it must be upon the terms of my position the practice of the Church giving bounds to the sense of the Scripture I can therefore safely agree with the Constitutions of the Apostles with S. Cyprian and Leo and whosoever else teaches that it is not safe for the people to assure their consciences upon the credit of their Pastors But it is because I suppose the Unity of the Church provided by God for a ground upon which the people may reasonably presume when they are to adhere to their Pastors when not To wit when they are owned not when they are disowned by the Unity of the Church For though this provision becomes uneffectual when this Unity is dissolved yet ought not that to be an argument that the goodnesse of God never made that provision which the malice of man may defeat But that whosoever concurrs to maintain the division concurrs to defeat that provision which God hath made As safely do I agree with all them who agree that whatsoever is taught in Christianity is to be proved by the Scriptures For if it belong to the Rule of Faith it is intended by the Scriptures though that intent is evidenced by the Tradition of the Church If to the Lawes of the Church the authority of it comes from the Scriptures though the evidence of it may depend upon common sense which the practice of the Church may convince If over and above both it is not receivable if not contained in the Scriptures And in this regard whosoever maintains the whole Scripture to be the Rule of Faith is throughly justified by all those testimonies that have been alleged to that purpose For though it be not necessary to the salvation of all Christians to understand the meaning of all the Scriptures yet what Scripture soever a man attains to understand is as much a Rule to his Faith as that which a man cannot be saved if hee understand not the sense of it whether in and by the Scripture or without it And though a man may be obliged to believe that which is not in the Scripture to have been instituted by the Apostles yet is he not obliged to observe it but upon that reason which the Scripture delivereth And upon these terms is the whole Scripture a Rule of Faith from which as nothing is to be taken away so is nothing to be added to it as the saying of S. Chrysostome in Phil. II. Hom. XII requireth And the saying of S. Basil in Esa II. and Ascet Reg. I. condemning all that is done without Scripture takes place upon no other terms than these Not as Cartwright and our Puritanes after him imagine that a man is to have a text of Scripture specifying every thing which hee doth for his warrant For as it is in it self ridiculous to imagine that all cases which fall out can be ruled by expresse text of Scripture our Christianity being concerned infinite wayes of which it is evident that the Scripture had no occasion to speak So if the words of the Scripture be lodged in a heart where the work of them dwelleth not a thing which wee see too possible to come to passe it is the ready way to make the Word of God a color for all unrighteousnesse not onely to others but to the very heart of him who hath that cloke for it It is therefore enough that the reason of every thing which a Christian doth is to be derived from that doctrine which the Scripture declaeth And where a man proceedeth to do that for which hee hath not such a reason so grounded as reasonable men use to go by then cometh that to passe which S. Basil chargeth Ascet Reg. LXXX That What is not of faith is sin It is true according to that sense which hitherto I have used after many Church Writers the Rule of Faith extendeth not to all the Scriptures but onely to that which it is necessary to salvation to believe and to know Which every man knowes that all the Scripture is not For though it be necessary to salvation to believe that all the Scripture is true yet is it not necessary to salvation to know all that the Scripture containeth And the reason why I use it in this sense is to distinguish those things contained in the Scriptures which Tradition extendeth to from those to which it extendeth not For upon these terms is the sense of them limitable to the common Faith But I quarel not therefore the opinion of them that maintaine the whole Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith acknowledging that whatsoever it containeth is necessarily to be believed by all that come to understand it And whatsoever it containeth not though the Scripture alone obligeth not to believe the truth of it is not necessarily to be observed for any other reason but that which the Scripture declareth As for S. Basil making it apostasy to bring that which is not written into the Faith It is a thing well known that the Arians were charged by the Church for bringing in words that were not in the Scriptures saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a time when Christ was not And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That hee was made of nothing On the other side after the Council of Nicaea the Arians charged the Church for bringing in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same substance Where then lay the difference between the Inndelity of the Arians and the Faith of the Church Theodoret showes it Hist Eccles I. 8. out of Athanasius de Actis Concil Niceni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith hee They were condemned by written words piously understood But how appears this piety For I suppose the Arians would not have granted it Hee addeth that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had been used by the Fathers which had it been inconsistent with the sense of the Church could not have been indured in a mater concerning the Rule of Faith whereas their terms were contrary to that which is found in the Scriptures Now S. Basil acknowledgeth that hee had elsewhere dealing with Hereticks used terms not found in the Scriptures to exclude their sense contrary to the Scriptures as you shall finde by the Authors alleged that the Council of Nicaea had done but to those who desired information with a single heart hee resolves to rest content with the Scriptures The terms whereof his meaning is that the Hereticks did not rest content with because they had a minde to depart from the Faith Upon the same terms Tertullian pronounces the Wo that belongs to them which adde to Gods Word upon Hermogenes because his error concerned the Article of our Creed that God made heaven and earth And S. Austine presumes the reason why there is no clear Scripture for the original of the soul to be because hee presumes that it concerns not the substance of Faith Besides these Observations some of those passages which are alleged may concern Christianity rather than the Scriptures
the sense of it For if the same Faith which first was preached was afterwards committed to writing by the Apostles and how should those Christians which had not the use of leters be saved otherwise then was it the authority of the Apostles acknowledged by them that found themselves tyed to be Christians which made the Faith to oblige whether delivered by writing or without it The consent of all Churches in the same Rule of Faith serving for evidence of the Apostles act in delivering the same to the Churches Nor can any further reason be demanded why that knowledg which the Gnosticks prerended to have received by secret wayes should be refuted than the want of this And therefore it is in vain to allege that as they scorned the Scripture so they alleged Tradition for this secret knowledge The Tradition which they alleged being secret and such as could not be made to appear But no lesse contradictory to the Tradition of the Church than to the Scriptures both infallibly witnessed by the consent of all Churches And hereupon I leave the sayings of S. Austine setting aside the authority of the Council of Nicaea and affirming that former General Councils may be corrected by later without answer As also the sayings of them who affirm the Faith which our Lord hath taught to be the rock upon which the Church is built For if no building can lay that foundation upon which it standeth then cannot the Church make mater of Faith being founded upon it And that authority which may be set aside or corrected can be no infallible ground of Faith It is true it is pleaded that though in the Church of Rome there be some that do believe that the Church is able to make new Articles of Faith that is to make such determinations in maters of Faith as shall oblige all men to believe them as much as they are obliged to believe all that which comes from our Lord by his Apostles Others that do believe onely that the Church is able to evidence what the Apostles delivered to the Church and that this evidence is the ground whereon particular persons are to rest that whatsoever is so evidenced was indeed so delivered by the Apostles yet both these agree in one and the same reason of believing both of them alleging the Tradition of the Apostles to the Church for the ground of their Faith But this is more than any man of reason can believe unlesse wee allow him that affirms contradictories to ground himself upon one part of the contradiction which the other part of it destroyes For seeing that there must be but one reason one ground upon which we believe all that we believe and that it is manifest that those Articles of Faith which the determination of the Church creates being not such by any thing which that determination supposes are believed to be such meerly in consideration of the authority of the Church that determines them By consequence the Scripture and whatsoever is held to be of Faith upon any ground which the authority of the Church createth is no mater of Faith but by the authority of the Church determining that it be held for such On the other side hee that allowes Tradition to be the reason why hee believes the Christian Faith necessarily allowes all that hee allowes to be mater of Faith not onely to be true but to be mater of Faith before ever the Church determine it So that allowing him to say that hee holds his Faith by Tradition hee must allow mee that hee contradicts himself whensoever hee takes upon him to maintain that the Church creates new Articles of Faith which were not so the instant before the determination of the Church CHAP. XXXII Answer to an Objection that choice of Religion becomes difficult upon these terms This resolution is for the Interest of the Reformation Those that make the Church Infallible cannot those that make the Scripture clear and sufficient may own Tradition for evidence to determine the meaning of the Scriptures and Controversies of Faith The Interest of the Church of England The pretense of Rushworthes Dialogues that wee have no unquestionable Scripture and that the Tradition of the Church never changes AS little shall I need to be troubled at any reason that may be framed against this resolution having answered the prejudice that seems to sway most men to apprehend that God must have been wanting to his Church if all things necessary to salvation be not clearly laid down in the Scriptures For it is very manifest that the very same presumption possesses the mindes of the adverse party that God must needs have provided a visible Judge infallible in deciding all Controversies of Faith Whether the Church or any person or persons authorized in behalf of the Church for the present all is one I shall therefore onely demand that it be considered first that God was no way tied either to send our Lord Christ or to give his Gospel which because it comes of Gods free grace is therefore called the Word of his Grace and the Covenant of Grace Then that hee hath not found himself obliged to provide effectual means to bring all mankinde to the knowledge of it resting content to have provided such as if men be not wanting to their own salvation and the salvation of the rest of mankinde may be sufficient to bring all men to the knowledg of it And when it is come to knowledg all discreet Christians notwithstanding must acknowledg that the motives thereof fully propounded though abundantly sufficient to reasonable persons yet do not constrain those that are convicted by them to proceed according to them as necessary reasons constrain all understandings that see them to judg by them For how should it be a trial of mens dispositions if there were no way to avoid the necessity of those motives that inforce it Now if any knowledg can be had of truth in maters of faith that become disputable it must all of necessity depend upon the sufficiency of those motives which convict men to imbrace the Christian Faith And if there be any such skill as that of a Divine among Christians of necessity all of it proceeds upon supposition of the said motives which not pretending to show the reason of things which they convict men to believe convict them notwithstanding to believe that they are revealed by God For what conviction can there be that this or that is true unlesse it may appear to fall under those motives as the means which God hath imployed so to recommend it Therefore can it not be reasonable to require a greater evidence to the truth of things disputable among Christians than God hath allowed Christianity it self which being supposed on all hands it remains questionable whether this or that be part of it Therefore can it not be presumed that God hath made the Scriptures clear in all points necessary to salvation to all understandings concerned or that hee hath
out of which that excellent translation into the Syriack which to the great benefit of Christianity these last ages have brought into Europe was made The antiquity of this later and the eminent helps which it hath contributed toward the understanding of the New Testament being so great as the Vulgar Latine though very learned and therefore very helpfull can never out-shine And yet will I never grant that either one or both of them and that with the help of the Arabick and other the most ancient Translations which the Church beside may have are not to give account to the consent of many Copies now extant nay to the credit of some one if it should so fall out in any passage that the sense of the Scripture which cannot be made out by the rest is clear to common reason according to that one Whether such a case do ever fall out in any part of the Scripture or not The assurance of Christianity not standing in this that either this or that is or must needs be true but in this that the Church is assured in all cases But by this it may appear how innocent the resolution of the authentick Original of the Old Testament vvhich I have premised is and hovv safely I ground my self not upon the credit of the Jevvs Copy but upon all the records vvhereby the Church assureth the Tradition of the Scripture In that it is freely confessed that the difference of reading vvhich can become questionable notvvithstanding the superstitious diligence of the Jevvs in preserving their Copy is neither so frequent nor any thing so vveighty as in the Nevv Which hovv much more considerable it is tovvards the upholding of our common Christianity is plain enough to him that shall have perused but the premises And surely vvere it not true as hath been premised that a certain Rule of Faith vvas from the beginning delivered to the Church it vvould seem strange that wee cannot deny that there have considerable differences crept into the reading of the New Testament so much more nearly concerning our salvation than the Old in the reading whereof through the diligence of the Jews there remains no considerable difference But if wee remember that S. Paul makes the ministery of Preaching the Gospel to be the ministery of the Spirit in opposition to the ministery of Moses in giving the Law which was the ministeâ—y of the leter wee shall finde that Faith the receiving whereof qualified Christians to be indowed with the Holy Ghost to be of such sufficience that remaining intire wee need not think the Church disparaged if the records thereof suffer decay so long as the effect of them remains written by the Holy Ghost in the hearts and lives of Christians Alwayes it being unquestionable that there are considerable differences remaining in the reading of the New Testament it will be a very great impertinence to fore-cast any danger in granting that some question may be made to the Jews Copy of the Old Testament though neither so frequent nor so considerable And all that hath been said hath issue in this consequence to justifie and to recommend to the world the usefulnesse of the design lately set on foot in London for printing the Bible with the most ancient and learned Translations in columns most agreeably to the design of Origen in his Teâ—rapla Hexapla and Octapla that is Old Testament of four six and eight columns recording the several numbers of Translations or columns whereof his several Editions consisted For in a word this furniture and that which serves to the same purpose for who will undertake that one book shall contain all is the Instrument I appeal to for evidence of the Scripture which wee have And further here is the original means of determining the sense of the same though besides this I have claimed many other helps to be requisite to that purpose The end of the First Book LAUS DEO OF THE COVENANT OF GRACE The second BOOK CHAP. 1. Two parts of that which remains How the dispute concerning the Holy Trinity with Socinus belongs to the first The Question of justification by Faith alone The Opinion of Socinus concerning the whole Covenant of Grace The opinion of those who make justifying Faith the knowledge of a mans Predestination opposite to it in the other extream The difference between it and that of the Antinomians That there are mean Opinions THE greatest difference that is to be discerned among those things that concern the duty of all Christians consists in this that some of them concern Christians as Christians others as members of the Church For though all Christians as Christians are bound to be members of the Church in as much as it is a part of their profession to believe one Catholick Church yet their obligation to be Christians being in order of nature and reason before their obligation to be members of the Church because the very being of the Church presupposeth all that are members of it to be Christians that obligation which is originall and more ancient must needs be presupposed to that which is grounded upon it Of what consequence it may be to distinguish this difference in the matter of Christian duties will perhaps appear in due time In the mean I shall freely say my opinion that all the Divines in the Christian world cannot more pertinently and to better purpose comprise the subject which they professe to be imployed about then by dividing it into that which concerns Christians as Christians and that which concerns them as members of the Church For mine own present purpose it is evident that the disputes which divide us do concern either the state of particular Christians towards God or the obligation they have to other Christians as members of the Church So that the matter which I propose to my insuing discourse is sufficiently comprised in two heads one of the Covenant of Grace the other of the Laws of the Church I know it may be said that the heresie of Socinus is of the number of those that have footing among us and that the principal point of it concerning the faith of the holy Trinity comes not properly under either of these heads And I deny not that it is very dangerous for us in regard of two points that have so great vogue among us The first is the cleare sufficience of the Scriptures commonly passing so without any limits that it seems to follow of good right that what is not clear out of the Scriptures to all understandings cannot be necessary for the salvation of all Christians to believe So that no man can be bound to take that for an Article of his Faith against which they can show him arguments out of the Scriptures which he cannot clearly assoile The other is that they put it in the power of Christians to erect Churches at their pleasure though supposing the Faith which Socinus teacheth and pretending to serve God according to the same without
question hereafter for the Principles which here wee seek to decide but supposing sufficient reason propounded to make it evidently credible And hee that alleges Gods Spirit for what hee cannot show sufficient reason to believe otherwise may thank himself if hee perish by believing that which hee cannot oblige another man to believe Here wee must make a difference between those men whom God imployes to deal with other men in his name and those which come to God by their means For of the first it is enough to demand how it appears that they come from God To demand by what means hee makes his will known to them supposing they come from him is more than needs at least in this place For if it be granted mee that the Apostles and Prophets were the messengers of God suppose I cannot tell how Prophesies are made evident to the souls of them to whom the Spirit of God reveals them No body will question Whether or no hee ought to believe these whom hee acknowledges Gods messengers And therefore it will be no prejudice to my purpose to set aside all curious dispute how and by what means God reveales his messages to those whom by such revelations hee makes Prophets But those that derive their knowledg from the report of such as are believed to come from God must as well give account how they know that which they believe to come from such report as why such report is to be believed For if wee believe that God furnished those whom hee imployed with sufficient means to make it appear that they came on his message wee can dispute no further why their report is to be believed If wee believe it not there will be no cause why those who pretend themselves to be Gods messengers should not be neglected as fools or rejected as impostors Nay there will be no cause why wee should be Christians upon the report of those that show us not sufficient reason to receive them for Gods messengers But this being admitted and believed unlesse evidence can be made what was delivered by them that came on Gods message it is in vain to impose any thing on the Faith of them that are ready to receive whatsoever comes upon that score The resolution then of all controversies in Religion which the Church is divided about consists in making evidence what hath been delivered by them whom all Christians believe that God sent to man on his message And therefore there will remain no great difficulty about the force and use of reason in matters of Faith if wee consider that it is one thing to resolve them by such principles as the light of reason evidenceth another to do it by the use of reason evidencing what Gods messengers have delivered to us For all dispute in point of Faith tends only to evidence what wee have received from the authors of our Faith Till that evidence come doubt remaineth when it is come it vanisheth Without the use of reason this evidence is not made though not by that which the light of nature discovereth yet by those helps which reason imployeth to make it appear what wee have received from those from whom wee received our Christianity Which without those helps did not appear But if competition fall out between that which is thus evidenced to come from God on the one side and on the other side the light of reason seeming evidently to contradict the truth of it First wee are certain that this competition or contradiction is only in appearance because both reason and revelation is from God who cannot oblige us to make contradictory resolutions Then there is no help without the use of reason to unmask this appearance I will not here go about to controule that which may be alleged on either side in any particular point by any general prejudice chusing rather to referre the debate to that particular question in which cause of competition may appear then to presume upon any thing which the truth of Christianity the only supposition which hitherto I premise appeareth not so contain Only this I will prescribe It is not the exception of a Christian to say That which the light of reason evidenceth not to be possible is not true though commended to us by the same reasons which move us to be Christians For the nature of God the counsails of God the works of God being such things as mans understanding hath no skill of till it be enlightened by God from above That sense of Gods oracles which the motives of Faith do inforce is no lesse undisputable then it is undisputable whether that which God saith be true or not who inacts his revelations by those motives CHAP. II. The question between the Scripture and the Church which of them is Judge in matters of Faith Whether opinion the Tradition of the Church stands better with Those that hold the Scripture to be clear in all things necessary to salvation have no reason to exclude the Tradition of the Church What opinions they are that deny the Church to be a Society or Corporation by Gods Law THe cure of all diseases comes from the sound ingredients of nature when they get the upper hand and restore nature by expelling that which was against it Neither can the divisions and distempers of the Church be cured but by the common truth which the parties acknowledg when the right understanding of it clears the mistakes which mans weaknesse tainteth it with There is a sufficient stock of sound Principles left all the parties which I mean when all of them acknowledg the Scriptures that is so much of them as all agree to contain the word of God But supposing the truth of them to come from God First it remaines in difference how the meaning of them may be determined when doubt is made of it And then because nothing but the true meaning of the Scripture can be counted Scripture if there be a way to determine that Whether any thing over and above it is to be received for the word of God with it Concerning which point it is well enough known what opinions there are on foot When Luther first disputed against the Indulgences of Leo X Pope those that appeared in defense of them the Master of the Popes Palace and Eckius finding themselves scanted of mater to allege out of the Scriptures betook themselvs to the common place of the Church and the Power of it the force whereof stood upon this consequence That whatsoever the Church shall decree is to be received for unquestionable Afterwards certain Articles extracted out of Luthers Writings being condemned by a Bull of the Pope Luther interposes his appeal to a Council that should decree according to the Scripture alone This is the rise of the great Controversie still on foot between the Church and the Scripture between Scripture and the Tradition of the Church of what force each of them is in deciding controversies of Faith They that hold
made of a General Council whether constituted according to right or not whether proceeding without force and fraud or not Is it as evident to all Christians as their Christianity or the Scriptures that it is not If it be said that all Catholicks agree that the Pope with a General Council or a General Council confirmed by the Pope cannot erre First what shall oblige them to agree For if they agree not their Infallibility is not evident to all Christians nor if their agreement appear casual can it be taken for a ground of Faith that is undefeifible Then to set aside all the East which contesting the Power of the Pope cannot concurre to this Infallibility about the Councils of Constance and Basle when the dispute between the Pope and Council was at the hottest there lived divers Doctors of repute that have maintained this Infallibility to be the gift and privilege not of the present but of the Catholick Church By name Ockam Alliacensis Panormitane Antoninus Cusanus Clemangis and Mirandula Whose words you may see in Doctor Baron of Aberdene his dispute de Objecto Fidei Tract V. Cap. XIX XX. Further I demand if there be in the Church a gift of Infallibility indâ—pendent upon the Scripture that is obliging to believe the decrees thereof which our common Christianity evidenceth not can it appear without the like reasons for which wee believe the Scripture Where is the evidence that Gods Spirit inspires them with their decrees Nay when wee see Popes and Councils imploy the same means to finde the truth of things in question which other men do would they have us believe that they shall not fail by Gods providence when they use no means but that may fail nor have themselves any reason in them to evidence that they do not fail For if they had they might make it appear But of all things the strâ—ngest is that they should undertake to perâ—wade the world this when as the Church it self never determined it Of all things that ever the Church of any time took in hand to decree it will never appear that ever it was decreed that the decrees of the present Church are to be admitted for Gods truth And therefore there is not so much appearance of any opinion the Church of Rome has that it is true as there is of humane policy in breeding men up in such prejudicate conceits which education makes them as zealous of as of their Faith though meer contradiction to the grounds of it That being intangled in their own understandings to hold things so inconsistent they may be the fitter instruments to intangle others in that obedience to the Church which they hold necessary though upon false reasons For as Antony disputes in Tully de Oratore that no man is so fit to induce others into passion as hee that appears really possessed with the same so is no man so fit to imbroile the true reason and order of believing in another mans understanding as hee that is himself first confounded in it There is indeed a plauâ—â—ble inconvenience alleged if it be not admitted to wit that differences cannot be ended otherwise But to object an inconvenience is not to answer an argument say Logicians Nor is it say I to demonstrate a truth It is requisite the Church should be one Suppose wee this for the present for it is not proved as yet but it is not therefore necessary that the unity thereof should depend upon the deâ—ision of all Controversies that arise what true what false It is a great deal easier to command men not to decide their own opinions than to believe their adversaries For to decide is nothing else but to command all men to judge one part to be true when it appeareth that a great part have already judged it to be false But not to offend him that hath declared a contrary judgment is a thing to be attained of him that cannot see reason to judge the same Charity may have place in all things in question among Christians though Faith be confined to the proper mater of it though wee cannot yet determine what that proper mater is and upon what termes it standeth It remains therefore that all presumption concerning the truth of the Churches decrees presupposeth the corporation of the Church the foundation thereof nor can any way be evidenced by supposing onely the truth of the Scriptures and the consent of Christians as Christians which conveyes the evidence thereof unto us So that the belief of the Scriptures and of all things so clear in the Scriptures that they are not questioned in the Church depending upon the evidence of Gods revelations to his messengers But the belief of the Churches decrees inasmuch as not evidenced by the Scriptures upon the presumption of the right use of the Power vested in them that decree by the foundation of the Church if that foundation may appear they do not allow us the common reason of all men that require us to yield the same credit to both CHAP. V. All things necessary to salvation are not clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Not in the Old Testament Not in the Gospel Not in the Writings of the Apostles It is necessary to salvation to believe more than this that our Lord is the Christ Time causeth obscurity in the Scriptures aswell as in other Records That it is no where said in the Scriptures that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scriptures Neither is there any consent of all Christians to evidence the same IN the next place to proceed by steps I must negatively conclude on the other side that all things necessary to the salvation of all are not of themselves clear in the Scriptures to all understandings Whereby I say not that all such things are not contained in the Scriptures as if some thing necessary to the salvation of all were to be received by Tradition alone Nor that being in the Scriptures they are not clear and discernable to the understandings of those that are furnished with means requisite to discern the meaning of the Scriptures But that which I stand upon is that it is not nor ought to be a presumption that this or that is not necessary to salvation because it is not clear in the Scriptures Which if it were admitted whosoever were able to make such an argument against any Article of Faith as all understandings interessed in salvation could not dissolve such as it is plain may be made against the truth of Christianity should have gained this that though it may be true yet it cannot be an Article of Faith To my purpose indeed it were enough in this place to prove that this is not the first truth in Christianity to wit that all things necessary to salvation are clear by the Scriptures For having obtained that there is no Rule to conclude those doctrines which may be questioned not to be Articles of Faith so that it cannot thereupon be
them hee is fain to argue very hard that their women ought their men ought not to be vailed at divine Service Concluding that if his reasons would not prevail the contentious must rest in this That wee have no such custome neither the Churches of God Why so if particular Churches be not tied to keep unity with the whole And by and by proposing another disorder in that they received not the Eucharist in commune poore and rich hee reproveth it as contrary to that which hee had delivered to them from the beginning Concluding that The rest will I set in order when I come So 2 Thess II. 25. Stand therefore brethren and hold fast the Traditions which yee have been taught either by word of mouth or by any letter of ours Neither can it be imagined that all Christians should be bound to heare the Apostles and not be bound to hold those things for Lawes to their conversation in maters of Religion which the Apostles should teach them to that purpose Of this nature is the decree at Jerusalem Acts XV. 20 28. that the then Churches of the Gentiles should abstain from things strangled and bloud as well as from fornication and the pollution of Idols For what is the ground or the purpose of it but to preserve them in unity with the Churches of Jews become Christians Of this nature is that blessing or Thanksgiving mentioned by S. Paul 1 Cor. XIV 16 17. 1 Tim. II. 1. being as I have showed in a Discourse of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church pag. 350-370 a form of Prayer or Thanksgiving delivered in substance by the Apostles for which the Sacrament of our Lords Supper hath been alwaies called the Eucharist because it is to be celebrated with it Of the same nature is tha order which S. James gives of praying for the sick anointing them with oile aswell for the forgivenesse of their sins as for the recovery of their bodily health James V. 14 15. Which I suppose no man will deny that it concernes all Churches alike If there be this evidence in the Scriptures for the beginnings of Church Law the practice of the Church from this beginning will afford much more Hee that would deny the Tradition of the Rule of Faith what will hee say to the Creed of the Apostles Not that I would have the words and syllables of it to containe whatsoever it is necessary for the salvation of a Christian to believe But because the Creed is not the words of the Creed but the sense and meaning of them together with that coherence and dependence of the parts thereof one upon and with another which the reasons and grounds of them inforce But first let it be understood that I make a difference between the Rule of Faith and the substance of Christianity Supposing Christianity to consist partly in mater of Faith partly in mater of maners Partly in things to be believed partly in things to be done though the Creed extend onely to mater of Faith There is nothing more evident in the practice of the whole Church before the world had admitted the profession of Christianity than this That there was a time allowed and required by the Church for those that professed themselves converted to believe the truth of Christianity to give trial of their conversation before they were admitted to Baptisme The Constitutions of the Apostles VIII 32. name three years but with this limitation that if any man demonstrate extraordinary zele to Christianity hee be received without so long trial Therefore if Clemens Alexandrinus require five it makes no difference For what marvail if several Churches at several times had several customes when as upon extraordinary occasions they were dispensable The Constitutions require extraordinary trial of those that had practised any sort of Magick judging by the experience of the times that it was hard to part with such superstitions It is enough for my purpose that during this time they might learn to behave themselves as Christians by conversing among Christians by coming to Church and bearing a part in the praises of God and hearing the Scriptures read and expounded And what is more notorious in the practice of the ancient Church than the difference between Missa Catechumenorum and Missa Fidelium Between that part of the Office of the Church which Pretenders to Christianity were admitted to or Hearers that is Scholars and Learners of it and that which was peculiar to Believers that is those that were Baptized and made Christians It is the designe of Clemens Alexandrinus his Paedagogus to show how the Word whether our Lord Christ or his Gospel is the Pedagogue of mankinde in bringing them to be Christians Not as wee mistake that word to signifie the Master of a School but as the fashion was then for men of quality to appoint a sonne a Governor to conduct him to School and home againe to attend on him at his exercises and upon all occasions to put him in minde how it might become him to behave himself and to report to his Father if hee proved untractable Thus hee maketh Pretenders to Christianity to be conducted by our Lord Christ and his Gospel in the conversation of Christians till they come to demand their Baptisme of the Church As it is manifest by the end of the Book where this Governor conducting his charge to the Church gives him up into his own hands so hee saith expresly as no more Governor of children but Master of men in the School of his Church Supposing then the point of maners and godly life to be part of the substance of Christianity it is evident that the Church alwaies acknowledged a certain Rule of Faith in that those who were thus prepared were alwaies taught their Creed that is required to repete it and heare it expounded by those whom the Church trusted for that purpose It is not my intent here to insist that the words of the Creed were delivered by the Apostles themselves or that the Rule of Baptisme delivered by our Lord in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is not a sufficient Symbole or cognizance for a Christian For what is there necessary to the salvation of all Christians that is not contained in the profession of him that desires to be baptized into this Faith But it is enough for my present purpose that it was alwaies requisite that whosoever is baptized should be instructed upon what termes hee is to expect to be saved by Christ and that which all were required to professe for that purpose to be the Rule of Faith For whether it may appeare that this or that is of that nature must come to trial though the question be only of the sense of the Creed supposing that the very words were delivered by the Apostles themselves For example It is not possible to render a reason of the coming of Christ not mentioning the fall of Adam nor of that not
mentioning the Devil and his Angels nor of that not mentioning the creation of Angels The knowledge then requisite to save a Christian containeth the Apostasy of the evil Angels whether it be in the Creed or not because neither the Creed as it is nor Baptisme in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost can be understood to have any sense without supposing it And therefore Irenaeus I. 2. could not deliver this Rule without mentioning the Devil and his Angels though I intend not thereupon to argue that it was contained in the words of the Creed at that time By S. Cyrils Catechises you shall understand that those who pretended to Baptisme at Easter were to be instructed in the sense and grounds of their Creed during the Lent And S. Augustine in his book de Catechizandis rudibus where hee acquaints his friend that had writ to him about something of that office with the form that hee was wont to use instructs him to begin with the beginning of Genesis and setting forth what course God had taken with mankinde before and under the Law to bring down his discourse to the coming of Christ and from thence to his second coming to Judgment Which is to the very same purpose onely taking opportunity to mixe the motives of Faith which the Old Testament containeth with the mater of Faith which the New Testament requireth Whatsoever then is said of the Rule of Faith in the writings of the Fathers is to be understood of the Creed Whereof though it be not maintained that the words which Pretenders were required to render by heart were the same yet the substance of it the reasons and grounds which make every point necessary to be believed were alwaies the same in all Churches and remaine unchangeable I would not have any hereupon to think that the mater of this Rule is not in my conceit contained in the Scriptures For I finde S. Cyril Catech. V. protesting that it containes nothing but that which concerned our salvation the most selected out of the Scriptures And therefore in other places he tenders his Scholars evidence out of the Scriptures and wishes them not to believe that whereof there is no such evidence And to the same effect Eucherius in Symb. Hom. I. Paschasius de Sp. S. in Praef. and after them Thomas Aquinas secunda II. Quest I. Art IX all agree that the form of the Creed was made up out of the Scriptures Giving such reasons as no reasonable Christian can refuse Not onely because all they whose salvation is concerned have not leisure to study the Scriptures but because they that have cannot easily or safely discern wherein the substance of Faith upon the profession whereof our salvation depends consisteth Supposing that they were able to discern between true and false in the meaning of the Scriptures To which I will adde onely that which Tâ—rtullian and others of the Fathers observe of the ancient Hereticks that their fashion was to take occasion upon one or two texts to overthrow and deny the main substance and scope of the whole Scriptures Which whether it be seen in the Sects of our time or not I will not say here because I will not take any thing for granted which I have not yet principles to prove but supposing it onely a thing possible I will think I give a sufficient reason why God should provide Tradition as well as Scripture to bound the sense of it As S. Cyril also cautioneth in the place aforenamed where hee so liberally acknowledgeth the Creed to be taken out of the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For saith hee the Faith was not framed as it pleased men but the most substantial maters collected out of the Scripture do make up one doctrine of the Faith For I beseech you what had they whosoever they were that first framed the Creed but Tradition whereby to distinguish that which is substantial from that which is not Heare Origen in the Preface to his books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cùm multi sum qui sentire se putent quae Christi sunt nonnulii eorum diversa à prioribus sentiant servetur verò Ecclesiastica praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens Illa sola credenda est veritas quae in nullo ab Ecclesiasticâ discordat traditione Illud tamen scire opor tet quoniam sancti Apostoli fidem Christi praedicantes de quibusdam quidem quaecunque necessaria crediderunt omnibus credentibus etiam his qui erga inquisitionem divinae scientiae pigriores videbantur manifestissimê tradiderunt Rationem scilicet assertionis relinquentes eis inquirendam qui Spiritûs dona excellentia praecipuè sermonis sapientiae scientiae per ipsum Spiritum Sanctum percipere merebantur De aliis verò dixerunt quidem quia sint quomodo autem aut unde sint siluerunt profectò ut studiosiores quoque l. quique ex posteris suis amatores sapientiae scientiae exercitium habere possent in quo ingenii sui fructum ostendere valerent Hi videlicet qui dignos se capaces sapientiae praepararent Species verò eorum quae per praedicationem Apostolicam manifestè traduntur hae sunt There being many that think their sense to be Christian and yet the sense of some differs from their predecessors But that which the Church preaches as delivered by order of succession from the Apostles being preserved and remaining the same in the Churches That onely is to be believed for truth which nothing differs from the Tradition of the Church This notwithstanding wee must know That the holy Apostles preaching the Faith of Christ delivered some things as many as they held necessary most manifestly to all believers even those whom they found the duller in the search of divine knowledge Leaving the reason why they affirmed them to the search of those that goe to receive the eminent gifts of the Holy Ghost especially of utterance wisedom and knowledge by the Holy Ghost Of other things they said that they are but how or whereupon they are they said not Forsooth that the more studious of their Successors loving wisedom and knowledge might have some exercise wherein to show the fruit of their wit To wit those that should prepare themselves to be worthy and capable of wisedom Now the particulars of that which is manifestly delivered by the preaching of the Apostles are these Which hee proceedeth to set down But Vincentius Lerinensis hath writ a Discourse on purpose to show that this Rule of Faith being delivered by succession to the principal as S. Paul requires Timothy to do and by them to those that were baptized was the ground upon which all Heresies attempting upon the Faith were condemned So that so many Heresies as historical truth will evidence to have been excluded the Church from the Apostles time for mater of belief so many convictions of this Rule Which
because all agreed that they transgressed therefore they were excluded the Church But Vincentius besides this advanceth another mark to discern what belongs to the Rule that is what the ground and scope of our Creed requires For it might be said that perhaps something may come in question whether consistent with the Rule of Faith or not in which there hath passed no decree of the primitive Church because never questioned by that time Wherein therefore wee shall be to seek notwithstanding the decrees past by the Church upon ancient Heresies Which to meet with Vincentius saith further that whatsoever hath been unanimously taught in the Church by writing that is alwaies by all every where to that no contradiction is ever to be admitted in the Church Here the stile changes For whereas Irenaeus Tertullian and others of former time appeal onely to that which was visible in the practice of all Churches By the time of the Council at Ephesus the dare of Vincentius his book so much had been written upon all points of Faith and upon the Scriptures that hee presumeth evidence may be made of it all what may stand with that which the whole Church had taught what may not I know this proposition satisfieth not now because I know Vincentius proceedeth upon supposition that the Church was and ought to be alwaies one Body in which that which agreeth with the Faith might be taught that which agreeth not might not Which is the question now in dispute For upon other termes it had been madnesse in him to allege and maintain the Council of Ephesus condemning Nestorius as infringing the Rule of Faith upon this presumption because ten received Doctors of the Church had formerly delivered the contrary of his doctrine It is well enough known that there are many questions in which though there may be ten Fathers alleged on one side yet there may be more alleged on the other side And it were a piteous case if Vincentius or I could tell you no wiser a way for the ending of Controversies in Religion than by counting noses The presumption lies in this That the witnesles that depose being of such credit in the Church as the quality which they beare in it presupposeth it cannot reasonably be imagined that they could teach that for truth which is inconsistent with Christianity but they must be contradicted in it and their quality and degree in the Church questioned upon it And that the Church having been alwaies one and the same Body from Christ whosoever should undertake to teach that for the Christian Faith which from the beginning had been counted false hee would have been questioned for contradicting that profession which qualified him for that rank which hee held in the Church It is the case of Nestorius who venting his Heresie in the Church gave the people occasion to check at it and the Council of Ephesus to condemn it Now Vincentius his discourse presupposeth that the doctrine of those ten whom hee allegeth had not been contradicted A thing which must needs be presupposed by him that supposed the Great Council of Nicaea had decreed no more than that which had alwaies been taught in the Church For it is plain that without questioning the Faith setled at Nicaea there is no room for the opinion of Nestorius But otherwise should ten of that quality which hee allegeth be so considerably contradicted that it must be presumed their doctrine was suffered to passe not as not taken notice of but as not contradicting the common profession of Christians it will appear a presumption that neither part is of the substance of Faith but both allowed to be taught in the Church And if it appear further that the fewer in number and the lesse in rank and quality in the Church hold that which dependeth more necessarily upon the Rule of Faith which containeth the substance of the Scriptures it will be no way prejudicial to the Unity and authority of the Church as a Corporation founded by God that a private man as I am should conclude it for truth against the greater authority in maters depending upon the foundation of the Church If it be said that this evidence supposeth the necessity of Baptisme to the making of a Christian Which not onely the Leviathaâ— is farr from granting who professeth himself bound to renounce Christ at the command of his Soveraign But the Socinians also and some of our Sectaries hold indifferent to salvation whether baptized or not I answer That the question here is not what belongs or belongs not to the Rule of Faith and Christian conversation necessary to the salvation of all Christians but whether there be any such Rule or not That the original and universal custome of Carechizing all Christians evidenceth such a Rule by the consent of all Christians as you have seen it evidenced by the frequent mention thereof in Scriptures That therefore it stands recommended to us by the same means and upon the same grounds for which wee receive the holy Scriptures And that though when the World was come into the Church and many more were baptized infants then afore it cannot be said that this order of Catechizing was so substantially performed as afore Yet the mater and theme of it remaining in the Tradition of the Creed and the sense of it in the writings of the Fathers and the decrees of the Church against Hereticks it remains still visible what belongs to it what not as I shall make appear in that which is questioned within the subject of this book Onely this is the place where I am to allege against the Leviathan why the profession of Christianity is necessary to the salvation of all Christians Whereupon it will follow without further proof that it is necessary to salvation to believe more than that Jesus is the Christ To wit whatsoever this Rule of Christianity containeth the profession whereof is requisite to Christianity Heare our Lord Mat. X. 32 33. Luke XII 8 9. Whosoever shall renounce mee before men him will I renounce before my Father which is in heaven And whosoever shall acknowledge mee before men him will I acknowledge before my Father which is in heaven And S. Paul Rom. X. 9 10. If thou confesse with thy mouth that Jesus is the Lard and believe with thy heaâ—t that God raised him from the dead that shalt be saved For with the heart a man believes to righteousnesse and with the mouth hee professeth to salvation And a Tim. II. 12. If wee deny him hee will deny us Our Lords Commission to his Apostles is Mat. XXVIII 19. Go make disciples all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Who are then Christs Disciples That wee may know what the Apostles are to make them whom they make Christs Disciples Yâ—e are my Disciples saith our Lord if yee do whatsoever I command you And John XV. 8. Herein is my Father glorified that yee heart 〈◊〉 fruit
truth as to show further how well it agreeth with the sense of the Catholick Church by which I had begun to show that wee are to examine all maters of Faith Indeed I must caution this first that I do not pretend as if this point were any part of the Rule of Faith which is the substance of Christianity to be believed but of all points concerning the knowledge of the Scriptures which is the skill of Christian Divines I hold it of most consequence And that therefore though I am not obliged to affirm that it is expresly taught by all the primitive Doctors of the Church as all maintaining the mystical â—ense it may be maintained that by consequence they do all unanimously deliver it Origen in praef de Principiis so accounts it so will it be necessary to show how well it standeth with the sense of them that it may appear that there is no consent of the whole Church against it It shall be therefore sufficient to name S. Jerome S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine the first affirming that hee reades nothing of the kingdom of heaven in all the Old Testament Epist CXXIX Mihi in Evangelio promittuntur regna coelorum quae vetus Instrumentum omnino non nominat To mee the kingdom of heaven is promised by the Gospel which the Old Testament nameth not at all The second in his Homilies de Lazaro and divers others places raising his exhortations drawn from examples of the Saints in the Old Testament upon this ground that if they did so and so when the Resurrection was not preached it behooveth us under the Gospel to do much more The last besides other places whereof some you may finde quoted in my book of the Service of God at the Assemblies of the Church in the book de Gestis Palestinis relating it for one of the Articles which Pelagius renounced at that Synod not onely that the Saints under the Law obtained salvation by it but even that the salvation of the world to come was preached under the Law The Article charged upon Pelagius you shall finde there to be this cap. V. Regnum coelorum etiam in veteri Testamento promissum That the kingdome of heaven was promised also in the Old Testament To which Pelagius answering That this may be proved by the Scriptures was judged by the Council not to depart from the Faith of the Church Which notwithstanding when S. Austine considers That the Old Testament in vulgar Language signifies the books of the Old Testament in which the kingdome of heaven is promised as the Gospel is fore-told But in the Scriptures the Old Covenant in which it is not promised Hee sayes as much as I have done Therefore hee saith further In illo verò Testamento quod Vetus dicitur datâ—m est in monte Sinâ non invenitur apertissime promitti nisi terrena foelicitas But in that which is called the Old Testament and was given in mount Sina none but earthly felicity is found to be very openly promised Whereupon hee proceedeth to observe that the Land of Canaan is called the Land of Promise in which the promises of the Old Testament figuring the spiritual promises belonging to the New are tendred by the Law And reason hee had to insist upon this because of another Article charged upon Pelagius of kin to this that men were saved under the Law as under the Gospel As you may see there cap. XI Which might well be understood to mean without the Grace of Christ But having cleared the ground of the difference between the literal and allegorical sense of the Scriptures of the Old Testament I hold it utterly unnecessary if not altogether impertinent to tender further proof of this position from the Fathers then the constant agreement of them in maintaining that difference Being when it is rightly understood the necessary and immediate consequence of it Indeed it cannot be maintained that they did understand expresly the true ground of this difference which had they done they would not have been found to use it impertinently and unseasonably as all lovers of Truth must avow that many times they do Notwithstanding in as much as they agree in maintaining and using of it from which use the ground of it which is this position is to be inferred it shall be enough that all of them agree in delivering that by consequence which the principal of them at least in expounding the Scriptures do expresly asfirme For nothing obliges mee to maintaine that this is a poiâ—t necessary to the salvation of all Christians to be believed And by consequence that it hath been every where taught and no where contradicted It is sufficient that I can and do hold it more generally necessary to the right understanding of the Scriptures than any other point of skill in the Scriptures Now if any man object that this is the doctrine of the Socinians I answer first That they also hold that nothing is necessary to salvation to be believed but that which is clear to all men in the Scriptures And that this position hath a necessary influence into their whole Heresie which is grounded upon the unreasonable presumption of it On the contrary the difference between the Law and the Gospel is a principle from which I hope to draw good consequences in maintainance of the Faith of the Church against the Socinians who if they did alwaies see the consequence of their owne positions would not deny the Tradition of the Church as I observed afore If they do not I am not to waive the doctrine of the Fathers because the Socinians acknowledge it But lastly I demand whether Socinus provide for the salvation of the Fathers or not If so why is his opinion blamed If not why is mine opinion that do taken for his CHAP. XIV The Leviathans opinâ—on that Christ came to restore that kingdome of God which the Jewes cast off when they rejected Samuel It overthroweth the foundation of Christianity The true Government of Gods ancient people The name of the Church in the New Testament cannot signifie the Synagogue Nor any Christian State THis position being settled in the next place I will proceed upon it to argue the vanity of that conceit of the Leviathan pag. 263. that the intent of Christs coming was to regaine unto God by a New Covenant that Kingdome which being his by the Old Covenant had been ravished from him by the rebellion of the Israelites in the election of Saul For supposing most truly that God became their King by the Covenant of the Law and that under him Moses had the Soveraigne Power to all purposes pag. 250 251 252. hee inferreth further that after Moses it was by God vested in the High Priests Aarons Successors though hee for his time was subject to Moses And this pag. 217. from that text of Exodus XIX 6. where God promiseth them that upon undertaking his Covenant they should be a Sacerdotal Kingdome which in
man for Communion with the Church by Baptisme but of that which the Church professeth to have received from our Lord and his Apostles And this is the true ground of the foundation of the Church and the Society thereof whereof so much hath been said To wit that God giving his Gospel for the salvation of mankind did think fit to trust the guard and exercise of it to men once instructed by those to whom at the first he had given immediate Commission to publish and establish Christianity Rather then leave them to expect at his hands every day new revelations and miracles for introducing that which had once been sufficiently declared And also rather then leave every man to his own head to make what he can of the Scriptures and think he hath salvation by living according to it For supposing that Christianity which is delivered by the Scriptures once subject to be misunderstood and corrupted of which we have but too much experience an effectual course to preserve it will be to found a Corporation or Society of the Church the members whereof each in his owne ranck should remaine intrusted by God but by the meanes of their predecessors from whom they received Christianity to preserve both the profession of Christian truth and the exercise of Gods service inviolable Nor is it effectuall to say that the unity of the Church may fail being divided by Heresies and Schismes insomuch that that Baptisme which is visibly valide and good shall be void of that invisible effect which it pretendeth For it is not requisite that God should provide such meanes of salvation as may be undefeisible It is enough that they are reasonable He that is Baptized into a profession destructive to that which all Christians are bound upon their salvation to believe perishes for want of Faith setting aside the unity of the Church which his Herisie violates over and above But if the unity of the Church be of such advantage to the maintenance of our common Christianity as it was before the dissolving of it it is no marvaile if the Baptisme of Schismaticks though valide and good for the visible forme become voide of effect to them who by receiving it make themselves parties to the breach of the unity of the Church We agree that the Power of the Church of Rome is the occasion of many abuses in the Church What they are it is my present businesse to enquire He that bounds the interpretation of the Scriptures within the sense of the Catholike Church shall not transgresse the Law of Gods truth in that inquiry He that accepts the bounds of his own fansy in stead of them is it not just with God if he die If once common Christianity and the maintenance thereof depend so much upon the unity of the Church is it not reason that the benefit of it should depend upon the same he who having attained the true Faith and according to the same seeking the unity of the Church faileth of it without any fault of his owne if he who so seeketh it can be supposed to faile of it hath the difficulty of overcoming his own ignorance to pleade for his excuse But for them who have the consent of all Christians from the beginning to oblige them to undertake the profession of Christianity by Baptisme but out of hatred to the present Church the abuses of it neglect baptisme upon presumption that they have the holy Ghost without it or that the reason why the Apostles Baptized is now ceased I say that for them I suppose there remaines no just plea seeing that by the unity of the Catholike Church they ought to have been guided in judging what is of the abuse of the present Church and what is not And thus that consideration which some seeme to be not without cause scandalized at when these effects of Christianity the power whereof must necessarily consist in an unfained heart are made to depend upon an outward ceremony of Baptisme which the Church gives is utterly voided by that reason which the Apostle insinuates when he sayes that Baptisme saves us not the laying down of the filth of the flesh but that profession to God which is made with a good and a sincere conscience Whereas those that distinguish that faith which alone justifieth from the profession thereof which baptisme executeth oblige themselves to make Baptisme a ceremony not whereon the promises of the Gospel depend but to signifie that they are had and obtained without it But to whom signifie not to God who giveth them Not to him that has them and by his faith knows he has them Not to the Church which can never be certified that he hath them indeed and demands onely to be certified that he wants nothing requisite to presume him to be such So that Baptisme being required onely to presume that a man is a Christian and that presumption being legally had by any act the Church or any that call themselves the Church can require as well as by being Baptized If that be all there is no reason to be given the Sociniant why Baptisme should be necessary to the salvation of Christians and therefore why it should not be in their power to use it or not to use it And truly I do much marvel to see the Socinians that have very well seen the truth concerning the twofold meaning of the Law literall and spirituall and the promise of the land of Canaan tied to the carnall observation thereof as that of everlasting life to the spirituall obedience of it I say I do marvel to see that in consequence hereunto they should not inferre that God hath appointed a spirituall people of the Christian Church answerable to Israel according to the flesh and that his spirituall promises should depend upon the visible imtiation of eveâ—â— Christian into the body of that people as the right of his temporal promises depended upon their initiation into the body of carnall Israelites not according to birth but according to promise Onely when I consider on the other side that without regard to the Article of the Catholick Church which Christians make a part of their Creed they rest in such a communion as their private perswasion of the sense of the Scriptures shall be of force to produce I do not marvail to see them not owne the consequence of their own principles when they see it not stand with other prejudices which they have imbraced I know there are two things will be objected here the one is a meer prejudice that by maintaining of free will by maintaining the Covenant of Grace to consist in an act of it we shall incurre the Heresie of Pelagius The other that if the condition of the Covenant of Grace be an expresse profession vow and promise to live as well as to believe according to what Christ hath taught and that without the use of reason no such promise can be of force or take place then infants cannot
Eve was the Mother of the living And though conceived in sin yet was not be in sin or sinfull But whether every one that turns from sin to Faith turn from sinfull custome as from his Mother to life one of the twelve Prophets will be my witnesse saying shall I give my first-born for impiety the fruit of my belly for the sin of my Soul He traduceth not him that said Increase and multiply but he calleth the first inclinations from our birth by which we are ignorant of God impieties He saith most truly that they cannot render a reason how we are born under Adams curse but by charging God He granteth actuall sin in conception but that not the sin of the Child that is conceived He saith the custome of sin may be our Mother Eve in the mysticall sense of David But he ascribeth it to those first motions from our birth which make mankind ignorant of God till they turn to Christianity Whether this be my plea or no let him that hath perused the Premises judge This same is to be said of S. Chrysostome in his Homily ad Neophytos denying that Infants are baptized because they are polluted with sin To wit that he appropriateth the name of sin to actuall sin But as Clemens acknowledges the first motions that we have from our birth to tend to ignorance of God So S. Chrysostome Hom. XI in VI. ad Rom. Hom. XIII in VII ad Rom. cleerly ascribes the coming in of concupiscence to Adams sin or rather to the sentence of mortality inflicted by God upon it wherein he is followed by Theodoret in V. ad Rom. observing that the want of things necessary to the sustenance of our mortality provokes excesses and that sins If this reason can generally hold so that all concupiscence may be said to be the consequence of mortality Christianity will be sound the necessity of Christs coming for the repair of Adams fall remaining the same But this is the reason why the same S. Chrysostome Hom. X. in VI. ad Rom. when S. Paul saith By one mans disobedience many are made sinners understandeth by sinners liable to death Concupiscence wherein Originall sinne consisteth as I have shewed being the consequence of mortality according to S. Chrysostome As for those that censure books at Oxford if they like not this I demand but one thing what they think of Zuinglius his Writings For I suppose none of them believes that Zuinglius holds originall sinne to be properly sinne or that infants are damned for it though whether they come to everlasting life or no notwithstanding their concupiscence which they are born with I find not that he saith Let them therefore choose whether they will censure Zuinglius his bookes or professe that they have the Faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons And therefore I do not understand why I should make any more of this difference of language then of that which was on foot in the ancient Church about the terms of hypostasis in the blessed Trinity among those who haâ—tily adhered to the Faith of the Church And I conceive I may compare it with the difference between the Latine and the Greek Church about the procession of the Holy Ghost whether from the Father and the Sonne oâ— from the Father by the Sonne For though I do believe with the Western Church that he proceedeth from both Yet the Eastern Church acknowledging as it doth from the Father by the Sonne If it had been in me the matter should never have come to a breach in the Church about that difference Even so the terme of Originall sinne being received in the Western Church to exclude the heresie of Pelagius I do not intend to take offence at the using or give offence by the refusing of it But I shall not therefore condemn those times or persons of the Church that used it not as unsound or defective in the Faith the Tradition whereof is not to be derived but by that which all parts agree in professing As for the punishment of everlasting torments upon infants that depart with it it is a thing utterly past my capacity to understand how it concerns the necessity of Christs coming that those infants who are not cured by it should be thought liable to them Would his death be in vaine would the Grace which it purchaseth be unnecessary unlesse those infants that have committed no actuall sinne go into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels Shall the corruption of our nature by the fall of Adam be counted a fable unlesse I be able to maintaine that infants are there or shew where they are if not there Or will any man undertake to shew me that consent of the whole Church in this point which is visible by the premises as concerning that corruption of nature which I challenge to be mater of Faith It is not to be denied that S. Augustine and enow after him have maintained it and perhaps thought that the Faith cannot be maintained otherwise But can that therefore be the Tradition of the whole Church which Doctors allowed by the Church do not believe In this as in other instances we see a difference between maters of Faith and Ecclesiasticall doctrines of which you have a Book of Gernadius intituled dâ— dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis For such positions as passe without offense when they are held and professed by such as injoy the communion of the Church or more then so rank of authority in it must necessarily be counted doctrines of the Church And yet if it appear that the contrary hath been held other whiles and else where they do not oblige our belief as matters of Faith As for the article of the Church of England which ascribeth the desert of Gods wrath and damnation to Originall sinne â— conceive it is alwaies the duty of every sonne of the Church so to interpret so to limit or to extend the acts of the Church of England that is the sense of them that it may agree with the Faith of the Catholick Church Because all such acts serve and are to serve onely to maintaine the Church of England a member thereof by maintaining the Faith of it How much more at this time that unity and communion which these acts tendred to maintain amongst our selves being irrecoverably violated by men equally concerned in the cherishing of it For admitting the Faith and the Laws of the primitive Church what can any Church allege why they are not one with us Not admitting them what can we alledge why we are not one with others It followeth therefore of necessity that the wrath of God and damnation which Originall sin deserveth according to the Article of the Church of England be confined to the losse and coming short of that salvation to which the first Adam being appointed the second Adam hath restored us There being no more to be had either by necessary consequence from the Scripture or by Tradition
which they hear from those that do not profess to Preach within those bounds who can deny that they are guilty to their own death What those bounds are I shall say by and by In the mean time let them take heed whose neglect of the written word or whose zeal to preaching shuts the Scriptures out the Church that they contribute not to the bringing in of the secret and invisible Word of the Enthusiasts It is now no dainty to hear that the word which we have written in our Bibles is not the Word that saveth but that which is secretly and invisibly spoken to us within by Gods Spirit And whosoever attributeth the reverence due to Gods word to any such dictate without dependence upon the Scriptures that is deriving the same from the Scripture by those means which God hath allowed us for the understanding of them according to the premises what shall hinder him to preferre the dictate of his own Spirit under pretense of Gods before that which he admitteth to come from Gods Spirit For he who admitteth the greater contradiction of two parallel Soveraigns why should he not admit a less that the written word is not Gods word in competition with the dictate of his own Spirit when there is so easie a cloke of expounding the written word though against all reason and rule of expounding it yet so as to submit even the substance of Christianty to the dictate of a private spirit We have an example for it in the impostures of Mahomet For doth not the Alcoran acknowledge both our Lord Christ and Moses true Prophets of God besides all other attributes yet in as much as it pretendeth the Spirit given to Mahomet in such a degree as to controle them both it smoothes the way to the renouncing of Christianity when the power of the sword fell out on the side of it Simon Magus and his followers the Gnosticks might have done the like had the like power been on their side as the Manichees did in part if those things be true that we read in Cedronus of a party of them possessed of the Power of the Sword about the parts of Armenia all upon pretense of higher revelations then were granted to the Apostles The same is alleged against the Paraclete of Montanus and perhaps his followers being disowned by the Church might fall to such extremities but at the beginning it doth not appear that he pretended any more then to introduce certain strict orders into the Church as injoyned by his Spirit and those of his fellow Prophets which it was not expedient for the Church to undertake and being so it was requisite for him to conform unto the Church any pretense of the Spirit notwithstanding but otherwise were no way destructive to Christianity Suppose then the reading of the Scriptures to be one of those offices for the which the Church is to assemble the order of reading them which is that which remains is a thing to subject so common reason that there need not much dispute about it If we look upon Tertullianes or before him Justin Martyrs Apologies for the Christians there will appear no more then this that every Church that is every Body of Christians under one Bishop did prescribe themselves that order for reading the Scriptures in the Church which they found requisite And if that primitive simplicity which the Christianity under persecution was managed with had continued what fault could have been found with it But when the World was come into the Church which he that injoyes his right senses will not believe did come into it all with the like affections to the professions which they undertook it was in vain to hope that differences would not rise or might not rise about this as well as other points in which the exercise of Christianity consisted Differences arising the greater authority is that to which the ending of them obliges all men to have recourse The greater authority you have seen is that of the greatest Churches whither in Synods or not requiring Synods to oblige the less by reason of the exigence or reasonableness of the case The order of reading the Scriptures and of singing or saying the Psalms and Hymns of Gods praises being grounded upon no other reason nor tending to any other end then that of exercising and improving the Christianity of Gods people I need noâ— dispute that the Order which the power of the Church of Rome hâ—d introduced here as well in the rest of the West was such as made the Assemblies of the Church fruitlesse to that purpose For what could those shreds of Psalms and Lessonâ— which that order prescribeth contribute that might be considerable to that purpose Nor need I argue how considerable the order of the Church of England is to the same For to finish the Psalter once a year the New Testament thrice a year the Old once besides for reverence to the ancient Ordinance of the Church another Order for beginning the Prophet Esay at Advent and Genesis at Septuagesima to be prosecuted on Festival days is an Order from which the Church hath reason to expect a good effect in the instruction of Gods people And the interweaving of the Lessons with Hymns as it is agreeable to the rules and the practice of the ancient Church so it is in reason a fit mean to preserve attention and quicken devotion in them who use it In the mean time supposing there were considerable objections to be made against this or that order yet Order in generall being a thing so requisite to the preservation of Unity in the Body of the Church there is no reason to be given why any body should be admitted to dispute any Order received that cannot advance another Order which he can pretend to be more effectual to the purpose in which the parties must needs agree I am here to answer that part of the question concerning the Canon of Scripture which I said in the first book concerneth the Law not the faith of the Church whither the reading of those Scriptures which S. Jerome calls Apocryphall Ruffinus upon the Creed Ecclesiasticall for part of the Church office be for the ediâ—ication of the Church or not And a few words shall serve me to answer it with The very name of Ecclesiastical serves him that admits the Church to be one Body the unity whereof requires some uniformity in the order of those offices the communion whereof is one part of the end for which it subsisteth For it is manifest that the whole Church hath frequented the reading of them and that they are called Ecclesiastical for no other reason but because the reading of them hath been frequented by the Church in the Church And whosoever makes this any title of separation from the Church of Rome will make his Title Schismatical separating for that which is common to the present Church of Rome with the whole Church But because the repute of the Church is so slight