answer this question then which we are thus secured that it cannot be answered to the prejudice of the Church and the faith thereof It will be worth the while to compare the discourse of our Lord to the company that followed him to Capernaum in the sixth of John with this to Nicodemus For no man can be so unreasonable as to imagine that the Sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted by our Lord at the time of that discourse or by virtue of it of the institution whereof we have so due account in the Gospells before the suffering of our Lord. And yet it would be a strange thing to imagine that all that long discourse of our Lord should have no relation to that Sacrament Especially seeing it is so agreeable to all reason that our Lord should deliver unto his disciples the effect of his Gospel in such terms as suted best with the ceremony of that Sacrament wherewith he intended to establish the same For supposing the eating of the flesh of Christ crucified and the drinking of his blood to be the consideration of his passion tending to a resolution of taking up his Crosse we have in it the summe of Christianity consisting in the bearing of Christs Crosse that is in conforming our selves to his sufferings Report we this to the discourse of our Lord with Nicodemus and it will seem strange to me that any man should marvaile that when the Sacrament of Baptisme was not yet instituted our Lord should propose his Gospel to him upon this ground that no man born of the flesh could attain to the kingdome of God without being born againe of water and the holy Ghost Seeing that whether he understood or not what our Lord meant by water it is enough that the Spirit which reneweth the old birth of the flesh dependeth upon that which it signifies whatsoever it is Whether Nicodemus for the understanding of our Lord betake himselfe to the consideration of the several Baptismes of the law or to the Baptism of John the Baptist or to the Baptisme by which proselytes were made Jews which divers learned men have both declared and alleadged to the clearing of this difficulty to very good purpose certaine it is by the premises that the condition of salvation is the profession of Christianity by baptisme that the gift of the holy Ghost is not promised upon any other terms Therefore the Sacrament of Baptisme being instituted there is no assurance of salvation without it where the precept thereof takes place therefore the first birth of the flesh is liable to originall sinne CHAP. X. The Old Testament chargeth all men as well as the wicked to be sinfull from the wombe David complaineth of himselfe as born in sinne no lesse then the Wise man of the children of the Gentiles How Leviticall Lawes argue the same And temporall death under the Old Testament The book of Wisdome and the Greek Bible BUt it is requisite that we look into the Old Testament to see what arguments of the same will discover themselves there provided that we be advised not to expect the reasons upon which the necessity of the Gospel is grounded clearly expressed there where the Gospel it felf is but intimated Those that will not admit the Faith of the Church without such proofes as themselves require may with the Jewes disbelieve the Gospel if our Lord will not prove it by such miracles as they would have and when and where they would have them done But admitting the truth of Christianity upon such reasons as God hath made effectuall to subdue the world to it it will be consequently necessary that there should be arguments of originall sinne in the Old Testament but darker then those which have been and shall be propounded out of the New Certainly it deserveth much consideration that Moses saith Gen. VI. 5. And the Lord saw that great was the evil of man upon earth and every imagination of the thoughts of his heart onely evil all the day long And againe Gen. VIIâ— 8. Upon smelling Noahs sacrifice God saith to himself I will no more curse the earth for man because the imagination of mans heart is evil from his youth For first God declares himselfe as a severe judge to take vengeance upon the sinnes of mankind by the deluge because the world was overflowed with sinne And afterwards either for the same reason because sinne cannot be washed out no not with the waters of a deluge so long as mankind is in being upon the earth or notwithstanding it he declares that he will curse the earth no more for mans sake Here it will be impossible to render a reason of that deluge of sinne which first brought a deluge of waters but could not overcome Gods goodnesse for mankind without a principle common to all mankind Such variety there is in their fansies such contrariety in the inclinations which they produce that it is impossible that they should agree in mischief were they meerly of Gods making And therefore Solomon having premised a hard word for women That seeking account one by one he had found a man of a thousand but a woman of all these he had not found inferreth Eccl. VII 29. Onely this behold I have found that God made man right but they have found out many devises Where I suppose he summoneth all men to inferre that between the uprightnesse in which God made man and the many crooked devises which they have found out to themselves there must something have fallen out to create a common principle to which those many inventions may be imputed But the act of Adam which passed away so soon as it was done had it left nothing behind it could have born the blame of it self alone and of nothing else When God commandeth the Israelites to put a fringe upon the corners of their garments he giveth this reason for it Numb XV. 39. And ye shall see it and remember all the commandments of the Lord and do them And not look after your hearts and your eyes after which ye commit whoredome Surely when he sets the lusts of their eyes and the imagination of their hearts in opposition to the commandment of God he justifies the words of our Lord Mat. X. 36. taken from the Prophet Mich. VII 6. to be fulfilled in every mans heart A mans enemies are those of his own house And Solomons taunt to the young man Eccles XI 9 Walk in the wayes of thine heart and in the light of thine eyes But know thou that for all these things God will bring thee to judgement Gods complaint by the Prophet Ezek. VI. 9. I am broken with their whorish heart which hath departed from me and with their eyes which go a whoring after their Idols Leadeth us for the reason and ground of both to that of the Apostle 1 John II. 16. For whatsoever is in the World the lust of the flesh the lust of the eyes and the pride of life is not of
thus proceedeth Heb. IX 13 14. For if the blood of Bulls and Goats and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkled sanctify the polluted to the purifying of the flesh how much more shall the blood of Christ who through the everlasting spirit offered himself to God blamelesse cleanse our conscience from dead works to serve the living God For though the Soul of Christ raised from the dead have immortality which is life indissoluable yet it hath not the virtue of it which is to be ascribed to the Spirit which raised him from the dead as vvell as us according to S. Paul Rom. VIII 10. 11. If Christ be in you though the body be dead because of sin yet the Spirit is life because of righteousness But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you he that raised Iesus from the dead shall quicken your mortall bodies also through his Spirit that dwelleth in you And whether the cleansing of sin can be ascribed to any gift bestowed upon the humane Soule of Christ as here they vvould have it ascribed to the immortality thereof let all the World judge I deny not indeed that Christ offers the Sacrifice of himself to the Father in the Heaven of Heavens as the Priest offered him the blood of those Sacrifices which were burnt without the Camp in that Holy of Holies But if I should deny that he offered himself to God vvhen he vvas crucified I might as vvell deny that the Priests offered therein Sacrifices to God when they killed them at the Altar and burnt them upon it So manifest so certain it is that the eternall Spirit by virtue whereof the blood of Christ being offered cleanseth sin was in Christ before his rising again And this is that which S. Paul saith 1 Tim. III. 16. And without crontroversie Great is the mystery of Godliness God was manifested in the Flesh justified in the Spirit preached to the Gentiles seen of Angels believed of the World taken up into Glory It is sayd indeed that the Syriack the Vulgar Latine the Arabick and the Commentaries under S. Ambrose his name all want 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here and understand S. Paul to speak of the Gospel all the while And that the Gospel being sayd to be preached before it is sayd to be taken up into Glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be no more then that it is exalted and glorified As if the order of the words did inforce that which is first sayd to have been first done or as if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not signifie the taking of him up to God but the making of the Gospel famous Such violence will a prejudicate supposition offer even to Gods words rather then to quit an argument For to what sense can the Gospel be sayd to be manifested in the flesh because preached by the man Christ And suppose it may be sayd to be justified by the Spirit as Wisdome is justified by the Children of Wisdome Mat. XI 9. Luke VII 35. how much more proper is it to understand that God who appeared in the flesh should be sayd to be justified so to be in or by the Spirit the Works whereof shewed him so to be as afore Neither shall we need to make any greater doubt of the reading of those vvords of S. Paul Acts XX. 28. Look therefore to your selves and to the whole Flock ever which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to feed the Church of God which he hath gotten with his blood Though the written Copy at S. James and the Syriack read here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because that the Church over which the Holy Ghost makes Bishops it bought with the blood of Christ is the same with that of the Apostle afore that the blood of Christ offered by the eternall Spirit cleanseth sin Neither is it so easie to avoyd the words of the Apostle Heb. XI 16. as some imagine For he took not Angels but the Seed of Abraham he took Suppose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be to challenge which is done by laying hands on that which we challenge Is the ground therefore void upon which he challenges these to life as his own that through feare of death were in bondage does not the whole Epistle argue that this is done by the offering of our flesh saith he not expresly that it behoved him to become like his Brethren in all things and that he is not ashamed to call them Brethren because he that sanctifieth and those who are sanctified are all of one Heb. XI 11. 14. 17. does Christ vindicate mankind or the Seed of Abraham For though this is written to the Hebrews alone yet it was written at such time as all christians understood that it belongs no less to the Gentiles Wherfore it is manifest that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which might seem to signifie Christs challenging mankind or vindicating them into freedome from death as well here as elswhere is restrained by the Text and consequence of the Apostles discourse to signifie the assuming of mans nature by the means whereof he won mankind into freedome and maintains it in the same In fine when the Apostle sayth 1 Pet. I. 11. That the ancient Prophets did search against what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ that was in them did declare and profess the sufferings to come upon Christ and the glories following the same He sheweth plainly that the same Spirit by which they spake by fits dwelt in the flesh of Christ for ever having once assumed it Of which Spirit the Evangelist sayth Marke XI 8. That Jesus knew by the Spirit how the Pharises reasoned of him within themselves For as I sayd afore that when it is sayd in the Old Testament that the word of God came to this or that Prophet an Angel appeared unto him speaking in the person of God vvho vvas therefore vvorshiped as God because the Word of God for vvhich being incarnate our Lord Jesus is for ever to be Worshiped as God vvas in that Angel at the present for that Service So I must further note here that upon such Word of God coming to a Prophet he became inspired that is possessed and acted by the Spirit of God for the time of that Service vvhich God by such a message imployed him about Not that all Prophets did receive such Word by such message from God before they spake those things which we believe still they spake by the Spirit of God For there is a great deal of appearance in the Scripture for that which the Jewes doctors deliver unto us Abarbanel by name alleging Maimoni for his saying upon Numb XI that there are inferior degrees of Prophesie which comes not by apparitions in which a man saw one that spake to him in Gods Name but sometimes meerly by inspiration of Gods Spirit inwardly moving either to act or to speak as
work of our Christianity and therefore to every part of it and by consequence that this grace is not given us in consideration of any thing that we are able to do towards the obliging of God to bestow it upon us But I will not take upon me to inflame this abridgment with rehearsal of the testimonies of Church Writers that went afore Pelagius in both these points The testimonies of Fathers that went afore him which S. Augustine hath produced are enough to put those to silence which would have originall sin to be a devise of his But Vossius in his History of the Pelagians having comprised as well these as the rest concerning originall sin libro 11. parte 1. Thes VI. and those which concern the necessity of Grace libro III. parte I. Thes I. II. it will not be to the purpose to do any part of that which hath been sufficiently done already over again To me indeed it seems very considerable that Pelagius acknowledging for Grace first free Will and the Law which teacheth the difference between good and bad after that for the Grace of Christ his doctrine and example first then the illumination of the mind by the Holy Ghost Yet alwaies maintained that man without the help of Grace is able to love God above all to keep his Commandments and resist the greatest temptations to the contrary And in all these points was condemned by the Church as you may see there libro III. parte II. Thes I-VIII For certainly there is a vast difference between the doctrine of Gods Laws absolutely necessary to the doing of his Will even for Adam in the state of innocency and the preaching of the Gospell convincing mankind that they are under Gods wrath by sin tendering pardon to them that imbrace it assuring of everlasting life or death according as they observe the profession of it and shewing the way by our Lords example All which the Scriptures ascribe to the coming of Christ as granted in consideration of it How much more when he granteth the illumination of the Holy Ghost to shew what is to be done must he needs transgress his own position which saith that there is no difference between that state in which we are born and that which Adam was made saving his example but the difference between a man and a Babe For were we born as Adam was made what needed Christ to have purchased by his death the gift of the Holy Ghost to enlighten us inwardly in doing that which without it man is born able to do And having granted the reasons and motives upon which Christians act as Christians to be shewed them both outwardly and inwardly by the Grace of Christ to deny the necessity of the sayd Grace to the acts which proceed from the same can have no excuse but one that Christ came only to evidence the truth of his message leaving the embracing or rejecting of it to every mans choyce Which to maintain if Socinus was fain to make our Lord Christ a meer man that there might be no more in his rising after death then a miracle to assure it Pelagius acknwledging the Trinity will be streightned by S. Pauls consequence If righteousnesse come by the Law then is Christ dead in vain supposing the death of Christ to bring that help of Grace which a miracle by evidencing the truth of the Gospel doth not And seeing God could not be moved by any thing that man could do to give our Lord Christ and the helps which his coming bringeth with it there will be no more left for Pelagius to say But that these helps are not granted of Grace but received by the works which men prevent it with The foundation therefore of the Christian Faith consisting in Gods-sending our Lord Christ of his pure free grace by vertue whereof all the effects of it are works of the same Grace Necessary it was that Pelagius should be condemned for the denying of the necessity of Grace to all acts of Christianity and for affirming that Grace is given according to mans merits as you see there Thesi IX XI that he was Both upon the doctrine of S. Paul premised afore that God was not moved by the works either of Jews or Gentiles to send them those helpes to salvation which the Gospel tendreth Nevertheless the preaching of the Gospel and all the help which it bringeth toward the imbracing of it is no less the Grace of Christ because Pelagius was forced for the better colouring of his Heresie to acknowledge it Onely it is not therefore to be sayd that it is all the help which the Grace of God by Christ furnisheth toward that salvation which Christianity tendreth But to be left to further dispute what further help is granted by God before and without any consideration of mans merit to bring to effect those acts in which the discharge of our Christianity consisteth Excluding therefore the pretense of Pelagius that Moses before the godly Fathers pleased God by the meer strength of nature and that salvation was to be had under the Law by the same Besides the good works of the Gentiles wherewith God was pleased according to Pelagius whom the Church condemned in this Article also as you may see there Thes X. And truly Pelagius acknowledging the Gospel to be no more then the declaration of that Will of God by which man is to be saved after Christ as the Law before Christ utterly overthroweth the plea of the Church derived from the Apostles that the Fathers were saved by faith before and under the Law that the New Testament was in force under the Old by vertue of that commerce which God by his word which afterwards being incarnate was our Lord Christ held with the Fathers His Spirit as naturally planted in the word going along to procure the efficacy of it Whereas Socinus though he acknowledgeth the difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Law yet making our Lord Christ a meer man the vertue of whose death could not extend to the salvation of those who lived afore his coming destroyeth the ground of that which he acknowledgeth This supposition that Christianity is more ancient then Judaâ—sme being necessary to the maintaining of the Church against the Synago ue Which is verified by Gods designing of a Church for the spouse of his Sonne before the Fall figured by the marriage between Adam and Eve according to S. Paul Ephes V. 22-33 But presently after the Fall that Word which being incarnate in our Lord Christ having declared enmity betwen the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent saying It shall break thy head and thou shalt bruise the heel of it The first Adam became the figure of the second according to the same S. Paul Rom. V. 14. Whereupon the Spirit of the second Adam in those Preachers of righteousnesse to whom the Word of God came in that Angel whom the Fathers worshipped for God strove form
our sinnes imputable to Christ nor his sufferings to us formally and personally but as the meritorious causes which satisfaction answerâ—â—h The effect of it the Covenant of Grace as well as helpe to perform it The Fathers saved by the Faith of Christ to come The Gospel a new Law The prâ—perâ—y of satisfaction and punishment in Christs sufferings Of the sense of the Catholick Church 245 CHAP. XXX God might have reconciled man to himselfe without the coming of Christ The promise of â—â—â— Gâ—spel dâ—pend as well upon his active as passive obedience Christ need 〈…〉 pâ—iâ—â—s that we might not The opinion that maketh justiâ—â—â—g 〈…〉 â—rust in God not true Yet not prejudicial to the Faith The dâ—câ—â—â— of the Council of Trent and the doctrine of the Schoole how it is not preâ—udicial to the Faith As also that of Socinus 254 CHAP. XXXI The state of the question concerning the perseverance of those that are once justified Of three senses one true one inconsistent wiâ—h the faith the third neither true nor yet destructive to the Faith Evidence from â—â—â— writings of the Apostles From the Old Testament The grace of Proâ—heâ—â—e when it presupposeth sanctifying grace Answer to some texts and of S. Pauls mâ—aâ—â—ng in the VII of the Romans Of the Polygamy of the Fathers What assurance of Grace Christians may have The Tradition of the Church 266 CHAP. XXXII How the fulfilling of Gods Law is possible how impossible for a Christian Of the difference between mortall and veniall sinne What love of God and of our neighbour was necessary under the Old Testament Whether the Sermon in the Mount correct the false interpretation of the â—ewes or inhanse the obligatin of the Law Of the difference between matter of Precept and matter of Counsail and the Perfection of Christians 285 CHAP. XXXIII Whether any workes of Christians be satisfactory for sinne and meritorious of heaven or not The recovery of Gods grace for a Christian fallen from it a worke of labour and time The necessity and essicacy of Penance to that purpose according to the Scriptures and the practice of the Church Merit by virtue of Gods promise necessary The Catholick Church agrees in it the present Church of Rome allowes merit of justice 300 The CONTENTS of the third Book CHAP. I. THe Society of the Church founded upon the duty of communicating in the Offices of Gods service The Sacrament of the Eucharist among those Offices proper to Christianity What opinions concerning the presence of Christs body and Blood in the Eucharist are on foot page 1 CHAP. II. That the Natural substance of the Elements remaines in the Sacrament That the Body and Blood of Christ is neverthâ—lâ—sse present in the same when it is received noâ— by the receiving of it The eating of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Câ—â—sâ— necessarily requireth the same This causes no contradâ—ction nor improperty â—â— the words of our Lord. 3 CHAP. III. That the presence of Christs body in the Eucharist depends not upon the living 〈◊〉 of him that receives but upon the true profession of Christianity in the 〈◊〉 thâ—â— câ—lâ—brates The Scâ—iâ—tureâ— that are alleged for the dependence of 〈◊〉 the communication of the properties They conclude not the sense of them b◠〈◊〉 â—â—ey are alleged How the Scripture confineth the flesh of Christ to the 〈◊〉 16 CHAP. IV. The opinion which maketh the Consecration to be done by rehearsing the operative words That our Lord consecrated by Thanksgiving The Form of it in all Lâ—â—urgies together with the consent of the Fathers Evidence that there is â—o Tradition of the Church for the abolishing of the Elements 23 CHAP. V. It cannot be proved by the Old Testament that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice How by the New Testament it may be so accounted Four reasons thereof depending upon the nature of Justifying Faith premised The consent of the Catholick Church The concurrence of the Church of England to the premises 38 CHAP. VI. The reason of the Order by which I proceed brings me to the Baptism of Infants in the next place The power of the Keyes seen in granting Baptism as well as in communicating the Eucharist Why Socinians make Baptism indifferent Why Antinomians make it a mistake to Baptize The grounds upon which I shake off both With answer to some objections 53 CHAP. VII The ground of Baptizing Infants Originall sinne though not instituted till Christ rose again No other cure for it Infants of Christians may be Disciplâ—â— are holy The effect of Circumcision under the Law inferreth the effect of Baptism under the Gospel 58 CHAP. VIII What is alledged to impeach Tradition for Baptizing Infants Proves not that any could be saved regularly who dyed unbaptized but that baptizing at years was a strong means to make good Christians Why the Church now Baptize What becomes of Infants dying unbaptized unanswerable What those Infants get who dye baptized â—5 CHAP. IX What controversie the Reformation hath with the Church of Rome about Penance Inward repentance that is sincere obtaineth pardon alone Remission of 〈◊〉 by the Gospel onely The condition of it by the Ministry of the Church What the power of binding and loosing contains more then Preaching or taking away offences Sinne may be pardoned without the use of it Wherein the necessity of using it lyeth 73 CHAP. X. The Sâ—cts of the Montanists Novatians Donatists and Meletians evidence the cure of sinne by Penance to be a Tradition of the Apostles So doâ—h the agreement of primitive practice with their writings Indulgence of regular Penance from the Apostles Confession of secret sinnes in the primitive Church That no sinne can be cured withoâ—â— the Keyes of the Church there is no Tradition from the Apostles The necessity of confessing secret sinnes whereupon it stands 86 CHAP. IX Penance is not required to redeem the debt of temporall punishment when the sinne is pardoned What assuraâ—ce of forgivenesse the law of auricular Confession as it is used in the Church of Rome procureth Of injoyning Penance after absolution performed Setting aside abuses the Law is agreeable to Gods Of the order taken by the Church of England 98 CHAP. XI The Unction of the sick pretendeth onely boaily health upon supposition of the cure of sinne by the Keyes of the Church Objections answered The Tradition of the Church evidenceth the same 106 CHAP. XII The ground of the Right of the Church in Matrimoniall causes Mariage of one with one iâ—solubly is a Law of Christianity The Law of Moses not injoyning it The Law of the Empire not aiming at the ground of it Evidence from the primitive practice of the Church 114 CHAP. XIV Scripture alledged to prove the bond of Mariage insoluble in case of adultery uneffectual S. Paul and our Lord speak both to one purpose according to S. Jerome and S. Austine The contrary opinion more reasonable and more general in the Church Why the Church may restrain the innocent party from marying again The
spirit of Christ hee is none of Christs So hee had premised Rom. V. 1-5 Being justified by Faith wee have peace towards God through our Lord Jesus Christ together with the joy of hope by the love of God poured out in our hearts through the Spirit of God which is in us The Kingdome of God consisting in righteousnesse and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost Rom. XIV 17. If it be here objected that the Grace of the Holy Ghost is necessary to bring a man to Christianity and therefore cannot suppose it Supposing this for the present but not granting it because it is in controversie and must be resolved by the grounds which wee seek It will be easie to distinguish between the grace of the Holy Ghost and the gift of the Holy Ghost For hee that is converted to believe the truth of Christianity may acknowledge it to be of Grace but must not presume of the gift of the Holy Ghost that it is bestowed on him for his own till his conversion be complete by undertaking the profession of Christianity If it be further alleged that Cornelius and his company received the Holy Ghost before they were baptized The answer is ready from that maxime of Law That every exception against a Rule establishes the Rule in cases not excepted Cornelius no Jew but converted from Idols to worship the true God under the promises which the Jewes expected with his company of the same Faith being in the state of Gods grace upon that account receives the Holy Ghost before Baptisme because God knew him ready to undertake the profession of Christianity so soon as it could appear to be commanded by God And this for the satisfaction of S. Peter and the Jewes in that secret which hereby begâ—n to be declared that the Gentiles as well as the Jewes belonged to the Church It is true the graces of the Holy Ghost are of two kindes For some of them are given for the benefit and salvation of those in whom they are Some for the benefit and edification of the Church And it is true that both kindes are meant and expressed by these Scriptures But it is no lesse true that neither of them is to be had but supposing the truth of Christianity and of the Scriptures For the first kinde is granted to none but those that imbrace Christianity with a sincere intention of living according to that which they professe Being indeed the help that God by his Gospel promises and allowes them to go thorough with that high and difficult profession which they undertake Wee see the Apostles forsake their Lord and make a doubt of his resurrection before the coming of the Holy Ghost Whom having received they are ready to professe Christ in the midst of utmost dangers And S. John as hee giveth the reason why the righteous sin not because their â—eed abideth in them that is the word of the Gospel by which they were ingendred anew to be Christians 1 John III. 9. So hee giveth the reason why they were not to be seduced by the Heresies of that time because the unction which they had received from the Holy One taught them to know all things 1 John II. 20 27. Thus the Unction of the Spirit supposes the seed of the Word and the seed of the Word inferres the Unction of the Spirit And as when the Word of God came to the Prophets they were withall possessed by Gods Spirit moving them to deliver it to the people So when the word of Faith is established in the heart of a Christian as David saith the Spirit of God possesseth him with an inclination both to professe it and to live according to it As for the second kinde it is true they are granted to those that are not heires of Gods promises as it appeares by the instances of Saul surprised with the Spirit of Prophesie when hee intended the death of David 1 Sam. XIX 23 24. Of those that have prophesied and cast out Devils and done miracles in our Lords name to whom hee shall say I know you not Mat. VII 22 23. Of Caiaphas who prophesied of our Lords death when hee was compassing of it John XI 49 -52. And of Balaam in the last place as all know But as the former kinde supposeth true Christianity in him that hath it so doth this correspondently suppose the profession of it as under the old Law the profession of the true God The tryal of a Prophet under the Law was not the doing of a miracle alone If hee seduced from God in stead of taking him for Gods messenger they were to put him to death Deut. XIII 1-5 So the tryal was the doing of a miracle under the profession of the true God Under the Gospel No man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus anathema nor can any man call Jesus Lord but by the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. XII 3. Supposing that a man speaketh such things as must come either from Gods Spirit or from evil Spirits the tryal is whether hee professe Christ or not And 1 John IV. 2 3. Every Spirit that confesseth Jesus come in the flesh to be Christ is of God And every Spirit that confesseth not Jesus Christ that is come in the flesh is not of God Every Spirit that is every inspiration which a man of himself cannot have God will not have his people so tempted that under the profession of the true Religion the Devils instruments should have power to work miracles to seduce them from it Upon these terms prophesied Saul under the Law and upon the same terms prophesied those under the Gospel whom our Lord will not own having done miracles in his name As for Caiaphas it doth not appear that hee spoke those words whereby S. John saith hee prophened of our Lords death by revelation or inspiration from God For the reason is given why hee prophened because hee was High Priest that year Now when the High Priests declared Gods orders to his ancient people there is no appearance that they were inspired by revelation with that which they declared But that putting on the Pontifical robes Gods will appeared by the brest-plate of Urim and Tummim though now wee know not how Accordingly to were Caiaphas his words ordered this gift being ceased many ages afore as to containe a Prophesie of our Lords death by Gods intent but without his But Balaams case is farre otherwise Arnobius advers Gent. I. tells us that Magicians in their operations met with contrary Gods whom hee calls Antitheos that would not suffer them to proceed Balaam met with the true God and knew him to be so and all his Inchantments controlable by him and yet sacrifices to false Gods that by their help hee might curse Gods people In this case Balaam though commanded as a subject is not as a friend inspired by God when God forces him to speak what hee would not If any man then resolve the credit of the Scripture into the
not to any part but to the whole Body of the Scriptures it would first have been said what Scripture speaking of the whole Body of the Scripture hath established this property or â—rivilege of it For my part upon the best consideration that I can take I am at a stand to finde any text of Scripture any letter or syllable of the whole Bible that sayes any thing at all good or bad of the whole Bible So farre is it from delivering this property or privilege of it So farre further from delivering it as the first truth in termes so clear and unquestionable as to make it a presumption to the deciding of all that is or may become questionable concerning the Scripture The words of S. Paul 2 Tim. III. 16 17. All Scripture inspired by God is also profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness That the man of God may be perfect Being fitted for every good work Cannot be said of the whole Body of Canonical Scripture being written before it was That is when evidently many parts of the New Testament were not written probably all and evidently concernes every part of Gods Word not the whole Body of the Scriptures Therefore with Origen I conceive they are meant of the Scriptures of the Old Testament To this effect That that instruction which is necessary to salvation being had by the Gospel which the Church teacheth those whom it maketh Christians the right understanding of the Old Testament according to the mystery of the Gospel is that which rendereth him whom God imployeth in the propagation of his Gospel and the edification of his Church able to convince those that withstand to edifie those that admit it Which if it be farre short of that which I deny the rest of those pitifull lame consequences which are usually made from the Scriptures to prove the same purpose will easily appeare to come short of it though I take not in hand to determine at present the full meaning of them but onely to show that they import not that all things necessary for the salvation of all Christians are clear to all Christians in the Scriptures The fashion is to allege Deut. IV. 2. XII 32. Yee shall take heed to do all the Word that I command you Yee shall adde nothing to it nor take any thing from it And You shall adde nothing to the Word that I command you nor take any thing from it That you may keep the commandement of the Lord your God which I command you And that it is threatned for a conclusion to the whole Scripture Apoc. XXI 18 19 If any man adde to the words of the Prophesie contained in this Book God shall lay upon him the plagues written in this Book God shall take away his share out of the book of Life and the holy City and the things that are written in this Book For is not all that is requisite sufficiently clear if nothing may be added or taken from the Scriptures Therefore is S. Paul also alleged pronouncing anathema if himself or an Angel from heaven or any man should take upon him to preach any other Gospel than that which they had already received Gal. I. 8 9. And that therefore are the Beraeans commended Acts XVII 11. that they did not admit even those things which S. Paul so great an Apostle preached to them without examining them by the Scriptures whether so as hee said or not To the same purpose John XX. 30 31. Many other miracles did Jesus which are not written in this book But these are written that yee may believe that Jesus is the Christ and that believing yee may have life through his Name Adde hereunto the Psalmists commendations of the Law XIX 7-31 as giving wisedom to the simple as inlightning the eyes and instructing the servants of God which how should it do if it be not first to be understood For the precept is a candle and the Law light saith Solomon Prov. VII 22. And Psalm CXIX 113. Thy word is a candle to my feet and a light to my paths Further the Scriptures tell us how they come to be obscure what makes them clear They shall be all taught by God saith the Prophet Isa LIV. 13. speaking of the times of the Gospel and the children of the Church And Jeremy XXXI 33 34. promiseth that God will put his New Covenant in the hearts of his children and write it in their entrailes so that they shall have no need to teach one another the knowledge of God because they should be all taught by God to know God And is not this that for which our Lord gives thanks to the Father Mat. XI 25. because having concealed the mystery of the Gospel from the wise and understanding hee had revealed it to babes and sucklings Which the Apostle expoundeth 1 John II. 20 21 27. You have an Vnctien from God and know all things I have not written to you because yee know not the truth but because yee know it and that no lye is of the truth And But as for you the Vnction which yee have received of him remaineth in you and yee need not that any man teach you But as that Vnction teacheth you of all things and is true and not false and as it hath taught you so shall you abide in it Whereupon afterwards IV. 1. Believe not every Spirit but try the Spirits whether of God or not To wit as those who were possessed of that by which they were to be tryed Therefore S. Paul 1 Thess V. 23. Try all things Hold that which is good To wit by that means which hee intimateth 1 Cor. II. 15. The spiritual man is judged by none but himself judgeth all things In fine I must not forget Cartwrights argument from the words of the Prophet Jeremy VII 31. XXXI 35. where hee reproveth the Jewes Idolatries by this argument that it never came into Gods minde to command them any such thing For if the grievousnesse even of their Idolatries consist in this that they were done without warrant of Gods word how can it be questionable that hee hath provided us instruction sufficient to clear us in all that wee are to do by the Scriptures But these Scriptures are as easily wiped away as they are alleged if wee go no further than to show that they inforce no such principle as is pretended for the ending of all Controversies that all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are clear to all Christians in the Scriptures For what a pitifull inconsequence is it to argue that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures because Moses forbideth to adde to or take from his Law For if the Gospel be not clearly contained in the Old Testament containing the Law and the Prophets and therefore much lesse in the Law alone then is it not lawfull to adde to or take from that Scripture in which all things necessary to salvation
them hee is fain to argue very hard that their women ought their men ought not to be vailed at divine Service Concluding that if his reasons would not prevail the contentious must rest in this That wee have no such custome neither the Churches of God Why so if particular Churches be not tied to keep unity with the whole And by and by proposing another disorder in that they received not the Eucharist in commune poore and rich hee reproveth it as contrary to that which hee had delivered to them from the beginning Concluding that The rest will I set in order when I come So 2 Thess II. 25. Stand therefore brethren and hold fast the Traditions which yee have been taught either by word of mouth or by any letter of ours Neither can it be imagined that all Christians should be bound to heare the Apostles and not be bound to hold those things for Lawes to their conversation in maters of Religion which the Apostles should teach them to that purpose Of this nature is the decree at Jerusalem Acts XV. 20 28. that the then Churches of the Gentiles should abstain from things strangled and bloud as well as from fornication and the pollution of Idols For what is the ground or the purpose of it but to preserve them in unity with the Churches of Jews become Christians Of this nature is that blessing or Thanksgiving mentioned by S. Paul 1 Cor. XIV 16 17. 1 Tim. II. 1. being as I have showed in a Discourse of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church pag. 350-370 a form of Prayer or Thanksgiving delivered in substance by the Apostles for which the Sacrament of our Lords Supper hath been alwaies called the Eucharist because it is to be celebrated with it Of the same nature is tha order which S. James gives of praying for the sick anointing them with oile aswell for the forgivenesse of their sins as for the recovery of their bodily health James V. 14 15. Which I suppose no man will deny that it concernes all Churches alike If there be this evidence in the Scriptures for the beginnings of Church Law the practice of the Church from this beginning will afford much more Hee that would deny the Tradition of the Rule of Faith what will hee say to the Creed of the Apostles Not that I would have the words and syllables of it to containe whatsoever it is necessary for the salvation of a Christian to believe But because the Creed is not the words of the Creed but the sense and meaning of them together with that coherence and dependence of the parts thereof one upon and with another which the reasons and grounds of them inforce But first let it be understood that I make a difference between the Rule of Faith and the substance of Christianity Supposing Christianity to consist partly in mater of Faith partly in mater of maners Partly in things to be believed partly in things to be done though the Creed extend onely to mater of Faith There is nothing more evident in the practice of the whole Church before the world had admitted the profession of Christianity than this That there was a time allowed and required by the Church for those that professed themselves converted to believe the truth of Christianity to give trial of their conversation before they were admitted to Baptisme The Constitutions of the Apostles VIII 32. name three years but with this limitation that if any man demonstrate extraordinary zele to Christianity hee be received without so long trial Therefore if Clemens Alexandrinus require five it makes no difference For what marvail if several Churches at several times had several customes when as upon extraordinary occasions they were dispensable The Constitutions require extraordinary trial of those that had practised any sort of Magick judging by the experience of the times that it was hard to part with such superstitions It is enough for my purpose that during this time they might learn to behave themselves as Christians by conversing among Christians by coming to Church and bearing a part in the praises of God and hearing the Scriptures read and expounded And what is more notorious in the practice of the ancient Church than the difference between Missa Catechumenorum and Missa Fidelium Between that part of the Office of the Church which Pretenders to Christianity were admitted to or Hearers that is Scholars and Learners of it and that which was peculiar to Believers that is those that were Baptized and made Christians It is the designe of Clemens Alexandrinus his Paedagogus to show how the Word whether our Lord Christ or his Gospel is the Pedagogue of mankinde in bringing them to be Christians Not as wee mistake that word to signifie the Master of a School but as the fashion was then for men of quality to appoint a sonne a Governor to conduct him to School and home againe to attend on him at his exercises and upon all occasions to put him in minde how it might become him to behave himself and to report to his Father if hee proved untractable Thus hee maketh Pretenders to Christianity to be conducted by our Lord Christ and his Gospel in the conversation of Christians till they come to demand their Baptisme of the Church As it is manifest by the end of the Book where this Governor conducting his charge to the Church gives him up into his own hands so hee saith expresly as no more Governor of children but Master of men in the School of his Church Supposing then the point of maners and godly life to be part of the substance of Christianity it is evident that the Church alwaies acknowledged a certain Rule of Faith in that those who were thus prepared were alwaies taught their Creed that is required to repete it and heare it expounded by those whom the Church trusted for that purpose It is not my intent here to insist that the words of the Creed were delivered by the Apostles themselves or that the Rule of Baptisme delivered by our Lord in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is not a sufficient Symbole or cognizance for a Christian For what is there necessary to the salvation of all Christians that is not contained in the profession of him that desires to be baptized into this Faith But it is enough for my present purpose that it was alwaies requisite that whosoever is baptized should be instructed upon what termes hee is to expect to be saved by Christ and that which all were required to professe for that purpose to be the Rule of Faith For whether it may appeare that this or that is of that nature must come to trial though the question be only of the sense of the Creed supposing that the very words were delivered by the Apostles themselves For example It is not possible to render a reason of the coming of Christ not mentioning the fall of Adam nor of that not
to have been a meer humane Law so did it no way concern the service of God which the Excommunicate among the Jewes were not excluded from by it But was a meer civil punishment tending to change and abate the estate and condition of him that was under it in his freedom and intercourse with his own peole By all this hee seemes to fortifie the argument which Erastus had made showing that there is no such thing as Excommunication commanded or established by that Law and therefore that there is no such power in the Church But further seeing that there was no other company of men extant in the world for the Apostles to understand by the name of the Church when our Lord commanded him that was offended among his Disciples Tell it to the Church Mat. XVIII 16-20 hee insists strongly that neither the Church of Christ nor any Consistory or Assembly of men or particular person claiming or acting in behalf and under the title of the Church can be understood by those words of our Lord But that the name of the Church must necessarily signifie the Body of Jewes as well as Christians as unbelievers or that Consistory which was able to act in behalf of them in their respective times and places such as wee must also understand the witnesses there mentioned to be For it is manifest that at the beginning of Christianity onely Jewes were admitted to be Christians in so much that the dispute was hot about Cornelius and his company Acts XI 1. being no Jewes in Religion but yet such as believed in the true God and had renounced the worship of Idols Whereby it seemes the command of our Lord to baptize all Nations Mat. XXVIII 19. was then understood to concern onely those of all Nations that had made themselves Jewes by being circumcised afore Accordingly wee see that by virtue of Claudius his Edict commanding all Jewes to depart from Rome Aquila and Priscilla being Christians came to Corinth Acts XVIII 2. to show that Christians at that time must needs use the Jewes fashions who were therefore reputed Jewes by the Law of the Romanes and injoyed the benefit of their Religion by the Jewes privileges granted or confirmed by the same Claudius in Josephus Antiq XIX 4. Whereupon it seems necessarily to follow that the Excommunication then in force was that which the Jewes had introduced by humane Law confirmed by the Law of the Empire Though it is to be thought that the Christians upon particular agreement among themselves such as wee finde they had by Pliny Epist X. 97. Tertul. Apolog. cap. II. Euseb Hist Eccles III. 33. S. Hierome Chron. 2123. Orig. contr Celsum I. pag. 4. had limited the use of it to such causes and termes as their profession required Therefore when our Lord in the next words commands that hee which will not heare the Church be accounted as an Heathen or a Publicane As it is manifest that hee gives the Church no power but onely prescribes what hee would have the party offended to do So neither Heathen nor Publicane being in the condition of an excommunicate person among the Jewes how can it be understood that our Lord would have him to be excommunicate whom hee commands to be held as a Heathen man or as a Publicane The effect then of this precept of our Lord will consist in limiting the precept of the Law Levit. XIX 17. to the publishing of those offenses between parties the private complaint whereof should be neglected So that if the opinion of Gods people should be no more esteemed by the osfeuder the party offended freely to return his scorn by avoiding his familiarity as Jewes were wont to avoid the familiarity of Heathen men and Publicanes Now when our Lord adds in the next words Whatsoever yee binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven The sense must either be general to signifie the obligation of all Law and the right and Power which one man may have by the act of his will to tye and limit another mans Or particular to the Law of Moses Whereby what was declared unlawfull by the Doctors and Professors of it was said in their language to be held or bound that which was permitted loose Which signification our Lord also uses Mat. XXIII 4. Luc. XI 46. This later sense concerning things and not persons will be farre from signifying that any man should be excommunicate And though Excommunication be a bond and was so among the Jewes yet how should wee understand that the Church is inabled to tye this bond by a commission the termes whereof containe all that superiors may do to oblige their inferiors This Author then acknowledges that S. Paul threatens Excommunication Gal. I. 8 9. 1 Cor. XVI 22. and that hee wishes himself that estate which it imports Rom. IX 3. Not as it hath been falsly imagined among Christians to be cut off from the communion of the Eucharist and other offices of Christianity But as it was used among the Jewes to inferre the abridgment of a mans freedome in publick conversation as vile and subject to the curses of the Church But when the same Apostle gives order that the incestuous person be delivered to Satan 1 Cor. V. 5. As also when hee saith that hee had delivered Hymenaeus and Philetus 1 Tim. I. 20. when hee ordereth them not to converse with such persons 1 Cor. V. 11. this hee takes no more to concerne Excommunication than those verses of the Psalms Blessed is the man that bath not walked in the counsail of the ungodly Or I have not sate with vain persons nor will have fellowship with the deceitfull That is to say that it is bad counsail towards God but neither ground nor signe of any commission to excommunicate in the body of the Church Whereas the Leviathan to show here out of order his sense of that place though hee acknowledge that both ancient and modern writers have understood it as if by the extraordinary graces which the Apostles then had to evidence the presence of God in his Church the excommunicate became subject to plagues and diseases inflicted by evil Angels to show that they came under the power of Satan when they were put out of the Church yet hee satisfies himself by saying that other learned men finde nothing like the excommunication of Christians in it pag. 209. and that it depended upon the singular privilege of the Apostles These are the grounds upon which the power of the Keyes and by consequence the charter and corporation of the Church and all Ecclesiastical right and power grounded thereupon are taken away in the first book de Synedriis to the same effect as in Erastus his positions But the Leviathan comes up close to the point in general and following the supposition which I have refuted That the Gospel or Christianity and the Scriptures that contain it are not Law till the secular Power that
himself because hee expresses not so much of his meaning For my part as I found it necessary so I finde it sufficient to have quoted these opinions and reasons advanced against the right of the Church because I finde they oblige mee to digg sor a foundation upon which as the true ground of that right which the Church claimeth I may be inabled to dissolve whatsoever reasons wit and learning impregnated by passion or interest can invent to contradict the same Here then I must have recourse to a position which some men will count hazardous others prejudicial to Christianity according as their prejudices or engagements may work But will appear in truth to them that shall take the pains to look through the consequences of it in the resolution of Controversies which divide the Church to concern the interest of Christianity and the peace of the Church more thâ—n any point whatsoever that is not of the Foundation of Faith In as much as there is no question that is started or can be started as the case is now with the Church so as to call in question the peace and unity thereof but the interpretation of the old Testâ—ment or some part of it in relation and correspondence to the New Testament will be ingaged in it Concerning which the position that I intend to advance is this That by the Law of Moses and the Covenant between God and the people of Israel upon it nothing at all was expresly contracted concerning everlasting life and the happinesse of the world to come Not that I intend to say That there was not at that time sufficient ground for a man to be competently perswaded of his right to it or sufficient means to come to the knowledge of that ground for hee that should say this could not give account how the Fathers should attain salvation under the Law which I finde all that maintain the truth of Christianity against the Jews so obliged to do that without it they must give up the game But that the thing contracted for between God and the people of Israel by the mediation of Moses was the Land of Promise That is to say that they should be a free people and injoy their own Lawes in the possession of it upon condition of imbracing and observing such Lawes as God should give As for the kingdome of heaven which the Gospel of Christ preacheth the hope of it was so mystically intimated that there was sufficient cause to imbrace it even then but not propounded as the condition upon which God offered to contract with them as hee doth with Christians And this though I cannot say that the Church hath at anytime expressed to be a part of the Rule of Faith yet that the Church hath alwaies implicitely admitted it for a part of the reason of Faith which wee call Divinity I must and do maintain Before I come to prove this I will here propound one objection because it seems to contain the force of all that is to be said against it For when our Lord sayes Mat. XIX 19. If thou wilt enter into life keep the commandements When hee resolves the great commandements of the Law to be the love of God above all things and of our neighbor as of our selves Mat. XXII 36. In fine wheresoever hee derives the duties of Christianity from the Law of Moses hee seems to suppose and so do his Apostles that the same life everlasting which hee promiseth by the Gospel was proposed by the Law as the reward for observing it And indeed what can the Gospel was propound for a more suitable way or meanes to salvation than the love of God and man in that order which the Law of God appointeth It is not for nothing that S. Augustine observeth The first commandement of the Decalogue to acknowledge God and the last not to covet that which is another mans to contain in them the utmost office of a Christian And all Divines have distributed the precepts of Moses Law into Moral as well as Judicial and Ceremonial The Moral precepts containing in them no lesse than the duties of Christianity when they are done with such an intent as God who by giving Moses Law declareth himself to see the most inward of the heart requireth Here in the first place supposing that God entring into Covenant with that people intended to establish their Civil Government by the Law of Moses I will proceed to argue that all Civil Lawes that are not contrary to the Law of Nature and the actions by them injoyned or prohibited may be done or not done for two several reasons For if there be reason enough for the Nations that know not God nor ground their Lawes upon any presumption of his will or expectation of good or evil from him to unite themselves in Civil Society then is their reason enough for them to observe the Lawes upon which the benefit of Civil Society is to be had though they suppose not themselvs obliged by God to them nor to oblige God by keeping them And if it be evident that all Civil Lawes not contrary to the Lawes of God and Nature do come from God as Civil Society doth it will be as evident that the keeping of them in that regard and for that consideration is obedience to God The Jewes Civil Law hath this privilege above the Civil Lawes of other Nations to be gronnded upon those acts whereby God revealing himself for their freedom by Moses tendereth them the Land promised to their Fathers upon the Covenant they then had with God upon condition of undertaking the Lawes which hee should give them for the future And no reason can deny that this was sufficient to convince them that God required of them not onely the work which the Law specified but that it be done in consideration of his will and in reference to his honor and service Though on the other side it is not necessary to grant that so much is expressed by the Civil Law of that Nation expresly tending to their Civil freedome and happinesse in the possession of the Land of Promise It cannot be doubted that the immortality of the soul and the reward of good and bad after death was received among that people from and before the time of receiving the Law Otherwise how should the Patriarchs obtain it which the maintainance of Christianity requireth that they did obtain It is also evident by the Scriptures that the same conversation which Christ and his Apostles preached was extant in the lives and actions of the Fathers before the Law Abraham Isaac Jacob Joseph Job Moses and the rest as the Fathers of the Church are wont to argue against the Jewes that Christianity is more ancient than Judaisme It is also manifest that the same conversation was extant and to be seen under the Law in the lives of the Prophets and their Disciples by the words of our Lord to the Scribes and Pharisees Mat. XXIII 29-36 when hee
is there just cause to think that thereby advantage is given to the Jewes against Christianity by granting that such passages out of which the New Testament drawes the birth and sufferings of our Lord are reasonably to be understood of his predecessors in Gods ancient people For it is plaine that it despite of the Jewes the works done by our Lord and his Prophesies concerning his Dying and Rising again and the destruction of the Jewes and the preaching of the Gospel to all Nations seconded by his Apostles and that which they did to winn credit that they were the witnesses of the same are the evidence upon which the Gospel obliges The Scriptures of the Old Testament which were no evidence to the Gentiles as much and more concerned in the Gospel than the Jewes were evidence and so to be not of themselves for what need Christ then have done those works But upon supposition that God intended not to rest in giving the Law but to make it the thred to introduce the Gospel by Which supposition as it is powerfully inforced by the nature of the Law and the difference between the inward and the outward obedience of God as it hath been hitherto declared and maintained So is it also first introduced by those works which our Lord declareth to be done for evidence thereof then made good by the perpetual correspondence between the Old and New Testament which any considerable exception interrupts And there reasons so much the more effectual because this difference of literal and mystical sense was then and is at this day acknowledged by the Jewes themselves against whom our Lord and his Apostles imploy it in a considerable number of Scriptures which they themselves interpret of the Messias though they are not able to make good the consequence of the same sense throughout because they acknowledge not the reason of it which concludes the Lord Jesus to be the Messias whom they expect If these things be true neither Origen nor any man else is to be indured when they argue that a mystical sense of the Scripture is to be inquired and allowed even where this ground takes no place For vindicating the honor of God and that it may appeare worthy of his wisedom to declare that which wee admit to be the utmost intent of the Scriptures For if it be for the honor of God to have brought Christianity into the world for the salvation of mankinde and to have declared himself by the Scriptures for that purpose then whatsoever tends to declare this must be concluded worthy of God and his wisedom whatsoever referres not to it cannot be presumed agreeable to his wisdom how much soever it flatter mans eare or fantasie with quaintnesse of conceit or language Now as I maintain this difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Old Testament to be necessary for the maintenance of Christianity as well as for understanding the Scriptures So are there some particular questions arising upon occasion of it which I can well be content to leave to further dispute As for example There is an opinion published which saith That the abomination of desolation which our Lord saith was spoken of by Daniel the Prophet concerning the destruction of Jerusalem Dan. IX 24 Mat. XXIV 15. Mar. XIII 14. was fulfilled in the havock made by Antiochus Epiphanes Which is also plainly called the abominatio of desolation by the same Prophet Daâ— XI 31. XII 10. Whether this opinion can be made good according to historical truth or not this is not the place to dispute Whether or no the difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Scriptures will indure that the same Prophesie be fulfilled twice in the literal sense concerning the temporal state of the Jewes once under Antiochus Epiphanes and once under Titus that is it which I am here content to referre to further debate One thing I affirme that notwithstanding this difference it is no inconvenience to say that some Prophesies are fulfilled but once Namely that of Jacob Gen. XLIX 8-12 that of Daniel IX 24. that of Malacbi III. 1. IV. 5 6. Because the coming of Christ boundeth the times of the literal and mystical sense And therefore there is reason why it should be marked out by Prophesies of the Old Testament referring to nothing else Againe I am content to leave to dispute whether the many Prophesies of the Old Testament which are either manifestly alleged or covertly intimated by the Revelation of S. John must therefore be said to be twice fulfilled once in the sense of their first Authors under the Law and again under the Gospel in S. Johns sense to the Church Or that this second complement of them was not intended by the Spirit of God in the Old Prophets but that it pleased God to signifie to S. John things to befall the Church by Prophetical Visions like those which hee had read in the ancient Prophets whereby God signified to them things to befall his ancient people For of a truth it is the outward rather than the spiritual state of the Church which is signified to S. John under these images A third particular must be the first Chapter of Genesis For in that which followes of Paradise and what fell out to our first Parents there I will make no question that hoth senses are to be admitted the Church having condemned Origen for taking away the historical sense of that portion of Scripture But whether the creation of this sensible world is to be taken for a figure of the renewing of mankinde into a spiritual world by the Gospel of Christ according to that ground of the difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Scripture which hitherto I maintaine This I conceive I may without prejudice leave to further debate But leaving these things to dispute I must insist that those things which the Evangelists affirm to have been fulfilled by such things as our Lord said or did or onely befell him in the flesh have a further meaning according to which they are mystically accomplished in the spiritual estate of his Christian people The chiefe ground hereof I confesse is that of S. Matthew VIII 17. where having related divers of our Lords miracles hee addeth that they were done That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Prophet Esay LIII 4. Hee took our infirmities and â—are away our sicknesses Together with the words of our Lord Luke V. 17-21 where hee telleth them of Nazareth This day are the words of the Prophet Esay LXI 1. The Spirit of the Lord is upon mee because hee hath anointed mee to preach the Gospel to the poor fulfilled in your hearing And his answer to John Baptist grounded upon the same passage Mat. XI 4 5 6. Go and tell John what yee have heard and seen The blinde receive sight the lame walk the lâ—pers are cleansed the deaf heare the dead are raised and the poor have the Gospel preached them For
as the Evangelist and our Lord both affirm that these things were prophesied concerning the cures which our Lord did upon their bodies so can it not be doubted that the cure of our soules is spiritually signified by the same whether you consider the promises whereby the ground of this correspondence is settled or the expresse words of the Apostle 1 Pet. II. 24. where that which S. Matthew expoundeth of the cures which our Lord did upon their bodies is referred to the taking away of sâ—nne by the sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse Which if it cannot be denied I shall make no difficulty to inferre that the words of the Prophet Esay VII 14. Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and yee shall call his name Emmanuel which the Evangelists referreth to our Lord Mat. I. 22. and by the premises were fulfilled when they were first said as in the figure are still accomplished in the children which by Gods grace are still â—orn of the holy faith of his Church by grace Nor that the words of the Prophet Osee XI 1. Out of Egypt have I called my Son which being manifestly said of the Israelites coming out of Egypt the same Evangelist II. 15. affirmeth to be fulfilled in our Lords coming back out of Egypt are still accomplished in those which out of the darknesse of this world are brought to Gods Church which is spiritually the Land of Promise Nor that the words of the Prophet Jeremy XXXI 15. which the same Evangelist expoundeth of the Innocents which were slaine by Herod at Bethlehem but the correspondence hitherto established requireth us to understand of the captive Jewes at Ramah in that Prophets time are still fulfilled in all that suffer persecution and death for Christianity Nor lasâ—ly that the words of the Psalmes XXII 8 18. Hee trusted in God that hee would deliver him let him save him seeing hee loveth him They pierced my hands and my feet And They part my garments among them and cast lots upon my vesture XLI 9. Hee which did eat of my bread hath lift up the heel against mee XLIX 9 21. The zeale of thine house hath eaten mee up And They gave mee gall to eat and in my thirst they gave mee vineger to drink VIII 2. Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise CIX 8. His Office let another take XVI 10. Thou shalt not leave my soul in Hell nor suffer thine holy One to see corruption which the New Testament will have to be fulfilled in those things that befell our Lord Christ in the flesh in his crucifying Maâ— XXVIII 18 35 43. Mark XV. 22 23 24. John XIX 17 29. in Judas betraying him John XIII 18. in his purging the Temple John II. 17. in the children that praised him Mat. XXI 16. in Matthias chosen in Judas stead Acts I. 20. in the resurrection of Christ Acts II. 31. XIII 35. But the correspondence premised and the reason of it require us first to understand of those things which befell David and Gods ancient people are still spiritually verified and accomplished in those things which befall the children of God and his Church under the state of Grace Neither shall I make any question that the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel which wee have settled being supposed it will not follow neverthelesse that all the Old Testament ought by virtue thereof to be so fulfilled in the life of our Lord Christ But that the Spirit of God in the Evangelists showeth that the Spirit in the Prophets so directed their words that they were intended to be farre more properly fulfilled in our Lord Christ than in those whom they were spoke of in the literal sense For wee do not finde that the Text that is to say that which went before and that which followes after those words which the Gospels say were fulfilled in our Lord Christ is answered by any thing which wee reade to have befallen him in the flesh And the general correspondence between Israel according to the flesh in the Old Testament and Israel according to the Spirit in the New being sufficient to justifie our Lord to be the Christ whom they expected and by consequence that twofold sense of the Old Testament which here wee maintaine there is no cause why they should be said to be impertinently alleged though by ordinary reason supposing this correspondence that could not be proved from those Texts which the Gospels say that they signifie Indeed such of them as are used by our Lord and his Apostles to prove him to be the Christ must be said and well may be maintainâ—d to do it by the perpectual correspondence of Gods earthly promises made good to his carnal people through the meanes of their Kings Priests and Prophets with the promises of the world to come made good by the means of our Lord Christ to the Church Therâ— is yet another kinde of our Lord Christs sayings and of things that befell him in the flesh in which there appears at the first view that difference of literal and mystical sense which hath been settled between the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments The Parable of the Prodigal childe for example seems not onely to contain a plain song of Gods earnest desire to be reconciled with penitent sinnerâ— but also a descant of the rejection of the Jewes and the calling of the Gentiles figured by it In like maner the Parable of him that fell among theeves as hee went down to Jericho Luke XI seemeth not onely to instruct who is the neighbor that wee are to love as our selves but also to figure the fall of man and the sending of our Lord for the restoring of him intimated as the ground of it So the acclamations of them that went afore and them that came after our Lord at his entrance into Jerusalem Mat. XXI agreeing in the same note of Hosanna to the Son of David I cannot tell whether any Christian could be so moroâ—e as to doubt but that it fell out on purpose to signifie the agreement of the Old and New Testament concentring in our Lord Christ But as it cannot be reasonably denied that these Parables and the like are mystical significations of the purpose of God in sending Christ or the event of it in the rejection of the Jewes and calling of the Gentiles So is all this nothing to the two senses of the Old Testament in which it is twice fulfilled once according to the Leter and again according to the Spirit I have thus farre inlarged this point concerning the correspondence and difference between the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament between the Ancient and New people of God to show how I conceive the scruples are to be resolved which may be made against an assumption of more efficacy and consequence than any other wheresoever any point of Christianity is to be showed from the Old Testament Yet so much more protection I owe the
governed by their own Nation shall wee imagine that this power was trusted with the High Priests because God had made them Soveraignes by the Law Or because after the King whom in that estate they could not have the High Priest was regularly the second person in the Kingdom For what a ridiculous thing is it to imagine that because Josue and the people to goe in and out at the word of the Lord by Eleazar the High Priest therefore the High Priest was alwaies Soveraigne Was it any more for Josue to be ruled by Elâ—azar the High Priest and his answer by Urim and Tummim not by going into the Sanctum Sanctorum than for Saul or David to be directed by the answer of the High Priest in those dayes when as our Author saith the right of the High Priest was by Gods permission though against Law seized in the Kings hands As for the Judges they that reade In those dayes there was no King in Israel every man did what was right in his own eyes with their eyes in their head do thereby understand that though the stories of the Idol in Dan and of Gibea are last in the book of Judges yet they are first in order of time before any Judge had succeded Josue the Judges having the same power for which Moses is called King in Israel Deut. XXXIV 5. For God being their King by the Covenant of the Law while hee raised up no Judge to be his Vicegerent in Moses stead hee governed theâ— by the Elders of the people to whom therefore Clemens and Eusebius and other Chronologers impute the time between Josue and Judges When this Government proved not of force to rule so stiff-necked a people and that God had raised up a Judge to refuse him was to refuse God who by manifest operations of his Spirit in him had declared him his Vicegerent Which is the plain reason why God pronounces that in refusing Samuel they had refused him and not Samuel For it is manifest that they might by the Law demand a King Deut. XVII 14 15. so ridiculous a thing it is to imagine that by demanding a King as other Nations had they rebelled against God who had made the High Priest their Soveraign For God expresseth their rebellion to consist in refusing Samuel whom hee had declared his Vicegerent who being once declared they were no more free do demand a King by the Law till his death Neither doth a Royal Priesthood or a Kingdome of Priests signifie that the High Priests were their Kings But that they who came out of bondage should now make a Kingdom themselves to be governed by their own Nation and Lawes which Lawes should consist much in offering sacrifices to God And those sacrifices though for the future special persons were to be appointed to offer them yet in regard they were offered in the name and on the behalf of the people whose offerings they were the body thereof are justly called Priests As all Christians to whom S. Peter challengeth the effect of this promise are ftiled by him a Royal Priesthood and by S. John Kings and Priests though nothing hinder them to have their Priests whose functions cannot be intermedled with by those who are no Priests without sacrilege In fine the effect of these words is that of the Prophet Esay LXI 5 6. that when the people shall be restored the Gentiles shall be their laborers and Vine-dressers while they in the mean time attend upon keeping holiday by offering sacrifices and feasting upon the sacrifices which they had offered It will now be easie to maintain that the Church when our Lord saith tell it the Church is not nor can be understood but of the Congregation of Christians though at that time in common speech it signified no more than the Congregation of Gods people For supposing that our Lord Christ came to contract a New Covenant with those that received him whereby they became his people on other termes and to other purpose than the people whom hee had before That hee conditioned with them to leave all things and take up his Cross That hee appointeth those that imbrace this condition to be baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost I say this being supposed they that before were the Congregation of Gods people are no more the Congregation of his people upon the same termes not by the same right or title though the same persons The one being his people under a Covenant for the Land of Promise and the condition of living by Moses Lawes The other under the promise of life everlasting which the former were not excluded from though not expresly included in it upon condition of receiving the Christian Faith and continuing in it Suppose wee that when our Lord Christ commanded them to baptize all Nations in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost his Disciples understood no more by all this than that those who should become Proselytes to this new and true Judaisme which our Lord preached should be initiated unto the same by Baptisme as Proselytes then by custome were unto the Law because wee see after the resurrection of our Lord how strange it was to them that the Gospel should be preached to the uncircumcised as such Suppoâ—e wee further that all the Nation of the Jewes whether in Jewry or wheresoever dispersed and none but Jewes had received the Gospel of Christ so as the ancient and New people of God to consist of all the same persons I say all this supposed shall make no maner of difference in the case But there shall be as much difference between the Old and New people of God considered as Societies and Bodies constituted and therefore distinguished by the several Covenants upon which they subsist as if they consisted of all several perâ—ons Should a man judge onely by his bodily eyes and see the people of Rome as it was when the Soveraign Power was in the people and again after it had been seized by Augustus I could not blame him to say that it was the same people But hee that should look upon that people with his understanding as a Civil Society State and Commonwealth and â—ay it was the same all men of understanding would laugh at him for it how much soever the interest of Augustus required that it should seem the same to grosse people Apply this instance to the case in hand and I shall need say no more Several things must either have several names or the same name in several notions or significations If our Lord took upon him to teach his Disciples the New Covenant hee came to introduce to make them the New people of God which hee came thereby to constitute such is the correspondence between the Old and the New the old Name served best to signifie the New thing But in the same sense it could not serve to represent to his hearers the several termes upon which Jewes and Christians are Gods people
Be it therefore granted that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with such additions as the place where they stand requires signifie that Body which at the time when our Lord spoke was Gods ancient people This signification if I mistake not descending from the first bodying of them into a Commonwealth in the Wildernesse when they might and were all called and assembled together to take resolution in what concerned their posterity as Commonwealths are presumed to be everlasting Bodies as well as themselves When after the return from the Captivity of Babylon they became dispersed into Aegypt Syria Mesopotamia Asia and elswhere owning still or challenging the same Lawes by owning which they first became one Body such Bodies of them as lived in Alexandria Antiochia Ephesus Nearda Sora Pombeditha or other Cities and their respective territories are by the same reason to be called the Synagogues of Alexandria Ephesus and so forth Being by that name sufficiently distinguished from the Gentile Inhabitants of the same Cities and Territories Neither is it pretended that there is any thing in the original force of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 why they should not both signifie the same But suppose our Lord Christ declare an intent of instituting a New people upon condition of imbracing his Gospel and use the old word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie this New people as well hee may use it for the near correspondence between them necessary it is that his hearers understanding him understand by that terme something else than the Law had deâ—clared afore And very convenient it was afterwards that when there fell out not onely distinction but opposition between the two Bodies they should be divided by names as they were by affections As the one is signified in all Church Writers by the name of the Synagogue the other by the name of the Church to signifie the distance which ought not to be between them but is For though nothing is more odious than to quarrel about words Yet as in divers things else the not appropriating the term of Synagogue to the Jewes as of Church to the Church which the Fathers throughly observe is an argument of not well distinguishing between the Law and the Gospel Which gives them a privilege in understanding the Scriptures above our times because as I said afore this is in my judgment the prime point of it notwithstanding all the advantages wee have above them for learning and a means to convey the same confusion to the minds of our hearers When therefore wee reade in the Apostles Writings of the Churches of Judaea and Samaria the Churches of Syria Asia Macedonia and Achaia when wee reade of the Church of Rome of Corinth Ephesus Philippi or Thessalonica And again in other places finde the name of the Church absolutely put without any addition to signifie the whole that containeth all the Churches named in other places so often do wee meet with so many demonstrations to common sense of several bodies signified by those that so speak as intended to constitute one whole Body of the Church After which nothing can be demanded but whether the intention of the Apostles prove them to be so onely in point of fact or in point of right which demand a Christian cannot make Our Lord in particular when hee answereth Mat. XVI 18. Thou art Peter and upon this rock will I build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it cannot be understood to speak of building the Synagogue which Moses had built so long afore Here I would desire him that thinks it so strange that our Lord should understand by the Church something else than the Jewes signified by it to ask the Author of the Leviathan what reason hee had when hee acknowledged that the Church of Corinth Ephesus and Thessalonica is the Body of Christians living in those respective Cities And whether hee had reason to affirm that the Church so signified did do those acts of right which onely Bodies can do and which hee affirmeth the Church under the Apostles did do For if these reasons be not reconcileable it will be worth the considering what truth there is in that position which is maintained by two that cannot agree about the reasons upon which they maintaine it Neither let any difficulty be made from the difference that may arise who they be to whom our Lord conmands there to resort whom hee bids tell the Church one or more or all For when it is resolved that the Church is a Body or a Society it will be by the nature of the subject manifest that the right of acting in behalf of this Body must by the constitution thereof be reserved either to one or to a few or to the whole in some principal acts in others referring themselves to their Deputies as in popular Governments And whosoever they are that this right is reserved to hee that resorts to them is properly said to resort to the Church though our Lord declaring here the purpose of instituting a Church declare not whom hee will trust the power of acting for the Church with Before I go further I must inferre against the Leviathan that seeing the whole Church is signified by the name of the Church absolutely put without addition by the Apostles as the body which all particular Churches constitute therefore the Church is understood and intended by them as a Body capable of right and able to act though not by all that are of it yet by persons trusted for it A thing which hee that had remembred his Creed could not have doubted of For though the name of a Church may be said to rest in a number of men not united by any right into a visible Body yet one holy Catholick and Apostolick Church cannot consist of all persons maintaining the profession thereof in opposition to all Societies claiming that name but not holding the profession requisite but it must be distinguished by something which it acknowledgeth for Law to oblige it they do not Again if the Name of Church in the Apostles rest upon the bodies of Christians in the Cities of Rome Coriâ—th and Ephesus then can it not now as of divine right signifie the several States Kingdomes and Commonwealths wherein Christianity subsisteth Not onely because the bounds of Christendom are not either materially or formally the same with the bounds of those States under which it is now maintained But chiefly because the signification of that name in the Apostles once resting by divine right upon those Congregations can never be transferred upon those Commonwealths which subsiâ—t not by the same right but necessarily descendeth upon those Bodies which derive their succession from them by visible acts of humane right Against both I further inferre that the Church being signified as one by divine right in the Scriptures can never be understood now to consist in all those
easily finde that people were not governed from the beginning by written Lawes but reasonable and lawfull consent in some person or quality of persons whether of Gods designing or mans chusing to govern in chief was a first a Law sufficient to constitute any Commonwealth as being sufficient to produce all other Lawes which dissatisfaction should make requisite for determining cōmon differences either in writing or by silent custome Thus was the Commonwealth of Israel constituted under Moses so soon as that People had received God for their King and referred themselves to Moses for the man by whom they should understand his will and pleasure Neverthelesse because the wisedom of God easily foresaw how lightly those who presently received him for their King would be moved to fall away from him to other Gods that which was as easie for his wisedom to do hee gave them presently such Lawes in writing both for the Ceremonies wherewith hee would be worshipped as held the most particular difference from those which the Nations worshipped their Gods with and for their civil conversation as might best distinguish them from all other Nations that were fallen away to the worship of Idols And all this besides the secret intent of scretelling and figuring the Gospel in and by the same This was the intent of the Decalogue first then of those Lawes which Moses received in the Mount to be delivered to the people Exod. XXII XXIII XXIV and lastly of the ref which Moses received in the Tabernacle from Gods mouth speaking with him as God faith face to face When God the Father had sent our Lord Christ to publicsh his Gospel and to declare the intent of founding his Church upon it when our Lord Christ had declared his intent of leaving the world and the prosecution of his Gospel and gathering of his Church to his Apostles and Disciples then was the Society of the Church founded in as full force of authority as ever can have been in it since Though not yet actually a Church because the materials of it are not men but Christians that is such as by receiving Christianity should come into the communion of it Besides God intending one communion of all that should become Christians out of all Nations And therefore pretending to maintains the State of this World and all the Commonwealths in which the Church standeth on the same termes which it findeth dischargeth the Church of all that power to force men to obedience by harm of this world by which all States maintaine themselves Therefore the Church can pretend no more than to communicate in some certain particulars for which the Society thereof is erected and in the communion whereof it consisteth Suppose wee then the Law of Moses to be ceased as to the outward force of governing the People to whom once it was Law though not as to the inward intent of introducing the Gospel to which it was the Preface Suppose wee the Society of the Church to be ordained in the communion of those things which Christianity introduceth I say those Rules without which the Unity of the Church cannot be maintained whatfoever they be called have no lesse the force of Lawes than any that Secular States either inact or inforce Because as hee that once hath undertaken to take God for his God under a promise of being a free Israelite cannot so long as that prosession stands make question of undergoing the rest of Moses Laws howsoever troublesome they seem So hee that once hath imbraced the communion of the Church in hope of life everlasting is by the fame reason obliged to observe such Rules according to which the communion of the Church is in force and use But the communion of the Church not consisting in anything of this world onely in the Offices of Gods service for invisible communion in the faith and love of Christ and all for Christs take as Christianity requires is presupposed to the visible communion of the Church no reason can require that they should be many at least at the beginning Our Lord Christ having preached and declared unto his Disciples that Prosession of Christianity into which hee appointeth all Chrissians to be Baptized may well be said to have ordained the Sacrament of Baptisme for a Law to all Christians distinguishing the Ceremony by which the Prosession of Christianity is solemnized from the Prosession it self of Christianity which hee that comes to be baptized must have taken upon him for a Law afore As little question there can be that our Lord Christ at his last Supper instituted not his last Supper for what sense can there be in saying that our Lord at his last Supper instituted his last Supper but the Sacrament of his last Supper which is the Sacrament of the Eucharist for a perpetual Law to the Church Here then wee have for Lawes to the Church First the Rule of Faith containing the prosession upon supposition whereof the Corporation of the Church is founded Secondly the Sacraments of Baptisme and of the Eucharist Thirdly other offices of common Prayers and Praises of God together with the Hearing of his Word common to the Church with the Synagogue which God is to be served with And therefore thus farre I have proved that there is a Society of one Catholick Church founded by God upon the precept or the privilege of communicating in the service of God by there offices of Christianity equally charged upon all Christians And consisting in the obligation of maintaining unity in serving God by the said Offices Supposing then a visible authority settled in the persons of our Lords Apostles and Disciples in behalf of the community of Christians Supposing this community efected into a Society visible Body or Corporation of the Church whatsoever can become questionable not concerning mine and thine which Civil Government pretendeth to decide but concerning communion in those Offices which God is to be served with by Christians is virtually and potentially already decided by the right of doing such acts as being done oblige the Church for whom they are done Which therefore are the Laws of the Church Wee see that the intent and meaning of Christianity is many times quessionable in maters of that weight or taken to be of that weight that Christians are not to communicate with those who pretending to be Chistians do believe otherwise Here wee have none but the Apostles themselves to have recourse to None but they have convinced Christendom to believe that their word is Gods word For though Moses and the Prophets and our Lord Christ all spake by the same Spirit in as much as they all intended a secret which was not to be published till the Apostles preached the recourse wee have to them is with intent to argue and discover by their writings the truth of that which may become questionable in the preaching of the Apostles What then may appear to be deter-mined by the act of the Apostles as the writings of the
it smelled so ranck that I conceived my self bound to cry out upon the venene that may be so closely couched under the words But to those that believe the truth of Christianity arguments from the mystical sense of the Old Testament must not seem contemptible those of our Lord Christ and his Apostles being such provided that the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel be preserved upon the right ground and in the right grain Provided also that no more waight be laid upon them than they are able to bear To wit no more than wee can lay upon the Law of Moses in proving the truth of Christianity Which if wee premise not the miracles of our Lord Christ and his Apostles done to witnesse their commission from God together with the excellence of Christianity above Judaisme even in the ballance of reason If wee make not good and constant correspondence between both wheresoever the ground of that correspondence takes place wee allege a reason that needs a reason to defend it But if wee do that wee imprest all the miracles done by Moses to introduce the Law to depose for the truth of the Gospel Wee furnish our selves of a magazine of argument in all points of Christianity to convince those who have received it what the conâ—â—itution of Gods ancient people and the truth then on foot will inferre upon the correspondence which they are supposed to hold with Christianity and with the Church I do then freely grant that Excommunication stood not immediately by Gods Law among Gods ancient people though by that Power which Gods Law had vested on them that first introduced it Were it Esdras by commission from the King of Persia as to the Power that inforced it with means to constraine though by the Law as to his Title before and against other men by the Law or whosoever it were besides But I will allege evidence for it after the return from Captivity which to my knowledge hath not hitherto been alleged Namely that which is called in the Greek Bible the third Book of Maccabees where it is râ—lated that when some of the Jewes at Alexandria had obeyed the Edict of Ptolomee Philometor commanâ—ing to worship an Idol which hee had set up the rest of the people 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abhorred those of them that had turned Aposâ—â—â—es and condeâ—ned â—â—em as enemies to the Nation depriving them of mutual conversation and the henefit of it III. 25. Upon the consideration of which passage I easâ—ly conclude that of 1 Macc. XIV 38. not to be well understood nâ—â— translâ—ted where it is said that Razias 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying indeed that in the â—orâ—er times under Antiochus Epiphanes when so many Jewes departed from their Law hee had brought in the decree of not mixing Judaisme That is to say that hee had been the means of passing a decree that those who stuck to their profession should not commâ—nicate with the Apoâ—â—ates These things were done by virtue of the Law against the will of their Soveraignes and therefore Philometor complaines of them for it 3 Macc. III. 16. but it is by virtue of his decree being his subjects that they put them to death aftâ—rwards VII 8 9 10. I do also grant that the putting of a man out of the Synagogue which I admit to have come in by the act of those men who nâ—verthâ—lesse had their authority originally from that act of God which made them a people under those Lawes imported a great abatement of the temporal privilege of each Jewes estate in as much as it is evident that whosoever was banished the conversation of Jewes in whole or in part was at the same rate abated the privilege of a Jew which they held by the declaration of their Soveraignes to maintain them in the use of their own Lawes For the privilege which a man holdeth among his people whereof hee is a native will appeare of what consequence it is when hee comes to live among strangers But I do not therefore yield that to be excommunicate out of the Church by the original constitution thereof and the Law of God imports the abatement of any secular privilege Because of the difference between the Synagogue and the Church which God appointed to be gathered out of all Nations under the condition of bearing Christs Crosse For such a company refusing their Communion to such as they exclude can neither prejudice their persons goods nor fame which being doubtfull to the world so long as they professe the Religion which the world owns not returns by consequence when they quit that Religion to return to the Religion of the State Rather as the Leviathan truly sayes they make themselves liable to all the persecution that may be brought upon them by such as think they have had ill measure by being put out of the Church Now to that which is argued That because the Christians went for Jewes among the Gentiles at the beginning of Christianity injoying Jewes privileges and thereby the exercise of their Religion therefore the Excommunications used by them must needs be such as were in force among the Jewes according to Moses Law that is by the Power which it establisheth The answer is by denying the consequence The reason this The Christians at the beginning communicated with the Jewes in that service of God which they used as well in the Temple as in the Synagogue How should they have opportunity to make them acquainted with the Gospel otherwise But as sometimes they assembled secretly among themselves for fear of the Jewes Acts XII 12. John XIX 38. so also besides those Offices which they served God with among the Jewes in the Temple or in the Synagogue they acknowledged others which they held themselves bound to and for which they retired themselves from the Jewes Acts I. 13. II. 42 46. III. 23. V. 42. VI. 2. The ground of their Communion with the Jewes Christians know to have been the hope of winning them to be Christians lasting while that hope should continue the ground of serving God in their own Assemblies the obligation of Christianity for ever to continue In regard of the conversation and communion which they held with the Jewes whether Civil or Religious they were subject to be excommunicated by the Jewes That is part of our Lords Prophesie John XVI 2. They shall put you out of their Synagogues Nay the time cometh that whoso killeth you shall think that hee doth God service But whatsoever the effect of these Excommunications might be being driven and confined in a maner to the Communion of the Church by being excluded or at least abridged the Communion of the Synagogue must they not needs forfeit their Communion by not fulfilling the condition by which they held it Or could they forfeit it upon other gronnds or to other effect than those upon which and to which they held it Indeed I will not undertake to give you many Scripture examples of Excommunications
probable and have still much reason to believe that the Christians at Rome lived at first divided into two Bodies one of Jewes under S. Peter the other of Gentiles under S. Paul For the Jewes as in the Land of Promise they were bound by the Law to protect strangers such as renouncing Idols should professe to serve the true God but not to suffer Idolaters to live in it So in their dispersions they must needs finde themselves bound proportionably to cherish those that should make the like profession whom they called the Godly of the Nations But the Empire and the Ministers thereof whether they intended to comprise them in the right and privilege of Jewes because joyned to their Religion or of Gentiles because uncircumcised the text of that Scripture decides not I confesse considering the words of Suetonius Claud. XXV Judaeos impulsore Chresto assiduè tumultuantes Roma expulit The Jewes raising continual tumults at the moving of Chrestus hee drove out of Rome I cannot give a better reason for the tumults which hee saith occasioned the Edict than the difference between them and the Christians part of whom were Jewes others adheered to them as Gentiles converted to the true God Whether his meaning be to lay the fault upon the Christians supposing that it is our Lord Christ whom hee calls Chrestus no difference in found being discernable Or whether hee meant to say that one Chrestus a Jew in Rome was author of those tumults as some would have it no reason can be given for those tumults so probable But whether so or not to our purpose it will be of no consequence For as well Gentilish as Jewish Christians being forced from Rome and seeking shelter among Christians elswhere would easily accomodate themselves with the Jewes of other parts upon the same terms as Christians did otherwise and yet continue to preserve themselves Christians and thereby members of the Church upon such terms as all Christians understood It should seem by the Epistle to the Ephesians I. 11 12 13. II. 2 3. 11-20 III. 1-6 that the first foundation of that Church was meerly of Gentiles the Jewes that may have been converted being so few that S. Paul held them not considerable to be taken notice of in his Epistle A thing that agrees punctually with that which S. Luke relates Acts XIX 8 9 10. that S. Paul perceiving hee could not prevail with the Jewes by his discourses in the Synagogue departed and separated the Disciples that is the Christians from them disputing dayly in the School of one Tyrannus And this for two years till the Gospel was known to all Asia Jewes and Gentiles This Tyrannus neverthelesse holding a School seems to have been a Doctor of the Jewes Law so that all Jewes refused not the Faith These I suppose no man will argue that they used Excommunication as the Jewes did because they had departed from the Jewes And yet it is agreeable to the case under Gallio to conceive that they were looked upon by the Romanes as a sort of men that had broke from the Jewes whose Religion they had professed afore and indifferently protected by them as not concerned in the difference while no Law was made against Christianity The coming indeed of S. John into Asia seems to have inned a very great harvest of Jews into the Church by that compliance which his successors at Ephesus and in the rest of Asia held with the Jewes for the winning of them to Christianity But this was afterwards In fine before the separation of Christians from the Jewes the Church seems to have been as it were a childe unborn in the mothers womb which though it draw the means of subsistence from the mother yet is it complete in all the same faculties of life which it shall exercise afterwards So whatsoever it was fit for the Church to do while it held communion with the Synagogue it was able then by the Power of conducting as well as founding it in the Apostles to do whatsoever it did afterwards onely the Body was strangely changed which it was to govern CHAP. XVIII The difference between S. Pauls anathema and that of the Jewes It is not necessary that the Christians anathema should signifie cursing That the incestuous person at Corinth was Excommunicated by S. Paul Jurisdiction of the Church Telling the Church binding and loosing holding him that is bound for a Heathen or a Publicane signisie the same The coherence of our Lords discourse Of Excommunication and Indulgence by private persons in the Ancient Church That Excommunication and the Power of the Church could not come in force by the voluntary consent of the first Christians How it may be said to be voluntary Of the confederacy of the primitive Christians ANd here I cannot chuse but mervail that the Anathema which S. Pauls Epistles mention sometimes should be made an argument that the Excommunication which hee means by it is the same which the Jews used because theirs was called by the same name For the answer is the same that I said afore of the name of the Church but there is more particular evidence for the reason here in the words of the Apostle I do for my part believe them that conceive the name by which the Jewes call anathema that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie the same that S. Paul means by maranatha For the Jewes use to call God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Name And this I conceive they compound with the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying to come and to make of both the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying maledixit or execravit hee cursed by the coming of God Though they use it to signifie the least degree of Excommunication whereas to curse a man by the coming of God seems to leave him to God to take vengeance of as incurable and desperate For every man knows how much difference there is between the original and use of words Now it is evident by the writings of the Prophets every where that they use to describe the appearance of God to punish sin in the stile of Gods coming And in that stile the passage which S. Jude referreth to proceedeth Jude 14 15. Behold the Lord cometh with his holy myriads to execute vengeance on all and to reprove all their wickednesse for all the wicked works that they have done and for all the hard words which they have stoken against him as wicked sinners For these are the words which Enoch the seventh from Adam is brought in speaking in that place to the old world whom hee preached to to recall them from that wickednesse which in the end was punished by the deluge Now when S. Paul saith 1 Cor. XVI 22. If any man love not the Lord Jesus let him be anathema maranatha It is plain that Maranatha signifies our Lord comes And so referrs to the second coming of our Lord Christ which the Gospel preaches For this learned person
Corporation of the Church by divine right it is sufficient in this place onely to show that there is a right in the Body of the Church by Gods appointment to do such things as the Nature of a Society founded upon a Charter of Gods inferreth For whatsoever persons shall be by the same appointment inabled to act for the Church and to conclude it as in no form of Government the whole is able to act by it self whatsoever is done by those persons is reasonably and legally said to be done by the Church though I referr it to another dispute to determine what persons they are and in what cases These reasons therefore do satisfie mee that the delivering to Satan which S. Paul condemns the incestuous person to implies indeed something extraordinary which the sentence of Excommunication in these dayes produceth not And it is this That during the time of the Apostles to manifest the presence of God in his Church those that were shut out of it became subject to the visible incursion of evil spirits plaguing them with bodily diseases Which S. Paul calleth the destruction of the flesh Intimating that Gods end in them was to reduce him to the sense of that Christianity which hee had professed that by inwardly returning to it the spirit might be saved in the day of Christ whether or no by outwardly professing it hee might be reconciled to the Church for salvation by the means of it As for the words of our Lord Dic Ecclesiae I will not insist upon the improbabilities of Erastus his interpretation that Let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publicane is no more but this Be it lawfull for thee to sue him in the Romanes Court. For this I say It is plain by S. Paul 1 Cor. VI. 1. that our Lords Disciples that is Christians might in no case implead one another before the Gentiles whatsoever Erastus imagine Which it is plain the Jewes also did their utmost to avoid Nor is the other more probable that makes it no more than that upon his neglect of the Synagogue hee was free to return scorn and to avoid him who had scorned the Synagogue For would our Lord binde his Disciples to resort to the Synagogue and yet obtain nothing but leave to scorn him that scorned them first and afterwards the Synagogue Besides the inconvenience common to both these interptetations that such a precept to his Disciples that is to all Christians should concern them no longer nor in any other consideration than that for which at the first Christians were bound to comply with the Synagogue which compliance not onely what it was but even what it signified they then understood no more than hee that understands nothing But I leave all other advantage to prosecute the principle premised That the Disciples of our Lord acknowledged a new King of Israel which the title of Gods anointed the Messias signified a new Covenant by which hee was their King a new Israel according to the Spirit not according to the flesh and by consequence new Laws which a New Common-wealth must needs inferr And therefore call it what you will Synagogue which as yet they understood not to be void or Church which they understood must be but that it should be distinct from the Synagogue understood not being commanded to tell the Assembly they must understand it to be an Assembly of themselves Christs Disciples which all Jews might be for any thing they yet understood And when our Lord saith Let him be unto thee as an Heathen man or as a Publicane though they understood that Heathen men and Publicanes resorted to the Temple as also those that were Excommunicate by the Synagogue did because the Law stood not upon any promise of the world to come but upon the privilege and sitl of a Jew to all rights that Jewes were indowed with yet they underflood also that our Lord spoke in Parables containing sharp speeches figures and riddles When hee faith Hee that smiteth thee on the right cheek turn him the left they underflood that himself no way balked his own command when being smitten by the Jews Ministers hee an-swered not by turning the other cheek But that his meaning was to have his Disciples as ready to do them good that so should assront them as if they should pleasure his anger by turning him another cheek to strike And when hee faith Hee that constraineth thee to go a mile with him go thou twain His meaning is not that they should leave their businesse to be counted fools for it But to be ready to do him as great a pleasure So hee that fees the Jews so to avoid the society of the Gentiles and by consequence of publiâ—anes who has necessary and continual frequentation with Gentiles that when they came from the Piazza they washed their hands before they went to meat as polluted by coming near them hee that fees S. Peter obliged to give account to his brethren the Jewish Christians why hee did eat with Cornelius and his Company though worthippers of the true God and such as had imbraced the Faith that fees God instruct him so to do by the vision of earing unclean beasts as if hee could no more do the one than the other by the Law Hee I fay that considers these things will say that our Lord when hee sayes Let him be to thee as an Heathen man or a Publicane hath very sharply expressed the fame that S. Paul means when hee sayes with such a one no not to eat And therefore I conclude his meaning to be that which I have concluded heretofore that his Disciples should carry none of their suits though concerning mater of Interest out of the Church but stand to what it shall determine For how should S. Paul demand Dare any of you having a cause with another go to suit before the unrighteous and not before the Saints I Cor. VI. I. If it had not been a Law known to Christians that their suits were to be determined within themselves Referring my self for further evidence that this was then in force to what hath been showed in another place and having not been contradicted must needs be in force And if any man shall object that this would be the ruine of all States so soon as they prosesse Christianity if the Jurisdiction of them should be swallowed up in the Jurisdiction of the Church all causes being in that case causes of Christians For an answer referring him not onely to that which I have said already there but to that which I purpose to say further before I have done with this point And upon these terms I grant Erastus that when out Lord sayes Let him be unto thee as a Heathen and a Publicane Hee sayes in effect be it lawfull for thee to sue him in the Court of the Gentiles Not as if our Lord did allow that which S. Paul forbids That a Christian should sue a Christian before Gentiles But
because being to be held as a Heathen or a Publicane as being Excommunicate that is to say suppposing that to be true which Erastus would have to be salse by consequence and in effect it would become lawfull to sue him before Gentiles as being no longer a Christian Now when it followeth What forever yee binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven If wee take binding and loosing in a general sense to signifie that Power of giving Law so that hereeby the Church is inabled to give Law to the Church setting aside for the present who of the Church is to give Law who to receive it then I say that by virtue hereof the Power of Excommunicating is given to the Church Because it is nothing else but such a Right established by a Law of God And if God give his Church a Power to make Laws then hee gives it Power to make a Law that shall give force to all the rest by inacting that penalty that shall be requisite to restrain disobedience But if wee take the terms of binding and loosing as they are used among the Jews and by consequence when that which is unlawfull is done for declaring what is lawfull or unlawfull to be done to be discharged of it I say that admitting the difference between the Law and the Gospel which I have established the Power of Excommunicating will follow in the Church For supposing the Law not to tender remission of sin in order to life everlafting but to the remporal privileges of a Jew to be bound and to be loose will signifie no more than to be in or out of possession of those privileges uncapable or capable of the fame by doing or not doing what the Law requireth to be done for that purpose In the mean time this Power will argue a Common-wealth of Israel founded by God by virtue of which foundation the Power of those who are inabled by the Law to make this declaration takes effect to all purposes contained in the Law But. supposing the Gospel to tender remission of sins in order to life everlasting upon such terms as the Covenant of Grace importeth To be bound and to be loose will signifie freedom from sin or the captivity and fervitude of it And therefore the Power of declaring this estare and what is to be done for the attaining of it will necessarily inserre a Society of the Church founded upon the Power of making that declaration whereupon any man may be accepted for such Neither can it be imagined that any part any degree of the fame can be in any man but so farr and to effect as the Community of the Church shall have allowed It is not now unknown that divers of those that dispute Controversies for the Church of Rome do challenge the Power of making Law for the Church by virtue of this Power of binding and loosing given by our Lord to his Apostles And this opinion taketh place by the former interpretation of these words which being admitted that consequence cannot be refused But taking the Power of binding and loosing to be by virtue of the Keyes of Gods House which are the Keyes of David or the House of David the figure of the Church which is that signification which the language of the Scripture required when our Lord. having promised his Church adds Mat. XVI 19. Unto thee will I give the Keyes of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heaven what soever thou loosest on earth shall be loosed in heaven The Power of binding and loosing in the Church will be correspondent to that which the Doctors of the Synagogue had of declaring this or that lawfull or unlawfull according to Moses Laws and a man tied to do this or that for maintaining his privilege by it And having said this I conceive I have done more than hee that distinguished these two meanings in our Lords words thought fit to do Hee distinguishing thus in the first book de Synedriis pag. 291 hath thought it enough to argue that neither the one nor the other will serve to ground the Power of Excommunicating in the Church Wherein what hee hath proved I referre my self to that which hath been said But in what sense the words of our Lord are to be understood according to his own opinion hee hath not declared how requisite foever it had been to do as I according to my opinion indeavor to do As for that little Objection that in Our Lords words it is not persons but things that are said to be bound and loose It is to be underflood that things are neither bound nor loose of themselves But that by the way of common understanding of men and speech it is attributed to them from the obligations that Iye upon men or persons by virtue of which obligations or freedom from them such things as they import are said to be bound or loose as lawfull or unlawfull for them to use who using them are either bound or free to such rights as the using or not using of them inferrs Though by consequence of this Power the Power of binding by Law or loosing that is of leaving free without tying by Law will naturally follow For as in Civil Government whatfoever person or persons are absolutely and without limitaiton indowed with the Soveraign Power must necessaraily be indowed with the Power of giving Law whereby they do but limit themselves what Law they will govern by which is before those Laws be declared their will and pleasure So if wee suppose in the Church a Power of admitting into and casting out of the Society of the Church wee must needs suppose a Power of giving Law to this Society because no Society at all can have Communion with it self but according to some Rules of exercising the said Communion which for the present are called Laws Now our Lord Christ having given his Disciples the Power of binding and Loosing by opening or shutting the doors of his Church that is by admitting into or excluding out of it hath thereby given them the Power of framing his Catholick Church Not that they are so properly said to binde those whom they shut out of the Church For when Christianity declareth mankinde to be under sin not to be freed of it but by submitting to Chrissianity the bond is contracted by him that finneth the shutting of the Church door upon him is but refusing him the cure whereof hee tenders himself uncapable But those whom they admit into the Church they are properly said to loose because though they cannot be loosed without their own act yet that act is not to be done without submitting to that authority which is intrusted to require it And this authority with those who acknowledge it by being admitted into the Church is that which consstuteth the Society and Corporation of the Church For admitting into the Church and allowing to continue
Dan. VI. 11. As the very words of these Texts and common reason with the Testimonies of Tertullian de Jejuniis cap. X. Epiphanius Heresi XXX S. Hierome upon the Text of Daniel S. Cyprian de Oratione Dominica and divers others import And again Acts XIII 2. wee see that the Christians at Antiochia assembled themselves in fasting for celebrating the service of God when they were to send away those that by Gods appointment were to carry the Gospel to further parts As the Church according to this example hath of ancient ages had a custome of Fasting before Ordinations But whether or no those things are to be observed by the Church as Laws introduced and begun by these practices this whether true or false whether questionable or unquestionable is not to be concluded by the words of those Scriptures which barely relate what was done Again At the institution of the Passeover it is expresly commanded that it be eaten with their loins girt shoes on their feet and staves in their hands Exod. XII 11. which notwithstanding it is manifest to all that believe that our Lord did eat the Passeover that hee did eat it sitting at the Table or leaning on his side as then they did eat at Table Mat. XXVI 20. Mar. XIV 18. Luke XII 14. in which posture neither were their loins girt nor their shoes on their feet nor had they staves in their hands And yet so sure as our Lord knew what the Law required so sure is it that his intent was to observe the same And therefore knowing this to be Scripture hee knew neverthelesse that it obliged not and every one that practised it knew the same and by the Scriptures could not know it See the like at the last Supper of our Lord. Our Saviour instituting the Sacrament of the Eucharist at his last Supper commandeth his Disciples to do that which hee had done And the Disciples of our Lord in pursuance of this Commandment are reported by the Scriptures to have celebrated the Eucharist at Supper as our Lord had instituted it and held those Assemblies at which they served God with the Offices of Christianity for that purpose the rich bearing out the poor in the charge of it This I have shewed afore more at large to be the meaning of those Scriptures wherein mention is made of these their Assemblies Acts II. 42. 46. VI. XX. 7. 1 Cor. XI 20 21 22. 33 34. Jude 12. 2 Pet. II. 13. By all this wee find not that the Eucharist was instituted by our Lord to be celebrated at the publick service of God where this Supper of our Lord is not celebrated as Tertullian acknowledgeth where neverthelesse hee affirmeth that it was delivered to the Church by the Apostles so to observe it de Cor. III. Eucharistiae Sacramentum in tempore victus omnibus mandatum à Domino etiam antelucanis coetibus nec nisi de manu Praesidentium sumimus Wee receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist which our Lord instituted at the time of meat and for all at our Assemblies afore day also but onely at the hands of our Presidents Though I have indeavored in another place to show that this is to be gathered from some circumstance of the Apostles writings to wit That in point of fact it was so practiced under them yet it is manifest that the bare words of the Scripture Do this in remembrance of mee and the Scriptures that relate onely what the Apostles did do not determine whether it ought to be celebrated otherwise than at Supper as our Lord instituted it Further. The Apostles Acts XV. 29. decree that those who were then converted to Christianity of Gentiles should abstain from things offered in Sacrifice to Idols Which being done to comply with the Jewes manifestly signifies that they were to abstain from those meats as meats of Gods making notwithstanding that the eating of them implied no communion with the sacrificing to Idols For it is a thing certain by the examples of Daniel and his fellows Dan. I. 9. of Tobit I. 11 12. and Judith XII 2 3 4 19. that the Jewes from the time of their captivity when they could not avoid conversing with the Gentiles had taken upon them to abstain not onely from things really sacrificed to Idols but from most things that came out of Gentiles hands because there was some presumption that a part of most kindes for First-fruits had been consecrated to Idols the rest being by those First-fruits polluted as dedicated to Idols Therefore in those places alleged it appears that they forbore all meats and drinks that came from the Gentiles Neither can there be reason to think it a folly which the Jews tell us that Nehemiah being Cup-bearer to the King was dispensed with for drinking the wine of the Gentiles For why should wee think him lesse scrupulous of the Law than those afore-named About this wine of the Gentiles and consequently other kindes there are many nice and scrupulous decisions in the Jewes Constitutions the ground whereof you may see by the premises is more ancient than the beginning of Christianity And this is that wherein the Apostles order the Gentilish Christians to comply with the Jewish to satisfie them that there was no intent of falling from that God who gave their Law in those that turned Christians And this decree S. Paul delivers to the Churches of his foundation to be observed Acts XVI 4. Which notwithstanding writing to the Corinthians hee manifestly distinguishes between eating things sacrificed to Idols materially as Gods creatures without inquiring whether so sacrificed or not and formally when notice must needs be taken that they are such 1 Cor. VIII â— instancing in two cases First when this is done nor onely in the company of Idolaters but in an house of Idols 1 Cor. VIII 10. Secondly when a man being invited by Idolaters knowes that they intertain him with the remains of things sacrificed to Idols part of which as the First-fruits whereby the rest was consecrated were first consumed upon the Altar whereby they that made these Feasts professed to communicate with their Altars that is with their Idols which were Divels 1 Cor. VIII 19-30 In these two cases then the Apostle forbidding them to eat things sacrificed to Idols lest they might give occasion to those that uncerâ—â—ood not what they did to coÌ„municate in Idolatries manifestly allowes them when that consideration takes no place to eat that which the Apostles had forbidden to eat intending to forbid the meats of the Gentiles for compliance with the Jews in the distance they kept from Idolaters And truly the same is manifestly to be gathered from that which hee orders among the Romans XIV 2 3 20 21. neither to condemn one another for not observing that difference of meats which by the Law then obliged nor yet to use such meats in case it might scandalize those that were of the Law to think that Christianity stands not with it Whereby it
question that the sayings and doings of our Lord and his Apostles the matter of the Gospels and Acts and the writings of the Apostles contain the same which the man of God that is Timothy is to Preach and Teach Neverthelesse waving so evident a presumption I am ready to stand to all that the words understood of the whole Bible will argue For granting that all Scripture was inspired by God to this purpose That the man of God might be perfectly furnished to every good worke of edifying believers or convincing gain-sayers of instructing the sonnes of the Church or correcting the rebellious it would be neverthelesse in vain to inferre that therefore all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are clearly expressed to all understandings in the Scriptures because it is evident that the man of God by being first made a Christian or else a man of God might be instructed in all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians or to the discharge of his particular trust which by learning the Scriptures he might afterwards be more plentifully inabled to know For granting that the Scripture is able abundantly to furnish him that hath learned all that is necessary for a Christian or for a man of God to know with all parts belonging to a man of God It followeth not that the Scripture clearly teacheth him that hath not learned the same all that is necessary to the salvation of all Christians Because he that transgresseth not the substance of Christianity may find in the Scriptures sufficient furniture both for the maintaining and for the advancing of that Christianiy which he acknowledgeth And yet he that trusteth his own sense to find out what is the substance of Christianity by the leter of the Scriptures may well miss of that which God never bade him trust his own sense to find by the Scripture Now if it be demanded how the Law can be said to give light or wisedom to the simple being of it selfe not to be understood I will answer from the peculiar consequence of my position concerning the double sense of the Law For it becometh a Christian to believe that the Law is thus highly extolled by the Brophets whom he is obliged to take for the fore-runners of Christ not for the outward and carnal sense of it as it was the condition of holding the Land of promise and the happinesse thereof but for the inward and spirituall sense as the means whereby the Spirit of God then enlightned them to discern the true inward and spirituall righteousnesse of Christians as I said afore And what is the reason that the Psalmist sairh XXV 11. 13. What man is he that feareth the Lord Him shall he teach in the way that he shall chuse The secret of the Lord is among them that fear him and he will shew them his Covenant The Covenant of the Lord being clearly expressed to all Israelites whose Ancestors contracting it with God had undertaken to teach it their children But that there was something more in it than all that were of it understood which God teacheth by the Psalmist all that were of it that he was ready to teach them that should come with his fear in their hearts to learn it The same which our Lord tells the Jews of his time Ioh. VII 17. If any man will do the will of my Father he shall know concerning my doctrine whither it be of God or I speak from my selfe For that which our Lord Christ shews shall be expresly received and acknowledged by those who by the Law had been conducted to be willing to do what God should command in point of inward and spiritual obedience To them that stand so affected nothing remaining to be done but to shew them that Christ was come from God with instructions what he vvould henceforth have them to do that vvould be saved Novv if the Prophets Esay and Ieremy promise that under the Gospel all Christians shall be taught of God If our Lord praiseth the Father for revealing to babes the secret thereof vvhich he had concealed from the great and learned of the world If upon the same account it was not flesh and blood but the Father that had revealed to S. Peter the Christ the Son of God I demand whether we shall imagine their meaning to be that God taught them these things without showing them reason sufficient argument to believe them to be true Or having shewed them such that he taught them by inclining them to follow that which he had showed them sufficient arguments to believe If we say that he taught them immediately without showing them any sufficient reason for the truth of that which he taught them to follow we expose our common Christianity to the scorn of all unbelievers whom by consequence we can show no reason why they should become Christians unlesse God make them so before they know why Nay we can show them no reason why we deal with them to become Christians why the Gospel should be preached at all or any man suffer for preaching or professing it in order to reduce the world to it unlesse we suppose that we can show them reason so sufficient why they should be Christians that it may by Gods grace become effectual to make them no lesse But this is the reason why our Lord Christ protesteth concerning the testimonie of Iohn the Baptist which every man sees how available it was to make him receivable of those who before had admitted Iohn to be sent by God professing himselfe sent expresly to bear witnesse to our Lord Christ I say this is reason enough why he professeth neverthelesse not to receive any witnesse from man For had not God provided afore-hand that the witnesse of Iohn should he accepted for the word of God that being so accepted it might leave no doubt in them that had accepted it so considerable a party that those who refused our Lord Christ durst not provoke it as we see by the Gospels that our Lord was come from God in vain had it been for our Lord to alledge his witnesse Wherefore when he alledgeth him alleadging not him but the Father who had procured him to be accepted well truly though alledging witness of Iohn Baptist be renounced the witnesse of man but professeth to speak those things whereby they might be saved only under the witness of God Neither is it strange that the Prophets Esay and Ieremy and the Apostle S. Iohn should say that those who had been thus taught of God should need no instruction from one another because they know all things already or because they had that within them that should teach them all things I confesse if we look impertinently upon that infinity of disputes that remains in the world either about action or about knowledge if we look upon the multiplying of controversies in Religion the least of which dispute of reason decides not and therefore faction determines it may appear a very
will divide the Church unlesse an end be put But I say that the Authority of the Church can be no reason obliging or warranting to believe that for truth which cannot be reasonably deduced from the motives of our common faith onely it shall be a reason obliging and warranting to keep the peace of the Church by not scandalizing such determinations thereof as are not destructive to the common faith Much more where the faith is not concerned onely the question is of determining the circumstances of those actions wherein the Communion of the Church is exercised which neither our Lord nor his Apostles have determined shall the disobeying of such determinations be the violating of that unity which all Christians professe that God hath ordained in his Church And now we have an easie account to give how the Prophets Haggai and Malachi send the Israelites to the Priest for resolution in those things which the practice of that people determined to belong to their office to resolve Because it cannot be doubted that their resolutions depended upon upon the acts of that authority which concluded that people by the Law aforesaid of Deut. XVII 8 -12 Which if not infallible and yet authorized by God to warrant the proceedings of his people it will be no marvail if those that act in dependance on them be authorized to warrant the people though further from being infallible To come now to those things that are alleadged to be said of the Apostles and of the Church having already limited the power of the Church not to extend to the faith of Christianity which it presupposeth it will be easie to distinguish it from the power of the Apostles Which though it presuppose the truth of Christianity preached by our Lord as that which they are imployed to introduce and establishâ— yet in order of nature and reason is before the very being of the Church as serving to evidence any truth of the Gospel to them that believe being convicted that they came from God to move them to believe For how can they stand obliged to believe the truth of our common Christianity to be that which God sent our Lord Christ to preach but by standing convict that the Apostles were sent by him to move them to accept of it and thereupon inabled with means to evidence this Commission and trust whereupon the world may safely repose themselves upon the credit of them whose act God owns by the witnesse he yields them for his own The true reason and ground upon which no act of theirs whither by word or writing is refusable by the Church Upon which the truth of things determined by their writings is no more determinable by the Church because the meaning of their words which is the truth sought for is in the words from the time they are said And is it then an unreasonable demand that their Charter He that heareth you heareth me extending to all that falls under their office should not be thought to descend upon the Church indefinitely but according to such limitations as the constitution thereof determineth That is to say not to the effect of creating faith but of preserving peace and unity in the Communion of the Church Not prejudicing neverthelesse that force of evidencing the truth of Christianity and the meaning of the Apostles writings which I have showed to be in the testimony of the Church not by any authority it hath from God but from that conviction which the testimony of such a body of men inferreth I shall not therefore deny that he who heareth or refuseth their successors heareth and refuseth God if that which they would be heard in be within the bounds of that power which God hath assigned them but is not the same that he assigned the Apostles But I shall utterly deny that it is by virtue of these words which were spoken by our Lord at such time as he had not declared whither they should have successors or not For there is very great appearance that they themselves after this expected to see the worlds end and the coming of Christ When the Apostles Mat. XXVI 3. inquire of our Lord When shall these things come to passe And what shall be the sign of thy coming and of the worlds end Though our Lord by this answer distinguisheth the time of the destruction of Jerusalem from the end of the world yet by the question there is no appearance that the Apostles did so distinguish before his answer And when his answer contains That this generation shall not be over till all these things come to passe and that not only after he had declared the destruction of Jerusalem but his coming and the end of the world Mat. XXIV 14 -23-29-34 it appeareth that those things which he declares shall forerun the worlds end were to begin before that generation were out when to end being not thought sit then to be said If this interpretation of Grotius which makes good the leter best suffer contradiction yet is it evident by S. Pauls Epistles 1 Cor. XV. 51 52. 2 Cor. V. 11-44 2 Thes IV. 15. 17. that he was not certificed but that the coming of Christ to judgement should be during his time In which S. Iohn by the Apocalypse was more fully informed If these things be true the obedience due to the Apostles successors cannot stand by virtue of this command given when it was not declared whither they were to have successors or not But by those Scriptures whereby it may appear so farre as in due place it shall appear whither or no and upon what terms the Apostles left their Authority with successors which when it appears then by consequence of reason it will be inferred from these words that who hears or refuses them hears or refuses God by whom the Apostles were inabled to leave such part of their power with successors Neither will it be strange that I allow not any Councill in which never so much of the authority of the present Church is united to say in the same sense and to the same effect as the Synode of the Apostles at Jerusalem It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Though I allow the overt act of their assembling to be a legall presumption that their acts are the acts of the Holy Ghost so farre as they appear not to transgresse those bounds upon which the assistance of the Holy Ghost is promised the Church For as for the Apostles I have showed before that they had the Holy Ghost given them not onely to preserve them in the truth of the common profession of Christians but to reveal unto them the true sense of the old Scriptures according to the Gospell which they preached though that grace was common to many more besides the Apostles not to all Christians upon which depended the resolution of the point then in debate Besides I do not intend to depart from that observation which I have made in another place that we find
by the Scriptures and by the primitive Records of the Church many revelations made to Gods people at their publick Assemblies by the means of such as had the Grace And thereupon do inferre that such a revelation was made to that Assembly upon the place directing the decree which there follows and is signified according to that brevity which the Scriptures use in alleadging that whereof no mention is premised in the relation that went afore by these words it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Now the words of our Lord Mat. XXVIII 20. Behold I am with you to the worlds end are manifestly said to the body of the Church and therefore do not promise it any priviledge of the Apostles And truly seeing it is a promise immediately insuing upon a Precept Go preach and make Disciples all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things I have commanded you I find it a matter of no ill consequence but very reasonable to say that the Precept is the condition of the Promise seeing no act so expressed can reasonably be understood otherwise But in regard it is otherwise manifest that the continuance of the Church is absolutely promised and foretold till the world end by name in those other words of our Lord The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Mat. XXI 18. I shall easily admit that God absolutely promises to be with his to the worlds end so as to preserve himselfe a people in the manifold distractions and confusions that fall out by the fault of those that professe themselves Christians as well as by the malice of Infidels But I shall deny that this inferres the gift of Infallibility in any person or quality in behalfe of the Body of Christians For supposing the visible profession of Christianity to continue till the worlds end so that under this visible profession there is sufficient means to conduct a true Christian in the way to salvation And that by this means a number of men invisibly united to our Lord Christ by his Spirit do attain unto salvation indeed These promises of our Lord will be evidently true though we neither acknowledge on one side any gift of Infallibility in the Church nor deny on the other side the visible unity of the Church instituted by Gods Law It will be evidently true that our Lord Christ is with his Disciples that is Christians till the worlds end who could not continue invisibly united to him without the invisible presence of his Spirit It will be evidently true that the Gates of Hell prevail not against his Church in the visible society whereof a number of invisible Christians prevail over the powers of darknesse For though granting the Church to be subject to error salvation is not to be attained without much difficulty And though division in the Church may create more difficulty in attaining salvation then errour might have done yet so long as salvation may be and is attained by visible communion with the Church so long is Christ with his nor do the Gates of Hell prevail against his Church though error which excludeth infallibility though division which destroyeth unity hinder many and many of attaining it But if the consequence that is made from those words of our Lord be lame that which may be pretended from the power of the Keyes or of remitting â—â—d retaining sins both one by the premises granted S. Peter the Apostles of the Church will easily appear to be none at all For no man can maintain the power of remitting and retaining sins to be granted to the Church but he must yield it to be communicated to more then those in whom the gift of Infallibility can be pretended to reside Neither can the greatest of the Apostles remit oâ— retain any mans sinne without inducing him to imbrace profession of Christianity or if having imbraced it he fall from it in deed and in effect without reducing him to the course and study of performing the same and upon due profession thereof readmitting him into the Church on the other side excluding those that cannot be reduced to this estate Nor can the least of all that are able to bring any man into the Church fail of doing the same upon the same terms And did ever any man ascribe the gift of Infallibility to all them that should have power and right from the Church and in the Church to do this What meaneth then the exception of clave non errante which is every where and by every body cautioned for that with any reason challenges the power of the Keyes for the Church To me it seems rather an argument to the contrary that seeing this power is challenged for the Church under this general exception without limiting the exception to any sort of maters or subjects And that the act of it is the effect of the decrees of the greatest authority visible in the Church as whether Arias should communicate with the Church or not was the issue of as great a debate as the authority of the Church can determine that therefore the sentence of his excommunication proceeded not from the gift of Infallibility in any authority concurring to the decree of Nicaea whence it proceeded granting generally the power of excommunication to be liable to the exception of clave non errante Indeed it cannot be denyed that something requisite to the exercise of this power was in the Apostles infallible or unquestionable as presupposed to the being of the Church For what satisfaction could men have of their Christianity if any doubt could remain whether the faith which they preached were sent from God or not whither the Laws of Ecclesiastical communion which they advanced were according to their Commission or not But the causes upon which the Church is obliged to proceed to imploy this Power being such as depend many times upon the rule of faith and the Laws given the Church by the Apostles by very many links between both The dependance whereof it is hard for all those that are sometimes to concur to these sentences to discern I conceive it now madnesse to maintain the gift of Infallibility from the power of the Keyes in the exercise whereof so many occasions of failing may come to pass As for the exhortations of the Apostles whereby they oblige the Churches of the Thessalonians and Ebrues diligently to obey and follow their Governors 1 Thes V. 14. 15. Heb. XIII 7. 17. these I acknowledge to be pertinent to the question in debate as concerning such Governours as had in their hands the ordinary power of the Church saving that when he saith Remember your Rulers which have spoken to you the word of God And considering the issue of their conversation imitate their faith It is possible he may speak of those that first brought them the Gospel and those were the Apostles and Disciples of Christ either of the first rank of the XII or
The Word shines upon all and is hid to none saith Clemens to the Gentiles But it is enough for his purpose that they may be convinced of Christianity whether the Scriptures contain it clearly to all understandings or not Tertullian prescribeth that when once wee believe wee are to believe that wee have nothing else to believe because the Gnosticks pretended secrets which our common Christianity they confessed contained not Claudius Apollinaris is afraid that our common Christianity might be thought unperfit if hee should write against Montanus And does not Christians writing one against another cast a mark of imperfection upon it in the opinion of unbelievers though Christians ought to know that God is not tyed to prevent offenses Assuredly the Gospel of which hee speaks is neither any one Gospel nor all four Nor can the word Gospel signifie either the New Testament alone or the Old and New both Nor could hee be thought to adde to them by expounding them and thereby maintaining the Church Therefore hee inferrs a good consequence that because it is forbidden to adde to or take from the Law therefore our common Christianity is not unperfit nor ought wee to do that whereby it may seem unperfit Now as for the sayings alleged out of S. Austine that import as much as the words which wee had afore Ego Evangelio non crederem having showed what is the effect and intent of them I shall not be very solicitous to show how all that is said to the same effect is answered For as there is no head so hard that cannot distinguish between the authority of the Church as it is a visible Body of men that could never have been cozened into the beliefe of Christianity upon pretended motives whether sufficient or not and as it is supposed by Christians to be a Body founded by God So is there no heart so hardned with prejudice as to refuse this demand That the authority of the Church as the Church presupposes the truth of Christianity and therefore proves it not And by consequence no truth that Christianity either containeth or inferreth Which being admitted if any thing be ascribed to the Church which seems not to suppose any part of Christian truth it must be referred to the authority and credit of the Church as a visible Body of men moving others to imbrace the Christian Faith For though this credit contribute to the making of those men Christians which are won to the Church already setled and so the Church is the Church before they are Christians Yet is the ground and reason which makes the Church a Body founded by God to wit the profession of Christianity more ancient in order of reason and nature than the being of the Church And upon supposition of this ground that is that the Church hath true reasons as well as sufficient to believe proceeds all that authority of the Church which S. Austine allegeth to the Manichees upon so high terms that hee would not believe were hee not moved by it to believe Neither was it the authority of the Church vested in the rest of the Apostles that gave S. Paul the authority of an Apostle over the Church though I have said afore that all the authority which the Church can ever have was in the Apostles and disciples of our Lord for the time And though it is manifest that S. Paul could not have had the Authority of an Apostle over the Church had he not been owned by the rest of the Apostles but the Authority of our Lord Christ in the Apostles of the same effect in obliging the Church to receive S. Paul for an Apostle as to receive that which they preached for the Faith Nor is the mater much otherwise in the receiving of any Scripture for Canonital For neither can any mans writing be owned for Canonical Scripture not supposing his person owned by the Apostles And his authority being so owned is necessarily before any authority of the Church and the very being of it That some Scriptures may be received in some Churches and not in others is not because any Church can have authority to reject that which another is bound to receive but because some Church may not know that some Scripture comes from a man so owned by the Apostles though another may know it and yet be a Church and salvation be had in the communion of it such knowledg depending meerly upon evidence in point of fact And therefore the act of the Church in listing the Scripture hath no authority but that which the presumption of such evidence createth As for the rest of that which is alleged for the authority of the Church if S. Jerome resolve to stand to the Church of Rome it is not because hee takes the sentence thereof to be infallible but because hee had reason to presume that it were in vain for an Angel in heaven to preach any other Faith to it than that which once had been received Nor doth S. Cyprian make the not believing the Popes infallibility the sourse of all Heresie and Schism but the neglect of authority derived from the Apostles upon the Heads of particular Churches in the consent of whom the visibility of the true Faith and Church both consisteth For it is meer slight of hand to take the Rock which the Gates of Hell vanquish not in S. Austine for the Church of Rome because hee spoke of it in the words next afore Being meant of the Vine which hee had speech of a little afore that to wit the Christianity which our Lord Christ preacheth For in S. Bernards time I grant the stile was changed and it might passe for good doctrine to say That the Faith cannot suffer any failleur in the Church of Rome As for all those passages of the Fathers which are alleged in recommendation whether of Tradition for the Rule of Faith or of Traditions which are the Lawes of the Church they are all mine own They cannot serve the turn of any opinion but that which I pretend That the Tradition of the Church witnessed and evidenced by the continual exercice and practice of the Church extant in the records of the Church not constituted and created by any expresse act of those that have authority in behalf of the Church as it giveth bounds to the interpretation of the Scripture in such things as concern the Rule of Faith So it discovereth what Lawes the Church received from the Apostles and by consequence what is agreeable and consequent to the intent of the same in future times according to the difference between that and the present state of the Church Let those things therefore which have been produced here be added to that which I alleged in the beginning to make evidence for the Corporation of the Church from the Lawes given it by the Apostles Irenaus shall serve both for the authority of the Scripture antecedent to the authority of the Church and for the Tradition of the Church bounding
that we have to come from God than we please For if it be fifteen or sixteen to one that the words which we have are not from God what respect can oblige us to do more And would Pagans and Idolaters think themselves lesse bound to us if we could perswade them that whatsoever is pretended in Scripture of a Covenant made by God with Abraham and his posterity to acknowledge and worship him alone for the true God may be denied so farre as by saying that no man can say we have any Record of it As for the Jews what a favour were it to them to quit them all that can be alleged against them out of Moses and the Prophets by saying That we cannot be assured that it is their writing For if it be said that whatsoever the Church hath interest to use against Atheists Pagans and Jews will be admitted upon Tradition having renounced Scripture can it be imagined that having granted that the whole narration upon which Christianity steppeth in may have been counterfeited in writing any man can undertake to show the truth of the same unquestionable by word of mouth Surely it may well astonish a man void of prejudice to see it so carefully alleged how many ambiguities and equivocations necessarily fall out in expressing mens mindes by writing never considering that the same may fall out in whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth so much more uncureably as a man writes upon more deliberation than hee speaks and posterity can affirm with more confidence that which is delivered by writing to have been said than that which is onely so reported For let common sense judg by what is usually done by men for the preserving of evidence concerning their estates whether it be more effectual to have it in writing or onely by word of mouth For whatsoever can be pretended to come by Tradition from the Apostles must first have been delivered in the Ebrew language at least that language which they spake and was so near the Ebrew of the Old Testament that in the New Testament it is called by that name Thence being turned into Greek or Latine it must have come afterwards into the now vulgar languages of Christendom Neither can any man imagine how the profession of Christians should be conveyed by Tradition and not by word of mouth Where though they that heard the Apostles certainly understood their meaning which there can be no question of when the intent is familiarly to teach it yet the terms wherein it was delivered not remaining upon record as much difference may creep in as there may be difference in several mens apprehensions saving that which the communion of the Church determineth And will any common sense allow that the meaning thereof shall be more certain than the words are more certain than the meaning of written words which are certain though obscure and yet not without competent means to bring the intent of them to light But I must not preferr any thing of this nature before any thing wee have in the Scriptures so long as both sides acknowledg it I demand then whether the precept of the Law which injoyned the Israelites to teach it their children concerned the written Law or not The Prophet David Psalm LXXVIII 1-8 shewes the practice of it and so do other passages of the Old Testament and surely there can be no doubt made that Moses himself did deliver and inculcate the sense of the precepts to his hearers But will any common sense allow that hee forgot his text when hee expounded the meaning of it Our Lord commands the Jews to search the Scriptures hee remits Dives in the Parable to Moses and the Prophets S. Paul presses that all things that are written are written for our learning that wee through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope That all Scripture inspired from God is profitable and a great deal more to the same effect and shall wee open the mouth of Atheism with an answer that this concerns not us who no way stand convict that wee have the words of Moses and the Prophets of our Lord and his Apostles Let this therefore passe for a desperate attempt of making a breach for Atheism Heathenism Judaism to enter in provided that the Reformation should have nothing to say against the Church of Rome But let it be demanded whether any of those that writ for the Church against Heresies were masters of the common sense of men or not And let it be demanded when they alleged the Scriptures against them whether they thought the meaning of them determinable or not It is true Tertullian prescribed against Hereticks that the Church was not tied to dispute with them out of the Scriptures and certainly had just reason so to do Because though they admitted the Apostles to have Gods Spirit yet they admitted not that Spirit to have declared to them the bottom of the truth as to themselves and therefore made use of the Scriptures as the Alcoran doth so farre onely as they agreed with the Traditions of their own Masters whom they supposed to have the falnesse of the truth Whereas it is manifest that Christianity admits no dispute from the Scriptures but from them that acknowledg no gifts of Gods Spirit that suppose not Christianity and the Scriptures Therefore those that disputed against the Heresies that grew up afterwards and acknowledged no revelation but that which had brought on Christianity what did they dispute upon For evidently they neither had nor used that prescription which Tertullian insisted upon against his Hereticks But as Tertullian might though not bound to so much use the Scriptures against such Hereticks as well as against Jews and Infidels did they who succeeded onely use it against succeeding Heresies that own no further revelation than that which Scripture came with not as necessity but to show the advantage they had for this they must do if nothing but probability is to be had from the Scriptures but the peremptory truth is without Scripture evident in the determination of the present Church which was first visible in ejecting Hereticks Certainly such a breach upon common sense cannot be admitted as for them that have evidence for the truth to compromise it to a dispute of probabilities Here therefore I do appeal to the common sense of all men that see how all the disputes that have been made from the beginning for the Faith against Heresies do consist of Scriptures drawn into consequence against them though in behalf of that which they professed to hold from the Apostles whether all this pains was taken to show what was probable or what was true upon the evidence of the true sense of Scripture falling within the compasse of that which they held from the Apostles The ground then of that account which pretends that wee have no Scripture is very frivolous For if common sense be valued by the experience of those that handle written Copies not by
though first penned in Ebrew yet was translated into Greek in Aegypt as the Prefice witnesses Supposing then the interest of Christianity against Judaism to consist in that which the Fathers of the Church do plead That the same Word and Wisedom of God which first dealt with the Patriarchs which gave the Law to Moses and afterwards spoke by the Prophets in after time dwelt in our Lord Christ Jesus and delivered the Gospel I demand what could have been said more to the purpose of Christianity against Judaism by those that lived under Moses Law There is a question whether the Apostles S. Paul and whosoever it was that writ the Epistle to the Ebrews do allege these Books and allow them for their Authors when they call our Lord Christ the Image of God 2 Cor. II. 4. the Image of the invisible God Col. I. 15. the resplendence of the glory of God and the express image of his substance Ebr. I. 3. the Power of God and the Wisedom of God 1 Cor. I. 24. When they say that all things in heaven and earth were created by him and to him and subsist through him as the first-born of the whole creature Col. I. 16 17. that the world was made by him and that hee sustaineth and moveth all things by his powerfull word Ebr. I. 2 3. For how like are these things to those which wee reade in Ecclesiasticus I. 1 4. All wisedom cometh from the Lord and is with him for everlasting Wisedom was made before all things and the understanding of prudence from everlasting And XXIV 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Before the world from the beginning hee made mee and for ever I fail not Having said in the beginning of the Chapter according to the Latine Copy Ego ex ore Altissimi prodivi primogenita ante omnem creaturam I came forth of the mouth of the most High the first born before every creature And again Ecclesiasticus I. 9 10. The Lord himself made her and saw and numbred her and poured her upon all his works With all flesh shee is according to his gift and hee furnisheth her to them that love him And XXIV 5-9 I came out of the most High and covered the earth like a mist I dwell in the highest and my throne is in the pilar of cloud I alone compass the circumference of heaven and walk in the bottom of the deep In the waves of the sea and in all the earth in every people and nation is my inheritance Adding that seeking rest among men shee found it no where but in Israel And in the book of Wisedom VII 22 -27 For there is in Wisedom an understanding spirit holy onely begotten manifold subtile thinn nimble perspicuous undefiled plain to be understood inviolable loving goodness quick not to be hindred beneficent loving to men firm sure not solicitous that can do any thing that survayeth all things and passeth through the purest and finest understanding spirits For Wisedom is nimbler than all motions and attaineth and passith through all things because of her pureness For it is a vapor of the power of God and a sincere effluence of the glory of the Almighty therefore no pollution can happen to it For it is the resplendence of the everlasting light the unspotted mirror of Gods working and the image of his goodness Which being one can do all things and remaining in her self reneweth all things and passing into pious souls in all ages makes them friends of God and Prophets And IX 9 10 11. And with thee is Wisedom that knoweth thy works and was present when thou madest the world and knoweth what is pleasing in thine eyes and right in thy commands Send her from thy holy heavens and from the throne of thy glory that shee may assist and labor with mee and I may know what is pleasing before thee For shee knoweth and understandeth all things and will guide mee wisely in my doings and keep mee in her glory Can any man reade these things and not remember the beginning of S. Johns Gospel In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God The same was in the beginning with God All things were made by it and without it was nothing made that was made Can any man conceive that the Apostles should call our Lord Christ the Word the Power and the Wisedom of God that made all things in heaven and in earth it self being brought forth before all creatures supporting and moving all things which was with God from everlasting that hee is the image of God the shine of his glory the character of his substance That the successors of the Prophets should describe the Wisedom of God to be the Word of God that dwelt in the Prophets and the Power of God that made all things being it self brought forth before all things that sustaineth and governeth all things to dwell by the throne of God as the shine of his light the miror of his works the breath and vapor of his power and glory and from thence to come and take possession of the souls of Prophets and not acknowledg all this to come from the same fountain Especially being perswaded afore as all that are not Jews must be perswaded that the same Spirit and Word of God qualified as Wisedom describeth it which possessing the souls of righteous men in that measure whereof each of them was capable made them Gods Prophets dwelt in Christ without measure according to the fulnesse of the Godhead as the Apostles have told and said John I. 14 16. III. 34. Col. II. 9 10. Truly if any man say as I know it is said that the same sense may be derived by the Apostles from the glory of God in Ezek. I. 28. from the attributes of the Messias Psal II. 7. 2 Sam. VII 14. Esa IX 6. from the making of the world by Gods wisedom recorded Psal XXXIII 5. CXXXVI 5. Jeremy LI. 15. X. 12. especially from that which Solomon hath written of Wisedom being present with God from everlasting and doing all his works Prov. VIII 11-31 I will not contend with him about it Though in my own judgment seeing it cannot reasonably be denied that these writings being extant long afore went then with the rest of the Greek Bible And seeing the texts that are alleged do not direct us to understand how the Word and Spirit and Wisedom of God by which the Law and the Prophets spoke dwelleth for ever in our Lord Christ as these passages of their Successors do I do firmly believe that they signifie their allowance of them whose doctrine they use But it is enough that it may hereby appear as it must needs appear that they give us good and sound commentaries upon so high a point of the Prophets doctrine their predecessors when the Apostles that follow them hold such correspondence with them in it Onely hereupon I will from hence draw the reason why the inward obedience to
Earl of Arundels Library appeareth not at all that therefore the whole translation was made then when it saith this leter came Nor that if it were then made it had any relation to or dependance upon their Schism or the sacrilege of it For though Josephus sayes that Onias found Priests and Levites of his minde to serve God there and though hee sayes elsewhere that Onias did this out of contention which hee had with the Jews at Jerusalem having banished him Thinking to draw the multitude from them to the Temple which hee had built de Bello Jud. VII 37. yet these are rather arguments that the Body of the Jews at Alexandria did not submit to his premises whatsoever his credit with the King might oblige them to permit particular men to do And Josephus Ant. XIII 6. immediately after the building of this Temple telleth us of a trial between the Samaritanes and Alexandrian Jews before the same Philometor whether the Temple at Jerusalem or that on Mount Gerizim were according to Gods Law And that those Jews were so zelous in the cause that they consented what side were cast those that pleaded for it to be put to death Which accordingly was executed upon Sabbaeus and Theodosius that pleaded for the Samaritanes Now though Josephus say not that this which hee relateth presently after the building of the Temple came to passe after it in time yet it is utterly incredible that those who had showed such zeal for the Temple at Jerusalem should the next day as it were that is in the same Kings raign run into the same crime whereof they had convicted the Samaritanes Certainly when the addition to Esther saith that the leter which hee had inserted was translated into Greek by Lysimachus son of Ptolomee a Jew of Jerusalem it is no sign that there was any pretense of Schism between the Jews of Jerusalem and those of Alexandria on foot And therefore this aspersion takes away nothing from the credit of the Greek Bible I am further confirmed in this opinion by considering the writings of Philo the Alexandrian Jew though I am not moved by them to think hee was a Christian but onely to conclude that hee cannot be convinced to be no Christian Three things I allege out of him as steps which hee hath made beyond the rest of the Jews towards a Christian The first That hee hath followed the Gospels in reproving the Tradition of the Elders for which they neglected to honor their parents as the Law commandeth The Tradition was this as wee finde by him in his book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If a man vow that his Father or Mother shall never be the better for any thing that is his it shall not be lavvfull for him to maintain them out of his goods For Korban signifies anathema And hee that said Be it Korban whatsoever thou maiest be the better for of mine In his anger to Father or Mother said in effect Be it anaâ—hema That is be hee accursed that touches it In this point then Philo follovvs the doctrine of Christ against the Tradition of their Elders The second is his exposition of Deut. XXVIII 46. The stranger that is within thee shall get above thee more and more And thou shalt come under him more more in his book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The stranger truly lifted aloft with good success shall be gazed at as admired and counted happy for two the greatest excellences That having turned to God hee hath received the most proper reward a firm rank in heaven not lawfull to be expressed But the right born imbasing and counterfeiting the coin of his birth shall slide down till hee come to the very depth of darkness That all men seeing these examples may grow sober considering how God accepts that virtue which springs from an enemy stock bidding the root farewell but the shoot welcome that is grown to a stock because by tillage it is changed to bear good fruit For hovv vvould a Christian expound this text against the Jevv in the mystical sense but by making the Christian the stranger vvhom this text prophesieth of that hee shall have the upper hand of the Jevv as Origen more than once if my memory fail mee not out of this place of Philo hath done The third consists of those things vvhich hee hath said in so many places concerning the Word of God agreeable to those passages of the Wisedome of Solomon Ecclesiasticus and Baruch vvhich I compared afore vvith the doctrine of the Apostles concerning that Wisedom of God vvhich is his Word of vvhich you have enovv in Grotius his annotations upon those texts but much more might be produced For vvhosoever compares them together shall finde that he vvho said them vvas not far from the Christian Faith For if it be objected and said that there is no evidence that ever this Philo professed Christianity vvithout vvhich he cannot be counted a Christian It may reasonably be ansvvered that during the time vvhen the Synagogue vvas at a bay vvhether to receive Christianity or not at vvhat time it is plain they did not persecute it nothing can be said vvhy it might not be professed by any Jevv of those Synagogues vvhich stood so affected to it not onely vvithout any mark of apostasie upon him among his fellovvs but even vvith that trust vvhich vvee knovv this Philo had among the Jevvs of Alexandria being deputed by them to Caligula in business concerning their vvhole subsistence For if those vvho vvere baptized by John the Baptist vvere not thought to depart from the Lavv vvhy should those vvho vvere baptized into Christ vvhether the effect of both Baptisms vvere the same or diverse the Lavv continuing in practice long after that time I must therefore professe to allovv the opinion those that vvill have this vvork to have been done by the Jews of Alexandria of which wee know there was a very great Body from the time of the first Ptolomee who having taken up the Greek in stead of their Mother tongue necessarily required that they should have the Scriptures in it It is then agreeable to reason that this translation being made so soon after the study of the Law came in request and so farr from Jerusalem should acknowledg more difference of sense arising from the divers wayes of determining those words that are written without vowels than those that are of a later date when the reading was better determined by custome and practice Which accordingly wee see is come to pass For the translations into the Greek that were made after the time of our Lord by Aquila Symmachus and Theodotion no Christians and the Chaldee of Onkelus and Jonathan who whatsoever time they were made in are later than so though wee cannot say that they do alwaies and in all things agree either with one another or with the Ebrew Copies which wee use yet must wee needs say that there is a great deal more agreement between them visible
of the Holy Ghost Where you see that upon inlightning that is Baptism we become partakers of the Holy Ghost And this consideration utterly voides the only reason why our Lord when he sayes to Nicodemus John III. 5. Verily verily I say unto thee unlesse a man be born again of waâ—er and of the Holy Ghost he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God should not seem to speak of the Sacrament of Baptism For at that time neither was the Sacrament of Baptism instituted nor the promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to it The Holy Ghost that is to say the gift of the Holy Ghost is no where promised before the ascension of Christ For besides that which I alledged in the beginning to show that it presupposeth Christianity When it is said John VII 37. The Holy Ghost was not yet because Christ was not yet glorified The dependance thereof upon the glorifying of our Lord is plainly expressed And that according to S. Paul Ephes IV. 8. 12. Shewing out of Psal LXVIII 18. that the graces of the Holy Ghost by which the Church is united and compacted into one Body are sent down by God as a largess in consideration of the advancement of our Lord to the right hand of God as in honour of that triumph Wherewith agreeth S. Peter Acts II. 33. Being then exalted to or by the right hand of God and having received the gift of the Holy Ghost as it is also called Acts X. 54. he hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear Now let any man say that these visible operations of Holy Ghost whereby the world was to be convinced of the presence of God in the Church of Christians these indeed depend upon the ascension of Christ But without the invisible operation of the Holy Ghost no man ever to salvation from the beginning supposing this for the present but not granting it if any man that is a Christian demand proof for it Though this be true yet it was not expresly promised by God nor expresly Covenanted for by man till the publishing of Christianity upon the ascension of Christ Therefore the Baptism of repentance which John preached was without question effectuall to the remission of sins as the Gospels propose it Mark I. 4. Luke III. 3 For if I maintain the salvation of those who living under the Law understood the Covenant of Grace to be folded up in it by the preaching of the Prophets much more easily can I maintain the salvation of those who have imbraced the Baptism of Repentance for remission of sins which Joâ—n Preached provided that they came to Christ to whom John Baptist sent his Disciples so soon as the command of Christianity should take place and not otherwise But not by vertue of the Covenant of Grace published which it was not to be till the ascention of Christ but by vertue of the Covenant of Grace vailed under the Law which was not unvailed as yet during the time of passage from the Law to the Gospel when the baptism of John might take place Neither was the baptism of John in the name of the Father Son and the Holy Ghost which baptism our Lord never established till after his rising again Mat. XXVIII 19. but in the name of him that was comming as S. Paul saith to the Disciples Acts XIX 4. John truly baptised the baptism of repentance saing to the people that they should believe on him that was comming after him that is in Christ Jesus which words some have endeavoured to set upon the rack and to pull them from those which follow but they hearing this were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus as if they were not S. Lukes words but S. Pauls speaking of S. John's hearers that they were baptized by him in the name of the Lord Jesus A thing altogether unreasonable to imagine that the Disciples of John should make a question whether our L. Jesus were the Christ or not as Mat. XI 2. Luke VII 18. if they had been from the beginning baptized in his Name And the words might have served to represse this conceit in them that had submitted to take the meaning from the words For it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which their meaning were it the meaning of the text would require Nor is it strange that they who had been baptized into the profession of admitting him that was comming for the Christ in hope by him to have remission of sins as their Fathers had alwayes hoped acknowledging our Lord Jesus not only to be the Christ but further sent by the Father to send the Holy Ghost should be baptized again in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost For the receiving of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of S. Pauls hands which followeth in S. Luke is sufficient evidence that it is the baptism of Christ and not of John Baptist whereof he speaketh Let us hear then the Commission of our Lord Christ to his Apostles Mat. XXVIII 19. Go make Disciples all Nation babtizing them in the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek in the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if we insist upon the property of the word must necessarily signifie make Disciples But who are Christs Disciples Those that take up his Crosse to follow him Those that will do whatsoever he commandeth Those that bear much fruit Those of whom our Lord saith John VIII 34. If ye abide in my Word then are ye truly my Disciples As I shewed you before speaking of the profession of Christianity This before Christs death and the institution of Baptism Afterwards who are his Disciples Acts XI 26. It came to passe that the Disciples were first called Christians at Antivchia First at Antiochia but afterwards all over that Book as well as afore they are oftner called Disciples then Christians Neither is the name given to any but Christians saving those Disciples which I spoke of just now who under the baptism of John had given up themselves to our Lord Jesus as the Christ but through invincible ignorance knew not yet that the gift of the Holy Ghost presupposed Christs Baptism being ready as we see to receive it so soon as they understood it by the means of S. Paul Now there is nothing more manifest than that the gift of the holy Ghost is promised by our Lord in the Gospel to supply the want of his bodily presence and therefore when he declared unto them his departure and not much afore it Which things if they be true of necessity the promise of the Holy Ghost is annexed to the precept of being baptized given by our Lord at his departure and from that time to take place Neither is the meaning of his commission in the words alledged that they should first teach and then baptize though teaching that which Christianity professeth
is necessarily presupposed to baptizing namely that Catechising which I spoke of afore but that they should make men Disciples by baptizing them in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost limiting thereby the quality of Disciples to which the Holy Ghost is promised to those who should have received the Sacrament of Baptism and so been made Disciples Seeing then it appears so plentifully that the Gift of the Holy Ghost promised by our Lord a little before his departure to supply his bodily presence is limited by him to the Sacrament of Baptisme Of necessity that new birth by Water and the Holy Ghost which our Lords words to Nicodemus require of all that shall enter into the Kingdom of heaheaven dependeth upon the Sacrament of Baptism whatsoever Nicodemus might understand by the terme of water at the time when our Lord spake them and this promise was not published Of which I shall have occasion to say more in another place Neither will is be to the purpose to object that it is the actuall assistance and not the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost that regenerateth supposing for the present but not granting that which all that pretend to Christianity do not acknowledge and therefore that the promise of the Holy Ghost to succeed upon Baptism no way obligeth us to understand that water which with the Holy Ghost regenerateth of the water of Baptism For the actuall assistance of the Holy Ghost regenerating a man to become a Christian may well be understood to go before the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost upon Baptism And in my opinion is to be understood when our Lord goes on and saies That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit Marvell not that I said unto thee ye must be born again The wind bloweth where it lifteth and ye hear the noise of it but cannot tell whence it commeth nor whither it goeth so is every one that is born of the Holy Ghost And therefore what shall hinder water and the Holy Ghost to signifie one and the same thing in this place the cleansing vertue and operation of the Holy Ghost being often signified under the figure of Water in the Scriptures So that Water and the Spirit may well stand here for no more than the Spirit that cleanseth I say all this will not serve the turn For the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost being promised Christs Disciples upon his departure to inable them to make good what they undertake by being hâ—s Disciples it is manifest that the actuall assistance of the holy Ghost regenerating to Christianity only prepares the way for it Seeing then that the gift of the Holy Ghost depends upon the Water of Baptisme it is manifest that the cleansing vertue of Gods Spirit in the new birth of sinners comes not to effect without the same I will further draw into consequence those texts of Scripture which I alledged in the first book to show that there was a certain Rule of Christianity delivered by the Apostles and acknowledged by them that undertook to be Christians for there are some of them that signifie plain enough that this acknowledgment was made at their baptism as the condition which it praesupposed When S. Paul thanketh God for the Romans that they had obeyed from the heart that form of Doctrine which had been delivered them Rom. VI. 17. What is this obeying from the heart but that answer or stipulation of a good conscience towards God in Baptism which S. Peter saith saveth us as you have seen And S. Paul to Timothy 1 Tim. VI. 12. 13. Fight the good fight of Faith lay hold of eternall life to which also thou wast called and madest a good profession before many witnesses I charge thee before God that quickeneth all things and Christ Jesus that witnessed the good Profession under Pontius Pilate that thou keep the command unspotted and blamelesse unto the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ What profession was it that our Lord died to witnesse but that he was ordained by God the King of them whom he was sent with the Gospel to save in regard whereof he is called by the Apostle Hebr. III. 2. the Apostle and High-Priest of our Profession Because he bore the Crosse afore us to witnesse that righteous cause which we are to maintain by bearing the same And what is that profession which Timothy made afore many witnesses but that of bearing Christs cross when he was baptized And what is the commandement which he is charged to keep unspotted and blamelesse but that Christianity which he became charged with at his Baptism Wherefore when S. John alledgeth an Unction from the Holy one even our Lord Christ which teacheth Christians all things so that they need not be taught to avoid the Heresies of that time because they knew the truth hut withall chargeth them to abide in that which they had learned from the beginning and in that Unction which teacheth them all things He sheweth us manifestly that the Unction of the Holy Ghost is granted by our Lord Christ to teach us all things which we have learned To wit that we be not seduced from that which we have learned from the beginning of our Christianity Now as it hath appeared that this Christianity was then learned and acknowledged in order to Baptism so likewise that the gift of the Holy Ghost dependeth upon the same Otherwise what shall we say to S. Peter ascribing remission of sins to Baptism Acts 11. 38 What shall we say to Ananias exhorting S. Paul Acts XXII 16. Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the name of the Lord What shall we say to S. Paul affirming that as many as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ Gal. III. 27. and that those that are baptized into Christ are baptized into his death Rom. VI. 4. Which is to say that God on his part granteth them power to perform that which they on their part professe to undertake And again Eph. V. 25 26. Christ gave himselfe for his Church that he might sanctifie it by cleansing it with the laver of water through the Word And again Titus III. 5 6. Not by works of righteousnesse which we had done but according to his mercy he saved us by the laver of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost which he powred upon us plentifully through our Saviour Jesus Christ And the Apostle to the Hebrews X. 21 22. Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith having our hearts cleansed from evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water let us hold fast the profession of faith without declining from it what starting hole is here left for him that had a mind to prefer his own prejudices before the Word of God to avoid the evidence of these testimonies for the concurrence of Baptism to the qualifying of a Christian for the promises of the
Moses a little before his death though in effect they had submitted to whatsoever should be required in Gods name by Moses when they passed the red Sea under his conduct Only it is to be observed that the Covenant of Circumcision which God had made with Abraham when he gave him the Land of Promise remained for their Title to it when the promise thereof became limited by the Law Which limitation because they submitted to by leaving Aegypt under the conduct of Moses and being shadowed by the Cloud saw their enemies drowned in the red Sea therefore are they elegantly said by S. Paul to be baptized into Moses in the Cloud and in the Sea For if being redeemed from the Aegypt of this world we undertake to leave it under the conduct of our Lord Christ If hereupon our sins be drowned in the waters of Baptism Were not they baptized in the same sense as we passe the red Sea at our comming out of Aegypt But both upon supposition of the correspondence between the two Testaments without which all this argument could neither have force nor relish And therefore I cannot but admire to see men learned in the Scriptures to maintain by this place that the Sacraments of the Old Testament are the same with the Sacraments of the New Not distinguishing whether immediatly or by way of correspondence For if you make the Kingdom of Heaven and the Land of Promise all a thing then is Baptism and the passage of the red Sea all one But then it will be all one to believe in Christ and to submit to his conduct to Paradise as to believe in Moses as the Israelites did hereupon Exod. XIV 31. and to put themselves under his conduct to the Land of Promise Which is my Argument But if setting aside the correspondence you make their ingagement to God under Moses for obtaining the Land of promise one thing and our ingagement to God under Christ another Certainly the immediate assurance of this and the immediate assurance of that which by means of the correspondence becoms also the assurance of this are severall things And if there be between the Old and New Covenant that correspondence which makes that the figure of this they may as well be said to be one and the same and by consequence the Sacraments of them as a mans Picture is called by his name when seeing the Pictures of our Princes for example we say This is H. the eight and this Queen Elizabeth But to say that the Sacraments of the Old Law do immediately figure or assure the same thing which the Sacraments of the Gospel do is the same thing as to say the rest of the Land of Promise and the everlasting rest of the Kingdom of Heaven are both one and the same Let us now see by what right that is upon what ground S. Paul argues that concerning the Gospel from the words of Moses Deut. XIII 11 -14 which is manifestly said by him concerning the Law Rom. X. 6 -10 The righteousnesse that is of Faith saith thus Say not in thine heart who will ascend into Heaven To wit to bring down Christ Or who will go down into the deep To wit to bring up Christ from the dead But what saith it The Word is near thee in thy mouth and in thy heart That is the word of Faith which we Preach That if thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe with thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved For with the heart a man believes to righteousnesse and with the mouth confession is made to salvation The argument is this If Moses duly warn the Israelites that they have no excuse for not obeying the Law which he had put as it were in their mouths and into their hearts so plainly had he taught it them then cannot those that hear the Apostles Preach the Gospel excuse themselves in not obeying it being so plainly shewed That if they professe Christ with their mouths believing with the heart that God raised him from the dead they should be saved That this word of Faith is put as it were in their mouths and in their hearts Can this be made good to be Moses his meaning not supposing that the Spirit of God intended the Gospel by the Law Or can it be denied so to be supposing it If therefore the profession of an Israelite tie him to the Law of God given the Jews shall not the profession of a Christian tie him to the Law of God given the Jews shall not the profession of a Christian tie him to the Law of God given the Christians Shall not the professing of Christ which the Apostle speaks of be the undertaking of it For S. Paul by saying that they were baptized into Moses under the Cloud and in the Sea plainly sheweth that as their undertaking to march under the conduct of Moses towards the Land of Promise through the red Sea was rewarded by God with the drowning of their enemies and the overshadowing of the Cloud So our undertaking to follow Christ towards that Kingdom which he obtained by his Crosse is rewarded with the extinguishing of sin and the refreshing of the Holy Ghost in our travel to the world to come And therefore the ingagement of the second Covenant being inacted and settled upon us by the Sacrament of Baptism the promises of the Covenant must needs depend upon the same What else shall the name of a New Covenant or a New testament signifie if we will not have them to signifie nothing Some man perhaps may marvel whence it comes that the agreement between God and his ancient People being alwaies represented in the Old Testament in the nature and terms of a Covenant the New is by the Apostle proved to have the nature of the last Will and Tessament of our Lord Christ Hebr. IX 16 17. But if this Testament be also a Covenant as the same Apostle saith Hebr. VIII 9. He hath obtained a more excellent Ministery by how much he is the Mediator of a better Covenant which is inacted upon better promises there will be no cause to marvell The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in ordinary Greek signifies no more than a mans last Will and Testament But in the use of the Jews that spoke Greek such as are the Apostles the translators of the Old Testament into Greek and others it fignisies also a Covenant If further it pleased God that our Lord Christ should die to assure us of everlasting life on his part which thereby he purchased obliging God on his part to give it to those that shall be found qualified for it well may the Apostle affirm that it is the last Will and Testament of him who died to make it irrevocable because mens Wills are not so till death But it containeth nevertheless a Covenant because men become not Sons of God by birth but by choice accepting the adoption which is tendred being
to be in regard of the world to come what would he have Christians to be but Libertines and Rebels True it is God imposeth it not as upon his subjects but tendreth it as to his rebels for the condition upon which they may become his subjects instead of his rebels And that is a just reason why it is called a Covenant rather than a Law And that reason justly reproves the Leviathans imagination that it can oblige neither more nor less than the Law of Nature For being positive as tendred by the meer will of God and upon what terms he pleased as the Precepts thereof which are Gods Laws to his Church and the institution of the Church it selfe is meerly positive there is no reason at all to presume that the moral Precepts which are in force under it are bounded by the Law of Nature Though whether it be so or not I undertake not here to determine But we know what S. Paul saith Rom. III. 27. Where is boasting It is shut out By what Law Not by the Law of works but by the Law of Faith That is by the Gospel which requireth that Faith of which I am inquiring wherein it consists for the condition of obtaining the promises which it tendreth And S. James 11. 8. 12. If ye fulfill the Royall Law which saith Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self ye do well And So speak ye and so do ye as being to be judged by the Law of Libertie For the liberty of being Gods subjects and under Gods royall Law the Gospel giveth Neither is S. Paul otherwise to be understood when he saith Rom. VIII 2. The Law of the Spirit of Life which is in Christ Jesus hath freed me from the Law of sin and of death The imbracing of the Gospel being the Law that is the condition upon which we become partakers of the Holy Ghost free from sin and from death And truly I cannot but pity the blindness of error so oft as I remember that I have heard Antinomians alledge the words of the Prophet Jer. XXXI 31 -34. quoted by the Apostle to show the difference between the first and second Covenant Heb. VIII 8 -11. Behold the dayes come saith the Lord that I will settle with the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new Covenant not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers when I tooke them by the hand and brought them out of the Land of Aegypt for they abode not in my Covenant and I neglested them saith the Lord For this is the Covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those dayes saith the Lord Putting my Laws into their mind I will also write them upon their hearts and I will be to them for their God and tâ—ey to me for my people Neither shall they teach every man his neighbour and every man his Brother saying Know the Lord For they shall all know me from the least of them to the greatest I say I cannot but pity them that upon these words ground themselves that the Covenant of Grace is a meer free promise not onely freely made for so I say it is free for what but Gods goodness moved him to tender it but freely without condition contracted for at their hands For cannot God by his Prophet foretell the effect of the Covenant of Grace but he must be presumed to set down the terms of it And if he express them not there is he the less free to demand them when he tenders them Especially the Covenant it self being to remain a secret till Gods time to reveal it I say then that this Prophesie hath taken full effect in the lives of those who submitting themselves to the terms of Christianity have received of God the gift of the Holy Ghost to understand their profession that they might live according to it But that this gift of the Holy Ghost that is to say the habituall assistance thereof neither was due nor bestowed but upon supposition of Chnstianity professed by baptisme which God by our Lord Christ hath revealed to be the condition which he requireth of them that will injoy the same CHAP. IV. The consent of the whole Church evidenced by the custome of chatechising By the opinion thereof concerning the salvation of those that delayed their Baptism By the rites and Ceremonies of Baptism Why no penance for sins before but after Baptism The doctrine of the Church of England evident in this case BUT I am now come to the argument that is to be drawn from the practise of the universall Church to my purpose And truly he that shall consider for what reason the Apostles should require those whom they had converted to be baptized will find himselfe intangled in rendring it unless he settle the ground of it upon the obligation of professing true Christianity And the effect of it in admitting to the unity of the Church which may require the performance and maintain the exercise of it And the consequence thereof they that are or shall be imployed by the Church to preach to unbelievers will find to be such that either they must insist upon the terms which I hold with them or they shall make them but aequivocall Christians That is such as may wear the Cross of Christ to man for a cognizance but not in the obligation of their hearts to God rather to suffer death than either to profess or act against that which he hath taught The next point in the visible practice of the Catholick Church is the custome of catechizing The circumstances whereof for time and manner though no man can mantain to have been the same in all Churches yet it may be argued to have been generally a time of triall for them that had been wonne to believe the truth of Christianity how they were likely to apply themselves to live like Christians and what assurance or presumption the Church might conceive that they would not betray the profession thereof And therfore I appeal to the common sense of all men whether they that exercised this course did not admit men to Christianity and baptism upon the condition of professing and undertaking so to do Besides those things which I alledged in the first Book in the Constitutions of the Apostles in the most ancient Canons of the Church and generally in all Church writers we read of Missa Catechumenorum and Missa fidelium In English the dismission of Scholars and the dismission of Believers Because during the Psalms during the reading of the Scriptures expounding the same reason was that learners should be present as well for their instruction in Christianity as for discharge of their â—uty in the praises of God and prayers to God Though the same prayers were not to be offered to God for Learners as for believers but they were to be dismissed with peculiar prayers of the Church for their particular estate such as yet are extant in the ancient Offices of the
by some of theit own body that they who demanded Baptism were no counterfeits but would stand to what they undertook it ought to be an Argument that they were to undertake that which they give the Church security to perform And indeed this custom being nothing else but an appertenance or consequence of the Interrogatories of Baptism I need say no more but that it appears thereby what those that were admitted to Baptism undertook when they were to have Sureties to undertake for them that they dissembled not in that which they undertook But in the next place I will alledge the constitution of the Church and all the authority of it Grounded as by the means which I have imployed to make evidence of it appeareth upon supposition and presumption that by being baptized into the visible communion thereof we attain invisible communion in the promises which the Gospel tendreth There are some that take upon them to censure the ancient Church for the abuse which I spoke of even now in delaying of Baptism These men if they will go alwaies by the same weights and measures must call S. Paul to account why he makes this demand 1 Cor. V. 12 13. What have I to do to judge those that are without do not ye judge those that are within But those that are without God shall judge For those who professed only to believe Christianity though obliged to learn how to behave themselves like Christians for with what face could they demand Baptism otherwise yet to speak properly were not Christians were not of the Church Therefore Clemens Alexandrinus in the end of his Paedagogus bringeth in the Word that is our Lord Christ or his Gospel which he calleth the Paedagogue for governing these Children and Novices in Christianity in their way to the Church giving up this Office to himselfe as being to become for the future their Doctor and Master and Bishop◠at their entrance into the Churcch The passage is remarkable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But it is not for me to teach these things further saith the Paedagogue We have need of a Doctor to expound these holy Oracles and to him we must go And truly it is time for me to give over my Office of Paedagogue and for you to become the Doctors Hearers He receiving you bread with good government having behaved themselves well during the time of their trial shall teach you these Oracles And in good time here is the Church and the onely Doctor the Bridegroom the good mind of a good Father Christ or the Gospel of Christ is the Paedagogue that guides and governs Children in Christianity to the School that is to the Church to demand baptism having behaved themselves well by the way during the time of their triall When that is done he teaches them no more as children are taught by a Paedagogue But as a Master teaches his Scholars so Christ those that are become his Disciples by being baptized Therefore afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Paedagogue having set us in the Church hoth recommended us to himselfe the Word the Doctor and Bishop of all And this is our Lords Commission to his Apostles to make them Disciples that should take up his Crosse by baptizing them in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Then to teach them to observe all that he had given them in Charge The same is the ground of Cassanders observation which is much to my purpose That the Church putteth no man to penance whatsoever his life may have been for any thing done before Baptism Zosimus thinks he layes a great imputation upon Christianity in pretending that Constantine finding no means to come clear of the bloud of his Wife Fausta or his Son Crispus gave ear to Christianity because it pretended to wash away all sin That Constantine should seek those meanes which Heathenism pretendeth to purge sin with may well be thought to proceed from the malignity of the Gentiles against the first Christian Prince For the rest not disputing of his doings before Baptism because the Church judgeth not that those are without though he professed Christianity when they were done it would be a disparagement to that Fountain which God hath opened for Juda and Jerusalem that there should be any sin which it cannot cleanse supposing the change sincere which the undertaking of Christianity professeth If not God is his Judge But though the Church refuse no man Baptism because professing Christianity he had delayed his Baptism yet as it appeared sufficiently by the scruple that was made of the salvation of those that died in that estate that the Church disallowed it so when they were come into the Church a mark of the authority of the Church was fastened upon them in that those that were baptized in their beds were made uncapable by one of those Canons which I spoke of in the first Book that were in force before the Church had any Canons in writing of being promoted to the Clergy For this you shall find objected to Noratianus by Cornelius in Eusebius Eccles Hist VII 43. That by the Canons he ought not to have been promoted to any rank in the Clergy because he had been baptized in his bed of sickness having delayed his Baptism for fear of persecution till he found himselfe in danger of death And though the Church put no man to penance for his life before Baptism because Christianity it selfe pretendeth a totall change in him that imbraceth it and that the Church judgeth not but presumeth of the truth of that change which is pretended by him that is without yet it fasteneth a mark of the authority which it purchaseth upon Christianity by providing that no man who had been ever put to penance should be promoted to any rank of the Clergy The reason is expressed in those words of Clemens his Epistle to the Corinthians pag. 54. speaking of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Preaching over Countreys and Cities they made the First-fruits of them whom they had converted Bishops and Ministers of them that should believe The learned Bloudell will have these First-fruits to signifie those that were first converted to Christianity A mistake more sutable to the prejudice which he had undertook to maintain then to the rest of his learning For who knoweth not that First-fruits are the best the floure the cream of the whole And if no man that dared not to professe Christianity no man that had been put to penance for failing having profest it is to be of the Clergy you see why they are called the First-fruits of Christians In the mean time if the Church judge not those that are without doth it not judge those that are within according to S. Paul Show me any thing that ever was called a Church that is shew me the time when and the place where Christianity was ever settled and exercised according to order and rule where those that had received Baptism were not under a discipline
or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both which are sometimes translated in the Greek of the Old Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying confidence â—s the resolution of Horatius Cocles not giving way to the enemy is called by Polibius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Livy subsistere â—osteâ—â— is to stand the enemy So Heb. III. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the first confidence of Christians and 2 Cor. VIII 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confidence in bosting So Rom. III. 25. Whom God hath proposed as a Propitiatory through faith in his blood The propitiatory was set before the Israelites to assure them of Gods help according to the Law So is Christ faith the Apostle to them that have recourse to him with confidence alledging for themselves his blood shed for us So Jam. 1. 6. 7. But let him ask in faith nothing doubting For he that doubteth is like the sea waves tossed and stirred with the windes Let not such a man think that he shall obtaine any thing of God Where the efficacy of prayer is ascribed to an assured confidence of obtaining that which is desired and therefore that beliefe which according to the words of our Lord Mar. XI 23. 24. seemeth properly to consist in this assurance obtaines all prayers And not supposing S. Paul to speak of the common faith of all Christians when he faith 1 Cor. XIII 2. If I have all faith so as to remove mountaines yet as he insinuates that this is done by that particular assurance and confidence which that grace giveth him that hath it So must the conquest of the World by the common faith of Christians be ascribed to that assurance and confidence with which all Christians expect Gods promises And truly through the manifold indifference of signification which words will afford them that will use them to their purpose it cannot be denied that to believe God and to believe in God is sometimes all a thing Yet it is very hard to believe that they are intended by the Scripture to signifie alwayes the same thing being so frequently and ordinarily used with a difference For if we consider that in very many texts of the Old Testament the nature of Faith is expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which speeches trusting and confidence in some body or some thing particularly in God when the speech is of religion is signified as well by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies believing in God it will be impossible to imagine that all such expressions import no more then barely believing those things to be true which God or man sayes though sometimes believing God and believing in God may signifie all one The Apostle Hebr. XI 33 34 35. thus reckoneth the marveilous things which through faith came to passe to the Fathers of the Old Testament Who by faith subdued kingdomes wrought righteousnesse obtained promises stopped the mouthes of Lions quenched the force of fire escaped the edge of the sword recovered of infirmities prevailed in warr put to flight armies of strangers women received their dead raised againe others were beaten to death not expecting deliverance that they might obtain a better resurrection And can it be reasonable to impute these effects to the bare belief of Gods power or goodnesse or whatsoever else can be thought requisite for them then to believe when as that trust and confidence in God which supposeth that beliefe is both by the nature thereof nearer to these effects and apt to dispose them to undergoe those trials under which they found such deliverances For of them all we may say as the Apostle of Elias James V. 17 18. Elias was a man subject to like passions with us and he earnestly prayed that it might not raine and it rained not upon the land for three years and six moneths And againe he prayed and the heavens gave raine and the earth put forth her fruit The confidence which Elias had grounded upon Gods presence with him made him first pray for drought and then for raine which came to passe according to his saying 1 Kings XVII 1. that there should be neither dew not rain for those yeares but according to his word And so the trust which the rest there mentioned had in God to obtaine so great things as the Apostle sayes befell them that rather then the beliefe of Gods power and goodnesse or whatsoever else they were to believe chalenges so great effects to be ascribed to it I must now observe a third notion which this word faith signifies especially in the writings of the Apostles from whence this difficulty is in the first place to be derived which you shall find Hebr. X. 39. We are not of apostasy to destruction but of faith to the saving of the soul What is opposite to falling from faith but perseverance in it or what doth all this Epistle but learn the Jews that were Christians not to forsake Christianity for the persecutions raised against them by those of their kindred So here Faith is Christianity as apostasy the renouncing of it Then S. Paul when he saith that his Apostleship was for the obedience of faith in all nations Rom. I. 55. and Rom. XVI 26. that the Gospel is made known to all nations for the obedience of faith must needs signifie that submission which those that render themselves Christians do undertake for the performing of that condition whereupon the Gospel tenders everlasting life Of which he saith againe Rom. III. 27. that boasting is not excluded by the law of works but by the law of faith For every law being a condition upon which a man enjoys some benefit in some society whereof he is a part the law of faith must needs be that condition the undergoing whereof intitles all men to the common claime of all Christians which is their Christianity So when S. Paul exliorteth them Rom. XII 3. 6. to think of themselves unto sobriety according as God hath divided to every one a measure of Faith As againe If any man had the gift of Prophesie according to the proportion of faith It is manifest that his meaning in the latter text is If any man had profited so farre in Christianity that God thereupon had bestowed on him the grace of prophesying For though it is well known that God sometimes gave that grace to those whom he loved not to life as Saul and Balaam and Caiaphas and those who shall say once Lord have we not prophesied in thy Name Mat. VII 22 which notwithstanding under Christianity is limited to the profession thereof as I shewed you in the beginning yet it is as certaine that those whom God imployeth to his People and Church upon those commissions that require such graces those he useth to chuse for their proficiency in true Godlinesse The prophets of the Old Testament being so ordinarily assumed out of those that had lived in the study of godlinesse
revealed from heaven upon all ungodlinesse and unrighteousnesse of men that hold the truth in unrighteousnesse For the preaching of the Gospel is that revelation which here he meanes And by S. Augustine de Catechizandi Rudibus we understand that by the order of the Church there was no instruction in Christianity without conviction of the judgement to come as that which obligeth to have recourse to Baptisme for the avoiding of it But when God condescends to tender to those whom he holds liable to his justice terms of reconcilement plainly he comes down from his Throne of judgement to deale with his obnoxious creatures upon equall terms or rather terms of disadvantage supposing what no Christian can deny that the Gospel tenders terms of our advantage Nay he is content to go before and to declare himself tied before hand if we accept expecting our choice whether we will be bound by accepting or not which is a difference between the Law and the Gospel not unworthy to be observed For the Covenant of the Law was struck once for all with all those whome it concerned to wit the whole people of Israel at once their posterity being by birth subject to it But when the Gospel is preached the Covenant of Grace is tendered indeed but not inacted till some man consent to become a Christian and therefore God first binds himself to stand to the termes which he tenders expecting whether man will accept them or not And though it be called the Covenant of Grace while it is but tendered yet it is not a Covenant till it be inacted between God and every one that is baptized Seeing then that no justification of sinners takes effect but by virtue of the Covenant of Grace and that the act of Gods meer Grace inacts and gives force to that Covenant manifest it must needs be that justification imports the act of God admitting him for righteous who setting aside that Covenant could not challenge so to be held and dealt with But if justification import this act of God shall it not therefore imply shall it not suppose some condition qualifying him for it For what challenge can he whom the Gospel overtaketh in sinne pretend for reward by it being engaged by Gods law to the utmost of his power otherwise shall a mans conversion from sinne past to righteousnesse to come challenge both the cancelling of his debts and a reward beyond all proportion of that which he is able to do being obliged to do it But shall that Gospel which pretends to retrive righteousnesse into the world allow the reward of righteousnesse without any consideration of it How then shall it oblige man to righteousnesse being a law that derogates from any law of God that went afore it allowing all the promises it tenders without any consideration of righteousnesse For I will not here stand to dispute whether the Covenant of Grace be a law or not because every contract is a law to the parties and this being between God and man and supposing the transgression of Gods Originall law necessarily abates the extent and force of it But I will demand what is or what can be the righteousnesse of a sinner but repentance Which as it is part of righteousnesse so farre as it is understood to be conversion from all sinne so as it is understood to be the conversion of sinners to Christianity is all righteousness because all sinners are called to Christianity Only with this difference that repentance is the way to that end which is righteousnesse Repentance in fieri righteousnesse in facto esse according to the terms of the Schoole And is it not righteousnesse for a sinner to desire to purpose to resolve to be righteous for the time to come Or can he that is truly qualified a sinner be any other way truly qualified righteous Therefore that resolution of righteousnesse which he that sincerely undetakes Christianity must needs put on the first part whereof is the profession of God by Christ the author and rewarder of it This I say is that which qualifies a Christian for the promises of the Gospel but alwayes by virtue of Gods free act in tendring the Covenant of Grace not by any obligation which his creature can prevent him with And this is manifestly S. Pauls sense in Rom. IV. 3 11 22 23 24. where he alleges Moses that Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse and David pronouncing him blessed unto whom God imputeth no sinne To shew that the Gospel declareth Christians to be justified by faith no otherwise then the Fathers understood men to become Righteous by Gods grace accepting that which nothing could oblige him to accept for righteousnesse For no man is so wilfully blinde as to imagine that the Apostle speakes here of our Lord Christ the object not of the act of faith whose words are That Faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse and blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne And sinne as I take it stands not in opposition to the object of faith And when the Scripture saith Psal CVI. 30 31. Then stood up Phineas and exercised judgement and so the Plague ceased And this was imputed to him for righteousnesse among all posterities for evermore It is manifest that doing vengeance upon malefactors is accounted a righteous thing for Phineas to do though by Gods command yet without processe of law And 1 Mac. 11. 52. Was not Abraham found faithfull in temptation and it was counted to him for righteousnesse And shall not faith be said to be imputed to him for righteousnesse in the same sense as we see evidently induring temptation is imputed to him and doing vengeance to Phineas for righteousnesse That is to say that the act of faith not the object of it which act what it is and wherein it consists I suppose is decided by the premises is imputed to Abraham and his Spirituall seed for righteousnesse I have said nothing all this while concerning that opinion which makes that faith which alone justifieth to consist in believing that a man is justified or predestinate to life in consideration only of Christs obedience imputed to him And truely having said so much why it cannot consist in having trust and confidence in God through Christ I do not think I need say much more to it First whether or no a Christian can have the assurance of faith that he is for the present justified or that he is from everlasting predestinate to life is a thing that I intend not here either to grant or to deny Nothing hindring me supposing for the present but not granting that such assurance may be had upon that supposition to dispute that he is not justified by having that assurance but that by being justified he obtaines it For were it not the strangest thing in the world that any knowledge should produce the object of it which it supposeth Can any reason allow the effect to produce the cause or any thing
having received the promises but having seen them afarre of and being perswaded and having saluted them and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims upon earth for they who say such things declare that they seek a country And had they been mindfull of that which they were come out from they might have had time to turn back But now they desire a better that is an heavenly Whereupon God is not ashamed to be called their God For he had prepared them a City And againe 39 40. These all being witnessed by faith received not the promises God having provided some better thing for us that they might not be perfected without us Where it is plaine that they according to the Apostle expected the kingdom of heaven by virtue of that promise which is now manifested and tendered and made good by the Gospell whereof our Saviour saith John VIII 98. Your father Abraham leaped to see my day and saw it and rejoyced And againe Mat. XIII 17. Verily I say unto you that many Prophets and righteous men have desired to see the things ye see and have not seen them and to hear the things ye hear and have not hard them CHAP. IX Of the Faith and Justification of Abraham and the Patriarkes according to the Apostles Of the Prophets and righteous men under the Law Abraham and Rahab the harlot justified by workes if justified by Faith The promises of the Gospel depend upon works which the Gospell injoyneth The Tradition of the Church HAving thus shewed that the interest of Christianity and the grounds whereupon it is to be maintained against the Jewes require this answer to be returned to the objection it remaines that I shew how the apostles disputations upon this point do signify the same Of Abraham then and of the Patriarches thus we read Heb. XI 8 10. By faith Abraham obeyed the calling to go forth unto the place he was to receive for inheritance and went forth not knowing whither he went By faith he sojourned in the land of promise as none of his own dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob heirs with him of the same promise For he expected a City having foundations the architect and builder whereof is God Is it not manifest here that both parts of the comparison are wrapped up in the same words which cannot be unfolded but by saying That as Abraham in confidence of Gods promise to give his posterity the land of Canaan left his country to live a stranger in it So while he was so doing he lived a pilgrim in this world out of the faith that he had conceived out of Gods promises that he should thereby obtaine the world to come And is not this the profession of Christians which the Apostle in the words alledged even now declareth to be signified by the pilgrimages of the Patriarchs And is not this a just account why they cannot be said to have attained the promises by the law but by faith Therefore that which followeth immediately of Sarah must needs be understood to the same purpose By faith Sarah also her self received force to give seed and bare beside the time of her age because she thought him faithfull that had promised Therefore of one and him mortified were born as the stars of heaven for multitude and as the sand that is by the sea shore innumerable For S. Paul declareth Gal. III. 16. IV. 22 Rom. IX 7 8 9. that the seed promised Abraham in which all the nations of the earth shall be blessed is Christ and the Church of true Spirituall Israelites that should impart the promise of everlasting life to all nations And this promise you saw even now that Abraham and the Patriarchs expected Sarah therefore being imbarked in Abrahams pilgrimage as by the same faith with him she brought forth all Israel according to the flesh so must it needs be understood that she was accepted of God as righteous in consideration of that faith wherewith she traveled to the world to come Neither can it be imagined that S. Pauls dispute of the righteousnesse of Abraham by faith can be understood upon any other ground or to any other effect then this What then shall we say that Abraham our father got according to the flesh saith he Rom. IV. 1-5 For if Abraham was justified by works he hath whereof to glory but not towards God For what saith the Scripture Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse But to him that worketh the reward is not reckoned according to grace but according to debt But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the wicked his faith is imputed for righteousnesse The question what Abraham found according to the flesh can signifie nothing but what got he by the Law which is called the flesh in opposition to the Gospel included in it which is called the Spirit Did he come by his righteousnesse through the Law or not For had Abraham been justified by works that should need none of that grace which the Gospel tendreth for remission of sinnes well might he glory of his own righteousnesse and not otherwise For he that acknowledges to stand in need of pardon and grace cannot stand upon his own righteousnesse Now Abraham cannot so glory towards God because the Scripture saith that his faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse which signifies Gods grace in accepting of it to his account not his claime as of debt Whereupon the Apostle inferreth immediately the testimony of David writing under the Law in these words As David also pronounceth the man blessed to whom God imputeth righteousnesse without works Blessed are they whose iniquities are remitted and whose sinnes are covered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne What can be more manifest to shew that the Apostle intends no more then that the Fathers pretended not to be justified by those workes which claimed no benefit of that Grace which the Gospel publisheth Especially the consequence of Davids words being this Psal XXXII 2. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne and in whose spirit there is no guile For the Prophet David including the spirituall righteousnesse of the heart in the quality of him to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works the Apostle must be thought to include it in the Faith of him to whom the Lord imputeth it for righteousnesse Now when S. Paul observeth in Moses that Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse Upon the promise of that posterity which he expected not Gen. XV. 6. It cannot be said that Abraham had not this faith afore Or that it was not imputed to him for righteousnesse till now Because the Apostle to the Hebrews hath said expresly that he had the same faith and to the like effect ever since he left his country to travail after Gods promises And certainly it was but an act of the same Faith to walk after the rest of those
restore And supposing that Christ raises onely those that are Christs as S. Paul speaks it is their bodies that he raises at last and that from that death which came by Adam Seeing then it cannot be doubted that S. Paul when he saies that by one man came death meanes the death of the body and seeing death passed upon all it is manifest that Adams sin passed upon all upon whom the death passed which it brought after it For otherwise how can it be said sinne came into the world by one man Is it possible to imagine that all men should propose to themselves to imitate the sinne of Adam Not possible Supposing all Adams posterity sinners to God they may be understood all to have imitated their first Father Adam two wayes For in as much as they sinne against God as he first did they may be said to imitate him in doing the like of that which he did though they had no knowledge of what he did much lesse propose to themselves his example to do that wherein they are said to imitate him in sinning against God This I confesse may truly be said but not to S. Pauls purpose Who intends not to say wherein sinne consists as to say in doing what Adam did But from whence it proceeds that from thence he may shew how it is taken away Now if it be said that all men in sinning do imitate Adam as proposing his example to themselves in the nature of a motive so that therefore it might be said that sinne came into the world by one man and death by sin which the Apostles discourse requires This would be evidently false In as much as the greatest part of the sinnes of mankinde are and have been committed by them that never knew what Adam did so farre from proposing to themselves to do the like So that it cannot be avoided that by the sinne of Adam all sinne came into the world as well as all death And therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seemeth to signifie in whom that is through whom all have sinned as Acts V. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the faith of his name 1 Cor. VIII 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall perish through thy knowledge For if it be said that it is not a handsome manner of speech that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whom should relate to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one man which it stands in such a distance from Let him be sure that there is nothing more ordinary in S. Pauls language then such transpositions And seeing death which I have shewed the Apostle speakes of hath equally passed upon all mankind it would be very impertinent to say that it passed upon all men in as much as every man had sinned And truly though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signifie in Greek in as much as all had sinned or so farre as every man had sinned or because all had sinned to wit in Adam by the same reason as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the language of the Poets signifies the same as in the beginning of Homer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet it seems to me evident that the sinne which S. Paul speakes of when he saies that Through the disobedience of one man sin came into the world and death by sinne is the sinne that every man does in the world And therefore when it followeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meaning must be through whom all men have sinned those sins which themselvs do For seeing there was mention of one man afore by whom sinne came into the world it is more reasonable that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be personall relating to that one man through whom all have sinned then reall to signifie because all had sinned And so it is not said by these wordes that all Adams posterity did commit the sinne of Adam in his committing of it But it is said that all the sinne that Adams posterity commits comes by the meanes of Adams sinne that is originall sinne is not expresly but metonymically not formally but fundamentally signified in that all sinne is affirmed to come from that of Adam and evicence also in that death is said to come by it That which hath been said makes me stand astonished to see a Doctor of the Church of England acknowledge no further signification of the Apostles words As by one man sinne came into the world and death by sinne and so sinne passed upon all in whom all have sinned But this That Adam sinned first and so all his posterity after him So that by one man sinne came into the world because coming upon all it must needs come first upon the first Not because his sinne had any influence upon others to cause their sinnes For seeing Pelagius whom it concerned so much to maintaine that Adams sinne did no harme to his posterity having made it the ground of his Heresie could not neverthe lesse put off the force of these words without a shift of imitation though so pittifully â—ame that it could not reach the farre greater part of his posterity It may justly seem strange that he who pretends not to go any thing so farre as Pelagius should not allow that sense of them which Pelagius could not refuse But if he oversee that which obliged Pelagius to grant that they intend to set forth the meanes by which sinne came into the world the observing of it will be enough to exclude his devise For to let passe that which is peremptory in them the comparison between the first and second Adam by whom this Doctor will not deny the righteousnesse of Christians to come otherwise then as the first righteous whatsoever Pelagius or Socinus doe because I cannot void that issue in this place The very processe of S. Pauls dispute having first convicted both Jewes and Gentiles of sin then Chap. IV. shewed how that faith which he preached promiseth righteousnesse requireth us to understand that he comes now to set forth by what meanes this sinne on the one side and this righteousnesse on the other comes into the world Neither will the words of the text be so satisfied wherein we find the same sense repeated in divers expressions which are not all capeable of that equivocation whereof these words by one mans disobedience are For S. Paul saith not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one man but according to the reasons premised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through whom all have sinned and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by that is through the transgression of that one and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 judgement to condemnation out of one besides on the otherside 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift through Grace Rom. V. 12 15 16. And this shall serve for the present to shew how unable this conceit is to stand against the evidence of the words Reserving that which is most peremptory in the matter and the consequence of it till I come to shew that our Lord Christ
in the same regard of the flesh Which is therefore the common principle by meanes whereof true righteousnesse can take no place without the Gospel of Christ neither in Jews nor Gentiles And therefore that which follows in S. Pauls discourse Rom. VII 14 leaving for the present the dispute how farre it takes place in the regenerate in all opinions must take place in the unregenerate upon a principle common to all mankind Which is this that as the Law of God is spirituall so man is carnall and by consequence sold under sinne For in whom there is a contradiction to the Law of God and that righteousnesse which it requireth of man from the inward motions of the heart so soon as the understanding becoms convict that this it requireth â—n him there is unquestionably a principle of rebellion against God for something that he is inclined to desire for himselfe without and against all respect of God Now by the processe of S. Pauls discourse all Christians that admit S. Paul must allow that it supposeth such a principle in all that come to Christianity whether or no it inferre the like in those that are already come to it To wit not to do what they like but what they hate and approving the Law to be good that forbids it to do the evil which they would not do not the good which they are willing to do So that though there be a Law of God which in their judgement they approve yet there is another Law in their menbers which prevailes against it to captive them to the law of sinne Which law be it the custome of sinne as much as you will provided that this custome have passed over all mankinde all that the Gospel is tendred to Seeing it is the choice of no man no nation but common to Adams posterity it must needs be derived by propagation from his sinne whom his posterity not knowing could not purpose to imitate The words of S. Paul Gal. V. 16 17. are to the same purpose Now I say Walk in the spirit and fulfill not the desires of the flesh For the flesh Iusteth against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh and these are opposite to one another so that ye may not do that ye would For supposing the same dispute whether they be meant of Christians or of the unregenerate at least when Christianity is tendered when men are exhorted to imbrace it then is there in man a principle opposite to that which the spirit of God bringing the Gospel and brought by the Gospel requires And that inferrs the same consequence as afore But I must not forget the passage of S. Paul Ephes I. 1 2 3. And you being dead in trespasses and sins in which once ye walked according to the age of this world according to the Ruler of the dominion of the aire the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience among whom all we also conversed once in the lusts of our flesh doing the desires of our flesh and thoughts and were by nature the children of wrath as the rest also For I must observe that Paul writing to a Church of Gentiles converted to be Christians himself of a Jew first concludeth the Gentiles to be under the power of Satan And then least it should be thought that the Jews of whom himselfe was one were invited to be Christians upon other termes he inferreth of them that we also among them Gentiles were by nature children of wrath Where it is plaine that S. Paul having expressed the sinnes of the Gentiles in which he saith they were dead and having aequalled the Jewes to them for walking according to their lusts cannot possibly be understood to speake of the common birth of all men when he saith we were by nature the children of wrath as well as others Whosoever shall peruse Epiphanius a Christian Writer but in such a stile as those that were not bred to the learning and elegance of the Greeks language may be supposed to use and therefore much resembling the stile of the Apostles and of very good use for them who would inwardly be acquainted with their language he shall find this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very ordinarily used by him not to signifie as commonly it doth by nature or by birth but truly and really Which signification how well it suits with the words of S. Paul when he saith We Jewes were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 really the children of wrath as also the rest that were Gentiles Let any man that can judge of learning judge So I insist not upon this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but upon S. Pauls discourse and upon the ground hitherto perswaded I argue That Jewes as well as Gentiles being thus concluded under the necessity of the Gospel which is the grace of Christ the ground of it can be no other then the corruption of all the posterity of the first Adam which onely the second Adam can cure I come now to our Saviours instruction to Nicodemus when of a Doctor of the Jews he became first a disciple of Christ John III. 3 5 6. Verily verily I say unto thee Vnlesse a man be born againe that is of water and of the holy Ghost he cannot see or enter into the kingdom of God That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit Marvaile not that I said to thee We must be born again And to the same effect S. John himself speaking in his own person of our Lord Christ John I. 12 13. But as many as received him to them gave he power to become the children of God to wit to those that believe in his name Who were not born of blouds or of the will of the flesh but of God In these words I acknowledge a very considerable difficulty though perhaps it is not that which most men do forecast But I that do maintaine that the Baptisme of Christ was not instituted when these words were said having said already that the Baptisme of Christ is that to which the promise of remission of sinnes is allowed must needs find it hard to answer what our Lord meant when he said Vnlesse a man be born of water and of the holy Ghost For if the Sacrament of Baptisme were not then instituted when our Saviour spake these things to Nicodemus how shall we say that originall sinne is signified by these words wherein there is no mention of the cure of it Surely upon the ground afore setled that the second birth is by the holy Ghost and the holy Ghost given in consideration of the profession of Christianity by being baptized For this being setled it may remaine questionable what Nicodemus could then understand by the name of water but it cannot be questionable that there is no regeneration without the holy Ghost and no holy Ghost without that condition upon which the gift of the holy Ghost is due that is without Baptisme To
the Father but of the World But what is there between God and the world but the old serpent and the leaven which he hath poisoned man with And this is that venim which we read of Psal LVIII 4 5 6. The wicked are estranged from their mothers womb as soon as they are born they go astray and speak lies They have venime like the venime of a serpent like the deaf addar that stoppeth his eare That will not hear the voice of the inchanters that inchant with charmes cunningly For if it be said that all this speakes onely of the wicked which of their own choice have addicted themselves to sinne and that by being bred to it by their Fathers and predecessor and so debauched from their own natural innocence I shall presently appeale to David himself and his confession with which he pretends to grace Psal LI. 7. 8. Behold I was formed in wickednesse and in sin did my mother conceive me But behold thou requirest truth in the intrailes and shalt make me to understand wisdome secretly I know it is said that this is nothing but an hyperbolicall expression of the Prophet whereby he chargeth himselfe with sinne even before he could understand what sinne was and that from the time of his conceiving in the womb were that possible he hath been liable to sinne and so left without mercy And to this purpose is alledged that of the Pharisees to the blind man John IX 34. Thou wast wholly born in sinne and dost thou teach us To argue that among the Jews it was an ordinary expression to aggravate a mans sinne by saying That he was borne in sinne And truly what the Jews of that time might conceive of the coming in of sinne is not alltogether so cleare in regard of the Apostles words to our Lord upon the occasion of the same man when they askt our Lord whether he was born blinde for his owne sinne or for the sinne of his parents John IX 2. Which our Lord answering for neither but for a particular intent of shewing a particular work of God upon him Denies not the common taint of our nature when he affirmes That particualr workes of providence upon particualr persons have particular reasons and ends for which God will have them come to passe But shews that there were severall opinions in vogue at that time through the nation and that there might be a conceit of mens soules sinning in other bodies or before they came into these bodies according to the position of Pythagoras or the conjecture of Origen Though the opinion of Herod concerning John the Baptist that he should be alive againe in our Lord Mat. XIV 2. doth not appeare to proceed from any such presumption as this but from an imagination that dead mens soules might come and live againe in the world whether in the same or other bodies From this opinion then the reproach of the Pharisees to this man that he was born in sinne may well seem to proceed And their error will not prejudice the truth that all men are indeed born in sinne But I observe further that the people of God as they were totally divided from the worship of Idols so from the consequences thereof which Paul in the first of the Romanes sheweth to have been all sorts of uncleanness in the first place and then the rest of those evils which towards the end of the Chapter he qualifies the Gentiles with For it is manifest that uncleannesse which contained no civil in justice was counted but an indifferent thing with all the Gentiles Let him that would be satisfied of this peruse what the Wise man hath said of the seed of the Gentiles which he compareth with the Jews whom they persecuted all along his whole work Wisdom III. 12-IV 1-6 Where it is manifest that he setteth forth the posterity of the Gentiles as defiled with the uncleannesse wherein they were bred and born And this is most certainely the reason why S. Paul saith of Christians married to Gentiles 1 Cor. VII 14. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband Else were your children uncleane but now are they holy To wit that a heathen husband or wife consenting to dwell in wedlock with a Christan is sanctified by a Christian husband or wife by whose meanes he is brought to this ingagement For when S. Paul adviseth the Christian party to continue in wedlock contracted with an Idolater before Christianity he presupposeth that the Gentile shall be willing to forbear the vulgar uncleannesses of the Gentiles for the love of a Christian yokefellow Otherwise it could not be honest nor for the reputation of a Christian among the Gentiles having power of divorcing as both parties had in the Romane Empire to continue in wedlock with him that acknowledged not Christian but onely civil wedlock That is the wife to be tied in regard of the issue but the man free to all uucleannesse which the Romane Lawes no way restrained And therefore their children so farre from being unclean according to the manners of heathen parents that they are holy upon presumption that they shall be bred in the instruction of Christianity by the meanes of that party which was Christian I observe againe that the Prophet David speaking of his wicked enemies the figure of the Jewes whom thereby he designeth aforehand to be the enemies of our Lord and his Church applieth the same expression to them being of the carnall people of God but farre from Jewes according to the spirit which the people of God other whiles use concerning the Gentiles when he saith that they are estranged from the wombe and as soone as they are born go astray and speak lies For it is manifest that he calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal LIX 6 9. which by the title appeares to be written of the Jewes his enemies And so Psal XLII 2. Which word commonly stands in as ill a sense with the Jewes as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gentes Nationes to the Christians not for people 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but for Ethnicks or Gentiles that is to say Idolaters And so to this day the Jewes call us Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say Gentiles And upon these observations I am induced to believe that the Pharisees and those of the Consistory out of the confidence they had of their own holinesse which they presumed of upon the Curisity which they kept the Law with did judge of those that pretended not to the same as of people once removed from Gentiles and so sinners from their birth by the grossenesse of those manners in which they were bred But when David comes to confesse of himself that he was altogether born in sinne and conceived by his mother in wickednesse It is not possible that any such reason should take place but rather such a one as may make good whatsoever
and sending other false Apostles as I said afore in thebeginning to Antiochia and other places saying that unless ye be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses ye cannot be saved there came no small trouble as I said afore and these are they that in Paul are called false Apostles deceitfull workers transforming themselves into Apostles of Christ. For here Epiphanius distinguishing two kinds of false Apostles one that pretended to be sent by our Lord Christ another by his Apostles applyes unto them the words of S. Paul 2 Cor. XI 23. by virtue of that of the Synodicall Letter of the Apostles Acts XV. 24. to whom we gave no such charge and sayes that whatsoever they pretended they were neither sent by our Lord Christ nor yet by his Apostles commission from Christ Herewith agrees all that which the Apostle writes against eating things sacrificed to Idols in the VIII and X. Chapters of this first Epistle For there is no question to be made that the Sect of Cerinthus was one of the Gnosticks because it is expressed in Epiphanius that they also taught the unknown God whom they pretended to make known And therefore when S. Paul saith in the beginning of that eighth chapter As concerning things offered to Idols we know that we all have knowledge knowledge indeed puffeth up but charity edifieth It is manifest that he civily reproveth that pretense of knowledge which some weak Christians were then in danger to be carried away with to believe That those who knew the true God whom their masters pretended to teach and the Idols of the Gentiles to be nothing might without scruple of conscience communicate in the worship of those whom they scorned and thought to be nothing Intending in the X. Chapter to protest that they could not communicate in the same without renouncing their Christianity And if any man say that Cerinthus according to Epiphanius saith That our Lord Christ is not to rise againe till the last day and therefore that the opinion of those that deny the resurrection which S. Paul disputes against 1 Cor. XV. can neither be imputed to Cerinthus nor the Câ—rintâ—ians It is answered that Epiphanius himself declares that the Cerinthians were not all of a minde Some of them denying the resurrection of Christ and by consequence of Christians against whom the maine of that Chapter argues Others affirming that Christ was not to rise again till all should rise againe at the worlds end And truly I see not why S. Paul should argue that it is necessary that we should believe the resurrection of Christ saying If Christ be not risen againe then is our preaching vaine and we are found false witnesses then is your faith vain and yâ— are yet in your sinnes 1 Cor. XV. 14-17 Unlesse among those whom he argues against the resurrection of Christ had been questioned which is Epiphanius his argument And I would faine hear who can give a better account of that everlasting difficulty in S. Pauls words that follow 1 Cor. XV. 29. For what shall those that are baptized for the dead do if the dead rise not againe why are they baptized for the dead then Epiphanius gives according to this supposition and that upon the credit of Historical truth not of any conjecture of his owne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 .. For in this countrey I mean Asia and Galatia this Sect flourished much Among whom a point of Tradition is come to us how some of them dying before Baptisme others are baptized for them in their name that rising at the resurrection they may be liable to no sentence of punishment as not having received Baptisme and become obnoxious to the power of him that made the world Where by the way you see the Cerinthians were Gnosticks because by baptisme they pretended to free men from the bad principle which made the world This being the doctrine of the Gnosticks Now if it be true as Epiphanius understood that the Cerinthians in Asia and Galatia baptized others for those that were dead without baptisme shall we think it strange that those false Apostles who transformed themselves into Apostles of Christ as Satan into an Angel of light should teach the Corinthians to do the same And what need S. Paul stand to condemne this condemning all their impostures by the dispute of both Epistles Neither is it more difficult to discerne those whom S. Paul disputes against in the second Chapter of his Epistle to the Colossians to be of the same stamp if we observe two points of his reproofe The one the worship of Angels the other abstinence from certaine meats and from women which S. Paul couches in these words Colos II. 21. Touch not taste not come not nigh those things which all tend to perish in the using This you may perceive by the warning he gives Timothy of the like men who afterwards should depart from the faith giving â—eed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of devils who should forbid marriage and injoyne abstinence from meats which God hath made to be received of those that know him with thanksgiving 1. Tim. IV. 1 2 3. I know there is a plausible opinion abroad that these doctrines of devils as I translate it are the Traditions which have crept into the Church for the worshiping of the souls of holy men departed which some Christians have brought into the ranke of those secondary gods which the Gentiles call daemones or daemonia But this opinion cannot be true First because it is plaine that the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serves to interpret the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now it is manifest that by seducing spirits S. Paul can mean nothing but those inspirations true or pretended which the devil and his ministers corrupted Christianity with And therefore when he declares himself further by adding and doctrines of devils He meanes doctrines taught by devils Secondly because the word daemones or daemonia is never used in a good sense among Christians as it is among Pagans For those that knew not the difference between good spirits and bad but in effect as S Paul saith 1 Cor. X. 20 21. worshiped devils it is not to be expected that they should expresse a meaning to scorne or detest those whom they worshipped And whatsoever opinions those Philosophers which followed Plato and Pithagoras had of the vulgar Idolatries of their countryes seeing there is so much appearance as I have shewed in another place that they were Magicians it is no marvaile that they make not the difference between good and evil spirits which Christianity alone fully declareth The Jewes themselves not having sufficiently discovered it in and by the Scriptures of the Old Testament But as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Idol signifying of it self indifferently any image or representation to Christians and Jewes who understand the Gentiles to worship false gods signifies the image of those Gods in an ill sense So to those that understand the devils to put themselves
power of all that is the Father he was content neverthelesse to be whatsoever they called him Hic igitur a multis quasi deus glorifi catus est saith Irenaeus docuit semetipsum esse qui inter Judaeos quidem quasi filius apparâ—erit in Samaria autem quasi pater descenderit in reliquis vero gentibus quasi Spiritus sanctus adventaverit Esse autem se sublimissimam virtutem hoc est eum qui sit super omnia Pater sustinere vocari sâ— quodcunque â—um vocant homines Where pretending first to be both Father and Sonne and holy Ghost Secondly to be worshipped for God it is manifest that setting up himself in stead of our Lord Jesus for the Messias whom the Samaritanes expected as well as the Jews he had no other reason to pretend to be also the Father and the holy Ghost but because he knew our Lord whom he counterfeited had taught that he is one and the same with the Father and the holy Ghost And so by what the counterfeit would be it appeareth what the truth is and taught himself to be To wit the Sonne of God to be worshipded as one God with the Father and the holy Ghost For we are not to think that Epiphanius contradicts his Master Jrenaeus when he saies that Simon who praetended to be the Father among the Samaritanes as the Son among the Jewes made his concubine Selena to be the holy Ghost whom he called also the Ennaea or Conceit of him the Father whereby he made the angels that made the world and mankind But rather to understand that intending to adulterate the Christiane Faith by bringing in a counterfeit imitation of it on purpose he pretended himself and his Conceit to be both one because he knew that according to the Christian faith both Father and Sonne both which he pretended to be as you have heard are one and the same God with the holy Ghost which he pretended his Conceite to be according to Fpiphanius but himself among the Gentiles according to Irenaeus The Heresie of his Scholar Menander is thus described by Irenaeus L. 21. Qui primam quidem virtutem inâ—ognitam ait omnibus se autem â—um esse qui missus sit ab invisibilibus salvatorem pro salâ—te hominum Mundum autem factum ab Angelis quos ipse similiter ut Simon ab Ennâ—a emissos dicit Who saith that the first Power is unknown to all and that himself was the Saviour that was sent by the invisible Powers for the salvation of men But that the world was made by the Angels whom he also like as Simon sayes were put forth by the Fathers Conceit Where you see above the Angels whom he maketh Creator of the world the unknown Father whom he pretendeth to make known his Conceit from whence the Angels came and the invisible Powers that sent him for the Saviour of the world Both these then pretending to be that which our Lord Christ indeed and in truth is did make themselves one ingredient or parcel of that unknown and invisible Godhead from whence they so made the angels to proceed that neverthelesse banding a faction against the same they make the coming of a Saviour necessary for this end to deliver mankind from the servitude of these Angels that made the world As for Saturninus pretending the father of all to be unknown otherwise then as he pretended to make him known it appears why he is among the Gnosticks But he pretends that two sorts of men were made by the Angels One by the good beeing an Image of the Power which is above which being infinitely taken with they said Let us make man after our image because it was instantly with drawn from their sight But so that it had not come to life had not the power above struck a sparke of light into it The other by the devils which the Saviour who is indeed unknown onely seemed a man came to subdue So Irenaeus l. 22. But Basilides Vt altius aliquid veriâ—imilius adinvenisse vidâ—atur in immensum extendit sententiam doctrinae suae ostendens Nun primo ab iâ—noto natum Patre ab hoc autem natum Logon deinde a Logo Phronesin a Phâ—onesi autem natas Sophian Dynamin a Dynami autem Sophia Virtutes Principes Angelos quos Primos vocat saith Irenaeus l. 23. He that he may seem to have added some higher thing and more likely to their invention extending the meaning of his position beyond all bounds shews that Nus or Meaning was first born of the Father who was not born Of him Logos Reason or the Word of him Prudence of it Wisdom and Power of them Virtues Princes and Angels whom he calls the prime onâ—s Where you see manifestly the fullnesse of the Godhead is made to consist of the Titles and Attributes of our Lord Christ Which Valentinus after these makes to consist in XXX Aeones or intelligible worlds which he derives from the unknown Father and silence or his conceit and Grace Bythos or the bottome and Charis Ennaea or Siâ—â— in whom he placed the first source of this Fulnesse And it hath been observed already that his number of XXX is the same that the heathen Gods are contrived into by Heâ—iodâ— Theogonia Much to my purpose For S. Cyril Catech. V. calls Valentine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Preacher of the XXX Gods This fullnesse of the Godhead which they taught being the deity which they worshipped As did also not onely Ptolemaeus and Secundus who followed Valentine and changed what they thought fit in his designe or the Gnosticks which followed Nicolas as you may see by Epiphanius But the rest from Simon Magus whose followers worshipped him and his Trull Selene under the images of Jupiter and Minerva saith Irenaeus expresly For Menanders first Power and the Ennaea or Conceit thereof and the invisible Powers by whom and from whom he pretended to be sent for the Saviour of mankind shew that this was that fullnesse of the Godhead in which he taught his followers to believe And when Epâ—pâ—â—nius confuting Saturninus saith that according to him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theâ—e shall be found no fullnesse in the Power above It is manifest that he taught his followers to worship that fullnesse which Epiphanius refuseth Simon Magus himself meant the like when he said according to Epiphanius that the Angels though they proceeded from his Ennaea or Conceit yet were without the Fullnesse that is not comprehended within it As for Câ—â—inthus whom all agree to have made our Lord Jesus the Sonne of Joseph and Mary born as other men are Epiphanius saies further of his sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But that after Jesus was growne a man who was borne of the seede of Joseph and Mary the Christ came downe upon him from the God that is above that is the Holy Ghost in the shape of a dove at Jordane and revealed to him the Father that
was unknowne and by him to his disciples whereby after the power came downe upon him from above he did miracles And that when he had suffered that which came from above flâ—w up againe from Jesus So that Jesus suffered and rose againe but the Christ which came upon him from above flew up againe without suffering which is that which came downe in the shape of a dove and that Jesus is not the Christ Where you see he makes the coming of Christ to be nothing else but an escape made by the Holy Ghost when he came upon our Lord out of the Fullnesse of the Godhead to return thither againe when he had suffered Now it is agreed upon that Cerinthus had spread his Heresies in Asia when Saint John writ his Gospell And though Epiphanius report that it was Ebion whom Saint John met with in the bath and refused to come in it so long as he was there calling away his Scholars with him Yet it must be resolved that it is a meere mistake of his memory because himselfe testifies as afore that the Heresy of Cerinthus flourished in Asia and in Galatia and because Eusebius after Irenaeus who conversed with Saint Johns Scholar Polycarpus reports it of Cerinthus As for the Heresy of Ebion it is manifest by Epiphanius himself in his Heresy that it sprung up first and flourished most in the parts of Palestine beyond or besides Jordane which they called Peraea what time the Church of Jerusalem had forsaken the City to remove themselves to Pella where God had provided for them at the destruction of it So that it appeareth not that Saint John saw the birth of it being probably removed into Asia before that time I shall therefore neede to say nothing of the Heresy of Ebion having Saint Jerome in Catalogo to witnesse that the Gospell of Saint John was written at the request of the Bishops of Asia in opposition to Cerinthus But the stocke of that evidence which I shall bring out of the Scripture for the state of our Lord Christ and his Godhead before his coming in the flesh lying therefore in the beginning of that Gospell which was writ on purpose to exclude it I shall referre the rest of that which I shall gather out of the New Testament to the sense and effect of it CHAP. XIII The Word was at the beginning of all things The apparitions of the Old Testament Prefaces to the Incarnation of Christ Ambassadors are not honoured with the honour due to their Masters The Word of God that was afterwards incarnate was in those Angels that spoke in Gods Name No Angel honoured as God under the New Testament The Word was with God at the beginning of all things as after his return THE Gospel of Saint John then beginneth thus In the beginning wâ—s the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God The same was in the beginning with God In which words the Socinians will not have the beginning to be the beginning of all things but the beginning of preaching the Gospel That is to say when John the Baptist began to preach And the Word to be the man Jesus so called because he was the man whom God had appointed to publish it So that in the beginning was the Word is in their sense When John the Baptist began to preach there was a man whom God had appointed to publish the Gospel And truly I cannot deny that the beginning here might signifie the beginning of the Gospel by the same reason as in the Scripture and in all Languages words signify more then they expresse But that reason can be no other then this because a man speakes of things mentioned afore in discourse or of that which is otherwise known to be the subject of his discourse So words signifie more then they expresse because something that is known need not be repeated at every turne What is the reason then why this addition not being expressed is to be understood Forsooth Saint Mark beginneth his Gospel thus The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Sonne of God As it is written in the Prophets Behold I send my Messenger before thy face that shall prepare thy way before thee The voice of him that cryeth in the wildernesse Prepare â—e the way of the Lord make his path plaine John was baptizing in the wildernesse Is not this a good reason Because in one Text of Saint Marke you find the beginning of the Gospel to be the preaching of John therefore wheresoever you read the beginning you are to understand by it the beginning of the Gospel At least in the beginning of S. Johns Gospel we must seek no other meaning for it But who will warrant that the word Gospel in S. Marke signifies the preaching of the Gospel as sometimes it does or this book of the Gospel which S. Mark takes in hand to write The words it is manifest may signifie either and therefore it cannot be manifest that the word beginning without any addition is put to signifie the one and not the other For if you understand the beginning of the book of the Gospel when S. John saies In the begining was the Word Their turne is not served As for the title of the Word which scarce any of the Apostles but S. John attributes to our Lord Look upon the beginning of his first Epistle That which was from the beginning which we have heard and seen and our hands have handled of the Word of Life for the Life hath been manifested and we have seen and bear witnesse and declare unto you that everlasting Life which was with the Father and hath been manifested unto us That which we have heard and seen declare we unto you Here it must be a man that S. John calls the Word when he speakes not onely of hearing but of seeing and handling the Word of Life But when he saies that the Word was with God from the beginning and since hath been made manifest to us is there nothing but the man and his office of preaching the Gospel to be considered for the reason why he is called the Word What meant then the Apostle Ebr. IV. 12 13 The Word of God is quick and active and cutteth beyond any two edged sword and cometh so farre as to divide between the soul and the spirit to the joints and marrow and judgeth the thoughts and conceits of the heart Neither is any creature obscure to it but all things naked and bare to the eyes of him whom we have to do with Where you see he begins his discourse concerning the Gospel but ends it in God And therefore attributes to the gospel under the name of the Word those things which onely God can do because to the Author of it under the Name of the Word he attributes the knowledge and governing of all things For the reason then why our Lord is called the Word we must have recourse to that which the most ancient
Fathers of the Church Clemens Alexandrinus Tertulliane Origen and others with Justine the Martyr have taught us That God spake unto the Fathers of the Old Testament by the ministery of the same second person of the Trinity by whom in our Flesh the Gospel was intended to be published in the last ages of the world And that therefore our Lord Christ is called the Word of God The Socinians think they have said enough to refute and renounce this advantage which Christianity hath alwaies used against the Jewes when with the Jews they have alledged that all those apparitions which those Fathers believe were ministred by our Lord Christ were the apparitions of meere Angles among whom one as principall in the Commission represented the person of God and in that regard is both called by the propper name of God not communicable to any creature which we I know not by what right translate Jehovah seeing it is a thing manifest that our Lord Christ and his Apostles did not pronounce it as it is certaine the Jewes among whom they lived did not at that time and also worshiped with the honour that is properly due to God alone And truly that it was alwaies some angel that is called by the proper name of God and worshipped as God by the Fathers in their apparitions is a thing so manifest through the Scriptures that I will not undertake any unnecessary trouble to prove it Neither do I think this any thing prejudicial to that which the Fathers of the Church teach For when they deliver that these apparitions were of the nature of prefaces and preambles to the apparition of the Word in our flesh it seems to be supposed that as the Word at the last assumed our flesh wherein to appear which afterwards he was never to let go againe according to the saying of divines after S. Gregory Nazianzene quod semel accepit nunquam dimisit so at the first he was wont to assume some Angelicall nature wherein he might appear to deal with men though not to retaine it for ever but to dismisse it the businesse for which it was assumed being done Neither is that any thing difficult which may be objected that these Angels did take unto them usually the bodies of men in which they might converse with men And therefore that when they are called by the name and worshipped with the honour of the onely true God there being something visible to which these things cannot be attributed they must be ascribed to the invisible nature of the Angels Not for it self which were Idolatry but in regard of God whose person they represent as Ambassadors and therefore are honoured with the honour due to the Prince whom they represent as the Jewes and with them the Socinians do understand those titles wheresoever in the Old Testament they are attributed to Angels This were some thing indeed if it were not manifest that the proper name of God is attributed to those Angels by whom God deales with men without assuming to them mens bodies There is nothing of this kind more eminent then that of Moses Exod. XXIII 21 22 23. Behold I send an Angel before thee to keep thee in the way and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared Look to thy self because of him and hear his voice provoke him not for he will not pardon your apostasy for my name is in the midst of him But thou shalt hearken to his voice and shalt doe all that I shall speak I will be an enemy to thine enemies and persecute thy persecutors For afterwards when they had sinned and God proffers to send an Angel with them to drive out their enemies because if he should go himself among them and they rebell againe he should destroy them It is manifest that Moses is not content till he hath obtained of God that himself would go along with them For before when Moses had pitched the Tabernacle without the camp he spake with God face to face there and the people worshipped towards that quarter But afterwards by his prayer he obtains that Gods face should go with them to give them rest having otherwise no desire to venture upon the voyage Exod. XXXIII 2 5 9 10. 11 14 15 16. Whereby it is manifest that the face of God in this place is the same that is called in another place the Angel of Gods face because he represented the person of God and therefore is called by the name of God and the name of God is said to be in him and Moses is said to talk face to face with God because he had conference with this Angel in the name of God who is called God face to face Whereas when God proffers barely an Angel he is not content but insists upon this And for this reason it is that whereas it is certaine that the Law was given by the ministery of Angels neverthelesse it is said that God spake all the ten commandments Because that Angel that had the commission and is called God spake them And afore though it is certain that it was the Angel of God who went before the camp of Israel in a pillar of a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night because it is said Exod. XIV 19. And the angel of the Lord that went before the camp of Israel removed and came behinde them and the pillar of cloud removed from before them and stood behind them yet it is said Exodus XIII 20. that it was the Lord that went so before them It is therefore manifest that the Name and Worship of God is given to the Angels that represent God as well when they assume to themselves no bodies as when they doe As for that which the Jewes and with them the Socinians alledge that it is because Ambassadors represent the persons of the Princes that send them and therefore are honoured with the honour that is properly due to them It is ridiculous and against common sense For certainly it is one thing to say that Ambassadors are honoured in consideration of the Princes from whom they come another with the same honours Ambassadors are strangers where they come Ambassadors and therefore for their own sakes must be respected where they come otherwise then at home otherwise then their aequalls where they come much more in respect of the Princes from whence they come But that any Prince should honour the Ambassador of any Prince with the same honour wherewith he would honour his Master if he were there is ridiculous to imagine Much lesse the Ambassador of God between whom and any creature that he can imploy upon any Ambassage there is incomparably more distance then between any Prince and any subject he can use Honour inwardly is nothing but the esteem a man hath of that which he honours outwardly nothing else but the signes whereby he expresseth it And though the conceit which a man hath of God is comparable with that which he hath with his
creature as both are representations to mans mind and therefore in themselves of the same nature yet the one represents God incomparable to that which the other represents concerning the creature As for the outward signes of honour though they may be equivocall and ambiguous yet there wants not meanes to determine whether a man intend to expresse that esteem which is incomparable to any he can have of any creature or not This is the esteem which the propper name and worship of God signifies which if they who know not God should tender to a creature they must be thought Idolaters If they which know God they must know that God is in that creature as Christians know that God is in Christ whom therefore they worship for God When therefore we find the Fathers of the Old Testament worshipping the apparitions they had for God when the Scriptures call them God it is because God was in them for the time as for ever in Christ after whose coming we do not find any angel called God or worshipped for God Not that before his coming all angels that come from Gad are called by the name of God But that where they are so called so it was For I need not stand here to shew how many apparitions of Angels are mentioned in the Old Testament of whom there is none called by the proper name of God or said to be worshipped by the Prophets whom they deal with It is true S. John in the New testament two severall times tenders the Angel that appeares to him that worship which he refuseth Apoc. XIX 10. XXII 12. But though he saies in refusing it worship God yet doth it not appear nor is it of it self any way credible that S. John should be so surprized as to honour and esteem the Angel as God whom he knew to be sent by God For to bid him reserve unto God that honour which he refuses is to bid him reserve unto God that honour which is incomparably more then that which he refuseth And who is it that can say or imagine that Cornelius intended to worship S. Peter for God because he tenders him that honour which S. Peter refuseth Acts X. 26. Saying Arise I also am a man Being one whose Religion was to worship the onely true God whose servant be thought S. Peter to be And therefore I shall not need to say that which otherwise I should have said That S. John knew not this difference betwen the dispensation of God in the Old and New Testament nor the reason why the Fathers worshipped those Angels that dealt with them in Gods Name which out of this difference may be observed To wit because the Word of God who at this time had assumed our flesh in the womb of the Virgin subsisting therefore by the Word which assumed it and not to be dismissed any more formerly assumed an Angel subsisting afore to deal with man by and therefore dismissed him againe when the businesse was done Let us now compare that sense which these words create according to Socinus with that which followeth from the premises and then I will be willing to leave it to the reader to choose For is it not a great secret which the Evangelist discovers by these words in his sense that when S. John Baptist began to preach there was such a man in the world as he whom God had appointed to publish the Gospel Is it that which he needed tell them that knew all before that there was six moneths between their ages Or did it not concern them to know that the same Word of God which dealt with the Fathers which by and by he meanes to tell them was incarnate the same was from the beginning that is to say to the confusion of Arrius no lesse then of Socinus from everlasting Was it not to the purpose to settle that which Cerinthus undermined upon the same credit upon which they were Christians Proceed we now to that which followes and we shall finde that if we admit Socinus his sense when S. John saies The Word was with God and afterwards The same was in the beginning with God I say if we admit the sense of these words to be this That what time S. John Baptist preached Jesus was with God in heaven We shall not give an account of those things which he sayes of himself in the Gospel pertinent to Christianity Which according to the sense of the Church we shall do John III. 11 12 13. Our Saviour saith to Nicodemus Verily verily I say unto thee We speak that we know and we witnesse what we have seen but ye receive not our witnesse If I have said to you earthly things and ye believe not how will ye believe if I tell you heavenly And no man is gone up into heaven but he that came down from heaven even the Sonne of man that is in heaven Againe John V. 19 20 30. Our Lord giving a reason why he bad the man whom he had cured take up his bed and walk Answers and sayes to them Verily verily I say unto you the sonne can do nothing of himself except he see the Father do something For what he doth the same doth likewise the Sonne For the Father loveth the Sonne and showeth him all that he doth And will shew him greater things then these that ye may marvaile And to the same effect our Lord saith to the Jewes John VIII 38. I speake what I have seen with my Father and therefore ye do what ye have seen with your Father Or at your and my Fathers house 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So John VI. 46 50 51 58. 62. Not that any man hath seen the Father but he that comes from God He hath seen the Father And This is the bread that commeth down from heaven that a man may eat of it and not dy I am the living bread that is come down from heaven And againe This is the bread that is come down from heaven And last of all What then if you see the Son of man go up thither where he was before Finally when our Lord now ready to leave the World tells his disciples John XVI 29. I came forth from my Father and came into the World Againe I leave the World and go to the father I demand of all the World that read and believe by these words that our Lord going back to the Father stayes there for everlasting whether they can understand when he affirmes in the same form of words that he came from the Father that he meanes onely that he had been with the Father since the Baptist began to preach Or that he had been there from everlasting before When he saith What if you see him go up thither where he was before That he had been there afore while the Baptist was preaching or that he had been there afore a while answerable to that while that he shall stay there after his going hence When he saith That they will
not believe him when he tells them heavenly things Because none of them have been in heaven as the Sonne of man who being come from heaven notwithstanding remaines in heaven Whether he mean onely That having been there in heaven and learnt the effect of his commission and being still there in heart as all Christians are he can tell them things from heaven which they will not believe Or that having been in heaven and not having forsaken it for his coming into the World he knowes the truth of all that he witnesses here by seeing the counsailes of God there even while he is here And that these are those things which he hath seen in his Fathers house to wit those counsailes which the Father out of his love to him had made him acquainted with and taught him to execute even as they had learnt in the devils shop their Father to execute his designes For can any man imagine that his being onely born of the Virgine by the power of God which is they say the holy Ghost is a sufficient reason why God should not onely shew him what he meant to do for our salvation but joyne him with himself in the work and that honour for it whereof no Angel that is the highest creature is capeable Or that all this is such an expression as manhood can bear of that participation of Gods counsailes which the Word having been acquainted with from everlasting was no stranger to while being in the World he was executing the same Surely when our Lord sayes that he is to leave the world to go back to the Father he declares an intent to abide in heaven for everlasting Therefore when he saies he came forth from the Father to come into the world To understand onely that he left the private life he had lived afore he began to preach to appear publickly to the World in his Office might justly be accounted a piece of frenzy if there were not haeresy in it The opposition between heaven where the Father is and the world being so manifest in the words that nothing but the vaine glory of maintaining a party could cause it to be overseen If these things be true we shall not need to go farre for the sense of our Lords words John XVII 5. And now glorify thou me O Father with that glory which I had with thee before the foundation of the World Because we see how many times in this Gospel by being with the Father our Saviour expresseth not his being in heaven when the Baptist began to preach but his being in heaven from the beginning of the World till he was born upon earth For can any doubt be made that the glory which he had with the Father from the beginning is that which he was to be exalted to at his rising againe As for that answer of his to the Jews that demanded of him having said Abraham your Father desired to see my day and saw it and rejoyced Thou art not yet fifty years old and hast thou seen Abraham To which Jesus answered and said Verily verily I say unto you before Abraham was I am John VIII 56 57 58. I perceive the World is ashamed to hear what Socinus is not ashamed to answer That the sense of the words is and so they ought to be translated Before Abraham become Abraham Or before he become Abraham I am Meaning that here you see me before the calling of the Gentiles whereby the Prophesie of Abrahams name Father of a great people is fulfilled For the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make both the name of Abraham to go before the Verbe in sense and the verb to signifie the time past So that there must have been another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as this that goes afore and if there had been so it must have been translated before Abraham was Abraham or before he was Abraham not before he become Abraham But for our Lord to say before Abraham was I am to wit in the purpose of God is no lesse impertinent to their question then to say I am here before the calling of the Gentiles And to imagine that our Lord would give an answer utterly impertinent to their question I know not how it can stand with his profession though not to declare all that truth which for the present they were not able to beare may well stand with it CHAP. XIV The Name of God not ascribed to Christ for the like reason as to creatures The reasons why the Socinians worship Christ as God do confute their limitations Christ not God by virtue of his rising againe He is the Great God with S. Paul the true God with S. John the onely Lord with S. Jude Other Scriptures Of the forme of God and of a servant in S. Paul BUT the Apostle adds still more and goes forwards saying And the Word was God Though here the Socinians thinke they have enough to plead when they can say that the name of God which is here used is not proper to signify God himself which the name of four letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so signifyeth in the Old Testament that it is never attributed to any creature but by abuse That is to say as imployed to expresse the sense of such men as believe not in the true God alone but attribute his honour to some of his creatures For it is very well known and granted on all hands that the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here translateth is attributed first to Gods Angels then to Gods ministers in governing his People The reason whereof I take to be this that having entred into covenant with God to have him for their soveraigne and to live by his Lawes they must needs be bound to acknowledge and to honour those who had commission from him whether immediately or mediately to govern his people by the said Lawes in stead of God himself as deputies Commissioners or Ambassadors represent the persons of those Soveraigns from whom they come This I suppose is a generall reason why this name of God in the Old Testament is communicated to the Governours of Gods people which the Socinians cannot with any reason refuse Neither can I imagine how it should be more evidently justified then by that of God to Moses Exod. VII 1. Behold I have made thee Pharaohs God and Aaron thy brother shall be thy Prophet For Aaron is made Moses his Prophet to publish his Orders to Pharaâ—h because he was a man of a ready tongue which Moses was not Exod. IV. 14 15 16. Prophet being no more then Interpreter or Truchman as Onkelâ—s translates it And therefore Moses is called also here Aarons God because he was to give the Orders which Aaron was to publish But Pharaohs God as Ruler and Prince over Pharaoh who was Ruler and Prinâ—â— of all Egypt as to those things which God should by him command Pharaoh to
do I suppose then that we cannot come to a more peremptory issue with the Socinians then by putting to triall whether this name of God be attributed to our Lord Christ to signify such a quality as is incompetible to a creature noâ— that be more peremptorily tried then by evidencing what is the honour and esteem which the name of God importeth in our Lord Christ and in Gods creatures For seeing that honour inwardly is nothing else but the esteem which a reasonable creature beareth in mind of that which it honoureth outwardly the signs of that esteem And seeing the distance between the nature of God and that of the creature is so unvaluable that it is impossible that he who believeth that there is that which deserveth the name of God should ever imagine that there is more then one It must remaine no lesse impossible that whosoever takes God for God should ever take any creature of never so great eminence for the same Indeed that inward honour which I found in the esteem of the minde is a thing of a finite and moderate nature whether it represent God or his creature the understanding in which it is not being capable of any thing that is not proportionable to it Which notwithstanding nothing hinders a finite conceit in the mind of a creature to represent an infinite perfection in that which it representeth if any true conceit of God can be found in any of his understanding creatures It is then manifest that I say not among the Socinians but among those who upon misunderstanding the grounds of Reformation have fallen away from the most holy Faith of the Church concerning the ever blessed Trinity there hath fallen a difference whether our Lord Christ is to be worshipped as God or not Socinus being now in appearance the head of that party which would have it so And therefore I shall not much need to dispute that but onely for satisfaction of the reader repeat some of those texts of Scripture which they seem to have stopped the mouthes of their adversaries with For when the Apostle saith Heb. I. 6. When he bringeth his onely begotten Sonne into the World he saith And let all the Angels of God worship him Supposeth he not that men should do that which Angels by Gods authority do And our Lord discourses John V. 22 23. that God hath given the power of judging to the Sonne That all may hanour the Sonne as the Father He that honoureth not the Sonne honoureth not the Father that sent him And This is that will of God the knowledge whereof moves Angels and men to fall down before the Lamb that was slaine and give him honour and glory Apoc. V. 8-13 Nor can any Christian deny that he was worshipped in any other sense or quality either by the blind man whom he had restored to sight John IX 39. or by others whom we find to be accepted of him as those who had been well instructed of him and by him in that which they owed him Luke XVII 5. Lord increase our Faith Mar. IX 24. Lord uphold my unbelief Mat. XX. 30. Have mercy upon us O Lord thou Sonne of David Luke XVII 13. Jesu Master have mercy upon us And Lord save us we perish Therefore our Lord saith to the Angel of Laodicea Apoc. III. 18. I advise thee to buy of me gold tried from the fire For what should he buy it with but the worship of God by prayers And the Apostle Heb. IV. 14 15. We have not an high Priest that cannot compassionate our infirmities but who was tempted in all things like us without sin Let us therefore go to the Throne of his grace that we may obtaine mercy and find grace for help in time Againe S. Paul Rom. X. 12 13. The same Lord is rich to all that call on him For whosâ— shall call upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved For that the worship of the onely true God goes with the name of the Lord ascribed to the Lord Jesus in the New Testament no question can be made So saith S. Luke of the first of Martyrs Acts VII 59 60. And they stâ—ned Stephen praying and saying Lord Jesu receive my Spirit And kneeling he cried with a loud voice saying Lord lay not this sinne to their charge Every Christian can tell by what he does whom Stephen calls Lord. And that is enough to shew how ridiculous they make themselves who when S. Stephen saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would have it understood that he calls upon the Lord of Jesus not upon the Lord Jesus For when S. Stephen offers to Christ the same prayer which Christ had offered to the Father and David to God Luke XXIII 46. Psal XXXI 6. Is it not the same honour whereof God alone is capable For they that should say that S. Stephen prayed this not because all Christians are to pray so but because he saw our Lord Christ at the right hand of God Should make that which would have been Idolatry otherwise to become acceptable service to God upon an accident depending on the free will of God And what else did S. Paul when he said 2 Cor. XII 8 9. Therefore besought I God thrice that it might depart from me But he said to me My Grace is sufficient for thee For my power is effectuall through weaknesse Most willingly therefore will I glory in my weaknesse that the power of God may dwell in me And S. John when he prayes Come Lord Jesus Apoc. XXII 20. prayes to him whose coming he desires that is whose strength is effectuall through weaknesse And whom else prayes S. Paul to when he saies 1 Thes III. 11 12. But God who is our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ prosper our Journey to you And 2 Thes II. 16. Our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father who hath loved us and given everlasting comfort and good hope through grace comfort your hearts and strengthen you in every good word and work For there being here no difference between the worship tendered to God and to Christ I must needs infer that it is the same which S. Paul signifies when he intitles his Epistle to all that call upon the name of the common Lord 1 Cor. I. 2. It is true they that alledge all these arguments doe likewise caution that this worship and these prayers which are tendered to God absolutely are tendered to Christ with limitation of some certaine circumstances which being supposed it becomes due to Christ being alwayes due to God But if the difference between God and his creature be not acknowledged it is impossible Christianity should stand If the difference between the worship due to God and to his creature be not acknowledged it is impossible the difference between God and his creature should stand Because worship is nothing else but the acknowledgement of this difference Therefore where the worship of God is tendered to his creature either the creature is made an Idol
or truly supposed to be God Therefore our Lord argues that the Father judging no man himself hath given the power of judging to the Sonne That all may honour the Son as they honour the Father Because he that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father John V. 22. 23. To wit since the setling of Christianity Whereby we may see how easie it is to answer the objection that is made from the words oâ— S. Peter Act. II. 36. Let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God hath made this Jesus whom ye crucified Lord and Christ As if this honour and worship were due to our Lord Christ upon the title of being raised from the dead by God And so much signified by S. Paul when he tells the Jews of Pisidia Act XIII 33. That God hath fulfilled the promise made to the Fathers to them and their children raising up Jesus as it is written in the second Psalme Thou art my sonne this day have I begotten thee For when the Apostle argues that Christ is become so much superior to the Angels as he hath inherited a more excellent name Because to whom of the Angels was it ever said Thou art my sonne this day have I begotten thee Heb. I. 4 5. It is pretended that not the title of Sonne of God which at present I speak not of but the honour and worship due to him that weares it is due by Gods raising him from the dead to the estate of sitting at his right hand Then which nothing can be more unjust For as it is truly said by our Lord after his rising againe Mat. XXVIII 18. All power is given to me in heaven and in earth So it is no lesse truly said Mat. XI 27. All things are delivered to me by my Father Neither knoweth any man the Sonne but the Father nor knoweth any man the Father but the Sonne and whomsoever the Son will reveal him to And therefore not disputing at present what the power given the Sonne by the Father is it shall be enough for my pupose that it is the same which was given him when he rose from the dead To wit that which all Christians acknowledge when they Worship him for God For how should any man understand that the man Jesus by being raised from the dead by being taken up into heaven to the Throne of God by any thing that his humane nature can be indued with should be worshipped for God had not this worship been due to him from the time of his being man as I have shewed you those who make this objection do acknowledge it to have been due For it is our Lords argument that the Son is to be honoured as the Father because his Father hath given him the Power of raising the dead to life and of judging the quick and the dead John V. 25 30. even then when he argued with the Jewes Therefore when S. Thomas being satisfied that our Lord was risen from the dead crys out my Lord and my God John XX. 28. There can be no more cause to understand any abatement in the notion of God or Lord then when David or our Saviour upon the Crosse cries out My God my God why hast thou forsaken me Psal XXII 1. For if David or S. Thomas were such men as believed those to be God which were not it would be necessary to say that their God is not absolutely God But supposing them to acknowledge the true God we cannot deny him to be the true God whom they so acknowledge In the words of S. Paul Rom. IX 5. Of whom is Christ according to the flesh who is over all God blessed for evermore there is some pretense made that Erasmus finds not the word God alledged by S. Hillary and S. Cypriane And Grotius I know not upon what mistake hath said That it is not in the Syriack For he that shall read the Syriack will find it there as plain as any thing else that is there And supposing it not there he that considereth what the Jews with whom S. Paul having been bred never fell from their God understand by the Blessed will never understand him to be called any thing lesse then God that is called blessed for evermore Now when S. John saith 1 John V. 20. We are in the true God in his Son Jesus Christ this is the true God and eternall life When S. Paul saith Titus II. 13. Expecting the blessed hope and glorious appearance of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ When S. Jude saith of the hereticks whom he writeth against Denying that onely Lord God and our Saviour Jesus Christ Jude 9. It is stoutly insisted upon by the Socinians that God and Christ are spoken of here as severall persons and so that these attributes belonging to God concern not Christ And examples are brought to show that it is not unusuall and therefore not unreasonable that in the words of S. John This he is the true God should have reference not to the Sonne Jesus Christ mentioned next afore but to the true God which is the Father mentioned at more distance That in the words of S. Paul and S. Jude though the article is not repeated when they say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yet this does not argue the same Christ to be meant by both titles referred to him by the same article But is onely a bare want of the article in the second place of which they give us examples enowe But all this can prove no more then that these texts might be so understood if there were any thing in the words to argue that so they must be understood which here appeares not On the other â—â—de for the text of S. Jude if we compare it with S. Peter who writes the same things with S. Jude of the same Hereticks we shall find that in the beginning of the chapter in stead of the words quoted out of S. Jude he puts onely that they deny the Lord or the Master that bought them In the end of it he signifies manifestly that he speakes of Christians that fell away 2 Pet. II. 1 20 21 22. Whereby it may appear that it is our Lord Christ Jesus whom he calleth the onely Lord or Master because he redeemed us from the State of captives and therefore that it is the same whom he calleth God And truly as I shewed afore that S. John in his Epistle to the seven Churches in the Revelations writes against the same hereticks so can there no question be made that they are the same of whom he sayes 1 John II. 22 23. Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ This is the Antichrist that denieth the Father and the Sonne Whosoever denieth the Son neither hath the Father Though we suppose this Epistle to be written to the then Christian Jewes For whereas they all pretend to hold God the Father whom as Jews originally they acknowledge the Apostle argues that bringing in another
Christ not the Son of God who made the world they could not rightly say that they held God the Father So that his argument being proper against them demonstrates who they are And this is the reason of that which went afore And ye have an unction from the holy one and know all things I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth but because ye know it and that no ly is of the truth And of that which immediately followes Let that therefore which ye have learned from the beginning remaine in you If that remaine in you which ye have heard from the beginning ye also shall remaine in the Sonne and in the Father For because they knew what Faith they had imbraced when they became Christians no man need tell them that they who would not have our Lord Jesus to be the Christ were liars and the holy Ghost which good Christians receive upon the hearty profession of Christianity he justly presumes will maintaine them in it This for the text of Saint Jude But I say further that the Name of the true God the great God the onely God which all of them attribute to God is attributed to him in equivalent terms not onely in those texts of the Old Testament when the proper name of God is given to the Angels that spake in the person of God which I spoke of afore But also in those where the name attributes an action of the onely true great God are given to the Messias which we agree is our Lord Jesus And therefore that there can be no cause to bring in unusual figures of speech to expound these texts for fear they should say that which is so many times said in the Scriptures S. Paul Rom. XIV 10 11. We shall all stand before the judgement seate of Christ saith he For it is written As I live saith the Lord unto me shall every knee â—ow and every tongue give praise to God Which any man may see is said of God by his Prophet Isa XLV 23. And therefore I marvaile it should seem strange that the same person should be called the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ Titus II. 20. when the appearance there mentioned is not the appearance of the Father but of Christ who shall appear judge at the last day though he have from the Father the glory wherein he shall appear Againe when he saith 1 Cor. II. 8. Had they known they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory It is manifest that he ascribes unto Christ the title of the onely true and great God in Psal XXIV 7 8 9 10. So the Apostle Heb. I. 10. affirming that to be said of Christ which we read Psal CII 25 26 27. Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundations of the earth and the heavens are the work of thine hands They shall perish but thou shalt indure They all shall wax old as doth a garment And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up and they shall be changed but thou art the same and thy years shall never fail For whereas they grant that the end is of Christ where he speakes of ending the world at his coming to judgement But not the beginning where he speaks of making the world because there he is called by the proper name of God I call all the world to witnesse what there is in the words to argue that he speakes not still of the same person of whom he began to speak What will they not do to rack the Scriptures and force them to say what they never meant that are not ashamed to advance pretenses in which there is so little appearance rather then confesse what all the Church of Christ maintaineth So when the Prophet sayes Mal. III. 3. Behold I send my messenger and he shall sweepe the way before thee and suddenly shall the Lord whom ye seek come to his Temple It is so manifest that he ascribes the title of the onely true God to the Messias that Grotius who is so much carried away with the Socinians exposition of divers texts in this point could not forbear to say that the hypostaticall union is signified by this And therefore it is manifest what Lordship we are to understand where Zachary saith to the Baptist his Sonne Thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his wayes Luke I. 46. So when the Prophet David saith of the Messias Psal CX 1. The Lord said to my Lord sit thou on my right hand untill I make thine enemies thy footstool And the Apostle inferreth upon it Heb. I. 13. To which of the Angels said he ever Sit thou at my right hand untill I make thine enemies thy footstoole He remitts us for his meaning to that which he had premised there of Christ Heb. I. 3. that having merited by himself the cleansing of our sinnes he sate down on the Throne of Majesty in the highest heavens And againe Heb. VIII 1. We have such an high Priest as is set down on the right hand of the Throne of Majesty in the heavens For the Majesty of God being presented in the Scripture by that which is most glorious upon earth of a King upon his Throne as king of heaven and earth whose commands all the Angels stand about the Throne ready to execute To seat our Lord Christ upon the same Throne is to commit the highest degree of treason against the Majesty of God by challenging for him the honour due to God alone if he be not the same God on whose behalfe those words challenge it Ask any Jew that hath learned God from the Old Testament what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Thron of Glory is or rather what he is that sits on it and see if he do not refuse our Lord Christ that priviledge because he must allow him to be the onely true God if he do not But why should I be troubled to fit him with the title of the onely true God wo expressely challenges to be esteemed aequall to God John V. 21 22 23. For as the Father raiseth and quickneth the dead so also doth the Sonne quicken whom he please For neither doth the Father judge any man but hath given all judgement to the Sonne that all may honour the Sonne as they honour the Father He that honoureth not the Sonne honoureth not the Father that sent him Which is as much as if he had said he that honoureth not the Sonne as he honoureth the Father having said afore That all may honour the Sonne as they honour the Father As for that answer of his John X. 32-36 The Jewes answered him saying For a good work we stone thee not but for blasphemy and because thou being man makest thy self God Jesus answered them Is it not written in your Law I have said ye are Gods If he called them Gods to whom the Word of God came and the Scripture cannot be voided Tell you him whom the Father hath sanctified and
sent into the world thou blasphemest because I said I am the Sonne of God Where they say it is manifest that he challengeth not the title of God properly but as it is communicated to creatures as here to the Judges of Israel It is to be granted that our Lord here imployes that which S. Chrysostome often calles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is good husbandry or sparingâ—esse in his language Expressing in more reserved terms that which he intends not to renounce For seeing the Jewes ready to stone him for that which they understood by it no marvaile if he abated his plea without quitting it arguing from the lesse if they to whom the Word of God came are called Gods much more he that is sanctified and sent into the World by the Father may call himself so and plead this reason too without disclaiming the property of the title because of that which immediately followes If I do not the works of my Father believe me not But if I do them though you believe not me believe the workes That ye may know and believe that the Father is in me and I in him Where it is plaine he holds up his claime by pleading the evidence of it As for that of S. Paul Phil. II. 6-11 Let the same minde be in you as in Christ Jesus who being in the form of God made it not an occasion of pride or of advantage that he was equal with God But emptied himself having taken the form of a servant and become in the likenesse of men And being found in figure as a man humbled himself becoming obedient to death even the death of the Crosse Wherefore God also hath overexalted him and given him the name that is above every name That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow both of things in heaven and upon the earth and under the earth and every tongue confesse that J. Christ is the Lord to the glory of God the Father Here I admit with Grotius the speech to be of Christ incarnate that the man Jesus is said to have emptied himself and taken the form of a slave becoming obedient to death For this man it is who when he so emptied himself was presently in the form of God of which he emptied himself thinking it no occasion of pride so I allow him to translate it though some words of Eusebius make me think it more properly translated advantage that he was â—qual to God but condescending so far to dissemble what he was as to be crucified But supposing this I demand how came Jesus to be in this forme of God before he humbled himself and wherein it consisted For if they say that in consideration of his undertaking the message of God when being thirty years old he was taken up to heaven as they say he was exalted to it then can they not say that he was indowed with it from his birth as being conceived by the H. Ghost But if as S. Paul saies he was so when he emptied himself of it then it is to be demanded by virtue of what he was so For by virtue of being conceived by the H. Ghost and born of a Virgin according to them he will no more be so then the first Adam being formed of Virgin earth and the breath of God breathed in him But if by virtue of the power and glory of God that is of God dwelling in him according to Grotius then by virtue of the hypostatical union which afore you saw he confesseth But the name above every name at which all things in heaven and earth and under the earth bow importing the honour that is proper to God which no man can give to any creature without making it God though given to the man Jesus yet signifies the reason for which it is given to stand in the Godhead that is communicated to his manhood And that alwaies due since he was man though not declared to be due nor published to the world while he was in it till he was overexalted to it upon his rising againe and the holy Ghost sent to inable his Apostles to preach it CHAP. XV. Not onely the Church but the World was made by Christ The Word was made flesh in opposition to the Spirit How the Prophets how Christians by receiving the Word of God are possessed by his Spirit How the title of Sonne of God importeth the Godhead How Christ is the brightnesse and Image of God THis is the next argument which the next words of S. John point out to us when he saith All things were made by him and without him was nothing made Which because they are peremptory in this cause so long as they are understood as all Christians have hitherto understood them That the World was made by that word of God which we believe to have been incarnate in our Lord Christ Socinus hath playd one of his Masteerpeeces upon them to perswade us to believe that they mean no more but that our Lord Christ is the Author of the Gospell whereby Christians are as it were new made and created a Church Seeing it is manifest that the Prophets do often describe the deliverances and restorings of Gods people by comparing them to the making of a new World with a new Sun and Moon and Stars and all Creatures new But when rhey do so it is first understood that they speak as Prophets for whom it is proper to express things to come in figurative speeches because it is not the intent of Gods Spirit that the particulars signified should be plain aforehand that the dependance of Gods people upon him and his word may be free Then by the consequence of the Prophesies compared with the events argument enough is to be had that these speeches are not properly but figuratively meant As for example when the Prophet Esay saith Behold I make a new Heaven and a new Earth In that very addition of new there is argument enough to conclude that he speaks by a propheticall figure which if a man read on he shall find still more to conclude But had he sayd Behold I make Heaven and Earth Either we must understand make for have made or that he means to make indeed such as these are And that supposing these destroyed In asmuch as these abiding those that might be made could not be called Heaven and Earth but a Heaven and an Earth Now in these words there is nothing added to intimate any abatement in the proper signification of all things And therefore S. John speaking in such terms as he that writeth dogmatically would be thought so to use as not to be mistaken must needs be understood to mean that the World was made at first by Gods word which by and by he will tell us that it was incarnate Especially that we may not make him to spend words to tell Christians such a secret as this That Christ is the first Author of the Gospel and Founder of his Church which they
that believe not might know by seeing Christians spring from his Doctrine Neither is that which followes any thing less clear He was in the World and the World was made by him and the World knew him not Though Socinus hath used his skill to darken it with a strange devise of three senses of this one word World in this one sentence which he conceives will be an elegant expression if we understand the World when it is sayd He was in the World to signifie his new people when it is sayd The World was made by him The Church that is all Christians When it is sayd The World knew him not the unbelievers And truly I believe most Languages will justifie the people among whom a man lives to be called the World The ordinary French sayes Il y a beaucoup de monde dâ—ns ceste ville There is a great deal of World in this Town word for word But that in the two clauses following the World should stand first for Believers then for unbelievers is such a figure without any thing added to give occasion so to understand it as nothing can be added to make it passable though something might be added to make it to be understood Besides consider what followes He came to his own and his own received him not For are the Jewes his own people onely because he was of that people Are the Jewes no otherwise his own then the English may be called mine own because being English I bring that which here I have written to the English Surely S. John meant to aggravate their fault more then by charging them to have refused a Countryman of their own To wit him that had made them and whose they were upon that score Consider what went before This is that true Light that lighteth every man that comes into the World For unless we understand this to be every man that comes into the Church which will be to deny that Christ gives any light to unbelievers at least to be signified by these words and to make them import no more then the same great secret that Christ is the Author of Christians we must understand by it as the truth requires it to be understood That our Lord came into the world because he came to live among that people called the world by that most ordinary figure of speech that is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the World so properly called and therefore all that it containeth that is the World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so called to wit that people was made by him and that neverthelesse this world being the body of that people knew him not that is owned him not being his own as all people are whom he enlightneth And what meanes the Apostle when he saies of the Sonne Heb. I. 2 3. Whom he made heir of all things by whom also he made the Worlds And Who beareth or moveth all things with his powerfull word For if any man attempt to apply the same salve to this wound also what will he have these worlds to be but those of which he saith againe Heb. XI 5. By faith we understand that the worlds were made by the Word of God To wit the world of invisible things and this visible world which by the Jewes writings we understand that their ancestors were wont co call this world and the world to come because they expected to live in it after this Whereupon the same Apostle saith againe Heb. II. 5. For he hath not subjected the world to come to Angels meaning the invisible world of Angels which to us is to come As for that which followeth whether he sustaine or whether he move all things by his word seeing it is his word that does it the same is Gods Word that made all things called his word also because incarnate And what is it lesse for him to move all things then that which S. Paul saith of God Acts XVII 28. that in him we live move and have our being And S. Paul Col. I. 16. For in him or rather through him were all things created that are in heaven and that are on earth visible things and invisible whether dominions or magistrates or powers all things were created by him and to him For what hath Christ done for the angels that he should be said to have made them suppose the redemption and reconcilement of mankinde make a new world with us is the reconciling of the Angel to us by reconciling of us to himself the making of them as it is the new making of us Is the making of him head of them the making of them If it be it is not he that made them seeing it is the Father that made him head of them But what shall become of all visible things besides man which are said here to have been created by Christ and cannot be made anew Therefore it is the whole world that S. Paul meanes was first made not men and Angels that he meanes were restored by Christ And when he saies they were made by him and to him that is for him he barres that snare which some put upon the Apostles words when he saies By whom also he made the worlds To wit that he meanes for him he made the worlds according to a common saying among the Jews which they think he points at That the world was made for the Messias I see that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both serving to signify a meane which belongs still to the effective cause As when it is said that all things subsist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. IV. 11. that the martyres overcome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. XII 11. that the false Prophet deceives 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. XIII 14. It is all one whether we understand For the will of God For the blood of the Lamb and the word which they witnesse For the signes which were granted him to do Or by and through the same because both import a mean effective cause But that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should signify 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the final cause is that which no Greek will indure And in this place S. Paul having said that all things were made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through him and to him that is for him Leaves no room to understand any thing else by these words But there is a further reason in the case and theme which S. Paul speaks to whereby it is evident that he challengeth the making of all things to Christ because he challengeth to him that worship which the Hereticks whom he writes against tendred to Angels as those by whom the World was made Which I shewed before was the doctrine of Simon Magus and Cerinthus both in the Apostles times and inferreth the abstinence from Gods creatures as proceeding from another principle from which also Moses Law came according to their doctrine the observation whereof they therefore pressed not as Moses had delivered it
but as it was revealed to them by the said Angels from whom Tertulliane saith they pretended to have received those doctrines which they imposed upon the Collossians though according to the Law of Moses And this is the ground of those things which S. Paul discourses as well against legall observations as against the worship of angels Col. II. 16. which if you will survay what Crotius hath noted upon that place and upon 1 Tim. IV. 1-5 you shall finde to be directly opposed to the doctrines of those Heresies which had their beginning even during the Apostles times So that the reason why he saith that They hold not the head from whom the whole body furnished and compacted by joints and bands groweth the growth of God Col. II. 19. is because they would not have the Angels and the World to be his work which therefore S. Paul must be understood to oppose And truly when they grant the passage of the Psalme noted by the Apostle and repeated before Heb. I. 10. Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth to belong to Christ where it speaketh of changing the world but to God where it speakes of making the world there being no difference imaginable between the making and the changing of it what reason can be imagined why all and the proper name of God with all should not be said of Christ Thus much at least our Lord not onely sayes but argues John V. 19 That God hath given him such workes to do as himself doth to raise the dead for example and to judge both quick and dead that all men might honour him as they do the Father which is neither more nor lesse then to esteem him neither more nor lesse And in the place afore named resuming and reinferring his claime of being equall to God which to divert the fury of the Jewes he had seemed a little to wave John X. 37 38. If I do not the works of my Father believe me not but if I do them though ye believe not me believe the workes That you may know that my Father is in me and I in him Where you may see that by the miracles which our Saviour shewed them having obliged them to believe that he was a Prophet come from God and by consequence that whatsoever he came to teach them is true By the works which he foretold of his sitting down at the right hand of God sending the H. Ghost calling the Gentiles raising the dead and judging both quick and dead he obligeth those that believe him to be Christ to believe him to be God being such things as none but God can do Now when S. John saies further And the Word was made flesh and dwelt amongst us And we saw his glory as the glory of the only begotten son of God full of grace and truth It is not to be denied that the name of flesh intimateh the weaknesse of that meane estate in the which it pleased Christ to come But that implying this it should not expresse his being man is a thing which the bare name of flesh will not indure The people of God onely being acquainted with spirituall and invisible substances in opposition to which man being called flesh or flesh and blood the weaknesse of his nature must by consequence be implied the nature it self being directly understood and expressed Wherefore when the Apostle saith John IV. 2 3. Every Spirit that acknowledgeth Jesus who is come in the flesh to be Christ is of God And every spirit that acknowledgeth not Jesus Christ that is come in the flesh to be Christ is not of God It is manifest that he speakes of those heresies which would have the Christ to be something else then the man Jesus belonging to the fullnesse of the Godhead whether it came upon the man Jesus to leave him againe according to Cerinthus during the time of the Apostles and Valentine and others afterwards or whether it never appeared in the person of a man in the World For I have made it manifest before that these were the Doctrines of those Haeresies wherof he gives them warning Besides we must here recall all the reasons that have been used to shew that S. John in the premises speaks of the state of the Word before the birth of our Lord and not before his appearing to Preach By which it will appear that we shall not need to dispute with Socinus about the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether it may at any time or whether here it may or must signifie was or became The consequence of the Text necessarily inferring that when S. John sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his meaning is not that this Word was a mean man but that the Word became man which it was not afore And therefore for S. Johns meaning we must look to the opposition between the Flesh and the Spirit so often expressed and signified to be in our Lord Christ by the Apostles S. Paul speaking of the Fathers Rom. IX 5. Of whom sayth he is Christ according to the flesh who is God blessed for evermore Intimating that he is another way according to the Spirit That way he expresseth Rom. I. 3. saying that Christ who came of the Seed of David according to the flesh is declaâ—ed or as the Syriack translates it known to he the Son of God according to the Spirit of Holinesse by rising from the dead Whereupon another Apostle sayes 1 Pet. III. 18. that he was put to death in the flesh but quickned in or by the Spirit Or as S Paul again 2 Cor. XIII 4. Crucified out of weakness but alive out of the power of God For in all these speeches as the flesh and the weakness thereof signifies the manhood so the Spirit the Godhead For in the Gospells sometimes he professeth to do miracles and cast out Devils by the power of God sometimes by the Holy Ghost Mar. VI. 5. IX 39. Luke IV. 36. V. 17. VI. 19. Where we hear what the Sinne against the Holy Ghost in the Gospell is Namely for those that stood so plentifully convict that these works were done by the power of God in him to say that they were done by the Prince of Devils For vvhen the Baptist sayth John III. 34. He whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God For God giveth him not the Spirit by measure He maketh the difference plain enough between the fulness of the Spirit dwelling in Christ vvhich is the Godhead of the Word incarnate never to be parted from the Manhood of Christ and that measure of it by vvhich the Prophets spake for the time that they vvere inspired As S. Paul sayes of the Church that grace is given it according to the measure of Christs gift Ephes IV. 7. Wherefore the Apostle having observed afore that Melchisedeck is called a Priest not according to the commandment of a carnall Law but according to the virtue of indissoluble Life Heb. VII 16.
God moved So it is often said that the Spirit of God came upon passed upon invested either Judges or Prophets Judg. III. 10. XI 29. XIV 6 19. 1 Sam. X. 6 10. Judg. VI. 34. 1 Chron. XII 18. XXIV 20. whereupon it is to be acknowledged that those Judges were also Prophets from Joshua the successor of Moses to whom that promise of God Deut. XVIII 18. seems to belong in the first place Nor is it therefore requisite that I dispute here by what meanes these Prophets were all assured that it was Gods Spirit not an evil Spirit which moved them either to act or speak Much lesse how they were inabled to assure others of it Thus much we see in the case of Balaam who by sacrifices to devils hoped to obtaine of them a commission to curse Gods people that when he went to meet his familiars to that purpose and was met with by God he knew God so well and his message that he durst not but do it I shewed you afore that those Angels by whom God spake to the Prophets in the Old Testament did not alwaies speak in the person of God and that in the New Testament the Word of God having once assumed the flesh of Christ though we read of divers apparitions of Angels yet we never read that the Angel who speakes in Gods Name is called God or honoured as God As for those Prophets which we read of in the Churches under the Apostles 1 Cor. XII 10 28 29. XIV 29 32 37. Ephes III. 5. IV. 11. as it is necessary to understand that their Graces were inferior to the Graces of the Apostles that it may be true which S. Paul saith 1 Cor. XIV 32. The Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets So can there be no reason to doubt that they were of that inferior sort of Prophets that spake by the meer inspiration of Gods Spirit without aparition of any Angel speaking to them either asleep or awake either in the name onely or further in the person also of God When therefore the Angel Gabriel appeared to the blessed Virgine saying Luke II. 35. The holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the most high shall overshadow thee And therefore the holy thing that is born shall be called the Sonne of God We are to understand that the holy Ghost who upon the Word of God delivered to a Prophet possessed his soul for a time till he had delivered Gods Word to them to whom it was sent upon this message possessing the flesh of the blessed Virgine made it a tabernacle for the Word of God alwayes to dwell in in which Word the Spirit of God alwaies dwelt For so the difference holds between our Lord Christ in whom dwells the fullnesse of his Spirit and his servants that have each of them his measure of it If we understand the word incarnate to have in it resident the power of Gods Spirit by which our Lord Christ proved himself the sonne of God in particular as S. Paul saith by rising from the dead by the Spirit of holynesse But the servants of God to whom this word came to be possessed and acted by the same Spirit onely while they were charged with the Word of God that is with their message Neither seems it more difficult to understand how Christians are possessed of Gods Spirit by the generall Promise of the Covenant of Grace when the assistance of God is by Gods appointment assured them to all such purposes as the common profession of Christianity requires This is the reason of the alliance which the Scriptures expresse between the Word and Spirit of God in our Lord Christ in regard whereof I have thought requisite to referre those Scriptures which speak of the Spirit of God in our Lord Christ to the grace of union rather then to the grace of unction as the Schoole distinguisheth that is to say rather to the Godhead of the Word dwelling in the flesh of Christ containing alwayes and implying the Spirit then to those graces parted out upon his soule which I neither doubt of nor that they are expressed in diverse passages of the Scriptures And this is the reason why the very name of the Spirit is attributed to the word incarnate in divers passages of the most ancient Church-Writers which Grotius hath carefully collected upon the foresaid text of Marke II. 8. And the position of Cerinthus is very remarkable that our Lord Jesus Christ being born as other men of Joseph and Mary at his baptisme the holy Ghost that is Christ saith he came down upon him in the shape of a dove revealing the unknown Father to him and to his followers and that by this his Power coming upon him from above he did miracles And that when he had suffered that which came from above flew up againe from Jesus So that Jesus suffered and rose againe but Christ that came upon him from above which is that which came down in the shape of a dove flew up againe without suffering So that Jesus is not Christ For hereby as it is manifest that they hold with the Church that Christ is God assuring us thereby that it was the originall faith of the Church so they shew that the overshadowing of the blessed Virgine by the holy Ghost imports the incarnation of the Godhead to them who believe it as the coming down of the holy Ghost at the Baptisme imports the dwelling of Gods Spirit in Christ till his suffering to Cerinthus And the same Epiphanius telling us of the Ebionites that sometimes they contradict themselves Otherwhiles saith he they say otherwise that the Spirit of God which is Christ came upon and invested the man that is called Jesus I will give you here if you please that which goes before in Epiphanius Some of them say saith he that Christ is that Adam that was framed first and inspired with the breath of God Others of them say that he is from above and was made before all things being a Spirit or the Spirit and above the Angels and ruleth all things and that he is called Christ and hath inherited that world and cometh hither when he pleaseth As he came in Adam and appeared to the Patriarchs putting on a body coming to Abraham Isaac and Jacob. The same say he came these last dayes putting on the same body of Adam and appeared a man and was crucified and rose and ascended againe Here you see that borrowing from the Scriptures the correspondence between the first and the second Adam they force upon it their own fable that both was one You see also by the same reason that their relation of Christs appearing to the Patriarches as in our flesh afterwards though corrupted by them is neverthelesse borrowed from the Tradition the Church In fine you see that the rule of all things the inheritance of the world and the principality of Angels and the Spirit that is called Christ here mentioned argues that the faith of the
Church which they corrupted by denying these attributes to the man Jesus attributed the same things to him which they denying were therefore excluded out of the Church When S. John proceedeth saying We saw his glory as the glory of the onely begotten Sonne of God he refers to that which went afore he dwelt among us Now seeing it is so ordinary for the Jewes to call the majesty of God dwelling among men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the very word that S. John uses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are obliged thereby to understand that the majesty of God dwelling among us in the tabernacle of Christs flesh bodily as figuratively it had done in the Tabernacle or Temple of the Jews declared it self notwithstanding by those glorious works which it wrought in his flesh to be what it was For the title of Sonne of God is given in the Old Testament to the Angels first and to the Messias when David saith Ps LXXXIX 18. I will make him my first born higher then the Kings of the earth Whereby it is evident that this title in the Literall sense belonged first to David Of whom also he that will maintaine the difference between the literall and the Spirituall sense upon that ground which I setled before must maintaine those words of David Psal II. 7. Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee To be said Now I suppose that those who expected the Messias to come as a temporall Prince to deliver the people of Israel from the yoke of their oppressors into the free use of that Law which they had received from God as did not onely the rest of the world when Christ came but even his own disciples before his rising againe could by no meanes be informed of that Spirituall kingdome which by the dwelling of the Word in our flesh was intended to be raised Which if it be true though they called the Messiah the Sonne of God as well as the Sonne of David yet is it impossible that they should conceive the same ground for which he is so called and by consequence understand the title in the same sense as we do And this difference of signification is necessary even in the understanding of the Gospel For when the Centurion saith at our Lords death Mark XV. 39. Of a truth this man was the Sonne of God It is not reasonable to imagine that he who dreamed not at all of his rising againe but was a meer heathen should call him the Sonne of God in that sense which we believe But either as Heathenisme allowed Sonnes of the Gods as some thinke or as by conversing with the Jews they had understood them to hold the Messias whom they expected to be the Sonne of God as Prince raised by God What shall we say then of the Apostles demand Vnto which of the angels said he at any time Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee When we find the title of Sonnes of God in the Old Testament attributed to Angels Surely it is necessary to have recourse to that sense in the which it was then known that Christians attributed this title to our Lord Still known by the honour which then and now the Church tendereth him according to it For what will all that Socinus acknowledgeth availe to make good the Apostles assumption when he saies that our Lord is the Sonne of God because conceived without man by the holy Ghost in the womb of a Virgine Is this any more then Adam may challenge for which he is called the Sonne of God Luke III. 38 For the effective cause entereth not into the nature of that which it produceth Neither importeth it any thing to the state of our Lord that he was conceived of the holy Ghost if we suppose nothing in him but a soul and a body which those that are born of man and woman have How then is the title of the Sonne of God incompetible to the Angels which Adam thus farre challenges If you look back upon the premises there remaines no doubt nor any way to escape it otherwise The holy Ghost overshadowing the blessed Virgine not onely workes the conception of a Sonne but dwells for ever according to the fullnesse of the Godhead in the manhood so conceived as by the nature of the Godhead planted in the Word which then came to dwell in the manhood so conceived Therefore that holy thing which is borne of the Virgine being called the Sonne of God is made so much above the Angels as the esteem which this name imports is above any thing that is attributed to them in the Scriptures Therefore is this Sonne of God honoured as God during his being upon earth by them that were instructed to understand the effect of it though they that were not disciples but took it onely for a title of the Messias which they knew he pretended to be perhaps conceived not so much by it Therefore our Lord himself poses the Pharisees how they would have David to understand the Messias to be his Lord whom they knew to be his Sonne Mat. XXII 42 45. Mark XII 35 37. Luke XX. 41 44. This is then that which S. Paul saith Col. I. 19. For in him it pleased God that all the fullnesse should dwell And Col. II. 9. 10. For in him dwelleth all the fullnesse of the Godhead bodily And Ye are filled through him Speaking of Christ I shewed you before that the heresies of that time some whereof it is manifest were then seducing the Colossians did all agree in preaching God the Father of all things to be unknown together with all that belonged to the compleating of the Godhead till they made him known And all this contrived by the devil to subvert the Faith of Christ by counterfeiting something like it in sound like false coyne to cozen the simple with Whereas therefore S. Paul here saith that the fullnesse of the Godhead dwelleth bodily in Christ And our Lord so often in S. Johns Gospel that the Father dwelleth in him and he in the Father And the fullnesse of the holy Ghost dwelleth in the Word incarnate as I shewed even now It is manifest that they laboured to introduce a counterfeit Fullnesse of the Godhead of their own devising into that esteem and worship which the fullnesse of the Godhead contained in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost preached by our Lord Christ and his Apostles challengeth And therefore that the fullnesse of the Godhead challenged by S. Paul to dwell in the flesh of Christ must stand in opposition to that fullnesse which these sects worshipped Being challenged by S. Paul as vindicating the Christian Faith from that corruption wherewith these Sects pretended to adulterate it And being challenged by those Sects in opposition to S. Paul and the Christian Faith which he vindicateth to rest in those whom they severally preached not in the Sonne and holy Ghost together with the Father as he maintaineth For when the fullnesse of
Irenaeus II. 7. Irrationale est autem impium adinvenire locum in quo cessat finem habet qui est secundum eas Propater Proarche omnium Pater hujus Pleromatis Nâ—c rursus in sinu Patris alterum quendam dicere tantam fabricasse creationem fas est vel consentiente vel non consentiente Now it is unreasonable and impious to imagine any place in which their Forefather and Forebeginning the Father of all and of this Fulness ceaseth and endeth Nor is it lawfull again to say that any other in the bosome of the Father made this great creation either with his consent or without it For here you see that the Gnosticks faigning some Principle besides the Father but resident in his bosome to have made the World are reproved by Irenaeus for adulterating the Christian Faith which maintaining the Son to be in the bosome of the Father signified him to be no stranger to the Father but of his own nature Whereby we see further what S. John means when he sayes that the Word was in the beginning with God and came into the World from thence In fine when S. John attributes to our Lord the title of onely begotten of the light and the truth which he that reads Irâ—neus will see that the Gnosticks made severall persons constituting that Fulness which severall Sects of them did imagine it must be concluded that â—â—ey finding these titles attributed by the Christians to our Lord did by attributing them to severall persons of whom the severall Sects of them framed their severall Fulnesses adulterate Christianity And that he finding them so doing vindicates it to the be true sense by fixing the said titles and the Godhead which they import upon our Lord Christ where they are due Here I alledge the words of the Apostle Heb. I 3. concerning Christ Who being the brightness of his glory and the Character of his substance and sustaining or moving all things as it follows in those words which have been already examined Which words the Socinians think they avoid fairely by saying that As the words of men are all Images of their minds so the man Jesus being to signifie that is to resemble the counsell of God to mankind is called the image of God as I sayd afore that he is called the Word of God in their sense And to this they think the words of S. Paul inclinable 2 Cor. IV. 4 5 6. where he saith that The God of this World hath blinded the conceptions of unbelievers that the inlightning of the glorious Gospell of Christ who is the Image of God might not shine on them For we preach not our selves but Christ Jesus the Lord and our selves your Servants for Jesus sake Because it is God who commanded light to shine out of darkness that hath shined in our hearts to enlighten us with the knowledge of the glory of God in the face or person of Christ Jesus Because in these words which intitle Christ the Image of God the preaching of the Gospel is so much insisted upon as the reason of it But as for the reason why our Lord is called the Word I refer my self to the premises so that he should be intituled the Image of his glory the character that is printed off from his substance that in consideration of the same he should have purged mans sins and be set on Gods Throne to be honoured with Gods own honours which all follows in the Apostles words is too gross for any reasonable man to digest And therefore in the title of Gods Image as I sayd before in the title of Gods Word there must be couched and understood a reason upon which all this may flow Which is nothing else but the fulness of the Spirit or the Godhead lodged for ever in the flesh of our Lord and rendring him capable as well to redeem all sinnes and to be advanced to the Throne of God that is to the Worship of God as to preach and make good that Gospel wherin the glory of Gods Wisdome and goodness so much appeareth And thus and not otherwise the account will be sufficient not only why our Lord â—s intituled the Image of God but how he is preached to be the Lord and the Apostles his Slaves how the glory of God shines off from his person or face upon the hearts of Believers For I do firmly believe as the Apostles writings have alwaies reference to the Scriptures of the old Testament to shew how they are fulfilled by the new So that our Lord is here called the image of God as the second Adam in reference to the first who is said to have been made in the Image and likenesse of God But with that difference which S. Paul hath expressed 1 Cor. XV. 45. As it is written the fiâ—st Adam was made a living soul so is the second Adam made a quickning Spirit For having shewed that the Spirit of Life which raised Christ from the dead is the fullnesse of the Godhead hypostatically united to the flesh of Christ well may I inferre that it is in consideration therof that he is called the image of Gods glory and the express character of his substance from which will also follow the expiation of our sins and his sitting upon Gods throne to be worshiped as God Thus shall the first Adam made a living soul in the image of God be the figure of the second Adam made a quickning Spirit in the image of God Thus shall the Old Testament be the figure of the new and the animal life given by the Word and Spirit of God the figure of spirituall and everlasting life given by the same Spirit of God dwelling in the Word of God incarnate I will here shew you the strange tale that Saturninus framed out of the relation of Moses concerning the making of man related by Epiphanius that you may judge thereby of the truth of that which he indeavored to disguise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So I read Epiphanius in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which makes no sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because saith he that same light which was the image of the Power above peeping down wrought a certaine provocation in the said Angels by whom he saith the World was made they attempted to frame man out of the â—ust they had to the image above For being in love with the light above and taken with the lust of it appearing and disappearing to them and unable to satisfie themselves of the comelynesse of that which they were in love with because his light flew up as soone as it came at them hereupon this Iugler frames the scene and saies that the angels said Let us make man to wit According to the image not according to our image because he denies that man was made after the image of God that made the world but after the image of the unknown Father which peeped down upon them in the Fullnesse of the Godhead and
agree that this is said When I can charge the Jewes themselves acknowledging likewise that this is meant of the Messias that the title and workes and attributes and worship of God are ascribed to the Messias even by the Old Testament I need not be thought to weaken the cause of our common Christianity by making the ground of it unremoveable Neither shall I stick by the same reason to acknowledge among the rest of those titles which Isaiah prophesieth of Ezekias noâ— that his name shall be the mighty God but that is as the pillar of Moses is called God is my standard so the title of Ezekias shall be God is mighty Because of the might God should shew by him in doing good to his people And as I will not say that he can be called the Father of eternity so I can say and do that whosoever will maintaine that God intended that Moses Law should cease which is so often said to be given for ever in the Scripture must grant that those words which may signify eternity when the matter or circumstance of the speech requires do signifie no more then a time whereof the term is unknown in the Old Testament I say likewise that the then people of God were to understand that Isaiah promised them Gods Spirit and the graces thereoâ— to rest upon their Princes by whom he promiseth them deliverance But all this being granted when it is either granted or proved on the other side that the name and workes and titles and worship of the onely true God are ascribed and challenged to our Lord Christ by his word of the New or Old Testament and the grounds upon which the meaning of it is evidenced upon supposition hereof I will neverthelesse challenge that sense of these Prophesies in behalf of our Lord Christ by virtue of the subject matter of the New Testament and the whole current thereof determining the capacity of those words wherein these Prophesies are delâ—vered unto it For I professe and maintaine that the difference between the Literall and mysticall sense of the Old Testament necessary to be maintained by all that will maintaine the truth of Christianity against the Jews cannot be maintained without granting such an equivocation in the words of it as the correspondence between the kingdom of heaven and that of Israel the Priesthood of Christ and Aaron the Propheticall office of Josua and Jesus in fine between the land of Canaan and the heavenly Paradise produceth And that when this is maintained throughout the Scripture then is that great work of Gods wisdome in making way for the Gospel by the Law glorified to the conviction of the Jews which when it is sometimes challenged and elsewhere waved becomes a stumbling block to the obstinacy of that willfull People It remaines that I omit not those things which Solomon preaches of the Wisdom of God in so sublime and mysterious language that when we read S. Paul intitling Christ The power of God and the wisdome of God 1 Cor. I. 24. we cannot refuse to understand them of the Godhead dwelling in his flesh as the Church hath alwayes done Wisdome was at the making of all things was brought forth before any thing was made Gods delight that delights it self in Gods workes especially in conversing with mankinde Prov. VIII 23-31 Adde hereunto Prov. IV. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wisdom is the principal or beginning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Adde Prov. III. 19 20. that God made heaven and earth by Wisdome Adde the words of a Prophet to whom God sends his friends to be expiated and reconciled to God Job XLII 7 8. that Wisdome is known to God alone as that which he looked upon when he ordained the creation of the universe Job XXVIII 20-28 Adde the Prophet David signifying the same in fewer words In wisdome hast thou made them all Psal CIV 24. that Wisdome which saith to all men by Job XXVIII 29. by David Psal CXI 10. by Solomon Prov. I. 2 IX 9. Eccles XII 15. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdome In which Wisdome the whole businesse of Solomons doctrine seems to be that the whole happinesse of man consisteth Is all this with Socinus but a figure of Rhetorick called Prosopopaeia whereby Solomon brings in Wisdom in the person of Gods favourite to signify that it comes from God and to inflame all men to love that which Solomon had prayed for to God to make him a happy Prince 1 Kings III. 9 11 12. 2 Chron. I. 10 11 Truly this were something for a Jew to acknowledge that the wisdome of Gods people which Moses also shews consisted in their Lawâ— Deut. IV. 6. came from God to order their doings to God For from hence it will follow that as those that are to give account to God of the most inward intentions and inclinations of the heart so are they obliged to order them and all the productions of them according to his will and to his honour and service But for a Christian that hath learnt the whole work of the Law to have been preparative to that which our Lord by his Gospel was to do and that before the Law the Fathers were instructed to live as Christians now do or should do the Law adding nothing but civile Lawes to inforce the obedience of them that rebelled against their discipline and ceremonies to figure the Gospel to come for such a one not to understand when Gods Prophets proclaime that the wisdome by which God made the World takes delight to converse with mankind to reduce it from Idols to the worship of God to stirre up Prophets to preserve them in it and to foretell Christ to come that the same wisdome which did this afterwards in our flesh did it afore without it is a fault to the Christianity which he professeth He that writ the Wisdome of Solomon though no Christian â—aw more when he said Wisd X. 1 2. This Wisdome preserved the first Father of the World who was made alone and drew him out of his sinne and gave him strength to rule all things Proceeding to shew the same of the Fathers that succeed The same author having presaced Wisd VI. 23. that he would shew how Wisdome was brought forth adds Wisd VII 22-27 that description which attributes to Wisdome the same that the Apostle ascribes to Christ The image or shine of Gods glory and substance the unstained mirror of his virtue the breath of his Power the flowing forth of the glory of the most High which sustaineth all things that he made and remaining the same renewâ—th or maketh new all things and setling upon holy mens mindes makes them Gods friends and Prophets And this having premised that the Spirit of God goes through all the World and that Wisdome is a Spirit that convinceth the secret perversenesse of the heart Wisd â— 5 6 7. Then of the death of the first-born in Egypt XVIII 14 15 16. For when all things were
possessed by still silence and night was at the middle of her course thy almighty Word came from thy Royall Throne in heaven strong as a man of Warre into the midst of a Land to be destroyed bringing thy unâ—ained command like a sharp sword and standing filled aâ— with death while reaching to heaven he stood upon the earth The like you have in the Wisdome of the Sonne of Sirach when he proclaimeth that Wisdome which God brought forth and by which he made all things to be the Author of that Wisdome which he teacheth And in the additions to Jeremy under the name of Baruch in the Greek Bibles shewing the Israelites that they were in bondage for deserting that way of Wisdome which unknown to the Idolatrous Nations he that founded the Earth and ordained the rest of the World by Wisdome hath seen and made known to them addes immediately Baruch III. 12-15 this is our God nor shall any other be valued besides him He found out the way of Knowledge and gave it to Jacob his servant and to Israel his beloved Afterwards he appeared on â—arth and conversed with men Which words I much marvaile to see stand suspected to some great Scholars as foisted in by Christiane Copyists For what do they import more then that the Wisdome of God which dealt with men by the flesh of Christ dealt with them afore by the Prophets Which the Jewes themselves who deny the Wisdome of God to be incarnate in our Lord Christ cannot refuse This Wisdome of God this Word of God this Spirit of God this image of his glory this mirror of his substance by which he made the World coming to holy men by the ministery of Angels in whom it was resident for that service made them Gods friends and Prophets as coming to us in the flesh of Christ which he took never to let go it hath made us the children of God that is Christians This is indeed that great figure in which the eloquence of the Old Testament consisteth and may be called as by the Greek Fathers many times it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or good husbandry of language intimating the way of Gods dispensing the knowledge oâ— himself which that time was capable of by such sparing expressions as being expounded by the appearance of our Lord Christ in the flesh may well make all doubt of the true intent of them to vanish And therefore I must needs applaude the practice of the Primitive Church related afore out of S. Athaâ—asius in Synopsi Scripturâ— and others to instruct the learners of Christistianity out of those books which we now call Apocrypha For by this point which cantaineth the summe of Christianity it doth appear as also by divers others it may appear that the Secret of Christianity folded up in the writings of the Prophets unfolded in the writings of the Apostles though the same for substance yet without disparagement to the Prophets because the counsaile of God required it is more clearly and plainly set forth in them then in the writings of the Prophets as the twilight is a degree to the light which the sun-rise bringeth with it What impressions of this sense may yet be discerned in the Jews writings I will not stand to inquire here where I write to all English so farre as they are capeable of those things wherein they are all concerned whether capable or not remitting the Readers that are capable to those that maintaine the truth of Christianity against the Jewes And to those things which Grotius upon the beginning of S. Johns Gospel whereof hitherto I maintaine the true meaning and upon other Texts which I have imployed to that purpose hath observed ouâ— of the Chaldee Paraphrase Philo the Jew and others of that nation besides diverse Heathen Philosophers whose sayings otherwise ungrounded seem to come from the sense of that people One thing I will observe which is very ordinary among their Ancient Doctors to call the Angel which speakes to the Fathers under the proper Name and in the person of God Metatron signifying neither more nor lesse then Metator in Latine as you may see in Buxtorfius his great Lexicon that is an harbinger or quartermaster of lodgings Whereof it is impossible to give so fit a reason as this That they understood him to be the fore-runner or harbinger of the Messias and therefore the Messias is our Lord Jesus The ancient Fathers of the Church having declared from the very mouth of the Apostles that those dispensations were managed by the Word of God now dwelling in our flesh as prefaces and praeludes to the incarnation of our Lord making way for it by the Ministery of the Prophets as Saint John the Baptist did at a nearer distance before his coming CHAP. XVII Answer to those texts of Scripture that seem to abate the true Godhead in Christ Of that creature whereof Christ is the first-borne and that which the Wisdome of God made That this beliefe is the originall Tradition of the Church What meanes this dispute furnisheth us with against the Arrians That it is reason to submit to revelation concerning the nature of God The use of reason is no way renounced by holding this Faith I Have in this defense given the true meaning to very many texts of Scripture that are alledged against the Faith of the Church Some remaine which I thinke fit to repeate and answer in this abridgment There be those that lay a great waight upon that of our Lord John XVII 3. This is eternal life to know thee the onely true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent But the same exclusive onely or something of the same force is found in many other places 1 Cor. VIII 4 5 6. There is no other God but one Ephes IV. 6. One God and Father of all 1 Tim. II. 5. There is one God and one Mediator of God and man the man Christ Jesus And wheresoever we read the onely God or the onely wise God or the like The rest are not many that I shall name Mat. XXIV 36. Of that day and hower knoweth no man nor the Angels of heaven nor the Sonne but the Father alone Col. â— 15. The first-born of the whole creature Seemeth to ranck Christ with the creatures being of the same birth John XIV 28. The Father is greater then I. For answer to the first I will not insist that the words are to be construed thus This is eternall life to know thee and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent to be the onely true God Or thus To know thee onely to be the true God and to know Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent For the Greek article which the Latine wanteth the English punctually answereth determines the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the onely true God to go together as agreeing in the same case with thee that went afore But this I say that the exceptive onely can by no reason be understood to exclude the attribute of the true
God which it restraines in these words to the Father from any that by the sense of him that speaks them can be understood to be included in it And that the sense of our Lord may be notwithstanding this onely to include the Sonne in the property of this attribute the true God I go no further then the sense of all Christians who all affirme the father to be the onely true God but believe the Sonne to be the same onely true God neverthelesse And that this is his sense I referre my self to the titles attributes workes and worship of the onely true God challenged hitherto from his words And this sense the words of S. John the meaning whereof according to the ordinary reading I have shewed before not to advantage Socinus seem to intend according to the true reading which the Vulgar Latine justified by the Marques of Velez his Spanish Copies as you may by the readings added to the Great Bible preserveth We know that the Sâ—nne of God is come and hath given us understanding to know the true one Et sumus in vero filius ejus Jesu Christo And we are in his true Sonne Jesus Christ This is the true God and eternall life Whereas it is ordinarily read And we are in the true One in his Sonne Christ Or Through his Sonne Jesus Christ 1 John V. 20. For it seemeth that the Apostle folding up both attributes of the True one that is as it followeth the True God and the True Sonne of God in our Lord Christ pointeth at the words of our Lord recorded by himself alone John XVII 3. This is eternall life to know thee the onely true God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ Challenging for him that he is no more to be excluded from the Title of onely true God then from that of author of eternall Life If it be said This cannot be Because there would be then more then one onely true God The answer is ready that this is not an argument from the force of these words that this cannot be the sense of them But from the light of reason that this sense cannot be true I know it is a trick that Crellius puts upon the Reader throughout his first Book de Deo Trino Vno that the sense of the Church is not the sense of the Scriptures because it contradicteth the evidence of natures light But when the sense of the Scripture is in question the dictate of reason concerning the truth of the matter is to be set aside that it may be judged without anticipation of prejudice from evidence planted in the very words of it And this is the answer to the rest of those texts that have the like exclusive but not in so strong terms as this Now when our Lord saith Of that day and hour knoweth not the Sonne I know S. Hilary laboureth very eloquently to shew that he meanes no more then that he had not commission to declare it But this would make the sense of our Lord to be the sense of those men who when they are asked that which they hold unfit to declare and yet would not seem to refuse the civility of declaring it do answer that they know not to wit so as to hold it fit to be told I will not tye my self to maintaine this reservation fit for our Saviour to use Especially where no circumstance of the case or the discourse appeares to intimate such a meaning to them whom he discourseth with When he said in the Comoedy Tu nescis id quod scis Dromo si sapias If thou beest wise thou knowest not what thou knowest Every man understands his meaning to be thou wilt not declare it Whether when the Messias saith I know not the day of judgement Men would conceive that he meant no more then this That he is not to declare it seems to be very questionable I can by no meanes comprehend how it can be prejudiciall to the Faith to say that the humane soul of Christ the knowledge whereof is necessarily limitted to the capacity of a creature and knowes things above nature by voluntary revelation of the Word and Spirit which knowes whatsoever is in God 1 Cor. II. 10 11. should be ignorant of something that is to come Luke II. 40 52. It is said The child grew and waxed strong in Spirit growing full of wisdome and the grace of God was upon it And Jesus improved in wisdome and stature and grace with God and men Shall I go and say that he seemed thus to grow as boyes in the Schools when they cannot answer texts of Aristotle that he speakes there in the sense of the ancient Philosophers The Schoole Doctors will have our Lords humane soul to have known all from the moment that he was conceived and think him not â—ound in the Faith that doubts of it But if onely originall Tradition be matter of Faith according to the Principle that is setled the meaning of particular texts of Scripture cannot be such Especially when it is evident that such a meaning is not necessarily consequent to that which is matter of Faith And if you look but upon the sayings of the Fathers that are alledged by the learned Jesuite Petavius 1 De Trinitate III. 5-11 You shall easily perceive how truly it is said by Leontius de Sectis pag. 546. Speaking of the Agnoâ—tae who were a Sect of Eutychians which held that our Lord knowes not all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But we say that we are not to stand stifly upon these things Therefore neither did the Synod of Calcedon trouble is about any such position as this Yet it is to be known that many of the Fathers even almost all say that he was ignorant Certainly Irenaeus and Athanasius if narrowly examined demand no more but that he is ignorant of nothing according to his Godhead So that it is so farre from being matter of Faith that it is not in the Church ever to make it so whatsoever the Church may do to oblige the members of it not to declare their judgment to the scandale of others in a point so obscure Now the words of S. Paul do manifestly distinguish between our Lord Christ and all Creatures insisting thus Who is the Image of the invisible God the first born of the whole Creature For in him were all things created whether in Heaven or on Earth Surely he in whom as by whom all things are sayd to have been made is not intended to be comprised in the number of things made by being called the first born of the whole Creature And therefore I conceive the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the compound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to signifie according to the Hebrew not first but before We have eminent examples in the Gospels John I. 15. the Baptist sayth of our Lord Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because he was before me Our Lord. John XV. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The world
hated you before me And that endless dispute among Chronologers about the words of S. Luke II. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I conceive cannot be so well composed as by translating it This inrolling was made before Quirinius was Governour of Syria That is to say before that which was made under Quirinius who was imployed divers years after to inroll all the Jews and their Goods when Archelaus was confiscated For Tertullian with whom Josephus fully agreeth sayth expresly That the taxation at which Christ was inrolled was made under Sentius Saturninus Governour of Syria and that the Records of it were then in Rome extant when he writ Let then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie him that was brought forth before all creatures Or let it signifie by way of metonymy the Heire of all things as the Apostle calls our Lord Christ Heb. I. 2. because the first born is heire by Law and we shall not need to feare that our Lord Christ shall become a Creature by being the first born of the whole creature For my part I should not think I had granted any such thing should I grant that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here may be taken in a generall sense to signifie as well the production of Gods Word as the production of his Creature I know how much dispute there hath been with the Arians about the sense of Solomons Prov. VIII 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nor do I believe it can be computed by reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the same seems to require First because it must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For it is not true that God got wisdome when he made the World but was possessed of it Secondly because Wisdome Eccles XXIV 14. having spoke of her dwelling with God as in Solomon and his appointing her to dwell in Israel addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Before the World from the beginning he made man and I faile not for everlasting And further in the beginning of the Chapter according to the Latine Copy Ego ex â—re Altissimi prodivi primogenita ante omnem creaturam I came cut of the mouth of the most High the first born before any Creature So â—it to the words of S. Paul that without doubt he had them in mind when he writ And again Eccles I. 4 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wisdome was made before all things and the understanding of prudence from everlasting After which there follows in most Greek Copies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which the Vulgar Latine rendreth Fons â—apientiâ— Verbum Dei in excelsis ingressus illius mandata aeterna As if he should say that the fountaine of Wisdome is that Word which was with God in the highest and whereby God hath made Heaven and Earth as the Psalmist sayth By the word of the Lord were the Heavens made and all the Hosts of them by the breath of his mouth Psal XXX 6. and the proceedings of Wisdome are the everlasting Commandements To wit of the Law whereby he instructed his people But this by consequence supposing the Old Testament to be a Tigure of the New must be understood of all those waies vvhereby God conversed vvith mankind to preserve it from falling quite away from his truth from the beginning as I have shewed afore Being nothing else but forerunners and prefaces to the coming of our Lord in the flesh vvhich therefore supposeth the being of this Wisdome before the World by virtue of that vvhich vvent before vvhere he sayth that Wisdome was made afore all things And again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Lord himself made her and saw and numbred her Which though it may be understood of the wisdome which he poured out upon his works as straight it followeth yet when it is sayd to have been brought forth before the world and before all things more is sayd and more must be understood Now S. Athanasius against the Arians I know embraceth another sense of Solomon as speaking of Christs taking flesh to be the beginning of Gods waies w th man redeemed But I say also that he produceth this other sense that I speak of that the VVisdome of God was brought forth by him before he made the VVorld by his wisdome and that this production may be signified by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though it commonly signifie the production of a Creature which was not afore but beginneth to be in him The passage of Athanasius is remarkable though upon occasion of that of the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. XIII 2. Who was faithfull to him that made him which he handleth Orat. II. contra Arrian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For words extinguish not the nature of things But rather their nature draws to it self and changes the words For words are not before things but things are first and after them words Therefore when the beeing signified is a thing made or created then made and became and created are properly sayd of them for I read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a thing made But when the beeing is a thing ingendred and a Son then made and became and created is not properly put upon it nor signifies a thing made but a man uses the word made for ingendred without difference VVhich proceeding to declare by instances in the vvord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or made he sheweth that it may as vvell be sayd of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 created which he equalleth unto it by the premises For a little after he saith vve may understand the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If he say of himself The Lord created me vvhich are the vvords of Solomon here questioned And by and by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Though Parents say the Sons that spring from them are made and created and come of them neverthelesse they deny not their Offspring And again Orat. III. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For it is the same thing to say that he is not made and to speak of his not being a Creature VVhich makes me confident that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in S. Paul may so be understood vvithout prejudice to the Faith And surely when he sayth Gen. IV. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have got a man with God As the word is the same with that which Wisdome useth in the Hebrew Prov. VIII 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the sense is the same with the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for she got a Son by bringing him forth which is called creare liberos in Latine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek and to make Children in other Languages And this is equivocation is very happy in our Mother English when by getting of Children vvhich formally and properly signifieth the purchasing of them into the Fathers Power as his own vvhich is in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it signifieth by vvay of metonomy the act of Generation vvhereby they are brought forth
vvhich is the proper signification of the Greek vvord here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense vvith the Latine create liberos as I sayd I know how much dispute there is that our Lord when he sayth The Father is greater then I is to be understood of his humane nature VVhich to me I confesse seems very hard that our Saviour should tell his Disciples for their comfort that God is greater then man and that therefore they ought to be comforted because he was going to God And having alwaies given this reason vvhy the eternall VVord of God was imployed in redeeming mankind because it came from God from everlasting I find that the priviledge of being the fountain of the Godhead vvhich is of necessity proper to the Father alone importeth that which the Sonne and the holy Ghost cannot have Not as if they had not the Godhead which is the same in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost But because they have it not from themselves and that it is necessarily more to give then to receive Whereupon it cannot be denied that the Sonne and the holy Ghost though honoured with the titles works attributes and worship of God are neverthelesse expressed and signified by the Scriptures as depending upon the Father and as something of his namely his Sonne and his Spirit though the same God also neverthelesse And this is without doubt the true answer to most of what Crellius brings in the second part of his first book De Deo that our Lord came not from himself nor to do his own will or to seek his own glory that he that believeth in him believeth not in him but in the Father that sent him John XII 4â— that he was called of God as Aaron Heb. V. 4. 5. that he received instruction from the Father that he prays to him that his words and workes are not his own but his Fathers and much more containing one and the very same difficulty which is assoiled by saying That wheresoever the weaknesse of his humane nature is not signified by the importance of what is said the rest is to be referred to the commission which he undertook to execute in our flesh which Commission supposes his coming from the Father of everlasting as the ground and reason of his undertaking of it This is that which the Prophet David signifieth Psalm XL. 7 8 9. Sacrifice and meat offering thou desirest none mine ears hast thou bored Which the Apostle Heb X. 9. quotes thus A body hast thou fitted for me The taking of our flesh being his giving up of himself for a servant to do Gods message in it as the servant that had his ear bored was to be free no more Exod. XXI 5. Burnt offering and sacrifice for sinne thou acceptest not Then said I loe I come To do thy will O God written of me in the voâ—lume of the Book is my desire yea thy Law is within my heart For his freedome in undertaking this commission as it supposeth a ground why it should be tendered so it importeth that obedience which God rewardeth And this is the cause why our Saviour tells his disciples If you loved me you would be glad that I go to my Father because the Father â—â— greater then I For if the Commission came from him then is he to performe all that the execution thereof inferreth That is to exalt our Lord to that estate which his disciples would be glad of if they knew what it were Nor let any man think that there is any danger of Arrius his heresie in all this I confesse the reasons I have advanced against Socinus do not formally destroy the pretense of the Arrians And the reason is because I find that I cannot kill those two birds with one stone Nor make the reasons that I advance to evidence the meaning of these Scriptures which are in question not to be that which Socinus would have to reach so farre as expresly and formally to destroy that sense which Arrius pretendeth I am confident that who will take the paines to consider that the Word was in the beginning when all was made shall have no ground to say that there was another beginning before the beginning of all things when that Word was made That this word was with God at the beginning as his bosome counseller Shall not sâ—y when God wanted his counsell That this Word was God Shall not say that any Christian is to count that God which is made of nothing That all things were made by it That any thing was made by that which is not God That the glory thereof in our flesh is the glory of the onely begotten Sonne of the Father shall make any difference between the honour of the Father and the honour of the Sonne And so I count it enough that the sense of the Scriptures here pleaded hath in it enough to resist the Arians with though this resistance be not here expressed But thus much is evident that as the Latine Fathers especially since S. Augustine have understood these words to be meant of our Lord Christ according to his humane nature so the Greek Fathers have understood them to be true even according to the divine nature upon that reason which I have declared And S. Hilary of the Latine Church though afore S. Augustine expresseth the reason which I have alledged ab authoritate originis because the priviledge of being Author and originall in respect of the Sonne and holy Ghost is that which they in respect of the Father can have nothing to countervail And this I say because I am perswaded that it is a consideration necessary to the maintaining and evidencing of the Tradition of the Church in this point For those that understand the state of this dispute must needs know that the most ancient writers of the Church Justine the Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian Origen and the rest that were before the Council of Nicaea do speak of the Sonne of God as of the Minister and workman to execute the counsels of God in making and governing of the World And therefore are spoken of by very learned men of these times enemies enough to those Heresies as men to be suspected in the sincerity of the Christiane Faith A thing not to be marvailed at in those that believe the expresse act and decree of the present Church to be the reason and ground of believing For upon that account what hinders that to become matter of Faith being decreed by those which are enabled on behalf of the Church which was not matter of Faith an hour before But those that draw the reason why they believe from the evidence which the society communion of the church tender to common sense that nothing could be refused by the whole body thereof but that which appeared to all contrary to that which all have received from the beginning will count it a violent abuse to all reason to make the Christiane Faith larger
because speech it self standing upon reason shews it to be the former as that whereupon it standeth But even so it maters not For though God had not yet sent forth his speech he had it no lesse within himself with and within his very reason silently thinking and disposing with himself those things which he was to utter by speech Further Cap. VI. VII Nam ut primum Deus voluit ea quae cum Sophia ratione sermone disposuerat intrase in substantias species sâ—as edere ipsum primum protulit sermonem habentem intra se individuas suas rationem sapientiam ut per ipsum â—ierent universa per quem erant cogitata disposita imo facta jam quantum in Deisensu Hoc enim eis deerat ut coram quoque in suis speciâ—bus substantiis cognoscerentur tenerentur Tunc igitur etiam ipse sâ—rmâ— speciem ornatum suum sumit sonum vocem cum dicit Deus Fiat Lux. Hâ—c est nativitas perfecta sermonis dum ex Deo procedit conditus ab â—o primum ad cogitatum in nomine Sophiae Dominus condidit me initium viarum dehinc generatus ad effectum cum pararet coelum aderam ei siâ—â—l exinde â—um patrem sibi faciens de quo procedendo filius factus est primogenitus ut ante omnia genitus unigenitus ut solus ex Deo genitus proprie de vulvâ— cordis ipsius secundum quod Pater ipse testatur Eructavit cor meum sermonem optimum Ad quem deinceps gaudens proinde gaâ—deâ—tem in persona illiâ—â— Filius meus es tu ego hodie genui te ante Luciferum genui te Sic filius ex sua persona profitetur Patrem in nomine Sophiae dominus condidit me initium viarum in opera sua For as soon as God pleased to put forth into their own substances and kinds those things which he had ordered within himself with the reason and speech of wisdom the first he brought forth was speech having in it reason and wisdom from which it is unseparable that all things might be made by that whereby they had been devised and disposed nay made aleready as to the sense of God For they wanted onely this to be known and had in their own kindes and substances Then therefore even Gods speech it self assumed his own kinde and dresse sound and voice when God said Let there be Light This is the perfect birth of speech as it proceedeth from God First made by him for a thought devised by him under the name of Wisdome the Lord made me the beginning of his wayes then ingendered to effect I was together with him when he prepared the heavens thenceforth making him his Father for I read Patrem sibi faciens not Pâ—câ—m as I find it promised by proceeding from whom he became a Sonne firstborn as born before all things and onely as alone ingendered by God from the proper womb of his heart according as the Father himself also witnesseth My heart hath uttered an excellent speech To whom rejoycing according as he rejoyceth in the Fathers person he saith Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee And before the morning starre have I ingendred thee As the Sonne also in his person professeth the Father under the name of Wisdome The Lord made me the beginning of wayes unto his works All this if it be understood as becometh God will containe nothing prejudiciall to the Faith of Gods Church whether it containe the true sense of the Scriptures or not through sound and voice and speech and thought or devise if they be understood as they signify in Gods creatures are inconsistent with his excellence But so farre it will be from Arius his heresie as to answer the very ground of it by saying That the Word or reason or Wisdome of God which incaâ—nate is our Lord Christ was from everlasting in God but not under the notion quality or attribute of Sonne till the making of the World And that as Tertulliane said in the place from whence the objection is quoted accidentis rei mentio the mention of an accessory to wit the declaration of Gods will to make the World gave him the denomination of Son which he bore not afore according to Tertulliane whether he hit the true sense of the Scripture in it or onely indeavour so to do though alwayes the same from everlasting The answer to this difficult passage of Tertulliane may serve for another contra Praxeam Cap. II. unicum Deum non alias putat credendum quam si ipsum eundemque Patrem Filium Spiritum dicat Quasi non sic quoquc unus sit omnia dum ex uno omnia per substantiâ— scilicet unitatem nihilominus custodiatur aeconomiae sacramentum quae unitatem in trinitatem disponit tres dividens Patrem Filium Spiritum Sanctum Tres autem not sâ—aâ—â— sed gradu non substantia sed forma nec potestate sed specie Vnius autem status unius substantiae unius potestatis quia unus Deus ex quâ— gradus isti formae species in nomine Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti deputantur He thinkes he is not otherwise to believe one God then saying that the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost are all one As if one were not all as well if all proceed from one By unity of substance forsooth preserving neverthelesse the mystery of that distribution which disposeth the Vnity into a Trinity ordering three the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost But not three for state but for rank not for substance but for forme not for power but for specialty But of one state one substance one power because one God from whom those ranks and formes and specialties are understood These words non statu sed gradu both Cardinal Bellarmine and Valentia meeting in a passage of Bullinger not naming his author have charged with Arianisme being indeed Tertuallians words manifestly expressing the Unity of the Godhead the substance state and power of it in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost by their personall properties characters or notions in the terms of gradus formae species rankes formes and specialties no other being then in use In like sort Ignatius according to the true Copies saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Goa was born Epist ad Ephes he calls him there Son of God and Son of man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God manifest as man He calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The eternall Word that came not forth from silence Epist ad Magnes Athanasius de Synodis quotes out of him We have one Physitian bodily and incorporeal ingendred and not ingendred God in man Justine calleth him the word of God indistinct from him in virtue and Power and â—â—caranate He makes him the Lord of hosts and the King of Glory He expresseth his procession by light kindled from light and fire from fire
Irenaeus expresly maintaineth him one and the same God with the Father and true God and his generation ineffable without beginning and from everlasting Clemens makes him God â—quall to God as his Sonne Origen not in any work now extant that may be questioned but as he is alledged by Athanasius de decretis Synodi Niceâ—ae saies of him that if there be any image of God who is invisible that image must also be invisible with a great deal more to the same purpose where he also quotes Theognostus in secundo hypopseon affirming the same at large to set aside those that are questioned And shall we not think our selves obliged so to understand their words which the importunity of Heresies have made questionable that they may consist and agree with those which remaine unquestionable Especially all of them agreeing in this That the world was made and is governed by Christ And that the whole dispensation of God tending to the salvation of mankinde whether before the Law or under the Law as well as since his appearing in the flesh was executed by him as a preface and prologue to his coming in the flesh a supposition which all seem to ground themselves upon especially against the Jewes in giving account of our common Christianity That our Faith is in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost That we are to glorifie to worship and to be baptized in the Name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost And in counting all Hereticks that denied it For communion with the Church not communicating with those who believe it not because they believe it not is an evidence which no words of doubtfull construction can obscure in the judgement of any man that is reasonable Nay among the very heathen that have made any mention of the Christian Faith doth not Plinies Epistle concerning the Christians acknowledge that they sung hymns to Christ as to God Doth not Lucian in his Philopatris manifestly expresse the Faith of the Trinity as the cognizance of Christians at that time hath it not appeared by these inventions wherewith the Gnosticks sophisticated it that the Fulness of the Godhead consists in the Trinity according to the Christian Faith as according to the severall Sects of them in their severall inventions That the Christians honoured and worshipped the blessed Trinity as those Sects did those imaginatitions of their own which they call the Fullnesse of the Godhead When Ebion Cerinthus Artemon Theodorus and after them Sabellius Noetus Praxâ—as and Paâ—lus Samosatenus were disowned by the whole Church and excluded the communion of all Christians did not all Churches that agreed in refusing them find themselves possessed of a contrary Faith as the reason for which they were refused Were all Christians out of their simplicity cunning enough to assoile all the reasons whereby these and Arius to boot did or might argue their pretenses from texts of Scripture Or did they think themselves bound to rest in the visible consent of the whole Church whether they were able to do that or not In fine the learned Jesuite Petavius in the Preface to his books de Trinitate and the beginning of the first as he hath evidently shewed that the substance of the faith of the Trinity is acknowledged by these ancient Christians some of whose words seem to disparage the Godhead of our Lord Christ So he indeavoureth to shew that they did it out of a desire to reconcile the faith with the doctrine of Plato and his followers If his opinion be admitted there will remaine evidence enough for the Tradition of Faith even in their writings whose skill in the Scriptures goes not the right way to maintaine it The plain song will be good musick though the descant transgresse Though for my part having seen what he hath said I repent me not of that which I had conceived out of Tertullianâ— That out of a desire to reconcile the creation of wisdome in the Proverbs according to the Greek not the doctrine of Plato with the rule of Faith they conceived this a supposition fit to do it That by Gods proceeding to create the World his mind or wisdome which incarnate is our Lord Christ attained not the essence and being which it had in God from everlasting but the denomination and quality of his Word and Sonne For you shall find there that most of them concurre in the speculations of Tertulliane Whereby you may see that this learned Jesuite is not agreed with the Cardinall du Perron to deny the reason why we hold the Faith of the holy Trinity originally from the decree of the Council of Nicâ—a and from that authority of the Church which maintaineth it But from the reason whereupon that decree was grounded and made That is from the meaning of the Scriptures expressed and limited by the Tradition of the Church And therefore not burthening my self here with the expounding of all those passages of their writings before Arius which may seem to derogate from the Tradition of the Church in that point I shall referre the Reader to those things whereby he showeth that they do unanimously concurre in maintaining the same Faith For if there be amongst them that have had speculations tending to reconcile some Scriptures to it which are not onely ill grounded as I dispute not but this of Tertulliane is but also prejudiciall to the Faith as some of Origens whom I have mentioned already That this is to be imputed to the inconsequence of their severall discourses not to any difference in their common Faith I remit you to that which he hath said to judge Onely whereas he de Trinitate II. 2. hath given you a full account of those Fathers which expound the words of our Lord The Father is greater then I to be meant of his Godhead which I have onely named in gross I will advise you again hereupon that many things which are said of the Sonne as inferior to the Father as when he is said to Minister unto the Father in creating the World may be imputed not to any inequality in that Godhead which is the same in all the Trinity but unto the manner of having it the Father originally as the Fountaine the Sonne and the holy Ghost as from him wherein the difference of the persons consisteth To the same Petavius de Trinitate VIII 2. I remit them that would be satisfied of the sense of the Fathers in that which I alledged for the reason why our Lord is called the Word by S. John To wit that the intercourse between God and man after the fall was executed and managed by his Ministry Not because I think this name of the Word unfit to signifiy the originall proceeding of the Sonne from the Father much lesse his concurrence in and to the creation of all things But because believing as I do that the mystery of the Trinity is revealed by the coming of our Lord I find great reason to conceive that his Apostle intended thereby to intimate
Gregory of Nâ—oâ—aesarea may perhaps relish either it was not publickly taken notice of when it was published or passed over in silence for the present in respect of his merit toward the Church As it must be said of his opinion concerning souls flitting into new bodies As for Euseb of Caesarea and the author of the Constitutions which are both charged in this point Eusebius living in the time when the consent of the Church over-ruled the contrary rather evidenceth then interrupteth that Tradition which condemneth him if he agree not with it But the author of the Constitutions is not known at what time he lived to write in the name of Clemens the Apostles Scholar that which for his part he thought most likely to come from the Apostles Whether or no he might think it became him writing in that name to use such terms as he found the ancientest Church-Writers use before the businesse of Arius Whether or no he might mistake himself in doing so I will not dispute But being hard to believe that he writ till the heresie of Arius and Eâ—nâ—mâ—us was down As I can give my self no good reason why he should bring in Arius under the habit of the Apostles so I see the suspicion which he hath contracted in a manner as ancient as the credit of his book in the Church After all this if any man marvail that Alexander Bishop of Alexandria should think so slightly of Arius his opinion as in debating it sometimes to side with him sometimes with his adversaries according to Sozomenus Eccles Hist I. 15. Let him consider that the Ecclesiasticall Historians informe us that the difference of Arius was commenced at a Consistory That is at a meeting of the Clergy to debate the businesse Onely Sozomenus that there had been divers meetings about it In which Alexander had not declared himself but spoken sometimes on this side and sometimes on that Not because there is any appearance in the story that Arius himself could have construed his procedings as if he had been doubtfull which side to choose But because any wise man in his place would have thought it the way to preserve his authority over Arius by not declaring himself party against him till he appeared untractable by that reason which his authority must inforce when it self would not serve the turn As for the great Constantine who in his Leter to the Church of Alexandria declareth many times that the question concerned not the substance of Faith It must be said that being no Christian as yet nor catechized in the Faith his information failed either in matter of fact reporting the position of Arius in such terms as might bear a good construction in which what latitude there is it may appear by the premises or in point of right making that not to concern the substance of Faith which indeed doth For those terms in which all the Ecclesiastical Histories agree that the debate was stated are such as indeed do concern the substance of Faith Neither is there any mark in the writings of the Fathers before this time upon which it can be said that any of them thought that there was a time when the Word of God which being incarnate in our Lord Christ was not but was made by God of nothing after that time Which are the characters that distinguish the heresie of Arius Set aside then the Constitutions Eusebius Origen and his Scholar Dionysius as questionable in point of fact or as granted that the sense of their words is not reconcileable with the Faith in point of right the retraction of Dionysius makes as much more for the Faith then his misprision condemned by Gennadius de Dogm Eccl. Cap. IV. and Facundus X. 5. against it as the rejecting of Sabellius makes more for the same then the doubtfull words of Gregory of Nâ—ocaesarea against That which is to be said thereupon is that there can be therefore no reason to blame the Councill of Nicaea for adding to the Creed the terme of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to oblige the Arians to the sense of the Church S. Athanasius in his Treatise de Actis Conc. Nicen. hath shewed us that it was introduced to cut off those equivocations whereby they ought to cover their owne sense under those other words which were propounded as capeable of the Catholick sense He that will say that this course ought not to have been held or that having taken effect it ought not to have been retained may as well say that the faith of Christ or the Unity of Gods service in that faith is not to be preserved For being once questioned therâ— must be a Rule and a mark to discern Christians from Hereticks I observe therefoâ—e likewise that the troubles which Arius occasioned in the Church never came to an end till the word person in Latine and hypostasis in Greek was admitted in opposition to the word essence or nature included in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Council of Nicaea had introduced into the Creed that the difference between the Church and Arius might be stated upon the expresse terms of three persons and one nature For it is evident by S. Jerome Epist LVII that the terme of hypostasis for person was not then received who writes to Pope Damasus to be authorized by him whether to admit or to refuse it But as after that time we hear no further question of the term so under the Emperor Gratiane and Pope Damasus we find the dispute extinguished But I say neverthelesse that there is no cause therefore to imagine that the sense of the Church and the faith thereof hath received any change by the use of new terms which the necessity of preventing Hereticks hath obliged the Church to introduce And I say as the others said that the importance and consequence of the said new terms ought to be reduced to that force which the sense of the Church according to the Scriptures alloweth or rather prescribeth And that whosoever shall take upon him under pretense of the most unquestionable decrees that any age of the Church hath produced to prescribe against that sense which the primitive records of the Church do inforce in so doing sets up the authority of that present Church against the Tradition of the Catholick And after all this shall the Socinians be admitted to alledge that S. Hilary quittâ—th a doubt whether the holy Ghost is to be called God or not Surely the Socinians cannot be admitted to alledge this unlesse they will be content to submit to S. Hilary in the whole businesse Nay unlesse they will stand to the Church to which S. Hilary stands But for those that are not Socinians and would be satisfied I will not use that wretched answer of Erasmus in that excellent preface to S. Hilarys works That the Church hath since decreed otherwise As if there were not a reason why the Church so decreed or as if he were not bound to render that reason
14. The naturall man admitteth not the things of Gods Spirit for they are folly to him neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned To wit by that Spirit which Christ purchased the gift of by his Crosse And why should the Soul of man take that for folly which Gods Spirit revealeth were there not a principle bred in our nature to determine all mens inclinations to this generall resistence Againe the same S. Paul teaching them not to think of themselves what the word of God allows not 1 Cor. IV. 7. For who distinguisheth thee Or what hast thou that thou hast not received But if thou hast received it why boastest thou as if thou hadst not received it Here if it be said that the speech is of the office of Apostles and the like and the graces requisite to the discharge of them which are graces tending to the common benefit of the Church not to the salvation of those particular persons to whom they are given The answer is evident that S. Paul speakes not of those graces but of the right use of them as it appears by the beginning of the Chapter So let a man account us as ministers of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God Now in stewards it is required that a man be found faithfull And this fidelity it is in which the Apostle appeales to God and wisheth them not to judge before God nor to think of themselves above what is written because as they have it not but from God and therefore not to boast of So they have it not to the purpose but when God discerneth and alloweth it to be in them And if it be said that it is manifest indeed by innumerable passages of the Apostles of which divers have been produced afore that the holy Ghost is granted to those that truly believe to dwell with them and to inable them to performe what they have undertaken in professing themselves Christians And before that the holy Ghost is granted indeed to those who preach the Gospel Apostles Evangelists Prophets and the like to inable them to convince the World that the Gospel which they preach comes from God and that it is to be imbraced But that it is not the holy Ghost but their own free choice that determines them to adhere to that which the holy Ghost convinceth them that they ought to adhere to I say for the present it is enough for me to shew by the Scriptures that the conviction which the Gospel tenders is from the holy Ghost the Gift whereof the obedience of our Lord Christ hath purchased There will follow enough to shew that the effect of this conviction to wit conversion is from the same grace In the mean time marke why our Lord challengeth the Pharisees and Scribes of the sinne against the holy Ghost Mark III. 28 29. All sinnes shall be forgiven the sonnes of men and blasphemies wherewith they shall blaspheme But whoso shall blaspheme against the holy Ghost hath no forgivenesse for ever but is guilty of everlasting judgement Because they said He hath an unclean Spirit Where not to dispute at present why the blasphemies against the holy Ghost cannot be remitted when all other sinnes are I challenge this to be evident in the words of the Gospell that their blasphemy against the holy Ghost consisted in this that though convicted that they were Gods works which our Saviour did yet they said that he did them by the devil I acknowledge it is the same crime when they who have tasted the heavenly gift and are become partakers of the holy Ghost and have relished the good Word of God and the powers of the World to come do fall away Heb. VI. 4 15. But with this difference that these are convict by their profession the other onely by their conscience God onely knowing that hardnesse of heart wherewith they resisted that conviction which the holy Ghost in our Lord Christ tendred These by professing themselves Christians who are promised the holy Ghost to dwell in them if their profession be sincere acknowledging that they transgresse the dictate of it Hereupon S. Stephen speaking by the holy Ghost and doing signes and miracles to convince the Jews that so he did Acts VI. 8 10. justly charges them Acts VII 51. Yâ— stiff-necked and uncircumcised in hearts and ears ye do alwaies resist the holy Ghost even ye as your Fathers And therefore our Saviour having said in one place Apâ—c III. 20. Behold I stand at the door and knock If a man hear my voice and open the doore I will come in to him and sup with him and he with me In another John XIV 23. If a man love me he will keep my Word and my Father will love him and we will come to him and make abode with him as it cannot be denied that the holy Ghost and in him the Father and the Sonne dwell in him that loves Christ no more can it be denied that Christ knockes at the door of the hearts of them that give him entrance to make them so to love him that he takes up his lodging in their hearts Adde we now to the premises the words of our Lord in the parable of the Vine John XV. 5. Without me ye can do nothing The words of the Apostle 2 Cor. III. 4 5 6. We have this confidence towards God not that we are sufficient of our selves to think any thing as of our selves but our sufficiency is of God who hath also made us sufficient ministeâ—s of the New Testament not the Leter but the Spirit Remembring what I said afore that this extends not onely to the grace of an Apostle but to the right use of it Of which right use the same Apostle 1 Cor. XV. 10. By the Grace of God I am what I am and his grace towards me was not in vaine but I laboured more then they all yet not I but the grace of God that was with me And againe of the whole businesse Phil. II. 11. 12. Wherefore my beloved work out your salvation with fear and trembling For it is God that worketh in you both to will and to do To wit by the holy Ghost which Christ sends and his influence from the beginning to the end of the work of Christianity And Ephes II. 8 9. 10. For by grace ye are saved through Faith and that not of your selves it is Gods gift not of works that no man may boast For we are his making created by Jesus Christ for good works which God hath prepared afore for us to walk in By the grace of the holy Ghost which we receive upon becoming Christians not by the works of the Law though it be also the same grace that makes us Christians by this grace are we saved Therefore S. Paul againe Phil. I. 6. Having this very confidence that he who hath begun a good work in you will compleat it unto the day of Christ Jesus And our Lord. John VI. 37 44
not did so order the meanes by which this obedience was effected or not that he might know that it would or would not come to passe And this preaching of the Gospel and the meanes and consequence of it being granted in consideration of Christ that the reason why such meanes was requisite is to be drawn from the fall of Adam and the corruption of mans nature by it And to this sense seeme the words of our Lord to belong John X. 28 29. I give my sheep eternal life nor shall they ever perish nor any man snatch them out of my hand My Father who gave me them is greatest of all nor can any man snatch them out of my Fathers hand Although it seems that he inlargeth the same sense to another effect John XVII 6 -12 I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou gavest me out of the world Thine they were and me thou gavest them and they have kept thy Word Now know they that whatsoever thou gavest me is from thee For the words that thou gavest me have I given them and they have received them and know of a truth that I am come forth from thee and thou hast sent me I ask for them I ask not for the world but for those that thou hast given me for they are thine And all mine are thine and thine mine and I am glorified in them And I am no more in the world but they are in the world and I come to thee Holy Father keep them in thy Name whom thou hast given me that they may be one as we When I was with them in the World I kept them in thy name These whom â—hou gavest me I kept nor is any of them lost but the Son of perdition that the Scripture may be fulfilled For afterwards it is said that our Lord spake to those that apprehended him to let his disciples go That the word which he had said might be fulfilled I have lost none of those whom thou gavest me John XVIII 9. But all this will not serve to make us believe that his then disciples alone were the men that the Father gave to Christ he having said expresly afterwards John XVII 20. I ask not for these alone but for those that shall believe in me through their word For this showes that he prayes for his then disciples in the common quality of disciples that is of Christians having other prayers to make for the world that is for those that were not As we see by and by John XVII 21. and Luke XXIII 34. But in that he saith so often that the Father had given them him from whose appointment the sufferings of Christ the power which he is advanced to the successe of the Gospel which he publisheth dependeth In that regard I conceive the helps of Gods grace by the second Adam whereby the breach made by the first is repaired necessarily to be implied in Gods giving unto our Lord Christ his disciples And of this sense much there is expressed by S. Paul Ephes I. 3. 11. Blessed God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ that hath blessed us with every spirituall blessing in the heavens through Christ As he chose us in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and blamelesse before him in love Having foreappointed us to adoption to himself through Jesus Christ according to the good pleasure of his will To the praise of his glorious grace whereby he made us acceptable in the beloved Through whom we have redemption by his blood even the remission of â—â—nnes according to the riches of his grace which hath abounded to us in all wisdome and prudence Having made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure which he purposed in himself at the dispensation of the fullnesse of times to restore all things both in heaven and in earth through Christ in whom also we have received our lots appoinâ—ed according to the purpose of him that effects all things according to the counsel of his will For not to insist upon the force of those terms and phrases which Saint Paul uses whatsoever blessings it may be said S. Paul hereby signifies to have been appointed to the Ephesians from everlasting as Christians I suppose it cannot be denied that he presupposes that they were also appointed from everlasting to be Christians to whom by so being those blessings should become due And all this so many times and so manifestly said to have been appointed in Christ or by Christ or through Christ that it cannot be questioned that not onely the Gospell by which they were brought to that estate but also the meanes that inforce it and the consequences whereby it takes effect all depend upon Christ and the consideration of his coming to destroy the works of the devil in our first parents CHAP. XIX Evidences of the same in the Old Testament Of Gods help in getting the Land of Promise and renewing the Covenant And that for Christs sake That Christianity cannot stand without acknowledging the grace of Christ The Tradition of the Church In the Baptisme of Infants In the Prayers of the Church In the decrees against Pelagius and other records of the Church IT remaineth now that I shew how the same truth is signified to us in the Old Testament whereof I will point out three sorts of passages tending to prove it and when they are put together making full evidence of it The first is of those wherein it is acknowledged that the inheritance of the Land of Promise is not to be ascribed to any merit or force of their own but to the goodnesse and assistance of God Then which nothing can be produced out of the New Testament more effectuall to shew that whatsoever tends to bring Christians to the kingdom of heaven is to be ascribed to the grace of God There being the same correspondence between the helps of spirituall Grace whereby Christians overcome their spirituall enemies and the help of God whereby the Israelites overcame the seven nations as between the kingdom of heaven and the land of Promise And therefore all those promises whereby God assures them of deliverance from their enemies and maintenance in the possession thereof all acknowledgements of Gods free gift whereby they held that inheritance argue no lesse concerning those helps whereby the children of the Church answering to the land of Canaan here are inabled to continue true spirituall members thereof and to attain the land of promise that is above I shall not need to produce many particulars of this nature whereof all the Old Testament affordeth good store That of Moses Deut. IX 3-8 I must not forget where assuring them of God to go along with them he warns them not to ascribe that favour to their one righteousnesse though he acknowledgeth that God imployes them to punish the seven nations but to his covenant with their Fathers And that God enabled them to cast
figures hereof and read their bringing out of Egypt into the land of Promise and the maintainance of them in the inheritance thereof notwithstanding their enemies yea notwithstanding their frequent transgressing of it imputed to the Covenant with their Fathers believing with S. Paul that all Gods promises are yea and amen in Christ they cannot consequently make doubt to believe not onely that they are spiritually made good to Christians but also were spiâ—itually made good to them who lived the life of Christians under the faith of Christ to come during the Law in consideration of his merits and sufferings And therefore it is not for nothing that I insist upon this that not onely the giving of the Law but the ambassages by which God dealt with the Fathers and Prophets of old time were performed by the same Word of God which afterwards becoming incarnate is now our Lord Christ assuming for the time the ministery of an Angel that represented and bore the person of God in the likenesse of man As prefaces and preludes to his coming in our flesh not to leave it any more For if it pleased God to use this ministery in order to that which was to purchase of him that grace which should build the Church is it marvail if in consideration of his Sonne by whom this intercourse between God and man was managed he should grant those helps at that time which by the meanes of that knowledge which that intercourse maintained were effectuall to reduce them to that spirituall obedience to God which made them friends to God at that time And therefore I marvaile not that the ancient Church according to that which I said afore should make use of those bookes which now we call Apocrypha for the instruction of those whom by the name of Catechumeni they prepared for baptisme For in as much as we have in them those expresse testimonies which I have quoted of the Wisdome of God dealing with mankâ—nd from the fall of Adam to reduce them to the knowledge of God and to maintaine them in it insomuch it affordeth a necessary instruction to informe all that desire to be Christians by what means the world was saved before and after the Law and yet no salvation but by Christianity Which they that neglect will sooner betray the cause of our common Christianity then give a good account of so great a difficulty The Socinians for certaine will want footing against the Jews either in shewing how the Fathers were saved or why they are rejected It remaineth that I give a reason why the position of Socinus or of Pelagius in denying the grace of Christ as the cure of Originall sinne is not consistent with the grounds of Christianity which is to say that the account which they are able to give for the coming of our Lord Christ is not sufficient not reasonable because they deny this grace Socinus liberally granteth the grace of God in sending Christ to publish his Gospel and to assure all mankind that he is ready to pardon the sinnes of all that receive it and to give them eternall life living here as Christians undertake to do That having provided that our Lord Christ should be born of a Virgine by the holy Ghost of his free grace he hath exalted him to the power and honour of God under himself thereby both rewarding his undertaking and performing this ambassage above merit and assuring us both of the truth of the Gospel and of the performance of it to them that live conformable to Christs Crosse who have a man of our own kind indowed with Gods own power to deliver us from all enemies of our own free will believing his Gospel so tendered and living as it requireth But in all this neither he nor Pelagius who as I said in the beginning as freely acknowledgeth that grace of God which consisteth in giving the Gospel besides that free will which we come into the world with tenders us any account at all how it comes to passe that all mankind iâ— become enemy to God and subject to his wrath Which untill it be supposed to be true there is no cause why the Apostles and the Church after them should invite the world to undertake so much hardship as Christianity importeth And therefore S. Paul hath had care to set it forth as the ground of Christianity in the beginning of his Epistle to the Romanes For it will not serve the turn to have recourse to the examples of their predecessors and the nature of man apt to imitate them as a sufficient reason hereof seeing this reason can go no higher then Adam and that there is evidence that through the grace of God good examples of his posterity such as walked with God if not of himself as the book of Wisdome affirms X. 1. and we have no cause to doubt were performed before the eyes of them who notwithstanding imitated the apostasy which he disclaimed How then shall we imagine supposing a good and an evil branch in his posterity that the bad example should so be followed that all the world should runne after strange Gods Onely a few Fathers by that entercourse which God granted them of grace and the doctrine which came from their Fathers but to their Fathers by grace being preserved intire to God How comes the same to passe after the floud in the posterity of so just a man as Noe after such a horrible warning as the deluge Had the light of reason been such in discerning the difference between good and bad as the Law of Nature and by consequence the state of mans creation requireth had mans inclination been without any bias contrary to that which the light of reason such as it is shewes how could this have been How comes it to passe that the excellence of mans nature and the reason that he is endowed with serves for a reproach to all mankind that now follows it That those who see the difference of good and bad when they are alone without witnesse when they are under publick ingagements commit those oppressions upon men whereof they have no example even from beasts Doth not all the learning all the experience of the world thus farre give testimony to Christianity and shall we think fit to advantage our selves upon this plea against those that are not Christians and straight to deny the consequence of it to Christians Especially having the fall of Adam so evident a beginning of it set forth by Moses and the comming of Christ by S. Paul for the cure of it Thus farre then we plead from the motives of our common faith But when we come to measure the grace of Christ which is the cure by the person of Christ I suppose I have right to demand for true that which I have proved that he is God and man not by grace noâ— by reward but by birth And give notice to Pelagius that Socinus in a more cunning age of disputing found it requisite for
24. Col. III. 9 10. Therefore man was first created in that righteousnesse and true holinesse to which Christians are renewed which renewing is called therefore the new man by S. Paul To this it may be answered on behalf of the other part That the dominion over the creatures belonges to the image of God in man according to the words of Moses Let us make man after our image and likenesse and let him bear rule over the fishes of the Sea and therefore God requireth a mans bloud of his brother and of beasts because he was made in the image of God Gen. IX 6. So that the image of God remaineth true righteousnes and holines being lost And therefore it seemeth that according to the natural state of man he is made according to Gods image in regard of this dominion over the creatures But according to that spirituall estate which the Gospel calleth us to much more in regard of the dominion over sin and concupiscence which the spirit of righteousnesse and true holinesse bringeth with it Though both derivative from the image of God in Christ to whom the Apostle Heb. II. 6-9 ascribeth that dominion as to the second Adam which the Psalmist setteth forth in the first Psal VIII 5-8 And if it be said as I said it may be that the precept given to them forbidding the fruit of the tree of knowledge is manifestly carnall and concerning their nature it is easie to say on the other side that the garden and those trees and therefore the precept concerning them are not understood if they be not taken as Symbolicall and mysticall to signifie that which S. Augustine in two words of free will and Christ comprehendeth That as the source of death is to satisfie the appetite of our owne particular profit or pleasure so to satisfie the appetite of that true goodnesse which that Word or Wisdome of God which now incarnate is our Lord Christ teacheth is the fountain of Life Not as if there were not two such fruits one granted to preserve life the other forbidden on paine of death But because they not onely did signifie which the other opinion may grant but also were understood by Adam to signify more as I have said As for the giving of names to living creatures which is commonly made an argument of more then humane wisdome in Adam to wit from Gods Spirit I conceive the other side may say That no names can signify the natures of things but some sensible properties by which they are known and discerned So that to give names ingeniously argues no more then taking due notice of those things which sense discovers to be most remarkable in each kinde And that not above the pitch of nature But when Adam saies This is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh And Therefore shall a man leave father and mother and cleave to his wife and they two shall be one flesh And S. Paul thereupon Ephes V. 30. This mystery is great but I mean as to Christ and the Church There is appearance that the Fathers have reason to suppose Adam a Prophet not onely to say the words which foretell the coming of Christ and the effect of it but also to understand the meaning which they contained Not as if he foresaw the incarnation of Christ which supposed his own fall But because by that word of God which spoke to him in his transe he understood that his posterity should be united and maried to God And yet on the other side it may be said without prejudice to Christianity that though this is certainly the mysticall sense of these words yet it is no more necessary that Adam when he spoke them should understand it then that the rest of those who were figures of Christ by their actions in the Old Testament did understand that they were so much lesse wherein that figure consisted Last of all it seems strange that Adam should so easily be cast down with so slight a temptation supposing that he was indowed with that divine wisdome which Gods Spirit giveth which will be no such marvaile if we suppose him to know no more then the conduct of his naturall life in Paradise might require Which notwithstanding this is no such advantage as it may seem For as the description of Paradise and the two trees and the precept concerning them so is also the temptation delivered in Symbolicall terms under the figure of that which concerned the preservation of their life representing all that may move the Sons of the first Adam to fall away from God And whatsoever be the reason that it is called the tree of knowledge to be like unto God and that by a way of such knowledge as should not depend on Gods will but their own choice may easily be understood to be the most dangerous temptation that an estate of so much advantage was capeable of how difficult so ever it be to understand by the words how they might believe it to depend upon eating the forbidden fruit And as the state of meer nature requiring the knowledge of so few things as the leading of such a life in obedience to God required must needs inferre that simplicity and innocence that made them more liable to be tempted So a state of supernaturall knowledge by the Spirit of God withdrawing their consideration from inferior things of this world to be conversant about the matters of God they might be exposed to temptation as well by not attending as by not apprehending the things of the world As on the other side they were fortified against it no lesse by that innocence and simplicity which made them not sensible of that which provoketh it then by that resolution of Gods Spirit which set them above it These being the considerations which appear to me in those things which the Scriptures propose unto us of this estate I will not stick to say that I hold the common opinion to be the more probable for two reasons The first Because it seemeth to me farre more consequent to the effect of mans fall which is the losse and want of spirituall grace necessary to the conduct of him in his spirituall life here to eternall life in the world to come that he should have transgressed and forfeited the meanes thereof then onely that innocence that should have inabled him to yeeld God obedience onely in an estate of meer nature and to the purpose of it Secondly because I find it to be received by the Fathers of the Church after S. Irenaeus who seemeth to have delivered it in expresse and clear terms And yet I must say on the other side that I find it no reason to count it a matter of Faith but onely the more reasonable supposition among divines So that the matter of Faith concerning originall sinne is more easily understood to depend upon it and more reasonably inferred from it and maintained by it Not onely because you see the reasons out of the Scriptures
so ballanced But chiefly because I see the subject of the dispute to be all upon the literall and mysticall sense of these Scriptures Without the knowledge whereof I am confident the Faith of a Christian is intire though the skill of a divine is nothing And for the consent of the Fathers how generall soever it be after Irenaeus I have the authority of the same Irenaeus backed by his reason in that excellent Chapter where he distinguishes between the Tradition of Faith and the skill of the Scriptures to resolve me that neither this point nor any other point which depends upon the agreement between the Old Testament and the New as this does can belong to the Faith of a Christian but onely to the skill of a divine But now this being premised and setled it will be easie for me to inferre that a state of meer nature is a thing very possible had it pleased God to appoint it by proposing no higher end then naturall happinesse no harder meanes then Originall innocence to man whom he had made The reasons premised sufficiently serving to shew that there is no contradiction in the being of that which there is so much appearance that it was indeed But I must advise you withall that I mean it upon a farre other supposition then that of the Schoole Doctors They supposing that man was created to that estate of supernaturall happinesse to which the Gospel pretendeth to regenerate Christians hold that it was Gods meer free grace that he was not created with that contradiction between the reason and appetite which the principles of his nature are of themselves apt to produce Whereupon it foloweth that concupiscence is Gods creature that is the indowment of it signifying by concupiscence that contrariety to reason which the disorder of sensuall appetite produceth A saying that hath fallen from the pen of S. Augustine and that after his businesse with Pelagius Retract I. 9. allowing what he had writ to that purpose against the Manichees in his third book de libero arbitrio which he mentioneth againe and no way disalloweth in his book de Dono perseverantiae cap. XI and XII but seemeth utterly inconsistent with the grounds which he stands upon against Pelagius For supposing contrariety and disorder in the motions of mans soul what is there in this confusion which it hath created in the doings of mankind that might not have come to passe without the fall Unlesse we suppose that a man can be reasonably madde or that concupiscence which reason boundeth not could be contained within any rule or measure not supposing any gift of God inabling reason to give bounds to it or preventing the effect of it which the supposition of pure nature alloweth us not to suppose For the very state of mortality supposing the immortality of the soul either requireth in man the conscience of integrity before God or inferreth upon him a bad expectation for the world to come And therefore though the sorrows that bring death might serve for advantage to happinesse were reasonable to govern passion in using them yet not being able they can be nothing but essayes of that displeasure of God which he is to expect in the world to come And therefore this escape of S. Augustine may seem to abate the zeale of those who would make his opinion the rule of our common Faith That which my resolution inferreth is no more then this That supposing God did not create man in an estate capable to attaine the said supernaturall happinesse he might neverthelesse had he pleased have created him in an estate of immortality without impeachment of trouble or of sorrow but not capable of further happinesse then his then life in Paradise upon earth importeth Not that I intend to say that God had been without any purpose of calling man whom he had created in this state unto the state of supernaturall grace whereby he might become capable of everlasting glory in the world to come as Christians believe themselves to be For the meaning of those that suppose this is that God purposed to exercise man first in this lower estate and having proved him and found him faithfull in it supposing Adam had not fallen to have called him afterwards to a higher condition of that immortality which we expect in the world to come upon trial of fidelity in that obedience here which is correspondent to it Whereupon it is reasonably though not necessarily consequent that this calling being to be performed by the Word of God which being afterwards incarnate is our Lord Christ and the Spirit which dwelt in him without measure our Lord Christ should have come in our flesh though Adam had not fallen to do this And this is alledged for a reason why afterwards the Law that was given to Moses covenanted expresly for no more then the happinnesse of this present life though covertly being joyned with that discipline of godlinesse which the people of God had received by tradition from their Fathers it afforded sufficient argument of the happinesse of the world to come for those who should imbrace the worship of God in spirit and truth though under the paedagogie and figures of the Law For they say it is suitable to the proceeding of God in restoring mankind that we understand him first to intend the recovering of that naturall integrity in which man was created by calling his people to that uprightnesse of civile conversation in the service of the onely true God which might be a protection to as many as under the shelter of such civile Lawes should take upon them the profession of true righteousnesse to God Intending afterwards by our Lord Christ to set on foot a treaty of the said righteousnesse upon terms of happinesse in the world to come But thesâ— things though containing nothing prejudiciall to Christianity yet not being grounded upon expresse scripture but collected by reasoning the ground and rule of Gods purpose which concerns not the truth of the Gospel whether so or not I am neither obliged to admit nor refuse So much of Gods counsel remaining alwaies visibly true That he pleased to proceed by degrees in setting his Gospel on foot by preparing his people for it by the discipline of the Law and the insufficience thereof visible by that time which he intended for the coming of our Lord Christ though we say that man was at first created in a state of supernaturall grace and capable of everlasting happinesse For still the reason of Gods proceeding by degrees will be that first there might be a time to try how great the disease was by the failing of the cure thereof by the Law before so great a Physitian as the Sonne of God came in person to visite it This onely I must adde because all this discourse proceeds upon supposition that man might have been created in an estate of meer nature if indowed with uprightnesse capable to attaine that happinesse which that estate required That
or so united to it hâ—â— they cannot fail of it And though the perfection of their estate admitteth no possibility of failing yet it is no waies prejudicial to the honour of God to provide men here of such an estate as is necessarily capable of failing His perfection being such as is necessarily capable of improvement And therefore it is no disparagement to God that he should create a possibility of sinning in that creaâ—ure in which if there were now not a posibility of sinâ—ing there could not be a posibility of attaining happinesse by not sining These things thus setled it remaines that we inquire whether that sufficienâ— grace wâ—ich the difference between the anâ—ecedent and consequent will of God settles be granted indifferently to all mankind or not And my answer is briefely this That God hath provided for all mankind that grace which at a distâ—nce is sufficient to save all mankind But that grace which iâ—â—â—mediately sufficient to save he hath not immediatly provided for all mankind but hath trusted hiâ— Church to provide it for the rest of mankind having left them meanes sufficâ—ent to doe it My reason is this because where God sendeth immediately meanes sufficient to save by converting to Christianity there he will dâ—mand an acount of the neglect of that meanes which hetendreth For I suppose from that which I said in the first book against the Leviathan that as many as come to the knowledg of Christianity are obliged to receive it Certainely he that believes the Christian faith must needs believe that God hath don enough to oblige all that come to knowe the truth of it to submit themselves to it otherwise to remain liable not onely to those sins which they are under when they come to know it but to the guilt of neglecting so great salvation provided tendred by God Now that those who never heard of the gospel of Christ remaine destitute of all meanes to be informed of the truth of Christianity shall not be juâ—ged either for neglecting or transgressing that will of God which it publisheth will appeare by manifest consequence from the expresse wâ—râ—s of S Paul concerning the judgement which the Jewes Gentiles before the â—osâ—ell remaine subject to Rom. XI 12. 16. For as many as have sinned without â—â—â—â—â—w al perish without the law as many as have sinned under the Law shall be 〈◊〉 by the Law For the hearers of the law are not just before God but the doers of the Law shall be justified For when the gentiles not having the Law doe by nature the things of the law these not having the law are a law to themselves who shew the workâ— of the law written in their hearts their conscience also witnessing with them and their thoughts interchangably accusing or excusing in the day that God shall judge the secrets of man according to my gospell Some constâ—ue these words thus As many as have sinned without the law shall perish without the law in the day that God shall judge the secrets of men according to my gospel If those that sin without the Law shall perish without the Law it is manifest that they shall not be condemned for transgressing the law which they never knew And if the ground why they perish be the law that is written in their hearts to which their conscience beares witnesse when their thoughts accuse or excuse them Whether this be at the day of iudgement or not it is plaine the conscience can never accuse a man nor by consequence God condem him for transgressing the will of God which he never knew And if God proceed not with the Gentiles upon the Law which the Isralites onely knew but upon the light and law of nature by which not knowing the Law they found themselves obliged to doe that which it commanded Then shall he not proced upon the Gospell with them who never had meanes to know it but upon the light of nature and the conscience of what they have don or not don according to it or against it And indeed the words of our Lord are plaine enough Iohn III. 17-21 God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world but that the world through him might be saved He that believeth on him shall not be condemned but he that beleiveth not on him is condemned already because he believed not in the name of the onely begotten Son of God And the condemnation is this that light is come into the world and men love darknesse better then light because their works are evill For every one that doth evill hateth the light and cometh not to the light that his works be not reproved But he that doth the truth cometh to the light that his works may be manifest that they are done in God For he thaâ— is condemned for not believing because he hates the light must first see the light before he hate it and so positively refuse to believe because his works will not endure the light And no man could doe the truth and that in God but he that was under the law of God Who if he did not the truth which the Law requireth would consequently hate the truth which the gospel preacheth So he that is condemned for not beleiving is he that heareth the gospel and receiveth it not And to this reason we must refer the words of S Paul Act XIV 16. Who in by past ages suffered all Nations to walk in their own waies And againe Acts Xâ—II 3â— God therefore who did oversee the times of ignorance now injoâ—â—râ—h all men every where to repent And Rom. III. 25. 26. Whom God hath proposed for a propitiatory through faith in his blood to declare his righteousnesse because of the passing by of sins that went afore To declare I say his righteousnesse at this present time For we cannot imagin that he will not demand account of the sins that have beene done from the beginning of the world of whom Enoch the seventh from Adam prophesied saying Behold the Lord is come with the ten thousands of his holy Angels to doe judgement upon all and to rebuke all the ungodly of them of all the ungodlinesse which they have committed and of all the bad words thay have spoken against him wicked sinners Jude 14. 15. And it is not for nothing that God when he let the Gentiles alone to walke in their owne waies no withstanding left not himself without witnesse doing good giving us raine from heaven and fruitfull seasons filling our hearts with food and gladnesse as S. Pa. proceeds Acts XIV 17. Nor that he made of one blood all Nations of men to dwell upon the face of the whole Earth determining times appointed before to the bounds of their dwelling that they might seeke the Lord if by any meanes they might find him by groping though not far distant from each one of us For in him we live and move and have our being as some also of your Posts have
flâ—sh was so husbanded that the deviles themselves though when they were constâ—â—ined to obâ—y him they cryed him up the Son of God yet should not loose the hoâ—e of destroying him Can we think that God immediately designed such a stratagem upon Satan and had not regard to the â—â—linations of his ministers or knew not what effect those considerations wâ—uld have which should arise in them upon those objects wich his providence presented them with By this we may see why our Lord upbraides the Cities in which he did his greatest miracles Mat. X. 21 22. Woe to thee Corasin woe to thee Bethâ—aida For had the mighâ—y works that have been don in thee been done in Tyre and Sidon they had long since repented in sackcloath and ashes And thou Capernauâ— that art exâ—lted to heaven shalt be cast down to Hell For had the mighty works that have been don in thee been don in Sâ—dome and Gomorah they had stood till this day I do so respect the learning and judgâ—ment of Grotius and Janseniâ—s that I will not take upon me to censuâ—e them when they make these words signifie no more then that in probability Sodom and Gomorah had repented at the sight of suâ—h miracles But I find no good reason to inferre as our Lord doth that positively Corazin Bethsaida and Capernaum shall be tormented more then Tyre and Sydon then Sodom and Gomorah because probably Sodom and Gomorah would have repented at the sight of such miracles The same I say to others who would have ouâ— Lord say onely this That had those miracles been don in Tyre and Sydon they would have repented but not from the heart Because miracles are not able to convert any man to God from the heart For in conscience is there reason that Corazin and Bethsaida should fare worse then Sodom and Gomorah because Tyre Sydon would have repented as hypocrites continuing no lesse sinners then they that repented not But to say as others doe that had God ordained those miracles to be done at Tyre and Sydon at Sodome and Gomorah he would have determined their wills by his immediate act to be converted is to say that our Lord by a mentall reservation saies that whereof he expresseth not the reason and so cozens them that satisfie themselves with the reason which he expresseth I know these answers are brought to avoid the heresy of Pelagiâ—s that outward calling without inward grace is enough to convert a man But there is no necessary to grant the consequence The miracles of Christ supposing his doctrine import the inward grace of the spirit to make it prevaile Why else are they who said they were don by Belzeâ—ub guilty of the sin against the Holy Ghost And this meanes being sufficient to convert them had been effectuall had they found men better dâ—spoâ—ed What was the difference They had found men not zealous of theire owne righâ—â—ousnesse by the Law who therefore had not resisted the righteousnesse of God which Christ teacheth with mirâ—cles â—ufficient to convict them that he was a true Prophet Upon these grounds God who knew all their hearts might comprehend the event The case of David at Keila is so neere this that I must not mention it any where else 1. Sam. XXIII 11. 12 13. And David said O Lord God of Israell thy servant heareth for certaine that Saul is coming to Keilah to destroy the City for my sake Will the men of Keilah shut me in his hand Will Saul come downe as thy servant heareth O Lord God of Israell shew thy servant And the Lord said He will come downe And David said Will the mâ—sters of Keilah shut me and my men into Sauls hands And the Lord said they will What escape is there here when God out of his knowledg of the secrets of their hearts foretells what they would doe if Saul should come against the City Nor will I forget that of the wise Hebrew for he drewe at the founâ—aine head of thâ— Prophets though he spake not by their spirit It is thâ—ught to be said oâ— Enoch according to that which wee read of him Gen. V. 24 Heb X 5 but the aâ—gument is the same whether so or not Wisdome IV. 10. 11. 14 He pleased and was beloved of him so that whereas he lived among sinners he translated him He was taken away least wickednesse should alter his understanding or deâ—eit beguile his mind For his soule pleased God therefore hasted he to take him away from wickednesse For if God knew such occurrences as would deceive Enoch or one in his stâ—te then by those occurrences be foresees the decree If he knew none unlesse himselfe determine his will to be deceived then can it not be aid that God translated him least wickednesse should deceive him but least God should appoint him to be deceived by wickednesse The same author thus commande h the mercy of God in destroying the Canaaniâ—es by little and little Wisdome XII 10. But chastising them by little little thou gavest them roome of repentance though knowing their pâ—rverse disposition to be such that they could not repent That is knowing that this gentle dealing of God would not be effâ—ctuaâ—l notwithstâ—nding all that he had done to assure his people of the land of promise â—o move them to imbrace the true God Upon which condition they might have been suffered to live as slaves to the Israelites if not as strangers among them as Rahab the harlot was suffered to doe among her kindred because she alone imbraced those termes So that the precept of the Law that commands the seven Nations utterly to be destroyed stands upon supposiâ—ion of this impenâ—tence thus foreseen To the same purpose speake those texts of Scripture in which it is said that or such or such a thing be not done such or such a thing will come to pâ—sse As Gen. XI 6. Behold the people is one and their language the same having begun this they will not give over whatsoever they have thought to doe Acts XXVII 31. Vnlesse these remaine in the ship ye cannot be saved â—say I. 9. Rom X 20. If the Lord of hosts had not left us a seed we had been as Sodom we had been lâ—ke Gomâ—rah Mat. XXIV 22. Had not those daies been shortned all flesh would perish ' But for the elects sake those daies shall be shortned For there is no necessity to say that God could not have prevented these effects by any other mâ—anes The buildâ—â—g of the Tower of Babel for the purpose by any other meane but by dividing their language The saving of the elect at the destruction of Jeâ—uâ—alâ—m but by shortning their time â—he saving of S. Pauls fellow travelers but by the mariners abiding on shipborde But that God knew that they would goe to build the Tower of Babel that the time not being shortned even the elect would perish that if the mariners leâ—t the ship the rest woulâ— be cast away should not Gâ—d
otherwise interpose As the Prophet â—say showing how great a mercy of God it was that any of the Israelites shouâ—d escape â—hat vengeance whâ—ch he foretelleth and alleaged by S Paul to shew how great a mercy of God it was that any of them should be saved by the Goâ—pell from the vengeance to come declare that God foresaw this ruine would come to passe it he did not interpose But to say that God foresaw this because he foresaw that himselfe had resolved by his immediate act to determine the wilâ—s of those men by which they were to come to passe to bring them to passe is to say that all those meanes by which it is signified that he saw they would come to passe are alleâ—ged by the Scripturs impertinently and to no purpose It followeth therefore of necessity that God foresaw that those things should come to passe by the cases which he saw stated and the wills of those men whom he saw concerned in stating the same And by the same reason that holdeth which is said Ex. III. 19. I know that the King of Egypt will not give you leave to depart but by a mighty arme Upon which the saying of the wise man alleaged afore is verified That God knew that the Egyptians would repent themselves and attempt to bring them back into bondge whom they had just afore intreated to be gon In fine all the scriptures which say This or that was don that such things as had been foretold might be fulfilled prove the same without answer Iohn XIX 24 36. They said then to one another let us not rend it but cast lots for it whose it shall be That the Scripture might be fulfilled which saith They shared my garments among them and for my coat they cast lots And againe These things came to passe that the scriptures might be fulfilled A bone shall not be broken of it Did God provide that Christs coat should be seamelesse that there being losse in sharing it the reason of casting lots for it may be unanswerable Did he provide that our Lord should have visibly breathed out his last that there might be no reason to breake his legs as the legs of the rest that having provided all this he might at length determine them to doe what they did which had he intended to doe it was impertinent whether he provided all this or not Mat. XI 17. 18. Then was fulfilled that which was said by Jeremy the Prophet saying A cry was heard in Ramah lamentation and weeping and great mourning Rachel weeping for her children and would not be comforted because they were not Herod was become jealous of the King of the Jewes that was borne and would have taken him away alone But when he could not heare of him by the wise men resolved to take away all under two yeares old that he might not escape Did God know that his bloudy humour would resolve this wickednesse upon these occurrencs or did he first provide the occasion and then determine him to doe that which without providing the occasion being so determined he would have done neverthelesse All the scriptures in which this is said argue as much I must not omit that which is said of Abiathar 1. Kings II 26. And Solomon drove Abiathar from being high Priest to the Lord. To fulfill the word of the Lord whIch he had spoken against the house of Ely in Shilâ—h Had God provided all that had befalne Abiathar and in the end according to his unquestionable justice the occurrences that resolved him to be of the conspiracy of Adon that the prophesies against Ely and his house 1 Sam. II. 30-â—6 III. 11-14 might come to effect which no reason could be given why so rather then otherwise if after all this he must interpose his immediate act to determine Solomon to fulfill it by setting Abiathar aside If God thus by his justice his mercy in consideration of mans by-past actions ordaine the occurrences whereof he knoweth what the issue will be shall it seeem strang that out of his originall right in his creature having set Adam in Paradise with those abilities that all agree he might have stood if he would he checked not the malice of the rebell Angels nor taught him that cunning which his simplicity had not needed had he loved to continue as was elegantly said simplicior quam ut decipi posset simpler or more an innocent then to be cousened Or can we say that He might have stood had he would who by Gods immediate act as we see was not determined to stand who could not have stood had he not been determined by God to stand had he been determined could not but stand None of which followes if we say that God seeing the state in which he had placed him a sufficient baite to resolve the apostate Angells to tempt seeing the temptation so strong that Adam would not resist it for the reasons which he in his secret counsaill saw best resolved to maintain both in acting their owne inclinations and himselfe to make the best of that which should be done And this precedent being resolved can it seem strange that he should order all men to come to the yeares of discretion when first they begin to act to their owne account with those impressions received from their education which he sees how they well incline them to the better or to the worse seeing also that they doe not resolve them either for the better or for the worse but by the means of their own free choice can it seem strange I say that he should order them to meet with those occurrences which suting with the merit of their by passed actions he sees wil determine their choice for the better or for the worse in those things which he sees that it was in them though perhapS with much more dificulty so for more advantage to have determined otherwise But to leave the rest of this discourse till I can goe through with it for the present the reason of this position seems to me demonstrative if any thing in this subject can be demonstrative supposing that which hath been proved that God by his own immediate act doth not determine the will of man to doe this or that For seeing that Christian faith presupposeth that God knoweth from everlasting whatsoever future contingencies shall come to passe during every moment of time whilst the world shall indure that it is evident that whatsoever is known must be knowable before it is knowne and therefore certaine or determined not by being knowne but by being capable of being known what ground can we imagine in contingencies to make them capable of beingknown For of theire owne nature we transgresse the very notion of contingencies which we suppose and evidently contradict our selves if we say there is any thing in them of themselves to determine this to coâ—e to passe rather then that supposing the cause to be no more determined to doe
the world of Judgement because the Prince of theis world is condemned by the conversion of those who forefook him to become Christians Therefore S Steven upbraideth the Jews saying Ye stisnecked and uncircumcised in hearts and eares ye do alwaies resist the Holy Ghost even you also as did your fathers Acts VII 51. Because being convicted by the Holy Ghost which spoke in him that he spoke from God neverthelesse they submit not to his message Therefore our Lord Mark III. 28. 29 30 All sins shall be forgiven the sons of men and blasphemies which they shall blaspheme But whoso shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath no remission for ever but is liable to everlasting damnation Because they said he hath an unclean spirit which you have againe Math. XII 31 32. Luke XII 10. Because being convicted that our Lord spoke did his miracles by the Holy Ghost they blasphemed saying that he spoke and did them by an uncleane spirit For these words and these workes are the meanes by which our Lord accomplished â—his promise Iohn XIV 23. If any man love me he will keep my word and my Father will love him and we will come to him and abide with him For before the condition If any man love me be fulfilled the case is that which our Lord expresseth Apoc. III. 20. Behold I stand at the dore and knock And if any man heare my voice and open the dore I will come in to him and sup with him â—e with me But being fulfilled the words of our Lord take place Iohn XVI 15 16 17. If yee love me ye will keep my commandements And I will aske the Father and he will give you an other Advocate to abide with you for ever even the spirit of truth which the world cannot receive because they â—ee it not nor know it but you know it because it abideth with you and is in you For seeing it is manifest by the premises that the undertaking of Christianity is the condition upon which the Holy Ghost is granted as a gift to abide with Christians the preaching of Christianity that is the proposing of those reasons which God by his word hath shewed us why wee should be Christians is the knocking of our Lord Christ by the spirit at the dore of the heart that he may enter and dwell in us by the same spirit according to the words of S. Paul 2. Cor. II. 16. For ye are the Temple of the living God as God hath said To wit I will dwell and converse among them and will be their God and they shall be my people That which some Philosophers say of the naturall generation of man That the soule frames its owne dwelling being fulfilled in the worke of generation by grace when the Holy Ghost by his actuall assistance frameth the man to be fit for the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost by becoming a true Christian If then we believe that the Holy Ghost was given by God and obtained by Christ as well to make the Gospell effectuall as to move the Apostles to preach it there can no doubt remaine that the preaching of the Gospell that is to say the meanes which the Holy Ghost provideth to make it either sufficient or effectual to convince the world of it is the instrument whereby he frameth himself that invisible house of true believers in which he dwelleth And therefore the meanes whereby Gods grace becomes effectuall to those who imbrace it is the same that renders it sufficient for those who refuse it the difference lying as well in the disposition which it meets with for which the man is accountable as in the spirit of God that presenteth it which renders God the praise when it takes effect and leaves men accountable when it does not If this reason had been in consideration with Socinus and perhaps with Pelagius he would have found it necessary acknowledging as all that read the Scriptures must needs acknowledge that which they find so frequent and so cleare in the Scriptures that the habituall gift of the Holy Ghost is granted to inable those who undertake Christianity to performe it to acknowledge also that the actuall help of it is necessary to make the motives of Christianity effectuall to subdâ—e men to it And by consequence that the coming of the second Adam was necessary to restore the breach which the first had made seeing it was not to be repaired without the same Nor is it to be marveled at that naturall meanes conducted by the grace of Christ should produce supernaturall effects such as I have shewed the obediencâ— of Christianity to be which supposing the Covenant of grace and freedome of mans will cannot be otherwise The reasons which appeare to the understanding and move the will to act contrary to the inclination of originall concupâ—scence in professing Christianity and living according to the same being sufficient to convict it to give sentence that so the man ought to doe And the circumstances in which the spirit of Christ conducteth these motives to the heart which it knocketh at by their means being able to represent them valuable to take effect with him who is moved to the contrary by his originall concupiscence And though meanes naturall because they move a man to proceed according to right reason which nature requires him to doe yet as they are brought to passe and conducted by a supernaturall cause nothing hinders the effect to be supernaturall in such a nature as is by them made capable of acting above nature I do much approve the discourse of some that have indeavoured to shew how this comes to passe thus supposing the covenant of the Law to be the renewing of that which was made with Adam in Paradise for the maintaining of him in the happnesse of his naturall life Which we may suppose though we suppose not that God covenanted not with him at all for the life to come For the dispensation of those blessings of this life which the covenant of nature limited by Moses Law to the happinesse of the land of promise tendreth may well be the advantage which God taketh to make the covenant of Grace acceptable especially to those who by Gods blessing failing of the blessings of the first covenant by that meanes becoming out of love with this present worlâ— meeâ— with the Covenant of Grace in such a disposition as may render it acceptable For so long as things goe well with men in this world it seemes haâ—sh to require them to takeup the Crosse of Christ that they may obtain the world to come But when the comforts of this world faile it is no marvell if any condition that tenders hope in the world to come be welcome If it be said that this renders the grace of Christ effectuall onely to the poore and men oâ— meane condition in the world who have cause to be weary of their estâ—te in it It is answered that it is no marvell if the
stand obliged to second the same with means sufficient to bring them to everlasting happinesse For the beginning of the worke being acknowledged to require Gods preventing Grace it cannot be said that those who are supposed to be thus saved are saved by works and not by grace or that in their regard Christ is dead in vaine the said helps being granted in consideration of Christs death But though it may without prejudice to christanity be said that God may dispense the helps of that grace which Christs death hath purchased besides and without the preaching of the Gospell yet can it not be said during the Gospell that any man attaineth the kingdom of heaven which Christianty promiseth but by it Now to be saved by the Gospell requires the profession of the faith and that the Sacrament of Baptisme at least in resolution and purpose So that whether among those nations where the gospell is not preached any man be saved by this way is a thing visible to be tried by examining whom this case hath been knowne to have become a Christian Of which I assure my selfe there will be found so few instances of historical truth that a discreet man will have no pleasure to introduce a position so neerely concerning the intent of Christs coming wherof there can so little effect appear For supposing instances might be alleaged to make the mater questionable how farr would they be from rendring a reason of that vast difference that is visible between the proceeding of God towards the salvation of those that are borne within the Pale of the Church and those that live and dye without hearing of christianity The one being so prevented with the knowledg of what they are to doe to be saved that they shall have much a do so to neglect it as to flatter their own concupiscence with any color of an excuse Whereas the other whatsoever conviction we may imagine them to have of one true God of an account to be made for all that wee doe of the guilt of sin which they are under without the Gospell it will be impossible to reduce the reason of the difficulties they are under more then the former to an equall desire in God of saving all together with the difference of mens complyance with the helps of Grace which it produceth And therefore considering the antecedent will of God is not absolutly Gods will but with a terme of abatement reserving the condition upon which it proceedeth I conceive it requisite as I have don to limit the signification thereof to those effects which we see God being to passe by vertue of it The utmost whereof being the provâ—dâ—ng of means for the preaching of the Gospell it is neverthelesse no prejudice to it that the Apostles are forbidden by the spâ—rit to preach in Bithynia or Asia Acts XVâ— 6 7. not because God would not have them to be saved or because the Macedonians by their works had obliged him to set them aside for their sakes who could have provided for both But for reasons knowne to himselfe alone and not reducible to any thing that appeares to us Especially considering the câ—se of infants dying before Baptisme in whose workes it is manifest there can be no ground of difference For to say that by the universality of that Grace which God declareth by Christ wee are to believe that they are all saved as many as live not to transgresse the Covenant of grace would be a novelty never heard of in the Catholike Church of Christ tending to unâ—ermine the foundation of our common salvation laid by our Lord â—o Nicodâ—mus Vnlâ—sse ye bâ— born againe of water and of the Holy Ghost ye cannot enter into the Kingdome of God For how should the generall tender of the Gospell intitle infants to the benefit thereof because they never transgressed that in which they were never estated It were in vaine then to looke about the scripture for examples to justifie any part of this position The widow of Sarepta to whom Elias was sent Naaman the Syrian who was sent to Eliseus Cyâ—us whom many supposed to have worshipped the onely God because in the end of the Chronicâ—es and beginning of Esdras he saith the God of heaven hath given me all the Kingdoms of the earth because the Prophet Esay makes him a figure of the Messias as the Kings of Gods people were for the freedom which they attained by his government the Centurion Cornelius to whom S. Peter was sen with the Gospell are all of one case which is the case of thâ—se strangers who living in the common-wealth of Israel though not circumcised yet woâ—shiped the onely true God under those lawes which the Jews tell us were delivered by God to Noe and by him to all his posterity and so were capable of thaâ— salvation which the Israelites had the meanes of under the Law though themselves not under it But neither have we evidence that their works under the light of nature obliged God to call them to the priviledg of stâ—angers in the hâ— use of Israel nor can the workes of Cornelius be taken for the workes of corrupt nature being in the state of Gods grace which was manifested under the Law and therefore prevented with those meanes of salvation which become necessary under the Gospell to the salvation which it tendreth So far are we from finding in them any argument of a Law obliging God to grant them those helps in consideration of their works don in the state of corrupt nature And therefore whatsoever examples we may find of this nature under Christianity they are to be referred to the free grace of God which as sometimes it may come to those of best conversation according to nature to whom the words oâ— our Lord To him that hath shall be given may be applied without prejudice to Christianity Math. XXV 19. Luk XIX 26. So also it fails not to call those who for their present state are most strangers to christianity that it may appeare that no Rule ties God but that free grace which his own secret wisdom dispenseth And truly those good works which corupt nature produceth necessarily depend upon those circumstances in which Gods proâ—â—dence placeth one man and not an other though both in the state of meere nature So that the one shall not be able to do that which is reasonable without overcoming those difficulties to which the other is not lyable In which regard it hath been said that the Heroick acts of the Heâ—hen may be attributed to the spirit of God moving them though not as granted in consideration of Christ but as conducting the whoâ—e worke of providence So little cause there is to imagine that the consideration of them should oblige God to grant those helps of grace the ground whereof is the obedience of Christ and the end the happinesse of the world to come CHAP. XXVI Predestination to grace absolute to glory respective Purpose of denying effectuall Grace
speech signify meer deliverance and that so they do signify in the figures of Christ in the Old Test when the Judges and Kings of Israel when God above them are said to redeem Israel that is to deliver him without paying ransom for him Nor that the New Testament speakes likewise when the effect onely is considered See Ex. XV. 13. Deut. VII 8. IX 26. XIII 5. XXI 8. 2 Sam. VII 23. Nehem. I. 10. Psal LXXVI 16. XXXI 6. CXI 9. Esa XXIX 22. Luke II. 38. XXI 28. XXIV 21. Act. VII 35. Rom VIII 23. Ephes VI. 30. As also for the terms of buying and selling Rom. VII 14. Esa L. 1. Deut. XXXII 30. Jud. III. 8. II. 14. Ephes V. 16. Col. IV. 5. And therefore it is not to be marvailed at that the Jewes denying Christ should deny his ransome as not expecting to be delivered by paying ransome But the figures of the Old Testament being performed in the New where the sacrifice of Christ determines the ransome of Israelites by their Kings Priests and Prophets as well as their Sacrifices to the ransome of the World by his blood Where the words of the Apostle and of our Lord expresse the guilt and punishment of sinne from which it redeemeth Next to the obstiuacy of the Jews in not believing it will be to acknowledge freedome given with the Jewes without acknowledging the consideration of a ransome with Christians Let us hear the Apostle Pet. I. 18. 19 20. knowing that you were not redemed from your vaine conversation delivered from your Fathers with corruptible thinges gold or silver but which the precious bloode of Christ as of a lambe without spot or blemish foreknowne indeede from the foundation of the world but manifested in these last times for us For though the end of this ransome be expressed because it is not immediately attained by the paying of it but by our will concurring with Gods Glorify God because ye are bought with a price Be not slaves to men because ransomed by Christ By the bloud of Christ ye are redeemed from your vain conversation received from your Fathers Yet if the meaning were onely to assure them that their deliverance will not faile them there could no cause be given them why the purchase of it by way of ransom should be expressed Which every man that goes to market must needs understand to import the consideration in which we have it There must be indeed freedome and deliverance where a ransom is paid as there is in our case if the seâ—vice of God be freedome But where the guilt of sinne goes before a clear score follows and the death of Christ comes between them must not the consideration which compares them together make even the reckoning CHAP. XXVIII Christ took away our sinne by bearing the punishment of it The Prophesie of Esay LIII We are reconciled to God by the Gospel in consideration of Christs obedience The reconcilement of Jews and Gentiles Men and Angels consequent to the same Of purging and expiating sinne by Christ and making propitiation for it Of Christs dying for us THere is further in sacrifices a consideration of bearing the punishment due to the sins that are expiated by them and so taking them away Wherein the Scriptures declare the sacrifices of the Law to figure the sacrifice of Christ So S. Paul Gal. III 10. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the â—urse of the Law where it saith Deut. XXVII 26. Cursed is every one that abideth not in all things written in the book of the Law to do them becoming a curse for us as it is written Cursed is every one that hâ—ngeth on a tree The exception of Socinus That this belonges onely to Jewes as a discharge of that curse which the breaking of Moses his positive Law inferreth is neither pertinent nor true For where the leter of the Law takes place to civil effects there the spirituall sense thereof takes place to spirituall effects by that which hath been said Therefore if the Law of Moses bind the posterity of Abraham over to a curse because they keep it not which S. Paul supposeth then the Law written in the harts of mankind which the Law of Moses as it is spirituall both containeth and improveth binds over mankind to that curse which the transgression thereof inferreth And there is no appearance that those whome the Apostle writes to were Jewes but such as out of error thought themselves bound to be jewes whether in part or in whole as they were Christians We are then ransomed from the curse by the curse which Christ indurd for us When S. Paul sayes 2 Cor. V. 21 Him that knew no sinne he made sinne for us that we might become the righteousnesse of God in him Socinus saith that Christ was made sinne and a curse because the Jewes used him as if he had beene sinfull and accursed by the Law But if God gave him up to them so to be used then was he used as sinfull and accursed by the will of God not onely by the sentence of Pilate And if we become righteousnesse to God then he became not sinne to man alone Therefore being so used not because he but because mankind was sinfull and accursed the effect must be to the account of mankind where the reason is grounded upon the consideration of it But why doe the Israelites lay handes on the Levites the Levites and Sacrificers both on the Sacrifice but to signify the discharging of themselves and charging their guilt upon the Priests and sacrifices respectively Lev. I. 4. Num. VIII 10. 14. which their constitutions injoyne to be done with all their might and with confession of sins Maimoni of offering Sacrifices III. 6. 8. 9. For this reason the sinne offeringes are given the Priests forbearing the iniquity of the Cougregation and making propitiation for them before the Lord Levit. X. 17. The Greeke indeede translates it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the meaning is That ye may take iniquity away from the Synagogue to wit by taking it on themselves and make propitiation for them before the Lord. For in consideration of their taking the sinne upon them they are properly rewarded with the sacrifice So Aaron beares the iniquity of their consecrate thinges Ex. XXVIII 38. And the Levites make propitiation lest the people be slaine for coming neere This is the reason of that which the Apostle observeth Ebr. XIII 11. that those sacrifices for sinne the blood whereof is caried within the vaile are burnt without the campe Because being charged with the sinne which they expiate they are to cary it away from among them whome they cleare of it Wherefore going on to apply this to Christs suffering without Jerusalem he showeth the figure to be accomplished in his taking away our sinnes but because they were layed on him first And truly the customes and opinion of the Hethen in purging their sinnes by laying theâ— upon their sacrifices are so plaine to this purpose that
to deny this to be the intent of that paterne which the devill thereby corrupted is to offer viâ—lence to common sense Here I come to the Prophesy of Es LIII wherein being obliged liteâ—aâ—ly to expound it with Grotius of the Prophet Jeremy I shall be thought by â—oâ—â— to make it the more difficult to prove this to be the mysticall sense of it Buâ— having given my selfe a Rule to maintaine the difference betweene these two senses in the Prophesies of the Old Testament I shall forbid Socinus any advantage against the Church by it Thus then saith the Prophet Es LIII 4 But he tooke our sicknesses and bore our greifes And we thought him plagâ—â—ed smitten of God and afflicted But he was wounded for our transgrâ—ssioâ—s and beaten for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was upon him and by his markes we are healed We all had gone astray like sheepe every one was turned his owne way and God made all our iniquities to meete him He was oppressed and afflicted yet opened he not his mouth He was ledde as a sheepe to the slaughter and as a sheepe is dumbe before him that sheares her so opened he not his mouth He was taken from restraint and judgement and his generation who shall declare For he was cut off from the land of the living he was smitten for the transgression of any people And he made his grave with the wicked and with the rich at his death for no wickednesse that he did nor deceite in his mouth yet the Lord was pleased to afflict him with sorrowes If thou make his soule an offering for guilt he shall see a seede he shall prolong his dayes and the good pleasure of God shall come to passe by his means For the labour of his soule shall he see and be satisfied By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many and he shall beare their iniquities Therefore will I give him a share with the great ones and with the mighty shall he divide the spoile because he poured out his soule to death and was counted among transgressors and bore the sins of many and interceded for transgressors That the Prophet Jeremy should be a figure of our Lord Christ in his doings and sufferings is no more then I have showed that all the Prophets were That the Prophet Esay should foretell the same for a figure of Christ is no more then that he should prophesy of our Lord Christ under the figure of himselfe which he doth many times The reason why the Prophet Jeremy is a figure of our Lord imports no more then this That being sent by God to reduce his people to his Law that they might continue injoying the Land of promise he was by them taken for an enemy of his country and used accordingly because he foretold theire ruine in case they obayed not and so God brought on him the merit of theire sinnes which he laboured to cure But so that his doctrine and the event of his Prophesies having reduced them to God and his Law theire restitution from captivity which he had foretold came to passe by his means Upon this account the Prophet Jeremy is a sacrifice for his people though no otherwise then as S. Paule exhortes the Romanes to present their bodies living sacrifice holy and acceptable to God Rom XII 1. Or as he saith to the Philippians If I be poured forth as a drinke offering upon the service and ministery of your faith Phil. II. 16. Or as to the Colossians I. 24. he supplies the remains of the afflictions of Christ in his flesh for his body which is the Church For the proportion will be just betweene that reconcilement which the Prophet procures betweene God and his people by his intercession and doctrine as to their temporall estate as a minister of God and a figure of Christ And that which our Lord Christ procures betweene God and his Church as to the everlasting estate of it Seeing then that Socinus acknowledges all this to be meant of the redemption of the world by the sufferinges of Christ what advantageth iâ— him that it is understood literally of the Prophet Jeremy For the importance of the Prophets words in him will take place according to the pretense of his coming not according to the nature of the Prophet Jeremies office And therefore what if the Evangelist say that the words of the Prophet Esay He tooke away our infirmities and caried away our diseases were fullfilled when our Lord cured the blinde and the lame Mat. VIII 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Evangelist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I confesse signify taking away as well as bearing And therefore that which the Baptist saith Mark I. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whose sâ—oe latchet I am not worthy to stoope and unty Is in S. Matth. IV. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to carry but to take away his shooes Which he that looses intends to take away Therefore Tertul. ad Marc. IV. Ipse igitur est Christus remediator valetudinum Hic inquit imbecillitates nostras aufert languores portat Therefore Christ himselfe is he that cures sicknesses He saith he takes away all infirmities and beares our diseases Portare autem Graeci pro â—o solent ponere quod est tollere Now the Greeke is wont to put bearing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for taking away And indeed the cure of bodily infirmities by Christ could not be fortold by the Prophet to come to passe by taking them upon himselfe but by taking them away from the people But if we say that he was to cure our spirituall infirmities no otherwise neither will the figure of Jeremy nor the words of Esay hold so properly which as I said afore are fullfilled more properly in the mystery then in the History For it is manifest that bearing our sins serves to amplify the sufferings whether of Jeremy or of our Lord which taking them away does not and yet it is aswell understood that they are taken from them by consequence to wit because laide on him For Jeremy bare the sinnes of the people first as our Lord on the Crosse but the cure came afterwards Besides when the Prophet sayes If thou shalt make his soule a sacrifice for guilt It is manifest that God layes the guilt on him which he takes from us Thirdly when the Prophet sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where one case of the person another of the thing follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Socinus translates it God by him met with all our iniquites I say confidently he makes it no Hebrew Had the Prophet said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it might have passed for Hebrew to signify that which he saies But as it lies at no rate Fourthly no man shall expound the Prophet but the Apostle 1 Pet. II. 24 25. Who himself took up our sinnes upon his body to the Crosse that being dead to sinnes we may live to righteousnesse by whose blew markes we
writeth of those Christians who he saith are seduced by the Hereticks which he speakes of 2 Pet. II. 18 22. For speaking bombast words of vanity they catch with the baite of fleshly concupiscences in uncleannesse those that had really escaped them that converse in error Promising them freedome themselves being slaves to corruption seeing a man is slave to that by which he is conquered For if having escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ and being intangled in them againe they be conquered the last error is become worse to them then the first For it had beene better for them not to have knowne the way of righteousnesse than having knowne or acknowledged it to turne from the holy precept once delivered to them But it is fallen out to them according to the old Proverbe The dogge that returnes to his owne vomit And the sowe that is washed to wallow in the mire Is it possible that all this should be thought to import no more then profession as to men without any effect as to God but onely to the Church For if we suppose them all to have counterfeited Christianity not really resolving to live as Christians how comes he to say that they had really escaped those that live in error whose wayes they had not really left And if they had escaped the pollutions of the world by the knowledge of Christianity had they done no more then a man by meere nature may doe Then may a man by meere nature be disintangled of the pollutions of this world But if they had conquered sinne by those helpes of grace which brought them to be Christians for otherwise how should they be conquered by the baites of sinne which those Heretickes deceive them with then had they obtained those promises which the Gospell rewardeth that conquest with In fine Can a dogge returne to the vomit or a sow to the miâ—e which they never left or can the later end be worse then the beginning to them who never were cleare of that damnation in which they were overtaken by the preaching of Christianity To that of S. John speaking of the Antichrists of the time them and their followers John II. 19. They went â—ut from among us but they were not of us For had they been of us they would have continued among us I will use no other answer then that which S. Austine hath given us de corrept gratia cap. IX that those who are qualified by attributes signifying predestination cannot fall away as long as they are described by present righteousnesse they may For saith he had they persevered they had persevered in Grace not in unrighteousnesse neither was theire righteousnesse counterfeite but not durable Therefore they were not in the number of sonnes when they were in the Faith of sonnes because those are truly sonnes that are foreknowne and predestinate and called according to purpose that they may be like the sonne For S. John and S. Paul being assured of theire owne adoption according to purpose it is no marvaile if they presume the like of those whome they comprise in the same quality with themselves in regard of theire present righteousnesse the profession whereof was visible I must not here omit the Epistle to the Seven Churches Apoc II. III. and the exhortations promises and threatninges tendred the Angels of them whether in behalfe of themselves it maters not much to this purpose or which is certaine in behalfe of the Churches In particular to that of Ephesus II. 45. But I have this against thee that thou hast left thy first love Remember therefore whence thou art â—allen and repent and doe thy first workes Otherwise I will come to thee suddenly and remove thy canâ—lesticke out of the place thereof if thou repent not How should any man be exhorted by the Spirit of God to returne to those workes that were not the workes of a true Christian How should the Judgement threatned take effect and no soule perish that had been saved otherwise To that of Thyatira II. 25. 26 28. But hold what you have untill I come He that conquereth and keepeth my workes to the end I will give him power over the Nations and he shall rule them with an iron rodde as a potters vessells are broken as I also haâ—e received of my Father And I will give him the morning starre What means this exhortation to them that are not capable of doing otherwise What means the power of Christ and the morning starre if not the reward of the world to come To that of Pergamus III. 11 Behold I come suddenly Hold what thou hast lest another take thy crowne Is it not plaine that he shall be saved if he hold what he hath That he shall not if another take his crowne Can S. Pauls severe sentences be avoided 1 Cor. VI. 9 10. Know ye not that the injurious shall not inherit the kingdome of heaven Be not deceived Neither whoremongers nor Idolaters nor adulterers nor the soft nor abusers of themselves with mankind nor thieves nor those that defraude nor drunkards nor revilers nor robbers shall inherit the kingdome of God Gal. V. 19. 20. 21. The workes of the â—lesh are manifest which are these Adultery fornication uncleannesse wantonnesse Idolatry witchcraft enmities strifes jealousies animosities provocations divisions sects envies murders drinkings debauches and the like to these of which I told you before hand aâ— I foretold you that they who doe such thinges shall not inherit the kingdome of God Eph. V. 58. For this ye know that no whoremaster or uncleane person or that defraudeth who is an Idolatur hath inheritance in the kingdome of God and of Christ Lâ—t â—o man deceive you with vaine wordes For for these thinges cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience Be ye not therefore partners with them For ye were darknesse but are now light in the Lord. Walâ—e as children of the light They that sowe pillowes under sinners elbowes excusantes excusationes in peccatis according to the vulgare translation Psal CXL 4. and treating termes of reconcilement betweene Christ and Belial betweene the promises of the Gospell for everlasting and the pleasures of sinne for a moment will not have this to belong to the godly whome they allow to doe such thinges for a snap and away without forfeiting their interest in the world to come but to the unregenerate who live in a setled course of such sinnes without remorse And I freely allow that so soone as the godly man whome they suppose to be overtaken with any such sinne shall take such a course to turne from it as may restore in him that resolution of mind for which God accepts a true Christian he is restored to the place which he held in Gods grace not as never forfeited but as recoverd anew In the meane time if any pretense be made that being once in Gods favor he can never faile of it it is as
sacrifices and other ceremonies thereof how little soever they minded the true intent and meaning of it were the true predecessors of the Scribes and Pharisees in our Lords time and the Prophets and their disciples the forerunners of our Lord and his Apostles and that both persecuted both upon the same score of account The inward righteousnesse of the heart which God onely alloweth being that which both preached and professed though the former under that knowledge of God and of his will with the Law the other which the Gospell advanceth And this the true and reall ground why they and that which befell them under the Old Testament do beare the figure of our Lord and his Apostles and that which befell them by the rulers of the Jewes in the New According to the words of our Lord Mat. XXIII 34 where he showeth that by crucifying himself and persecuting his disciples they do but fill up the measure of their Fathers wickednesse And S. Paul of the Jewes to the same effect 1 Thes II. 15 16. Who both killed the Lord Jesus and their own Prophets and please not God and oppose all men Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved For wrath is come on them to the end I say then that under that dimme light of Gods will which the Saints of the Old Testament injoyed when the world to come was not yet covenanted for nor the sayings and doings of our Lord Christ manifested to invite to Christianity it is necessarily consequent that God should accept of that obedience under the law which as it must come from a sincere heart and studious of pleasing him so must it needs come short of that perfection which the Gospel requireth For as I said before that love of God with all the heart and all the soul and all the might which the Law requireth is limited by the precepts of the law which whoso observes with all the heart and so forth must be thought to have performed that love wherein then the observation of Gods law consisted As for the precept of not coveting of which S. Paul sayes Rom. VII 7-11 that he had not known concupiscence had not the Law said Thou shalt not covet And Saint Augustine observes that being joyned to to the precept of loving God above all things they comprise all Christianity Though all this be true according to the spirituall sense of the Law yet according to the leter it cannot be denied that the last precept of the decalogue forbiddeth onely compassing that which is another mans Counting his wife in that number because there was then meanes to compasse another mans wife without breaking the Law which allowed of divorces And therefore this is the senâ—e of that which followeth in S. Paul Sinne taking advantage wrought in me all concupiscence by the commandment For without the Law sin is dead But I once lived without the law But the commandment coming sin revived and I died And the commandment which was to life was found for me to death For sin taking occasion by the commandment deceived me and so slew me All this I say as the rest of that Epistle concerning the inability of the Law to bring us to righteousnesse is to be understood of the outward and litterall sense of the law To wit that the Israelites before they received the Law and so other men without the Law understood not that it was a sinne but a piece of wit to compasse a mans wife or goods without violence or to commit that uncleannesse to which the law had assigned no penalty So the Law being given and having assigned no penalty to the transgression of this precept was it marvile that sin prevailing over that conviction of the conscience which the precept tendered should seduce a man to give way to concupiscence and turn the precept that was given for life to his death He then that was not imposed upon with this â—light of sinne but received the commandment as Gods who hath other penalties in store then those which the Law assigneth if out of conscience to God he observed the Laws of his worship from the heart if he kept all that which not onely the penalties assigned by the law but the will of God declared by the precept convinced him to take hold of his conscience is it not reason to conclude that he fulfilled that measure of spirituall righteousnesse which God for that time required of them whom he assured of the world to come upon condition of such obedience Which if it be so that obligation to this righteousnesse which was so declared under the Law is that Law of spirituall obedience which God judgeth those by whom for that time he accepted unto the reward of the world to come As for the precept of loving our neighbour as our selves having showed that it concerned onely Israelites under the Law I have also by the same meanes showed that they were to detest the Gentiles as Idolaters that detestation being the meanes to keep them up to the service of God from falling away to Idols Whereupon as by the Law he that fell from the Law and seduced his kindred to do the like was to find no maner of pity at the hand even of his brethren Deut. XIII 8. So also it is provided by the Jews Constitutions that they shall observe no rule of common equity in seeking evidence against such a one to bring him to conviction and to make him an example And as for those hypocrites which under pretense of the outward and carnall observatiof the Law persecuted the preachers of true spiritual righteousnesse the Prophets of Old and our Lord and his Apostles who pretended to carry it unto the Gentiles whom they hold themselves obliged to hate as having been once Idolaters it is visible that those Saints who suffered persecution at their hands did not find themselves tied to that measure which the Gospel prescribeth of praying for their enemies to the utmost This is seen in those curses which David and Jeremy pursue their enemies with the Gospel having prescribed for a generall rule to all Christians Blesse them that curse you Mat. V. 44. Luke VI. 27. Rom. XII 14. 1 Pet. III. 9. James III. 9. I deny not that herein they were figures and forerunners of our Lord and his disciples and their sayings prophesies of the curses that should overtake the people of the Jewes for persecuting them For I have showed just now the ground upon which this is to be received But I challenge that ground also which I setled at the beginning that the mysticall sense of the Scripture alwayes supposeth a litterall sense and that these things cannot be understood to be fulfilled in our Lord Christ but that first they must have been verified in the Prophets themselves In whome as it is plaine that the persecutions for which they curse did come to passe so plaine it is that their curses fell upon their persecutors For nothing
have not received any more the Spirit of bondage to fear but ye have received the Spirit of adoption whereby ye cry Abba that is Father For those that are led with the hope of temporall promises as all must necessarily be led under that Law which was established upon such must needs be subject to fear of disgrace with God whensoever their sinnes allowed not those promises to take place So then though they were then partakers of Gods Spirit as the Prophet Ezekiel showes us XXXVI 27. XXXVII 14. XXXIX 20. Yet in as much as it is called the Spirit of feare there is due argument that they were not pertaker of that peace and joy in the holy Ghost which Christians afterwards were moved with to indure all persecution for the maintainance of their profession But the Apostle pointeth us ouâ— further the sourse of this feare Heb. II. 14 15. When he saith that our Lord Christ tooke part â—f flesh and bloud that by death he might abolish him that had the power of death â—ven the devil and discharge all those that through the fear of death were all their life long subject unto bondage For so long as the promises of this life ended in death and the punishments thereof conducted to it they who knew that death came into the world upon the transgression of Adam could not think themselves discharged of Gods wrath so long as they found themselves liable to the debt of it No marvaile then if the Spirit of God were the Spirit of fear in them who saw not as yet the kingdom of death dissolved by the rising of our Lord Christ from the dead Another argument I make from the words of our Lord when the disciples were ready to demand fire from heaven upon those Samaritanes that received them not after the example of Elias Luke IX 52-56 Ye know not what Spirit ye are of saith our Lord For the Son of man came not to destroy but to save mens lives Whereby he declareth that because the Gospel bringeth salvation whereas the Law wrought wrath as S. Paul saith by tendring conviction of sinne without help to overcome it Rom. III. 20. IV. 15. VII 8-11 therefore God requireth under the Gospel of those that are his the Spirit that seeketh onely the good of them from whose hands they receive it not Whereas under the Law even his Prophets revenged themselves of their enemies by vengeance obtained at Gods hands And by this meanes we have an answer for that difficulty otherwise insoluble in our Lords words of John Baptist Mat. XI 11. Verily I say to you there never arose among those that are born of women one greater then John the Baptist But the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater then he For if God under the Law required not of his Prophets that perfection of Charity which the Gospel exacteth of all Christians if in those things which they said and did by Gods Spirit they have not expressed it well may it be said that the least of all those that belong to the Gospel in truth which here is called the kingdom of heaven is in a respect of so great concernment greater then the Prophets of the Old Testament As for the example of Jael the wife of Eber the Kenite who being in league with Jabin and Siâ—era for the good of Gods people knocked him on the head being retired into the protection of her house and is commended for it by the Spirit of God in Deborah the Prophetesse Jud. V. 17-21 VI. 24-28 The instance indeed is difficult enough And they that are so ready to condemne the fact of Judith in cutting off Holefernes by deceit and that by the example of her father Simeon that spoiled and destroyed the men of Shecheâ—â— contrary to covenant Judg. IX 2. Gen. XXXIV 23. are not advised how to come clear of it Suppose there was just cause of hostility between them a daughter of the house being dishonoured by the Prince of that people For among Gods people their chastity was alwayes as highly valued as it was little regarded among Idolaters Suppose that they condescended to be circumcised not for love to the true God but for hope of increasing their own power and riches by bringing the Israelites under their Government as there is appearance enough in the words of Hamor Gen. XXXIV 20 21 22. Yet a league being inacted upon such a pretense the zeal of Simeon and Levi in destroying those that were come under the covering of Gods wings so farre very well figures the zeal of the Jewes in persecuting the Apostles and not allowing the Gentiles any room of salvation by their own onely true God And therefore it is excellently observed by S. Jerome Tradit Hebr. in Genesin that the Scribes were of the tribe of Simeon as the Priests of the tribe of Levi in whom the curse of Jacob by the Spirit of God detesting their fact and prophesying the like to those their successors in the case of our Lord Christ and his Apostles I will divide them in Jacob and scatter them in Israel Gen. XLIX 5 6 7. was evidently fulfilled in the mysticall sense The tribe of Levi for gathering of Tithes and the tribe of Simeon for imployment of Clarkes and Notaries dwelling dispersed through all the tribes as Solomon Jarchi in his glosse upon the place literally expoundeth it But the case of Judeth is the case of a stratageme in professed hostility which whether Christianity allowe or not certainly no Law of nations disallowes And therefore though she propose to her self the zeale of Simeon and Levi for the honour of their people and the successe they had against their enemies yet if we understand her not to commend the meanes by which they brought it to passe to wit by violating the publick faith we shall not find her contradict the Spirit of God which by Jacob condemns them for it As for the â—act of Jael it is in vaine to alledge any mysticall sense to justify it as some would do unlesse we can undertake that there was no such thing done in the way of historicall truth which I suppose no man will be so madde as to do And therefore if any man will not believe that the Spirit of God in Deborah extolls onely the temporall benefit which the people of God reâ—ped by that fact of hers for which she was alwayes to be famous amongst them leaving to her self the justification of her conscience Let him seek a better answer But he who transgressing that Charity that is fundamentall in Christianity and therefore without which no Christian can obtaine the Spirit of God shall make her example a motive to that which he cannot justify even in Gods ancient people Though I allow him to mistake Christians for Pagans and Idolaters whose professed enmity to Gods people upon the account of Religion was the ground of that revenge which they were allowed then to pursue them with yet I must not allow him
that would onely be saved So that the workes whereby they are pursued must be called workes of supererogation because he that does them layes out more upon Gods service then he is obliged to do They are the words of our Lord to the disciples Mat. XIX 11 12. All are not capable of this word of not marrying For there are Eunuchs which were so born from their mothers wombe And there are Eunuchs which were made Eunuchs by men And there are Eunuchs that have made themselves Eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven He that is capable let him hold this Here it is said that God hath made some men of such constitution of nature that they are able to containe themselves from marriage and that this is the gift of continence which whoso hath falls under a command of not marrying whoso hath not of marrying But when our Lord exhorts those that are able to containe themselves from marriage to strive for that grace certainely he makes not that a gift of nature which he would have a man indeavour to attaine He that is exhorted to make himself an Eunuch is not so made by God but from God he hath the grace to preferre the kingdom of heaven before even that content which God alloweth him here and if he betray not that grace by preferring that content before the clearest and securest meanes of attaining it he will not faile of grace to performe that which he resolves for Gods sake And truely it were strange that the Gospel should make that grace which conducts to the height of Christianity to consist in an indowment of nature But S. Pauls wordes will take no nay 1 Cor. VII 25-28-36 37 38. Of Virgins I have no precept of the Lord but give advise as having received mercy of the Lord to be faithfull I think then this expedient for the present necessity that it is good for a man to be thus Art thou tied to a wife seek not to be loose Art thou loose from a wife seek not a wife But if thou marry thou sinnest not and if a virgine marry she sinneth not Onely such shall have affliction in the flesh But I spare you Againe If a man think he deales unhansomly with his Virgine if she passe her flour and so it must be let him do as he please he sinneth not let him marry But he that standeth firme in his heart having no necessity but hath power over his own will and hath resolved this in his heart to preserve his Virgine doeth well So he that marrieth her doeth well but he that marrieth her not doeth better Is the sunshine more manifest then this A man may resolve either of both for his daughter a Virgine supposing her will to follow his as generally the duty of the children is which S. Paul here supposeth and not sinne but do well yet better in containing from marriage because of the advantage which that state yeildeth Christianity as S. Paul showes Therefore he declares that God hath given no law in it but his Apostle gives that advise for the best which his Lord had done The same Apostle of Widowes 1 Tim. V. 5 9-14 She that is a Widow indeed and desolate hopeth in God and continueth in supplications and prayers night and day And let no Widow be listed under threescore years old having been the wife of one husband having a testimony for good works that she hath bred up her children entertained strangers washed â—he Saints feet helped the afflicted followed every good work But refuse younger Widowes for when they grow wanton against Christ they will marry Being to be condemned because they have renounced their first faith And withall they learn to be idle and to go about from house to house and not onely idle but tattlers busie bodies speaking things unfitting Therefore I would have the younger marry Here is againe a clear case Timothy is directed to liâ—t some Widowes for the service of the Church in the state of Widowes others to refuse That which commends the one for the preferment is the exercise of those workes which they could not have had opportunity for in the state of wedlock That which renders the others dangerous is because for them to desire marriage is to grow wanton against Christ Wherefore when S. Paul would have them to marry it is not because he denieth in the next words that state of proficience which he had acknowledged just afore but because it is better to hold the mean then to fall from the highest ranck of Christianity Which serves to resolve his meaning as well as his Masters 1 Cor. VII 1 2 6 7. For that which you writ to me about it is good for a man not to touch a woman But because of fornication let every man have his own wife and every woman her own husband But this I speake of indulgence not by command For I would all men were even as my self But every one hath his proper grace of God some thus some otherwise Doth not the grace of God in married people assiâ—t in the offices of Christianity towards those relations which marriage procureth Correspondently therefore the Grace of God in the continent is not a natural temper obliging them so to live But the helps that inable them to discharge themselves like Christians in a higher rank among Christians So that the perfection of Christianity lies not in the state of continence but in the rank of it That is to say in â—hose offices of Christianity wherein their estate gives them opportunity to be conversant the state being no otherwise so accountable then because there is a presumption that persons are such as they ought to be and as their state gives them opportunity to be The perfection of Christianity then consisteth in the love of God and in his service and the service of Christians for Gods sake That is in spending a mans life in those offices in which there is most regard to God least to our owne temporall interest But is it unreasonable to count that a state of perfection which generally and in reason is the meanes for it because it is found to be practised to other effects Is it unreasonable to think that God who hath need of all states for the service of his Church and giveth those severall graces which are requisite to make severall men serviceable for severall states should not determine by law but leave to their choice whom he indues with those graces that which containes not the work of Christianity but being indifferent by kind is neverthelesse by kind the meanes to procure it Saint Paul gives this reason why he wrought for his living rather then take any thing of the Corinthians in these termes It were better for me to dye then that any man should void that which I glory in For if I preach the Gospel I have nothing to glory of for necessity lies upon me yea woe to me if I preach not the Gospel For if I do
Advocate with the father Jesus Christ the righteous and he is the propitiation for our sins And when David who had the spirit of God upon the same termes as Christians have it excepting that which hath been excepted prayeth Psalm XIX 13 14. Who understandeth his errours Clense me from hidden sins Keep thy servant also from presumptuous sins that they beare not rule over me Then shall I be upright and cleane from great transgressions He showeth sufficiently the difference between veniall and mortall sins as to Christians which in case of invincible ignorance and meere supprize comes to no sin as to Christians But he showeth also that Christians neglecting themselves may come to fall into sins of persumption which he prayeth against For the rest the same S. Iohn incouraging Christians to pray for the sins of Christians with this limitation as I surppose if by their advice they appear to be reduced to take the cours which may procure pardon at Gods hands acknowledgeth further that there is a sin unto death I say not that yee pray for it saith he 1. John V. 16. 17. And the Apostle to the Hebrews VI. 4 5 6. speaketh of some sin which he acknowledgeth not that it can be admitted to penance for the obtaining of forgivenesse which he protesteth again Ebr. X. 26 -31 XII 16 17. It is commonly thought indeed that to deny the true faith against that light which God hath kindled in a mans conscience is hereby declared to be a sin that repentance cannot cure Or rather that God hereby declareth that he will never grant in repentance And truly that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost which our Lord saith shall never he pardoned neither in this world nor in the world to come Mat. XII 31 32. Mark III. 28 29. Luke XII 10. manifestly consisteth in attributing the works which the holy Ghost did to convert men to Christ to the devill being convinced that our Lord came from God by the workes he did for that purpose Just as Saint Steven reproaches the Jewes for resisting the holy Ghost as their Fathers had done Acts VII 51. And that there is no cure for this sin it is manifest because it consisteth in rejecting the cure And apostasy from Christianity which is manifestly the sinne which the Apostle to the Hebrews intendeth differeth from it but as the obligation to Christianity once received differeth from that Christianity which being proposed with conviction a man is bound to receive But otherwise not onely the Church but the Novatians themselves supposed that those who had denied the Faith might recover pardon of God by repentance Nor can it become visible to the Church what is that conviction which whoso transgresseth becomes unpardonable because God hath excluded him from repentance In the meane time how difficult the Primitive Church accounted it to attaine pardon of such sinnes appeares by the excluding of the Montanists and Novatians first then by the long Penance prescribed Apostates Murtherers and Adulterers least the admitting of them to Penance might seem to warrant their pardon upon too light repentance Saint Paul admits the incestuous person at Corinth whether to Penance or to Communion with the Church But upon what termes Least the offender should be swallowed up with extream sorrow and least Satan should advantage himself against them should he refuse it And because having written out of great anguish of heart with teares for them who presumed to bear him out in it he had found them moved with sorrow according to God to repentance with all satisfaction and desire of peace with the Apostle 2 Cor. II. 1-8 VII 7-11 For we understand by Saint Paul 1 Cor. V. 2. 2 Cor. XII 21. that even the Church themselves when they shut a sinner out of the Church did make demonstration of sorrow for his case And therefore himself much more was put to mourning and to professe by his outward habit that he thought his sinne incurable without sorrow answerable to it And when Saint Paul commands the Collossians III. 5. Mortify your members that are upon earth fornication uncleannesse passion evill desire and covetousnesse which is idolatry For which the wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience It is manifest that he placeth the mortifying of these vices in the afflicting and humbling of our earthly members wherein the lusts of them reside Therefore he serves his own body no otherwise but striving for the prize of Christians like one of their Greekish Champions that would not beat the aire he beates his own body black and blew to bring it under servitude Least having preached to others himself should become reprobate 1 Cor. IX 26 27. And certainly if Christianity require this discipline over Saint Pauls body least he should fall into sinne it will require very great severity of them that are fallen into sinne to be exercised upon their bodies the lusts whereof they have satisfied by those sinnes to regain the favour and appease the wrath of God and to settle that hatred of sinne and that love of goodnesse in the heart which the preventing of sinne for the future necessarily requireth The practice of the Old Testament sufficiently signifieth the same Though David in the Psalme that I mentioned afore seem to make the pardon of his sin a thing easily obtained at Gods hands as it is indeed a thing easily obtained supposing the disposition which David desired it with but not that disposition a thing easily obtained yet you shall find the same David elsewhere wetting his bed and watring his couch with his teares so that his beauty is gone with mourning his flesh dried up for want of fatnesse and his bones cleave to his flesh for the voice of his mourning Indeed he alwayes expresseth his affliction to be the subject of his mourning But alwayes acknowledging his sins to be the cause of those afflictions which he therefore takes the course to remove by taking this course for his sinnes The Prophet Esay I. 15 16. thus calleth the Jewes to appease Gods wrath Wash ye make ye clean remove the evil of your workes from before mine eyes cease to do evil learn to do good seek righteousnesse Sure this was never intended to be done by the meer thought of doing it But the Prophet Joel having threatned a plague what doth he prescribe for the cure And now saith the Lord return to me with all your heart with fasting weeping and mourning and rent your hearts and not your garments and turn to the Lord your God for he is gracious and mercifull long-suffering great in mercy and repenteth him of evill Blow the trumpet in Sion sanctify a fast invite the assembly gather the people sanctify a Congregation make the old and young and the sucking infants meet let the bridegroom come forth of his chamber and the bride of her closet let the Priests the ministers of the Lord weep between the Porch and the Altar and say Spare Lord thy people and
served by his Church It is plain enough to all that have the use of reason what that communion of the Church and the Society thereof is able to effect and hath effected in preserving the Rule of Christianity wherein the salvation of Christians consisteth free and intire from the infection of mens devices expresly or by consequence destructive to it as well as the conversation of Christians from unchristian manners But if the Church be trusted to exact the profession of Christianity of all that require by Baptisme to be admitted unto the Communion of the Church It must by consequence be intrusted to exact of them also the performance of that which they have professed that is undertaken to professe For the profession being the condition upon which they are admitted to the Communion of the Church the performance or at least a presumption of the performance must needs be the condition upon which they injoy it Upon this ground the Church becomes not onely a number of men but a Society Corporation and Communion of Christians in those Offices wherewith God hath declared that hee will be served by Christians For upon supposition of such a Declaration or such a Law of God it is that the Church becomes a Body or Corporation of all Christians though under several Common-wealths and Soveraignties of this world As there are in all States several by Corporations subsisting by some act or Law of the Soveraign Powers of the same For if God had not appoâ—â—ted what Offices hee will be served with by his people at their common Assemblies there could be no ground why the Church should be such a Society founded by God there being nothing appointed by God for the members of it to communicate in But were there nothing but the Sacrament of the Eucharist acknowledged to have been delivered by God to his people to be frequented and celebrated by them at their common Assemblies that alone would be enough to demonstrate the foundation and institution of the Communion and Corporation of the Church by God For of a truth the rest of those Offices wherewith God requires to be served by Christians are the same by which hee required to be served by his ancient people before Christianity setting aside that difference with the divers measure of the knowledge of God in this and in that estate must needs produce Though there is no serving of God by the blood of bulls and goats nor by other ceremonies and sacrifices of Moses Law under Christianity Yet were the praises of God the hearing of his Word read and the instructing and exhorting of his people in it and to it together with the sacrifice of Prayer frequented by Gods people under the Law as still God is served and is to be served with them under Christianity And upon this account I have truly said elswhere as I conceive it that the Corporation of the Church is founded upon the privilege which God hath granted all Christians of assembling themselves for the service of God though supposing that the Powers of the world should forbid them so to do For this privilege consists in nothing else but in that command which God hath given his Church of serving him with these Offices Whereupon it necessarily insues that notwithstanding whatsoever command of Secular Powers they are forbidden to serve God in the Communion of them that are not of the Church Seeing they cannot be commanded to serve God in the Communion of the Church but they must be forbidden to serve God in the Communion of them which are not of the Church And upon this ground stands all the Power which the Church can challenge in limiting the circumstances and conditions upon which men may communicate in these Offices Which as it may justly seem of it self inconsiderable to the world and the Powers that govern it So when those Powers take upon them to establish the exercise of it by their Lawes If they maintain not the Church in that Power which of right and of necessity it had from God before they professed to maintain Christianity they destroy indeed that which in word they professe But if they take upon them to maintain it in the right which originally it had to limit the said circumstances by such Rules as by the act of Secular Powers become Lawes to their people then must the Power of the Church become as considerable as it is indeed in all States and Common-wealths that retain the Christianity which they had from the beginning in this point This being the ground and this the mater of Ecclesiastical Lawes and the Sacrament of the Eucharist being that Office proper to Christianity in order to the Communion whereof all Lawes limiting the circumstances and conditions of the said Communion are devised and made It seems requisite to my designe in the first place to void those Controversies concerning the same which all men know how much they have contributed to the present divisions of the Church For the determination of them will be without doubt of great consequence to determine the true and right intent of those Lawes which serve onely to limit those circumstances which are onely the condition of communicating in this and those other Offices Concerning which there is no other controversie on foot to divide the Church but that which concerns the said circumstances Now what differences concerning the Sacrament of the Eucharist are mater of division to the Church I may suppose all the world knows the opinion of Transubstantiation being so famous as it is Which importeth this That in celebrating this Sacrament upon pronouncing of the words with which our Lord delivered it to his Disciples This is my Body this is my Bloud the substance of the elements Bread and Wine ceaseth and is abolished the substance of the Body and Bloud of Christ coming into their stead though under the species of Bread and Wine that is to say those accidents of them which our senses witnesse that they remain In opposition whereunto some have proceeded so farr as to teach that this Sacrament is no more than a meer sign and the celebration and communion thereof barely the renewing of our Christian profession of believing in Christ crucified whom it representeth importing no spiritual grace at all to be tendred by it from God Which may justly seem to be the opinion of the Socinians and properly to give the name of Sacramentaries to all that professe it For in reason and justice wee are to difference it from the opinion of those that hold it for a sign appointed by God to tender the Body and Bloud of Christ spiritually to be received by it of as many as with a lively faith communicate in it Though these also cannot pretend to make it any more than a sign by virtue of that consecration which makes it a Sacrament Seeing it is the faith of him that receives it as they say which makes it the Body and Bloud of Christ spiritually though truly
and really to him that so receives it There is besides another opinion extremely distant from this last in regard thaâ— whereas this ascribes the presence of the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Eucharist to the faith of them that receive it which is after the consecration of the Sacrament in as much as it is exercised in receiving the same the other extreme opinion that I speak of attibutes it to the hypostatical Union of the two natures in the person of Christ the consequence whereof they will have to be this That the perfections of the God-head are communicated to the humane nature in the person of Christ exalted to the Power of gathering and conducting his Church through this world to the world to come Because this Power being to be exercised in our nature requires and imports the attributes of the God-head to the executing and in the executing of it For seeing the Manhood of Christ cannot communicate with his God-head in giving this spiritual assistance to his Church but first it must be present and seeing this assistance is given by the Sacrament of the Eucharist of necessity they think the Body and Bloud of Christ must be present in the Eucharist to give this assistance by virtue of the hypostatical Union ordained for that purpose And so this opinion becomes extremely opposite to the last because it attributes the presence and so the receiving of the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist to that Faith which takes effect after that consecration which makes the Sacrament Whereas this attributes the same to the hypostatical Union of the Manhood with the God-head in Christ taking effect without exception after his exaltation to glory which it is manifest is so long since past and done before the celebration of it CHAP. II. That the natural substance of the Elements remains in the Sacrament That the Body and Bloud of Christ is neverthelesse present in the same when it is received not by the receiving of it The eating of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse necessarily requireth the same This causes no contradiction nor improperty in the words of our Lord. THis being the question wherein I am now to give judgment and no more required of a Divine than to give such a meaning to those few Scriptures which depose in it as may no way contradict the Rule of Faith I shall without considering how to content those factions which these opinions have made content my self by delivering that opinion which I conceive best satisfies the plain words of the Scripture without trenching upon any ground of Christianity within which the meaning of the Scriptures is to remain I say then first that if wee will not offer open violence to the words of the Scripture and to all consideration of reason that may deserve to direct the meaning of it wee must grant in the first place That the bodily substance of Bread and Wine is not abolished nor ceaseth in this Sacrament by virtue of the consecration of it And of this I conceive the manifest words of the Scripture wheresoever there is mention of this Sacrament are evidence enough Mat. XXVI 26-29 And when they were eating Jesus took bread and having blessed brake and gave it to his Disciples saying Take eat this is my Body And taking the cup hee gave thanks and gave it to them saying Drink yee all of it For this is that bloud of mine of the New Testament which is shed for many unto remission of sins And I say unto you I will not drink from henceforth of this production of the vine till I drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdome In S. Mark I can imagine no maâ—er of difference but this Mark XIV 24 25. This is my bloud of the New Testament which is shed for many Verily I say unto you that I will not drink of that which the vine brings forth till I drink it new in the kingdome of God In S. Luke thus XXII 17-20 And taking the cup hee said Take this and divide it amongst you For I say unto you that I will not drink of that which the Vine brings forth till the kingdome of God come And hee took bread and having given thanks brake it and gave it to them saying This is my Body which is given for you Do this in remembrance of mee Likewise also the cup after having supped saying This cup is the New Testament in my bloud which is shed for you S. Paul 1 Cor. XI 23-32 For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered to you that the Lord Jesus in the night that hee was betrayed took bread and having given thanks brake it saying Take eat this is my body which is broken for you This do in remembrance of mee Likewise also the cup after having supped saying This cup is the New Testament in my bloud This do so often as yee drink it in remembrance of mee For so often as you eat this bread and drink this cup yee declare the Lords death till hee come Therefore whoso eateth this bread or drinketh this cup unworthily is guilty of the body and bloud of Christ But let a man examine himself and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For whoso eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords Body Therefore many among you are sick and weak and many fall asleep For if wee did discern our selves wee should not be condemned But when wee are judged wee are chastised by the Lord that wee be not condemned with the world And again 1 Cor. X. 16 17 18. The cup of blessing which wee blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ The bread which wee break is it not the communion of the Body of Christ For as the bread is one so wee many are one body For wee all partake of the same bread Had not a man as good bid the Scripture be silent for hee will believe what hee list notwithstanding the Scripture as set all this evidence upon the rack to make it deny that which it cries aloud For when S. Matthew tells us that our Lord took bread and having blessed brake and gave it saying This is my Body that hee took the cup and having given thanks gave it to them saying This is my Bloud Is it not as manifest that hee sayes This bread is my Body this wine is my Bloud as that hee sayes This is my Body this is my Bloud Unlesse wee think that This can demonstrate any thing but that which had been spoke of afore in the processe without giving any mark to know what it is that hee meant to demonstrate There is none of them that deny this but will be puzzled to say himself what hee would have the Disciples to whom this is said understand by This forbidding them to understand that which went before In S. Mark S. Luke and S. Paul the
difficulty is the same For is not This of which our Lord speaks the same that hee took If you say not so because hee gave thanks before hee said This is my Body This is my Bloud at least it must be that which hee broke after hee had given thanks and that of necessity is the same bread which hee took as the same wine For to imagine that This demonstrates bread and wine which when hee sayes is my Body and Bloud are then abolished to make room for the Body and Bloud is that which his affirmation is will by no means allow requiring that which it affirmeth to be verified for that time which it demonstrateth or presenteth to the understanding So that This must be the Body and Bloud of Christ at such time as it is This that is that Bread and that Wine which Gods word demonstrateth In fine whatsoever it is which This may be said to demonstrate besides Bread and Wine it will be unpossible to make appear that the Disciples understood that which the Scriptures whereby wee must learn what they understood expresse not But this is not all When S. Matthew sayes I will drink no more of this production of the Vine which S. Luke sayes that our Lord said before the consecration of the Sacrament either wee must say that hee repeated the same words which is nothing unlikely seeing the tender of the cup at which they were said is repeated by our Lord as it is agreed upon that the Jewes at the Supper of the Passeover did customarily repeat the same And this answer takes away all imputation of confusion from the text of S. Matthew But if any man stand upon it that these words were said onely before the consecration though they are repeated by S. Matthew after it at the delivering of the cup and therefore that it is not called wine which is in the cup after the consecration If hee consider how pertinently hee makes S. Matthew bring in this saying upon the delivery of the cup not supposing that to be wine which was in it hee will finde himself never a whit easied by that escape For how grosse were it for him to put these sayings together This is my bloud of the New Testament which is shed for many to the remission of sins And I say unto you I will drink no more of this production of the Vine had hee not taken that which was in the cup for wine The same holds in the words of S. Mark having followed S. Matthew in this So when S. Paul makes our Lord say Take eat this is my Body which is broken for you is it not manifest that breaking is properly said of bread of a body of flesh not without some impropriety to be understood by that which is common to bread and to a body of flesh And would S. Paul have used a term which necessarily referrs him that hears it to bread were it not bread which our Lord brake after the consecration of the Sacrament in resemblance wherewith this body is said to be broken because it was wounded But when the same S. Paul speaking of that which they take which they eat which they drink which certainly they do after the consecration when it is the Sacrament saith So oft as yee eat this bread and drink this cup yee declare the Lords death till hee come Therefore whoso eateth this bread and drinketh this cup unworthily is guilty of the body and bloud of Christ Is there then any reason left why wee should not believe bread to be bread and wine to be wine when the word of God sayes it but that whatsoever the word of God say wee are resolved of our prejudice And when hee saith again Let a man examine himself and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup speaketh hee of eating and drinking any thing else but that which all Christians receive in the Sacrament of the Eucharist If any thing can possibly be more manifest than this it is that which hee addeth arguing that all Christians are one Body â—s the bread is one to wit which they eat because they all partake of onâ— bread And therefore when hee saith further The cup of blessing which weâ— blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ The bread which wee break is it not the communion of the body of Christ I will not insist upon this that it is called bread after the blessing though S. Matthew observeth that our Lord calleth it so after giving of thanks because the cup may be called the cup of blessing which wee blesse before the blessing be past and done But I say confidently that to make our Lord say that the bread is the communion of the Body and the cup that is the wine that is in the cup which is blessed for what else can be understood to be in the cup with correspondence to bread is the communion of the bloud of Christ is to make him say that which hee did not mean unlesse hee did mean that that is bread and wine whereby Christians communicate in the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist But shall this evidence of the nature and substance of Bread and Wine remaining in the Sacrament of the Eucharist even when it is a Sacrament that is when it is received either deface or efface the evidence which the same Scriptures yield us of the truth of Christs body and blood brought forth and made to be in the Sacrament of the Eucharist by making it to be that Sacrament Surely wee must not suffer such a conceit to prossesse us unlesse wee will offer the same violence to the manifest and expresse words of the Scripture For of necessity when our Lord saith This is my body this is my blood either wee must make is to stand for signifieth and This is my body this is my bloud to be more than this is a sign of my body and bloud Or else the word is will inforce the elements to be called the body and bloud of Christ at that time and for that time when they are not yet received That is to say whether hee that receives them who think it for their advantage to maintain that This is my body and my bloud signifies no more but this is a sign of my body and bloud to advise how they can ground the true real participation of the body and bloud of Christ in by the Sacrament of the Eucharist upon the Scripture allowing no more than the signification of the body bloud of Christ by that Sacrament to be declared in those words of the Scripture that describe the institution of it For that a man receives the body and bloud of Christ spiritually through faith in receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist is no more than hee does in not receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist if by the act of a living faith wee do eat the flesh of Christ and drink his
that to be true and by the consideration of it is induced to resolve and undertake the profession of Christianity hee it is that eats and drinks the flesh and bloud of Christ till hee depart from the effect of it For no man can be thought to feed upon that which hee vomits up again Neither can there be found a more exact correspondence than that which is seen between the nourishment of the body in the strength whereof it moves and those reasons whereupon the minde frames the resolutions from which a mans conversation proceeds And because God hath promised to give the Holy Ghost to them that faithfully resolve this and that as many as have the Holy Ghost their mortal bodies shall by the Holy Ghost that dwelleth in them be raised to life everlasting Rom. VIII 11. therefore they that thus eat the body and bloud of Christ shall not dy but live unto everlasting This being the eating and drinking of Christs flesh and bloud spiritually by Faith and that when the Sacrament of the Eucharist is instituted the effect of it must needs be the same spiritual nourishment and sustenance of the soul but by a new means to wit the receiving of that Sacrament As the eating and drinking of the flesh and bloud of Christ spiritually by faith presupposes the flesh of Christ crucified and his bloud poured forth so must the eating of it in the Sacrament presuppose the being of it in the Sacrament to wit by the being and becoming of it a Sacrament Unlesse a man can spiritually eat and drink the flesh and bloud of Christ in and by the Sacrament which is not in the Sacrament when hee eats and drinks it but by his eating and drinking of it comes to be there Hee therefore spiritually eats and drinks the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament who considering the profession Christ calls us to with that faith which supposes him to have signed his calling by finishing his course upon the Crosse resolves to undertake the same and in that resolution participates of the Eucharist But if the flesh and bloud of Christ be not there by the virtue of the consecration of the elements into the Sacrament then cannot the flesh of Christ and his bloud be said to be eaten and drunk in the Sacrament which are not in the Sacrament by being a Sacrament but in him that eats and drinks it For that which hee findes to eat and drink in the Sacrament cannot be said to be in the Sacrament because it is in him that spiritually eats and drinks it by faith Either therefore the flesh and bloud of Christ cannot be eaten and drunk in the Eucharist or it is necessarily in the Sacrament when it is eaten and drunk in it in which if it were not it could not be eaten and drunk in it This is further seen by the words of S. Paul when inferring his purpose to wit that Christians ought not to communicate in things sacrificed to Idols upon that which hee had premised The cup of blessing which wee blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ The bread which wee break is it not the communion of the body of Christ hee addeth 1 Cor. X. 18 20 21. Look upon Israel according to the flesh do not they which eat the Sacrifices partake with the Altar What say I then That an Idol is any thing Or that a thing sacrificed to an Idol is any thing Rather that what the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to Devils and I would not have you partake with Devils Yee cannot drink the cup of God and the cup of Devils Yee cannot partake of the Lords Table and the table of Devils These words manifestly suppose the Eucharist to be the communion of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse For as our Lord saith This cup is the New Testament in my bloud or my bloud of the New Testament so is it manifest that God in inacting his Covenant that is his Testament proceeds according as the custome was among the most ancient Nations of the world to solemnize the establishment thereof with sacrifice I have showed you before that the Law was covenanted for with sacrificing Holocausts and Peace-offerings the bloud whereof was sprinkled on all the People But the Elders in the name of the people feasted upon the remaines Exod. XXIV 5-11 And among the Sacrifices of the Law those sin-offerings wherein the Priests shared with the Altar in behalf of them whose sins they expiated by them and the peace-offerings wherein those that offered them as well as the Priests that offered them shared with the Altar had their effect by virtue of the Law and the Covenant which introduced it And therefore they contained a new act by which the Covenant was renewed as to the particular purpose of those Sacrifices and the effect of them in them for whom they were made Correspondently the Covenant of Grace being inacted by the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse as to Gods part that is to say so farr as to oblige God to grant remission of sins and life everlasting to all those that are baptized into the faithfull profession of Christianity is renewed in the Consecration and Communion of the Eucharist whereby that Sacrifice is renewed and revived unto the worlds end So that as those who eat of the Sacrifices of the Altar whether by the Priests or by themselves did feast with God whose Altar had received and consumed a part of those Sacrifices So those that communicate in the Eucharist do feast upon the Sacrifice of our Lord Christ on the Crosse which God is so well pleased with as to grant the Covenant of Grace and the publication thereof in consideration of it This being evidently that correspondence which the discourse of S. Paul requires remains manifestly proved by the same Though of a truth the words of our Lord when hee saith This is my bloud of the New Testament which is shed for you Or This cup is the New Testament in my bloud which is shed for you cannot otherwise be understood than by taking This cup or This which our Lord speaks of to stand for the action of giving and receiving the Sacrament not for that which is given and received in it and by it For otherwise how should a Cup or that which is in it be a Testament But in as much as the Communion of the Eucharist proceeds upon supposition of the Covenant of Grace and therefore imports a profession both on Gods part and on his that receives it of performing the condition to which respectively they binde themselves by the same In that regard nothing can be more properly said than that God tenders by that Sacrament all that the Gospel promises and man by receiving it the Condition which God covenants for at his hands Which whether you call the New Covenant or the New Testament it maters not an heir upon condition of performing the will of the dead being in
the same state with him that contracteth upon articles But there is as much said when our Lord saith onely This is my body which is given for you if it be rightly understood that is supposing the body of Christ to have been given to be sacrificed for us upon the Crosse For hee that tenders this to eat thereby declares that hee incites to the profession of that Covenant which otherwise appears to have been inacted by that which hee tenders The same sense is contained in S. Pauls words 1 Cor. V. 8 9. Christ your Passeover is slain for you Let us therefore feast not with old loven nor with the leven of malice and deceit but with the unlevened bread of sincerity and truth For if wee consider the circumstance of time and place which our Lord took to institute the Sacrament of the Eucharist just when the Paschal Lamb was eaten how shall wee deny the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse to have been as presently received there as the Sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb was the subject and occasion of the Feast at which hee ordained it But the discourse by which the Apostle perswades Christians to separate themselves from the Jewes Ebr. XIII 10-16 is most pertinent to this purpose as that which is not to be understood otherwise Though when hee saith Wee have an Altar whereof those that serve the Tabernacle have no right to eat I allow that by an Altar hee means metonymically a Sacrifice For proving his intent by instancing in those Sacrifices for sin the bloud whereof was carried within the vail being by the Law appointed to be burnt without the Camp or City Jerusalem hee supposes them to figure our Lord Christ who suffered without Jerusalem Inferring thereupon that they ought to go forth of the communion of the Synagogue though they were to suffer persecution at the hands of their brethren for it But when hee proceedeth By him therefore let us offer to God the sacrifice of praise continually that is the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his Name And to do good and to communicate forget not for with such sacrifices God is well pleased Either wee must conceive him to return to his purpose and to show what Sacrifice hee meant when hee said Wee have an Altar of which they that wait upon the Tabernacle have no right to eat Or wee can give no reason what hee meant to argue that the Jewes have no right to the Sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse which Christians pretend not to eat of in any Sacrifice but in the Eucharist And surely if wee consider but the name of Eucharist wee cannot think it could have been more properly signified than by calling it the sacrifice of praise the fruit of the lips that confesse the Name of God For when hee proceeds to exhort not to forget communicating their goods do wee not know and have wee not made it to appear that this must be by their oblations to the Altar the first-fruits of their goods whereof the Eucharist being first consecrated the rest served the necessities of the Church Which as hath been showed was the original of all Consecrations and Dedications that have been made in Christianity If therefore the eating of the Sacrifice of the Crosse in the Sacrament of the Eucharist mean no more but the signifying and the figuring of that eating of the Sacrifice of the Crosse which is done by a lively Faith that is by every one that considers the death of Christ with that Faith which supposing all that the Gospel sayes of it to be true resolves faithfully to professe Christianity the question is why the Sacrament of the Eucharist was instituted by God why in those elements and to what purpose seeing without Gods appointment men could have done it of themselves to the same effect But if it be manifest that by the Sacrament of the Eucharist God pretends to tender us the communion of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse then is there another presence of the body and bloud of our Lord in the Sacrament beside that spiritual presence in the soul which that living faith effecteth without the Sacrament as well as in the receiving of it Which kinde of presence you may if you please call the representation of the Sacrifice of Christ so as you understand the word representation to signifie not the figuring or resembling of that which is onely signified But as it signifies in the Romane Laws when a man is said repraesentare pecuniam who payes ready money Deriving the signification of it à re praesenti not from the preposition re Which will import not the presenting of that againe to a mans senses which once is past but the tendring of that to a mans possession which is tendred him upon the place That this is the intent of the Sacrament of the Eucharist one peremptory argument there remains in the words of S. Paul when hee sayes Whoso eateth this bread and drinketh this cup unworthily is guilty of the body and blood of Christ For neither can it be said that the Apostle by way of hyperbole calls the slighting of Gods ordinance which hee hath appointed to signifie Christs death the crucifying of our Lord again Because it is manifest that his menace is grounded upon a particular consideration of the nature of the crime not upon that which is seen in every sin Renouncing Christianity indeed is truly the crucifying of Christ again as the Apostle shewes Ebr. VI. 6. and unworthily receiving the Eucharist is by just construction the renouncing of Christianity because that is it which renews the bond of observing it But otherwise it were too cold an expression to make S. Paul call it the crucifying of Christ for that which is common to all sins Nor would it serve the turn For when it follows Hee that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords Body Unlesse a man discern the Lords Body where it is not of necessity it must there be where it is discerned to be not made to be there by being discerned to be there It will now be objected that I hold things inconsistent and state such a sense of our Lords words as makes contradictories true For if bread and wine remaining bread and wine can be also the body and bloud of Christ that is unlesse granting them to be that which they are wee deny them to be that which is not that which wee grant them to be there will be no cause why wee should believe any thing to be that which it is more than that which it is not All difference being a sufficient ground of that contradiction which denies any thing to be that which differs from it that is which it is not The difficulty of answering this is the same which every man findes when hee is put to prove that which is most evident or to make that clear by words which all mens common sense admits Supposing
as our Lord was when hee spoke the words that I indeavor to clear When therefore the properties of the divine nature are attributed to the Manhood of our Lord supposing as all good Christians do that neither natures nor properties are confounded what can wee say but this That by such attributions as these in the Language of his Prophets the Apostles God would have us understand a supernatural conjunction and union of two natures in one person of our Lord And what shall wee then say when the name of Christs body and bloud is attributed to the bread and wine of the Eucharist but that God would have us understand a supernatural conjunction and union between the body and bloud of Christ and the said bread and wine whereby they become as truly the instrument of conveying Gods Spirit to them who receive as they ought as the same Spirit was alwaies in his natural body and bloud For it maters not that the union of the two natures is indissoluble that of Christs body and bloud onely in order to the use of the elements that is speaking properly from the consecration to the receiving The reason of both unions being the same that makes both supernatural to wit the will of God passed upon both and understood by the Scriptures to be passed upon both though to several effects and purposes Therefore I am no way singular in this sense All they of the Confession of Auspurg do maintain it before mee and think it enough to say that it is an unusual or extraordinary maner of speech when one thing is said to be another of a several kinde and nature but which the unusual and extraordinary case that is signified both expounds and justifies They indeed maintain another reason of this presence and therefore another maner of it For if by virtue of the hypostatical union the omnipresence of the God-head is communicated to the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist then is the flesh and bloud of Christ there not onely mystically but bodily But if supposing both the elements and the flesh and bloud of Christ bodily present it may neverthelesse truly be said This is my flesh This is my bloud How much more if as I say the elements onely be there bodily but the flesh and bloud of Christ onely mystically and spiritually And therefore I finde it reasonable for mee to argue that the sense of so many men both learned and others understanding the words of our Lord in this sense ought to convince any man that it is not against common sense and therefore tending so much to make good the words of our Lord and the holy Scripture it not to be let go I do not intend neverthelesse hereby to grant that the sense of these words This is my body this is my bloud for This is the signe of my body and bloud is a true sense because abundance of learned as well as ordinary people take it so to be But well and good that it might have been maintained to be the true sense of them had no more been expressed by the Scripture in that businesse For then I suppose the sense of the Church of which I say nothing as yâ—t could not have evidenced so much more as I have deduced by consequence from the rest of the Scripture But the mystical presence of the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Eucharist being further deduced from the Scripture by good consequence I conceive the common understanding of all those men who granting that do not grâ—nt the Elements to be abolished sufficient ground for mee that the signification of these words This is my body this is my bloud inforceth it not Whereas on the other side the substance of the Elements is not distinguishable by common sense from their accidents for whether the quantity and the mater be all one or not whether beside the mater and accidents which the quantity is invested with a substantial form berequisite is yet disputable among Philosophers And therefore no reason can presume that the Apostles to whom these words were spoken did understand This of which our Lord speaks to signifie the sensible accidents of bread an swine severed from the material substance of the same I may therefore very well undertake to say that this sense of the words is more proper than conceiving the substance of bread and wine to be abolished the effect of grace to the Church remaining the same For the property of speech is not to be judged by the signification of a single word but by the tenor of the speech wherein it stands and the intent of him that speaks declared by his actions and the viâ—ible circumstances of the same Now our Lord having taught those to whom this was spoken that the eating of his flesh and drinking of his bloud is done by living faith must be supposed by appointing this Sacrament tendring his flesh to eat and his bloud to drink to limit and determine an office in the doing whereof his flesh and bloud is either eaten and drunk or crucified according to the premises If then the eating and drinking of his flesh and bloud out of the Sacrament be meerly spiritual by living faith shall not the presence thereof in the Sacrament be according Shall it not be enough that they are mystically present in the Sacrament to be spiritually eaten by them that receive them with living faith to be crucified of them that do not Is it any way pertinent to the spiritual eating of them that they are bodily present Is it not far more proper to that which our Lord was about tending without question to the spiritual union which hee seeks with his Church that hee should be understood to promise the mystical than the bodily presence of them in the Sacrament which is nothing else than a Mystery by the proper signification and intent of it I grant an abatement of that which the terms of body and bloud were originally imposed to signifie being without question that which is visible and subject to sense But if the nature of the action which our Lord was about of the subject which his words expresse be such as requires this abatement then cannot the original sense of these words be so proper for this place as this abatement Here I will observe that the Council of Trent it self Sess XIII cap. I. speaketh so warily in this mater as not to exclude all maner of tropes from the right sense of these words saying Indignissimum sanè flagitium est ea à quibusdam contentiosis pravis hominibus ad sictitia imaginarios trapos quibus veritas caernis sanguinis Christi negatur contra universum Ecclesiâ— sensum detorqueri It is indeed a very great indignity that they are by some contentious and perverse persons wrested aside to contrived and imaginary tropes whereby the truth of Christs flesh and bloud is denied contrary to the whole sense of the Church They were wiser than to
this cup unmorthily should be guilty of the body and bloud of Christ as not discerâ—ing it according to S. Paul 1 Cor. XI 27 28. unlesse wee suppose the same Sacramentally present by virtue of that true Christianity which the Church professing and celebrating the Sacrament tendâ—eth it for spiritual nourishment to a living faith for mater of damnation to a dead faith For if the profession of true Christianity be as of necessity it must be mater of condemnation to him that professeth it not truly that is to say who professing it doth not perform it shall not his assisting the celebration and consecration of the Eucharist produce the effect of rendring him condemned by himself eating the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament out of a profession of Christianity which spiritually hee despiseth for not fulfilling what hee professeth Or that living faith which concurreth to the same as a good Christian should do be left destitute of that grace which the tender of the Sacrament promiseth because the faith of those who joyn in the same action is undiscernable Certainly if the Sacramental presence of Christs body and bloud tendring the same spiritually be a blessing or a curse according to the faith which it meets with it can by no means seem unreasonable that it should be attributed to that profession of Christianity which makes it respectively a blessing or a curse according to the faith of them for whom it is intended As for that opinion that makes this presence to proceed from the Hypostatical Union passed so long before it stands upon those Scriptures which seem to signifie that those properties wherein the Majesty of Christs God-head consists are really communicated to this Manhood in the doing and for the effecting of those works wherein that assistance and grace and protection which hee hath promised his Church upon his Exaltation consisteth S. Paul writeth to the Colossians that It pleased that all fulnesse should dwell in Christ in whom dwelleth all the fulnesse of the God-head bodily as hee expresseth himself more at large Col. II. 9. that they by him might be filled and by him to reconcile all things tâ— himself making peace by the bloud of his Crosse by him I say whether things on earth or in the Heavens And you being once estranged and enemies in your mind through evil works yet now hath hee reconciled through the body of his flesh by death to present you holy and without spot and blamelesse before him Here it is plain enough that our Reconciliation is ascribed to the flesh of Christs body as to his bloud after in whom wee have Redemption even the remission of sins by his bloud Col. I. 14 19-92 to wit for the fulnesse of the God-head dwelling bodily in Christ When our Lord saith all things are delivered mee by my Father Mat. XI 27. in order to the revealing of his Gospel that is to the making of it effectual When hee saith All power in heaven and earth is given mee Mat. XXVIII 18. a question is made how given if a necessary conâ—equence of the Hypostatical Union I answer Because the exercise thereof was limited by the appointment of God and the purpose for which hee caused the Word to dwell in our flesh which though of force to do all things should not have had right in our flesh to execute that which God had not appointed And therefore is our Lord Christ justly said to receive that power of God which by degrees hee receiveth commission to exercise The sitting of Christ at the right hand of God I have showed that the Apostle makes an argument of divine power and authority dwelling in our flesh in the person of Christ Heb. I. 3. Acts II. 33. V. 31. Eph. I. 20-22 where S. Paul ascrbies the filling of the Church a work of God alone to it And as hee sits on Gods own Throne so he shall judge all as man saith our Lord John V. 21 22 23 26-30 and raise them up and quicken them to that purpose For the Throne of God on which Christ is set down is the Seat of his Judgement And therefore as I live saith the Lord God in the Prophet Es XLV 23. Christ in the Apostle Rom. XIV 11. to mee shall every knee â—ow and every tongue shall give glory tâ— God To the same purpose is all that you read of anointing our Lord Christ with the Holy Ghost given him by God without measure saith the Baptist John III. 34. if you understand it not of the habitual graces poured forth upon the Manhood of Christ from the fulnesse of the God-head dwelling bodily in it of the truth whereof neverthelesse there is no disputes but of the very Majesty of the God-head communicated unto it in the person of Christ as of a truth I have said that they are to be understood In fine not onely the â—erit but the applâ—cation thereof that is the effecting of the cleansing of our consciences from sin is ascribed unto the bloud of Christ Ebr. IX 14. 1 John I. 7. How or in what regard but because by the eternal Spirit hee offered up himself blamelesse to God as the Apostle saith In which regard onely it is that our nature in Christ is honoured with the worship due to God because being for ever inseparable from the God-head of the Word it is not to be appreheâ—ded or figured so much as in the imagination but as the flesh of the Word This is a brief of the Scriptures which they allege to inferre that seeing hee hath promised to feed his Church with his flesh and his bloud in the Sacrament of the Eucharist which cannot be unlesse they be there And seeing the like works are performed and executed by the flesh that is the Manhood of Christ through the virtue of the God-head united unto it Therefore it is to be believed that by communication of the Majesty of the God-head to the flesh of Christ it becomes present wheresoever his promise and the comfort and strengthening of his Disciples which is the work of his Mediators Office whereunto by sitting down at Gods right hand heâ— is installed requires the presence of it If it be said that by this position the attributes and properties of the God-head are placed in the Manhood as their own proper Subject into which they are transferred by the operation of the God-head not devesting it self of them but communicating them to the Manhood to be thenceforth properties really residing in it and therefore truly to be attributed to it I must do them right and acknowledge that they utterly disclaim this to be their meaning Confessing thereby that if it were they could not avoid the imputation of Eutyches his Heresie condemned by the great Council of Chalcâ—don the confusion of the natures remaining unavoidable when the properties of the God-head being communicated to the Manhood in this sense can be no more said to remain the properties of it I undertake not thus much
and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist is a very great miracle taking that to be miraculous which requires the infinite power of God to effect it not that which contains a visible effect thereof apt to bear witnesse to that truth which it is done to confirm I must remit you to that which hath been already said to judge whether the miracle consist in abolishing the substance of the Elements and substituting the body and bloud of Christ in their stead Or in placing the substance of Christs body and bloud under the same dimensions in which the substance of the Elements subsisteth Or rather then either of both that it be enough to ingage the infinite power of God that by his Spirit hee tendreth the flesh and bloud of Christ so Sacramentally present in the Elements that whoso receiveth them faithfully thereby communicates as truly in the Spirit of God according to his Spirit as according to his body hee communicates Sacramentally in his body and bloud Here is the place for mee to allege those Scriptures which inform us of the true nature and properties of the flesh and bloud of Christ remaining in his body even now that it is glorified For if in the proper dimensions thereof hee parted from his Disciples and went was carried or lifted and taken up into heaven Acts I. 2 9 10. 1 Pet. III. 22. Luke XXIV 50 51. Mark XVI 19. If in the same visible form and dimensions hee shall come again to judgement Acts I. 11. 1 Thes IV. 16. if the Heavens must receive him till that time for sure no man will be much tempted with that frivolous conceit that S. Peters words Acts III. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are to be construed whom it behoveth to contain the Heavens but whom it behoveth that the Heavens contain Unlesse it could appear how S. Peter should understand the body of Christ to contain the heavens not the heavens it sitting at Gods right han◠till his Enemies be made his foot-stool Psal CX 1. if to that purpose hee leave the world John XVI 28. no more to be in it XVII 11. so that wee shall have him no more with us Mat. XXVI 11. it behoveth us to understand how wee are informed that the promise of his body and bloud in the Eucharist imports an exception to so many declarations before wee believe it Indeed there is no place of Gods right hand by sitting down at which wee may say that our Lords body becomes confined to the said place But seeing the flesh of Christ is taken up into Heaven to sit down at Gods right hand Though by his sitting down at Gods right hand wee understand the man Christ to be put into the exercise of that divine power and command which his Mediators Office requires Yet his body wee must understand to be confined to that place where the Majesty of God appears to those that attend upon his Throne Neither shall the appearing of Christ to S. Paul Acts XXIII 11. be any exception to this appointment Hee that would insist indeed that the body of Christ stood over Paul in the Castle where then hee lodged must say that it left Heaven for that purpose For that is the miracle which the Text expresseth that hee was there whose ascent into Heaven it had reported afore But seeing the very body of Christ might in a vision of Prophesie appear to Paul in the Spirit without any contravention to that determination which the Scripture otherwise had expressed Were it not madnesse to go about to limit the sense and effect of it upon pretense of a promise altogether impertinent to the occasion in hand and every whit as properly to be understood without so limiting the sense of it This is all the argument that I pretend to maintain upon this consideration Knowing well enough that it is said indeed that the flesh of Christ remaining in Heaven in the proper dimensions thereof which the Exaltation allowes nothing hinders the same to be present under the dimensions of the Elements whether the substance of them be there which Consubstantiation allowes or whether they be abolished as Transubstantiation requires Which hee that would contradict must enter here into a Philosophical dispute whether or no the infinite power of God can bring to passe either or neither of these effects That is to say whether it imply a contradiction that the body and bloud of Christ which is as sure in Heaven as the faith of Christ is sure should at the same time be present in the Sacrament of the Eucharist under the dimensions of the Elements whether wee suppose the substance of them to be abolished or to remain present This dispute I am resolved not to touch at this time Partly for that reason which I have alleged upon other occasions Because I desire to discharge this Book being written in our mother tongue of all Philosophical disputes tending rather to puzzle than to edifie the main of those that speak English Partly for a reason peculiar to this point because it hath been argued that if wee deny Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation as contradictory to reason there can be no cause why wee should cleave to the Faith of the Trinity which every man sees to be no lesse contradictory to humane reason than either of both For though I do no ways admit this consequence because it is evident that the nature of bodily substance is far better comprehended by mans understanding than the incomprehensible nature of God which it is impossible to apprehend any thing of but under the resemblance of something belonging to sensible substance yet I am willing to go to issue without drawing this dispute into consequence referring to judgment whether the evidence for Consubstantiation or Transubstantiation be such as for the holy Trinity out of the Scriptures That is to say whether the presence of the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist is so to be understood as to void the confining of them to those dimensions which the Scripture allowes them in Heaven And this as necessarily by the Scripture as the Scripture necessarily obligeth to believe the Holy Trinity When as it may be more properly to the nature of the businesse understood mystically as in a Sacrament intended to convey the communion of his Spirit In the mean time allowing any man that submits his reason to all that Christianity imports the sober use of it in disputing whether the presence of the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist as Consubstantiation or as Transubstantiation requires be contradictory to the evidence of reason or not CHAP. IV. The opinion which maketh the Consecration to be done by rehearsing the operative words That our Lord consecrated by Thanksgiving The Form of it in all Liturgies together with the consent of the Fathers Evidence that there is no Tradition of the Church for the abolishing of the Elements COming now to consider wherein the Consecration of the Eucharist consists I find
no opinion on foot but that which hath taken possession by the authority of the School-Doctors that it is performed by the recital of these words This is my body This is my bloud in the Canon that is the Canonical or Regular Prayer for the Consecration of the Eucharist of the Masse For those that have set aside this Prayer and do not allow the opinion that these words are operative to the effecting of that which the institution of the Eucharist promises though they retain the recital of them in the action yet have not declared any common agreement wherein they intend to maintain the Consecration of the Eucharist to stand And is it not then free for mee to declare that I could never rest satisfied with this opinion of the School-Doctors as finding it to offer violence to common sense and the truest intention of that which wee may see done in consecrating the Eucharist For when our Lord takes the Elements in his hands and blesses them or gives God thanks over them then breaks the bread and delivering them bids his Disciples take and eat them because they are his body and bloud is it not manifest that they are so called in regard of something which hee had already done about them when delivering them hee calls them at that present time of delivering them that which hee could not call them afore his body and bloud No say they that is easily understood otherwise from the common customes which men use in civil conveyances Nothing being more usual by several customes of several nations then to convey the right and possession of house or land by delivering writings testifying certain deeds done to that effect to put in possession of a house by delivering the key or the post to be held or putting into the house by delivering a turf of the land to be conveyed to put into rightful possession of the same adding the like words to these Here is this house or this land take it for thine own But in vain Those that use this escape consider not that our Lord said these words Take eat drink this is my body this is my bloud when hee delivered them So that if by saying these words hee made them that which the words signifie then by delivering them hee made them that which they signifie For so the like words serve in delivering possession to expresse the intent of him that delivers it To which overt act of delivering the right of possession and the conveying of it is as much to be ascribed as to the words which animate it by expressing the intent of it Which if it be true then were the Elements which our Lord delivered to his Disciples consecrated by delivering them And therefore by consequence the Eucharist is never consecrated but by delivering of it Seeing of necessity the Eucharist is consecrated by the same means as the first which Christ communicated to his Disciples was consecrated But this can by no means stand with the intent of them that maintain this opinion supposing as they do that the Sacrament is consecrated before it be delivered to them that receive it And hence starts another argument For these words as they are used in consecrating the Eucharist are part of the rehersal of that which ouâ— Lord Christ did when hee consecrated that Eucharist which hee gave his Disciples And will any reason endure this that the Eucharist be thought to be consecrated by reciâ—ing what Christ said when hee delivered that Eucharist which hee had consecrated And not by doing what Christ commanded to be done when hee appointed it to be celebrated Certainly hee that sayes Christ took bread and blessed it and brake it saying Take eat this is my body sayes what Christ did and said before and when hee delivered it Hee that sayes further that hee said do this in remembrance of mee sayes that Christ instituted this Sacrament But to say that Christ instituted this Sacrament is not to consecrate that Sacrament which Christ instituted That is not done but by doing that which Christ is said to have done And is not Christ said to have blessed the Elements Is it not said that having taken and blessed and broken the bread delivering it to his Disciples hee affirmed it to be his body at the present when hee delivered it Can the becoming of it his body be imputed to the taking or breaking or delivering of it Doth it not remain then that it be imputed to the blessing of it Here finding it evident by comparing the Evangelists one with another and with S. Paul that blessing and giving of thanks in this case are both one and the same thing signified by two words I must needs inferre that blessing the Elements is nothing else but giving God thanks over them which at the present our Lord had in hand with intent to make them the Sacrament of his body and bloud The people of God in our Lords time were wont to take nothing for meat or for drink without first giving God thanks solemnly for it as they had it in hand You may see how scrupulous they were in this point by the title of Blessings the first of the Talmud where you have those forms of thanks-giving recorded and the circumstances at which they were to be used in receiving several kinds which were some of them doubtlesse more ancient than our Lords time A practice fitting for Christianity to continue setting aside that superstitious scrupulosity of forms and circumstances wherein the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees consisted Therefore S. Paul withstanding those Hereticks that taught to abstain from meats which God hath made to be participated with thanks-giving by the faithful and such as have known the truth 1 Tim. IV. 3 4 5. addes for his reason Because every creature of God is good and none to be rejected received with thanks-giving For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer The word of God inabling Christians to receive it with a good conscience so as they may expect Gods blessing which they have desired by their prayers For is it not manifest that having said that every creature is good which a Christian receives with thanks-giving when hee addes that it is sanctified by prayer grounded on Gods words hee includes in that thanksgiving which hee means prayer to God for a blessing upon it The creatures of God then are sanctified to the nourishment of our bodies by Thanks-gving with prayer for Gods blessing And shall wee think that that Thanks-giving wherewith they are sanctified to the nourishment of our Souls doth not include prayer to the effect intended that they may become the body and bloud of Christ which God by this Sacrament pretends to feed our Souls with And doth not the execution of our Saviours Institution when hee sayes Do this consist in giving God thanks for the redemption of Mankind with prayer that wee may be fed by the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist
Certainly the word Do this is that which the whole action is grounded upon as pretending to execute it and therefore the effect of it so far as consecrating the Eucharist is already come to passe when the Church may say This is our Lords Body this is his bloud as our Lord said This is my body this is my bloud But the strength of this resolution I confesse lies in the consent of the Church and those circumstances visible in the practice thereof which to them that observe them with reason are manifest evidences of this sense I have observed in a Book of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church p. 347-370 the passâ—ges of divers of the most ancient Writers of the Church in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or giving thanks is put for consecrating the Eucharist Unto which adde the words of Irenaeus in Eusebius Eccles Hist V. 20. concerning the then Bishop of Rome Anicetus when Polycarpus was there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is hee gave way to Polycarpus to celebrate the Eucharist For seeing that this Sacrament that is the Elements consecrated are called the Eucharist all over the Church from this thanks-giving the act thereof passing upon them to give them by way of Metonymie this name What can be more reasonable than to grant that it is this act and not the rehersal of the words of the Gospel which relate what our Lord did and said in instituting as well as celebrating it by which the consecâ—ation is performed Though on the oâ—her side I insist that these words have alwayes been rehearsed by the Church in consecrating the Eucharist and ought still to be frequented and among them those which our Lord said when hee delivered it This is my body This is my bloud which now the whole School thinks to be the onely operâ—tive words in that change which the making of the Elemâ—nts to become the Sacrament imports I have also showed in the same place that S. Paul when hee saith 1 Cor. XIV 16 17. For if thou blesse by the Spirit hee that fills the place of an Idâ—ot or private perâ—on how shall hee say the Amen upon this thanks-giving For hee knoweth not what thou sayest For thou indeed givest thanks well but the other is not edified by blessing and giving thanks means the consecrating of the Eucharist which thoâ—e that hâ—d the grâ—ce of Languages among the Corinthians undertook then to do in unknown tongues and are therefore reproved by the Apostle Because it may appear by the constant practice of the whole Church that it ended with an Amen of the people which S. Paul therefore calls the Amen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to wit that was used in that case And also that when hee writeth to Timothy I exhort therefore first of all to make supplications prayers intercessions thanks-givings for all men For Kings and all that are in eminence that wee may lead a peaceable and quiet life in all piety and gravity hee intends to châ—rge that at the celebration of the Eucharist which here hee calleth Thanks-givings prayers be made as for all states of men so especially for publick Powers and Princes Because S. Augustine S. Ambrose and the Author de Vocatione Gentium I. 12. do expresly testifie unto us that the custome which the Church then and always afore and since hath had to do this came from this Ordinance of S. Paul and containeth the fulfilling of it And because it is manifest by all the forms of Liturgie in all Churches that are yet extant and by the mention made of the maner of it upon occasion in the writings of the Fathers that the Eucharist was never to be celebrated without prayer for all states of Christs Church And this indeed is a great part of the evidence which I pretend There are extant yet in several Languages several Liturgies that is forms of that complete Service of God by Psalmes and Lessons and Sermons and Prayers the Crown whereof was the Eucharist as that of S. Mark of S. James of S. Peter S. Basil S. Chrysostome which are the forms that were used in their Churches of Alexandria Jerusalem Rome Caesarea Constantinople though not as they had from the beginning appointed but as Prelates of authority and credit had thought fit to adde to or take froâ— or châ—nge that which they from the beginning had appointed There is besides the Canon of the Roman Masse that is the Canonical or Regular Prayâ—r which the Eucharist is consecrated with which is the same in Latine with that of S. Peter in Greek upon the mater as of a truth the Greek is but the Translation of the Latine it seems for the use of these Greeks in Italy that follow the Church of Rome and that of S. Ambrose at Milane three translated out of Arâ—biâ—k by the Mâ—ronites at Rome the Ethiopick translated â—into Latine many Canons called by them Anaphora in the Maronites Missal lately printed at Rome in the Syriack one of the Christians of S. Thomas in the East-Indies in Latine In all these you shall observe a Prayer to begin where the Deacon formerly saying Sursum corda Lift up your hearts the people answered Habemus ad Dominum Wee lift them up unto the Lord. The subject of it is at least where any length is allowed it to praise God for creating the world and maintaining Man-kind through his providence with the fruits of the earth Then after acknowledgement of Adams Fall for using first those means of reclaiming Man-kind unto God which wee find by the Scriptures that it pleased God to use under the Law of Nature first by the Patriarches then under the Law of Moses by the Prophets then sending our Lord Christ to redeem the world Upon which occasion rehearsing how hee instituted the Eucharist at his last Supper prayer is made that the Holy Ghost coming down upon the present Elements may sanctifie them to become the body and bloud of Christ so that they which receive them may be filled with his Grace This being so visible in so many of these Liturgies shall wee say that all that followes after the Deacons warning let us give thanks makes up that which the ancient Church after S. Paul by a peculiar term of art as it were calls the Eucharist or Thanksgiving Or that the Sacrament which taketh the name from it is consecrated onely by rehearsing those words which our Lord said when hee delivered it This is my body this is my bloud Especially all reason in the world inforcing that the presence of the body and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist being that which God promiseth upon the observation and performance of his institution and appointment cannot be ascribed to any thing else In the Latine Masse before the rehersal of the Institution they pray thus Quam oblationem tu Deus in omnibus quaesumus benedictam ascriptam ratam rationabilem acceptabilemque facere digneris Vt nobis corpus sanguis
fiat dilectissimi filii tui Domini nostri Jesu Christi Which oblation thou O God wee pray thee vouchsafe to make in all respects blessed imputable accountable reasonable and acceptable That it may become to us the body and bloud of thy well-beloved Son our Lord Christ Jesus Then after the Institution Jube haec perferri per manus sancti Angeli tui in sublime altare tuum in conspectu divinae Majestatis tuae Ut quotquot ex hoc altaris participatione sacrosanctum filii tui corpus sanguinem sumpâ—erimus omni benedictione coelesti gratia repleamur Command them to be carried by the hands of thy holy Angel unto thine Altar that is above before thy divine Majesty that as many of us as shall receive the holy body and bloud of thy Son by this communion of the Altar may be filled with all heavenly benediction and grace These two parts of this Prayer are joyned into one in most of those Forms which I have named whether before the rehersal of the institution or after it Onely in those many Forms which the Maronites Missal containeth the rehersal of the institution comes immediately after the Peace Which was in the Apostles time that Kisse of Peace which they command going immediately before the Deacons warning to lift up hearts to the Consecrating of the Eucharist Though those words are not now found in any of these Syriack forms For after the institution is rehearsed it is easie to observe that there followes constantly though not immediately but interposing some other Prayers a Prayer to the same effect with these two But in two several formes For in all of them saving two or three which pray that the Elements may become the body and bloud of Christ to the Salvation of those that receive by the Holy Ghost coming down upon them Prayer is made that this body and this bloud of Christ may be to the Salvation of the Receivers Which may be understood to signifie the effect of both these Prayers in so few words But it may also be understood to signifie that whosoever framed them conceived the consecration to be made by the rehersal of the institution premised Which if I did believe I should not think them ancient but contrived at Rome where they are printed upon the doctrine of the School now in vogue For in all formes besides the effect of these prayers is to be found without excepting any of those which wee may have any confidence of that they are come intire to our hands I demand then whether I have reason to attribute the force of consecrating the Eucharist upon which the Sacramental presence of the body and bloud of Christ depends to the recital of what Christ said or did at his celebrating the Eucharist or instituting it for the future Or to the Prayer which all Christians have made and all either do make or should make to the expresse purpose of obtaining this Sacramental as well as spiritual presence Hear how Justine describes the action Apolog. II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Having done our Prayers wee salute one another with a kisse Then as I said that the Peace was next before the Consecration is offered to the cheif of the Brethren bread and a cup of water and wine mixed Which hee takes and sends up praise and glory to the Father of all through the name of the Son and Holy Ghost Giving thanks at large that wee are vouchsafed these things at his hands To wit the means which God used to reclame Man-kind under the Law of nature and Moses and lastly the coming of Christ and his death and the institution of the Eucharist Who having finished his Thanks-giving and Prayers for the making of the Elements the body and bloud of Christ by the Holy Ghost all the people present follow with an acclamation saying Amen Afterwards hee calls the Sacrament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The food which thanks hath been given for by the prayer of that word which came from him That is which our Lord Christ appointed the Eucharist to be consecrated with when hee commanded his Disciples to do that which hee had done So Origen in Mat. XV. calls the Eucharist Panem verbo Dei per obsecrationem sanctificatum Bread sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer And contra Celsum VIII Oblatos panes edimus corpus sanctum quoddam per preces factos Wee eat the bread that was offered made a kinde of holy body by prayer Not that which is grounded upon that Word of God by which his creatures are our nourishment as Justine saith afterwards that Christians blesse God by the Son and Holy Ghost for all the food they take but that Word of Christ whereby hee commanded to do that which hee had done S. Cyril of Jerusalem Catech. Mystag III. saith That the bread is no more common bread after the calling of the Holy Ghost upon it Because hee saith afterwards Cat. Myst V. that the Church prayes God to send the Holy Ghost upon the Elements to make them the body and bloud of Christ As I said So S. Basil calls the form of Consecration which I showed you hee affirms to come by Tradition from the Apostles as here I maintaiu it doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The words of invocation To wit whereby wee call for the Holy Ghost to come upon the elements and consecrate them de Spiritu Sancto cap. XXVII S. Gregory Nyssene de vitâ Mosis saith the bread is sanctified by the Word of God which is his Son But to say further by what means hee adds in virtue of the blessing To wit which the Church consecrates the Eucharist with as our Lord did Optatus describes the Altars or Communion Tables which the Donatists broke For they were of wood not of stone Quo Deus omnipotens invocatus sit quo postulatus descendit Spiritus Sanctus On which almighty God was called to come down On which the Holy Ghost upon demand did come down S. Jerome describes the dignity of Priests Epist LXXXV Ad quorum preces corpus Christi sanguisque conficitur At whose prayers the Body and Bloud of Christ is made To wit by God And in Sophoniae III. Impiè agunt in legem putantes Eucharistiam imprecantis facere verba non vitam Et necessariam esse tantùm solennem Orationem non Sacerdotum merita They transgresse the Law of Christ thinking that the Eucharist is made by the words not the life of him that prayes over it And that only the customary prayer not the works of the Priest are requisite In fine as often as you reade mysticam precem or mysticam benedictionem when there is speech of the Eucharist in the Fathers be assured that which here I maintain is there understood True it is Irenaeus V. 2. affirmeth that the Bread and the Wine receiving or admitting the Word of God accipientia become the Eucharist of the Body and Bloud of Christ But what word this is hee
declares himself further when hee saith IV. 34. Panis percipiâ—ns invocationem Dei jam non communis est The bread that hath admitted the invocation of God is no more common bread To wit that word of instituion in virtue whereof the Church calleth upon God to make the elements his body and bloud Some of them say it is done by Gods word as the world was made by it But the world was made by the word of Gods command And in these words This is my body this is my bloud command there is none In these Do this in remembrance of mee there is a command which includes a warrant or promise Though the effect of it depend upon the execution of the command by the Church whereas immediately upon Gods word the world was made And this is that word S. Augustine meant when hee said Accedat verbum ad elementum sit Sacramentum The word being applyed to the element the Sacrament is made But this application is the execution of Christs Ordinance not saying that hee said This is my body this is my bloud For hee saith the body and bloud of Christ is onely that quod ex fructibus terrae susceptum ac prece mysticá consecratum rite sumimus Which wee duly receive being taken out of the fruits of the earth and consecrated by the mystical prayer which I speak of De Trinit III. 4. To the same purpose Epist LIX A saying or two of S. Chrysostomes indeed I remember that name those words speaking of the consecration as by which the flesh and bloud of Christ became present in the Eucharist In II ad Tim. Hom. II. that as the words which our Saviour then spoke are the same which the Priest now uses so is the Sacrament the same and consecrated by Christ as that was And Hom. de Judâ— hee saith to inferre the same The words are pronounced by the mouth of the Priest but the elements are consecrated by the Power and Grace of God This is saith hee my body By this word the bread and wine are consecrated Not by the rehearsing of these words but by virtue of his command Do this And by virtue of that blessing or thanksgiving upon which our Lord affirms the elements which hee had consecrated to be his body and bloud For the meaning may well be referred to the institution of Christ and the execution thereof by the Church which S. Chrysostom supposing may well say that upon this affirmative of our Lord This is my body this is my bloud depends the Consecration of the Eucharist Not as that which effecteth it but as that which evidenceth and assureth it in as much as it was said by our Lord Christ upon supposition of that blessing or prayer which hee appointeth it to be consecrated with So the Author de Caenâ Domini in S. Cyprian that since our Lord said Do this in remembrance of mee This is my body this is my bloud the bread and the cup being consecrated by these words become profitable to the salvation of man True it is indeed in as much as the appointment of our Lord Christ is not completely executed by consecrating the Eucharist but by respectively delivering and receiving it you may truly say that by virtue of these words Take eat this is my body this is my bloud that which every man receives becomes the body and bloud to him that receives it For as I have said that it becomes the sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse in order to our feasting upon it so is that which I receive completely and finally the body and bloud of Christ to mee when I receive it But this sense supposing it already to be the body and bloud of Christ to all that communicate in it according to Christs ordinance cannot be to the purpose of them that would have it become such to all that receive it by virtue of these words by which it becomes so finally to him that finally receives it An Objection indeed there is but which lies against the other opinion as much as against this out of S. Gregory Epist VII 64. Indict II. Orationem verò Dominicam idcirco mox post precem dicimus quia mos Apostolorum fuit ut ad ipsam solummodo orationem oblationis hostiam consecrarent Et valdè mihi inconveniens visum est ut precem quam Scholasticus composuerat super oblationem diceremus Et ipsam traditionem quam Redempâ—or noster composuit super eâ—us corpus sanguinem taceremus But the Lords Prayer wee therefore say straight after the Prayer because the custome of the Apostles was to consecate the sacrifice of oblation with that alone And it seemed to mee very inconvenient that wee should say over the oblation the Prayer which a School Doctor had composed And silence the Tradition which our Redeemer composed over his body and bloud For if the Apostles consecrated the Eucharist by saying the Lords Prayer as S. Gregory here seems to affirm thâ—n can there be no Tradition of the Apostles whereby a certain Prayer is prescribed as that wherein the consecration of the Eucharist consisteth Therefore if it should appear that S. Gregory did indeed believe that the Apostles used the Lords Prayer in celebrating the Eucharist with an intent to consecrate the Sacrament by the same I confesse I should rather adhere to S. Basil affirming the Apostles to have delivered certain words that is the meaning of certain words to call upon God for the consecrating of the elements into the body and bloud with For in so doing I should not preferâ— S. Basil but the whole Church the practice whereof so general and so original as hath been declared could have no beginning but that which our common Christianity pretendeth from the Apostles before S. Gregory And truly that the Consecration should end with the Lords Prayer I do easily believe to come from the practice of the Apostles so ancient and so general I finde that custom which S. Gregory maintains Nor is it any more that S. Jerome hath said in his third book against the Pelagians though hee is sometimes alleged for that which S. Gregory saith Sic docuit Apostolos suos ut quotidie in corporis illius sacrificio credentes audeant loqui Pater noster qui es in coelis So taught hee his Disciples that believers dare say every day at the sacrifice of his Body Our Father which art in heaven By â—nd by Paâ—em quotidianum sive super omnes substantias venturum Apostoli deprecantur ut digni sint assumptione Corporis Christi The Apostles pray for daily bread or above all substances to come that they may be worthy to receive the Body of Christ All this concerns the concluding of the Consecration with the Lords Prayer as it did alwaies conclude For â—â—r â—ight hee allegeth that as soon as a man is baptized coming to the Communion hee is to say Forgive us our Trespasses But before that form was made which
S. Gregory saith Scholasticus composed whether hee mean a man of that name or as I conceive some Doctor that professed the Scriptures if S. Gregory should tell mee that some other form to the same effect was not in use I could not believe him believing the premises The substance and effect whereof under the name of Eucharistia or the Thanks-giving is that which the Church from the beginning consecrated the Eucharist with by the appointment of our Lord and according to the practice of his Apostles So Rabanus de Institutione Clericorum I. 32. affirms that the whole Church consecrates with Blessing and Thanksgiving the Apostles having taught them to do that which our Lord had done Walafridus Strabus de Rebus Ecclesiasticis cap. XXII relates two several opinions concerning this businesse as it appears by his discourse Et relatio majorum est ità primis temporibus Missas fieri solitas sicut modò in Parasceve Paschae in quo die apud Romanos Missae non aguntur communicationem facere solemus Id est praemissâ— Oratione Dominicà sicut ipse Dominus noster praecepti commemoratione passionis adhibitâ eos Corpori Dominico communicâsse Sanguini quos ratio permittebat And there is a relation of our Predecessors that in the first times Masse was done as now on Good Friday on which day Masse is not said at Rome the communion is wont to be made That is that the Lords Prayer premised and the commemoration of his death applyed those whom reason allowed did communicate in the Body and Bloud of our Lord. The practice of the Church of Rome here mentioned is that which still continues not to consecrate the Eucharist either on Good Friday or the Saturday following For then Masse is said so late that it belongs to Easter day And on Maundy Thursday the Eucharist is consecrated and reserved to be received on Good Friday That any commemoration of Christs death is made at the receiving of it as Rabanus saith I finde not This is certain that no man imagines that the Eucharist is consecrated by any thing that is said or done at the receiving of it but at the Masse on the day before And this in the Greek Church is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Liturgy of the elements that were consecrated afore Which they use on other days besides Therefore this opinion that the Apostles should celebrate so would import that they celebrated the Eucharist without consecrating of it That is that they never appointed how it should be consecrated Which neither Rabanus nor any of these whose opinion he relates can maintain Nor supposing the premises is it tenable And therefore I take the true meaning of S. Gregories words to be laid down in another opinion related afore by Rabanus Quod nunc agimus multiplici orationum cantilenarum consecrationum officio totum hoc Apostoli post eos proximi ut creditur orationibus commemoratione passionis dominica faciebant simpliciter That which wee act by an Office compounded of many and divers Prayers Psalms and Consecrations all that the Apostles and the next after them did plainly with prayers and the commemoration of our Lords passion as it is thought For the consecration may well be understood to be made plainly by prayer with commemoration of our Lords passion in opposition to that solemnity of Lessons Psalms and Prayers which at the more solemn occasions of the Church it was afterwards celebrated with Though wee suppose it to conclude alwaies with the Lords Prayer as S. Gregory requires And herewith the words of S. Gregory seeâ— to agree when hee â—aith Vt ad ipsam â—solummâ—do orationem To consecrate at or with it alone not by it alone But if this opinion cannot passe having indeed no constraining evidence but that S. Gregories words will needs require that they conâ—ecrated the Eucharist by the Lords Prayer alone I will will then â—ay that the Apostles understood the petition of our dayly bread as S. Cyprian upon the Lords Prayer doth To wit of the breâ—d and drink of the Eucharist daily celebrated and received For supposing this intent and meaning there is nothing pretended to be done by the consecration which that Petition signifieth not Praying that God will give us this day the dayly food of our â—ouls by the elements presently provided for that purpose And all this will no way prejudice that which hath been said of the mater and form of the consecration derived by Tradition from the Apostles to be frequented at more solemn occaâ—â—ons of Christian Assemblies For that Assembly which believing that Christians are justified by undertaking to professe the Faith and to live according to it and that our Lord hath left us his body and bloud of the Eucharist to convey the Holy Ghost to our â—ouls that they may be able to perform what they undertake should pray the Lords Prayer over the Elements proposed with that intent I cannot doubt of their receiving the Body and bloud of Christ Provided that where the occasion will bear more solemnity the Order of the Church received from the Apostles be not neglected Whereas supposing Christians to believe that they are justified by believing that they are justified or predestinate in consideration onely of Christs sufferings and that the Eucharist is instituted onely for a signe to confirm this Faith Though they should regularly use that form of consecration which I maintain to come by Tradition from the Apostles I would not therefore grant that they should either consecrate the Eucharist or could receive the Body and bloud of Christ by it Sacrilege they must commit in abusing Gods ordinances to that intent for which hee never appointed it but Sacrament there would be none further then their own imagination And upon these premises I am content to go to issue as concerning the sense of the Catholick Church in this point If it can any way be showed that the Church did ever pray that the flesh and bloud might be substituted instead of the elements under the accidents of them then I am content that this be counted henceforth the Sacramental presence of them in the Eucharist But if the Church onely pray that the Spirit of God coming down upon the Elements may make them the body and bloud of Christ so that they which received them may be filled with the grace of his Spirit Then is it not the sense of the Catholick Church that can oblige any man to believe the abolishing of the Elements in their bodily substance because supposing that they remain they may neverthelâ—sse become the Instrument of Gods Spirit to convey the operation thereof to them that are disposed to receive it no otherwise than his flesh and bloud conveyed the efficacy thereof upon earth And that I suppose is reason enough to call it the body and bloud of Christ Sacramentally that is to say as in the Sacrament of the Eucharist It is not here to be denied that
places to burn the remains of the Sacrament as Hesychiuâ— in Levit. VIII witnesseth or at Constantinople to give them to School-boies had they not conceived the change of the elements to be in order to the use of them and that this use and that which is done in order thereunto expireth when the occasion of giving them to those for whom the Church interideth them ceaseth And upon these premises I conclude that as it is by no means to be denied that the elements are really changed translated turned and converted into the body and bloud of Christ so that whoso receiveth them with a living faith is spiritually nourished by the same hee that with a dead faith is guilty of crucifying Christ Yet is not this change destructive to the bodily substance of the elements but cumulative of them with the spiritual grace of Christs body and bloud So that the body and bloud of Christ in the Sacrament turns to the nourishment of the body whether the body and bloud in the truth turn to the nourishment or the damnation of the soul And upon these terms if I reade in S. Cyril of Jerusalem where afore that the elements in the Eucharist are not bread and wine I should think my self very simple to imagine that therefore S. Cyril believed Transubstantiation Knowing as any man that pretends to understand the nature and use of language ought to know that any thing may be absolutely denied to be that which in some sort it is not when a man intends to contest that in some sort it is not For so S. Cyril saith that the elements are not bread and wine to signifie that they are not bare bread and wine but mystically the body and bloud of Christ that is as in the Sacrament of it And to speak properly whoso believes Transubstantiation ought not to believe that the elements are changed into the body and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist For wheresoever there is a change there something of the subject that is changed ought to remain though it be not sensible Whereas in Transubstantiation the whole subject of Christs body and bloud is imagined to be substitured in stead of bread and wine under their dimensions and accidents Which is the absolute ceasing of them to be and the beginning of the thing signified not absolutely to be but to be under those dimenâ—ions So that there remains no subject for that change which the Fathers understand the accidents remaining unchanged the substance of the terms having nothing common to bear the passion of that change which must be attributed to it But what can be said to them that affirm in expresse terms that the substance of the elements remains unchanged Who are so many as may very well serve to interrupt and defeat any pretense of Tradition for the ceasing of them For there can be no pretense that any thing should belong to the common Faith of the Church the contrary whereof it hath been free for men of note and rank in the Church to professe The Author de Sacramentis in S. Ambrose IV. 4. Si ergò tanta vis est in sermone Domini Jesu ut incipiant esse quae non â—rant quantò magis operatorius est ut sint quae erant in aliud commutentur If then there is that force in the word of the Lord Jesus that those things should begin to be which were not How much more is it so operative that remaining what they were they be changed into what they were not Lanâ—ranck I see contra Berengarium hath questioned the reading of these words by saying that other Copies reade ut quae erant in aliud commutentur But I see also that hee had so little confidence in those Copies that â—ee held himself obliged to expound the other reading and say that they remain what they were in their accidents Which whether it serve the turn let common reason judge I see also that Guitmund Bishop of Aversa hath owned Berengarius his reading de Sacram. III. and therefore have no reason to distrust those who affirm that it is owned by Algerus Paschasius Berâ—ram Ives of Chartres Gratiane and P. Lombard in their quotations of it The words of S. Chrysostome Epistolâ ad Caesarium contra Apollin are these Sicut antetequam sanctificetur panis panem nominamus divinâ autem sanctificante gratiâ mediante Sacerdote liberatus quidem est ab appellatione panis dignus autem habitus est Demini corporis appellatione etsi natura panis in ipso permansit divinâ mundante naturâ As before the bread be consecrated wee call it bread But when the grace of God hath sanctified by the means of the Priest it quitteth the name of bread and is held worthy of the title of the Lords Body though the nature of bread remain in it So also here the divine nature cleansing Cardinal Bellarmine de Euchar. 22. allegeth that there is no such Epistle of S. Chrysostomes neither is it found in his works P. Martyr reports it as hee found it in a written Copy of the Library at Florence And it is found in the Bibliotheca Patrum and in several pieces collected by Canisius What would it then avail that it were not S. Chrysostomes but some other ancient Church Writers For neither the mater of the comparison between the inâ—amation and the Eucharist nor the terms in which it is delivered will ever render it suspicious to any man that observes those conceptions and expressions of the Fathers which I have reported in the premises Gelasius de dâ—abus naturis in Christo Certè sacramenta quâ— sumimus corporis sanguinis Christi divina res est prâ—â—ter quod per eadem divinae efficimur consortes naturae Et tamen esse non deâ—init substantia vel natura panis vini Certainly the mysteries of the body and bloud of Christ which wee receive is a thing divine Therefore by the means of them wee become also partakers of the divine nature And yet ceaseth not to be the naâ—uâ—e and substance of bread and wine By and by Sicut in hanc transeunt scilicet divinam Spiritu Sancto perficiente substantiam permanent tamen in suâ proprietate naturae As by the operation of the Holy Ghost they passe into this to wit a divine substance and yet remain in the property of their own nature Ephrem Patriarch of Antiochia in Photius Cod. CCXXIX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So also the Body of Christ which believers receive neither departs from the sensible substance nor is divided from the intelligible grate And spiritual baptisme which becometh and is one whole preserves the property of the sensible substance the water I mean yet looses not that which it is become This coâ—parison makes mee adde here that passage of those extractions out of Theodotus which is found at the end of Clemens Alexandrinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the bread of the Eucharist and the oile of the Chrâ—â—â—ne which
comparison S. Cyril of Jerusalem uses in this case is sanctified by virtue of the Name of Christ remaining the same for sensible substance for I confidently maintain that the negative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 destroyes the sense as the comparison justifies for who sayes that the oile of the Chrisme or the water of Baptisme is changed for substance but for force changed into a spiritual virtue So also the water both that is exâ—rcized and that which Baptisme is done with not onely retains the worse but also receiveth sanctification Theodoret Dial. I. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Lord would have those that receive the divine mysteries not regard the nature of the things they see but upon the change of their names believe the change which grace effecteth For hee who called his natural body corn and bread and again named himself the Vine honours the visible Symboles with the name of his body and bloud not changing the nature but adding his grace to it And Dial. II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For neither do the mystical signes after consecration depart from their own nature but remain in the same substance and figure and form and may be seen and touched as afore The Pâ—eface to the Romane Edition of these Dialogues â—aith that Theodoret uses this language because the Church had as yet decreed nothing in this point An excuse much like the censure of the Epistles of Isidore of Pâ—lusium printed at Anwerpe which are licenced as containing nothing contrary to faith oâ— good manners For if the Church is able to make new Articles of Faith then may whosoever licenses books passe this censure because by the act of the Church making that Faith which was not so afore the dead might incurr the contrary censure But supposing that the Church is not able to do such an act that which was not contrary to the Faith when Theodoret writ it can never be contrary to it I will end with Facundus because the formal terms of my opinion are contained in his words Sicut Sacramentum corporis sanguinis ejus quod est in pane poculo consecrato corpus ejus sanguinem dicimus non quòd propriè corpus ejus sit panis poculum sanguis sed quod in se mysterium corporis ejus sanguinisque contineant Hinc ipse Dominus benedictum panem calicem quem discipulis tradidit corpus sanguinem suum vocavit As wee call the Sacrament of his body and bloud which is in the consecrated bread and cup his body and bloud Not because the bread is properly his body and the cup his bloud but because they contain in them the mystery of his body and bloud Whereupon our Lord himself also called the bread and cup which having blessed hee delivered to his disciples his body and bloud This is in few words the sense of the whole Church concerning this businesse Ignatius in his Epistle to the Church of Smyrna saith that the Gnosticks forbore the Eucharist because they believed not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ which suffered for our sins which the Lord raised again by his goodnesse But why believed they not this because they would not believe Transubstantiation or because they would not believe that our Lord Christ had flesh Let Tertullianâ— speak contra Marc. IV. Acceptum panem distributum discipulis corpus suum illum fecit Hoc est corpus meum dicendo id est figura corporis mei Figura autem non fuisset nisi veritatis esset corpus Caeterùm vacua res quod est phantasma figuram capere non posset That bread which hee took and distributed to his disciples hee made his body saying This is my body That is the figure of my body But the figure it had not been if the truth of his body were not Otherwise an empty thing such as an apparition is â—ad not been capable of a figure For as Maximus saith in the third of those Dialogues against the Marcionists that go under Origens name what body and bloud was that whereof hee ministred the bread and the cup for signs and images commanding the Disciples to renew the remembrance of them by the â—ame As for that which is alleged out of Irenaeus I. 9. of Marcus the Magician and Heretick Pro calice enim vino mixto â—ingens se gratias agere in multum extendens sermâ—nem invocationis purpureum rubicundum apparere facit uâ— putetur ea Gratia ab eis quae sunt super omnia suum sanguinem stillare in illius caliâ—em l. illum per invocationem ejus Making as though hee would give thanks for the cup mixed with wine and inlarging the word of invocation by which I said the Eucharist is consecrated to much length hee makes it to appear purple and red That men may think that Grace drops the bloud thereof from the Powers over all into that cup by the means of his invocation For had Irenaeus said that this Magician turned the wine into the substance of bloud in truth or in appearance it might have been alleged that the Christians whose Sacrament this Magician counterfeited though other Gnosticks as Ignatius saith quite balked the Eucharist and used it not believed that to be bodily bloud which is in the chalice and that therefore hee did it But when hee saith onely that hee made it appear purple and red perhaps hee used white wine which by juggling hee made seem red However there is no appearance that because hee made that look red which was in the cup therefore those Christians whom hee labored thereby to seduce did believe the bodily substance of Christs bloud to be in the Eucharist in stead of the substance of wine and under the dimensions of it It remains that I take notice in as few words as is possible of those contentions that have passed about this presence and the dissiculties which Transubstanhath found in getting the footing which it hath in the Western Church The book which Paschasius Radbertus Abbot of Corby near Arniens writ under the Sons of Charles the Great to prove that the Body of Christ in the Eucharist is that same which was born of the Virgin is yet extant Though the more curious finde no such thing as Transubstantiation in it but rather a conceit of the impanation of Christs body if such a hideous term may passe that is that the God-head of our Lord Christ being by the operation of the Holy Ghost united to the elements the body and bloud of Christ is by the same means united to the fame A conceit not farr wide of that which Rupertus Abbot of Duitsh near Cullen about the year MCX teacheth that the bread is assumed by the Word of God to be his body as that is his body which was formed of the flesh of the Virgin Nor is there in effect much difference between this conceit and that of Consubstantiation at least according to those that ground
can be produced to depose for the Sacrifice of the Eucharist than the sense of those Scriptures of the New Testament already handled which are in a maner all that have any mention of it will inferr and allow There is much noise made with the Priesthood of Melchisedeck of whom wee reade Gen. XIV 19 24. And Melchisedeck King of Salem brought forth bread and wine for hee was the Priest of the most High God And hee blessed him saying Blessed be Abraham of the most High God which owneth heaven and earth In reference whereunto the Psalmist speaking of Christ Psal CX 4. The Lord sware and will not repent thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedeck And the Apostle taking for granted that hee is a figure of Christ in the mystical sense Ebr. VII 13. argueth the voiding of the Levitical Law from the purpose of setting up another Priesthood declared by the Psalm But no where in all that Chapter which is all spent about the Exposition of it so much as intimateth the Priesthood of Christ to consist in any thing but in offering up to God in heaven his own body and bloud sacrificed upon the Crosse to make expiation for the sins of his people and to obtain of God that grace and assistance that comfort and deliverance which their necessities from time to time may require Be it granted neverthelesse that seeing of necessity Melchisedeck is the figure of Christ those things which Melchisedeck is related to have done are also necessarily figures of things done by our Lord Christ For otherwise were not the mystical sense of the Old Testament a laughing stock to unbelievers if it should hold in nothing but that which the Spirit of God hath expounded in the New Testament by our Lord and his Apostles I have therefore to the best advantage translated the words of Moses For not and hee was the Priest of the living God That whoso will may argue thereupon that his bringing forth bread and wine was an act of his Priesthood Which if I would deny no man can constrain mee by virtue of these words to acknowledg But I cannot therefore allow that Translation which sayes Obtulit panem vinum that as Priest hee offered bread and wine in sacrifice to God The Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so evidently signifying protulit not obtulit hee brought forth not that hee offered that hee brought forth bread and wine to refrâ—sh Abraham â—nd his people returning weary from the slaughter of the Kings not that hee offered them in sacrifice to God as his Priest the mention of his Priesthood râ—ther advancing the reason why hee blessed them than why hee fed them As both Moses in the words next afore and the Apostle also Ebr. VII 1. intimateth or declareth the intent why hee brought them forth Though if I should grâ—nt that custome which was common to all Idolaters to have been in forâ—e under the Law of nature because wee see it retained and inâ—cted by the Law of Moses not to taste of any thing till some part of it had been dedicated to God in the nature of first-fruits to the sanctifying of the whole till when it was not to be touched I say though I should grant this for a reâ—son why hee may be thought to have offered bread and wine to God not why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be translated protulit hee brought forth no man would have cause to thank mee for any advantage from thence For still the correspondence between Melchisedeck â—nd our Lord Christ would lye in this that our Lord by appointing this Sacrâ—ment brings forth bread and wine to strengthen the peoâ—lâ— of Abraham in their warfare against the powers of darknesse as in the dayes of his flâ—sh hee fed those that attended upon his doctrine least they should faint in their travail Now this will first inferr that it is bread and wine which our Lord feeds us with in the Eucharist And again that it hath the virtue of sustaining us by being made the body and bloud of Christ as in a Sacrament by virtue of the consecration past upon it Which is all that which I say to a hair that by being made a Sacrament it becomes the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse to be feasted upon by Christians In like maner be it granted that the words of the Prophet Malachy I. 11. From the rising of the Sun to his going down my name shall be great among the Gentiles and in every place incense shall be offered to my name and a pure meat offering For my name shall be great among the Gentiles saith the Lord of Hosts is a Prophesie of the institution of this Sacrâ—ment because it is contained in those kindes of breâ—d and wine which served for meat and drink offerings in the Law of Moses But this being granted what shall wee do with the incense and the meat offering which the Prophet speaks of unlâ—sse wee say that they signifie that which corresponds to the meâ—t and drink offerings of the Law and their incense under the Gospel And will not thâ—t prove to be the spiritual sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving which God under the Gospel is served with by all Nations Though those prayers and prâ—â—es of God being by the institution of the Eucharist limited and determined to be such as the celebration thereof requires it is no inconvenience nay it will be necessâ—ry to grant that the sacrifice thereof is fore-told by these words not signifying neverthelesse the nature of it to require any thing more thâ—n is exprâ—ssed by the premises Be the same therefore said if you please of all the Sacrifices of the Old Law of all the Prophesies in which the service to be rendred to God in the New Testament is described by the offering of Sacrifices As for the words of our Lord to the woman of Samaria John IV. 23. The hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth For the Father seeketh such to worship him God is a Spirit and those that worship him must worship him in spirit and truth Though I grant as afore that this is fulfilled by the celebration of the Eucharist when once wee suppose our Lord to have limited the worship of God under the Gospel to the form of it yet there can be no consideration of a sacrifice signified by these words which neither suppose nor expresse the sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse the Eucharist no way bearing the nature of a sacrifice but as it is the same with it But for the same reason and by the same correspondence between the sacrifices of the Law and that of Christs Crosse it may be evident that it is not nor can be any disparagement to the Sacrifice of our Lord Christ upon the Crosse to the full and perfect satisfaction and propitiation for the sins of the world which it hath made that the Eucharist should be
consideration of their being changed into the Body and Bloud of Christ represented sacrificed upon the Crosse makes them properly no Sacrifice In the former consideration being properly Oblations let them be improperly Sacrifices For in this sense in the Canon of the Masse Te igitur Clementissime Pater per Jesum Christum filium tuum Dominum nostrum supplices rogamus ac petimus uti accepta habeas ac benedic as hâ—c dona haec munera haec sancta sacrificia illibata Wee therefore humbly beseech and desire thee most mercifull Father through Jesus Christ thy Son our Lord to accept and blesse these gifts these presents these holy unstained Sacrifices And not onely here before the Consecration but just before the Lords Prayer and the Communion Per Christum Dominum nostrum Per quem haec omnia semper Domine bona creas sanctificas vivificas benedicis praestas nobis Through Christ our Lord Through whom thou O Lord alwaies createst sanctifiest quickenest and furnishest us with all these good things The repetition of which consideration shows that they are presented to God to be consecrated and made the Eucharist as Oblations out of believers goods According to the form used in divers Greek Liturgies from the words of David 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wee give thee thire own of thine own But when our Lord sayes This is my body which is given for you This is my bloud which is poured out for you Will any man of sense understand That is now by that which here I do offered up to God for you and the bloud as poured forth Or rather this is that body and bloud that is given to be crucified and poured forth for you shortly upon the Crosse Let it therefore have the nature of a Sacrifice so soon as the Consecration is past It shall have that nature improperly so long as it is not the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse Though truly so long as the Sacrament is not empty of that which it signifieth And accorâ—ing to this truth true Altars they are true Temples true Sacrifices though improperly where and by whom it is ministred But I will not therefore grant that this Sacrificing that is this consecrating the Elements into the Sacrifice is an action done in the person of Christ Though they are agreed that it is done by the rehersing of the words of Christ For the rehersing of Christs words is not an act done in the person of Christ Nor do I take upon mee his person whose words I recite And I have showed that the Consecration is done by the Prayers of the Church immediately though these Prayers are made in virtue of Christs order commanding to do what hee did and thereby promising that the Elements shall become that which hee saith those which hee conâ—ecrated are As for the other opinion which I am not to be the more in love with because I am not satisfied with this it is to be considered that the Elements are offered thrice in the Canon of the Masse The first is that offering which I rehersed last beginning Te igitur going before the Consecration as â—â— agree The second is that which this opinion intendeth agreeing with the other that the Consecration is past by rehersing the words of institution But mine opinion allows not this For I conceive the Consecration is yet in doing till that Prayer be past Vt quotquot ex hâc Altaris participatione Sacro-Sanctum filii tui corpus sanguinem sumpserimus omni benedictione coelesti gratiâ repleamur That as many of us as shall have received the Holy body and bloud of thy Son by this communion of the Altar may be filled with every heavenly blessing and grace Which is the later of the two in which I conceive the Consecration to consist as in all other Liturgies in something correspondent to it And truly the very words of the second offering do bear that the Elements are by it offered to God not as consecrated but as to be consecrated supposing the blessing of them to be the consecrating of them as I proved afore Therefore the offering and the presenting of them to God as consecrated is that which is done by the Prayer which follows Memento Domine famulorum famularumque tuarum And nobis quoque peccatoribus famulis tuis whereby the several estates of Christs Church are recommended to God in virtue and consideration of Christs passion here represented and commemorated Not that I intend here to justifie that Prayer for the dead which this containeth but because referring that to consideration in due time all Liturgies have a place where according to S. Paul intercession is made for all States of Christs Church in consideration of the Sacrifice of Christs Crosse represented by this Sacrament And because this intercession is properly the offering up of the the said Sacrifice to God for their necessities And therefore this opinion saith well that the Consecration exhibiteth onely the Sacrifice to be offered up to God by the Prayers of the Church But not by the Prayer which desireth the blessing of the Elements wherein the consecating of them is contained which is that of the elevation in the Canon of the Masse but by those Prayers whereby the effects of Christs Crosse are prayed for in behalf of his Church According to which opinion the consecrating of the Elements will be the Sacrificing of Christ no further than as the body and bloud of Christ are thereby represented as Sacrificed But there will be no further cause of complaint in this then there is cause to complain that there is not such ground for division as the parties would have For though there be onely a general reason of offering no particular consideration of destroying seen in the act of the Church offering either the Elements to be consecrated or the consideration of Christs Crosse represented to render God propitious to his Church Yet are the consecrated Elements no lesse the Sacrifice of Christs Crosse than the presence of Christs body and bloud in them will allow though in order to that Evangelical banquet upon them at which and by which the Covenant of Grace is renewed For the Apostles having made the Eucharist a Sacrifice in this regard I must not count the making of it one offensive I say then that having proved the consecration of the Eucharist to be the production of the body and bloud of Christ crucified or the causing of them to be mystically present in the elements thereof as in a Sacrament representing them separated by the crucifying of Christ And the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse being necessarily propitiatory and impetratory both it cannot be denied that the Sacrament of the Eucharist in as much as it is the same Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse as that which representeth is truly said to be the thing which it representeth is also both propitiatory and impeâ—ratory by virtue of the consecration of it whereby it becometh the
worthy frequenting of this holy Sacrament that suffers As for the Church of England I referr my self to the very form of those Lawes according to which as many as have received Orders in it have promised to exercise the Ministery to which they were appointed by the same and that before God and his Church at so solemne an occasion that nothing can be thought obligatory to him that would transgresse it For the Offertory which the Church of England prescribeth if it signifie any thing signifieth the dedication of that which is offered as at large to the necessities of the Church so in particular to the celebration of the Eucharist then and there At the consecration the Church prayeth That wee receiving these thy creatures of Bread and Wine according to thy Son our Saviour Christs holy institution in remembrance of his death and passion may be partakers of his most blessed body and bloud And after the Communion Wee thy humble servants intirely desire thy fatherly goodness mercifully râ— accept this our Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving Most humbly beseeching thee to grant that by the merits and death of thy Son Jesus Christ and through faith in his bloud wee and thy whole Church may obtain remission of our sins and all other benefits of his death and passion All this having premiâ—ed prayer for all States of Christs Church Which whether it make not the Sacrament of the Eucharist by virtue of the Consecration the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse propitiatory and impetratory for them who communicate in it by receiving the Elements whether or no by virtue of this Oblation propitiatory and impetratory for the necessities of the rest of the Church as well as the Congregation present I leave to men of reason but not to Puritanes to judge This I am sure the condition of the Gospel which is the fourth reason for which I have showed that the Eucharist is counted a Sacrifice in the sense of the Church is exactly expressed in the words that follow to the confusion of all Puritanes that would have us expect the blessings promised from such a kinde of faith which supposes it not neither implies â— And â—â—â—e wee offer and present to thee O Lord our selves our souls and bodies to be a reasonable holy and lively sacrifice unto thee humbly beseeching thee that all we which be partakers of this holy Communion may be fulfilled with thy grace and heavenly benediction For the reason which obliges us to professe this at receiving the Eucharist which is the New-Testament in the blood of Christ is because the promises which the Gospel covenanteth for depend upon it as the condition which renders them due And upon these premises I may well conclude that all the reasons for which I have showed that the Eucharist is a sacrifice in the sense of the Church are recapitulâ—ted and comprised in which followeth And though we be unworthy through our manifold sinnes to offer unto thee any sacrifice yet we beseech thee to accept this our bounden duty and service not waying our merits but pardoning our offences CHAP. VI. The reason of the Order by which I proceed brings me to the Baptism of Infants in the next place The power of the Keyes seen in granting Baptism as well as in communicating the Eucharist Why Socinians make Baptism indifferent Why Antinomians make it a mistake to Baptize The grounds upon which I shake off both With answer to some objections WHen I proposed to write of the Laws of the Church that is to say of those controversies concerning the same which are the subject of division in mater of Christian amity to the English at this time I proposed my subject in aeqivocall terms till it be further distinguished that the Laws of the Church may be understood to be those which God hath given the Church to conduct the body of the Church in the exercise of their Christianity And they may be understood to be those which God hath inabled the Church to give themselves according to that which I showed from the beginning That Gods giving such Laws to Christians as are to be kept and exercised by the community of Christians at their respective Assemblies is a demonstration that God hath founded a Society or Corporation under the name of the Church And that supposing the Church to be such a Society or Corporation of necessity inferreth that it is inabled by Gods Law to give Laws unto it selfe in such maters as not being determined by Gods Law become necessary to be determined for preservation of the Body in unity and communion in the offices of Gods service The Laws therefore that God gives his Church are so farre the subject of this inquiry as may make it to appear what is left to the power and duty of the Church to determine And to this purpose it seemed requisite in the first place to determine what the rule of Faith containeth to be believed of the Sacrament of the Eucharist which is the ground of whatsoever can be pretended that he hath injoyned his Church as concerning the frequentation of it having determined the like afore not only concerning the Sacrament of Baptism but also concerning Penance in as much as they contain qualifications requisite by the Gospel to render the promises thereof due to particular Christians Whereas the Sacrament of the Eucharist being as I said afore the most eminent of those offices which God hath injoyned to be celebrated by the Assembles of his Church having first founded his Church upon the duty and the command or upon the charter or priviledge of holding those Assemblies even when the Powers of the world allow it not required a teaâ—y express to determine the true intent why it was instituted that it might the better appear in due time how those circumstances in the celebration of it which are a great part of the subject of that division which prevails among us in point of Christianity may best be determined to the intent of Gods Law And also that the true intent of other Powers given the Church evidently â—ending to the maintenance of Christianity and the purity thereof but alwaieâ— with a respect to the unity of the Church in the communion of those offices whereof this is the chief might the better be estimated by a right understanding of the end which they seek You have then the first that is the original and primitive and also if you demand that the prime and chief power of Gods Church consisting in celebrating the Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist Not in washing away the filth of the Body as S. Peter saith that is not in ministring the outward ceremony of washing the body with water or any part of it but in admitting and allowing that professinn of a good Conscience which qualifies a man to be a member of the Church For this allowance is no lesse then a declaration on the part of the Church that he who upon these times
I come to conclude against the Anabaptists Our Lord saith to Nicodeâ—â—us Joh. III. 3. Verily verily I say unto thee unlesse a man be born again hee cannot seâ— the Kingdom of God And what this new birth is he setteth forth in answering that impertinent question which Nicodemus not understanding him makes how a man should come out of his Mothers belly the second time Verily verily I say unto thee unlesse a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit Here I will grant the Anabaptists that the Sacrament of Baptism is not instituted by these words but by the act of our Lord after his Resurrection when he gives his Apostles their Commission Go make Disciples all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you Mar. XXVIII 18. But for reasons which perhaps they will not thank me for though they be not able to refute As yet when this discourse was held it was not declared to all that took our Lord for a Prophet that he was the Sonne of God Nicodemus himselfe that comes to him as a Prophet saying Master we know thou art a Prophet come from God For no man could do the works that thou dost unlesse God were with him If he go away instructed that the same which obliges him to take our Lord Christ for a Prophet concludes him to be the Christ the Son of God he is beholden to the freedom of our Lord in declaring to him the pretense of his coming by this discourse But for the purpose of sending the Holy Ghost it cannot be imagined that it was declared from the beginning of our Lords preaching who reveals not the intent of his death to his Apostles till he grew towards the time of it The priviledge of sending the Holy Ghost being part of that state to which he was to be exalted rising from death How then can it be imagined that our Lord should from the beginning of his preaching appoint all to be baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost which is the Sacrament of Baptism that makes us Christians Certainly it is not the same thing for John to baptize in the name of him that should come as for the Apostles in the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost Unlesse we think that all the people of God who expected a Messias expected him to be the Son of God which Christians worship our Lord Christ for and they crucified him for pretending to be There is therefore no cause why we should offer that violence to the Scripture Acts XXX 4. 5. John indeed baptized the baptism of repentance saying to the people that they were to believe in him that came after him that is in Christ Jesus And hearing this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus which I showed you is offered by those that would have it to signifie That those who were baptized by Iohn Baptist were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus For other answers that are devised to avoid to clear a Scripture I count them not worth the refuting so evidenâ—ly they force the express sense of the words And among them none more unreasonable thâ—n that which saith that these men were not indeed baptized with the baptism of Iohn though they thought they were And that S. Paul when he sayes John indeed baptized with water saying to the people that they should believe in him that was to come even in Christ Iesus argues and perswades them that they were not indeed baptized with the Baptism of Iohn though they thought they were For of all things in the world could men be deceived to think that they professed that which the Baptism of Iohn must oblige them to professe and did not Nor can it be said with any appearance of truth that Iohn baptizing unto repentance those whom he sends for the means of salvation for the future to him that was to come did baptize in the Name of the Lord Jesus in as much as it is necessary to be said that the Apostles when they baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Acts II. 38. VIII 16. X. 48. did sufficiently intimate the name of the Father whose Son they preached our Lord to be and also of the Holy Ghost whom our Lord had promised to those that are baptized as Irenaeus so long since hath exquisitely cleared the difficulty how they observed their Commission of baptizing in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Baptizing as S. Luke reports in the Name of the Lord Jesus But of Iohn the Baptist it is said Ioh. I. 29-34 That the morrow after he baptized our Lord he declared him to be the man that was to come after him in whose name he had baptized that he knew him not but came to declare him and that by the coming down of the Dove upon him it was revealed to him that he should know our Lord to be the man that came to Baptize with the Holy Ghost Whereby it appeareth that he cannot be thought to have baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus as that importeth as much as baptizing in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost For though it is evident that Iohn knew our Lord when he came to be baptized that he knew him to be in the world from the time that he began to preach and that he should baptize with the Holy Ghost Yet not knowing the man from the time that he began to baptize how could he baptize in his name and as the Son of God that was to give the Holy Ghost before our Lord himselfe had preached and declared upon what terms it was to come I suppose it is easie enough to distinguish between baptizing in the name of Christ and baptizing with an intent of sending them whom he baptized to Christ to be baptized with the Holy Ghost Neither is this to say that Iohns Baptism availed not to remission of sinnes for the time that it was on foot by Gods appointment when as we acknowledge that dispensation of Grace which was intimated and conveyed by the Law to have been the means to bring some to the righteousnesse of faith How much more the twilight of the Gospel under John the Baptist But that before the Covenant of Grace was published by the preaching of our Lord and inacted on Gods part by his death upon the Crosse or rather by raising him from death it was not time to determine that act by which God intended that profession which he requires for the condition of it should be solemnized and celebrated Therefore there came water and blood out of our Lords side upon the Cross to intimate the ground upon which this Sacrament should be in force for the future And if this be the condition
of the Church But you have also a possibility for the cure of sinne without the authority of the Church in as much as it had been too impertinent for the Apostle to have given a Precept of confessing sinne to one another if no sinne could be pardoned without having recourse to the Church The same is the effect of S. Johns words If a man see his Brother sinne a sinne not unto death For it is manifest that that sinne which one man sees is not notorious to the Church And yet the distinction which S. John maketh between the sinne which he commandeth a private Christian to pray for and the sinnes which he commandeth not the Church to pray for with the difficulties which the primitive Church had about it show that those sinnes which private advice cannot cure he would have brought to the Church And S. Johns meaning is that a man should pray for such sinnes of his Brother as he is sure are not to death Supposing first his Brother disposed by himself or by his advise to take the course that may qualifie him for forgivenesse But if it prove doubtful whether to death or not the Apostle by saying that there are some sinnes which he referreth to the Church whither to pray for pardon of them to wit in order to restoring them to the communion of the Church or not supposeth that they are reported to the Church by him that saw them when the Church saw them not But first supposing that they might possibly have been cured without bringing them to the Church And if these things be true then is the bringing of a sinner back from the error of his way according to that Precept of S. James which followeth an obligation that is to be discharged not onely by the office of a private Christian in convicting a private Christian of his sinne and of the means that he is to use for his recovery but also by bringing him to the Church if the case require it Which obligation will necesâ—atily lie upon the sinner himself in the first place But so that his own skill and fidelity to his own salvation may possibly furnish him his cure at home The tenor of our Saviours words throughly inforceth the same according to that which I observed in the first Book p. 140. that all Christians may be said to bind sinne by showing a Christian his sinne in case he refuse that cure which he that convicts him of his sinne convicts him that is to use And to loose sin in case he imbrace it But this in the inner Court of the Conscience between God and the soul For though the words of our Lord If thy Brother offend thee tell him of it between him and thee extend to private injuries obliging a Christian first to seek reparation by the good will of his party upon remonstrance of the wrong Then not to seek it out of the Church but by the Church yet they necessarily comprehend all sinnes which another man knows which to him are offences And therefore when our Saviour saith If he hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother it is manifest that the effect of his promise which followeth Whosoever ye bind on earth shall be bound in heaven is obtained by the act of a private Christian without recourse to the publick authority of the Church And who will believe that the skill and fidelity of some private Christian may not furnish him as good a cure as he can expect to learn from any private Christian to whom he can have recourse And yet the process of our Lords discourse showes that the intent of it concerns in chiefe the exercise of the Keyes of Gods Church even upon those sinnes which are not notorious Which who so considers cannot refuse to grant that S. Pauls injunction for the restoring of him that is surprised in sinne concerns both the office of private Christiaâ—s and also of a whole Church and the Body of it And truly considering what hath been said concerning Scripture and Tradition it cannot seem strange that the Apostles leaving such authority with the Churches of their founding with generall instructions to those whom they trusted them with writing to the Bodies of those Churches things respectively concerning all Christians should give directions concerning all in generall terms which the visible practice of the said Churches might determine to the respective office of each quality and estate in those Churches No more then that our Lord finding the power of the Keyes not yet visible before Christianity should propose his instructions in that generality which onely his Apostles orders and the practice of their Churches upon their instructions determineth For the power of the Keyes in the Church inables it further untill the worlds end to limit further whatsoever shall appear to require further determination to the end of binding and loosing of sinne which it importeth according as the present state of the Church in every age shall require Let us now consider that though I have made evidence by consequence from the writings of the Apostles that remission of sinnes committed after Baptism may be obtained without the Keyes of the Church yet it is hard to find any expresse promise to that effect in their writings unlesse it be that of S. Johns first Epistle In which notwithstanding a limitation of that confession which the Apostle requires to the Church and to those that are trusted by the Church may reasonably be understood supposing the way of curing sinne by the ministery of the Church to have been customary and therefore known at that time And on the contrary though I do believe these consequences to be unreproveable yet it is to be considered that S. Pauls indulgence seems to be granted upon a particular occasion incident to distemper the ordinary course of the Church Namely the prevailing of some sinne to a faction of some great or the greatest part of the Church Which as it necessarily intercepted the use of the power of the Keyes though provided and ordained by God for the curing of the said sinnes so can it by no means argue that God hath not appointed it for the ordinary means of curing them As for the consequence which was made from the testimonies of the Law and the Prophets and of the Gospels before the establishment of the Covenant of Baptism to show that they take effect also in sinnes after Baptism It may easily be considered that they take place no further then that disposition which is requisite to the forgivenesse of those sinnes whereby the grace of Baptism is violated may be supposed to be produced without helpe of the Church Which as I conceive I have proved to be possible so I conceive no man living can prove to be so easie that all those who stand in need of the remedy can presume upon so good ground as the safety of the soul requires to obtain it or to have obtained it of themselves without that helpe which
that managed the power of the Keyes in behalfe of the Church and by their judgement whether at large or limited by Canons provided afore-hand for the Church was the cure appointed The Council of Trent granteth that God hath not forbidden publick confession of secret sinne My reasons inferre more That confession of sinne in secret is an abatement of that discipline which our Lord and his Apostles instituted for the cure of sinne by the Church and by consequence an abatement to the efficacy of his Ordinance Neither can any thing be alledged for it but the decay of Christianity by the coming of the world into the Church and the necessity which that bringeth upon the Church to abate of that which the primitive institution requireth that the Ordinances of our Lord may be preserved to such effects as can be obtained with the unity of the Church And therefore I deny not that this Law may be abused to become a torture and snare and an occasion of infinite scandals to well disposed Consciences For who will provide Laws for so vast a Body as the whole Church of Christendome yet is that shall give no occasion of offence They that pretend it are but Absoloms Disciples that to cure one advance innumerable No more do I deny that the skill of all Confessors that is all that must be trusted with that power which this Law constituteth is not nor can probably be able to value the sinnes that are brought to them and to prescribe the cure which they requite supposing their conscience such as will not fail to require that which their skill finds to be requisite In questions of this nature though it were to be wished that such Laws could be provided for the Church as being unblameable might render the Church unblameable Yet they that are capable of giving sentence what is best for so vast a body will find it best as in all other Corporations or Common-wealths to improve the Ordinances of God to the best of that which can be obtained with the unity of the Church And therefore setting aside those gross abuses which may follow upon the perswasion that those penalties which are to be imposed by the power of the Keyes to produce that disposition which qualifieth penitents for remission of sinnes tend onely to satisfie for the temporall penalty remaining due when the sinne is pardoned And setting aside those abuses in the practice of Penance which tend to introduce this perswasion I must freely glorifie God by freely professing that in my judgement no Christian Kingdom or State can maintain it selfe to be that which it pretendeth more effectually then by giving force and effect to the Law of private confession once a year by such means as may seem both requisite and effectuall to inforce it Not that I do condemn that order which the Church of England at the Reformation contented it selfe with as rendring the Reformation thereof no Reformation and leaving men destitute of sufficient means for the remission of sinne after Baptism to leave it to the discretion and conscience of those who found themselves burthened with sinne to seek help by the means of their Pastors as appeareth both in the Communion service and in the visitation of the sick But because I see the Church of England hath failed of that great peece of Reformation which it aimed at in this point To wit the receiving of publick Penance This aime you shall find expressed in the beginning of the Commination against sinners in these words Brethren in the primitive Church there was a godly discipline that at the beginning of Lent such persons as were notorious sinners were put to open Penance and punished in this world that their souls might be saved in the day of our Lord And that others admonished by their example might be more afraid to offend In the stead whereof untill the said discipline may be restored again which is much to be wished it is thought good What is the reason that â—o godly a desire of so evident a Reformation could not take place when Reformation in the Church was so generally sought besides those common obstructions with all good pretenses will necessarily find in all communities of Christians I shall not much labour to perswade him that shall consider the â—ares of Puritantism to have been sowed together with the grain of Reformation in the Church of England This I will say that where visible Penance is exercised for sins of themselves visible and much more which the conscience of those who commit them makes visible there is a reasonable ground of presumption that those who see this done upon others will not advance to the communion of the Eucharist without visiting their own consciences and exacting competent revenge upon their sins though they use not the help of their Pastoâ—s in taxing it That vulgar Christians would have been moved voluntarily to seek the help of their Pastors in taxing the cure of their sins without seeing the practice of that medicine upon notorious sins which the discipline of the Church required who can imagine For nothing but example teaches vulgar people the benefit of good Laws Noâ— did secret Penance ever get the force of a general Law but by example But where there is no pretense of casting notorious offenders out of the company of Christians that thereby they may be moved to submit to the cure of their sinnes by satisfying the Church of their Repentance because the secular Power inforces no sentence of excommunication it is no Christian Kingdom or Common-wealth though Christians may live in it â—as Christians may be cast upon a coast that is not inhabited by Christians For he that believes not onely that there is a Catholick Church in the world but that he must be saved by being a member of it may and will find imperfection enough in those Laws by which the Keyes of the Church are imployed and exercised but if he find no reconciliation of sinne by the Keyes of the Church because no excluding of sinners from the communion of it will find no part of the Catholick Church there because no part of the Catholick Church was ever without it And therefore I must not fail to declare my opinion in this place that in a Christian Common-wealth if by any means those that are convicted of capitall crimes by Law come to escape death either by favour of the Law or by Grace of the Soveraign as many times it falls out and likewise all those that are convicted of crimes that are infamous having satisfied the justice of the Law ought to stand excommunicate till they satisfie the Church And for the same reason those whom the Church convicteth of crimes which civill justice punisheth not but Christianity maketh inconsistent with the hope of Christians being excommunicate upon such conviction ought not to be restored to the communion of the Church until by just demonstrations of their converâ—ion the Church be satisfied of them as qualified for
but for adultery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and maries another and he that mariâ—s her that is put away commits adultery Mat. V. 32. XIX 9. Mark X. 11. 12. Luk. XVI 18. it is pretended there p. 454. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Gospels signifies any thing that is dishonest and that what the State judges dishonest is just ground of divorce You must know that in our Lords time there was a difference which is supposed to be the occasion of the question made to our Lord between the Schools of Hillel and Shammai two great Heads of the Pharisees about the meaning and extent of the Law concerning divorces Deut. XXIV 1 which allows him that likes not his wife because he hath found or having found matâ—r of nakednessâ— in her to put her away For Shammai confined the intent of it to that which is dishonest and deserveth shame as nakednesse doth But Hillel extended it to any thing that offends the Husband as say they for example if she burn his Meat As for R. Akiba that allowed it if a man can get a fairer wife his opinion is but the inlargement of Hillels which expoundeth Moses his words If he have found in her mater of wickednesse to signifie either nakednesse or other mater besides This question then being on fooâ— at that time it is argued p. 478 that our Lord intends nothing else but the resolution of it the Pharisees demanding nothing else and therefore making no opposition to that which he resolves Mat. XIX 3-9 And thereupon great pains is bestowed cap. XXIII XXVII to show that our Lords exception 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies no more then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Moses according to the opinion of Shammai For if we suppose our Lord to have spoke in that Ebrue which the Jews then spake and now we read in the Talmud and Chaldee Paraphrases then must he use the word which the Law useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Gospels must translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If in Syriack the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifying the uncleannesse of the Stews is necessarily understood by the circumstance of the place where it is used to signifie all uncleannesse but may be extended to all sinne whereby we go a whoring from God as the Scripture uses to speak So according to this opinion our Lord excluding onely arbitrary divorce allows it where Moses according to Shammai allows it for any cause of dishonesty or that deserves shame as nakednesse does And if these premises be pertinent to that which follows that is to justifie those divorces that are made according to the Imperiall Laws related afterwards for the Author all the while protests to determine nothing p. 496. the inference must be this That those causes of divorce which Christian powers by their Lavvs have allovved or shall allovv are the true interpretation of that cause which Moses under the time of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or nakednesse our Lord of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is usually translated Forâ—ication alloweth I forbear to relate any more of that which is alleged to shevv that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the words of our Lord may signifie the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Moses according to R. Akâ—ba For the reason which I rely upon admits no consideration of it The resolution of our Lord is manifestly inconsistent vvith the Law of Moses and therefore with any interpretation that can be thought agâ—â—eable to it For when he saith Moses for your hard-heartednesse But I say unto you What can be more evident then that he repeals the provision of the Law and restrains what Moses had allowed Is it not manifest that whâ—n he â—llegeth that God having made first one man and one woman joyned them in mariage to be parted no more he granteth that Moses Law had abated of this and declareth the reviving of Gods first appointment among his own Disciples Can the allowance of divorce according to the Law stand with the primitive institution of Paradise more then having more wives at once Can we suppose the Pharisees come to our Lord to decide between Hillel and Shammai who condemns all Pharisees Or is it a marvail that he who pretended to be the Messias should introduce a provision differing from Moses and â—rom all that pretended onely to interpret his Law That there should be no further dispute of the mater of his resolution when there lay no dispute but about his authority whither from God or not Suppose our Lord to them no more but a Propheâ— to his Disciples the Messias why should they dispute that which they knew his Disciples admitted when they saw the primitive appointment of God related by Moses clear on his side That is to say why should they not be put to silence now as well as other times when they could not answer his allegations out of the Scriptures It is therefore utterly unreasonable to imagine that our Lord intending to restrain those divorces which Moses law alloweth should use a term of the same extent with that which â—e intended to restrain The Jews indeed insist upon this That a Prophet had alwaies power to suspend the obligation of any positive Precept for the time as Elias that of sacrificing no where but at Jerusalem Levit. XVII 1-9 Deut XII 5-18 26 27. XIV 21-26 when he sacrificed in mount Carmel 1 Kings XVII 22-39 But our Lord introducing a new Law instead of Moses his Law their aâ—cestors crucified him therefore and they to this day maintain it Indeed there is cause to believe that the Prophet Malachy reproving the oppressions which the Jews then laid upon their wives for the love of strangers which they had maried over their heads contrary to the Law Mal. I. 14. 15 16. propounds the liberty of divorce which the Law allows for an expedient acceptable to God as his own provision when he saith For the Lord God of Israel saith If thou hatest put away as the Jews there expound it For they who construe it The Lord God of Israel saith that he hateth putting away cannot give account why the Prophet should mention the mater of divorce where his purpose is to blame the oppression of Israelitish wives for the love of strangers maried against the Law Whereas when he addeth For one covereth violence with his Garment saith the Lord of Hosts He aggravateth the same fault by this consideration that the covenant of mariage signified usually in the Scripture by covering the woman with the mans Garment Ezek. XVI 8. Ruth III. 10. is imployed for a means of oppression and violence upon her that out of love entred into it And the Prophet Malaâ—hi holding his Commission by virtue of Moses Law how shall he say that God hates that which by his law he provided though for a remedy of further mischief There is indeed great dispute whither the allowance of Moses law did
secure them that put away their wives under the law in point of conscience to God And it is certain if that be true which I have setled in the second Book concerning the inward and outward the civill and spirituall obedience of God under Moses law and the difference between them that it could not alwaies do it For could he that knâ—w he put away his wife for â—ust or for wrath or for advantage think that he loved his wife whom all men know they are to love above others being bound to love all Israelites as himselfe But on the contrary he that had lighted upon a wife of crooked conditions and having done his reasonable indeavour to reclaim her had found her incorrigible how should he think he did her wrong using the power that Gods law had given him so moderately in putting her away Had God given them a Law which could in no case be used without sinne For had the nakednesse which the law allowed for a just cause of divorce signified nothing else but that which our Lord by his Gospel allows what question remains whither the conscience be secured by it or not But among Christians covenanting with God upon express promises of the world to come under a 〈◊〉 and more excellent rule of obedience with promise of helps proportionable to go through with it it is marvail if an obligation be acknowledged of bearing with patience the maners of the wife vvhich a man himselfe chuses never giving over the hope of reducing her to reason until she falsifie the trust of wedlock That when the mater is come to that point it should no more be mater of precept but mater of counsail to indure such a wife when the infamy of a mans bed my be saved and hope of reclaiming her may remain So that the question whether the meaning of Moses his words be the meaning of Christs is the same in this particular of mariage vvhich the Christians have generally with the Jews whether our Lord Jesus persiting the Lavv by bringing in the Gospell be the Christ or not The resolution whereof as it necessarily infers the difference between them which I have setled in the second Book so that difference vvill as necessarily inferre this provision of our Lord to be severall from that of Moses Out of Origen in Mat. VII a pleasant conceit is alleged Forsitan audax aliquis Judaicus vir adversus doctrine Salvatoris nostri dicet quoniam Jesus dicens Qui cunque dimi serit uxorem suam exceptâ causâ fornicationis facit â—â—â— machari permiâ—it uxo em dimittere quem ad modum Moyses quâ—m retulit propter duritiem cordiâ— Judâ—orum hoc prâ—cepisse Et hanc ipsam inquiet esse causam fornicationis per quam juste uxâ—r à viro dimittitur secundum quam Moyses praecepit dimitterâ— uxorem si inventa fuerit res turpis in â—â Perhaps some bold Jewish fellow may say crossing our Saviours Doctrine that even Jesus saying Whosoever shall send away his wife but for fornication makes her comâ—â—it adultery hath given leave to put a wife away even as Moses who he relareth did command this for the Jews hard-heartednesse And will say that this is the very same cause of fornication for which a wife is justly put away by a Husband according to which Moses also commands to put away a wife if a foul thirg be found in her Whence it is argued that there were then that expounded our Lords words to the same intent vvith Moses That there were Origen sayes not that there might be I grant But they must be Jews and adversaries to our Saviours Doctrine that should do it For he that should say so must blame our Saviour for pretending to contradict Moses vvhich Origen supposeth no Jevv could deny saying indeed the same thing Othervvise he must contradict the Synagogue for allowing divorce where Moses allowed it not if the soul thing which Moses allows divorce for be onely that fornication for which our Lord allows it Then he that would make use of Origen to prove that the terms of our Lord and of Moses may signifie the same thing must first answer the Argument wherewith he convinces him that thus should blaspheme our Lord. Adultery saith he is no cause of divorce but of death by Moses law therefore that dishonest thing for which the Law allows divorce is not adultery In fine he that examines all that is said or can be said of the diverse significations of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Scriptures will find but two the one proper in the case of man and wife the other by translation to the alliance between God and his people perpetually compared to a mariage all over the Scripture That this signification cannot take place here this may serve to evidence That the cause upon which our Lord allovvs divorce must be something betvveen the Wife and the Husband as it vvas in the Lavv For vvould it not be impertinent to punish transgression of Gods Covenant vvith dissolution of vvedlock The proper signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeed is larger in the Scriptures then according to the Atrick Greek to signifie all uncleannesse at the mater requires For vvhen S. Paul sayes 1 Cor. V. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a man to have his Fathers wife would not have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in ordinary Greek But it is no marvail if the Jews that spoke Greek call all that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which their usuall language called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in our Lords words is exactly expounded by Hesychius and the Etymologick turning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who being Christians do usually expound that proâ—erty of the Greek which is usuall among Christians out of the Bible And this is demonstrated to be the signification here meant because it is not possible to show that ever there was any opinion rule or practice received in the Church that it is lawfull to divorce but in case of Adultery I do truly conceive that there was anciently a difference of opinion and practice in the Church whither it be lawfull to mary again upon putting away a wife for adultery or whether the bond of mariage remain undissoluble when the parties are separated from bed and bord for adultery But this difference argues consent in the rest that is that excepting the case of Adultery there is no divorce to be among Christians Neither do I now speak of the base times of the Eastern Empire of which I will give you such an account as I find most reasonable when I come to the difficulty that is proposed I say it may appear that the Church originally granted no divorce but for adultery whether the innocent party or whether both were allowed to mary again living the other or not It is acknowledged by our Author that Tertullian cont Marc. IV. 34. de Pudicitiâ— cap.
great but I mean in Christ and in the Church The mariage of Adam with Eve was intended by God for a figure and prophesie of the incarnation of Christ and his spiritual mariage with the Church by virtue of it as the Scripture wheresoever it speaks of the first and second Adam declareth Therefore as I said their mariage was an indissoluble union of one with one as the mariage of Christians which reviveth it Be the mariage of Christians then a Sacrament as much as any man would have it to be be it a commemoration if Adams was a prediction of the incarnation of Christ and of his mariage with the Church Let it contain a promise of Grace to them that exercise it as Christians should do it is therefore indissoluble in the point of right I confesse that is to say it is the profession of an obligation upon the parties to hold it indissoluble But is it therefore indissoluble in point of fact May not the obligation so professed be transgressed And is not mariage a civill contract even among Pagans and Infidels and that by Gods appointment And may not the Law which God â—â—ath restrained the mariage of Christians to presuppose the conditions of a civill contract And are not civill contracts void when one party transgresseth the condition on which they are made Or cannot mariage signifie the mariage between Christ and his Church cannot the observation of it oblige God to give grace unlesse we understand all such conditions thereby to be extinguished The union of the word with our flesh the union of Christ with his Church depends onely upon that effectuall Grace which himself purposed from everlasting because as I said upon supposition of our perseverance The union of Wife and Husband signifies it no lesse though the obligation being transgressed it may become void But how shall marying as a Christian should mary be the means to obtain Grace unlesse as well the union as that promise may be forfeited by transgressing the condition upon which it is made The cheife difficulty then lies in the words of our Lord Mat. V. 30. 31. XIX 3-9 in which I must in the first place consider that there are diverse things observable in them to show that our Lord though he declared not openly that the Gentiles should imbrace Christianity and the Jews refuse it yet neverthelesse propounds it so that he must be understood to intend it for the Gentiles so converted as well as for the Jews That of Origen in the first place For the Law appointing death for the punishment of adultery what need the exception of adultery to the Jews among whom divorce for adultery was death Secondly his words in S. Mark X. 11. 12. Who so â—utteth away his wife and marietâ— another committeth adultery against her and if a wife put away her Husband and mary another she committeth adultery For by the Jews Law though the Husband might put away his wife yet the wife could not put away her Husband And though Josephus report that Herods sister Salome sent her Husband a Bill of divorce yet he reports it as that which never was done afore and therefore cannot be thought to have come to a custome in our Lords â—ime Thirdly how could our Lord say according to the Jews Law that he who maried a woman divorced committeth adultery when as what hindred a man then to mary a divorced wife out of meer charity to keep her from committing adultery Lastly if we consider S. Pauls wordes whereby he teacheth as I have showed that the wife having the same interesse in the Husband as the Husband in the wife by the Christian Law the wife can no more leave her Husband then the Husband the wife 1 Cor. VII 1-5 I. 11. it will appear that his Doctrine extending to the condition of man and wife by the then Romane Law is derived as it must needs be derived from this sense of his Masters Seeing then that divorce not onely among the Jews but among â—he Romanes was alwayes understood to dissolve the bond of Mariage what appearance can there be that our Lord when he sayeth He that putteth away his wife unlesse for adultery and marieth another committeth adultery and he that marieth her who is put away committeth adultery intendeth not to extend the exception to marying again as well as to putting away And therefore that he who putteth away for adultery she who is not put away for adultery may mary again For if those whom he spoke to could understand nothing by divorce but that which they saw and the divorce which they saw or heard of inabled all parties to mary again then that divorce which the exception of fornication allows by our Lords law understanding that exception inables to mary again Two reasons are opposed from our Lords words First in S. Mark X. 12. S. Luke XVI 18. the exception is not expressed and yet it is said He that puts away his wife and maries another commits adultery To which it is answered That the Gospels are as S. Justine the Martyr calls them remembrances of the sayings and doings of our Lord the effect whereof was delivered to and received by them who were baptized as the Law of Christianity And that therefore in recording them it was thought enough to remember the heads of those things which were undertaken to be believed and observed That therefore all that undertake to expound the four Gospels do use to adde whatsoever any of them hath more then the one which he hath in hand to make up his sense In fine therefore that in this point the sense of our Lord is not to be measured by that which S. Mark and S. Luke hath lesse but that which S. Matthew hath more And therefore that when our Lord saith He that puts away his wife and maries again commits adultery And he that maries her that is put away commits adultery He is to be understood with this exception unlesse for adultery It is objected secondly That by this account she that is put away for adultery may mary again and neither her selfe noâ— he that maries her be chargeable with adultery which were a gross inconvenience that by the Law of our Lord a woman by committing adultery or man in like case should advantage himselfe to mary again with a good conscience For if it be true He that puts away but for adultery and maries again and he that maries her who is put away but for adultery commits adultery then will it follow that he who puts away his wife for adultery and maries another and he that maries her that is so put away commits no adultery To which I answer that it follows not that our Lord so saying should mean this consequence But rather that he who maries her that is put away for adultery commits adultery much more Though he who puts her away is no cause of it neither chargeable with adultery for marying again For if the Husband be
S. Peter and Iohn were wonne to Christianity according to the division which S. Paul hath recorded unto us Gal. II. 9. 10. whereupon we see him exercise the the office of an Apostle to the Churches of the Jews dispersions by his Epistle Iames I. 1. But let us proceed S. Paul and Barnabas ordained their Presbyters Church by Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. XIV 23. And appointed Titus to constitute Presbyters in Creete City by City Tit. I. 5. Be it granted because Epiphanius hath said it and it is a thing in it self reasonable that in some places the number of believers was so small that there needed but a Bishop to govern and a Deacon or Deacons to attend upon the execution of his orders That there should be Churches constituted by the name of such Churches in such Provinces and no more people any where signified would make them Churches that might be not that were Tertullians saying Ubi tres Ecclesia licet laici Where there be three though of the Laity there is a Church is not meant of such Churches But that three Christians or two in our Saviours terms Mat. XVIII 19. that meet to serve God are a Church because so assembled being of the Church At least in mother Churches of mother Cities where the Apostles made their chiefe residence because the harvest was there greatest and likewise their Ministers that there should be no more Christians then one Bishop could govern and teach during the Apostles time seems to me to cary no appearance of truth And to imagine that those who were designed for Pastors of Churches in being were alwaies resident in the mother Church though occasions whereof there is no rule might and must cause their presence there many times the reason of their office admits not But if we admit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie more then one in a City and a Church it seems not to be refutable that they were appropriate to those Churches The name of Presbyters of such and such Churches bâ—ing relative to the people of their respective Churches Further S. Paul sâ—nding to Ephesus called to him the Elders of the Church whom by and by he saith The Holy Ghost had placed Bishops over his flock to feed the Church of God Act. XX. 17. 28. Here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by virtue of the article may referre us either to the whole Church or to that part of the Church which the speech most concerned or in fine to the very Church of Ephesus There is a conjecture that S. Paul makes them Bishops by saying that God had made them Bishops of his Church who were Presbyters when he sent for them But I allow not those of the Church of Rome that our Lord made the Bread and Wiâ—e of his last Supper his Body and Blood by saying This is my Body this is my Blood But by that which he did before he said it For the same reason therefore I cannot allow that S. Paul here makes them Bishops of Presbyters by saying God hath made you Bishops in his Church not declaring by any thing that he sayes or does any intent so to do thereby to be understood But I cannot but consider that Irâ—naeus III. 14. tells us that S. Paul at this time called together the Bishops and Presbyters Qui erant ab Epheso reliquis proximis civitatibus Which were of Ephesus and other the next Citâ—â—s and S. Jerome ad Evagr. that he called together omnes illos apud quâ—s praedicaverat All those wiâ—h whom he had preached Which if we grant the article of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will referrs us to that part of the Church that was concerned whereas the words as they lie as he sent to Ephesus and called the Elders of the Church referre us to the Church there mentioned of Ephesus When S. Paul addresses his Episâ—le to the Philippians together with the Bishops and Deacons Phil. I. 2. when in his instructions to Timothy he passes immediately from Bishops to Deacons 1 Tim. III. 1-8 It is said that the Bishops of the next Cities together with their Deacons were present or ordinarily resident on the Capital City according to that which I said even now of Ephesus And it may be said that they were Bishops and Deacons at large in respect to the Church at large not applyed to the functions either of Bishop or Priests in this or that Church And truly I do remember the words of Clemens ad Corinth speaking of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Preaching therefore the Word by Cities and by Countries and Baptizing they made the first-fruits of them whom they had baptized Bishops and Deacons of those that should believe And that S. Paul addresses his Epistles to the Church that is at Corinth and to all that called on the name of the Lord in all Achaia 2 Cor. I. 1. So that they provided for the ordering of them that should become or were become Christians before they were yet cast into Churches And it is reasonable to think that those were ordained in the mother Cities and there stood upon their guard expecting opportunity of framing their flocks And that this was a cause why the titles of Bishops and Presbyters are promiscuously used and attributed But I cannot therefore yield that one Bishop with one or more Deacons could serve the Churches of Philippi Corinth or Ephesus Or that as yet no Governours were affected and applied to several Churches For when S. Paul directs Timothy to dispose of the stock of the Church for the Honour that is the maintenance of widows and Presbyters to receive accusations against Presbyters under two or three witnesses and to rebuke them that should offend before all 1 Tim. V. 2. 16-28 it seems not reasonable to imagine Timothy the Judge of the Biships of inferiour Churches as regularly every Bishop is of his own Presbyters that he should rebuke the Bishop of Forâ—iâ—e though inferiour Churches before the people of his Church of Ephesus that he should dispose of the stock of his Church at Ephesus upon Widows or Presbyters of other Churches then that at Ephesus But rather that the proceeding of Timothy is prescribed as a â—orm for the proceeding of others in their respective Churches Another opinion saith That the Deacons whom S. Paul puts next to Bishops are Presbyters called also Ministers of God and Christ as Timothy 1 Thes III. 2. S. Paul himself 2 Cor. II. 23. Ministers of the New Testament as S. Paul 2 Cor. III. 6. Ministers of the Gospel as S. Paul Ephe. III. 7. Ministers of Righteousness into whom the Ministers of Satan are transformed 2 Cor. XI 15. Ministers of the Church as S. Paul Col. I. 25. Observing that the vulgar Latine of S. Jerome translates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phil. I. 1. 1 Tim. III. 8. Diaconos elsewhere in thirty places Ministros and concluding that these Deacons are the same with Presbyters under the Apostles and the Bishops their
next successors till the order of Deacons was brought in by the Church Which to me seems strange that the titles of the Apostles and their companions should constitute or signifie an inferiour order of Presbyters And therefore think it more pertinent to the meaning of those texts to observe the terms which are added in them to limit that Ministery for which they are called Ministers either by the persons or subject mater to which it relates For the Apostles commission being immediate from our Lord as the commission of their companions when they became their Apostles from themselves and the mater in which the Apostles ministred to God or Christ their companions also to them being the Word or the Gospel that is the work of publishing it distinguishes them from the Deacons that are under Bishops in S. Paul as those that ministred to their respective Bishops and by their appointment to the people as the VII at Jerusalem by the appointment of the Apostles For if S. Paul be called Minister of the Church Col. I. 15. he is so called as Minister of the whole Church or Minister of God in the work of it not of this or that Church which Deacons are called Deacons because they minister to but at the Order of their Bishops and Presbyters As for the companions of the Apostles when they are sent upon their commissions to preach the Gospel they are fitly called Ministers of the word the Gospel the New Testament or Evangelists when they give personall attendance upon them the Apostles they may fitly be understood to be called their Ministers in the same sense as Deacons are called Deacons for attending upon their Bishops allowing alwaies as much difference between them and ordinary Deacons as between S. Paul for example and the Bishop or Priest on whom the Deacon attends And for these two several notions you have just ground in the texts of the Apostles Acts I. 17. 25. VI. 1. 4. XIX 22. 2 Tim. IV. 5. 6 7 11. Besides when Phaebe is alled a Deaconnesse of the Church at Câ—nchrâ—ae Rom. XVI 1. when S. Paul sayes that they who Minister well procure themselves a good step and much freedom in the faith which is in Christ Jesus 1 Tim. III. 13. I understand not what this opinion would make of Deaconnesses or what is that faire step which Deacons attain by ministring well which in my opinion is clearly the rank of Presbyters as Clemens Alexand. and others of the Fathers have expounded it Neither do I think it possible to give a more reasonable reason why the vulgar translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ministros so often elsewhere should translate it Diacones Phil. I. 1. 1 Tim. III. 8. then to put a difference between that sense in which it stands for the Deacons of Churches which the Greek word Diaconus had been used to signifie all over the Latin Church and that signification in which the Apostles and their companions are called the Ministers of Christ or of the Gospel In which because the Greek Diaconi was not famous in the Latine therefore he imployeth tke Latine Ministri that answers it Plainly seeing the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beareth a notion of waiting upon anothers pleasure in executing his orders and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of ruling and governing and seeing I have showed that the Presbyters according to the ancient custome of the Church derived originally from the Synagogue did sit with their Bishop though in a rank under him while the Deacons hood as waiting upon them as you may see in the Apostolicall form of divine service Chap. III. IV. and in the Right of the Church Chap. III. I cannot see how both these names can be accepted to signifie the same persons Or how the degree which S Paul saith is attained by well performing the Deacons office can be any thing but the rank of Presbyters There remains the words of the Apostles 1 Thes V. 12. 13. Now we request you brethren to know those that labour amongst you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you And to esteeme them more then abundantly in love for their works sake And again Heb. XIII 7. 17. Remember your Leaders which have spoken to you the word the issue of whose conversation seeing imitate ye their faith And Be ruled by your Leaders and yield to them for they watch for your souls as those that must give account That they may do it joyfully and not groaning For that is not for your turn Where it is manifest he distinguisheth those that first planted the Churches to whom he writes from those that governed them at present But whether it be more reasonable to understand by these words one governour to one Church or a Bench of Presbyters to each whether assigned to one particular Church or belonging to any Church as much as to these I shall willingly referre it to the Reader to Judge The words of S. Jame I conceive admit no denyal Jam. V. 14. Is any man among you sick let him call for the Presbyters of the Church and let them pray over him anointing him with oyl in the name of the Lord here are Elders more then one and those proper and relative to one and the same Church and the office which they do not competible to any Lay Elders according to any pretense supposing especially that which I said afore to clear the intent of it In fine the seven stars which are the Angels of the seven Churches and the seven Candlesticks which are the seven Churches Revel I. 20. seem to yield us a pregnant evidence of so many Governours proper to so many Churches To wit so many Bishops as is argued elsewhere As for the words of S. Paul 1 Cor. XII 28. And some hath God set in the Church first Apostles secondly Prophets thirdly Doctors then miracles then Graces of healing helps Governments kinds of Languages And Ephe. IV. 11. And he gave some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Doctors It is true the offices of Apostles and Evangelists cannot be confined to one particular Church but the offices of Pastors and Doctors may and ought of Helps and Governments must At least if we understand them as I have showed that they are to be understood to wit Governours of the sick impotent and needy and their assistants in that work For I may freely say there hath nothing been said to the purpose of those Offices but this And therefore seeing the Apostle in both places speaks of the whole Church which consisteth of all Churches the form whereof is still the same how much soever they differ in bignesse it seemeth to me very reasonable to understand by S. Paul that God hath placed in the Church as well those offices which relate to all or to many Churches as those which relate unto one that by the means of all of them the University of Christians may be edified in and to the unity of one Body
Bishop above his Presbyters not to be derived from any agreement of the Church but from the appointment of the Apostles In the mean time suppoâ—â—ng the whole Church to agree in that which God had inabled them to agree in having not tied them to the contrary but having tied them to live in viâ—â—ble unity and communion all Churches with all Churches they that depart from this Unity upon this account shall bee no less Schismaâ—â—cks then had the Superiority of Bishops been setled by the Apostles This is that which I come to in the next place CHAP. XVIII The Apostles all of oequall power S. Peter onely chiefe in managing it The ground for the pre-â—minence of Churches before and over Churches Of Alexandria Antiochia Jerusalem and Rome Ground for the pre-eminence of the Church of Rome before all Churches The consequence of that Ground A summary of the evidence for it SOme consideration I must now bestow upon that Position which derives a Monarchy over the Church from S. Peters priviledges For I make no scruple to grant that he was indeed the first and chief of the Apostles as he is reckoned in the Gospels Mat. X. 2. Mar. III. 16. Luk. VI. 14. and that in likelihood because he was the first in leaving all to adhere unto our Lord as the man to whom our Lords call is directed Luk. V. 4-11 though he was first brought to our Lord by bis brother Andrew as Philip once brought Nathanael that was not of the twelve John I. 41-46 so that this first call gave them acquaintance but made them not Apostles And from this beginning we may well draw the reason why S. Peter is alwaies the forwardest to answer our Lords demands and to speak in the name of his fellows Mat. XIV 28. XV. 25. XVI 16. XVII 24. XVIII 21. XIX 27. XXVI 33. Mar. VIII 29. X. 28. XI 21. XIV 29. Luk. VIII 45. IX 20. XII 41. XVIII 28. XXII 34. Joh. VI. 68. XIII 6. Act. I. 13. 15. II. 14. 37. IV. 8. which it would not become the reverence we owe the Apostles so impute to S. Peters sorwardnesse without acknowledging the ground of it being visible But these priviledges will not serve to make S. Peter Soveraign over the Apostles The stress lies upon Mat. XVI 16-19 And Simon Peter answered and said Thou arâ— the Christ the Son of the living God And Jesus answered and said to him Blessed art thou Simon Son of Jonas for flesh and blood hath not revealed this to thee but my Father in the heavens And I say to thee that thou art Peter and upon this Rock will I build my Church and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it And I will give thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever thou loosest on earth shall be loose in the heaven And upon John XXI 15. 16 17. where S. Peter thrice professing to love Christ receives of him thrice the command of Feeding his sheep But will this serve the turn ever a whit more It must be either by virtue of the mater which our Lord sayes of or to S. Peter or by virtue of his saying it to S. Peter and to none else Against this later consideration I conceive I have provided by the premises For seeing there is a sufficient reason to be given otherwise why S. Peter answers before the rest when our Lord demand whom they acknowledge him to be the reply of our Lord addressed to him alone will give him no more then the precedence not the Soveraignty over the Apostles Which is still more evident in S. John because S. Peter having undertaken before the rest to stand to our Lord in the utmost of all his trialls had deserted him most shamefully of them all denying udder an oath to have any knowledge of him For it is not observed for nothing that he professes the love of Christ thrice Let S. Peter then be the Prince Apostle or the chiefe Apostle let him be if you please the Prince of the Apostles there will be found a wide distance between Princeps Apostolorum in Latine as some of the Fathers have called him and Soveraign over the Apostles When Augustus seized into â—is hand the soveraign Power of the Romane Empire nomine Principis as we read the beginning of Tacitus under the title of Prince He was well aware that the Title which he assumed did not necessarily proclaim him Soveraign which he deâ—â—red not to do As for the â—aâ—er of our Lords words those that fear where there is no fear wil have our Lord say that he buildeth his Church upon the Faith of S. Peter profâ—ssing our Lord to be Christ Or to point at himselfe when he saith Upon this Rock will I build my Church But what needs it Saith he any more to S. Peter then S. Paul saith to the Ephesians II. 20. Built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himselfe being the chief corner stone Or S. John of the new Jerusalem Revel XXI 14. And the wall of the City had twelve foundations upon which were the names of the XII Apostles of the Lambe How then shall S. Peter be Soverâ—ign by virtue of an attribute common to him with the rest of the Apostles Some conceive that when our Lord proceeds to tell him that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church He meanâ— no more but that he will rescue his from death by raising them again But raising from death implies raising from sinne in the Old Testament expresses it in the New And the City of God which is the Church in the New Testament referrs to the City of Satan that oppugneth it And therefore The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Cannot signifie lesse then a promise that the Church shall continue till our Lords second coming to judgement notwithstanding the malice of Satan and his complices But S. Peter is not the onely foundation of it though no body else be named here Again our Lord gives S. Peter the Keyes of his Church here as in S. John he commands him to feed his flock But is the office of feeding Christs flock S. Peters peculiar Have not the Apostles the charge of it even from our Lord do they do it by virtue of S. Peters commission or by his appointment How are they Christs Apostles otherwise As for the Keyes of the Church they are given to S. Peter here they are given to the Twelve by the power of remitting and retaining sinnes as I have shewed John XX. 21. 22 23. by the power of binding and loosing they are given to the Church Mat. XVIII 18. And can any man make S. Peter Soveraign over the Apostles and over the Church by virtue of that which is no priviledge of his the rest of the Apostles and the Church being all indowed with it Hear we not what S. Luke saith Act. VIII 14. The Apostles
change which Temporal Power remaining in the same hands is able to produce within its own dominions The consequence of which consideration will be this that where Temporal Power makes such a change in the state of those Cities which are the seats of Churches that the Government and advancement of Christianity either may proceed changing the priviledges of the Churches or cannot proceed otherwise there the Church either may or ought to transferre the pre-eminences of Churches from City to City And therefore that where the case is otherwise the Church is not bound upon every act of Temporall Power to proceed to any change If this seem obscure being thus generally said let not the Reader despair before we have done to find instances in things that have come to pass not onely to clear my meaning but also to evidence the reason upon which I proceed It is likewise easie for him that considers this supposition and the effect and consequence of it to see that it gives no Jurisdiction to the Church of Rome much lesse to the Head thereof in behalfe of it over other Churches then those which resort immediately to it as every Diocess is concluded by the mother Church and every Province by the Synod of it much lesse the Power of giving Law to the whole but by the act of those Synods whereof the whole consists or of judging â—ny appeal that may be brought to it But it makes the Church of Rome as other Head Churches the center to which the causes that concern first the Western Churches in particular then the whole are to resort that they may find issue and be decided by the consent and to the unity of all whom they concern It is also easily to be observed that this eminence of the greatest Churches over their inferiours which originally is no further defined and limited then the consequence of this ground in respect of the rest of Christendom required might lawfully be defined and limited further either by sâ—lent custome or by express law of the Church consenting at leaâ—â—â—â—â—ffect and practice which is the onely real positive Law that rules all Societies Whereby new rights and priviledges might come to the Church of Rome as well as to other Churches which might also be for the good of the whole in â—â—intaining the unity of the Church together with the common interest of Christianity But I deny not on the other side that this Power the beginning whereof is so necessary and just the intent so excellent by the change of the world and the state of things in it may be so inhansed that though it do provide for the unity of the Church yet it shall not provide for the interess of Chistianity But of this and the consequence of it in due time For the present the reason upon which my position the effect and consequence whereof I have hitherto set forth is grounded is the effect of it in all proceedings of the Church recorded first in the Scriptures and afterwards in Church Writers as they succeed those that I must here principally consider being the very same that I considered in the first Book to make evidence of the being of the Church in point of fact as a body out of which now the right which held it together as the soul must appear Adding the consideration of such eminent passages in succeeding times as may serve to the same purpose I will not here repeat the marks of it which I have produced out of the Scriptures in the right of the Church Chap. II. For the dependence of Churches is part of this position as an ingredient without which the unity of the whole is not attainable I will onely adde here the consideration of that which I alleged in the first Book out of S. Johns last Epistle 5-10 Some have thought it so strange that Diotrephes and his faction should not acknowledge those that were recommended by S. John an Apostle that they have rather intitled the Epistle to a successor of his in the Church of Ephesus whose Tombe S. Jerome saw there besides S. John the Apostle whom Papias called John the elder as he is called in the beginning of these two Epistles Hieron Catal. in Johanne Papiâ Ens. Ecclesiast Hist II. 25. But he that considers what S. Paul writes to the Corinthians of his adversaries there will not marvail that S. John should find opposition at the hands of Diotrephes aspiring to the Bishoprick by banding a faction against the Jewish Christians whom it appears sufficiently that S. John cherished And therefore the mark here set upon Diotrephes is not for introducing Episcopacy as the Presbyterians would have it but for disobeying the superiour Church whereof S. John was head to the indangering of Unity in the Whole For could Diotrephes hope to make himselfe Bishop in his own Church when no body was Bishop in any Church besides Or might not Diotrephes hope to do it by heading a party that disallowed compliance with Judaism at that time If then the Apostles provided not that the Church should continue alwayes one if this Unity was not alwayes maintained by the dependence of Churches let this reproof have no effect in any succeeding time of the Church But if the eminence of S. Johns Church above the neighbour Churches in insuing ages was a necessary ingredient to the unity of the whole then be it acknowledged that S. Johns successors might lay the blame of Diotrephes his ambition upon any successor of his that should follow it Before I go any further I will here allege those Fathers which do teach that our Lord gave S. Peter the Keys of his Church in the person of the Church and as the figure of it Namely S. Cyprian Pacianus S. Hierom S. Augustine and Optatus whose words I will not here write out to inflame the bulk of this Book because you have them in the Archbishop of Spalato de Rep. Eccl. 1. VII 17-29 VIII 8. 9. Adding onely to them S. Ambrose de dignitate Sacerdotali cap. 1. affirming that in S. Peter the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven are given to all Priests And cap. II. speaking of the words of our Lord to S. Peter Feede my sheepe Quas oves quem gregem non solum tunc beatus suscepit Petrus sed nobiscum eas suscepit cum illo eas nos suscepimus omnes Which sheep and which flock not onely S. Peter then undertook but also he with us and with him we all undertook them And venerable Bede upon the words of our Lord Tell the Church Haec potestas sanctae Ecclesiae Episcopis specialiter commissa est generaliter vero omni Ecclesiae data creditur Nam quod dominus alibi hanc ligandi solvendique potestatem Petro tribuit utique in Petro qui typum gerebat Ecclesiae omnibus Apostolis hoc concessisse non dubitatur The power of the Keys is committed especially to the Bishops of the Holy Church but is believed to be
given generally to every Church For whereas our Lord elsewhere gives unto S. Peter this power of binding and loosing there is no doubt that in Peter bearing the form of the Church he gave it to all the Apostles Proceeding to allege S. Jerome and S. Augustine to the same purpose And upon the words of our Lord Feed my sheep Quod Petro dictum est omnibus Christi discipulis dictum est Hoc namque fuerunt caeteri Apostoli quod Petrus fuit pastores sunt omnes grex unus ostenditur qui ab Apostolis tunc unanimi consensu pascebatur deincepâ— a successoribus eorum communi curâ pascitur That which is said to Peter is said to all Christs Disciples For what Peter was that were the rest of the Apostles They are all shepherds but the flock appears to be but one which as then it was fed by the Apostles with unanimous consent so is it since fed by their successors with common care These Fathers then when they give this for the reason why our Lord gives Peter onely the Keys of the Church with the charge of feeding his flock that hee bore the person and form of the Church suppose the Church to be a body compacted of all Churches ruled by the same form of Government for the preserving of unity in the whole as the colledge of the Apostles consisteth of so many persons indowed all with one and the same power for whom one answers to signifie the unity of the whole Whereby it appeareth first negatively That the Church did uot understand any Soveraign Power to be committed to S. Peter by these words Then positively that our Lord speaking to him alone signifies there by the course which he hath established for preserving unity in the Church To wit that all Churches being governed in the same form the greater go before the lesse in ordering maters of common concernment S. Cypriane from whom all the rest have this doctrine hath cleared the intent of it when he thus writeth Epist ad Jubai LXXII Manifestum est autem ubi per quos remissa peccatorum datur quae in baptismo scilicet daâ—ur Nam Petro primum dominus super quem aedificavit Ecclesiam unde unitatis originem instituit ostendit potestatem istam dedit ut id solveretur in caelis quod ipse solvisset in terris Et post resurrectionem quoque ad Apostolos loquitur dicens Sicut misit me Pater ego mitto vos Hoc cum dixisset inspiravit aâ—t illis Accipite spiritum sanctum Si cujus remiseritis peccata remittentur illi si cujus tenueritis tenebuntur Unde intelligimus non nisi in Ecclesiâ— praepositis in Evangelicâ lege dominica ordinatione fundatis licere baptizare remissam peccatorum dare Now it is manifest where and by whom remission of sinnes is given when it is given in Baptism For our Lord first gave to Peter upon whom he built his Church and in whom and from whom he instituted and declared the original of unity in it this power that it should be loosed in heaven whatsoever he had loosed on earth And after his resurrection also speaking to the Apostles he saith As my Father sent me so send I you And having said this he breathed on them saying If ye remit any mans sinnes they shall be remitted him if ye retain any mans they shall be retained Whence we understand that it is not lawful for any but those that are set over the Church and grounded in the Evangelical Law and the Ordinance of our Lord to baptize and give remission of sinnes Because Peter received the Keys therefore all and every Church that is those that are over it and none else can give remission of sinnes by admitting to Baptism Shall we think the consequence extravagant having so clear a ground for it to wit the unity of the whole Church setled upon two ingredients the same form in all Churches but with dependence of the lesse upon the greater Churches If any man say all this is disputed by Cypriane to prove that Baptism given by Hereticks is void wherein he hath been disowned by the Church And that therefore the reasons are not well grounded from whence it is inferred The answer is easie because he inferrs upon them that which though true they do not inforce That a man cannot lawfully baptize is not so much as that if he do baptize his Baptism is void S. Cypriane took both for one and therefore his reason is good though it conclude not his purpose Why not void being unlawful I refer my self to what S. Augustine since hath disputed and the Church decreed and practised And here you have one ground for that distinction between the Power of Order and the Power of Jurisdiction comparing one with another the Bishops and Priests of several Churches according to the original constitution of the Church I allow S. Hierome to say that wheresoever there is a Bishop whither at Rome or at Eugubium an obscure City near Rome he is of the same worth as of the same Priesthood Epist LXXXV For as to the inward Court of the conscience the office that is Ministred by the Bishop or Priest of a lesse Church is no lesse effectual then by one of a greater Church But as to the outward Court of the Church supposing all Churches governed in the same form but the Churches of lesse Cities subordinate to the Churches of greater Cities by the appointment of the Apostles the act of the lesse Church of the Bishop or a Priest of it cannot be of that consequence to the whole as the act of the greater Church And so though the Bishop or the Priest of a litle Church be of the same Order with the Bishop or Priest of a great Church yet the authority of the one extendeth without comparison further then the authority of the other can do And you may perhaps dispute whether this authority produce any such as Jurisdiction or not but whether there be ground hereupon to distinguish between the Order which is the same in both and the authority which it createth in which there is so great difference you cannot dispute Certainly the office of a Deacon in a greater Church may be of more consequence to the whole then many Bishops can bring to pass As the assistance of Athanasius in the office of a Deacon to Alexander Bishop of Alexandria at the Council of Nicaea was of more consequence to the obtaining of the decree of the Council then the votes of many Bishops there CHAP. XIX Of the proceedings about Marcion and Montanus at Rome The businesse of Pope Victor about keeping Easter a peremptory instance The businesse of the Novatians evidenceth the same Of the businesses concerning the rebaptizing of Hereticks Dionysius of Alexandria Paulus Samosatenus S. Cypriane and of the Donatists under Constantine AMongst the proceedings of the Church I will first alledge that of the Church of Rome
which they hear from those that do not profess to Preach within those bounds who can deny that they are guilty to their own death What those bounds are I shall say by and by In the mean time let them take heed whose neglect of the written word or whose zeal to preaching shuts the Scriptures out the Church that they contribute not to the bringing in of the secret and invisible Word of the Enthusiasts It is now no dainty to hear that the word which we have written in our Bibles is not the Word that saveth but that which is secretly and invisibly spoken to us within by Gods Spirit And whosoever attributeth the reverence due to Gods word to any such dictate without dependence upon the Scriptures that is deriving the same from the Scripture by those means which God hath allowed us for the understanding of them according to the premises what shall hinder him to preferre the dictate of his own Spirit under pretense of Gods before that which he admitteth to come from Gods Spirit For he who admitteth the greater contradiction of two parallel Soveraigns why should he not admit a less that the written word is not Gods word in competition with the dictate of his own Spirit when there is so easie a cloke of expounding the written word though against all reason and rule of expounding it yet so as to submit even the substance of Christianty to the dictate of a private spirit We have an example for it in the impostures of Mahomet For doth not the Alcoran acknowledge both our Lord Christ and Moses true Prophets of God besides all other attributes yet in as much as it pretendeth the Spirit given to Mahomet in such a degree as to controle them both it smoothes the way to the renouncing of Christianity when the power of the sword fell out on the side of it Simon Magus and his followers the Gnosticks might have done the like had the like power been on their side as the Manichees did in part if those things be true that we read in Cedronus of a party of them possessed of the Power of the Sword about the parts of Armenia all upon pretense of higher revelations then were granted to the Apostles The same is alleged against the Paraclete of Montanus and perhaps his followers being disowned by the Church might fall to such extremities but at the beginning it doth not appear that he pretended any more then to introduce certain strict orders into the Church as injoyned by his Spirit and those of his fellow Prophets which it was not expedient for the Church to undertake and being so it was requisite for him to conform unto the Church any pretense of the Spirit notwithstanding but otherwise were no way destructive to Christianity Suppose then the reading of the Scriptures to be one of those offices for the which the Church is to assemble the order of reading them which is that which remains is a thing to subject so common reason that there need not much dispute about it If we look upon Tertullianes or before him Justin Martyrs Apologies for the Christians there will appear no more then this that every Church that is every Body of Christians under one Bishop did prescribe themselves that order for reading the Scriptures in the Church which they found requisite And if that primitive simplicity which the Christianity under persecution was managed with had continued what fault could have been found with it But when the World was come into the Church which he that injoyes his right senses will not believe did come into it all with the like affections to the professions which they undertook it was in vain to hope that differences would not rise or might not rise about this as well as other points in which the exercise of Christianity consisted Differences arising the greater authority is that to which the ending of them obliges all men to have recourse The greater authority you have seen is that of the greatest Churches whither in Synods or not requiring Synods to oblige the less by reason of the exigence or reasonableness of the case The order of reading the Scriptures and of singing or saying the Psalms and Hymns of Gods praises being grounded upon no other reason nor tending to any other end then that of exercising and improving the Christianity of Gods people I need noâ— dispute that the Order which the power of the Church of Rome hâ—d introduced here as well in the rest of the West was such as made the Assemblies of the Church fruitlesse to that purpose For what could those shreds of Psalms and Lessonâ— which that order prescribeth contribute that might be considerable to that purpose Nor need I argue how considerable the order of the Church of England is to the same For to finish the Psalter once a year the New Testament thrice a year the Old once besides for reverence to the ancient Ordinance of the Church another Order for beginning the Prophet Esay at Advent and Genesis at Septuagesima to be prosecuted on Festival days is an Order from which the Church hath reason to expect a good effect in the instruction of Gods people And the interweaving of the Lessons with Hymns as it is agreeable to the rules and the practice of the ancient Church so it is in reason a fit mean to preserve attention and quicken devotion in them who use it In the mean time supposing there were considerable objections to be made against this or that order yet Order in generall being a thing so requisite to the preservation of Unity in the Body of the Church there is no reason to be given why any body should be admitted to dispute any Order received that cannot advance another Order which he can pretend to be more effectual to the purpose in which the parties must needs agree I am here to answer that part of the question concerning the Canon of Scripture which I said in the first book concerneth the Law not the faith of the Church whither the reading of those Scriptures which S. Jerome calls Apocryphall Ruffinus upon the Creed Ecclesiasticall for part of the Church office be for the ediâ—ication of the Church or not And a few words shall serve me to answer it with The very name of Ecclesiastical serves him that admits the Church to be one Body the unity whereof requires some uniformity in the order of those offices the communion whereof is one part of the end for which it subsisteth For it is manifest that the whole Church hath frequented the reading of them and that they are called Ecclesiastical for no other reason but because the reading of them hath been frequented by the Church in the Church And whosoever makes this any title of separation from the Church of Rome will make his Title Schismatical separating for that which is common to the present Church of Rome with the whole Church But because the repute of the Church is so slight
the Church according to the affirmation of S. Basil that this Prayer is a Tradition of the whole Church Many are the Lâ—â—urgies that is the formes of celebrating the Eucharist in the Eastern Churches under Constantinople Alexandria and Antiochia yet extant which show the substance of it after the Deacon had said Lift up your hearts the People answering Wee life them up to the Lord which evidently pointeth ouâ— that which S. Paul calls the Thanksgiving or Blessing wherein the Consecration of the Sacrament consisteth beginning there and ending with the Lords Prayer in all of them to be this Repeating the creation of all things and the fall of man to praise God that hee left him not helpless but called first the Fathers then gave the Law and when it appeared that all this would not serve to reclaim him to God sent his onely Son to redeem him by his Cross who instituted this remembrance of it Praising God therefore for all this but especially for the death and resurrection of Christ and praying that the Spirit promised may come upon the elements presently set forth and make them the Body and Bloud of Christ that they who receive them with living Faith may be filled with the Grace of it I acknowledg that the repetition of the creation and fall of man the calling of the Patriarchs and giving the Law is all silenced or left out in the Latine Canon that is that Canonical Prayer which this Sacrament is consecrated and communicated with neither can I say that it is extant in the Ambrosian or any form besides that may appear to have been anciently in use in any part of the Western Church Though I have reason enough to conceive that it was used from the beginning and afterwards cut off for the shortning of the service because of the great consent that is found among forms used in the Eastern parts and because wee see how the Psalms and Lessons retained in them are abridged of that length which by the Constitutions of the Apostles and other ancienter records of the Church may appear to have been used in former ages But there can be no reason to say that the leaving out of all this being so remote a ground of the present action makes any difference in the substance and effect of that prayer which it is done and performed with And the rest being the same in all forms that remain extant inables mee to conclude that the Prayers of the Church which the Eucharist is to be consecrated with were from the beginning prescribed not for so many words but for the substance of them not in writing but by silent custom and Tradition received by the Church from the Apostles and ought to continue the same to the end of the world in all Churches There is a little objection to be made against this from that which Walafridus Strabo and other Latine Writers concerning the Offices of the Church have reported from some passages of S. Jerome and S. Gregory the Great That S. Peter at the first did consecrate the Eucharist with the Lords Prayer onely Which if it all this falls to the ground and the form of consecrating the Eucharist hath proved so uniform meerly by the consent of after ages and will remain subject to be changed again seeing that the Lords Prayer may for the substance of it be rendred into other terms and conceptions as many wayes as a man pleases But there is I have showed you a mistake in the meaning of these passages intended onely in opposition to that variety of Psalms and Lessons and Hymns and Prayers which afterwards were brought in to make the celebration of the Sacrament more solemn in regard whereof they say that S. Peter consecrated onely with the Lords Prayer not with any of those additions for solemnities sake when hee consecrated by that Thanksgiving or Blessing which our Lord consecrated the Sacrament at his last Supper with adding onely in stead of all other solemnities the Lords Prayer which the Consecration is still concluded with in all ancient forms For when the Order and occasions of Assemblies were not setled but the Offices of Christianity were to be ministred upon such opportunities as they could finde out for themselves it is no mervail if S. Peter himself might be obliged to abare all but meerly what was requisite And truly I may here seasonably say that I conceive the Lords Prayer is justly called by Tertullian Oratio legitima or the Prayer which the Law that is the precept of our Lord in the Gospel When yee pray say thus prescribeth not as if hee would have them serve him with no other prayer but this But that they should alwayes use this as a set prayer whatever other occasions they might have of addressing themselves to God with other prayers For accordingly I do observe that in all prescribed forms upon what occasion soever not onely of celebrating the Eucharist which assemblies have therefore been called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Missae in Latine from the dismission of them as in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the gathering of them whereas the Latine word Collectae which answers it is extended to other assemblies but other more dayly and hourly occasions according to the premises concerning Five hours of Prayer in the day in S. Cyprians time which since have come to seven that there is alwayes a room for the Lords Prayer as if the service of God were not lawfull according to the precept When yee pray say thus unless it be used Which is that which I shall advise them of who either exclude it as unlawfull or forbear it as offensive that they may consider how they count themselves members of Christs Church waiving that which the whole Church hath practiced in obedience to his precept for conformity with the enemies of his Church There is yet another sort of Prayers which are offered to God at the celebration of the Eucharist according to S. Pauls command for all estates and orders of men whether in the world or in the Church and for all their necessities in regard whereof I showed you afore that the Eucharist is counted a Sacrifice for the Church or rather for all mankinde As the High Priest when hee went into the Holy of Holies according to Philo prayed for the whole world representing the intercession of Christ for the same now at the right hand of God which the Church in his name by celebrating this Sacrament executeth and commemorateth upon earth And the form hereof I can easily say by the same reason is for mater and substance though not for so many words and for the conceptions it is expressed with prescribed according to S. Pauls command by the custom of the Church received by Tradition from the Apostles For when I have once named the necessities of all Orders and Estates without or within the Church in general supposing what Christianity requires Christians to pray for as well in behalf of
VII 47-50 He showeth plainly that the vulgar conceit of the Jewes came farre short of the doctrine of the Prophets in this point and that this was then a great hinderance to the Jewes Christianity which vulgarly publisheth that which onely the worshippers of God in Spirit and truth understood under the Law As Barnabas also in that Epistle which the ancientest of the Fathers have acknowledged and is lately set forth declareth Now for the text of the Judges concerning that which the Jewes call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Idol of Micah Is it to be considered that there may be and are two opinions concerning the true sense and intent of the second commandment where it saith Thou shalt not make to thy self any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or carved image the likenesse of any thing For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the originall of it signifying all carved work it may be thought that God intends by these words to prohibite all use of carved work among his people Not as if the making of a carved image were idolatry but to avoid the occasions of idolatry which as I have said that art though it introduced not yet it increased And therefore it followeth For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God For jealousie forbids as well the meanes of adultery as adultery But if we suppose the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 extended by use beyond the original of it it may import onely such statues as are made to represent a godhead imagined afore And then the letter of the precept forbids no more then to make any carved work for the image of God According to the first sense the making of the Cherubims over the Ark falls within the precept And is to be taken for a dispensation of the Lawgiver in the matter of a positive precept which his own act onely rendered unlawfull But according to the later being not included in the matter of the precept there needs no exception to render it lawfull The same is to be said of the brazen serpent Whether of these opinions is true I need not here dispute Onely as I began to say afore I say further that during the time that high places were licensed it can be no inconvenience to grant that there was the like furniture provided for the service of God there to that which was prescribed in the Tabernacle For upon what ground that People thought it commanded by God there in which there could be no just occasion of idolatry upon the like ground and to the like purpose it might be taken up in the high places Though that reason which had moved God to prohibit high places after the place of his worship should be setled Levit. XVII 5. 7. might alwayes indanger them to go astray as the story of Gideon showes For though so long as they understood the ground upon which and the intent to which they were used they remained secure yet forgetting it by the deceitfullnesse of error they were subject to be seduced The fact of Micah then hath two of these handles which Epictetus his manuall mentions It may be taken as if he meant onely to make an high place for the service of the onely true God according to the Law the carved work which he furnished it with being onely in stead of the furniture of the Tabernacle Which is the case of Gideon as I stated it afore For when the Prophet Osee threatens the ten tribes that they shall dwell a long time without Ephod or Teraphim He does not mean it for a punishment that they should be restrained of the idolatry which they practised to the Calves But he signifieth that the Cherubim of the Temple where they ought to have served God and where it would be the blessing of that promise which the Law tendereth to serve God have the name of Teraphim common to them with the Calves Though those the objects of idolatry these the instruments of Gods service For on the other side the fact of Micah may be so taken as if he intended to set up a carved image of an imaginary Godhead to be worshipped for the onely true God And this intent seems to me the more probable of the two For there stands upon it the mark of a thing done against Gods Law Judg. XVII 6. In that day there was no king in Israel every man did what seemed right in his own eyes Which of the case of Gideon originally could not have been said And besides That Micah could not have any of the Tribe of Levi to minister in this high place but was faine to take his sonne in the mean time till he lighted upon a wandering Levite whose necessity might debauch him to any imployment This also seems an argument that his house of gods which he furnished with Ephod and Teraphim Judg. XVII 5. was erected to false gods For that his mother had consecrated her money to the incommunicable name of God v. 2. is easily answered by the same that hath been said to the cases of Aaron and Jeroboam But my opinion remaines never a whit prejudiced though these arguments seem insufficient and though it be said that the worship of the true God was that which Micah hereby intended For still the same alternative will have recourse which takes place in Jeroboams case Either his intent was the service of the true God and then though we suppose that he sinned against the precept of the Law Levit. XVII 5. yet he sinned not the sinne of idolatry Or his intent was the service of some imaginary Godhead and then he committed idolatry according to my opinion notwitststanding that he used the name of the onely true God in the businesse As for that which is objected that according to this opinion there would be no sufficient reason for that difference which the Scripture maketh between the sinne of Jeroboam which made Israel to sinne and the idolatries of Ahab and of the house of Omri and those wherein Manasses followed the Amorites How much he is deceived that thus reasons may easily appear to him that compares those murders those uncleannesses those horrible vilanies which the devil had seduced the Gentiles to under the pretense of Gods worship and for the discharge of that obligation which the sense of Religion binds all men with That compares these I say with the service of a false God but otherwise according to the same rites and ceremonies which the Law commands the true God to be served with Nor shall I need to say any thing to that which remaines either what interest Jeroboam could have to cary the people to the worship of any other then the true God who was to count his turn served if they went not up to Jerusalem Or how either he or they who conformed to his command could by onely so doing blot out of their mindes that opinion of the true God which they had suckt in with their milke and
whereby they thought they held their estate whether of this world or the hope they might have of the world to come For my opinion obligeth me not to say that Idolatry was commanded by this law of Jeroboam or practised by all that conformed to it But that though not expresly commanded yet it followed by necessary consequence upon the introducing of the Law Not by consequence of naturall necessity from that which the terms thereof imported but by that necessity which the Schoole calls morall when the common discretion of men that are able to judge in such matters evidences that supposing such a Law it must needs and will come to passe CHAP. XXVI The Place or rather the State of happy and miserable Soules otherwise understood by Gods people before Christs ascension then after it What the Apocalypse what the rest of the Apostles declare Onely Martyrs before Gods Throne Of the sight of God I Come now to the nicest point if I mistake not of all that occasions the present Controversies and divisions of the Western Church the state of soules departed with the profession of Christianity till the day of Judgement The resolution whereof that which remaines concerning the publick service of God the order and circumstances of the same must presuppose This resolution must procede upon supposition of that which the first book hath declared concerning the knowledge of the Resurrection and the world to come under the Old Testament and the reservation and good husbandry in declaring it which is used in the writings of it The consideration whereof mightily commendeth the wisdome and judgment of the ancient Church in proposing the bookes which we call Apocrypha for the instruction of the Ca echumeni or learners of Christianity For these are they in which the Resurrection and the world to come and the happy state of righteous soules after death is plainly and without circumstance first set forth I need not here repeat the seven Maccabees and their mother professing to dy for Gods Law in confidence of Resurrection to the world to come 2 Mac. VII 9 11 23 36. nor the Apostle Ebr. XI 35-38 testifying the same of them and the rest that lived or died in their case But I must not omit the Wisdom of Solomon the subject whereof as I said afore is to commend the Law of God to the Gentiles that in stead of persecuting Gods people they might learn the worship of the onely true God For this he doth by this argument that those who persecute Gods people think there remains no life after this but shall find that the righteous were at rest as soone at they were dead and in the day of judgement shall triumph over their enemies Wisdome II. III. 1-8 V From hence proceeding to show how the wisdome of Gods people derives it selfe from Gods wisdome who so strangely delivered them from the persecutions of Pharaoh and the Egyptians for a warning to those that might undertake the like In particular the Kings of Egypt under whom this was writ and the Jewes most used the Greek The Wisdome of Jesus the sonne of Sirach pretending to lay down those rules of righteous conversation which the study of the Law the off-spring of Gods Wisdome had furnished him with is not so copious in this point though the precepts of inward and spirituall obedience and service of God from the heart which he delivers throughout can by no meanes be parted from the hope of the world to come being grounded upon nothing else And he proposeth it plainly from the beginning when he saith He that feareth God it shall go well with him in the end and at the day of his death he shall be blessed The very additions to Daniel are a bulwarke to the Faith of the Church when it appeares that the happinesse of righteous soules after death is not taken up by any blind tradition among Christians but before Christianity expressed for the sense of Daniels fellows in those words of their hymne O ye spirits and souls of the righteous blesse ye the Lord praise him and magnify him for ever And whatsoever we may make of the second book of Maccabees the antiquity of it will alwayes be evidence that the principall author of it Jason of Cyrene could never have been either so senselesse or so impudent as to impose upon his nation that prayers or sacrifices were used by them in regard of the resurrection if they believed not the being and sense of humane souls after death 2 Mac. XII 43. Proceed we to those passages concerning this point which the Gospell afford us and consider how well they agree herewith I will not here dispute that our Lord intended to relate a thing that really was come to passe but to propose a parable or resemblance of that which might and did come to passe when he said Luke XVI 19 There was a certaine rich man that was clad with fine linnen and purple and made good chear every day But I will presume upon this That no man that meanes not to make a mockery of the Scriptures will indure that our Lord should represent unto us in such terms as we are able to bear that which falls out to righteous and wicked soules after death if there were no such thing as sense and capacity of pleasure and paine in souls departed according to that which they do here I will also propose to consideration the description of the place whereby he represents unto us the different estate of those whom it receiveth And in Hell lifting up his eyes being in torments he sees Abraham from afarre and Lazarus in his bosome And afterwards And besides all this between us and you there is a great gappe fixed so that those who would passe from hence cannot nor may they passe from thence to us For I perceive it is swallowed for Gospell amongst us that Dives being in Hell saw Lazarus in the third heavens Whereas the Scripture saith onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the invisible place of good and bad â—oules For so the processe of the Parable obliges us to understand it Sâ—â—ing it would be somewhat strange to understand that gappe wherewith the place of happy soules is here described to be parted from the place of torments to be the earth and all that is between the third heavens and it The Jewes at this time as we see by the Gospell believing according to the testimonies alleged that righteous soules were in rest and pleasure and happinesse wicked in misery and torments called the place or state of those torments Gehenna from the valley of the sonnes of Hinnom neer Jerusalem where those that of old time sacrificed their children to devils burnt them with fire The horror of which place it appears was taken up for a resemblance fit to represent the torment of the wicked soules after death In like manner Gods people being sensible of Gods mercy in using meanes to bring them back to the ancient inheritance
which our first parents lost by rebelling against God They could not use so fit a terme to expresse the rest and happinesse of blessed spirits in the world to come as by calling the place of it Paradise But that the place of this rest was the third heavens before the sitting down of our Lord Christ at the right hand of his Father I am yet to learn that there is any syllable or tittle in the holy Scripture to signify that the people of God understood at such time as our Lord delivered this Parable So that there can possibly be no reasonable presumption that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here used not in reference to the body which goes to corruption in the grave but to the soul or spirit should signify the same with Gehenna in opposition to Abrahams bosome Neither the originall signification of the word nor the circumstance of the parable nor any opinion received then among Gods people so limiting the signification of it But that the bosome of Abraham should signify the place of rest which God had appointed for the righteous the reason is plaine The hospitality of Abraham being renowned in the Scripture and the happinesse of the world to come being usually represented to the people of God at that time under the resemblance of a Feast whereof Abraham is made the Master when his bosome is made the place to receive and refresh Lazarus There is therefore no reason why the bosome of Abraham and Paradise should not signify the same state or the same place to the apprehension of Gods people at that time But there is also no reason why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Parable should not extend to comprehend both Gehenna and Paradise in the sense of those to whom our Lord addresses this Parable For neither is it any way necessary when the good thief prayes Lord remember me when thou comest into thy kingdome And our Lord answers To day shalt thou be with me in Paradise Luke XXIII 42 43. that Paradise should here be understood to signify the third heavens the way into which was not yet laid open standing the first Tabernacle saith the Apostle Ebr. IX 8. And againe Which new and living way our Lord Jesus hath dedicated or hanseled for us through the vaile that is his flesh unlesse we abuse our selues with an imagination that words can signifie things which could not be aprehended on t of them by those to whom they were said For as for S. Paul who was ravished into the third heavens that is into paradise 1 Cor. XIV 3 4. I conceive I need not insist upon an exception which there is no issue to try To wit that S. Paul speakes of severall raptures one into the third heavens the other into Paradise For to speake freely it seems no more then reason to grant that S. Paul was ravished to the presence of our Lord Christ But I must needs insist that the word Paradise could not signifie the same thing to S. Paul after the Ascension of our Lord as to the hearers of our Lord afore it As for the words of the same S. Paul having a desire to depart and to be with Christ Phi. I. 23. whether they do confine the spirit of S. Paul departed to the place of our Lord Christs bodily presence in the third heavens I will not conclude till I have considered more of those scriptures which may concerne the same purpose And indeed the Apocalypse as it is the last of the new Testament so seemeth to declare more in this mater then all the rest of it before had done For when upon the opening of the fift seale Apoc. VI. 9 10 11. the soules of Martyrs having demanded vengeance upon their persecutors were cloathed with long white robes and bidden to expect the fulfilling of their numbers And after that the CXLIVM of the XII tribes that were to be preserved from the said vengeance were sealed It followeth Apoc. VII 9. 14. After that I looked and behold a great multitude whom no man could number of every nation and tribe and people and language standing before the Throne and before the Lambe and cloathed in long white robes with Pâ—lmes in their hands And to show who they were These be they who come out of the great tribulation and have washed their robes and have blanched their robes in the bloud of the lambe Therefore they are before the throne of God and serve him day and night in his Temple and he that sitteth upon the Throne overshadoweth them They shall not hunger nor thirst nor shall the sun fall on them nor any heate For the Lambe that is in the midst of the Thorne feedeth them and guidâ—th them to living wells of water and God wipes away all teares from their eyes Here you have the soules of the Martyrs before the throne of God over shadowed by him that sitteth on the Throne who wipeth away all teares from their eyes And again Apoc. XIV 1-5 where the CXLIVM that were sealed appear again upon mount Sion and the voice of harpers is heard singing to their harps a new song before the throne and before the foure living creatures and Elders which no man but the sealed could learne It followeth These are they that have not been defiled with women for they are Virgins These are they that followe the Lambe whithersoever he goeth These are redeemed from among men as first fruits to God and to the Lambe Nor was any deceite found in their mouthes For they are unspotted before the Throne of God Here CXLIVM appeare upon mount Sion hearing onely the song which the harpers sing to their harps And therefore those that were not defiled with women that followe the Lamb whithersoever he goeth that are unspotted before the thâ—one of God are the harpers not those that were sealed The same Martyrs soules that appeared before in long white robes with Palmes in their hands now appeare singing the song of triumph to their harps For so it followeth v. 13. after denouncing the the fall of Babilon and vengeance of God upon those that worship the Beast I heard a voice from heaven say to me Write Blessed are the dead that from henceforth dye in the Lord. Even so saith the spirit for they rest from their labour and their works goe along with them Well might Tertullian restraine this to Martyrs for the consequence of the text mightiâ—y inforceth it The Lambe indeed is seen on mount Sion with those that are sealed But it is never said that they are before the Throne but onely they who appeare in Heaven that is the Martyrs whose song of tryumph they heare and learne which needed not have been said if they were represented as of one company And perhaps it is said that they follow the Lamb whither soever he goes Because they followed him to his Crosse suffering that death for him which he had suffered for us And that they are Virgines Because not stayned
with the pollution of false Gods For truly when it is said that guile was not found in their month We cannot understand any thing more proper then the profession of the Christian Faith forwhich they dyed For of whom can it be more properly said that guile was not found in his mouth then of him that dies rather then transgresse that vvhich he undertook at his Baptisme to professe the name of Christ unto death He that likes not this vvill be obliged to grant that virgins also have the state of Martyrs by this Prophesy For besides all that hath been said to shovv that in all this prophesy save the XXIV none but Martyrs appear in heaven before Gods Throne unlesse vve say that here Virgins also are seene among the Martyrs vvhenas in the beginning of the VII Chapter order is taken for the sealing of those that should escape the vengeance of God in Judaea being Christians and servants of God who in the beginning of the fourteenth appeare againe with the lamb upon mount Sion But the Martyrs soules appeare in heaven before the Throne both in the fift and in the seventh besides what I argue here by consequence drawne from the meaning of the foureteenth it would be a thing incons quent to the text and grain of the Prophesy to say that the servants of God who are preserved by the name of God sealed on their foreheads Apoc. XIV 1. VII 3. from that destruction which involves the persecutors of Christianity should appeare in the same company ranck with the Martyrs Among whom are those that are slaine in the City of Jerusalem Ap. XI 7 8 9. of a several condition from those that are preserved alive Compare wee here with the doctrin of S. Paul 2. Cor. V. 1-4 For we know that if this earthly house of our Tabernacle be dissolved we have a building from God a house not made with hands eternall in the heavens And for this we groan desiring that our dwelling from heaven be vested upon us If so be we shall not be found naked having put it upon us For wee that are in the tabernacle groane as grieved not because we desire to be stripped but to be invested that the mortall may be swallowed up of life The whole text of this discourse manifestly imports that S. Paul expects the resurrection as the accomplishment of his hopeâ— not groaning for the day of his death to have his soule stripped from his body but to have it invested with a heavenly tabernacle made by God his glorified body which bringeth life that swalloweth up the mortality of this As also he saith Rom. VIII 23. That we who have the first fruits of the spirit groane within our selves expecting the adoption even the redemption of our body Where the resurrection is the adoption of those who rise againe to be Sons of God according to the word of our Lord Luke XX. 36. For neither can they dye any more for they are equall to Angels And being children of the resurrection are children of God It is true it appeares by S. Paul that he was no further certified as then of the counsaill of God then to make it a question whether he and the Christians of his time should be found alive by the Lord Christ at his coming to judgement For therefore he saies with an if If we shall not be found naked of our bodies when we put on glorious bodies Though he had said afore that if this body be dissolved we shall have a heavenly body for it And so 1 Cor. XV. 57. The dead shall rise incorruptible and we shall be changed And 1 Tim. IV. 15. 17. We that are left alive unto the comming of the Lord shall not prevent those that are falne asleep Againe We that are left alive shall be ravished with them in the clouds into the ayre to meet the Lord And so shall be alwaies with the Lord. So that the thousand yeares which it is revealed to S. Iohn that the Church shall indure after the fall of Babylon and the judgement exercised upon the whore Apoc. XX. is a further revelation of Gods will and pleasure for the subsistance of Christianity with the world how much soever he hath determined it shall indure more then he hath there declared But notwithstanding seeing that S. Paul though uncertaine thereof suspends the accomplishment of his and our happinesse upon the resurrection Most manifest it is that the stripping of our bodies by death is not the terme of Gods promise according to S. Paul Wherefore when it folowes Having therefore alwaies confidence and knowing that dwilling in the body wee are â—ilgrims from God for we walke by faith not by sight we desire with confiderce rather to travell out of the body and to dwell with God Supposing that S. Paul expected this change by Christs second coming before he died he contradicts not himselfe when he refers it to the resurrection which if we think that he assignes it unto the meane time wee make him to do Therefore S. Iohn 1 Epistle III. 2. Beloved we are now the Children of God But it is not yet manifest what wee shall be Yet wee know that when he or it is made manifest we shall be like him for wee shall see him as he is Sons of God because Sons of the resurrection we saw before in our Lords words Sons of God because adopted to his spirit wee have here in S. Iohn But as S. Paul made our adoption to be the redemption of the body so Eph VI. 30. Grieve not the holy spirit of God saith he by whom yee are sealed to the day of redemption And â— 14 speaking of the same spirit Who is the earnest of our inheritance untill the redemption of the purchase As our Lord saith also Luke XX. 28. Lift up your heades for your redemption draweth nigh speaking of his second coming If therefore neither our adoption and redemption nor Gods purchase be compleat before we rise againe whether wee read in S. Iohn When he shall be made manifest or when it shall be made manifest what we shall be the resurrection is the time For if wee be not like Angels till the resurrection as our Lord saies much lesse like God or like our Lord Christ as S. Iohn sayes As for the terme of seeing God upon which the School Doctors have stated the controversy of the Saints happinesse in the meane time It is a thing evident enough that the speech is borrowed from the comparison between Moses and other Prophets Num. XII 6 7 8. Where God saith he will deale with other prophets by a vision or a dreame but with Moses face to face And yet S. Paule 1. Cor. XIII 12. comparing the knowledge of God by faith with the knowledge of God by sight Wee see now by a glasse in a riddle but then face to face Now wee know in part then shall I know as I am knowne Which S. â—ohn calls as he is for sure
oneby the Holy Angels though in the Apocalypse the Martyrs are before the Throne and the Elders sit on seates round about the Throne seeing it cannot be said that they are translated out of the Verge of Hell into the heavens by the resurrection and ascension of Christ who were in happinesse before by the parable of Dives Lazarus I take the chambers or the houses here mentioned to be the bosom of Abraham in the parable Paradise in our Lords promise secret indeed because the script is sparing in imparting unto us the knowledge of the place But such as oblige them earnestly to desire long for the consummation of all things which not only the comparison of the womb in this Apocryphal scripture but the cry of the souls in Apocal. VI. 10. XX. 12 17 20. witnesseth But I must go no further in this point till I have resolved the difficulty of Samuels souls which he that wil needs question whether it were in the deviles hand for a witch to bring up out of the earth or in the bosome of Abraham where ouâ— Saviour placed Lazarus may as well question whether the witch or the Law sent us to the true God To a heathen man that acknowledgeth not the enmity betweene God and the Devil which the scripture establisheâ—h Necromancy that bringeth the likenesse of the dead out of the earth need not goe for a diabolicall art nor those spirits which minister such appositions be counted uncleane spirits But the scripture even of the old testament placing the Giants Gods enemies beneath oblige us to take it for an uncleane spirit that serves an act forbiden by Gods Law by bringing the likenesse of Gods prophet out of the place where Gods enemies goe after death For though Gods friends goe to the dust as concerning their bodies and as concening theire soules the old Testament declares not whither they goe yet hath it no where described them in that company to which Solomon deputeth his foole And our Saviours parable representeth Dives in the flames which burnt Sodom and Gâ—morrhaâ— no otherwise then Solomon quartereth his fool with the Giants that tyranized over the old world or the land of promise Wherefore though I reject not Ecclesiasticus for commending Samuel because he prophesied after his death because at the worst it is not fit to reject a booke of such excellent use for one mistake yet I had rather say that Saul having by his Apostasy declined to the worship of the Devile by Necromancy did thinke it more satisfactory to be answered by Samuel then by any other likenesse that this is indeed for Samuels honour but that otherwise it is no more for Ecclesiasticus to say that Samuel prophesied then for the scripture that Samuel spoke to Saul Who whether he tooke it for Samuel or for an uncleane spirit the scripture would call it no otherwise then the witch whom he submitted to pretended Shee when she saith I see Gods ascend out of the earth though I find it no incongruity that she should pretend the Spirit whom she imployed to be of that number whom the scripture calleth Gods or Gods sonnes yet because it is rather to be thought that she pretended to bring up Samuel indeed it is more convenient to translate it I see a Judge come up out of the earth understanding that by the habit of a Judge in which he appeared she shows him to Saul for Samuel For the observation of the Jews doctors is most true that Elohim signifies the Judges of Gods people These things thus cleared it is manifest that the soule of Christ parted from his body which lay in the grave did not goe into hell to free the Fathers souls out of thâ— Devils hands and to translate â—hem to the full happinesse which wâ—nts only the company of the body as an accessary to complete it But seeing he may be thought to have gon thither to declare the victory of his Crosse to begin that triumph over the Devill and his partie which the Gospell shall accomplish at the generall judgement by the redemption of the Church Let us see what the Scripture teacheth S. Peter Acts. II. 25-35 first affirmes that David spake of Christ when he said Psalme XVI 11 12. Thou shalt not leave my soul in Hell Nor suffer thine holy one to see corruption Thou shalt shâ—w me the path of life thou shalt fill me with the gladnesse of thy presence And proves it because David was dead and buryed and his Seâ—ulchre was seen to thâ—t day Just as he proves afterwards that when David said Psalme CX 2. The â—ord said unto my Lord sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footestool he meant it of Christ because David never went up into the heavens And there is no doubt the opinion of the Jewes at that day bore him out in that exposition because as to this day so then they did expound those texts of the Messias So he had nothing to doe but to show hâ—w true they were of our Lord Jesus That this no way requireth that thâ—y should not be unâ—erstood of David in the literall sense I refer my self to that which hath been â—aid already But what fignifies it in the literall sense that God shâ—wes David thâ— path of life and fills him with the gladnesse of his presence Surely that he pâ—â—serves him alive in his state title of King of Gods people to serve God before the Arke So Hezâ—kias when he was unwilling to dy â— because the living onely praise God â—â—d â—aid What is the signe that I shall goe into the Temple of the Lord. Esa XXXVIII 19 22. So David how many times doth he â—et forth for the comfort of his life that he might come and see God in the Temple Ps XVII 15. XXIV 3. 5. XXVI 6-13 XLII And in a word every where If this be the literall sense of the Psalme what shall iâ— signifie in the mysticall sense supposing our Lord Jesus the Messias and suâ—posing him killed by the Jewes Let S. Peter be judge when he saies thaâ— â—avid knowing as a Prophet that the Messias our Lord Jesus whom ye have slâ—in should come out of his loines foretold of his resurrection that his oule was not left in Hell nor aid his flesh see corruption For is it any way reqâ—isite to the 〈◊〉 of this argument that our Lords humane soule should triumph over thâ— Devile and his party in the entralls of the earth Therefore â—f you accept his souâ—â— to signifie his person as David Psalm XXV 12. His soule himselfe shall lâ—ve at ease and his seed shall inherit the Land thou shalt not leave my soule in Hell will be no more then thou shalt not suffer thine holy one to lee corruption Thou shalt not suffer me to be cut off from thy presence to which I am to present the sacrifice of my Crosse But if you will needs have the soule to signifie that which stands
in opposition to the flesh seeing the soules of the Fatherâ— which by the dispensation of the Law appeared not freed from the Devin wâ—re indeed free by the Gospel uâ—der the Law it is no marvaile that â—ur Lord Christ represents his soule as in the power oâ— those who had the power oâ— death who â—aith This is your time and the time of the powers of darkenesse Doâ—h S. Paul make any more oâ— thâ—s text Heare his words Actâ— Xâ—Iâ— 34-37 That he raised him from the dead no more to returne to corruptioâ— thus he saith I will give you the sure meâ—cies of David Wherefore he saith also in an other Psalm Thou shall no suffer thine holy one to see corruption For David having served the counsaile of God in his generation fell asleep and was added to his Fathers and saw corruption But he whom God raised â—â—w no corruption He argues the mysticall sense in our Lord Christ 〈◊〉 the literall sense in David was come to nothing by his death but how the mysticall sense in our Lord Christ By his triumphing in Hell or by rising againe Therefore S. Paul againe Rom. X 6-9 thus wrâ—steth the words of Moses out of the Jewes hands to the establishing of the Gospel upon supposition that the law is the figure of it Say not in thy heart who shall goe up into heaven as Moses Deut. XXX 12. faith The Law is not in heaven that thou shouldest say would to God some body would bring it us from heaven that we might heare and doe it So saith he of the Gospel thou needest not say would to God some body would go up into heaven To wit to bring downe Christ Or who shall goe downe into the deep as Moses addeth The Law is not beyond sea that that thou needest say would to God some body would goe beyond sea and bring it us that we might heare and doe it So thou needst not say would to God some body would goe downe into the deep To wit to bring Christ up from the dead But what saith it The Law correspondent to the Gospell The word is neere in thy mouth and in thy heart That is the word of Faith which wee preach That if thou prâ—fesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus believing with thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved Here it is plaine the deepe is not named for the place of the damned but for that place or for that state out of which it was hard to recover Christ supposing him dead As it was hard to bring the law from beyond the seas The deep I deny not represents to us the place of the damned Luke VIII 31. as also the parts that are under the earth Phi. II. 10. Apoc. V. 13. may comprehend also the dead Therefore the deep signifies the place of the damned not necessarily as here but because the speech is of the region of Devils of the sealing up of the devill in the deep Just as I said of the grave the pit and the place under the earth that when the scripture speakes of the Giants of the enemieâ— of Gods people of Davids enemies in Gods people it signifies either the place or at least the state of the damned which the Old Testament must needs acknowledg acknowledging the happinesse of Gods people Psalme IX 18. Proverbs V. 8 VII 27. IX 18. And so went Corah and his complices quick into Hell Num. XVI 30 33. So Psalme LV. 24. LXIII 10. The proper place of the dâ—mned spirits seemeth to be properly called by S. Peter Tartara when he saies that God delivered them to be kept for judgement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in chaines of darkenesse being cast downe into Tartara or Hell 1. Peter II. 4. Now the state of death brings not Christian soules into Hell unlâ—sse wee suppose that the place of good souls under the Law which supposition I have destroyed Therefore the bringing of Christ from the deep is done by raising him again So quoting David againe Ephes IV. 8 9 10. Therefore he saith Psa LXVIII 17. Going upon high he led captivity captive and gave men gifts Now that he ascended what is it but that he first descended into the lower paâ—ts of the Earth He that descended is the same that ascended far above all things to fill or fulfill all things The Psalme speakes of the Arke going up into the Tabernacle or Temple figuring the going up of our Lord to the right hand of God as Psalme XXIV 6-10 XLVII 5. The going up of the Arke was Gods triumph over the Idolatrous nations whom he cast out of the Land of promise giving gifts to his people in it The going up of our Lord Christ S. Paul saies implies that he had come downe before into the lower pâ—rt of the Eearth Either in respect of mount Sinai upon which the Psalme describes God with that attendance which the aâ—ke the Cherubines thereof signifie his host of Angels in the words just afore Or we may well understand the lower parts of the earth to signifie by the figure of apposition the earth that is below as flumen Rheni Vrbs Patavii signifie the river Rhine and the City Padna For we have a peremptory instance in Psa CXXXIX 15 where David saith that he was fashioned in the lower parts of the earth speaking of his mothers wombe therefore meaning the earth below The ascension therefore of Christ pretending to fill rather then fulfill all with his graces of which he proceeds to speake requires no descent into hell which he pretends not to fill with his Graces If the resurrection ascension of Christ satisfie these texts so that they require no further descent then into the state of deaâ—h supposing what I said before of the soules of the fathers under the Old Testament I must needs conclude that the body of Christ being buryed his soule went with the good theifes soule into Paradise or the bosome of Abraham where the soules of the Fathers were refreshed of their travells till the first and then the second comming of our Lord. Paradise we know was the place of mans happniesse wherein he was created whence having sinned he was shut out In our Lords time Gods people it is plaine understood well enough the state of the righteous soules in the other world You have seene it out of those boâ—kes which we call Apocrypha Supposing the place unknown as indeed it is how could it be more properly signified then by the name of Paradise opening unto us the whole allegory by which the happinesse which wee seeke to recover by the covâ—nant of grâ—ce was expressed to us by God first in the Land of promise secondly in the Church after in the heavens after the redemption of our bodies The true Land of promise to which the Gospell and the Church secretly taught and built under the Law introduceth us because the Law cannot is that Paradise to which Christ restoreth Adam that was
breedeth purgeth away the love of the creature And it may be thought that the examination of the conscience the conviction of sinne the remorse and shame of so many disloyalties the feare of the Judge and in fine the strictnesse of the judgement is the fire which Saint Paul sayes shall try every mans work as the fire which burns up the world shall their bodies and sever the dregs and drosse of them to the Devil and his Angels from whom they came with the dregs and drosse of the world which divines say shall be conveyed to Hell as the â—inke of it But hereupon the Apostle when he sayes Ye are come to the spirits of just men made perfect Hebrews XII 23. may be understood that they are thus perfected supposing him to speake of the generall judgement to come to passe then straight as the destruction of Jerusalem did and that therefore he saith Ye are come But he may be also understood to say that they are perfected by Christianity in comparison of Judaisme as our Lord saith Be ye perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect And as he saith that the least in the kingdome of heaven is greater then John the Baptist Whereas if we understand him to say Ye are come to the Spirits of just men perfected between the departure and the day of judgement we make him to say that which is no where else either said or intimated by the Scripture And that is it which distinguisheth my opinion from the position of Purgatory or rather the doctrine of the scriptures from the decree of the Councils of Florence and Trent For will the present Church of Rome be content with such an estate of soules as no man can be helped out of What were Purgatory worth if men were perswaded that there is no meanes to translate their soules out of the flames thereof into heaven before the generall judgement Or what were Christianity the worse if all were perswaded that those soules which wee speake of all this while need their friends prayers to help them through this middle estate and especially through the dreadfull tryall of the day of judgement Surely thus much the worse that men must of necessity keep a better account of their steps here and take a better care to cleare themselves of the sins which they commit that they may passe it with the more joy and cherefullnesse Well may they part with the drosse and stubble of the immediate imputation of Christs merits sufferings which they have built upon the foundation of the remission of sins and everlasting life in consideration of the same but upon condition of Christanity upon these termes here rather then part with it at their charge then if perhaps they have not failed of the foundation by the meanes of it And upon these termes I am not troubled at the words of our Lord Mat. XII 32. Who shall speake a word against the Son of man it shall be remitted him But who shall speake against the Holy Ghost it shall never be remitted him neither in this world nor in the world to come For as for mine owne part I finde the force of the words well enough satisfied taking it onely for a fashion of speech signifying onely that that sin could by no meanes be pardoned no not in the world to come not supposing that the world to come hath meanes to pardon so great sins as this world hath no meanes to doe I confesse according to my opinion there is in some sort pardon for sins in the other world though absolutely there is not because there is none but in vertue of the covenant of Grace the termes whereof onely take place in this world though the effect thereof extend to the world to come For after departure in the state of Grace for a man to know that there is no more danger of failing of everlasting life is absolutely that which the greatest Saints of this world could never attaine to Though some effects of sin stick to those that are so assured between death and the day of judgement in respect to which he who is absolutely said to be pardoned because in no danger of forfeiting it may be said so far not to be pardoned as the continuance of those effects imports But there is nothing in my opinion to signifie that there is meanes of obtaining pardon for those sins in the next world which there is no meanes to obtain pardon for in this Which this saying of our Lord at the foote of the letter signifies And therefore I for my part can very well rest satisfied with this sense taking the inlarging of it by mentioning the world to come for an elegance which common speech beareth and that of our Lord frequenteth But if any man thinke I respect not the Fathers that have expounded it to the sense which I refuse not the rule of faith being safe let every man injoy his opinion in it Of the figure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Grotius observes in the words in the world to come whereby it shall not be for given him in the world to come signifyes He shall be soundly punished for it in the world to come let them who are capable see him discourse learnedly in his Anotations upon this place As little am I troubled at that other text of the Gospell Mat. V. 26. Luke Xâ—I 58. Thou shalt not come forth till thou hast paid the utmost farthing For I can easily grant that the taking away of those effects of sin which remaine in those that dy in grace according to my opinion may be said to come by paying the utmost farthing But I need not grant that he who saies thou shalt not come forth till thou hast paid the utmost farthing saies Thou mayest come forth by paying the utmost farthing For the condition of paying the utmost farthing will be unpossible if wee understand the prison to be the Lake of the damned which the executioner mentioned afore requires In S. Luke for a Preface to the Parable Why doe yee not judge what is right from your soules saith our Lord That is why doe ye not judge what ye are to doe in the mater of my Gospell by that which you use to doe in worldly matters If you be liable to an action you find it best to compound it before the judge give sentence and grant execution upon it For then you must stand to the extremity of the Law The preaching of the gospell showes that the Law oâ— God hath an Action against you which you may take up by becoming Christians and yet you will not doe it In S. Mathew it followes upon the precept of being reconciled to a mans brother which showes that God accepts not that sacrifice which is not offered in charity But it cannot signifie lesse then in S. Luke That our Lord upon that occasion puts all in mind to be reconciled to God because there is no redemption if he grant execution
against us This execution then is either upon refusing the termes of reconcilement or upon failing of that which we undertake by accepting them That is not upon those failleures which may consist with reconcilement as those who would have these words to signifie Purgatory imagine but which destroy it And therefore the limitation till thou hast paid the utmost farthing signifies as Mat. I. 15. He knew her not till she had brought fourth her first borne son though he never knew her That is to say his utmost farthing shall never be paid My opinion would allow me to accept of Tertullians and S. Cyprians sense of this text who do indeed acknowledge the voiding of those effects of sin which may remain upon those that depart in the state of Grace between death and the day of judgement to be the paying of this utmost farthing But I have shewed you why it agrees not with the intent of the words And if it did it were nothing to Purgatory because Tertullian expresseth it to be paid mâ—ra resurrectioniâ— by the delay of the resurrection that is not before tâ—e generall judgement whereby Purgatory is quite spoiled For pretending the expinting of veniall sin which consisteth with reconcilement together with satisfying the debt of temporall punishment reserved by God upon that sin which he remitteth it cannot be intended by him that gives warning of seeking reconcilement not of voiding the penalties which may remaine when it is obtained Where you may see by survaying the scriptures which have been debated that there is not the least pretense in them for paying this debt by induring the flames of Purgatory for that sin which is forgiven afore But that all satisfaction endeth in voiding the guilt of sin by appeasing the wrâ—th of God for it before wee goe hence There be other texts both of the old and New Testament that are usually alleaged in this dispute But because rather for show then substance I will rather presume that all reasonable men may see where the consequence failes then use so many words as it requires to show it He shall sit as a refiner that purifieth silver and â—â—all purifiâ— the Sons of Levi and purge them as Gold and silver that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in rightousnesse saith the Prophet Malachi III. 3. But manifestly speaking of the first coming of Christ and triall which the Gospel passes them through that turn Christians upon mature advice Whatsoever trial the second coming of Christ may bring with it correspondent to the first it will be nothing to Purgatory the day of judgement determining it As for thee also by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth the prisoners out of the pit where in was no water Saith the Prophet Zachary IX 11. speaking of the returne from the Captivity of Babylon and of the prince of Israel that should figure oâ—t our Lord Christ and rule from sea to sea and from the river to the ends of the earth Whereby it appeareth that the spiritual sense of this Prophesy ending â—n the redemption of mankind by the death of Christ and his Kingdome by the preaching of his Gospel can by no meanes be extended to any delivering out of Purgatory and if it could must not be intended to take place before the second coming Which intent would also appear groundlesse in this Because I have showed that he did not deliver the soules of the Fathers out of the Devils hands at his first coming which this text is alleaged to prove no lesse then Purgatory For this will confine it to the delivery of mankind from sin by the death of our Lord Christ and his sufferings CHAP. XXVIII Ancient opinions in the Church of the place of soules before the day of judgement No Tradition that the Fathers were in the Verge of Hell under the Earth The reason of the difference in the expressions of the Fathers of the Church What Tradition of the Church for the place of Christs soule during his death The Saints soules in secret mansions according to the Tradition of the Church Prayer for the dead supposeth the same No Purgatory according to the Tradition of the Church LEt us now consider the Tradition of the Church in these particulars Justin the Martyr in his dispute with Trypho the Jew by the example of Samuel proveth that the soules of the Fathers and Prophets were in the hands of the Powers of darkenesse And that by the prayer of our Lord Psal XXII 21. wee are taught to pray at our departure that God would not give us up to them as he at his death commends his soule into his Fathers hands It â—s wel enough known that Clemens Alexandrinus believes that both our Lord his Apostles went into Hel to deliver from thence such soules as should admit that which he came to preach He followed in it the Apocryphall vision of Hermes then in request where this is still found libro III. similitud III. and what followers he hath in this opinion you may see by the late Lord Primate his answer to the Jesuites Challenge p. 274. S. Austine de Haer. LXXIX after Philastrius de Haer. LXXIV counts this opinion in the list of Heresies Yet doubted not that he did deliver thence whom he found fit Epist XCIX de Gen. ad Lit. XII 33 34. Nor S. Jerom that he did them good who were there though how it can not be said in Ephes IV. libro II. To the same purpose in IV. Dan. I. in III. Lament II. That this opinion had great vogue in the Church and must be counted in the number of Ecclesiasticall positions cannot be denyed That it is or ever was held as of the Rule of Faith it must Marcion was the fiâ—st that placed the Fathers soules in Hell that he might assigne heaven for the part of his Christ and his God as wee learne by Tertullian IV. 3 4. to wit to entertaine his disciples For this ingageth Tertullian to oppose the Gulfe and the rich mans lifting up his eyes in Hell for arguments that Abrahams bosome is no part of it but higher then Hell though not in heaven to refresh all believers Abr. children til the resurrection for he allowes paradise onely to Martyrs which he maketh also the place under the Alâ—ar where S. Iohn saw onely Martyrs soules though else where Apolog. cap XLVII and in his Poem de Judicio cap. VIII he assigneth it to incertaine the Saints soules without any difference alleaging a revelation to Perpetua a Montanist Virgine to that purpose de Resurr XLIII And therefore de Anima LV. makes that which he made before higher then hell but not in heaven a part of hell where our Lord visited the Fathers soules to wit the upper part of it being all contayned within the entrailes of the earth To the same purpose Iraeneus V. 31. saith it is manifest that the soules of Christians goe into an invisible place the English of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
this that the body being buryed the soule goe ad Inferos For in Psalmum II. he exemplifies in Dives and Lazarus And Lactantius VII 21. Nec tamen quisquam putet animas post mortem protinus judicari Omnes in una communique custodia detinentur dones tempus adveniat quo maximus index meritorum faciat examen Yet let no man think that soules are judged straight after death They are kept in one common guard till the time come for the Soveraigne Judge to examine theire deserts He denies them to be judged whom Novatianus acknowledgeth to be prejudged or forejudged He means our common guard but intends not to deny the gulfe which it is parted with S. Ambrose de Bono Mortis X. XI saith that those lodgings which the Apocryphichall Esdras speaketh of are the many lodgings which our Lord saith are in his fathers house Iohn XIV 2. and speaking of the Gentiles Satis fuerat dixisse illis quod liberatae animae a corporibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 peterent id est locum qui non videtur quem locum Latine infernum dicimus It had been enough for them to have said that soules freed from their bodies goe to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to a place not seen which place wee call hell in Latine Signifying that according to Christianity all soules going to Esdras his lodgings may be said to goe to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Latine makes to be under the Earth But whether Christianity so understand it or no not expressing Againe Ergo dum expectatur plenitudo temporis expectant anims remunerationem debitam Alias manet paena alias gloria Et tamen nec illae interim sine injuria nec istae sine fructu sunt While therefore the fulnesse of time is expected soules also expect their own reward Some punishment some glory attendes yet neither they without hardship nor these without benefit in the meane time Yet as it followes neither grieved with cares neither vexed with the remembrance of that which is past as the wicked but foreseeing their rest and glory to come injoy the quiet of their lodgings under the guard of Angels If it be excepted that there is no mention of the Fathers soules Let it be considered how many Church-writers have made the bosome of Abraham in which Lazarus rested before our Lords death a place of rest and refreshment from death till the day of judgement Their words you may find in the answer to the Jesuits Challenge named afore p. 260-267 Where those expositions of the Gospell which goe under the name of Theophilus of Antiochia Euthymius of Lions write two opinions the one placing it under the earth the other above because the rich man lifted up his eyes From whence the second of those dialogues against the Marcionists that goe under Origens name argueth that it is in heaven So far is the ancient Church from being agreed that those store-houses wherein it is agreed that all soules are kept till the generall judgement are beneath the earth And though he was a Christian that writ the Apocryphall book of Esâ—ras II. from whom S. Ambros and S. Austine receive their store-houses of Soules yet speakes it in the person of Esdras concerning the Fathers of the Old Testament In the meane time of the removing of them by the descent of Christ out of the Verge of Hell into heaven not one word in all this which certainely may serve to evidence that there never was nor is any such Tradition in the Church In fine the descent of righteous soules in to hell and the deliverance of them from thence by the descent of our Lord Christ may be understood two severall waies Either according to the literall sense of the old Testament or according ot the mysticall sense of the New For it is manifest that Adam was condemned to labor the earth first and then to returne to the earth And this being expulsed out of Paradise The secret of Christianity consisting in this that our Lord Christ should restore the posterity of Adam from those sorrowes which brought him to the earth whence he was taken to Paradise whence he was expulsed was not to be revealed though it was to take effect in all who in effect though not in forme imbraced and held the Covenant of Grace during the old Testament The land of promise and the blessings thereof were then the pledges of this hope To leave them by death was then to acknowledge themselves liable to the second death which returning to the earth signified so long as their returne to Paradise was not revealed Though to them which understood what the Land of promise signified it was to returne into paradise The new testament succeeding to reveale the mystery of the old must it not needes seeme strange that the Fathers of the old Testament should behave themselves towards death as they who had not this hope Supposing this reason not then to be declared it neede not seeme strange not supposing the same it seems to cal in question som thing of our common Christianity The Gospel opens the secret representing Dives in Hel torments Lazarus in Abrahams bosom But our Lord Christ himselfe being brought downe to the dust of the earth to deliver mankind from the second death signified by the same did our common redemption require that he should come any further under death and them who had the power of it our common Faith might seeme maimed in not believing it But the worke of redemption being accomplished upon the Crosse the effect of it was to be tryed by the disposing of his soule Which effect whether those that belonged to the new Testament under the Old understood by the scriptures of the Law they understood it as did the Devil by theire deliverance out of his hands For the reason of their deliverance he might not understand till the rising of Christ againe taught it When therefore wee see the soules of Adam and his posterity assigned by the Fathers of the Church to the powers of darkenesse let us understand it to hold according to the Old Testament and it will comprehend also the souls of the Fathers Who belonged to the New Testament When we heare them describe them in the rest of Abrahams bosome according to that which our Lord revealeth let us understand the effect of the New Testanent in them that dyed under the Old Without distinguishing thus I conceive it will be impossible to reconcile the Fathers to themselves and the common faith For pressing that which they say on either side you will not faile to make them crosse one an other as well as the Scriptures But thus distinguishing the common faith will remaine that which Macrina in Gregory Nyssens dialogue de anima resurrectione answers to the question Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is To wit that the translation of the soule from this visible world to that which is not seen is all that can be had
trample Paganisme under feet after the conversion of Constantine Certainely nothing can be named so correspondent to that honour which is prophesied for them that suffered for Gods law under Antiochus Epiphanes Dan. XII Is not all this honour properly derivative from the honour of God and our Lord Christ and relative to his service For that is the worke for which Christians assemble and for those assemblies the Church stands as I have often said The honour of the Saints but the occasion circumstance or furniture for it Neither is it to be doubted that the Saints in happinesse pray for the Church militant and that they have knowledge thereof if they goe not out like sparkles and are kindled againe when they resume their bodies which I have showen our common Christianity allowes not For is it possible to imagine that knowing any thing that is knowing God and themselves they should not know that God hath a Church in the world upon the consumation whereof their consummation dependeth Or is it possible that knowing this and being disposed towards this Church as they ought to be disposed towards it in respect to God they should not intercede with God for the consummation of it and the meanes thereof which is all we can desire I will not use the text of Jeremy XI 1. and Ezek. XIV 13-19 because it is manifest that Moses and Samuel that Noe Daniel and Job are named in them but to put the case that if those men were alive and made intercession for their people they should not prevaile Which is not to say that which I have showed that the Old Testament speakes not out plaine that being alive they doe intercede Therefore they make no consequence I will not use the text of the Gospell Luke XVI 9. Make ye friends of the unrighteous Mamon that when yee faile they may receive you into everlasting Tabernacles Though S. Austine de Civit. I. 27. makes a doubt whether it be by the intercession of his friends that such a man is received Because he makes no doubt that it is in consideration of the charity by which he made them his friends that he is received And therefore in that consideration it must be that they are said to receive him not in consideration of their prayers Of which therefore this text saith nothing But I must needs use the text of the Apoc. V. 8. VIII 3. whereby it appeareth as much that the Church triumphant prayeth for the Church militant as that the saints of the Church triumphant are alive And I wil use these texts of the Old Testament where Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and David are in consideration alleged to God in behalf of his people Gen. XXVI 5 24. Ex. XXXII 13. Deut. IX 27. 1. Kings XI 12 32 33 34. XV. 4. 2. Kings VIII 19. XIX 34. XX. 6. Es XXXVII 35. 1. Kings XVIII 36 1 Chron. XXIX 28. For as our Saviour argueth well that Abraham Isaac and Jacob are alive and shall rise againe because God is not the God of the dead So is the consequence as good that what God doth for their sakes he doth it for their mediation or intercession unlesse he meane to set that on their score which they desire not at his hands The Angels of little children alwaies see the Fathers face in heaven Math. XVIII 10. And there is joy in the presence of Gods Angels over one sinner that repenteth Luke XV. 10. And David saith that the Angell of the Lord pitcheth his tent round about them that feare him and delivereth them Psalme XXV 8. And they are all ministring spirits sent forth to attend upon them that shall be heires of salvation Heb. I. 14. and have they not that affection for those whom God so affecteth as to provide them such attendance not to mediate with their desires to God the effect of that goodnesse which he is so affectionate to bestow upon us An imagination so barbarous cannot possesse any man till he think himselfe beloved of God for hating those that honour Saints and Angels above measure Let them looke to the measure and let them looke how they hate them that observe it not Let them not ground their measure upon a supposition of as little affection in the Saints and Angels for us as in themselves for the Saints and Angels unlesse it be because such a supposition may deserve to deprive them of the benefit of such relations For as for the Church S. Cyprian doubts not when he desires that those who shall happen to depart first be mindfull of them that remaine in their prayers to God Epist I. And the Saints in heaven that are secure of their owne salvation he saith are solicitous for us in his booke de mortalitate S. Jerome saith the same of Heliodorus Epist I. nor is any thing to be faulted of that which he writes against Vigilantius to that purpose S. Austine supposeth that Nebridius prayed for him being dead Confess IX 3. and expects benefit from S. Cypryans prayers de Bapt. V. 7 17. He said afore that we are to be commended by the prayers of the Martyrs and de sanctis Serm. XLVI Debent Martyres aliquid in nobis recognoscere de suis virtutibus ut pro nobis dignentur domino supplicare The Martyrs must take notice of something of their owne vertues in us that they may vouchsafe to become petitioners to God for us And againe contra Faustum XX. 21. the reason why they celebrated the memories of the Saints he assignes that they might be partners in their merits and be helped by their prayers Both which Leo in S. Lam. considers as well the helpe as the example of the Saints and S. Gregory Epist VII 57. Indict II. Rogo omnipotentem Deum ut sua te gratia protegat beati Petri Apostolorum principis intercessione a malis omnibus illi sum servet I beseech Almighty God to protect thee with his grace and through the intercession of S. Peter Chiese of the Apostles keep thee unharmed by any evill It were to no purpose to show what I allow by bringing more for this cannot be disallowed allowing the premises But this being supposed whatsoever may be disputed whether Saints or Angels in this regard may be counted Mediators intercessors or Advocates between God and us will be meere contentions about words holding to the termes hitherto supposed For the intercession of our Lord Christ being grounded upon the worke of redemption the effects of it must be according To make all mankind acceptable to God under the condition which the Gospell declareth To obtain for every man those helps of Grace by which he may or by which he is effectually resolved to undergoe the condition requisite He that knowes the God-heade of Christ to be the ground in consideration whereof the obedience of Christ is acceptable by God to this effect and yet will needs say that Saints or Angels are our Mediators Intercessors or Advocates to
the acts of them that teach these prayers the acts of the Church because it tolerates them and maintaines them in it in stead of casting them out it would be hard to free that Church from Idolatrie which whoso admitteth can by no meanes grant it to be a Church the being whereof supposeth the worship of one God exclusive to any thing else But the words of them are capable of the same limitation that I gave to the words of our Lord when I said that they whom Christians do good to here may be said to receive them into everlasting habitations because God does it in consideration of them and of the good done them And so when Irenaeus calls the Virgine Mary the advocate of Eve V. 19. he that considers his words there and III. 33. shall find that he saith it not because she prayed for her but because she believed the Angels message and submitted to Gods will and so became the meanes of saving all though by our Lord Christ who pleadeth even for her as well as for Eve Ground enough there is for such a construction even the belief of one God alone that stands in the head of our Creed which we have no reason to thinke the Church allowes them secretly to renounce whom she alloweth to make these prayers And therefore no ground to construe them so as if the Church by allowing them did renounce the ground of all her Christianity But not ground enough to satisfie a reasonable man that all that make them do hold that infinite distance between God and his saints and Angels of whom they demand the same effects which if they hold not they are Idolaters as the Heathen were who being convinced of one Godhead as the Fathers challenge to their faces divided it into one principall and divers that by his gift are such How shall I presume that simple Christians in the devotions of their hearts understand that distance of God from his creatures which their words signify not which the wisest of their teachres will be much troubled to say by what figure of speech they can allow it Especially if it be considered how little reason or interest in religion there can be to advance the reverence of Christian people towards the Saints or Angels so farre above the reason and ground which ought to be the spring-head of it For so farre are we from any Tradition of the Catholicke Church for this that the admonition of Epiphanius to the Collyridians takes-hold of it Haer. LXXIX For they also would have been Christians being a sort of women in Arabia who in imitation of the Eucharist offered to the Virgine Mary and communicated Therefore Epiphanius reproves them by the Custome of the Church that no such thing was ever done in the Church as well as by the ground of Christianity that Christians worship onely one God This admonition then takes hold though not of the Church yet of the prayers which it alloweth signifying the same with their oblations So doth the admonition of Saint Ambrose in Rom. I. to them who reserve nothing to God that they give not to his servants So doth that of Saint Augustine de vera Rel. Cap. LV. that our religion is not to consist in worshipping the dead And that an Angel forbad S. John to worship him but onely God whose fellow-servants they were So doth the argument of S. Gregory Nyssene contra Eunom IV. and Athanasius contra Arian III. concluding our Lord to be God because he is worshipped which Cornelius was forbid by Saint Peter Saint John by the Angel to do to them saith Athanasius In fine so dangerous is the case that whoso communicateth in it is no way reasonably assured that he communicateth not in the worship of Idols Onely the Church of England having acknowledged the Church of Rome a true Church though corrupt ever since the Reformation I am obliged so to interpret the prayers thereof as to acknowledge the corruption so great that the prayers which it alloweth may be Idolatries if they be made in that sense which they may properly signify But not that they are necessarily Idolatries For if they were necessarily Idolatries then were the Church of Rome necessarily no Church The being of Christianity presupposing the worship of one true God And though to confute the Heretickes the stile of moderne devotions leaves nothing to God which is not attributed to and desired of his Saints Yet it cannot be denied they may be the words of them who believe that God alone can give that which they desire The second sort it is confessed had the beginning in the flourishing times of the Church after Constantine The lights of the Greek and Latine Church Basil Nazianzene Nyssene Ambrose Jerome Augustine Chrysostome Cyrils both Theodoret Fulgentius Gregory the Great Leo more or rather all after that time have all of them spoken to the Saints departed and desired their assistance But neither is this enough to make a Tradition of the Church For the Church had been CCC years before it began Irenaeus is mistaken when he is alledged for it as I said even now Cardinall Bellarmine alleges out of Eusebius de Praeparat XIII 10. Vota ipsis facimus We make our prayers to them But the Greek beares onely We make our prayers to God at their monuments Athanasius de sanctissima deipara whom he quotes is certainly of a later date then Athanasius Out of S. Hillary I see nothing brought nor remember any thing to be brought to that purpose In fine after Constantine when the Festivalls of the Saints being publickly celebrated occasioned the confluence of Gentiles as well as Christians and innumerable things were done which seemed miracles done by God to attest the honour done them and the truth of Christianity which it supposed I acknowledge those great lights did think fit to addresse themselves to them as petitioners but so at the first as those that were no wayes assured by our common Christianity that their petitions arrived at their knowledge You have seen Saint Augustine acknowledge that they must come by such meanes as God is no way tied to furnish Gregory Nazianzene speakes to Gorgonia in his Oration upon her and to Constantius in his first oration against Juliane but under a doubtfull condition if they were sensible of what he spake Enough to distinguish praying to God from any addresse to a creature though religion be the ground of it And when the apparitions about their monuments were held unquestionable yet was it questioned whether the same souâ— could be present at once in places of so much distance or Angels appear like them as you may see in the answer aforesaid pag. 391. 394. Nay Hugo de S. Victore in Cassander Epist XIX hath inabled him to hold that the Litanies do not suppose that the Saints hear them and therefore are expounded by some to signify conditionall desires if God grant them to come to their knowledge But of that I speak
the â—lesh to fall from their own to their husbands or their wives Gods the worshippers whereof they saw prosper in the world Not so those who had undertaken his Crosse and thereupon if faithfully had received his spirit which the Gospell bringeth For so why should the Church think that having Images should seduce those that are such to thinkâ— them the seates of some God head which supposeth a conceite of more Gods then one And upon this supposition proceedeth all that is written â—n the prophesies of Esay and Jeremy in the book of Baruch under the person of Jeremy and in the rest of the prophets in scorne of the Images of the Gentiles To wit that they imagined some Deity contayned and inclosed in them which were indeed meere wood and stone The question that remaines is but onely this whether this power of the Church hath been duely executed and within the bounds of our common Christianity or not For to pretend that the Apostles themselves have put it in use by prescribing that images be had and in Churches would be to contradict all that appeares in the point by the records of the Church For though I be obliged to say that there was never any constitution of the Apostles injoyning the whole Church not to bring any image into any Church because all the Church that is considerable hath sometimes done it yet will it easily appeare there is no act of the whole Church binding all to have them in Churches The council of Elivira Can. XXXVI Placuit picturas in Ecclesiis esse non debere ne quod câ—litur in parietibus pingatur It seemed good that there be no pictures in the Churches least that which is worshiped be pictured on the wales The Epistle of Epiphanius to Iohn Bishop of Jerusalem is extant in S. Jerome relating how finding somthing of our Lord Christ painted upon a vaile in a Church of his Diocesse he gave order to teare it which being out of his Diocese he could not have don had he not thought it against Gods Law and therfore no law of the Church And Eusebius Eccles Hist VII 18. relating the statue of our Lord curing the woman that had the issue of blood at Caesaâ—ea Philipi faith it is no marvaile that Gentils converted to the â—aith should honour our Lord and his Apostles for he saith he had sâ—en images of Peter and Paul as well as of our Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preserved from their time as the Gentiles used to honour their Saviors or benefactors But had it been against Gods Law would not the Apostles have told them so would they not have believed the Apostles whom they belâ—eved before they were Christians The picture of the good shepheard upon the Chalices of the Church which Tertullian appeales to de Pudicit cap. VII easily shows that they used not his Picture who used an Embleme of Christ for a Picture And you heard S. Austine say that he knew many worshippers of Pictures and Tombes among Christians The true ground and effect of these passages is hard for me to evidence here in a few words I believe S. Austine saw some dow baked Christians doe that at the tombes of Christians which when they were idolaters they did at the tombes of their friends where part of their Idolatries don were to their Ghosts For by that which followes he complains that he saw that excesse of meate and drinke upon the graves of Christians which it is no marvaile if the Idolatries of the Gentiles allowed So that it is no such marvaile that such Christians should worship Pictures as did the Gentiles The Canon is one of the hardest pieces of antiquity that I know The most probable seemes to be this That it followes the reason alleged in Deuteronomy against any image for God because they saw no shape of God So the word cultus seemes strictly to signifie that honour which Christianity tenders immediately to God not that which it may injoine to his creature And their reason will be this because the God head cannot be painted therefore no Pictures in Churches I doe believe there was somthing of the quarrell betweene Iohn of Jerusalem and Epiphanius about Origen upon which Theophilus of Alexandria heaved S. Chrosystome out of the Sea of Constantinople in that act of tearing the vaile But I believe Epiphanius acted according to his opinion in it and an opinion that he owned to all the world what ever the rest of the Church did for we see not that proceeding against Iohn of Jerusalem as against S. Chrosystome Eusebius might thinke those statues of our Lord and his cure those pictures of S. Peter and S. Paul more ancient then indeed they were But neither doth he charge any Idolatry upon them nor is there any question in the case but of having pictures in private not in the Church That after this time Churches were everywhere trimmed with the stories of the Saints and the Passions of the Martyrs I need not repeat much to prove the controversy in the East about the worshipping of them is evidence enough that the use of them went forward but with such contradiction that some held them Idoles and broke them in peeces who were there upon called Iconoclastâ— others worshipped them who after many attempts of the contrary party prevailed at length in a Council at Nicaea thence called the VII General Council with the concurrence of the Pope That the decree of the Councill injoines no Idolatry notwithstanding whatsoever prejudice to the contrary I must maintaine as unquestionable supposing the premises So far is it from leaving any roome for the imagination of any false God head to be represented by the images which it allowes that it expressely distinguisheth that honour done the image of our Lord Christ to be equâ—vâ—cally called worship that is to be onely so called but not to signifie the esteeme of God which he that believes the Holy Trinity can no way attâ—ibute to the image of our Lord supposing not granting that it were lawfull to honoure the image of our Lord not with any gesture or word signifying any God head inclosed in it which the idolatries of the heathen did signifie but that it is the picture of that man who also is God which he who believes the Trinity and puts off his hat and bowes the knee to the image of our Lord must needs signifie I say this shall be no â—dolatry because whether the worship of the image or of him whose image it is necessarily it is no worship of God but proceeds from an esteem that the image is a contemptible creature but that the man whom it signifies is God I say upon these termes it is not possible that it should be Idolatry to worship this image Because though the words or the gesture which are used may signifie the honour due to God alone yet the profession under which they are used necessarily limits them to the honour of that which is not
is a thing necessary to the subsistence of all communities Nor is a private person chargeable with the faults of the Lawes under which he lives untill it appeare that by the meanes of those faults he must faile of the end for which the community subsisteth That is of salvation by communicating with the Church of Rome But to make a private Christian a party to the decrees and customes of the Church by swearing to admit and imbrace them all because he communicateth with it is to make him answerable for that which he doeth not He that would swear no more then he believes nor believe more then he can see cause to believe being a private Christian and uncapable to comprehend what Lawes and customes are fit for so great a Body as the Church must not swear to the Lawes of the Church as good or fit were there no charge against them because past his understanding but rest content by conforming to them to hold communion with the Church But in stead of mending the least of those horrible abuses which the complaints of all parts of Christendome evidence to be visible to exclude all that will not sweare to them is to bid them redeem the communion of the Church by transgressing that Christianity which it ought to presuppose Well may that power be called infinite that undertakes to do such things as this But how should the meanes of salvation be thought to consist in obeying it Here is then a peremptory barre to communion with the Church of Rome onely occasioned by the Reformation but fixed by the Church of Rome That order which severall parts of Christendome had provided for themselves under the title of Reformation might have been but provisionall till a better understanding between the parties might have produced a tollerable agreement in order whereunto a distance for a time had been the lesse mischievous had not this proceeding cut off all hope of peace but by conquest that is by yeilding all this And therefore this act being that which formed the Schisme the crime thereof is chiefly imputable to it As therefore I saide afore that the Sacrament of Baptisme though the necessary meanes of salvation becomes a necessary barre to salvation when it inacteth a profession of renouncing either any part of the Faith or the unity of the Church So here I say that the communion of the Eucharist obtained by making a profession which the common Christianity alloweth not a good Christian to make is no more the meanes of salvation to him who obtaineth it upon such termes how much soever a Christian may stand obliged to hold communion with the Church And this is the reason that makes the communion of the Church of Rome absolutely no more warrantable then afore now that it is become unwarrantable to communicate with Presbyteries and Congregations But comparatively an extremity in respect to the contrary extremity holds the place of a meanes Nor did I ever imagine that the humor of reforming the Church without ground or measure may not proceed to that extremity that it had been better to have left it unreformed then to have neglected those bounds which the pretense of Reformation requireth I say not that this is now come to passe comparisons being odious But this I say that he who goes to reforme the Church upon supposition that the Pope is Anti-Christ and the Papists therefore Idolaters is much to take heed that he miskenne not the ground for that measure by which he is to reforme And taking that for Reformation which is the furthest distant from the Church of Rome that is possible Imagine that the Pope may be Antichrist and the Papists Idolaters for that which the Catholick Faith and Church alloweth It is a marvaile to see how much the zeale to have the Pope Antichrist surpasses the evidence of the reasons which it is proved with For otherwise it would easily appeare that as an Antipope is nothing but a pretended Pope so Antichrist is nothing else but a pretended Messias He who pretends to be that which Christ is indeed and to give salvation to Gods people Our Lord foretells of false Christs and false Prophets Mat. XXIV 24. Marke XIII 22. and those are the Preachers of new Sects which pretended to be Christs and which pretended not to be Christs Simon Magus and Menander we know by Irenaeus and Epiphanius Dositheus by Origen upon Matthew pretended all of them to be the Messias to the Samaritanes who as Schismaticall Jewes expected the Messias as well as the Jewes Saturninus and Basilides were false prophets but not Antichrists because not pretending that themselves were the Messias but pretending some of those whereof they made that fullnesse of the Godhead which they preached to consist to be the Messias Among the Jewes all that ever took upon them to be the Messias besides our Lord Jesus are properly Antichrists Among whom Barcochab under Adriane was eminent But there is reason enough to reckon Manichaeus and Mahomet both of that ranck As undertaking to be that to their followers which the Jewes expected of the Messias to save them from their enemies and to give them the world to come For Manichaeus seems indeed to have given himself the Name of Menahem signifying in the Ebrew the same as Parucletus in Greeke because he pretended to be assumed by the holy Ghost as not he but Christians believe that the Word of God assumed the manhood of Christ But when he writ himself Apostle of Jesus Christ in the head of his Epistle called the foundation which S. Austine writes against it was not with an intent to acknowledge our Lord the true Christ whose coming he made imaginary and onely in appearance but to seduce Christians with a colourable pretense of the name of Christ and some ends of the Gospels as you heard Epiphanius say to take himself for that which Christ is indeed to Christians Saint Austine contra Epist Fund cap. VI. suspecteth that he intended to foist in himself to be worshipped in stead of Christ by those whom he seduced from Christ And shows you his reason for it there But whether worshipped or not for it cannot be said that Mahomet pretended to be worshipped for God by his followers though he could not be that which our Lord Christ is to Christians unlesse he were worshipped for God yet he might be that which the Messias was expected to be to the Jewes in saving them through this world unto the world to come Whether Christians are to expect a greater Antichrist then any of these towards the end of the world or not is a thing no way clear by the Scriptures And the authority of the Fathers is no evidence in a matter which evidently belongs not to the Rule of Faith It is not enough that Saint John saith Ye know that the Antichrist is coming 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 John II. 28. for how many thousand articles are there that signify no such eminence and
thence forth to recover man from the labor of sinne to which when he became mortall he was condemned to Paradise from whence he had been expulsed And therefore our Lord Christ according to S. Peter 1 Pet. IV. 18 19 20. going out of the world by that Spirit whereby he was made alive when he had been put to death in the flesh to wit speaking in his Apostles preached to the Spirits in prison that had been disobedient in the days of Noe Converting the Gentiles by the gift of his Spirit granted upon his sufferings who had refused the same in Noe the Preacher of righteousnesse 1 Pet. II. 5. When God said My Spirit shall no more strive with man Gen VI. 2. For the pilgrimage of the Patriarchs the Promise of the Land of Canaan the Law given by Moses was all but the further limitation and rule of that outward and civile conversation under which the traffique of Christianity was then driven by Prophets who spake by Gods Spirit This Reason Socinus being obliged to miskenne by making our Lord Christ a meer man cannot give that account of the grace of Christ before his coming which the Church doth Acquiting thereby my position That the Law covenanteth expresly onely for the Land of Promise of all suspicion of compliance with his intentions By this you see that Pelagius and Socinus both are carried out of the way of Christianity because they will not acknowledge the decay of mankind by the fall of Adam and the coming of Christ to repair it But those of Marseilles and the parts adjoyning in France that formalized themselves against S. Augustines doctrine of Predestination and effectuall Grace freely and heartily acknowledging Originall sin seem to have justified only upon the true interest of Christianity in that free will which the Covenant of Grace necessarily supposeth though mistaking their way out of humane frailty they failed of the truth though they parted with Pelagius They made faith or at least the beginning of faith and of will to beleive to repent and to turn unto God the work of free will in consideration whereof God though no way tied so to do grants the help of his Grace and Spirit to performe the race of faith Most truly maintaining according to that vvhich hath been professed in the beginning of this book that the act of true Faith is an act of mans free will which God rewardeth with his free Grace To wit with the habituall gift of his spirit inabling true believers to go through with that Faith which thereby they undertake as I have shewed you both these elsewhere Most expresly acknowledging the preaching of the Gospel going before in which whatsoever help the coming of our Lord Chirst hath furnished to move and winne the world to believe is involved But miskenning the grace of the Gospel granted by God in consideration of his obedience to make him a Church that might honour him for it If Pelagius acknowledged no more in the coming of Christ then to make his message appear to be true so that the imbracing of it might oblige God to grant his grace by preventing it with an act of free will complying with it The reason was not because this very tender being the purchase of our Lord Christs free obedience could be subject to any merit of man But because he was engaged to maintaine that we are borne in the same estate in which Adam was made needing nothing but Gods declaration of his will and pleasure towards the fulfilling of it But for them who acknowledge the decay of our nature by the fall of Adam and the coming of our Lord to repair the breaches of it to ascribe the grace which God furnisheth those that believe with for the performing of that which by believing they undertake to the act of freewill in believing which themselves acknowledge to be prevented by so many effects of Christs coming as the preaching of his Gospel necessarily involveth and which the Scriptures so openly acknowledge to be prevented by the Grace of his Spirit purchased by his sufferings must needs argue a great deal of difficulty in the question which the worse divines they appear must needs justifie them to be much the better Christians And indeed there is great cause to excuse them as farre as reason will give leave in a case wherein the Fathers that went afore Pelagius seem to be ingaged with them For it is ordinary enough to read them exhorting to lay out the indeavovrs of free will expecting the assistance of Gods Grace to the accomplishment of that which a man purposes And besides S. Augustine who acknowledges that before the contest with Pelagius he did think faith to be the act of free will which God blesseth with Grace to do as he professeth It cannot be denied that S. Jerome so great an enemy to the Pelagians with some others have expressed that which amounts to it But it is true on the other side that the same Fathers do frequently acknowledge the beginning as well as the accomplishment of our salvation to the grace of God Which is not onely an obligation so to expound their sayings when they set free will before grace as supposing the cure thereof begunne by Grace But also a presumption that those who expresse not the like caution are no otherwise to be understood Especially supposing expresly the motives of faith provided by the holy Ghost granted in consideration of our Lords sufferings in virtue whereof the resolution which is taken for the best must of necessity proceed though by the operation of the same Spirit whereby they are advanced and furnished It is therefore no doubt a commendable thing to excuse the writings of that excellent person John Casiane so farre as the common Faith will give leave as you may see the learned Vossius doth as speaking ambiguously in setting grace before free will sometimes as well as other whiles free will before Grace For Faustus his book De libero arbitrio I cannot say the same though I must needs have that respect for his Christian qualities which the commendations that I read of him in Sidoius Apollinaris deserve For besides that the stile of it is generally such as seems to make free will the umpire between the motions of grace and of sinne which ascribes the ability of well doing to God but the act to our selves that the Fathers under the Law of nature were saved by free will he delivers expresly with Pelagius An oversight grosse enough in any man that shall have considered upon what terms Christianity is to be justified against the Jews out of the Old Testament There is therefore appearance enough that the II Council of Orange which finally decreed against the heresie of Pelagius was held expresly to remove the offenses which that book had made And evidence enough that the articles of it are justified by the tradition of the whole Church For those prayers of the Church that way and subject of
XI 50. 51. 52. But in what sense doe Christians find it true Surely no man that ever prayed to God in Christs name need to be told it It is requisite therefore that we have recourse to the consideration of those thinges which the Scripture uses to joyne with the mention of Christs dying for us if we will rightly determine the meaning of it And so having premised the consideration of a sacrifice upon which our sinnes were charged of our ransome by the price of it of reconciliation and propitiation for sinne obtained for us by it we must conclude that when the Scripture speakes of Christs death for us the meaning of it cannot be satisfyed by granting that he died to move us to be Christians CHAP. XXIX The grant of Grace in consideration of Christ supposes satisfaction made by him for sinne Neither our sinnes imputable to Christ nor his sufferings to us formally and personally but as the meritorious causes which satisfaction answereth The effect of it the Covenant of Grace as well as help to performe it The Fathers saved by the Faith of Christ to come The Gospel a new Law The property of Satisfaction and Punishment in Christs sufferings Of the sense of the Catholike Church THere remaines one argument from the premises where I concluded that effectuall Grace is appointed from everlasting and therefore granted in time in consideration of Christ and his merits according to S. Paul Ephes I. 3-6 For if this grace be granted in consideration of Christ and life everlasting appointed from everlasting and granted in time in consideration of that quality which this grace effâ—cteth it cannot in reason be avoided that remission of sinne and life everlasting is granted here in right and title and in effect in the world to come in consideration of that quality which the effectuall helps of Grace of their own nature tend to produce which they are appointed by God to produce and which really and in effect thus are produced being granted by God in consideration of Christs obedience But why should I be so solicitous to restore all those Scriptures to their true meaning which they have set upon the rack to make them speak a false having such evidence of reason that by this position they make the death of Christ voide and needlesse even in their owne judgement For though if they should say that Christ came onely to show those workes that migh be sufficient to make his Gospell credible and give us good example I could not say that the death of Christ were to no end Yet would they say that it were to no competent end complaining as they do how much they are wronged when they are understood to acknowledge no further end of his coming But when they say that he died to induce men to be Christians by inacting the Covenant of Grace that is assuring them that God will stand to it on his part and that according to the example of Christ bearing his Crosse they shall attaine his glory I demand how all this can be more assurance then every man hath that is peremâ—orily assured otherwise as no man doubts but competently it may be assured otherwise that the Gospell of Christ is Gods message For when sufficient evidence is once made and a man is convinced to beleeve that God promises remission of sinnes and everlasting life to them that imbrace it can he that beleives God to be God remaine any more doubtfull of the truth of his promise To Pharao and to his people it was necessary that the wonders of God should be repeated till they stood convict that there was no God else which they beleived not afore But to them that admit the God of Israel to be the onely true God being convict that the Gospell is his promise is any further assurance requisite that he will stand to it who were not God if he should not stand to it when they say that Christ died to the end that being advanced to be God he might be able to bring his promises to effect I referre my selfe to the sense of any man that is able to thinke of God with due reverence whether it be possible to imagine that a meere man having made promises to mankind in Gods name can live with God to see Gods promises frustrate And by consequence whether it can appeare necessary that our Lord Christ should be advanced to be God that he might be able in his owne person to fullfill the promises which he had made us in his Fathers Name I referre my selfe to that which I have said to show the word of God which took the flesh of man from the Virgine to be God from everlasting as the Sonne of God and his everlasting wisâ—ome and image And therefore not advanced to be God in consideration of his obedience But that having condescended to that state which his obedience in doing his fathers message and testifying the truth thereof required the Sonne of God incarnate was advanced in our flesh by the appointment of God in reward of his obedience to the privilege of sending the Holy Ghost to make his Gospell effectuall to convert the nations to Christianity that by them he might be acknowledged and glorified for that which he was from everlasting So that the end of his coming being to obtaine that grace by which the world might be converted to Christianity and being converted obtaine remission of sinnes and life everlasting for it and neither of these purposes admitted by Socinus we may well say to him as S. Paul sayes to the Jews Gal. II 21. If righteousnesse be by the Law then is Christ deade in vaine So if righteousnesse came as Socinus would have it then is Christ deade to no purpose Because all that he requires might have been as well effected without it Whereas a due valuable consideration in regard whereof the converting grace of the Holy Ghost and remission of sinnes and life everlasting in consideration of the effect thereof should be granted could not have been had without it It is strange to be observed how litle Socinus hath to produce out of the scriptures to prove a position of such consequence as this All his businesse in a maner being to draw those texts which heitherto have been understood in the sense of the Church to his intent I can for the present recall no more then those frequent passages of the Apostles especially S. Paul whereby they affirme the righteousnesse and salvation of Christians to come by the meere grace of God and our Lord Christ Which I need not here repeate no wayes apprehending the infernce That it cannot be said to come from the meere grace of God if I suppose the consideration of Christs obedience and sufferinges as the purchase of it It is true in the wordes of the Prophet Jeremy XXXI 34-34 alleged by the Apostle Ebr. VIII 8-12 to be meant of the Gospell we find a promise of God to pardon the sinnes of his
people without expressing any consideration in regard whereof he would doe it And likewâ—se our Lord in the Parable of the master that forgave his servant ten thousand talents Mat. XIIII 23 Seemes to expresse Gods pardon which his Gospell publisheth to be free from any consideration in which it is either proclaimed or granted But as I said to our Antinomians who will needes beleive upon the warrant of the Prophets words that their sinnes are pardoned meerely in consideration of Christ without regard to any disposition requisite to qualify them for it by the Gospell That it was neither requisite nor fit that the termes upon which the blessinges promised by the Gospell are granted should be expressed by the Propheâ—y that onely foretelleth the coming of it being to be gathered from that proportion which the Law in regard of the land of promise holds to the Gospell in regard of the world to come So say I to the Socinians who will needs have the same wordes to signify That supposing the disposition that qualifies for the promises of the Gospell they suppose no consideration of the obedience of of Christ That though the termes of the Gospell are not expressed by the Prophet foretelling the coming of it as being included in those of the Law by virtue of the proportion aforesaid it were strange to thinke that the coming and death of Christ is not sufficient since to determine the meaning of the Prophets words to it And so likewise to the Parable that if our Saviour found it not fit to expresse the consideration upon which the pardon which the Gospell publishes is passed yet his death and suffringes coming after to interpret the intent of that which he hâ—d said before that was to be declared it is strange that they should not be thought sufficient to adde that consideration which before he had neither expressed nor denyed As for the free grace of the Gospell I challenge all the reason in the world to say If Gods free act in providing the means of salvation by Christ and sending him to publish the conditions upon which he is ready to be reconciled to those that accept them tendering withall sufficient help so to doe be not a valuable reason for which the Gospell is to be called the Covenant of grace though granted in consideration of thâ—t ransome by Christ which the free grace of God provideth Whether our Antinomians have not as good reason to say that the promises of the Gospell are not free if they require the condition of Christianity as the Socinians if they suppose Christ and his obedience Here followes I confesse a very valuable reason of Socinus so long as that satisfaction of Christ which the Church teacheth is not understood which it is no mervaile if it cary them aside not understanding the faith and doctrine of the Church aright They allege that there can be no ground in reason upon which one man may be punished for another mans sinne Guilt being a morall consequence of an act that is naturally past and gone that is for the present nothing in rerum natura upon a due ground of reason which imputes the acts of reasonable creatures to their account because they are under a Law of doing thus and not otherwise But that thâ— sinnes of one man should be imputed to another who cannot be obliged for another to doe or not to doe that which redounds to the others account if done or not done is no more possible then that he should have done or not done that which the other is supposed to have done or not done If it be said that Christ voluntarily took upon him the punishment of our sinnes as a surety answeres for his freinds debt It is acknowledged that this way turnes off the Debt from him that it is payd for to the surety but extinguishes it not as the undergoing of punishment extinguishes the crime in all the Justice of the world so that he who had right to punish can exact that no more for which he hath received satisfaction once Which is to say that the sufferinges of Christ are not the punishment of our sinnes And I truely doe freely acknowledge that the instances which have been brought either out of the scriptures to show that one man hath been punished for another mans sin among civil people so that it is not to be thought against the light of nature are either insufficient or impertinent to the case For I have learned from my beginning in the Schooles that God when he visits the iniquities of the fathers upon the children does not inflict upon them more punishment then their owne sinne deserues but makes their sinnes his opportunity of bringing to passe his judgements against the sinnes of their predecessors or those who in regard of other relations are reasonably taken to be punished by their punishment And this I will here prove no further but taking it for granted inferre that it comes not home to the case of our Lord Christ purchasing us by his death remission of sinnes everlasting life But my reason is because it is evident to me that one mans doings or sufferings may be understood or said to be imputed to another two wayes First immediately and personally supposing that there is a ground in reason for it And this that opinion requires which holds that faith which alone justifieth to consist in beleiving that a man is praedestinate to life meerely in consideration of Christs death suffering for the elect alone For how should we be justified by beleeving this but supposing that Christ suffered upon this ground to this purpose But having showed this opinion to be utterly false by showing that the Gospell supposes the condition of Christianity in that Faith which alone justifieth I must here presume that this sense of the imputation of Christs merits and therefore this intent of his death is meerely imaginary And the supposition whereupon it proceedes to wit that one mans doings or sufferings may be personally and immediately imputed to another mans account utterly unreasonable And therefore must and doe say that as it is sufficient so it is true that the sufferings of Christ are imputed unto us in the nature of a meritorious cause moving God to gâ—ant mankind those termes of reconcilement which the Gospell importeth This is evident by the opposition which S. Paul maketh betweene the disobedience of Adam and the obedience of Christ Rom. V. 12. 18. 19. Where discovering the ground of our reconcilement with God whâ—ch the Gospell publisheth he imputeth it to the obedience of Christ in the rest of his discourse attributing it to his death For having said that Christ died for us being sinners and that we are justified by his bloud and reconciled by the death of his sonne being enimies he inferreth therefore as by one man sinne came into the world and death by sinne and so death passed upon all Signifying by the other part of the comparison which he rendreth not
the bread and the wine to remain in the Sacrament of the Eucharist as sense informs and the word of God inforces if the same word of God assirm there to be also the body and bloud of Christ what remaineth but that bread and wine by nature and bodily substance be also the bodily flesh and bloud of Christ by mystical representation in that sense which I determined even now and by spiritual grace For what reason can be imagined why the material presence of bread and wine in bodily substance should hinder the mystical and spiritual presence of the body and bloud of Christ as in a Sacrament whereby they are tendered of grace to them that receive Shall they be ever a whit the more present in this sense if the substance of bread and wine be abolished than if it be not Certainly unlesse wee believe the spiritual grace of Christs body and bloud in the Sacrament of the Eucharist to possesse those dimensions which the Elements hold and if so then are they not there Sacramentally and mystically but bodily and materially wee can give no reason why the bodily presence of the Elements should hinder it So farr is this from being strange to the nature and custome of humane speech that supposing the invisible presence of one thing in another and with another which is visibly present it cannot otherwise be expressed than by saying this is that though every man know what distance there is between their natures The Dove in the which the Holy Ghost was seen to come down and rest upon our Lord the fiery Tongues in which the Holy Ghost rested upon the Apostles the fire and the whirlewinde in the which Gods Angels attend upon him and upon his commands in regard whereof it is said Psalm CIV 4. Hee maketh his Angels Spirits and his Ministers a flaming fire are they not as truly said to be the Holy Ghost or those Angels as the Holy Ghost or those Angels is said to come down to rest or to move because those things rest and come down or move whereas the Holy Ghost otherwise can neither rest nor come down nor those Angels move as the fire or the winde moves in which they are I know it may be said that neither the Dove nor those Tongues are called the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures Nor do I intend to build upon any supposition that they are This I say whosoever understands the capacity of words serving for instruments to signifie mens mindes may firmly conclude rhat they may as well be said to be the Holy Ghost as it may be said that the Holy Ghost came down because the Dove came down For can there be any occasion for a man of sense to conceive cloven Tongues of fire to be the Godhead of the Holy Ghost because they are called the Holy Ghost in regard they are used to demonstrate the presence of it when no man complains that any man of sense hath occasion to mistake the God-head to move because the Holy Ghost is said to come down in the bodily shape of a Dove I know it may be said and is said that in the Text of the Psalm that I quoted it is not to be translated winds but spirits or spiritual substances because the Apostle having alleged it to show the difference between them and our Lord Christ Ebr. I. 7 14. inferreth that they are ministring Spirits signifying thereby not winds but that which Christians signifie by the name of spiritual substances And I yield that they are so called not onely in the common language of Christians but in the Apostle also here and by our Lord speaking in the common phrase of Gods people when hee saith A spirit hath not flesh and bones as yee see mee have Luke XXIV 39. upon occasion of that appearance of Gods majesty which is either presented to or described by the Prophets in the Old Testament with his Throne attended by Angels the visible signs of whose presence are whirlewind and fire So in the place quoted Psalm CIV 2. That puts on light for a robe stretches the heavens as a curtain laies the beams of his chambers in the waters makes the clouds his chariot and walks upon the wings of the winde Whereupon followes That makes his Angels Spirits or Winds and his Ministers a flame of fire which answers winds not spiritual substances Compare the description of Gods appearance Psal L. 3. Our God shall come and shall not keep silence a consuming fire shall go before him and be very tempestuous round about either with the visions of the Prophet Ezekiel I. and Daniel VII or with the description of the same laid down Psalm XVIII 10-14 and you will have reason to say as I do Especially when you reade Hee rode upon a Cherub and did fly hee came flying upon the wings of the wind where a Cherub in the first clause is the wind in the second The same sense being repeted according to the perpetual custome of the Psalms So when Angels appeared in the shape of men was it not true to say this is an Angel but wee must suppose the nature of man abolished If the Holy Ghost and Angels be of spiritual nature the flesh and the bloud of Christ bodily then are they at as great distance from the Dove from the Tongues from the Fire from the Wind from the men in which they appeared as the flesh and bloud of Christ from the elements of the Eucharist Nor is the mystical and Sacramental presence of the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist ever a whit more destructive to the bodily presence of the elements then the invisible presence of the Holy Ghost or Angels to the visible presence of those things in which they were Nay if I may without offense allege that which is most pertinent to this purpose not being usually alleged in it That maner of speech which all orthodoxe Christians use in calling the person of our Lord Christ either God or Man according to the nature which they intend chiefly to signifie or in ascribing the properties of each nature to the said person respectively to the subject of their speech hath no other ground than this which I speak of For all affirmatives Philosophers know signifie the subject that a man speaks of to be the very same thing with that which is attributed to it As when this wall is said to be white this wall is the same subject with this white Therefore when a thing is said to be that which in nature wee see it is not as when a mans picture is said to be hee the saying though extremely proper if you regard what use the elegance of speech requires is unproper to the right understanding of the nature of the things wee speak of though a man would not be so well understood commonly if hee should go about to explain his meaning by more or other words As I conceive I am not so well understood in writing thus
it not upon the Ubiquity of our Lords body but upon his will executed by celebrating the Sacrament or that of some later Greeks Damasc de â—ide Orthâ—d IV. 14. to contradict the Council of Constantinople against images under Copronymus which had recommended the Eucharist for the true image of our Lord maintaineth that it is not to be called noâ— is called in S. Basils Liturgy after the consecration the type figure image or antitype of the body and bloud of Christ Which neverthelesse Cardinal Bellarmine de Euchar. II. 15. judgeth not tenable The II Council of Nicaea that decreed for Images taking up this mans doctrine seemeth to have obliged those that follow to the same terms That is as hee there expresseth himself That God joyns his God-head to the elements to make them his body and bloud and that by the operation of the Holy Ghost which took him flesh of the Virgin so that they are no more two but one and the same Thus hee expresseth the change hee pretendeth which Transubstantiation admits not The Greeks at Venice in their answer to the first of XII questions proposed them by the Cardinal of Guise published by Lionclavavius will hereupon have neither the substance nor the accidents of the elements to remain the same as they were but to be transelemented say they into the divine substance It would be great skill to reconcile this with Transubstantiation But for the opposition made to Paschasius at the time the book of Bertram or Ratran yet extant the remembrance of John the Irish Scot one of the learned men of that time who is thought for the hatred of his opinion to have died by the hands of his Scholars the Monks of Malmesbury the opposition of Amalarius of Triers and Rabanus of Mence expressed by their sense in the works extant de Officiis Ecclesiasticis and de Institutione Clericorum are sufficient witnesses The recantation of Berengarius indited by Cardinal Humbertus at Rome MLIX comes not yet home to the businesse as it lies in the Canon Ego Berengarius For the Glosse of the Canon Law is fain to advise that if it be not well understood it creates as great an Heresie as that of Berengarius in that it sayes That the body and bloud of Christ are manâ—ged by the hands and broken by the teeth of believers not onely in the Sacrament but in the truth Which Mirandula in his Apology saith cannot be clearly understood but in the way of Damascenâ— and Paschasius And yet understanding the Sacrament to consist as well of the thing signified as of the signe though the body of Christ is not touched noâ— broke because the Sacrament is not the body of Christ according to the sensible substance which wee touch and break yet is it truly touched and truly broken as in the Sacrament because the Eucharist is truly the body and bloud of Christ as the Sacrament is and out ought to be truly that which it signifies and conveyes But as it is hereupon no mervail that hee was brought to a second recantation in a Council at Rome under Gregory VII so is that a preâ—â—mption that Transubstantiation was not yet formed And truely for England the Paschal Homily of Alfrick Archbishop of Canterbury together with those Extractions which you reade out of him in the annotations upon Bede p. 332-335 are sufficient evidence of a difference between the sense of that time and after that Lanfranck Berengarius his adversary was Archbishop of Canterbury And Pope Innocent III having inâ—erted the word Transubstantiation in the LXX Articles which hee proposed to the Council of Lateran in MCCXV what is the reason why they past not the Council as Mathew Paris with others testifie but that they were found burthensom And Gregory IX the nephew of Innocent cent having contrived these Articles into his decretals though under the name of the Council but of Innocent III in the General Council though the School Doctors depending on the Pope for the most part not on the Council were content to own them yet have wee no decree of any Council for them till that of MDLV under Leo X. For as for the institution of the Aâ—â—enians in the Council of Florence which though it use not the term of Transubstanciation seemeth to come up to the sense being advanced after the departure of the Greeks and not voted by the Council but onely published as the act of the Pope in the Council it cannot be called the decree of the Council though done in a publick Session of the Council in the great Church at Florence Certainly adding to the opinions of the School Doctors Scotus Durandus Ockam Cameracensis Bassolis and Gabriel besides those who living since Luther have acknowledged the same Caâ—etane Fisher Canus Suarez Vasquez and Bellarmine that it is not to be proved by expresse text of Scripture nor by reason grounded upon the same that which hath been alleged If this be not enough to evidence all interruption of Tradition which is pretended for Transubstantiation nothing is For that which Church Writers declare that they did not believe when they writ that they cannot declare that they received of their Predecessors for mater of faith And that which at any time was not mater of faith how farr soever the decree of the Church may oblige particular sons of the Church not to contradict it for the peace of the Church yet at no time can ever become of force to oblige a man to believe or to professe it for mater of faith CHAP. V. It cannot be proved by the Old Testament that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice How by the New Testament it may be so accounted Four reasons thereof depending upon the nature of Justifying Faith premised The consent of the Catholick Church The concurrence of the Church of England to the premises I Come now to the question of the Sacrifice the resolution whereof must needs proceed according to that which hath been determined in the point now dispatched For having showed the presence of the body and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist because it is appointed that in it the faithfull may feast upon the Sacrifice of the Crosse Wee have already showed by the Scriptures that it is the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse in the same sense and to the same effect as it containeth the body and bloud of Christ which it representeth that is mystically and spiritually and sacramentally that is as in and by a Sacrament tendereth and exhibiteth For seeing the Eucharist not onely tendereth the flesh and bloud of Christ but separated one from the other under and by several elements as his bloud was parted from his body by the â—â—olence of the Crosse it must of necessity be as well the Sacrifice as the Sacrament of Christ upon the Crosse And without all doubt it is against all the reason of the world to think that any more can be proved by any Scriptures of the Old Testament that are or
supposing that difference between the Law and the Gospell which I have setled in the first book they may advance in the knowledg of Christianity by the preaching of those who understand it But not distinguishing that which is necessary from that which is not necessary by supposing that which is necessary they may heare Sermons all their life long and not know wherein their salvavation consists a thing found by experience when there was a Rule of doctrine agreeable to the Scriptures and not knowing the ground there laid forth upon which the Old Testament beares witnesse to the New they may gaine nothing by hearing sermons all theire life long but mere dissatisfaction in the grounds of our common Christianity Whereas going into the scriptures with those two principles and the humility of Christians they may teach themselves that edification which they ought not to expect from those that acknowledg them not As for the present order which suppresseth all Assemblies for the service of God when there is no Preaching It is manifest that I will not say no understanding no eloquence but no lungs or voice For of a truth this order makes the service of God a worke rather of the lungs and of the voice then of any thing else can furnish entertainement for the assemblies of the church with that which is worth the hearing so oft as it is fit for the people of God to assemble for his service This makes the businesse for which the greatest part now goes to Church to be no more the service of God but to get mater of discourse or debate for the Sabbath as they call it how well the man preached or how well he prayed For whereas they were wont to object against the Church that it was not praying but reading prayers which was ministred to the Church as if attention of mind devotion of spirit could not aswel go a long with him that reades as with him that is to study what to say when he praies now the censures that passe upon mens prayers do shew that the hearers minds cannot be imployed in praying when they are taken up with judging how well the prayer they heare is made Much more justly may the same be said if it be considered how a man is obliged to discerne what the mater of the prayer is whether it be from blasphemy Heresy Slander Rebellion or not least before he be aware he joine in such horible crimes by saying Amen to their prayer which he is no otherway secured to be free from the same Now it may be considered that the prayers which usher sermons in out by the order of the church of England but by the faction that destroyeth it though they exclude the service of God out of the Church upon pretense of praying as the spirit indites yet are indeed no lesse provided aforehand then the prayers of the Church 〈◊〉 a little from time to time as occasion may require to make the people believe that they are ex tempore dictates of the spirit So that the change which many men call reformation consists in this that the peoples devotions are now confined to that which every one that dare mount the Pulpit dare say instead of that which the Church upon mature deliberation had appointed to be said But if it be thus in prayers which are alwaies for substance the same what shal we say of Sermons the substance whereof changeth according to the compasse of the Scripture and all the points of it which the texts upon which men take their rise occasion them to intreat experience in the decay of that reverence devotion which the publick service of God is to be performed with may easily point a man of common understanding to the sourse of it in those false weak suppositions upon which the order or rather the disorder of the present chang standeth Instead whereof therefore acknowledging that there was just cause at the time of the Reformation to complain upon the want of Preaching and instruction of the people I do and am to maintaine that there was never any pretense that the communion of the Eucharist and the service of God that it is to be celebrated with ought to give way and to be excluded the assemblies of christians to bring in that rule which is now in effect a cheife point of the chang that is made with us that without preaching no assembly for Gods service And thereupon though I desire that the more solem service of God when the Eucharist is celebrated may have a sermon for part of it as I have showed both by the Scriptures and by the primative practice of the Church that the use was under the Apostles and in the next ages yet that the order prescribed by the Church of England for the celebrating of the same when and where there is not meanes for a Sermon such as ought to be had is not to be deserted upon any pretense of frequenting Sermons As for more oridinary occasions of assembling for the service of God having proved afore that they ought to be frequented for the celebrating of other Offices of Gods service besides preaching I take it for proved that the order prescribed by the Church of England for the celebrating of Gods service upon such occasions is no way to be deserted but meanes to be sought for the frequenting of it Acknowledging with all the zeale and the joy which S. Paul expresseth for the further edification of those Churches to whom he directeth his Epistles in that Christianity which they had received 1 Cor. I. 5 6 7. Eph. I. 17. 18. Phil. I. 9 Col I. 9. Rom. I. 11. 12. as a strong motive to the Church to procure preaching as frequent as it can be procured and maintained without these offenses That the same S. Paul incourageth directeth frequent ample use of these miraculous graces which God granted the Churches of that time unto that purpose 1. Cor. XIV 1-31 Eph. IV. 7-16 But supposing alwaies the Spirits of the Prophets to be subject to the Prophets because God is not the God of unquietnesse but of peace as in all Churches of the Saints 1 Cor. IV. 32 33. And that there is one body and one spirit even as we are called in one hope of our calling the unity of which spirit is to be preserved in the bond of Peace Eph. IV. 3 4. By vertue of that Order which God had setled in his Church for preserving unity in it declaring his meaning by bestowing the most Eminent Graces upon the most eminent persons of his Apostles by meanes whereof the spirits even of Prophets became subject to greater Prophets for avoiding of unquietnesse and preserving of peace as S. Paul further declareth when he addeth by and by 1. Cor. XIV 36. 37. What came the word of God out from you or came it to you onely if any man think himselfe a Prophet or spirituall let him acknowledg the things I write
to you to be the commandements of the Lord. Which is to say that all even Prophets are to be subject to the Apostles by consequence to none but them who have received commission from the Apostles For howshal any order he setled to maintain unity in the communion of Gods service upon any other principle but that upon which the Coirnthians are obliged to rest in this which therefore being setled by order from the apostles is from thencforth trusted with the teaching of Gods people and no man further then he is trusted by the same Neither is it any marvaile that in the Church of England after orders confirmed after possession of a Church license of preaching is granted by the Bishop Because there are divers offices as well concerning the cure of soules as the service of God in the Church to which men may be appointed by the Lawes of the Church who are not to be trusted with Preaching even to their own people but upon expresse submission to the Bishops correction in behalfe of his Church For if sufficient power be reserved the Bishop to provide for his flock it will be in him to provide instruction for them by such persons as he shall think fit to trust and if it be not in him so to doe the fault is in the Lawes abridging his power of making a cheerfull account to God for his people Howsoever from hence it may appeare how ridiculous a thing it is to judge of the instruction a Bishop affords his flock by the sermons himselfe preaches unlesse it could be thought that his lungs and sides could reach all his people For his fidelity in trusting such persons as are to be trusted with teaching his people and his care in watching over the performance of their trust extendeth alike to all and maketh his Clergy his instruments in feeding his flock And whatsoever may have decayed in this Order through the Church of England the restoring thereof by wholsom Lawes aswell Ecclesiastcall as Civill had been and is the Reformation of Christianity not the rooting up of the very foundations of the Church out of zeale to exirtpate the order of Bishops And since the licentiousnesse of preaching what any man can make of the Bible hath made so faire a way for so few years to the rooting up of Christianity with the Church what will there be to secure the consciences of Gods people that they may safely go to Church and trust their soules with the means of salvation that are there to be found but the restoring of Gods Church That is to say of that authority which he by his Apostles hath provided for the determining of all things concerning his publike service supposing the profession of that faith which the whole Church hath maintained from the beginning as received from our Lord by his Apostles Which if it be true the same reason will oblige all men to provide the meanes of salvation for themselves that is to follow them of their owne choice without direction or constraint of the Lawes in the meane time I doe not conceive it becomes me to say what ought to be as I conceive it behoves me to say what ought not to be This I will say having proved that the prayses of God and Prayers much more the Eucharist are principal in comparison of preaching which is subordinate That the assemblies of Gods people ought to be more frequent for them then they can be for heareing of Sermons as I have showed by the premises S. Paul commands to pray continually and David saith the praises of God shall be alwaies in his mouth not expressing the assemblies of Gods people but inferring that which I have said of the dayly service of God in publick in my book of the assemblies of the Church Chap. VIII I maintain there is no ground no precept no example no practise of dayly preaching like this for daily prayers which if it be true the confining of assemblies to sermons is to Gods disservice It will be said that S. Paul 1 Tim. IV. 2. Thus exhorteth Preach the word be instant in season out of season examine rebuke exhort with all long suffering and meeknesse And it is as easily answered that here is nothing to the purpose Instance in the preaching of the word refers to unbelievers To induce them to be Christians though out of season is alwaies seasonable Long-suffering and meeknesse in examining rebuking exhorting of Christians privately may be publikely if not according to order must needs be unseasonable Men seeme to imagin that there were Pulpits and Churches and audiences ready to heare the Apostles preach before men were Christians When they were they shall find that meanes of meeting was provided by Christian people according to their duty the order appointed by them and their successors That they sate upon their chaires in teaching challenging the authority by which they taught the people sometimes standing somtimes allowed to sit downe None but Deacons preached standing when the order and discipline of the primitive Church was in force To deal with those that were not Christians S. Paul must goe out into the Piazza or to the Exchange to Gentiles to do that which they did in the Synagogue or in the temple to the Jewes Acts XVII 7 11. 46. In preaching to Jewes it was their advantage to observe the orders of the Synogogue And yet he that shall peruse that which I have said in the book aforenamed shall never say that those assemblies were principally for preaching which the Apostles made use of to preach to the Synagogue When they had ordered the assemblies of Churches what have you in their writings to recommed frequent preaching but S. Pauls order in the use of these miraculous graces given the Corinthians 1 Cor. XIV unlesse it be drawne into consequence that S. Paul prevailed till midnight Acts. XX. 7. as if the act of an Apostle being to depart were a precedent to the order of the Church Buâ— I have showed you in the foresaid book Chap X. that the Eucharists have a share in the use of the said graces and the worke of the said assemblies as also Hymnes of Gods praises And in â— Cor. XI you read very much of the Eucharist as also of praying Prophesying that is praysing God by Psalmes as I have said there Chap. V. without any mention of Preaching If the Doctrine of the Apostles be joyned with breaking of bread and Prayer Acts XI 42. If the Elders that laboure in the word and doctrine be preferred by S. Paul 1 Tim. V. 17. You have a solemn instruction concerning prayers and the Eucharist 1. Tim. II. 1 2. as also exhortations to frequent it Ebr. XIII 15. without any mention of preaching In fine there is nothing in the Scripture to question the ground which I setled afore As for the practice of the Church I will goe no further then Gennadius de dogmatibus Eccles Cap. LIII neither commending nor blaming those that