Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
lord_n word_n write_a write_v 654 4 6.3299 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A58849 A course of divinity, or, An introduction to the knowledge of the true Catholick religion especially as professed by the Church of England : in two parts; the one containing the doctrine of faith; the other, the form of worship / by Matthew Schrivener. Scrivener, Matthew. 1674 (1674) Wing S2117; ESTC R15466 726,005 584

There are 25 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

sides we are obliged by conscience to our proper Fathers in Christ For to do otherwise is to provoke God to deliver such over as light and gadding Huswifes to the impure embraces of any seducer to Schism and Heresie But when such a conviction shall be wrought in us of the errors and unsafety of that communion in which we were educated That we must either forsake that or Christ then must the advice and sentence of our Saviour prevail with us in St. Luke If any Lu● 14. 26. man comes to me and hate not his Father and Mother and Wife and Children and Brethren and Sisters yea and his own Life also he cannot be my Disciple And as we should go against common prudence and humanity it self out of an opinion That our Parents natural may err and set us upon unwarrantable Acts to turn them off and deny all obedience unto them least they should lead us into errors so should we do very unchristianly and against apparent precepts of Scripture contemptuously and proudly to deny submission both of Judgement and practise unto our spiritual Parents because forsooth they are men and may err the Spirit of disobedience tacitly insinuating unto us a much more pestilent opinion That while we do as best liketh our selves we shall be much more safe if not infallible as if we might not err But of this as we have already spoken in part so may there offer it self a more proper place more fully to speak afterward A second general means to attain the true sense of Scripture is indeed the Spirits assistance by which it was at first composed There is certainly none like to that For as St. Paul hath it What man knoweth the 1 Cor. 2. 11. things of a man save the Spirit of a man which is in him Even so the things of God knoweth no man but the Spirit of God The only hazard we here run is and that no small one That we presume not lightly upon such a peculiar guidance of the Spirit which we have not The general remedie therefore of this evil is that prescribed by our Lord Christ viz. Prayer For Thus he speaketh by St. Mathew All things whatsoever ye ask in prayer believing ye shall receive And more Mat. 21. 22. Luk. 11. 13. particularly by St. Luke If ye then being evil know how to give good gifts unto your children how much more shall your heavenly Father give the holy Spirit to them that ask them And a Third means is when being soundly and well instructed in the general Augustin de Doct. christ Lib. 3. cap. 2. drift and design of Faith or Gods holy word we by the Analogy which one part of Faith must bear with another do judge of the truth or error of any thing contained in Scripture And To this belongs a Fourth as it is commonly reckoned viz. due and Id. 16. cap. 3. prudent comparing of several places of Scripture knowing that no sense can be admitted of Scripture which disagreeth with any part of Scripture Skill or knowledg of the original tongues in which they were wrot may be accounted a Fifth meanes and herein a special observation of the several Idioms of both Old and New Testament Lastly Consideration of the Histories of Countries Persons and Customes to which Holy writ do relate To these several others of inferior Order might be named but I here pass them to come to a more exact and seasonable treatise of Tradition so much conducing to the abovesaid ends CHAP. XII Of Tradition as a Means of Vnderstanding the Scriptures Of the Certainty of unwritten Traditions that it is inferior to Scripture or Written Tradition No Tradition equal to Sense or Scripture in Evidence Of the proper use of Tradition TO this place is due the Treating of Tradition as well for the better compleating of what may yet seem wanting in directions for the attaining the proper sense of the Rule of Faith the Scripture as because of the pretensions in its behalf made by some to an equal share in the Rule it self by laying down this fundamental Division of the Word of God into Written commonly called Scripture and Unwritten called Tradition And That the Word of God may be left unwritten as well as written is Moreman said the Church was before the Scriptures Philpo● shewed that his argument was fallacious For he took the Scriptures only to be that which is written by men in letters whereas in very deed all Prophesy uttered by the Spirit of God was counted to be Scripture Fox Martyr Vol. 3. pag. 29. undeniable nay That actually it was delivered by word of mouth before it was committed to writing is evident from the infinite Sermons of the Apostles Evangelists and Evangelical Preachers who declared the same For To them who were contemporary to the immediate Disciples of Christ the word of God was delivered by speech to the end it might be written so far as it seemed expedient to Divine Providence for the perpetual benefit of succeeding generations but to us The word of God is preached vocally or orally because it is written And so we read our Saviour himself used it against the Devil and incredulous Jews not quoting the uncertain and unecessary Traditions remaining with the Jews but the written Word saying by St. Mathew * Mat. 4. V. 4. 7. 10. Joh. 8. 17. It is written man shall not live by bread alone And verse the seventh It is written again And the third time It is written thou shalt worship the Lord thy God c. And so by St. John and innumerable other places It is written in your Law Christ in all his disputes against his Jewish adversaries seldome or never arguing from their Traditions which were many but from the written word of God only And notwithstanding speaking Philosophically it is not repugnant to reason That things delivered from Father to Son through many ages should persevere in their pristine integrity and be preserved incorrupt in the main yet is it inconsistent with the Fallibility of humane nature to secure them in all Points from violation either without writing or with All the world concurring in this That the Invention of Letters was a special gift of God towards Mankind for the more safe and profitable continuance of things passed to following times Such an intollerable Paradox Cresies Exomologesis is that which modern Wits their scarce tollerable Tenets urging them thereunto have of late vented and to their best defended That Tradition taken in contradistinction to Writing is more safe than writing as if writing had not all the priviledges belonging to oral Tradition with great advantage or because written monuments may suffer by tract of time and passing so many hands unwritten traditions might pass so many ages and mouths inviolate When while we see too great variety in the reading or letter of books we could be so blind as not to behold infinite more of the same nature in
two Tables and hanging all on one string Charity which saith St. Paul is the fulfilling of the Law as many Beads or Jewels make but one Bracelet Yet according to the several forms and distinct matter are they often distinguished Origen Hom. 10. super Exod Non ut simplicioribus videtur cuncta quae statuantur Lex dicitur c. Psal 19. 7 8. as by Origen in these words It is not as may seem to the simpler sort that all things that are constituted are the Law Lex but some truly are called Law some Testimonies some Commands some Righteousnesses some Judgments which the 18 or 19 Psalm plainly teaches us saying The Law of the Lord is a perfect Law converting the soul the Testimony of the Lord is sure making wise the simple The Statutes of the Lord are right rejoycing the heart the Commandment of the Lord is pure enlightning the eyes Neither doth Gulielmus Parisiensis much vary from his sense who makes seven Parts of the Law of God the First whereof is Testimonies Sunt autem partes Legis hujus Dei septem quarum prima est Testimenia c. Gul. Parisiens de Legibus cap. 1. and these are of Truths and therefore to be believed The Second Commands and these are of Honest things and therefore to be fulfilled The Third Judgments and these are of Equity and therefore to be obeyed The Fourth are Examples and these are to be imitated The Sixth is Threatnings to wit of Punishments and these are to be feared The Seventh are Ceremonies and these are to be reverenced and observed Thus he But whether these do not concern rather the whole Body of the Law than the Decalogue in particular may justly be doubted but shall not here be disputed though upon this account it may seem to concern this also For if the Ten Commandments be the sum of the whole Law of Moses as is credibly taught how can it so be unless it vertually comprehends the several distinct parts thereof which will be farther cleared in the brief consideration of these three Particulars concerning the Decalogue 1. The Institution of this Law 2. The Nature or Use of it and Thirdly The Explication of it The Authour and Institutour of this Law was insallibly God himself as of all the Writings of Moses the Prophets Evangelists and Apostles received amongst us for Canonical But whether there were any more immediate act of God and as I may say personal in delivering these Commands than in communicating his will by Moses to the Israelites upon other occasions is not so well resolved The Learned of the Jewish Doctours do put a distinction between the Divineness of the Pentateuch wrote by Moses and the rest of holy Scripture of the Old Testament making that the Ground and Rule as it were of other prophetical Writings and so do many suppose the Law to be more Sacred than the other parts of Scripture and to be more Sacred because more solemnly and formidably and with greater manifestation of Gods Glory and Majesty delivered to Moses yea and because written with the finger of God himself as the Scripture witnesses which seems to speak as if God herein had not used the ministery of Angels as at other times and upon other occasions but spake and acted immediately in his own person These words saith Moses in Deuteronomy the Lord Deut. 5. 22. spake unto all your assembly in the Mount out of the midst of the fire of the cloud and of the thick darkness with a great voice and he added no more and he wrote them in two Tables of Stone and deliveted them to me And when the people in Exodus beg of Moses saying Speak thou with us and we will Exod. 20. 19. hear thee but let not God speak with us least we dye it seems to imply that God himself was the speaker Nay God saith afterward Ye have seen that v. 22. I have talked with you from heaven And to this effect the holy Scripture elsewhere as Deut. 4. 36. Nehem. 9. 13. Deut. 5. 4. Exod. 33. 11. from all which there is nothing more certain then that the voice was sensible and after humane manner audible contrary to some Jews who as Buxtorf tells us presume to say it was imaginary only And what do not the Jews superstitiously devise to magnifie this Law and by implication themselves above other people so favoured by God For they not only say that God with his own mouth spake these Ten Words but with his own hands made the two Tables as may be seen in Buxtorf and Buxtorf de Decalogo amongst others Rabbi Simeon writes That both Tables were created by God immediately and that before the world began not regarding how contradictory to Scriptures such an assertion is Exod. 34. 1 2 3 4. and Deut. 10. 1. which they would understand only of the Second Tables but without reason But if we consider first how dubiously and ambiguously the word God is used in Scripture signifying Angels often and sometimes Men of Renown and Command and the Finger of God to be the same sometimes with the Spirit of God sometimes with the Power of God Exod. 8. 19. Luke 11. 20. And secondly That then according to our apprehension and the Scriptures phrase God is said to do a thing himself when he doth it not by any humane instrument or help though he imployeth invisible Spirits therein there will be no such necessity of Consequence as may seem at first view and thus Calvin upon these words of Exod. 31. 18. interprets the matter not amiss And if we consider secondly what sense the Writers of the New Testament take them in the other opinion which holds that these Commands were delivered by the mediation of Angels will appear most probable For so saith St. Stephen expresly in the Acts to the Jews Who received the Law by Acts 7. 53. Gal. 3. 19. the disposition of Angels and have not kept it And St. Paul It was ordained by Angels in the hands of a Mediatour And in the Epistle to the Hebrews it is called The word spoken by Angels Some may say here That by Law is here to be understood not the Decalogue only but the whole Law of Moses at the least which cannot be absolutely denyed though the contrary seems most probable But if it be so does not the whole include the parts If the Law in general was so dispenced does it not follow that this Law in particular was so ordained Though if it be granted that this Law particularly was so delivered it doth not follow that the whole Law of Moses was so given by the ministery of Angels and not only by Divine inspiration without any Angels officiating towards it as in this Case we suppose And Perkins on the Galatians affirmeth directly that this Law was given by the Perkins Gal. 3. 19. ministery of Angels And to confirm this I shall adde a Scholastical Reason For if it
be true what St. John saith that No man hath seen God at any time and what the John 1. 18. Schools teach as I believe that fleshly eyes cannot possibly discern God immediately may we not much more truly say that we cannot hear Gods voice with our fleshly ears and live any more than see God and live But God says expresly No man shall see me and live But as God maketh certain Exod. 33. 20. representations of himself to our eye which are not himself but yet bear his name in Scripture so God produceth or causeth to be produced audible sounds which are not really and properly his voice yet represent so much to the ear of man which when it comes attended with more than natural or ordinary circumstances as did the voice at the giving of the Law it is more especially and signally ascribed unto God as his Lastly It is said in Exodus that Moses wrote upon the Tables the words of Exod. 34 28. the Covenant the Ten Commandments which in the beginning of the Chapter God is said to write I will write upon these Tables the words that were Exod. 34. 1. in the first c. which moved the Fathers as Cyprian and Austin whom Lyra follows to understand them so that God wrote Autoritatively and Moses Ministerially But later Jewish and Christian Expositours have thought good rather to refer the later part of these words And he was there with the Lord fourty dayes and fourty nights he did neither eat bread nor drink water and he wrote upon the Tables the words of the Covenant the Ten Commandments to God not without some violence to the sense more current otherwise But in such variety and obscurity as is here I see no remedy but men must judge for themselves However I suppose the second thing propounded is from hence competently clear concerning the Nature of this Law That as it is undoubtedly Divine so from the Authority delivering it it hath no more force or obligation upon us than other words of God extant in holy Scripture Nor is it easily to be conceived how any thing can be said to be more or less divine which is acknowledged to come from God by vertue of any manner of delivering it whether mediately or immediately by a still and quiet inspiration or by a publick and majestick declaration but from the matter it may And Buxtorf in his forementioned Tractate on Buxtorf in Decalog num 51. Priscis temporibus c. the Decalogue hath these words In ancient times it was a custome among the Jews that the Decalogue should every day in the Morning Prayers be publickly and privately rehearsed and repeated This laudable custom in latter times they have abolished the reason whereof the Talmud renders to be lest the people should believe that the Decalogue had any ●ore divineness in it than other parts of Scripture From whence we may observe First That anciently the Jews had a constant Form of Worship Secondly That there is no such ridiculousness in Prayers publick and private to repeat the Creed and Ten Commandments as certain pretenders to giftedness have presumed Thirdly That the Jewish Doctours discerning the great inconvenience that might happen from admitting degrees of Sacredness in Divine Revelations chose to prevent such errours by taking away the presumed occasion For however some have distinguished between Divine Right and Apostolical making this a mean between humane purely and divine yet in propriety of speech all Constitutions are either divine purely or purely humane And therefore Apostolical Right can be no more than humane Right when it is distinguished from Divine This we speak of Constitutions taken in their formality not as oftentimes they are used for the things themselves so ordained For no doubt but as there are degrees of sins against Laws so these degrees are estimated from the weightiness or lightness of the matter against which offences are committed And thus we may hold that the Ten Commandments are more Sacred that is contain more important matters than generally the rest of the Scriptures do that is again in the like number words being certainly the most perfect and plain and compendious form of serving God that the Jews had any where revealed unto them if not a more absolute sum of our practical duties towards God and Man then we find collected together in so few words in the Gospel and therefore not unworthily inserted into the Second part of the Office of our Church But whether this Decalogue was ever intended by God as such a perfect and compleat Rule of Obedience that nothing to which Jew or Christian was obliged hath escaped it may well be question'd understanding the Question not so much of ceremonial or extrinsecal Duties of Religion as moral and perpetual Many have this last age brought forth who though they look upon it little less than ridiculous to make any use of the Ten Commandments in our worship of God yet ascribe so great perfection to it as a Rule that they suppose they have convinced you of absurdity enough if they drive you to either of these straits To deny any Moral duty to be contained in the Decalogue or to affirm any Ceremonial to be therein included For then they loudly cry concerning the First you make the Law of God an Imperfect Rule And concerning the Second as by name doth Dr. Twisse in his Treatise on the Sabbath with innumerable others If for instance the Fourth Commandment be not Moral what doth it among the Ten Commands And having said this they need they think say no more to confound their adversaries To the former therefore we say that improving the Art of Reduction to the height no doubt but all Moral and Ceremonial duties too may be reduced to some of the Ten Commandments For if our Saviour Christ our Great and Infallible Master reduced these Ten to two and again all things contained in the Law and Prophets which must be all Moral duties to Love of God and Love of our Neighbour in St. Matthews Gospel saying On these two Commandements hang all the Law and the Prophets Nay and Matth. 22. 37 38 39 40. which is yet more St. Paul brings all Christian duties under one Head of Love saying Love is the fulfilling of the Law Do we wonder at or can Rom. 13. 10. we censure those who would have all Christian vertues included and vices and sins excluded by the Decalogue But surely they who contend for such a comprehension as may be useful to a man do not intend that it self should be incomprehensible and illimited which at this rate it must be reducing every thing to any thing but certain Rules have been invented for the limiting and directing of men in this matter which being not taken from the Reason of the thing it self so much as the Arbitrary wit of the Hic video quosdam in hoc elaborasse ut universa proecepta sive jubentia sive
faithful 2 Tim. 2. 11 12. saying If we be dead with him we shall also live with him If we suffer we shall also raign with him And is it not certainly implied that we shall receive the promises of God which are as well of Eternal and Spiritual things if we do the will of God by Faith and works of Faith when it is said Ye have need of patience that after ye have done the will of God ye might Heb. 10. 36. receive the promise And I should wonder at the subtilty of Perverters of divine Writ if they shall be able to draw any other sense from the words of Christ expressing his Rule of proceeding at the day of Judgment thus Come ye blessed of my Father inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the Mat. 25. 34 35 36. foundation of the world For I was an hungred and ye gave me meat I was thirsty and ye gave me drink I was a stranger and ye took me in Naked and ye cloathed me I was sick and ye visited me I was in prison and ye came unto me How can any thing be spoken more plainly to make Eternal Life the reward They falsify our Tenets saying That we hold that Good works are not means of Salvation Francis White Epist. Dedie of Good works than is here spoken Or how can any man affirm that all things necessary to salvation are plainly taught and easily to be understood in Scripture and shall denie this to be plain and such good works as are here specified necessarie to salvation For to bring in any Scholie which shall elude this will do them much more mischief in other cases as leading to the corrupting all places of Scripture which they allow to be plain and rendring them altogether useless to the ends for which they are alleadged For to say only that Faith must be here understood is most true but insufficient to make the testimonie void because otherwise they were not good works And this must alwayes be retained in memory which we have before laid as a foundation That they are not the good works of natural Reason or humanity nor the good works of the Law now voided which we here in this dispute contend for but they are the works of Faith qualified with all the due conditions of the Gospel of Grace and actuated by the Spirit of Grace And here it may be useful to instance in some of those principal adjuncts which make our works truly evangelical and leading to that blessed end spoken of And here I do not make Faith so properly a condition as a cause and a common Essential foundation supposed to all Evangelical Acts as the root is not aptly termed a Condition of the fruit but the intrinsique Cause thereof But others there are very necessarie though not in the same degree such as these First that they be done in obedience to the will and command of Almighty God ordaining Good works Anew commandment John 13. 24. saith Christ I give unto you that ye love one another And how far this extends St. Paul tells us saving He that loveth another hath fulfilled the Law Rom. 13. ● Ephes 2. 10. And yet more expresly to the Ephesians he saith We are Gods workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them And again to the Thessalonians he saith This is the Thes 4. 3. will of God even your sanctification Secondly the merits of Christs Passion whereby we are redeemed to God and sanctified according to St. Paul to Titus speaking of Christ Who gave himself for us that he might redeem Tit. 2. 14. us from all iniquitie and purisie unto himself a peculiar people zealous of Good works A third thing requisite to constitute a work Good according to the Gospel is that it proceed from a Person adopted or made a Child of God by Grace For this is required of all true Christians That they be born again of John 3. 5. Joh. 3. 9. water and the Holy Ghost And as the same author elsewhere hath it Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin for his seed remaineth in him and he cannot sin because he is born of God A fourth is the inward Grace of God working and moving the mind to holy works and this preventing us so that we are first excited of Gods Spirit without any natural inclination of our own to do that which is the good and acceptable will of God For to this end make our Saviours words in the Gospel where he saith Without me ye can do nothing that 1 Joh. 15. 5. is no Good work answerable to the perfection of the Gospel and the promises thereof A fifth is the outward Grace of God remitting and passing over the several Omnia mandata facta deputantur quando quicquid non fit agnoscitur Aug. Retract defects and blemishes adhering to Good works even of the Regenerate For then saith an holy Father truly is the Law fullfilled when what is committed amiss is pardoned And to this relate the words quoted in the Epistle to the Hebrews as an ingredient into the Covenant of the Gospel viz. I will be merciful to their unrighteousness and their sins and their iniquities will Heb. 8. 12. I remember no more Sixthly Perseverance in good is likewise necessarie though not to the essence of the Act done to make it Good for perseverence doth not of it self add good or evil to an action but supposes the same and continues it as it finds it yet to the reward it is absolutely necessarie Forasmuch as Gods Judgement as mans likewise is alwayes passed according to what a man actually is found to be whether good or evil and not to what a man hath been or possibly afterwards might have been For saith the word of God Be thou faithful unto death and I will give thee a Crown of Life And Revel 2. 10. 1 Cor. 7. 8. elsewhere Waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ who shall also confirm you unto the end that ye may be blameless unto the day of our Lord Jesus Last of all to make a good Work rewardable is requisite the freeness of Gods promises made to accept the same and to reward it not for its own sake but for his sake and Christs sake And that God hath promised blessed rewards to those that work according to the tenour of the Gospel as now described doing it as his children under the protection of Christs mediation and merits to the glory of God through the operation of Gods Spirit persevering therein till God shall call them off resting not upon themselves but his promises is most undeniable and a Principle necessary to be maintained and practised by all faithful Christians doth appear from what is before alleadged And what if any thing may be is yet more cleerly asserted by Christ saying He that receiveth Mat. 10. 41. a
but they were the intermediate effects of the stock of Grace treasured up in the Soul and exhorting and improving it self by the continual supplie of the Spirit of Christ according to the * Mat. 25. 16. doctrine of St. Paul to the Corinthians saying Insomuch that we desired Titus that as he had begun so he would also finish in you the same Grace also Therefore as ye abound in every thing in Faith in utterance in knowledge and v. 7. in all diligence and in your love to us see that ye abound in this Grace also Of this influence of Christs Spirit to the augmentation of Grace in the hearts of the true believers speaketh the same Apostle to the Colossians thus The Col. 2. 19. Head from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministred and knit together encreaseth with the encrease of God Sanctification then may be described The Grace of God infused into the Soul of a Sinner and purifying it by Faith as Justification is the reputation and acceptation of a person for Just by almighty God through the intuition of the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ And yet more distinctly to declare their mutual agreement and difference it will conduce much to the due understanding of them both First then Justification and Sanctification agree in their Subject The true believer the same person who is Sanctified being also Justified and he that is Justified being Sanctified also For so saith the prophet Nahum of him The Lord is slow to anger and great in power and will not at all acquit the wicked Nahum 1. 3. And when we find St. Paul affirming the contrary in appearance viz. that God justifieth the ungodly we are to understand him to speak not in Rom. 4. 5. Sensu composito in such manner that he is justified while he is so ungodly but in Sensu diviso a distinct sense and season as if it had been said Him that was once ungodly as he seems to interpret himself in his Epistle to the Corinthians where having spoken of the many abominations men were subject to he saith And such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are 1 Cor. 6. 11. Sanctified but ye are Justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God Secondly Justification and Sanctification agree in their foundation which is at least inchoate and initial holiness For though no mans inherent holiness arises so high as to denominate him truly Just or holy for its own sake yet both to Sanctification and Justification is necessarily required some preparatorie and imperfect holiness consisting principally in the Conversion of the mind to God from sin Thirdly both Sanctification and Justification are alike owing to Faith as their immediate Cause next under Gods Spirit as may be gathered from the prayer of Christ for his disciples Sanctifie them through thy truth thy word is Joh. 17 17. truth That is the doctrine of Faith received To which Faith the effect of Sanctification is ascribed by St. Peter in the Acts whereby the Act. 15. 9. hearts of the Gentile were purified or Sanctified Fourthly they are both equally imputed unto us through the Righteousness of Christ Therefore saith St. Paul to the Corinthians To them that are Sanctified in Christ Jesus And 1 Cor. 1. 2. Heb. 10. 29. to the Hebrews it is said We are Sanctified by the blood of the Covenant So that no less are we Sanctified then Justified by Christs death and merits and the imputation of them But on the other side they are distinct in some formalities such as these may be for First the immediate cause of our Sanctification is in holy Scripture imputed to the operation and influence of the Holy Spirit as our Justification is more properly attributed to Christ the mediator between God and man As appeareth from St. Pauls words to the Thessalonians But we are bound to give thanks alwayes for you brethren beloved of the Lord 2 Thes 2. 13. because God hath from the beginning chosen you to Salvation through Sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth And St. Peter Elect according 1 Pet. 1. 2. to the foreknowledge of God the Father and Sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience Thirdly Justification looketh backward being an absolution of the guilty from sins formerly committed and holding him Just but no man is justified actually from sins which hereafter he may fall into But Sanctification relates chiefly to the time future For not only is a sinner by the Spirit of Regeneration and Sanctification purged from the old Leaven of sin and malice but he becometh a New Lump and unleavened 1 Cor. 5. 7. Rom. 6. 13. and whereas he hath yielded his members as Instruments of unrighteousness unto sin he doth yield himself unto God as those that are alive from the dead And old things are done away in him and all things become new And whosoever is 1 Joh. 3. 9. thus born of God doth not commit sin for his seed remaineth in him and he cannot sin because he is born of God Fourthly to the Act of our Justification the will of man doth not necessarily concurr though it dissents not but is rather passive than Active but to our Sanctification is absolutely required the co-operation of the will and affections of man with the Grace of God in all those who have attained unto the use of reason For indeed by baptism Infants are so far Sanctified as to be freed from that hereditarie evil incident unto them which their will concurred not to but to actual Sanctification from those evils our wills did freely consent actual concurrence of our wills is necessary Fifthly Our Justification is entire and absolute at once no man being partly Justified and partly not Justified though he be partly Just and partly unjust or unholy But no man in this Life is so perfectly Sanctified as that there wants not somewhat to consummate the same because Justification being altogether the Act of God and not at all of Man God may and doth wholly and freely remit the guilt of sin to the penitent offendor But Man being also concerned in the Sanctification of himself his acts are imperfect and defective so that the effect it self partakes of the same and so Sanctification continues imperfect And it is not all at once but answerable to our natural man proceedeth by degrees Until we all come Eph 4. 13. in the unity of the Faith and of the knowledg of the son of God unto a perfect man unto the measure of the Stature of the fulness of Christ which fulness of stature is that we are to hope for and enjoy only in heaven Lastly to search no farther into this point before Justification there must of necessity goe some degree of Sanctification even in the opinion of such as contend most rigorously for freeness of Justification for to make Justification altogether
inconditionate and absolute on mans part is to blaspheme the immutable Justice of God and withall destroy the use of Faith in order to our Justification For it is impossible any thing bearing the name of a cause or condition as Faith certainly doth when we say We are Justified by ●aith should be posteriour to the thing it so relates unto The promise indeed of pardon and Justification of a sinner is actually made to those who do not actual●y believe and repent but promise answerably and covenant to believe and repent Non enim ut f●●● eat ignis cal facit sed quia fervet N●c ideo ben● currit ro●a ut rotunda s●t sed quia rotunda A●g ad Simplic Qu. 1. but the Execution and performance of this promise is not made before there be an actual fulfilling of our Covenant with God But then on the other side there must be perfect Justification before there can be that perfect Sanctification which we all aspire unto and God expects from us For then are we truly Sanctified when our works are holy and acceptable unto to God which they are not untill they proceed from a person so far Justified as to be accepted of God Whence may be resolved that doubt about Gods acceptation of the person for the works sake or the work for the persons sake For wisely and truly did the wife of Manoah inferr Gods acceptation of their sacrifice from the favour and grace he bore unto their persons and at the same time prove the favour God bore to their persons from the Acceptance of their sacrifice saying If the Lord were pleased to kil us he Judg. 13. 23. would not have received a burnt-offering and a meat-offering at our hands neither would he have shewed us all these things nor would as at this time have told us such things as these That God therefore accepted their Burnt-offering it is a sign he approved their persons but the reason antecedent of Gods acceptation of their sacrifice was because he first approved their persons And yet notwithstanding the goodness of the person is the original of the goodness of the work nothing hinders but the goodness of the work may add value favour and estimation unto the person As to use Luthers comparison and others after and before him the tree bears the fruit and not the fruit the tree And the goodness of the tree is the cause of the goodness of the fruit and not the goodness of the fruit the cause of the goodness of the tree Yet the fruit doth procure an esteem and valuation from the owner to the tree and endears it to him to the cultivating the ground and dressing it and conferring much more on that than others In like manner the Person Sanctified and Justified produces good works and not those good works him but some actions accompanied with Gods grace antecedent and inferiour to the fruit it self Yet doth the fruit of good Works add much of esteem and honour from God to such a person and render him capable of an excellent reward for St. Paul to the Philippians assureth them and us when he saith I desire fruit that may abound to your account Phil. 2. 7. CHAP. XVIII Of Justification as an Effect of Faith and Good Works Justification and Justice to be distinguished and How The several Causes of our Justification Being in Christ the Principal Cause What it is to be in Christ The means and manner of being in Christ. TO the informing our selves aright in the much controverted point of Justification which whether it be a proper effect of Good works or not doth certainly bear such a relation ●o them as may well claim this place to be treated of it seemeth very expedient after we have distinguished and illustrated it by Sanctification explained to proceed to distinguish it likewise from Justice For as Righteousness or holiness the ground of Sanctification is to be distinguished from Sanctification it self so is Justice the ground to be distinguished from Justification its complement and perfect on This being omitted or confusedly delivered by diverse hath been no small cause of great obscurities For Righteousness or Justice seems to be nothing else but an exact agreement of a mans actions in general to the true Rule of Acting and that Rule is the Law or word of God For he that offends not against that is undoubtedly a Just man of himself by his own works and needs nothing but Justice to declare and ackowledg him for such no mercy nor favour As that thing which agrees with the square or Rule is perfect But notwithstanding such supposed perfect conformitie to the Law of God be perfect righteousness yet is not this to be Justified Neither can any man in Religion be said more to Justifie himself than in civil cases where it is plainly one thing to be innocent and to be an accurate unreproveable observer of the Law in all things and to have sentence pronounced in his behalf that so indeed he really is For this is only to Justifie him though in pleading his own case in clearing and vindicating himself a man is vulgarly said to Justifie himself And no otherwise if we will keep to the safe way of proper and strict speaking is it in Religion Supposing that which never happen'd since Christ that a man should have so punctually observed every small as well as great precept of Gods Law that no exception could be taken against him yet is he not hereby Justified though he may be said to be the true Cause of his Justification and that he hath merited it Which St. Paul seems to implie unto us saying For I know 1 Cor. 4. 4. nothing by my self yet am I not hereby Justified For in truth Justification is an act of God only as Judge no less then author of his own Laws upon the intuition of due Conformitie to it or Satisfaction of it And as a man may possibly be just and yet never be Justified taking things abstractly so may a man be unjust and guilty and yet be justified doth not the word of God as well as common reason and experience certifie so much He that Justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the Just even Prov. 17. 15. they both are abomination unto the Lord. This then surely may be No man then can be justified by himself or any Act or Acts of him no not through Christ But though he cannot thus Judicially and formally Justifie himself it is not so repugnant to reason or Scripture to be said Materially and Causally to act towards his Justification Nay he cannot come up to the rigour of the Rule nor excel so far in Justice and holiness as to demand at Gods hands his absolving sentence yet that he cannot contribute towards it is not only false but dangerous doctrine leading men into a sloathfull despondencie and despair so that they shall do nothing at all because they cannot do all that is required of
leadeth men to assure themselves of the benefit of the promises which are conditional before it be evident unto them that such conditions have been duly observed by them The consideration of this uneven dealing and unreasonable conclusion upon such a supposal hath prevailed with some to make the promises of Salvation so free as not to consist with any condition but peremptory and absolute yea excluding Faith it self the last thing of all that their Religion will suffer them to deny God as a Condition making the only use of it to be to receive what is so freely given them as they falsly and prophanely imagine It will not after this be necessary to lay down the reasons of the contrary opinion having already shewed That there is no Precept for such a point of Faith no Proposition declaring it no Article of our Creed requiring it that falling very short of it which teacheth us to believe in God wherein they say three things are imposed on us to believe First That there is a God Secondly That this God is my God Thirdly That I must trust and put my confidence in him for my salvation All which we readily assent unto But the most pertinent of all these come not home to the case before us For every man may and ought to put his confidence in God for his Salvation and yet be never so much as confident of his Salvation as is plain and that upon this reason That the well grounding of such a confidence as this latter may be very obscure to him and so the thing it self not clear Again It is prescribed by the Lords Prayer and other places of Scripture to pray daily for Remission of Sins saying Forgive us our sins as we forgive them that trespass against us this we are no less to pray for than for our daily bread Therefore since we are not ordinarily so assured of the Pardon of them For as a man hopeth not properly for what he hath neither doth he pray for it knowing he hath it This St. Pauls argument to the Hebrews Heb. 10. 18. proves saying Where remission of sin is there is no more offerings for sin i. e. where the remission of our sins is known to us Praying being our Sacrifice under the Gospel This were ridiculous and displeasing to God we thereby implying that we have not that which we know we have which were unthankfully done of us God in such cases expecting justly from us acknowledgment of his Grace conferring such a blessing by all humble and devout Praise and Thanksgiving for it and not absurdly petitioning him as if we had it not And this is so convincing upon some that I find a bold profession in these words The fourth Petion in the Perkins Lords Prayer must be understood not so much of our old sins or debts as of our present and new sins I grant we must petition for pardon for our new sins but I deny that we are not daily to repent and beg mercy at Gods hands all the dayes of our Life for our ancient as well as moderner offences And therefore the same Author suspecting it may be the insufficiencie of this answer proceedeth I answer again We pray for the pardon of our sins not because we have no assurance thereof because our assurance is small we grow on from grace to grace in Christ c. Which is very soundly and soberly spoken but quite overthrows what was before contended for about Certainty For Assurance that is weak and small is no assurance but a competent degree and a comfortable measure of hope and probability which we not only allow but know to be enjoyned us in holy Scripture by St. Peter saying Make your calling and 2 Pet. 1. 10. election sure for if ye do these things ye shall never fall Where we grant That a man is bound so to walk believe and live as becometh the Faith he professes that his Salvation is sure before God and that he shall in that conjuncture never fall but this is not made so sure thereby to himself and one reason is included in the very words which are If ye do these things which implyes that such things may be omitted and express the consequence thereupon And not only doth this premature Certitude take us off from Prayer and Repentance which alone destroy all true Faith in us and under a glorious shew of most supream and firm assurance leave us really destitute of the proper means to attain that good degree of perswasion to the quieting of the troubled and distrustful Conscience but it also quite alienates the mind and enfeebles the hands of faithful men in the vigorous pursuit of obedience without which no man shall be saved For as a man cannot needs not repent of what he knows to be so fully forgiven nor ask that pardon again which he is thoroughly perswaded is granted him So neither can any man with that solicitude and resolution pursue the means of Salvation principally seen in obeying Gods Laws with Faith in Christs merits when his mind shall be wholly possessed with an opinion that the principal end next to the glory of God is absolutely satisfied namely his soul saved They say indeed that the meditation hereof should rather quicken and incite men to a more exact walking with God out of a greater obligation of gratitude and common ingenuity to make returns answerable to the singular Grace conferred 'T is true it should so indeed And so should an inheritance put actually and irrevocably into the son and heirs hands before the death of the Father But how many instances have we That so it is not for one That so it is Or who can say That ingenuity and good natur'dness are generally as powerful to keep up order and vertue in the world as the proposing of future favours and penalties to the persons concerned We are not therefore to judge of the future motions of Quod non metuitur contemnitur quod contemnitur utique non colitur Ita fit ut religio majestas honor metu constet metus autem non est ubi nullus irascitur Lactant. De Ira Dei cap. 8 men so much from some moral obligations as from natural propensions And who can say That naturally we are are as prone to do good to others as to ourselves To obey God abstractively i. e. secluding the fears and hopes we have from that service is to do it for Gods sake which is confessed to be the most noble principle a man can act by but when the Evils imminent on disobedience or the Blessing ensuing our obedience thorowly affect us we then will move upon a natural principle actuated and promoted by Faith But to conclude this the Sum of what a good Christian is to believe in this point is First The immutableness of God in his covenanting with man and the mutableness of man on his part in fulfilling the tearms he is tyed to God in Both these
are intimated to us in these words of St. Paul which are vulgarly brought against us viz. Nevertheless the foundation of God 2 Tim. 2. 19. standeth sure having this seal The Lord knoweth who are his And let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity The first foundation of God is that which he hath layed in his assuring us that he will have a Church in despite of all Enemies and Persecuters which would destroy it The second is the seal to this Charter which relating to special persons is twofold The First That God knoweth who are his that is according to Scripture phrase owneth and asserteth the cause of those that are his and will never forsake them otherwise than he hath declared that is they not violating egregiously the Covenant on their parts The second is that which follows viz. Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity This is the seal set to the Covenant made by God which if not duly and proportionably to the favourableness of the Evangelical Covenant observed by man the seal of God avails but little to the benefit of a Christian A second conclusion may be That notwithstanding God hath no where enjoyned us under any forfeiture to obtain this assurance yet he requireth us to be alwayes so pressing and proficient in Faith and Holiness of Life that above his Capitulations or ordinary Promises made in his Word he may communicate his pleasure unto us and good-will concerning the particular salvation of us This hath been imparted unto divers and may again when it seems good to God But it is no Rule to us Thirdly A faithful Christian ought to endeavour the attaining to a strong and true degree of Hope by Gods grace and the working out of his Salvation with fear and trembling For St. John saith That a man may arrive to such a state of assurance as 't is called that considering and believing the undetermined mercy of God in the Gospel he may have confidence of Gods love towards him his own conscience not condemning him as St. John saith Beloved if our heart condemn us not then 1 John 3. 21. have we confidence towards God Lastly This sense serves much to the comfort and tranquility of the mind of scrupulous Christians more than the holding of a peremptory assurance of Salvation which they who require it cannot deny to be wanting to many faithful servants of God For when they consider that the want of this assurance is no indication or character of a Reprobate as some would make it and they must who bring it under precept and promise then are they heartened still to press towards holy and devout exercises believing that God not seeing nor judging as man judgeth nor as they of themselves but out of his incircumscribed mercie may accept them and have mercy on them And here properly doth that doctrine of Faith commended in the Articles of our Church as very comfortable take place viz. as that which when we have done all we must betake ourselves unto and which brings us neerest to God namely not that we believe we are justified for or because we believe we are freely but because Faith and trust in God as it is the first stone in our heavenly building so is it the crown and consummation of all when we disown and disavow all sufficiencie in ourselves or our most Christian Acts even Faith it self and trust in his mercy to be accepted under all our fears and reasonings to the contrary not manifestly violating the Covenant with God for which our own hearts and ordinary apprehensions may condemn us CHAP. XXII Of the Contrary to true Faith Apostasie Heresie and Atheism Their differences The Difficulty of judging aright of Heresie Two things constituting Heresie The Evil disposition of the mind and the falseness of the Matter How far and when Heresie destroyes Faith How far it destroyes the Nature of a Church THus having sufficiently treated of the most general and principal Effect of Faith before we leave this we are in reason to enquire into that which privatively relates to true Faith and that is Heresie What that is and wherein it consisteth For Heresie cannot properly be applyed to any but such who are of the Faith and in some degree belong to the Catholick Church wherein it is distinct from Atheism Apostasie and professed Infidelity For Infidelity though it carries with it in its name a sense which comprehends both Atheism and Apostasie yet use hath prevailed so far as to apply it only to such who do receive some Articles of the Christian Faith and them fundamental too though not as the Christians For Example Infidels may believe there is a God and that God but one and that there shall be a Resurrection of the Just and Unjust and Life everlasting either in misery or bliss yet being either wholly ignorant of or directly denying some fundamental Points of Faith as Christian they continue Infidels though not Atheists Neither can they be accounted Hereticks having never been of the Church nor initiated into or embraced the true Faith These are Negatively only related to the Church as Logicians say Dissimilary things relate one to another viz. A black thing to a white But Heresie is of a privative sense and an opposition to the true Catholick Faith with an Obligation not only taken from the matter of Faith it self to which all the world owe homage and obedience but from some extrinsecal formalities whereby some men more especially contract a relation to the Church of Christ And the first and most principal cause hereof is the solemn dedication which is made by ourselves or others we not oppugning it of us in the initiating Rite of Baptism wherein renunciation is openly made of all things persons and opinions contrary and inconsisting with that Doctrine we there submit unto and vow to observe This Dedication of us to Christ doth make and denominate us Christians and Catholicks according to the less ancient use of the word of which we shall hereafter speak Now according to the degree or manner of violating this most solemn and sacred Vow in Baptism are men said to be Apostates and Hereticks And an Apostates are Hereticks but not all Hereticks Apostates The principal difference consisteth in this 1. That the Apostate doth renounce even the first principles of Christian Faith as Christian And they are they which are expresly contained in the form of Baptism whereby he became a Christian 2. In a formal profession contrary to such Covenant made with God in Christ But Heresie doth not absolutely deny the Grounds of Christianity it self but whether by affected errour or invincible doth resolutely and firmly assert things contrary to true Doctrine But to give a precise definition of Heresie as St. Augustine of old so we find at this day very difficult and not to turn to the right hand or to the left not to make it too broad and wide
drunkenness who putteth the bottle to his neighbours mouth provoking him to drink to excess or of Theft who will by no means steal himself but is aiding in his advice and putting advantages into his hands to take anothers Goods In like manner the necessary consequence of a light Errour being very notorious though a person be not formally an Heretick in the conclusion which he may protest against as not following from his erroneous proposition yet if in truth it doth so and is generally so reputed to the mis-leading of Christians such a man is really or virtually an Heretick and obnoxious to the guilt and punishment due unto such Errours which he denies For instance It is a notorious Heresie to hold it unnecessary there should be any Church of Christ and to affirm That it suffices that every good Christian hath the word of God and believes and lives by himself though the word of God contradicts this impiety sufficiently and to be a Christian at large If any person heretically inclined shall deny that this is his opinion or that thus he would have it yet if he preaches such Doctrine and publishes such Opinions which do necessarily infer thus much he is a notorious Heretick in reality though not in the formality As also if he should teach The Church hath no power to enjoyn any thing besides what the word of God requires This Errour taken simply and nakedly hath no such monstrousness as may not pass for tolerable but in the necessary consequence it is as pernicious to the community of Christians as to preach against Christ himself And therefore the argument of late Rationalists is very false founded upon this ground Socinus Chi. viz. That Christians are not to be obliged under pain of damnation such as Anathema's and Excommunications are to any thing which Christ hath not by his Law prescribed For this indeed taken strictly is true Christ for ought may appear doth not in Scripture command Rites in use with the Church but Christ under pain of his displeasure doth require that we should do all things not contrary to his injunctions for the keeping up Non sunt parva existimanda sine quibus magna consistere enim possint Hieron of the nature of a Church and Christian Society and therefore though the Errour be in it self light it falls in the event heavy upon Christianity it self and deserves no less rigour than is used towards the offender in Faith it self Lastly From hence we may reasonably judge of the frequent denunciations of alienation from the Faith and Church against them who erred heretically affirming in general That Heresie quite alienated from the Church and that Society could not be of the Church which maintained an Heresie For first we are to note that few or none before St. Cyprians time were so severely censured by the ancient Fathers but such as were offenders against the very principles of Christianity it self St. Cyprian indeed and others from him extended this censure to such as were less criminal For it is a very hard matter to instance in any one Article of Faith though I know some great Clerks have attempted it which Novations or Donatists rejected or offended against So that abating somewhat for the vehemence of the zeal conceived against such enemies to the Church in the writings of Fathers against Hereticks it will appear that it was matter of Fact rather than Faith or Heresie which exposed them to such censures For uncharitableness will as certainly damn as unfaithfulness And he that dies for Christ as divers Hereticks did in animosity groundless against his brother and especially against the Church of which he is or ought to be a member may notwithstanding loose his Life hereafter as well as here But of this more now we are to speak of the Church CHAP. XXIII Of the proper Subject of Faith the Church The distinction and description of the Church In what sense the Church is a Collection of Saints Communion Visible as well as Invisible necessary to the constituting a Church HAving spoken of the Nature Kinds Acts and Effects of Christian Faith we proceed now to speak of the proper Subject of Faith which is the Church Which word is commonly used as well for the Place where our Lord is publickly and solemnly worshipped as for the People of God serving and worshipping him But of this latter only we art to treat at present which we define to be A Calling and Collection of Saints from The Church is an universal Congregation or fellowship of Gods faithful People and Elect built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ being the head and corner stone Hom. Chur. of Engl. Part. 2. pa. 213. their vain Conversation in the world to the Faith and Worship of God according to the Rule and Laws of his Holy word and to visible communion with themselves which description I doubt not to be grounded in all its parts upon the Scriptures themselves And that God is the Author and only Institutor of such a Church if it needed any proof the Scripture would soon afford it St. Paul saith to the Corinthians Chap. 7. * 1 Cor. 7. 17. But as God hath distributed to every man as the Lord hath called every one so let him walk and so ordain I in all Churches And so exhorteth the Thessalonians to † 1 Thess 2. 12 walk worthy of God who called them to his Kingdom and Glory And so in very many places else where as will appear farther now we consider the Term from whence God doth call and choose his faithful people and that is the World the world not taken in its natural sense signifying the Natural bodies of all sorts of which it consisteth nor absolutely from it in the more special sense in which Mankind is sometimes called the world for civil conversation and humane mutual Offices may be maintained and ought between Christians and Heathens or Infidels but rather in a moral sense that is unnatural unjust unrighteous communication with the wicked of the world as wicked as St. Paul explaineth himself to the 1 Cor. 5. 9 10. Corinthians I wrote unto you in an Epistle not to company with fornicatours Yet not altogether to refuse to converse with the fornicatours of this world or with the covetous or extortioners or with Idolaters for them must ye needs go out of the world but if any man that is called a brother be a fornicatour c. St. Peter takes most of the terms in our description speaking 1 Pet. 2. 9 10. of Converts to the Faith Ye are a chosen generation a Royal Priesthood an holy Nation a peculiar People that ye should shew forth the praises of God who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light c. And St. Paul to the Ephesians According as he hath chosen us in him before the Ephes 1. 4. foundation of the World that we should be holy and
be in them before and which doth more than countervail such antecedent liberty of simply teaching as was then in some manner fixed Thirdly there was in such cases as this added a Power and Right of instituting others as occasion offered which is unknown to have been in them as Evangelists From it follows that of all the forementioned kinds of Government that of the Church approached neerest to that call'd Monarchical which was only absolute and universal in Christ the Soveraign Head thereof but Ministerially under him and over the Church under their circuit Politically as proper Heads and Rulers and whatever power after extraordinary Callings by Revelation from God ceased any one dispartake of in the Church was ctrtainly at first derived from such single Persons alone however to the solemnity of such ordination others of an inferiour Order concurred thereto And as the Government of the civil World was originally without exception so far as search can be made by the most curious Antiquaries Monarchical though it were not governed by one man alone but by Civil Supream Princes of several Dominions into which the earth was parcelled So though no one Father or Bishop ever presided over all the Christian world yet several single Persons in their respective Provinces governing the Church as Principal the Government of the Church may rightly be termed Monarchical in Particular but Aristocratical as to the whole For as the Apostles were all Monarchs compared with their Proselites Converts and Churches by them founded but were but Peers compared one with another So was it with the Bishops and Patriarchs of the Church succeeding them whereby the Prophesie of Christ in St. Matthew was verified spoken not so much as some mistake it of his Heavenly Kingdome but earthly his Church and its ensuing glory Verily I say unto you that ye which M … ●● have followed me in the regeneration when the son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve Tribes of Israel That when the Church of Christ should flourish then there should be such as in lieu of the twelve Tribes of Israel should Rule as in Thrones the Church of God under the Gospel They who object against this the words of Christ in Saint Matthew Ye know that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them and M●tt 20 25. 26. they that are great exercise autority upon them But it shall not be so among you Do declare no less against Aristocratical then Monarchical Government yea all Government over the Church And their favourable g●osS in behalf of one will be as valid for that which they reject For as it was not at all the mind of Christ that there should be no Governours at all over his Church so doth it not at all appear that what was lawful for many to do was not lawful for one But here the old cheat again takes place to suppose that the Government of one is in it self tyrannical and of many free but neither Christ nor nature ever taught them how to prove this presumptuous imagination And to this may we add another such mistake from St. Peters words That men should not be Lords over Gods heritage And what then Must there be more 1 Pet. 5. 3. than one over a Church and not onely one May a company of Presbyters oblige Christians to do or believe such things and not Lord it but if by a principal Person bearing Rule this same thing be done then is the Precept violated Besides who sees not that hath not a mind to be blind That the Apostle speaks nothing at all in these words of the kind of Government but the exercise of it and abuse Surely if Episcopal Government could not choose but tyrannize and Presbyterial could do nothing but according to Scripture and equity this Objection were unanswerable otherwise not worth the mentioning much less answering as common as it is and as confidently urged And as to that Pretense intended to overthrow our prime ground of Christs institution taken from what was first actually found in the Church viz. That Imparity of Christs Ministers was not found in the Church till about an hundred and forty or fifty years after Christ when it is confessed by the Enemies of Ecclesiastical Hierarchies that it prevailed Let the Huggers of this Device First consider what a pitiful addition is made to their cause from hence seeing that it is undenyable there was a disparity all the Apostles dayes who in order excelled all Ecclesiastical Persons and that almost one hundred years were spent of the said tearm in their time So that about fifty or sixty years only this imaginary Government had its being and then was lost again for fourteen hundred and then was better lost then found and taken up again But a far worse inconvenience spoils this jest as being founded and raised only from conjecture and that conjecture upon the obscurity of those ages not so clearly known as afterwards CHAP. XXIX Of the necessity of holding visible Communion with Christs Church Knowledge of that visible Church necessary to that Communion Of the Notes to discern the true Church how far necessary Of the Nature or Condition of such Notes in General IT being so necessary as we have above shewed to be in communion with the visible Church of Christ and the Nature of things themselves being more intrinsick many times than to characterize sufficiently them to the Enquirer into them it hath been thought necessary to explain them farther by more apparent and observable notices given of them And in the Doctrine of the Church these seem to be of greatest consequence Visibility Universality or Catholickness Sanctity and Perpetuity Of all which we shall briefly speak in order yet first premising somewhat concerning Notes in General For seeing as we have said it is necessary to know the true Church from the false and the Natures of things are often-times so abstruse and hidden from us that we cannot discover them from their own Light therefore it hath been judged very reasonable to pitch upon certain outward Notes eading us unerringly to the knowledge of the thing it self And in truth I cannot wholly approve of that course chosen to certifie us and point out to us the-true Church taken from the very being of it such as are Faithful and sincere Doctrine taught therein Sacraments duly administred Worship purely performed and Discipline rightly constituted because these are rather of the very intrinsick nature and definition it self of the Church than notes and characters outward whereby the nature it self should be certainly known We all indeed without exception consent that that Church is the true Church which is thus qualified and affected believeth aright is governed aright administreth the Sacraments aright and worshippeth aright and in one word which followeth most exactly the Rules of Holy Scripture but in the Assumption and Application is all the doubt and infinite
themselves For though infinite Instances may be given of Cities and Nations which have wrung the Civil Power out of the hands of their Princes and Magistrates and pretended they would be ruled by their own Counsels and power yet could they never effect this but were constrained after all devices used to no purpose to let go their hold if not Pretensions and suffer the assumed Power to return to a more capable subject Which incapacity of using such Power is no less then an unanswerable Demonstration to me that it was never there placed by any divine Will or Right but somewhere else Now though some eminent Reformers of the Late Age have been so superfluously and in truth superstitiously nice and as is pretended jealous for Christs honour and absolute Headship over his Church that would not so much as allow the name of Government to the Church or any in it least Christ should suffer loss but administration must be the Junius de Ecclesia name signifying power and Rule exercised in the Church yet in truth all this is no better then a Superstitious fear where there is no fear For they are not names but things that are so much to be heeded And if these men in their Charge had not acted the part of Governours as well as others we might have allowed this invention for tollerable but the truth is the honour pretended to Christ and the Gentle usage of the People have ended in the same thing which the other more openly and honestly professed to do the difference being only in the Hands so acting But 't is no new thing to beguile dissetled people with new words into new orders neither will it ever be left off as common a Stratagem as it is so long as the People are people and Craft and Ambition shall spurrmen of Fortune to currie and scratch that unruly beast to the end that when they find it convenient they may get up of them and ride them at their pleasure This incapacity of all Christians to rule themselves being the same with the other necessarily inferreth a more proper subject of that Power which not being assumed but delivered any more then the Faith it self founds a distinction of Christians and the Church as ancient as the Church it self not unknown to Civil Societies For as hath been said a Kingdom or Commonwealth is said to decree and act such a thing when not the thousand part thereof so much as know any thing of it till it be done so that clearly there is a Nation Real and Representative and Formal and proper This consisteth of all Persons in that Society and every member of that Political Bodie The other of such Principal Parts of that Bodie as are in Possession of autority and power to Rule the rest and whose Acts are interpreted to be the Acts of the whole State And that the Church consisting of infinite Persons uncapable of consulting or acting Decretorily must and alwayes had certain Select Persons representing the whole which it should conclude the thing it self together with Precedents of all Places and Ages do prove The greatest arguments and most colourable are taken from the Infancy of the Church to the contrary For both Hereticks and Schismaticks endeavour at contrary conclusions from the Scripture Patrons of the Popes absoluteness argue from a Superiority or Primacy of order in St. Peter when the Church consisted it may be of twenty persons to make good the Popes pretensions to supremacy over the universal Church when it consisteth of so many Nations But to this our answer is ready First that the like power was never in St. Peter over his fellow Apostles and the Rest that is claimed by the Present Bishop of Rome Secondly That if such a Power as is asserted to St. Peter for the Popes sakehad ever been in him really yet it could be no good ground of his Successors claiming the same over the Catholick Church And that First because there is no probability of the like Gifts and Graces requisite to such Autority in the Popes of Rome as were given by Christ to St. Peter yea there are more instances to be given of the Ignorance and horrible vitiousness of Persons possessing that Chai● then in any other Patriarchal See in Christendom Secondly There is no Rule of Certainty setting aside the Personal incapacities and imperfections how far the Apostolical power was derived to their Successors but what may be taken from the end of such power which was to conserve the Church in due order of Government Devotion and Faith and this may as well and better be performed without one Persons engrossing to himself the Disposal of all things Primarily though not in the Execution Thirdly the difference is vast between the Church consisting of so few and contracted into so narrow a circuit as at the first founding of it when one man might have with great facility taken the whole management of the Church upon him and in following Ages when it was diffused into so many and far distant quarters of the Universe not to be inspected or managed by one man though an Apostle On the other side Persons of Democratical Principles and purposes finding in holy Writ that the whole Church without distinction of Persons were often assembled together and that during their such meeting matters concerning the due administration of the Church were treated of collect from thence that in right and not rather occasionally they concurred to Publick Acts of the Church but this likewise is a fallacy without any necessity of consequence as will appear from the original and orderly search made into the first Constitution and the gradual Progress of Ecclesiastical Persons and functions First then That Christ is the Head of the Church and under that General notion of Power life and motion doth communicate his influence unto his Body the Scripture is so manifest and it is so generally and willingly by all assented to that it were lost time to insist on it He is then by immediate consequence the fountain of all Power resting in that Body as doth appear from the several Appellations subordinate to that of Head attributed unto him in Scripture For Hebrews the third and first he is called The Apostle of our profession And in the Book of the Acts he is stiled that Prophet Heb. 3. 1. Acts. 3. 22. Deut. 18. 15. Luk. 4. 18. which was in Deuteronomie promised to the true Israel And an Evangelist he is made to us by his own words verifying the Prediction of Esaias upon himself Saying The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he hath anointed me to preach the Gospel And St. Peter calleth him our 1 Pet. 2. 25. Mat. 23. 10. Bishop Doctour or Master he claims as proper to himself in St. Mathew And to the Hebrews as before he is called a Priest an High priest yea lastly a Deacon or Minister for the words properly used signify the same Rom. 15. 8. thing
such as were Christians without any autority in the Church and therefore we read often of the Apostles and their Party on the one side and Brethren on the other But the Officers and Rulers of the Acts. 11. 1 12 17 15 23 16. 2. Church are not found to have any general name distinguishing them from others but were by their particular charges and Offices known to men as Apostles Elders Bishops Evangelists Deacons But afterward compendiousness of speech general cemprehension of them so distinct requiring they received their several Names not as Socinus Salmasius and some such presumptuous traders for Anarchy in the Church would have it the things themselves or being For it is granted that at first all true believers Clerus dicimur quia sors Dei sumus Hieron Item Praefat. ad Enarrat August Psal 1 Pet. 5. 3. were called indifferently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Gods Portion or Clergy as we now speak For it is very probable that St. Peter using that word which we render Clergy doth intend to comprehend thereby all Christian People as well as they who as St. Hierome saith are the Lords portion more peculiarly But with good advice afterward they who were more especially dedicated to Gods service and attended his Altar were signally called the Clergy and the other the Laity or people very agreeably to the phrase of the Old Testament where we find not only a distinction in the things themselves but in the names of such as served any ways in Gods house and those who were only Israelites at large For these were called simply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sons of the People or the Laity as we now adayes speak 2 Chron. 35 7 12. Vid. Vatab. in Locum in opposition to the Levites which discrimination in terms was thought to be introduced in Josiah's time Secondly From what is said we may conclude that even before and after this distinction all the administration of Church affairs passed through the hands of these Persons of the Clergy or Ecclesiastical Functions and that their Votes and Acts ever went under the name of the Church it may be that in the beginning of the Church when Christians had not so many advantages as after they had and their convenience of assembling was not so great but they were constrained to teach and pray and determine controversies and ordain Laws for the Church that the Laity as we now call them were present at all these but that this fortuitous presence should inferr a right nothing appears A third Conclusion may be That observing the orderly Rites used to invest any person with a Clerical Power it must necessarily follow that they who wanted them never attained the thing it self For the Author to the Hebrews asserts plainly the sacredness of Evangelical Ministring Heb. 5. 4. from the Prescriptions and practise of the Levitical saying No man takes this office upon him but he that was called of God as was Aaron and least it might be presumed that this strickness concerned the Old Law only he proceedeth to that greatest of Precedents Christ himself who though he needed not any Institution being absolutely free to all such purposes of himself yet was called of God in signal manner to shew that all that exercise such Sacred function should much more be thereunto orderly called Now to understand what this ordinary and orderly call is the better it is worth the observing how Aaron was called for so in proportionable manner ought all under the Gospel be ordained to the Ministry And here first we may note there is not the least intimation given of such a Call as is Internal upon which many vainly rest But Aaron was called not only internally by certain proper and sufficient Gifts to that Office but externally and that not of himself but of another He was called by God Now least it should be here suspected that a bare and bold presumption of being called of God without some outward evidence prooving the same might suffice to justify an Intruder of himself into the Ministry the Scripture tells us how Aaron was called of God and that is not only of God and immediately but mediately by man that is by Moses Nay farther because many content themselves with such an Ordination as comes from another not examining much what power or Right such persons have so to ordain others the Scriptures tell us that Aaron was called by another and him appointed specially by God so to do as we read Exodus the 28. 1. where Exod. 2. ● God commandeth Moses saying And take thou unto thee Aaron thy Brother and his sons with him from among the children of Israel that they may minister unto me in the Priests Office Here is their Election or Vocation Their consecration or ordination followeth afterward described particularly according to its several Ceremonies in the next chapter So that we see the great Example or Figure of Evangelical ordination directeth to such a form as ought to be of God by the hands of some who are thereunto appointed And if any should here interpose that Moses himself was no Priest properly himself though he were of the Tribe of Levi and yet he consecrated Priests being himself rather a Civil Magistrate and from hence argue a power in Lay-men especially Magistrates to do the same now adayes I answer here indeed doth Calvins defence of himself and such as are in like condition take place of an Ordinary call and an Extraordinary For before God had setled a Rule and Order in his Church the extraordinary and immediate hand of God did appoint persons to minister before It was therefore first of all an Extraordinary Act in God to call Moses rather than any others to direct and Rule his Church it was next an Extraordinary Act in him to separate the whole Tribe of Levi to Minister before him but from that time forward there was no such thing heard of as an Extraordinary Call Secondly I answer that God prescribing to us Rules and Precedents doth not thereby so tie his own hands as he doth ours but when he pleaseth he may create Persons in Extraordinary manner to what ends he will And his Autority infallibly granted to those we call now Lay-men is altogether sufficient to make a Priest of what Order or dignity soever he shall be But until such infallible Proofs of either Gods immediate Calling which is Extraordinary indeed or his immediate enabling or empowring any other Person not having in the ordinary Course established in his Church received such a power be given all such Extraordinary assuming of the Ministery on a mans self is more then one way Extraordinary and to be rejected as void And with such no good and conscientious Christian ought to Communicate as with Priests that is as Offering the Spiritual Sacrifice of Prayer and Praise unto God as a Legitimate and Publick Minister of God or Mediatour of the People or that Mistical Sacrifice in the
be he no where affirms but saith expresly I do not therefore affirm because I oppose it not But the supream folly of cutting off scores hundreds and thousands of years of torments by Indulgences upon earth was such an imposture as could never enter into the head of any of the sober Ancients and not to be endured amongst Christians Many are the Suffrages of the Fathers to that of the word of God Blessed are the dead which dye in the Lord from henceforth yea saith the Spirit Rev. 14. 13. that they may rest from their Labours and their works do follow them Implying a direct and comfortable passage from this miserable to that happy life in heaven And whereas they say That they who go to Purgatory may be said to dye in Christ because they shall at length be delivered by Christ How can that stand with such excessive pains there suffered to which none on earth are equal either in degree or continuance How can these wretched souls be said to rest from their labours and sorrows Must they not make God a mocker of his servants in comforting them against their affections in this world by telling them they shall one day be delivered from them and go to greater in Purgatory Besides What grounds do they find in the Word of God or the word of the primitiye Fathers which makes a a twofold state in Christ One of them who by Saintly lives pass immediately to bliss Another of them who are in a middle state and are partly miserable and partly blessed But to their prime argument the Answer is easie We are not generally purged wholly from sin nor have we made full satisfaction of punishments for our sins in this Life unless by Martyrdom or some heroical and eminent Sanctity Both are false which are here supposed First That Martyrdom for Christ or the most holy and exemplary life lead here in this world do so perfectly purge us that we need not further cleansing Again it is denyed that true and sincere repentance acted in this life both in forsaking sin and in true conversion unto God sufficeth not to purge us from all our sins in this life as to the guilt and penalty of them and the odious stain rendring the soul unaccepted to God though men arive not to the perfection of Martyrdom or the eminencie of Sanctity attainable here as St. John witnesseth But if we walk in the light as he is in the light 1 John 1. 7. we have fellowship one with another and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin He doth not here intend to speak of the supreamest sanctity only but of that general state of grace and holy life in which whoever is the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth him from all his sins and dying in that state needs no more cleansing to make him capable of entring immediately into everlasting bliss which is far from all torment though not so consummate as to be capable of no addition at the Resurrection when the Body shall be re-united to the Soul Nor doth this take away what of prerogatives is justly due to Martyrdom or eminent Holiness in this Life because there remains proper to them first a greater measure of comfortable assurance of Gods favour and bliss hereafter and a much greater and higher degree of glory when possessed than inferiour degrees of holiness here can lay claim to And this is sufficient encouragement next to the pure intention of holiness it self and Gods glory to any Christian to abound in good works knowing that his 1 Cor. 15. labour is not in vain in the Lord. And thus much of those we call Aequivocal Sacraments and improper For though all true Sacraments are ordinarily necessary to salvation yet all things ordinarily necessary to salvation are not Sacraments as Repentance which in its nature consisting of true Contrition of heart and conversion unto God and thereby putting us into capacity of mercy from God is not pretended to be a Sacrament until the Priest acteth his part towards the Penitent And if Contrition thus understood or Repentance be no Sacrament surely neither can Confession or Satisfactions which are said to be parts of Repentance be Sacraments nothing being in the parts which may not be in the whole But so moderate sound Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops a course hath our Church taken as to call them Sacramentals as being above the order of general acts and duties of Piety and not amounting to the dignity of the two proper ones Baptism and the Eucharist CHAP. XL Of Baptism The Author Form Matter and Manner of Administration of it The General necessity of it The Efficacy in five things Of Rebaptization that it is a prophanation but no evacuation of the former Of the Character in Baptism MANY Acceptations are found of the word Baptism in Holy Scripture which I leave to others who have collected them and betake my self to the thing it self commonly understood by it And thus Baptism is a Sacrament of the New Testament instituted by Christ consisting of the outward signs of Water and the Word and the inward Grace of Regeneration and remission of sins and outward Communion with the Church of Christ all which I conceive to be contained in our Church Catechism where it is first described by its outward Sign to be Water wherein the Party is baptized in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost And by its inward Grace to be A death unto sin and a new birth unto righteousness for being by nature born in sin we are hereby made the Children of Grace This Sacrament then of baptism is said truly to succeed that of Circumcision and to have the same Spiritual effect upon the Spiritual and inward man which that had over the Outward The agreement and difference between which two will sufficiently appear from the comparing of this as we now shall explain it with that which we shall do by considering the Form the Matter The Subject The Efficacy and the Minister of Baptism The Form we have propounded to us by Christ when he first instituted the same and commanded his Disciples to go and teach all nations baptizing Mat. 28. 19. them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you From whence it doth appear that taking Baptism simply for the Act it consisteth in that form of words here prescribed by Christ and the outward Action of baptizing with Water But taken more Concretely and complexly for all things concurring to that Sacrament essentially It is a Covenant made between God and Man whereby is promised on Gods part remission of sins and salvation and on mans part Faith and Observation of the terms of the Gospel as St. Mark more expresly hath it He that believeth Mar. 16. 16. Eph. 2. 12. and is baptized shall be
upon us it is evident that they are to be understood not of the ordinary Baptism by Water but the extraordinary of the Holy Ghost sometimes preventing Baptism as appears in the Acts more than once Other reasons out of Scripture Act. 10. 41. brought to this purpose do prove only that to repeat Baptism is needless but not damnable For the Ethiopians who are reported to Baptize Breerwoods Enquirit themselves once a year on the same day that Christ was Baptized do it as the History of them tells not so much implying an invalidity in one Baptism as a convenience to bring to mind the Baptism of Christ on Epiphany perhaps reckoning the precept of Christ given to Communicate in Remembrance of him might hold to the obliging them to repeat Baptism in remembrance of his Baptism CHAP. XLI Of the second Principal Sacrament of the Gospel the Eucharist Its names Its parts Internal and External It s matter Bread and Wine And the necessity of them Of Leavened and Vnleavened Bread Of Breaking the Bread in the Sacrament VVE now come to the Second most proper and necessary Sacrament known by several names as that of The Supper of the Lord in our Church Catechisms not because our Lord Christ made his Supper of it or ever intended we should but because at his Last Supper upon the Paschal Lamb and the conclusion of it he instituted this for his Apostles and all Faithful peoples spiritual benefit as a Spiritual Repast or Supper nourishing them to eternal Life In answer to which we read of the Promise of Christ in the Revelations Behold Rev. 3. 20. I stand at the door and Knock if any man hear my voice and open the door I will come into him and will Sup with him and he with me And St. Paul more expresly to the Corinthians When ye come together therefore 1 Cor. 11. 20. into one place this is not to eat the Lords Supper distinguishing hereby this Sacred Supper from the more ordinary communion which those first Christians had in their Charitable meetings to eat and drink together to their mutual edification and comfort From whence their Cavils seem to be groundless who with some scorn reject this name in use much amongst the Reformed fearing somewhat derogatory to those Sacred Mysteries And upon the same grounds likewise do they shun the name of the Lords Table lest the word Altar which seems to them more sacred should be less accounted of And yet without reason For surely where St. Paul calls those holy Mysteries The Table of the Lord he speaketh not properly but Metonymically 1 Cor. 10. 21. not of the Material Table on which they were placed but of the Adjuncts which were the Sacramental Elements Though it be plain that from this Supper of the Lord the Table furnished with it took its denomination of the Lords And that not only in Scriptures but amongst Primitive writers too And Altar of the Lord it was called only Metaphorically not properly by both no otherwise than the Lords day was called by way of Analogy The Sabbath day From the Form used at the celebration of those Mysteries it was called Eucharist which was Thanksgiving as Mathew 26. 26 27. From the Effect which was double Communion with Christ and with the Members of Christs Body the Faithful it was termed Communion 1 Cor 10. 16. From the Matter of which it consisted The Body and Blood of Christ Corin ibid. And many more less considerable appellations have been received in the Church to be passed over in this short view wherein we are rather to enquire into the Nature of it in these Particulars viz 1. The Author 2. The Matter 3. The Form 4. The Ends and Effects For the Author It is without controversy Christ himself the histories of the Gospels plainly so affirming Mat. 26. 26. Mar. 14. 22. Luc. 22. 19. And St. Paul to the Corinthians 1 Epist 11. 23. It having nothing herein peculiar to it it being necessary to all Sacraments so properly called that they be Instituted of God or Christ as is above proved The Greatest contention of all is concerning the Subject-matter of this Blessed Sacrament not in a few words to be opened or composed The clearest way to proceed in this disquisition is First to consider the External Part and then the Internal The External are the Signs or Elements appointed by Christ to insinuate and represent unto us his Passion or as his own express words are to bring to remembrance his death and Passion This do in remembrance of me And what is here only recorded by the Evangelists Luk. 22. 19. to have been said of the Bread St. Paul affirmeth to have been likewise spoken of the Cup Do this as often as ye drink it in remembrance 1 Cor. 11-25 of me declaring unto us the use and end of the Institution of these Signs But before we go any further it will be necessary in our way to distinguish the twofold most principal and common acceptation of the word Sacrament here For sometimes it is taken Complexly for the whole ministration of the Lords Supper and at other times only for the Material Part of it which again is sometimes taken for the External or signifying Part the Elements and sometimes for the Internal or things by them signified which are the Body and Blood of Christ and that not simply and absolutely but as under the consideration of his Bitter death and Passion and that for our sakes The Elemental and External parts of this Sacrament are to be considered two ways First before the celebration or consecration of the same and then after First then it is generally agreed to on all sides that our Saviour Christ took natural Bread and natural Wine most commonly in use in those Countreys and therefore in all reason this ought to be a constant binding prescription to all that minister and use that Sacrament and not to vary from the very kind used by him when ever it can with any tolerable care and cost be obtained But seeing that Christ in all probability without any scrupulous choice of Wheat or Rye or Barley or any one single Grain made use of that which was in ordinary use at Meals amongst them and there being no express word which of these he took there appears no reason why any one of which Bread may be made for the service and life of Man may not be taken to this purpose And especially considering that the end of the Institution which is said to be the representing of Christs death and Passion and the affecting us thereby may no less be performed by the one sort than the other Yet where the constant practice of the Church confirmed by positive Injunctions hath determined the kind it can be no ways free or safe for any unnecessarily to vary from that It is of much greater difficulty to determine What is to be done in the cases of such both extreme Northern as
be made apparent in how many and great things they have degenerated in their Doctrine and Worship since it pleased God to withdraw his holy Spirit from that Church upon their rejecting of the true Messias sent them and to translate it to the Church of the Gentiles And no wonder that they who observe not that now should argue against it as a thing not to be done and moreover deny that ever it was believed or practised by their Forefathers for there remains no other way to excuse themselves in their present error but to maintain that it was never otherwise held This is a common evasion of all Hereticks and Sectaries But that the Scriptures of the Old Testament contained this Doctrine in substance though the more perspicuous and glorious manifestation of the same was reserved for the New is not to be denied especially if we consider how that many of their own Doctors and Rabbies have so interpreted the same And some have admired the Hebrew Language as the holy Tongue not so much as some of moderner standing amongst them have given out because of the neat and modest expression of things of impure and obscene nature for it is very plain that the most obscene things are there as broadly and manifestly expressed as elsewhere but from the matter which it treats of generally very divine and particularly from the nature of that Tongue in every word of which being a Radix or original the Mystery of the Trinity is implied in that it consists but of three principal Letters which Letters make but one word But there are more sure words of Prophesie than they and such are these together with the Comment and approbation of the Chaldee Paraphrast Gen. 3. v. 8. it is said They heard the voice of the Gen 3. 8. Lord God walking in the Garden which words Onkelos renders thus And they heard the voice of the Word of the Lord God where we see that Voice and Word are distinguished the one being taken for the Word spoken the other for the Word subsisting or personal And again v. 22. where the Hebrew hath And the Lord God said c. Jonathans or as some more properly the Hierusalem Targum hath The Word of the Lord said And the same Hierusalem Targum on Deuteronomy the 33. 7. hath The Word of the voice of the Lord heard Judah where the Original and other Translations have Hear Lord or receive Lord the voice of Judah And so in other places which doth argue a Personality ascribed unto the Word of God Which doth farther appear for that the action of Creation extending the Heavens and Repenting is attributed unto the Word of God But I leave the asserting of the Mystery of the Trinity from the Scriptures of the Old Testament interpreted by the learnedst and most renowned of the Jewish Doctors to such who have made it their design to convince them from testimonies of their own Authors as Petrus Galatinus and more exactly Josephus de Voisin in his Comments on Prigro Christianae Fidei and especially de Trinitate I shall only add here that memorable passage in Bibliander out of the Jewish Rabbies upon that place in Bibliander de Paschate Israel Gen. 28. 11. Gen. 28. And he lighted upon a certain place and tarried there all night because the Sun was set and he took of the stones of the place and put them for his pillows and lay down in that place to sleep Where some Rabbies saith Bibliander do understand that he took two stones but others as Rabbi Nechemias that he took three and in this manner prayed to God If God shall write his Name upon me as he did his Name upon mine Ancestors let all these become one and he found them all one By which type of the stone they give to understand God to be the Original of all things for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in Hebrew is a stone implies in a mystery the Trinity for in Aben Ab intimates the Father Ben signifies the Son and ● or N. Neshanna or Spirit Thus they Which their interpretation whether it hath not more of wit than solid Argument I am not here to determine it sufficing our present purpose to shew that the Doctrine of the Trinity is no invention of Christians as moderner Jews vainly give out for if their forefathers mention the same though their grounds may not be of the soundest it argues they knew and received it Other Texts from the Old Testament implying this Mystery are chiefly these 2 Sam. 23. 2. Isa 48. 16 17. and chap. 61. 1. and chap. 63. 9. Psal 33. 6. compared with Joh. 11. 1 2 3. Haggai 2. 5. compared with Gen. 1. 26. Isa 6 3 c. Concerning all which it is to be observed First That it is not to be expected the testimonies of the Old Testament whose design it was to deliver all things more covertly and obscurely should be altogether so literally and expresly taken as that none other may be found as proper as that sence given by Christians but it may suffice that an apt accommodation may be made to the confirmation of our Faith and that by the chief enemies to it Secondly That the Tradition of the Jewish Church differed from the historical or literal sence Hence our Saviour Christ proves the Messias to be God out of Psalm 110. v. 1. The Lord said Psal 110. Matth. 22. 42. unto c. arguing to this effect He who was greater than David himself from whom the Messias should come must needs be God David calling him in Spirit Lord but David in Spirit calls the Messias his Lord whereas David being himself absolute Soveraign had no mortal greater than he therefore he must be God This was then generally received amongst the wisest of them That the Messias was there intended though the words might be capable of a more literal sence And the like may we judge of the Arguments of St. Paul drawn out of the Old Testament to confirm the Doctrine of the New and particularly this for it is confessed that he bringeth many proofs as do also the other sacred Pen-men out of the Books of the Old Testament which have a literal sence much differing from that purpose to which they are alledged But it is certain that the ancient Jews did maintain two sences a Literal and a Mystical and that St. Paul being educated in the prime Traditions and Mysteries of their Divinity used them according to the known sence of the learned For otherwise it had been as easie then for the Jews to have put in their exceptions against his Doctrine as now it is for Jews to cavil at them But besides the Autority of the Old Testament principally to be used against Jews the Autority of the New must be enforced against the Heresies of Christians against this great Mystery Go ye saith Christ in St. Matthew and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father Matth.
That grace is the cause of such special acts of God Neither doth any prevision in God of acceptation of grace of complyance with and obedience to Gods will move to Elect or Call any man and that upon that sure ground of Thomas because Thom. 3. Q. 2. 11. c. there can be no possible way of meriting without Grace for Grace is the first Principle or beginning of all merit and nothing can be a cause or so much as conduce to its own being But the inclining of God to such a thing must come under the notion of meriting or to speak more agreeably to our ears doing well before God And therefore they much more truly may be said to be the direct cause of Grace And this not as some Pelagian Hereticks supposed at last by constraint of argument for the more ready and easie operation of mans will but simply to will that which is good Nay St. Austine saith and that truly the same of mans Understanding De Spir. Litera ca. 7. as Will. For he holds forth his mercy not because they do know but to the end they may know Neither because they are of a right heart but that they may be right of heart doth he hold forth his Righteousness whereby he justifieth the ungodly So that provision of good Works or Faith as the reason inclining God to confer Grace simply is altogether inconsistent with the Holy Scriptures and the freeness of Gods grace asserted plentifully therein But there is another and farther tearm of Gods Predestination Election and Vocation which is to his Kingdome of Glory and the Reward not of the merit but work of Faith and Holiness And to these no doubt but we are ordained and elected and called as the end by those means This is that St. Paul intended in that place to the Romans above quoted and in the second chapter telling us God will render to every man according Rom. 2. v. 6. 10. to his deeds and glory honour and peace to every man that worketh good to the Jew first and also to the Gentiles Christ tells us in the twentieth chapter of St. Matthew that to set on his right hand and on his left in Matth. 20. 23. Matth. 25. 34 35 36 37 38. his Kingdom shall be given to them for whom it is prepared and in the 25th who they are for whom it is so prepared from the foundation of the world viz. the Righteous and moreover who are the Righteous namely such who abounded in good works there particularly mentioned And to this may be referred most of those speeches at large falling from the most eminent Fathers of the Church before the time of Austine wherein they affirm that God elected some and not others upon the fore-sight of good works in them and obedience others rejecting for their disobedience Thus spake Origen thus Chrysostome Nazianzene Ambrose and Hierome too who wrote as expresly as Austine against such a freedom of the will which should give any occasion to God to confer his first Grace on man all meaning no more than the election of man to glory upon the intuition of Grace Now if this opinion should be strained to the highest it would not rise to this that God did choose any man simply and primarily for his works sake or his faith fore-seen for as is shewed God elected simply to that and not for that but the most may be wrung out of it is too great a propinquity to Merit But neither doth this follow seeing they who say God in such an order i. e. after grace upon such an occasion as those good works of which God is no less a principle cause than Man doth choose to confer glory on a man or ordain him to life do not say that such fore-seen works bear a proportion to such glory or reward The Scriptures which plainly affirms the former exclude the latter making it a matter of free promise in the original and the gift of God together with mans work as especially to the Romans St. Paul doth Now being made free from sin and become Rom. 6. 22 23. servants to God ye have your fruit unto holiness and the end everlasting life For the wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ There is nothing therefore more consonant to reason nothing better reconciles the seeming jarrs of the ancient Fathers before and about the time of Austin with that more wary and exact state and defence of the Question concerning Gods election of man upon pre-vision of Faith and Obedience alwayes including Christs obedience and merits and the freeness of his Grace in electing And nothing reconciles the Scriptures more clearly than the opinion which allows God to be the sole reason of his own will and the author of his Grace of Sanctification and Salvation also and yet holdeth such an order between these that God doth not choose any man to his free and immerited Grace of Salvation but through and upon consideration I do not say valuable and proportionable in weight and worth but in nature of the state of Sanctification going before Does not St. Paul render it as a reason why God was to be glorified in his Saints when he came to take vengeance of his adversaries Because our testimony among you was believed And did not the Master of 2 Thes 1. 10. Mat. 20. 2. the Vineyard who is Christ fore-ordain a penny to the Labourers in consideration of their labour foregoing Doth not St. James say the very Jam. 1. 12. same in these words Blessed is the man that endureth temptations for when he is tried he shall receive the Crown of life which the Lord hath promised to them that love him Surely that which man promiseth upon a condition he doth not ordinarily bestow before that condition be performed but ordains it to follow upon it And to the same purpose speaks St. John too in the Apocalypse Be thou faithful unto death and I will Rev. 2. 10. give thee a Crown of life But perhaps they think there remains some force in Calvins argument still against this and that God must be obnoxious to that imprudence that ordinary men are not if he did not first propound the end and then make all means to conform and conduce to it so that man should first be ordian'd to his end of glory or misery before he is All this I grant and yet grant them nothing and this is all they are like to get from confounding the inward and secret acts of God with his outward or the Decrees of God with the execution of them as Twiss notoriously doth in Twissius Animadvers in Collat. Arm. cum Jun. p. 1 2. his entrance to the Animadversions on the Conference between Arminius and Junius It is certain that God doth decree a man to his end before he is but doth he ordain him to such an end before he ordains him to
in general concerned himself in the marriage of others And to declare how that state was not at all inconsistent with a state Clerical of twelve Disciples John 2. 1 2. which Christ chose to minister for him Eleven are supposed to be married persons or at least to have been married formerly To answer which by saying that after they were chosen they forsook their wives is to evade and not really to answer First because it had been as easie for Christ surely to have picked out a dozen persons free from the knowledge of women as to make choice of such as were wedded had he judged any incapacity in these to the Evangelical Ministery But secondly do we find any thing in special prescribed by Christ for such separation from wives more than for other Christians who were not Ministers of the Gospel For of all faithful Christians it is spoken in certain junctures that whoever forsaketh not Father and Mother and Brethren and Sisters and Wise and Children for Christs sake cannot be his Disciple And there is no rule but common necessity and prudence not Divine prescription which requires any man for the Gospels sake to forsake his Wife rather than his Father and Mother Yet that the Apostles did actually absent rather than separate themselves from their Wives and that others who enter'd into the ministration to the Church under the Apostles foreseeing what St. Paul expresseth the present distress of the Church as well in regard of the 1 Cor. 7. 26. persecutions of the Church as the paucity of Preachers the greatness of the Harvest and the small number of Labourers did decline the state of marriage is very probable because they were required by Christs Injunction to Go and teach all Nations which travelling life ill could consist with cohabitation with Wives And therefore it must be given them Gratis and not by the merits of any reason o● grounds they can show that that such relinquishing of their Wives was either total or upon conscience made of the thing it self Doth not St. Paul say expresly in the words before those now touched Concerning Virgins I have no commandment of the Lord If such as served at the Altar were to be excepted surely he 1 Cor. 7. 25. would not have left the Rule so general as we find speaking only according to humane prudence And though they search with their best eyes they shall not be able to find in any other writings of the Apostles one Text o Scripture obliging Bishops or Priests to singleness of life more than those of the Laity unless they argue from reason That Virginal Chastity is more severe more pure more spiritual than conjugal which is yielded and therefore more obliging the Clergy who should be more spiritual persons then others all which I deny not but say that this binds them no more from marriage than it doth from wine and strong drink which if none of the Clergy ever used they were the more to be commended unless in such cases as St. Paul advises Timothy For their stomachs sake and often infirmities And thus is Bellarmin's first proof laid Bellarm. de Clericis l. 1. c. 19. The sole grounds then of unmarried state of Priests must be fetch'd from Tradition and Reason of both which we shall presume to speak a word or two Apostolical Tradition is pretended but not trusting much to that recourse is had to the Old Testament from certain allegorical interpretations made of some Rites in Moses's Law which may do well in the Church where they used them to perswade but ill in the Schools to prove the same as a necessary duty The argument taken from the custom of the Priest abstaining from their Wives during the time of their ministration I do really 1 Chron. 24. believe to have had an influence upon Primitive Christians Judaizing in many other things of like nature to restrain them from the use of their Wives upon solemn ministrations But this was without Law or Canon freely undertaken and embraced as was Celebacie it self at first until about the year 385. Siricius Bishop of Rome made a constitution that it should and ought to be and that on that ground And that the inferiour Orders such as Ostiaries Readers Exorcists and Acolythites should only be permitted to marry But Alexander the third about the year 1160 proceeded according to the method of that Church to shut them also out the doors of Orders that should presume to marry But all that was done against those in greater or sacred Orders in the Church for more than three hundred years after Christ was to deny such as were married access to the Altar by way of ministration who from that time abstained not from their Wives as did the Council of Arles and some in Spain Only a custom prevailed very generally and anciently to suffer none who were in those called Sacred Orders such as were Bishops and Priests and Deacons to marry after they were so ordained for if they did they were dismissed of their Office or their Wives The Eastern Church ever accepted of married persons into the Clergy and at length understanding the Apostle Let the Bishops be the husbands of one wife as a Precept rather than a Caution that they should be husbands of no more then one which in all likelyhood the truest sense in the Sixth Council In Trullo decreed they only should be received into Priestly Orders who were married And therefore all antiquity for twelve hundred years together fails them in this that it was otherwise then voluntary that married Priests lived from their Wives who had before orders or that married Men might not be made Priests though 't is confessed they preferred unmarried Persons before them until that Sixth Council which for that reason amongst others Bellarmine calls a Profane Synod and Baronius impious such a great veneration have they for the Autority of the Church when it speaks not their sense Yet as we are far from giving an exact and full account of this long controversie here so are we so far as I can Divine at the judgment of our Church willing to accommodate the matter with others that can digest any thing but their own stout devises to acknowledge a Power in the Church to bind or loose her sons of the Clergy to an unmarried state or to leave them free For to aggravate matters to that height as to make it absolute tyranny or Antichristian and to be against the word of God which saith Marriage is honourable in all things and the like implyes more of the weakness of the Arguer than strength in the Argument more of spite and passion than ingenuity or soberness For 't is answered very sufficiently marriage is not condemned but virginity commended before it Marriage is not at all declared to be evil when Celebacie is said to be much better Marriage is not condemned when certain persons are condemned for marrying Doth a Father that should cast off
And that Oraculum by notice whereof the Bishop of Rome with the Senate of Cardinals granted to the Sclavonian Nation that they should use the tongue of their Country in sacred actions seemeth to pertain to all Nations named Christians Omnis spiritus laudet Dominum omnis lingua confiteatur ei Let every spirit praise the Lord and every tongue confess to him And Thomas Cajetane a man doubtless most learned and acute wrote in a certain place It were better for the edification of the Church publick prayers to be said in the vulgar tongue in the Church which the people may hear than in the Latin tongue And when he was for this reproved by some he answered He built upon the foundation of the Apostles in his fourteenth Chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians c. Thus far and much more followeth out of that grave man to this purpose So that in one of those things which convince the Church of Rome of Innovation and obstinacie in novelties as nothing need more be said against it to that end nothing being said more for it in the upshot of all Disputes but that for some time it hath been in use there and the Trentine Convention hath Azorus Institut Mor. l. 8. c. 26. Salmer in 1 Cor. 16. Disp 30. made all sure according to their manner by decreeing it inconvenient that Divine Offices should commonly be in the vulgar tongue as Azorius writeth and as Salmeron It anathematizes such as will not be content with the three tongues in which the super scription was written upon the Cross of Christ Which is a fansie without any firmness at all it being certain no such thing was intended thereby and evident that the Hebrew tongue was scarce ever used in Christian services though the Syriack hath been And it is not agreed whether of the two was the Language but this we rest not on nor can the Romanists But when they have turned every stone to little purpose they come to that which will never fail them in this or any other point the determination of their Church and practise of the same which upon no accounts must be violated for that were to loose or hazard all as Azorius in the place fore-cited doth with little modesty and less advantage to his cause profess and answering this question Whether the vulgar tongue might not be indulged to Hereticks petitioning for it and for the peace of the Church saith I answer Councils and Fathers and the Church were never wont to yield to such like Hereticks demands But this he proves in matters quite of a different nature as if when the Fathers would hear of no accommodation with Arius Eutycheus Nestorius holding notorious heresies against Christ even when they would have introduced some verbal agreement they could be precedents to oppose that wherein if it were false can consist no heresie but is true and most generally was practised by all the Fathers and Churches at first and so continued for eight hundred years And therefore he speaks more to this purpose in these words following If it should be granted to Lutherans and Calvinists that they should celebrate Divine Service in their vulgar tongue they would afterward give out that they had got their wills yea that the Church had changed her opinion and left off her ancient custom as contrary to Scripture and so charge the Church with erring and would exult with incredible joy and gladness over it c. This is in truth the very same reason which our grave Puritans render why they conform not to the Church in her Service whenas they confess they have nothing of sin to object against the thing it self viz. They should be judged of mutability and levity should thereby weaken their Ministry in the esteem of their people which in all probability they borrowed from their Father Calvin one of whose reasons against the moderation Calvin Epist of Melancthon was that if they should make any correction in that Reformation which was so hastily hudled up they should weaken their Ministry The reasonableness of which I leave to others to judge of But rejecting the common reasons all of which we are not here to examine of Papists we shall freely oblige them to give better grounds of the Liturgies in unknown tongues than may be ordinarily found amongst them though no sufficient can be given And one is the great veneration had to the traditions of the Ancients in worshipping God not that anciently any instance can be given that may be a precedent to the corruptions of these times but that having with sober grave and holy advice framed a Liturgy in any one tongue they were very scrupulous how they made any alteration therein though of words only and therefore that which is vulgarly spoken altering daily and that which was written remaining altogether unchanged in words tract of time bred a diversity between the one and the other But this we demand of our Adversaries what one president for many hundred years together they can produce where at the first institution of publick Service it was so contriv'd that nothing of the vulgar language should be taken into it There is a vast difference between a passive and an active and purposed inconvenience The ancient predecessours of the Roman Church never intended that their Latin Service should be hid or unknown from the common people which many generations after followed yet so it must needs fall out in time But they who at this day plant Churches in both Indies and obtrude their Latine tongue upon the people there and who deny liberty to other Provincial Churches in Europe and elsewhere to celebrate in their known Language do purpose mischief unto such Christians and become Schismatical in not only not redressing themselves according to the Rule of their fore-fathers whom they should much more imitate in ordering their service so that the Common Christian might understand the same as primitively and for a long time they did than in sticking so severely to the bare Letters and Syllables they used not making conscience of far more scandalous practices in altering the service it self in matter by absurd additions and detractions but with denunciation of Excommunication against such Churches as shall presume to redress that evil of ignorance and render Christians intelligent of what they do But I have been of opinion that the vulgar have been no small cause of this great superstition and inconvenience to themselves In that in process of time their devotion slacking in timely repairing to the Church and in due demeanor in the Church neglecting to concur with the Minister of God and to reciprocate with him and almost deserting the Service by coldness sloth and indevotion the Priest was constrained perhaps with a Deacon or Clerk only to perform the service alone And truly let such people look to their modern teachers who have instilled such ungracious opinions into them as to take them off
from an hearty and diligent answer and reply to the Minister and thank themselves if ever they be denied the understanding the publique worship of God For is there not much reason that the service should forsake them who forsake that And that they who will not concern themselves reverently and devoutly as they ought to do in it should be made uncapable of so doing by such an invention as this I know they of the Sectaries as their writings testifie can be content the Common people should say Amen at the last as if St. Paul had indeed intended no more than that one word whereas in all probability he intended not that word at all in terms but such a constant and general suffrage as might be implied in that word and yet that word very laudably used in the conclusion of several prayers It may I should think put them to the blush to consider how herein they vary from the whole practice of ancient Churches as I could particularly show and give us no reason why they presume so sacrilegiously to defraud the People I have I confess met in some of their writings such an one as can scarce be wondred at enough coming from them For they say it may give some occasion Account of the Conference at c. to the Laity to invade the Office of the Minister Priest they would have said if they dar'd to speak so in Publique And is not this wonderful and ridiculous both that they who have by their own Principles quite destroyed the ancient Hierarchy of the Church so far as power would enable them and by their practice opened a way for all comers into the Ministry by defending Extraordinariness of Vocation should be more zealous than any Hierarchical persons in either Ancient or Modern days for the Dues and Rights of the Ministry This surely can have no good meaning as it hath no good reason seeing all that the Laity doth in such cases is only to follow and not to lead as Pastours do and to answer the call of others and not to give any law or word to any Is there any fear that the common people should ascend to the throne when they give their approbation by shout and applause to the Oration of their King made from thence There ciprocation of the people was never looked upon otherwise than a suffrage and an ●●●●ance and argument of the inward affection born by them to the worship of God performed by the Priest and a proof of their communion with him So that very early in the Church it was constituted that no such publick Service should be performed in the Church where Consecrat Dist 1. there were not two at least to make answer to the Priest And as there was never before these prevaricating Sectaries any fear that the Deacon should invade the Priests office because he made answer to him so neither that the people should usurp either because they replyed to both as innumerable instances may prove take this amongst many which I could add to them already collected by Vicecomes In the Aethiopian Mass which bears the name of Joseph Vicecom Observ Eccl. Tom. 3. l. 1. c. 14. the Universal Canon thus speaks the Deacon Bow the knee People Before thee O Lord we bow it and praise thee The Assistent to the Priest saith as followeth Lord Lord c. The People replyes the same Then the Assistent of the Priest or rather Bishop for so the word Sacerdos and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly used signifies follow the Prayer Lord c. The Deacon says Arise to Prayer The People Lord have mercy upon us c. Thus and much more anciently Now for the credit of the Roman Church and much more for the Puritan who agrees with it herein hear what follows in Vicecomes This custom is long since antiquitated in the Latin Church a custom being brought in that some one of the number of Clerks should answer to the Priest in the sacred ministration of the Mass Which when it first began may well be doubted by reason of the scarcity of Writers who treat of it But if I may use my conjecture it was but a little before Beroaldus his dayes which Beroaldus I take to be him who lived about the year 1480 because he is the first that I can find who makes mention thereof in a Manuscript of Ceremonies which is extant in the Library of the Canons of the great Church c. By which it may be seen which are most popish the Church of England in its publick Liturgy commending and prescribing this ancient custom and laudable or Sectaries who have conspired with Papists to abolish it and exclude it out of their Service CHAP. XI Of the Circumstances of Divine Worship and first of the proper Place of Divine Worship called the Church the manner of worshipping there Of the Dedication of Churches to God their Consecration and the Effects of the same That no man can convert any part of the Church to his private use without profanation of it and Sacriledge Against the abuse of Churches in the Burial of dead Bodies erecting Tombs and enclosing them in Churches or Chancels Rich men have no more right to any part of the Church than the Poor The Common Law can give no Right in such Cases THERE are two very considerable circumstances in most Moral and Divine Actions Place and Time which have great influence upon the goodness and evil of an action And we have already so far touched the former as to assert the Excellencie of a Place Publick above the Private Closet or Domestick Rooms Now it is requisite we should enquire into the condition of such publick places as we call Temples or Churches omitting here Sic ergo appellamus Ecclesiam Basilicam quâ continetur populus c. Aug. Ep. 157. the various names and significations and acceptations as more proper for larger and learneder Treatises And yet we must not omit the distinction of Church into Proper and Improper as Austin doth thus use it For so saith he we call the Temple Basilica the Church wherein is contained the people which are truly called the Church as that by the name Church that is The place is called Gods Temple or Church because the company and congregation of Gods people which is properly called the Church doth there assemble themselves on the days appointed Homil. Ch. of Engl. Of the place c. p. 126. the people contained in the Church we should signifie the place which contains c. And to prevent all mistakes we confess we here mean that opprobriously called The Steeple-house as no bodies house but as we believe the House of God by institution and designation however it proves many times by Hereticks and Schismaticks intrusion and usurpation the House of the Enemy to God But the Kings Palace is still the Kings though Rebels and Usurpers possess themselves by violence and injustice of the same And that
a good while after So that the same difficulty is in reference to the Sabbath and it and is thus solved by Calvin himself That there were certain previous injunctions given Calvin Harmon in Pent. particularly and more rudely by God concerning the observation of certain Rites before that more exact delivery of them by God to Moses on Mount Sinai And as alwayes a day or time was allotted so likewise some special place separated from common uses as that called here the Tabernacle to the service of God For had there been any proper weakly day appointed by God before Moses surely we should have found some little mention thereof in the History of Moses from the Creation to his days but not a word of any such thing do we find to that purpose CHAP. XIII Of the Institution of the Lords Day That it was in part of Apostolical and partly Ecclesiastical Tradition Festival Days and Fasting derived unto us from the same Fountain and accordingly to be observed upon the like grounds Private Prayers in Families to the neglect of the Publique Worship unacceptable to God Of the Obligation all Priests have to pray daily according to their Office Of the Abuse of Holy days in the Number and unjustifiable occasions of them Of the Seven Hours of Prayer approved by the Ancient Church and our First Reformers Mr. Prinne's Cavils against Canonical Hours refuted THAT the Institution of the Lords day hath no known foundation from the Command of God or Christ may be collected from what is said But that the Apostles and Church Apostolical did by their example and practice commend it to following generations of Christians I acknowledge most true But still there remains a knot to be untied about the force of that Constitution whether it was only of Custom or Precept or all the Obligation proceeded from the decrees of the Church after the Apostles For direct Precept we find little or no Grounds in Scripture For Practice Apostolical and Custom upon that descending to posterity also the accession of the Laws Ecclesiastical and Imperial we make no scruple to acknowledge them to be very solemn and obligatory upon all good Christians But seeing all things practis'd by the Apostles are not Obligatory it will be worth the enquiry under what Capacity they so acted whether as Apostles or as Governors of the Church in such a large sense as might be communicable to their successours That it was not meerly and precisely an Apostolical Act to establish such a Festival seems to appear from the grounds found in the Law of Nature moving men to celebrate a day to God again that the first day of the week being the day of our Lord and Saviours Resurrection seems to be no other than Common Ecclesiastical Prudence as that which agreeth most with the End it self viz. The due commemoration of Christs resurrection on that day but that Christ should be so Commemorated and God so glorified seems to me to be specially Apostolical and so Divine that it is not alterable by the Counsel or Decrees of the Church any time after from whence may conveniently be reconciled the opposite opinions of both School-men and Canonists some of whom have asserted the divine Right of the Lords day and others the Ecclesiastical or Canonical only For that a day be Festivally observed to God is Natural that on such a Festival or Thanksgiving day Christ should be magnified and God praised is Apostolical but that on the First day of the week Christian Prudence and the necessary power of the Church may seem to suffice Which appeareth from the manner of celebrating the Christian Sabbath which hath been always left to the Authority and wisdom of the Church varying according to occasions given For that Christians very anciently met to treat of divine matters to communicate to celebrate the Eucharist and to sing Psalms Hymns and Spiritual Songs Justine Justin Apol. 2. Tertul. Apologer Martyr and Tertullian and the famous Epistle of Pliny witness And to this end they had a vacation from all worldly servile matters as many proofs of Antiquity demonstrate And for the dignity of this day it was that on it and none other Bishops were to be consecrated by the constitution of Leo 1. And what are the Prerogatives of this First Leo 1. Distinct 75. c. 1. Quod die c. day of the week are explained at large by the Ancient Fathers and Councils here not to be rehearsed From this Fountain of Ecclesiastical power resident in the Church springeth the Act of instituting other days to the Glory and Praise of God of two sorts viz. days of Humiliation and Exultation or joy For it is certain that after it was agreed upon that Christs Resurrection should be weekly celebrated it was consented to also that a Yearly Thanksgiving should be kept for the same which was the Christians Passover and our Easter day is immemorially practised and without interruption derived to this present age And therefore as well because it is the greatest matter of joy that at any time befell the Church of Christ as because it regulateth other principal Feasts and Fasts of the Church as lastly because thence is plainly inferred a power in the Church of ordaining Feasts and Fasts to the worship of God it is called by the Ancient The Mother of Feasts And surely upon this the Fathers of the Church produced many other Daughter-Feasts not all in a year nor an age but according to their power to maintain and defend them which was very difficult for them to do as becomed under Gentile persecution who were most severe against such Celebrities instituted by Christians to the overthrow and contempt of Gentile worship which according to the Light of nature consisted much in this as Seneca Legum Conditores Festùm instruerunt dies ut ad hilaritatem homines cogerent c. Seneca de Tranquil Aninai c. 15. hath said in these words The Founders of Laws ordained Festival days to the end that men might meet publiquely in Jollity puting some moderation to Labours as necessary for them These Gentile Institutions prevailing not only to Idololatrical service but corruption of manners contrary to nature it self The Ancient Fathers of the Church knew no better Antidote against such poison than to introduce Christian Festivals whereby all the natural and Civil benefit of Vacation from Labours friendly conversation and such like might be enjoyed and due worship and praise be given unto God in Christ Jesus And therefore Theodoret. Serm. 7. de Sacrificiis Theodoret with other Fathers is not ashamed to profess as a very laudable and religious occasion of Christian Feasts That they succeeded the Idolatrous and lewd Feasts of the Gentiles which some but in vain would turn against the use of them But they stand upon surer foundations than to be blown down with the wind of vain doctrines blustering against them For First as is said Nature it self directs to them
not Composito viz. before some one place be determined and dedicated especially to his worship and not after or from the contempt of Gods house or from dislike of the Publique worship or from admiration of our own Gifts and a delight to show them or lastly a design to breed a faction in private against the publique profession I know likewise and grant that several just Impediments there are to the publique service and in such Cases most necessary it is that Gods service should be performed within doors But it is not necessary that this should be performed as the affected manner is in a service quite distinct from the publique yea often quite contrary What men speak in prayer and spiritual devotion between God and their own souls privately they are the only proper judges of and Christian not Liberty only but piety requires they should so be But surely when Men speak before others as well as God and there is nothing so much as the Place which diversifies the worship in a Family from that in the Church that of the Church is most proper And not to say any thing of the Laity no Priest or Minister of our Church ought upon common occasions to officiate in Prayers in Private Families any otherwise than he is bound to do in Publique especially if they to whom he officiates and himself have not performed their duties in that manner before in Publique which when they have then only is the proper place for another free-will offering unprescribed I shall not here insist on the obligation all Priests have to recite their Office as I could but only give this general reason That every Priest is ordained of God by man as a constant intercessour between God and Man in behalf of the People and especially them of whom he hath a Pastoral charge and not only the nature of his Office but condition of his Benefice requires that this he doth constantly or daily twice the old rule being very reasonable viz. Beneficium requirit officium the temporal benefits received by the Clergy require spiritual office The first is daily and so should the second also be And this is no such innovation as the contrary that the Priest should have nothing to do but when he preaches or that he should pray and offer to God as liketh best every single Christian which is impossible and ridiculous and an intolerable presumption in any man to prescribe to their Minister how he should minister to them when he is lawfully prescribed his duty before and if he were not he ought to prescribe to others not of the same order with himself and not take Laws from them which is the corruptest and modernest of all Innovations But the Recitation of the Office by the Priest is a constitution of above a thousand years standing according Barthol Gavantus in Rubricam Brev. Tom. 2. Sect. 2. c. 5. Tit. 1. Compilatio Chronolog ad An. 490. to the account of them who set it Jowest Sigebert in his Chronicle affirmeth it began in the year 540 as Gavantus out of him But I find another Chronologer to place it in the year 490 saying Anastasius the fifty second Pope ordained that no Clergyman should omit his Divine Office the office of the Mass or Eucharist only excepted And therefore with excellent wisdom and advice it is in these words prescribed by the Church before the Liturgy All Priests and Deacons are to say daily the Morning and Evening Prayer either privately or openly not being let by sickness or some other urgent cause And surely as there is an Obligation upon Priests to use these prayers there must be implied an obligation in all the true sons of the Church to be present at them and to joyn with the Priest Which because it cannot be expected that all men well inclin'd should be always in a capacity to do the Priest doubtless may comply with the exigencies of others so it be not to the pre judice of the Publique And now considering also the many extraordinary days of Festivals and ordinary days of Fasting wherein especial obligation lies upon all Good Christians so far as they can without justifiable impediment to appear in the house of God and worship him not omitting their personal and private devotions at home and comparing the same with the practice of Puritans who are so strangely deluded with the great vertue of a Sermon and extemporary prayers at home that it goes quite against the hair if not conscience of them to visit Gods house upon the account of prayers and adoration only let it be fairly judged whether they have such cause to insult over our Religion and not be ashamed of their gross defects and dissonancy from all that ever professed Christianity before their days Will their bold pretences to Giftedness think they in their rare way of worship cover these foul blemishes from God when they do not from men But this upon the occasion of the contrary abuse of times in order to Religion wherein the Rom●n Church hath exceeded and departed from the practice of the Ancient Church which indeed had some other solemn times of worship before the fourth Century besides Sundays and Easter day but very Erasinus in Matth. 11. v. 30. Id. in Romanos cap. 14. 5. few Truly and learnedly saith Erasmus upon Matthew The Age of Hieromne knew very few Feasts except the Lords day And in another place he writes thus With the Jews some days were prophane and some days holy but with the Christians every day is equally this he speaks according to the sense of Origen not excepting the Lords day holy Not that Festivals are not to be observed which the holy Fathers instituted afterward to the more commodious assembling of Christian People and to the worship of God but that they were very few to wit The Lords day Easter and Pentecost and some such like reckoned up by Hieromne But I know not whether it be expedient to add Feast upon Feast especially since we see the manners of Christians to come to that pass that so much reason as there was of old to institute them for pieties sake so great seems there to be to antiquitate them Thus he And this hath been the opinion of the Church of England and the course taken in the Reforming the abuse in the number of them And a second abuse hath been pared off by us seen in the end of them which is rather to the honour of Saints than of God or Christ among Papists I know at the long run as we may so speak they ascribe in their doctrine all to God but not half of them have this sense and little or nothing many times comes from them but what is directed to the Saint they then worship Bishop Whitgift doth distinguish ours from theirs many ways This one shall suffice at present out of him Neither Whit gifts Answer to the admonition pag. 175. are they Holy days called by the name
it is That divine Adoration receives its specification from the intention which is an act principally of the will so that be the object what it will yet if I have no intention to worship any other than the true God I worship him when I direct my worship to that which we may suppose not to prove upon tryal God But this is not to be granted that intention is sufficient to denominate worship or constitute it true and Catholick though it suffices abundantly to make a worship false when it is intended for such And then may a man be said to intend false worship not only when he knows it to be false but when he might possibly know it to be so and when he intends to worship that which actually is a false object For as hath been said Idolatry consists principally in the understanding as also the Scripture intimateth when it charges the Idolatrous Israelites with ignorance 2 King 17. 26. Isa 4. 9. of God For were not the Samaritans Idolaters who knew not the manner of the God of Israel And what saith the Prophet Isaiah They that make a graven Image i. e. to worship it are all of them vanity and their delectable things shal not profit and they are their own witnesses they see not nor know that they may be ashamed Surely if any man saw and were convinced of his error he would be ashamed of it but 't is his ignorance that detains him as well as precipitates him into such errors Ephes 4. 18. as St. Paul witnesses of the Gentiles Having their understanding darkened through the ignorance that is in them because of the blindness of their heart Fifthly There is no reason to grant that simplicity and sincerity of Intention and Resolution of worshipping none but the true God may not consist and hold good in worshipping more than one God as in the Act. 17. 23. case of the Athenians worshipping the unknown God in the Acts For as Pausanias in Eliacis taking notice of this inscription hath it The Persians threatning Greece with War the Athenians sent to the Lacedemonians to beg aid of them Pan met their Embassador Philippides and expostulated with him why the Athenians had made no statue to him but left him our adding that if they received him he would stand by them Hereupon they erected this Monument To the unknown God Others say That they being miserably harrassed with the Pestilence and finding no relief from them they worshipped bethought themselves there might be a God neglected by them who might relieve them and so dedicated an Altar To the unknown God Might not all these things stand with very great sincerity of intention And yet I suppose it was Idolatry So that sincere resolution and intention of worshipping none but the true God only may be found where many are worshipped For though to us as St. Paul saith * Toletus Instruct Sacerdotum l. 4. c. 14. § 6. There is but one God and one Lord yet with all Nations it was not so they might really and stedfastly believe there were more Gods than one And therefore Tolet the Jesuit well writeth thus Therefore Idolatry is the exhibiting of a Divine worship to a false God For to worship him for true God who is not God either by praising him or invoking him or Sacrificing to him or any wayes prostrating our selves to him is to commit Idolatry False adoration which is Idolatry is never but where an Error in the understanding goeth before † De Ratione lure definiend pag. 273. Num ut Supersationis caput est Id. 〈◊〉 i●a emnus Dei caltus non solum extrav ritatem fidei sed etiam extra uniatem Ecclesis alterius Dei cultum in se contnet ab coquem Fides Christiarorum communis intra Ecclesiam colendum prop●nit Omnis enim Commentitia religio talem sibi Deum colendum p●●ponit qualem sibi ipsa commenta sit non qualem se ipse ostendit Quod Idololatrioe instar quoddam est And besides all this the Author of this tenet in another place acknowledges it to be a sort of Idolatry to feign or device a worship of God otherwise than was instituted of God and that not only to worship God out of the verity of Faith but out of the unity of the Church containeth in it a worship of another God than is propounded by the Christian Faith to be worshiped in the Church And again All commentitions religion propounds such a God to be worshipped as it hath feigned to it self not as he hath declared himself to be By which words I understand him to explain himself and draw nearer to the common notion of Idolatry than he is commonly taken to do For granting that it is a kind of Idolatry to offer any superstitious worship interdicted by God and that in thus doing a man doth in effect frame to himself a God distinct from the true God it may be easily granted that all Idolatry consisteth in Polytheism or plurality of Gods because in effect a man makes strange Gods though not formally as he that constituteth one of purpose to worship as the object of his Devotion And this agreeth with what othet learned men have written of Idolatry Quicunque de Deo secus sentit quam revera est c. Erasm in symbolum Catechesm 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epict. Cap. 38. Perkins Cases of Conscience l. 2. c. 11. Luther Colloq Mensalia p. 91. extending it to a false notion or judgment of the one true God For Erasmus in his Catechism on the Creed saith Whosoever thinketh otherwise of God than in truth he is or doth not believe him to be such as the Authority of the Holy Scriptures hath described him to us believeth not in God but in an Idol To the same purpose speaketh Mr. Perkins thus If adoration be given to the true God with a false and erroneous intention it makes him an Idol For example if the body be bowed with this intent to worship God out of the Trinity as the Turk doth Or if he be worshipped out of his Son with the Jews thus doing we worship not the true God but an Idol To these I add these words of Luther All manner of Religion let it have never so great a name and lustre of Holiness when people will serve God without his word and command is nothing else but plain Idolatry It may be said in behalf of Jews and Turks that they are not Idolaters because they worship God according to the true Light of Nature asserting and magnifying above all men the unity of God and directing their worship after the manner of the service of God before Christ To which answering I shall wave the question about the measure of knowledg the Jews had of the Trinity before Christ of which somewhat hath been said before and rather distinguish between the manner of their believing or disbelieving those mysteries For it is much different
ventantia ad hoec decem redigant Capitalium peccatorum species quae septem numerantur in aliquod horum referum sed sedulâ diligentiâ magis quam serid Erasm Cateches 6. in Decal Thom 22. qu. 148. 2. ad 1. Contrivers of them may as well as many other things be refused at pleasure as an humane Invention For mine own particular I think Erasmus has spoken judiciously and truly in the Case Here I see some labouring hard to reduce all Precepts whether commanding or forbidding to these Ten and to refer the seven deadly sins to some of these but with diligence more sedulous than serious And no other instance needs be given of an incapacity in the Decalogue of Regular reduction of this nature than what Thomas has given us whose Logical head was able to do as much in this kind as any mans Framing an Objection to himself that Gluttony was no mortal sin because it was not contrary to any of the Ten Commandments answers thus Gluttony is a mortal sin in as much as it averts us from the Ultimate end and according to this by a Certain Reduction by which every thing may be reduced to every thing is opposed to the Command of Sanctifying the Sabbath in which is required our rest in the Ultimate End If this be fair and allowable what needed we any more Commandments than that of keeping holy the Sabbath day For surely all sin as well as Gluttony turns us away from our Last End which is God and our resting in him and therefore by this reason all sin should be Sabbath-breaking St. James James 2. 10. indeed saith Whosoever shall keep the whole Law and yet offend in one point he is guilty of all that is a breaker of all But he very well explains himself immediately after that he meant not so much in respect of the matter of the Law that a man could not sin against it in one case but he must sin against it in another but in respect of the Manner For saith he He that said unto thee do not commit adultery said also do not kill c. implying thus much that the same evil mind that disposes a man to disobey God in one point of the Law will incline him to the like in others and the Cords of Fear and Love of God being broken to offend God in one sin leave him at liberty to offend him in any other whatever Not that a man doth directly or actually commit sin against the whole Law As in the case of Moral Vertues according to Philosophers all are so connected and dependent upon one another in Prudence that whoever wants that lies open to all vices But our enquiry is concerning the connexion of vertues and vices in the matter of them whether the offender in one sin is guilty of all whether the Drunkard be a Thief or the Sabbath-breaker an Adulterer For according to the large extent of Rules commonly given either of these may be made good and without such a latitude drunkenness will hardly find a proper place in any of the Ten Commandments unless we say as some more wittily than solidly Drunkenness slaggers through all the Commands And in the like sense What sin doth not And therefore Thom. ibid. Thomas is constrained to acknowledge that Not all Mortal sins are directly contrary to the Precepts of the Decalogue but those only which contain injustice because the Precepts of the Decalogue in especial manner pertain to Justice and the parts thereof That so many Ancient as well as Modern Doctors of Christs Church have endeavoured to bring all Sins and Graces and Duties to the Ten Commandments I take to proceed from this three-fold cause First in Imitation of the Jews who agreed with Christians in the Use of the Decalogue Novatianus Epist●de Judaicis apud Tertul cap. 3. Deniqu d●eem sermones ●lh in tabulis nibil novum dacent c. Grot. in Decalogum as being no more than a restoring the decayed Law of Nature in man and reprinting it in his mind as well hath Novatianus observed thus Lastly those ten sayings in Tables teach no new thing but what was blurred they admonish that Justice contained in them as fire buried might as it were by the breath of the Law be re-enkindled And Philo testifieth of the Jews not only of his Times but ancienter that they were wont to reduce All the Precepts of Moses his Law to these Ten not that they did believe that they were all contained in them as Grotius hath observed but that those things we have here belong to such general heads of Actions unto which for memory sake others may be reduced in like manner as Philosophers are wont to Sixt. Sen. Bib. l. 4. reduce all things to Aristotles Ten Categories or Predicaments though by the way it is observed by Sixtus Senensis out of ancient Authors that Aristotle was not the true Author of the Ten Predicaments but rather Architas Tarentinus And this Christians did more accurately as being better endowed with the Holy Spirit and obliged to higher vertues A second reason might be for that the Decalogue as we have already said though it be not such an exquisite and ample Rule as to contain all things without great straining and force yet it being the most significant is any where extant in Scripture Christians chose that for their Compendium to which other duties might relate And this Thirdly because of the expediency of advancing some one Form of Words to be a Rule of Practise as were the Creed and Lords Prayer instituted as Forms of Faith and all Prayers and that chiefly for help to the Memory of men in their compleat duty towards God and Man The first that I have observed who brought this way of Reduction of all things to the Commandments was St. Hieromne who hath delivered such General Rules for this purpose as have been much improved and multiplied by many Catechises and Commentators upon them To which I shall refer the Reader at present passing or rather posting from the Use in General to the Particular Use of it in the Third thing viz. The Explication CHAP. XX. Of the Ten Commandments in Particular and their several sense and importance IN all Laws three things are to be considered saith a late excellent Die ●m●bi H●los-phasier Oretzere si non tres Le●u● partes d●●mm●● Philosophis Platone Possidonio Cicerone alits consittuantur nempe Preoemium Lex ipsa Epilogus sive sanctio Goldastus Replicat ad Gretz c. 11. person in the Civil Law The Preface the Law it self and the Epilogue or Conclusion to it or Sanction And these are all found in the Decalogue And where some have no special Preface there the General Prologue is to be current and applyed unto them And so where other particular precepts want the enforcement of them in the conclusion they may well borrow it from some other as for Example I am the Lord thy God set
have from the matter it self divided the Commandments so that Four which relate principally to God should be placed in the First Table and Six in the Second which seems to be most rational though no less arbitrary than the other There are likewise among the Jews who agree not in the very matter it self of the Ten Commandments For some as the Talmudists and others following them do make that we call properly The Proaem or Preface I am the Lord thy God to be part of the First Commandment which is denyed by Aberbenel and others of them as well as most of us For this Proposition or Sentence I am the Lord thy God is as we say properly Enunciative or Indicative or purely affirmative and not Imperative or Commanding as all Precepts must be which are so properly called The First Commandment therefore is this Thou shalt have no other Gods §. I. but me Where it is first to be observed that almost thorow the whole Decalogue some variety in words is to be found in Exodus and in Deuteromy the Fifth where it is repeated The Reason whereof Grotius thinks to be this That here Moses did set down or rather took precisely what was spoken or written by the Angel but in Deuteronomy he rehearses the same himself without such absolute Punctualities of words or expressions and yet must we not dare to say or believe that Moses transgressed his own Rule given by God in the Fourth Chapter before viz. Ye shall not adde unto Deut. 4. 2. the word which I command you neither shall ye diminish ought from it that ye may keep the Commandments of the Lord your God which I command you So that it is a vain Scholie some would give us upon that and such like Texts of Scripture that nothing at all must be added to Gods word more than we find the Letter to require For undoubtedly such speeches mean no more than that we should do or say neither more or less to overthrow the intention of God in his Commandments For otherwise all the large and far fetched senses devised and applyed by the precise Masters and Mistakers of that Rule to each particular Precept in the Decalogue would be found either Superstitious or Sacrilegious inventions though not inconsistent with the Analogy of Faith Furthermore Laws are of two sorts generally Affirmative or Negative In the Negative of which this is one the ordinary method of explication is first to declare those sins of Commission which are prohibited and then the Duties Graces and Vertues which are there implicitly required on the contrary this being one general Rule of expounding the Decalogue that where any vice or sin is forbidden there the contrary vertue is commanded And on the other side Where any vertue or holy act is required there the contrary vice or evil is interdicted As for Example Here it is forbidden that we should have or make or worship any other God but the one true God therefore on the contrary there is an implicite injunction duly and faithfully to serve that one true God And though the sense Negative is most current and general through the whole Decalogue yet were the Affirmative duties they which God principally aimed at and intended For Negatives do not make us holy to God in themselves but only as they are necessary introductions and good beginnings to the more perfect performance of Positive Duties It would avail a man very little towards the fulfil●ing of this First Commandment not to worship more Gods than one for so he m●ght worship none at all and be a greater offender than the Idolater that worships many We are therefore in the first place to enquire what are those Vertues and Graces God commands and so shall we more readi●y and easily conceive what errours and sins we are hereby commanded to avoid Some of both sorts we shall here instance in to make more compleat that rude and imperfect account given above of the Acts of Obedience and Holiness owing from every good Christian to God but as in a Table rather than in a Treatise The Supposition then that this first Precept requires of us the true worship of God doth infer all that train of Graces thereunto necessary which are commonly reduced to these three Theological Vertues Faith Hope and Charity Of the nature of Faith as well in General as Particular have we spoken largely in the first Part Yet rather in a speculative than practical or obediential way which is proper to this place By the duty of Faith then it is first required that we should have a competent knowledge of God and of his will for some knowledge must of necessity go before Faith There is a twofold knowledge One of simple apprehension or intelligence and this must go before Faith For how Rom. 10. 14. saith St. Paul shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard It is impossible a man should worship God before he believes there is a God And impossible he should believe there is a God before he hath some notion or apprehension of a God either by hearing which is the ordinary way or by some inward suggestion And therefore we read that Paul inquiring of the Acts 19. 2. Novices in Christianity at Ephesus Have ye received the Holy Ghost they answered We have not as yet heard whether there be an Holy Ghost or no. And there is another knowledge of Assurance which assurance is caused in Humane Sciences by an orderly and necessary connexion of natural causes one with another but in Divine matters by Faith which causes that or greater perswasion than any outward artificial Demonstrations And therefore both the encrease of our knowledge and the encrease and strengthning of our Faith are much required by this Precept according as we have the Scriptures more particularly advising us and that by St. Peter 2 Pet. 1. 5. And beside all this giving all diligence adde to your faith vertue and to vertue knowledge and to knowledge temperance c. And so in his first Epistle 1 Pet. 2. 3. 1 Tim. 2. 4. Taste and see how good the Lord is And St. Paul to Timothy God will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth And infinite other places Next to knowledge of God seems to be the fear of God according as Acts 9. 39. the Scripture hath it And the Churches were edified walking in the fear of the Lord. Next to Fear comes Repentance and Sorrow for sins past then Renovation or that properly called Obedience in Newness of Life with many others not here to be insisted on The second Grace is Hope which excites to walk and act according to the Gospel from the consideration of the many Promises and upon the intuiti●n of an excellent reward to follow certainly the fulfilling the will of God Of which we have spoken in treating of Gods works Lastly Charity with its retinue of Divine Graces is required
praecipit vel humana Constitutio Et ut facilius ita tutius qu●que est omnes Imagines è templis submovere qud●n imp●trare uc nec modus praetere●●ur nec admiscedtur superscitio Eratm in Symb. Decalog Cateches 6. commended yet have not men dared as yet by any direct Precept to command the use of Images at all in Churches For that Images should be in Churches saith Erasmus no Constitution so much as humane requireth And as is is more easie so is it more safe to withdraw all Images out of Churches then to prevail that the Mean should not be exceeded nor Superstition mingled therewith Thirdly If that Rule of Explication holds good viz. that in the Decalogue where a sin is forbidden there the occasion leading thereunto is also forbidden I make no doubt but to worship the Creatour or any Creature by an Image is also here forbidden as Idolatrous though perhaps not Idolatry absolute And contrary to the current sense and distinction of modern Romanists concerning Material and Formal Idolatry of which we have before spoken denying an errour about the Object to be Formal Idolatry provided the intention be directed to the only true object of worship God we may more safely and properly call this outward visible adoration given to outward objects or at least seeming to be given to them Formal Idolatry than Material because there is nothing wanting to common sense which might make and denominate it Idolatry and this to have the Formalities of Idolatry but if they take Formal for the intrinsick specification of a thing then it is a Contradiction and Nonsense to say or suppose that there can be any Idolatry not Formal as to imagine any thing can be without its form or that which is absolutely necessary to make it what it is Furthermore this worshipping of God by any thing made is forbidden by this command if not as simply and immediately unlawful in it self yet under the head of Scandal unjustly and unnecessarily given For in this Case it will no more if so much as excuse a man from the just suspicion of Idolatry that he upon occasion declares he does not worship the thing before which he worships than it could do them of whom St. Paul to the 1 Cor. 8. 4. Corinthians speaks who sat in the Idols Temple being Christians and knowing an Idol was as much as nothing in the world and a man having so much Faith and Knowledge might do as he please in neglect and contempt of that but St. Paul could not be put off so but knowing and taking for v. 7. 10 11. granted that some did eat before an Idol with a conscience and sense of an Idol as it were adjured such presumers under the terrour of being accessary to the ruin of their brothers Souls not to have to do with them So what if it be true as most true it is a man may worship God or Saints before an Image and have a right intention and pure conscience towards God is it not also as true that he may have an erroneous and idolatrous intention Nay are not the Evidences and Presumptions much more clear and strong that his intention is corrupt then that it is pure Can flesh and bloud put any difference between the visible act of him that doth worship an Image directly and properly and of him that doth not Is not this then scandalous to sin So that we may reasonably conclude this Command to stretch it self to forbid all worship by Images and especially in publick where there is more danger to others though not under the same guilt or penalty as flat idolizing of any thing besides God For in that it is said Thou shalt not bow down to them is plainly forbidden external reverence to or before them in any way of Religious worship In that it is said Nor worship them is expressed the internal act and forbidden And thus far of the more literal sense of this Precept the more remote and reductive sense as I may call it is to interdict all worshipping of Imaginations or vain opinions which are certain Idols of the mind as the other are of the outward senses And thus Hierom upon the Prophet Esay Hieron in Isaiam c. 40. tropically applies his words To whom will ye liken the Lord c. We may say that Arch-hereticks are here rebuked who make sundry Idols out of their own heart c. And again upon the same Prophet afterward Quicquid Id. in Isaiam c. 44. v. 15 16. de Idolis dictum est potest referri ad haereseon Principes c. Whatever the Prophet speaks of Idols may be referred to the Ringleaders of Hereticks who dexterously frame out of their own hearts certain images of their opinions and of a lye and worship them knowing that they made them themselves And think it not sufficient to keep them to themselves unless they seduce other simpler folk with the adoration of them Against this little noted but most frequently practised Idolatry we have an excellent Sermon of a Reverend Bishop Andrews Sermon of worshipping Imaginations Sin ulachris phantasmatum suprum sectatores suos omnis error illidit Aug. Expos Ep. ad Rom. Inchoata lib. Prelate long since made and never more need was there then is now to inculcate this when people blinded with the love of their own inventions and opinions of the sense of Scripture run carelesly and rashly into the Idolatry of their own wayes having first consecrated them with an obscure and mistaken Text of Scripture or two and so made them as they think Divine This is condemned in this Commandment as are also all corrupting depraving mis-sensing Gods Holy Word bringing in Sects and Heresies disesteem and abuse of his Sacraments And to name no more to be remiss prophane and negligent in the true Service and Worship of God either by inward aversion or outward absenting themselves without just cause from him in his house and denying him that outward adoration and humiliation which he here forbids us to give any but himself which he surely never would have done had he not set some value on it himself And on the contrary we are required positively here to give all outward as well as inward worship to him as he is in his illimited nature without circumscribing him in our minds or likening him to any corporeal being how excellent soever The second Part of this Commandment gives us the reason of it viz. For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God deterring all men from the violation of the same from the Power Majesty and Justice of him against such contemners of his worship and his word So that as too often it is seen that some fond worldly and covetous Parents will even venture their own necks and damn their souls out of an extream desire to advance their children and to settle them sure and flourishing as they think in the world after them God confounds this their plot