even the lake of Gehenna and so to the place of the neerest Denomination Epis. Asser. p. 379. Pacif. Your wit lying in the affinity of sound betwixt Geenna and Geneva is much like that of Campian Elizabeth and Jezabel But as for Lay-Elders I am not much solicitous about them thinking the Church may be well enough without them only I cannot think they are so destitute of all Antiquity and Scripture as you imagine that of 1 Tim. 5. 17. hath more for Lay-Elders than many places in Scripture urged by our Bishops have for Episcopacy Dr. Whitgist is said to have these words That he knoweth that the Primitive Church had in every Church certain Seniors to whom the Government of the Congregation was committed and in a Book against Mar-Prelate subscribed by the Archbishop of Canterbury the Bishop of Winchester Lincoln and London it is affirmed That the Government by Elders was used under the Law and practised under the Gospel by the Apostles though not fit for our times Though afterwards repenting this plain Confession they caused certain words importing the contrary to be printed in a sheet of Paper which paper was pasted in all the books of the first impression to cover and conceal the former assertion This I take on the Testimony of an Author who so printed in Queen Elizabeths time in a Tract called A Petition directed to her most Excellent Majesty but Mr. Nowel is plain in his Catechism in Latine p. 155. Edit. 1570. Grotius also acknowledgeth that Geneva did not first institute these Officers but only restored them nor may it be amiss for the learned Reader to consult about this point of Elders Bodins Method cap. 6. p. 245. Le ts on to the third Commandment Land Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain This our blessed Saviour repeating expresseth it thus It hath been said to them of old Thou shalt not forswear thy self to which Christ adds out of Numb. 30. 2. But thou shalt perform thy Oaths unto the Lord the meaning of the onewe are taught by the other We must not Invocate the Name of God in any promise in vain i. e. with a lie this is to take the Name of God i. e. to useit to take it into our mouths for vanity i. e. according to the perpetual stile of Scripture for a lie and this is to be understood only in promises for so Christ explains it out of the Law Thou shalt perform thy Oaths for lying in judgement which is also with an Oath or taking Gods Name for a witness is forbidden in the ninth Commandment Grand Exemp part 2. p. 114. Pacif. At this rate indeed write Maldonate and the Composer of the Racovian Catechism but without any reason for it is gratis dictum that our Lord doth repeat or give the sense of the third Commandment Exod. 20. 7. It is more probable that he intends those words Levit. 19. 12. As for the words in the third Commandment they have alway been so interpreted by Protestant Commentators as to forbid not only false swearing but vain swearing yea all irreverent use of the Name of God whether with an Oath or without an Oath So the Catechism in King Edward the 6ths raign so Bishop Hooper in his Exposition of the Decalogae so the Common Church Catechism so the Homily part 1. p. 45 46. No one that hath but a smattering skill will deny {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} sometime to signifie mendacium or falsum but it doth also signifie gratis in vanum as often if not more often The LXX Exod. 20. 7. render {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Aquila {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Yet I can more easily excuse this if you will but acknowledge that vain and unnecessary Oaths were unlawful to the Jews as well as us Laud By the Natural Law it was not unlawful to swear by an oath that implyed not Idolatry or the belief of a false God I say any grave or prudent oath when they spake a grave truth And it was lawful for the Jews in ordinary entercourse to swear by God so they did not swear to a lye to which also swearing to an impertinence might be reduced by a proportion of reason for they that swear by him shall be commended saith the Psalmist Psal. 63. 11. And swearing to the Lord of hosts is called speaking the Language of Canaan Isa. 19. 18. Great Exem part 2. p. 114. Pacif. This is Theology that a sober Heathen would startle at How do you prove that by the Natural Law it was not unlawful to swear an Oath when they spake a grave truth Doth any Scripture say so Do the more sage sort of profane Writers say so or do not all rather say who have not blinded Natural Conscience That it is not lawful to swear in the gravest matter if a man may be credited without an oath or if his oath be not like to be an end of strife Or what man who knows that God was alway tender of his Name and Glory canthink that it was lawful for the Jews to swear by God in ordinary entercourse They did ordinarily swear but it was not lawful so to do The son of Sirach reproves it Heathens condemn it it is indeed said They that swear by him shall glory Psal. 63. 11. but it is not said They that swear by him in ordinary entercourse shall glory if they should they would glory in their shame As for the place Isa. 19. 18. it proves not that swearing to the Lord in ordinary entercourse is speaking the Language of Canaan but it is a Prophecy only of the calling of Egypt that sundry of that Nation should make the same Profession and Confession of Faith that Gods people did and that they should by solemn Oath engage themselves to depend on the living Lord alone How doth this prove that it was lawful for the Jews to swear by God in ordinary entercourse or that their ordinary communication ought not to be yea yea and nay nay as well as ours Pass we on to the fourth Law of the Decalogue Laud There was nothing Moral in it but that we do Honour to God for the Creation and to that and all other purposes of Religion separate and hallow some portion of our time Great Exem part 2. p. 119. Pacif. Surely this is the way to rob us of one of the laws of the Decalogue for either the fourth Commandment is moral for a determinate time or for nothing at all some time being moral by the other Commandments and it would be strange that the Church of England should appoint this fourth Commandment to be publickly read and teach her members to pray Lord have mercy upon us and encline our hearts to keep this Law and yet think it had only that latent morality you speak of if the fourth Commandment be not in force in the words of it according to their literal and Grammatical
such is his graciousness that he will accept of what we can do and what we cannot do that he will set on the score of Christ But let me hear you speak plainly Whether a man can keep the Law and be without sin Land There are who I hope out of ignorance teach the people such doctrine as not accidentally and occasionally but directly and per se causeth them to sin such is that Catechetical doctrine that no man is able either by himself or by any grace received in this life perfectly to keep the Commandments of God but doth daily break them in thought word and deed Dr. Gell. p. 247. Pacif. What then do you think a man may be without sin Laud They are justly to be reproved who plead for their spots and stains and alledge for themselves that they must be defiled with them while they live here but when shall they be cleansed from them cleansed they must be they say they shall be purified at the end of this life yea when they can sin no more then they shall be cleansed from their spots what Scripture can they alleadge for this Sure I am there 's none in the whole Word of God besides they attribute more to their own natural death then they do the death of Christ and our conformity thereunto If therefore the spots cannot be washed out in this life nor at the end of this life it must then follow that there must be a time after this life and before we enter into the holy City when these spots be washed out and when and where must that be but in Purgatory Mark now Beloved whither this unclean doctrine of necessity leads the Authors of it they who are great enemies to Popery are by this their Tenent the greatest Patrons of Purgatory Id. p. 750. Pacif. What then think you of those places Eccles. 7. 20. There is not a just man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not and 1 Joh. 1. 8. If we say we have no sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us Laud Solomon speaks of such a just man as is under the first dispensation that of the Father which is the fear of God p. 768. But those children of the Father who have their sins forgiven them through his Name and are now brought unto the Son and grown so strong in him that they overcome the Evil one these at length attain to the old age in the Spirit and experimentally know him who is from the beginning This is that state {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} that is without sin such an estate is possible and attainable through the grace of God and his Holy Spirit that men may be without sin p. 790. Pacif. I shall hereafter know whence some of our Quakers and Antinominans get their canting language But doth not this discourse of yours quite pull down what was laid by our first Reformers Artic. 15. Sin was not in him i. e. Christ but all we the rest although baptized and born again in Christ yet offend in many things and if we say we have no sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us If you think this Doctrine be false no better way for confuting it then by bringing out some of your Saints that have attained the full age of the Spirit and so live without sin such a one could I never meet with never hear of yea I have observed that those who have made the greatest pretensions to perfection have been so far from perfection of grace that they have discovered themselves to have no Religion at all But I have heard of certain new Precepts by which Christ did perfect the Moral Law concerning the perfection of which I have alway had high thoughts Laud Christ hath perfected the Law and set it higher then any the most studyed Doctor did think himself obliged by it formerly Prac Catec 2. Ed. p. 93. God is light and in him is no darkness at all 1 Joh. 1. 5. This is to be understood of Gods Law and Commandment that they had before some mixture of imperfection but now have none had before some vacuities in them which are now filled up by Christ p. 94. Of this the same Author may be seen in his Letters to Dr. Cheynell Pacif. That our Saviour in the 5 of Matthew doth but expound the Law and clear it from the absurd glosses and interpretations of the Scribes and Pharisees seems to be plainly resolved by our Church in the Homilies p. 41. p. 79. Part. 1. Edit. Lond. 1623. which Edition I all along follow and had Christ acted the part of a new Law-giver and not of an Interpreter only it is not like he would have said Except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees but except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of Moses and the Prophets you cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven Maldonate indeed tells us that Christ doth all along tacitely oppose himself to Moses by that form of speech but I say unto you only ad declinandam invidiam he names him not but who can think our Lord opposeth himself to a servant that was faithful in all his house but whether Christ did intend to fill up the vacuities of the Moral Law by adding new Precepts will best appear by examination of particulars and shewing that the Moral duties which are supposed to be de novo enjoyned in that chapter were duties enjoyned to Israelites as well as us to some Precepts no addition is pretended to be made but yet because there is Controversie made and raised about them all it may not be amiss to take all into consideration you know the Church of Rome is commonly charged with Idolatry and made to transgress both first and second Commandment the first by worshipping the Bread in the Eucharist the second by making Images of the the true God c. what think you of these matters Laud Idolatry is a forsaking the true God and giving divine worship to a creature or Idol that is to an imaginary god who hath no foundation in essence or existence Libert. Prop. p. 258. Pacif. You seem already to forsake the Doctrine of our Church as also doth Mr. Mountague who saith in his Gagge that Ido's and Images may be two things whereas the Homily saith expresly Part. 2. p. 12. That the Scriptures use the words Images and Idols indifferently for one thng alway and in the said Homily it is further asserted that there may be Idolatry in worshipping the true God in an undue manner Laud It is evident that the object of the Papists Adoration in the blessed Sacrament is the only the Eternal God hypostatically joyned with his holy humanity which humanity they believe actually present under the veil of the Sacramental signs and if they thought him not present they are so far from worshipping the Bread in this case that themselves profess it to be Idolatry to do so which
saying St. Laurence pray for me Gagg p. 200. 'T is most probable there are Angel keepers if thus my self resolved do infer Holy Angel-keeper pray for me I see no reason to be taxed with point of Popery or Superstition much less of absurdity or impiety Invocation of Saints p. 99. in principio Save all other labour in this point prove but only this their knowledge of any thing ordinarily I promise you straight I will say Holy St. Mary pray for me Answ. to Gagg p. 229. Pacif. Here are sundry things wherein you seem to me to depart from our Church and from Scripture which is worse for to pray St. Laurence pray for me in such a sense as the Papists do must needs be great impiety no less than Idolatry because they do ascribe that unto the creature which is only proper unto the Creator I judge it also absurd and impious to pray to the Angel Gardian to pray for us for 't is not possible that any one without a Revelation from Heaven should attain to any certainty that there are any Angel Gardians and to go upon opinion and probability in my prayers is impiety but I do not in the least think that if it were proved that the Saints departed had knowledge ordinarily of what we do and are that therefore we might presently pray to them to pray for us If you ask me why not as well as to the Saints on the earth the Homily will answer for me Part. 2. p. 116. Christ our only Mediator is sufficient in Heaven and needeth no others to help him Why then do we pray one for another in this life some men may perhaps here demand Forsooth we are willed so to do by the express Commandment both of Christ and his Disciples to declare as well the Faith that we have in Christ towards God as also the mutual charity that we bear one towards another in that we pity our brothers case and make our Petition to God for him But that we should pray unto Saints neither have we any Commandment in Scipture nor yet example which we may safely follow so that being done without authority of Gods Word it lacketh the ground of Faith and therefore cannot be acceptable to God For what soever is not of faith is sin And the Apostle saith That faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God Yet thou wilt object further That the Saints in Heaven pray for us and that their prayer proceedeth of an earnest charity that they have toward their Brethren on earth Whereto it may well be answered First that no man knoweth whether they do pray for us or no And if any man will go about to prove it by the nature of charity concluding that because they did pray for men on earth therefore they do much more now in heaven then may it be said by the same reason that as oft as we do weep on earth they do also weep in Heaven because while they lived in this world it is most certain and sure they did so And whereas some of late have much endeavoured to re-introduce into our Church the antiquated custom of praying for the dead I shall only say at present there is nothing in any of our Articles Homilies Lyturgies enjoyning or so much as approving or commending Prayer for the dead there is rather something that makes against any such kind of prayer Part. 2. of Homil. p. 116. The like I say about Canonical hours of Prayer no mention made of them by our Church therefore no obligation upon us to observe and yet 1637. there was a Sermon printed with Licence by one Mr Wats who would needs perswade us That King David observed all Canonical hours for these are his words upon that speech of the Royal Psalmist Psal. 119. 62. At midnight will I arise to give thanks unto thee Mark here that he praised not God lying but used to rise to do it at other hours the Saints may sing aloud on their beds but when a Canonical hours comes of which mid-night was one David will rise to his Devotion the morning watch was another Canonical hour And this David was so careful to observe that he oft-times waked before it Psal. 149. 5. Were this true I should think it were a fault not to appoint some one to awake me at midnight that I might rise up out of my bed to put up some prayers unto my Creator but till there be some proofs of such Canonical hours I shall bless God for undisturbed rest and sleep Laud It seems by Clement Epis. ad Corin. p. 52 53. edit. Junia that no small part of that {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} or good order required by St. Paul whose mind he might best know as one of his Disciples 1 Cor. 14. 40. doth consist in the due observing of those times and hours limited and prescribed by authority for our prayers and devotions The use of Dayly Publick Prayers printed 1641. p. 5. Pacif. How much the scope of this place is mistaken might easily be shewn but I refer any learned man to the Observations of Mr. William Burton upon that Epistle p 77 78. I think the main that Christians are now to look after is that when they pray they pray for things agreeable to Gods Word and with fervency Laud There is but one thing in the world that God hates besides sin that is indifferency and lukewarmness which although it hath not in it the direct nature of sin yet it hath this testimony from God that it is loathsom and abominable and excepting this thing alone God never said so of any thing in the New Testament but what was a direct breach of a Commandment Dr. Tayl. Ret. of Prayer p 61. Pacif. I am glad to hear you say that luke-warmness and indifferency in Religion are loathsom to God but wonder to find you averring that these have not in them the direct nature of sin or that they are not a direct breach of a Commandment for doth not the Commandment require that we serve God with all our might strength and power Are we not commanded to be fervent in spirit serving the Lord nor do I think that God would hate these tempers if they were not directly sinful and direct breaches of his Law Laud Christians consider that God forbad to the Jews the very having and making images and representments not only of the true God or of the false and imaginary Deities but of visible Creatures which because it was but of temporary reason and relative consideration of their aptness to superstition and their conversing with Idolatrous Nations was a command proper to that Nation part of their Covenant not of eternal indispensable reason not of that which we usually call the Law of Nature Grand exem part 2. p. 111. Pacif. I do not think that God ever forbad to the Jews all images or representments of Creatures but as Vasquez saith Omnem imaginem seu effigiem modo