he was made after the Image of God and before he was corrupted by Sin And therefore though it is not easy to clear all difficulties in so Intricate a matter yet it seems reasonable to think that Man in a state of Innocency was a purer and a freer Creature to good than now he is But after all this seems to be only a fleeing from the difficulty to a less offensive way of talking of it for if the Prescience of future Contingents cannot be certain unless they are decreed then God could not certainly foreknow Adam's Sin without he had made an Absolute Decree about it and that as was just now said is the same thing with the Supralapsarians Hypothesis of which shall say no more having now laid together in a small compass the full Strength of this Argument I go next to set out with the same Fidelity and Exactness the Remonstrants Arguments They begin with this That God is Just Holy and Merciful That in speaking of himself in the Scripture with relation to those Attributes he is pleased to make Appeals to Men to call them to reason with him Thus his Prophets did often bespeak the Iewish Nation the meaning of which is That God Acts so that Men according to the Notions that they have of those Attributes may examine them and will be forced to justify and approve them Nay in these God proposes himself to us as our Pattern we ought to imitate him in them and by consequence we may frame just Notions of them We are required to be holy and merciful as he is merciful What then can we think of a Justice that shall condemn us for a Fact that we never committed and that was done many Years before we were born As also that designs first of all to be glorified by our being eternally miserable and that decrees that we shall commit sins to justify the previous Decree of our Reprobation If those Decrees are thus originally designed by God and are certainly effectuated then it is unconceivable how there should be a Justice in punishing that which God himself appointed by an Antecedent and Irreversible Decree should be done So this seems to lye hard upon Justice It is no less hard upon Infinite Holiness to imagine that a Being of purer eyes than that it can behold iniquity Heb. 1.13 should by an Antecedent Decree fix our committing so many Sins in such a manner that it is not possible for us to avoid them This is to make us to be born indeed under a Necessity of Sin and yet this necessity is said to flow from the Act and Decrees of God God represents himself always 〈◊〉 the Scriptures as gracious merciful slow to anger and abundant in goodness and truth Exod. 34.6 2 Pet. 3.9 Ezek. 18.12.33.11 It is often said That he desires that no man should perish but that all should come to the knowledge of the truth And this is said sometimes with the Solemnity of an Oath As I live saith the Lord I take no pleasure in the death of sinners They ask What sense can such words bear if we can believe that God did by an Absolute Decree reprobate so many of them If all things that happen do arise out of the Decree of God as its First Cause then we must believe that God takes pleasure both in his own Decrees and in the execution of them and by consequence that he takes pleasure in the death of sinners and that in contradiction to the most express and most solemn words of Scripture Besides what can we think of the Truth of God and of the Sincerity of those Offers of Grace and Mercy with the Obtestations the Exhortations and Expostulations upon them that occur so often in Scripture if we can think that by Antecedent Acts of God he determined that all these should be ineffectual so that they are only so many solemn words that do indeed signify nothing if God intended that all things should fall out as they do and if they do so fall out only because he intended it The chief Foundation of this Opinion lies in this Argument as its Basis That nothing can be believed that contradicts the Justice Holiness the Truth and Purity of God that these Attributes are in God according to our Notions concerning them only they are in him infinitely more perfect since we are required to imitate them Whereas the Doctrine of Absolute Decrees does manifestly contradict the clearest Ideas that we can form of Justice Holiness Truth and Goodness From the Nature of God they go to the Nature of Man and they think that such an inward Freedom by which a Man is the Master of his own Actions and can do or not do what he pleases is so necessary to the Morality of our Actions that without it our Actions are neither good nor evil neither capable of Rewards or Punishments Mad Men or Men asleep are not to be charged with the good or evil of what they do therefore at least some degrees of Liberty must be left with us otherwise why are we praised or blamed for any thing that we do If a Man thinks that he is under an Inevitable Decree as he will have little remorse for all the Evil he does while he imputes it to that inevitable Force that constrains him so he will naturally conclude that it is to no purpose for him to struggle with Impossibilities And Men being inclined both to throw all blame off from themselves and to indulge themselves in Laziness and Sloth these Practices are too natural to Mankind to be encouraged by Opinions that favour them All Virtue and Religion all Discipline and Industry must arise from this as their first Principle That there is a Power in us to govern our own Thoughts and Actions and to raise and improve our Faculties If this is denied all Endeavours all Education all pains either on our selves or others are vain and fruitless things Nor is it possible to make a Man believe other than this for he does so plainly perceive that he is a free Agent he feels himself balance matters in his Thoughts and deliberate about them so evidently that he certainly knows he is a free Being This is the Image of God that is stampt upon his Nature and tho' he feels himself often hurried on so impetuously that he may seem to have lost his Freâ—dom in some Turns and upon some Occasions yet he feels that he might have restrained that Heat in its first beginning he feels he can divert his Thoughts and master himself in most things when he sets himself to it He finds that Knowledge and Reflection that good Company and good Exercises do tame and soften him and that bad ones makes him
For so great and so important a Matter as this is must be supposed to be either expresly declared in the Scriptures or not at all The Article affirming That some General Councils have erred must be understood of Councils that pass for such and that may be called General Councils much better than many others that go by that Name For that at Arimini was both very Numerous and was drawn out of many different Provinces As to the strict Notion of a General Council there is great Reason to believe that there was never any Assembly to which it will be found to agree And for the Four General Councils which this Church declares she receives they are received only because we are persuaded from the Scriptures that their Decisions were made according to them That the Son is truly God of the same Substance with the Father That the Holy Ghost is also truly God That the Divine Nature was truly united to the Human in Christ and that in One Person That both Natures remain distinct and that the Human Nature was not swallowed up of the Divine These Truths we find in the Scriptures and therefore we believe them We reverence those Councils for the sake of their Doctrine but do not believe the Doctrine for the Authority of the Councils There appeared too much of Human Frailty in some of their other Proceedings to give us such an Implicite Submission to them as to believe things only because they so Decided them ARTICLE XXII Of Purgatory The Romish Doctrine concerning Purgatory Pardons Worshipping and Adoration as well of Images as of Relicks and also Invocation of Saints is a fond thing vainly invented and grounded upon no warrant of Scripture but rather repugnant to the Word of God THERE are two small Variations in this Article from that published in King Edward's Reign What is here called the Romish Doctrine is there called the Doctrine of School-men The plain reason of this is that these Errors were not so fully espoused by the Body of the Roman Church when those Articles were first published so that some Writers that softened matters threw them upon the School-men and therefore the Article was cautiously worded in laying them there But before these that we have now were published the Decree and Canons concerning the Mass had passed at Trent in which most of the Heads of this Article are either affirmed or supposed though the formal Decree concerning them was made some Months after these Articles were published This will serve to justifie that diversity The second difference is only the leaving out a severe word Perniciously repugnant to the Word of God was put at first but perniciously being considered to be only a hard word they judged very right in the Second Edition of them that it was enough to say repugnant to the Word of God There are in this Article five Particulars that are all Ingredients in the Doctrine and Worship of the Church of Rome Purgatory Pardons the Worship of Images and of Relicks and the Invocation of Saints that are rejected not only as ill grounded brought in and maintained without good warrants from the Scripture but as contrary to it The first of these is Purgatory concerning which the Doctrine of the Church of Rome is that every Man is liable both to Temporal and to Eternal Punishment for his Sins that God upon the Account of the Death and Intercession of Christ does indeed pardon Sin as to its Eternal Punishment but the Sinner is still liable to Temporal Punishment which he must expiate by Acts of Pennance and Sorrow in this World together with such other Sufferings as God shall think fit to lay upon him but if he does not expiate these in this Life there is a State of Suffering and Misery in the next World where the Soul is to bear the Temporal punishment of its Sins which may continue longer or shorter till the Day of Judgment And in order to the shortening this the Prayers and Supererogations of Men here on Earth or the Intercession of the Saints in Heaven but above all things the Sacrifice of the Mass are of great Efficacy This is the Doctrine of the Church of Rome asserted in the Councils of Florence and Trent What has been taught among them concerning the Nature and the Degrees of those Torments though supported by many pretended Apparitions and Revelations is not to be imputed to the whole Body and is indeed only the Doctrine of Schoolmen though it is generally preached and infused into the Consciences of the People Therefore I shall only examine that which is the established Doctrine of the whole Roman Church And first as to the Foundation of it that Sins are only pardoned as to their Eternal Punishment to those who being justified by faith have peace with God through our Lord Iesus Christ. Rom. 5.1 There is not a colour for it in the Scriptures Remission of Sins is in general that with which the Preaching of the Gospel ought always to begin and this is so often repeated without any such reserve that it is a high assuming upon God and his Attributes of Goodness and Mercy to limit these when he has not limited them but has expresly said that this is a main part of the New Covenant Jer. 31.34 Heb. 8.12 that he will remember our sins and iniquities no more Now it seems to be a Maxim not only of the Law of Nations but of Nature that all offers of Pardon are to be understood in the full extent of the Words without any secret Reserves or Limitations unless they are plainly expressed An Indemnity being offered by a Prince to persuade his Subjects to return to their Obedience in the fullest Words possible without any reserves made in it it would be lookt on as a very perfidious thing if when the Subjects come in upon it trusting to it they should be told that they were to be secured by it against Capital Punishments but that as to all Inferior Punishments they were still at Mercy We do not dispute whether God if he had thought fit so to do might not have made this distinction nor do we deny that the Grace of the Gospel had been infinitely valuable if it had offered us only the Pardon of Sin with relation to its Eternal Punishment and had left the Temporal Punishment on us to be expiated by our selves but then we say this ought to have been expressed The Distinction ought to have been made between Temporal and Eternal and we ought not to have been drawn into a Covenant with God by words that do plainly import an intire Pardon and Oblivion upon which there lay a limited Sense that was not to be told the World till it was once well engaged in the Christian Religion Upon these Reasons it is that we conclude that this Doctrine not being contained in the Scriptures is not only without any warrant in them but that it is contrary to those full offers of
to what was set out in its proper Place And although we set a due value upon some of the Apocryphal Books yet others are of a lower Character The First Book of Maccabees is a very grave History writ with much exactness and a true Judgment but the Second is the Work of a mean Writer He was an Abridger of a larger Work and as he has the Modesty to ask his Readers Pardon for his Defects so it is very plain to every one that reads him that he needs often many grains of allowance So that this Book is one of the least valuable Pieces of the Apocrypha and there are very probable Reasons to question the Truth of that Relation concerning those who were thus prayed for But because that would occasion too long a Digression we are to make a difference between the Story that he relates and the Author 's own Reflections upon it for as we ought not to make any great Account of his Reflections these being only his private Thoughts who might probably have imbibed some of the Principles of the Greek Philosophy as some of the Iews had done or he might have believed that Notion which is now very generally received by the Iews that every Iew shall have a share in the World to come but that such as have lived ill must be purged before they arrive at it It is of much more importance to consider what Iudas Maccabeus did 2 Maccab. 12.40 which even by that Relation seems to be no more than this That he finding some things Consecrated to the Idols of the Iamnites about the Bodies of those who were killed concluded that to have been the cause of their Death And upon this he and all his Men betook themselves to Prayer and besought God that the Sin might be wholly put out of remembrance He exhorted his People to keep themselves by that Example from the like Sin and he made a Collection of a Sum of Money and sent it to Ierusalem to offer a Sin-offering before the Lord. So far the matter agrees well enough with the Iewish Dispensation It had appeared in the days of Ioshua how much guilt the Sin of Achan though but one Person had brought upon the whole Congregation and their Law had upon another Occasion prescribed a Sin-offering for the whole Congregation to expiate Blood that was shed when the Murderer could not be discovered That so the Judgments of God might not come upon them by reason of the cry of that Blood And by a parity of Reason Iudas might have ordered such an Offering to free himself and his Men from the guilt which the Idolatry of a few might have brought upon greater Numbers such a Sacrifice as this might according to the nature of that Law have been offered But to offer a Sin-offering for the Dead was a new thing without ground or any intimation of any thing like it in their Law So there is no reason to doubt but that if the Story is true Iudas offered this Sin-offering for the Living and not for the Dead If they had been alive then by their Law no Sin-offering could have been made for them for Idolatry was to be punished by cutting off and not to be expiated by Sacrifice What then could not have been done for them if alive could much less be done for them after their death So we have reason to conclude that Iudas offered this Sacrifice only for the Living And we are not much concerned in the Opinion which so slight a Writer as the Author of that Book had concerning it But whatever might be his Opinion it was far from that of the Roman Church By this Instance of the Maccabees Men who died in a State of mortal Sin and that of the highest nature had Sacrifices offered for them Whereas according to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome Hell and not Purgatory is to be the Portion of all such So this will prove too much if any thing at all that Sacrifices are to be offered for the Damned The design of Iudas his sending to make an Offering for them as that Writer states it was that their Sins might be forgiven and that they might have a happy Resurrection Here is nothing of Redeeming them out of Misery or of shortening or alleviating their Torment So that the Author of that Book seems to have been possessed with that Opinion received commonly among the Iews That no Iew could finally perish as we find S. Ierom expressing himself with the like partiality for all Christians But whatever the Author's Opinion was as that Book is of no Authority it is highly probable that Iudas's design in that Oblation was misunderstood by the Historian and we are sure that even his sense of it differs totally from that of the Church of Rome A Passage in the New Testament is brought as a full proof of the Fire of Purgatory 1 Cor. 3. from V. 10. to 16. When St. Paul in his Epistle to the Corinthians is reflecting on the Divisions that were among them and on that diversity of Teachers that formed Men into different Principles and Parties he compares them to different Builders Some raised upon a Rock an Edifice like the Temple at Ierusalem of Gold and Silver and noble Stones called precious Stones whereas others upon the same Rock raised a mean Hovel of Wood Hay and Stubble of both he says every man's work shall be made manifest For the day shall reveal it because it shall be revealed by fire for the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is And he adds If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon he shall receive a reward and if any man's work shall be burnt he shall suffer loss but he himself shall be saved yet so as by fire From the first view of these words it will not be thought strange if some of the Ancients who were too apt to Expound places of Scripture according to their first appearences might fancy that at the last day all were to pass through a great Fire and to suffer more or less in it But it is visible that that Opinion is far enough from the Doctrine of Purgatory These words relate to a Fire that was soon to appear and that was to try every Man's work It was to be revealed and in it every Man's work was to be made manifest So this can have no relation to a secret Purgatory Fire The meaning of it can be no other but that whereas some with the Apostles were building up the Church not only upon the Foundation of Jesus Christ and the Belief of his Doctrine but were teaching Men Doctrines and Rules that were Vertuous Good and Great Others at the same time were daubing with a profane mixture both of Judaism and Gentilism joining these with some of the Precepts of Christianity a day would soon appear which probably is meant of the destruction of Ierusalem and of the Iewish Nation or
it may be applied to the Persecution that was soon to break out in that day those who had true Notions generous Principles and suitable Practices would weather that Storm Whereas others that were entangled with weak and superstitious Conceits would then run a great risk though their firm believing that Jesus was the Messias would preserve them Yet the weakness and folly of those Teachers would appear their Opinions would involve them in such danger that their escaping would be difficult like one that gets out of a House that is all on fire round about him So that these words cannot possibly belong to Purgatory but must be meant of some signal discrimination that was to be made in some very dreadful appearances which would distinguish between the true and the false Apostles and that could be no other but either in the destruction of Ierusalem or in the persecution that was to come on the Church though the first is the more probable It were easy to pursue this Argument further and to shew that the Doctrine of Purgatory as it is now in the Roman Church was not known in the Church of God for the first six hundred Years that then it began to be doubtfully received But in an ignorant Age Visions Legends and bold Stories prevailed much yet the Greek Church never received it Some of the Fathers speak indeed of the last probatory Fire but though they did not think the Saints were in a state of consummate Blessedness enjoying the Vision of God yet they thought they were in a state of ease and quiet and that in Heaven St. Austin speaks in this whole matter very doubtfully he varies often from himself Aug. de Civit. Dâ—i l. 21. c. 18. ad 22. Enâ—â—â—r c. 67 68 69. Ad Dulcid 〈◊〉 primâ— he seems sometimes very positive only for two States at other times as he asserts the last probatory Fire so he seems to think that good Souls might suffer some grief in that sequestred state before the last Day upon the account of some of their past Sins and that by degrees they might arise up to their Consummation All these Contests were proposed very doubtfully before Gregory the Great 's days and even then some Doubts seem to have been made But the Legends were so copiously plaid upon all those Doubts that this Remnant of Paganism got at last into the Western Church Tertul. de Câ—r mil. c. â— de Ex. 〈◊〉 c. 13. â—â—prian 〈◊〉 34.37 〈…〉 75. l. 3. â—3 It was no wonder that the Opinions formerly mentioned which began to appear in the Second Age had preduced in the Third the practice of Praying for the Dead of which we find such full evidence in Tertullain and St. Cyprian's Writings that the matter of Fact is not to be denied This appears also in all the Antient Liturgies And Epiphanius charges Aerius with this of rejecting all Prayers for the Dead asking why were they prayed for The Opinions that they fell into concerning the State of departed Souls in the Interval between their Death and the Day of Judgment gave occasion enough for Prayer they thought they were capable of making a Progress and of having an early Resurrection They also had this Notion among them That it was the peculiar Priviledge of Jesus Christ to be above all our Prayers but that no Men not excepting the Apostles nor the Blessed Virgin were above the Prayers of the Church They thought this was an Act of Church-Communion that we were to hold even with the Saints in Heaven to pray for them Thus in the Apostolical Constitutions in the Books of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy and in the Liturgies that are ascribed to St. Basil and St. Chrysostom Dion de Eccl. Hierar Cap. 7. they offer unto God these Prayers which they thought their reasonable Service for those who were at rest in the Faith their Forefathers Fathers Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles Preachers Evangelists Martyrs Confessors Religious Persons and for every Spirit pâ—rfected in the Faith especially for our most Holy Immaculate most Blessed Lady the Mother of God the ever Virgin Mary Particular Instances might also be given of this out of St. Cyprian St. Ambrose Nazianzen and St. Austin Aug. Conf. l. 9. c. 19. who in that famous and much cited Passage concerning his Mother Monica as he speaks nothing of any Temporal Pains that she suffered so he plainly intimates his belief that God had done all that he desired Thus it will appear to those who have examined all the Passages which are brought out of the Fathers concerning their Prayers for the Dead that they believed they were then in Heaven and at rest and by consequence though these Prayers for the Dead did very proâ—ably give the chief rise to the Doctrine of Purgatory yet as they then made them they were utterly inconsistent with that Opinion Tertullian who is the first that is cited for them says we make Oblations for the Dead Supra and we do it for that Second Nativity of theirs Natalitia once a year The Signification of the word Natalitia as they used it was the Saint's Days of Death in which they reckoned he was born again to Heaven So though they judged them there yet they offered up Prayers for them And when Epiphanius brings in Aerius asking Why those Prayers were made for the Dead Though it had been very natural and indeed unavoidable if he had believed Purgatory to have answered that it was to deliver them from thence yet he makes no such answer but only asserts that it had been the Practice of the Church so to do The Greek Church retains that Custom though she has never admitted of Purgatory Here then an Objection may be made to our Constitution that in this of praying for the Dead we have departed from the practice of the Ancients We do not deny it both the Church of Rome and we in another Practice of equal Antiquity of giving the Eucharist to Infants have made changes and let that Custom fall The Curiosities in the Second Century seem to have given rise to those Prayers in the Third and they gave the rise to many other Disorders in the following Centuries Since therefore God has commanded us while we are on Earth to pray for one another and has made that a main Act of our Charity and Church-Communion but has no where directed us to pray for those that have finished their Course and since the only pretence that is brought from Scripture of St Paul's praying that Onesiphorus might find mercy in the day of the Lord cannot be wrought up into an Argument for it cannot be proved that he was then Dead and since the Fathers reckon this of praying for the Dead only as one of their Customs for which they vouch no other Warrant but Practice since also this has been grosly abused and has been applied to support a Doctrine totally different from theirs we think that we have as good a Plea
scandalous Parts Such as the Worship of subordinate Gods and of Images These are the chief Grounds upon which we separate from the Roman Communion Since we cannot have fellowship with them unless we will join in those Acts which we look on as direct violations of the First and Second Commandment God is a jealous God and therefore we must rather venture on their Wrath how burning soever it may be than on his who is a consuming Fire ARTICLE XXIII Of Ministring in the Congregation It is not lawful for any Man to take upon him the Office of publick Preaching or Ministring the Sacraments in the Congregation before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same And those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent which be chosen and called to this work by Men who have publick Authority given unto them in the Congregation to call and send Ministers into the Lord's Uineyard WE have two particulars fixed in this Article The First is against any that shall assume to themselves without a lawful Vocation the authority of dispencing the things of God The Second is the defining in very general Words what it is that makes a lawful Call As to the First it will bear no great difficulty We see in the old Dispensation that the Family the Age and the Qualifications of those that might serve in the Priesthood are very particularly set forth In the New Testament our Lord called the Twelve Apostles and sent them out He also sent out upon another occasion Seventy Disciples And before he left his Apostles He told them that as his Father had sent him so he sent them John â—â— 2â— Which seems to Import that as he was sent into the World with this among other Powers that he might send others in his Name so he likewise empowered them to do the same And when they went planting Churches as they took some to be Companions of Labour with themselves so they appointed others over the particular Churches in which they fixed them Such were Epaphras or Epaphroditus at Colosse Timothy at Ephesus and Titus in Crete To them the Apostles gave Authority Otherwise it was a needless thing to write so many directions to them in order to their conduct They had the Depositum of the Faith 2 Tim. 1.13 with which they were chiefly entrusted Concerning the succession in which that was to be continued we have these Words of St. Paul The things which thou hast heard of me among many witnesses the same commit thou to faithful Men 2 Tim. 2.2 1 Tim. 2.1 2 3. 1 Tim. 2.12 1 Tim. â— c. who shall be able to teach others also To them directions are given concerning all the different Parts of their Worship Supplications Prayers Intercessions and giving of thanks and also the keeping up the decency of the Worship and the not suffering of Women to Teach like the Women Priests among the Heathen who were believed to be filled with a Bacchick Fury To them are directed all the Qualifications of such as might be made either Bishops or Deacons They were to examine them according to these and either to receive or reject them All this was directed to Timothy that he might know how he ought to behave himself in the house of God 1 Tim. 3.15 1 Tim. â— 1 3 17 19 22. He had Authority given him to Rebuke and Entreat to Honour and to Censure He was to Order what Widows might be received into the Number and who should be refused He was to receive Accusations against Elders or Presbyters according to directed Methods and was either to Censure some or to lay Hands on others as should agree with the Rules that were set him And in conclusion he is very solemnly charged 1 Tim. 6.20 2 Tim. 2.15 2 Tim. 4.2 5. to keep that which was committed to his Trust. He is required rightly to divide the word of truth to preach the word to be instant in season and out of season to reprove rebuke and exhort and to do the work of an Evangelist and to make full proof of his ministry Some of the same things are charged upon Titus whom St. Paul had left in Crete to set in order the things that were wanting Tit. 1.5 9 13. and to ordain Elders in every City Several of the Characters by which he was to try them are also set down He is charged to rebuke the people sharply and to speak the things that became sound doctrine He is instructed concerning the Doctrines which he was to Teach and those which he was to Avoid and also how to Censure an Heretick He was to admonish him twice Tit. 3.10 and if that did not prevail he was to reject him by some publick Censure These Rules given to Timothy and Titus do plâ—inly Import that there was to be an Authority in the Church and that no Man was to assume this Authority to himself according to that Maxim that seems to be founded on the Light of Nature as well as it is set down in Scripture as a standing Rule agreed to in all Times and Places No Man taketh this honour to himself Heb. 5.4 but he that is called of God as was Aaron St. Paul in his Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians did reckon up the several Orders and Functions Rom. 12.6 7 8. 1 Cor. 12.28 Eph. 4.11 12 13 16. that God had set in his Church and in his Epistle to the Ephesians he shews that these were not transient but lasting Constitutions For there as he reckons the Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors and Teachers as the Gifts which Christ at his Ascension had given to Men so he tells the Ends for which they were given For the perfecting the Saints by Perfecting seems to be meant the initiating them by Holy Mysteries rather than the compacting or putting them in joint For as that is the proper Signification of the Word so it being set first the other things that come after it make that the strict Sense of Perfecting that is Compleating does not so well agree with the Period for the work of the Ministry the whole Ecclesiastical or Sacred Services for the edifying the Body of Christ to which instructing exhorting comforting and all the other Parts of Preaching may well be reduced and then the duration of these Gifts is defined 'Till we all come in the Vnity of the Faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect Man This seems to Import the whole State of this Life We cannot think that all this belonged only to the Infancy of the Church and that it was to be laid aside by her when she was farthâ—r advanced For when we consider that in the Beginnings of Christianity there was so liberal an Effusion of the Holy Spirit poured out upon such great Numbers who had very extraordinary Credentials Miracles and the Gift of Tongues to prove their Mission it does not seem so necessary in such a
their joining to the Idol Feasts for an Idol was nothing and so that wstich was offered to an Idol could contract no defilement from the Idol it being nothing Now if the meaning of their being partakers with Devils imports only their joining themselves in Acts of Fellowship with Idolaters then the Sin of this would have easily appeared without such a re-inforcing of the Matter For tho' an Idol was nothing yet it was still a great Sin to join in the Acts that were meant to be the Worship of this nothing This was a dishonouring of God and a debasing of Man But St. Paul seems to carry the Argument farther that how true soever it was that the Idol was nothing that is a dead and lifeless thing that had no Vertue nor Operation and that by consequence could derive nothing to the Sacrifice that was offered to it Yet since those Idols were the Instruments by which the Devil kept the World in Subjection to him all such as did partake in their Sacrifices might come under the Effects of that Magick that might be exerted about their Temples or Sacrifices By which the Credit of Idolatry was much kept up And though every Christian had a sure defence against the Powers of Darkness as long as he continued true to his Religion yet if he went out of that Protection into the Empire of the Devil and joined in the Acts that were as a Homage to him he then fell within the reach of the Devil and might justly fear his being brought into a Partnership of those magical Possessions or Temptations that might be suffered to fall upon such Christians as should associate themselves in so detestable a Service In the same Sense it was also said 1 Cor. 10.18 that all the Israelites who did eat of the Sacrifices were partakers of the Altar That is that all of them who joined in the Acts of that Religion such as the Offering their Peace-Offerings for of those of that kind they might only eat all these were partakers of the Altar That is of all the Blessings of their Religion of all the Expiations the Burnt-offerings and Sin-offerings that were offered on the Altar for the sins of the whole Congregation For that as a great Stock went in a common Dividend among such as observed the Precepts of that Law and joined in the Acts of Worship prescribed by it Thus it appears that such as joined in the Acts of Idolatry became partakers of all that Influence that Devils might have over those Sacrifices and all that continued in the Observances of the Mosaical Law had thereby a partnership in the Expiations of the Altar so likewise all Christians who receive this Sacrament worthily have by their so doing a share in that which is represented by it the Death of Christ and the Expiation and other Benefits that follow it This seemed necessary to be fully explained For this Matter how plain soever in it self has been made very dark by the ways in which some have pretended to open it With this I conclude all that belongs to the first Part of the Article and that which was first to be explained of our Doctrine concerning the Sacrament By which we assert a real Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ but not of his Body as it is now glorified in Heaven but of his Body as it was broken on the Cross when his blood was shed and separated from it That is his Death with the merit and effects of it are in a visible and federal Act offered in this Sacrament to all worthy Believers By Real we understand True in opposition both to Fiction and Imagination And to those Shadows that were in the Mosaical Dispensation in which the Manna the Rock the brazen Serpent but most eminently the Cloud of Glory were the Types and Shadows of the Messias that was to come With whom came Grace and Truth that is a most wonderful Manifestation of the Mercy or Grace of God and a verifying of the Promises made under the Law In this Sense we acknowledge a real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament Though we are convinced that our first Reformers judged right concerning the use of the Phrase real Presence that it were better to be let fall than to be continued since the Use of it and that Idea which does naturally arise from the common acceptation of it may stick deeper and feed Superstition more than all thoâ—e larger Explanations that are given to it can be able to cure But howsoever in this Sense it is innocent of it self and may be lawfully used though perhaps it were more cautiously done not to use it since advantages have been taken from it to urge it farther than we intend it and since it has been a snare to some I go in the next Place to explain the Doctrine of the Church of Rome concerning this Sacrament Transubstantiation does express it in one Word but that a full Idea may be given of this Part of their Doctrine I shall open it in all its Branches and Consequences The Matter of this Sacrament is not Bread and Wine For they are annihilated when the Sacrament is made They are only the remote Matter out of which it is made But when the Sacrament is made they cease to be And instead of them their outward Appearances or Accidents do only remain Which though they are no Substances yet are supposed to have a Nature and Essence of their own separable from Matter And these Appearances with the Body of Christ under them are the Matter of the Sacrament Now though the Natural and Visible Body of Christ could not be the Sacrament of his Body yet they think his real Body being thus veiled under the Appearances of Bread and Wine may be the Sacrament of his glorified Body Yet it seeming somewhat strange to make a true Body the Sacrament of it self they would willingly put the Sacrament in the Appearances but that would sound very harsh to make Accidents which are not Matter to be the Matter of the Sacrament Therefore since these words This is my Body must be literally understood the Matter must be the true Body of Christ so that Christ's Body is the Sacrament of his Body Christ's Body though now in Heaven is as they think presented in every Place where a true Consecration is made And though it is in Heaven in an extended State as all other Bodies are yet they think that Extension may be separated from Matter as well as the other Appearances or Accidents are believed to be separated from it And whereas our Souls are believed to be so in our Bodies that though the whole Soul is in the whole Body yet all the Soul is believed to be in every Part of it but so that if any Part of the Body is separated from the rest the Soul is not divided being one single Substance but retires back into the rest of the Body They apprehend that Christ's Body is present after
Body Here then was the Tradition and Practice of the Church falsified which is no small Prejudice against those that support the Doctrine as well as against the Credit of that Council About thirty Years after that Council Paschase Radbert Abbot of Corby in France did very plainly assert the corporal Presence in the Eucharist He is acknowledged both by Bellarmin and Sirmondus to be the first Writer that did on purpose advance and explain that Doctrine He himself values his Pains in that Matter and as he laments the slowness of some in believing it so he pretends that he had moved many to assent to it But he confesses that some blamed him for ascribing a Sense to the Words of Christ that was not consonant to Truth There was but one Book writ in that Age to second him the Name of the Author was lost till Mabillon discovered that it was writ by one Herigerus Abbot of Cob. But all the Eminent Men and the great Writers of that time wrote plainly against this Doctrine and affiâ—med that the Bread and Wine remained in the Sacrament and did nourish our Bodies as other Meats do Those were Rabanus Maurus Archbishop of Mentz Amalarius Archbishop of Triers Heribald Bishop of Auxerre Bertram or Ratramne Iohn Scot Erigena Walafridus Strabus Florus and Christian Druthmar Three of these set themselves on purpose to refute Paschase Rabanus Maurus in an Epistle to Abbot Egilon wrote against Paschase for saying that it was that Body that was born of the Virgin that was crucified and raised up again which was daily offered up And though that Book is lost yet as he himself refers his Reader to it in his Penitential so we have an Account given of it by the Anonymous defender of Paschase Ratramne was commanded by Charles the Bald then Emperour to write upon that Subject which he in the beginning of his Book promises to do not trusting to his own Sense but following the Steps of the Holy Fathers He tells us that there were different Opinions about it Some believing that the Body of Christ was there without a Figure Others saying that it was there in a Figure or Mystery Upon which he apprehended that a great Schism must follow His Book is very short and very plain He asserts our Doctrine as expresly as we our selves can do He delivers it in the same Words and proves it by many of the same Arguments and Authorities that we bring Raban and Ratramne were without dispute reckoned among the first Men of that Age. Iohn Scot was also commanded by the same Emperour to write on the same Subject He was one of the most Learned and the most Ingenious Men of the age and was in great Esteem both with the Emperour and with our King Alfred He was reckoned both a Saint and a Martyr He did formally refute Paschase's Doctrine and assert ours His Book is indeed lost but a full Account of it is given us by other Writers of that Time And it is a great Evidence that his Opinion in this Matter was not then thought to be contrary to the general Sense of the Church in that Age For he having writ against St. Augustin's Doctrine concerning Predestination there was a very severe Censure of him and of his Writings published under the Name of the Church of Lions In which they do not once reflect on him for his Opinions touching the Eucharist It appears from this that their Doctrine concerning the Sacrament was then generally received Since both Ratramne and he though they differ'd extreamly in that Point of Predestination yet both agreed in this It is probable that the Saxon Homily that was read in England on Easter-day was taken from Scot's Book which does fully reject the corporal Presence This is enough to shew that Paschase's Opinion was an Innovation broached in the Ninth Century and was opposed by all the Great Men of that Age. The Tenth Century was the blackest and most ignorant of all the Ages of the Church There is not one Writer in that Age that gives us any clear Account of the Doctrine of the Church Such remote Hints as occur do still savour of Ratramne's Doctrine All Men were then asleep and so it was a fit time for the Tares that Paschase had sown to grow up in it The Popes of that Age were such a Succession of Monsters that Baronius cannot forbear to make the saddest Exclamations possible against their Debaucheries their Cruelties and their other Vices About the middle of the Eleventh Century after this Dispute had slept almost two hundred Years it was again revived Bruno Bishop of Angiers and Berengarius his Archdeacon maintained the Doctrine of Ratramne Little mention is made of the Bishop but the Archdeacon is spoken of as a Man of great Piety So that he past for a Saint and was a Man of such Learning that when he was brought before Pope Nicolaus no Man could resist him He writ against Paschase and had many followers The Historians of that Age tell us that his Doctrine had overspread all France The Books writ against him by Lanfranc and others are filled with an impudent corrupting of all Antiquity Many Councils were held upon this Matter and these together with the Terrours of Burning which was then beginning to be the common Punishment of Heresy made him renounce his Opinion But he returned to it again yet he afterwards renounced it Though Lanfranc reproaches him that it was not the Love of Truth but the Fear of Death that brought him to it And his final Retracting of that renouncing of his Opinion is lately found in France as I have been credibly informed Thus this Opinion that in the Ninth Century was generally received and was condemned by neither Pope nor Council was become so odious in the Eleventh Century that none durst own it And he who had the Courage to own it yet was not resolute enough to stand to it For about this Time the Doctrine of extirpating Hereticks and of deposing such Princes as were Defective in that Matter was universally put in Practice Great Bodies of Men began to separate from the Roman Communion in the Southern Parts of France and one of the chief Points of their Doctrine was their believing that Christ was not corporally Present in the Eucharist and that he was there only in a Figure or Mystery But now that the contrary Doctrine was established and that those who denied it were adjudged to be burnt it is no wonder if it quickly gained Ground when on the one hand the Priests saw their Interest in promoting it and all People felt the Danger of denying it The Anathema's of the Church and the Terrours of Burning were infallible Things to silence Contradiction at least if not to gain Assent Soon after this Doctrine was received the Schoolmen began to refine upon it Lib. 4. Dist. 11. as they did upon every thing else The Master of the Sentences would not determine how Christ was Present
the concurrence of other Churches In the way of managing this every Body of Men has somewhat peculiar to it self and the Pastors of that Body are the properest Judges in that matter We know that the several Churches even while under one Empire had great varieties in their Forms as appears in the different Practices of the Eastern and Western Churches And as soon as the Roman Empire was broken we see this Variety did increase The Gallican Churches had their Missals different from the Roman And some Churches of Italy followed the Ambrosian But Charles the Great in compliance with the desires of the Pope got the Gallican Churches to depart from their own Missals and to receive the Roman which he might the rather do intending to have raised a New Empire to which a Conformity of Rights might have been a great Step. Even in this Church there was a great Variety of Usages which perhaps were begun under the Heptarchy when the Nation was subdivided into several Kingdoms It is therefore suitable to the Nature of Things to the Authority of the Magistrate and to the Obligations of the Pastoral Care That every Church should act within her self as an entire and independent Body The Churches owe only a Friendly and Brotherly Correspondence to one another but they owe to their own Body Government and Direction and such Provisions and Methods as are most likely to promote the great Ends of Religion and to preserve the Peace of the Society both in Church and State Therefore we are no other way bound by Antient Canons but as the same reason still subsisting we may see the same cause to continue them that there was at first to make them Of all the Bodies of the World the Church of Rome has the worst Grace to reproach us for departing in some Particulars from the Antient Canons since it was her ill Conduct that had brought them all into desuetude And it is not easy to revive again Antiquated Rules even though there may be good reason for it when they fall under that tacit Abrogation which arises out of a long and general disuse of them ARTICLE XXXV Of Homilies The Second Book of Homilies the several Titles whereof we have joined under this Article doth contain a godly and wholesome Doctrine and necessary for these Times as doth the Former Book of Homilies which were set forth in the Time of Edward the Sixth and therefore we judg them to be read in Churches by the Ministers diligently and distinctly that they may be understanded of the People The Names of the Homilies 1. Of the right use of the Church 2. Against Peril of Idolatry 3. Of repairing and keeping clean of Churches 4. Of Good Works First Of Fasting 5. Against Gluttony and Drunkenness 6. Against Excess of Apparel 7. Of Prayer 8. Of the Place and time of Prayer 9. That common Prayers and Sacraments ought to be ministred in a known tongue 10. Of the reverent estimation of God's Word 11. Of Alms-doing 12. Of the Nativity of Christ. 13. Of the Passion of Christ. 14. Of the Resurrection of Christ. 15. Of the worthy receiving of the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ. 16. Of the Gifts of the Holy Ghost 17. For the Rogation-days 18. Of the state of Matrimony 19. Of Repentance 20. Against Idleness 21. Against Rebellion AT the time of the Reformation as there could not be found at first a sufficient Number of Preachers to instruct the whole Nation so those that did comply with the changes which were then made were not all well-affected to them so that it was not safe to trust this matter to the Capacity of the one side and to the Integrity of others Therefore to supply the Defects of some and to oblige the rest to teach according to the Form of sound Doctrine there were two Books of Homilies prepared the first was published in King Edward's time the second was not finished till about the time of his Death so it was not published before Queen Elizabeth's time The Design of them was to mix Speculative Points with Practical matters Some explain the Doctrine and others enforce the Rules of Life and Manners These are plain and short Discourses chiefly calculated to possess the Nation with a Sense of the Purity of the Gospel in opposition to the Corruptions of Popery and to reform it from those crying Sins that had been so much connived at under Popery while men knew the Price of them how to compensate for them and to redeem themselves from the Guilt of them by Masses and Sacraments by Indulgences and Absolutions In these Homilies the Scriptures are often applied as they were then understood not so critically as they have been explained since that time But by this Approbation of the two Books of Homilies it is not meant that every Passage of Scripture or Argument that is made use of in them is always convincing or that every Expression is so severely worded that it may not need a little Correction or Explanation All that we profess about them is only that they contain a godly and wholesom Doctrine This ratheâ— relates to the main Importance and Design of them than to every Passagâ— in them Though this may be said concerning them That considering thâ— Age they were written in the Imperfection of our Language and some lesser Defects they are Two very extraordinary Books Some of them arâ— better writ than others and are equal to any thing that has been writ upon those Subjects since that time Upon the whole matter every one whâ— subscribes the Articles ought to read them otherwise he subscribes a Blank he approves a Book implicitely and binds himself to read it as he may be required without knowing any thing concerning it This Approbation is not to be stretched so far as to carry in it a special Assent to every Particular in that whole Volume but a man must be persuaded of the main of the Doctrine that is taught in them To instance this in one particular since there are so many of the Homilies that charge the Church of Rome with Idolatry and that from so many different Topicks no man who thinks that Church is not guilty of Idolatry can with a good Conscience subscribe this Article That the Homilies contain a good and wholesom Doctrine and necessary for these times for according to his sense they contain a false and an uncharitable Charge of Idolatry against a Church that they think is not guilty of it and he will be apt to thâ—nk that this was done to heighten the Aversion of the Nation to it Therefore any who have such favourable thoughts of the Church of Rome are bound by the force of that Persuasion of theirs not to sign this Article but to declare against it as the authorizing of an Accusation against a Church which they think is ill grounded and is by consequence both unjust and uncharitable By necessary for these times is not to be meant