private reason perswade him That he hath found out the truth and yet at the same time assure him That he is no less fallible than another man and therefore may possibly embrace and hug a false conception with as much fondness as a true and withal That private Judgements are not in themselves so safe as publique nor single as many What violence were this to his reason nay how much more rational than the first simple Act to comply with the Reason of others whom reason also requires to listen to and obey and Scripture much more From hence we may rightly conclude against both extremes in these days who yet agree in this very ill-grounded opinion That there must be an Infallible Director or Judge or we cannot submit to them in matters of Faith and our Salvation This is absolutely untrue both in humane and divine matters Who sees not indeed that it were to be wished for and above all things desired Who sees not the great inconvenience for want of such a standard of opinions as this But can we rationally conclude therefore that so it is Or hath God or ought he of his necessary goodness and wisdom as some have ventured to affirm to grant all things that are infallibly good for man Is it not sufficient that a fair though not infallible way is opened to attain the truth here and bliss hereafter but every one must find it Is it little or no absurditie That infinite never come to means of truth and so great that many who enjoy them do not receive the benefit by them Again Are good manners and virtues no less essential to Salvation than Faith and is there no infallible Judge of manners Is there no infallible Casuist And must there be of points of Faith How many have the infallible Rule of holy Life and yet mistake either in the sense or application of it so far as to perish in unknown Sins And yet none have to prevent that great and common evil call'd for an infallible Censour whose determinations might settle doubtful consciences in greatest safety and silence all apologies which are wont to be made for our sins and errors and so bring us nec essarily to truth or leave us under self and affected condemnation But The Ground of this mistake being farther searched into will be found very weak and fallacious An infallible Faith say they must have an infallible Judge And of these some assume thus There is no man infallible Therefore no man can be Judge of Faith Others assume thus But there is and must be an infallible Faith Therefore there must be an infallible Judge So that we see both would have infallible Judges but differ only in their choice of them For The former would have the Scriptures Judge and Rule which is very honest but very simple The later would have some external Judge which hath much more of reason in it And fails only in the choice of this Judge or in the description of him For There is nothing more unreasonable than to ordain that which is under debate to be Judge of it self besides the great absurdity of confounding the Rule or Law and the Interpreter and Judge And There is nothing more fallacious than to confound Causes and occasions together as the later opinion doth For If the Church or whatever Judge may be supposed were the true direct cause of our Faith then indeed it would necessarily follow That our Faith could no wayes be infallible unless the Judge were also infallible the effect not exceeding the cause nor the Conclusion the Premises or propositions from whence it was deduced But Because the Church is only on Occasion or a Cause without which we should neither believe the Scriptures in general to be the Word of God nor any sentence to be duly drawn from the same there is no necessity at all of such a consequence For The Infallibility now spoken of is either the thing believed which is the Word of God of which the Church I hope is no Cause or the Grace of Faith excited and exercised by us through the Spirit of Grace in us the mynistery of the Church serving thereunto acording to St. Paul saying We therefore as workers together with 2 Cor. 6. 1. him beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain For as in things natural He that applies Actives to Passives that is the Cause proper to the matter about which the Action is is not the proper or natural cause of the Effect but the occasion only yet is said vulgarly so to be as when a man applies fire to combustible matter he may though improperly be said to burn it when it is the fire and not he that burns it So the Church or Judge of Scriptures sense applying the same to a capable subject the effect is true and infallible Faith but it is not the effect of the Church or instrument or mean rather but of the Holy Spirit of Grace which taketh occasion from thence to produce Faith and that infallible For Were this Infallibility we now speak of the Churches then when ever the Church should so propound and urge points of Faith they must needs have an effect in the Soul For if they say The Church teaches in an humane way they say she teaches in a fallible way which overthrows all And from this is cleared that difficulty which opposeth a Judge of Scripture and Faith because none could be found infallible For not making the Judge the cause of Faith but occasion he may be necessarily required to Faith God who is the only principal cause with his holy word seldom or never concurring without those outward means And therefore though I readily enough grant That the Scriptures are so plainly written that a single simple person wanting greater helps to attain to the abstruser sence of them and using his honest and simple endeavour may easily find so much of the Rule of Faith and holy Life as to be saved by them yet I cannot say the same of any men who presuming on Gods power against his promise which includeth the use of outward meanes or mistaking his promise for absolute when it is conditional shall look no farther than their own wits shall lead them Now The outward meanes to which God hath annexed his promise of Grace may be these First That which we have here handled a general and sober submission to the Guides of our youth and our spiritual Fathers and Pastors in Christ which to forsake is the part of a wanton and fornicating Soul according to Solomon This common Reason and nature it self seem to require of all Prov. 2. 17. under Autority by the disposition of Almighty God That they in the first place hearken unto the voice and explication of the Church wherein they are educated until such time as a greater manifestation of truth shall withdraw them unwillingly from the same For so long as Senses are equally probable on both
in general concerned himself in the marriage of others And to declare how that state was not at all inconsistent with a state Clerical of twelve Disciples John 2. 1 2. which Christ chose to minister for him Eleven are supposed to be married persons or at least to have been married formerly To answer which by saying that after they were chosen they forsook their wives is to evade and not really to answer First because it had been as easie for Christ surely to have picked out a dozen persons free from the knowledge of women as to make choice of such as were wedded had he judged any incapacity in these to the Evangelical Ministery But secondly do we find any thing in special prescribed by Christ for such separation from wives more than for other Christians who were not Ministers of the Gospel For of all faithful Christians it is spoken in certain junctures that whoever forsaketh not Father and Mother and Brethren and Sisters and Wise and Children for Christs sake cannot be his Disciple And there is no rule but common necessity and prudence not Divine prescription which requires any man for the Gospels sake to forsake his Wife rather than his Father and Mother Yet that the Apostles did actually absent rather than separate themselves from their Wives and that others who enter'd into the ministration to the Church under the Apostles foreseeing what St. Paul expresseth the present distress of the Church as well in regard of the 1 Cor. 7. 26. persecutions of the Church as the paucity of Preachers the greatness of the Harvest and the small number of Labourers did decline the state of marriage is very probable because they were required by Christs Injunction to Go and teach all Nations which travelling life ill could consist with cohabitation with Wives And therefore it must be given them Gratis and not by the merits of any reason oâ— grounds they can show that that such relinquishing of their Wives was either total or upon conscience made of the thing it self Doth not St. Paul say expresly in the words before those now touched Concerning Virgins I have no commandment of the Lord If such as served at the Altar were to be excepted surely he 1 Cor. 7. 25. would not have left the Rule so general as we find speaking only according to humane prudence And though they search with their best eyes they shall not be able to find in any other writings of the Apostles one Text o Scripture obliging Bishops or Priests to singleness of life more than those of the Laity unless they argue from reason That Virginal Chastity is more severe more pure more spiritual than conjugal which is yielded and therefore more obliging the Clergy who should be more spiritual persons then others all which I deny not but say that this binds them no more from marriage than it doth from wine and strong drink which if none of the Clergy ever used they were the more to be commended unless in such cases as St. Paul advises Timothy For their stomachs sake and often infirmities And thus is Bellarmin's first proof laid Bellarm. de Clericis l. 1. c. 19. The sole grounds then of unmarried state of Priests must be fetch'd from Tradition and Reason of both which we shall presume to speak a word or two Apostolical Tradition is pretended but not trusting much to that recourse is had to the Old Testament from certain allegorical interpretations made of some Rites in Moses's Law which may do well in the Church where they used them to perswade but ill in the Schools to prove the same as a necessary duty The argument taken from the custom of the Priest abstaining from their Wives during the time of their ministration I do really 1 Chron. 24. believe to have had an influence upon Primitive Christians Judaizing in many other things of like nature to restrain them from the use of their Wives upon solemn ministrations But this was without Law or Canon freely undertaken and embraced as was Celebacie it self at first until about the year 385. Siricius Bishop of Rome made a constitution that it should and ought to be and that on that ground And that the inferiour Orders such as Ostiaries Readers Exorcists and Acolythites should only be permitted to marry But Alexander the third about the year 1160 proceeded according to the method of that Church to shut them also out the doors of Orders that should presume to marry But all that was done against those in greater or sacred Orders in the Church for more than three hundred years after Christ was to deny such as were married access to the Altar by way of ministration who from that time abstained not from their Wives as did the Council of Arles and some in Spain Only a custom prevailed very generally and anciently to suffer none who were in those called Sacred Orders such as were Bishops and Priests and Deacons to marry after they were so ordained for if they did they were dismissed of their Office or their Wives The Eastern Church ever accepted of married persons into the Clergy and at length understanding the Apostle Let the Bishops be the husbands of one wife as a Precept rather than a Caution that they should be husbands of no more then one which in all likelyhood the truest sense in the Sixth Council In Trullo decreed they only should be received into Priestly Orders who were married And therefore all antiquity for twelve hundred years together fails them in this that it was otherwise then voluntary that married Priests lived from their Wives who had before orders or that married Men might not be made Priests though 't is confessed they preferred unmarried Persons before them until that Sixth Council which for that reason amongst others Bellarmine calls a Profane Synod and Baronius impious such a great veneration have they for the Autority of the Church when it speaks not their sense Yet as we are far from giving an exact and full account of this long controversie here so are we so far as I can Divine at the judgment of our Church willing to accommodate the matter with others that can digest any thing but their own stout devises to acknowledge a Power in the Church to bind or loose her sons of the Clergy to an unmarried state or to leave them free For to aggravate matters to that height as to make it absolute tyranny or Antichristian and to be against the word of God which saith Marriage is honourable in all things and the like implyes more of the weakness of the Arguer than strength in the Argument more of spite and passion than ingenuity or soberness For 't is answered very sufficiently marriage is not condemned but virginity commended before it Marriage is not at all declared to be evil when Celebacie is said to be much better Marriage is not condemned when certain persons are condemned for marrying Doth a Father that should cast off
the matter before such as they find startled and impatient at such plain derogation of Gods honor But they who openly profess to give Divine honor to Saints thus state the matter as doth Azorius Hoeretiques Azor. Instit Moral l. 9. c. 10. Quinto quaeritur c. saith he no wayes deny that Saints are to be honoured with that worship and honor which men eminent for vertue power wisedom nobility and Authority may be worshipped with for such honor as this is altogether civil and human but they tax Catholiques for worshipping them as God that is that they give divine honor to them But greatly are they mistaken For Catholiques worship them not as God but for Gods sake worship and honor them For as before Minime cols pro Deo sâ—d propter Deum c. we said Catholiques worship not the Image for God but for Gods sake So in like manner we honor not Saints only with that honor wherewith we honor vertuous wise and noble men but with divine honor and worship which is an Act of Religion But we give not divine honor to them for their own sakes but for Gods sake Thus he Against which we object sacriledg and Idolatry thus loosly delivered For as for the distinction it serves their turn nothing at all It implies with us a contradiction For to give Divine honor to any Creature is Idolatrous for what reason or for whose sake soever it be given Neither is it possible a man should give it to a Creature for Gods sake meaning as I suppose they do for the honor of God For divine worship being proper to God and incommunicable to any but him can no more be given for his sake to the Creature than supream honor to a Villain for the Kings sake And therefore as he goes on to erect Temples and Altars and offer Sacrifices in honor of Saints which is to tell us more plainly what they mean by Divine worship and this as they say for Gods sake is with us Idolatry who deny that any such things can be done really to Gods honor and much more that God would have them so honour'd or himself by them And whereas a little before he saith It was the Heresy of Eustathius as Socrates writeth in his History l. 2. c. 33. That Saints were not to be worshipped but God alone as being against the first Commandment There is no such thing to be found in that place but this we find which expresses the dealing of the Romanists in this and other controversies viz. how that Sccrat l. 2. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eudoxius being in Julians dayes placed in the Episcopal Throne of Constantinople he uttered these words in publique God the Father is impious but God the Son is pious at the hearing whereof the minds of all present being much troubled and beginning to mutiny He added Let not this saying trouble you For 't is true thus God the Father is impious because he worshippeth none but God the Son is pious because he worshippeth the Father Which being heard the tumult was appeased and instead of it they all fell out into laughter and so was that saying ever after look'd on as ridiculous In like manner when these new Divines come with great swelling language of divine honor to be given to the Creature in their interpreting themselves they must be very heretical and prophane or very ridiculous Or rather it is both to say We must give divine honor to Saints for Gods sake yea an abomination yet greater to make God the author of his own injury and degradation as it were to set up a competitor to a King against his will or at least without his will for his sake But suppose what may not be granted that there is a favourable interpretation and tolerable practise in the Church of Rome of these things I am sure this is not tolerable that such sayings as these and many more should pass untouched or uncersur'd by them yea are kept and nourished and preferred much by the most Visible autority of their Church and the other softer inferior sense allowed and made use of chiefly to dispute with and to decline the force of a resolute accuser and to satisfie green proselytes with who are not able to digest the stronger and ranker Divinity they have for them in store when it shall be too late to see the truth and must have their mouths stopt and all objections and scruples answered with this The Church cannot err It is most apparent that God neither in Old nor New Testament hath given any such warrant as Ahasuerus did to Haman to exalt Mordecai or Pharaoh to honor Joseph for us to honor Saints in exhibiting any thing of divine worship to them I shall not need therefore trouble this place with their citations to that purpose which is not to the purpose when it was there manifest to all that such honor was the honor not of a King but a principal subject and Minister of state Neither do Scriptural reasons advance their cause Whereof some are so parabolical and forced that they fall to nothing before they come to us as that of Mat. 24. 26. and that of Saint Peter 2 Pet. 1. 14. 15. being plainly intended of the records he would leave with them he wrote to to bear in memory what he delivered to them as Cajetane hath noted And the Power promised Rev. 2. 26. to them that overcome is not as they violently give out a power to dispense blessings and therefore to be sought to by Invocation but a power to be victorious in the Faith against all persecutions And those reasons drawn from Apoc. 5. 8. and 6. 10. and 8. 3 4. Are all besides the vanity of the form of the argument it self upon a false foundation and supposition viz. as if those things there related were acted in Heaven and not upon earth True it is as hath been noted before that the Vision of the Apostle is implyed to have been in Heaven concerning things there revealed to him but it was of things only to be fulfilled on earth And though it is most easie fit and obvious to interpret the Angel offering incense as the servent prayers of the holy Saints upon earth to God the Father yet it is I conceive more literal and agreeable to the intent of the Revelations made to interpret them partly as descriptions of things doing then in the Church and partly as prophesies of the future condition of the Church in the publique Service of God where by the Angel we are to understand the Bishop who in the first dayes of the Church was wont in presence and behalf of the people to offer up the common prayers of the People at the golden Altar viz. The special place of his ministration which prayers and worship did like incense ascend unto the holy Throne of God And the fire which is said to be cast from the Censer and Altar unto the earth is
be convicted of moral evil and so unconcernedly to omit the weightier matters of the Law as Judgment Mercy or Charity in Vnity and Faith what can Charity call this but meer Pharisaism and where must such Pharisaism end at length but in Sadducism even denying of the Blessings and Curses of a Future Life For as Drusius hath Si Patres nostri selvissent mâ—râ—â—â—s resurrecturâ— praemia manere â—ustos â—â—st hanc vitam nâ—n tantoperè râ—bellassent Drusius in Mat. c 3. v. 7. Item in c. 22 23. observed it was one Reason alledged by the Sadduces against the Resurrection If our Fathers had known the dead should rise again and rewards were prepared for the Righteous they would not have rebelled so often not conforming themselves to Gods Rule as is pretended by all but conforming the Rule of Sin and of Faith it self to the good Opinion they had of their own Persons and Actions which Pestilential Contagion now so Epidemical God of his great Mercy remove from us and cause health and soundness of Judgment Affection and Actions to return to us and continue with us to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. THE CONTENTS OF THE CHAPTERS Chap. I. OF the Nature and Grounds of Religion in General Which are not so much Power as the Goodness of God and Justice in the Creature And that Nature it self teaches to be Religious Chap. II. Of the constant and faithful assurance requisite to be had of a Deity The reasons of the necessity of a Divine Supream Power Socinus refuted holding the knowledge of a God not natural Chap. III. Of the Unity of the Divine Nature and the Infiniteness of God Chap. IV. Of the diversity of Religions in the World A brief censure of the Gentile and Mahumetan Religion Chap. V. Of the Jewish Religion The pretence of the Antiquity of it nulled The several erroneous grounds of the Jewish Religion discovered Chap. VI. The vanity of the Jewish Religion shewed from the proofs of the true Messias long since come which are many Chap. VII The Christian Religion described The general Ground thereof the revealed Will of God The necessity of Gods revealing himself Chap. VIII More special Proofs of the truth of Christian Religion and more particularly from the Scriptures being the Word of God which is proved by several reasons Chap. IX Of the several Senses and Meanings according to which the Scriptures may be understood Chap. X. Of the true Interpretation of Holy Scriptures The true meaning not the letter properly Scripture Of the difficulty of attaining the proper sense and the Reasons thereof Chap. XI Of the Means of interpreting the Scripture That they who understand Scripture are not for that authorized to interpret it decisively The Spirit not a proper Judge of the Scriptures sense Reason no Judge of Scripture There is no Infallible Judge of Scripture nor no necessity of it absolute The grounds of an Infallible Judge examined Chap. XII Of Tradition as a Means of understanding the Scriptures Of the certainty of unwritten Traditions that it is inferiour to Scripture or written Tradition No Tradition equal to Sense or Scripture in Evidence Of the proper use of Tradition Chap. XIII Of the nature of Faith What is Faith Of the two general grounds of Faith Faith divine in a twofold sense Revelation the formal reason of Faith Divine Of the several senses and acceptations of Faith That Historical Temporarie and Miraculous Faith are not in nature distinct from Divine and Justifying Faith Of Faith explicite and implicite Chap. XIV Of the effects of true Faith in General Good Works Good Works to be distinguish'd from Perfect Works Actions good four wayes Chap. XV. Of the effect of Good Works which is the effect of Faith How Works may be denominated Good How they dispose to Grace Of the Works of the Regenerate Of the proper conditions required to Good Works or Evangelical Chap. XVI Of Merit as an effect of Good Works The several acceptatations of the word Merit What is Merit properly In what sense Christians may be said to merit How far Good Works are efficacious unto the Reward promised by God Chap. XVII Of the two special effects of Faith and Good Works wrought in Faith Sanctification and Justification what they are Their agreements and differences In what manner Sanctification goes before Justification and how it follows Chap. XVIII Of Justification as an effect of Faith and Good Works Justification and Justice to be distinguished and how The several Causes of our Justification Being in Christ the principal cause What it is to be in Christ The means and manner of being in Christ Chap. XIX Of the efficient cause of Justification Chap. XX. Of the special Notion of Faith and the influence it hath on our Justification Of Faith solitary and only Of a particular and general Faith Particular Faith no more an Instrument of our justification by Christ than other co-ordinate Graces How some ancient Fathers affirm that Faith without Works justifie Chap. XXI A third effect of justifying Faith Assurance of our Salvation How far a man is bound to be sure of his Salvation and how far this assurance may be obtained The Reasons commonly drawn from Scripture proving the necessity of this assurance not sufficient c. Chap. XXII Of the contrary to true Faith Apostasie Heresie and Atheism Their Differences The difficulty of judging aright of Heresie Two things constituting Heresie the evil disposition of the mind and the falsness of the matter How far and when Heresie destroys Faith How far it destroys the Nature of a Church Chap. XXIII Of the proper subject of Faith the Church The distinction and description of the Church In what sense the Church is a Collection of Saints Communion visible as well as invisible necessary to the constituting a Church Chap. XXIV A preparation to the knowledge of Ecclesiastical Society or of the Church from the consideration of humane Societies What is Society What Order What Government Of the Original of Government Reasons against the peoples being the Original of Power and their Right to frame Governments Power not revocable by the people Chap. XXV Of the Form of Civil Government The several sorts of Government That Government in general is not so of Divine Right as that all Governments should be indifferently of Divine Institution but that One especially was instituted of God and that Monarchical The Reasons proving this Chap. XXVI Of the mutual Relations and Obligations of Soveraigns and Subjects No Right in Subjects to resist their Soveraigns tyrannizing over them What Tyranny is Of Tyrants with a Title and Tyrants without Title Of Magistrates Inferiour and Supream the vanity and mischief of that distinction The confusion of co-ordinate Governments in one State Possession or Invasion giveth no Right to Rulers The Reasons why Chap. XXVII An application of the former Discourse of Civil Government to Ecclesiastical How Christs Church is alwayes visible and how invisible Of the communion
than guide or promote men in the knowledge of Scripture it self which naked would be better understood and resolved on then with them Fifthly The seeming opposition and contradiction in Scripture are no little impediments to the setling of mens minds in the knowledg of them Sixthly a Sixth difficulty will be The distinguishing of things Judicial Ceremonial and Moral so far as to be assured How far it is lawful to use or necessary to refuse what is prescribed by Precept or example in the Old Testament Seventhly To name no more The several various Lections may much offend the simplicity of such who shall not be well inform'd concerning the substantial integrity of Divine writ And all these I recite to no other end than to flacken the precipitancy and cool the impetuous and presumptious heat of such who the less able they are to examine and judge the more confident they are to conclude out of Scriptures what they phansie and like best refusing the outward and ordinary means of receiving the true sense upon indeed a certain truth That Gods Spirit is the best interpreter of its own Laws and God is able to direct them in the sober use of them but a most unsound and unsafe inference from hence that God doth or will so assist them when they neglect those sober outward means he hath no less ordained to that end then the former Of which means we are in the next place here to treat CHAP. XI Of the Means of interpreting the Scripture That they who understand Scripture are not for that authorized to Interpret it decisively The Spirit not a Proper Judge of the Scriptures sense Reason no Judge of Scripture There is no Infallible Judge of Scripture nor no necessity of it absolute The grounds of an Infallible Judge examined THE Opinion That all things necessary to salvation are plainly enough delivered in Scripture is pious and reasonable enough taken with its due qualifications and limitations namely of Persons of Times of Places and such like For of things supposed to be necessary all are not to all men alike necessary no not to the same man at all times For there are some Articles of Faith that are sufficiently explained and propounded to him others are not so and therefore in relation to such a person not so necessary to be explicitly believed Again some points of Religion are necessary to be received for their own sakes after due proposal others are necessary to be received for the sake of others and so imediately only necessary The Articles in the Creed of the Apostles are most of the former sort to be for their own sakes believed But the Articles of the Church and its power and autority which I take not to be mentioned in the Creed as most do are necessary for the preservation of the true Faith it self For without the use and receiving of Discipline there can be no Church properly so called as may hereafter be prooved and without a Church there can be no long continuance of Faith Therefore from hence it is not difficult to null the pretensions of some ranck Disputants who lay it as a Principal foundation and so reasonable that it scarce needs any thing but clamours and out cries to make it take effect on them that shall dare to reject it That nothing is necessarily to be offered to the Faith of any or to be by him received which is not expressed in holy writ For in holy writ it is necessary to observe and obey such as are set over us in the Lord so far as we are not convinced that they determine or impose any thing contrary to the word of God And for ought doth appear it is as necessarily required that we should depend upon our Guides in the Church for the due meaning of the Scriptures as upon the suggestions of Gods Spirit which refuseth not but requireth such outward means concurring with its direction For nothing can be more absurd or vain than simply to depend upon divine intimations of Gods Spirit because it is all sufficient of it self to such purposes For it is not only sufficient to them but to all other as well divine as natural ends and yet to so rest on it as to neglect or pass over contemptuously other meanes is rather to provoke God to denie the ordinary assistance of it For God doth not act in the world according to his power but according to his Will and Promise made unto us It is true that Christ hath promised in St. Mathew Whatsoever ye ask in my name believing ye shall receive and Math. 21. 22. by St. Luke more expresly If ye then being evil know how to give good gifts Luk. 11. 13. unto your children how much more shall your heavenly Father give the holy Spirit to them that ask him These and such like promises of being invested with Gods blessed Spirit must not be so absolutely understood as that all who simply crave it should forthwith certainly be therewith endowed because St. James as other places of Scripture explains and restrains this large promise according to the Oeconomie or more general tenour of the Gospel i. e. That we ask aright and believing which whether we in prayer do duly observe may be well doubted of us though we doubt not of the Thesis it self or Rule That he that asketh aright shall receive And besides these are senses in which such promises are truly verified and Gods Spirit truly given and yet not a full importment of all the graces which flow from it For they who at first were called to the Faith of Christ and baptized were indued with the holy Spirit and yet not presently instated in the discerning of all the mysteries of Christian Faith but still depended upon the Prophets and Apostles and interpreters of Gods will for the attaining of his will even revealed in General For according to the known distinction there are spiritual Gifts signally so called and spiritual Graces And some men may receive the influence of Gods Spirit in the way of Grace which sanctifies the will and affections and not of Gifts which illuminates the mind and understanding and that not only to the use of things absolutely necessary to our Salvation but to the benefit of others Add hereunto That notwithstanding the Spirit is so sufficient of it self and God doth grant it to them who ask it of them We know that generally it is not granted to any but in the way which Christ ordained the same and that was that first it should descend as it also did immediately and primarily upon the Church representative or Ruling who were then his Apostles and holy Disciples and in like manner is it still to be expected soberly through the mediation of such as are by Christ set to govern the Church and rule under him herein succeeding the Apostles and not immediately and by a leap from the head to the lowest members which though it may be yet is so rarely
Justification Just as much as the fair gay train of a Peacock to the bird that draws it after it make a fine show and that is all that we know of But the difficulty is yet very strong behind And that is seeing it is granted that some Faith in Christ is Justifying and some is not Justifying whence comes this about Is it not because one is a lively and operative Faith and the other is drie and unactive and unfruitful So that Faith which is said to Justifie is it self first Justified by its works For though as hath been said Faith doth absolutely produce good Works and not good Works Faith yet good Works are they in which its goodness consists next unto its object Christ and consequently render it Justifying actually And whereas they would evade his and elude St. James's autority by distinguishing the Cause and Sign of our Justification saying That we are Justified only by Faith effectivè effectually but by works as St. James saith ostensivè declaratorily as signs that we are Justified it is a sense meerly obtruded upon the Apostle there being no more grounds or occasion given by St. James why they should understand him that works justifie only declaratorily than are given by St. Paul that I should interpret that Justification which he ascribes to Faith to be only Declaratorily For though Faith received in the mind is not apparent yet when it is professed then it may be said no less to declare our Justification then good works as the Scripture it self testifies saying With the heart man believeth unto righteousness Rom. 10. 10. i. e. to the doing of works of righteousness which proceed from a true Faith and with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation CHAP. XX. Of the Special Notion of Faith and the Influence it hath on our Justification Of Faith Solitary and Onely Of a Particular and General Faith Particular Faith no more an Instrument of our Justification by Christ than other co-ordinate Graces How some Ancient Fathers affirm that Faith without Works Justifie ALL this while we have treated of the complex notion of Faith or at least as it is that first general Grace whereby we are inserted into Christ and justified by it together with its blessed retinue of subordinate Evangelical Graces which are reduced to these three Faith Hope and Charity where Faith standeth by its self and is a peculiar Grace of it self and hath in this acceptation a more then common prerogative attributed unto it in order to our Justification or the bringing us to Christ and partaking of Christ For that is it whereby we are only properly justified and all Graces serve for no other end here than to adopt us for the benefit of Justification through Christ and for Christ's sake alone So that no man can as yet complain That though I derogate somewhat from the vertue and value of Faith in reference to our Justification as it is explained by moderner Divines some I mean I do not in the least detract from the sufficiencies freeness and absolute necessity of Christ's Merits and Grace towards us Yea I establish it nay I augment and commend more the Free Grace of God then do they who have chose another way to express it For all this while I do not compare Works with Christ nor Hope nor Charity nor Obedience with Christ as is plain but I compare now one Grace with another and Faith simply considered with the obedience of Faith For Faith taken as in general for the embracing of the Fundamentum ergo esi justitiae Fides Ambr. Offic. Lib. 1. cap. 29. Lib. 2. cap. 2. Habet vitam aeternam fides quia est fundamentum bonum Habet facta quia vir justus dictis factis probatur c. Id. de Basilicis non Tradendis Fides quae est justitiae fundamentum quam nulla bona opera praecedunt sed ex qua omnia procedunt ipsa nos à peccatis nost◠is purgat c. Prosper Lib. 3. de Vita Contemplativa cap. 21. Fides est omnium bonorum fundamentum humanae salutis initium c. August in Vigilia Pentecostis whole Body of the Gospel hath this undoubted prerogative to be the Grace of all Graces the Mother of all the Fountain from which all flow and as the Fathers generally do justifie because it is the foundation of all access to Christ Which assertion of theirs however later Wits have slighted and contemned as not giving Faith its due in order to our Justification doth in my opinion with much greater perspicuity and simplicity and soundness express its proper office then those newly invented and several distinctions and sub-distinctions confunding rather than setling the judgment of a good Christian And first They ascribe this virtue of Justifying to a special Faith Then they say this Faith doth not justifie as a Work or Act but Grace Then they proceed to affirm That not as a principal cause but only as an instrument created by God in the heart to that end And yet farther Not as an Instrument active and operative but as an Instrument rather receptive and passive as appears by the example given of an Hand which is no true cause of an Alms given but yet it properly receives it But first What a disorder must these multiplyed niceties needs breed in the minds of the simpler sort who are not able to comprehend them and so are brought into great troubles of conscience whether their Faith be directed to Christ under the true relation it ought to bear How much more clear and easie is that Doctrine that teaches First That neither our Faith nor Works proceeding from thence can avail any thing without Christ and that all their sufficiencie is of Christ And next That this Faith and good Works do but qualifie us according to the Free Covenant of Grace for Christ Secondly If it be denyed as in truth it is That Faith is any more an Instrument whether active or passive or a Hand as it is called to lay hold especially in another kind of Christ than Hope or Charity I do not find how they can prove it For I may and do yield a greater degree of vertue in Faith special well founded on God than in other Graces distinct from it but I do not yield that this is the Faith properly by them contended for For It is a mixt compound Grace consisting of Hope and Love which they call Fiducia Confidence and resting upon God This indeed is a special Grace as considered in subordination to the general Grace whereby we assent and submit to the Gospel of Christ but it is not special as distinct from other co-ordinate Graces with it Calvin Inst Petrus Mart. Lo. Com. class 3. cap. 4. num 6. But what manner of Faith say they do we suppose that which goes so ill attended alone First I suppose there is such a Grace distinct from others and that which was set up against
accepted if done by her more soberly and seriously as it ought by all whether Minister or otherwise And that this Act of Zipporah was not so exorbitant in the manner of doing as vulgarly supposed more learned Men have shewed at large And secondly That is was not so extraordinary doth appear from the practice of the Jews who as P. Fagius hath observed upon Deuteronomy Fagius in Deuteron C. 10. 16. Cap 10. v. 16. do believe if a Man be wanting to whom it belongs one Uncircumcised as a Servant a Woman so not an Heathen or Infidel a Youth may circumcise an Infant Neither was Circumcision to be repeated made by what man soever though an Heathen or Infidel And in brief We find no person excluded by the Catholick Church from doing this office for one desiring it or capable otherwise of it but a Mans self And yet we are told by searchers into the ancient practice of the Jews that a man might circumcise himself And thus much of the First Proper and Generally necessary Sacrament to Salvation Baptism adding only one thing more for a conclusion and that is about the Repetition of Baptism or Anabaptism Of which prophanation of that solemn Sacrament I find many really guilty but not so much nor upon those grounds they are Generally charged For I have not met with any that directly affirm it to be requisite or lawful to reiterate Baptism though in fact they do so For the Novatians the Donatists the Arrians and they of Late years who are called from the Renewing of their Baptism Anabaptists have none of them that we find declared it reasonable that Baptism once truly performed should be acted over again but all these suppose it not done and therefore they do it It was always the opinion of the Catholick as well as Heretical and Schismatical Churches That all outward words or washings sufficed not to the due effect of baptism There were three several incapacities which render'd pretended baptism void so far that the Person so baptized was held obliged to be again baptized The incapacity of the Minister or Baptizer The incapacity of the Person or subject to be baptized Thirdly the incapacity of the Form used in Baptism If the Minister had any time fallen from or denied the Christian Faith or was of impure and Scandalous manners he was reputed by the Novatians and Donatists uncapable of such a sacred Office and consequently in that though a Priest did not effectually administer that Holy Sacrament imagining that he who was so defiled himself could not by his Ministration cleanse another and therefore he was baptized not as repeating former baptism but as not being baptized at all The Arrians being enemies to the second Person in the Trinity and judging the Catholicks to be so too in ascribing too much unto Christs divine nature looked on the form of baptizing as corrupt and insufficient to such an end and therefore thought another necessary And our modern Anabaptists as they are called not thinking Infants capable of that Sacrament for want of Faith and Repentance which they hold absolutely necessary to Salvation and that in the properest sense deny any effect to follow upon those Actions used So that we see there are no proper Anabaptists such I mean who hold it so much as needful to baptize any persons above once Though in Fact they stand guilty of this prophanation upon the grounds of others not hard to be made Good against them as we have against these last shewing the Capacity children are in of receiving Baptism as also that the unworthiness of the Person ministring Sacraments doth not impede the effect of those Sacraments while he hath a proper subject to work upon and observes the proper form required Now this form according as the Arrians excepted against at doth depend upon the disputation of the Divine Nature of Christ proper to another place It may here be doubted whether the zeal of some of the Ancients but of most of the Schoolmen hath not too far transported them who damn all such as repeat Baptism once rightly administer'd it being impossible in their opinion that Baptism should be twice acted but the Former must be renounced and truly if Baptism once truly performed be renounced that which follows is also renounced being in it self good For there is but One Baptism as St. Paul saith But this can never be proved as necessarily Ephes 4. and perpetually true They indeed of whom now we have spoken who were so engaged in heretical opinions and societies as to believe the imperfection and insufficiency of that Baptism they received could not admit of another but they must reject the first But then whether absolutely they rejected true Catholick Baptism may be a doubt For he only renounces his Baptism properly who rejecteth the Form it self and the Faith therein implied And this is the One Baptism of which St. Paul is certainly to be understood that is necessarily One in nature but that it should be also so One in number as multiplied both should be made void no reason is given And surely St. Paul intended no such thing though he may be said much less to have intended the multiplication of it The more probable opinion therefore of the two is That the Second Baptism is void rather than the first As if two married persons being joyned together in Lawful Matrimony once should presume a Second time to go through the same Ceremony it may be only to confirm them in that state this were to baffle and prophane such Ordinances but it were not to make the former Vows and Rites void And for the reasons given against Iteration of Baptism though I yield the Conclusion that it ought not so to be I do not hold them convincing used to this purpose Not that taken from the indelibleness of that Character supposed to be imprinted in the soul by that Sacrament 'T is true Circumcision had a visible character made in the body which could scarce be altered or removed But that therefore to answer this there must be a proportionable impresâ—â—on the soul which is invisible follows not St. Paul calls Circumcision a sign and a seal and it is Baptism in a Metaphorical sense And the Fathers who many times mention such things intended nothing more than an immutable Obligation on our part to God and an infallible communication of Gods grace to them who duly are partakers of his Sacraments It is also true a Man can be born but once spiritually as naturally and therefore supersluous and prophane are all attempts to a Regeneration a second time the principles of spiritual life being preserved intire in themselves though in a way to be extinguished upon pertinacy in sin and dying in impenitency And for those places of Scipture where St. Paul tells us we are sealed by Gods spirit alledged 2 Cor. 1. 21 22. Eph. 1. 13 14. Eph. 4. 30. to prove that we have a Character made in Baptism
such opinion of it as in truth agrees only to God He directly intends who really supposes falsly any Creature to be God and intends to worship it as God or certainly he who otherwise out of perverted affection desires to worship that which he well knows to be a Creature as God He intends indirectly who no ways intending directly to honour a Creature as God yet outwardly notwithstanding this doth bestow divine honor on the Creature as God So that in the judgment of sober men he may be thought to account the Creature for God as if any man through fear of death should sacrifice to Idols Therefore if actually a man worships that which is not God his intention to worship only the true God can relieve him no farther than his opinion and intention to accompany with his own wife excuses him from Casual Adultery in lying with another woman and that is but little unless circumstances be such as may render the ignorance of the Fact invincible as they say or unavoidable And the intention and opinion if they be against ordinary presumptions to the contrary do not excuse Now to apply it to the last Case of Christ corporally present in the Sacrament This is agreed upon by us that what Christ saith to be so is infallibly true seem it never so contrary to our outward senses But seeing the words of Christ according to the like expressions in Holy Writ where things that bear Analogy with one another are said positively to be one another as where St. Paul saith Believers are Christs bone and Christs flesh which is not true in the natural sense but Metaphorical for otherwise unbelievers might be said so to be which St. Paul never intended do not necessarily infer that sense and all the ends imaginable are attainable no less by the spiritual sense and metaphorical acceptation of the words than by the more gross and natural And lastly to suppose what is said above concerning this subject testimony of senses bear witness to the contrary as much after Consecration as before the upshot of the business will be this Whether there remains any such infallible inducements to produce an opinion of such a thing there being whether such gounds unresistible there be for to found such an intention that may excuse from errour And therefore I absolutely deny Spalatoe's opinion saying I answer I acknowledge no Idolatrous De Republ. Eccl. Lib. 7. cap II. num 2. crime in the adoration of the Eucharist so long as the intention is directed aright For they who teach that Bread to be no longer bread but the body of Christ c. For if they knew that the Body of Christ did not lye hid under the Species and his blood under those of Wine they would not so worship This I say satisfies not because they have no sufficient grounds that so it is or so Christs words are to be understood Secondly and as to this point principally because Idolatry is primarily a defect and errour in the understanding as their own men confess and only secondarily and by consequence in the will or purpose which altogether overthrows the moderate sense of Forbes likewise to Forbes ubi supra p. 439. say no more For as for that other evasion and purgation whereby they would fetch off Papists from Idâ—latrous worship in the Eucharist because there can be no doubt made but Christ may be adored as Austins known words are in the Eucharist with all outward and bodily as well as mental worship is much less to the purpose For This quite changes the question which is wholly about the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the ancients call them the objects appearing whether they be Christ and to be worshipped as Christ For Christ in the Sacrament we may worship without exceptions of any divine or corporal manner Christ's body and blood are really present in the Eucharist we grant and in a more eminent manner then in other places or divine ordinances but when we hear him say The faithful receive the body and blood of Christ in Forbes ibid. themselves corporally but yet after a spiritual miraculous and imperceptible manner we grant the manner to be wonderful and imperceptible but we cannot grant it to be Corporally and Spiritually in the same respect without a contradiction For What is corporally to receive a thing but modo corporali after a corporal manner and therefore to correct as it were that Expression with that which follows viz. Modo tamen spirituali yet after a spiritual manner is quite to destroy what he seem'd to say before For Nothing can be received Corporally after a spiritual manner And it is much more intelligible than that of the Romanists which saith That the Body of Christ may be received spiritually and bodily For the body according to them is taken into the mouth and so bodily received by the wicked and unbelievers and it is by the faithful besides received by Faith spiritually which may stand together But to suppose any spiritual way to explicatory of the corporal way of receiving Christ is to suppose contradictions But this belongs to another place Let us now touch the third exception I make against the distinction of Material and Formal Idolatry taken from the Novelty of it and singularity as never heard of before late dayes when extremities put mens wits to study for new forms of Speech to dress up the new body of Divinity framed to themselves Why did not the Heathen come off so For surely they might Why did not this enter into the head of the ancienter School-men who I dare say make no mention of it How comes it about that the aneient Fathers and Councils knew no other Idolatry than that which even moderner Papists approve of when the soberer mode is on them viz. The worshipping as God that which is not God without any notice taken of Material and Formal worship contenting themselves with the general distinction of Ignorance of the Law and Ignorance of the Fact or wilful Ignorance and unwilling Or vincible and invincible Surely this implies somewhat singular in this case which they either are ashamed to express or can not which latter is my case For I confess I see no reason why we may not distinguish two sorts of Heresie as well two sorts of Schism two sorts of Adulterie two sorts of Drunkenness and Murder Material and Formal as of Idolatry And yet we hear little or no mention of this distinction but only as it is applyed to Idolatry which besides what is abovesaid renders it more suspected and the coyners and users of it Fourthly and lastly The dangerousness of this distinction and apparent damage it doth to Christian Religion declares it to be wicked and intollerable while it both opens a way to all carelessness in worshipping we know not how nor what contrary to our Faith and then when we may receive competent information of our error and should repent it lulls us asleep