the thing certain to another much less necessary in it self And since God would not bind us upon pain of sin and punishment to make deductions our selves much less would he bind us to follow another mans Logick as an Article of our Faith I say much less another mans for our own integrity for we will certainly be true to our selves and do our own business heartily is as fit and proper to be imployed as another mans ability He cannot secure me that his ability is absolute and the greatest but I can be more certain that my own purposes and fidelity to my self is such And since it is necessary to rest somewhere lest we should run to an infinity it is best to rest there where the Apostles and the Churches Apostolical rested when not only they who are able to judge but others who are not are equally ascertained of the certainty and of the sufficiency of that explication 12. This I say not that I believe it unlawful or unsafe for the Church or any of the Antistites religionis or any wise man to extend his own Creed to any thing may certainly follow from any one of the Articles but I say that no such deduction is fit to be prest on others as an Article of Faith and that every deduction which is so made unless it be such a thing as is at first evident to all is but sufficient to make a humane Faith nor can it amount to a divine much less can be obligatory to bind a person of a differing perswasion to subscribe under pain of losing his Faith or being a Heretick For it is a demonstration that nothing can be necessary to be believed under pain of damnation but such propositions of which it is certain that God hath spoken and taught them to us and of which it is certain that this is their sence and purpose For if the sence be uncertain we can no more be obliged to believe it in a certain sence than we are to believe it at all if it were not certain that God delivered it But if it be only certain that God spake it and not certain to what sence our faith of it is to be as indeterminate as its sence and it can be no other in the nature of the thing nor is it consonant to Gods justice to believe of him that he can or will require more And this is of the nature of those propositions which Aristotle calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which without any further probation all wise men will give assent at its first publication And therefore deductions inevident from the evident and plain letter of Faith are as great recessions from the obligation as they are from the simplicity and certainty of the Article And this I also affirm although the Church of any one denomination or represented in a Council shall make the deduction or declaration For unless Christ had promised his Spirit to protect every particular Church from all errours less material unless he had promised an absolute universal infallibility etiam in minutioribus unless super-structures be of the same necessity with the foundation and that Gods Spirit doth not only preserve his Church in the being of a Church but in a certainty of not saying any thing that is less certain and that whether they will or no too we may be bound to peace and obedience to silence and to charity but have not a new Article of Faith made and a new proposition though consequent as 't is said from an Article of Faith becomes not therefore a part of the Faith nor of absolute necessity Quid unquam aliud Ecclesia Conciliorum decretis enisa est nisi ut quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentius crederetur said Vincentius Lirinensis whatsoever was of necessary belief is so still and hath a new degree added by reason of a new light or a clear explication but no propositions can be adopted into the foundation The Church hath power to intend our Faith but not to extend it to make our belief more evident but not more large and comprehensive For Christ and his Apostles concealed nothing that was necessary to the integrity of Christian Faith or salvation of our souls Christ declared all the will of his Father and the Apostles were Stewards and Dispensers of the same Mysteries and were faithful in all the house and therefore concealed nothing but taught the whole Doctrine of Christ so they said themselves And indeed if they did not teach all the Doctrine of Faith an Angel or a man might have taught us other things than what they taught without deserving an Anathema but not without deserving a blessing for making up that Faith intire which the Apostles left imperfect Now if they taught all the whole body of Faith either the Church in the following Ages lost part of the Faith and then was their infallibility and the effect of those glorious promises to which she pretends and hath certain Title for she may as well introduce a falshood as lose a truth it being as much promised to her that the Holy Ghost shall lead her into all truth as that she shall be preserved from all errours as appears John 16.13 Or if she retained all the Faith which Christ and his Apostles consign'd and taught then no Age can by declaring any point make that be an Article of Faith which was not so in all Ages of Christianity before such declaration And indeed if the Church by declaring an Article can make that to be necessary which before was not necessary I do not see how it can stand with the charity of the Church so to do especially after so long experience she hath had that all men will not believe every such decision or explication for by so doing she makes the narrow way to Heaven narrower and chalks out one path more to the Devil than he had before and yet the way was broad enough when it was at the narrowest For before differing persons might be saved in diversity of perswasions and now after this declaration if they cannot there is no other alteration made but that some shall be damned who before even in the same dispositions and belief should have been beatified persons For therefore it is well for the Fathers of the Primitive Church that their errours were not discovered for if they had been contested for that would have been called discovery enough vel errores emendassent vel ab Ecclesiâ ejecti fuissent But it is better as it was they went to heaven by that good-fortune whereas otherwise they might have gone to the Devil And yet there were some errours particularly that of Saint Cyprian that was discovered and he went to heaven 't is thought possibly they might so too for all this pretence But suppose it true yet whether that declaration of an Article of which with safety we either might have doubted or been ignorant does more good
Disswasive from Popery The First Part. THE Introduction 285 Chap. I. The doctrine of the Roman Church in the controverted Articles is neither Catholick Apostolick nor Primitive 286 Sect. 1. That our Religion is but that their Religion is not such is proved in general first from their challenging power of making new Articles and secondly from the practice of their Indices Expurgatory with some instances of their Innovating 286 2. They Innovate in pretending power to make new Articles 290 3. They did Innovate in their doctrine of Indulgences 291 4. In their doctrine and practice about Purgatory 294 5. In their doctrine of Transubstantiation 297 6. They Innovate in their doctrine of the Half-Communion 30◠7. In that they suffer not their publick Prayers to be in a language vulgarly understood 303 8. In requiring the adoration of Images 305 9. In picturing God the Father and the Bl. Trinity 307 10. In arrogating to the Pope an universal Bishoprick 308 11. A Miscellany of many other doctrines and practices wherein that Church has Innovated Chap. II. They maintain Doctrines and Practices in opposition to us that are direct impieties and certainly destroy good life 312 Sect. 1. Such is their doctrine of Repentance 312 2. And Confession 315 3. Of Penances and Satisfactions 316 4 5. Their doctrine about Pardon and Indulgences Contrition and Satisfaction 318 6. Satisfaction and habitual sins distinction of Mortal and Venial sins by which they contract their Repentance and their Sins and mistake in cases of Conscience 322 7. Their teaching now of late that a probable opinion for which the authority of one Doctor is sufficient may in practice be safely followed 324 8. That Prayers are accepted by God ex opere operato 327 9. Such is their practice of Invocating dead Saints as Deliverers 329 10. And of Exorcising possessed persons 333 11. Sacramentals such as Holy-water Paschal-wax Agnus Dei c. 336 12. The worship of Images is Idolatry and to worship the Host. 337 13. The Summ and Conclusion of the whole Chapter 337 Chap. III. Their Docrines are such as destroy Christian Society in general and Monarchy in particular 340 Sect. 1. As equivocation mental reservation taught and defended by them c. 340 Their teaching that faith is not to be kept with Hereticks dispensing with Oaths Dissolving the bonds of duty 341 They teach the Pope has power to dispense with all the Laws of God and to dissolve contracts 2. Their Exemption of the Clergie from the secular authority as to their Estates and Persons even in matters of Theft Murder and Treason c. and the divine right of the seal of Confession 343 3. By subjecting all Christian Kings to the Pope who can as they teach depose and excommunicate Kings and that Subjects are bound to expel Heretical Kings The Second Part of the Disswasive THe Introduction containing an answer to the Fourth Appendix of J. S. his Sure-footing 351 Lib. I. Sect. 1. Of the Church that the Church of Rome relies upon no certain foundation for their Faith Of Councils and their authority the Canon Law and the great contrariety in it Of the Pope of the notes of the Church 381 2. Of the sufficiency of H. Scripture to Salvation which is the foundation and ground of the Protestant Religion The sufficiency of Scripture proved by Tradition 405 3. Of Traditions and those doctrines and practices that most need the help of that Topick as of the Trinity Paedo-Baptism Baptism by Hereticks and the Lords day 420 4. There is nothing of necessity to be believed which the Apostolical Churches did not believe 436 5. That the Church of Rome pretends to a power of introducing into the Confession of the Church new Articles of Faith and endeavours to alter and suppress the old Catholick doctrine 446 First They do it and pretend to a power of doing it Secondly That it agrees with their interest so to do 452 6. They use indirect ways to bring their new Articles into credit e. g. the device of Indices Expurgatorii 454 First That the King of Spain gave a Commission to the Inquisitors to purge Catholick Authors Secondly That they purged the very Indices of the Father's works Thirdly They did purge the Writings of the Fathers too 7. While they enlarge the Faith they destroy Charity 459 8. The insecurity of the Roman Religion 466 9. That the Church of Rome does teach for doctrines the commandments of men 471 10. Of the Seal of Confession the First Instance 473 11. The Second Instance is the imposing Auricular Confession upon Consciences as a Commandment of God 477 First For which there is no ground in holy Scripture 479 Secondly Nor in Ecclesiastical Tradition either of the Latin or Greek Church 491 Lib. II. Sect. 1. Of Indulgences and Pilgrimages 495 2. Of Purgatory The testimonies of Roffensis Polyd. Virgil c. Alphonsus à Castro are vindicated 500 It is proved that Purgatory is not a consequent to the doctrine of Prayer for the dead 501 The Fathers made Prayers for those whom they believed not to be in Purgatory 502 And such Prayers are in the Roman Missal 505. The Greek and Latin Fathers teach that no Soul enters Heaven till the day of Judgment The doctrine of Purgatory was no Article in S. Austin's time 506. It was not owned by the Greek Fathers 510. It is directly contrary to the ancient Fathers of the Latin Church 512 3. Of Transubstantiation wherein the authorities out of Scotus Odo Cameracensis Roffensis Biel Alph. à Castro Pet. Lombard Durandus Justine Martyr Eusebius S. Augustine are justified from the exceptions of the Adversaries And it is proved that the Council of Laterane did not determine the Article of Transubstantiation but brake up abruptly without making any Canons at all 516 4. Of the Half-Communion 528 Of the Decree of the Council of Constance 528. The authority of S. Ambrose 530. and S. Cyprian 531 5. Of the Scriptures and Service in an unknown tongue 532 S. Basils authority S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose S. Austin Aquinas Lyra. 6. Of the Worship of Images 535 1o. The Quotations vindicated 536. of S. Cyril Chrysostom Epiphanius Austin Council of Eliberis Nicene II. Francfort First The Council of Francfort condemned the Nicene II. 540 Secondly They commanded that it should not be called a General Council ibid. Thirdly The acts of it are in the Capitular of the Emperor written in the time of the Synod 541 Of Tertullian 541. Clemens Alexandrinus 542. Origen 543. 2o. The Quotations alledged by them answered as of S. Basil S. Athanasius 544. S. Chrysostom 545. 3o. The truth confirmed 545 First Image-worship came from Simon Magus ibid. Secondly Heathens spake against it 546 Thirdly Christians did abominate it ibid. Fourthly The Heathens never charged the Christians with it ibid. Fifthly The Primitive Fathers never taught those distinctions that the Papists use to discern lawful Idolatry from Heathen Idolatry 547 Sixthly The Second Commandment is against it ibid.
new emergent Questions and they none of them all asserted either by Scripture or Antiquity that if I had a mind to leave the way of God and of the Catholick Church and run in pursuit of this meteor I might quickly be amuzed but should find nothing certain but a certainty of being misguided Therefore if not for conscience sake yet for prudence bonum est esse hîc it is good to remain in the Fold of Christ under the guard and supravision of those Shepherds Christ hath appointed and which his Sheep have alwayes followed For I consider this one thing to be enough to determine the Question My Sheep saith our blessed Saviour hear my voice if a stranger or a thief come him they will not hear Clearly thus That Christ's Sheep hear not the voice of a stranger nor will they follow him and therefore those Shepherds whom the Church hath followed in all Ages are no Strangers but Shepherds or Pastors of Christ's appointing or else Christ hath had no Sheep for if he hath then Bishops are the Shepherds for them they have ever followed I end with that golden Rule of Vincentius Lirinensis Magnoperè curandum est ut id teneamus quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus creditum est Hoc est enim verè proprieque Catholicum For certainly the Catholick belief of the Church against Arius Eunomius Macedonius Apollinaris and the worst of Hereticks the Cataphrygians was never more truly received of all and alwayes and every where than is the government of the Church by Bishops Annunciare ergo Christianis Catholicis praeter id quod acceperunt nunquam licuit nunquam licet nunquam licebit It never was is nor ever shall be lawful to teach Christian people any new thing than what they have received from a primitive fountain and is descended in the stream of Catholick uninterrupted succession * I only add that the Church hath insinuated it to be the duty of all good Catholick Christians to pray for Bishops and as the case now stands for Episcopacy it self for there was never any Church-Liturgy but said Letanies for their King and for their Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 THE REAL PRESENCE AND SPIRITUAL OF CHRIST IN THE Blessed Sacrament Proved against the DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION By JER TAYLOR D. D. and Chaplain in Ordinary to King CHARLES the First Oportuit emim certè ut non solùm anima per Spiritum Sanctum in beatam vitam ascenderet verùm etiam ut rude atque terrestre hoc corpus cognato sibi gustu tactu cibo ad immortalitatem reduceretur S. Cyril in Joh. l. 4. c. 14. Literam sequi signa pro rebus accipere servilis infirmitatis est S. Aug. l. 3. de doct Christ. LONDON Printed for R. Royston Bookseller to the King 's most Excellent MAJESTY MDCLXXIII To the Right Reverend D r. WARNER L. B. R. Right Reverend Father I Am against my Resolution and proper disposition by the over-ruling power of the Divine Providence which wisely disposes all things accidentally engaged in the Question of Transubstantiation which hath already so many times passed by the Fire and under the Saw of Contention that it might seem nothing could remain which had not been already considered and sifted to the bran I had been by chance ingaged in a conference with a person of another perswasion the man not unlearned nor unwary but much more confident than I perceived the strength of his argument could warrant and yet he had some few of the best which their Schools did furnish out and ordinarily minister to their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their Emissaries and Ministers of temptation to our people I then began to consider whether there were not much more in the secret of the Question which might not have perswaded him more fiercely than I could then see cause for or others at least from whom upon the strength of education he might have derived his confidence and searching into all the secrets of it I found infinite reason to reprove the boldness of those men who in the sum of affairs and upon examination will be found to think men damned if they will not speak non-sence and disbelieve their eyes and ears and defie their own reason and recede from Antiquity and believe them in whatsoever they dream or list to obtrude upon the world who hath been too long credulous or it could never have suffered such a proposition to be believed by so many men against all the demonstration in the world And certainly it is no small matter of wonder that those men of the Roman Church should pretend Learning and yet rest their new Articles of Faith upon propositions against all Learning that they should ingage their Scholars to read and believe Aristotle and yet destroy his Philosophy and reason by their Article that they should think all the world fools but themselves and yet talk and preach such things which if men had spoken before this new device arose they would have been thought mad But if these men had by chance or interest fallen upon the other Opinion which we maintain against them they would have filled the World with Declamations against the impossible Propositions and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of their Adversaries They would have called us Dunces Idiots men without souls without Philosophy without Sense without Reason without Logick destroyers of the very first notions of mankind But now that they are ingaged upon the impossible side they proceed with a prodigious boldness and seem to wonder that mankind does not receive from them all their first principles and credit the wildness and new notions of their Cataphysicks for Metaphysicks it is not Their Affirmatives and Negatives are neither natural nor above nor besides nature but against it in those first principles which are primely credible For that I may use S. Austin's words Nemo enim huic evidentiae contradicet nisi quem plus defensare delectat quod sentit quà m quid sentiendum sit invenire But I see it is possible for a man to believe any thing that he hath a mind to and this to me seems to have been permitted to reprove the vanity of mans imagination and the confidence of opinion to make us humble apt to learn inquisitive and charitable for if it be possible for so great a company of men of all sorts and capacities to believe such impossible things and to wonder that others do not eandem insaniam insanire it will concern the wisest man alive to be inquisitive in the Articles of his first perswasion to be diligent in his search modest in his sentences to prejudge no man to reprove the Adversaries with meekness and a spirit conscious of humane weakness and aptness to be abused But if we remember that Pere Coton Confessor to Henry the fourth of France was wont to say that he could do any thing when he had his God in his hand and his King at
matter of Faith or a Doctrine of the Church for if it had these had been Hereticks accounted and not have remain'd in the Communion of the Church But although for the reasonableness of the thing we have thought fit to take notice of it yet we shall have no need to make use of it since not only in the prime and purest Antiquity we are indubitably more than Conquerours but even in the succeeding Ages we have the advantage both numero pondere mensurâ in number weight and measure We do easily acknowledge that to dispute these Questions from the sayings of the Fathers is not the readiest way to make an end of them but therefore we do wholly rely upon Scriptures as the foundation and final resort of all our perswasions and from thence can never be confuted but we also admit the Fathers as admirable helps for the understanding of the Scriptures and as good testimony of the Doctrine deliver'd from their fore-fathers down to them of what the Church esteem'd the way of Salvation and therefore if we find any Doctrine now taught which was not plac'd in their way of Salvation we reject it as being no part of the Christian faith and which ought not to be impos'd upon Consciences They were wise unto salvation and fully instructed to every good work and therefore the Faith which they profess'd and deriv'd from Scripture we profess also and in the same Faith we hope to be sav'd even as they But for the new Doctors we understand them not we know them not Our Faith is the same from the beginning and cannot become new But because we shall make it to appear that they do greatly innovate in all their points of controversie with us and shew nothing but shadows instead of substances and little images of things instead of solid arguments we shall take from them their armour in which they trusted and chuse this sword of Goliah to combat their errors for non est alter talis It is not easie to find a better than the Word of God expounded by the prime and best Antiquity The first thing therefore we are to advertise is that the Emissaries of the Roman Church endeavour to perswade the good People of our Dioceses from a Religion that is truly Primitive and Apostolick and divert them to Propositions of their own new and unheard-of in the first Ages of the Christian Church For the Religion of our Church is therefore certainly Primitive and Apostolick because it teaches us to believe the whole Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and nothing else as matter of Faith and therefore unless there can be new Scriptures we can have no new matters of belief no new Articles of faith Whatsoever we cannot prove from thence we disclaim it as not deriving from the Fountains of our Saviour We also do believe the Apostles Creed the Nicene with the additions of Constantinople and that which is commonly called the Symbol of Saint Athanasius and the four first General Councils are so intirely admitted by us that they together with the plain words of Scripture are made the rule and measure of judging Heresies amongst us and in pursuance of these it is commanded by our Church that the Clergy shall never teach any thing as matter of Faith religiously to be observed but that which is agreeable to the Old and New Testament and collected out of the same Doctrine by the Ancient Fathers and Catholick Bishops of the Church This was undoubtedly the Faith of the Primitive Church they admitted all into their Communion that were of this Faith they condemned no Man that did not condemn these they gave Letters communicatory by no other cognisance and all were Brethren who spake this voice Hanc legem sequentes Christianorum Catholicorum nomen jubemus amplecti reliquos verò dementes vesanosque judicantes haeretici dogmatis infamiam sustinere said the Emperours Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius in their Proclamation to the People of C. P. All that believ'd this Doctrine were Christians and Catholicks viz. all they who believe in the Father Son and Holy Ghost one Divinity of equal Majesty in the Holy Trinity which indeed was the sum of what was decreed in explication of the Apostles Creed in the four first General Councils And what Faith can be the foundation of a more solid peace the surer ligaments of Catholick Communion or the firmer basis of a holy life and of the hopes of Heaven hereafter than the measures which the Holy Primitive Church did hold and we after them That which we rely upon is the same that the Primitive Church did acknowledge to be the adequate foundation of their hopes in the matters of belief The way which they thought sufficient to go to Heaven in is the way which we walk what they did not teach we do not publish and impose into this Faith intirely and into no other as they did theirs so we baptize our Catechumens The Discriminations of Heresie from Catholick Doctrine which they us'd we use also and we use no other and in short we believe all that Doctrine which the Church of Rome believes except those things which they have superinduc'd upon the Old Religion and in which we shall prove that they have innovated So that by their confession all the Doctrine which we teach the people as matter of Faith must be confessed to be Ancient Primitive and Apostolick or else theirs is not so for ours is the same and we both have received this Faith from the Fountains of Scripture and Universal Tradition not they from us or we from them but both of us from Christ and his Apostles And therefore there can be no question whether the Faith of the Church of England be Apostolick or Primitive it is so confessedly But the Question is concerning many other particulars which were unknown to the Holy Doctors of the first Ages which were no part of their faith which were never put into their Creeds which were not determin'd in any of the four first General Councils rever'd in all Christendom and entertain'd every where with great Religion and Veneration even next to the four Gospels and the Apostolical Writings Of this sort because the Church of Rome hath introduc'd many and hath adopted them into their late Creed and imposes them upon the People not only without but against the Scriptures and the Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God laying heavy burdens on mens Consciences and making the narrow way to Heaven yet narrower by their own inventions arrogating to themselves a dominion over our faith and prescribing a method of Salvation which Christ and his Apostles never taught corrupting the Faith of the Church of God and teaching for Doctrines the Commandements of Men and lastly having derogated from the Prerogative of Christ who alone is the Author and finisher of our Faith and hath perfected it in the revelations consign'd in the Holy Scriptures therefore it is that we
But the thing is this Biel reckon'd three opinions which in Lombards time were in the Church the first of Consubstantiation which was the way which long since then Luther followed The second that the substance of bread is made the flesh of Christ but ceases not to be what it was But this is not the Doctrine of Transubstantiation for that makes a third opinion which is that the substance of bread ceases to be and nothing remains but the accident Quartam opinionem addit Magister that is Peter Lombard adds a fourth opinion that the substance of bread is not converted but is annihilated this is made by Scotus to be the second opinion Now of these four opinions all which were then permitted and disputed Peter Lombard seems to follow the second but if this was his opinion it was no more for he could not determine whether that were the truth or no. But whether he does or no truly I think it is very hard for any man to tell for this question was but in the forge not polished not made bright with long handling And this was all that I affirm'd out of the Master of Sentences I told of no opinion of his at all but that in his time they did not know whether it viz. the doctrine of Transubstantiation were true or no that is the generality of the Roman Catholicks did not know and he himself could not define it And this appears unanswerably by Peter Lombards bringing their several sentiments in this Article and they that differ in their judgments about an Article and yet esteem the others Catholick may think what they please but they Cannot tell certainly what is truth But then as for Peter Lombard himself all that I said of him was this that he could not tell he could not determine whether there was any substantial change or no. If in his after discourse he declares that the change is of substances he told it for no other than as a meer opinion if he did let him answer for that not I for that he could not determine it himself expresly said it in the beginning of the eleventh distinction And therefore these Gentlemen would better have consulted with truth and modesty if they had let this alone and not have made such an outcry against a manifest truth Now let me observe one thing which will be of great use in this whole affair and demonstrate the cange of this doctrine These three opinions were all held by Catholicks and the opinions are recorded not only by Pope Innocentius 3. but in the Gloss of the Canon Law it self For this opinion was not fix'd and setled nor as yet well understood but still disputed as we see in Lombard and Scotus And although they all agreed in this as Salmeron observes of these three opinions as he cites them out of Scotus that the true body of Christ is there because to deny this were against the faith and therefore this was then enough to cause them to be esteem'd Catholicks because they denied nothing which was then against the â—aith but all agreed in that yet now the case is otherwise for whereas one of the opinions was that the substance of bread remains and another opinion that the substance of bread is annihilated but is not converted into the body of Christ now both of these opinions are made heresie and the contrary to them which is the third opinion pass'd into an article of faith Quod vero ibi substantia panis non remanet jam etiam ut articulus fidei definitum est conversionis sive transubstantiationis nomen evictum So Salmeron Now in Peter Lombards time if they who believed Christs real presence were good Catholicks though they believed no Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation that is did not descend into consideration of the manner why may they not be so now Is there any new revelation now of the manner Or why is the way to Heaven now made narrower than in Lombards time For the Church of England believes according to one of these opinions and therefore is as good a Catholick Church as Rome was then which had not determined the manner Nay if we use to value an Article the more by how much the more Ancient it is certainly it is more honourable that we should reform to the Ancient model rather than conform to the new However this is also plainly consequent to this discourse of Salmeron The abettâ—râ— of those three opinions some of them do deny something that is of faith therefore the faith of the Church of Rome now is not the same it was in the days of Peter Lombard Lastly this also is to be remark'd that to prove any ancient Author to hold the doctrine of Transubstantiation as it is at this day an Article of faith at Rome it is not enough to say that Peter Lombard or Durand or Scotus c. did say that where bread was before there is Christs body now for they may say that and more and yet not come home to the present Article and therefore E. W. does argue weakly when he denies Lombard to say one thing viz. that he could not define whether there was a substantial change or no which indeed he spake plainly because he brings him saying something as if he were resolv'd the change were substantial which yet he speaks but obscurely And the truth is this question of Transubstantiation is so intricate and involved amongst them seems so contrary to sense and reason and does so much violence to all the powers of the soul that it is no wonder if at first the Doctors could not make any thing distinctly of it However whatever they did make of it certain it is they more agreed with the present Church of England than with the present Church of Rome for we say as they said Christs body is truly there and there is a conversion of the Elements into Christs body for what before the Consecration in all sences was bread is after Consecration in some sence Christs body but they did not all of them say that the substance of bread was destroyed and some of them denied the conversion of the bread into the flesh of Christ which whosoever shall now do will be esteemed no Roman Catholick And therefore it is a vain procedure to think they have prov'd their doctrine of Transubstantiation out of the Fathers also if the Fathers tell us That bread is chang'd out of his nature into the body of Christ that by holy invocation it is no more common bread that as water in Cana of Galilee was chang'd into wine so in the Evangelist wine is changed into blood That bread is only bread before the sacramental words but after consecration is made the body of Christ. For though I very much doubt all these things in equal and full measures cannot be prov'd out of the Fathers yet suppose they were yet all this comes not up to the Roman
saying of Saint Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The answer of a good conscience towards God For of the recitation and profession of this Creed in Baptism it is that Tertullian de resur carnis says Anima non lotione sed responsione sancitur And of this was the prayer of Hilary lib. 12. de Trinit Conserva hanc conscientiae meae vocem ut quod in regenerationis meae Symbolo baptizatus in Patre Filio Spir. S. professus sum semper obtineam And according to the rule and reason of this Discourse that it may appear that the Creed hath in it all Articles primò per se primely and universally necessary the Creed is just such an explication of that Faith which the Apostles preached viz. the Creed which St. Paul recites as contains in it all those things which entitle Christ to us in the capacities of our Law-giver and our Saviour such as enable him to the great work of redemption according to the predictions concerning him and such as engage and encourage our services For taking out the Article of Christs descent into Hell which was not in the old Creed as appears in some of the Copies I before referred to in Tertullian Ruffinus and Irenaeus and indeed was omitted in all the Confessions of the Eastern Churches in the Church of Rome and in the Nicene Creed which by adoption came to be the Creed of the Catholick Church all other Articles are such as directly constitute the parts and work of our redemption such as clearly derive the honour to Christ and enable him with the capacities of our Saviour and Lord. The rest engage our services by proposition of such Articles which are rather promises than propositions and the whole Creed take it in any of the old Forms is but an Analysis of that which St. Paul calls the word of salvation whereby we shall be saved viz. that we confess Jesus to be Lord and that God raised him from the dead by the first whereof he became our Law-giver and our Guardian by the second he was our Saviour the other things are but parts and main actions of those two Now what reason there is in the world that can inwrap any thing else within the foundation that is in the whole body of Articles simply and inseparably necessary or in the prime original necessity of Faith I cannot possibly imagine These do the work and therefore nothing can upon the true grounds of reason enlarge the necessity to the inclosure of other Articles 9. Now if more were necessary than the Articles of the Creed I demand why was it made the Characteristick note of a Christian from a Heretick or a Jew or an Infidel or to what purpose was it composed Or if this was intended as sufficient did the Apostles or those Churches which they founded know any thing else to be necessary If they did not then either nothing more is necessary I speak of matters of meer belief or they did not know all the will of the Lord and so were unfit Dispensers of the mysteries of the Kingdom or if they did know more was necessary and yet would not insert it they did an act of publick notice and consign'd it to all Ages of the Church to no purpose unless to beguile credulous people by making them believe their faith was sufficient having tried it by that touch-stone Apostolical when there was no such matter 10. But if this was sufficient to bring men to heaven then why not now If the Apostles admitted all to their Communion that believed this Creed why shall we exclude any that preserve the same intire Why is not our faith of these Articles of as much efficacy for bringing us to heaven as it was in the Churches Apostolical Who had guides more infallible that might without errour have taught them superstructures enough if they had been necessary and so they did But that they did not insert them into the Creed when they might have done it with as much certainty as these Articles makes it clear to my understanding that other things were not necessary but these were that whatever profit and advantages might come from other Articles yet these were sufficient and however certain persons might accidentally be obliged to believe much more yet this was the one and only foundation of Faith upon which all persons were to build their hopes of Heaven this was therefore necessary to be taught to all because of necessity to be believed by all So that although other persons might commit a delinquency in genere morum if they did not know or did not believe much more because they were obliged to further disquisitions in order to other ends yet none of these who held the Creed intire could perish for want of necessary faith though possibly he might for supine negligence or affected ignorance or some other fault which had influence upon his opinions and his understanding he having a new supervening obligation ex accidente to know and believe more 11. Neither are we oblig'd to make these Articles more particular and minute than the Creed For since the Apostles and indeed our blessed Lord himself promised heaven to them who believed him to be the Christ that was to come into the World and that he who believes in him should be partaker of the resurrection and life eternal he will be as good as his word yet because this Article was very general and a complexion rather than a single proposition the Apostles and others our Fathers in Christ did make it more explicite though they have said no more than what lay entire and ready form'd in the bosom of the great Article yet they made their extracts to great purpose and absolute sufficiency and therefore there needs no more deductions or remoter consequences from the first great Article than the Creed of the Apostles For although whatsoever is certainly deduced from any of these Articles made already so explicite is as certainly true and as much to be believed as the Article it self because ex veris possunt nil nisi vera sequi yet because it is not certain that our deductions from them are certain and what one calls evident is so obscure to another that he believes it is false it is the best and only safe course to rest in that explication the Apostles have made because if any of these Apostolical deductions were not demonstrable evidently to follow from that great Article to which salvation is promised yet the authority of them who compil'd the Symbol the plain description of the Articles from the words of Scriptures the evidence of reason demonstrating these to be the whole foundation are sufficient upon great grounds of reason to ascertain us but if we go farther besides the easiness of being deceived we relying upon our own discourses which though they may be true and then bind us to follow them but yet no more than when they only seem truest yet they cannot make
a lie But a good man that believes what according to his light and upon the use of his moral industry he thinks true whether he hits upon the right or no because he hath a mind desirous of truth and prepared to believe every truth is therefore acceptable to God because nothing hindred him from it but what he could not help his misery and his weakness which being imperfections meerly natural which God never punishes he stands fair for a blessing of his morality which God always accepts So that now if Stephen had followed the example of God Almighty or retained but the same peaceable spirit which his Brother of Carthage did he might with more advantage to truth and reputation both of wisdom and piety have done his duty in attesting what he believed to be true for we are as much bound to be zealous pursuers of peace as earnest contenders for the Faith I am sure more earnest we ought to be for the peace of the Church than for an Article which is not of the Faith as this Question of rebaptization was not for S. Cyprian died in belief against it and yet was a Catholick and a Martyr for the Christian Faith 23. The summe is this S. Cyprian did right in a wrong cause as it hath been since judged and Stephen did ill in a good cause as far then as piety and charity is to be perferred before a true opinion so far is S. Cyprian's practice a better precedent for us and an example of primitive sanctity than the zeal and indiscretion of Stephen S. Cyprian had not learned to forbid to any one a liberty of prophesying or interpretation if he transgressed not the foundation of Faith and the Creed of the Apostles 24. Well thus it was and thus it ought to be in the first Ages the Faith of Christendom rested still upon the same foundation and the judgements of heresies were accordingly or were amiss but the first great violation of this truth was when General Councils came in and the Symbols were enlarged and new Articles were made as much of necessity to be believed as the Creed of the Apostles and damnation threatned to them that did dissent and at last the Creeds multiplied in number and in Articles and the liberty of prophesying began to be something restrained 25. And this was of so much the more force and efficacy because it began upon great reason and in the first instance with success good enough For I am much pleased with the enlarging of the Creed which the Council of Nice made because they enlarged it to my sence but I am non sure that others are satisfied with it While we look upon the Articles they did determine we see all things well enough but there are some wise personages consider it in all circumstances and think the Church had been more happy if she had not been in some sence constrained to alter the simplicity of her faith and make it more curious and articulate so much that he had need be a subtle man to understand the very words of the new determinations 26. For the first Alexander Bishop of Alexandria in the presence of his Clergy entreats somewhat more curiously of the secret of the mysterious Trinity and Unity so curiously that Arius who was a Sophister too subtle as it afterward appeared misunderstood him and thought he intended to bring in the heresy of Sabellius For while he taught the Unity of the Tritity either he did it so inartificially or so intricately that Arius thought he did not distinguish the persons when the Bishop intended only the unity of nature Against this Arius furiously drives and to confute Sabellius and in him as he thought the Bishop distinguishes the natures too and so to secure the Article of the Trinity destroyes the Unity It was the first time the Question was disputed in the world and in such mysterious niceties possibly every wise man may understand something but few can understand all and therefore suspect what they understand not and are furiously zealous for that part of it which they do perceive Well it happened in these as always in such cases in things men understand not they are most impetuous and because suspicion is a thing infinite in degrees for it hath nothing to determine it a suspicious person is ever most violent for his fears are worse than the thing feared because the thing is limited but his fears are not so that upon this grew contentious on both sides and tumultuous rayling and reviling each other and then the Laity were drawn into parts and the Meletians abetted the wrong part and the right part fearing to be overborn did any thing that was next at hand to secure it self Now then they that lived in that Age that understood the men that saw how quiet the Church was before this stirre how miserably rent now what little benefit from the Question what schism about it gave other censures of the business than we since have done who only look upon the Article determined with truth and approbation of the Church generally since that time But the Epistle of Constantine to Alexander and Arius tells the truth and chides them both for commencing the Question Alexander for broaching it Arius for taking it up and although this be true that it had been better for the Church it never had begun yet being begun what is to be done in it of this also in that admirable Epistle we have the Emperours judgment I suppose not without the advice and privity of Hosius Bishop of Corduba whom the Emperour loved and trusted much and imployed in the delivery of the Letters For first he calls it a certain vain piece of a Question ill begun and more unadvisedly published a Question which no Law or Ecclesiastical Canon defineth a fruitless contention the product of idle brains a matter so nice so obscure so intricate that it was neither to be explicated by the Clergy nor understood by the people a dispute of words a doctrine inexplicable but most dangerous when taught lest it introduce discord or blasphemy and therefore the Objector was rash and the Answerer unadvised for it concerned not the substance of Faith or the worship of God nor any chief commandment of Scripture and therefore why should it be the matter of discord For though the matter be grave yet because neither necessary nor explicable the contention is trifling and toyish And therefore as the Philosophers of the same Sect though differing in explication of an opinion yet more love for the unity of their Profession than disagree for the difference of opinion So should Christians believing in the same God retaining the same Faith having the same hopes opposed by the same enemies not fall at variance upon such disputes considering our understandings are not all alike and therefore neither can our opinions in such mysterious Articles So that the matter being of no great importance but vain and a
from the person to the confession of Peter and declared that to be the foundation of the Church And thus I have requited fancy with fancy but for the main point that these two Expositions are inclusive of each other I find no warrant For though they may consist together well enough if Christ had so intended them yet unless it could be shewn by some circumstance of the Text or some other extrinsecall Argument that they must be so and that both senses were actually intended it is but gratìs dictum and a begging of the Question to say that they are so and the fancy so new that when S. Austin had expounded this place of the person of Peter he reviews it again and in his Retractions leaves every man to his liberty which to take as having nothing certain in this Article which had been altogether needless if he had believed them to be inclusively in each other neither of them had need to have been retracted both were alike true both of them might have been believed But I said the fancy was new and I had reason for it was so unknown till yesterday that even the late Writers of his own side expound the words of the confession of S. Peter exclusively to his person or any thing else as is to be seen in Marsilius Petrus de Aliaco and the gloss upon Dist. 19. can ità Dominus § ut suprá Which also was the Interpetation of Phavorinus Camers their own Bishop from whom they learnt the resemblance of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which they have made so many gay discourses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 7. Fifthly But upon condition I may have leave at another time to recede from so great and numerous Testimony of Fathers I am willing to believe that it was not the confession of S. Peter but his person upon which Christ said he would build his Church or that these Expositions are consistent with and consequent to each other that this confession was the objective foundation of Faith and Christ and his Apostles the subjective Christ principally and S. Peter instrumentally and yet I understand not any advantage will hence accrue to the See of Rome For upon S. Peter it was built but not alone for it was upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone and when S. Paul reckoned the Oeconomy of Hierarchy he reckons not Peter first and then the Apostles but first Apostles secondarily Prophets c. And whatsoever is first either is before all things else or at least nothing is before it So that at least S. Peter is not before all the rest of the Apostles which also S. Paul expresly averrs I am in nothing inferiour to the very chiefest of the Apostles no not in the very being a Rock and a Foundation and it was of the Church of Ephesus that S. Paul said in particular it was columna firmamentum veritatis that Church was not excluding others for they also were as much as she for so we keep close and be united to the corner-stone although some be master-builders yet all may build and we have known whole Nations converted by Lay-men and women who have been builders so far as to bring them to the corner-stone 8. Sixthly But suppose all these things concern S. Peter in all the capacities can be with any colour pretended yet what have the Bishops of Rome to doe with this For how will it appear that these promises and Commissions did relate to him as a particular Bishop and not as a publick Apostle since this latter is so much the more likely because the great pretence of all seems in reason more proportionable to the founding of a Church then its continuance And yet if they did relate to him as a particular Bishop which yet is a farther degree of improbability removed farther from certainty yet why shall S. Clement or Linus rather succeed in this great office of Headship then S. John or any of the Apostles that survived Peter It is no way likely a private person should skip over the head of an Apostle Or why shall his Successors at Rome more enjoy the benefit of it then his Successors at Antioch since that he was at Antioch and preached there we have a Divine Authority but that he did so at Rome at most we have but a humane And if it be replied that because he died at Rome it was Argument enough that there his Successors were to inherit his privilege this besides that at most it is but one little degree of probability and so not of strength sufficient to support an Article of faith it makes that the great Divine Right of Rome and the Apostolical presidency was so contingent and fallible as to depend upon the decree of Nero and if he had sent him to Antioch there to have suffered Martyrdome the Bishops of that Town had been heads of the Catholick Church And this thing presses the harder because it is held by no mean persons in the Church of Rome that the Bishoprick of Rome and the Papacy are things separable and the Pope may quit that See and sit in another which to my understanding is an Argument that he that succeeded Peter at Antioch is as much supreme by Divine Right as he that sits at Rome both alike that is neither by Divine Ordinance For if the Roman Bishops by Christ's intention were to be Head of the Church then by the same intention the Succession must be continued in that See and then let the Pope go whither he will the Bishop of Rome must be the Head which they themselves deny and the Pope himself did not believe when in a schism he sat at Avignon And that it was to be continued in the See of Rome it is but offered to us upon conjecture upon an act of providence as they fansy it so ordering it by vision and this proved by an Author which themselves call fabulous and Apocryphal under the name of Linus in Biblioth PP de passione Petri Pauli A goodly building which relies upon an event that was accidental whose purpose was but insinuated the meaning of it but conjectured at and this conjecture so uncertain that it was an imperfect aim at the purpose of an event which whether it was true or no was so uncertain that it is ten to one there was no such matter And yet again another degree of uncertainty is to whom the Bishops of Rome do succeed For S. Paul was as much Bishop of Rome as S. Peter was there he presided there he preached and he it was that was the Doctor of the Uncircumcision and of the Gentiles S. Peter of the Circumcision and of the Jews onely and therefore the converted Jews at Rome might with better reason claim the privilege of S. Peter then the Romans and the Churches in her Communion who do not derive from Jewish
no such thing as is pretended or if they did it is but little considerable because they did not believe themselves their practice was the greatest evidence in the world against the pretence of their words But I am much eased of a long disquisition in this particular for I love not to prove a Question by Arguments whose Authority is in itself as fallible and by circumstances made as uncertain as the Question by the saying of Aeneas Sylvius that before the Nicene Council every man lived to himself and small respect was had to the Church of Rome which practice could not well consist with the Doctrine of their Bishops Infallibility and by consequence supreme judgment and last resolution in matters of Faith but especially by the insinuation and consequent acknowledgment of Bellarmine that for 1000 years together the Fathers knew not of the Doctrine of the Pope's Infallibility for Nilus Gerson Almain the Divines of Paris Alphonsus de Castro and Pope Adrian VI. persons who lived 1400 years after Christ affirm that Infallibility is not seated in the Pope's person that he may erre and sometimes actually hath which is a clear demonstration that the Church knew no such Doctrine as this there had been no Decree nor Tradition nor general opinion of the Fathers or of any Age before them and therefore this Opinion which Bellarmine would fain blast if he could yet in his Conclusion he says it is not propriè haeretica A device and an expression of his own without sense or precedent But if the Fathers had spoken of it and believed it why may not a disagreeing person as well reject their Authority when it is in behalf of Rome as they of Rome without scruple cast them off when they speak against it For Bellarmine being pressed with the Authority of Nilus Bishop of Thessalonica and other Fathers says that the Pope acknowledges no Fathers but they are all his children and therefore they cannot depose against him and if that be true why shall we take their Testimonies for him for if Sons depose in their Father's behalf it is twenty to one but the adverse party will be cast and therefore at the best it is but suspectum Testimonium But indeed this discourse signifies nothing but a perpetuall uncertainty in such Topicks and that where a violent prejudice or a concerning interest is engaged men by not regarding what any man says proclaim to all the world that nothing is certain but Divine Authority 13. But I will not take advantage of what Bellarmine says nor what Stapleton or any one of them all say for that will be but to press upon personal perswasions or to urge a general Question with a particular defaillance and the Question is never the nearer to an end for if Bellarmine says any thing that is not to another man's purpose or perswasion that man will be tried by his own Argument not by another's And so would every man doe that loves his liberty as all wise men do and therefore retain it by open violence or private evasions But to return 14. An Authority from Irenaeus in this Question and on behalf of the Pope's Infallibility or the Authority of the See of Rome or of the necessity of communicating with them is very fallible for besides that there are almost a dozen answers to the words of the Allegation as is to be seen in those that trouble themselves in this Question with the Allegation and answering such Authorities yet if they should make for the affirmative of this Question it is protestatio contra factum For Irenaeus had no such great opinion of Pope Victor's Infallibility that he believed things in the same degree of necessity that the Pope did for therefore he chides him for Excommunicating the Asian Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all at a blow in the Question concerning Easter-day and in a Question of Faith he expresly disagreed from the doctrine of Rome for Irenaeus was of the Millenary opinion and believed it to be a Tradition Apostolicall Now if the Church of Rome was of that opinion then why is she not now where is the succession of her Doctrine But if she was not of that opinion then and Irenaeus was where was his belief of that Churche's Infallibility The same I urge concerning S. Cyprian who was the head of a Sect in opposition to the Church of Rome in the Question of Rebaptization and he and the abettors Firmilian and the other Bishops of Cappadocia and the voicinage spoke harsh words of Steven and such as become them not to speak to an infallible Doctor and the supreme Head of the Church I will urge none of them to the disadvantage of that See but onely note the Satyrs of Firmilian against him because it is of good use to shew that it is possible for them in their ill carriage to blast the reputation and efficacy of a great Authority For he says that that Church did pretend the Authority of the Apostles cùm in multis Sacramentis Divinae rei à principio discrepet ab Ecclesia Hierosolymitana defamet Petrum Paulum tanquam authores And a little after Justè dedignor says he apertam manifestam stultitiam Stephani per quam veritas Christianae petrae aboletur Which words say plainly that for all the goodly pretence of Apostolicall Authority the Church of Rome did then in many things of Religion disagree from Divine Institution and from the Church of Jerusalem which they had as great esteem of for Religion sake as of Rome for its Principality and that still in pretending to S. Peter and S. Paul they dishonoured those blessed Apostles and destroyed the honour of their pretence by their untoward prevarication Which words I confess pass my skill to reconcile them to an opinion of Infallibility and although they were spoken by an angry person yet they declare that in Africa they were not then perswaded as now they are at Rome Nam nec Petrus quem primum Dominus elegit vendicavit sibi aliquid insolenter aut arroganter assumpsit ut diceret se primatum tenere That was their belief then and how the contrary hath grown up to that height where now it is all the world is witness And now I shall not need to note concerning S. Hierome that he gave a complement to Damasus that he would not have given to Liberius Qui tecum non colligit spargit For it might be true enough of Damasus who was a good Bishop and a right believer but if Liberius's name had been put in stead of Damasus the case had been altered with the name for S. Hierome did believe and write it so that Liberius had subscribed to Arianism And if either he or any of the rest had believ'd the Pope could not be a Heretick nor his Faith fail but be so good and of so competent Authority as to be a Rule to Christendom why did they not appeal to
from Christ it is a receiving Christ which is the duty here enjoyned this is one way of doing it and all the ways that they are capable of And that this precept can be performed this way S. Augustine affirms expresly in his third book de peccatorum meritis remissione In this thing there is nothing hard but the metaphors of eating and drinking Now that this is to be spiritually understood our Blessed Lord himself affirms in answer to the prejudice of the offended Capernaites that it is to be understood of Faith and that Faith is the spiritual manducation is the sense of the ancient Church and therefore in what sense soever any one is obliged to believe in the same sense he is obliged to the duty of spiritual manducation and no otherwise But because Infants cannot be obliged to the act or habit of Faith and yet can receive the Sacrament of Faith they receive Christ as they can and as they can are intitled to life But however by this means the difficulty of the expression is taken off for if by eating and drinking Christ is meant receiving Christ by Faith then this phrase can be no objection but that S. Austin's affirmative may be true and that this commandment is performed by Infants in Baptism which is the Sacrament of Faith To eat and drink does with as great impropriety signifie Faith as Baptism but this is it which I said at first that the metaphoricall expression was no part of the precept but the vehiculum of the Commandment occasioned by the preceding discourse of our Blessed Saviour and nothing is necessary but that Christ should be received by all that would have life eternall of which because Infants are capable and without receiving Christ they by virtue of these words are not capable and but in Baptism they cannot receive Christ it follows that these words are no argument to infer an equal necessity of communicating Infants but they are a good argument to prove a necessity of baptizing them Secondly But farther yet I demand can Infants receive Christ in the Eucharist Can they in that Sacrament eat the flesh of Christ and drink his bloud If they cannot then neither these words nor any other can infer an equal necessity of being communicated for they can infer none at all and whether those other words of Nisi quis renatus fuerit c. do infer a necessity of Baptism will be sufficiently cleared upon their own account But if Infants can receive Christ in the Eucharist to which they can no more dispose themselves by Repentance then they can to Baptism by Faith then it were indeed very well if they were communicated but yet not necessary because if they can receive Christ in the Eucharist they can receive Christ in Baptism and if they can receive him any way this precept is performed by that way and then whether they must also be communicated must be enquired by other arguments for whatsoever is in these words intended is performed by any way of receiving Christ and therefore cannot infer more in all circumstances and to all persons Thirdly Suppose these words were to be expounded of Sacramentall manducation of the flesh of Christ in the Lord's Supper yet it does not follow that Infants are as much bound to receive the Communion as to receive the Baptism It is too crude a fancy to think that all universal Propositions whether affirmative or negative equally expressed do signifie an equal universality It is said in the Law of Moses Whosoever is not circumcised that soul shall be cut off from his people this indeed signifies universally and included Infants binding them to that Sacrament But when it was said Whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to death whether small or great although these words be expressed with as great a latitude as the other yet it is certain it did not include Infants who could not seek the Lord. The same is the case of the two Sacraments the obligation to which we do not understand onely by the preceptive words or form of the commandments but by other appendages and the words of duty that are relative to the suscipients of the several Sacraments and the analogy of the whole Institution Baptism is the Sacrament of beginners the Eucharist of proficients that is the birth this is the nourishment of a Christian. There are many more things of difference to be observ'd But as the Church in several Ages hath practised severally in this Article so in the particular there is no such certainty but that the Church may without sin doe it or not doe it as she sees cause but that there is not the same necessity in both to all persons and that no necessity of communicating Infants can be inferr'd from the parallel words appears in the former answers and therefore I stand to them Ad 9. The summe of the sixth Argument is this The promise of the Holy Ghost is made to all to us and to our children and if the Holy Ghost belong to them then Baptism belongs to them also because Baptism is the means of conveying the Holy Ghost as appears in the words of S. Peter Be baptized and ye shall receive the holy Ghost as also because from this very argument S. Peter resolved to baptize Cornelius and his family because they had received the gift of the Holy Ghost for they that are capable of the same grace are receptive of the same sign Now that Infants also can receive the effects of the Holy Spirit is evident because besides that the promise of the Holy Ghost is made to all to us and our posterity S. Paul affirms that the children of believing parents are holy but all holiness is an emanation from the Holy Spirit of God Ad 19. To the words of S. Peter they answer that the promise does appertain to our children that is to our posterity but not till they are capable they have the same right which we have but enter not into possession of their right till they have the same capacity for by children are not meant Infants but as the children of Israel signifies the descendents onely so it is here And indeed this is true enough but not pertinent enough to answer the intention and efficiency of these words For I do not suppose that the word children means Infants but you and your children must mean all generations of Christendom all the descendents of Christian parents and if they belong to their posterity because they are theirs then the Promises belong to all that are so and then children cannot be excluded But I demand have not the children of believing parents a title to the Promises of the Gospel If they have none then the Kingdom of Heaven belongs not to such and if they die we can doe nothing but despair of their Salvation which is a proposition whose barbarity and unreasonable cruelty confutes itself But if they
Scripture both for the confirmation of good things and also for the reproof of the evil S. Cyril of Jerusalem Catech. 12. Illuminat saith Attend not to my inventions for you may possibly be deceiv'd but trust no word unless thou dost learn it from the Divine Scriptures and in Catech. 4. Illum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For it behoves us not to deliver so much as the least thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Divine and holy mysteries of Faith without the Divine Scriptures nor to be moved with probable discourses Neither give credit to me speaking unless what is spoken be demonstrated by the Holy Scriptures For that is the security of our Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is derived not from witty inventions but from the demonstration of Divine Scriptures Omne quod loquimur debemus affirmare de Scripturis Sanctis so S. Hierom in Psal. 89. And again Hoc quia de Scripturis authoritatem non habet eâdem facilitate contemnitur quâ probatur in Matth. 23. Si quid dicitur absque Scripturâ auditorum cogitatio claudicat So S. Chrysostom in Psal. 95. Homil. Theodoret Dial. 1. cap. 6. brings in the Orthodox Christian saying to Eranistes Bring not to me your Logismes and Syllogismes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I rely only upon Scriptures I could reckon very very many more both elder and later and if there be any Universal Tradition consigned to us by the Universal Testimony of Antiquity it is this that the Scriptures are a perfect repository of all the Will of God of all the Faith of Christ and this I will engage my self to make very apparent to you and certain against any opposer Upon the supposition of which it follows that whatever the Church of Rome obtrudes as necessary to Salvation and an Article of Faith that is not in Scripture is an Innovation in matter of Faith and a Tyranny over Consciences which whosoever submits to prevaricates the rule of the Apostle commanding us that we stand fast in the liberty with which Christ hath set us free To the other Question Whether an Ecclesiastical Tradition be of equal authority with Divine I answer Negatively And I believe I shall have no adversary in it except peradventure some of the Jesuited Bigots An Ecclesiastical Tradition viz. a positive constitution of the Church delivered from hand to hand is in the power of the Church to alter but a Divine is not Ecclesiastical Traditions in matters of Faith there are none but what are also Divine as for Rituals Ecclesiastical descending by Tradition they are confessedly alterable but till they be altered by abrogation or desuetude or contrary custom or a contrary reason or the like they do oblige by vertue of that Authority whatsoever it is that hath power over you I know not what Mr. G. did say but I am confident they who reported it of him were mistaken He could not say or mean what is charged upon him I have but two things more to speak to One is you desire me to recite what else might impede your compliance with the Roman Church I answer Truth and Piety hinder you For you must profess the belief of many false propositions and certainly believe many Uncertain things and be uncharitable to all the world but your own party and make Christianity a faction and you must yield your reason a servant to man and you must plainly prevaricate an institution of Christ and you must make an apparent departure from the Church in which you received your Baptism and the Spirit of God if you go over to Rome But Sir I refer you to the two Letters I have lately published at the end of my Discourse of Friendship and I desire you to read my Treatise of the Real Presence and if you can believe the doctrine of Transubstantiation you can put off your reason and your sense and your religion and all the instruments of Credibility when you please and these are not little things In these you may perish an error in these things is practical but our way is safe as being upon the defence and intirely resting upon Scripture and the Apostolical Churches The other thing I am to speak to is the report you have heard of my inclinations to go over to Rome Sir that party which needs such lying stories for the support of their Cause proclaim their Cause to be very weak or themselves to be very evil Advocates Sir be confident they dare not tempt me to do so and it is not the first time they have endeavoured to serve their ends by saying such things of me But I bless God for it it is perfectly a Slander and it shall I hope for ever prove so Sir if I may speak with you I shall say very many things more for your confirmation Pray to God to guide you and make no change suddenly For if their way be true to day it will be so to morrow and you need not make haste to undo your self Sir I wish you a setled mind and a holy Conscience and that I could serve you in the capacity of Your very Loving Friend and Servant in our Blessed Lord JER TAYLOR Munday Jan. 11. 1657. THE SECOND LETTER SIR I Perceive that you are very much troubled and I see also that you are in great danger but that also troubles me because I see they are little things and very weak and fallacious that move you You propound many things in your Letter in the same disorder as they are in your Conscience to all which I can best give answers when I speak with you to which because you desire I invite you and promise you a hearty endeavour to give you satisfaction in all your material inquiries Sir I desire you to make no haste to change in case you be so miserable as to have it in your thoughts for to go over to the Church of Rome is like death there is no recovery from thence without a Miracle because Unwary souls such are they who change from us to them are with all the arts of wit and violence strangely entangled and ensur'd when they once get the prey Sir I thank you for the Paper you inclosed The men are at a loss they would fain say something against that Book but know not what Sir I will endeavour if you come to me to restore you to peace and quiet and if I cannot effect it yet I will pray for it and I am sure God can To his Mercy I commend you and rest Your very affectionate Friend in our Blessed Lord JER TAYLOR Febr. 1. 1657 8. THE THIRD LETTER SIR THE first Letter which you mention in this latter of the 10 th of March I received not I had not else failed to give you an answer I was so wholly unknowing of it that I did not understand your Servant's meaning when he came to require an answer But to your Question which you now propound I answer
give very great assistances to Episcopal Government and yet be no warranty for Tyrannical and although even the Sayings of the Fathers is greater warranty for Episcopacy and weighs more than all that can be said against it Yet from thence nothing can be drawn to warrant to any man an Empire over Consciences and therefore as the probability of it can be used to one effect so the fallibility of it is also of use to another but yet even of this no man is to make any use in general but when he hath a necessity and a greater reason in the particular and I therefore have joyn'd these two Books in one Volume because they differ not at all in the design nor in the real purposes to which by their variety they minister I will not pretend to any special reason of the inserting any of the other Books into this Volume it is the design of my Bookseller to bring all that he can into a like Volume excepting only some Books of devotion which in a lesser Volume are more fit for use As for the Doctrine and Practice of Repentance which because I suppose it may so much contribute to the interest of a good life and is of so great and so necessary consideration to every person that desires to be instructed in the way of godliness and would assure his salvation by all means I was willing to publish it first in the lesser Volume that men might not by the encreasing price of a larger be hindred from doing themselves the greatest good to which I can minister which I humbly suppose to be done I am sure I intended to have done in that Book And now my Lord I humbly desire that although the presenting this Volume to your Lordship can neither promote that honour which is and ought to be the greatest and is by the advantages of your worthiness already made publick nor obtain to it self any security or defence from any injury to which without remedy it must be exposed yet if you please to expound it as a testimony of that great value I have for you though this signification is too little for it yet I shall be at ease a while till I can converse with your Lordship by something more proportionable to those greatest regards which you have merited of mankind but more especially of My Lord Your Lordships most affectionate Servant JER TAYLOR THE CONTENTS and ORDER of the whole Volume The Apologie for Liturgie THE Authors PREFACE to the Apology for Authorized and Set Forms of Liturgy Quest. 1. Whether all Set Forms are unlawful Page 2 2. Whether are better in publick Set Forms injoyned by Authority or Set Forms composed by private Preachers Sect. 51. pag. 13 Episcopacy Asserted Sect. 1. CHrist did institute a government in his Church pag. 45 2. This Government was first committed to the Apostles by Christ. 46 3. With a power of joyning others and appointing Successors 47 4. This Succession is made by Bishops 48 § For the Apostle and Bishop are all one in Name and Person ibid. 5. and Office 49 6. Which Christ himself hath made distinct from Presbyters 50 7. Giving to Apostles a power to do some offices perpetually necessary which to others he gave not 51 § as of Ordination ibid. 8. and Confirmation 52 9. and Superiority of Jurisdiction 55 10. So that Bishops are Successors in the office of Apostleship according to Antiquity 11. and particularly of S. Peter 61 12. And the institution of Episcopacy expressed to be jure divino by Primitive Authority 63 13. In pursuance of the Divine Institution the Apostles did ordain Bishops in several Churches as S. James and S. Simeon at Jerusalem 65 14. S. Timothy at Ephesus 67 15. S. Titus at Crete 70 16. S. Mark at Alexandria 73 17. S. Linus and S. Clement at Rome 74 18. S. Polycarp at Smyrna and divers others 75 19. So that Episcopacy is at least an Apostolical ordinance of the same authority with many other points generally believed 76 20. And was an office of Power and great Authority 77 21. Not lessened by the counsel and assistance of Presbyters ibid. 22. And all this hath been the Faith and practice of Christendom 84 23. Who first distinguished names used before in common 85 24. Appropriating the word Episcopus to the supreme Church-officer 89 25. Calling the Bishop and him only the Pastor of the Church 91 26. and Doctor 92 27. and Pontifex ibid. 28. And these were a distinct order from the rest 94 29. To which the Presbyterate was but a degree 96 30. There being a peculiar manner of Ordination to a Bishoprick 31. To which Presbyters never did assist by imposing hands 97 32. For a Bishop had a power distinct and superior to that of Presbyters As of Ordination 101 33. and Confirmation 108 34. and Jurisdiction Which they expressed in attributes of authority and great power 111 35. Requiring universal obedience to be given to Bishops by Clergie and Laity 113 36. Appointing them to be Judges of the Clergie and Laity in spiritual causes 115 37. Forbidding Presbyters to officiate without Episcopal license 125 38. Reserving Church Goods to Episcopal dispensation 129 39. Forbidding Presbyters to leave their own Dioecese or to travel without leave of the Bishop 129 40. And the Bishop had power to prefer which of his Clerks he pleased 130 41. Bishops only did vote in Council and neither Presbyters nor People 133 42. The Bishops had a propriety in the persons of their Clerks 138 43. Their Jurisdiction was over many Congregations or Parishes 139 44. And was aided by Presbyters but not impaired 144 45. So that the Government of the Church by Bishops was believed necessary 148 46. For they are Schismaticks that separate from their Bishop 149 47. And Hereticks 150 48. And Bishops were always in the Church men of great honour 152 49. And trusted with affairs of Secular interest 157 50. And therefore were forced to delegate their power and put others in substitution 163 51. But they were ever Clergie-men for there never was any Lay-Elders in any Church-office heard of in the Church 164 A Discourse of the Real Presence Sect. 1. THE state of the Question 181 2. Transubstantiation not warrantable by Scripture 186 3. Of the Sixth Chapter of S. John's Gospel 188 4. Of the words of Institution 198 5. Of the Particle Hoc in the words of Institution 201 6. Of these words Hoc est corpus meum 208 7. Considerations of the manner circumstances and annexes of the Institution 213 8. Of the Arguments of the Romanists from Scripture 217 9. Arguments from other Texts of Scripture proving Christ's Real Presence in the Sacrament to be only Spiritual not Natural 219 10. The doctrine of Transubstantiation is against Sense 223 11. The doctrine of Transubstantiation is wholly without and against reason 230 12. Transubstantiation was not the doctrine of the Primitive Church 249 13. Of Adoration of the Sacrament 267 The
desire to do natural or moral good things but even spiritual 784 4o. he may leave many sins which he is commanded to forsake 785 5o. he may leave some sins not only for temporal interest but out of fear of God and regard to his Law ibid. 6o. he may besides abstinence from evil do many good things 786 7 o he may have received the Spirit of God and yet be in a state of distance from God ibid. 6. The character of the unregenerate state or person n. 42.787 7. What are properly and truly sins of infirmity and how far they can consist with the regenerate estate 789 8. Practical advices to be added to the foregoing considerations 795. n. 65. Chap. IX Of the effect of Repentance viz. remission of Sins 800 Sect. 1. There is no sin but with Repentance may be pardoned ibid. 2. Of pardon of sins committed after baptism 802 3. Of the difficulty of obtaining pardon The doctrine and practice of the Primitive Church in this Article 803 4. Of the sin against the H. Ghost and in what sence it may be unpardonable 808 5. What sin is spoken of by our Lord Matth. 12.32 and that final impenitence is not it 810 6. The former doctrines reduced to practice 815 Chap. X. Of Ecclesiastical Penance or the fruits of Repentance 820 Sect. 1. What the fruits of Repentance are in general ibid. 2. Of Contrition or godly sorrow the reasons measures and constitution of it 821 3. Of the nature and differences of Attrition and Contrition 828 4. Of Confession 830 1o. Confession is necessary to Repentance ibid. 2o. It is due only to God 831 3o. In the Primitive Church there was no judicial absolution used in their Liturgies n. 54.838 4o. The judicial absolution of a Priest does effect no material change in the Penitent as to giving of pardon 841. n. 60 5. Attrition or imperfect Repentance though with absolution is not sufficient 842 6. Of Penance or satisfactions 844. 1o. sorrow and mourning 2o. Corporal austerities 3o. Prayers 847. 4o. Alms 848. 5o. forgiving injuries 6 o restitution 849 7. The former doctrine reduced to practice 850 8. The practice of Confession 854 9. The practice of Penances and corporal austerities 858 A Discourse in Vindication of Gods Attributes of Goodness and Justice in the matter of Original Sin against the Calvinists way of understanding it 1o. THe truth of the Article with the errors and mistakes about it 869 2o. Arguments to prove the truth 872 3o. Objections answered 881 4o. An Explication of Rom. 5.12 ad 19. 887 An Answer to the Bishop of Rochesters First Letter written concerning the Sixth Chapter of Original Sin in the Discourse of Repentance 895 The Bishop of Rochesters Second Letter upon the same subject 907 An Answer to the Second Letter from the Bishop of Rochester 909 The Liberty of Prophesying EPist Dedicatory Introduction Sect. 1. Of the nature of Faith and that the duty of it is compleated in believing the Articles of the Apostles Creed 941 2. Of Heresie its nature and measures That it is to be accounted according to the stricter capacity of the Christian Faith and not in opinions speculative nor ever to pious persons 947 3. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary nor literally determined 965 4. Of the difficulty of expounding Scripture 971 5. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to expound Scripture or determine questions 976 6. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Councils Ecclesiastical to expound Scripture or determine questions 984 7. Of the fallibility of the Pope and the uncertainty of his expounding Scripture and resolving Questions 995 8. How unable the Fathers or Writers Ecclesiastical are to determine our questions with certainty and truth 1007 9. How incompetent the Church in its diffusive capacity is to be Judge of controversies and how impertinent that pretence of the Spirit is 1011 10. Of the authority of reason and that it proceeding on the best grounds is the best Judge 1013 11. Of some causes of error in the exercise of reason which are in themselves inculpable 1016 12. How innocent error of mere opinion is in a pious person 1022 13. Of the deportment to be used toward persons disagreeing and reasons why they are not to be punished with death 1025 14. Of the practice of Christian Churches toward persons disagreeing and when persecution first came in use 1031 15. How far the Church or Governours may act to the restraining false or differing opinions 1034 16. Whether it be lawful for a Prince to give toleration to several Religions 1036 17. Of complying with disagreeing persons or weak Consciences in general 1038 18. A particular instance in the opinion of the Anabaptists to shew that there is so much reason on both sides of the Question that a pious person mistaking may be innocent in his error 1040 1o. The arguments usually alledged for baptizing Infants n. 3. ad 12.1041 1042 2o. How much the Anabaptists have to say in opposition to those arguments and to justifie their own tenent n. 12. ad 34.1043 ad 1051 3o. A reply to the arguments of the Anabaptists by the Author since the first Edition wherein the lawfulness of the Churches practice is established n. 34. ad fin Sect. 1051. ad 1068 19. That there ought not to be any toleration of doctrines inconsistent with piety or the publick good 1069 20. How far the Religion of the Church of Rome may be tolerated 1070 21. Of the duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion 1076 22. That particular men may communicate with Churches of different perswasions and how far they may do it 1077 The Discourse of Confirmation INtroduction Sect. 1. Of the Divine Original Warranty and Institution of the Rite of Confirmation 3 2. The Rite of Confirmation is a perpetual and never-ceasing Ministery 12 3. That Confirmation which by laying on of Hands gives the H. Spirit was actually continued and practised by all succeeding Ages of the Primitive Church 15 4. The Bishops were always and are still the only Ministers of Confirmation 18 5. The whole procedure of Confirmation is by prayer and laying on of Hands 22 6. Many great Graces and Blessings are consequent to the worthy reception and due ministery of Confirmation 24 7. Of preparation to Confirmation and the circumstances of receiving it 28 A Discourse of Friendship 1. HOw far a perfect Friendship is authorized by the principles of Christianity 35 2. What are the requisites of Friendship 38 3. What are the lawful expressions and acts of Friendship 42 4. Whether a Friend may be dearer than a Husband or Wife 47 5. What are the duties of Friendship 49 6. Ten Rules to be observed in the conduct of Friendship 50 Five Letters about change of Religion 53 THE AUTHORS PREFACE TO THE APOLOGY FOR AUTHORIZED and SET FORMS OF LITURGY WHEN Judges were instead of Kings and Hophni and Phinehas were among the Priests every
our infirmities for we know not what we should pray for as we ought but the Spirit it self maketh intercession for us with groanings that cannot be uttered c. From whence the Conclusion that is inferred is in the words of S. Paul that we must pray with the Spirit therefore not with set forms therefore ex tempore Sect. 13. THE Collection is somewhat wild for there is great independency in the several parts and much more is in the Conclusion than was virtually in the premises But such as it is the Authors of it I suppose will own it And therefore we will examine the main design of it and then consider the particular means of its perswasion quoted in the Objection Sect. 14. IT is one of the Priviledges of the Gospel and the benefit of Christs ascension that the Holy Ghost is given unto the Church and is become to us the fountain of gifts and graces But these gifts and graces are improvements and helps of our natural faculties of our art and industry not extraordinary miraculous and immediate infusions of habits and gifts That without Gods spirit we cannot pray aright that our infirmities need his help that we know not what to ask of our selves is most true and if ever any Heretick was more confident of his own naturals or did evermore undervalue Gods grace than the Pelagian did yet he denies not this but what then therefore without study without art without premeditation without learning the Spirit gives the gift of prayer and is it his grace that without any natural or artificial help makes us pray ex tempore no such thing the Objection proves nothing of this Sect. 15. HERE therefore we will joyn issue whether the gifts and helps of the Spirit be immediate infusions of the faculties and powers and perfect abilities Or that he doth assist us only by his aids external and internal in the use of such means which God and nature hath given to man to ennoble his soul better his faculties and to improve his understanding ** That the aids of the Holy Ghost are only assistances to us in the use of natural and artificial means I will undertake to prove and from thence it will evidently follow that labour and hard study and premeditation will soonest purchase the gift of prayer and ascertain us of the assistance of the Spirit and therefore set Forms of Prayer studied and considered of are in a true and proper sence and without Enthusiasm the fruits of the Spirit Sect. 16. FIRST Gods Spirit did assist the Apostles by ways extraordinary and fit for the first institution of Christianity but doth assist us now by the expresses of those first assistances which he gave to them immediately Sect. 17. THUS the Holy Ghost brought to their Memory all things which Jesus spake and did and by that means we come to know all that the Spirit knew to be necessary for us the Holy Ghost being Author of our knowledge by being the fountain of the Revelation and we are therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taught by God because the Spirit of God revealed the Articles of our Religion that they might be known to all ages of the Church and this is testified by S. Paul He gave some Apostles and some Prophets c. for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man c. This was the effect of Christ's ascension when he gave gifts unto men that is when he sent the Spirit the verification of the promise of the Father The effect of this immission of the Holy Ghost was to fill all things and that for ever to build up the Church of God until the day of consummation so that the Holy Ghost abides with the Church for ever by transmitting those revelations which he taught the Apostles to all Christians in succession Now as the Holy Ghost taught the Apostles and by them still teaches us what to believe so it is certain he taught the Apostles how and what to pray and because it is certain that all the rules concerning our duty in prayer and all those graces which we are to pray for are transmitted to us by Derivation from the Apostles whom the Holy Ghost did teach even to that very purpose also that they should teach us it follows evidently that the gift of prayer is a gift of the Holy Ghost and yet to verifie this Proposition we need no other immediate inspiration or extraordinary assistance than that we derive from the Holy Ghost by the conveyance of the Apostolical Sermons and Writings Sect. 18. THE reason is the same in Faith and Prayer and if there were any difference in the acquisition or reception faith certainly needs a more immediate infusion as being of greatest necessity and yet a grace to which we least cooperate it being the first of graces and less of the will in it than any other But yet the Holy Ghost is the Author of our faith and we believe with the Spirit it is S. Pauls expression and yet our belief comes by hearing and reading the holy Scriptures and their interpretations Now reconcile these two together Faith comes by hearing and yet is the gift of the Spirit and it says that the gifts of the Spirit are not extasies and immediate infusions of habits but helps from God to enable us upon the use of the means of his own appointment to believe to speak to understand to prophesie and to pray Sect. 19. BUT whosoever shall look for any other gifts of the Spirit besides the parts of nature helped by industry and Gods blessing upon it and the revelations or the supplies of matter in holy Scripture will be very far to seek having neither reason promise nor experience of his side For why should the spirit of prayer be any other than as the gift and spirit of faith as S. Paul calls it acquired by humane means using divine aids that is by our endeavours in hearing reading catechizing desires to obey and all this blessed and promoted by God this produces faith Nay it is true of us what Christ told his Apostles sine me nihil potestis facere not nihil magnum aut difficile but omninò nihil as S. Austin observes Without me ye can do nothing and yet we were not capable of a Law or of reward or punishment if neither with him nor without him we were able to do any thing And therefore although in the midst of all our co-operation we may say to God in the words of the Prophet Domine omnia opera operatus es in nobis O Lord thou hast wrought all our works in us yet they are opera nostra still God works and we work First is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gods grace is brought to us he helps and gives us abilities and then
Countries of Christendom till by Crusado's massacres and battels burnings and the constant Carnificia and butchery of the Inquisition which is the main prop of the Papacy and does more than Tu es Petrus they prevail'd far and near and men durst not oppose the evidence whereby they fought And now the wonder is out it is not strange that the Article hath been so readily entertained But in the Greek Church it could not prevail as appears not only in Cyril's book of late dogmatically affirming the Article in our sence but in the Answer of Cardinal Humbert to Nicetas who maintained the receiving the holy Sacrament does break the fast which it could not do if it were not what it seems bread and wine as well as what we believe it to be the body and blood of Christ. And now in prosecution of their strange improbable success they proceed to perswade all people that they are fools and do not know the measures of sence nor understand the words of Scripture nor can tell when any of the Fathers speak affirmatively or negatively and after many attempts made by diverse unprosperously enough as the thing did constrain and urge them a great Wit Cardinal Perron hath undertaken the Question and hath spun his thread so fine and twisted it so intricately and adorned it so sprucely with language and sophisms that although he cannot resist the evidence of truth yet he is too subtle for most mens discerning and though he hath been contested by potent adversaries and wise men in a better cause than his own yet he will alwayes make his Reader believe that he prevails which puts me in mind of what Thucydides told Archidamus the King of Sparta asking him whether he or Pericles were the better wrastler he told him that when he threw Pericles on his back he would with fine words perswade the people that he was not down at all and so he got the better So does he and is to all considering men a great argument of the danger that Articles of Religion are in and consequently mens perswasions and final interest when they fall into the hands of a witty man and a Sophister and one who is resolved to prevail by all means But truth is stronger than wit and can endure when the other cannot and I hope it will appear so in this Question which although it is managed by weak hands that is by mine yet to all impartial persons it must be certain and prevailing upon the stock of its own sincerity and derivation from God And now R. R. though this Question hath so often been disputed and some things so often said yet I was willing to bring it once more upon the stage hoping to add some clearness to it by fitting it with a good instrument and clear conveyance and representment by saying something new and very many which are not generally known and less generally noted and I thought there was a present necessity of it because the Emissaries of the Church of Rome are busie now to disturb the peace of consciences by troubling the persecuted and ejecting scruples into the infortunate who suspect every thing and being weary of all are most ready to change from the present They have got a trick to ask where is our Church now What is become of your Articles of your Religion We cannot answer them as they can be answered for nothing satisfies them but being prosperous and that we cannot pretend to but upon the accounts of the Cross and so we may indeed rejoyce and be exceeding glad because we hope that great is our reward in Heaven But although they are pleased to use an Argument that like Jonas Gourd or Sparagus is in season only at some times yet we according to the nature of Truth inquire after the truth of their Religion upon the account of proper and Theological Objections Our Church may be a beloved Church and dear to God though she be persecuted when theirs is in an evil condition by obtruding upon the Christian world Articles of Religion against all that which ought to be the instruments of credibility and perswasion by distorting and abusing the Sacraments by making error to be an art and that a man must be witty to make himself capable of being abused by out-facing all sence and reason by damning their brethren for not making their understanding servile and sottish by burning them they can get and cursing them that they cannot get by doing so much violence to their own reasons and forcing themselves to believe that no man ever spake against their new device by making a prodigious error to be necessary to salvation as if they were Lords of the Faith of Christendom But these men are grown to that strange triumphal gaety upon their joy that the Church of England as they think is destroyed that they tread upon her grave which themselves have digged for her who lives and pities them and they wonder that any man should speak in her behalf and suppose men do it out of spight and indignation and call the duty of her sons who are by persecution made more confident pious and zealous in defending those truths for which she suffers on all hands by the name of anger and suspect it of malicious vile purposes I wonder'd when I saw something of this folly in one that was her son once but is run away from her sorrow and disinherited himself because she was not able to give him a temporal portion and thinks he hath found out reasons enough to depart from the miserable I will not trouble him or so much as name him because if his words are as noted as they are publick every good man will scorn them if they be private I am not willing to publish his shame but leave him to consideration and repentance But for our dear afflicted Mother she is under the portion of a child in the state of discipline her government indeed hindered but her Worshippings the same the Articles as true and those of the Church of Rome as false as ever of which I hope the following book will be one great instance But I wish that all tempted persons would consider the illogical deductions by which these men would impose upon their consciences If the Church of England be destroyed then Transubstantiation is true which indeed had concluded well if that Article had only pretended false because the Church of England was prosperous But put the case the Turk should invade Italy and set up the Alcoran in S. Peters Church would it be endured that we should conclude that Rome was Antichristian because her temporal glory is defaced The Apostle in this case argued otherwise The Church of the Jews was cut off for their sins be not high-minded ô ye Gentiles but fear lest he also cut thee off it was counsel given to the Romans But though blessed be God our afflictions are great yet we can and do onjoy the same religion as the good Christians
divinae vocationi Because the Word was made flesh therefore he was desired for life to be devoured by hearing to be ruminated or chewed by the understanding to be digested by faith For a little before he called his flesh also celestial bread still or all the way urging by an allegory of necessary food the memory of their Fathers who preferrd the bread and flesh of Egypt before the Divine calling 11. S. Athanasius or who is the Author of the Tractate upon the words Quicunque dixerit verbum in filium hominis in his works saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. The things which he speaks are not carnal but spiritual For to how many might his body suffice for meat that it should become the nourishment of the whole World But for this it was that he put them in mind of the ascension of the Son of man into Heaven that he might draw them off from carnal and corporal sences and that they might learn that his flesh which he called meat was from above heavenly and spiritual nourishment For saith he the things that I have spoken they are spirit and they are life 12. But Origen is yet more decretory in this affair Est in novo Testamento litera quae occidit eum qui non spiritualiter ea quae dicuntur adverterit si enim secundùm literam sequaris hoc ipsum quod dictum est Nisi manducaveritis carnem meam biberitis sanguinem meam occidit haec litera If we understand these words of Christ Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood literally this letter kills For there is in the new Testament a letter that kills him who does not spiritually understand those things which are spoken 13. S. Ambrose not only expounds it in a spiritual sence but plainly denyes the proper and natural Non iste panis est qui vadit in corpus sed ille panis vitae aeternae qui animae nostrae substantiam sulcit That is not the bread of life which goes into the body but that which supports the substance of the soul And fide tangitur fide videtur non tangitur corpore non oculis comprehenditur this bread is touch'd by faith it is seen by faith and without all peradventure that this is to be understood of eating and drinking Christ by faith is apparent from Christ's own words verse 35. I am the bread of life he that cometh to me shall not hunger and he that believeth on me shall not thirst coming to Christ is eating him believing him is drinking his blood It is not touch'd by the body it is not seen with the eyes S. Chrysostom in his 47. Homily upon this Chapter of S. John expounds these words in a spiritual sence for these things saith he are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as have in them nothing carnal nor any carnal consequence 14. S. Austin gave the same exposition Vt quid paras dentes ventrem crede manducasti and again Credere in eum hoc est manducare panem vivum Qui credit in eum manducat 15. Theophylact makes the spiritual sence to be the only answer in behalf of our not being Canibals or devourers of mans flesh as the men of Capernaum began to dream and the men of Rome though in better circumstances to this day dream on Putabant isti quòd Deus cogeret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quia enim nos hoc spiritualiter intelligimus neque carnium voratores sumus imò sanctificamur per talem cibum non sumus carnis voratores The men of Capernaum thought Christ would compel them to devour mans flesh But because we understand this spiritually therefore we are not devourers of mans flesh but are sanctified by this meat Perfectly to the same sence and almost in the very words Theodorus Bishop of Hieraclea is quoted in the Greek Catena upon John 16. It were easie to add that Eusebius calls the words of Christ his flesh and blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that so also does S. Hierom saying that although it may be understood in mystery tamen veriùs corpus Christi sanguis ejus sermo scripturarum est that so does Clemens Alexandrinus that S. Basil sayes that his Doctrine and his mystical coming is his flesh and blood that S. Bernard sayes to imitate his life and communicate with his passion is to eat his flesh But I decline for the present to insist upon these because all of them excepting S. Hierom only may be supposed to be mystical Expositions which may be true and yet another Exposition may be true too It may suffice that it is the direct sence of Tertullian Origen Athanasius S. Ambrose S. Austin and Theophylact that these woâ—ds of Christ in the sixth of S. John are not to be understood in the natural or proper but in the spiritual sence The spiritual they declare not to be the mystical but the literal sence and therefore their testimonies cannot be eluded by any such pretence 17. And yet after all this suppose that Christ in these words did speak of the Sacramental manducation and affirm'd that the bread which he would give should be his flesh what is this to Transubstantiation That Christ did speak of the Sacrament as well as of any other mystery of this amongst others that is of all the wayes of taking him is to me highly probable Christ is the food of our souls this food we receive in at our ears mouth our hearts and the allusion is plainer in the Sacrament than in any other external right because of the similitude of bread and eating which Christ used upon occasion of the miracle of the loaves which introduc'd all that discourse But then this comes in only as it is an act of faith for the meat which Christ gives is to be taken by faith himself being the Expounder Now the Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist being acts and Symbols and consignations of faith and effects of believing that is of the first and principal receiving him by faith in his words and submission to his Doctrine may well be meant here not by vertue of the words for the whole form of expression is Metaphorical not at all proper but by the proportion of reason and nature of his effect it is an act or manner of receiving Christ and an issue of faith and therefore is included in the mystery The food that Christ said he would give is his flesh which he would give for the life of the world viz. to be crucified and killed And from that verse forward he doth more particularly refer to his death for he speaks of bread only before or meat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but now he speaks of flesh and blood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bread and drink and therefore by Analogy he may allude to the Sacrament which is his similitude and representation but this is but the meaning of the
does our faith do the same thing for if we believe him there the want of bodily sight is supplied by the eye of faith and the Spirit is pretended to do no more in this particular and then his presence also will be less necessary because supplied by our own act Add to this That if after Christs ascension into Heaven he still would have been upon Earth in the Eucharist and received properly into our mouths and in all that manner which these men dream how ready it had been and easie to have comforted them who were troubled for want of his bodily presence by telling them Although I go to Heaven yet fear not to be deprived of the presence of my body for you shall have it more than before and much better for I will be with you and in you I was with you in a state of humility and mortality now I will be with you with a daily and mighty miracle I before gave you promises of grace and glory but now I will become to your bodies a seed of immortality And though you will not see me but under a vail yet it is certain I will be there in your Churches in your pixes in your mouths in your stomachs and you shall believe and worship Had not this been a certain clear and proportionable comfort to their complaint and present necessity if any such thing were intended It had been so certain so clear so proportionable that it is more than probable that if it had been true it had not been omitted But that such sacred things as these may not be exposed to contempt by such weak propositions and their trifling consequents the case is plain that Christ being to depart hence sent his holy Spirit in substitution to supply to his Church the office of a Teacher which he on Earth in person was to his Disciples when he went from hence he was to come no more in person and therefore he sent his substitute and therefore to pretend him to be here in person though under a disguise which we see through with the eye of Faith and converse with him by presential adoration of his humanity is in effect to undervalue the real purposes and sence of all the sayings of Christ concerning his departure hence and the deputation of the holy Spirit But for this because it is naturally impossible they have recourse to the Divine Omnipotency God can do it therefore he does But of this I shall give particular account in the Section of Reason as also the other arguments of Scripture I shall reduce to their heads of proper matter SECT X. The doctrine of Transubstantiation is against sense 1. THAT which is one of the firmest pillars upon which all humane notices and upon which all Christian Religion does rely cannot be shaken or if it be all Science and all Religion must be in danger Now beside that all our notices of things proceed from sense and our understanding receives his proper objects by the mediation of material and sensible phantasms and the soul in all her operations during this life is served by the ministeries of the body and the body works upon the soul only by sense besides this S. John hath placed the whole Religion of a Christian upon the certainty and evidence of sense as upon one unmoveable foundation That which was from the beginning which we have seen with our eyes which we have beheld and our hands have handled of the word of life And the life was made manifest and we have seen it and bear witness and declare unto you eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us which we have seen and heard we declare unto you Tertullian in his book de anima uses this very argument against the Marcionites Recita Johannis testationem quod vidimus inquit quod audivimus oculis nostris vidimus manus nostrae contrectaverunt de Sermone vitae Falsa utique testatio si oculorum aurium manuum sensus natura mentitur his testimony was false if eyes and ears and hands be deceived In Nature there is not a greater argument than to have heard and seen and handled Sed quia profundâ non licet luctarier Ratione tecum consulamus proxima Interrogetur ipsa naturalium Simplex sine arte sensuum sententia And by what means can an assent be naturally produced but by those instruments by which God conveys all notices to us that is by seeing and hearing Faith comes by hearing and evidence comes by seeing and if a man in his wits and in his health can be deceived in these things how can we come to believe Corpus enim per se communis deliquat esse Sensus quo nisi prima fides sundata valebit Haud erit occultis de rebus quo referentes Confirmare animi quicquam ratione queamus For if a Man or an Angel declares Gods will to us if we may not trust our hearing we cannot trust him for we know not whether indeed he says what we think he says and if God confirms the proposition by a miracle an ocular demonstration we are never the nearer to the believing him because our eyes are not to be trusted But if feeling also may be abused when a man is in all other capacities perfectly healthy then he must be governed by chance and walk in the dark and live upon shadows and converse with fantasms and illusions as it happens and then at last it will come to be doubted whether there be any such man as himself and whether he be awake when he is awake or not rather then only awake when he himself and all the world thinks him to have been asleep Oculatae sunt nostrae manus credunt quod vident 2. Now then to apply this to the present question in the words of S. Austin Quod ergo vidistis panis est calix quod vobis etiam oculi vestri renunciant That which our eyes have seen that which our hands have handled is bread we feel it taste it see it to be bread and we hear it called bread that very substance which is called the body of our Lord. Shall we now say our eyes are deceived our ears hear a false sound our taste is abused our hands are mistaken It is answered Nay our senses are not mistaken For our senses in health and due circumstances cannot be abused in their proper object but they may be deceived about that which is under the object of their senses they are not deceived in colour and shape and taste and magnitude which are the proper objects of our senses but they may be deceived in substances which are covered by these accidents and so it is not the outward sense so much as the inward sense that is abused For so Abraham when he saw an Angel in the shape of a humane body was not deceived in the shape of a man for there was such a shape
reckoned and in others respersed over this Treatise But to return to the present objection it is observable that S. Cyril does not say it is not bread though the sense suppose it to be so for that would have supposed the taste to have been deceived which he affirms not and if he had we could not have believed him but he says though the sense perceive it to be bread so that it is still bread else the taste would not perceive it to be so but it is more and the sense does not perceive it for it is the body of our Lord here then is his own answer plainly opposed to the objection he says it is not bread that is it is not meer bread and so say we he says that it is the body of our Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the antitype of the Lords body and so say we He says the sense perceives it to be bread but it is more than the sense perceives so he implies and so we affirm and yet we may trust our sense for all that it tells us and our understanding too for all it learns besides The like to this are the words of S. Chrysostome where he says We cannot be deceived by his words but our sense is often deceived look not at what is before us but observe Christs words Nothing sensible is given to us but things insensible by things sensible c. This and many higher things than this are in S. Chrysostome not only relating to this but to the other Sacrament also Think not thou receivest the body from a man but fire from the tongue of a Seraphim that for the Eucharist and for Baptism this The Priest baptizes thee not but God holds thy head In the same sence that these admit in the same sence we may understand his other words they are Tragical and high but may have a sober sence but literally they sound a contradiction that nothing sensible should be given us in the Sacrament and yet that nothing insensible should be given but what is conveyed by things sensible but it is not worth the while to stay here Only this the words of S. Chrysostome are good counsel and such as we follow for in this case we do not finally rely upon sense or resolve all into it but we trust it only for so much as it ought to be trusted for but we do not finally rest upon it but upon faith and look not on the things proposed but attend to the words of Christ and though we see it to be bread we also believe it to be his body in that sence which he intended SECT XI The doctrine of Transubstantiation is wholly without and against reason 1. WHEN we discourse of mysteries of Faith and Articles of Religion it is certain that the greatest reason in the world to which all other reasons must yield is this God hath said it therefore it is true Now if God had expresly said This which seems to be bread is my body in the natural sence or to that purpose there had been no more to be said in the affair all reasons against it had been but sophismes When Christ hath said This is my body no man that pretends to Christianity doubts of the truth of these words all men submitting their understanding to the obedience of Faith But since Christ did not affirm that he spake it in the natural sence but there are not only in Scripture many prejudices but in common sense much evidence against it if reason also protests against the Article it is the voice of God and to be heard in this question For Nunquam aliud natura aliud sapientia dicit And this the rather because there are so many ways to verifie the words of Christ without this strange and new doctrine of Transubstantiation that in vain will the words of Christ be pretended against reason whereas the words of Christ may be many ways verified if Transubstantiation be condemned as first if Picus Mirandula's proposition be true which in Rome he offered to dispute publickly that Paneitas possit suppositare corpus Domini which I suppose if it be expounded in sensible terms means that it may be bread and Christs body too or secondly if Luthers and the ancient Schoolmens way be true that Christs body be present together with the bread In that sence Christs words might be true though no Transubstantiation and this is the sence which is followed by the Greek Church 3. If Boquinus's way be true that between the bread and Christs body there were a communication of proprieties as there is between the Deity and humanity of our blessed Saviour then as we say God gave himself for us and the blessed Virgin is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mother of God and God suffered and rose again meaning that God did it according to his assumed humanity so we may say this is Christs body by the communication of the Idioms or proprieties to the bread with which it is united 4. If our way be admitted that Christ is there after a real spiritual manner the words of Christ are true without any need of admitting Transubstantiation 5. I could instance in the way of Johannes Longus in his Annotations upon the second Apology of Justin Martyr Hoc est corpus meum that is My body is this that is is nourishment spiritual as this is Natural 6. The way of Johannes Caâ—panus would afford me a sixth instance Hoc est corpus meum that is meum as it is mea creatura 7. Johannes à Lasco Bucer and the Socinians refer hoc to the whole ministery and mean that to be representative of Christs body 8. If Rupertus the Abbots way were admitted which was confuted by Algerus and is almost like that of Boquinus that between Christs body and the consecrate symbols there was an hypostatical union then both substances would remain and yet it were a true proposition to affirm of the whole hypostasis this is the body of Christ. Many more I could reckon all which or any of which if it were admitted the words of Christ stand true and uncontradicted and therefore it is a huge folly to quarrel at them that admit not Transubstantiation and to say they deny the words of Christ. And therefore it must not now be said Reason is not to be heard against an Article of Faith for that this is an Article of Faith cannot nakedly be inferred from the words of Christ which are capable of so many meanings Therefore reason in this case is to be heard by them that will give a reason of their faith as it is commanded in Scripture much less is that to be admitted which Fisher or Flued the Jesuit was bold to say to King James that because Transubstantiation seems so much against reason therefore it is to be admitted as if faith were more faith for being against reason Against this for the present I shall oppose the excellent words of S. Austin
Ep. 7. Si manifestissimae certaeque rationi velut Scripturarum Sanctarum objicitur authoritas non intelligit qui hoc facit non Scripturarum illarum sensum ad quem penetrare non potuit sed suum potiùs objicit veritati nec quod in eis sed quod in seipso velut pro eis invenit opponit He that opposes the authority of the holy Scriptures against manifest and certain reason does neither understand himself nor the Scripture Indeed when God hath plainly declared the particular the more it seems against my reasons the greater is my obedience in submitting but that is because my reasons are but Sophismes since truth it self hath declared plainly against them but if God hath not plainly declared against that which I call reason my reason must not be contested by a pretence of Faith but upon some other account Ratio cum ratione concertet 3. Secondly But this is such a fine device that it can if it be admitted warrant any literal interpretation against all the pretences of the world For when Christ said If thy right eye offend thee pluck it out Here are the plain words of Christ And Some make themselves Eunuches for the kingdom of Heaven Nothing plainer in the Grammatical sence and why do we not do it because it is an unnatural thing to mangle our body for a Spiritual cause which may be supplied by other more gentle instruments Yea but reason is not to be heard against the plain words of Christ and the greater our reason is against it the greater excellency in our obedience that as Abraham against hope believed in hope so we against reason may believe in the greatest reason the Divine revelation and what can be spoken against this 4. Thirdly Stapleton confuting Luthers opinion of Consubstantiation pretends against it many absurdities drawn from reason and yet it would have been ill taken if it should have been answered that the doctrine ought the rather to be believed because it is so unreasonable which answer is something like our new Preachers who pretend that therefore they are Spiritual men because they have no learning they are to confound the wise because they are the weak things of the world and that they are to be heard the rather because there is the less reason they should so crying stinking fish that men may buy it the more greedily But I will proceed to the particulars of reason in this Article being contented with this that if the adverse party shall refuse this way of arguing they may be reproved by saying they refuse to hear reason and it will not be easie for them in despite of reason to pretend faith for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unreasonable men and they that have not faith are equivalent in S. Pauls expression 5. First I shall lay this prejudice in the Article as relating to the discourses of reason that in the words of institution there is nothing that can be pretended to prove the conversion of the substance of bread into the body of Christ but the same will infer the conversion of the whole into the whole and therefore of the accidents of the bread into the accidents of the body And in those little pretences of Philosophy which these men sometimes make to cousen fools into a belief of the possibility they pretend to no instance but to such conversions in which if the substance is changed so also are the accidents sometimes the accident is chang'd in the same remaining substance but if the substance be changed the accidents never remain the same individually or in kind unless they be symbolical that is are common to both as in the change of elements of air into fire of water into earth Thus when Christ changed water into wine the substances being chang'd the accidents also were alter'd and the wine did not retain the colour and taste of water for then though it had been the stranger miracle that wine should be wine and yet look and taste like water yet it would have obtained but little advantage to his doctrine and person if he should have offer'd to prove his mission by such a miracle For if Christ had said to the guests To prove that I am come from God I will change this water into wine well might this prove his mission but if while the guests were wondring at this he should proceed and say wonder ye not at this for I will do a stranger thing than it for this water shall be changed into wine and yet I will so order it that it shall look like water and taste like it so that you shall not know one from the other Certainly this would have made the whole matter very ridiculous and indeed it is a strange device of these men to suppose God to work so many prodigious miracles as must be in Transubstantiation if it were at all and yet that none of these should be seen for to what purpose is a miracle that cannot be perceived It can prove nothing nor do any thing when it self is not known whether it be or no. When bread is turned into flesh and wine into blood in the nourishment of our bodies which I have seen urg'd for the credibility of Transubstantiation The bread as it changes his nature changes his accidents too and is flesh in colour and shape and dimensions and weight and operation as well as it is in substance Now let them rub their foreheads hard and tell us it is so in the holy Sacrament For if it be not so then no instance of the change of Natural substances from one form to another can be pertinent For 1. Though it be no more than is done in every operation of a body yet it is always with change of their proper accidents and then 2. It can with no force of the words of the institution be pretended that one ought to be or can be without the other For he that says this is the body of a man says that it hath the substance of a humane body and all his consequents that is the accidents and he that says this is the body of Alexander says besides the substance that it hath all the individuating conditions which are the particular accidents and therefore Christ affirming this to be his body did as much affirm the change of accidents as the change of substance because that change is naturally and essentially consequent to this Now if they say they therefore do not believe the accidents of bread to be changed because they see them remain I might reply Why will they believe their sense against faith since there may be evidence but here is certainty and it cannot be deceived though our eyes can and it is certain that Christ affirmed it without distinction of one part from another of substance from his usual accidents This is my body Hoc Hîc Nunc and Sic. Now if they think their eyes may be credited for
figura corporis sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi Make this ascribed oblation reasonable and acceptable which is the figure of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. And again Mira potentia c. it is a wonderful power of God which makes that the bread should remain what it is and yet be changed into another thing And again How much more operative is the word of Christ that the things be what they were and yet be changed into another and so that which was bread before consecration now is the body of Christ Hoc tamen impossibile est ut panis sit corpus Christi Sed haec verba ad sanum intellectum sunt intelligenda ita solvit Hugo saith the Gloss in Gratian which is an open defiance of the doctrine of S. Ambrose affirming it to be impossible But because these words pinch severely they have retrenched the decisive words and leave out sint and make them to run thus that the things be changed into another which corruption is discovered by the citation of these words in Paschasius Guitmond Bertram Algerus Ivo Carnotensis Gratian and Lombard But in another place he calls the mystical chalice the type of the blood and that Christ is offered here in imagine in type image or representation in coelo in veritate the truth the substance is in heaven And again This therefore truly is the Sacrament of his flesh Our Lord Jesus himself says this is my body Before the blessing by the words it was named another species or kind after the consecration the body of Christ is signified 27. S. Chrysostome is brought on both sides and his Rhetorick hath cast him on the Roman side but it also bears him beyond it and his divinity and sober opinions have fixt him on ours How to answer the expressions hyperbolical which he often uses is easie by the use of rhetorick and customs of the words But I know not how any man can sensibly answer these words For as before the bread is sanctified we name it bread but the Divine grace sanctifying it by the means of the Priest it is freed from the name of bread but it is esteemed worthy to be called the Lords body although the nature of bread remains in it To the same purpose are those words on the Twenty second Psalm published amongst his works though possibly they were of some other of that time or before or after it matters not to us but much to them for if he be later and yet esteemed a Catholick as it is certain he was and the man a-while supposed to be S. Chrysostome it is the greater evidence that it was long before the Church received their doctrine The words are these That table he hath prepared to his servants and his maidens in their sight that he might every day shew us in the Sacrament according to the order of Melchisedeck bread and wine to the likeness of the body and blood of Christ. To the same purpose is that saying in the Homilies of whoever is the Author of that opus imperfectum upon S. Mat. Si igitur haec vasa c. If therefore these vessels being sanctified it be so dangerous to transfer them to private uses in which the body of Christ is not but the mystery of his body is contained how much more concerning the vessels of our bodies c. Now against these testimonies they make an out-cry that they are not S. Chrysostoms works and for this last the book is corrupted and they think in this place by some one of Berengarius's scholars for they cannot tell Fain they would believe it but this kind of talk is a resolution not to yield but to proceed against all evidence for that this place is not corrupted but was originally the sence of the Author of the Homilies is highly credible by the faith of all the old MS. and there is in the publick Library of Oxford an excellent MS. very ancient that makes faith in this particular but that some one of their scholars might have left these words out of some of their copies were no great wonder though I do not find they did but that they foisted in a marginal note affirming that these words are not in all old copies an affirmation very confident but as the case stands to very little purpose But upon this account nothing can be proved from sayings of Fathers For either they are not their own works but made by another or 2. They are capable of another sence or 3. The places are corrupted by Hereticks or 4. It is not in some old copies which pretences I am content to let alone if they upon this account will but transact the question wholly by Scripture and common sence 5. It matters not at all what he is so he was not esteemed an Heretick and that he was not it is certain since by themselves these books are put among the works of S. Chrysostom and themselves can quote them when they seem to do them service All that I infer from hence is this that whensoever these books were writ some man esteemed a good Catholick was not of the Roman perswasion in the matter of the Sacrament therefore their opinion is not Catholick But that S. Chrysostom may not be drawn from his right of giving testimony and interpretation of his words in other places in his 23 Homily upon the first of the Corinthians which are undoubtedly his own he saith As thou eatest the body of the Lord so they viz. the faithful in the old Testament did eat Manna as thou drinkest blood so they the water of the rock For though the things which are made be sensible yet they are given spiritually not according to the consequence of nature but according to the grace of a gift and with the body they also nourish the soul leading unto faith 28. The next I produce for evidence in this case is S. Austin concerning whom it is so evident that he was a Protestant in this Article that truly it is a strange boldness to deny it and upon equal terms no mans mind in the world can be known for if all that he says in this question shall be reconcilable to Transubstantiation I know no reason but it may be possible but a witty man may pretend when I am dead that in this discourse I have pleaded for the doctrine of the Roman Church I will set his words down nakedly without any Gloss upon them and let them do by themselves as much as they can Si enim Sacramenta quandam similitudinem c. For if the Sacraments had not a certain similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments they were no Sacraments at all But from this similitude for the most part they receive the things themselves As therefore according to a certain manner the Sacrament of the body of Christ is the body of Christ the Sacrament of the blood of
found out a remedy for those of old so he will also for the poor misled people of Ireland and will take away the evil minds or the opportunities of the Adversaries hindring the people from Instruction and make way that the Truths we have here taught may approach to their ears and sink into their hearts and make them wise unto Salvation Amen A DISSUASIVE FROM POPERY To the People of IRELAND PART I. The INTRODVCTION THE Questions of difference between Our Churches and the Church of Rome have been so often disputed and the evidences on both sides so often produc'd that to those who are strangers to the present constitution of affairs it may seem very unnecessary to say them over again and yet it will seem almost impossible to produce any new matter or if we could it will not be probable that what can be newly alledged can prevail more than all that which already hath been so often urged in these Questions But we are not deterr'd from doing our duty by any such considerations as knowing that the same Medicaments are with success applied to a returning or an abiding Ulcer and the Preachers of God's Word must for ever be ready to put the People in mind of such things which they already have heard and by the same Scriptures and the same Reasons endeavour to destroy their sin or prevent their danger and by the same word of God to exstirpate those errors which have had opportunity in the time of our late disorders to spring up and grow stronger not when the Keepers of the field slept but when they were wounded and their hands cut off and their mouths stopp'd lest they should continue or proceed to do the work of God thoroughly A little warm Sun and some indulgent showers of a softer Rain have made many weeds of erroneous Doctrine to take root greatly and to spread themselves widely and the Bigots of the Roman Church by their late importune boldness and indiscreet forwardness in making Proselytes have but too manifestly declar'd to all the World that if they were rerum potiti Masters of our affairs they would suffer nothing to grow but their own Colocynths and Gourds And although the Natural remedy for this were to take away that impunity upon the account of which alone they do encrease yet because we shall never be Authors of such Counsels but confidently rely upon God the Holy Scriptures right Reason and the most venerable and prime Antiquity which are the proper defensatives of truth for its support and maintenance yet we must not conceal from the People committed to our charges the great evils to which they are tempted by the Roman Emissaries that while the King and the Parliament take care to secure all the publick interests by instruments of their own we also may by the word of our proper Ministery endeavour to stop the progression of such errors which we know to be destructive of Christian Religion and consequently dangerous to the interest of Souls In this procedure although we shall say some things which have not been alwayes plac'd before their eyes and others we shall represent with a fittingness to their present necessities and all with Charity too and zeal for their souls yet if we were to say nothing but what hath been often said already we are still doing the work of God and repeating his voice and by the same remedies curing the same diseases and we only wait for the blessing of God prospering that importunity which is our duty according to the advice of Solomon In the Morning sow thy seed and in the Evening withhold not thy hand for thou knowest not whether shall prosper either this or that or whether they both shall be alike good CHAP. I. The Doctrine of the Roman Church in the Controverted Articles is neither Catholick Apostolick nor Primitive SECT I. IT was the challenge of Saint Augustine to the Donatists who as the Church of Rome does at this day inclos'd the Catholick Church within their own circuits Ye say that Christ is Heir of no Lands but where Donatus is Co-heir Read this to us out of the Law and the Prophets out of the Psalms out of the Gospel it self or out of the Letters of the Apostles Read it thence and we believe it Plainly directing us to the Fountains of our Faith the Old and New Testament the words of Christ and the words of the Apostles For nothing else can be the Foundation of our Faith whatsoever came in after these foris est it belongs not unto Christ To these we also add not as Authors or Finishers but as Helpers of our Faith and Heirs of the Doctrine Apostolical the Sentiments and Catholick Doctrine of the Church of God in the Ages next after the Apostles Not that we think them or our selves bound to every private Opinion even of a Primitive Bishop and Martyr but that we all acknowledge that the whole Church of God kept the Faith entire and transmitted faithfully to the after-Ages the whole faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the form of doctrine and sound words which was at first delivered to the Saints and was defective in nothing that belong'd unto salvation and we believe that those Ages sent millions of Saints to the bosome of Christ and seal'd the true Faith with their lives and with their deaths and by both gave testimony unto Jesus and had from him the Testimony of his Spirit And this method of procedure we now chuse not only because to them that know well how to use it to the Sober and Moderate the Peaceable and the Wise it is the best the most certain visible and tangible most humble and satisfactory but also because the Church of Rome does with greatest noises pretend her Conformity to Antiquity Indeed the present Roman Doctrines which are in difference were invisible and unheard-of in the first and best Antiquity and with how ill success their Quotations are out of the Fathers of the first three Ages every inquiring Man may easily discern But the noises therefore which they make are from the Writings of the succeeding Ages where secular interest did more prevail and the Writings of the Fathers were vast and voluminous full of controversie and ambiguous sences fitted to their own times and questions full of proper Opinions and such variety of sayings that both sides eternally and inconfutably shall bring sayings for themselves respectively Now although things being thus it will be impossible for them to conclude from the sayings of a number of Fathers that their Doctrine which they would prove thence was the Catholick Doctrine of the Church because any number that is less than all does not prove a Catholick consent yet the clear sayings of one or two of these Fathers truly alledged by us to the contrary will certainly prove that what many of them suppose it do affirm and which but two or three as good Catholicks as the other do deny was not then
esteem our selves oblig'd to warn the People of their danger and to depart from it and call upon them to stand upon the wayes and ask after the old paths and walk in them lest they partake of that curse which is threatned by God to them who remove the ancient Land-marks which our Fathers in Christ have set for us Now that the Church of Rome cannot pretend that all which she imposes is Primitive and Apostolick appears in this That in the Church of Rome there is pretence made to a power not only of declaring new Articles of faith but of making new Symbols or Creeds and imposing them as of necessity to Salvation Which thing is evident in the Bull of Pope Leo the tenth against Martyn Luther in which amongst other things he is condemn'd for saying It is certain that it is not in the power of the Church or Pope to constitute Articles of Faith We need not add that this power is attributed to the Bishops of Rome by Turrecremata Augustinus Triumphus de Ancona Petrus de Ancorano and the Famous Abbot of Panormo that the Pope cannot only make new Creeds but new Articles of Faith that he can make that of necessity to be believ'd which before never was necessary that he is the measure and rule and the very notice of all credibilities That the Canon Law is the Divine Law and whatever Law the Pope promulges God whose Vicar he is is understood to be the Promulger That the souls of Men are in the hands of the Pope and that in his arbitration Religion doth consist which are the very words of Hostiensis and Ferdinandus ab Inciso who were Casuists and Doctors of Law of great authority amongst them and renown The thing it self is not of dubioâ—â— disputation amongst them but actually practis'd in the greatest Instances as is to be seen in the Bull of Pius the fourth at the end of the Council of Trent by which all Ecclesiasticks are not only bound to swear to all the Articles of the Council of Trent for the present and for the future but they are put into a new Symbol or Creed and they are corroborated by the same decretory clauses that are us'd in the Creed of Athanasius That this is the true Catholick Faith and that without this no Man can be saved Now since it cannot be imagined that this power to which they pretend should never have been reduc'd to act and that it is not credible they should publish so invidious and ill-sounding Doctrine to no purpose and to serve no end it may without further evidence be believed by all discerning persons that they have need of this Doctrine or it would not have been taught and that consequently without more ado it may be concluded that some of their Articles are parts of this new faith and that they can therefore in no sence be Apostolical unless their being Roman makes them so To this may be added another consideration not much less material that besides what Eckius told the Elector of Bavaria that the Doctrines of Luther might be overthrown by the Fathers though not by Scripture they have also many gripes of Conscience concerning the Fathers themselves that they are not right on their side and of this they have given but too much demonstration by their Expurgatory indices The Serpent by being so curious a defender of his head shews where his danger is and by what he can most readily be destroyed But besides their innumerable corruptings of the Fathers Writings their thrusting in that which was spurious and like Pharaoh killing the legitimate Sons of Israel though in this they have done very much of their work and made the Testimonies of the Fathers to be a record infinitely worse than of themselves uncorrupted they would have been of which divers Learned Persons have made publick complaint and demonstration they have at last fallen to a new trade which hath caus'd more disreputation to them than they have gain'd advantage and they have virtually confess'd that in many things the Fathers are against them For first the King of Spain gave a Commission to the Inquisitors to purge all Catholick Authors but with this clause Iique ipsi privatim nullisque consciis apud se indicem expurgatorium habebunt quem eundum neque aliis communicabunt neque ejus exemplum ulli dabunt that they should keep the expurgatory Index privately neither imparting that Index nor giving a copy of it to any But it happened by the Divine Providence so ordering it that about thirteen years after a copy of it was gotten and published by Johannes Pappus and Franciscus Junius and since it came abroad against their wills they find it necessary now to own it and they have printed it themselves Now by these expurgatory Tables what they have done is known to all Learned Men. In Saint Chrysostom's Works printed at Basil these words The Church is not built upon the Man but upon the Faith are commanded to be blotted out and these There is no merit but what is given us by Christ and yet these words are in his Sermon upon Pentecost and the former words are in his first Homily upon that of Saint John Ye are my friends c. The like they have done to him in many other places and to Saint Ambrose and to Saint Austin and to them all insomuch that Ludovicus Saurius the Corrector of the Press at Lyons shewed and complain'd of it to Junius that he was forc'd to cancellate or blot out many sayings of Saint Ambrose in that Edition of his Works which was printed at Lyons 1559. So that what they say on occasion of Bertram's Book In the old Catholick Writers we suffer very many errors and extenuate and excuse them and finding out some Commentary we feign some convenient sence when they are oppos'd in disputations they do indeed practise but esteem it not sufficient for the words which make against them they wholly leave out of their Editions Nay they correct the very Tables or Indices made by the Printers or Correctors insomuch that out of one of Froben's Indices they have commanded these words to be blotted The use of Images forbidden The Eucharist no Sacrifice but the memory of a Sacrifice Works although they do not justifie yet are necessary to Salvation Marriage is granted to all that will nor contain Venial sins damn The dead Saints after this life cannot help us nay out of the Index of Saint Austin's Works by Claudius Chevallonius at Paris 1531. there is a very strange deleatur Dele Solus Deus adorandus that God alone is to be worshipped is commanded to be blotted out as being a dangerous Doctrine These Instances may serve instead of multitudes which might be brought of their corrupting the Witnesses and razing the Records of Antiquity that the errors and Novelties of the Church of Rome might not be so easily reprov'd Now if
and Martyrs Confessors Bishops and Anachorets that prosecuting the Lord Jesus Christ with a singular honour we separate these from the rank of other men and give due worship to his Divine Majesty while we account that he is not to be made equal to mortal men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although they had a thousand times more righteousness than they have Now first here is mention made of all in their Prayers and Oblations and yet no mention made that the Church prayes for one sort and only gives thanks for the other as these Gentlemen the Objectors falsely pretend But here is a double separation made of the Righteous departed one is from the worser sort of sinners the other from the most righteous Saviour True it is they believ'd they had more need to pray for some than for others but if they did not pray for all when they made mention of all how did they honour Christ by separating their condition from his Is it not lawful to give thanks for the life and death for the resurrection holiness and glorification of Christ And if the Church only gave thanks for the departed Saints and did not pray for mercy for them too how are not the Saints in this made equal to Christ So that I think the testimony of Epiphanius is clear and pertinent To which greater light is given by the words of Saint Austin Who is he for whom no man prayes but only he who interceeds for all men viz. our Blessed Lord. And there is more light yet by the example of Saint Austin who though he did most certainly believe his Mother to be a Saint and the Church of Rome believes so too yet he prayed for pardon for her Now by this it was that Epiphanius separated Christ from the Saints departed for he could not mean any thing else and because he was then writing against Aerius who did not deny it to be lawful to give God thanks for the Saints departed but affirm'd it to be needless to pray for them viz. he must mean this of the Churches praying for all her dead or else he had said nothing against his Adversary or for his own cause Saint Cyril though he be confidently denied to have said what he did say yet is confessed to have said these words Then we pray for the deceased Fathers and Bishops and finally for all who among us have departed this life Believing it to be a very great help of the souls for which is offered the obsecration of the holy and dreadful Sacrifice If Saint Cyril means what his words signifie then the Church did pray for departed Saints for they prayed for all the departed Fathers and Bishops it is hard if amongst them there were no Saints but suppose that yet if there were any Saints at all that died out of the Militant Church yet the case is the same for they prayed for all the departed And 2. They offered the dreadful Sacrifice for them all 3. They offered it for all in the way of prayer 4. And they believed this to be a great help to souls Now unless the souls of all Saints that died then went to Purgatory which I am sure the Roman Doctors dare not own the case is plain that prayer and not thanksgivings only were offered by the Ancient Church for souls who by the Confession of all sides never went to Purgatory and therefore praying for the dead is but a weak Argument to prove Purgatory Nicolaus Cabasilas hath an evasion from all this as he supposes for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the word us'd in the Memorials of Saints does not alwayes signifie praying for one but it may signifie giving of thanks This is true but it is to no purpose for when ever it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we pray for such a one that must signifie to pray for and not to give thanks and that 's our present case and therefore no escape here can be made the words of Saint Cyril are very plain The third Allegation is of the Canon of the Greeks which is so plain evident and notorious and so confessâ—d even by these Gentlemen the Objectors that I will be tried by the words which the Author of the Letter acknowledges So it is in the Liturgy of Saint James Remember all Orthodox from Abel the just unto this day make them to rest in the land of the living in thy Kingdom and the delights of Paradise Thus far this Gentleman quoted Saint James and I wonder that he should urge a conclusion manifestly contrary to his own Allegation Did all the Orthodox from Abel to that day go to Purgatory Certainly Abraham and Moses and Elias and the Blessed Virgin did not and Saint Stephen did not and the Apostles that died before this Liturgy was made did not and yet the Church prayed for all Orthodox prayed that they might rest in the Land of the living c. and therefore they prayed for such which by the confession of all sides never went to Purgatory In the other Liturgies also the Gentleman sets down words enough to confute himself as the Reader may see in the Letter if it be worth the reading But because he sets down what he list and makes breaches and Rabbet holes to pop in as he please I shall for the satisfaction of the Reader set down the full sence and practice of the Greek Canon in this Question And first for Saint James his Liturgy which being merrily disposed and dreaming of advantage by it he is pleased to call the Mass of Saint James Sixtus Senensis gives this account of it James the Apostle in the Liturgy of the Divine Sacrifice prays for the souls of Saints resting in Christ so that he shews they are not yet arriv'd at the place of expected blessedness But the form of the prayer is after this manner Domine Deus noster c. O Lord our God remember all the Orthodox and them that believe rightly in the faith from Abel the just unto this day Make them to rest in the Region of the living in thy Kingdom in the delights of Paradise in the bosom of Abraham Isaac and Jacob our Holy Fathers from whence are banished grief sorrow and sighing where the light of thy countenance is president and perpetually shines In the Liturgy of Saint Basil which he is said to have made for the Churches of Syria is this Prayer Be mindful O Lord of them which are dead and departed out of this life and of the Orthodox Bishops which from Peter and James the Apostles unto this day have clearly professed the right word of Faith and namely of Ignatius Dionysius Julius and the rest of the Saints of worthy memory Nay not only for these but they pray for the very Martyrs O Lord remember them who have resisted or stood unto blood for Religion and have fed thy holy Flock with righteousness and holiness Certainly this is not giving of
but therefore this is bread still here the Consequence is good and is so still when the subject of the proposition is something real and not in appearance only Because whatsoever is but in appearance and pretence is a Non-Ens in respect of that real thing which it counterfeits And therefore it follows not This is not a common dove therefore it is a Dove because if this be model'd into a right proposition nihil supponit there is no subject in it for it cannot in this case be said This Dove is no common Dove but this which is like a Dove is not a common Dove and these persons which look like men are not common men And the rule for this and the reason too is Non entis nulla sunt praedicata To which also this may be added that in the proposition as C. Perron expresses it the negation is not the Adjective but the substantive part of the predicate It is no common Dove where the negative term relates to the Dove not to common It is no Dove and the words not common are also equivocal and as it can signifie extraordinary so it can signifie Natural But if the subject of the proposition be something real then the consequent is good as if you bring a Pigeon from Japan all red you may say This is no common Pigeon and your argument is still good therefore it is a Pigeon So if you take sugred bread or bread made of Indian wheat you saying this is no common bread do mean it is extraordinary or unusual but it is bread still and so if it be said this bread is Eucharistical it will follow rightly therefore this is bread For in this case the predicate is only an infinite or Negative term but the subject is suppos'd and affirm'd And this is also more apparent if the proposition be affirmative and the terms be not infinite as it is in the present case This bread is Eucharistical I have now I suppose clear'd the words of Justin M. and expounded them to his own sence and the truth but his sence will further appear in other words which I principally rely upon in this quotation For speaking that of the Prophet Isai. Panis dabitur ei aqua ejus fidelis he hath these words It appears sufficiently That in this prophecie he speaks of bread which our Lord Christ hath deliver'd to us to do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a memorial that he is made a body for them that believe in him for whose sake he was made passible and of the Cup which for the recordation of his blood he delivered to them to do that is give thanks or celebrate the Eucharist These are the words of Justin Where 1. According to the first simplicity of the primitive Church he treats of this mystery according to the style of the evangelists and S. Paul and indeed of our Blessed Lord himself commanding all this whole mystery to be done in memory of him 2. If S. Justin had meant any thing of the new fabrick of this mystery he must have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the bread made his body though this also would not have done their work for them but when he says he gave the bread only for the remembrance of his being made a body the bread must needs be the sign figure and representation of that body 3. Still he calls it bread even then when Christ gave it still it is wine when the Eucharist is made when the faithful have given thanks and if it be bread still we also grant it to be Christs body and then there is a figure and the things figured the one visible and the other invisible and this is it which I affirmed to be the sence of Justin Martyr And it is more perfectly explicated by Saint Greg. Naz. calling the Pascal Lamb a figure of a figure of which I shall yet give an account in this Section But to make this yet more clear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. We do not receive these as common bread or common drink but as by the word of God Jesus Christ our Lord was made flesh and for our salvation had flesh and blood so are we taught that that very nourishment on which by the prayers of his word thanks are given by which our flesh and blood are nourished by change is the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus Here S. Justin compares the consecration of the Eucharist by prayer to the incarnation of Christ the thing with the thing to shew it is not common bread but bread made Christs body he compares not the manner of one with the manner of the other as Cardinal Perron would fain have it believed for if it were so it would not only destroy an Article of Christian faith but even of the Roman too for if the changes were in the same manner then either the man is Transubstantiated into God or else the bread is not Transubstantiated into Christs body but the first cannot be because it would destroy the hypostatical Union and make Christ to be one nature as well as one person but for the latter part of the Dilemma viz. that the bread is not Transubstantiated whether it be true or false it cannot be affirmed from hence and therefore the Cardinal labours to no purpose and without consideration of what may follow But now these words make very much against the Roman hypothesis and directly prove the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the consecrated bread that is after it is consecrated to be natural nourishment of the body and therefore to be Christs body only spiritually and Sacramentally unless it can be two substances at the same time Christs body and bread in the Natural sence which the Church of Rome at this day will not allow and if it were allowed it would follow that Christ body should be Transubstantiated into our body and suffer the very worst changes which in our eating and digestion and separation happen to common bread This argument relies upon the concurrent Testimony of many of the ancient Fathers besides Justin Martyr especially S. Irenaeus and certainly destroys the whole Roman Article of Transubstantiation for if the Eucharistical bread nourishes the body then it is still the substance of bread for accidents do not nourish and quantity or quality is not the subject or term of Nutrition but reparation of substance by a substantial change of one into another But of this enough Eusebius is next alledged in the Dissuasive but his words though pregnant and full of proof against the Roman hypothesis are by all the Contra-scribers let alone only one of them says that the place of the quotation is not rightly mark'd for the first three chapters are not extant well but the words are and the last chapter is which is there quoted and to the 10. chapter the Printer should have more carefully attended and not omit the Cypher which I suppose he would
God or if I do I shall soon find a pardon For I consider that the Commandments are impossible and what is not possible to be done we are not to take care of and he that fails in one instance cannot be sav'd without a pardon not by his obedience and he that fails in all may be sav'd by pardon and grace For the case is so that we are sinners naturally made so before we were born and nature can never be changed until she be destroyed and since all our irregularities spring from that root it is certain they ought not to be imputed to us and a man can no more fear Gods anger for being inclined to all sin than for being hungry or miserable and therefore I expect from the wisdom and goodness of God some provisions which will so extinguish this solemn and artificial guilt that it shall be as if it were not But in the mean time the certainty of sinning will proceed For besides that I am told that a man hath no liberty but a liberty to sin and this definite liberty is in plain English a very necessity we see it by a daily experience that those who call themselves good men are such who do what they would not and cannot do what they would and if it be so it is better to do what I have a mind to quietly than to vex my self and yet do it nevertheless and that it is so I am taught in almost all the discourses I have read or heard upon the seventh Chapter to the Romans and therefore if I may have leave to do consonantly to what I am taught to believe I must confess my self to be under the dominion of sin and therefore must obey and that I am bidden to obey unwillingly and am told that the striving against sin is indeed ordinarily ineffective and yet is a sign of regeneration I can soon do that I can strive against it and pray against it but I cannot hope to prevail in either because I am told before-hand that even the regenerate are under the power of sin they will and do not they do and will not and so it is with me I would fain be perfect if I could but I must not hope it and therefore I would only doe my actions so reasonably that I would not be tied to vex my self for what I cannot help or to lose the pleasure of my sin by fretting at it when it is certain it will be done and yet I shall remain in the state of regeneration And who can help all this but God whose mercy is indeed infinite and although in the secret dispensation of affairs he hath concluded all under sin yet he had no purpose we should therefore perish but it was done that he might have mercy upon all that is that we may glorifie him for supplying our needs pardoning our sins relieving our infirmities And therefore when I consider that Gods mercy hath no limit in it self and is made definite only by the capacity of the object it is not to be doubted but he loves his creatures so well that we shall all rejoyce in our being freed from eternal fears For to justifie my hopes why may not I be confident of Heaven for all my sins since the imputation of Christs righteousness is that by which I shall be justified my own is but like a menstruous rag and the just falls seven times a-day but Christs Cross pays for all And therefore I am confident I shall do well For I am one of those for whom Christ died and I believe this this faith is not to be reprov'd for this is that which justifies who shall condemn me It is not a good life that justifies a man before God but it is faith in the special promises for indeed it being impossible to live innocently it is necessary that away of Gods own finding out should be relied upon Only this indeed I do I do avoid the capital sins blasphemies and horrid murders I am 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I sin like a Gentleman not like a Thief I suffer infirmities but do not do like a Devil and though I sin yet I repent speedily and when I sin again I repent again and my spiritual state is like my natural day and night succeed each other by a never failing revolution I sin indeed in some instances but I do my duty in many and every man hath his infirmities no man can say My soul is pure from sin but I hope that because I repent still as I sin my sins are but as single actions and since I resist them what I can I hope they will be reckoned to me but as sins of infirmity without which no man is or can be in this state of imperfection For if I pray against a sin and my spirit does resist it though the flesh prevails yet I am in the state of grace For that I may own publickly what I am publickly taught a man cannot be soon out of the state of grace but he may be soon in Gods love is lasting and perpetual when it hath once begun and when the curtain is drawn over the state of grace by the intervening of a sin yet as soon as ever we begin to cry for pardon nay when we do but say we will confess our sins nay when we do but resolve we will God meets us with his pardon and prevents us with some portions of it And let things be at the worst they can yet he that confesseth his sins to God shall find mercy at the hands of God and he hath established a holy Ministery in his Church to absolve all penitents and if I go to one of them and tell the sad story of my infirmity the good man will presently warrant my pardon and absolve me But then I remember this also that as my infirmity that is unavoidable shall not prejudice me so neither shall any time prejudice my repentance For if on my death-bed I cry unto God for pardon and turn heartily unto God in the very instant of my dissolution I am safe because when-ever a man converts to God in the same instant God turns to him or else it were possible for God to hate him that loves God and our repentance should in some periods be rejected expresly against all the promises For it is an act of contrition an act of the love of God that reconciles us and I shall be very unfortunate if in the midst of all my pains when my needs increase and my fears are pregnant and my self am ready to accept pardon upon any terms I shall not then do so much as one act of a hearty sorrow and contrition But however I have the consent of almost all men and all the Schools of learning in the world that after a wicked life my repentance at last shall be accepted Saint Ambrose who was a good probable Doctor and one as fit to be relied on as any man else in his Funeral Oration
profited or obliged by our services no moments do thence accrew to his felicities and to challenge a reward of God or to think our best services can merit heaven is as if Galileo when he had found out a Star which he had never observed before and pleased himself in his own fancy should demand of the Grand Signior to make him king of Tunis for what is he the better that the studious man hath pleased himself in his own Art and the Turkish Empire gets no advantages by his new Argument * And this is so much the more material if we consider that the littleness of our services if other things were away could not countervail the least moment of Eternity and the poor Countrey man might as well have demanded of Cyrus to give him a Province for his handful of river water as we can expect of God to give us Heaven as a reward of our good works 22. XVI But although this rule relying upon such great and convincing grounds can abolish all proud expectations of reward from God as a debtor for our good works yet they ought not to destroy our modest confidence and our rejoycings in God who by his gracious promises hath not only obliged himself to help us if we pray to him but to reward us if we work For our God is merciful he rewardeth every man according to his work so said David according to the nature and graciousness of the work not according to their value and proper worthiness not that they deserve it but because God for the communication of his goodness was pleased to promise it Promissum quidem ex misericordiâ sed ex justitiâ persolvendum said S. Bernard Mercy first made the promise but justice pays the debt Which words were true if we did exactly do all that duty to which the reward was so graciously promised but where much is to be abated even of that little which was bound upon us by so glorious promises of reward there we can in no sence challenge Gods justice but so as it signifies equity and is mingled with the mercies of the chancery Gratis promisit gratis reddit So Ferus God promised freely and pays freely If therefore thou wilt obtain grace and favour make no mention of thy deservings And yet let not this slacken thy work but reinforce it and enlarge thy industry since thou hast so gracious a Lord who of his own meer goodness will so plentifully reward it 23. XVII If we fail in the outward work let it be so ordered that it be as little imputable to us as we can that is let our default not be at all voluntary but wholly upon the accounts of a pityable infirmity For the Law was a Covenant of Works such as they were but the mind could not make amends within for the defect without But in the Gospel it is otherwise for here the will is accepted for the fact in all things where the fact is not in our power But where it is there to pretend a will is hypocrisie Nequam illud verbum est benè vult nisi qui benè facit said the Comedian This rule is our measure in the great lines of duty in all negative Precepts and in the periods of the law of Christ which cannot pass by us without being observed But in the material and external instances of duty we may without our fault be disabled and therefore can only be supplied with our endeavours and desires But that is our advantage we thus can perform all Gods will acceptably For if we endeavour all that we can and desire more and pursue more it is accepted as if we had done all for we are accepted according to what a man hath and not according to what he hath not Unless we can neither endeavour nor desire we ought not to complain of the burthen of the Divine Commandments For to endeavour truly and passionately to desire and contend for more is obedience and charity and that is the fulfilling of the Commandments Matter for Meditation out of Scripture according to the former Doctrine The Old Covenant or the Covenant of Works IN that day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die Cursed in every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the law to do them And thou shalt write upon stones all the words of this law very plainly Thou shalt not go aside from any of the words which I command thee this day to the right hand or to the left But it shall come to pass if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes then shall all these curses come upon thee and overtake thee And if you will not be reformed by these things but will walk contrary unto me then will I also walk contrary unto you and will punish you yet seven times for your sins He that despised Moses law died without mercy under two or three witnesses The New Covenant or the Covenant of Grace WE are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past through the forbearance of God * To declare I say at this time his righteousness that he might be just and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus * Where is boasting then it is excluded by what law of works Nay but by the law of faith * Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit For as many as are led by the Spirit they are the sons of God * Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities because he maketh intercession for the Saints according to the will of God * And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God He that spared not his own Son but delivered him up for us all how shall not he with him also freely give us all things Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect It is God that justifieth This is the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days saith the Lord I will put my laws in their mind and write them in their hearts and I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a people all shall know me from the least to the greatest * For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more If any man be in Christ he is a new creature old things are past away all things are become new And all things are of God who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus
in the remaining portion of our days actions meet for repentance so the Baptist called them This is in Scripture by way of propriety called Repentance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so the Baptist used it distinguishing Repentance from its fruits that is from such significations exercises and prosecutions of this change as are apt to represent and to effect it more and more such as are confession weeping self-afflictions alms and the like So S. Paul using the same words before King Agrippa But by way of Synecdoche not only the fruits and consequent expressions but the beginning sorrow also is signified by the same word and all are under the same Commandment though with different degrees of necessity and expression of which I shall afterwards give account Here I only account concerning the essential and constituent parts and definition of Repentance 10. All the whole duty of Repentance and every of its parts is sometimes called Conversion Thus godly sorrow is a conversion or change and upon that account S. James calls upon sinners Be afflicted and mourn and weep let your laughter be turned into mourning and your joy into weeping This is the first change of our affections which is attended with a change of our judgment when we do no longer admire the false beauties of sin but judge righteously concerning it And of this the Prophet Jeremy gives testimony Surely after that I was turned I repented And by this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Hebrews express the duty which the LXX indifferently render by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is best rendred Conversion And then follows the conversion of the whole man body and soul mind and spirit all are set in opposition against sin and apply themselves to the service of God and conformity to Jesus SECT II. Of Repentance in general or Conversion 1. REpentance and Faith in Scriptures signifie sometimes more generally and in the federal sence are used for all that state of grace and favour which the holy Jesus revealed and brought into the world They both signifie the Gospel For the whole Gospel is nothing else but that glad tidings which Christ brought to all mankind that the Covenant of Works or exact measures should not now be exacted but men should be saved by second thoughts that is by Repentance and amendment of life through faith in the Lord Jesus That is if we become his Disciples for that is the condition of the Covenant we shall find mercy our sins shall be blotted out and we shall be saved if we obey heartily and diligently though not exactly This becoming his Disciples is called Faith that is coming to him believing him hoping in him obeying him and consequent to this is that we are admitted to Repentance that is to the pardon of our sins For him hath God exalted on his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give repentance and remission of sins This is the summ Total of the Gospel That we have leave to repent supposes that God will pardon what is past But then that we have leave to repent supposes us also highly bound to it It is in meer pity to our imfirmities our needs and our miseries that we have leave to do it and this is given to mankind by faith in Jesus Christ that is by becoming his Disciples for he hath power to pardon sins and to take them away and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness viz. which we have committed This is that which all the world did need and long'd for it was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hidden mystery from all ages but revealed in Christ whose blood as S. Clement expresses it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 brought to all the world the grace of Repentance 2. This is the Gospel For the Gospel is nothing else but Faith and Repentance The Gospel is called Faith by S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before that faith came we were under the law shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed that is to the Gospel or the glad tidings of Repentance which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hearing of faith For Faith being here opposed to the Law that is the Covenant of Mercy to the Covenant of Works must mean the Covenant of Repentance And therefore although if we consider them as proper and particular graces and habits they have differing natures and definitions yet in the general and federal sence of which I now speak Faith and Repentance are only distinguished by relations and respects not by substance and reality Repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ that is Repentance for having sinned against God a Repentance I say through faith in Jesus Christ that is a Repentance procured and preach'd and enjoyn'd by Christ being the summ of his Discipline And that it may appear Faith and Repentance to be the same thing and differing only in name and manner of expression S. Paul confounds the distinction which he formerly made and that which he called Repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus in his Sermons in Asia in his Epistle to the Hebrews he calls Repentance from dead works and faith in God And the words are used for each other promiscuously in S. Luke for that which the rich man in Hell called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abraham called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If one comes from the dead they will repent No said Abraham If they will not hear Moses and the Prophets then if one come from the dead they will not believe or be perswaded And S. Peter giving an account of the delaying of the coming of the Lord for the punishment of the obdurate Jews and enemies of Christ says it is because God of his infinite goodness expects even them also to be converted to the faith or becoming Christians as the whole design of the place infers and this he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a coming to Repentance that is to the faith of Christ. And therefore the Gospel is nothing else but an universal publication of Repentance and pardon of sins in the Name of Christ that is procured for all them who are his Disciples and to this we are baptized that is adopted into the Religion into that Discipleship under which God requires holiness but not perfect measures sincerity without hypocrisie but not impeccability or perfect innocence 3. And as the Gospel is called Faith and Faith is Repentance that is it is the same Covenant of Grace and Mercy with this only difference that it is called Faith as it relates to Christ who procured this mercy for us Repentance as it signifies the mercy it self so procured So Baptism by the same analogy is called the Baptism unto Repentance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Baptism of Repentance so it is called in the Jerusalem Creed that is the admission to the grace of the Gospel which the Fathers of C.P.
in their appendage to the Nicene Creed thus express I believe one Baptism for the remission of sins that is to remission of sins we are admitted by Baptism alone no other way shall we have this grace this title but by being once initiated into the Gospel to be Disciples of Jesus Not that it is to be supposed that our sins are only pardon'd when we are baptized but that by Baptism we are admitted to the state and grace of Repentance and pardon of sins And this is demonstratively certain not only upon those many instances of baptized penitents admitted to pardon and baptized Criminals called upon in Scripture to repent but upon the very nature of the Evangelical Covenant and the whole design of Christs coming For if we were not admitted to Repentance after Baptism then we were still to be judged by the Covenant of Works not by the Covenant of Faith and we should inherit by the Law or not at all and not be heirs according to promise and then Christ were dead in vain we are yet in our sins and all the world must perish because all men have sinned and so none should go to Heaven but newly baptized Infants or newly baptized Catechumens and how then could the Gospel be a New Covenant it being exactly the same with the Law for so it must be if it promise no mercy or Repentance to them that sin after our admittance to it * But Baptism is a new birth and by it we are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 renewed unto Repentance unto that state of life which supposes holiness and imperfection and consequently needs mercy all the way according to that saying Justus ex fide vivet The just shall live by faith that is all our righteousness all our hopes all our spiritual life is conserved by and is relying upon this Covenant of Mercy the Covenant of Faith or Repentance all his life time the just shall still need pardon and find it if he perseveres in it that is endeavours to obey according to the righteousness of Faith that is sincerely diligently and by the measures of a man Of this we shall in the sequel make use 4. For the present I consider that Repentance or Conversion admits of degrees according to the necessities of men For that Repentance which Christ and his Apostles preach'd at the opening of the Kingdom was an universal change of life which men did lead in the darkness of Heathen ignorance and idolatrous impieties among the Gentiles and the more than Heathen crimes among the Jews the whole Nation being generally false superstitious bloody persecutors proud rebellious and at last rejecters and crucifiers of their Messias whom they had long'd for ever since they were a people But in the perswasion and effecting of this Repentance there was some difference of Dispensation and Ministery 5. John the Baptist began and he preach'd Repentance to the Jews that they might believe in the Messias and so flee from the wrath to come that is from the destruction of their Nation which he prophetically foretold should come to pass for their rejecting him whom the Baptist did fore-signifie Christ and his Apostles pursued the same Doctrine still thrusting forward the design that is preaching such a Repentance as was proportionable to his purpose that is obedience to the Gospel the admission of such doctrines which did destroy the gayeties and cursed usages of the world So that the Repentance which was first preached was in order to Faith that is the Baptist and Christ and Christs Apostles preaching Repentance did mean such a conversion or change as would take them off from those crimes which so prepossess'd their hearts that by them they were indispos'd to receive Christs person and doctrine both which were so contrary to their prejudices of Pride and Covetousness Malice and Ambition 6. And therefore among the Jews Repentance was to go before Faith for they were already sufficiently disposed to believe the Revelations of God they had been used to Prophets and expected the Messias and pray'd for his day and long'd passionately for it so that they were by nothing hindred in their faith but by their lusts and secular thoughts and the way to make them believe was to cure their pride How can ye believe who receive honour one of another Their hunting after praise among the people did indispose them to the believing and receiving Christs person and doctrine Therefore until they did repent of that they could not believe and accordingly our blessed Saviour complain'd that when they saw the light which shin'd in the Ministery of John the Baptist yet they would not repent that they might believe * But afterwards the Jews when they were invited to the Religion that is to believe in Jesus were first to be called to Repentance because they had crucified the Lord of life and if they should not repent for crucifying an innocent person they would be infinitely far from believing him to be the Lord of life and their long desired Messias 7. But the Repentance that was preached to the Gentiles though it had the same design as to the event of things yet it went in another method Their Religion taught them impiety lust and folly was plac'd upon their Altars and their gods bore in their hands smoking firebrands kindled with the coals of Sodom they had false confidences and evil examples and foolish principles they had evil laws and an abominable Priesthood and their Daemons whom they call'd Gods would be worshipped with lusts and cruelty with drunkenness and revellings so that their false belief and evil Religion betrayed them to evil lives therefore they were to be recovered by being taught a better belief and a more holy Religion therefore in these faith was to go before Repentance Poenitentiae stimulus ex fide acciderat as Tertullians expression is Faith was the motive of their Repentance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So S. Clemens Alexandrinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Repentance is the perfection and consummation of Faith For unless the sinner believes his action to be a sin and that evil is his portion if he sins and that he shall be happy if he live by the rule of the Commandments he can never be converted Therefore in the conversion of the Gentiles Faith was to be ordinarily the first 8. In proportion to these several methods the doctrine or state of Christianity was sometimes called Faith sometimes Repentance He that believed Jesus Christ would repent of his sins and he that did repent would believe But sometimes Infidelity stood at the gate and sometimes Malice and vile Affections That which stood next was first to be removed 9. Now the access of both these to Christ is in Scripture called Conversion or Repentance Where Faith only was wanting and the man was of Moses and a good man the becoming a Christian was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a perfection or consummation a progression rather than a returning
shall all likewise perish Neither does God exacting or describing Repentance in several lines use any respect of persons but with the same measures he will deal with all For when there is a difference in the Divine mercy it is in giving time and grace to repent not in sparing one and condemning another who die equally criminal and impenitent Those little lines of hopes are not upon either of these foundations For whatsoever is known or revealed is against these persons and does certainly condemn them Why then are they bidden to hope and repent I answer once for all It is upon something that we know not And if they be not sav'd we know not how they cannot expect to be saved by any thing that is revealed in their particular When S. Peter had declar'd to Simon Magus that he was in the gall of bitterness and yet made him pray if peradventure the thought of his heart might be forgiven him he did not by any thing that was reveal'd know that he should be pardoned but by something that he did not know there might be hope It is at no hand to be dissembled out of tenderness and pity to such persons but to be affirmed openly there is not revealed any thing to them that may bid them be in any degree confident But he that hath a deadly wound whom the Chirurgeons affirm to be hopeless yet is willing to receive Cordials and to be dress'd 2. If in the measures of life and death which are described in large characters there be any lines so indefinite and comprehensive that they who preach and declare the doctrines do not fully take in all that God intends upon the account of our weakness and ignorance there may be some little rushes and twiggs to support their sinking hopes For although the matters of duty and the conditions of life and death are so plain and legible that we can all understand our obligation yet things are seldome so described that we can give the final sentence concerning others There is a secret in these things which nothing shall open but the day of Judgment No man may judge his brother that is no man can or ought to say This man is damn'd and yet we know that he that dies an impenitent Traytor or Rebel or adulterer is damn'd But yet that Adulterous Natta or the Rebel Cinna or the Traytor sâ—â—ti line is actually damn'd that we know not The reason is because our duty is described for us to guide and walk our selves by not to judge and sentence others And even the judgment of the Church who hath authority to judge and sentence yet it is only for amendment it is universal it is declarative it is conditional not personal final decretory and eternal For otherwise does man judge otherwise does God II. There is some variety in the case and in the person and in the degrees of Repentance There is a period beyond which God will not admit a man to pardon but when it is we know not There is a minimum Religionis the least measure of Religion the lowest degree of acceptability but what it is we cannot tell There is also a proper measure for every one but no man can fathom it And the duties and parts of Repentance consist in the terms of a great distance and latitude and we cannot tell when a man first begins to be safe and when he is newly escaped from the regions of sin and when he begins his state of grace Now as God abates great measures of his wrath and forgives all that is past if we return betimes and live twenty years in piety and repentance so he does if the man do so nineteen years and eighteen and still shortning till you come to a year or any the least time that can do the work of Repentance and exterminate his vicious habit Now because Abraham begg'd for the pardon of Sodom if there should be found fifty righteous there and then abated five and then five more and then ten more till he came to ten alone and it is supposed that Abraham first gave out and that God would have pardon'd the City for one righteous mans sake if Abraham had still persevered to ask if any man will suppose that it may be done so in the abatements of time to be made to a returning sinner though I say it is a strange diminution to come from years to one day yet I will say nothing against it but that length or shortness of time makes nothing to the mercies of God but it makes very much to the duty of man because every action requires some time and every habit much more Now we have reason to say that the condition of a dying penitent after a whole wicked life is desperate because so far as we understand things habits are not to be extinguish'd and the contraries acquir'd but with long time and study But if there be any secret way by which the Spirit of God does work faster and produce undiscerned miracles we ought to adore that goodness by which it is so and they that can believe this may hope the other In the mean time neither the one nor the other is revealed and so it stands as it did in the whole Question IV. We find in the instance of Abrahams faith that against hope he believed in hope that is that he had great arguments on both sides and therefore that in defiance of one he would hope in the other because this could not fail him but the other could If it can be brought to pass that a dying man can hope after a wicked life it is a hope against hope and of this all that I can say is that it is no contradiction in the thing to affirm that a dying penitent who hath contracted vicious habits hath not time left him to perform that repentance which God requires of habitual sinners under the pains of eternal death and yet to bid such a person do what he can do and pray if peradventure God will be intreated Because that little hopes which he is bid to have are not warranted or relying upon pretence of any particular revelation contrary to the so many expressions of severe duty and stricter conditions but are plac'd upon the foundation of the Divine Power and such little proportions and similitudes of things and guesses and conjectures of kind persons as can only be sufficient to make the dying man try what can be done V. The first ages of the Church did exactly use this method of Doctrine and Discipline In some cases whereof I shall afterwards give account they refus'd to declare them pardon'd to minister Gods pardon to dying penitents but yet would not bid them despair but refer them to the Divine judgment which if it be reduc'd to the causes of things if we believe they proceeded reasonably must mean this that they knew of no revelation concerning the pardon of such persons but whether God would or no pardon
the gayeties of this sinful age For although Christs blood can expiate all sins and his Spirit can sanctifie all sinners and his Church can restore all that are capable yet if we consider that the particulars of every naughty mans case are infinitely uncertain that there are no minute-measures of repentance set down after Baptism that there are some states of sinners which God does reject that the arrival to this state is by parts and undetermin'd steps of progression that no man can tell when any sin begins to be unpardonable to such a person and that if we be careless of our selves and easie in our judgments and comply with the false measures of any age we may be in before we are aware and cannot come out so soon as we expect and lastly if we consider that the Primitive and Apostolical Churches who best knew how to estimate the mercies of the Gospel and the requisites of repentance and the malignity and dangers of sin did not promise pardon so easily so readily so quickly as we do we may think it fit to be more afraid and more contrite more watchful and more severe 31. I end this with the words of S. Hierome Cùm beatus Daniel praescius futurorum de sententiâ Dei dubitet rem temerariam faciunt qui audacter peccatoribus indulgentiam pollicentur Though Daniel could foretel future things yet he durst not pronounce concerning the King whether God would pardon him or no it is therefore a great rashness boldly to promise pardon to them that have sinned That is it is not to be done suddenly according to the caution which S. Paul gave to the Bishop of Ephesus Lay hands suddenly on no man that is absolve him not without great trial and just dispositions 32. For though this be not at all to be wrested to a suspicion that the sins in their kind are not pardonable yet thus far I shall make use of it That God who only hath the power he only can make the judgment whether the sinner be a worthy penitent or not For there being no express stipulation made concerning the degrees of repentance no taxa poenitentiaria penitential Tables and Canons consign'd by God it cannot be told by man when after great sins and a long iniquity the unhappy man shall be restor'd because it wholly depends upon the Divine acceptance 33. In smaller offences and the seldom returns of sin intervening in a good or a probable life the Curates of souls may make safe and prudent judgments But when the case is high and the sin is clamorous or scandalous or habitual they ought not to be too easie in speaking peace to such persons to whom God hath so fiercely threatned death eternal But to hold their hands may possibly increase the sorrow and contrition and fear of the penitent and returning man and by that means make him the surer of it But it is too great a confidence and presumption to dispense Gods pardon or the Kings upon easie terms and without their Commission 34. For since all the rule and measures of dispensing it is by analogies and proportions by some reason and much conjecture it were better by being restrain'd in the Ministeries of favour to produce fears and watchfulness carefulness and godly sorrow than by an open hand to make sinners bold and many confident and easie Those holy and wise men who were our Fathers in Christ did well weigh the dangers into which a sinning man had entred and did dreadfully fear the issues of the Divine anger and therefore although they openly taught that God hath set open the gates of mercy to all worthy penitents yet concerning repentance they had other thoughts than we have and that in the pardon of sinners there are many more things to be considered besides the possibility of having the sin pardoned SECT IV. Of the Sin against the Holy Ghost and in what sence it is or may be Vnpardonable 35. UPON what account the Primitive Church did refuse to admit certain Criminals to repentance I have already discoursed but because there are some places of Scripture which seem to have incouraged such severity by denying repentance also to some sinners it is necessary that they be considered also lest by being misunderstood some persons in the days of their sorrow be tempted to despair 36. The Novatians denying repentance to lapsed Christians pretended for their warrant those words of S. Paul It is impossible for those who were once inlightened and have tasted of the Heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come if they shall fall away to renew them again unto repentance seeing they crucifie to themselves the son of God afresh and put him to an open shame and parallel to this are those other words For if we sin wilfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation which shall consume the adversaries The sence of which words will be clear upon the explicating what is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and what by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 37. If they shall fall away viz. from that state of excellent things in which they had received all the present endearments of the Gospel a full conviction pardon of sins the earnest of the Spirit the comfort of the promises an antepast of Heaven it self if these men shall fall away from all this it cannot be by infirmity by ignorance by surprise this is that which S. Paul calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sin wilfully after they have received the knowledge of the truth Malicious sinners these are who sin against the Holy Spirit whose influences they throw away whose counsels they despise whose comforts they refuse whose doctrine they scorn and from thence fall not only into one single wasting sin but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they fall away into a contrary state into Heathenism or the heresie of the Gnosticks or to any state of despising and hating Christ expressed here by Crucifying the Son of God afresh and putting him to an open shame these are they here meant such who after they had worshipped Jesus and given up their names to him and had been blessed by him and felt it and acknowledged it and rejoyc'd in it these men afterwards without cause or excuse without error or infirmity chusingly willingly knowingly call'd Christ an Impostor and would have crucified him again if he had been alive that is they consented to his death by believing that he suffer'd justly This is the case here described and cannot be drawn to any thing else but its parallel that is a malicious renouncing charity or holy life as these men did the faith to both which they had made their solemn vows in Baptism but this can no way be
is taken off by Christ and his goodness is manifest in making a new Census for us taxing and numbring us in Christ and giving us free Redemption by the blood of Jesus but yet that we ought to confess that we are liable to damnation by Adam and saved from thence by Christ that Gods justice may be glorified in that and his goodness in this but that we are still real sinners till washed in the blood of the Lamb and without God and without hopes of Heaven till then and that if this Article be thus handled the Presbyterian fancy will disappear for they can be confuted without denying Adams sin to be damnable by saying it is pardoned in Christ and in Christ all men are restored and he is the head of the Predestination for in him God looked upon us when he designed us to our final state and this say they is much for the honour of Christs Redemption To these things Madam I have much to say something I will trouble your Ladiship withal at this time that you and all that consider the particulars may see I could not do the work of God and truth if I had proceeded in that method For 1. It is observable that those wiser persons who will by no means admit that anyone is or ever shall be damned for Original sin do by this means hope to salve the justice of God by which they plainly imply that to damn us for this is hard and intolerable and therefore they suppose they have declared a remedy But then this also is to be considered if it be intolerable to damn children for the sin of Adam then it is intolerable to say it is damnable If that be not just or reasonable then this is also unjust and unreasonable for the sentence and the execution of the sentence are the same emanation and issue of justice and are to be equally accounted of For 2. I demand had it been just in God to damn all mankind to the eternal pains of Hell for Adams sin committed before they had a being or could consent to it or know of it If it could be just then any thing in the world can be just and it is no matter who is innocent or who is criminal directly and by choice since they may turn Devils in their mothers bellies and it matters not whether there be any laws or no since it is all one that there be no law and that we do not know whether there be or no and it matters not whether there be any judicial process for we may as well be damned without judgment as be guilty without action and besides all those arguments will press here which I urged in my first discourse Now if it had been unjust actually to damn us all for the sin of one it was unjust to sentence us to it for if he did give sentence against us justly he could justly have executed the sentence and this is just if that be But 3. God did put this sentence in execution for if that be true which these learned men suppose that by Adams sin we fell into a damnable condition but by Christ we are rescued from an actual damnation for it then it will follow that when he sent the holy Jesus into the world to die for us and to redeem us he satisfied his Fathers Anger for Original Sin as well as for actual he paid for our share as well as for Adams for our share of that sin which he committed as well as for those which we committed and not he he paid all the price of that as well as of this damnation and the horrible sentence was bought off and God was so satisfied that his justice had full measure for the damnation to which we stood liable God I say had full measure for all for so all men say who speak the voice of the Church in the matter of Christs satisfaction so that now although there was the goodness of God in taking the evil from us yet how to reconcile this process with his justice viz. That for the sin of another God should sentence all the world to the portion of Devils to eternal ageâ— and that he would not be reconciled to us or take off this horrible sentence without a full price to be paid to his justice by the Saviour of the world this this is it that I require may be reconciled to that Notion which we have of the Divine justice 4. If no man shall ever be damned for the sin of Adam alone then I demand whether are they born quit from the guilt or when are they quitted If they be born free I agree to it but then they were never charged with it so far as to make them liable to damnation If they be not born free when are they quitted By Baptism before or after He that says before or after must speak wholly by chance and without pretence of Scripture or tradition or any sufficient warrant and he cannot guess when it is If in Baptism he is quitted then he that dies before Baptism is still under the Sentence and what shall become of him If it be answered that God will pardon him some way or other at some time or other I reply yea but who said so For if the Scriptures have said that we are all in Adam guilty of sin and damnation and the Scriptures have told us no ways of being quit of it but by Baptism and Faith in Christ Is it not plainly consequent that till we believe in Christ or at least till in the faith of others we are baptized into Christ we are reckoned still in Adam not in Christ that is still we are under damnation and not heirs of Heaven but of wrath only 5. How can any one bring himself into a belief that none can be damned for Original sin if he be of this perswasion that it makes us liable to damnation for if you say as I say that it is against Gods justice to damn us for the fault of another then it is also against his justice to sentence us to that suffering which to inflict is injustice If you say it is believed upon this account because Christ was promised to all mankind I reply that yet all mankind shall not be saved and there are conditions required on our part and no man can be saved but by Christ and he must come to him or be brought to him or it is not told us how any one can have a part in him and therefore that will not give us the confidence is looked for If it be at last said that we hope in Gods goodness that he will take care of Innocents and that they shall not perish I answer that if they be Innocents we need not appeal to his goodness for his justice will secure them If they be guilty and not Innocents then it is but vain to run to Gods goodness which in this particular is not revealed when to condemn them is not
believed by the same simplicity it is taught when we do not call that a mystery which we are not able to prove and tempt our faith to swallow that whole which reason cannot chew One thing I am to observe more before I leave considering the words of the Apostle The Apostle here having instituted a comparison between Adam and Christ that as death came by one so life by the other as by one we are made sinners so by the other we are made righteous some from hence suppose they argue strongly to the overthrow of all that I have said thus Christ and Adam are compared therefore as by Christ we are made really righteous so by Adam we are made really Sinners our righteousness by Christ is more than imputed and therefore so is our unrighteousness by Adam to this besides what I have already spoken in my humble addresses to that wise and charitable Prelate the Lord Bishop of Rochester delivering the sence and objections of others in which I have declared my sence of the imputation of Christs righteousness and besides that although the Apostle offers a similitude yet he finds himself surprised and that one part of the similitude does far exceed the other and therefore nothing can follow hence but that if we receive evil from Adam we shall much more receive good from Christ besides this I say I have something very material to reply to the form of the argument which is a very trick and fallacy For the Apostle argues thus As by Adam we are made sinners so by Christ we are made righteous and that is very true and much more but to argue from hence as by Christ we are made really righteous so by Adam we are made really sinners is to invert the purpose of the Apostle who argues from the less to the greater and to make it conclude affirmatively from the greater to the less in matter of power is as if one should say If a child can carry a ten pound weight much more can a man and therefore whatsoever a man can do that also a child can do For though I can say If this thing be done in a green tree what shall be done in the dry yet I must not say therefore If this be done in the dry tree what shall be done in the green For the dry tree of the Cross could do much more than the green tree in the Garden of Eden It is a good argument to say If the Devil be so potent to do a shrewd turn much more powerful is God to do good but we cannot conclude from hence but God can by his own mere power and pleasure save a soul therefore the Devil can by his power ruine one In a similitude the first part may be and often is less than the second but never greater and therefore though the Apostle said As by Adam c. So by Christ c. Yet we cannot say as by Christ so by Adam We may well reason thus As by Nature there is a reward to evil doers so much more is there by God but we cannot by way of conversion reason thus As by God there is an eternal reward appointed to good actions so by Nature there is an eternal reward for evil ones And who would not deride this way of arguing As by our Fathers we receive temporal good things so much more do we by God but by God we also receive an immortal Soul therefore from our Fathers we receive an immortal Body For not the consequent of a hypothetical proposition but the antecedent is to be the assumption of the Syllogism This therefore is a fallacy which when those wise persons who are unwarily perswaded by it shall observe I doubt not but the whole way of arguing will appear unconcluding Object 6. But it is objected that my Doctrine is against the ninth Article in the Church of England and that I hear Madam does most of all stick with you Of this Madam I should not now have taken notice because I have already answered it in some additional papers which are already published but that I was so delighted to hear and to know that a person of your interest and piety of your zeal and prudence is so earnest for the Church of England that I could not pass it by without paying you that regard and just acknowledgment which so much excellency deserves But then Madam I am to say that I could not be delighted in your zeal for our excellent Church if I were not as zealous my self for it too I have oftentimes subscribed that Article and though if I had cause to dissent from it I would certainly do it in those just measures which my duty on one side and the interest of truth on the other would require of me yet because I have no reason to disagree I will not suffer my self to be supposed to be of a Differing judgment from my Dear Mother which is the best Church of the world Indeed Madam I do not understand the words of the Article as most men do but I understand them as they can be true and as they can very fairly signifie and as they agree with the word of God and right reason But I remember that I have heard from a very good hand and there are many alive this day that may remember to have heard it talk'd of publickly that when Mr. Thomas Rogers had in the year 1584. published an exposition of the Thirty Nine Articles many were not only then but long since very angry at him that he by his interpretation had limited the charitable latitude which was allowed in the subscription to them For the Articles being framed in a Church but newly reformed in which many complied with some unwillingness and were not willing to have their consent broken by too great a straining and even in the Convocation it self so many being of a differing judgment it was very great prudence and piety to secure the peace of the Church by as much charitable latitude as they could contrive and therefore the Articles in those things which were publickly disputed at that time even amongst the Doctors of the Reformation such were the Articles of Predestination and this of Original sin were described with incomparable wisdom and temper and therefore I have reason to take it ill if any man shall deny me liberty to use the benefit of the Churches wisdom For I am ready a thousand times to subscribe the Article if there can be just cause to do it so often but as I impose upon no man my sence of the Article but leave my reasons and him to struggle together for the best so neither will I be bound to any one man or any company of men but to my lawful Superiors speaking there where they can and ought to oblige Madam I take nothing ill from any man but that he should think I have a less zeal for our Church than himself and I will by Gods assistance be all
are once thought an enemy to God it is our duty to persecute you even to death we do God good service in it when if we should examine the matter rightly the Question is either in materiâ non revelata or minus evidenti or non necessariâ either it is not revealed or not so clearly but that wise and honest men may be of different mindes or else it is not of the foundation of faith but a remote super-structure or else of mere speculation or perhaps when all comes to all it is a false Opinion or a matter of humane interest that we have so zealously contended for for to one of these heads most of the Disputes of Christendome may be reduced so that I believe the present fractions or the most are from the same cause which S. Paul observed in the Corinthian Schism when there are divisions among you are ye not carnal It is not the differing Opinions that is the cause of the present ruptures but want of charity it is not the variety of understandings but the disunion of wills and affections it is not the several principles but the several ends that cause our miseries our Opinions commence and are upheld according as our turns are served and our interests are preserved and there is no cure for us but Piety and Charity A holy life will make our belief holy if we consult not humanity and its imperfections in the choice of our Religion but search for truth without designes save onely of acquiring heaven and then be as careful to preserve Charity as we were to get a point of Faith I am much perswaded we shall find out more truths by this means or however which is the main of all we shall be secured though we miss them and then we are well enough For if it be evinced that one heaven shall hold men of several Opinions if the unity of Faith be not destroyed by that which men call differing Religions and if an unity of Charity be the duty of us all even towards persons that are not perswaded of every proposition we believe then I would fain know to what purpose are all those stirrs and great noises in Christendome those names of Faction the several Names of Churches not distinguished by the division of Kingdomes ut Ecclesia sequatur Imperium which was the Primitive Rule and Canon but distinguished by Names of Sects and men these are all become instruments of hatred thence come Schisms and parting of Communions and then persecutions and then warrs and Rebellion and then the dissolutions of all Friendships and Societies All these mischiefs proceed not from this that all men are not of one mind for that is neither necessary nor possible but that every Opinion is made an Article of Faith every Article is a ground of a quarrel every quarrel makes a faction every faction is zealous and all zeal pretends for God and whatsoever is for God cannot be too much we by this time are come to that pass we think we love not God except we hate our Brother and we have not the vertue of Religion unless we persecute all Religions but our own for lukewarmness is so odious to God and Man that we proceeding furiously upon these mistakes by supposing we preserve the body we destroy the soul of Religion or by being zealous for faith or which is all one for that which we mistake for faith we are cold in charity and so lose the reward of both All these errours and mischiefs must be discovered and cured and that 's the purpose of this Discourse SECT I. Of the nature of Faith and that its duty is compleated in believing the Articles of the Apostles Creed 1. FIrst then it is of great concernment to know the nature and integrity of Faith For there begins our first and great mistake for Faith although it be of great excellency yet when it is taken for a habit intellectual it hath so little room and so narrow a capacity that it cannot lodge thousands of those Opinions which pretend to be of her Family 2. For although it be necessary for us to believe whatsoever we know to be revealed of God and so every man does that believes there is a God yet it is not necessary concerning many things to know that God hath revealed them that is we may be ignorant of or doubt concerning the propositions and indifferently maintain either part when the Question is not concerning Gods veracity but whether God hath said so or no That which is of the foundation of Faith that only is necessary and the knowing or not knowing of that the believing or dis-believing it is that only which in genere credendorum is in immediate and necessary order to salvation or damnation 3. Now all the reason and demonstration of the World convinces us that this foundation of Faith or the great adequate object of the Faith that saves us is that great mysteriousness of Christianity which Christ taught with so much diligence for the credibility of which he wrought so many miracles for the testimony of which the Apostles endured persecutions that which was a folly to the Gentiles and a scandal to the Jews this is that which is the object of a Christians Faith All other things are implicitely in the belief of the Articles of Gods veracity and are not necessary in respect of the Constitution of faith to be drawn out but may there lie in the bowels of the great Articles without danger to any thing or any person unless some other accident or circumstance makes them necessary Now the great object which I speak of is Jesus Christ crucified Constitui enim apud vos nihil scire praeter Jesum Christum hunc crucifixum so said St. Paul to the Church of Corinth This is the Article upon the Confession of which Christ built his Church viz. only upon St. Peters Creed which was no more but this simple enunciation We believe and are sure that thou art Christ the Son of the living God And to this salvation particularly is promised as in the case of Martha's Creed John 11.27 To this the Scripture gives the greatest Testimony and to all them that confess it For every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God And whoever confesseth that Jesus Christ is the Son of God God dwelleth in him and he in God The believing this Article is the end of writing the four Gospels For all these things are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and then that this is sufficient follows and that believing viz. this Article for this was only instanced in ye might have life through his name This is that great Article which in genere credendorum is sufficient disposition to prepare a Catechumen to Baptism as appears in the case of the Ethiopian Eunuch whose Creed was only this I believe that Jesus Christ is the
Son of God and upon this confession saith the story they both went into the water and the Ethiop was washed and became as white as snow 4. In these particular instances there is no variety of Articles save only that in the annexes of the several expressions such things are expressed as besides that Christ is come they tell from whence and to what purpose And whatsoever is expressed or is to these purposes implyed is made articulate and explicate in the short and admirable mysterious Creed of St. Paul Rom. 10.1 This is the word of faith which we preach that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved This is the great and entire complexion of a Christian's faith and since salvation is promised to the belief of this Creed either a snare is laid for us with a purpose to deceive us or else nothing is of prime and original necessity to be believed but this Jesus Christ our Redeemer and all that which is the necessary parts means or main actions of working this redemption for us and the honour for him is in the bowels and fold of the great Article and claims an explicite belief by the same reason that binds us to the belief of its first complexion without which neither the thing could be acted nor the proposition understood 5. For the act of believing propositions is not for it self but in order to certain ends as Sermons are to good life and obedience for excepting that it acknowledges Gods veracity and so is a direct act of Religion believing a revealed proposition hath no excellency in its self but in order to that end for which we are instructed in such revelations Now Gods great purpose being to bring us to him by Jesus Christ Christ is our medium to God obedience is the medium to Christ and Faith the medium to obedience and therefore is to have its estimate in proportion to its proper end and those things are necessary which necessarily promote the end without which obedience cannot be encouraged or prudently enjoyned So that those articles are necessary that is those are fundamental points upon which we build our obedience and as the influence of the Article is to the perswasion or engagement of obedience so they have their degrees of necessity Now all that Christ when he preached taught us to believe and all that the Apostles in their Sermons propound all aim at this that we should acknowledge Christ for our Law-giver and our Saviour so that nothing can be necessary by a prime necessity to be believed explicitely but such things which are therefore parts of the great Article because they either encourage our services or oblige them such as declare Christs greatness in himself or his goodness to us So that although we must neither deny nor doubt of any thing which we know our great Master hath taught us yet salvation is in special and by name annexed to the belief of those Articles only which have in them the endearments of our services or the support of our confidence or the satisfaction of our hopes such as are Jesus Christ the Son of the living God the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus forgiveness of sins by his bloud Resurrection of the dead and life eternal because these propositions qualifie Christ for our Saviour and our Law-Giver the one to engage our services the other to endear them for so much is necessary as will make us to be his servants and his Disciples and what can be required more This only Salvation is promised to the explicite belief of those Articles and therefore those only are necessary and those are sufficient but thus to us in the formality of Christians which is a formality superadded to a former capacity we before we are Christians are reasonable creatures and capable of a blessed eternity and there is a Creed which is the Gentiles Creed which is so supposed in the Christians Creed as it is supposed in a Christian to be a man and that is oportet accedentem ad Deum credere Deum esse esse remuneratorem quaerentium eum If any man will urge farther that whatsoever is deducible from these Articles by necessary consequence is necessary to be believed explicitely I answer It is true if he sees the deduction and coherence of the parts but it is not certain that every man shall be able to deduce whatsoever is either immediately or certainly deducible from these premises and then since salvation is promised to the explicite belief of these I see not how any man can justifie the making the way to heaven narrower than Jesus Christ hath made it it being already so narrow that there are few that find it 7. In the pursuance of this great truth the Apostles or the holy men their Contemporaries and Disciples composed a Creed to be a Rule of Faith to all Christians as appears in Irenaeus Tertullian St. Cyprian St. Austin Ruffinus and divers others which Creed unless it had contained all the intire object of Faith and the foundation of Religion it cannot be imagined to what purpose it should serve and that it was so esteemed by the whole Church of God in all Ages appears in this that since Faith is a necessary pre-disposition to Baptism in all persons capable of the use of reason all Catechumens in the Latine Church coming to Baptism were interrogated concerning their faith and gave satisfaction in the recitation of this Creed And in the East they professed exactly the same faith something differing in words but of the same matter reason design and consequence and so they did at Hierusalem so at Aquileia This was that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These articles were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 5. Cod. de S. Trinit ad fid Cath. Cùm recta Now since the Apostles and Apostolical men and Churches in these their Symbols did recite particular Articles to a considerable number and were so minute in their recitation as to descend to circumstances it is more than probable that they omitted nothing of necessity and that these Articles are not general principles in the bosom of which many more Articles equally necessary to be believed explicitely and more particular are infolded but that it is as minute an explication of those prima credibilia I before reckoned as is necessary to salvation And therefore Tertullian calls the Creed Regulam fidei quâ salvâ formâ ejus manente in suo ordine possit in Scriptura tractari inquiri si quid videtur vel ambiguitate pendere vel obscuritate obumbrari Cordis signaculum nostrae militiae Sacramentum S. Ambrose calls it lib. 3. de velandis virgin Comprehensio fidei nostrae atque perfectio by S. Austin Serm. 115. Confessio expositio regula fidei generally by the Ancients The profession of this Creed was the exposition of that
than the damning of those many souls occasionally but yet certainly and fore-knowingly does hurt I leave it to all wise and good men to determine And yet besides this it cannot enter into my thoughts that it can possibly consist with Gods goodness to put it into the power of man so palpably and openly to alter the paths and in-lets to heaven and to streighten his mercies unless he had furnished these men with an infallible judgment and an infallible prudence and a never failing charity that they should never do it but with great necessity and with great truth and without ends and humane designs of which I think no Arguments can make us certain what the Primitive Church hath done in this case I shall afterwards consider and give an account of it but for the present there is no insecurity in ending there where the Apostles ended in building where they built in resting where they left us unless the same infallibility which they had had still continued which I think I shall hereafter make evident it did not And therefore those extensions of Creed which were made in the first Ages of the Church although for the matter they were most true yet because it was not certain that they should be so and they might have been otherwise therefore they could not be in the same order of Faith nor in the same degrees of necessity to be believed with the Articles Apostolical and therefore whether they did well or no in laying the same weight upon them or whether they did lay the same weight or no we will afterwards consider 13. But to return I consider that a foundation of Faith cannot alter unless a new building be to be made the foundation is the same still and this foundation is no other but that which Christ and his Apostles laid which Doctrine is like himself yesterday and to day and the same for ever So that the Articles of necessary belief to all which are the only foundation they cannot be several in several Ages and to several persons Nay the sentence and declaration of the Church cannot lay this foundation or make any thing of the foundation because the Church cannot lay her own foundation we must suppose her to be a building and that she relies upon the foundation which is therefore supposed to be laid before because she is built upon it or to make it more explicate because a cloud may arise from the Allegory of building and foundation it is plainly thus The Church being a company of men obliged to the duties of Faith and obedience the duty and obligation being of the faculties of will and understanding to adhere to such an object must pre-suppose the object made ready for them for as the object is before the act in order of nature and therefore not to be produced or encreased by the faculty which is receptive cannot be active upon its proper object So the object of the Churches Faith is in order of nature before the Church or before the act and habit of Faith and therefore cannot be enlarged by the Church any more than the act of the visive faculty can add visibility to the object So that if we have found out what foundation Christ and his Apostles did lay that is what body and systeme of Articles simply necessary they taught and required of us to believe we need not we cannot go any farther for foundation we cannot enlarge that systeme or collection Now then although all that they said is true and nothing of it to be doubted or dis-believed yet as all that they said is neither written nor delivered because all was not necessary so we know that of those things which are written some things are as far off from the foundation as those things which were omitted and therefore although now accidentally they must be believed by all that know them yet it is not necessary all should know them and that all should know them in the same sence and interpretation is neither probable nor obligatory but therefore since these things are to be distinguished by some differences of necessary and not necessary whether or no is not the declaration of Christ and his Apostles affixing salvation to the belief of some great comprehensive Articles and the act of the Apostles rendring them as explicite as they thought convenient and consigning that Creed made so explicite as a tessera of a Christian as a comprehension of the Articles of his belief as a sufficient disposition and an express of the Faith of a Catechumen in order to Baptism whether or no I say all this be not sufficient probation that these only are of absolute necessity that this is sufficient for meer belief in order to Heaven and that therefore whosoever believes these Articles heartily and explicitely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Saint John's expression is God dwelleth in him I leave it to be considered and judged of from the premises Only this if the old Doctors had been made Judges in these Questions they would have passed their affirmative for to instance in one for all of this it was said by Tertullian Regula quidem fidei una omnino est sola immobilis irreformabilis c. Hâc lege fidei manente caetera jam disciplinae conversationis admittunt novitatem correctionis operante scil proficiente usque in finem gratia Dei This Symbol is the one sufficient immoveable unalterable and unchangeable rule of Faith that admits no increment or decrement but if the integrity and unity of this be preserved in all other things men may take a liberty of enlarging their knowledges and prophecyings according as they are assisted by the grace of God SECT II. Of Heresy and the nature of it and that it is to be accounted according to the strict capacity of Christian Faith and not in Opinions speculative nor ever to pious persons 1. AND thus I have represented a short draught of the Object of Faith and its foundation the next consideration in order to our main design is to consider what was and what ought to be the judgment of the Apostles concerning Heresy For although there are more kinds of vices than there are of vertues yet the number of them is to be taken by accounting the transgressions of their vertues and by the limits of Faith we may also reckon the Analogy and proportions of Heresy that as we have seen who was called faithful by the Apostolical men we may also perceive who were listed by them in the Catalogue of Hereticks that we in our judgmenâ—s may proceed accordingly 2. And first the word Heresy is used in Scripture indifferently in a good sence for a Sect or Division of Opinion and men following it or sometimes in a bad sence for a false Opinion signally condemned but these kind of people were then call'd Antichrists and false Prophets more frequently than Hereticks and then there were many of them in the World But it is
decreed it pro edicto So it is in the case of a Heretick The understanding which is judge condemns him not by an express sentence for he erres with as much simplicity in the result as he had malice in the principle But there is sententia lata à jure his will which is his law that hath condemned him And this is gathered from that saying of S. Paul 2 Tim. 3.13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse deceiving and being deceived First they are evil men malice and peevishness is in their wills then they turn Hereticks and seduce others and while they grow worse and worse the errour is master of their understanding they are deceived themselves given over to believe a lie saith the Apostle They first play the knave and then play the fool they first sell themselves to the purchase of vain-glory or ill ends and then they become possessed with a lying spirit and believe those things heartily which if they were honest they should with Gods grace discover and disclaim So that now we see that bona fides in falso articulo a hearty perswasion in a false article does not alwaies make the errour to be esteemed involuntary but then only when it is as innocent in the principle as it is confident in the present perswasion And such persons who by their ill lives and vitious actions or manifest designs for by their fruits ye shall know them give testimony of such criminal indispositions so as competent judges by humane and prudent estimate may so judge them then they are to be declared Hereticks and avoided And if this were not true it were vain that the Apostle commands us to avoid an Heretick For no external act can pass upon a man for a crime that is not cognoscible 12. Now every man that erres though in a matter of consequence so long as the foundation is intire cannot be suspected justly guilty of a crime to give his errour a formality of heresie for we see many a good man miserably deceived as we shall make it appear afterwards and he that is the best amongst men certainly hath so much humility to think he may be easily deceived and twenty to one but he is in some thing or other yet if his errour be not voluntary and part of an ill life then because he lives a good life he is a good man and therefore no Heretick No man is a Heretick against his will And if it be pretended that every man that is deceived is therefore proud because he does not submit his understanding to the authority of God or Man respectively and so his errour becomes a heresie To this I answer That there is no Christian man but will submit his understanding to God and believes whatsoever he hath said but always provided he knows that God hath said so else he must do his duty by a readiness to obey when he shall know it But for obedience or humility of the understanding towards men that is a thing of another consideration and it must first be made evident that his understanding must be submitted to men and who those men are must also be certain before it will be adjudged a sin not to submit But if I mistake not Christs saying call no man master upon earth is so great a prejudice against this pretence as I doubt it will go near wholly to make it invalid So that as the worshipping of Angels is an humility indeed but it is voluntary and a will-worship to an ill sence not to be excused by the excellency of humility nor the vertue of Religion so is the relying upon the judgement of man an humility too but such as comes not under that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that obedience of Faith which is the duty of every Christian but intrenches upon that duty which we owe to Christ as an acknowledgement that he is our great Master and the Prince of the Catholick Church But whether it be or be not if that be the Question whether the disagreeing person be to be determined by the dictates of men I am sure the dictates of men must not determine him in that Question but it must be settled by some higher principle So that if of that Question the disagreeing person does opine or believe or err bonâ fide he is not therefore to be judged a Heretick because he submits not his understanding because till it be sufficiently made certain to him that he is bound to submit he may innocently and piously disagree and this not submitting is therefore not a crime and so cannot make a heresy because without a crime he may lawfully doubt whether he be bound to submit or no for that 's the Question And if in such Questions which have influence upon a whole systeme of Theology a man may doubt lawfully if he doubts heartily because the authority of men being the thing in Question cannot be the judge of this Question and therefore being rejected or which is all one being questioned that is not believed cannot render the doubting person guilty of pride and by consequence not of heresy much more may particular questions be doubted of and the authority of men examined and yet the doubting person be humble enough and therefore no Heretick for all this pretence And it would be considered that humility is a duty in great ones as well as in Idiots And as inferiours must not disagree without reason so neither must superiours subscribe to others without sufficient authority evidence and necessity too And if rebellion be pride so is tyranny and it being in materiâ intellectuali both may be guilty of pride of understanding sometimes the one in imposing sometimes the other in a causless disagreeing but in the inferiours it is then only the want of humility when the guides impose or prescribe what God hath also taught and then it is the disobeying Gods dictates not mans that makes the sin But then this consideration will also intervene that as no dictate of God obliges men to believe it unless I know it to be such So neither will any of the dictates of my superiours engage my faith unless I also know or have no reason to dis-believe but that they are warranted to teach them to me therefore because God hath taught the same to them which if I once know or have no reason to think the contrary if I disagree my sin is not in resisting humane authority but divine And therefore the whole business of submitting our understanding to humane authority comes to nothing for either it resolves into the direct duty of submitting to God or if it be spoken of abstractly it is no duty at all 13. But this pretence of a necessity of humbling the understanding is none of the meanest arts whereby some persons have invaded and usurpt a power over mens faith and consciences and therefore we shall examine the pretence afterwards and try if God hath invested any Man or company
tres hypostases dicere si jubetis and again Obtestor beatitudinem tuam per Crucifixum mundi salutem per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Trinitatem ut mihi Epistolis tuis sive tacendarum sive dicendarum hypostaseôn detur authoritas 30. But without all Question the Fathers determined the Question with much truth though I cannot say the Arguments upon which they built their Decrees were so good as the conclusion it self was certain But that which in this case is considerable is whether or no they did well in putting a curse to the foot of their Decree and the Decree it self into the Symbol as if it had been of the same necessity For the curse Eusebius Pamphilus could hardly find in his heart to subscribe at last he did but with this clause that he subscribed it because the former curse did only forbid men to acquaint themselves with forraign speeches and unwritten languages whereby confusion and discord is brought into the Church So that it was not so much a magisterial high assertion of the Article as an endeavour to secure the peace of the Church And to the same purpose for ought I know the Fathers composed a form of Confession not as a prescript Rule of Faith to build the hopes of our salvation on but as a tessera of that Communion which by publick Authority was therefore established upon those Articles because the Articles were true though not of prime necessity and because that unity of confession was judged as things then stood the best preserver of the unity of minds 31. But I shall observe this that although the Nicene Fathers in that case at that time and in that conjuncture of circumstances did well and yet their approbation is made by after Ages ex post facto yet if this precedent had been followed by all Councils and certainly they had equal power if they had thought it equally reasonable and that they had put all their Decrees into the Creed as some have done since to what a volume had the Creed by this time swelled and all the house had run into foundation nothing left for super-structures But that they did not it appears 1. That since they thought all their Decrees true yet they did not think them all necessary at least not in that degree and that they published such Decrees they did it Declarando not imperando as Doctors in their Chairs not masters of other mens faith and consciences 2. And yet there is some more modesty or wariness or necessity what shall I call it than this comes too for why are not all controversies determined but even when General assemblies of Prelates have been some controversies that have been very vexatious have been pretermitted and others of less consequence have been determined Why did never any General Council condemn in express sentence the Pelagian heresie that great pest that subtle infection of Christendome and yet divers General Councils did assemble while the heresie was in the World Both these cases in several degrees leave men in their liberty of believing and prophesying The latter proclaims that all controversies cannot de determined to sufficient purposes and the first declares that those that are are not all of them matters of Faith and themselves are not so secure but they may be deceived and therefore possibly it were better it were let alone for if the latter leaves them divided in their opinions yet their Communions and therefore probably their charities are not divided but the former divides their Communions and hinders their interest and yet for ought is certain the accused person is the better Catholick And yet after all this it is not safety enough to say let the Council or Prelates determine Articles warily seldom with great caution and with much sweetness and modesty For though this be better than to do it rashly frequently and furiously yet if we once transgress the bounds set us by the Apostles in their Creed and not only preach other truths but determine them pro tribunali as well as pro cathedra although there be no errour in the subject matter as in Nice there was none yet if the next Ages say they will determine another Article with as much care and caution and pretend as great a necessity there is no hindring them but by giving reasons against it and so like enough they might have done against the decreeing the Article at Nice yet that this is not sufficient for since the Authority of the Nicene Council hath grown to the height of a mountainous prejudice against him that should say it was ill done the same reason and the same necessity may be pretended by any Age and in any Council and they think themselves warranted by the great precedent at Nice to proceed as peremptorily as they did but then if any other Assembly of learned men may possibly be deceived were it not better they should spare the labour than that they should with so great pomp and solemnities engage mens perswasions and determine an Article which after Ages must rescind for therefore most certainly in their own Age the point with safety of faith and salvation might have been disputed and disbelieved And that many mens faiths have been tyed up by Acts and Decrees of Councils for those Articles in which the next age did see a liberty had better been preserved because an errour was determined we shall afterward receive a more certain account 32. And therefore the Council of Nice did well and Constantinople did well so did Ephesus and Chalcedon but it is because the Articles were truly determined for that is part of my belief but who is sure it should be so before-hand and whether the points there determined were necessary or no to be believed or to be determined if peace had been concerned in it through the faction and division of the parties I suppose the judgment of Constantine the Emperour and the famous Hosius of Corduba is sufficient to instruct us whose authority I rather urge than reasons because it is a prejudice and not a reason I am to contend against it 33. So that such determinations and publishing of Confessions with Authority of Prince and Bishop are sometimes of very good use for the peace of the Church and they are good also to determine the judgment of indifferent persons whose reasons of either side are not too great to weigh down the probability of that Authority But for persons of confident and imperious understandings they on whose side the determination is are armed with a prejudice against the other and with a weapon to affront them but with no more to convince them and they against whom the decision is do the more readily betake themselves to the defensive and are engaged upon contestation and publick enmities for such Articles which either might safely have been unknown or with much charity disputed Therefore the Nicene Council although it have the advantage of an acquired and prescribing Authority yet it must
not become a precedent to others lest the inconveniences of multiplying more Articles upon a great pretence of reason as then make the act of the Nicene Fathers in straightning Prophesying and enlarging the Creed become accidentally an inconvenience The first restraint although if it had been complained of might possibly have been better considered of yet the inconvenience is not visible till it comes by way of precedent to usher in more It is like an arbitrary power which although by the same reason it take six pence from the subject it may take a hundred pound and then a thousand and then all yet so long as it is within the first bounds the inconvenience is not so great but when it comes to be a precedent or argument for more then the first may justly be complained of as having in it that reason in the principle which brought the inconvenience in the sequel and we have seen very ill consequences from innocent beginnings 34. And the inconveniences which might possibly arise from this precedent those wise Personages also did foresee and therefore although they took liberty in Nice to add some Articles or at least more explicitely to declare the first Creed yet they then would have all the world to rest upon that and go no farther as believing that to be sufficient Saint Athanasius declares their opinion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Faith which the Fathers there confessed was sufficient for the refutation of all impiety and the establishment of all Faith in Christ and true Religion And therefore there was a famous Epistle written by Zeno the Emperour called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Epistle of reconciliation in which all disagreeing interests are entreated to agree in the Nicene Symbol and a promise made upon that condition to communicate with all other Sects adding withal that the Church should never receive any other Symbol than that which was composed by the Nicene Fathers And however Honorius was condemned for a Monothelite yet in one of the Epistles which the sixth Synod alledged against him viz. the second he gave them counsel that would have done the Church as much service as the determination of the Article did for he advised them not to be curious in their disputings nor dogmatical in their determinations about that Question and because the Church was not used to dispute in that Question it were better to preserve the simplicity of Faith than to ensnare mens consciences by a new Article And when the Emperour Constantius was by his Faction engaged in a contrary practice the inconvenience and unreasonableness was so great that a prudent Heathen observed and noted it in this character of Constantius Christianam religionem absolutam simplicem N. B. anili superstitione confudit In quâ scrutandâ perplexiùs quà m in componendâ gratiùs excitavit dissidia quae progressa fusiùs aluit concertatione verborum dum ritum omnem ad suum trahere conatur arbitrium 35. And yet men are more led by Example than either by Reason or by Precept for in the Council of Constantinople one Article de novo integro was added viz. I believe one Baptism for the remission of sins and then again they were so confident that that Confession of Faith was so absolutely intire and that no man ever after should need to add any thing to the integrity of Faith that the Fathers of the Council of Ephesus pronounced Anathema to all those that should add any thing to the Creed of Constantinople And yet for all this the Church of Rome in a Synod at Gentilly added the clause of Filioque to the Article of the Procession of the holy Ghost and what they have done since all the World knows Exempla non consistunt sed quamvis in tenuem recepta tramitem latissimè evagandi sibi faciunt potestatem All men were perswaded that it was most reasonable the limits of Faith should be no more enlarged but yet they enlarged it themselves and bound others from doing it like an intemperate Father who because he knows he does ill himself enjoyns temperance to his Son but continues to be intemperate himself 36. But now if I should be questioned concerning the Symbol of Athanasius for we see the Nicene Symbol was the Father of many more some twelve or thirteen Symbols in the space of an hundred years I confess I cannot see that moderate sentence and gentleness of charity in his Preface and Conclusion as there was in the Nicene Creed Nothing there but damnation and perishing everlastingly unless the Article of the Trinity be believed as it is there with curiosity and minute particularities explained Indeed Athanasius had been soundly vexed on one side and much cryed up on the other and therefore it is not so much wonder for him to be so decretory and severe in his censure for nothing could more ascertain his friends to him and dis-repute his enemies than the belief of that damnatory Appendix but that does not justifie the thing For the Articles themselves I am most heartily perswaded of the truth of them and yet I dare not say all that are not so are irrevocably damn'd because citra hoc Symbolum the Faith of the Apostles Creed is intire and he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved that is he that believeth such a belief as is sufficient disposition to be baptized that Faith with the Sacrament is sufficient for heaven Now the Apostles Creed does one why therefore do not both intitle us to the promise Besides if it were considered concerning Athanasius Creed how many people understand it not how contrary to natural reason it seems how little the Scripture says of those curiosities of Explication and how Tradition was not clear on his side for the Article it self much less for those forms and minutes how himself is put to make an answer and excuse for the Fathers speaking in excuse of the Arrians at least so seemingly that the Arrians appealed to them for trial and the offer was declin'd and after all this that the Nicene Creed it self went not so far neither in Article nor Anathema nor Explication it had not been amiss if the final judgment had been left to Jesus Christ for he is appointed Judge of all the World and he shall judge the people righteously for he knows every truth the degree of every necessity and all excuses that do lessen or take away the nature or malice of a crime all which I think Athanasius though a very good man did not know so well as to warrant such a sentence And put case the heresie there condemned be damnable as it is damnable enough yet a man may maintain an opinion that is in it self damnable and yet he not knowing it so and being invincibly led into it may go to heaven his opinion shall burn and himself be saved But however I find no opinion in Scripture called damnable but what are impious in materiâ
practicâ or directly destructive of the Faith or the body of Christianity such of which Saint Peter speaks bringing in damnable heresies even denying the Lord that bought them these are the false Prophets who out of covetousness make merchandise of you through cozening words Such as these are truly heresies and such as these are certainly damnable But because there are no degrees either of truth or falshood every true proposition being alike true that an errour is more or less damnable is not told us in Scripture but is determined by the man and his manners by circumstances and accidents and therefore the censure in the Preface and end are Arguments of his zeal and strength of his perswasion but they are extrinsecal and accidental to the Articles and might as well have been spared And indeed to me it seems very hard to put uncharitableness into the Creed and so to make it become as an Article of Faith though perhaps this very thing was no Faith of Athanasius who if we may believe Aquinas made this manifestation of Faith non per modum Symboli sed per modum doctrinae that is if I understand him right not with a purpose to impose it upon others but with confidence to declare his own belief and that it was prescribed to others as a Creed was the act of the Bishops of Rome so he said nay possibly it was none of his So said the Patriarch of C. P. Meletius about one hundred and thirty years since in his Epistle to John Douza Athanasio falsò adscriptum Symbolum cum Pontificum Rom. appendice illâ adulteratum luce lucidiùs contestamur And it is more than probable that he said true because this Creed was written originally in Latine which in all reason Athanasius did not and it was translated into Greek it being apparent that the Latine Copy is but one but the Greek is various there being three Editions or Translations rather expressed by Genebrard lib. 3. de Trinit But in this particular who list may better satisfie himself in a disputation de Symbolo Athanasii printed at Wertzburg 1590. supposed to be written by Serrarius or Clencherus 37. And yet I must observe that this Symbol of Athanasius and that other of Nice offer not at any new Articles they only pretend to a further Explication of the Articles Apostolical which is a certain confirmation that they did not believe more Articles to be of belief necessary to salvation If they intended these further Explanations to be as necessary as the dogmatical Articles of the Apostles Creed I know not how to answer all that may be objected against that but the advantage that I shall gather from their not proceeding to new matters is laid out ready for me in the words of Athanasius saying of this Creed This is the Catholick Faith and if his authority be good or his saying true or he the Author then no man can say of any other Article that it is a part of the Catholick Faith or that the Catholick Faith can be enlarged beyond the contents of that Symbol and therefore it is a strange boldness in the Church of Rome first to add twelve new Articles and then to add the Appendix of Athanasius to the end of them This is the Catholick Faith without which no man can be saved 38. But so great an Example of so excellent a man hath been either mistaken or followed with too much greediness all the World in factions all damning one another each party damn'd by all the rest and there is no disagreeing in opinion from any man that is in love with his own opinion but damnation presently to all that disagree A Ceremony and a Rite hath caused several Churches to Excommunicate each other as in the matter of the Saturday Fast and keeping Easter But what the spirits of men are when they are exasperated in a Question and difference of Religion as they call it though the thing it self may be most inconsiderable is very evident in that request of Pope Innocent the Third desiring of the Greeks but reasonably a man would think that they would not so much hate the Roman manner of consecrating in unleavened bread as to wash and scrape and pare the Altars after a Roman Priest had consecrated Nothing more furious than a mistaken zeal and the actions of a scrupulous and abused conscience When men think every thing to be their Faith and their Religion commonly they are so busie in trifles and such impertinencies in which the scene of their mistake lies that they neglect the greater things of the Law charity and compliances and the gentleness of Christian Communion for this is the great principle of mischief and yet is not more pernicious than unreasonable 39. For I demand Can any man say and justifie that the Apostles did deny Communion to any man that believed the Apostles Creed and lived a good life And dare any man tax that proceeding of remissness and indifferency in Religion And since our blessed Saviour promised salvation to him that believeth and the Apostles when they gave this word the greatest extent enlarged it not beyond the borders of the Creed how can any man warrant the condemning of any man to the flames of Hell that is ready to die in attestation of this Faith so expounded and made explicite by the Apostles and lives accordingly And to this purpose it was excellently said by a wise and a pious Prelate St. Hilary Non per difficiles nos Deus ad beatam vitam quaestiones vocat c. In absoluio nobis facili est aeternitas Jesum suscitatum à mortuis per Deum credere ipsum esse Dominum confiteri c. These are the Articles which we must believe which are the sufficient and adequate object of the Faith which is required of us in order to Salvation And therefore it was that when the Bishops of Istria deserted the Communion of Pope Pelagius in causâ trium Capitulorum He gives them an account of his Faith by recitation of the Creed and by attesting the four General Councils and is confident upon this that de fidei firmitate nulla poterit esse quaestio vel suspicio generari let the Apostles Creed especially so explicated be but secured and all Faith is secured and yet that explication too was less necessary than the Articles themselves for the Explication was but accidental but the Articles even before the Explication were accounted a sufficient inlet to the Kingdome of Heaven 40. And that there was security enough in the simple believing the first Articles is very certain amongst them and by their Principles who allow of an implicite faith to serve most persons to the greatest purposes for if the Creed did contain in it the whole Faith and that other Articles were in it implicitely for such is the doctrine of the School and particularly of Aquinas then he that explicitely believes all the Creed
neither expressed nor involved I understand not But then if you extend the analogie of Faith further than that which is proper to the rule or Symbol of Faith then every man expounds Scripture according to the analogie of Faith but what His own Faith which Faith if it be questioned I am no more bound to expound according to the analogie of another mans Faith than he to expound according to the analogie of mine And this is it that is complained on of all sides that overvalue their own opinions Scripture seems so clearly to speak what they believe that they wonder all the world does not see it as clear as they do but they satisfie themselves with saying that it is because they come with prejudice whereas if they had the true belief that is theirs they would easily see what they see And this is very true For if they did believe as others believe they would expound Scriptures to their sence but if this be expounding according to the analogie of Faith it signifies no more than this Be you of my mind and then my arguments will seem concluding and my Authorities and Allegations pressing and pertinent And this will serve on all sides and therefore will doe but little service to the determination of Questions or prescribing to other mens consciences on any side 5. Lastly Consulting the Originals is thought a great matter to Interpretation of Scriptures But this is to small purpose For indeed it will expound the Hebrew and the Greek and rectifie Translations But I know no man that says that the Scriptures in Hebrew and Greek are easie and certain to be understood and that they are hard in Latine and English The difficulty is in the thing however it be expressed the least is in the language If the Original Languages were our mother tongue Scripture is not much the easier to us and a natural Greek or a Jew can with no more reason or authority obtrude his Interpretations upon other mens consciences than a man of another Nation Add to this that the inspection of the Original is no more certain way of Interpretation of Scripture now than it was to the Fathers and Primitive Ages of the Church and yet he that observes what infinite variety of Translations of the Bible were in the first Ages of the Church as S. Hierom observes and never a one like another will think that we shall differ as much in our Interpretations as they did and that the medium is as uncertain to us as it was to them and so it is witness the great number of late Translations and the infinite number of Commentaries which are too pregnant an Argument that we neither agree in the understanding of the words nor of the sence 6. The truth is all these ways of Interpreting of Scripture which of themselves are good helps are made either by design or by our infirmities ways of intricating and involving Scriptures in greater difficulty because men do not learn their doctrines from Scripture but come to the understanding of Scripture with preconceptions and idea's of doctrines of their own and then no wonder that Scriptures look like Pictures wherein every man in the room believes they look on him only and that wheresoever he stands or how often soever he changes his station So that now what was intended for a remedy becomes the promoter of our disease and our meat becomes the matter of sickness And the mischief is the wit of man cannot find a remedy for it for there is no rule no limit no certain principle by which all men may be guided to a certain and so infallible an Interpretation that he can with any equity prescribe to others to believe his Interpretations in places of controversie or ambiguity A man would think that the memorable Prophecy of Jacob that the Scepter should not depart from Judah till Shiloh come should have been so clear a determination of the time of the Messias that a Jew should never have doubted it to have been verified in Jesus of Nazareth and yet for this so clear vaticination they have no less than twenty six Answers S. Paul and S. James seem to speak a little diversly concerning Justification by Faith and Works and yet to my understanding it is very easie to reconcile them but all men are not of my mind for Osiander in his confutation of the book which Melancthon wrote against him observes that there are twenty several opinions concerning Justification all drawn from the Scriptures by the men only of the Augustan Confession There are sixteen several opinions concerning original sin and as many definitions of the Sacraments as there are Sects of men that disagree about them 7. And now what help is there for us in the midst of these uncertainties If we follow any one Translation or any one mans Commentary what rule shall we have to chuse the right by or is there any one man that hath translated perfectly or expounded infallibly No Translation challenges such a prerogative to be authentick but the Vulgar Latine and yet see with what good success For when it was declared authentick by the Council of Trent Sixtus put forth a Copie much mended of what it was and tied all men to follow that but that did not satisfie for Pope Clement revives and corrects it in many places and still the Decree remains in a changed subject And secondly that Translation will be very unapt to satisfie in which one of their own men Isidore Clarius a Monk of Brescia found and mended eight thousand faults besides innumerable others which he says he pretermitted And then thirdly to shew how little themselves were satisfied with it divers learned men among them did new translate the Bible and thought they did God and the Church good service in it So that if you take this for your precedent you are sure to be mistaken infinitely If you take any other the Authors themselves do not promise you any security If you resolve to follow any one as far only as you see cause then you only do wrong or right by chance for you have certainty just proportionable to your own skill to your own infallibility If you resolve to follow any one whithersoever he leads we shall oftentimes come thither where we shall see our selves become ridiculous as it happened in the case of Spiridion Bishop of Cyprus who so resolved to follow his old book that when an eloquent Bishop who was desired to Preach read his Text Tu autem tolle cubile tuum ambula Spiridion was very angry with him because in his book it was tolle lectum tuum and thought it arrogance in the preacher to speak better Latine than his Translator had done And if it be thus in Translations it is far worse in Expositions Quia scil Scripturam sacram pro ipsa sui altitudine non uno eodemque sensu omnes accipium ut penè quot homines tot illic sententiae erui posse
says Bellarmine the body in the sign What 's that for neither the sign nor the body nor both together are broken For if either of them distinctly they either rush upon the errour which the Roman Synod condemn'd in Berengarius or upon that which they would fain excuse in Pope Nicolas but if both are broken then 't is true to affirm it of either and then the Council is blasphemous in saying that Christ's glorified body is passible and frangible by natural manducation So that it is and it is not it is not this way and yet it is no way else but it is some way and they know not how and the Council spake blasphemy but it must be made innocent and therefore it was requisite a cloud of a distinction should be raised that the unwary Reader might be amused and the Decree scape untoucht but the truth is they that undertake to justifie all that other men say must be more subtle then they that said it and must use such distinctions which possibly the first Authours did not understand But I will multiply no more instances for what instance soever I shall bring some or other will be answering it which thing is so far from satisfying me in the particulars that it encreases the difficulty in the general and satisfies me in my first belief For if no Decrees of Councils can make against them though they seem never so plain against them then let others be allowed the same liberty and there is all the reason in the world they should and no Decree shall conclude against any Doctrine that they have already entertained and by this means the Church is no fitter instrument to decree Controversies then the Scripture it self there being as much obscurity and disputing in the sense and the manner and the degree and the competency and the obligation of the Decree of a Council as of a place of Scripture And what are we the nearer for a Decree if any Sophister shall think his elusion enough to contest against the Authority of a Council yet this they do that pretend highest for their Authority which consideration or some like it might possibly make Gratian prefer S. Hierom's single Testimony before a whole Council because he had Scripture on his side which says that the Authority of Councils is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that Councils may possibly recede from their Rule from Scripture and in that which indeed was the case a single person proceeding according to Rule is a better Argument so saith Panormitan In concernentibus fidem etiam dictum unius privati esset dicto Papae aut totius Concilii praeferendum si ille moveretur melioribus Argumentis 11. I end this Discourse with representing the words of Gregory Nazianzen in his Epistle to Procopius Ego si vera scribere oportet ità animo assect us sum ut omnia Episcoporum Concilia fugiam quoniam nullius Concilii sinem laetum faustúmque vidi nec quod depulsionem malorum potiùs quà m accessionem incrementum habuerit But I will not be so severe and dogmaticall against them â—or I believe many Councils to have been call'd with sufficient Authoritie to have been managed with singular piety and prudence and to have been finished with admirable successe and truth And where we find such Councils he that will not with all veneration believe their Decrees and receive their Sanctions understands not that great duty he owes to them who have the care of our souls whose faith we are bound to follow saith Saint Paul that is so long as they follow Christ and certainly many Councils have done so But this was then when the publick interest of Christendome was better conserv'd in determining a true Article then in finding a discreet temper or a wise expedient to satisfie disagreeing persons As the Fathers at Trent did and the Lutherans and Calvinists did at Sendomir in Polonia and the Sublapsarians and Supralapsarians did at Dort It was in Ages when the summe of Religion did not consist in maintaining the Grandezza of the Papacy where there was no order of men with a fourth Vow upon them to advance Saint Peter's Chair when there was no man nor any company of men that esteem'd themselves infallible and therefore they searched for truth as if they meant to find it and would believe it if they could see it proved not resolved to prove it because they had upon chance or interest believed it then they had rather have spoken a truth then upheld their reputation but onely in order to truth This was done sometimes and when it was done God's Spirit never fail'd them but gave them such assistances as were sufficient to that good end for which they were assembled and did implore his aid And therefore it is that the four General Councils so called by way of eminency have gained so great a reputation above all others not because they had a better promise or more special assistances but because they proceeded better according to the Rule with less faction without ambition and temporal ends 12. And yet those very Assemblies of Bishops had no Authority by their Decrees to make a Divine Faith or to constitute new objects of necessary Credence they made nothing true that was not so before and therefore they are to be apprehended in the nature of excellent Guides and whose Decrees are most certainly to determine all those who have no Argument to the contrary of greater force and efficacy then the Authoritie or reasons of the Council And there is a duty owing to every Parish Priest and to every Diocesan Bishop these are appointed over us and to answer for our souls and are therefore morally to guide us as reasonable Creatures are to be guided that is by reason and discourse For in things of judgement and understanding they are but in form next above Beasts that are to be ruled by the imperiousness and absoluteness of Authority unless the Authority be divine that is infallible Now then in a juster height but still in its true proportion Assemblies of Bishops are to guide us with a higher Authority because in reason it is supposed they will do it better with more Argument and certainty and with Decrees which have the advantage by being the results of many discourses of very wise and good men But that the Authority of General Councils was never esteemed absolute infallible and unlimited appears in this that before they were obliging it was necessary that each particular Church respectively should accept them Concurrente universali totius Ecclesiae consensu c. in declaratione veritatum quae credenda sunt c. That 's the way of making the Decrees of Councils become authentick and be turn'd into a Law as Gerson observes and till they did their Decrees were but a dead letter and therefore it is that these later Popes have so laboured that the Council of Trent should be received
the Pope in the Arian Controversie why was the Bishop of Rome made a party and a concurrent as other good Bishops were and not a Judge and an Arbitrator in the Question why did the Fathers prescribe so many Rules and cautions and provisoes for the discovery of Heresy why were the Emperours at so much charge and the Church at so much trouble as to call and convene Councils respectively to dispute so frequently to write so sedulously to observe all advantages against their Adversaries and for the truth and never offered to call for the Pope to determine the Question in his Chair Certainly no way could have been so expedite none so concluding and peremptory none could have convinc'd so certainly none could have triumphed so openly over all Discrepants as this if they had known of any such thing as his being infallible or that he had been appointed by Christ to be the Judge of Controversies And therefore I will not trouble this Discourse to excuse any more words either pretended or really said to this purpose of the Pope for they would but make books swell and the Question endless I shall onely to this purpose observe that the old Writers were so far from believing the Infallibility of the Roman Church or Bishop that many Bishops and many Churches did actually live and continue out of the Roman Communion particularly Saint Austin who with 217 Bishops and their Successors for 100 years together stood separate from that Church if we may believe their own Records So did Ignatius of Constantinople S. Chrysostome S. Cyprian Firmilian those Bishops of Asia that separated in the Question of Easter and those of Africa in the Question of Rebaptization But besides this most of them had Opinions which the Church of Rome disavows now and therefore did so then or else she hath innovated in her Doctrine which though it be most true and notorious I am sure she will never confess But no excuse can be made for S. Austin's disagreeing and contesting in the Question of Appeals to Rome the necessity of Communicating Infants the absolute damnation of Infants to the pains of Hell if they die before Baptism and divers other particulars It was a famous act of the Bishops of Liguria and Istria who seeing the Pope of Rome consenting to the fifth Synod in disparagement of the famous Council of Chalcedon which for their own interests they did not like of renounced subjection to his Patriarchate and erected a Patriarch at Aquileia who was afterwards translated to Venice where his name remains to this day It is also notorious that most of the Fathers were of opinion that the Souls of the faithfull did not enjoy the Beatifick Vision before Doomsday Whether Rome was then of that opinion or no I know not I am sure now they are not witness the Councils of Florence and Trent but of this I shall give a more full account afterwards But if to all this which is already noted we adde that great variety of opinions amongst the Fathers and Councils in assignation of the Canon they not consulting with the Bishop of Rome nor any of them thinking themselves bound to follow his Rule in enumeration of the Books of Scripture I think no more need to be said as to this particular 15. Eighthly But now if after all this there be some Popes which were notorious Hereticks and Preachers of false Doctrine some that made impious Decrees both in Faith and manners some that have determined Questions with egregious ignorance and stupidity some with apparent sophistry and many to serve their own ends most openly I suppose then the Infallibility will disband and we may doe to him as to other good Bishops believe him when there is cause but if there be none then to use our Consciences Non enim salvat Christianum quòd Pontifex constanter affirmat praeceptum suum esse justum sed oportet illud examinari se juxta regulam superiùs datum dirigere I would not instance and repeat the errours of dead Bishops if the extreme boldness of the pretence did not make it necessary But if we may believe Tertullian Pope Zepherinus approved the Prophecies of Montanus and upon that approbation granted peace to the Churches of Asia and Phrygia till Praxeas perswaded him to revoke his act But let this rest upon the credit of Tertullian whether Zepherinus were a Montanist or no some such thing there was for certain Pope Vigilius denied two Natures in Christ and in his Epistle to Theodora the Empress anathematiz'd all them that said he had two natures in one person S. Gregory himself permitted Priests to give Confirmation which is all one as if he should permit Deacons to consecrate they being by Divine Ordinance annext to the higher Orders and upon this very ground Adrianus affirms that the Pope may erre in definiendis dogmatibus fidei And that we may not fear we shall want instances we may to secure it take their own confession Nam multae sunt decretales haereticae says Occham as he is cited by Almain firmiter hoc credo says he for his own particular sed non licet dogmatizare oppositum quoniam sunt determinatae So that we may as well see that it is certain that Popes may be Hereticks as that it is dangerous to say so and therefore there are so few that teach it All the Patriarchs and the Bishop of Rome himself subscribed to Arianism as Baronius confesses and Gratian affirms that Pope Anastasius II. was strucken of God for communicating with the Heretick Photinus I know it will be made light of that Gregory the seventh saith the very Exorcists of the Roman Church are superiour to Princes But what shall we think of that Decretall of Gregory the third who wrote to Boniface his Legate in Germany quòd illi quorum uxores infirmitate aliquâ morbidâ debitum reddere noluerunt aliis poterant nubere Was this a doctrine fit for the Head of the Church an infallible Doctor It was plainly if any thing ever was doctrina Daemoniorum and is noted for such by Gratian Caus. 32.4.7 can quod proposuisti Where the Gloss also intimates that the same privilege was granted to the English-men by Gregory quia novi erant in fide And sometimes we had little reason to expect much better for not to instance in that learned discourse in the Canon-Law de majoritate obedientia where the Pope's Supremacy over Kings is proved from the first chapter of Genesis and the Pope is the Sun and the Emperour is the Moon for that was the fancy of one Pope perhaps though made authentick and doctrinall by him it was if it be possible more ridiculous that Pope Innocent the third urges that the Mosaicall Law was still to be observed and that upon this Argument Sanè saith he cùm Deuteronontium Secunda lex interpretetur ex vi vocabuli comprobatur ut quod
have transacted the solennity with better circumstances and given answers with more truth For the Question is asked of believing in the present And if the Godfathers answer in the name of the child I do believe it is notorious they speak false and ridiculously for the Infant is not capable of believing and if he were he were also capable of dissenting and how then do they know his minde And therefore Tertullian gives advice that the Baptism of Infants should be deferred till they could give an account of their Faith And the same also is the Counsel of Gregory Bishop of Nazianzum although he allows them to hasten it in case of necessity for though his reason taught him what was fit yet he was overborn with the practice and Opinion of his Age which began to bear too violently upon him and yet in another place he makes mention of some to whom Baptism was not administred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reason of Infancy To which if we adde that the parents of S. Austin S. Hierom and S. Ambrose although they were Christian yet did not baptize their children before they were 30 years of age and S. Chrysostome who was instituted and bred up in Religion by the famous and beloved Bishop Meletius was yet not baptized till after he was twenty years of age and Gregory Nazianzen though he was the son of a Bishop yet was not Christened till he came to man's age it will be very considerable in the example and of great efficacy for destroying the supposed necessity or derivation from the Apostles 28. But however it is against the perpetual analogie of Christ's Doctrine to baptize Infants For besides that Christ never gave any precept to baptize them nor ever himself nor his Apostles that appears did baptize any of them all that either he or his Apostles said concerning it requires such previous dispositions to Baptism of which Infants are not capable and these are Faith and Repentance And not to instance in those innumerable places that require Faith before this Sacrament there needs no more but this one saying of our Blessed Saviour He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned plainly thus Faith and Baptism in conjunction will bring a man to heaven but if he have not Faith Baptism shall doe him no good So that if Baptism be necessary then so is Faith and much more for want of Faith damns absolutely it is not said so of the want of Baptism Now if this decretory sentence be to be understood of persons of age and if children by such an answer which indeed is reasonable enough be excused from the necessity of Faith the want of which regularly does damn then it is sottish to say the same incapacity of Reason and Faith shall not excuse from the actual susception of Baptism which is less necessary and to which Faith and many other acts are necessary predispositions when it is reasonably and humanely received The Conclusion is that Baptism is also to be deferred till the time of Faith And whether Infants have Faith or no is a question to be disputed by persons that care not how much they say not how little they prove 29. First Personal and actual Faith they have none for they have no acts of understanding and besides how can any man know that they have since he never saw any sign of it neither was he told so by any one that could tell Secondly Some say they have imputative Faith but then so let the Sacrament be too that is if they have the parents Faith or the Church's then so let Baptism be imputed also by derivation from them that as in their mothers womb and while they hang on their breasts they live upon their mothers nourishment so they may upon the Baptism of their parents or their Mother the Church For since Faith is necessary to the susception of Baptism and themselves confess it by striving to find out new kinds of Faith to dawb the matter up such as the Faith is such must be the Sacrament for there is no proportion between an actual Sacrament and an imputative Faith this being in immediate and necessary order to that And whatsoever can be said to take off from the necessity of actual Faith all that and much more may be said to excuse from the actual susception of Baptism Thirdly the first of these devices was that of Luther and his Scholars the second of Calvin and his and yet there is a third device which the Church of Rome teaches and that is that Infants have habitual Faith But who told them so how can they prove it what Revelation or reason teaches any such thing Are they by this habit so much as disposed to an actual belief without a new Master Can an Infant sent into a Mahumetan province be more confident for Christianity when he comes to be a man then if he had not been baptized Are there any acts precedent concomitant or consequent to this pretended habit This strange invention is absolutely without art without Scripture Reason or Authority But the men are to be excused unless there were a better But for all these strategems the Argument now alledged against the Baptism of Infants is demonstrative and unanswerable 30. To which also this consideration may be added that if Baptism be necessary to the Salvation of Infants upon whom is the imposition laid to whom is the command given to the parents or to the children Not to the children for they are not capable of a Law not to the parents for then God hath put the salvation of innocent babes into the power of others and Infants may be damned for their fathers carelesness or malice It follows that it is not necessary at all to be done to them to whom it cannot be prescribed as a Law and in whose behalf it cannot be reasonably intrusted to others with the appendant necessity and if it be not necessary it is certain it is not reasonable and most certain it is no where in terms prescribed and therefore it is to be presumed that it ought to be understood and administred according as other precepts are with reference to the capacity of the subject and the reasonableness of the thing 31. For I consider that the baptizing of Infants does rush us upon such inconveniences which in other Questions we avoid like rocks which will appear if we Discourse thus Either Baptism produces spiritual effects or it produces them not If it produces not any why is such contention about it what are we the nearer heaven if we are baptized and if it be neglected what are we the farther of But if as without all peradventure all the Paedo-baptists will say Baptism does doe a work upon the Soul producing spiritual benefits and advantages these advantages are produced by the external work of the Sacrament alone or by that as it is helped by the co-operaâ—ion
sent away without cause and because the negative is in this case later then the affirmative it must enter as the affirmatives doe when they happen to be later then the negative Adde to this that for the introduction of a negative against the possession of a prevailing affirmative it is not enough to invalidate the arguments of the affirmative by making it appear they are not demonstrative for although that might have been sufficient to hinder its first entry yet it is not enough to throw it out because it hath gotten strength and reasonableness by long custome and dwelling upon the minds of men and hath some forces beyond what it derives from the first causes of its introduction And therefore whoever will perswade men to quit their long perswasions and their consonant practices must not tell them that such perswasions are not certain and that they cannot prove such practices to be necessary but that the Doctrine is false against some other revealed Truth which they admit and the practice evil not onely useless but dangerous or criminal So that the Anabaptists cannot acquit themselves and promote their cause by going about to invalidate our Arguments unless they do not onely weaken our affirmative by taking away not one or two but all the confidences of its strength but also make their own negative to include a duty or its enemy to be guilty of a crime And therefore if it were granted that we cannot prove the Baptism of infants to be necessary and that they could speak probably against all the Arguments of the right Believers yet it were intolerable that they should be attended to unless they pretend and make their pretence good that they teach piety and duty and necessity for nothing less then these can make recompence for so violent so great an inroad and rape upon the perswasions of men Whether the Anabaptists do so or no will be considered in the sequel Thirdly These Arguments which are in this Section urged in behalf of the Anabaptists their persons I mean finally not their cause at all but in order to their persons can doe the less hurt because they rely upon our grounds not upon theirs that is they are intended to perswade us to a charitable comport towards the men but not at all to perswade their Doctrine For it is remarkable that none of them have made use of this way of arguing since the publication of these Adversaria and of some things they can never make use As in that exposition of the words of S. Peter Be baptized and ye shall receive the holy Ghost which is expounded to be meant not in Baptism but in Confirmation which is a Rite the Anabaptists allow not and therefore they cannot make use of any such Exposition which supposes a Divine institution of that which they at no hand admit And so it is in divers other particulars as any wary person that is cautious he be not deluded by any weak and plausible pretence of theirs may easily observe But after all the Arguments for the Baptism of children are firm and valid and though shaken by the adverse plea yet as trees that stand in the face of storms take the surer root so will the right Reasons of the right Believers if they be represented with their proper advantages Ad 3. 13. The first Argument is the Circumcising of children which we say does rightly infer the Baptizing them The Anabaptist says no because admit that Circumcision were the type of Baptism yet it follows not that the circumstances of one must infer the same circumstances in the other which he proves by many instances and so far he sayes true And therefore if there were no more in the Argument then can be inferred from the type to the antitype both the supposition the superstructure would be infirm because it is uncertain whether Circumcision be a type of Baptism and if it were granted it cannot infer equal circumstances But then this Argument goes farther and to other and more material purposes even to the overthrow of their chief pretension For Circumcision was a seal of the righteousness of faith And if Infants who have no Faith yet can by a Ceremony be admitted into the Covenant of Faith as S. Paul conâ—ends that all the circumcised were and it is certain of Infants that they were reckoned amongst the Lord's people as soon as they were circumcised then it follows that the great pretence of the Anabaptists that for want of Faith Infants are incapable of the Sacrament comes to nothing For if Infants were admitted into the Covenant of Faith by a Ceremony before they could enter by choice and reason by Faith and Obedience then so they may now their great and onely pretence notwithstanding Now whereas the Anabaptist says that in the admission of the Jewish Infants to Circumcision and of Christian Infants to Baptism there is this difference that Circumcision imprints a character on the flesh but Baptism does not Circumcision had no word added but Baptism hath and therefore Infants were capable of the former but not of the latter for they might be cut with the Circumcising-stone but they cannot be instructed with the word of Baptism in that there was a character left by which they might be instructed when they come to age but in Baptism there is no character and the word they understand not therefore that was to purpose but this is not I answer that this is something to the circumstance of the Sacraments but nothing to the substance of the Argument For if the Covenant of Faith can belong to Infants then it is certain they can have the benefit of Faith before they have the grace that is God will doe them benefit before they can do him service and that is no new thing in Religion that God should love us first But then that God is not as much before-hand with Christian as with Jewish Infants is a thing which can never be believed by them who understand that in the Gospel God opened all his treasures of mercies and unsealed the fountain itself whereas before he poured forth only rivulets of mercy and comfort That Circumcision is a seal of the righteousness of faith Saint Paul affirms that so also is Baptism if it be any thing at all the Anabaptists must needs confess because they refuse to give Baptism to them who have not Faith and make it useless to them as being a Seal without a Deed. But then the Argument is good upon its first grounds But then for the title Reparties but now mentioned that Circumcision imprints a character but Baptism does not that Baptism hath a word but Circumcision had none they are just nothing to the purpose For as that character imprinted on the Infants flesh would have been nothing of instruction to them unless there had been a word added that is unless they had been told the meaning of it when they came to be men so neither will the word
those little ones which were then brought for they were come already and though they were tacitly reproved who offered to hinder them yet the children were present and therefore it must relate to others to all Infants that they should for ever be brought to Christ. And this is also to be gathered from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of such not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of these for these are but a few but the Kingdome of God is of such as these who are now brought children make up a great portion of it and the other portion is made up by such who become like to these And if the Transcript belong to the Kingdome it were strange if the Exemplar should not if none can enter but they who are like children it must be certain that nothing can hinder the children And lastly if we regard the Doctrine which Christ established upon this action it will finish the Argument into a certain conclusion Whosoever shall not receive the Kingdome of God as a little child shall not enter therein receive it as a little child receives it that is with innocence and without any let or hinderance So that they who receive it best receive it but as little children for they being the first in the kind are made the measure of all the rest and if others shall be excluded for not being like these it is certain these are not to be excluded for not being like others other are commanded to be like them in innocence and that is sufficient to make them recipients of the Divine grace but therefore to make Infants to be recipients it is not required that they should have the use of Reason And we do not well consider that it is God who creates all our capacities of grace and it is he who makes us able to receive what he intends to bestow and nothing of ours can doe it no good actions can deserve any grace much less the first grace the grace of Baptism and all that men can doe in the whole use of their Reason and order of their life is to return as much as they can to the innocence of their Infancy and Prayer is but a seeking after pardon and grace whereby we may stand as innocents before God and Charity is but growing and is here principally the extermination of all malice and envie and by Alms as Daniel advis'd to Nebuchadnezzar we do but break off our sins and our health is but the expulsion of evil humors and our pleasure is but the removal of a pain and optimus est qui minimis urgetur and our best holiness is being like to Infants and therefore it is no wonder if God made them the principals in this line and loves them so well who are innocent of any consent to evil And although they have done no good yet they are all that which God loves they are his Image undefiled unscratchâ—d unbroken by any act or consent of their own but then it were a very great wonder if these in whom God sees the work of his own hands the image of his own essence the purity of innocence the capacities of glory to whom his Holy Son gave such signal testimonies of his love upon whom he bestowed a blessing for whose sake he was much displeased when they were hindred to come whom he declared the exemplar of those who should be saved and the pattern and precedent of receiving his Kingdome to whom he imparted spiritual favours by a ceremony and selemnity I say it were a very great wonder that these should not receive the same favours in the way of ordinary establishment who have the principal title and did actually receive them in the extraordinary before the general appointment of the other If there be any thing that can hinder them it must be something without for nothing within can hinder them to receive â—hat which others cannot receive but by being like them and if any thing without does hinder them it cannot expect to fare better then the Disciples with whom Christ was much displeased But of what can they now be hindered Not of the grace of the Sacrament that is their own by way of eminent relation and propriety the Kingdome of Heaven is theirs and of such as they are Not of the Sacrament therefore or solemnity for that is wholly for the other and is nothing but an instrument and hath a relative use and none else and as it is to no purpose to any man till they receive the grace of it so it can be for no reason detained from them who shall certainly have the grace though they be forcibly deprived of the instrument Unless therefore they who could come to Christ and were commanded to be brought to Christ when he was upon earth may not cannot come to him now that he is in Heaven and made our Advocate and our Gracious Lord and King unless they who had the honour of a solemnity from the hands of Christ may not be admitted to a ceremony from the hands of his servants unless Baptismal water be more then Baptismal grace and to be admitted into the Church be more then to be admitted to Heaven it cannot with any plausible reason be pretended that Infants are to be excluded form this Sacrament Ad 14. Now as for the little things which the Anab. murmurs against the first essay of this Argument they will quickly disappear For whereas he says it were a better Argument to say that Christ blessed children and so dismissed them but baptized them not therefore Infants are not to be baptized this is perfectly nothing because Christ baptized none at all men women nor children and this will conclude against the Baptism of men too as well as Infants and whereas it is hence inferred that because Christ baptized them not therefore he hath other ways of bringing them to Heaven then by Baptism it is very true but makes very much against them For if God hath other ways of bringing them to Heaven who yet cannot believe if they can go to Heaven without Faith why not to the Font If they can obtain that glorious end in order to which the Sacrament is appointed without the act of believing then so also they may the means But for what end to what purpose do they detain the water when they cannot keep back the Spirit and why will they keep them from the Church when they cannot keep them from God and why do men require harder conditions of being baptized then of being saved And then that God will by other means bring them to Heaven if they have not Baptism is argument sufficient to prove that God's goodness prevails over the malice and ignorance of men and that men contend more for shadows then for substances and are more nice in their own ministrations then God is in the whole effusions of his bounty and therefore that these disagreeing persons may doe themselves injury but in the event of things none to the
the Baptism of whole Families in which children are as well to be reckoned as the uninstructed servants and if actual Faith be not required before Baptism even of those who are naturally capable of it as it is notorious in the case of the Gaolour who believed and at that very hour he and all his family were baptized then want of Faith cannot prejudice Infants and then nothing can Sixthly There was never in the Church a command against the baptizing Infants and whereas it is urged that in the Council of Neocaesarea the Baptism of a pregnant woman did no way relate to the child and that the reason there given excludes all Infants upon the same account because every one is to shew his Faith by his own choice and election I answer that this might very well be in those times where Christianity had not prevailed but was forced to dispute for every single proselyte and the mother was a Christian and the Father a Heathen there was reason that the child should be let alone till he could chuse for himself when peradventure it was not fit his father should chuse for him and that is the meaning of the words of Balsamo and Zonaras upon that Canon But secondly the words of the Neocaesarean Canon are not rightly considered For the reason is not relative to the child but onely to the woman concerning whom the Council thus decreed The woman with child may be baptized when she will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For her Baptism reaches not to the child because every one confesses his Faith by his own act and choice that is the woman confesses onely for herself she intends it onely for herself she chuses onely for herself and therefore is onely baptized for herself But this intimates that if she could confess for her child the Baptism would relate to her child but therefore when the Parents do confess for the child or the Godfathers and that the child is baptized into that confession it is valid However nothing in this Canon is against it I have now considered all that the Anabaptists can with probability object against our Arguments and have discovered the weakness of their exceptions by which although they are and others may be abused yet it is their weakness that is the cause of it for which although the men are to be pitied yet it may appear now that their cause is not at all the better Ad 28. It remains that I consider their own Arguments by which they support themselves in their misperswasion First It is against the analogie of the Gospel for besides that Christ never baptized any Infants nor his Apostles there is required to Baptism Faith and Repentance of which because Infants are not capable neither are they capable of the Sacrament To these things I answer that it is true Christ never baptized Infants for he baptized no person at all but he blessed Infants and what that amounts to I have already discoursed and he gave a commandment of Baptism which did include them also as I have proved in the foregoing periods and in other places That the Apostles never baptized Infants is boldly said but can never be proved But then as to the main of the Argument that Faith and Repentance are pre-required I answer It is in this as it was in Circumcision to which a Proselyte could not be admitted form Gentilism or Idolatry unless he gave up his name to the Religion and believed in God and his servant Moses but yet their children might and it might have been as well argued against their children as ours since in their Proselytes and ours there were required predispositions of Faith and Repentance 2. But it is no wonder that these are called for by the Apostles of those whom they invited to the Religion they dealt with men of reason but such who had superinduced foul sins to their infidelity which were to be removed before they could be illuminated and baptized but Infants are in their pure naturals therefore nothing hinders them from receiving the gifts meer graces of God's Holy Spirit before-mentioned 3. But we see also that although Christ required Faith of them who came to be healed yet when any were brought or came in behalf of others he onely required Faith of them who came and their Faith did benefit to others For no man can call on him on whom they have not believed but therefore they who call must believe and if they call for others they must believe that Christ can doe it for others But this instance is so certain a reproof of this Objection of theirs which is their principal which is there all that it is a wonder to me they should not all be convinced at the reading and observing of it I knew an eminent person amongst them who having been abused by their fallacies upon the discovery of the falshood of this their main allegation was converted I know also some others who could not at all object against it but if they had been as humble as they were apprehensive would certainly have confessed their errour But to this I can adde nothing new beyond what I have largely discoursed of in the Treatise of Baptism before-mentioned Ad 30. The next Argument is If Baptism be necessary to infants upon whom is the imposition laid to whom is the command given The Children are not capable of a Law therefore it is not given to them nor yet to the parents because if so then the Salvation of Infants should be put into the power of others who may be careless or malicious I answer that there is no precept of baptizing Infants just in that circumstance of age for then they had sinned who had deferred it upon just grounds to their manhood But it is a precept given to all and it is made necessary by that order of things which Christ hath constituted in the New Testament so that if they be baptized at all in their just period there is no commandment broken but if Infants come not to be men then it was accidentally necessary they should have been baptized before they were men And now to the enquiry upon whom the imposition lies it is easie to give an answer it lies upon them who can receive it and therefore upon the parents not so that the Salvation of Infants depends upon others God forbid but so that if they neglect the charitable ministry they shall dearly account for it It is easie to be understood by two Instances God commanded that children should be circumcised Moses by his wife's peevishness neglected it and therefore the Lord sought to kill him for it not Gershom the child It is necessary for the preservation of childrens lives that they eat but the provisions of meat for them is a duty incumbent on the parents and yet if parents expose their children it may be the lives of the children shall not depend on others but when their father and mother forsaketh them
first mysteries of our Regeneration Now because Christ is the great Fountain of this Blessing to us and he it was who sent his Father's Spirit upon the Church himself best knew his own intentions and the great Blessings he intended to communicate to his Church and therefore it was most agreeable that from his Sermons we should learn his purposes and his blessing and our duty Here Christ declared rem Sacramenti the spiritual Grace which he would afterwards impart to his Church by exterior Ministery in this as in all other Graces Mysteries and Rituals Evangelical Nisi quis Vnless a man be born both of Water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God But the next Objection is yet more material 2. For if this be the meaning of our Blessed Saviour then Confirmation is as necessary as Baptism and without it ordinarily no man can be saved The Solution of this will answer a Case of Conscience concerning the necessity of Confirmation and in what degree of duty and diligence we are bound to take care that we receive this Holy Rite I answer therefore that entring into the Kingdom of God is being admitted into the Christian Church and warfare to become Sons of God and Souldiers of Jesus Christ. And though this be the outward Door and the first entrance into Life and consequently the King's high-way and the ordinary means of Salvation yet we are to distinguish the external Ceremony from the internal Mystery The Nisi quis is for this not for that and yet that also is the ordinary way Vnless a man be baptized that is unless he be indeed regenerate he cannot be sav'd and yet Baptism or the outward washing is the Solemnity and Ceremony of its ordinary ministration and he that neglects this when it may be had is not indeed Regenerate he is not renewed in the spirit of his Mind because he neglects God's way and therefore can as little be sav'd as he who having receiv'd the External Sacrament puts a bar to the intromission of the Inward Grace Both cannot always be had but when they can although they are not equally valuable in the nature of the Thing yet they are made equally necessary by the Divine Commandment And in this there is a great but general mistake in the doctrine of the Schools disputing concerning what Sacraments are necessary necessitate medii that is as necessary Means and what are necessary by the necessity of Precept or Divine Commandment For although a less reason will excuse from the actual susception of some than of others and a less diligence for the obtaining of one will serve than in obtaining of another and a supply in one is easier obtained than in another yet no Sacrament hath in it any other necessity than what is made merely by the Divine Commandment But the grace of every Sacrament or Rite or Mystery which is of Divine ordinance is necessary indispensably so as without it no man can be sav'd And this difference is highly remarkable in the words of Christ recorded by S. Mark He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned Baptism it self as to the external part is not necessary necessitate medii or indispensably but baptismal Faith for the remission of sins in persons capable that indeed is necessary for Christ does not say that â—he want of Baptism damns as the want of Faith does and yet both Baptism and Faith are the ordinary way of Salvation and both necessary Baptism because it is so by the Divine Commandment and Faith as a necessary means of Salvation in the very Oeconomy and dispensation of the Gospel Thus it is also in the other Sacrament Vnless we eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood we have no life in us and yet God forbid that every man that is not Communicated should die eternally But it means plainly that without receiving Christ as he is by God's intention intended we should receive him in the Communion we have no life in us Plainly thus Without the Internal grace we cannot live and the External ministery is the usual and appointed means of conveying to us the Internal and therefore although without the External it is possible to be sav'd when it is impossible to be had yet with the wilful neglect of it we cannot Thus therefore we are to understand the words of Christ declaring the necessity of both these Ceremonies They are both necessary because they are the means of spiritual advantages and graces and both minister to the proper ends of their appointment and both derive from a Divine Original but the ritual or ceremonial part in rare emergencies is dispensable but the Grace is indispensable Without the grace of Baptism we shall die in our sins and without the grace or internal part of Confirmation we shall never be able to resist the Devil but shall be taken captive by him at his will Now the External or Ritual part is the means the season and opportunity of this Grace and therefore is at no hand to be neglected lest we be accounted despisers of the grace and tempters of God to ways and provisions extraordinary For although when without our fault we receive not the Sacramental part God can and will supply it to us out of his own stores because no man can perish without his own fault and God can permit to himself what he pleases as being Lord of the Grace and of the Sacrament yet to us he hath given a Law and a Rule and that is the way of his Church in which all Christians ought to walk In short The use of it is greatly profitable the neglect is inexcusable but the contempt is damnable Tenentur non negligere si pateat opportunitas said the Bishops in a Synod at Paris If there be an opportunity it must not be neglected Obligantur suscipere aut saltem non contemnere said the Synod at Sens They are bound to receive it or at least not to despise it Now he despises it that refuses it when he is invited to it or when it is offered or that neglects it without cause For causlesly and contemptuously are all one But these answers were made by gentle Casuists he only values the Grace that desires it that longs for it that makes use of all the means of Grace that seeks out for the means that refuses no labour that goes after them as the Merchant goes after Gain and therefore the Old Ordo Romanus admonishes more strictly Omnino praecavendum esse ut hoc Sacramentum Confirmationis non negligatur quia tunc omne Baptisma legitimum Christianitatis nomine confirmatur We must by all means take heed that the Rite of Confirmation be not neglected because in that every true Baptism is ratified and confirmed Which words are also to the same purpose made use of by Albinus Flaccus No man can tell to what degrees of
they cannot charge it with any evil 2. Because for all the time of King Edward the Sixth and till the Eleventh year of Queen Elizabeth your people came to our Churches and prayed with us till the Bull of Pius Quintus came out upon temporal regards and made a Schism by forbidding the Queen's Subjects to pray as by Law was here appointed though the Prayers were good and holy as themselves did believe That Bull enjoyned Recusancy and made that which was an act of Rebellion and Disobedience and Schism to be the character of your Roman Catholicks And after this what can be supposed wanting in order to Salvation We have the Word of God the Faith of the Apostles the Creeds of the Primitive Church the Articles of the four first General Councils a holy Liturgy excellent Prayers perfect Sacraments Faith and Repentance the Ten Commandments and the Sermons of Christ and all the Precepts counsels of the Gospel We teach the necessity of good works and require and strictly exact the severity of a holy life We live in obedience to God and are ready to die for him and do so when he requires us so to do We speak honourably of his most holy Name we worship him at the mention of his Name we confess his Attributes we love his Servants we pray for all men we love all Christians even our most erring Brethren We confess our sins to God and to our Brethren whom we have offended and to God's Ministers in cases of Scandal or of a troubled Conscience We communicate often we are enjoyned to receive the holy Sacrament thrice every year at least Our Priests absolve the penitent our Bishops ordain Priests and Confirm baptized persons and bless their people and intercede for them and what could here be wanting to Salvation what necessity forced you from us I dare not suspect it was a Temporal regard that drew you away but I am sure it could be no Spiritual But now that I have told you and made you to consider from whence you went give me leave to represent to you and tell you whither you are gone that you may understand the nature and conditions of your change For do not think your self safe because they tell you that you are come to the Church You are indeed gone from one Church to another from a better to a worse as will appear in the induction the particulars of which before I reckon give me leave to give you this advice If you mean in this affair to understand what you do it were better you enquired what your Religion is than what your Church is For that which is a true Religion to day will be so to morrow and for ever but that which is a holy Church to day may be heretical at the next change or may betray her trust or obtrude new Articles in contradiction to the old or by new interpretations may elude ancient Truths or may change your Creed or may pretend to be the Spouse of Christ when she is idolatrous that is adulterous to God Your Religion is that which you must and therefore may competently understand You must live in it and grow in it and govern all the actions of your life by it and in all questions concerning the Church you are to chuse your Church by the Religion and therefore this ought first and last to be enquired after Whether the Roman Church be the Catholick Church must depend upon so many uncertain enquiries is offered to be proved by so long so tedious a method hath in it so many intrigues and Labyrinths of Question and is like a long line so impossible to be perfectly streight and to have no declination in it when it is held by such a hand as yours that unless it be by material enquiries into the Articles of the Religion you can never hope to have just grounds of confidence In the mean time you can consider this if the Roman Church were the Catholick that is so as to exclude all that are not of her communion then the Greek Churches had as good turn Turks as remain damned Christians and all that are in the communion of all the other Patriarchal Churches in Christendom must also perish like Heathens which thing before any man can believe he must have put off all reason and all modesty and all charity And who can with any probability think that the Communion of Saints in the Creed is nothing but the Communion of Roman Subjects and the Article of the Catholick Church was made up to dispark the inclosures of Jerusalem but to turn them into the pale of Rome and the Church is as limited as ever it was save only that the Synagogue is translated to Rome which I think you will easily believe was a Proposition the Apostles understood not But though it be hard to trust to it it is also so hard to prove it that you shall never be able to understand the measures of that question and therefore your Salvation can never depend upon it For no good or wise person can believe that God hath tied our Salvation to impossible measures or bound us to an Article that is not by us cognoscible or intends to have us conducted by that which we cannot understand And when you shall know that Learned men even of the Roman party are not agreed concerning the Catholick Church that is infallibly to guide you Some saying that it is the Virtual Church that is the Pope Some that it is the Representative Church that is a Council Some that it is the Pope and the Council the Virtual Church and the Representative Church together Some that neither of these nor both together are infallible but only the essential Church or the diffusive Church is the Catholick from whom we must at no hand dissent you will quickly find your self in a wood and uncertain whether you have more than a word in exchange for your Soul when you are told you are in the Catholick Church But I will tell you what you may understand and see and feel something that your self can tell whether I say true or no concerning it You are now gone to a Church that protects it self by arts of subtilty and arms by violence and persecuting all that are not of their minds to a Church in which your are to be a Subject of the King so long as it pleases the Pope In which you may be absolved from your Vows made to God your Oaths to the King your Promises to Men your duty to your Parents in some cases A Church in which men pray to God and to Saints in the same Form of words in which they pray to God as you may see in the Offices of Saints and particularly of our Lady a Church in which men are taught by most of the principal Leaders to worship Images with the same worship with which they worship God and Christ or him or her whose Image it is and in which they usually picture
teaching us But it is at least hugely disputable and not at all certain that any man or society of men can be infallible that we may put our trust in Saints in certain extraordinary Images or burn Incense and offer consumptive oblations to the Virgin Mary or make Vows to persons of whose state or place or capacities or condition we have no certain revelation We are sure we do well when in the holy Communion we worship God and Jesus Christ our Saviour but they who also worship what seems to be Bread are put to strange shifts to make themselves believe it to be lawful It is certainly lawful to believe what we see and feel but it is an unnatural thing upon pretence of faith to disbelieve our eyes when our sense and our faith can better be reconciled as it is in the question of the Real Presence as it is taught by the Church of England So that unless you mean to prefer a danger before safety temptation to unholiness before a severe and a holy Religion Unless you mean to lose the benefit of your Prayers by praying what you perceive not and the benefit of the Sacrament in great degrees by falling from Christ's institution and taking half instead of all Unless you desire to provoke God to jealousie by Images and Man to jealousie in professing a Religion in which you may in many cases have leave to forfeit your faith and lawful trust Unless you will still continue to give scandal to those good people with whom you have lived in a common Religion and weaken the hearts of God's afflicted ones Unless you will chuse a Catechism without the Second Commandment and a Faith that grows bigger or less as men please and a Hope that in many degrees relies on men and vain confidences and a Charity that damns all the World but your selves Unless you will do all this that is suffer an abuse in your Prayers in the Sacrament in the Commandments in Faith in Hope in Charity in the Communion of Saints and your duty to your Supreme you must return to the bosom of your Mother the Church of England from whence you have fallen rather weakly than maliciously and I doubt not but you will find the Comfort of it all your Life and in the Day of your Death and in the Day of Judgment If you will not yet I have freed mine own Soul and done an act of Duty and Charity which at least you are bound to take kindly if you will not entertain it obediently Now let me add this That although most of these Objections are such things which are the open and avowed doctrines or practices of your Church and need not to be proved as being either notorious or confessed yet if any of your Guides shall seem to question any thing of it I will bind my self to verifie it to a tittle and in that too which I intend them that is so as to be an Objection obliging you to return under the pain of folly or heresie or disobedience according to the subject matter And though I have propounded these things now to your consideration yet if it be desired I shall represent them to your eye so that even your self shall be able to give sentence in the behalf of Truth In the mean time give me leave to tell you of how much folly you are guilty in being moved by such mock-arguments as your men use when they meet with women and tender consciences and weaker understandings The first is Where was your Church before Luther Now if you had called upon them to speak something against your Religion from Scripture or right Reason or Universal Tradition you had been secure as a Tortoise in her shell a Cart pressed with Sheaves could not have oppressed your cause or person though you had confessed you understood nothing of the mysteries of succession doctrinal or personal For if we can make it appear that our Religion was that which Christ and his Apostles taught let the Truth suffer what Eclipses or prejudices can be supposed let it be hid like the holy fire in the captivity yet what Christ and his Apostles taught us is eternally true and shall by some means or other be conveyed to us even the enemies of Truth have been conservators of that Truth by which we can confute their Errors But if you still ask where it was before Luther I answer it was there where it was after even in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and I know no warrant for any other Religion And if you will expect I should shew any Society of men who professed all the doctrines which are now expressed in the Confession of the Church of England I shall tell you it is unreasonable because some of our Truths are now brought into our publick Confessions that they might be oppos'd against your Errors before the occasion of which there was no need of any such Confessions till you made many things necessary to be professed which are not lawful to be believed For if we believe your superinduc'd follies we shall do unreasonably unconscionably and wickedly but the questions themselves are so useless abstracting from the accidental necessity which your follies have brought upon us that it had been happy if we had never heard of them more than the Saints and Martyrs did in the first Ages of the Church But because your Clergy have invaded the liberty of the Church and multiplied the dangers of damnation and pretend new necessities and have introduc'd new Articles and affright the simple upon new pretensions and slight the very institution and the Commands of Christ and of the Apostles and invent new Sacramentals constituting Ceremonies of their own head and promise grace along with the use of them as if they were not Ministers but Lords of the Spirit and teach for doctrines the commandments of men and make void the Commandment of God by their tradition and have made a strange Body of Divinity therefore it is necessary that we should immure our Faith by the refusal of such vain and superstitious dreams but our Faith was completed at first it is no other than that which was delivered to the Saints and can be no more for ever So that it is a foolish demand to require that we should shew before Luther a Systeme of Articles declaring our sence in these questions It was long before they were questions at all and when they were made questions they remained so a long time and when by their several pieces they were determined this part of the Church was oppressed with a violent power and when God gave opportunity then the yoke was broken and this is the whole progress of this affair But if you will still insist upon it then let the matter be put into equal balances and let them shew any Church whose Confession of Faith was such as was obtruded upon you at Trent and if your Religion be Pius Quartus his Creed
at Trent then we also have a question to ask and that is Where was your Religion before Trent The Council of Trent determined That the Souls departed before the day of Judgment enjoy the Beatifical Vision It is certain this Article could not be shewn in the Confession of any of the ancient Churches for most of the Fathers were of another opinion But that which is the greatest offence of Christendom is not only that these doctrines which we say are false were yet affirmed but that those things which the Church of God did always reject or held as Uncertain should be made Articles of Faith and so become parts of your Religion and of these it is that I again ask the question which none of your side shall ever be able to answer for you Where was your Religion before Trent I could instance in many particulars but I shall name one to you which because the thing of it self is of no great consequence it will appear the more unreasonable and intolerable that your Church should adopt it into the things of necessary belief especially since it was only a matter of fact and they took the false part too For in the 21. Sess. Chap. 4. it is affirmed That although the holy Fathers did give the Sacrament of the Eucharist to Infants yet they did it without any necessity of salvation that is they did not believe it necessary to their salvation Which is notoriously false and the contrary is marked out with the black-lead of every man almost that reads their Works and yet your Council says this is sine controversiâ credendum to be believed without all controversie and all Christians forbidden to believe or teach otherwise So that here it is made an Article of Faith amongst you that a man shall neither believe his reason nor his eyes and who can shew any Confession of Faith in which all the Trent-doctrine was professed and enjoyned under pain of damnation And before the Council of Constance the doctrine touching the Popes power was so new so decried that as Gerson says he hardly should have escaped the note of Heresie that would have said so much as was there defined So that in that Article which now makes a great part of your belief where was your Religion before the Council of Constance And it is notorious that your Council of Constance determined the doctrine of the Half-communion with a Non obstante to Christ's institution that is with a defiance to it or a noted observed neglect of it and with a profession it was otherwise in the Primitive Church Where then was your Religion before John Hus and Hierom of Prague's time against whom that Council was convened But by this instance it appears most certainly that your Church cannot shew her Confessions immediately after Christ and therefore if we could not shew ours immediately before Luther it were not half so much For since you receded from Christ's Doctrine we might well recede from yours and it matters not who or how many or how long they professed your doctrine if neither Christ nor his Apostles did teach it So that if these Articles constitute your Church your Church was invisible at the first and if ours was invisible afterwards it matters not For yours was invisible in the days of light and ours was invisible in the days of darkness For our Church was always visible in the reflections of Scripture and he that had his eyes of Faith and Reason might easily have seen these Truths all the way which constitute our Church But I add yet farther that our Church before Luther was there where your Church was in the same place and in the same persons For divers of the Errors which have been amongst us reformed were not the constituent Articles of your Church before Luther's time for before the last Councils of your Church a man might have been of your Communion upon easier terms and Indulgences were indeed a practice but no Article of Faith before your men made it so and that very lately and so were many other things besides So that although your men cozen the credulous and the simple by calling yours The old Religion yet the difference is vast between Truth and their affirmative even as much as between old Errors and new Articles For although Ignorance and Superstition had prepared the Oar yet the Councils of Constance and Basil and Trent especially were the Forges and the Mint Lastly If your men had not by all the vile and violent arts of the world stopped the mouths of dissenters the question would quickly have been answered or our Articles would have been so confessed so owned and so publick that the question could never have been asked But in despite of all opposition there were great numbers of professors who did protest and profess and practise our doctrines contrary to your Articles as it is demonstrated by the Divines of Germany in Illyricus his Catalogus testium veritatis and in Bishop Morton's Appeal But with your next objection you are better pleased and your men make most noise with it For you pretend that by our confession Salvation may be had in your Church but your men deny it to us and therefore by the confession of both sides you may be safe and there is no question concerning you but of us there is great question for none but our selves say that we can be saved I answer 1. That Salvation may be had in your Church is it ever the truer because we say it If it be not it can add no confidence to you for the Proposition gets no strength by our affirmative But if it be then our authority is good or else our reason and if either be then we have more reason to be believed speaking of our selves because we are concerned to see that our selves may be in a state of hope and therefore we would not venture on this side if we had not greater reason to believe well of our selves than of you And therefore believe us when it is more likely that we have greater reason because we have greater concernments and therefore greater considerations 2. As much charity as your men pretend us to speak of you yet it is a clear case our hope of your Salvation is so little that we dare not venture our selves on your side The Burger of Oldwater being to pass a River in his journey to Daventry bad his man try the ford telling him he hoped he should not be drowned for though he was afraid the River was too deep yet he thought his Horse would carry him out or at least the Boats would fetch him off Such a confidence we may have of you but you will find that but little warranty if you remember how great an interest it is that you venture 3. It would be remembred that though the best ground of your hope is not the goodness of your own faith but the greatness of our charity yet we that charitably
betray it yet the same severity you 'l find among us For though we will not tell a lie to help a sinner and say that is necessary which is only appointed to make men do themselves good yet we advise and commend it and do all the work of Souls to all those people that will be saved by all means to devout persons that make Religion the business of their lives and they that do not so in the Churches of the Roman Communion as they find but little advantage by periodical confessions so they feel but little awfulness and severity by the injunction You must confess to God all your secret actions you must advise with a holy man in all the affairs of your Soul you will be but an ill friend to your self if you conceal from him the state of your spiritual affairs We desire not to hear the circumstance of every sin but when matter of justice is concerned or the nature of the sin is changed that is when it ought to be made a Question and you will find that though the Church of England gives you much liberty from the bondage of innumerable Ceremonies and humane devices yet in the matter of holiness you will be tied to very great service but such a service as is perfect freedom that is the service of God and the love of the holy Jesus and a very strict religious life For we do not promise Heaven but upon the same terms it is promised us that is Repentance towards God and Faith in our Lord Jesus and as in Faith we make no more to be necessary than what is made so in holy Scripture so in the matter of Repentance we give you no easie devices and suffer no lessening definitions of it but oblige you to that strictness which is the condition of being saved and so expressed to be by the infallible Word of God but such as in the Church of Rome they do not so much stand upon Madam I am weary of my Journey and although I did purpose to have spoken many things more yet I desire that my not doing it may be laid upon the account of my weariness all that I shall add to the main business is this 4. Read the Scripture diligently and with an humble spirit and in it observe what is plain and believe and live accordingly Trouble not your self with what is difficult for in that your duty is not described 5. Pray frequently and effectually I had rather your prayers should be often than long It was well said of Petrarch Magno verborum fraeno uti decet cum superiore colloquentem When you speak to your Superior you ought to have a bridle upon your tongue much more when you speak to God I speak of what is decent in respect of our selves and our infinite distances from God But if love makes you speak speak on so shall your prayers be full of charity and devotion Nullus est amore superior ille te coget ad veniam qui me ad multiloquium Love makes God to be our friend and our approaches more united and acceptable and therefore you may say to God The same love which made me speak will also move thee to hear and pardon Love and devotion may enlarge your Litanies but nothing else can unless Authority does interpose 6. Be curious not to communicate but with the true Sons of the Church of England lest if you follow them that were amongst us but are gone out from us because they were not of us you be offended and tempted to impute their follies to the Church of England 7. Trouble your self with no controversies willingly but how you may best please God by a strict and severe conversation 8. If any Protestant live loosely remember that he dishonours an excellent Religion and that it may be no more laid upon the charge of our Church than the ill lives of most Christians may upon the whole Religion 9. Let no man or woman affright you with declamations and scaring words of Heretick and Damnation and Changeable for these words may be spoken against them that return to light as well as to those that go to darkness and that which men of all sides can say it can be of effect to no side upon its own strength or pretension THE END THREE LETTERS WRITTEN TO A GENTLEMAN That was tempted to the Communion of the ROMISH CHURCH The First Letter SIR YOU needed not to make the Preface of an excuse for writing so friendly and so necessary a Letter of Inquiry It was your kindness to my person which directed your addresses hither and your duty which ingag'd you to inquire some-where I do not doubt but you and very many other ingenious and conscientious persons do every day meet with the Tempters of the Roman Church who like the Pharisees compass Sea and Land to get a Proselyte at this I wonder not for as Demetrius said by this craft they get their living but I wonder that any ingenious person and such as I perceive you to be can be shaken by their weak assaults for their batteries are made up with impossible propositions and weak and violent prejudices respectively and when they talk of their own infallibility they prove it with false Mediums say we with fallible Mediums as themselves confess and when they argue us of an Uncertain Faith because we pretend to no infallibility they are themselves much more Uncertain because they build their pretence of infallibility upon that which not only can but will deceive them and since they can pretend no higher for their infallibility than prudential motives they break in pieces the staff upon which they lean and with which they strike us But Sir you are pleased to ask two Questions 1. Whether the Apostles of our Blessed Lord did not Orally deliver many things necessary to Salvation which were not committed to writing To which you add this assumentum in which because you desire to be answered I suppose you meant it for another Question viz. whether in those things which the Church of Rome retains and we take no notice of She be an Innovator or a conserver of Tradition and whether any thing which she so retains was or was not esteemed necessary The answer to the first part will conclude the second I therefore answer that whatsoever the Apostles did deliver as necessary to Salvation all that was written in the Scriptures and that to them who believe the Scriptures to be the word of God there needs no other Magazine of Divine truths but the Scripture And this the Fathers of the first and divers succeeding Ages do Unanimously affirm I will set down two or three so plain that either you must conclude them to be deceivers or that you will need no more but their testimony The words of S. Basil are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Every word and every thing ought to be made credible or believ'd by the testimony of the Divinely-inspired
Quest. Whether without all danger of Superstition or Idolatry we may not render Divine worship to our Blessed Saviour as present in the Blessed Sacrament or Host according to his Humane Nature in that Host Answ. We may not render Divine worship to him as present in the Blessed Sacrament according to his Humane Nature without danger of Idolatry Because he is not there according to his Humane Nature and therefore you give Divine worship to a Non Ens which must needs be Idolatry For Idolum nihil est in mundo saith S. Paul and Christ as present by his Humane Nature in the Sacrament is a Non Ens for it is not true there is no such thing He is present there by his Divine power and his Divine Blessing and the fruits of his Body the real effective consequents of his Passion but for any other Presence it is Idolum it is nothing in the world Adore Christ in Heaven for the Heavens must contain him till the time of restitution of all things And if you in the reception of the Holy Sacrament worship him whom you know to be in Heaven you cannot be concerned in duty to worship him in the Host as you call it any more than to worship him in the Host at Nostre Dame when you are at S. Peter's in Rome for you see him no more in one place than in another and if to believe him to be there in the Host at Nostre Dame be sufficient to cause you to worship him there then you are to do so to him at Rome though you be not present for you believe him there you know as much of Him by Faith in both places and as little by sense in either But however this is a thing of infinite danger God is a jealous God He spake it in the matter of external worship and of Idolatry and therefore do nothing that is like worshipping a mere creature nothing that is like worshipping that which you are not sure it is God and if you can believe the Bread when it is blessed by the Priest is God Almighty you can if you please believe any thing else To the other parts of your Question viz. Whether the same body be present really and Substantially because we believe it to be there or whether do we believe it to be there because God hath manifestly revealed it to be so and therefore we revere and adore it accordingly I answer 1. I do not know whether or no you do believe Him to be there really and Substantially 2. If you do believe it so I do not know what you mean by really and Substantially 3. Whatsoever you do mean by it if you do believe it to be there really and Substantially in any sence I cannot tell why you believe it to be so you best know your own reasons and motives of belief for my part I believe it to be there really in the sence I have explicated in my Book and for those reasons which I have there alledged but that we are to adore it upon that account I no way understand If it be Transubstantiated and you are sure of it then you may pray to it and put your trust in it and believe the Holy Bread to be coeternal with the Father and with the Holy Ghost But it is strange that the Bread being consecrated by the power of the Holy Ghost should be turn'd into the substance and nature of God and of the Son of God if so does not the Son at that time proceed from the Holy Ghost and not the Holy Ghost from the Son But I am ashamed of the horrible proposition Sir I pray God keep you from these extremest dangers I love and value you and will pray for you and be Dear Sir Your very affectionate Friend to serve you JER TAYLOR March 13. 1657 8 THE END THE TABLE THough the whole Volume consists of divers Tractates of several Titles yet because one course or order of numbers runs through all the pages till you come to pag. 1070 where begins the Discourse of Confirmation and a new account of 70 pages more reaching to the end of all therefore it was not necessary to trouble this Index with the several Titles of the Books and Discourses Where then the number of the page has the letter b with it as it has for no more then 70 of the last pages the Reader is referred to the Book of Confirmation and the Discourse of Friendship c. But where the number of the page hath not that letter with it he is directed to the rest of the Volume Note also that n stands for the marginall number and ss sect § stands for the Section in those parts of the Volume that are so divided A. Absolution OF the forms of it that have been used page 838 num 53. In the Primitive Church there was no judicial form of absolution in their Liturgies 837 n. 50 52. and 838 n. 54. Absolution of sins by the Priest can be no more then declarative 834 n. 41. and 841 n. 58. The usefulness of that kind of absolution 841 n. 59. Judicial absolution by the Priest is not that which Christ intended in giving the power of remitting and retaining sins 837 n. 50. and 841 n. 60. Absolution Ecclesiastical 835 n. 44. Attrition joyned with Priestly absolution is not sufficient for pardon 842 n. 62 64.830 n. 33. The Priest's power to absolve is not judicial but declarative onely 483. A Deacon in the ancient Church might give absolution 484. The Priest's act in cleansing the Leper was but declarative 483 486. The promise of Quorum remiseritis is by some understood of Baptism 486. Absolution upon confession to a Priest does not make Attrition equal to Contrition 842 n. 62 64. The severity of the Primitive Church in denying absolution to greater criminals was not their doctrine but their discipline 805 n. 21. Accident What is the definitive notion of it 236 sect 11. Acts. The usuall acts of repentance 845 n. 74. To communicate in act or desire are not terms opposite but subordinate 190 sect 3. What repentance single acts of sin require 646 n. 43. A single act of sin is cut off by the exercise of the contrary vertue 647 n. 45. A single act of vertue is not sufficient to be opposed against a single act of Vice 647 n. 46. How a single act of sin is sometimes habitual 648 n. 49 50. Some acts of sin require more then a moral revocation or opposing a contrary act of vertue in repentance 648 n. 50. Single acts of sin without a habit give a denomination 641 n. 25. Book of Acts Apostles Chap. 13.48 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained 780 n. 28. and 835 n. 44. Adam Concupiscence is not wholly an effect of his sin 752 n. 11. How we can be liable to the punishment of his sin when we were not guilty of it 752 n. 12. How we are sinners in Adam ibid. The effect of his fall upon
his posterity 870 874. That mankind by the fall of Adam did not lose the liberty of will 874. The sin of Adam is not in us properly and formally a sin 876. His sin to his posterity is not damnable 877. Of the Covenant God made with Adam 914. The Law of works onely imposed on him 587 n. 1. What evil we really had from Adam's fall 748 n. 14. The following of Adam cannot be original sin 764 n. 28. The fall of Adam lost us not heaven 748 n. 3 4. Whether if Adam had not sinned Christ had been incarnate 748 n. 4. Adam was made mortal 779 n. 4. Those evils that were the effects of Adam's fall are not in us sins properly inherent 750 n. 8. His sin made us not heirs of damnation 714 n. 22. nor makes us necessarily vicious 717 n. 39. Adam's sin did not corrupt our nature by a physical efficiency 717 n. 40. nor because we were in his loins 717 n. 41. nor because of the decree of God 717 n. 42. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What it signifieth 617 n. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The meaning and use of the word 635 n. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What latitude of signification it hath 809 n. 39. Aelfrick Who lived in England about A. D. 996. determines against Transubstantiation 266 n. 12. Aerius How he could be an heretick being his errour was not against any fundamental article 150 ss 48. He was never condemned by any general Council 150 ss 48. The heresie of the Acephali what it was 151 ss 48. Aggravate No circumstance aggravates sin so much as that of the injured person 614 n. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The use of that word in the Scripture 639 n. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The meaning and use of the word 638 n. 14. Alms. Are a part of repentance 848 n. 81. How they operate in order to pardon ibid. It is one of the best penances 860 n. 114. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What the word signifieth 617 n. 21. and 619 n. 26. S. Ambrose He was both Bishop and Prefect of Milane at one time 160 ss 49. His testimony against transubstantiation 259 260 261 § 12. and 300. His authority for confirmation by Presbyters considered 19 b. 20 b. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The notion of the word 809 n. 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The importance of the word 617 n. 122. Angels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 11.10 explained 58. § 9. Of worshipping them 467. Antiquity The reverence that is due to it 882. Apostle Whence that name was taken 48 § 4. Bishops were successours of the Apostles ibid. In what sense they were so 47 § 3. Saint James called an Apostle because he was a Bishop 48 § 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ep. to Philip. 2.25 does not signifie Messenger but Apostle 49 § 4. That Bishops were successours in their office to the Apostles was the judgement of antiquity 59 § 10. St. James Bishop of Jerusalem was not one of the twelve Apostles 48 § 4. Apostles in Scripture called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 85 § 23. That the Canons of the Apostles so called are authentick 89 § 24. Of the Canons that go under their names 981 n. 9. The Apostles were by Christ invested with an equal authority 308. S. Peter did not act as having any superiority over the other Apostles 310 § 10. c. l. 1. Arius His preaching his errours was the cause why in Africk Presbyters were not by Law permitted to preach 128 § 37. How the Orthodox complied with the Arians about the Council of Ariminum 441. How his heresie began 958 n. 26. The opinion of Constantine the Great concerning the heresie of Arius 959 n. 26. How the opposition against his heresie was managed 958 959 960 n. 26 ad 36. Art How much it changes nature 652 n. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The signification of the word 665 n. 18. and 637 n. 8. Athanasius The questions and answers to Antiochus under his name are spurious 544. He intended not his Creed to be imposed on others 963. Concerning his Creed ibid. n. 36. His Creed was first written in Latine then translated into Greek 963 n. 36. Attrition What it is 842 n. 63. and 828 n. 25. The difference between it and contrition ibid. Attrition joyned with absolution by the Priest that it is not sufficient demonstrated by many arguments 830 n. 33. Attrition joyned with confession to a Priest and his absolution is not equal to contrition 842 n. 62 64. S. Augustine He was employed in secular affairs at Hippo as well as Ecclesiastical 161 § 49. His authority against Transubstantiation 261 262 § 12. Of his rule to try traditions Apostolical 432. Gratian quotes that out of him that certainly never was in his writings 451. He prayed for his dead mother when he believed her to be in heaven 501 502. The doctrine of the Roman Purgatory was no article of faith in his time 506. The Purgatory that Augustine sometimes mentions is not the Roman Purgatory 507 508. His authority in the matter of Transubstantiation 525 His zeal against the Pelagians was the occasion of his mistake in interpreting Rom. VII 15 775 n. 18. His inconstancy in the question whether concupiscence be a sin 913. Austerity Of the acts of austerity in Religion of what use they are 955 n. 18. Authority That is most effectual which is seated in the Conscience 160 § 49. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What the Apostle means by it Tit. III. 11 780 n. 30. and 951 n. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What it signifieth 689 n. 5. B. Baptism THE doctrine of Infant-Baptism relieth not upon tradition onely but Scripture too 425 426. S. Ambrose S. Hierome and S. Augustine though born of Christian parents were not baptized till they were at full age 425. The reason why the Church baptizeth Infants 426. An answer to that saying of Perron's That there is no place of Scripture whereby we can certainly convince the Anabaptists 426. The validity of the baptism of hereticks is not to be proved by tradition without Scripture 426 427. Of the salvation of unbaptized Infants that are born of Christian parents 471. Of the Scripture Liturgy in an unknown tongue 471. The promise of quorum remiseritis is by some understood of Baptism 486. Of the pardon of sins after baptism 802 n. 7. Saint Cyprian and S. Chrysostome's testimony for Infant-baptism 760 n. 21 22. The principle on which the necessity of Infants baptism is grounded 426 and 718 n. 42. Sins committed after it may be pardoned by repentance 802 n. 8 9. It admits us into the Covenant of repentance 803 n. 10. If we labour not under the guilt of original sin why in our infancy are we baptized That objection answered 884. The state of unbaptized Infants 897. The difference between this Chrism and that of Confirmation 20 b. The difference between Baptism and Confirmation as to the use 26 b. Of the change
Confirmation 8. b. That the Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews speaking of laying on of hands meaneth Confirmation and not Absolution nor Ordination 10 11. b. It was to continue down to all ages of the Church 13 14. b. Confirmation proved by the Testimony of the Fathers and the practice of the Primitive Church 15. b. Of the authority of S. Ambrose and Pope Sylvester alledged to prove that Confirmation may be administred by Presbyters 19 20 ss 4. b. The difference between the Chrism of Confirmation and Baptism 20. b. Friers Regulars and Jesuites did in England challenge by Commission from the Pope a power of administring Confirmation though they were but Presbyters 21. b. The difference as to the use between Confirmation and Baptism 26. b. The blessings and graces usually conveyed by Episcopal Confirmation 25 26. b. The Ceremonies of it 24 25. b. Of the change made in us by it 28. b. Confirmation was usually administred at the same time with Baptism 29. b. The reason was because few were then baptized but adult persons ibid. The Apostles were not confirmed till after they had received the Sacrament of our Lord's Supper 30. b. Whether Confirmation be administred more opportunely in infancy or in our riper years 29 30. b. Whether it can be administred more then once 32. b. On what account the Primitive Christians did confirm hereticks reduced and reconciled 32. b. Conscience That authority is most effectual which is seated there 160 § 49. The Church of Rome arrogates to her self an Empire over Consciences 461. The niceties that every Ideot must trouble his Conscience with that worships Images in the way of the Romanists 548. How the religious man's Conscience is intangled by some modern errours that are allowed Pref. to Discourse of Repentance The contention between the flesh and conscience no sign of Regeneration 781 n. 31. How to know which prevails in this contention ibid. Consequent The manner of the Scripture is to include the consequent in the antecedent 679 n. 62. Consignare Of the sense of that word in the ancient Church 20. b. Contrition A description of Contrition 829 n. 28 29. The efficacy of it in repentance 670 n. 61. What it is 821 n. 5. The difference between it and Attrition 828. It must not be mistaken for a single act 829 n. 31. 1 Corinth Chap. 11. v. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained 58 § 9. and 11.29 Eateth and drinketh unworthily explained 218 § 8. and 898. and 6.12 expl 619 n. 23. and 10.23 ibid. and 2.14 expl 723 n. 53. and 785 n. 44. and 11.27 expl 814 n. 59. 2 Corinth Chap. 15.21 expl 712 n. 15. and 12.21 expl 803 n. 12. and 1.21 22. Now he which confirmeth us and hath anointed and sealed expl 28. b. Corporal Austerities Or penances 858 n. 111. They are not simply necessary ibid. Corporal Afflictions are not of repentance 846 n. 75. How they are to be used 846 847 n. 76 77. The Primitive Christians did not believe them simply necessary 847 n. 78 79. Covenant Reasons why with a Covenant of works God began this intercourse with man 575. The opposition between the new and old Covenant is not in respect of faith and works 588 n. 7. Councils Presbyters had not the power of voting in them 136 § 41. That of Basil was the first in which Presbyters in their own right were admitted to vote 136 § 41. Presbyters as such did not vote in that first Oecumenical Council Act. 15. p. 137 § 41. The people had de facto no vote in that Council ibid. The sixth Canon of the Council of Sevil objected and explained 147 § 44. Aërius was never condemned by any general Council 150 § 48. In the first council of Constantinople he is declared an heretick that believes right but separates from his Bishop 151 § 48. The Ephesine Council did decree against enlarging Creeds 290 c. 1. § 2. The Council of Trent decreed a Proposition in matter of fact that was past 290. c. 1. § 2. The Council of Trent binds all its subjects to give to the Sacrament of the Altar the same worship which they give to God himself 267 § 13. The Council of Constance decreed the half Communion with a non obstante to our Lord's institution 302 c. 1. § 6. The authority of a general Council against publick prayers in an unknown tongue 304. The Council of Eliberis and the Synod of Francford were against the worship of Images 306. The Council of Chalcedon did by decree give to the Bishop of Constantinople equal privileges with Rome 310. A Pope accused in the Lateran Council for not being in Orders 325 c. 2. § 7. Even among the Romanists the authority of general Councils is but precarious 391. Hard to tell which are General Councils 392 393. The last Lateran Council is at Rome esteemed a general Council but in France and Germany none at all 392. General Councils not infallible 392. Instances of General Councils that have been condemned by the succeeding 393. How to know which are General Councils 393. It cannot be known who have voices in Councils who not 394. The Laiety were sometime admitted to vote in Councils 394 395. What if two parties call each their Council 395. How shall the decision be in a Council if the Bishops be divided in their opinions 395. Who hath power to call a general Council 395. Of a general Council confirmed by the Pope 395. A general Council in many cases cannot have the Pope's confirmation 396. Whether the Pope be above a Council 396. The Divinity of the H. Ghost was not decreed in the Council of Nice 424. The questions that arose in the Council of Nice were not determined by Tradition but Scripture 425. How many of the Orthodox did begin to comply with the Arians about the Council of Ariminum 441. The definitions of general Councils were not so binding in the Primitive Church 441. The Councils of Nice and Chalcedon did decree against enlarging Creeds ibid. Lindwood in the Council of Basil made an appeal in the behalf of the King of England against the Pope 511. What passed in the Lateran Council concerning Transubstantiation 519. Neither Transubstantiation nor any thing else was in the Lateran Council decreed 519. The same Council that decreed Transubstantiation made Rebellion the duty of subjects 520. Of the second Council of Nice and that of Francford and the Capitular of Charles the Great 540 541. Of the testimony of the Eliberitane Council against Images 538. Of the Council of the Apostles held at Jerusalem mentioned Act. 15. p. 948 n. 3. Of Councils Ecclesiastical 948 § 6. per tot Concilium Sinuessanum a forged one 991 n. 9. Reasons why decrees of Councils in defining controversies lay no obligation 986 987 988 989 ad fin sect Saint Augustine teacheth that the decrees of general Councils are as much subject to amendment as the letters of private Bishops 991 n. 8. The Roman Council under
well as the institution it self 201 § 5. Scotus affirmed that the truth of the Eucharist may be saved without Transubstantiation 234 § 11. Some have been poisoned by receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist 249 ss 11. The wine will inebriate after consecration therefore it is not bloud 249 § 11. The Marcossians Valentinians and Marcionites though they denied Christ's having a body yet used the Eucharistical Elements 256 § 12. The Council of Trent binds all its subjects to give to the Sacrament of the Altar the same worship which they give to the true God 267 § 13. To worship the Host is Idolatry 268 § 13. They that worship the Host are many times according to their own doctrine in danger of Idolatry 268 269 § 13. Lewis IX pawned the Host to the Sultan of Egypt upon which they bear it to this day in their Escutcheons 270 § 13. The Primitive Church did excommunicate those that did not receive the Eucharist in both kinds Pref. to Diss. pag. 5. The Council of Constance decreed the half Communion with a non obstante to our Lord's institution 302 c. 1. § 6. Authorities to shew that the half Communion was not in use in the Primitive times 303 c. 1. § 6. Of their worshipping the Host 467. Of Communion in one kind onely 469 470. The word Celebrate when spoken of the Eucharist means the action of the people as well as the Priest 530. The Church of God gave the Chalice to the people for above a thousand years 531. The Roman Churche's consecrating a Wafer is a mere innovation 531 532. The Priest's pardon anciently was nothing but to admit the penitent to the Eucharist 839 n. 54. Of the change that is made in us by it 28. b. The Apostles were confirmed after 30. b. Eusebius His testimony against Transubstantiation 259 260 261 § 12. and 300. and 524. Excommunication Neither the Church nor the Presbyters in it had power to excommunicate before they had a Bishop set over them 82 § 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sometimes it was put to signifie Ecclesiastical repentance 830 n. 34. Exorcisms Their exorcisms have been so bad that the Inquisitors have been fain to put them down 333 § 10. The manner of their casting out Devils by exorcism 334 c. 2. § 10. They give Exorcists distinct ordination 336. Exorcism in the Primitive Church signified nothing but Catechizing 30. b. Ezekiel Chap. 18. v. 3. explained 726 n. 61. F. Faith THE folly of that assertion Credo quia impossibile est when applied to Transubstantiation 231 § 11. To make new Articles of faith that are not in Scripture as the Papists do is condemned by the suffrage of the Fathers Pref. to Diss. pag. 4 5. The Church of Rome adopts uncertain and trifling propositions into their faith 462. The doctrine of the Roman Purgatory was no arricle of faith in Saint Augustine's time 506. What faith is and wherein it consists 941 n. 1. New Articles cannot by the Church be decreed 945 n. 12. Faith is not an act of the understanding onely 949 n. 9. By what circumstances faith becomes moral 950 n. 9. The Romanists keep not faith with hereticks 341. Instances of doctrines that are held by some Romanists to be de fide by others to be not de fide 398. What makes a point to be de fide 399. What it is to be an Article of faith 437. Some things are necessary to be believed that are not articles of faith 437. The Apostles Creed was necessary to be believed not necessitate praecepti but medii 438. No new articles as necessary to be believed ought to be added to the Apostles Creed 438 446. The Pope hath not power to make Articles of faith 446 447. Upon what motives most men imbrace the faith 460. The faith of unlearned men in the Roman Church 461. Fasting It is one of the best Penances 860 n. 114. Father How God punisheth the Father's sin upon the Children 725. God never imputes the Father's sin to the Children so as to inflict eternal punishment but onely temporal 725 n. 56. This God doth onely in punishments of the greatest crimes 725 n. 59. and not often 726 n. 60. but before the Gospel was published 726 n. 62. Fathers When Bellarmine was to answer the authority of some Fathers brought against the Pope's universal Episcopacy he allows not the Fathers to have a vote against the Pope 310 c. 1. § 10. No man but J. S. affirms that the Fathers are infallible 372 373 374. The Fathers stile some hereticks that are not 376. Of what authority the opinion of the Fathers is with some Romanists 376 377. They complained of the dismal troubles in the Church that arose upon enlarging Creeds 441. They reproved pilgrimages 293 496. The Primitive Fathers that practised prayer for the dead thought not of Purgatory 501. They made prayer for those who by the confession of all sides were not then in Purgatory 502 503. The Roman doctrine of Purgatory is directly contrary to the doctrine of the Fathers 512. A Reply to that Answer of the Romanists That the writings of the Fathers do forbid nothing else but picturing the Divine Essence 550 554. In what sense the ancient Fathers taught the doctrine of original sin 761 n. 22. How the Fathers were divided in the question of the beatifick vision of souls before the day of Judgement 1007. The practice of Rome now is against the doctrine of S. Augustine and 217 Bishops and all their Successours for a whole age together in the question of Appeals to Rome 1008. One Father for them the Papists value more then twenty against them in that case how much they despise them 1008. Gross mistakes taught by several Fathers ibid. The writings of the Fathers adulterated of old and by modern practices 1010. particularly by the Indices Expurgatorii 1011. Fear To leave a sin out of fear is not sinful but may be accepted 785 n. 37. Figure Ambiguous and figurative words may be allowed in a Testament humane or Divine 210 § 6. A certain Athenian's enigmatical Testament ibid. The Lamb is said to be the Passeover of which deliverance it was onely the commemorative sign 211 § 6. How many figurative terms there are in the words of institution 211 212 § 6. When the figurative sense is to be chosen in Scripture 213 § 6. Flesh. The law of the flesh in man 781 n. 31. The contention between it and the Conscience no sign of Regeneration 782 n. 32. How to know which prevails in the contention 782 n. 5. Forgiving Forgiving injuries considered as a part or fruit of Repentance 849 n. 83. Free-will How the necessity of Grace is consistent with this doctrine 754 n. 15. That mankind by the fall of Adam did not lose it 874. The folly of that assertion We are free to sin but not to good 874. Liberty of action in natural things is better but in moral things it is a weakness 874. G. Galatians CHap. 5.15
calling himself Universal Bishop 310. Saint Peter did not act as having any superiority over the Apostles 310 c. 1. § 10. There is nothing in Scripture to prove that the Bishop of Rome succeeds Saint Peter in that power he had more then any other 310. Pope Victor and Pope Stephen were opposed by other Bishops 310. The Council of Chalcedon did by decree give to the Bishop of Constantinople equal priviledges with Rome 310. A Pope accused in the Lateran Council for not being in Orders 325 c. 2. § 7. It is held ominous for a Pope to canonize a Saint 333 c. 2. § 9. The Romanists teach the Pope hath power to dispense with all the Laws of God 342. He hath power as the Romanists teach to dispose of the temporal things of all Christians 344. He is to be obeyed according to their doctrine though he command Sin or forbid Vertue 345. He takes upon him to depose Princes that are not heretical 345. The greatness of the Pope's power 345. Sixtus Quintus did in an Oration in the Conclave solemnly commend the Monk that kill'd Henry III. of France 346 c. 3. § 3. Of the Pope's confirming a General Council 395. A General Council in many cases cannot have the Pope's Confirmation 396. Whether the Pope be above a Council 396. When Pope Stephen decreed against Saint Cyprian in the point of rebaptizing Hereticks Saint Cyprian regarded it not nor changed his opinion 399. Sixtus V. and some other Popes were Simoniacal 401. A Simoniacal Pope is no Pope ibid. An Heretical Pope is no Pope ibid. What Popes have been heretical 401 402. What Popes have been guilty of those crimes that disannul their authority 400 401 402. The Pope hath not power to make Articles of Faith 446 447. Of his Infallibility 995 § 7. per tot He the Romanists teach can make new Articles of Faith and new Scripture 450. The Roman Writers reckon the Decretal Epistles of Popes among the Holy Scriptures 451. Bellarmine confesseth that for 1500 years the Pope's judgment was not esteemed infallible 453. A strange unintelligible Indulgence given by two Popes about the beginning of the Council of Trent 498. An instance of a Pope's skill in the Bible 505. Lindwood in the Council of Basil made an appeal in behalf of the King of England against the Pope 511. The same Pope that decreed Transubstantiation made Rebellion lawful 520. When the Pope excommunicated Saint Cyprian all Catholicks absolved him 957 n. 22. Some Papists hold that the Popedome is separable from the Bishoprick of Rome how then can he get any thing by the title of Succession 999. Divers ancient Bishops lived separate from the Communion of the Roman Pope 1002. The Bishops of Liguria and Istria renounced subjection to the Patriarchate of Rome and set up one of their own at Aquileia ibid. Divers Popes were Hereticks 1003. Possible Two senses of it 580 n. 34. Prayer The practice of the Heathens in their prayers and hymns to their gods 3 n. 11. Against them that deny all Set forms of Prayer 2 n. 6. seq Against those that allow any Set forms of prayer but those that are enjoyned by Authority 13 n. 51. Prescribed forms in publick are more for the edification of the Church then the other kind 14 n. 56. ad 65. The Lord's Prayer was given to be a Directory not onely for the matter of prayer but the manner or form too 19 n. 75. The Church hath the gift of Prayer and can exercise it in none but prescribed Forms 18 n. 69 70. Our Lord gave his Prayer to be not onely a Copy but a prescribed Form 19 n. 78. The practice of the Primitive Church in this matter 21 n. 86. Whether the Primitive Church did well in using publick prescribed Forms of Prayer and upon what grounds 25 n. 97. An answer to that Objection That Set forms limit the Spirit 30 n. 116. That Objection that Ministers may be allowed a liberty in their Prayers as well as their Sermons answered 32 n. 129. What in the sense of Scripture is praying with the Spirit 9 n. 37. and 47. The Romanists teach that neither attention nor devotion are required in our prayers 327 c. 2. § 8. Of the Scripture and Liturgy in an unknown tongue 471. A Pope gave leave to the Moravians to have Mass in the Sclavonian tongue 534. Of Prayer as a fruit or act of Repentance 848 n. 80. It is one of the best penances 860 n. 114. Those testimonies of the Fathers that prove Prayer for the dead do not prove Purgatory 295. The opinion and practice of the ancient Church in the language of publick Prayers 303 304. The Papists corrupted the Imperial law of Justinian in the matter of Prayers in an unknown tongue 304 c. 1. § 7. The authority of a Pope and General Council against publick Prayers in an unknown tongue 304. The difference between the Church of England and Rome in the use of publick Prayer 328 c. 2. § 8. Prayer for the dead The Primitive Fathers that practised it did not think of Purgatory 501. Saint Augustine prayed for his dead Mother when he believed her to be a Saint in Heaven 501 502. The Fathers made prayers for those who by the confession of all sides were not then in Purgatory 502 503. Communicantes offerentes pro sanctis proved to mean prayer and not thanksgiving onely 502. Instances out of the Latin Missal where prayers are made for those that were dead and yet not in Purgatory 505. The Roman doctrine of Purgatory is directly contrary to the doctrine of the ancient Fathers 512. Preach Presbyters in Africk by Law were not allowed to preach upon occasion of Arius preaching his errours 128 § 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbyter Tit. 1.15 it signifies Bishop and not mere Presbyter 71 § 15. Presbyters in Jerusalem were something more then Presbyters in other Churches 97 § 21. Those Presbyters mentioned Act. 20.28 in these words in quo Spir. Sanctus vos posuit Episcopos were Bishops and not mere Presbyters 80 § 21. Neither the Church nor the Presbyters in it had power to excommunicate before they had a Bishop set over them 82 § 21. Mere Presbyters had not in the Church any jurisdiction in causes criminal otherwise then by delegation 82 § 21. In what sense it is true that Bishops are not greater then Presbyters 83 § 21. Bishops in Scripture are styled Presbyters 85 § 23. Apostles in Scripture styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 85 § 23. Mere Presbyters in Scripture are never called Bishops 86 § 23. A Presbyter did once assist at the ordaining a Bishop 98 § 31. Presbyters could not ordain 102 § 32. The Council of Sardis would not own them as Presbyters who were ordained by none but Presbyters 103 § 32. A Bishop may ordain without the concurrence of a Presbyter 105 § 32. Photius was â—he first that gave the power of Confirmation to Presbyters 109 § 33. The Bishop alone could
brought death into the world That it was his sin alone that did the great mischief That this sin was made ours 〈◊〉 by inherence but by imputation That they who suffered the calamity did not know what the sin was That there was a difference of men even in relation to thiâ— sin and it passed upon some more than upon others that is some were more miserable than others That some did not sin by that sin of Adam and some did that is some there were whose manners were not corrupted by that example and some were that it was not our sin but his that the sin did not multiply by the variety of subject but was still but one sin and that it was his and not ours all which particulars are as so many verifications of the doctrine I have delivered and so many illustrations of the main Article But in verification of one great part of it I mean that concerning Infants and that they are not corrupted properly or made sinners by any inherent impurity is clearly affirmed by S. Peter whose words are thus rendred in the same Aethiopick Testament 1 Pet. 2.2 And be ye like unto newly begotten Infants who are begotten every one without sin or malice and as milk not mingled And to the same sence those words of our Blessed Saviour to the Pharisees asking who sinn'd this man or his Parents John 9. the Syriack Scholiast does give this Paraphrase some say it is an indirect question For how is it possible for a man to sin before he was born And if his Parents sinn'd how could he bear their sin But if they say that the punishment of the Parents may be upon the Children let them know that this is spoken of them that came out of Egypt and is not Universal And those words of David In sin hath my Mother conceived me R. David Kimchi and Abeâ—esra say that they are expounded of Eve who did not conceive till she had sinned But to return to the words of S. Paul The consequent of this discourse must needs at least be this that it is impossible that the greatest part of mankind should be left in the eternal bonds of Hell by Adam for then quite contrary to the discourse of the Apostle there had been abundance of sin but a scarcity of grace and the access had been on the part of Adam not on the part of Christ against which he so mightily and artificially contends so that the Presbyterian way is perfectly condemned by this discourse of the Apostle and the other more gentle way which affirms that we were sentenced in Adam to eternal death though the execution is taken off by Christ is also no way countenanced by any thing in this Chapter for that the judgment which for Adams sin came unto the condemnation of the world was nothing but temporal death is here affirmed it being in no sence imaginable that the death which here S. Paul says passed upon all men and which reigned from Adam to Moses should be eternal death for the Apostle speaks of that death which was threatned to Adam and of such a death which was afterwards threatned in Moses's Law and such a death which fell even upon the most righteous of Adams posterity Abel and Seth and Methuselah that is upon them who did not sin after the similitude of Adams transgression Since then all the judgment which the Apostle says came by the sin of Adam was sufficiently and plainly enough affirmed to be death temporal that God should sentence mankind to eternal damnation for Adams sin though in goodness through Christ he afterwards took it off is not at all affirmed by the Apostle and because in proportion to the evil so was the imputation of the sin it follows that Adams sin is ours metonymically and improperly God was not finally angry with us nor had so much as any designs of eternal displeasure upon that account his anger went no further than the evils of this life and therefore the imputation was not of a proper guilt for that might justly have passed beyond our grave if the sin had passed beyond a metonymy or a juridical external imputation And of this God and Man have given this further testimony that as no man ever imposed penance for it so God himself in nature did never for it afflict or affright the Conscience and yet the Conscience never spares any man that is guilty of a known sin Extemplo quodcunque malum committitur ipsi Displicet Authori He that is guilty of a sin Shall rue the crime that he lies in And why the Conscience shall be for ever at so much peace for this sin that a man shall never give one groan for his share of guilt in Adams sin unless some or other scares him with an impertinent proposition why I say the Conscience should not naturally be afflicted for it nor so much as naturally know it I confess I cannot yet make any reasonable conjecture save this only that it is not properly a sin but only metonymically and improperly And indeed there are some whole Churches which think themselves so little concerned in the matter of Original sin that they have not a word of it in all their Theology I mean the Christians in the East-Indies concerning whom Frier Luys di Vrretta in his Ecclesiastical story of Aethiopia says That the Christians in Aethiopia under the Empire of Prestre Juan never kept the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary no so entremetieron en essas Theologias del peccato Original porque mâ—nca tuvieron los entendimientes muy metafisicos antes como gente afable benigna Llana de entendimientos conversables y alaguenos seguian la dotrina de los santos antiguos y de los sagrados Concilios sin disputas ni diferencias nor do they insert into their Theology any propositions concerning Original Sin nor trouble themselves with such Metaphysical contemplations but being of an affable ingenuous gentle comportment and understanding follow the Doctrine of the Primitive Saints and Holy Councils without disputation or difference so says the story But we unfortunately trouble our selves by raising Ideas of Sin and afflict our selves with our own dreams and will not believe but it is a vision And the height of this imagination hath wrought so high in the Church of Rome that when they would do great honours to the Virgin Mary they were pleased to allow to her an immaculate conception without any Original Sin and a Holy-day appointed for the celebration of the dream But the Christians in the other world are wiser and trouble themselves with none of these things but in simplicity honour the Divine attributes and speak nothing but what is easie to be understood And indeed Religion is then the best and the world will be sure to have fewer Atheists and fewer Blasphemers when the understandings of witty men are not tempted by commanding them to believe impossible Articles and unintelligible propositions when every thing is
proper instrument but as a consequent is to an antecedent in a chain of causes accidentally and by positive institution depending upon each other Who can help it if men will say that it happened that they recovered after the taking Physick but then was the time in which they should have been well however The best confutation of them is to deny Physick to them when they need and try what nature will doe for them without the help of art The case is all one in this Question this onely excepted that in this case it is more unreasonable then in the matter of Physick because the Spirit is expresly signified to be the baptizer in the forecited place of Saint Paul From hence we argue that since the Spirit is ministred in Baptism and that Infants are capable of the Spirit the Spirit of adoption the Spirit of incorporation into the body of Christ the Spirit sealing them to the day of redemption the Spirit intitling them to the Promises of the Gospel the Spirit consigning to them God's part of the Covenant of Grace they are also capable of Baptism For whoever is capable of the Grace of the Sacrament is capable of the sign or Sacrament itself To this last clause the Anab. answers two things First that the Spirit of God was conveyed sometimes without Baptism I grant it but what then Therefore Baptism is not the sign or ministery of the Holy Ghost It follows not For the Spirit is the great wealth and treasure of Christians and is conveyed in every ministery of Divine appointment in Baptism in Confirmation in Absolution in Orders in Prayer in Benediction in assembling together Secondly The other thing they answer is this that it is not true that they who are capable of the same grace are capable of the same sign for females were capable of the righteousness of Faith but not of the seal of Circumcision I reply that the Proposition is true not in natural capacities but in spiritual and religious regards that is they who in Religion are declared capable of the grace are by the same Religion capable of the Sacrament or sign of that grace But naturally they may be uncapable by accident as in the Objection is mentioned But then this is so far from invalidating the Argument that it confirms it in the present instance Exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis For even the Jewish females although they could not be circumcised yet they were baptized even in those days as I have proved already and although their natural indisposition denied them to be circumcised yet neither nature nor Religion forbad them to be baptized and therefore since the Sacrament is such a ministery of which all are naturally capable and none are forbidden by the Religion the Argument is firm and unshaken and concludes with as much evidence and certainty as the thing requires Ad 10. The last Argument from Reason is That it is reasonable to suppose that God in the period of Grace in the days of the Gospel would not give us a more contracted comfort and deal with us by a narrower hand then with the Jewish babes whom he sealed with a Sacrament as well as enriched with a grace and therefore openly consigned them to comfort and favour Ad 22. To this they answer that we are to trust the word without a sign and since we contend that the Promise belongs to us and to our children why do we not believe this but require a sign I reply that if this concludes any thing it concludes against the Baptism of men and women for they hear and reade and can believe the Promise and it can have all its effects and produce all its intentions upon men but yet they also require the sign they must be baptized And the reason why they require it is because Christ hath ordained it And therefore although we can trust the Promise without a sign and that if we did not this manner of sign would not make us believe it for it is not a miracle that is a sign proving but it is a Sacrament that is a sign signifying and although we do trust the Promise even in the behalf of Infants when they cannot be baptized yet by the same reason as we trust the Promise so we also use the Rite both in obedience to Christ and we use the Rite or the Sacrament because we believe the Promise and if we did not believe that the Promise did belong to our children we would not baptize them Therefore this is such an impertinent quarrel of the Anabaptists that it hath no strength at all but what it borrows from a cloud of words and the advantages of its representment As God did openly consign his grace to the Jewish babes by a Sacrament so he does to ours and we have reason to give God thanks not onely for the comfort of it for that 's the least part of it but for the ministery and conveyance of the real blessing in this Holy mystery Ad 23 24 25. That which remains of Objections and answers is wholly upon the matter of examples and precedents from the Apostles and first descending Ages of the Church but to this I have already largely spoken in a Discourse of this Question and if the Anabaptists would be concluded by the practice of the Universal Church in this Question it would quickly be at an end For although sometimes the Baptism of children was deferred till the age of reason and choice yet it was onely when there was no danger of the death of the children and although there might be some advantages gotten by such delation yet it could not be endured that they should be sent out of the world without it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said S. Gregory Nazianzen It is better they should be sanctified even when they understand it not then that they should go away from hence without the seal of perfection and sanctification Secondly But that Baptism was amongst the Ancients sometimes deferred was not always upon a good reason but sometimes upon the same account as men now adays defer repentance or put off Confession and Absolution and the Communion till the last day of their life that their Baptism might take away all the sins of their life Thirdly It is no strange thing that there are examples of late Baptism because Heathenism and Christianity were so mingled in towns and cities and private houses that it was but reasonable sometimes to stay till men did chuse their Religion from which it was so likely they might afterwards be tempted Fourthly The Baptism of Infants was always most notorious and used in the Churches of Africa as is confessed by all that know the Ecclesiastical Story Fifthly Among the Jews it was one and all if the Major domo believed he believed for himself all his family and they all followed him to Baptism even before they were instructed and therefore it is that we find mention of