who will or can think it reasonable that the Church should be thought to avow all that hath been written by any of the Church and is come to the hands of posterity by whatsoever means Or who will think it strange that a Christian should not understand the Rule of his Christianity though the right understanding thereof should have been the condition requisite to the making of him a Christian If the profession made by the writing from which posterity hath it were evidently so notorious to the Church and the maintenance thereof so obstinate that the Church could not avoid taking notice of it and contradicting it without quitting the trust of the Rule of Faith deposited with it then and not otherwise I do admit that the contrary of that which is regularly and ordinarily taught by Church Writers is inconsistent with the Rule of Faith Besides this another presumption or prescription limiting the interpretation or Scriptures in such things as concern the Traditions of the Apostles wee may be confident to have gained from the Society of the Church demonstrated by the premises To wit that if any thing be questionable whether it come by Tradition from the Apostles or not there can no conclusion be made in the negative because it is not expressed in the Scriptures Here I desire all them that will not mistake mee to take notice that I intend not here to conclude or inferre what force those Traditions which I pretend may come from the Apostles though it be not certified by the Scriptures may have to oblige the Church which question I found it requisite to set aside once afore But that which here I affirme onely concerns the question of fact that it is not impossible to make evidence that some Orders or Rites and customes of the Church had their beginning of being brought in for Laws to the Church by the Apostles though not written in the Scriptures Confessing neverthelesse that the proving hereof which no reason can hinder mee to proceed with here will be a step to the resolving of that force which the Traditions of the Apostles whether written or not written in the Scriptures have and ought to have in obliging the Church at present when it shall appear to be common to written and unwritten Traditions to have their authority from the Apostles And the evidence of this prescription depends upon a more general one limiting the interpretation of Scripture in mater of this nature that is concerning the Laws of the Church how far they were intended by the Apostles to tye the Church not to exceed the practice of the Church succeeding the times of the Apostles The demonstration whereof consists in certain instances of things recorded by the Scriptures of the New Testament either evidencing onely mater of fact that is what was then done and therefore importing no precept what was to be done for the future or importing such precepts as no man will stand to be now in force It is manifest that the Scriptures report how the Disciples under the Apostles were wont to assemble themselves to serve God by the Offices of Christianity upon the first day of the week called vulgarly Sunday after the Resurrection of Christ John XX. 19 26. Acts. XX. 7. Con. XVI 2. Apoc. I. 10. Speaking of the banishment of S. John conforming himself to the times of the Church for the service of God and thereupon ravish'd in Spirit Which no man questions It is said indeed in this case as it is said by others in the question of Tithes that the first day of the week is commanded to be kept holy of Christians by the fourth Commandment But I demand of any man that can tell seven whether the first day of the week and the seventh day of the week be the same day of the week or not And if this be unquestionable I demand further whether the Jews were tyed by the fourth Commandement to keep the last day of the week or not Assuring my self that whosoever believes the Scriptures and reads the Commandement that obliges them to rest all that day in which God rested from making Heaven and Earth can no more doubt that they were bound to rest on Saturday than that God rested from making Heaven and Earth upon that day I demand then whether the same precept that obliged them to keep Saturday can oblige Christians to keep Sunday And do conclude that it can no more be said then that the same word signifies both the seventh and the first day So wide an error so small a mistake can cause when faction hath once swallowed it A man would think it a very easie mistake to understand the seventh day of the week which God commands to be hallowed as if it signified one of the seven and no more Which if it were true then were the Jews never tied to rest on the Saturday by Gods Law but might have chosen which day of seven they would have rested on notwithstanding that God rested on the Saturday which is to make the reason of the precept impertinent to the mater of it I intend not to deny that the reason and ground upon which the Christian Church came to be enjoyned to keep the first day of the week is drawn and to be drawn from the fourth Commandment But I say further that the reason and ground of a positive Law makes it not a Law but the act of him that hath power to give Law signifying that hee intends to inact it for a Law whether hee expresse the reason or not And thus I say as I have hitherto said concerning other Ordinances which have the force of Law to oblige the Church that they can no more stand by virtue of such Ordinances as I acknowledge to have been torrespondent to them under the Law of Moses than Christianity by the virtue of Judaisme or the Gospel by virtue of the Law which though it bear witnesse to the Gospel yet hee were a Madman that should say That hee who was bound to be circumcised by virtue of that circumcision should be bound to be baptized supposing him of the number of Christians who agree that Baptisme coming in force circumcision could no more continue in force And surely those simple people who of late times have taken upon them to keep the Saturday though it were in truth and effect no lesse than the renouncing of their Christianity yet in reason did no more then pursue the grounds which their Predecessors had laid and drawn the conclusion which necessarily followes upon their premises that if the fourth Commandment be in force then either the Saturday is to be kept or the Jews were never tied to keep it Besides this particular it is manifest that the Apostles observe the third and sixth and ninth hours of the day for the service of God Acts II. 15. III. 1. X. 3 9 30. And this according to an Order then in force among Gods people according to the Scriptures Psal LV. 18
the Church to be the onely infallible Judge of all Controversies of Faith necessarily suppose that the Church is by Gods appointment that is Jure divino a Corporation Society or Body of men visible though not Civil because standing upon Gods will revealed in order to the happinesse of the world to come In which Society because in no Society all that are Interessed can act for themselvs it behooveth that there be a publick Authority vested in some persons or Bodies the Act whereof may oblige the whole And thus it may and must be understood that the Church is maintained to be Judge in Controversies of Faith by the definitive sentence of those that have authority to oblige the Body Whether Pope or Council wee dispute not here or what else may be imagined For that as all other Controversies in Religion is to be decided by the resolution of the point now in hand what is the means to determine by reason all such differences Which if it could not be decided without supposing whose authority is to tye the Church there could be no end of differences in the Church whatsoever there will be Here is then an opinion famous enough that the Church is indowed with a gift of Infallability by virtue whereof whatsoever sentence is passed by them that are authorized on behalf of the Church becomes matter of Faith and obliges all men to receive it by the same reason for which they receive the Christian Faith Now they who in opposition to this opinion do maintain the Scriptures to be the onely Judge in Controversies of Faith do involve in this opposition an equivocation manifest enough For it is manifest that their intent is to render a reason by this position why they submit not to that sentence which condemneth their positions in the name of the Church To wit because it is contrary to the Scriptures And further why they with-draw themselves from the communion of that Church which condemneth them and joyn in communion grounded upon the profession of the positions condemned maintaining themselves thereupon to be the true Church of God and those that condemne them the corrupt and counterfeit Whereby it appeareth that in effect they do maintain that there is no Judge provided by God to be visible in his Church with the gift of Infallible But that they are themselves and ought to be Judges to condemne all sentences given against the Scripture by any authority established in the Church By which means the Scripture becomes no more the Judge but the Rule or the Law by which men are to judge Whether they are to stand to such sentences as are given in the name of the Church or not Now if the Scripture be the Law or the Rule by which Controversies of Faith are to be judged there will be no pretense to exclude any means that may serve as evidence to clear the meaning of it And therefore there will be no cause why the Tradition of the Church should not be joyned with the Scripture in deciding Controversies of Faith Not disputing hitherto whether or no it contain any thing that the Scripture containeth not to clear and to determine the sense of the Scripture Whereas they that maintain the sentence of the present Church to be the reason of believing can no way resolve their belief into the Tradition of the Catholick Church Because that supposes only the act of our Lord and his Apostles delivering to the Church that which it holdeth Which who so supposeth can allege no other reason why hee believeth And therefore the sentence of the present Church cannot be the reason why any man should believe that which there was reason from the beginning to believe without it They who to exclude the Tradition of the Church state this position upon these terms That all things necessary to salvation are clearly contained in the Scriptures pretending to limit the generality of the question put it upon an issue not to be tryed till wee have resolved what means there is to determine the meaning of the Scripture For to be necessary to salvation is to be true and something more So that nothing can appear necessary to salvation till it can appear to be true Nor appear to be true untill it can be resolved what means there is to distinguish between true and false Besides how unlimited this limitation is may appear by this Because whatsoever is clear is said to be clear in relation to some sight And there is so much difference between the sight of several Christians that nothing can be said to be clear to all because it is clear to some And that which is not clear to all whose salvation is concerned in it what availes it those to whom it is not clear Now I suppose those that advance these termes will not grant that nothing is necessary to salvation that may be questioned by an argument out of the Scripture which all Christians cannot answer Knowing that such things as themselvs hold necessary to salvation may be assalted by such reasons out of the Scripture as they do not think all Christians fit to resolve Besides they do not pretend that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scripture of themselvs but by consequence of reason which may make them clear Now hee that would draw true consequences from the Scripture had need be well informed of the mater of that Scripture which hee drawes into consequence And to that information how can it appear that any thing is more necessary than the Tradition of the Church Therefore though I say not yet whether it be true or false that all things necessary to salvation are clearly contained in the Scriptures yet at the present I say that this is not the prime truth which must give a reason of all that followes upon it but demands a reason to be given for it by those principles upon which the resolution of all maters of Faith depends All this while wee agree upon the supposition that the Church is a Society of men subsisting by Gods revealed will distinct from all other Societies Because as I said those that have departed from the Church of Rome have hitherto pretended their own communion to be the true Church For if it be said that they do not or scarce ever did agree in communion one with another so that they can pretend to constitute all one Church That is not because they do not think that they ought all to constitute one Church but because they agree not upon the conditions Each part thinking that the other doth not believe as those whom they may communicate with ought to believe But this is now manifestly contradicted by two opinions among us though the one can be no â—ect the other as yet appears not to be one The first is that of them that think themselves above Ordinances the Communion of the Church onely obliging proficients and every perfect Christian being to himself a Church Of these
be said that God granteth the Secular Power any right to punish him for that choice for which hee maketh him unaccountable The ground of my reason lies in that which hath been said against the Infallibility of the Church For if the sentence of the Church be not of force to oblige any man to believe the truth of it much lesse can the sentence of any Christian though never so Soveraign oblige the meanest of his Subjects to believe that Religion to be true which hee commandeth because hee commandeth it And whatsoever penalty the Soveraign inflicteth upon those that concurre not to the exercise of that Religion which hee holdeth forth as when hee denieth them protection in the exercise of their own which as I have showed is no mean one implieth a command of exercising his and is inflicted in consideration of obeying Gods command which the Subject is inabled by God to judge that hee hath against all the world to the contrary So that upon these terms the Secular Power which is inabled to judge for it self upon the same account with the meanest Subject thereof cannot have power to punish any Subject for exercising any Religion which it alloweth not For all Power as I said afore is a moral quality consisting in a Right of obliging another mans will by the act of his will that hath it Therefore if a Subject cannot be obliged by the will of his Soveraign to professe and to exercise that Religion which his Soveraign prescribeth then cannot the Soveraign have power to impose any penalty upon his Subject for professing or exercising that Christianity which hee believeth All Christianity obliging a man to the utmost of his ability to professe and to exercise that Religion which hee believeth to be true And the reason is manifest For Christianity is from God and the Secular Power is from God though by several means Christianity by the coming of Christ and the preaching of his Apostles Secular Power by what means I will not here dispute nor yet suppose any thing that is questionable That which serves my turn is evident to the common reason of all men That by another act of God than that upon which Christianity standeth That Christianity dependeth not upon it That as I argued against the Leviathan by a Law which no Secular Power can abate If therefore God oblige a Christian by his Christianity to serve God otherwise than his Soveraign commandeth hee is bound by the same bond to disobey his Soveraign to obey God which obliged the primitive Christians to suffer death rather than renounce the Faith But I intend not to say that absolutely which I say upon supposition of this Doctors sense Nor do I intend here to dispute that which I have resolved in another place what kind of penalties Secular Power is able to inact that Christianity with which it self professeth The question is now how the Secular Power is able or becomes able to impose penalties in maters of Religion which as a Christian it is not able to oblige the Subject to acknowledge not how far these penalties may extend A question which cannot be answered not supposing the Church A question which is no question supposing it For supposing that God sending Christianity founds for part of it the visible society and corporation of a Church assuring the common sense of all people thereby what is the condition upon which Salvation is to be had by communicating with it What will remain but to conform to the communion of this Church labouring to work out every man his own Salvation by the means which the communion thereof furnisheth Which whoso doth not but pretends to disturbe it will remain punishable by the Secular Power for I have said already that the Church is not inabled to inflict temporal penalties not absolutely because it is Christian but upon supposition that it maintaineth the true Church The acts whereof as Excommunication by the original constitution thereof inforceth So did not the Secular Power inforce that Excommunication it must of necessity become ineffectual when the world is come into the Church and Christianity professed by the State And this is the resolution that I have given in another place that the acts of the Church for the mater of them are limited by the Church that is to say by persons qualified by the Church and in behalf of it but the force that executes them must come from the State For supposing the Church to be founded by God and the power of it resolved into that act wherein this foundation consisteth Whatsoever the Church is by this power inabled to do will belong to the Church by Gods Law to do though the mater of that which it doth be not limited by Gods Law but by the act of men inabled by Gods Law to do it S. Cyprian and others of the Fathers have reason when they argue that the acts of the Church are the acts of God For no man capable of common reason can doubt that what is done by commission from superiour Power is the act of that Power which granted the commission so far as it ownes the execution of it And I have sufficiently limited the Power granted the Church heretofore by the mater of that communion for which it subsisteth and the supposition of the Christianity upon which it subsisteth What is therefore done by virtue of this commission though perhaps ill done for the inward intent with which men do it yet being within the bounds of the Power established by God is to be accepted as his own act without contesting whose act of founding the Church it cannot be infringed Which if it be true so far is the Secular Power from being able to create or constitute a Church by creating that difference of qualities in which the difference between several Members thereof consisteth that it is not able of it self to do any of these acts which the Church that is those who are qualified by and for the Church are thereby qualified to do without committing the sinne of Sacrilege in seizing the Powers which by Gods act are constituted and therefore consecrated and dedicated to his own service into its own hands not supposing the free act of the Church without fraud and violence to the doing of it CHAP. XXI How the Tradition of the Church limits the interpretation of Scriptures How the declaration of the Church becomes a reasonable mark of Heresie That which is not found in the Scriptures may have been delivered by the Apostles Some things delivered by the Apostles and recorded in the Scriptures may not oblige S. Austines Rule of Apostolical Traditions ANd by this means I make account I have gained another principle towards the interpretation of Scripture and resolution of things questioned in Christianity either concerning the Rule of Faith or such Laws and Customs determining the circumstances of Ecclesiastical Communion as I showed afore are understood by the name of Apostolical Traditions Which principle that no
to range themselves among their own respective Sectaries So that to impute the corruption of their damnable inventions to the Church because they mixed themselves with the Church till they were discovered is the same justice that the Gentiles did the Christians in charging them with those horrible incests and vilainies which the Gnosticks only were guilty of because they so farr as it was for their turn affected to shelter themselves under the profession of Christians I shall have occasion in another place to inquire further concerning the riâ—ng of the Gnosticks during the time of the Apostles In the mean time because I see those who know not how to yield to the truth when it is showed them stand in the justification of the wrong that is done the Church by expounding of the corruptions of the Papacy that which Hegesippus saith of the Gnosticks it shall be enough to give you his own words in Eusebius Eccles Hist III. 32. R. Steph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hegesippus saith That till that time the Church remained a pure Virgin and undefloured Those that indeavored to adulterate the true Rule of that preaching which saveth the Rule of Faith which I said so much of afore lurking in obscure holes of darknesse till then if any such there were But the sacred quire of the Apostles having found the several ends of their lives And that generation of men being past that were vouchsafed to hear the wisedom of God with their own ears then did the confirmation of atheistical error receive beginning through the deceit of false Teachers Who now none of the Apostles remaining undertook bare-headed for the future to preach that Knowledge which is falsly so called in opposition to the preaching of the truth For here you have in expresse terms that Knowledge falsly so called from whence the Church after S. Paul calls all those Hereticks Gnosticks as pretending to have got it by such means as our Lord had not discovered to his Apostles You have also the difference between their lurking under the Apostles and their open preaching after their death in terms so expresse that hee must have a good will to it whoever oversees I shall be obliged to referr my self to these same words in another place Now to that which is objected concerning the opinion of the Millennaries I answer first that it cannot be thought ever to have been Catholick For Iustine the Martyr who first mentions it in his dispute with Trypho the Jew not many years after the Apostles expresly testifies that it was the opinion of the most orthodox Christians to wit in his judgment but withall that it was contradicted by others who were neverthelesse Christians even in his account that is of the Communion of the Church Which as it is a peremptory exception against the Universality so is it a reasonable presumption against the Originality of it Seeing that in so few years between him and the Apostles those that believed not all which they had delivered for the common Christianity can in no probability be thought to have injoyed the Communion of the Church And truely had it not been contradicted elsewhere that excellent Prelate Denys of Alexandriae that suppressed it in Egypt about CXXX after as you may see in Eusebius Eccles Hist VII 23 24 25. would have found a hard text of it For the intelligence and correspondence then in use between all parts of the Church would easily have confirmed those of his charge even against him The reason of atchieving the work was because the rest of Christendom insisted not on it Neither is the number or repute of Writers extant the reason to conclude any thing Catholick if the premises be true But the evidence which may be made sometimes from the disputes of able Writers but much more from the acts which past in the Church according or against that which they dispute that their doctrine was received or not received by the Church in whole or in part as necessary or not And therefore secondly I say that the mater of this position concerneth not the Rule of Faith commonly obliging all Christians but the interpretation of a true Prophesie indeed but the true understanding whereof whoso would make necessary to the salvation of all Christians should tye all Christians upon their salvation to understand the Apocalypse which who does To justifie this opinion it hath been showed that the Jewes have this opinion that their Christ shall raign M years when hee comes which seeing they cannot be supposed to have received from the Christians it makes a just presumption that they had it even in S. Iohns time The Jewes have a Tradition which they attribute to the School of one R. Elias mentioned in many of their writings by name in Baal haturim upon Gen. II. and which is also the conceit not onely of Lactantius VII 14. Tychonius the Donatist in his V Rule for expounding the Scripture and the Epistle anciently intitled to S. Barnabas and lately published but also as you may see in the late Lord Primates Latine Discourse of Cainan That as there passed II M years before the Law under the Law counting from Abraham II M years so the dayes of Christ should be II M years and after that the everlasting Sabbath But whether or no the Jews of S. Iohns time could expect this thousand years for the complement of the Sabbath or work of VIIM years which this Tradition promised Whether or no Christians may expect the end of the World at the end of VII M years the Sabbath that shall succeed being eternity according to that of S. Peter and of the Psalm that M years are as a day in Gods sight let them that have nothing else to do inquire Certainly it will not concern the meaning of the Apocalypse unlesse it could be said that the M years there fore-told are to begin after II M years of our Lord are finished Indeed this wee see that the Jewes whom King Alphonsus imployed to make the accounts of the Celestial motions in appointing the motion of the fixed Starrs from West to East to come rome round in XLIXM years the irregularity of that motion to come round in VII M years and that not being obliged to it by any observations made the like account of Sabbaths of thousands of years and VII thousands as the Law doth of dayes or years or Sabbaths of years But if these Jewes be pitifully put to it when to excuse their not believing in Christ who came when the World was about IVM years old according to their own Tradition they are fain to say that it hath failed a small mater of almost XVII C years for their sins Among the Christians what can be said more but that it pleased God to promise them M years of prosperity and raign which the Jews forsaking Christ promised themselves to no purpose Seing the beginning of them cannot be tyed to the end of VIM years from the beginning of the
every Instrument of a contract contain every thing that is in force by the said contract Surely it is a thing so difficult to contain in writing every thing that a contract intends that many times if witnesses were not alive other whiles if general Lawes did not determine the intent of words in fine if there were nothing to help the tenor of such Instruments things contracted would hardly sort to effect Consider now what is alleged on the other side how resolutely how generally the Tradition both of the Rule of Faith and of Lawes to the Church is acknowledged even by those witnesses whose sayings are alleged to argue the sufficience perfection and evidence of the Scriptures Is it civil is it reasonable to say that the Writers of the Christian Church make it their businesse to contradict themselves which no Scholar will admit either Infidels Pagans Jewes Mahumetans or Hereticks to do Is it not easie to save them from contradicting themselves by saying that Tradition of Faith containeth nothing that is not in the Scriptures but limits the meaning of that which they contain Tradition of Lawes may contain that which is not in the Scriptures for the species of fact but is derived from the Scripture for the authority from whence it proceeds Or is it possible by any other means reasonably to save them from contradicting themselves These generals premised freely may wee make our approaches to the particulars and by considering the circumstance of the places where they lye make our selves consident to finde some limitation restraining the generality of their words to make them agree as well with my position as with themselves For example Epiphanius Haer. LXXVI Irenaeus II. 46. III. 15. Athanasius Dispcum Ario say all is clear in the Scriptures Meaning that the sense of the Church is clearly the sense of the Scriptures in the points questioned But not to them who exclude that Tradition which themselves include and presuppose Observe again that the perspicuity of the Scriptures is not limited to things necessary to salvation in all that hath been alleged but once in S. Austine Epist III. and observe withall that the knowledg of things necessary proceeds upon supposition of the Rule of Faith acknowledged and received from the Church in the Catechizing of those that were baptized Not determined by every ones sense of the Scriptures It is therefore easily granted that the Scriptures were made for all sorts of people that they might profit by them Alwaies provided that they bring with them the Faith of the Catholick Church for the Rule within the bounds whereof they may profit by reading them otherwise they may and they may not And therefore those sayings which were alleged to prove them obscure convincing that they are not clear to all understandings because they require study and search and digging do necessarily leave him that comes without his Rule not onely in doubt of finding the truth but in danger of taking error for it Upon the like supposition S. Austine affirms de Vtilitate credendi VI. that any man may finde enough in the Old Testament that seeks as he ought For to seek humbly and devoutely is the same thing for him that is no Christian For the Manichees to whom S. Austine recommends the Old Testament in this place were Christians no further than the name as it is for him that is a Christian to seek like a Christian that is having before his eyes the Faith of the Church And this is that which S. Austine means that hee who is no Christian so seeking may finde enough to make him a Christian That is as much as hee is to expect from the Old Testament And this supposition is exprest by Origen contra Celsum VII when hee sayes that the unlearned may study the Scriptures with profit after their entrance made For this entrance is the Rule of Faith which they were taught when they were baptized And the Catechism of that time containing as well the motives as the mater of Faith appears to the unlearned the way into the deep that is the mystical sense of the Scripture Upon the same terms may wee proceed to grant all that is alleged to show that which is not contained in the Scriptures not to be receivable in point of Christian truth For having showed that the Rule of Faith is wholly contained in the Scriptures And nothing contained in the records of Church Writers to be unquestionable but the Rule and Tradition of Faith Whatsoever further intelligence and information can be pretended either tending to establish the same or by consequence of reason to flow from it if it cannot be pretended to come from Tradition because there is no Tradition of the Church concerning that wherein the Church agrees not either it must come from the Scripture or by the like revelation as the Scriptures which no Church Writer pretends to have For as for that which by consequence of reason is derived from those things which the Scripture expresseth Seeing the words of the Scripture is not the word of God but the sense and meaning of them it were a thing very impertinent to question whether or no that be contained in the Scripture which the true sense of the Scripture by due consequence of argument imports But if the question be of Lawes delivered the Church by the Apostles having showed that there may sufficient evidence be made of such though not recorded in the Scriptures there can no presumption be made being not found in the Scriptures that therefore a Law was not first brought into the Church by the Apostles And yet it remains grounded upon the Scriptures in point of righâ— because the authority by which it was brought into the Church is either established or attested by the Scriptures Mater of fact being competently evidenced by other historical truth besides And upon these terms wee may proceed to acknowledg the goodness of an argument drawn negatively from the Scriptures that is to say inferring this is not in the Scriptures therefore not true Doth my position then oblige mee to deny Irenaeus affirming III. that the Apostles writ the same that they preached Or S. Austine in Psalmum XXI de Vnitate Ecclesiae cap. V. and Optatus V. tying the Donatists to be tried by the Scriptures Both parties pretending to be children of God are to be tryed by their Fathers Will that is by the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament But if there shall fall out any difference about the intent of their Fathers Will the meaning of the Old and New Testament shall I think that is said in vain which is alleged on the other side out of the same S. Austine contra Cresconium I. 33. that if a man would not erre in that point hee is to advise with the Church which the Scripture evidenceth For the question being about the rebaptizing of Hereticks that is about a Law of the Church if you will have S. Austine agree with S. Austine
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
therefore affected a compliance with the ancient Church And truly it is fit it should be thought that they complied with him because hee complied with the Catholick Church for by that reason they shall comply with the Church if in any thing hee comply not with it But it is a great deal too little for him to say that will say the truth for the Church of England For it hath an Injunction which ought still to have the force of a Law that no interpretation of the Scripture be alleged contrary to the consent of the Fathers Which had it been observed the innovations which I dispute against could have had no pretense If this be not enough hee that shall take pains to peruse what Dr. Field hath writ hereupon in his work of the Church shall find that which I say to be no novelty either in the Church of England of in the best learned Doctors beyond the Seas And sure the Reformation was not betrayed when the B. of Sarum challenged all the Church of Rome at S. Pauls Crosse to make good the points in difference by the first DC years of the Church Always it is easie for me to demonstrate that this resolution That the Scripture holding the meaning of it by the Tradition of the Church is the onely means to decide controversies of Faith is neerer to the common terms that the Scripture is the onely Rule of Faith than to that Infallibility which is pretended for the Church of Rome Having demonstrated that to depend upon the Infallibility of the present and the Tradition of the Catholick Church are things inconsistent whereas this cannot be inconsistent with that Scripture which is no lesse delivered from age to age than Tradition is though the one by writing the other by word of mouth and serving chiefly to determine the true meaning of it when it comes in debate And if prejudice and passion carry not men headlong to the ruine of that Christianity which they professâ— it cannot seem an envious thing to comply with the most learned of the Church of Rome who acknowledge not yet any other Infallibility in the Church then I claime rather than with the Socinians the whole Interest of whose Heresie consists in being tryed by Scripture alone without bringing the consent of the Church into consequence and that supposing all mater of Faith must be clear in the Scripture to all them that consult with nothing but Scripture But I cannot leave this point till I have considered a singular conceit advanced in Rushworthes Dialogues for maintaining the Infallibility of the Church upon a new account The pretense of that Book is to establish a certain ground of the choice of Religion by the judgement of common sense To which purpose I pretend not to speak in this place thinking it sufficient if this whole work may inable them who are moved with it duely to make that choice for themselves and to show those that depend on them how to do the like But in as much as no man will deny the choice of Religion to be the choice of truth before falshood in those particulars whereof the difference of Religion consists It is manifest that the means of discerning between true and false in mater of Faith which I pretend cannot stand with that which hee advanceth It consists in two points That the Scripture is not and that Tradition is the certain means of deciding this truth Which if no more were said will not amount to a contradiction against that which I resolve For hee that sayes the Scripture is not the onely means excluding that Tradition which determines the meaning of it doth neither deny that Tradition is nor say that the Scripture is the certain means of deciding this kind of truth But the issue of his reasons will easily show upon what termes the contradiction stands Hee citeth then common sense to witnesse that wee cannot rest certain that wee have those Scriptures which came wee agree by inspiration of God by reason of the manifold changes which common sense makes appearance must come to passe in transcribing upon such a supposition as this That so many Columns as one Book contâ—ins so many Copies at least are made every hundreth years and in every Copy so many faults at least as words in one Column Upon which account 15 or 16 times as many faults having been made in all copies as there are words it will be so much oddes that wee have no true Scripture in any place Abating onely for those faults that may have fallen out to be the same in several copies And if Sixtus V Pope causing 100 copies of the Vulgar Latine to be compared found two thousand faults supposing two thousand copies extant which may be supposed a hundred thousand in any Language what will remain unquestionable It is further alleged that the Scripture is written in Languages now ceased which some call Learned Languages because men learn them to know such Books as are written in them the meaning whereof not being subject to sense dependeth upon such a guessing kind of skill as is subject to mistake as experience showes in commenting of all Authors But especially the Hebrew and that Greek in which wee have the Scriptures That having originally no vowels to determine the reading of it wanting Conjunctions and Preposiaions to determine the signification of him that speaks all the Language extant being contained in the Bible alone the Jews Language differing so much as it does from it the Language of the Prophets consisting of such dark Tropes and Figures that no skill seems to determine what they mean This so copious and by that means so various in the expressions of it though wanting that variety of Conjugations by which the Hebrew and other Eastern Languages vary the sense that to determine the meaning of it is more than any ordinary skill can compasse Adde hereunto the manifold equivocations incident to whatsoever is expressed by writing more incident to the Scripture as pretending to give us the sense of our Lords words for example not the very syllables Adde the uncertainties which the multiplicity of Translations must needs produce and all this must needs amount to this reckoning That God never meant the Bible for the means to decide controversies of Faith the meaning whereof requires many principles which God alone can procure because so indefinite Which the nature of the Book argueth no lesse as I observed being written in no method of a Law or a Rule nor having those decisions that are to oblige distinguished from mater of a farre diverse and almost impertinent nature Upon these premises it is inferred as evident to common sense that the Scripture produces no distinct resolution of controversies though as infinitely usefull for instruction in virtue so tending to show the truth in maters of Faith in grosse and being read rather to know what is in it than to judge by it by the summary agreement of it with that which
Valerianus de Flavigny Professor of the Ebrew in the University of Paris written in opposition to an opinion vented in the Preface to the great Bible lately published there in disparagement of the Ebrew Copy of the Old Testament Where hee shall see that opinion refuted with that eagernesse and the contrary attested by the opinions of so many Divines of so great note in the Church of Rome since that Council that no man that sees them can deny that notwithstanding the decree it is free for every man to maintain the original Copies to be authentick And truly hee that should affirm the credit of the Scripture to stand upon the decree of the present Church or upon the testimony of the Spirit must by consequence have recourse to the same visible decree or to the same invisible dictate whensoever it shall be necessary to accept or refuse the reading of any text of Scripture with that faith which if it be false the whole truth of Christianity will be forfeit What Rushworth and his possession would do to evidence what reading of the Scripture is indeed authentick when as it doth not appear what is the reading which the Church is truly in possession of let him advise For in that case hee must expresly avow the consequence of his position that the Scripture is not considerable in resolving Controversies of Faith Because the Church is not in possession of the certain reading of any Scripture For if hee say hee hath made short work in that question having discharged the Scripture of being necessary to the Church and therefore acquitted himself of any necessity to show how wee may come by true Scripture and in stead thereof and all other means of deciding Controversies in the Church established the tradition presently in possession First it will be easier for mee to verifie the short Rule of Faith by the Scriptures interpreted according to that which by records may appear to have been from the beginning of force in the Church than it will be for him to show what is the Tradition which the Church is in possession of at present And that this being showed I shall not need to fear any great danger that hee may object from the variety of reading which may be found in several Copies the necessity of salvation being secured And then in the next place to say That the Scripture is not necessary though not for the salvation of every Christian yet for the salvation of the Body of Christians which is the Church Though that faction which separation ingenders will suffer no opinion to be plausible but those which are in extreams Yet I hope the malice of Satan hath not yet debauched the ears of Christians to indure And thus as afore it was settled that the whole Scripture is received for the word of God upon the credit of Tradition so of every part and parcel of it wherein the credit of several Copies consisteth it is consequently to be said that nothing can oblige the faith of a Christian to receive it unquestionably for the word of God the Tradition whereof is not unquestionable But thus mâ—ch being settled That what was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew is to be received for the authentick Word of God What was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew may still remain questionable That is to say this being agreed it may still remain questionable what Copies they are that do contain that which was originally delivered in Greek and Ebrew How probable it is I need not yet say but any man of common sense must say that it is possible through the changes that time is able to produce that the translations shall prove better than the originals and that the Scriptures shall be truer read among those that have received than among those that delivered them And this is indeed the true state of the question which is now come to be disputed upon due terms as it seems To wit whether the Ebrew Copies which now wee have from the Jews and the Greek Copies of the New Testament now extant contain that Scripture which all Christians are bound to receive upon their Christianity not onely in opposition to the Vulgar Latine which the Council of Trent injoyneth and to the authority of the present Church thinking that it is concluded in that decree but in opposition to that Tradition which other ancient Copies either original or translated may and do contain and evidence In which point I shall in the first place professe as concerning the Old Testament that I finde it no inconvenience but a great deal of reason to grant that at what time those books were made up into a Body and consigned unto the Synagogue the reading which wee have received from them was not delivered as unquestionable so that it should be any prejudice to the Law of God to suspect it but as the most probable and by admitting whereof no prejudiee to the said Law could follow And the safety of this position both Jews and Christians will witnesse with mee For if the Jews rruly acknowledg and insist that their Judaism is sufficiently grounded and witnessed by the leter of the Old Testament which wee have the Christians that their Christianity is as sufficiently to be evidenced by the Copies wee have as Christianity was intended to be delivered by the Scriptures of the Old Testament Is it possible that it should be a mater of jealousie for mee to admit that in that Body of the Old Testament which the Christians have received from the Jews there may be found some passages the reading whereof was not received as unquestionable when the Body of the Old Testament was consigned to the Synagogue from whence the Church receiveth it I say not when this time was nor would I have that which I affirm here to stand upon a circumstance so disputable I do believe the Jews when they tell us of the men of the Great Synagogue after the return from the Captivity from whom and by whom the Scriptures they believe were settled and delivered to their posterity I do also believe that this Assembly might and did indure whilest the Grace of Prophets had vogue and was in force among Gods people For if I believe them when they tell mee that there was such a company of men I cannot disbelieve them that the Prophets Haggai Zachary and Malachi the Scribe Esdras the same with Malachi as they tell us for any thing I know for why should I not believe Malachi being appellative and signifying my messenger to be Esdras his surname given him from that which is prophesied Mal. III. 1 Mordecai Nehemias Josue the son of Josedok and many others of that time were of it But shall I believe that their Prophetical grace was imployed to decide the true reading of the Scripture shall I believe that a new revelation was given to notifie how every leter and syllable was to be read when neither the consequence of the mater required it
nothing but sufficient evidence that they came from God could have brought to passe Here if any man should say I know I have the Writings of Homer Aristotle or Tully by the Writings themselvs he might be convicted by tendering them to one that knowes nothing of Tully or Homer or Aristotle and asking him whether hee can say by those books whether they be Homers or Aristotles or Tullies Writings Bu◠he that first understands what account the world alwaies hath had their Writings in and studying them finds the marks in them may well say that hee knows the authors by their Writings So tender the Scripture in Ebrew or Greek to a savage of the West-Indies and ask him whether they be the Word of God or not who believes not in God as yet do you believe hee can tell you the truth But convict him of that which I have said how and by what means they came to our hands how they have been and are owned for Lawes to the hearts and lives of Gods people and hee will stand convict to God if hee believe not finding that written in the Books which the men own for the rule of their conversations So by the same means that all records of Learning are conveyed us are the Scriptures evidenced to be mater of historical faith But inasmuch as the mater of them had never been received but by the work of God in that regard they become mater of supernatural faith in regard of the reason moving in the nature of an object to believe as well as in regard of Gods grace moving in the nature of an effective cause I know there have been divers answers made to assoile this difficulty by those that dispute Controversies That the Scriptures authority is better known in order of nature the Churches in that order by which wee get our knowledg as Logicians and Philosophers use to distinguish between notius naturâ and notius nobis because our knowledg rises upon experience which wee have by sense of particulars and yet the general reason being once attained by that means is in some sense better known than that which depends upon it That the authority of the Scripture is the reason why wee believe but the authority of the Church a condition requisite to the same creating in the mindes of men that discreetly consider it a kinde of inferior Faith though infallible which disposes a man to accept the mater of that Faith which God onely revealeth though the reason why we believe is only the act of God revealing that which he obligeth us to believe But all this to no purpose so long as they suppose the foundation of the Church in the nature of a Corporation for the ground of admitting the mater of Faith not the credit of all believers agreeing in witnessing the motives of Faith I remember in my yonger time in Cambridge an observation out of Averrois the Saracene his Commentaries upon Aristotle which as I finde exactly true so may it be of good use That in Geometry and the Mathematicks the same thing is notius naturâ and nobis to wit the first principles and rudiments of those sciences which being evident as soon as understood produce in time those conclusions which no stranger to those studies can imagine how they should be discovered For being offered to the understanding that comprehendsthe meaning of them they require no experience of particulars with sense time brings forth to frame a general conceit of that in which all agree or to pronounce what holds in all particulars Because it is immediately evident that the same holds in all particulars as in one which a man has before his eyes The like is to be said of the processe in hand though the reason be farre otherwise Hee that considers may see that the motives of Faith assured to the common sense and reason of all men by the consent of believers are immediately the reason why wee believe the Scriptures in which they are recorded to be the Word of God without so much as supposing any such thing as a Church in the nature of a Corporation indowed with authority over those of whom it consists The consent of Christians as particular persons obliging common reason both to believe the Scriptures and whatever that belief inferres As this must be known before wee can believe the Scriptures so being known it must be if any be the onely reason why we believe either the Scriptures or that Christianity which they convey unto us And if it be the onely reason why wee believe then is it better known in order of reason as well as of sense to be true than the authority of the Church the knowledg whereof must resolve into the reason why wee are Christians And if this be true then is not the authority of the Church as a Corporation to be obliged by the act of some members so much as a condition requisite to induce any man to believe All men by having the onely true reason why all are to believe being subject to condemnation if they believe not But not if they believe not the Corporation of the Church unlesse it may appeare to be a part of that Faith which that onely reason moves us to believe Neither doth the credit which wee give to all Christians witnessing the motives of Faith to be true by submitting to Christianity in regard of them create in us any inferior Faith of the nature of humane because the witnesse of man convayes the motives thereof to our knowledg But serves us to the same use as mens eyes and other senses served them when they saw those things done which Moses and the Prophets which our Lord and his Apostles did to induce men to believe that they came from God For as true as it is that if God have provided such signs to attest his Commission then we are bound to believe So true is it that if all Christians agree that God did procure them to be done then did hee indeed procute them to be done that men might believe For so great a part of mankinde could not be out of their wits all at once Let not therefore those miracles which God hath provided to attest the Commissions of Moses and the Prophets of our Lord and his Apostles be counted common and probable motives to believe unlesse wee will confesse that wee have none but common and probable motives For what reason can wee have to believe that shall not depend upon their credit Unlesse it be the light of natural reason which may make that which they preach more evidently credible but never evidently true If these works were provided by God to oblige us to believe then is that Faith which they create truely divine and the work of God Though had all men been blinde they had not been seen and had all men been out of their wits wee might presume that they had agreed in an imposture And now it will be easie to answer the
disputed by degrees that they are not true There would be nothing in my way to hinder the resolution of a positive Rule to distinguish between true and false in all things concerning the Christian Faith Notwithstanding because by that which already wee have said and that which appears to all men in the Scriptures there is sufficient means to conclude so much as I have proposed and that the proof of it will be an advantage to that which shall follow I shall undertake it supposing no more than I have said I do remember the Argument made against Tradition by Marinaro the Carmelite at the Council of Trent Which as it was thought so considerable there that order was taken that hee should appeare no more in the Council so seemed to mee when I reade it not easie to answer Now upon further consideration I make it my ground to prove the conclusion which I have advanced Hee argued That it was not possible to give a reason why God should provide that some of those truths which are necessary to salvation should be recorded in Scripture others equally obliging not For if you interpose the terme clearly and argue That there is no reason why God should deliver some things clearly by writing others not the argument will be the same To mee it seems manifest that hee who once holds that all things necessary to the salvation of all are clearly contained in the Scriptures adding onely clearly to his terms to all understandings ties himself by giving the reason why they ought to be clear because necessary to maintain that all truths are delivered by Scripture in the same degree of clearnesse to all understandings as they are in degree of necessity to the salvation of all souls For that every cause every reason should inferre the consequence produce the effect answerable in degree to that degree which the reason or cause is supposed to hold is a thing that all reason inforces every understanding justifies But that all things are not clear by the Scriptures in the same degree as they are necessary to salvation is clear to all in point of fâ—ct Inasmuch as there are infinite truths which Christians diffâ—r not about in the Scriptures because they think not their salvation concerned in the mater of them those which are thought to concern it remaining in dispute because not so clear Neither is it for a Christian to prescribe a reason why it ought to be otherwise because that were to prescribe unto Almighty God a rule not depending upon his will declared otherwise This is the issue upon which I demonstrate my intent Neither Gods act in general of declâ—ring his will in writing not his particular acts of declaring his will in such several maters as the several writings of the Prophets and Apostles which make the Body of the Scriptures contain do any way import the declaring of an intent in God thereby to manifest all things necessary to the salvation of all clearly to all understandings therefore that any thing is necessary to salvation is no presumption that it is clearly declared in Scripture to all understandings Inasmuch as it is manifest that no man can give Law to God what hee ought to declare but all men may presume that and that onely to be declared which by dealing with mâ—n under such or such a profession hee hath of his free goodnesse tied himself to declare For it being in the free choice of God whether to declare any will concerning mans salvation or none and that choice being made it remaining yet in his choice whether hee would declare his will by writing or not as it was in his power for so many years before Moses to save men without Scripture it cannot be said that either before declaring an intent to save men hee was bound to declare all that was necessary unto it by writing or by declaring it And this I hold enough to demonstrate to all understandings that the declaring of an intent to deliver us by writing things concerning our salvation imports not in God an intent to declare thereby all things necessary to the salvation of all clearly to all understandings Which will yet be cleâ—rer by proving the other part of my proposition that by the intent of writing the several Books whereof the Scripture consists clearly declared God hath not clearly declared the intent so often said The proof of this by the particulars I hold the sufficientest satisfaction that can be tendred here where the pretense is to proceed onely upon that which all Christians receive The particulars consist in the writings of the Prophets the sayings and doings of our Lord recorded in the four Gospels and the writings of the Apostles For the Gospels pretending to contain the doings and sayings of our Lord but to be written by his disciples It followes by the nature of the busâ—nesse that they must contain some thing as from the person of the Writer and of his sense over and above what they pretend to record Which properly will belong to the writings of the Apostles though contained in the Gospels And thus farre to avoid cavil I have thought fit here to distinguish Now that all mater of salvation is not clearly contained in the writings of the Prophets that is in the Old Testament written by Moses and his Scholars the Prophets I prescribe upon that which all Christians suppose as the ground upon which Christianity is justified against Judaisme That the Old Testament delivereth but the figure and shadow of the New For unlesse a man will have the figure and shadow to be all one with the body and substance hee must confesse that the substance of Christianity which is shadowed in the Old Testament is not clearly declared by the same unless he will have to be shadowed and unshadowed that is clear to be all one Let mee demand if Christianity be clearly declared by the Law to be that profession which God would have all to be saved by that should be saved from the time of prescribing it what need the miracles of our Lord and his Apostles what need the Resurrection and so his Sufferings as to the account of evidencing the truth of his Doctrine For the Law being once received upon necessary reasons it is impossible to say why any new reasons should be requiâ—ite to inforce the truth or the obligation of the Gospel if it were clearly declared by it Again it is manifest that our Lord being risen again and giving the Holy Ghost unto his Disciples by breathing on them John XX. 22. gave them also a spiritual grace of understanding the Scriptures as you finde Luke XXIV 32 45. Where first the Disciples that went to Emmaus confesse with admiration Did not our hearts burn within us when hee talked with us on the way and opened us the Scriptures declaring unto them how hee was foretold in the Old Testament as you have it afore Then having perswaded them all that it was even hee
Church For it is manifest that hitherto the authorities of Church Writers cannot be considered any otherwise than as the opinions of particular persons which no wayes import the consent of the whole Church For whereas hitherto there is nothing to oblige the Faith of any Christian but that which is plaine by the Scriptures and the consent of the Church It no wayes appears as yet how the authorities of Church Writers can evidence the consent of Church I will not therefore be curious here to heap up the sayings of the Fathers commending the sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures One or two I will take notice of because they are all I can remember in which the limitation thereof to things which our salvation requires us to believe is expressed S. Augustine de doctr Christianâ— II. 9. In eis quae aperte in Scripturis posita sunt inveâ—iuntâ—r illa omnia qnae continent fideâ— moresq vivendi In those things which are plainty set down in the Scriptures is found whatsoever that Faith or maners by which wee live doth containe S. Chrysostome in II. ad Thessal Hom. III. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are plain and plain and straight in the Scriptures all things that are necessary are mâ—nifest Whereunto wee may addâ— the words of Constantine to the Council of Nâ—â—â—a in Theodoreâ— Eâ—clef Hist l. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles and the Oracles of the ancient Prophets plainly teach us what wee are to think of God But I will also take notice that the same S. Augustine de doctr Christ III. 2. saith that the Rule of Faith which hee had set forth in the first book is had from the plainer places of the Scripture and the authority of the Church And the same S. Chrysostome in the same Homily sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those things which the Apostles writ and those which they delivered by word of mouth are equally credible Therefore let us think the Tradition of the Church deserves credit It is a Tradition seek no more And Vincentius in the beginning of his Commâ—nitorium or Remembrance confessing the Canon of the Scriptures to be every way perfect and sufficient requires neverthelesse the Tradition of the Church for the steddy understanding of it And therefore I have just ground to say that all that is necessary to salvation is not clear in the Scriptures to all that can reade in the opinion of S. Chrysostome and S. Augustine But to all that reade supposing the Rule of Faith received from the Church to bound and limit the sense and exposition of the Scriptures And therefore may more justly suppose the same limitation whâ—n they speak of the perfection and sufficience and clearnesse of the Scripture at large without confining their speech to that which the necessity of salvation requires us to believe And this is already a sufficient barr to any man that shall pretend the consent of the Church which concurreth to evidence the truth of the Scripture for the perspicuity thereof in things necessary to be believed to all whom they may concerne For so long as Tradition may be requisite besides Scripture that cannot appear When it shall appear whether requisite or not then will it appear how farr the sufficience and perspicuity of the Scripture reacheth And this I come now to inquire CHAP. VI. All interpretation of Scripture is to be confined within the Tradition of the Church This supposeth that the Church is a Communion instituted by God What means there is to make evidence of Gods Charter upon which the Corporation of the Church subsisteth The name of the Church in the Scriptures often signifieth the Whole or Cathelick Church THis presumption then which is able to prejudice the truth by disparaging the means God hath given to discover it And that by possessing men that things pretended to be necessary to salvation would have been clear of themselves to all men in the Scriptures if they were true But nothing conducing to clear the doubtfull meaning of any Scripture that is never so true This presumption I say being removed and the authority of the Church as the reason of believing taken away it remaines that wee affirm whatsoever the whole Church from the beginning hath received and practised for the Rule of Faith and maners all that to be evidently true by the same reason for which wee believe the very Scriptures And therefore that the meaning of them is necessarily to be confined within those bounds so that nothing must be admitted for the truth of them which contradicteth the same Wee saw before that the Scripture consisteth of motives to Faith and mater of Faith That in the motives of Faith supposing them sufficient when admitted for true a difficulty may be made upon what evidence they are admitted for true That the conviction of this truth consisteth in the profession and conversation of all those who from the beginning receiving Christianity have transmitted it to their successors for a Law and Rule to their beliefs and conversations Wherefore there can remain no further question concerning the truth of that which stands recommended to us by those same means that evidence the truth of those 〈◊〉 for which wee receive Christianity Had there been no 〈◊〉 Christianity to have been read in the profession and practice of all that call themselves Christians it would not have been possible to convince the enemies of Christianity that wee are obliged to believe the Scriptures If the professing and practising things so contrary to the interest of flesh and bloud be an â—vidence that they are delivered and received from them who first showed reasons to believe It must first remain evident that there are certain things that were so professed and practised from the beginning before it can be evident that the motives upon which they are said to be received were indeed tendred to the world for that purpose This is that common stock of Christianity which in the first place after receiving the Scriptures is to be admitted for the next principle toward the settling of truth controverted concerning the meaning of them as flowing immediately from the reason for which they are received and immediately flowing into the evidence that can be made of any thing questionable in the same It is that sound ingredient of nature which by due application must either cure all distempers in the Church or leave them incurable and everlasting And truly if it were as easie to make evidence what those things are which have been received professed and practised from the beginning by the whole Church as it is necessary to admit all such for truth I suppose there would remain no great difficulty in admitting this principle But in regard it is so easie to show what contradiction hath been made within the pale of the Church to that which elsewhere otherwhiles hath been received I cannot tell whether men despaire to finde any thing generally received
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
rather here to prevent the objection that may be made that I ground my selfe upon the authority of men when I allege the testimonies of Church Writers For those that may abuse themselves with such a fond imagination as this are to consider that I claime as yet no other credit not onely for Tertullian who after hee turned Montanist was not of the Church but for the Fathers of the Church but that which common sense allowes men of common sense in witnessing maters of historical truth To wit that they who published writings that are come to posterity would not have alleged things for true which every man might see to be false in point of fact Because by so doing common sense must needs tell them that they must of necessity utterly discredit the cause which they meant to promote As in the case in hand If wee say that Tertullian being a Montanist alleged against the Church things so notoriously false that all the world might see and know them to be false wee refuse him the credit of a man in his right senses For what were hee but a mad man that would tell the Church that such or such Customes you know are practised among Christians knowing that they were not practised by the Catholick Church though they might be among the Montanists Therefore though I put a great deal of difference between the authority of Tertullian and S. Basil in regulating the Church yet in witneshng mater of fact I can ascribe no more to S. Basils testimony in his book de Sp. S. cap. XXVII than I do to this of Tertullian His words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of things decreed and preached that are kept in the Church some wee have from written doctrine some wee have received as delivered in secret down to us from the Tradition of the Apostles both of the same force to godlinesse And this will no man contradict that hath but a little experience in the rules of the Church For if wee go about to refuse unwritten customes as of no great effect wee shall unawares wound the Gospel in the dangerous part or rather turn the Faith preached into a bare name As first to mention the first and commonest Who taught us by writing to mark with the figure of the Crosse those that have hoped in the name of our Lord Christ Jesus What Scripture taught us to turn to the East when wee pray Which of the Saints left us by writing the words of invocation upon discovering the bread of Thanksgiving and the cup of Blessing For wee are not content with those which the Apostle or the Gospel mentions but promote and inferre others as of great force toward the Sacrament which wee have received by unwritten doctrine Wee also blesse the water of Baptisme and the oile of anointing and besides the man himself that is baptized from what Scripture and not from silent and secret Tradition And indeed what written word taught the very anointing of oile And that a man is drenched thrice whence comes it And other things about Baptisme renouncing Satan and his Angels from what Scripture come they And not from this unpublished and secret doctrine I will not here dispute the saying of S. Basil that these orders are of the same force toward Christian piety as the Scriptures And that Christianity would be but a bare name were it not for these unwritten customes how the truth of it holds Nay it were easie to instance against him as well as against Tertullian that among the particulars which they name there are those which never were in force through the whole Church but onely in some parts of it My present purpose demands onely this that Christians had rules which they observed for Lawes in the exercise of their communion And therefore by the intent of those who inforced those rules do constitute a Society or Corporation by the name of the Church Which Corporation Tertullian whether a Montanist or not when hee writ the book which I quote claimeth to belong to in reckoning himself among those that observed the Rules of the Catholick Church If wee suppose the Church to be one Body consisting of all Churches which are all of them several Bodies it will be not onely reasonable but absolutely necessary by consequence to grant that some orders there must be which shall have the force of the whole others onely in some parts of it And though S. Basil or Tertullian mistake local customes for general yet had there not alwaies been a Body capable of being tied by general customes there had been no room for this mistake No prejudice shall hinder mee to name here the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles Not as if I meant to maintain that the writings so called were indeed penned by them But because they contain such limitations of customes delivered the Church by the Apostles as were received and in use at such times and in such parts of the Church where those who penned those writings writ For though I should grant that those limitations are not agreeable to that which was brought in by the Apostles no man would be so ridiculous as to demand that there were never any orders or customes delivered the Church by the Apostles which succeeding times did limit otherwise The book of Canons which was acknowledged by the representatives of the whole Church in the Council of Chalcedon if it be survayed shall be found to contain onely particular limitations of general orders held by the Church before those Canons were made by the several Councils either the same with those in the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles or differing onely according to several times and places For wee have yet extant a book of Canons made out of the Africane Councils containing the like limitations of the same customes and orders which though not the same yet served to preserve the Churches of Africk in unity with the rest of the Church This Code wee finde added to the former by Dionysius Exâ—guus in his translation of the Canons together with the Canons of the Council at Sardica And Cassiodore who lived the same time with Dionysius affirmes that this collection was in use in the Church of Rome at that time Divin lect cap. XXIII But there is extant a later Collection of Canons under the title of the Church of Rome consisting of the same Canons together with some of the Rescripts of Popes which were come into use and authority in the Western Church at such time as the said Collection was made Of the same Canons consisteth another Greek collection printed by du Tillet and commented by Balsamon which addeth hereunto the Canons of the sixth and seventh Synod in use in the Greek Church but not acknowledged by the Latine Where instead thereof the collections of Martinus Braccarensis and Isidorus Mercator of Burchardns Bishop of Wormes and Ives of Chartres where last of all the collection of Gratiane the Dominican Monk was in
use till the Rescripts of the Pope took place and excluded the Canons of the whole Church The succession of which Law is so visible that hee that may say that the order presently in force can no way agree with that which was established by the Apostles shall not have the face to asfirm that there never was any order established by the Apostles instead of it so visible shall the impressions be of that corruption by which it declines from the order first established by the Apostles And therefore I allege here in the last place the consent of those of the Reformation who in answering this objection when it is argued that therefore Tradition is necessary as well as Scripture do not deny that there was a Rule of Faith that there were Orders delivered the Church by the Apostles to preserve the Unity of the Church But to answer for themselves why they stand not to the present Church of Rome in them do allege That the Rule of Faith delivered the Church by word of mouth is also delivered by writing and contained in the Scriptures Tnat the Rules of good order which the Apostles delivered were never intended to be unchangeable as you may heare Tertullian say de Velandis Virginibus cap. I. For in making this answer they do acknowledge that the Church had a Rule of Faith which it had received for a Law from the Apostles and therefore delivered for a Law to all that became Christians But whether this Rule be contained in the Scriptures or not concernes not my present purpose seeing it will be as much the cognizance of Christians and foundation of the Society and Corporation of the Church tending to maintain unity in the profession and exercise of Christianity whether so or otherwise Onely no man will deny that it may be not so easie to discern by the Scriptures alone what belongs to it what not as it may appear to be by the Churches delivering of it Nor do I pretend here that the orders delivered by the Apostles are all unchangeable For who knoweth not that the Lawes of every Common-wealth do change from age to age the state of Government remaining the same because those rights in which Soveraignty consisteth remain the same And therefore it is enough for my purpose that the Church had certain orders regulating the proceeding thereof in maters wherein it is to communicate as well under the Apostles as in succeeding ages Nor requiring that they should be alwaies the same but that they should come alway from the same power which they left in the Church that so the Body may appear to continue alwaies one and the same And that I proceed to prove by showing that the power of those publick persons which did alwaies act in behalf of the Church in admitting into and excluding out of the Church whereby those Laws were in force and wherein the Unity of the Church consisteth is derived from our Lord by the act of his Apostles CHAP. VIII That the Power of Governing the whole Church was in the Apostles and Disciples of Christ and those whom they took to assist them in the parts of it The Power of their Successors must needs be derived from those Why that Succession which appeares in one Church necessarily holdeth all Churches The holding of Councils evidenceth the Vnity of the Church FOr this I must presume of in the first place That as the Church is and was to be the true spiritual Israel of God when his ancient people departed from him by refusing the Gospel So to signifie this did our Lord chuse out XII Apostles and LXX Disciples answerable to the XII Princes of Tribes and the LXX Elders which with Moses were to govern Gods ancient people Neither do I mervail that wee finde in the Scriptures no further use made of these LXX no further power exercised by them under that title The difference between Gods ancient and new people appearing straight after our Lords Ascension and making that order uselesse for the future For Israel dwelling all in one Land might easily be governed by one Soveraign Court in maters of the Law answerable in power to that of Moses and his LXX Elders But Christianity being to be dispersed all over the world those LXX with our Lord chose for his present service could not serve for the like purpose in time to come It is therefore enough that the number of them signifies unto us the foresaid purpose their office for the time to come being swallowed up in the offices of the rest of our Lords Disciples besides the XII Apostles remaining alwaies the Judges of the XII Tribes of Israel here and in the world to come I am sensible that some both of our Presbyterians and Independents have been nibbling at this point as if they had a minde if they durst to say That the Apostles had no authority in the Church but as writers of Scriptures As for the Goverment of the Church that the people or their buckram Elders were to give them checkmate in it But having met with this pretense in another place and heard no man open his mouth to maintain it I shall at present rest content to have showed afore that their authority is the ground of the authority of their writings here that their Traditions were Law to the Church and that by their writings which mention not so much as what the Traditions were Whereby it appears that they took place as acts of their perpetual authority over the Church not as revelations of Gods will sent by those Epistles wherein sometimes they are not so much as named Besides the Apostles then at such time as the Church of Jerusalem contained all Christendome as I observed afore you have mention of the Elders at Jerusalem Acts XI 30. XV. 2 4 6 22 23. And again after the propagation of Christianity XXI 18. Of leading men also among the brethren who were also Prophets Doctors and Evangelists XV. 22 32 35. These then had not their commission from the Apostles because other disciples as well as the XII received at our Lords own hands the power of remitting sins by the Holy Ghost John XX. 18-23 But there was never yet any doubt made that their authority was limitable by the Apostles because of the eminence of the XII among the Disciples And therefore hee that would say that the LXX were contained in the number of those Elders and Leaders could no more be contradicted then some of the Ancient Fathers can be contradicted in reporting that some of them were of the number of the VII that were chosen to assist the Apostles Acts VI. S. Paul further rehearsing the graces that our Lord hath granted for the edification of his Church reckoneth Apostles Evangelists Prophets Pastors and Doctors Eph. IV. 11. 1 Cor. XII 28. Now it is the whole Church that the Apostle speaks of here as I observed afore and therefore the authority here mentioned extendeth to the whole Church But
But hee that complaineth of that will be bound to advance some other meaning of those texts which may be free from contradiction both to the Rule of Faith and to Historical truth which common sense justifieth And yet admit no mention of publick Penance in the Church no intent to speak of it in all the Scriptures there alleged Which perhaps will be too hard to do Further I labor not I will suppose no man so wilfull as to dispute the right of excluding from the Communion of the Church granting a power of limiting the conditions upon which it is to be restored to them who forfeited it And this is visible It was but a mater of LXX years after the decease of S. John according to Eusebius his Chronicle that Montamis appeared to demand that Adulterers might not be readmitted to the communion of the Church upon Penance That those that had married the second time might not communicate That the rule of Fasting might be stricter than was in use That it might not be lawfull to fly from persecution for the Faith It is manifest that these were his pretenses by Tertullian that maintaines them being seduced with the opinion of inspirations and revelations granted him and his partizans to that purpose These pretenses were afterwards in part revived at Rome by Novatianus to get himself the Bishoprick there by excluding from Penance and reconciliation those that had fallen away in the persecution of Decius It appeareth also that those men alleged for themselves the very passages of the Apostles which I allege to my intent Neither can it appear that ever any son of the Church did contradict them by saying that the Apostles meant nothing of Penance as they imagined And now let all men judge whether the Church have reason to hold this evidence of Penance and by consequence of its own being a Church Was Epiphanius and all that writ against the Novatians troubled to no purpose at the VI of the Ebrews when those Schismaticks alleging it for themselves might have been silenced by denying that it concerned Penance Why did not the Church allege that the sin unto death 1 John V. 17. is no such thing as Apostasy from Christianity when the Novatians alleged it to prove that Apostates were not to be reconciled to the Church How came it to passe that there was so much doubt made in the Church of Rome of admitting the Epistle to the Ebrews for Canonical Scripture witnesse S. Jerome Epist ad Dardanum as thinking that it did absolutely contradict the re-admitting of Apostates which had been practised in that Church before Montanus Tertullian of all men was troubled without cause that the incestuous person whom hee supposes to be excommunicated at Corinth by S. Pauls Order 1 Cor. V. should be re-admitted by his Indulgence 1 Cor. VII De Pudicitiâ cap. XIII XIV XV. because hee saw this was a peremptory exception against Montanus that a crime equal to Adultery should by S. Paul be admitted to Penance How easie a thing it had been for him to say that there is nothing of Penance nothing of Excommunication which Penance presupposes and therefore inferres in delivering to Satan the incestuous person in commanding them not so much as to eat with those that are called brethren that is Christians but are indeed such as the incestuous But hee being some fourteen hundred years nearer the beginning of Christianity than wee and being satisfied by his five senses of those things which new Heresies and Schismes oblige us to argue by consequences found that his Patriarch Montanus could not answer so And therefore thinking that the Church could not answer their arguments forces an answer to this by saying it was not the same man that is excommunicated by the Apostles Order 1 Cor. V. and restored by his Indulgence 2 Cor. VII Because hee saw the reconciling of a sinner to the Church by Penance as lively described and signified by S. Pauls Indulgence there as by any record of the Church at such time as it was most in use And can there remain any doubt of this Excommunication because the Church cannot now deliver to Satan for destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus Surely all the writings of the Apostles do bear witnesse that the miraculous graces of the Holy Ghost which they had then but all Christians see the Church hath not now served not onely to witnesse the truth of Christianity but the authority of the Apostles in behalf of it This authority having taken effect by those Ordinances which the Church hath received at their hands It is no longer requisite that God should bear witnesse to his own Ordinances by such miraculous effects seeing hee doth no longer bear witnesse to the truth of Christianity by the like Hee that believes that whosoever is not in the Church is in the power of Satan needs no reason why hee is delivered to Satan that is put out of the Church Hee that believes it not is not to be perswaded that there is a power of Excommunication granted the Church But that the Christian saith which the Church preacheth is true for that without peradventure preached the Church At least till some body show us that this reason is insufficient hee must not demand that wee give an Article of our Creed and all the help to salvation which the communion of the Catholick Church pretendeth for such an objection as this Chuse now whether you will say as I say That under the Apostles difficulty was made of re-admitting some sorts of sins but never any peremptory order against it and so that Montanus and Novatianus were Schismaticks for seperating from the Church when the whole Church was agreed that there was a necessity of it or look about for a more reasonable sense to assoile the great difficulties of these passages Provided that you offer not violence to common sense and historical truth by imagining that so near the Apostles time there could be so much question about Penance they having neither meant nor ordained any thing about it To this argument all the most ancient records of the Church wheresoever mention is made of reconciling by Penance all the Penitential Canons of later ages will bear witnesse For who can undertake to answer or rather to obscure the evidence made in the place aforenamed that some sins were refused Penance and reconcilement in the first ages of the Church When wee have a whole book of Tertullian contending with Montannus to impose a Law upon it of re-admitting no Adulterers When wee know a whole sect of Novatians that left the Church that they might re-admit no Apostates As for the Penitential Canons of later ages it is manifest to any man that shall peruse and compare them with that which hath been said of the primitive times that they are nothing else but the abatement of that rigor of Discipline which during the primitive heat and zele of
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
by making that profession which the Church requireth owneth the person of the Church for Corporations are persons in Law for the evidence which hee trusteth in the mater of his Salvation I shall not need to have recourse to the Article of our Creed to prove that hee owneth the unity of it and obligeth himself upon his Salvation to abide in the same Nor indeed have I any need here to repeat the processe by which I have demonstrated the corporation of the Church Here I inferre as clearly gained by it that the effect of binding or loosing men from sin is limited by God to a condition of acknowedging or not acknowledging the Church for two reasons and in two cases For hee that is admitted to Baptisme upon professing the Faith of the Church and undertaking to live as a Christian if hee transgresse this profession forfeits the communion of the Church which hee attained by making it And hee that acknowledgeth the unity of the Church which all that are baptized must needs acknowledge forfeits his share in it by doing that which dissolveth it though hee transgresse not the profession of his Christianity doing it Now it appeareth by S. Paul and our Lord that Christians under Infidels are forbidden to carry any of their sutes out of the Church and commanded to end them among themselves And shall hee not forfeit the benefit of his Christianity and become bound by the sin hee committeth in so doing that doth this I may therefore grant Erastus and this Doctor that Let him be to thee as a Heathen or Publicane signifies be it lawful for thee to implead him before Unbelievers But it must be as I said afore upon supposition that hee is first excommunicate and become no Christian to thee and therefore to be used as a Heathen or a Publicane As also I grant him that to be delivered to Satan signifies not to be excommunicate but supposes it For if S. Paul calling the miraculous graces of the Apostles time the manifestation of the Spirit do teach us that the world was thereby convicted That God of a truth was in his Church as hee saith again 1 Cor. XIV 24 25 then was it to the same purpose and effect that those who were shut out of the Church should become liable to the incursions of evil Spirits To wit To make the difference between the Land of Goshen and the rest of Egypt visible It was therefore necessary that the power of binding or loosing in the Apostles and Disciples of our Lord should be accompanied with the gift of the Holy Ghost which our Lord breathed upon them For by them the world was to be assured upon what termes they might be loosed from sinne and continue in the Unity of the Church which if they forsook they became bound again But there is not the same reason why the same should be thought requisite to the same power in their successors For those terms being once declared and settled hee that professeth and teacheth them as the Apostles have taught is a competent Minister to loose or to bind another not onely though hee have not that gift of the Holy Ghost that may make him appear to be appointed by God to that purpose but also though hee be bound himself because hee undergoes not that which hee professeth Now if the premises be true it is a mistake as grosse as pernicious to imagine that particular Christians by the light common to all Christians are Judges in all things concerning Christianity or the Scriptures For if the attaining of Christianity and Salvation by it require no more but to know the Rule of of Faith and the common precepts of Christian conversation together with the Offices wherewith God is to be served by his Church If the gift of the Holy Ghost be promised to those that are baptized upon undertaking this then is the understanding of the rest of the Scriptures no further required at their hands neither have they any warrant for that which they shall do upon any such presumption as this The Church that hath received of God the trust of maintaining unity in this service of God so as may best stand with the maintenance of that profession which it presupposeth hath by consequence an obligation upon them to stand to the resolution thereof saving that common Christianity which the constitution thereof presupposeth It is therefore utterly a most poisonous doctrine to be infused into the ears of Christian people that they are by their Christianity free to cast themselves into Churches as they may meet with those whom they best like to communicate with It is therefore a thing to stand astonished at that they who have hitherto declamed against any thing in Christianity the reason whereof is not to be derived from the Scripture not seeing in the Scripture any such thing as a Church that was not founded by the Apostles or by commission from the Apostles not in all Christianity any thing ever counted a Church that was not planted by mean authority derived thence to some Church should now think themselves at liberty to build Churches upon no other foundation than an arbitrary agreement of seven persons Suppose I say nothing as yet in what right and interest several Members or rather several ranks and qualities concurre to the resolution of the Church Suppose I grant the power may be so abused that several parts of the Church may stand obliged to provide for themselves without the whole which is al that the common profession of Reformation importeth Shall we not be throughly reformed till we renounce one Catholick Church as visibly a corporation as the Baptisme which we received upon acknowledging of it is visible If every Church be planted by the authority of the Apostles to that effect extant and alive in some Church then is not the communion thereof with all other Churches by the means of that which planted it communicating with all arbitrary but a necessary consequence of that obligation to the Unity of the whole which it gets by being a Church Nor is there any reason why the acts of the whole whether done by representatives in Synods or resolved at distance of time and place by intelligence and correspondence of the absent should any way depend upon the satisfaction of particular Christians how just or how requisite For neither doth their conformity to them in any reasonable construction import any ingagement of their conscience to the justice or necessity of them Unlesse it could be said that a man could not live in society without binding himself to answer for the acts of that society wherein hee liveth Which hee that saith will not find an independent congregation to continue in for four and twenty hours or to enter into onely for one For what obligation can all Christians have to answer for that which our Christianity upon profession whereof we are become Christians containeth not Indeed when the abuse is so visible that the unity of
the Church provided for the service of God upon supposition of this common Christianity evidently destroyeth what it pretendeth to maintain I leave the case at present for their plea who cannot obtain the consent of the whole if they reform themselves But you see what reason I have to deny that this Reformation consisteth in voiding the obligation of the acts and decrees of the Church For the same reason the authority of Pastors is as visibly derived from the act of the Apostles in primitive Churches as their own authority is visible in the Scriptures And unlesse all Christendom could be cousened or forced at once to admit such an imposture they can be no Churches further than the name in which it is derived from the Law of nature and reason and the liberty left private Christians to dispose of themselves in Ecclesiastical communion where they please For of that liberty neither the Scriptures nor all Christianity since the time of them will yield one example I marvel therefore that S. Pauls commission to Timothy 1 Tim. V. 17. should seem to import no more then a reproof and that at the discretion of him that is reproved whether hee will admit it or return him as good as hee brings For if S. Pauls commission to Timothy extend no further what could hee have done more himself had hee been present And the Apostle injoyning obedience to those who first brought the Gospel and to those who presently ruled those Churches in the same terms Hebr. XIII 7 17. must needs be thought to give the successors their predecessors authority saving the difference observed afore So certain is it which I have advanced in another place that this opinion is not tenable without denying the authority of the Apostles in the quality of Governours of the Church For as to the exception that may be made concerning the use of this Power I have already demurred to the doubt that may rest in difference between the succession of Faith and the succession of persons In fine not to insist here what the respective interests of publick and private persons in the Church are and ought to be because it is a point that cannot here be voided It shall be enough to say that of necessity the authority of publick persons in and for the whole must be such as may make and maintain the Church a Society of reasonable people not a Common-wealth of the Cyclopes in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no body is ruled by any body in any thing according to Euripides As for the Synagogues that may be presumed rather then evidenced to have subsisted in the ten Tribes during the Schisme Let him make appear what hee can hee shall never have joy of it towards his intent so long as the difference between the Law and the Gospel stands which I have â—ettled that the Church and the State were both one and the same Body under the Law as standing both by the same title of it But several under the Gospel the one standing upon the common ground of all Civil Government the other upon the common Faith of Christianity which ought to make all Christian States one and the same whole Church For in the two Tribes who were at their freedom to resort to the Temple for that service of God which was confined to the Temple which all could neither alwayes do nor were bound to do there is no record of any settled order for assembling themselves to serve God either in the Law obliging of right or actually practised according to Historical truth How much lesse in the ten Tribes being fallen from the Law by the Schism And if there wanted not those who had not bowed the knee to Baal nor Prophets and schools of Prophets under whom they might assemble themselves yet was this far from a Society formed by a certain Rule and Order for communicating in Gods service as I have shewed the Church is And therefore hee who upon that account thinks himself free from the Rule of Gods service under which wee now have in the Church of England must first either nullifie the Gospel as owning no such thing as one visible Church or prove the Church in which hee received his Christianity to be apostate Now I confesse our Doctor here makes use of an assumption which I intend not to deny being an evident truth That every man hath the Soveraign Power of judging in mater of Religion what himself is to beleeve or to do For how should any man be accountable to God for his choice upon other termes But hee will intangle himself most pitifully if hee imagine That God hath turned all men loose to the Bible to make what they can of it and professe the Religion that they may fansie to themselves out of it Even those who make men beleeve the Infallibility of the Church must in despite of themselves appeal to the judgement of whomsoever they perswade to pronounce that so it is And for the rest how much soever he referre himself to him that hath intangled him in that snare it proceeds wholly upon this supposition to which hee hath once made his understanding a slave But if all the world should do as men do now in England make every fansy taken up out of the Bible a Law to their Faith not questioning whether ever professed owned or injoined by the Church or not it would soon become questionable whether there be indeed any such thing as Christianity or not these that professe it agreeing in nothing wherein they would have it consist And for my part the the mater is past question supposing what hath been said That God provided from the beginning of Christianity that all Churches should be linked together by a Law of visible Communion in the service of God and so to make one Church For by this means to become a Member of any Church was to become a Member of the whole Church by the right of visible Communion with all Churches into which all Members of any Church were baptized And this it is which made the Church visible For when a man had no further to enquire but what Christians they were who in every City communicated with all Christians besides the choice was ready made without further trial avoiding the rest for Hereticks or Schismaticks And this choice being made there was no fear of offense by reading the Scriptures the sense whereof this choice confined to the Faith and Rules received through the whole Church So that speaking of Gods Institution every man is Soveraign to judge for himself in mater of Religion supposing the Communion of the Church and the sense of the Scripture to be confined within that which it alloweth But hee who thereupon takes upon him to judge of Religion out of the Scripture not knowing what bounds the Communion of the Church hath given the sense of it shall never impute it to Gods Ordinance if hee perish by chusing amisse Now if it be objected
man mistake mee pretends not any general Rule for the interpretation of Scripture even in those things which concern the Rule of Faith but inferrs a prescription against any thing that can be alleged out of Scripture that if it may appear to be contrary to that which the whole Church hath received and held from the beginning it cannot be the true meaning of that Scripture which is alleged to prove it For the meaning even of those Scriptures which concern the Rule of Faith must be had by the same same means by which I shall come by and by to show that the meaning of all Scriptures whatsoever they concern is to be had and established But the being and constitution of the Society of the Catholick Church from the beginning is of force to prescribe this limitation to the Fansies of all men that take upon them to interpret the Scriptures that they neither admit nor impose upon any man any thing for the true sense of Scripture whereby the substance of Christianity which the Rule of Faith importeth may become questionable So that an evidence of such opposition ought to out-shine and supresse any appearance or supposed evidence of truth in any such sense The Rule of Faith Not to go about to determine in this place what it containes because it is the Master-piece of all the Divines of Christendome to say what is fundamental in Christianity and what is not but to give a grosse description of what men mean when they inquire for it consists partly in things to be believed partly in things to be done Hee that holds so much of Christian truth as may reasonably certifie him of all that is requisite to qualifie a Christian man for remission of sins and life everlasting which are the promises of the Gospel may well be said to hold the whole Rule of Faith in things to be believed Hee that holds so much of Christian truth as may reasonably certifie him of all that is requisie to preserve all Christians with consciences void of sin may be said to hold it in things to be done For the common Rule of Faith importeth not what is necessity for any Christian but for all Christians And that any thing contrary to the salvation of all Christians should be held and professed by all Christians is a grosse contradiction to common sense Whereupon it is no lesse evidently true that the Catholick Church of all ages and places is utterly infallible In as much as it is a grosse contradiction to suppose a number of men to attain salvation who all do hold some thing destructive to the salvation of any one So much difference there is between the whole Church which is the Catholick Church of all times and places and the present Catholick Church respectively to those ages in which the Communion of the whole was not interrupted by any breach but effectuated by actual correspondence For the act of the Catholick Church in this sense which I call the present Church if it be lawfull obligeth all that are of it But it self stands obliged to the Faith of the whole Church as that which the being privilege of a Church resupposeth to beâ— rofessed by it And of this I cannot conceive how any question should remain The difficulty that remains is how it may appear that all this is not a fine nothing how it may reasonably seem to signifie something towards the limitation which I prescribe to the interpretation of those Scriptures which may be alleged in mater concerning the Rule of Faith And the answer is that seeing it hath appeared that the Apostles of our Lord Christ established from the beginning one Catholick Church consisting of all Churches by the will of God and his appointment and that in consideration of that which was made to appear afore that all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians though evidently extant and discernable in the Scriptures are not neverthelesse evidently discernable by all them whose salvation they concern that therefore the unity and Communion of the Catholick Church was provided by God as the depository of his truth the acknowledgment whereof should be necessary to obtain life everlasting So that the effect of this trust deposited by God in the Church to be at least thus much That whatsoever was advanced in any part thereof as belonging to the Rule of Faith being condemned where first it was advanced and in consequence of that condemnation by all other parts of the Church to that effect as to render those that held it uncapable of the Communion of all the whole Church That this I say might be accounted a reasonable mark to discern such doctrine to be destructive to the Rule of Faith And thus were all Heresies marked for such by the Church and upon this ground those marks were receivable not onely before Constantine but so long as it may be visible that nothing hindred this correspondence wherein the actual unity of the Church consisted to operate and have effect For if this be the reason and ground which made these marks reasonable as grounded upon it then hee that supposes this reason either actually interrupted or impeached cannot presume upon the like effect And therefore the justifying of these marks requires the evidencing of this correspondence of the Church and no more And truly I could not but admire to finde it alleged by Crellius the Socinian in his answer to Grotius concerning the satisfaction of Christ where hee argues that no Ecclesiastical Writer ever profest that opinion I say I admired to finde him answer that Pelagius the Heretick maintained the same For sure it is not much more pertinent than if hee should allege that the Jewes professe our Lord Jesus not to be the Messias or that the Gentiles do not worship one true God In as much as though they be further from the faith of true Christians than Pelagius yet an Heretick is no lesse excluded from the Communion of the Church than a Jew or a Gentile And the whole reason for which the testiemonies of Ecclesiastical Writers is receivable to evidence maters concerning the Rule of Faith to which they can give no credit but are by acknowledging the same receivable for Christians is the Communion of the Church which make it evident that what such men professe in the Church is not against the Faith of the Church And this in the second place may be a reasonable presumption or evidence of that which belongeth to the Rule of Faith when a thing is so ordinarily and vulgarly taught by Church Writers that there can be no reasonable presumption made by the doctrine of any of them that the contrary was ever allowed by the Church So then I do not tye my self to this that if any thing be found in the writings of any of those whom wee call commonly Fathers it is therefore not contrary to Christianity or to the Rule of Faith that is either expresly or by consequence For
is evident that hee allowes them that which the Apostles had forbidden because it is evident that this is one of those differences which Jews by the Law were bound to make If therefore there be this difference in the Scriptures it is manifest that the leter of them doth not determine what obliges So again the same Apostle 1 Cor. XI 1-16 disputeth at large that men ought not but women ought to cover their heads at praying or prophesying in the Church For the intent whereof though it hath been the subject of whole books in this age I conceive I need go no further than Tertullians book de Velandis Virginibus who living so much nearer the Apostles knew better the custoÌ„ms of their Churches than all the Criticks of this time Hee disputes the case in question then whether Virgins had a privilege not to vail their faces at Divine Service by arguing that they cannot be excepted from S. Pauls words and alleging the example of the Church of Corinth where at that very time the Virgins vailed their faces at Divine Service as other women did Which whether it tye the Church or not at this time it will scarce be granted by those who now practice it not And in another place 1 Tim. V. 3-6 hee showeth that there was then an Order of Widowes whose maintenance hee ordereth to come from the stock of the Church as likewise how they are to be qualified and how imployed Of which Order there is no where any step remaining in the Church at â—resent though nothing be more imperative than the Order concerning it So the precept of the Apostle serves not to oblige the Church at present though by Scripture And if I may use the argument ad hominem upon the supposition of those that I dispute with who intend not to take any thing for true which I prove not as debating the principles of Christian truth it is manifest that the Apostle James V. 14. appointeth that the sick be anointed with oil together with prayers as well for the recovery of their health as for the forgivenesse of their sins Which it is manifest that it cannot appear not to oblige the Church at this time by virtue of that Scripture which injoyneth it And therefore to say nothing at present whether it do indeed oblige the now Church or not those that believe it doth not oblige cannot be able to give a reason why it obligeth not by the Scripture alone And this is the argument whereby I prove that the interpretation of Scripture as concerning mater of Law to the Church or the means to be used in determining what obligeth what not cannot transgresse the tradition and practice of the Church Because that which is propounded in the Scriptures as meer mater of fact may oblige and that which is propounded as mater of precept creating right may not oblige the Scripture not determining whether it intend that obligation to be universal or not For having showed afore that the Church is a Society instituted by God to which these Rules are given as Laws to govern it in the exercise of those Offices wherein the Communion therâ—of consisteth all reasonable men must grant that as the intent and meaning of all Laws is to be gathered from the primitive and original practice of that Society for which they were made so is the reason of all Orders delivered to the Church by the Apostles and by consequence their intent how farr they were to oblige to be measured by the first and most ancient practice of the Church which first had them to use Whereunto let us adde these considerations That the Orders delivered the Church by the Apostles were of necessity in force before mention can be made of them in their writings That the writing of them is neither the reason why they oblige nor a thing thereunto requisite but meerly supervenient to the force of them And that there is sufficient evidence that those motives to believe which the Scripture recordeth but cannot evidence are neverthelesse true and that the truth of those motives cannot be evident but by the Society of the Church which the said Laws do maintain For upon these conâ—â—derations it will appear necessarily consequent that as there be Apostolical Traditions which the Scripture evidently witnesseth so evidence may be made of them without Scripture The Rule of S. Austine how to discern what Traditions do indeed come from the Apostles is well enough known to be this To wit that which is observed over all the Church though it cannot be discerned when where or by whom it came first in force that is in his times by the authority of what Synod it was settled that must be deemed and taken to come from the authority of the Apostles themselves I will not use the terms of Synod or Synods because I conceive the Church was from the beginning by virtue of the perpetual intelligence and correspondence settled and used between the parts of it a standing Synod even when there was no Assembly of persons authorized to consent in behalf of their respective Churches Such things as became requisite to be determined in any Church being thereby so communicated to the rest as the order taken in one either to be accepted by them or redressed Neither will I say that the Rule is so effectual as it is true For I cannot warrant how general the practice of every thing that may come in question can appear to have been over the whole Church nor whether it may appear to have begun from some act of the Church to be designed by some place or persons or not which in S. Austines time I doubt not might be made to appear and being made to appear would maintain the Rule to be true Nor have I need of any such Rule as may serve to discern whatsoever may become questionable whether it come from the Apostles themselves or not It shall suffice mee here to presume thus much that no man can prescribe against any Rule of the Church that it comes not from the Apostles because it is not recorded in the holy Scriptures And therefore that nothing hindereth competent evidence to be made of the authority of the Apostles in some Orders of the Church of which there is no mention in the Scriptures Correspondently to that which was settled afore concerning the Rule of Faith that no man can prescribe against any thing questionable that it is no part of it because it is not evident in Scripture or because such arguments may be made against it out of the Scriptures which every one whose salvation it concerns is not able evidently to assoile And all this being determined I intend neverthelesse that it still shall remain questionable how farr these Orders of the Apostles oblige the Church Because I intend not to prescribe from all this that those Orders which shall appear to have been brought in by the Apostles may not become uselesse to the Church CHAP.
world And truly no more than this can be thought requisite to the purpose of the whole Prophesie of incouraging them to continue constant in the profession of Christianity notwithstanding all persecutions as foreknowing the issue Now hee that continues constant in Christianity and never knew this Prophesie shall want nothing necessary to his salvation though hee want so nething very effectual to the having of that which is necessary To wit of perseverance in Christianity The intent of this Prophesie being to perswade them to it Which is enough to show any man a difference between the right understanding of this Prophesie and any part of the Rule of Faith As for the custome of giving the Eucharist to Infants so soon as they were baptized I answer that the evidence which I will give you that it was never used out of an opinion of necessity to Salvation as the Baptisme of Infants was seemeth to be an exception sufficient against the universal use of it as supposed to come from the Apostles Hee that will shew mee any Writer of the Church by whose testimony it may be presumed that the Church did not baptize Infants out of an opinion that they could not be saved without it I speak not now of the truth of this opinion but onely of the point of fact whatsoever may be argued from thence by virtue of the premises I will yield him that the same Writer did believe that the giving of the Eucharist to Infants upon their Baptisme was commanded by the Apostles I acknowledge it is the opinion of Tertullian for which there is no mark upon him as ever a whit the lesse Catholick that it was not expedient to baptize Infants because of the danger of years under discretion to seduce them from the fulfilling of their profession before they could throughly understand what it imported But I deny that this was because he or any body then believed that they could go out of the world unbaptised and yet be saved For when the vigilance of Parents and the diligence of all might assure them not to fail of Baptism in case of necessity it is no marvail if the reason alledged might move men to defer it to the years of manhood beleeving no lesse the necessity of it Now in the writings of Fulgentius a worthy African Prelate there is extant a little piece in answer to a Letter of Ferrandus a Deacon of his it seems about a certain Moore who being converted and having divers times made profession of Christianity as the custome of the Church then required after that being taken sick was baptized without being able by speaking to make the like profession as the rule required all at their baptism to make Upon other considerations the Letter desires resolution of the salvation of this Moore But upon this also because he survived not to receive the Eucharist which is clearly answered in the affirmative upon as good reasons of Scripture as a good Christian can desire Which is without exception to show that they had not that opinion of the necessity of the Eucharist as of Baptism sufficient to argue a severall beginning of observing them both And truly seeing it is granted on all hands that it is no inconvenience in Christianity that the Church or any part of it mistake the true meaning of some Scriptures the alledging of our Lords words Vnless yee eat the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his blood yee have not life in you Joh. VI. 53. seems to argue that this came to be an order from some new act of the Church or part of it rather then that it was practised as coming from the Apostles Whereunto if we add that which here follows though it appear chiefly by S. Cyprian de lapsis to have been frequented in Africk though it were practised in the Western and Eastern Church yet perhaps it will appear to comeshort of S. Austins rule of discerning what comes from the Apostles as affording appearance that it was neither Original nor Catholick as for how prejudiciall this is not the place to determine it The words of Innocent I Pope out of which it is commonly taken for granted that this custome was in use at Rome are these Epist XCIII Apud Augustinum Illud verò quod eos vestra fraternitas asserit praedicare parvulos aeternae vitae praemiis etiam sine baptismatis gratiâ posse donari perfatuum est Nisi enim manducaverint carnem filii homins biberint sanguinem ejus non habebunt vitam in â—semetipsis But that which your brotherhood affirms that they publish that Infants may have the reward of eternal life given them even without the grace of baptism is very foolish For unlesse they eat the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his blood they have not life in themselves Where it is plain that eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ which he makes necessary to salvation is that which consists in being baptized but of giving them the Eucharist not a word more then this The same fense concerning the eating of the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ in and by baptisme and that onely necessary to salvation S. Austine also most manifestly delivers in a passage alledged by Gratain de Consecrat dist 2 Cap. Quia passus est dominus out of a certain Homily de infantibus which Bede also hath in 1 ad Cor. X. Nulli est aliquatenus dubitandum unumquemque sidelium Corporis sanguinis Dominici tunc esse participem quando in baptismate membrum efficitur Christi nec alienari ab illius panis calicisque consortio etiamsi antequam panem illum comedat calicemque bibat de hoc seculo migraverit in unitate Corporis Christi constitutus No man is any way to doubt that every believer then becomes partaker of the body and blood of Christ when he is made a member of Christ by baptism Nor does he become a stranger to the communion of that bread and cup though before eat that bread and drink that cup he goes out of the world estated in the unity of Christs body And thus he expounds also the eating of Christs flesh and drinking his blood de peccatorum meritis remis III. 4. And so he is likewise there to be understood Cap. XX. And to this purpose all those passages of his are in force whereby he requireth nothing but Baptisme to the salvation of Infants And in this sense Hypognost ad Art V. Quomodo vitam regni coelorum promittitis parvulis non renatis ex aqnâ spiritu non cibatis carne atque non potatis sanguine Christi qui fusus est in remissionem peccatorum Ecce non baptizatus vitali etiam cibo poculoque privatus dividitur à regno coelornm ubi fons viventium permanet Christus How do ye Pelagians promise little ones not born again of water and the spirit noâ— fed with the flesh nor drenched with the blood of
Christ shed for reâ—â—ission of sins the life of the Kingdom of heaven See the unbaptized deprived also of the bread and cup of life is divided from the Kingdom of Heaven where Christ the well of life remains So it appears that the African Church had this custome but held it not necessary to salvation as Baptism But by Gennadius de dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis Cap. LII It appears to have been a custome of the Church when Hereticks were reconciled to the Church by confirmation to give their little ones the Eucharist presently upon it And Ordo Romanus de Baptismo prescribes it after the solemn Baptism before Easter which the French Capitulary I. 161. and Alcuinus also de divinis officiis provideth for And in the Eastern Church Dionysius in the end of the booke de Hierarchiâ Ecclesiasticâ In the mean time it is to be considered that there being no order that all should be baptized Infants nor at what age Whereupon St. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XLII in Sanctum Bapt. advises at three or four years of age it cannot be said to have been a generall custome of the Church Nor that it could be originall from the Apostles because the solemn times of Baptisme at Easter and Whitsontide cannot be thought to have been settled till Christianity was grown very vulgar For as for those that were baptized upon particular occasions or in danger of death it cannot be thought that the Eucharist was celebrated for their purpose nor doth any example appear that it was ever brought them from the Church On the contrary when the times of Baptisme came to be disused because it was found to be for the best that all should be baptized Infants upon this occasion the receiving of the Eucharist came to be deferred as much longer then was fitting in my opinion then it was given too soon in S. Cyprians time according to the example related by him in his Book de Lapsis where the Child whom the Pagans had given bread dipped in the wine that had been consecrated to their Idols because too young to eat of the flesh of their sacrifices receives the Eucharist in the Church CHAP. XXIV Two sorts of means to resolve whatsoever is resolvable concerning the Scripture Upon what terms the Church may or is to determine controversies of Faith And what obligation that determination produceth Traditions of the Apostles oblige the present Church as the reasons of them continue or not Instances in our Lords Passeover and Eucharist Penance under the Apostles and afterwards S. Pauls vail eating blood and things offered to Idols The power of the Church in limiting these Traditions I May now proceed I conceive to resolve generally upon what principles any thing questionable in Christianity is determinable and as franckly as briefly do affirm that there are but two sorts of means to resolve us in any thing of that nature Tradition and Argument Authority and Reason History and Logick For whatsoever any Artist or Divine hath said of the great use of the languages in discovering the true meaning of the Original Scriptures by the ancient Translations as well as the Originalls which I allow as much as they demand they must give me leave to observe that seeing all languages are certain Lawes of speaking which have the force of signifying by being delivered to posterity upon agreement of their Predeoessors all that helpe is duly ascribed to Tradition which we have from the Languages Indeed this is no Tradition of the Church no more then all History and Historicall truth concerning the times the places the persons mentioned in the Scripture concerning the Lawes the Customes the Fashions and orders practised by persons mentioned in the Scriptures in all particulars whereof the Scripture speaks which whether it be delivered by Christians or not Christians as far as the common reason of men alloweth or warranteth it for Historical truth is to be admitted into consequence in inquiring the meaning of the Scriptures and without it all pretense of Languages is pedantick and contemptible as that which gives the true reason to the Language of the Scripture whatsoever it import in vulgar use This helpe being applied to the Text of the Scripture it will be of consequence to confider the process of the discourse pursuing that which may appear to be intended not by any mans fancy but by those marks which cleared by the helps premised may appear to signifie it Which is the work of reason supposing the truth of the Scriptures And whereas other passages of Scripture either are clearer of themselves or being made clearer by using the same helps may seem to argue the meaning of that which is questioned whereas other parts of Christianity resolved afore may serve as principles to inferre by consequence of reason the truth of that which remains in doubt not to be impured therefore to reason but to the truth from which reason argues as believed and not seen this also is no lesss the work of reason supposing the truth of the Scriptures But whereas there be two sorts of things questionable in Christianity and all that is questionable meerly in point of truth hath relation to and dependance upon the rule of faith as consequent to it or consistent with it if we will have it true or otherwise if false I acknowledge in the first place that nothing of this nature can be questionable further then as some Scripture the meaning whereof is not evident createth the doubt And therefore that the determination of the meaning of that Scripture is the determination of the truth questionable For seeing the truth of Gods nature and counsails which Christianity revealeth are things which no Christian can pretend to have known otherwise then by revelation from God and that we have evidence that whatsoever we have by Scripture is revealed but by the Tradition of the Church no further then all the Church agreeth in it all that wherein it agreeeth being supposed to be in the Scripture and much more then that It followeth that nothing can be affirmed as consequent to or consistent with that which the tradition of the Church containeth but by the Scripture and from the Scripture So that I willingly admit whatsoever is alleadged from divers sayings of the Fathers that whatsoever is not proved out of the Scriptures is as easily rejected as it is affirmed limiting the meaning of it as I have said But whatsoever there is Scripture produced to prove seeing we have prescribed that nothing can be admitted for the true meaning of any Scripture that is against the Catholick Tradition of the Church it behoveth that evidence be made that what is pretended to be true hath been taught in the Church so expresly as may inferre the allowance of it and therefore is not against the rule of Faith But this being cleared so manifest as it is that the Church hath not the priviledge of infallibility in any express act which is not justifiable from the universall
the Christian Faith The one forfeiteth his interest in Heaven by the inward act of his soul refusing the common faith which saveth all Christians though outwardly holding communion with the Church The other by the inward act of the soul proceeding to the outward act of dissolving the communion of the Church which the common charity of Christians in the first place is to maintain If both these crimes may come under the the common name of Heresie because inward misbelief naturally tendeth to make a sect of such as shall profess to live according to it no marvail if all divisions of the Church be commonly called both Heresies and Schisms whatsoever be the cause upon which they divide If meer schisms that is where the cause is not any thing necessary to the salvation of all to be believed be also Heresie in the Language of the Apostles Neverthelesse there being so much difference between the two crimes and the grounds of them it is necessary to understand setting aside all aequivocation of terms that there is a crime consisting in mis-believing some Article of the faith which if you please may properly be called Heresie And another consisting in dissolving the unity of the Church which is properly called Schism when there is no further pretense for it then some Law which the Church being able to make the other part will rather depart then admit There may divisions in the Church upon pretence of such doctrines as are not necessary to the salvation of all and so no part of the rule of faith but so evidently to be deduced from it and from the rest of the Scriptures that the Church may have cause to determine the same and yet others may choose rather to depart from the Church then suffer the determination thereof to take place Which divisions that memorable observation of S. Jerome seems to call Heresies which said that all Schisms naturally devise to themselves some Heresie that is some doctrine extravagant from the doctrine of the Church that they may seem not to have departed from the Church for nothing Which is very well exemplified by S. Austine in the Donatists But whether such divisions are to be counted Heresies or Schisms both names properly signifying all divisions of the Church and only that crime which consisteth in mis-believing some Articles of faith appropriating the name of Heresie because common use hath given it no peculiar name of its own I leave to him that shall please to determine it Supposing these things it will not be requisite for me to say much to that which hath been published concerning the nature of Schism of late That being to be had onely out of the Scripture it is no where there to be had but in S. Paul to the Corinthians That there was at Corinth when S. Paul writ onely one Congregation of Christians which he calleth the Church of Corinth That therefore there is no crime of schism but in breaking one Congregation into more As for any visible society of the Catholick Church acknowledging the materials men that professe Christianity which he that sees cannot believe to the form which is that unity which is visible he is as great a stranger as if he had never heard of the Creed acknowledging notwithstanding an invisible unity in the common faith and love of Christians upon perswasion whereof he challenges as great freedom from schism as ever any member of the Catholick Church could claim For having showed how a thing which God made visible for many ages may reasonably be expected to be found in the Scriptures I am not to yield to try it by any part of them knowing that whosoever evidenceth a society of the Church by Gods Law evidenceth the crime that consists in the dissolving of it And it were fit we were told how all the Christians in a City where God had much people should sit at one Table or at least sup in one room before we believe that there was then no more Christians at Corinth then could assemble at once Which if I did believe I would notwithstanding alledge Iustine the Martyrs words Apol II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 On the day called Sunday all that dwelt in Cities or in Countries assemble themselves in one And supposing that then there were more Christians in Rome and the Territorie thereof for example for he writes to the Emperour Antoninus then could meet together in one place As Iustine means not when he saies That all in Cities or Countries meet in one that all made one Assembly but met all in common assemblies I would thereupon argue that no more does S. Paul say when he gives these rules to the Corinthians 1 Cor. XI 14. which serve any assembly that there was then but one Congregation at Corinth If in Iustines time if afore if after he can show me any Church of Rome or any City beside Rome that contained not all the Christians of that City and the Territory thereof I will believe that when Clemens writ the Letter lately published from the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth there were no more Christians at Rome or at Corinth then could meet all at once But if in all the Scripture as well as in all the Records of the Church a Church signifie the university of Christians which one City and the Territory thereof containeth it is an affront to common sense for him to deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the Church that is contained in the City and Territory of Rome or Corinth Let the learned Publisher of that Epistle take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there for Inquilinus or Peregrinus in Inmate or Pilgrim because his Greek gave him leave he that hath been showed so plentiful mention of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the subject in question for that which we now call a Diocese can have no reason to see with his eyes but because he is resolved not to use his own For in the very address of Polycarpus his Epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the Church of God dwelling beside Philippi The dative case quite spoils the construction of the words to his sense If the Church of the Philippians dwelt near Philippi then the Christians of the Territory belonged to the Church of the City As for the visible unity of the Catholick Church it was not so easie for me to evidence that which could not be questionable till the difference between Catholick Church and true Church came to be questionable As it is not hard for any Christian to question whither the Church which was Catholick for so many ages ought now to be Catholick or not For till he have destroyed the evidence which this abridgement hath been able to advance and when that is done new evidence will not be wanting so long as the records of the Church are Historically true and men continue possest of common sense it is in vain to alledge the dictate of his own
I. 1. Theodoret in Levit. Quaest IX Theophilus II. Paschali S. Jerome in Psal XCVIII Omne quod loquimur debemus affirmare ex Scripturis Sanctis Whatsoever wee say wee are to prove out of the Holy Scriptures To the same purpose in Mat. XXIII in Aggaei I. Origen in Mat. Tract XXIII That wee are to silence gain-sayers by the Scriptures as our Lord did the Sadduces Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem quae mihi factorem ostendit facta I adore the fulness of the Scripture which showes mee both the Maker and what hee made saith Tertulliane contra Hermog cap. XXII S. Austine de peccat meritis remiss II. 36. Credo etiam hinc divinorum eloquiorum claerissima autorit as esset si homo sine dispendio promissae salutis ignorare non posset I believe there would be found some clear authority of the Word of God for this the original of mans soul if a man could not be ignorant of it without losse of the salvation that is promised In fine seeing it is acknowledged that the Scripture is a Rule to our Faith on all hands the saying of S. Chrysostome in Phil. III. Hom. XII is not refusable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Rule is not capable of adding to or taking from it For so it looseth being a Rule For the same reason S. Basil in Esa II. and Ascet Reg. I. condemns all that is done without Scripture On the other side in the next place a greater thing cannot be said for the Church than that which Tertul. contra Marc. IV. 2. S. ser Ep. LXXXIX S. Aust cont Faust XXVIII 4. have said that S. Pauls authority depended upon the allowance of the Apostles at Jerusalem Tertul. Denique ut cum auâ—oâ—ibus contuâ—â—t convenit de regulâ Fidei dextras miscuere In a word as som as hee had conferred with men in authority and agreed about the Rule of Faith they shook hands S. Jer. Ostendens se non habuisse securitatem praedicandi Evangolii nisi Petri caeterorum Apostolorum qui cum eo erant fuisset sententia roboratum Showing that hee had not assurance to preach the Gospel had it not been confirmed by the sentence of Peter and the rest of the Apostles that were with him S. Austine That the Church would not have believed at all had not this been done Among the sentences of the Fathers which make S. Peter the rock on which the Church is built the words of S. Austine contra partem Donati are of most appearance Ipsa est Petra quam non vincunt superbae inferorum Portae This Church of Rome is the Rock which the proud gates of Hell overcome not S. Jerome is alleged hereupon consulting Damasus then Pope in maters of Faith as tied to stand to his sentence Epist LVII and Apolog. contra Rufinum Scito Romanam fidem Apostolicâ voce landatam istiusmodi praestigias non recipere Etiamsi Angelus aliter annunciet quà m semel praedicatum est Petri authoritate munitum non posse â—â—utari Know that the Faith of Rome commended by the voice of the Apostle is not liable to such tricks Though an Angel preach otherwise than once was preached that being fortified by the authority of S. Peter it cannot be changed The saying of S. Cyprian is notorious Non aliunde haereses orta sunt aut nata schismata nisi indè quòd Sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur nec unus in Ecclesiâ ad tempus Saeerdos ad tempus Judex Christi vice cogitatur cui si secundum magisteria divina fraternit as obtemperaret universa nemo adversùm Sacerdotum Collegium quicqam moveret nemo discidio unit atis Christi Ecclesiam scinderet Heresies spring and Schisms arise from no cause but this That the Priest of God is not obeyed that men think not that there is one Priest in the Church one Judg in Christs stead for the time Whom if the whole Brother-hood did obey as God teacheth no man would move any thing against the College of Priests or tear the Church with a rent in the Vnity of it The authority which the Church giveth to the Scripture is again testified by S. Austine contra Epist fundamenti cap. V. Cui libro necesse est me credere si credo Evangelio Quum utramque Scripturam similiter mihi Catholica commendet authoritas Which book of the Acts I must needs believe if I believe the Gospel Catholick authority alike commending to mee both Scriptures To the same purpose contra Faustum XI 2. XIII 5. XXII 19. XVIII 7. XXVIII 2. XXXIII ult Therefore hee warns him that reads the Scriptures to preferr those books which all Churches receive before those which onely some And of them those which more and greater Churches receive before those which fewer and lesse So that if more receive some and greater others though the case hee thinks doth not fall out the authority of them must be the same And contra Cresconium II. 31. Neque enim sine causâ tam salubri vigilantiâ Canon Ecclesiasticum constitutus est ad quem certi Prophetarum Apostoloruus libri pertineant quos omnino judicare non audoamus For neither was the Rule of the Church settled with such wholesom vigilance without cause to which certain books of the Prophets and Apostles might belong which wee should dare on any terms to censure Where manifestly hee ascribeth the difference between Canonical Scripture and that which is not to an act of the Church settling the same Of the Power of the Church to decide Controversies of Faith all the Records of the Church if that will serve the turn do bear plentifull witnesse But the evidence for the gift of Infallibility from them seems to consist in this consequence That otherwise there would be no end of Controversies neither should God have provided sufficiently for his Church S. Austine contra Cresconium I. 33. Quisquis falli met uit huyus obscuritate quaestionis Ecclesiam de illâ consulat quam sine ullâ ambiguitate Scriptura sacra demonstrat Whosoever is afraid to be deceived by the darkness of this question concerning Rebaptizing let him consult the Church about it which the Holy Scripture demonstrateth without any ambiguity S. Bernard Epist CXC ad Innoc. II. Papam Opertet ad vestrum referri Apostolatum pericula quaeque scandala emergentia in regno Dei ac praesertim quae de fide contingunt Dignum namque arbitror ibi potissimum resarciri damna Fidei ubi non possit Fides sentire defectum All dangers and scandals that appear in the kingdome of God are to be referred to your Apostleship For I conceive it sitting that the decaies of the Faith should there especially be repaired where the Faith is not subject to fail As concerning the mater of Traditions wee are not to forget Irenaeus III. 2 3 4. where hee showes that the Gnosticks scorning both Scripture and Tradition as coming from those that knew not Gods minde
translations those especially which are the most ancient by those who understand them is duely esteemed a help to that end and not a hinderance For as the turning of them into so many Languages prevents all errors of Copiers and assures the true reading so the comparing of the translations with the original showing how it was understood anciently by those who were better and nearer acquainted with the mater of them than wee are who must have it from them makes up a commentary of the meaning of the same and how farr it extends I do therefore here appeal to the common sense of all them that have been at charge or at pains to procure and compasse the Edition of all translations of the Bible especially the ancient in particular the Spanish Anwerpe and Paris which it is hoped is now improved to the same purpose here at London and do challenge all men to say first whether the designe be commendable or not then whether it can be commendable if it contribute not to preserve the true reading to determine the true meaning of the Scriptures As for that which I conceive I have sufficiently insisted upon in behalf of the truth that the writings of the Apostles presuppose a Rule of Faith received by those to whom they addresse together with certain Rules limiting their communion in the service of God upon supposition of that Rule I am here to claim the effect of it that the sense of the Scripture is to be limited to that which common sense may discover by the records of the Church to have been the sense and intent of the same But that this should argue an intent in God not to have given the Scriptures to determine debates that might arise among Christians concerning the common faith and that upon onely the visible profession of the Church all arguments to the contrary from the Scriptures all clamors of conscience are to be silenced without reconciling them to the primitive Faith and practice of the Church to which it is evident that if the Church be not wanting to their duty they are reconcileable this is that which I must and do proclaim to be utterly brutish and unreasonable And therefore to proceed to the next point I grant and insist that nothing but that which is received from our Lord Christ his Apostles can by any means seem receivable to any Christian But whereas it may be received either by writing alone or by word of mouth alone or by both I say that the receiving of Christianity by word of mouth alone cannot be pretended the power of the Church to create articles of Faith which was never heard of till the quarel with Luther was on foot being excluded but supposing it evident to common sense that the act of the present Church is the act of the Catholick Church from the Apostles Which so farr as I know was never heard of till Rushworths Dialog ues came forth The Christianity that was from the beginning received by word of mouth consists in the profession of believing a certain Rule of Faith and undertaking a certaine Rule of life as the Law and condition whereby all Christians hope to attain everlasting life Besides all Christians being upon this profession admitted to communicate with the Church in the service of God acicording to such Rules as determine the circumstances thereof first brought in by the Apostles These Rules may also be said to be received by word of mouth because the practice of them holds by custome from age to age though the expresse knowledg and profession of them is not the means to save particular Christians further than it is the means to maintain the service of God in the unity of his Church which is the means of it Here are then two heads of things received by word of mouth which hee that will speak expresly in this point must distinguish And according to this distinction I say that onely the Rule of Faith which is the Law of attaining everlasting life and the communion of the Church is delivered by word of mouth though when I say so I understand that the true intent and meaning thereof and what it importeth to common sense cannot be excluded Besides which there is of necessity infinite mater of discourse concerning things consequent or impertinent or repugnant to the same some whereof obtaining credit in some times and some parts of Christendom comes by tradition of word of mouth neverthelesse to other ages and places which therefore do truly bear the name of Tradition Though not as delivered from the beginning by the Apostles further then as by them the means is delivered whereby it may appear which of them is consequent which of them repugnant which of them impertinent to that which they have delivered indeed As concerning the Laws of the Church so certain and so manifest as it is that there were Rules delivered by the Apostles to have the force of Law in directing the communion of Christians in the publick service of God to the Unity of the Church So certain and manifest is it First that the same Laws are not capable to regulate the communion of the Church in all estates of it which the change of times should produce And yet secondly that whatsoever should be changed or taken away or added to the same ought to tend to the same intent which it is visible those of the Apostles did purpose Let any understanding that is capable but consider the difference that needs must arise by the Secular Power undertaking the protection of Christianity between the Church afore and the Church afterwards If hee say the same Laws will serve to maintain the communion of the Church in both estates supposing the society thereof to be the same upon the premises I shall then confesse that it is to no purpose to appeal to any discourse of reason in this whole dispute I say further that among those who professe that nothing ought to be received for revealed truth but that which was first delivered by our Lord and his Apostles nothing ought to have the force of Law but that which tendeth to the same purpose with that which they inacted Nothing hindreth things to be received into belief and practice that are really not onely impertinent to but inconsistent with that which indeed they have delivered to us The appeal is to common sense therefore let discourse and experience satisfie common sense Religion indeed is a bond by the condition whereof wee perswade our selves of peace with God of attaining the good and avoyding the ill which belongs to those that are so or otherwise And thus farre it is certain that Religion is a thing bred in mans nature which it is impossible for him to shake off or renounce But is it impossible for him to become perswaded hereof upon undue terms Whence then comes all false Religion whether of Jews or Pagans For we shall not need here to consider Mahumetanes whose Religion supposeth
that they were inspired by Gods Spirit or that the authors thereof ever spoke by the same And with this resolution the testimonies of Ecclesiastical writers will agree well enough if wee consider that to prove them to have the testimony of the Church to be inspired by God it is not enough to allege either the word or the deed either of Writers or Councils alleging the authority of them or calling them Holy Divine or Canonical Scriptures Nothing but universal consent making good this testimony which the dissent of any part creates an exception against For if those to whom any thing is said to be delivered agree not in it how can it be said to be delivered to them who protest not to have received it Wherefore having settled this afore that no decree of the Church inforceth more than the reason of preserving unity in the Church can require wee must by consequence say that if the credit of divine inspiration be denied them by such authors as the Church approveth no decree of the Church can oblige to believe them for such though how farr it may oblige to use them I dispute not here It shall therefore serve my turn to name S. Jerome in this cause Not as if Athanasius in Synopsi Melito of Sardis in Eusebius S. Gregory Nazianzene abundance of others both of the most ancient Writers of the Church and of others more modern who justly preferr S. Jerome in this cause did not reject all those parts or most of them which the Church of England rejecteth But because were S. Jerome alive in it there could be no Tradition of the Church for that which S. Jerome not onely a member but so received a Doctor of the Church refuseth For it will not serve the turn to say that hee writ when the Church had decreed nothing in it who had hee lived after the Council of Trent would have writ otherwise The reasons of his opinion standing for which no Council could decree otherwise Hee would therefore have obeyed the Church in using those books which it should prescribe But his belief whether inspired by God or not hee would have built upon such grounds the truth whereof the very being of the Church presupposeth Nor will I stand to scan the sayings of Ecclesiastical Writers or the acts of Councils concerning the authority of all and every one of these books any further in this place There is extant of late a Scholastical History of the Canon of the Scripture in which this is exactly done And upon that I will discharge my self in this point referring my Reader for the consent of the Church unto it And what importeth it I beseech you that they are called Sacred or Canonical Scriptures As if all such writings were not holy which serve to settle the holy Faith of Christians And though it is now received that they are called Canonical because they contain the Rule of our Faith and maners and perhaps are so called in this notion by S. Augustine and other Fathers of the Church Yet if wee go to the most ancient use of this word Canon from which the attribute of Canonical Scripture descendeth it will easily appear that it signifieth no more than the list or Catalogue of Scriptures received by the Church For who should make or settle the list of Scriptures receivable but the Church that receiveth the same it being manifest that they who writ the particulars knew not what the whole should contain And truly as I said afore that the Church of Rome it self doth not by any act of the force of Law challenge that the decrees of the Church are infallible So is it to be acknowledged that in this point of all other it doth most really use in effect that power which formally and expresly it no where challengeth Proceeding to order those books to be received with the like affection of piety as those which are agreed to be inspired by God which it is evident by expresse testimonies of Church writers were not so received from the beginning by the Church So that they who made the decree renouncing all pretense of revelation to themselves in common or to every one in particular can give no account how they came to know that which they decree to be true So great inconveniences the not duely limiting the power of the Church contrives even them into that think themselves therefore free from mistake in managing of it not because they think they know what they do but because they think they cannot do amisse It remaineth therefore that standing to the proper sense of this decree importing that wee are to believe these books as inspired by God neither can they maintain nor wee receive it But if it shall be condescended to abate the proper and native meaning of it so as to signifie onely the same affection of piety moving to receive them not the same object obliging Christian piety to the esteem of them it will remain then determinable by that which shall be said to prove how these books may or ought to be recommended or injoyned by the Church or received of and from the Church CHAP. XXXIII Onely the Original Copy can be Authentick But the truth thereof may as well be found in the translations of the Old Testament as in the Jewes Copies The Jewes have not falsified them of malice The Points come neither from Moses nor Esdras but from the Talmud Jewes AS to the other point it is by consequence manifest that the Church hath nothing to do to injoyn any Copy of the Scripture to be received as authentick but that which it self originally received because it is what it is before the Church receive it Therefore seeing the Scripture of the Old Testament was penned first and delivered in the Ebrew Tongue for I need not here except that little part of Esdras and Daniel which is in the Chaldee the same reason holding in both that of the New in the Greek there is no question to be made but those are the authentick Copies Neither can the decree of the Council of Trent bear any dispute to them who have admitted the premises if it be taken to import that the Church thereby settleth the credit of Scripture inspired by God upon the Copy which it self advanceth taking the same away from the Copy which the author penned That credit depending meerly upon the commission of God and his Spirit upon the which the very being of the Church equally dependeth But it is manifest that it cannot be said that the said decree necessarily importeth so much because it is at this day free for every one to maintain that the Original Ebrew and Greek are the Authentick Copies the Vulgar Latine onely injoyned not to be refused in act of dispute or question which hindreth no recourse to the Originals for the determining of the meaning which it importeth Hee that will see this tried need go no further than a little book of Sorbonne Doctor called
communion with or obligation of dependance one upon another either in the Rule of Faith or service of God according to it wherein they may seem elder brothers to those who have put the like principle in practice among us though without supposing any other Rule of Faith then that which every Church so constituted shall agree to take for the sense of the Scriptures Now how soon it may come into the mind and agreement of a Church so constituted to take up the profession of Socinus for the Rule of their Faith I leave them that are capable to judge if yet we have no experience of it But I have observed by reading Socinus his Book de Christo Servatore one of the first if not the first of all the Books whereby he declared his heresie that being extreamly offended at his adversaries opinion he seems to have been thereby occasioned to fall upon another extream of denying the satisfaction of Christ and so by degrees his Godhead as the only peremptory principle to destroy the satisfaction of Christ and by consequence as well that reason of the Covenant of Grace which the Church as that which his adversary maintaineth Conceiving then his error about the Covenant of Grace to have occasioned his error in the Faith of the holy Trinity I conceive I shall handle the chiefe Controversies in Religion that divide the Church at present according to the title of my Book though I maintain not the faith of the Trinity against Socinus otherwise then as the maintenance of the Covenant of Grace grounded upon the satisfaction of Christ as that upon his Godhead shall require Another reason I had because this Heresie seems to be too learned to become popular among us though branches of it may come to have vogue For though there hath been but too much either of wit or Learning imployed in framing the Scriptures to the sense of it in the chiefe points of Christianity Yet is it hard to make the vulgar understanding not onely of hearers but of teachers such as these times allow capable of that sense to which they have framed the most eminent passages of the Scriptures and the grounds of it together with the consent and agreement of the severall points of Christianity among themselves according to it Upon this consideration I charge not my selfe with the maintenance of the Faith of the holy Trinity otherwise then as the consideration thereof shall be incident to resolve the nature of the Covenant of Grace which is the first part of my purpose Therefore that a few words may propose many and great difficulties from whence it comes and what it is that renders Christians acceptabe to God sand heirs of everlasting life who as men are his enemies by sinne here and â—ubjects of his wrath in the world to come this I conceive to be the sum of what we are to inquire Concerning in the first place that disposition of mind which qualifies a man for those blessings which the Gospel tenders upon that condition which the Covenant of Grace requires and in the second place whether this disposition be brought to passe in us by the free Grace of God and the helps which it provides or by the force of nature that is by that light of understanding and that freedom of choice which necessarily proceeds from the principles of mans nature It is well enough known how great dispute there is between them that professe the Reformation and the Church of Rome whether a man be justified before God in Christ by Faith alone or by Faith and Works both speaking of actuall righteousnesse or if we speak of habituall righteousnesse by Faith and Love For though the whole Garland of supernaturall vertues concurrs to the habituall righteousnesse of Christians which is universall to all objects actions Yet seeing the reason of them all is derived from that which Faith believeth and the intent of all referred to that service of God which love constraineth where Faith and Love are named there the rest may well be understood Whether Faith alone therefore or Faith and love so much the parties must in dispite of them remaine agreed in that there is some disposition or act of mans mind required by the Covenant of Grace as the condition that qualifieth a man at least for so much of that Promise which the Gospel tendreth as justification importeth But this being supposed and granted it may and must be disputed in what consideration it qualifieth for the same Which is to make short whether the inward worth of that disposition whatsoever it shall prove to be oblige Almighty God to reward it with that which the Gospel promiseth Or whether in consideration of the obedience of Christ performed in doing the message which he undertook of reconciling Man unto God he hath been pleased to proraise that reward which is without comparison more then can be due to that disposition which he requires as the condition to qualifie us for the promise Here must I relate the position of the Socinians concerning the intent of Christs comming Not to purchase at Gods hands those helps of Grace which inable Christians to become qualified for the promise which the Gospel tendreth which the Church with S. Austin in the dispute with the Pelagians cals therefore the Grace of Christ Not to reconcile us to God in the nature of a meritorious cause his obedience being the consideration for which God accepteth that disposition which qualifies us for the promise of the Gospel as the condition upon which he tenders it But to yield us sufficient reason both to perswade us of the truth of his message as by the rest of his works so especially by rising again from the dead and also to induce us to imbrace the Gospel by assuring us of the fulfilling of that promise to us which we see so eminently performed in him by that height to which we believe him to be exalted and then having induced us to undertake the Gospel of Christ to secure us both of protection against the enemies thereof here by that power which he that went before us in it hath obtained for that purpose and of our crown at the judgement to come And all this not in any consideration of the merits and sufferings of Christ but of Gods free Grace which alone moved him to deale with us by Christ to this effect and to propose a reward so unproportionable to our performance which would not redound to the account of his free Grace if it should be thought to have been purchased either by the satisfaction of Christ in regard of our sins to be redeemed or by his merits in regard of the reward to be purchased As for the matter of Justification by Faith alone it is to be observed that Socinus is obliged by the premises to understand that Grace for which the Gospel is called The Covenant of Grace to be no Grace of Christ that is to say not given out of any
and really to him that so receives it There is besides another opinion extremely distant from this last in regard thaâ— whereas this ascribes the presence of the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Eucharist to the faith of them that receive it which is after the consecration of the Sacrament in as much as it is exercised in receiving the same the other extreme opinion that I speak of attibutes it to the hypostatical Union of the two natures in the person of Christ the consequence whereof they will have to be this That the perfections of the God-head are communicated to the humane nature in the person of Christ exalted to the Power of gathering and conducting his Church through this world to the world to come Because this Power being to be exercised in our nature requires and imports the attributes of the God-head to the executing and in the executing of it For seeing the Manhood of Christ cannot communicate with his God-head in giving this spiritual assistance to his Church but first it must be present and seeing this assistance is given by the Sacrament of the Eucharist of necessity they think the Body and Bloud of Christ must be present in the Eucharist to give this assistance by virtue of the hypostatical Union ordained for that purpose And so this opinion becomes extremely opposite to the last because it attributes the presence and so the receiving of the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist to that Faith which takes effect after that consecration which makes the Sacrament Whereas this attributes the same to the hypostatical Union of the Manhood with the God-head in Christ taking effect without exception after his exaltation to glory which it is manifest is so long since past and done before the celebration of it CHAP. II. That the natural substance of the Elements remains in the Sacrament That the Body and Bloud of Christ is neverthelesse present in the same when it is received not by the receiving of it The eating of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse necessarily requireth the same This causes no contradiction nor improperty in the words of our Lord. THis being the question wherein I am now to give judgment and no more required of a Divine than to give such a meaning to those few Scriptures which depose in it as may no way contradict the Rule of Faith I shall without considering how to content those factions which these opinions have made content my self by delivering that opinion which I conceive best satisfies the plain words of the Scripture without trenching upon any ground of Christianity within which the meaning of the Scriptures is to remain I say then first that if wee will not offer open violence to the words of the Scripture and to all consideration of reason that may deserve to direct the meaning of it wee must grant in the first place That the bodily substance of Bread and Wine is not abolished nor ceaseth in this Sacrament by virtue of the consecration of it And of this I conceive the manifest words of the Scripture wheresoever there is mention of this Sacrament are evidence enough Mat. XXVI 26-29 And when they were eating Jesus took bread and having blessed brake and gave it to his Disciples saying Take eat this is my Body And taking the cup hee gave thanks and gave it to them saying Drink yee all of it For this is that bloud of mine of the New Testament which is shed for many unto remission of sins And I say unto you I will not drink from henceforth of this production of the vine till I drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdome In S. Mark I can imagine no maâ—er of difference but this Mark XIV 24 25. This is my bloud of the New Testament which is shed for many Verily I say unto you that I will not drink of that which the vine brings forth till I drink it new in the kingdome of God In S. Luke thus XXII 17-20 And taking the cup hee said Take this and divide it amongst you For I say unto you that I will not drink of that which the Vine brings forth till the kingdome of God come And hee took bread and having given thanks brake it and gave it to them saying This is my Body which is given for you Do this in remembrance of mee Likewise also the cup after having supped saying This cup is the New Testament in my bloud which is shed for you S. Paul 1 Cor. XI 23-32 For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered to you that the Lord Jesus in the night that hee was betrayed took bread and having given thanks brake it saying Take eat this is my body which is broken for you This do in remembrance of mee Likewise also the cup after having supped saying This cup is the New Testament in my bloud This do so often as yee drink it in remembrance of mee For so often as you eat this bread and drink this cup yee declare the Lords death till hee come Therefore whoso eateth this bread or drinketh this cup unworthily is guilty of the body and bloud of Christ But let a man examine himself and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For whoso eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself not discerning the Lords Body Therefore many among you are sick and weak and many fall asleep For if wee did discern our selves wee should not be condemned But when wee are judged wee are chastised by the Lord that wee be not condemned with the world And again 1 Cor. X. 16 17 18. The cup of blessing which wee blesse is it not the communion of the bloud of Christ The bread which wee break is it not the communion of the Body of Christ For as the bread is one so wee many are one body For wee all partake of the same bread Had not a man as good bid the Scripture be silent for hee will believe what hee list notwithstanding the Scripture as set all this evidence upon the rack to make it deny that which it cries aloud For when S. Matthew tells us that our Lord took bread and having blessed brake and gave it saying This is my Body that hee took the cup and having given thanks gave it to them saying This is my Bloud Is it not as manifest that hee sayes This bread is my Body this wine is my Bloud as that hee sayes This is my Body this is my Bloud Unlesse wee think that This can demonstrate any thing but that which had been spoke of afore in the processe without giving any mark to know what it is that hee meant to demonstrate There is none of them that deny this but will be puzzled to say himself what hee would have the Disciples to whom this is said understand by This forbidding them to understand that which went before In S. Mark S. Luke and S. Paul the
in the judgement of many that think themselves the most refined Christians that they allow it not that common sense in managing the businesse of Christianity which they must needs allow Jews Pagans Mahometans in faithfully serving their own faithlesse suppositions and which all experience shows us that it serves all mankind to what purpose soever it is imployed and that notwithstanding so great a triall of it as the governing of so great a Body as the Church is in unity so farre and so long as this Unity hath prevailed it is therefore necessary to give a reason why the Church so used them Which supposing the premises it will be as easie as it is necessary for me to give and that more sufficient if I mistake not then can possibly be given not supposing the same For if the secret of the resurrection the general judgement and the World to come if the mystery of the Holy Triniâ—y consisting in the Word or Wisdome and Spirit of God if the inward and spiritual service of God in truth of heart be more clearly opened in them by the work of Providence dispensing the effect of Canonicall Scripture by the occurrences of time then in the Law and the Prophets themselves which I have showed both that so it is and why so it is from the ground of the difference between the Old and the New Testament then I suppose there is sufficient reason why those who admit the Old Testament to be made for common edification in the Church should not put any question concerning those Scriptures Those new lights among us who do not allow the Psalter to be pertinently and reasonably imployed for the publick service of God upon all occasions as the Church hath alwaies imployed it may assure us that they understand not why the Scriptures of the Old Testament are read in the Church because they understand not the correspondence between the Old and the New Testament in the understanding whereof the edification of the Church by the Scriptures of the Old Testament consisteth There may be offence taken at divers things in these Scriptures I deny not But there may be offence taken in like maner at divers things in the Canonicall Scriptures of the Old Testament The humility of Christians requires them edifying themselves in that which they understand in the Scriptures according to our common Christianity in the rest which they understand not to refer themselves to their Superiours The Church understood well enough this difference and this correspondence to be discovered by these writings as the time required when it appointed Learners to read them And though I stand not upon terms yet I conceive they are more properly called Ecclesiastical because the Church hath imployed them to be read in the Church then Apocryphal according to the use of that word in the Church to signifie such writings as the Church suspecteth and therefore alloweth not to be read whither in publick or in private Whereupon I conceive also that the term of Canonical Scripture hath and ought to have two senses one when we speak of the Jews Canon in the Old Testament another when we speak of the Canon of the Church For seeing the Tradition of the Synagogue is perfect evidence what Scriptures of the old Testament are to be received as inspired by God the word Canon in that case may well signifie the Rule of our Faith or maners But because the Church cannot pretend to create that evidence originally but onely to transmit what she receiveth from the Synagogue Pretending neverthelesse to give a Rule what shall be read for the edification of the Church the word Canon therefore in that case will signifie onely the list or Catalogue of Scriptures which the Church appoints to be read in the Church which seems to reconcile the diverse accounts extant in severall Records of the Church CHAP. XXIII The consideration of the Eucharist prescribed by Tradition for the mater of it Lords Prayer prescribed in all services The mater of Prayers for all estates prescribed The form of Baptism necessary to be prescribed The same reason holdeth in the forms of other Offices IN the next place I do maintain that the Order of celebrating the Eucharist and the Prayer which it was was from the beginning solemnized with were from the beginning prescribed the Church by unwritten custome that is by Tradition from the Apoâ—â—les containing though not so many words that it was not lawful to use more or lesse for these were always occasions for celebrating the Eucharist emergent which must be intimated in fewer or more words in the celebrating of it yet the mater and substance of the Consecration of it together with the mater and substance of the necessities of the Church for which it was offered that is to say for which the Church was and is to pray at the celebration of it as hoping to obtain them by the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross which it representeth as received from the beginning was every were known to be the same This I inferr from that which I have said in the Book afore quoted of those Texts of S. Paul where those Prayers of the Church which the Eucharist is consecrated with are called Eucharistia or Thanksgiving if not rather the thanksgiving because it was a certain form of Thanksgiving well known to all Christians by that name from whence the Sacrament â—o consecrated was also so called from the time that our Lord hâ—ing blessed or given thanks to the Father over the Elements had said This is my body this is my blood and order is given that at the celebration thereof Prayers be made for the necessities of the Church and of all people 1 Cor. XIV 25. 26. 1 Tiâ—â— II. 1-8 Together with those passages of primitive antiquity from whence it appeareth there that the form of consecrating the Eucharist used and known generally in the Church is called Eucharistia and that the custome of interceding for all the necessities of the Church and for the reducing of unbelievers to the same is and hath been taken up and ever frequented by the Church in obedience to and prosecution of the said precept of the Apostles This observation might perhaps be thought too obscure evidence â—o bring to light a point of this consequence were it not justified by all that I produced afore to show that the Eucharist is consecrated by the Prayers of the Church which celebrateth it upon the faith of our Lords institution and promise For the mater of these Prayers tending to a certain purpose that the Elements may become the Body and Blood of Christ and convay his Spirit to those who receive them with living faith the Consecration which is the effect of them requires that the form of them be prescript and certain though not in number of words yet in sense in tent and substance And this by the evidence there produced may appear to have been maintained from the beginning by Tradition in
supposing that difference between the Law and the Gospell which I have setled in the first book they may advance in the knowledg of Christianity by the preaching of those who understand it But not distinguishing that which is necessary from that which is not necessary by supposing that which is necessary they may heare Sermons all their life long and not know wherein their salvavation consists a thing found by experience when there was a Rule of doctrine agreeable to the Scriptures and not knowing the ground there laid forth upon which the Old Testament beares witnesse to the New they may gaine nothing by hearing sermons all theire life long but mere dissatisfaction in the grounds of our common Christianity Whereas going into the scriptures with those two principles and the humility of Christians they may teach themselves that edification which they ought not to expect from those that acknowledg them not As for the present order which suppresseth all Assemblies for the service of God when there is no Preaching It is manifest that I will not say no understanding no eloquence but no lungs or voice For of a truth this order makes the service of God a worke rather of the lungs and of the voice then of any thing else can furnish entertainement for the assemblies of the church with that which is worth the hearing so oft as it is fit for the people of God to assemble for his service This makes the businesse for which the greatest part now goes to Church to be no more the service of God but to get mater of discourse or debate for the Sabbath as they call it how well the man preached or how well he prayed For whereas they were wont to object against the Church that it was not praying but reading prayers which was ministred to the Church as if attention of mind devotion of spirit could not aswel go a long with him that reades as with him that is to study what to say when he praies now the censures that passe upon mens prayers do shew that the hearers minds cannot be imployed in praying when they are taken up with judging how well the prayer they heare is made Much more justly may the same be said if it be considered how a man is obliged to discerne what the mater of the prayer is whether it be from blasphemy Heresy Slander Rebellion or not least before he be aware he joine in such horible crimes by saying Amen to their prayer which he is no otherway secured to be free from the same Now it may be considered that the prayers which usher sermons in out by the order of the church of England but by the faction that destroyeth it though they exclude the service of God out of the Church upon pretense of praying as the spirit indites yet are indeed no lesse provided aforehand then the prayers of the Church 〈◊〉 a little from time to time as occasion may require to make the people believe that they are ex tempore dictates of the spirit So that the change which many men call reformation consists in this that the peoples devotions are now confined to that which every one that dare mount the Pulpit dare say instead of that which the Church upon mature deliberation had appointed to be said But if it be thus in prayers which are alwaies for substance the same what shal we say of Sermons the substance whereof changeth according to the compasse of the Scripture and all the points of it which the texts upon which men take their rise occasion them to intreat experience in the decay of that reverence devotion which the publick service of God is to be performed with may easily point a man of common understanding to the sourse of it in those false weak suppositions upon which the order or rather the disorder of the present chang standeth Instead whereof therefore acknowledging that there was just cause at the time of the Reformation to complain upon the want of Preaching and instruction of the people I do and am to maintaine that there was never any pretense that the communion of the Eucharist and the service of God that it is to be celebrated with ought to give way and to be excluded the assemblies of christians to bring in that rule which is now in effect a cheife point of the chang that is made with us that without preaching no assembly for Gods service And thereupon though I desire that the more solem service of God when the Eucharist is celebrated may have a sermon for part of it as I have showed both by the Scriptures and by the primative practice of the Church that the use was under the Apostles and in the next ages yet that the order prescribed by the Church of England for the celebrating of the same when and where there is not meanes for a Sermon such as ought to be had is not to be deserted upon any pretense of frequenting Sermons As for more oridinary occasions of assembling for the service of God having proved afore that they ought to be frequented for the celebrating of other Offices of Gods service besides preaching I take it for proved that the order prescribed by the Church of England for the celebrating of Gods service upon such occasions is no way to be deserted but meanes to be sought for the frequenting of it Acknowledging with all the zeale and the joy which S. Paul expresseth for the further edification of those Churches to whom he directeth his Epistles in that Christianity which they had received 1 Cor. I. 5 6 7. Eph. I. 17. 18. Phil. I. 9 Col I. 9. Rom. I. 11. 12. as a strong motive to the Church to procure preaching as frequent as it can be procured and maintained without these offenses That the same S. Paul incourageth directeth frequent ample use of these miraculous graces which God granted the Churches of that time unto that purpose 1. Cor. XIV 1-31 Eph. IV. 7-16 But supposing alwaies the Spirits of the Prophets to be subject to the Prophets because God is not the God of unquietnesse but of peace as in all Churches of the Saints 1 Cor. IV. 32 33. And that there is one body and one spirit even as we are called in one hope of our calling the unity of which spirit is to be preserved in the bond of Peace Eph. IV. 3 4. By vertue of that Order which God had setled in his Church for preserving unity in it declaring his meaning by bestowing the most Eminent Graces upon the most eminent persons of his Apostles by meanes whereof the spirits even of Prophets became subject to greater Prophets for avoiding of unquietnesse and preserving of peace as S. Paul further declareth when he addeth by and by 1. Cor. XIV 36. 37. What came the word of God out from you or came it to you onely if any man think himselfe a Prophet or spirituall let him acknowledg the things I write
driven out of paradise If you call the same Jerusalem it will appeare why the place of the damned is called Gehenna which was the place without Jerusalem where those that were sacrificed to the Idoles of Canaan were consumed with horrible tortures of fire The Scripture of the old Testament yeeldeth not the name but the true interpretation of it In the meane time though our Lord by carying the thiefe into Paradise show that it continues not shut yet continues it no lesse secret no better knowne then it is knowne where Adam first dwelt It is strange that the bosome of Abraham should signifie the same He is acknowledged the Father of the faithfull by Jewes as well as Christians His hospitality is recounted in the scripture The kingdome of God which his people then expected is proposed by our Lord in dâ—vers passages of the Gospell under the figure of an entertainement as an expression then familiar to his people It is no marvaile that it should be called Abrahams bosome from whom the faith that purchaseth it hath so eminent a beginning though the Fathers before Abraham be there One thing we must note A vast gap wee see between it and the flames where Dives was tormented But where the partition is fixed so little is determined by the words of the scripture that whether both within the earth or one within the earth the other in the heavens or whether both without this visible world as of the place of the damned some argue with great probability from the darkenesse that is without in the Gospell no rule of â—aith determines And therefore whether the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the parable useth Luke XVI 23. when the rich man lifts up his eyes in Hell and sees Lazarus in Abrahams bosome whether it comprehend the bosome of Abraham as well as the place of torments no Rule of faith determineth For as it manifestly signifyeth the place of the damned in the scripture which it is manifest Gods people must needs distinguish by the scripture is the place where they were sure by the scripture that God would punish his and their enemies So comprehending also the place of righteous soules nor distinguished from the other to Gods people by the ancient scriptures how should the signification of it be restrained here For as the Hethen so Josephus also manifestly extendeth it to the place of righteous as well as wicked soules after death For when he saies that de Bello Jud. II. 12. the Saduces 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 take away the punishments and rewards of the World to come under the one name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he comprises both estates which the rest of Gods people attributed then to good and bad The Pharises he saies Antiq. XVIII 2. maintaine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 punishments and honors under the earth And that as it followeth for ever which is as much as if he had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because those things which were thought to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 things under the earth Again of the Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And agreeing with the Greekes they affirme that good soules are assigned a seate beyond the Ocean in a place not grieved with raine or snow or heate but alwaies refreshed with a milde West wind blowing from the Ocean But the evill ones they assigne a darke and stormy nooke full of torments without ceasing And yet in an other place he saith they assigne them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most holy place of the Heavens So little ground is there for the distinct signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the sense of those to whom our Lord spoke It behoveth us therefore to acknowledge the victory of our Lord Christ and his triumph over the Devill and all the damned which S. Paul as in the text quoted out of the Epâ—stle to the Ephesians he ascribeth to the Ascension of our Lord according to the Psalme which he alleageth so Col. II. 15. to the Crosse when he saith Spoiling principalities and powers he made open show of them triumphing over them in it by it or upon it to wit his Crosse to which he had said just afore that he nayled the hand writing which was against us This victory and triumph belongs to the rule of faith and the beliefe of it to the substance of Christianity because by vertue of it we have reconciliation with God and the rest of that which the Gospell promiseth But that it should be performed by the descent of Christs soule into the place of the damned being begun upon the Crosse and finished at the ascension as the necessity of our redemption requireth not so no Rule of Faith will oblige to believe There is great appearance that the devil did not understand the effect of it till our Lord rose againe as Ignatius saith that he understood not the the birth of the blessed Virgine Pilates Wives dream is a signe that doubting of the consequence he would have hindred that which by Judas he did procure He thought himself Lord of mankind because for sin they were condemned to death That by the death of Christ this condemnation was to be voided possibly he might not understand till Christ rose againe Though the soules of the Fathers were delivered out of his Power before the death of Christ yet might he not understand that by virtue of it Our Lord saith John XIV 30. The Prince of this world cometh and hath nothing in me Because he found nothing of his owne that is of sinne in Christ Though he had nothing to do with Christ in justice seeing in deed he had meanes to swallow him and might not know that the swallowing of him would oblige him to render his interest in all that should escape with him is it a marvaile that he swallowed him being a murtherer from the beginning Thus farre I have owned the reason of our redemption against Socinus Which if it be true the victory of Christ was declared that is the triumph begunne at his rising againe And therefore it is no way prejudiciall to the common Faith which I know some have imagined that our Lord Christ having been in Paradise with the good thiefe or in the bosome of Abraham with Lazarus till Easter day morning when he was to rise againe went from thence in his humane soul to the place of the damned to declare to the devil that by laying violent hands on him who had not sinned he had lost not onely the Fathers but all that should believe at the preaching of the Gospel For herein the triumph of his victory upon the Crosse consisteth But the substance of this ceremony being so fully provided for by the death of his Crosse and by his riâ—ing againe in virtue of it that he who believeth it not should be thought to come short of believing all that which it is necessary to salvation to believe seemeth to me
course of life as he thinks may give him best meanes and opportunity of discharging the common profession of Christians though all Christians are not tied to professe the same shall he not stand bound to make it good upon the same ground for which Ananias and Sapphira are condemned in withdrawing that which they professed to consecrate to God But Saint Pauls instruction to refuse the younger widdows hath no answer Because when they grow wanton against Christ they will marry Having damnation as having set their first faith at nought 1 Tim. V. 11 12. For what can that first faith be but their promise ingaged to the Church whereby they dedicate themselves to the service thereof in the state of widows Under the Old Testament it is no mistake of the Jewes to believe that all Gods people were ordinarily under the precept of increase and multiply requiring of them the state of marriage Saint Angustine and other Fathers of the Church have found markes of it in the Old Testament It is not therefore to be imagined that there is either precept or precedent for the state of Monkes in the Old Testament Nor yet to be denied that Nazarites especially from the mothers womb that those women who kept guard at the Tabernacle Exod. XXXVIII 5. 1 Sam. II. 22. as Anna the daughter of Phanuel that departed not from the Temple serving God with fasting and prayer day and night Luke II. 37. that the Rechabites are instances and precedents of some principles and ingredients of their profession even under the Old Testament For if man and wife should now dedicate themselves to attend upon the poor sick and helplesse in hospitals or the like they would be no lesse The Prophets though under no perpetuall tye lived in a kind of Community with their disciples not for that knowledge of the Law which the Rulers of the people professed whom they were ordinarily in difference with and often times persecuted to death by them but for those rudiments of Christianity which by their meanes were kept alive under the Law The Rechabites being of the race of the Kenites which it seems upon Moses invitation to Jethro tooke part with the Israelites in the Land of Promise under the condition of worshipping onely the true God knowing what all strangers are subject to living under the dominion and protection of strangers received a Law from their predecessors not to have further to do in the world then their subsistence by the simplest sort of life by being shepherds required And being commended for obeying their Rule by the Prophet Jeremy from Gods mouth have much justified them who under Christianity do voluntarily put themselves under the like Rule out of a pretense the better to discharge their Christianity by that meanes During the time of our Lord there was a third sect of people among the Jewes whom we find no mention of in the Scriptures of the New Testament because they lived retyred out of the world some married others in single life both under a most strict observation of their Rule which you have in Josephus under the name of Essanes It is well enough known that Eusebius finding a relation written by Philo the Jew of that manner of life which they used in Egypt hard by Alexandria hath reported them for Christians and how this report hath been disowned of late yeares as a meer mistake of Eusebius or an ungrounded conjecture I who have showed that it is possible Philo himself may have been a Christian must not reject the opinion of those who think they might really be Christians converted by the first arrivall of Christianity in Aegypt For in the case which I spoke of there is no cause why they might not be both Jewes and Christians the separation of the Church from the Synagogue not being yet formed and when it was formed continue Christians forsaking the Synagogue And truly the mention of Virgines as of a peculiar order visible in the Church is so ancient in the writings of Tertulliane Methodius whose Book of Virginity is published of late and Saint Cypriane that it must needs be impossible to find any beginning for it For Tertulliane writing his Book De velandis Virginibus to prove that Order not exempt from Saint Pauls injunction that women vail their faces at divine service appeales to the custome of the Church at Corinth to which Saint Paul writ it as having alwayes observed it in Virgines And therefore the same Saint Paul directing him who had resolved to keep his daughter a Virgine 1 Cor. VII 37. seems to suppose this resolution to imply that education whereby she might be inabled so to continue For it is true the profession is difficult but not impossible for him to go commendably through with that by Gods grace undertakes it with that zeal which the end requires I do much admire the resolution of Gennadius De ' Dogmat. Eccles cap. LXIV that it is not the meer love of a continent estate which Christianity esteems unlesse it be chosen as the meanes and opportunity of serving God with the more freedome otherwise signifying rather the declining of mariage then the love of Chastity For. so it is indeed he that chuses a continent estate to avoid the difficulties of mariage seems rather to tempt God and to expose himself to many desertions waving the remedy which he hath provided But he who trusts to Gods assistance for the accomplishment of that intention which Christianity commendeth though it command not may assure himselfe of it not destituting his prayers of the indeavours which he may and is to contribute This being the case of particular persons that withdraw themselves from the world to make their salvation the more assured the interesse which accrues to the Church in them that do so seems to be no more then may be grounded upon the profession of such a purpose For so long as it is secret between God and the soul the Church can have nothing to do in it But being once professed and known to take hold the transgression thereof becoming notorious is a sinne which owes an account to the Church Not that the manner of this profession is any way provided for but by the custome of the Church For he that should actually and visibly declare such an intention by really entering upon the course and living according to it would become necessarily liable to that account for the transgressing of it which the solemnity renders due And therefore that solemnity reduceth it self to the nature of those ceremonies whereby actions of great consequence wherein the authority of the Church is exercised ought in reason to get reverence For by that meanes the parties concerned receive a due impression of the charge they undertake when God and his Church become rather parties then witnesses to it In the mean time they remaine in the Church what they were before private Christians onely professing such a course of life onely ingaged to God in
such thing as a Councill according to the supposition of the congregations And therefore in the acts of Counciles which are the Lawes whereby the Church is to be ruled the people can have no further satisfaction then to see them openly debated under the knowledge of the people Indeed the interest of Soveraigne powers in Church maters which I allow not onely in order to the publicke peace but as they are members of the Catholicke Church and so trusted with the protection of all that is Catholicke in behalf of the people gives them that power over the acts of Counciles which by and by I shal declare Which though grounded upon another account and belonging to them in an other quality then that which the constitution of the Church createth is notwithstanding provided by God to secure his people of their Christianity together with the unity of the Church But the suffrage of the people of every Church that is their acknowledgment that they know no exception against the persons in nomination for Bishops or other orders of the Church as it agreeth with the proceedings of the Apostles and primative Church so must it needs be a most powerfull meanes to maintaine that strict bond of love and reverence between the Clergy and the people in the recovery whereof the unity of the Church consisteth And supposing publick penance retrived without which it is in vaine to pretend Reformation in the Church there can be no stronger meanes to maintaine Christianity in effect then the satisfaction of the people though not in the measure of penance to be injoyned yet in the performing of it Alwaies provided that this interest of the people be grounded upon no other presumption that any man is the child of God or in the state of Grace and indowed with Gods spirit then that which the law of the Church whereby he injoyes communion which the Church createth For this presumption must needs be stronger concerning the Clergy by their estate then it can be concerning the people Because by their estate they are to be the choice of the people And though as all morall qualities are subject to many exceptions some of the people may be better Christians then some of the Clergy yet a legall presumption that any of them is so must needs be destructive to the Unity of the Church But no disorder in religion can be so great as to justifie the obdurate resolution of the Church of Rome to withdraw the scriptures from the people There is nothing more manifest then that the lamentable distractions which we are under have proceeded from the presumption of particular Christians up on their understanding in the scriptures proceeding to think their quality capable of reforming the Church Onely those that can have joy of so much mischief to our common Christianity can thinke otherwise But I am not therefore induced to thinke our Christianity any other then the Christianity of those whom our Lord whom S. Paul and other Apostles and Prophets exhort and incourage to the study of the scriptures Whom S. Chrysostome and others of the Fathers so earnestly deale with to make it their businesse All the offense consists in this that private Christians observe not the bounds of that which is Catholike when they come to read the scriptures For if they be not content to confine the sense of all they read within that rule of faith in which the whole Church agreeth because they understand not how they stand together If they thinke the Lawes of the whole Church can command things contrary to that which God by scripture commandeth It is no marvaile they should proceed to make that which they think they see in the Scripures though indeed they see it not a Law to the Church For they think it is Gods will that ties them to it But if the Church be the Church as I have showed it is then was the Scripture never given private Christians to make them Judges what all Christians are bound to believe what the Church is to injoine the Church for the condition of communion with the Church If any man object the inconvenience that it appeareth not who or where that Church is and so we are confined to those boundes that cannot appeare This inconvenince is the clearest evidence that I can produce for the Catholike Church For unlesse we grant this inconvenience to come by Gods institution and appointment we must confesse the unity of the Church to be Gods appointment because the dissolution thereof produceth this inconvenience For were the unity of the Church in being I could easily send any man to the Catholike Church by sending him to his owne Church Which by holding communion with the whole Church must needs stand distinguished from those which hold it not though under the name of Churches And he who resorts to the Church for resolution in the Scriptures supposes that he is not to break from the Church for that wherein the whole Church is not agreed Now that the unity of the Church is broken in pieces it remaines no more visible to common sense what it is wherein the whole Church agrees as the condition for comunion with it But the meanes to make it appear againe having disappeared through disunion in the Church is that discourse of reason which proceeds upon supposition of visible unity established by God in the Church And the meanes to make it appear againe to common sense is the restoring of that unity in the Church by the interruption whereof it disappeareth Then shall the edification of particular Christians in our common Christianity proceed without interruption by meanes of the Scriptures every one supposing that his edification in the common Christianity dependeth not upon the knowledge of those things wherein the Church agreeth not but of those things wherein it agreeth In the mean time it remaineth that offenses proceed to be infinite and endlesse because men giving no bounds to their studies in the Scriptures imagine the edification of the Church to consist in that wherein themselves not regarding the consent of the Church have placed their own edification in the Scriptures CHAP. XXXII How great the Power of the Church and the effect of it is The right of judging the causes of Christians câ—aseth when it is protected by the State An Objection If Ecclâ—siasticall Power were from God Secular Power could not limit the use of it Ground for the Interest of the State in Church matters The inconsequence of the argument The concurrence of both Interests to the Law of the Church The Interest of the State in the indowment of the Church Concurrence of both in matrimoniall causes and Ordinations Temporall penalties upon Excommunication from the State No Soveraigne subject to the greater Excommunication but to the lesse The Rights of the Jewes State and of Christian Powers in Religion partly the same partly not The infinite Power of the Pope not founded upon acts of Episcopacy but upon the Secular Powers
to communicate All are bound to communicate once a year at Easter and before they do it to say they are sory for the sinnes they confesse undertaking the Penance which is injoyned not for cleansing the sinne but to remaine for Purgatory if they do it not here The like at the point of death with extreme unction over and above Within the compasse of this law Christians may fall into the hands of conscientious Curates and Confessors that shall not faile to instruct them wherein their Christianity and salvation consists and how they are to serve God in Spirit and in truth preferring the principall before the accessory rubbish of ceremonies and observations indifferent of themselves but which spend the strength of the seed and root of Christianity in leaves and chaff without fruit But they may also fall under such as shall direct them to look upon the virtue of the sacrifice that is repeated in the Masse and promise themselves the benefit thereof by the work done without their assistance To look upon their Penance onely as that which must be paid for in Purgatory if not done here To do as the Church does and to believe as it believes promising themselves salvation by being of communion therewith though it import no more then I have said Nay though they be directed such devotions as are common to God with his creature as spend the seed of Christianity in the chaffe of observations impertinent to the end of it On the other side departing thence to Congregations and Presbyteries what meanes of salvation shall a Christian have Two Sermons a Sunday and a prayer before and after each But whether it be the Word of God or his that Preaches whether Christianity allow to pray as he prayes or not no Rule to secure And whether Christian liberty allow that men be tied to serve God from Sunday to Sunday or not untill Gods spirit indite what every man shall say to God no way resolved A man may possibly light upon him that does not take justifying Faith to consist in beleeving that a man is of the elect for whome alone Christ died or that beleeving it presses the consequences which contradict his owne premises as if he did not But how easy is it to light upon him that drawes the true conclusion from the premises which he professeth and maketh meere Popery of the whole duty of a Christian Certainly the Church of Rome holdeth no error in the Faith any thing neare so pernicious as this That of transubstantiation is but a fleabite in comparison of it He who by reason of his education is afraide to thinke that the elements remaine is he therefore become incapable of the Spirit of God conveyed by the Body and Blood of our Lord in the Sacrament And certainely that is the prime Interest of our Christianity in it though the bodily presence of the elements is no way prejudiciall to the same But who so beleeveth he hath Gods Word for his salvation not supposing any condition requisite may think himselfe tied to live like a Christian but by no meanes but by holding contradictories at once Which though all men by consequence do because all erre Yet in matters of so high consequence to do it cannot be without prejudice to the work of Christianity and dangerous to the salvation it promiseth Nor can Baptisme or the Eucharist be Baptisme or the Eucharist but equivocally to them that allow the true consequence of this And shall any man perswade me that unlesse a man will sweare that which no man is able to show that a Christian may sweare he perishes without help for want of this communion so obtained Or on the other side that his salvation can be secured who to obtaine that meanes of salvation which Congregations or Presbyteries tender concurre to the open act of Schisme which they do So necessary is it for me to continue in the resolution of my nonage as being convinced upon a new inquiry that the meanes of salvation are more sufficient more agreeable for substance to the Scriptures expounded by the originall practice of the whole Church though perhaps not for forme in that meane then in either extreme This resolution then being thus grounded what alteration can the present calamity of the Church of England make in it to perswade a man to believe thosearticles which the Bull of Pius VI. addeth to the common faith to maintaine whatsoever is once grown a custome in the Church of Rome as for that service of God which it destroyeth Or on the other side to become a party to that expresse act of Schisme with misprision of Heresy involved in it which the erecting of Congregations and Presbyteries importeth Epiphanius mentioneth one Zachaeus in Syria that retired himself from communion with the Church to serve God alone If the force of the Sword destroy the opportunities and meanes of yeelding God that service which a mans Christianity professed upon mature choice requireth shall it be imputable to him that desiring to serve God with his Church he is excluded by them who ground their communion upon conditions which the common Christianity alloweth not Or to them by whom he is so excluded I can onely say to the scattered remaines of the Church of England whose communion I cherish because it standeth upon those termes which give me sufficient ground for the hope of Salvation which I have cherished from my cradle that the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Church of England being no longer in force by the Power of this world are by consâ—quence no longer a sufficient Rule for the order of their communion in the offices of Gods service In which Order the visibility of every Church consisteth Not as if the nature of good and badde in the matter of them had suffered any change but because being the mean to preserve unity in the service of God upon those termes which the Law of the Land inforced they are no sufficient meane to preserve it upon those termes which onely our Christianity requireth To wit that it be distinct from Congregations and Presbyteries as well as from the Church of Rome Which in my opinion making it necessary to the salvation of every Christian to communicate with the Catholicke Church that is with a Church which ought to be a member of the whole Church is of great consequence For neither is it actually and properly a Church the order whereof in the service of God is not visible Nor is there sufficient meanes in that case for the effect of a Church and of that visible order in which the being of a Church consisteth towards the salvation of those who are of it or might be of it And this is that which must justify that which I have done in speaking out so farre what I conceive the Rule of Faith what the Lawes of the Catholick Church require to be provided for in every Church and every estate For if they be not wanting to themselves to their
Title to the salvation of Gods people they have enough in the Scriâ—tures interpreted by the Original Tradition practice of the whole â—hurch both to condemn the errors which the ground of their Comâ—â—nion obliges them to disown to give such a rule to the order of 〈◊〉 Communion in the offices of Gods service as the present state 〈◊〉 compared with the primitive state of those Christians who â—â—fir â—ucceeded the Apostles shall seem to require It is indeed a very great case to me that having declared against untrue and unsufficient causes for dividing the Church for which there can be no cause sufficient I have owned the cause which I think sufficient for a particular Church to provide for it selfe without the consent of the whole For by this meanes I secure my self from being accessory to Schisme and the innumerable mischiefes which it produceth But I confesse this declaration makes me liable to a consequence of very great importance That there is no true meane no just way to reconcile any difference in the Church but upon those grounds and those termes which I propose For supposing the Society of the Church by Gods Law upon what termes the least sucking Heresy amongst us is reconcileable to the party from which it broke last supposing it reconcileable upon the grounds and termes of our common Christianity upon the same termes is the Reformation reconcileable to the Church of Rome the Greek Church to the Latine all parts to the Whole the Congregations and Presbyteries to the Church of England Whereas not proceeding upon those grounds not standing on those termes all preâ—ense of reconciling even the Reformed among themselves will prove a meer pretense Laus Deo FINIS Faults escaped in the firse Booke PAge 7. line 47. r. shall it be disc pag. 20. l. 45. r. to all sentences p. 21. l. 50. 1 Thes V. 14 15. r. 12 13. l. 52 Heb. XII r. XIII 23. 39. r. the act 40. 6. then those r. better then â— 28. under-r undertooke 48. 30. r. washing or sitting downe to 59. 53. r. adulterers 66. 28. Ladies day r. Lords day 89. 53. secret to the r. seâ—reâ— so 95. 46. with r. which 115. 26. those found r. thes 116. 33. that this r. that is 121. 4. r. intertainment 122. 7. Church with r. with him 137. 8. without r. within 140. 13. r. virtue of the 147. 1. we had r. he had 57. r. indowment 155. 25. now have r. now are 172. 34. after Acts put 176. 25. dele rome 177. 52. r. he eat 178. 28. then it was r. as it was 181. 57. r. so continuall 182. 51. to Gods r. to use G. 183. 37. comming from Christ r. of Christ 185. 6. after lamented put 186. 21. there may r. may be 189. 29. r. change 190. 14. banquet r. banquet 28. passive r. positive 45. r. owned 193. 16 â—ele argument 221. 2. not up r. cast up 235. 18. if when r. when 237. 16. which the r. with the 37. aliver r. alone 241. 16. Ahab r. Jehn 248. 50. Jeroboams then r. Jeroboams sinne 250. 38. neither r. either Second Book Pag. 7. l. 30. r. we be p. 8. 36. John 7. 37. r. 39. 40. r. now if 20. 41. Joh. IV. r. Ephes IV. 22. 12. that those r. those that 62. 19. he pert r. be pâ—rt 23. Heb. IV. 16. r. 1. 68. of as r. of man as 71. 33. r. evidenced 101. 55. r. the Angels 109. 9. and both r. so bâ—th 116. 56. as you may by r. as you may see by 118. 35. Solomons r. Solomons words 36. r. composed 119. 51. dele â—â— 125. 28. r. to deriâ—e 26. 53. which r. with which 128. 31. r. they thought 162. 5. tendred r. raended 164. 54. serve or the purpose not r. serve the purpose or not 165. 24. concerning r. consining 56. upon necessity r. upon the like n. 166. 21. after that r. the line afore iâ—ports this or that 167. to see that it supposeth r. that it is sup 171. 55. r. comes not to passe 174. 45. will not r. shall not 184. 28. of that k. r. or that k. 57. for which they addict themselves to love r. which they addict themselves to for love 51. r. with the 189. 35. discerne r. deserve 192. 36. ye knowing r. ye knowe 193. 34. or r. if 195. 15. â—ay r. might 35. 1. Ad â—â—â—ah 198. 24. that is r. that it is prophets r. prophet 199. 12. were r. we are 17. in r. is 49. r. soverainty 201. 13. upon passe r. to â—asse 203. 31. generation r. regen 206. 49. observations r. observation 207. 51. lusted r. lasted 208. 56. teach r. reach 209. 10. deceâ—t r. decree 22. you r. them 26. verifying r. resolving 211. 34. supposed r. suppose 215. 21. causes r. clauses 216. 6. XI r. I. 217. 53. refutes r. refuses 218. â—agined r. imagining 52. without the bonds r. wâ—thâ—n the bounds 219. 9. adxe r. adde 220. 3. of the r. to the 37. r. allwayes freely doe it 221. 24. whereby r. that order 922. 34. by one r. by somâ— 223. 37. revealed r. related 224. 30. S. S. Austine point S. Austme 225. 57. of God r. to God 240. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 247 49. r. or to show 250. 12. they can be r. can be 251. 32. this part r. his â— 256. 55. in sending r. â—endriâ—g 259. 16. r. conceiving 260. 32. r. having excluded 35. r. proposes 261. 29. 31. r. premises premises 264. 27. r. 〈◊〉 281. 6. r. â—â—â— can 282. 38. r. distinguisâ—eâ—h 289. 45. r. which the 296. 26. let him in r. let them 297. 7. the rank of it r. the werk 300. 25. as I said 1. I said 304. 33. should be r. that God should 307. 13. but the r. be â—â—â—â—â— Third Book Pag. 6. l. 9. r. to be no more 12. 54. it not r. is not 14. 2. which r. with 16. 1. is not r. is the 19. 6. after r. afore 37. 47. r. though not under 54. 7. r. times r. termes 55. 53. r. promises 58. 21. truly one r. done 61. 23. r. on purpose 64. 21. r. S. Peter 65. 51. r. Zonarâ—â— 66. 10. a dore r. alone 69. 37. r. refused 38. r. construed 48. r. whatsoever 70. 1. r. Predestinatians 86. 1. r. Novatians 88. 55. r. Homil. 91. 25. r. Cappadocâ—â— 95. 25. r. Synedrâ—â—s 98. 58. repentance r. upon rep 110. 55. r. prescribed 111. 22. r. ministery 32. was Apostle r. we Apostles 113. 56. r. import 57. practice 1. Priests 115. 53. r. prefers 116. 4. for forn r. except for â— 117. 54. r. draw them 119. 57. corrected r. 〈◊〉 122. 1. time r. â—erme 123. 12. r. is it 128. 2. r. Mileu 137. 49. r. Gentium secuâ—â—â—m 〈◊〉 139. 13. r. her husbands brother 145. 4. r. all one 151. 29. r. setled 160. 16. r. Eldest 163. 58. r. will find 164. 41. according the r. to the 169. 33. r. the third 43. r. of the chief 178. 42. r. rights 191. 44. r. good works 197. 2. first r. seventh 206. 39. r. further for the ord 209. 1. r. so subject to 25. r. once a moneth 252. 2. r. if it be true all 273. 32. or so as 276. 46. or r. nor 277. 54. r. noâ— by the order 279. 2. r. conferred 280. 12. r. preached 282. â—2 and more r. and not 283. 46. r. oblige 285. 17. r. which God 44. upon r. up an 288. 10. r. God which tho 292. 20. seem r. serve 31â— 22. r. apparitions 316. 10. r. it is 318. 56. r. if the fire 327. 26. our r. one 328. 58. dele ne 334. 41. r. consecration 335. 29. in the r. is 336. 41. as he r. she 338. 7. r. grounded 56. this rec r. 〈◊〉 339. 31. r. variety 341. 22. r. and makes 26. not missing r. missing 29. any dif r. â—o â— 342. 16. r. which by to blessing 345. 30. r. Chrisme 36. hands r. bâ—nds 5â— some r. serve 349. 50. r. subsisteâ—â— 352. 6. r. premises 353. 53. instructing r. in serving 356. 55. sometimes 360. 7. r. no â— 364. 58. r. reasâ—â—able though noâ—â— 370. 55. r. Laickâ— 372. 53. r. ground 373. 38. r. necessarily 374. 5. r. degrees 374. 39. sureâ—y r. society 378. 13. r. as when 381. 36. r. upon Ep. but upon acts of the 385. 1. r. supposeth 40. r. supposition 54. r. of â—â—â— then that