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
drunkenness who putteth the bottle to his neighbours mouth provoking him to drink to excess or of Theft who will by no means steal himself but is aiding in his advice and putting advantages into his hands to take anothers Goods In like manner the necessary consequence of a light Errour being very notorious though a person be not formally an Heretick in the conclusion which he may protest against as not following from his erroneous proposition yet if in truth it doth so and is generally so reputed to the mis-leading of Christians such a man is really or virtually an Heretick and obnoxious to the guilt and punishment due unto such Errours which he denies For instance It is a notorious Heresie to hold it unnecessary there should be any Church of Christ and to affirm That it suffices that every good Christian hath the word of God and believes and lives by himself though the word of God contradicts this impiety sufficiently and to be a Christian at large If any person heretically inclined shall deny that this is his opinion or that thus he would have it yet if he preaches such Doctrine and publishes such Opinions which do necessarily infer thus much he is a notorious Heretick in reality though not in the formality As also if he should teach The Church hath no power to enjoyn any thing besides what the word of God requires This Errour taken simply and nakedly hath no such monstrousness as may not pass for tolerable but in the necessary consequence it is as pernicious to the community of Christians as to preach against Christ himself And therefore the argument of late Rationalists is very false founded upon this ground Socinus Chi. viz. That Christians are not to be obliged under pain of damnation such as Anathema's and Excommunications are to any thing which Christ hath not by his Law prescribed For this indeed taken strictly is true Christ for ought may appear doth not in Scripture command Rites in use with the Church but Christ under pain of his displeasure doth require that we should do all things not contrary to his injunctions for the keeping up Non sunt parva existimanda sine quibus magna consistere enim possint Hieron of the nature of a Church and Christian Society and therefore though the Errour be in it self light it falls in the event heavy upon Christianity it self and deserves no less rigour than is used towards the offender in Faith it self Lastly From hence we may reasonably judge of the frequent denunciations of alienation from the Faith and Church against them who erred heretically affirming in general That Heresie quite alienated from the Church and that Society could not be of the Church which maintained an Heresie For first we are to note that few or none before St. Cyprians time were so severely censured by the ancient Fathers but such as were offenders against the very principles of Christianity it self St. Cyprian indeed and others from him extended this censure to such as were less criminal For it is a very hard matter to instance in any one Article of Faith though I know some great Clerks have attempted it which Novations or Donatists rejected or offended against So that abating somewhat for the vehemence of the zeal conceived against such enemies to the Church in the writings of Fathers against Hereticks it will appear that it was matter of Fact rather than Faith or Heresie which exposed them to such censures For uncharitableness will as certainly damn as unfaithfulness And he that dies for Christ as divers Hereticks did in animosity groundless against his brother and especially against the Church of which he is or ought to be a member may notwithstanding loose his Life hereafter as well as here But of this more now we are to speak of the Church CHAP. XXIII Of the proper Subject of Faith the Church The distinction and description of the Church In what sense the Church is a Collection of Saints Communion Visible as well as Invisible necessary to the constituting a Church HAving spoken of the Nature Kinds Acts and Effects of Christian Faith we proceed now to speak of the proper Subject of Faith which is the Church Which word is commonly used as well for the Place where our Lord is publickly and solemnly worshipped as for the People of God serving and worshipping him But of this latter only we art to treat at present which we define to be A Calling and Collection of Saints from The Church is an universal Congregation or fellowship of Gods faithful People and Elect built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ being the head and corner stone Hom. Chur. of Engl. Part. 2. pa. 213. their vain Conversation in the world to the Faith and Worship of God according to the Rule and Laws of his Holy word and to visible communion with themselves which description I doubt not to be grounded in all its parts upon the Scriptures themselves And that God is the Author and only Institutor of such a Church if it needed any proof the Scripture would soon afford it St. Paul saith to the Corinthians Chap. 7. * 1 Cor. 7. 17. But as God hath distributed to every man as the Lord hath called every one so let him walk and so ordain I in all Churches And so exhorteth the Thessalonians to †1 Thess 2. 12 walk worthy of God who called them to his Kingdom and Glory And so in very many places else where as will appear farther now we consider the Term from whence God doth call and choose his faithful people and that is the World the world not taken in its natural sense signifying the Natural bodies of all sorts of which it consisteth nor absolutely from it in the more special sense in which Mankind is sometimes called the world for civil conversation and humane mutual Offices may be maintained and ought between Christians and Heathens or Infidels but rather in a moral sense that is unnatural unjust unrighteous communication with the wicked of the world as wicked as St. Paul explaineth himself to the 1 Cor. 5. 9 10. Corinthians I wrote unto you in an Epistle not to company with fornicatours Yet not altogether to refuse to converse with the fornicatours of this world or with the covetous or extortioners or with Idolaters for them must ye needs go out of the world but if any man that is called a brother be a fornicatour c. St. Peter takes most of the terms in our description speaking 1 Pet. 2. 9 10. of Converts to the Faith Ye are a chosen generation a Royal Priesthood an holy Nation a peculiar People that ye should shew forth the praises of God who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light c. And St. Paul to the Ephesians According as he hath chosen us in him before the Ephes 1. 4. foundation of the World that we should be holy and
Gods Word already confirming this duty and to leave others to every ingenuous Christians diligent use of it to avoid prolixity And for the objections which may be made and are commonly found against what is above delivered for the same reason I pass them over as likewise because I intend not here Controversie but Positive Institutions 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 of Christ and his Members The Church of Christ taken specially for the Elect who shall infallibly be saved never visible But taken for true Professours of the Faith must alwayes be visible though not Conspicuous in comparison of other Religions or Heresies THE Reasons moving me to insist a while upon Civil Government before I entred upon Ecclesiastical are First because I find Authors of the grounds of Christian Religion to treat of the same generally Secondly because where breaches have been made often in the Faith and Discipline of the Church there necessary provision ought to be made to secure them for the future but for want of due understanding of this Doctrine licencious zeal blinded with presumption hath transported very many into unchristian practises Thirdly because it is a necessary introduction to the more clear and compendious pursuing of our subject of the Spiritual Society of the Church of Christ and particularly its Form The Form of Christs Church may be distinguished according to the vulgar Notion into invisible and visible or inward and outward Invisible we here call that which doth not at all offer it self to our outward sense of seeing cannot be beholden with our eye Or that which may in some manner appear to our sight but not as a Church of Christ though in truth it so may be According to the first acceptation of invisible we understand the Body Mystical of Christ consisting of himself the only proper Head the Holy Spirit animating and influencing the same and the particular members of the holy most happy invisible Spirits in heaven and Saints on earth spiritually united to them by Christ in the divine band of holiness And hitherto do the words of the Apostle to the Ephesians seem to be applyed saying Having made known the mystery of his will That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather Ephes 1. 9 10. together in one all things in Christ both which are in heaven and which are in earth even in him signifying hereby the mystical conjunction of Men and Angels in Christ Jesus although there are who not improbably and more literally do understand these words only of the collection and uniting of Jews who in respect of their peculiar exaltation to Gods service and favour are stiled in Scripture heavenly compared with the Gentiles and Gentiles into one Faith and Church of Christ which therefore divers times is called a Mystery as Romans the 16. 25 26. Ephes 3. v. 3 4 5. Col. 1. 26 27. 1 Tim. 3. 16. because as is there expressed it was an hidden and incredible thing to the Jews that the Gentiles should be taken into the like priviledges and rights of serving God as were once esteemed incommunicable to any so fully as to the Jews But whether the Scripture according to its most genuine and literal sense intendeth at any time to comprehend into one Society Angelical Peings and Humane as the Church of Christ as I do not find though the Ancients as well as Modern have held such an opinion so do I not oppose the Mystery of which we now speak being sufficiently verified in the preternatural and invisible conjunction of Christ and his Church in the indissoluble bands of his Spirit guiding the members thereof into all sufficiencie of Grace here and immortal absolute glory hereafter in heaven To understand this co-union or conjunction of Christ and his Members the better we are to call to mind a threefold union intimated in holy Writ unto us First a conjunction of Nature when more are of the same individual nature as the three Persons in the Holy Trinity are united in the same Divine Nature though in themselves distinct which is so proper to that mystery of the Trinity that it is not to be found elsewhere no not in that intimate communion we now speak of between Christ and his Members their natures continuing distinct Again another conjunction proper to Christian Religion is the union of two natures into one Person as in the Mystery of Christs incarnation when the humane and divine Nature become one so far as to constitute but one Person Christ Jesus So do not Christ and his Church But by a third way are Christ and his Church united into one aggregate Spiritual Body or Society which is effected by his Spirit which yet do not make properly a Part of that Body but by its manifold divine Graces do produce and conserve the same Christ thereby and his Church being as St. Paul saith One Spirit He that is joyned unto the Lord is one Spirit And 1 Cor. 6. 17. St. John likewise saith Hereby we know that we dwell in him and he in us because he hath given us of his Spirit This truly and only in a proper sense is invisible and that alwayes and hath two Parts the triumphant in Heaven which is a most perfect pure holy and blessed Society which have through the bloud of the Lamb and the power of his Spirit overcome the three grand Enemies Sin Death and the Devil and reaped the fruits of their sufferings and labours all tears being wiped from their eyes all sorrows being fled away all temptations for ever conquered and ceasing to molest them Now this part of Christ's Church remains alwayes invosible unto us here below And as for the other Part which is called Militant and are described to be A number of faithful and elect people living under the Cross and aspiring towards the perfection of Grace and Glory hereafter supposing at present what may hereafter be farther discussed viz. That such a peculiar number of holy persons there are within the visible Church of Christ which shall infallibly attain to everlasting bliss in heaven yet neither are these as such at any time visible or discernable to our common senses It being scarce if at all possible to judge infallibly who shall be saved and who shall not be saved it being much more difficult for any man to be assured of another mans salvation than of his own seeing that as is said hereunto an inward testimony of Gods Spirit is required which is the ground of that sound hope which is commonly called Assurance but the Promises of God in holy Scripture do not extend in like manner to the assuring of any man that another shall be saved as that he himself shall or that anothers faith shall not fail as that his own shall not but thus far only probably a truer and more certain sentence may
be pronounced by others who are ordained of God to be judges of our state of Grace upon the discovery of our consciences to them then can be by our selves which is sufficient but of the unalterableness of that state no man can certainly affirm any thing Which holdeth true likewise as to the contrary state of Damnation For though a more than probable judgment may be made of the state of Damnation of him who continues impenitently in notorious sins yet may no man pronounce a peremptory sentence against any such person that he inevitably shall be damn'd because he cannot see into the abstruse Counsels of Almighty God so far as to deny a Liberty left in him to confer such efficacious grace upon such a notorious offender as may reduce him to God no more than withdraw grace from him who at present standeth in all probable way of perseverance This being so it followeth from hence necessarily That the Church of Christ taken for the so faithful and elect that they shall without all peradventure attain the Crown of the Triumphant is evermore in its own nature invisible that is not to be distinguished by us nor known certainly and if so then in vain and to no purpose at all are such Disputations as are made about the invisible Church in that sense of invisibility which signifies that which can in no manner appear certainly to us The other sense of invisibleness according to which a thing is possible to be seen is an object of sense but actually is either not to be seen or with very great difficulty For as in Philosophy it is with Divisibility so may it be with Visibility in Divinity Every thing that hath Quantity according to the Philosopher is divisible or is capable of being divided into lesser parts even without end but yet so small may the parts so divided become at last that no Artist shall be able to cut them any more in pieces So may we understand a thing to be visible which is so small and inconsiderable that actually it can hardly if at all be perceived But visible and palpable being taken for things which not only affect the senses simply but with some more than common notoriety the usual question Whether the Church of Christ is alwayes visible ought to be understood of such a competence of perspicuity as may ordinarily be discerned by persons rightly disposed in their understandings taking here right disposition of our inward apprehensions in a proportionable manner to that which relates to our common outward senses which if it be called into doubt as it may no wonder that the other may be and that without remedy Now according to the most strict acceptation of Visible for whatsoever may possibly be discerned the reasolution will be easie That Christs Church is and must alwayes be visible For thus to be Invisible is as much as not to be at all For seeing the Parts of which it consists be they but two or three persons in the most rigorous sense are Visible the whole must needs be visible too of it self however it may in the more received sense be termed invisible because compared with the Church of Christ as prophesied of and promised in the Gospel it is so inconsiderable as may deserve rather to be accounted invisible it being out-shined and over-shadowed by other Pretenders But there being two things which constitute the Church one the association of many persons into outward communion one with another the other the inward communion in the true Faith of Christ and the former being common very often to Hereticks as well as true Christians it may be doubted whether the true Church of Christ as opposed to heretical Societies is at all visible For seeing the true and orthodox Faith together with its practical holiness do not occur plainly to our senses the true Faith cannot be discerned visibly from the false by any outward sense How can it possibly be said that the Church of Christ is at all visible or apparent to a man 'T is true a man may discern a real man from a painted man or from any other creature from the outward notices of his body though he cannot see his soul which doth primarily constitute the person of man but he cannot see whether he be a true and honest man in a moral sense from any thing appearing outwardly So may one discern the Faith professed in general to be Christian by the outward frame and fashion of the Church professing the same but the soundness of the same and sincerity according to Christs will and institution he cannot from thence conclude upon And therefore if the Catholick Faith as Catholick in the stricter sense can never be visible the Catholick Church so being and denominated from that Faith can never be said to be properly visible but only as a Society not as the true Society of Christians in opposition to the false For instance sense or common reason not informed from the word of God could never judge whether the Arrian or the Catholick Faith as it then began to be called were most truly Christian but they both might judge that they were Christian Societies and so at least outwardly made a true Church But because it is one thing to profess the true Faith and another quite distinct from that Truly to profess the Faith as it is one thing to profess Justice and Truth and Honesty and another truly to profess these and practise them therefore can there be no estimate taken of the true Catholick Church from the persons professing the Catholick Faith who are alwayes uncertain and mutable but judgement must be made from the outward constitution only which are Discipline or Government and not Doctrine or Faith For where the former is not rightly composed according to the mind and institution of Christ there cannot be said to be a true Church And where the second is wanting there must likewise be no Church the foundation of the Church and Rule failing viz. the true Faith But wherever these be inviolately and incorruptly preserved and publickly professed though we should suppose every particular Member of such a Society to be notorious Hypocrites yet the Church might be said to be a true Church because the Church doth not receive any more than its material subsistance from the persons believing but its formal and more distinct Being it hath from the true Regiment and Faith which it is possible though scarce probable may be sufficiently preserved under hypocritical and wicked members of the same This is not only true in it self but appears so to be from the necessity of having any knowledge of the true Church at all and its being visible at any time For it never being certainly visible who are the predestinate infallibly to Life and who are not who shall constantly stand and who shall fall who are inwardly hypocrites and who are faithful and sincere indeed seeing notwithstanding the exactest judgment and search of man there
may be a falling away It could never appear which is the true Church if judgment were to be made not from the outward Forms and Faith professed but from the affection and inclination of Persons or from the invisible decrees of God of granting or denying persevering Grace to persons in the Church So that it is manifest from hence how lurious frivolous vain and sophistical disquisitions must needs be which are founded and managed upon the ground of an invisible Church properly so called The improper acceptation then of Invisible can only occasion a just controversie i. e. as it is taken comparatively and in relation to a much more conspicuous and glorious Society and that either of Infidels who may by numbers much exceed in outward glory much out-shine it in power over-rule it and by persecution and oppression so far straiten lessen and crush it that it may be termed obscure and invisible Or otherwise compared with the Societies of much more publick and outwardly glorious Hereticks and Schismaticks pretending the Catholick Church And truly if acute and exact Geographers computing the several professions of Religion and their possessions of the earth deceive us not the Church of Christ may comparatively with other superstitions Mahometan Jewish and Gentile be not unaptly said to be invisible Christian Religion being allowed but Five parts of Thirty Mahometan six and Idolaters nineteen parts of the earth But if we shall divide Christian again into Catholick according to the Judgment of several See Brerewoods Inquiries Chap. 14. Writers there will not remain at present above two parts of all the Thirty parts of the earth to be possessed by the Catholicks and if so what will become of the visibility of the Church thus understood And if a moderate sense of visibility be admitted signifying a real and apparent being only of the Church though inferiour in pomp and number unto others how doth the great end and benefit for which chiefly the Church is to be maintained Catholick and Visible shrink up into little or nothing when it cannot commend it self for any such glory to the beholder nor signalize it self to the doubter of the true Faith in the Church as may hereafter appear more fully when we shall come to speak of the Notes of the Church It may suffice to conclude this Point with these two First That Christs Church is essentially and so long as it is at all must necessarily be a Society or a communion of many For so we are taught to believe out of the Apostles Creed which speaking of the Catholick Church exegetically interpreteth what we are to understand by that term viz. The Communion of Saints And therefore we are to distinguish between being of the Catholick Church and being Christians A man may be a Christian and yet not be of the Church For no man can be of the Church who doth not hold communion with it For to deceive himself and say though he be not of the visible Communion or visible Church he may be or is of the invisible and mystical is to take for granted that which he ought to prove but never can be able but from somewhat external and the ordinary method and most effectual means of being mystically united unto Christ is by being Politically united which must be visibly unto the Body of Christ the Church It hath been therefore ever matter of greatest wonder to me to hear and read how freely all struglers and Factions of Christians how inconsiderable soever do assert to and confidently to assert that common Rule Without the Church there is no salvation and are so obscure nice or absurd in their sense of it having very little or nothing to secure themselves from self-condemnation besides an ill grounded presumption that they are inwardly united to Christ and are of the invisible Church which in truth is no Church but a certain state wherein there is no administration or order that we can learn now all Society must necessarily have order and administrations for their regulating but none such do we read of to be in Christs invisible Body Christ himself being all in all and therefore improperly called a Church And therefore all such being infallibly saved who are so of Christs Body they that so abruptly and peremptorily assure themselves they are of that invisible State do in effect contradict themselves and mean they shall be saved without being of the Church For surely the Authour of that saying meant nothing else but that before one could be according to Gods ordinary dispensation revealed in his word of Christs mystical Body called abusively the Invisible Church he must belong to the visible communion of Christs Political Body or Church So that it is not sufficient to comfort our selves with an opinion that we are good Christians and hold the same Faith entirely and purely that is required of us unless we hold outward communion And therefore secondly as Christs Church must necessarily be a Society communicating so must it be a visible communion and outward For how is it possible that such communion which constitutes a Society should be entred into unless it be visible There shall therefore as well out of the very nature of the Design God and Christ had to establish a Church as from the many promises fortifying that Resolution and perfecting that Design be evermore an outward visible company of Professours of Christian Religion in the world which shall retain the Faith of Christ and the necessary effects of it in Worship to that degree of perfection which shall or may lead a Believer certainly to Salvation as will more plainly appear from what is now to succeed viz. the outward Form of the Church CHAP. XXVIII Of the Outward and Visible Form of Christs Church Christ ordained One particularly What that was in the Apostles dayes and immediately after The vanity of such places of Scripture as are pretended against the Paternal Government of the Church FOR the Church to be and to be visible or appear to be I reckon the same thing and therefore thought good to speak of that and premise it to what in order follows on this subject viz. The Visible Form 2. The Adjuncts or Affections And 3. the Power of the Church of Christ By the Form of the Church we mean that frame and outward constitution whereby the Society of Christian believers are not only united mystically and inwardly to Christ as their proper Head and universal nor as agreeing in the substance of one Faith and Worship but as conventing and consenting in one outward Discipline or Administration of this Body so collected So that Discipline otherwise called Government is by principal Sectaries themselves rightly affirmed to be an essential ingredient into the nature of a Church which will manifestly appear if we distinguish between the nature of a Christian or many Christians separate in themselves from any Jurisdiction and the nature of a Church For a Christian or a true Believer differeth from
but I said that Cook reports them as heard from Diodates own mouth and I there give him the very Page where those words are to be found and this simple Quarreller and Vindicator of Puritans hath no other way to evade this then by a bold and sensless denial of the thing so apparent Now to that excellently learned person Bochartus what is it I say against him but that he would needs be medling where it concerns him not as the too common practise hath constantly been both of French and Dutch Divines What have they to do to interpose so often and uncharitably in behalf of Puritans as they have Is it not sufficient that they are not disquieted by us in their singularities and inconformities to the perpetual constitution and orders of Christs Universal Church but they must needs seek all occasions pragmatically to animate Sectaries to give them counsel and assistance to give them Communicatory Nisi me mea fallat opinio afhâ— mare auâ—â—â— quamum familtaris congress is gratiâ lâ—pâ—re vâ—nour à Duâ—â—llor antua illum à me superari crationis scriptae nitâ—re utilitate cun ejus scriptio â—â—ta prolixitate ariditate pariat fastidium taedium lectori hand dubium mea etiam ad aperturam libri detmebit cum amaena fincifera voluptate capietque desiderio alteriora legendi nullis offuciis Strephis paralogismis imprimis diverticulis cum à proposiio tum à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cardine litis quaestioniquâ— quae inter Hiâ— raâ—chic â—â— Puritanos vertitur deterritus conâ—â—â—sâ—â— ad aljiciendas chartas ut in lectione vindiciarum Durellianarum Lud. Molin ante Durel Patroni p. 2. 3. Letters in the height of their Seditions and Schisms to write Apologies and Vindications for them as Bochartus hath In which besides this I think he was in an error to suppose that that great Truth he defends of Subjects not to take up Arms against their Soveraign can be made good from the Cabbalistical and Talmudical sayings of the Rabbies upon which that Thesis is chiefly built and may be as easily pull'd down by rejecting such Ornaments rather then Arguments of Speech And this is all he objects against me in that bold Work of his saving several reproachful tearms which I will not trouble any body with Only concerning the Canina facundia i. e. Dogged Eloquence he taxeth me with I may tell him I am not fit to be his or his Brethrens Scholar in such Speeches And yet as * Turpe est contra ardenter perversa assâ—rentes 〈◊〉 pra veritaâ—â— frgidi res inveno i. Rusâ—ic Diac. Advers Acephâ—l Rusticus Diaconus hath it against the Acephali or headless Schismaticks in his days It 's very absurd for us to be found more cool for the Truth when we write against such as vehemently assert the contrary And concerning the barbarousness and unevenness of my stile though I want not matter of defense from several heads I shall pass them over and also his most polite and elegant stile for which he praises himself so worthily and wisely and only refer the Reader to that one instance which he may find Page 2 and 3 of his Patronus against Monsieur Durell where this great and vain-glorious Latinst while he magnifies his singular Talent of Elegance in the Latin Tongue offends in his tedious and ill-joynted Period against the Rules of Rhetorick and in worse concordance against the common Rules of Grammar So unluckie is this man and that in more ways then I will object to him And now I must touch a farther occasion of my present undertaking and that was the many errors vented by dissenting persons in our Church with which our Adversaries commonly revil'd us as shall be seen by and by in the mean time least any should suppose I go out Perkinsius qui in Aâ—li◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—he legiae 〈◊〉 â—xiulâ—â— â—ujus 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 Vortius Biâ—lioth l. 2 c. 3. of the common road of forreign Reformers so much trod by many Dissenters amongst us because I was not well skill'd in Calvins Bezas and Ursins Works I must tell them they were the Authors first of all recommended unto me and read by me more then those of our own Church And because I knew well of what great account as well abroad as at home Mr. Perkins his works were I would be no stranger in them but finding in them a servile and credulous spirit so far addicted to such Modern Divines that scarce any thing so new harsh or inconsistent with the judgment of Antiquity fell from them but Perkins presently took it up for Scripture and Catholick Doctrine and transcribed the same into his Works I have here collected in brief what I observed as Heterodox in his Works apt to corrupt young and injudicious Readers But here I shall say nothing of his known monstrous sense of Gods Decrees and Predestination but what a Learned Person his great friend and defender hath said before me Bishop * Abbot in Thompson Diâ—â— c. 1. Perkinsius vir alt quin eruditur pius 〈…〉 quam ille centra 〈◊〉 câ—ntra veteris Ecclesiae fidâ—m cura lâ—psâ—â— Alani absoluâ—â— dâ—cretam 〈…〉 non levem erravit Perkins on Gal. 3. v. 12. Abbot Perkins saith he otherwise a very learned and godly man in describing Divine Predestination which contrary to our and the Ancient Church he hath determined to be decreed without the fall of Adam hath committed no small Error 1. The first I observe is his sense of Justification by Faith thus expressed The Gospel promiseth life to him that doth nothing in the cause of his Salvation but only believeth in Christ and promiseth Salvation to him that believeth yet not for his Faith nor for any Works but for the Merits of Christ The Law then requires doing unto Salvation and the Gospel believing and nothing else Both ends of this sentence are utterly false and scandalous to Christianity it self and most of all as he there explains Non apprehendi potest quod promittitur nisi custoditu a fucrit 〈◊〉 jubetur Leo M. Ser. 9. ad jejun 7. Mensis V. 18. himself thus Believing and doing are opposed in the Article of Justification in our good conversation they agree Faith goeth before and Doing follows but in the work of our Justification they are as fire and water To the same effect he speaketh afterward All which we have refuted shewing that in no place of Scripture are the works of Faith opposed to Faith in Christ in any consideration but only the works of the Law as opposite to or not done in Christ nor in Faith 2. Secondly he saith A third benefit to them that believe in Id. ib. cap. 3. p. 320. Christ is That they have liberty to live and serve God without fear of damnation or any other evil 3. Thirdly God never gave to any man power to effect a Chap. 3. 5. Miracle
only to signifie how Christ was lifted up on the Cross but as practised in the Roman Church to the intent direct and divine Worship be given it 7. Wicked men eat not the Body of Christ Sure enough in a proper sense not denominatively only as the consecrated Elements are called the Body of Christ very often and currently 8. That they who communicate not are to be put out of the Church This is such an Error as the Ancient Church was guilty of as well as we as your own Vicecomes sheweth at large Vicecomes Vol. 3. l. 1. c. 18. 9. The Keys of the Church consist only in opening the Word of God No such thing is held by us 10. Private Confession is to be taken away Not so much as Sectaries say this absolutely 11. The Ceremonies of the Church are to be abrogated Simply and falsly said and directly contrary to the Articles of our Artic. 20. Church 12. Prayers in the Latin Tongue are barbarous and against St. Pauls Precept Very true where they are at first so instituted and understood by very few or none and so are they in the English Tongue or any other 13. No man can fulfill the Law This is true or false as it may be taken 14. More Masses then one cannot be said in one day in one Church Here our Accuser saith he knows not what For neither doth our Church inhibit more then once to officiate Liturgically neither did the Ancient Church practise if permit it for above four hundred years after Christ as appears from Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria consulting with Leo the first Bishop of Rome what he should Leo 1 Epist 79 or as some So. See also Grecian consecr Dist c. 51. do when Christians were so numerous that they could not all be received into the Church at once who answered In such cases he might safely reiterate the office And the Council of Antisiodorum or Auxere held about the Year 578 decreed that but one Mass should be said upon one Altar in one day which is as much observed by the Church of Rome now-a-days as other Canons of Councils which lye in their way thrown out And where in the Ancient Church do you read of above one Altar in one Church 15. Unity is no Note of the Church Discords and Divisions are certain signs of Errors but Unity is no certain sign of Truth nor so much as of a Church how then can it be of a true Church 16. Universal Councils may be repeal'd by Particular This See Petrus Gregorius Syntagm l. 15. c 3. is nothing he might have said by particular persons as the Popes who may according to that Church null Acts of Councils Oecumenical But we only hold that in things mutable according to the condition Article 34. of Time Place and other Circumstances rendring some Decrees prejudicial to some Churches contrary to the intention of the first Ordainers of them a Provincial Church may make alterations 17. The Church may erre in Faith And what of that meaning any one Individual single Church as the Roman hath according to our Articles 18. The Precepts of the Church concerning set Fasts are A Doctrine of Devils It is rather a Doctrine of Devils to teach so 19. Peter was not the Prince of the Apostles Peter was A or if you will The Principal Apostle but he was not the Prince of any one of them much less of all 20. The Bishop of Rome is Antichrist We are not so much agreed about this point as to give in a full verdict but we agree he is Antichristian 21. The difference concerning Leaven and Easter is inconsiderable Where no danger of Schisms or confusions may alter the case it is true 22. It is Heathenish to invoke Saints that reign with Christ Whether heathenish or no may be doubted they never worshipping any relating to Christ But for all that it may be and is superstitious and idolatrous in the sense very current in the Roman Church 23. The Reliques of Saints are not to be worshipped We hold so indeed though we hold they are to be respected relatively 24. The Saints in Heaven have no merits It is true taken strictly and properly 25. Indulgences of the Church are vain They are not only vain but wicked and generally blasphemous and ridiculous as mangâ—ed by the Church of Rome contrary or at least without all Precedents of the Christian Church for many hundred years viz. in remitting Sins or Punishments after this life and that divers times before they are committed Is not this fine and wonderful ancient and Catholick 26. Nothing is to be read in the Church besides Canonical Scripture This is rank Puritanism contradicted by themselves in their practise who read their Sermons as well as others and pray which is aequivalent to reading in this case out of their own heads rather than Scripture 27. In Oecumenical Councils and Private for the explaining of the Doctrine of Faith the consent of Lay-Princes is necessary It is necessary for the orderly assembling of such Councils It is necessary for the giving any Secular enforcement unto them 28. That it is lawful for Lay-men alone the Clergy opposing to introduce the Ancient Religion This is true no farther then that of Gerson which is alledged to this purpose A Lay-man with Scripture on his side is to be preferred before a Council without it Supposing a monstrous Proposition no wonder if a monstrous conclusion follows 29. He is no Bishop that teacheth not This is also a Puritan strain It being only true that he is no faithful conscientious Pastor but either proud or treacherous or sloathful or basely prudent who doth not in person discharge his Office so far as he is able without turning the care of his flock over to others using that for an argument of keeping close in his Cabin which is rather an argument of appearing in his charge viz. storms on the Church Opposition the Faith and Orders of the Church meet withal and difficulties obstructing the truth It being both shameful and ridiculous both in Bishop and Priest to censure others for enemies to the Church and for them so to wast it in all mens esteem in deserting it and delivering it up to the care of others themselves seeking little else then their temporal Harvest and case These men are over the Church indeed but 't is as the Extinguisher is over the Candle to put it out They pretend for themselves they have been sufferers for the Church and so it should seem indeed by their carriage to it in that through their scandalous negligence as to their charge they take a course to revenge themselves of it by making it suffer as much or more for them 30. Faith alone justifies How this is held we have even now as also we shall hereafter more fully explain 31. There are no Merits in Good works There are none properly so called 32. Priests and Monks may marry 'T is true where the
Church hath not denyed that Liberty and where they have made no Vow to the contrary bereaving themselves of that Liberty 33. There is no Purgatory 'T is little less then Heretical to Artic. Chur Eng. 22. affirm there is in the Roman sense 34. There is no external Sacrifice Most true in a strict proper sense 35. Devils cannot be driven away by Holy Water and the Sign of the Cross By these alone we have few or none Instances in the Ancient Church that Devils were cast out of the Possessed But many we find and those most authentique and undeniable whereby it appears that the ancient Christians even to St. Chrysostoms dayes did exorcise or cast out Devils by Prayers and Humiliation with which were used the sign of the Cross but not so ancient was Holy Water to that purpose And though we look on this as the Gift of Miracles formerly more general and effectual then now-a-days it is any where honestly to be found yet neither do we deny such power absolutely nor hold such unnecessary Rites utterly unlawful to be used 36. It is unlawful and an horrible wickedness for a man to erect the Image of Christ in Christian Temples No such matter The wickedness consists in giving it the accustomed Worship in the Church of Rome And thus have I given certain Instances of the injurious dealings of both extreams against us as by themselves stated it being my design in the ensuing Treatise to state rather then largely dispute matters more equally and thereby to discover the frauds and falsities current against us I shall now requite their pains in collecting falsly and fraudulently the opinions of our Church by a sincere and faithful proposing of the Heretical and pestilent Dogmes of the Roman Church as I find them laid down and maintain'd by Bellarmine that so even common reason if not sense of indifferent Christians may judge which Church holds most contrary Doctrines to Gods and Mans Laws 1. The Books by us called Apocryphal and so proved by Bellarm. De Verho Dei l. 1. c. 7. the general Consent of the Church in all Ages are Canonical and properly Divine 2. It is neither convenient nor profitable that the Scriptures L. 2. c. 15. 16. or Prayers of the Church should be in the Vulgar Tongue 3. All things necessary to Faith and Holy Life are not contain'd L. 4. c. 3. in the Scriptures but Traditions also 4. Scriptures without Tradition are not simply necessary C. 4. nor sufficient 5. The Apostles applyed not their minds to write by God's C. 4. command but as they were constrained by a certain necessity 6. Scriptures are not Rules of Faith but as a certain C. 12. Monitorie to conserve and nourish the Doctrine received 7. Hereticks deny but Catholicks affirm Peter to be the De Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 2. Head of the Universal Church and made a Prince in Christs stead 8. When Christ said Simon son of John so the Vulgar L. 4. c. 1. Translation in Bellarmine corruptly for Jonas Feed my Sheep he spake only to Peter and gave him his Sheep to feed not exempting the Apostles 9. Whether the Pope may be an Heretick or not it is to be L. 4. c. 2. believed of the whole Church that he can no ways determine that which is Heretical 10. Neither the Pope nor the particular Roman Church C. 4. can erre in Faith 11. The Pope cannot only not erre in Faith but neither C. 5. in Precepts of Manners which are prescribed the whole Church and which are concerning things necessary to Salvation or things in themselves good or evil 12. The Pope alone hath his Jurisdiction immediately from C. 24. Christ but all other Bishops their ordinary Jurisdiction immediately from the Pope 13. The Pope hath Supream power indirectly in all Temporal L. 5. c. 1. 6. matters by reason of his Spiritual power This is the opinion of all Catholick Divines 14. The Pope as Pope may not ordinarily depose Temporal Ibid c. 6. Princes though there be just cause as he may Bishops yet he may change Kingdoms and take them away and give them to another as the highest Spiritual Prince if it be needful to the Salvation of Souls 15. As to Lawes the Pope as Pope cannot ordinarily make a Ibid. Civil Law or establish or make void Lawes of Princes because he is not the Political Prince of the Church yet he may do all these if any Civil Law be necessary to the Salvation of Souls and Kings will not make them and so if Laws be pernicious to Souls and Kings will not abolish them 16. Though the Pope translated the Empire and gave a De Translat Imp. l. 3 c 4. Right to choose a Prince yet he transferred not nor gave that power Supream and most ample which himself had of Christ over all the Church And therefore as when the Cause of the Church required he could translate the Empire from the Greeks to the Germans in like manner might he translate it from the Germans to another Nation upon the like reason c. 17. No obedience is due to a Prince from the Church Câ—â— Berâ—â—â— c. 31. Tom. 7. when he is excommunicated by publick Authority The Pope and his Predecessors never forbad Subjects to obey their Princes for being once deposed by them they were no longer lawful Princes This is it we teach 18. To call General Councils belongs properly to the Tom. 2. de Concil l. 1. c. 12. Pope yet so that the Emperor may do it with his consent 19. Particular Councils confirmed by the Pope cannot erre L. 2. c 5. in Faith and Manners 20. The Pope is simply and absolutely above the whole C. 17. Church and above a General Council so that he may not acknowledge any Judicature on earth above him 21. The Church is a Company of men professing the L. 3. c. 2. same Christian Faith joyned together in the Communion of the same Sacraments under the Government of lawful Pastors and especially One Vicar of Christ on earth the Bishop of Rome 22. Purgatory may be proved out of the Old and New De Purgaâ— 1. c. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. Testament 23. Purgatory is a Doctrine of Faith so that he who believeth Cap. 15. not Purgatory shall never come there but shall be tormented in Hell in everlasting burning 24. Invocation of Saints may be proved from Scripture De Sanct. Beaâ—â—â—d l. 1. c. 19. 25. It 's lawful to make the Image of God the Father in De Reliq c. 8. the form of an Old Man and of the Holy Spirit in the form of a Dove 26. The Images of Christ and of Saints are to be worshipped L. 2. c. 21. De Imag. not only by accident and improperly but also by themselves properly so that they may terminate Worship as considered in themselves and not only as they
of Christ and his Members The Church of Christ taken specially for the Elect who shall infallibly be saved never visible But taken for true Professours of the Faith must alwayes be visible though not conspicuous in comparison of other Religions or Heresies Chap. XXVIII Of the outward and visible Form of Christs Church Christ ordained One particularly What that was in the Apostles dayes and immediately after The vanity of such places of Scripture as are pretended against the Paternal Government of the Church Chap. XXIX Of the necessity of holding visible communion with Christs Church Knowledge of that visible Church necessary to that communion Of the Notes to discern the true Church how far necessary Of the nature or condition of such Notes in general Chap. XXX Of the Notes of the true Church in particular Of Antiquity Succession Unity Universality Sanctity How far they are Notes of the true Church Chap. XXXI Of the Power and Acts of the Church Where they are properly posited Of the fountain of the Power derived to the Church Neither Prince nor People Author of the Churches Power But Christ the true Head of the Church The manner how Christs Church was founded Four Conclusions upon the Premisses 1. That there was alwayes distinction of persons in the Church of Christ 2. The Church was alwayes administer'd principally by the Clergy 3. The Rites generally received in the Church necessary to the conferring Clerical power and office 4. All are Usurpers of Ecclesiastical power who have not thus received it In what sense Kings may be said to be Heads of the Church Chap. XXXII Of the exercise of political power of the Church in Excommunication The Grounds and Reasons of Excommunication More things than what is of Faith matter sufficient of Excommunication Two Objections answered Obedience due to commands not concerning Faith immediately Lay-men though Princes cannot Excommunicate Mr. Selden refuted Chap. XXXIII Of the second branch of Ecclesiastical Power which is Mystical or Sacramental Hence of the Nature of Sacraments in general Of the vertue of the Sacraments Of the sign and thing signified That they are alwayes necessarily distinct Intention how necessary to a Sacrament Sacraments effectual to Grace Chap. XXXIV Of the distinction of Sacraments into Legal and Evangelical Of the Covenants necessary to Sacraments The true difference between the Old and New Covenant The Agreement between Christ and Moses The Agreements and Differences between the Law and the Gospel Chap. XXXV Considerations on the Sacraments of the Law of Moses Of Circumcision Of the Reason Nature and Ends of it Of the Passover the Reason why it was instituted It s use Chap. XXXVI Of the Evangelical Sacraments Of the various application of the name Sacrament Two Sacraments univocally so called under the Gospel only The others equivocally Five conditions of a Sacrament Of the reputed Sacraments of Orders Matrimony and Extream Unction in particular Chap. XXXVII Of Confirmation What it is The Reasons of it The proper Minister of it Of Unction threefold in Confirmation Of Sacramental Repentance and Penance The effects thereof Chap. XXXVIII Of the proper Affections of Repentance Compunction Attrition and Contrition Attrition is an Evangelical Grace as well as Contrition Of Confession its Nature Grounds and Uses How it is abused The Reasons against it answered Chap. XXXIX Of Satisfaction an act of Repentance Several kinds of Satisfaction How Satisfaction upon Repentance agrees with Christs Satisfaction for us How Satisfaction of injuries necessary Against Indulgences and Purgatory Chap. XL. Of Baptism The Authour Form Matter and Manner of Administration of it The general necessity of it The efficacie in five things Of Rebaptization that it is a prophanation but no evacuation of the former Of the Character in Baptism Chap. XLI Of the second principal Sacrament of the Gospel the Eucharist Its names Its parts Internal and External It s Matter Eread and Wine and the necessity of them Of Leavened and Unleavened Bread Of breaking the Bread in the Sacrament Chap. XLII Of the things signified in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the Body and Bloud of Christ How they are present in the Eucharist How they are received by Communicants Sacramentally present a vain invention All Presence either Corporal or Spiritual Of the real Presence of the signs and things signified The real Presence of the signs necessarily infer the Presence of the Substance of Bread and Wine Signs and things signified alwayes distinct Chap. XLIII The principal Reasons for Transubstantiation answered Chap. XLIV Of the Sacrifice of the Altar What is a Sacrifice Conditions necessary to a Sacrament How and in what sense there is a Sacrifice in the Eucharist Chap. XLV Of the form of consecrating the Elements Wherein it consisteth Whether only Recitative or Supplicatory Chap. XLVI Of the participation of this Sacrament in both kinds The vanity of Papists allegations to the contrary No Sacramental receiving of Christ in one kind only How Antiquity is to be understood mentioning the receiving of one Element only The pretended inconveniences of partaking in both kinds insufficient Of adoration of the Eucharist Chap. XLVII The Conclusion of the Treatise of the subject of Christian Faith the Church by the treating of Schism contrary to the visible Church Departure from the Faith real Schism not formally as to the outward Form Of the state of Separation or Schism Of Separation of Persons Co-ordinate and Subordinate Of Formal and Virtual Schism All Heresie virtually Schism not formally Separation from an Heretical Society no Schism From Societies not heretical Schism Heretical Doctrine or Discipline justifie Separation How Separation from a true Church is Schism and how not In what sense we call the Roman Church a true Church Some Instances of heretical Errors in the Roman Church Of the guilt of Schism Of the notorious guilt of English Sectaries The folly of their vindications That th Case of them and us is altogether different from that of us and the Church of Rome Not lawful to separate from the Universal Church The Contents of the Second Book of the First Part. Chap. 1. OF the formal Object of Christian Faith Christ An Entrance to the treating of the Objects of Faith in particular Chap. II. Of the special consideration of God as the object of Christian Faith in the Unity of the Divine Nature and Trinity of Persons in that Chap. III. Of the Unity of the Divine Nature as to the simplicity of it And how the Attributes of God are consistent with that simplicity Chap. IV. Of the Unity of the Divine Nature as to number and how the Trinity of Persons may consist with the Unity and Simplicity of the Deity Of the proper notions pertaining to the Mystery of the Trinity viz. Essence Substance Nature Person The distinction of the Persons in the Trinity Four enquiries moved How far the Gentiles and Jews understood the Trinity The Proof of the Doctrine of the Trinity from the New Testament and the explication of
be called Religion And nothing can be more fundamentally Just then for the Creature to refund according to its ability and rank the Fruits 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Philo Judaeus Allegoriarum lib. 2. Papin L. Siquis â—f De Religios of those perfections received from the Cause of all Causes especially considering that such retribution is rather an augmentation then diminution of such Perfections in the Creature For not onely are all things thus freely derived from God to the Creatures but by a perpetual act of Providence called Conservation continued to them together with a most various and bountiful supply of all things requisite thereunto to which no Creature could lay any claim either to have or to hold And therefore most just equal reasonable and honourable it is for it to make such a Re-exhibition to God as is called Religion Therefore that famous Heathen Lawyer said well Summa ratio est quae pro Religione facit The highest Reason of all is that which makes for Religion And Tullie in a certain place defines Religion thus briefly and aptly Religio est Justitia erga deos Religion is Justice towards the gods And Macrobius makes Pietie and Religion two of the seven parts into which he divides Justice These not onely truly Christian but natural grounds of sober Men Macrob. Saâ— c. 7. P. 37. may suffice to put to silence the brutish Philosophie of some of late who acknowledge no other grounds of Dominion either Divine or Humane or of Obedience thereunto but Power and Force enabling to exact and extort the same not considering that Protection on the part of the Governing and Profit and Benefit on the part Governed do create a debt of veneration and service And therefore by the same reason should Justice have no place in the Ruler but onely his Power and Pleasure to incline him to govern well as it should have no place in the Governed to obey well And not only from the special benefits derived from God should Man return the mite of his recompence or recognition by Religion but also from a subordination of Creatures serving him should he be moved to pay the like to God The Psalmist tells us that God hath put all things Psal 8. 6 7 8. under Mans feet All Sheep and Oxen yea and all the beasts of the Field The Fowls of the Air and the Fish of the Sea and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the Seas From this example therefore Subjection and subserviency of all inferiour Creatures to Man by the appointment of God doth appear the reasonableness of Mans subjection unto God Neither was this though forfeited by Man upon his first disobedience against God so lost unto him but it was confirmed unto him after the Flood in these words And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon Gen. 9. 2. every beast of the Earth and upon every Fowl of the Air and upon all that Quod non metuitur contemnitur quod contemnitur utique non colitur Ita fit ut Religio Majestas honor metu constet c. Lactant. de Ira Dei c. 8. Psal 111. 10. Prov. 1. 17. moveth upon the Earth and the Fishes of the Sea into your hand are they delivered This Fear therefore and dread of a Divine Majesty is that which God hath in like manner laid upon Man as the ground and cause of all religious worship of him Man being infinitely more inferiour and subject by nature to God then the Beasts are to him For as Lactantius hath it That which is not feared is contemned that which is contemned cannot be worshiped and so it comes to pass that Religion and Majesty and Honour consists of Fear Which the Scripture assures us of also where it saith by David and Solomon both The Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdome And notwithstanding all Creatures do exhibit obedience unto Almighty God yet none may properly be said to be Religions but Man For Religion must be a service and a tendency to Perfection and union with God but the Blessed Spirits of Men and Angels are out of their Apprentiship and imperfect state and consummated in that fruition and reward and union with God which they are capable of And the Apostate Spirits though they give obedience to God cannot be said to be Religious because their wills are constantly and utterly rebellious and all is involuntary and forced but Religion must be free and voluntary as is intimated Psalm 110. by the Psalmist Again Irrational Creatures or Beasts cannot be said to be Religious properly though they may be said to be Obedient For Obedience may consist as with necessity in Devils so with ignorance and necessity both as in Beasts But Religion must be rational as St. Paul implieth in these words I beseech you brethren by the mercies of God Rom. 12. 1. that ye present your bodies a living Sacrifice holy acceptable unto God which is your reasonable service Whatsoever worship the Creatures give unto God is principally performed by their Head Man Man being as the first born and eldest Son to God in comparison of them So that as it was a natural Law that the eldest of the Family and most worthy should be as a Priest to the rest to offer Sacrifice unto God for all the rest as Cain and Abel are interpreted to bring their offerings to Adam to present them to God so do the Beasts bringing their several tributes to Man through him offer their bounden service unto God 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 knowledg of a God not natural ALL Religion supposeth a Deity as all Arts and Sciences suppose their foundation upon which they are built and not prove it Yet notwithstanding for the more effectual knowledg and perswasion hereof and for the due exercise of that natural notion of a God which many times is very weak for want of use as men sometimes loose the use of their bodily Limbs for want of due exercise of them we shall briefly recount for methods sake some of those many demonstrations of a Divine supream Being which is God and that by these gradations First That there are purer and superiour Beings to Man though not obvious to any of the five gross senses of man may be gathered from the effects supernatural to all corporeal Creatures and ordinarily visible Such are the suddain and rapid translations of Bodies from one place to another Such are likewise voices heard without any notice given to the eye of persons present Such are Apparitions made to diverse in all ages of Spirits to persons in the likeness of Bodies indeed but declaring by their manner of entrance their manner of motions and actions their manner of departure and disappearing that such forms are only assumed to render their presence more obvious
the several Senses and Meanings according to which the Scriptures may be understood IT being found what is the Letter of the Word of God It is necessary to know what is the true sense of it For this is only in truth the Word and not the Letters Syllables or Grammatical words To know this we must first distinguish a Sense Historical and Mystical The Historical Sense is the same as the Literal so called because it is that which is primarily signified and intended by such a form of words And this is twofold For either these words are to be taken in the proper and natural signification as I may call that which is in most vulgar use or in their borrowed and mataphorical Sense As when I call a thing hard and apply it to Iron or Stone I speak properly and according to the Natural sense but when I apply Hardness to the heart I speak improperly and Metaphorically and yet Literally too intending thereby to signifie not any natural but moral quality in the heart The Seven Ears saith Joseph in Genesis are seven years and the Seven fat Kine are Seven years And so Christ in the Gospel This is my Body and infinite others in Scripture are Metaphorical and Literal Senses both The Mystical Sense is that which is a translation not so much of words from one signification to another as of the entire Sense to a meaning not excluding the Historical or Literal Sense but built upon it and occasion'd by it And is commonly divided into the Tropological Allegorical and Anagogical which some as Origen make coordinate with the former saying The Scripture is a certain Intelligible world wherein are four Parts Origen Homil 2. In Diversos as four Elements The Earth is the Literal Sense The waters is the profound Moral Sense The Air is the Natural Sense or natural science therein found And above all the sublime sense which is Fire In another place he mentions only the Historical Moral and Mystical And generally Idem Homil. 5. in Leviticum the Fathers do acknowledg all these though with some variation not distinguishing them as we have as might be shown were it needful to enlarge here on that subject The Moral Sense is that which is drawn from the natural to signifie the manners and conditions of men The Allegorical is a sense under a continuation of tropes and figures The Anagogical a translation of the meaning of things said or done on earth to things proper to heaven The Oxe being suffered to eat while he trod out the Corn according to St. Paul in the Moral sense signified that the labourer was worthy of his hire Mount Sinah and Mount Sion as the same Gal. 2. 24 25. Apostle saith signified the two Cities of God Earthly and Heavenly Allegorically And the Church of God upon Earth the Church Triumphant in heaven It is therefore without reason and modesty both that some strickt Modern Divines have set themselves against the Antient in contracting all these senses into one so as to allow no more which is of very ill consequence to the Faith both of Jew and Christian For generally all the hopes of the Jews concerning the Messias to come and all the proofs of the Christian taken from the Old Testament That he is come would come to little or nothing seeing there is manifestly a Literal or Historical sense primarily intended upon which the Mistical is built So that the arguments of the Evangelists and St. Paul in his Epistles convincing that Christ was the true Messias must needs be invalid seeing their quotation to that purpose had certainly another Literal Sense And it is against the condition of the whole Law it self which as St. Paul Heb. 10. 1. saith was a Shadow of good things to come and not the very things themselves It is here replied commonly That all these are but one Literal Perkins on Galâ—â— 22. sense diversely expressed which is to grant all that is contended for but with a reservation of a peculiar way of speaking to themselves that having been so infortunate as to judge of things amiss they may in some manner solace themselves with variety of phrase too commonly found amongst such as resolve to say something new where there is no just cause at all And to that which seems a Difficultie That no Symbolical sense can be argumentative or prove any thing in Divinity we answer That it cannot indeed unless it be known first to be the true Mistical sense of the words alledged For neither is the Literal sense it self until it be known that such was the true intent of the Speaker But those things which were symbolically and Mystically delivered in the Law being well known to Christ and his Apostles as likewise to the Learnedest of the Jewish Doctors by a received current tradition amongst them were of force to the ends alledged by them But where such a Mystical sense is not received nothing can be inferred from thence which is conclusive CHAP. X. Of the true Interpretation of Holy Scriptures The true meaning not the letter properly Scripture Of the difficultie of attaining the proper sense and the Reasons thereof IT availeth a Christian as little to have the Letter of the word of God without the genuine sense as it doth a man to have the shell without the Kernel For the sense is the word of God not the Letter Wicked men yea the Devil himselfe maketh use of the Letter to contradict the truth it self as St. Hierome hath observed and other Fathers and constant experience certifieth not without the consent of the Scripture it self which saith of it self In it are some things hard to be understood which 2 Pet. 3. 16. they that are unlearned and unstable wrest as they do all other Scriptures to their own destruction Therefore because it is very necessarie to be informed of the difficulties and dangers in misinterpreting Scripture before we can throughly apply our selves to prevent and avoid them we will First shew briefly That many things are difficult in Scripture and the Reasons why and after proceed to the most probable means rightly to interpret the same And these obstacles in attaining the true sense of Gods word are either found in our selves or in Gods wisdome and Providence or lastly in the Word of God it self Some indeed piously but inconsiderately make all the reason of difficulties not denied by them altogether in the Scripture to be in Man supposing they hereby vindicate Gods Providence from that censure it might otherwise be liable unto if so be that God should deliver such a Law to man which could not well be understood but apt to mislead men into errour And therefore say they It is the darkness and perversness of mans understanding and will that make things in Scripture obscure and not the condition of the Scriptures themselves But this no ways doth attain its end For when did God deliver his written word unto Mankind
that none can without another extraordinary confirmation rest satisfied that so it is really with him Lastly for our clearer proceeding We are herein to distinguish between the attaining to the true sense of Scripture and the decision or determination of Controversies according to the Scripture And that the most important Query is not so much Whether a man hath the Spirit or not or whether he hath the truest and most genuine meaning of the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures or not but how this should be made known and manifested so far unto others as that they should rationally and soberly rest satisfied in the opinions of the said pretenders to such truths For it s well and smartly said in this doubt The Question is not Whether the Spirit in a Man or Church or the Scripture though this last way is very improperly expressed be the best Judge of the Sense of Scripture but where it resides to such purposes And what a great stir is made to little purpose while the former is so easily granted on all sides and there is nothing done at all to convince a sober man or Christian That such or such persons are they we ought expect the dictates of Gods Spirit from For Judgement properly so called can never be separated from Autority or lawful presiding over others joyned with power to oblige to such sentence as shall be passed but how this should be competible to single or many Persons agreeing in the same thing in their private capacity yea though enabled with the spirit more than ordinary cannot well be understood So that at most they can be judges of controversies only for themselves and that at their own peril and can do no more than perswade advise and exhort not oblige others to think as they do But Judges must and ought to do more or they had as good do nothing So that that which hath found great acceptance and applause by too many doth upon examination prove very insignificant and impertinent to the resolution of the difficultie in hand viz. That things that are necessary are obvious in Scripture and Every man is Judge to himself granting I say This which is yet really untrue yet scarce any thing is said to the purpose which enquired not so much How a man might perswade himself but how and with what influence he may proceed to the conviction and reducing of others so that the essential to a Church be not destroyed as it certainly must be where no communion is and there will infallibly cease all communion where it is meerly arbitrary for Christians to believe and judge and walk and worship as they please For this it is for every man to judge for himself Will it be yet farther said That we should bear with one another and live peaceably and charitably one with another and not molest each other for his Judgement If it be as I know it is I reply first That this plausibility without possibility is not true according to the opinions of them who use it For they certainly hold That Heresie and Schism are not to be endured or born withal Christ and God must not be blasphemed by unsound opinions or prophane or superstitious actions and this diversity yea contrariety of judging must needs find these faults in one another very often and consequently be of opinion That they are not to be suffered and Charity must not be so far mistaken or abused as to licentiate such enormities But What if after all this contention for the Spirit it be not judge at all as in truth it is not in any proper sense For the Spirit is only the due qualification of the Person or Persons not simply to judge for that descends upon them by being ordinarily and orderly constituted over the Church of Christ but to judge aright and to give faithful and unerring sentence in matters under debate and question And the same may be in proportion affirmed of Reason termed by some who would seem to excell others in reason most improperly as well as unreasonably Judge of Controversies For all judgement disquisition and expositions are made by Persons not by things Reason indeed is the Instrument whereby a Person is enabled to judge or find out the truth unto which unless there be a due accession of Autority and Power such reason though very exquisite and happy must keep within its own doors and judge at home for it self and not for others nor contrary to more publick and autoritative determinations without the peril of being taxed of Arrogance and it self justly condemned if not for the Inward errours of the mind for the outward errors in ill managing truths If it were so That Reason in men were infallible we ought not to stand upon nicities of terms or improper language But for men to deny others the Seat and Power of Judicature because they may err and to take it to themselves as if the spirit of Error had no power over them is at the same time a grievous though pleasing error both against Reason and common justice too And if it be said That every man is bound by the Law of nature being indued with reason to use that reason and not bruitishly to suffer himself he knows not or cares not whether to becarried by others Reasons and not his own I retort And every man is obliged by the Law of Nations which is a more refined principle than that of gross Nature properly taken to contain himself in the order of Community he is placed and to submit to the reason of common Judgement no less than his own For undoubtedly until every man in private and particular be unerrable which is not to be expected on this side heaven there will diverse inconsistent judgements prevail and divide one from another and cause such a breach as the society whether divine or humane will soon perish and come to nothing But granting what was before demanded That every man must act according to his reason above the nature of beasts this doth not conclude That therefore he must be let alone and not brought even by force to submit to others against such reason First Because it is not resolved by any but a mans own deceitful opinion That it is really reason which is so presumed to be Secondly Because he that is so constrained to submit his reason is not thereby denyed either the nature or use of his but still much transcendeth the capacity of beasts For He discusses he discourses he judges rationally after the manner of men even when the effect of all these Acts are contrary to reason And lastly In wise men and good humble Christians there is a superior principal of reasonableness to that of meer direct nature For That he that has most reason on his side and when that it self is controverted he that according to appearance of Circumstances may lay the fairest claim to that is to be followed no rational man can deny Therefore should a Mans
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
decision I wish with all my heart so far am I from an evil eye or niggardly affection towards Scripture they could make their words good when they tell us all things are contained in Scripture It is a perfect Rule of all emergent doubts and acts in the Church It is Judge and Law both of Controversies but alas they cannot For they take away from it more then by this rank kindness they give to it Gods word is Perfect as a Law and so far as he intended it but it must cease to be a Law and take another nature upon it if it were a Judge too in any proper sense And the Canon of Scripture must be it self variable and mutable if it could particularly accommodate it self to all occasions and exigencies of Christians But this is not only absurd but needless For God when he made men Christians did not take away from them what they before had as Men but required and ordained that humane judgement and reason should be occupied and sanctified by his divine Revelations He in brief gave them another and far better Method Aid and Rule to judge by and did not destroy or render altogether useless their Judgement even in matters sacred To the Law and Esay 8. 20. to the Testimonie saies the holy Prophet if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them This indeed plainly declares the Rule by which we are to walk and Judge but it doth not tell us that the Law it self doth speak but men according to it And this is to Judge Now because no one man no one age no one Church should judge for all no nor for it self contrary to all doth the necessity and expediencie of Tradition not to affront or violate but secure the written word of God and that in two special respects appear First as giving great light and directions unto the Rulers of the Church and limiting the uncertain and loose wit of man which probably would otherwise according to its natural pronitie flie out into new and strange senses dayly of holy Scripture The Records of the Church like so many Presidents and Reports in our Common Law giving us to understand Low Consuetudo etiam in Civilibus rebus pro Lege suscipitur cùm deficit Lex nec differt Scripturd an ratione consistat quando Legem ratio commendet Tertul. de coron mil. cap. 4. such places of Scripture were formerly understood and on which side the case controverted passed And why this course in divine matters should not be approved I see not unless unquiet and guilty persons shall seek under colour of a more absolute appeal to Scripture which is here supposed to be sincerely appealed unto before to wind themselves into the seat of Judicature and at length not only as fallibly but also usurpingly decree for themselves and others too This event hath so manifestly appeared that there is no denying of it or defending it They therefore who professedly introduce Tradition to the defeating and nulling of Scripture deal indeed more broadly and in some sense more honestly as being what they seem than they who give all and more then all due to it in language but in practise overthrow it But we making Tradition absolutely subordinate and subservient to Scripture and in a word of the nature of a Comment and not of the Text it self we are yet to seek not what deceitfully and passionately for we know enough of that already but soberly can be objected against it For if it be said Tradition is it self uncertain it is obscure it is perished it contradicts it self and so can be of little use we readily joyn with them so far as to acknowledge that such traditions and to them to whom they so appear can with no good reason be appealed to But we deny that there are none but such and that such as prove themselves to be true and honest men upon due trial and examination ought to be hang'd out of the way because they were found in company with thieves and Cheats Supposing then That such honest Traditions are to be found in the Church another great benefit redoundeth to the Church from thence in that it doth in some cases supply the defects of the Law it self the Scripture But here I must first get clear of this reputed Scandal given in that I suppose the Scriptures defective or imperfect I have already and do again profess its plenitude and sufficiency as far as a Rule or Law is well capable of Now what God by his infinite wisdom and power might have done I cannot question in contriving such an ample Law as should comprehend all future and possible contingencies in humane affairs but this I say That he disposing things by another Rule viz. to act according to humane capacity and condition never did or so much as intended to deliver such an infinite Law Is not Moses and Gods dealing to him and his ministry to God and the people frequently alledged as a notable argument to convince us of the amplitude of the New Testament Moses say they was faithful in all his house And therefore much Heb. 3. 2. more was Christ Very good and what of all this As much as comes to nothing For wherein did the faithfulness of Moses consist In powring out unmeasurably all that might be said touching divine matters Or rather in delivering faithfully and exactly all that God commanded him This truly did Moses and therefore was very true and faithful to him that sent him and gave him his charge This did Christ and this did the Apostles of Christ and his inspired servants and therefore were all no less faithful to God than Moses But did not Moses leave more cases untouched in the Administration of the Jewish Policie then were litterally expressed Yes surely judging it sufficient that he had laid down general Rules and Precepts according to which Emergencies which might be infinite should by humane prudence be reduced and accordingly determined And so choose they or refuse they must they grant did Christ and his Instruments leave the Law of the Gospel which yet not wanting all that can be expected from a Law cannot modestly be pronounced imperfect notwithstanding as is said manifold particulars are not there treated of Now those are they we say Tradition doth in some measure supply unto us and the defect of Tradition it self which hath not considered all things is made good by the constant power of the Church given by the Scriptures themselves in such cases which require determination of circumstances of time place order and manner of Gods service according to the Edification of the Church of Christ 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 Temperance and Miraculous Faith are not in nature
it is no man can tell further then from the negative notion viz. That it is not true Faith and so no Justifying Faith but a shadow of it not the thing but the foremention'd Faiths are or may be real and Good but Hypocritical can never be so as Hypocritical But we shall conclude this Chapter with an other observation we conceive has occasion'd misbelief concerning Justifying Faith For it is too commonly believed That all Justifying Faith must and doth necessarily and actually Justify all in whom it is But that is not so but that is truly Justifying Faith which in its own nature tendeth thereunto though peradventure defeated of its effect For if natural causes have not alwayes their proper effects through outward impediments may it not be much rather the case of spiritual things which work not naturally but freely To the former distinctions of Faith may be well added another and that of Faith Explicite and Implicite much insisted on and therefore here to be considered And it cannot be neither is it denied but really such cases there are in which good Christians have not that plenitude of Faith desirable and in some cases necessarie For otherwise we must condemn the Faith of St. Peter himself so much commended by Christ himself Mat. 16. 16 17 18. when he openly professed the Deitie of our Saviour Christ For not long after Christ sharply rebuked him for his ignorance of this Passion of him Mat. 16. 23 saying Get thee behind me Satan thou art an offence unto me And so were the Disciples ignorant of the Resurrection of Christ and of the Ascension of Christ supposing his Kingdom should be rather a Temporal than Spiritual and eternal as appeareth by their Question Wilt thou at this time restore Act. 1. 6. again the Kingdom unto Israel And I make no doubt after so much evidence from the Histories of the Primitive times that many Eminently holy persons suffering martyrdome for Christ were very meanly seen and setled in divers of those Articles of Faith which have been since imposed as necessarie on the Church and indeed ought to be How this can be allowed is therefore to be inquired into And to this end First it must be determin'd what may be meant by Implicit and Explicit Faith That we call Explicit Faith which clearly distinctly and expresly believs an article of Faith or any divine truth revealed Implicit then must be such a Faith that believs obscurely and confusedly only Secondly it is necessarie to distinguish this distinction it self For Faith may be said to be Implicit either in respect of its object or of its Act. The First Impliciteness consisteth in this That a Christian believing some one material article of Faith clearly and expressly may be said to believe that which is included in that and necessarily follows from it As he that shall believe that Christ consisteth of a divine and humane nature may be said to believe that article contained as it were under it viz. That Christ had a humane will as well as divine though his ignorance be such as never to have particularly considered the same But the Act of Faith I call implicite is when a man being as they say a Christian or Believer at large and liking that Religion very well shall without search without knowledge of the principal points of Faith shuffle all together and conclude all as he thinks sufficiently in this That he believes as a good Christian or Catholick believes as the Church believes The First of these kinds of Faith must necessarily be allowed as good and laudable provided it be not accompanied with an affected ignorance or sloth hindering a mans proficiencie in the Extent and Intention or degrees of it For surely this means the Holy Scripture when it saith I have fed you with Milk and not with meat for hitherto ye were not able to bear it 1 Cor. 3. 2. 1 Cor. 2. 6. neither yet now are ye able And again Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect yet not the wisdom of this world c. Which intimate unto us That the servants of Christ imitating their Master herein did not presently pour forth all the several Mysteries of the Kingdom of God and of Faith but proceeding gradually laid first the foundation Christ Jesus and according to the capacitie of their Converts opened the rest more Explicitly afterward And I make no doubt but the obscure and narrow Faith of the unlearned being generally more sincere and firm than that of the knowing and inquisitive shall lead them to Heaven no less than that more ample Christs equal proceedings being such as not to require the same of all in quantitie of measure but of proportion to their state and his Gifts and Graces conferred on men But that other sort of Faith which satisfies it self with the sincerity and Catholickness of it and that it is of such a sort not attending to or endeavouring after any further illumination or information in the branches arising from that root we cannot see how men can speak reasonably or conscionably in the commendation of it or such who are owners of it can hope to receive any greater benefit than to be numbred amongst true Believers without the reward For it is expresly against Gods word which requireth that the Word of God should dwell in you richly in all wisdom c. And Col. 3. 16. Ignea res fies est ubicunque ociosa est non est Sed quemadmodum in lucerna oleum alit flammam ne extinguatur ita Charitatis opera fidem alunt ne deficiant Fides gignit bona opera Sed illa vicissim nutriunt Parentem Erasmus in Symbolum the reason hereof is because the obedience of Faith of which before is generally proportionable to the Faith it self from whence it springs How then can any man act as all men are tied with an universal obedience who know not nor believe what they are obliged to do but by that Faith which is wanting in them And rudely and effectedly to rest quietly under the immaginarie protection of believing as the Church believes may indeed keep men which is all commonly lookt after here from being Hereticks but it doth not secure them from being Heathens For what ever is said and pretended such ignorant persons do not believe as the Church believes For when the Church believes Expresly and they believe confusedly do they believe as the Church believes When the Church believes she knows what and they believe they know not what do they believe as the Church believes Lastly when the Church believes directly and positively things as they are propounded and these believe negatively that is no otherwise then the Church not oppositely to the sense of it do they believe as the Church believes May not a Heathen believe no otherwise then the Church and yet be an Heathen Nay the more naturally stupid and indocil men are the safer Catholicks they should be because
are intimated to us in these words of St. Paul which are vulgarly brought against us viz. Nevertheless the foundation of God 2 Tim. 2. 19. standeth sure having this seal The Lord knoweth who are his And let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity The first foundation of God is that which he hath layed in his assuring us that he will have a Church in despite of all Enemies and Persecuters which would destroy it The second is the seal to this Charter which relating to special persons is twofold The First That God knoweth who are his that is according to Scripture phrase owneth and asserteth the cause of those that are his and will never forsake them otherwise than he hath declared that is they not violating egregiously the Covenant on their parts The second is that which follows viz. Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity This is the seal set to the Covenant made by God which if not duly and proportionably to the favourableness of the Evangelical Covenant observed by man the seal of God avails but little to the benefit of a Christian A second conclusion may be That notwithstanding God hath no where enjoyned us under any forfeiture to obtain this assurance yet he requireth us to be alwayes so pressing and proficient in Faith and Holiness of Life that above his Capitulations or ordinary Promises made in his Word he may communicate his pleasure unto us and good-will concerning the particular salvation of us This hath been imparted unto divers and may again when it seems good to God But it is no Rule to us Thirdly A faithful Christian ought to endeavour the attaining to a strong and true degree of Hope by Gods grace and the working out of his Salvation with fear and trembling For St. John saith That a man may arrive to such a state of assurance as 't is called that considering and believing the undetermined mercy of God in the Gospel he may have confidence of Gods love towards him his own conscience not condemning him as St. John saith Beloved if our heart condemn us not then 1 John 3. 21. have we confidence towards God Lastly This sense serves much to the comfort and tranquility of the mind of scrupulous Christians more than the holding of a peremptory assurance of Salvation which they who require it cannot deny to be wanting to many faithful servants of God For when they consider that the want of this assurance is no indication or character of a Reprobate as some would make it and they must who bring it under precept and promise then are they heartened still to press towards holy and devout exercises believing that God not seeing nor judging as man judgeth nor as they of themselves but out of his incircumscribed mercie may accept them and have mercy on them And here properly doth that doctrine of Faith commended in the Articles of our Church as very comfortable take place viz. as that which when we have done all we must betake ourselves unto and which brings us neerest to God namely not that we believe we are justified for or because we believe we are freely but because Faith and trust in God as it is the first stone in our heavenly building so is it the crown and consummation of all when we disown and disavow all sufficiencie in ourselves or our most Christian Acts even Faith it self and trust in his mercy to be accepted under all our fears and reasonings to the contrary not manifestly violating the Covenant with God for which our own hearts and ordinary apprehensions may condemn us CHAP. XXII Of the Contrary to true Faith Apostasie Heresie and Atheism Their differences The Difficulty of judging aright of Heresie Two things constituting Heresie The Evil disposition of the mind and the falseness of the Matter How far and when Heresie destroyes Faith How far it destroyes the Nature of a Church THus having sufficiently treated of the most general and principal Effect of Faith before we leave this we are in reason to enquire into that which privatively relates to true Faith and that is Heresie What that is and wherein it consisteth For Heresie cannot properly be applyed to any but such who are of the Faith and in some degree belong to the Catholick Church wherein it is distinct from Atheism Apostasie and professed Infidelity For Infidelity though it carries with it in its name a sense which comprehends both Atheism and Apostasie yet use hath prevailed so far as to apply it only to such who do receive some Articles of the Christian Faith and them fundamental too though not as the Christians For Example Infidels may believe there is a God and that God but one and that there shall be a Resurrection of the Just and Unjust and Life everlasting either in misery or bliss yet being either wholly ignorant of or directly denying some fundamental Points of Faith as Christian they continue Infidels though not Atheists Neither can they be accounted Hereticks having never been of the Church nor initiated into or embraced the true Faith These are Negatively only related to the Church as Logicians say Dissimilary things relate one to another viz. A black thing to a white But Heresie is of a privative sense and an opposition to the true Catholick Faith with an Obligation not only taken from the matter of Faith it self to which all the world owe homage and obedience but from some extrinsecal formalities whereby some men more especially contract a relation to the Church of Christ And the first and most principal cause hereof is the solemn dedication which is made by ourselves or others we not oppugning it of us in the initiating Rite of Baptism wherein renunciation is openly made of all things persons and opinions contrary and inconsisting with that Doctrine we there submit unto and vow to observe This Dedication of us to Christ doth make and denominate us Christians and Catholicks according to the less ancient use of the word of which we shall hereafter speak Now according to the degree or manner of violating this most solemn and sacred Vow in Baptism are men said to be Apostates and Hereticks And an Apostates are Hereticks but not all Hereticks Apostates The principal difference consisteth in this 1. That the Apostate doth renounce even the first principles of Christian Faith as Christian And they are they which are expresly contained in the form of Baptism whereby he became a Christian 2. In a formal profession contrary to such Covenant made with God in Christ But Heresie doth not absolutely deny the Grounds of Christianity it self but whether by affected errour or invincible doth resolutely and firmly assert things contrary to true Doctrine But to give a precise definition of Heresie as St. Augustine of old so we find at this day very difficult and not to turn to the right hand or to the left not to make it too broad and wide
without blame before him in love And it hath been shewed before how that when in the New Testament we read of Gods Calling and choosing and electing we are not so much to understand the eternal purpose or decree of God but the execution thereof in Gods actual calling and electing certain persons to the profession and belief of the Faith of Christ which he effected by the fulfilling of the Prophesie made by Christ in St. Matthews Gospel relating to the Matth. 24. 31. destruction of the Jewish Polity and Church and erecting of the Christian instead thereof viz. And he shall send his Angels that is his Messengers and Ministers with a great sound of a trumpet i. e. the Gospel preached and published and they shall gather together his elect i. e. such as he shall make choice of from the four winds i. e. from all quarters of the world from one end of heaven to the other Now these persons by Gods word and good-will called from such vanities ignorances and vices are in the Scripture called Saints not so much because they were all so throughly or absolutely sanctified from their former natural or moral impieties contracted in their state of Nature and Gentilism as that they should retain no sin and none of them should fail of heaven hereafter But first either from the better part the whole was denominated actually holy which is not unusual in all speech Or because having made renunciation of the World and Flesh and Devil in Baptism they were called and consecrated to Holiness Or lastly because they made open and solemn profession thereof however some so called might be and did appear to be reprobates And names and appellations are given not from any inward affection or quality which sense cannot judge of but from such things as are visible and apparent And thus in the Old Testament as well as New it is used As in the Psalmes Gather my Saints Psalm 50. 5. together unto me those that have made a Covenant with me by Sacrifice which imply the whole body of the people of Israel as the words going immediately before do also declare And wherever in the Book of Psalms which is in divers places we find the Congregation of the Saints is meant the Israelites in general And in Daniel Chap. 7. v. 8. 21 22 25 27. is the word necessary taken Now it being most customary with the Penmen of the New Testament to borrow the phrase of the Old this tearm Saints was translated from the Jewish Synagogue to the Christian Church by St. Paul expresly to the Romans saying To all that be in Rome beloved of Rom. 1 7. God called Saints so the original better then the insertion of to be made in the translation As likewise in his first Epistle to the Corinthians To the Church of God which is at Corinth to them that are sanctified in Christ 1 Cor. 1. v. 2. Jesus called to be Saints withall that in every place call upon the name Jesus Christ their Lord and ours And the like salutation we shall find in most of St. Pauls Epistles as also most frequently in the body of them as may be obvious to any reader though I deny not but sometimes in the New Testament it is taken in a more restrained sense signifying especially the victorious and triumphant not Militant Saints From all which it doth sufficiently appear in what sense the Church may and ought to be described a Society or Collection of Saints And withal how miserably and mischievously they err who giving that title to a Party hold themselves bound to gather a certain select number out of Christians not accusable of any notorious errour from the Faith of Christ as the Apostles of Christ did out of Heathens and Jews and to constitute and call them Saints Another thing requisite to the constitution of a Church is That it be a Communion of Saints it sufficing not that persons elected or selected as above-said be many in number but holy by nature or institution as God ordained of old in the forming of the Jewish Church Deut. 7. 6. Thou art Deut. 7. 6. 26 19. 18 9. an holy people unto the Lord thy God The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself above all the people that are upon the face of Earth Which words are with advantage applyed unto the Christian Church by St. Peter Whence it is that the same St. Peter maketh it an 1 Pet. 2. 9 10. 2 Pet. 1. 4. end of calling this company together That they may be partakers of the Divine Nature or as it is otherwise more plainly render'd Of a Divine Nature Holiness drawing us near unto the Nature of God himself As the Wiseman also writeth The giving heed unto her Laws is the assurance Wisdom 6. 18 19. of Incorruption and Incorruption maketh us near unto God And not only must they be holy but to that end must of necessity hold a twofold communion The one Invisible with one Head Christ The other Visible and external with one another For the Apostle tells us speaking of Christians The head of every man is Christ And to the Ephesians The 1 Cor. 11. 3. Ephes 5. 23. husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the Church and and he is the Saviour of the world There can therefore no question be made but it is most essential as well to the Church in general as every particular Christian or Member of the same that Christ be the Head of his Church as St. Paul yet more clearly expresseth it to the Colossians excepting against such Professors of Christian Religion as held not the Head from which all the Body by joynts and bands having nourishment ministred and knit 2 Col. 2. 19. together encreaseth with the increase of God Therefore leaving that as on all hands granted we come to the external communion of the 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 IN the outward Communion of the Church two things are to be enquired into First the Nature of it wherein it consisteth Secondly the Adjuncts or Affections thereof First we shall treat Civitas à conversatione multorum dicta est pro eo quod plurimorum in unum constituat contineat vitas Origin Homil. 5. in Genesim briefly of the Nature of this Communion To understand which clearly it will be expedient to begin with the definition of Communion in General or Society humane For Communion is nothing else but Humane Society And Humane Society is nothing else but a conversation of men out of natural reason inclining and moving them thereunto for the mutual supply of the
to the world Upon this Innovating Hereticks were forced to seek subterfuge from revelations and extraordinary discoveries promised as they corruptly understood Scripture by Christ in St. John saying I have yet many things to say unto you but ye Joh. 16 12 13. cannot bear them now Howbeit when the Spirit of truth shall come he will guide you unto all truth c. Hence they collected That Christ communicated not all to his immediate Disciples but reserved diverse things to be imparted extraordinarily to them and the phansie of such extraordinary favours from God is such a bewitching device that few not soundly setled in Faith can chose but expect and thirst after and at last conceit that so God doth deal with them when there is no such matter And of this Sacrilegious and Heretical folly are those Churches no less than simple single persons guilty which under pretense of power in the Church which must not be denyed of declaring the sense of Scripture and Faith do in very deed invent and introduce new Articles of Faith and absurd Scholies unheard of before either in substance or form and say They do but explain only what was before implyed and included in holy Writ For all Articles of Faith all necessary and due Discipline all true Administration of Sacraments wherein the truth of Christian Churches are generally affirmed to consist must long since have been discovered from the Rule of all these or otherwise they who were ignorant of or defective in these could not lay any just claim to be true Churches of Christ So that in truth Antiquity thus understood is an excellent Note of the true Faith and the true Faith not contradicted in worship as is possible more than a Note or Sign of a true Church it is the very Being it self But where Antiquity it self is obscure the condition of a Note according to the Canvasers of this point being to be more cleer than that which is in question it cannot do this good office for us And to argue backward as too many do very incongruously endeavouring to prove that which should prove is to discover the fondness of their opinions and falsness of their cause at the same time For instance to say the Church cannot err in Doctrine therefore we must believe this to be most ancient And to affirm that no man can precisely declare the time and place when such a Doctrine entred the Church taxed for innovation is very absurd as commonly and confidently as it is used For St. Augustine on whose grounds they seem to build this supposition supposed that First no time could be instanced in when such an usance was not in the Church but many times this can be done against pretences to Apostolicalness though the direct time when it began may not be instanced in For whenas most Doctrines of Faith have some practical worship proper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristoteles Polit Lib 5. 8. 175. to them and evidencing them such as are the form the matter the rites of prayer none of which recorded in the Church insinuate any such opinions in that age of the Church especially of publick approbation is it not an argument more than conjectural there was then no such thing believed in the Church though we be not able to determine when it first sprung up Again it is very weak and frivolous which is presumed as unquestionable that all abuses and corruptions in the Church had some proper period wherein they must needs show themselves according to that formality as afterwards they appeared in and became notorious No doubt is to be made but points of Doctrine had their conceptions augmentations and progressions insensible as infinite other things in nature and manners have had and daily have A man may better demand the hour in which an Apple began first to rot or the week in which an old Groat began first to be defaced and loose its form than require a determinate point of time or perhaps the year in which such a Doctrine began to be corrupted into an heretical sense and practise But many of these are very exactly and faithfully set down and found short of immemorialness of Tradition as they term it For Succession another note of the Church I find it by some divided into Succession Doctrinal and Personal meaning better than they speak For I know nothing properly succeeding but where something is departed or lost Now the Doctrine of the Church being incessant and perpetual and not diverse from it self cannot be said so properly to succeed it self as to persevere in the Church But if we should pass that order and allow this language yet the thing it self seems here quite to be mistaken it being not at present enquired into the Faith of the Church which if it were granted to be sound and Catholick doth not of it self necessarily and fully infer a true Church and upon the reasons before agreed to viz. Due administration of Discipline to be essential to a true Church but into the Form constituting it a Visible and Formal Church to which is indispensably required proper Pastors and that by the appointment of Christ as St. Paul thus witnesseth speaking of Christ leaving Ephes 4. 11 12 the earth and ascending into heaven and deputing thereupon certain Officers in his stead in a visible ministration which he ceaseth now to exercise He gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastors and Teachers For the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministry for the edifying of the body of Christ Now it is not necessary here to determine the quarrel about the kind of Officers here mentioned it sufficing to our purpose what is very evident that they who are Governours of the Church must be given to the Church by Christ But Christ acting no longer politically or visibly as hath been said and must be yielded but mystically he cannot be said to ordain any immediately in his own person but by the ministry of others Now how is it possible to distinguish them whom Christ hath appointed to constitute others in the Church from them to whom he hath given no such order but by this succession we now speak of namely a traduction of that faculty which is in one deriving it originally though by many intermediate hands from Christ himself to another succeeding him because as the Apostle to the Hebrews speaks the Priests are not suffered to continue by reason of Death This Hebr. 7. 23. surrogation then of Pastors and Priests is not to be at the pleasure or arbitrement of men to institute but must be by the will of Christ and this will of Christ must be revealed unto us either by the ordinary line and course from himself and Apostles or else must by some extraordinary and miraculous way be made known to men For though we deny it to be Christs practise to commission men to these ends we do not deny it to be
in his power so to do but that he hath so done actually to the fairest Pretenders we shall deny until better demonstrations than can be made from their own asseverations or appealings to the extraordinary effects of their Ministry Christ sayes in the Tenth of John Verily verily John 10â— 1. he that entreth not by the door into the sheep-fold but climbeth up some other way the same is a thief and a robber That the Sheep-fold is the Church that the door is the ordinary way of entring into office in that Church that the Shepheard is Presider over the Church I find none to doubt nor that climbing in at the windows is extraordinary thrusting ones self into Office in the Church nor that such as do so though they be never so conscionable painful and orthodox otherwise are not thieves and robbers if not shearing abusing the Flock yet taking that upon them without ordinary grant which belongs not to them This evil is only remedied by a successive and ordinary transmission of that Power which Christ left with certain peculiar persons he called Apostles with authority to communicate the same to others to the worlds end according to the several ranks and orders of his Ministers of which his Church consisteth So that succession not of Doctrine only but Officers in the Church is no less essential to a Church properly so called than Officers themselves or Discipline And as for the distinction invented without any precedent in antiquity without any warrant from Scripture without any justice or reason humane or divine to stop mens mouths and blind their eyes who are very simple of Vocation internal and external it is utterly rejected as a vain frivolous impertinent phansie For internal Vocation as they called it is nothing but an ability competently serving to such an end but this is no Vocation at all properly any more than it is for me to take anothers purse because God hath given me strength power and opportunity to do so It may be an exception will here be put in against the comparison from the unlawfulness of this latter and not of the former but I suppose as well an unlawfulness in the former though not so notorious as in the latter And adde That however considered in it self it be unlawful for me to spoil another yet if God calls me to it it is not and according to the new Doctrine of Vocation a man is then inwardly called when he is enabled to do a thing But an Outward call too is commended and that ordinary too when things are setled to our mind otherwise extraordinary calling must suffice And truly an extraordinary calling will suffice at any time but then very much better proofs are expected to make such extraordinary Vocation apparent to equal judges than we can any where find in the Apologies of them that rest wholly upon that as their safest Anchorage in this unhappy fluctuating Vocation By what therefore we can judge from the description the Scriptures give us of a formed Church and sentence of the Ancient no Society a Nibilâ—lind est quantum ego quidem intelligo Ordinaria Dei ad altquod munus vocatio quam ab his penes ques est plena legitima de ejusmodi rebus statuendi potestas personae ipsâ—rum judicio non in-idâ—nâ—ae nullo intercedente prava ambitione dolo malisve artibus designatio Sander sonus Praefat ad Tract de Juramento Church can be truly and formally called which wants lawful and ordinary Pastours and Priests and no ordinary Pastours or Priests without due Ordination and no due Ordination but from such who have that power in a right Line communicated unto them in a succession of mortal Persons to an immortal faculty in the Church as may hereafter in convenient place be farther proved So that it may well be admitted that Succession not when one steps up unappointed or illegally appointed into the place and office of another but thus explained is necessary to the Being of a true Church of Christ And yet I do not say it is necessary to Christianity or simply to salvation where it is not despised or scornfully rejected For we may well suppose that Gods promises will notso far fail as to leave a Christian people destitute of such ordinary means of becoming a Church without notorious forfeitures of his grace on their parts or will remit of the general rigor of his Laws requiring Unity of a Church as well as Unity of Faith to the being good Christians and true believers And for these who are most troublesome and loud in demanding Succession or rejecting all Churches defective therein as scarce in saveable condition though I hold it an high temptation of God and provocation of highest displeasure to flock to such Societies as are not known to have this succession of Pastors without such interruption that the Renewal and restitution thereof were meer Laical and consequently void yet where invincible ignorance through education or incapacity natural of judging hath subjected a Christian to that unhappiness who dares exclude him from salvation And the greatest boasters and magnifiers of succession should do well to consider how they can better than hitherto they have quit and secure themselves from the retort of want of succession For however a numerous a glorious Roll is shown of succeeders in their principal See yet we find unanswerable difficulties in their due succession and ordination of which these two will take them up more time and cost them more care and pains than their lives length may suffice to viz. The uncertainty of Succession from Intention necessary to that Sacrament of Ordination which can never be sufficiently known to have been present at that time no though the Ordainer should swear solemnly to it more than Morally which amounts to no moâ—e upon tryal than Probably And the more then probable suspicion of Simoniacal contracts in ascending the Pastoral throne which the common Law declareth nulling such indirect Invasions and voiding Ordinations For the third sign of the true Catholick Church Unity the more I look into it the less I find considerable in it It being necessary according to common Philosophy That every thing which hath a â—eing should be but one and not many and if the Catholick Church be so in this sense what great matter is acknowledged in it above other things For when a thing is divided into many parts it ceases to be what it was before but still there is unity in the Parts severally considered And so if we suppose the Universal Church divided schismaticaâ—ly into distinct and opposite societies it can scarce be supposed but the Parties so divided are though infinite yet in unity with themselves And how then can that which is common to so many be a specifick character of one especially By this separation therefore it may be concluded That one or perhaps both are in fault and guilty but agreeing within themselves equally as well they may
and for ought appears the Schismatical may be in greater unity within it self than the Catholick how can any man discern from unity which is the Catholick or true Church The Unity therefore which may any wise describe or distinguish the sounder part of Christs Church from the heretical must not be taken from that which it holdeth within it self but with some other which is acknowledged for Catholick wherein comes the use of Antiquity again because the Ancient Churches of Christ were saved by the same Faith and Worship that all succeeding Churches must be therefore if it may appear that a Church doth not agree in all necessary or considerable points of Faith Worship and Government with them of former ages supposed to be truly Catholick it self cannot be Catholick or a true Christian Church But they who look no higher than one Age or two and no farther then one place or two and finding convenient agreement amongst themselves do characterise themselves for Christs Church fall into the censure of St. Paul to the Corinthians who measuring themselves by themselves and comparing 2 Cor. 10. 12. themselves among themselves are not wise And in the Revelation of St. John we read of some Nations into whose heart God hath put to fulfill Revel 17. 7. his will and to agree and give their Kingdom unto the Beast until the word of God should be fulfilled I hope this unity of consent will not be taken for any argument of the faithfulness of their consent or Catholickness But more we shall have occasion to speak of Unity in the treating of Schism In the mean time I see no force at all in the places alleadged out of the Old Testament to prove so much as may be well allowed to the unity of the Church as where it is said My Beloved is but one and to the Cantic like purpose For such places taken in relation to Fact and not to Precept and counsel rather that Gods Church should be so and endeavour to keep the Spirit of Unity in the bond of peace as the Apostle speaks can Ephes 4. 3. be understood strictly only of that single Nation of the Jews which was alone chosen so peculiarly to himself Or of the future Coalition of Jew and Gentile into one Body as the same Apostle in the same Epistle speaketh of Christs Passion That he might reconcile both unto God in one Chap. 2. 16. Body by the Cross having slain the enmity thereby i. e. between Jew and Gentile These difficulties and uncertainties in this Note of Unity have constrained the Patrons of the Roman Cause to find out such an Unity which indeed is more apparent and certain to him that commits his Faith to be guided by some outward sign but so much repugnant to all ancient Churches so wholly strange to them and unheard of that it may seem to do them much more mischief than advantage as that which excludes all Antiquity from having any suffrage in this cause And this their Note is Unity Bellarm. de Notis Eccles lib. 4. cap. 10. init with the Bishop of Rome as boldly said and as weakly proved as their enemies could wish St. Hierom indeed saith to Damasus he is resolved to hold as He and that See believed in one particular of the Trinity and used not simply and abstractly consider'd this as a probable argument of Orthodoxness and preserving the peace of the Church but with the concurrence of other Circumstances rendring his Opinion probable But doth he or any ancient Author deserving with themselves the name of a Father teach as they would perswade indefinitely That to hold communion with the Bishop of Rome is to be assured you are of the true Catholick Church Christs Charter much stood upon to St. Peter and the Rhetorical flourishes many times of the Holy Fathers extolling St. Peter and his Successors but never categorically affirming or soberly determining so will not amount to this Hence they proceed to Universality too as a sign of the true Church and an help to Unity it self For it profitteth nothing that there be some one Church and that in one Age and Place which is at unity with it self if it be not universal Christs Church is said to be universal but so many senses are given of Universality it self that it is hard to apply it positively to any pretending to it For nothing so plain as that the Christian Faith doth not and never did possess all Nations nor all the persons of those Nations where it hath flourished No man therefore can know the true Church by that which is not true of it And therefore I make no doubt but the most anciently genuine and proper sense of that expression in the Apostles Creed where it is said I believe the Catholick Church Vide Augustinum Epistolâ— 50. aimed at no more than to cause us to believe that Christs Church was from that time forward no longer to be of one Nation or one Denomination as it was before Christs Incarnation but Catholick that is Universal and indifferently to extend to all People For at that time when the Creed was composed the secondary sense wherein Catholick and sound Believer signified the same thing was scarce at all heard of no not before the Councel of Nice under Constantine Afterwards it was applyed to particular Sees as well Alexandrian Antiochian and some others as Roman In Theodosius the second his dayes which above 400 years after Christ a Sozomenus Ecclesiast Hist lib. 7. cap. 4. Law was made that none should call themselves Catholicks but such as believed aright concerning the Holy Trinity the rest should be termed Hereticks Afterward notwithstanding every Sect and Heresie usurped that name as may appear from that very place corruptly cited out of Austin August Epist ad Epistolam Fundamenti by some to prove the true Church from the Title of Catholick it self For saith he however all Hereticks desire to be called Catholicks yet if any enquired for a Catholick Church they were directed to the Orthodox and not Heretical Churches But if we take the word Catholick in a more restrained sense not for that which is all over the world actually but so far as it doth extend passeth generally through all and that not Places but Ages too where shall we find a Catholick Church Christians never for fourteen or fifteen hundred yeers not conspiring into one belief no not in things held very important to Faith and I mean not only single persons but Societies of Christians Therefore neither from hence can we conclude directly of the true Church in opposition to Heretical And therefore the Patrons of this opinion of the Universality finding themselves harder pursued with difficulties than they can evade being taken in their own snares are forced according to their very vain custom to leave off the tryal of the truth from matter of Fact which is most plain and ready and proceed to say It ought so
to be for certain reasons they draw at their pleasure out of Scripture and the necessity of our knowledge of it which is as solid a way of proceeding as if I finding my self by natural sense cold another should attempt to demonstrate the contrary because it is Midsommer But this use we may yet make of Universality to jude of Catholickness of Faith taking it for the most constant for time place and persons according as all humane account requires to ascribe that to the more numerous and eminent which is strictly proper only to the whole entire Body as a Councel or Senate is said to decree a thing when the chiefest do so some dissenting surely this is a very probable argument of the Catholickness of that Faith and consequently that Church so believing But what we before observed must not be forgotten here viz. That in all such enquiries as these the Estimate must be taken from the whole Church passed as well as Present and that there is as well an Eminency of Ages as Persons to preponderate in this Case Lastly the advantage Negative from Universality is very considerable to discern the true Faith and Church from false because it is most certain if any Doctrine or Discipline shall be obtruded on the Church which cannot be made evident to have been actually received in the Church and not by colourable and probable conjectures and new senses of Scripture invented to that purpose in some former Age that is Heretical and Schismatical and in no good sense Catholick The last Note which we shall mention is Sanctity which we hold very proper to this end taken abstractedly from all Persons as considered in Doctrine and Principles For if any Church doth teach contrary to the Law of nature of moral vertues of Justice or the like we may well conclude that to be a false Church though it keeps it self never so strictly to the Rule of Scriptures in many or most other things For it is in the power of mans wit and may be in the power of his hands to devise certain Religious Acts and impose them on others which shall carry a greater shew of severity and sanctity than there is any grounds for in Scripture or Presidents in the best approved Churches and yet this is not true Holiness of Believers For to this is principally required that it be regulated and warranted by Gods holy Word Yet neither so directly and expresly as if it were unlawful to act any thing in order to Holiness without special precept from thence For I see no cause at all to reject the ancient distinction found frequently with the Fathers of the Church of duties of Precept and duties of Councel For there ever was and ought to be in Christs Church several ranks of Professours of Christs Religion whereof for instance some live more contemplative some more active lives But if all commendable and profitable States were under Precept then should all sin that do not observe the same but God hath taken a mean course in not commanding some things of singular use to the promoting of Piety in true Believers but commending the same unto us Such are Virginal chastity Monastick life Travelling painfully not only towards the salvatian of a mans own soul but of others likewise and certain degrees uncommanded of Duties commanded as of charity towards our Christian neighbours Watchings unto Prayer and spiritual Devotion which being prescribed no man can determine to what degree they are by God required of us precisely some therefore are left to the Freewill-offerings of devouter persons who thereby endeavour either to assure themselves more fully of their salvation or increase of the glory afterward to be received For as Christ tells us in the Gospel Much was forgiven to Mary because she loved much so shall much be given upon the same reason They therefore that teach contrary to such wholesome and useful means of Holiness as these or the like under perhaps vain suspicion of too great opinion may be had of their worthiness incur at least with me the censure of being enemies to the holiness of Christs Church and render their Churches more suspected for the opposing of them than others for approving or practising them The Holiness then of the Church commending it to the eye and admiration of the World doth consist in the divineness and spiritualness of its Doctrine and Ecclesiastical discipline in use in it exceeding moral civility For it may be that such a severe hand of civil Justice may be held over a people that they may live more orderly and inoffensively to the world than some true Christian Churches but if this be done as often it is out of civil Prudence natural Gravity or a disposition inclined rather to get an estate than riotously and vainly to spend on which brings such scandal to Religion then is not this a sign of a true Church or Christian because it proceedeth not from principles proper to Christian Religion but secular interest how specious soever it may appear to the World CHAP. XXXI Of the Power and Acts of the Church Where they are properly posited Of the Fountain of the Power denyed to the Church Neither Prince nor People Authour of the Churches Power But Christ the true Head of the Church The manner how Christs Church was founded Four Conclusions upon the Premisses 1. That there was alwayes distinction of Persons in the Church of Christ 2. The Church was alwayes administred principally by the Clergy 3. The Rites generally received in the Church necessary to the conferring Clerical Power and Office 4. All are Vsurpers of Ecclesiastical Power who have not thus received it In what sense Kings may be said to be Heads of the Church AFter the Church found and founded as abovesaid the special Acts thereof claim due consideration and the Power or Right of so acting And this Power we make two-fold in General Political and Mystical or Sacramental Of both which we must first enquire after the proper Subject before we treat of the proper Acts thereof That all Power which is given by Christ doth reside in the Church as its subject no man can or doth question But because the Church it self being as is said a Society united in one Faith and administred outwardly by Christian Discipline according to Christs mind admitteth of several senses and acceptations therefore it must be first understood which and in what sense is according to Christs intention the proper seat of this power And before we come to Scriptural grounds we take no small help in this Enquiry from the common state of all Government which we have already shown to be such as is not ascending but descending It cometh not originally nor can from the multitude or people who are the object of this power i. e. the Persons properly to be governed and not governing all the Examples of former Ages confirming not only the unnaturalness and unreasonableness but impossibility of the People governing
Eucharist and especially going upon the grounds of Luther Calvin Perkins and some others of Great note that all Sacerdotal they may call them if they please Ministerial Acts done by him who is no true Minister are really null and void Fourthly we conclude that seeing all Ecclesiastical power as Ecclesiastical doth proceed from Christ and his Successors and that by Ordinary and visible means they who have not received the same by such Ordinary Methods are usurpers of the same whether Political or Mystical And that to deny this to the Church is to deny that which Christ hath given them and such a Principle of the Churches well Being without which it cannot subsist and it not subsisting neither can the Faith it self And to the reason above given we may add Prescription beyond all memory For from Christs time to this day a perpetual and peculiar power hath ever been in the Clergy which hath constantly likewise born the name of the Church to assemble define and dispose matters of Religion And why should not Prescription under Unchristian as well as Christian Governours for so many Ages together be as valid sacred and binding to acknowledgment in the Case of Religion as Civil Matters will ever remain a question in Conscience and common Equity even after irresistible Power hath forced a Resolution otherwise It is true such is the more natural and Ancient Right Civil Power hath over the outward Persons of men than that which Religion hath over the Inward man that it may claim a dominion and disposal of the Persons of even Christian subjects contrary to the soft and infirm Laws of the Church because as hath been said Men are Men before they are Christians and Nature goeth before Grace And Civil society is the Basis and support to Ecclesiastical Yet the grounds of Christianity being once received for good and divine and that Religion cannot subsist nor the Church consist without being a Society and no Society without a Right of counsel and consultation and no consultation without a Right to assemble together the Right of assembling must needs be in trinsique to the Church it self Now if no man that is a Christian can take away the essential ingredient to the Church how can any deny this of Assembling For the practise of it constantly and confidently by the Apostles and brethren contrary to the express will of the Lawful Powers of the Jews and Romans and the reason given in the Acts of the Apostles of obeying God rather then man do imply certainly a Law and Charter from God so to do and if this be granted as it must who can deny by the same Rule necessity of Cause and constant Prescription that they may as well provide for the safety of the Faith by securing the state of the Church as for the truth and stability of the Church by securing the true Faith by doctrine and determination The Great question hath ever been Whether the Church should suffer loss of power and priviledges upon the Supream Powers becomming Christian Or the Supream power it self loose that dominion which it had before it became of the Church For if Christianity subjected Kings necessarily to the Laws of others not deriving from them then were not Kings in so good a Condition after they were Christians as before when they had no such pretences or restraints upon them and so should Christs Law destroy or maim at least the Law of God by which Kings reign But there may be somewhatsaid weakning this absurdity For Granting this That there is a God and that he is to be worshipped and that as he appointeth all which we must by nature believe it seems no less natural to have these observed than the Laws of natural Dominion Now granting that at present which if we be true to our Religion we must not deny viz. That Christian Religion is the true Religion and that God will be worshipped in such sort as is therein contained For any Prince absolute to submit to the essentials of that Religion is not to loose any thing of his Pristine Rights which he had before being an Heathen for he never had any Right to go against the Law of God more then to go against the Law of Nature but it doth restrain his Acts and the exercise of his Power And if the Supream after he hath embraced Christianity shall proceed to exert the same Authority over the Church as before yet the Church hath no power to resist or restrain him Civilly any more than when he was an Alien to it Now it being apparent that Christian Faith and Churches had their Forms of believing and Communion before Soveraign powers were converted and that he who is truly converted to a Religion doth embrace it upon the terms which he there finds not such as he brings with him or devises therefore there lies an Obligation upon such powers to preserve the same as they found it inviolate And truly for any secular Power to become Christian with a condition of inverting the orders of the Church and deluting the Faith is to take away much more than ordinary accrues unto it by such a change It is true the distinction is considerable between the Power of a Christian and unchristian King exerted in this manner because taking the Church in the Largest sense in which all Christians in Communion are of it what Christian Kings act with the Church may in some sense bear the name of the Church as it doth in the State acting according to their secular capacity but much more improperly there than here because there are no inferiour Officers or Magistrates in such a Commonwealth which are not of his founding and institution whatsoever they do referr to him and whatsoever almost he doth is executed by them But Christ as we have shewed having ordained special Officers of his own which derive not their Spiritual Power at all from the Civil and to this end that his Church might be duly taught and governed what is done without the concurrence of these can in no proper sense bear the name of the Church But many say the King is a Mixt person consisting partly of Ecclesiastical and partly Civil Authority but this taken in the ordinary latitude is to begg the Question and more a great deal than at first was demanded For who knows how far this Mixture extends and that it comprehends not the Mystical Power of the Church as well as the Political And how have they proved one more than the other by such a title It were reasonable therefore first to declare his Rights in Ecclesiastical matters as well as Civil and thence conclude he is a Mixt Person and not to affirm barely he is a Mixt Person and from thence inferr they know not what Ecclesiastical power themselves And if he hath such power whether it is immediately of God annexed to his Natural Right or by consent of the Church is attributed unto him For by taking this course we
may reconcile many otherwise contrary opinions found amongst the Ancient Fathers sometimes ascribing much of the Ecclesiastical Power to Christian Emperours and sometimes calling the same in question The Church of England so far as she hath declared herself herein seemeth to take the mean way and follow herein the Prescriptions of the Old Testament and the Precedents of Christian Emperors found in the Antient Church under the Gospel and doth profess to be the due of our Kings as much as ever any Kings upon earth to sway in Ecclesiastical matters In execution of which power as there was alwayes approbation moderated according to the customes of the Church so was there always Opposition when the bounds were exceeded And undoubtedly true is That we are taught by our Church to acknowledge That whatever in Church Constitutions and Canons Church of England Can. 2. matters was the Right of Jewish Kings or Christian Emperours of Old is so now the Right of our Kings But some not content herewith have out of the Title of Head given at the first attempts of Reformation to our King and made by acts of State Hereditary to his successors drawn an argument to prove all that power which rested in the Church to be devolved on the Kings of this Nation But this hath ever been disowned and disclaimed in such a large sense by themselves as appears by Queen Elizabeths Injunctions and an Act of Parliament in confirmation whereof I shall here only recite the opinion or testimony of Bishop Jewel in his view of Pius Quintus his seditious Bull Bishop Jewel against the Bull of Pius 5th against her in these his own word Where is the called Supream Head Peruse the Acts of Parliament the Records the Rolls and the Writs of Chancery or Exchequer which pass in her Graces name Where is she ever called Supream Head of the Church No No brethren she refuseth it she would not have it nor be so called Why then doth Christs Vicar blaze and spread abroad so gross an untruth c. This was her Judgement and modesty then when there was greatest cause to apprehend some such thing and what she thought of it I never could learn was ever otherwise interpreted by her Successors For notwithstanding that according to the most ancient and undoubted Rights of this Emperial Crown our Kings are supream Governors of the Church as well as State yet never was it expounded of the Church as they were Ecclesiastical but as they were of Civil capacity For herein differeth the Right of Kings according to our Reformation from that of Roman Perswasion That Clergy men becoming Sons of the Church in more especial manner than they of the Laity are not thereby exempted from the Civil Power either in matter of propertie or Criminalness But the Roman Church so far exalted and extended their Ecclesiastical Power as to withdraw such Persons and their Cases civil from Civil cognizance and judgement and assume it to themselves And this the Pope claiming very injuriously as Head of the Church To root up this usurpation Henry the eight null'd that his pretence and took the title to himself intending nothing more then to vindicate his Prerogative in that particular For though it cannot be denied that many and great Priviledges to this effect have been of Old granted by Christian Emperours to eminent Bishops to judge of their own Sons as they were called within themselves yet did they never claim this as a Native Right of the Church or Christianity but as an act of Grace from the Civil Power And though the Church following therein the Councel of St. Paul to go to Law rather before 1 Cor. 6. 1. the Just than unjust and that Christians should rather determine Causes of differences amongst themselves by arbitration than scandalously apply themselves to the Judgement Seat of Heathen did ever endeavour to determine business within it self and yet more especially the Clergy Yet they never denied a Right in Civil Autority to call them in question upon misdemeanours or to decide their Cases of Civil nature And for the other of Divine nature or purely Ecclesiastical Princes never expected or desired to intermeddle therewith This the Roman Deputy of Achaia Gallio understood not to concern his Juridical power when Act. 18. he refused to be a Judge of such matters as were esteemed Religious though in that violence was offered to the body of St. Paul before his face he might and ought to have shewn his Autority But when the Soveraign Power became Christian it was not thought unlawful at all nor scandalous to address themselves to it for decision of Controversies And this is it which is intended to be demanded now by our Kings in their Supremacy in Cases Ecclesiastical and Civil and acknowledged by the Clergy of this Church to be his due without that servile way of seeking leave from the Bishop of Rome or any under him Onely where it may be showed that Peculiar Grants of Exemptions from the common course of Justice have been made by Princes to the Clergy of the Church may it not seem equal that they should enjoy the benefit of them as well as others in other Cases But nothing is more unreasonable or intollerable then the impudence of those spitefully and malitiously bent against the Religion professed in our Church who argue from the Kings Supremacy over the Church such an absolute dominion there as they will by no means acknowledge due to him in the State If by Acts of Parliament a thing be confirmed to the Commonwealth it is lookt on as inviolable by the King and unalterable without the like solemn Revocation as was the Constitution But by vertue of the Ancient Right of the Crown they would have it believed the King may at his pleasure alter such solemn Acts made in behalf of the Church Without the concurrence of the Three Estates nothing is lookt upon as a standing Law to the Civil State but by vertue of this Supremacy Ecclesiastical they would have it believed that without any more ado without consent or counsel of the Church he may make what alteration of Religion he pleases which was never heard or dreamt of Yea and whereas not only his Civil but Ecclesiastical Power always acknowledged the Bounds of common benefit and extended not to destruction they would have it thought that he may when he pleaseth by vertue of such Headship destroy the Body of the Church and Religion and leave none at all so far at least as the withdrawing of all secular aid and advantage do hasten its ruine But they will not be of this opinion any longer than they have brought about their mischievous purposes Surely St. Paul who had 1 Cor. 5. 12. nothing to do at all with State matters and could not touch one that was without the Church by Ecclesiastical censure was as much the Head of the Church as ever any Prince in Christendom doth expressly declare that whatsoever
with Christians denying them all outward conversation as well as spiritual in matters of Religion Now this seems to be a branch of the Old Greater Excommunication and not in all places disusâ—d And sometimes is unlawful and otherwhile lawful according to the extent and application of them For to inflict the same to the dissolving of ties of nature is not agreeable to the simplicity of the Gospel And Natural Ties we call such as are between Subjects and Soveraign Parents and Children Husband and Wife which by no Ecclesiastical Excommunication can be broken or nulled The reason whereof besides the monstrous effects ensuing upon their evacuation not here to be treated of is this That Ecclesiastical Power can take away no more than it gave nor Christianity destroy what it never builded But Christianity did never simply confer such Rights on men but the Law of Nature only it regulated and directed the same therefore can it not null it It is therefore unchristian for any pretending Ecclesiastical Power to absolve subjects from obedience Civil or Children from natural and the like But every Christian in that he is adopted of God by baptism and admitted into the Society of Christians doth receive thereby certain Rights and power to communicate with it in all things which power may be forfeited and lost by breach of Covenant as well with the Body of the Church to live and believe according to the Received Faith and practice thereof as with the Head Christ And this being so judged by those who are over the Church in the Lord it is very consonant to Christian Religion to deny such of what order or rank soever they be the signs of outward communion Prayer and Communication of the Holy Sacraments of Christ The Church hath power to declare even soveraign Princes uncapable of such Communion and deny it them which we call the Lesser Excommunication Yet because as we said No natural Right can be extinguished upon unchristian misdemeanours If a Supream Prince of a Place should disdain to be denied or opposed in such cases and would make his entrance into the Church by vertue of his Civil Right to all places under his Dominion the most that the Church could do justly in such cases were to diswade him but by any force to resist his entrance into any Church were unlawful as it would be also to minister in a Christian manner in his presence for this cannot be commanded by him but in such cases suffering must be put in practice as for the Faith it self sought to be destroyed Some there are yet who call in question the peculiar and incommunicable Right of decreeing this Censure of Excommunication to those called the Clergy which is very strange seeing this Power is part of that of the Keys delivered by Christ himself to such only as he constituted Governors of the Church and that in Christs days their was a distinction between the Members of his Body as to Inferiority and Superiority Obedience and Command Teacher and Learner and much more in the Apostles days after Christs Assention and much more yet after their days according as the matter of the Church Christians encreasing and improving became more capable of a more convenient form and fashion For as it is in the production of natural things though the Form be certain and constant and the very same at the first production as in its perfection yet it doth not appear so fully and perfectly as afterward So was it with the Body of Christs Church It is certain therefore that from the beginning this Act of Excluding from the Communion was never executed but by the Rulers and Presidents of Congregations though the people might concurr thereto Now that these Rulers whom we may call Bishops or Presbyters were not created by the People nor by the Prince we have shewed already and therefore did nothing in their Right but in the Power of Christ whose Ministers alone they properly were And this being essential to right Administration of the Church how can it be supposed either to be separable from the Church in General or from those persons who are the proper Administrators of it For to say with some It is needless Selden de Jure Gentium apud Bibliander apud Erastum wholly where Christian Magistrates rule whose proper office it is to rebuke and punish vice and scandalous misdemeanors which say they can only be just cause of Excommunication is to destroy the subject of the question which supposes it needful and upon this enquires after the Persons which should Execute the same And spitefully to defeat the Church of all Authority from Christ doth indeed translate this Power to the Civil Magistrate And is not the absurdity the very same which endowes the Christian Governor with Civil Power and which endows the Civil Magistrate with Christian If it be not absurd for a King to be a Philosopher it is not absurd for a Philosopher to be a King If it be not absurd for a Civil Magistrate to have Priestly power it is not absurd for him that hath Priestly power to be a Magistrate There is certainly no inconsistency on either side For things of a far different nature and intention may easily meet in the same person though the things themselves can never be the same Here therefore the things differing so egregiously it is no more than nacessary that a different cause be acknowledged necessary which not appearing the Effect must be denied Now the Cause of all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as Ecclesiastical must needs come from him from whom the Church it self hath its Original and being And it is a certain Rule that a man is born to nothing that comes from Christ as Head of his Church but is made and instituted Which whoever is not cannot lay any just claim to any Office under him I know it is objected that Preaching being an Ecclesiastical Act hath without contradiction been practised by diverse and to this day may be no ordination preceeding To which I thus answer by distinguishing first between doing a thing Ex Charitate and Ex Officio out of Charity and out of duty Preaching was ever permittedin the Church especially taken in the larger sense wherein it signifies all declaration of the Gospel out of Charity But the office of Preaching was never suffered but upon antecedent qualifications And these two differ yet farther For he that doth a thing out of Office doth it so that it is not lawful for him absolutely to omit it but he that doth it out of Charity and only by connivance not by commission may cease at his pleasure and as he made may suspend himself when he will Again he that teaches without Autority upon bare permission nay be silenced without any other cause renderd but the will of him that hath the Jurisdiction or if a reason be given because He hath no autority is sufficient But he that is orderly instituted to that end cannot without
are we to mutiny against the Constitutions of Eastern and Western Churches which in progress of time added some inferiour Orders to those most anciently received in the Church viz. of Bishop Priest and Deacon For I take it to be no invasion of Christs Right to call to the assistance of such as he had constituted such as he did not ordain to that end but to retrench of the number to dissolve that Order which he appointed that is sacrilegious What then may we call Orders but The Collation of an Ecclesiastical Faculty or Power to serve God and the Church by such as are authorized by God using the necessary Forms of Words and Rites thereunto required according to his order of Ministration Now we have already shewed That as no man can create himself a secular neither can he an Ecclesiastical Officer and as no man in that Politv can be created but by one in Authority rightly derived to him so can none in Spiritual matters be ordained to Ecclesiastical Ministration but he that is thereunto called by some in Lawful or at least real Power And therefore such who are chosen and appointed by the common people are but common people after such vainly affected callings and they who are of an inferiour Order were never acknowledged to have power to create one of a Superiour to them As it was never endured in the Church till of late dayes that Priests should appoint Bishops or Priests because though Power of the Keys were communicated to them in reference to the two Principal and necessary Sacraments yet never as to the whole complex notion of the same which consists of Jurisdiction as well as Knowledge and Intercession And the School argument which at least hath given occasion to confound the Order of Bishop and Priest is very false and frivolous supposing all Ecclesiastical Orders to be so denominated in or dine ad consecrandum from their relation to the Power of Consecrating the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist because they suppose that to be the supream Mystery and End of Priestly Office but the distinction of Power Political and Mystical in the Church quite overthrows that For the Power of Jurisdiction is greater in its kind than that of celebrating and therefore not so vainly to be taken Again the Orders of the Church are so called from the Relation they have to the Body Ecclesiastical or outward Form and Constitution of it which is made up of all of them by a gradual ascent from the lowest to the highest which make that Hierarchy without which a Church has but very little to show that it is a Church but is forc'd to shroud it self under the obscure priviledges of being an invisible Church though not visible Orders therefore thus duly administred though they be not a Sacrament for then must there be seven Sacraments subordinate to the other famous seven because generally seven sorts of Orders are administred in the Church yet are they Sacramental things that is Sacred and no less necessary to the constituting a Visible Body of Christ than are the others to the Invisible And though that cannot presently be concluded to be a true Church of Christ which hath them I do not see how that can be a true Church which hath them not And for that which is commonly called Extream Unction being the Anointing of the Infirm of Body or such as are despaired of as to this Life I see no great matter to be objected against it no more did Luther nor Bucer nor some other eminent Reformers for a good while after they left Rome provided it be done with that solemnity and soundness of invocation of God and Benediction of the deceasing Party as may comfort and strengthen him in his last Agonies It being ancient though not so old as is pretended nor ministred in the same manner as now For in the beginning not one but many Presbyters of the Church were called according to the advice of St. James to pray over the sick and to anoint James 1. 14 15 him with common not compounded or artificial Oyl and that not without a miraculous event But because the Miracle is now ceased it is no good reason the thing it self should be detested For Primitively a Miracle did accompany Baptism too which ceasing no man will declare the Sacrament it self ought to cease likewise The Superstitions of Prayer and some other Rites added of late whereby the simplicity of it hath been corrupted is a more reasonable ground of laying it down Neither is the want thereof in that formality to be charged upon a Church where there is commanded and continued due Ministration to the Sick answerable to the necessities of Body and Soul But though the use hereof be ancient yet the name Sacrament hath not so anciently been ascribed to it in the sense at this day Current And Innocent the first who is reported to have so called it doth permit others besides Priests to minister the same to the Sick the Chrism or Oyl being made by the Bishop CHAP. XXXVII Of Confirmation What it is The Reasons of it The Proper Minister of it Of Vnction threefold in Confirmation Of Sacramental Repentance and Penance The Effects thereof BUT of Confirmation much greater esteem hath ever been and ought still to be had though not so much as some of the Ancients and divers Modern Schoolmen would exalt it to unless a favourable interpretation be made of their judgments delivered concerning it For they make it more useful than Baptism it self and impute the efficacy of Baptism in great part unto this Sacrament To judge the better of which Opinion it is to be consider'd what this Confirmation is Confirmation may be said to be a solemn Act of Invocation of God and Benediction of a Person upon his publick Profession of that Christian Faith into which he was before baptized First It was required that the Person capable of this Ceremony should have first been baptized For he was not hereby made a Christian but as the word importeth confirmed in that Faith into which he had been baptized And the Reasons hereof were such then as do to this day commend exceedingly the use of it viz. Because some were baptized in their minority or infancy when wanting common judgment they could not discern the nature use and end of Baptism and therefore very requisite it was that they should after due and sober information in the mysteries and principles of Christian Religion make in their own person such a publick Profession of the same as they were bound to do at the time of their baptism according Catechismus Argentoratensis p. 36. D. Cum nos pueri instituti sumus in fide Christiana debemus eam palam aperte profiteri c. as the Church Catechism of Strasburgh since the Reformation well thus expresses it by Scholar and Master Schol. We that are children and instructed in the Faith of Christ ought to profess the
Sanctified by the word and â— Tim. 4. 5. Prayer But the word and Sanctification there are no preaching or consecration but only signify that God by the Gospel which is his word proper removed the sentence of uncleannesse from things so judged to be under the Law and set them as free as other reputed Clean But prayer's proper Act and Office it is to bring down a special Benediction upon Sacramental and Familiar food On the other side the difference being so vast and Sacred between Common Creatures of bread and Wine and the Sacramental it was lookt upon as a thing of greatest use and concernment to all believers to know whether such consecration was performed or not But where the form was so loose and indetermined as it must needs be consisting in the various and Prolix office belonging thereunto how could it possible be diserned when the Host was consecrated and whether seeing neither the whole Canon could be said thereunto absolutely necessary nor could it be assigned what part thereof essentially and essectually performed he Consecration Hereupon the Latine Church hath taken upon them to define the Conversion of the Elements into Christ for that they make Consecration to a very few precise words used by Christ at the First Institution of his Holy Supper viz This is my Body and This is my Blood And I have not found how the Arguments on either side can be well answered while the Opinion of trans-elementation or such supposed conversion stands Good and is accepted but otherwise it is no hard matter to answer Both. For supposing not a change of the proper natures and substances of the Elements into the Body of Christ naturall What inconvenience would it be to be undetermined by a certain number of words when the mystical change was wrought granting that this change Relative is made by the word and Prayer as the change of water in baptism is made not by any special number or form of words but by the Office whether longer or shorter And therefore the necessitie of putting the whole virtue in those few words recited was received presently upon the doctrine of Transubstantiation which is an argument that the Greek Church never admitted it in the Latin sense however I know they would not in their Councels contend with them about that but kept themselves to the tradition of their Predecessors who restrained not the Consecration to such number of words but must have with the like prudence and necessity have done so had they so apparently and expresly received such a simple conversion as being true all Christians ought to be so punctually assured of and venerate that nothing in their Creed could be more necessary and not contented themselves with the Relative change only of the things themselves which precisely to know stood them not so much in hand seeing the Reverence given to the Visible objects could not exceed that communicable to Creatures It may be granted therefore that the words of Christ are so necessary that Consecration cannot rightly be performed without them but yet denied to be so operative that upon the plain recitation of them they should presently effect that great alteration of them as the Story I make no doubt feigned to beget belief of this new opinion implieth telling us That certain Shepheards while it was the custom to pronounce the Canon of the Mass openly having learned it Henorius in Gemma Animae 1. 103. and recited it over their bread and wine which they had before them in the field as they were at their ordinary Meal the bread was turned visibly into Christs body and the Wine into his Blood and that the Shepheards were struck dead from heaven Whereupon it was decreed in a Synod that from thence forward no man should rehearse the said Canon Audibly or out of Sacred Places or without Book or without Holy Vestments or without an Altar A tale as likely to be true as the thing they would prove by it And so let them pass together while we proceed to the CHAP. XLVI Of the Participation of this Sacrament in both Kinds The vanity of Papists allegations to the Contrary No Sacramental Receiving of Christ in One kind only How Antiquity is to be understood mentioning the receiving of one Element only The pretended inconveniences of partaking in both kinds insufficient Of Adoration of the Eucharist SECOND Thing formally necessary to this Sacrament which is Celebration in both Kinds or Bread and Wine In treating whereof we must do so much Justice to the Cause as to acknowledge a reasonable distinction between the Sacrament it self and the Communicants in it To the former I suppose it is agreed that indispensably both Elements are necessary and Essential and that there can be no Sacrament without them both whatever solemnity may be acted to the eye or ear For the Sacrament noâ— being a thing of natural force or vertue but instituted the very formality of the Institution consisting in the joint concurrence of both Elements the Removing of One is the Adulteration of the Whole and destruction neither can that be said to be a Sacrament of Christs Institution but if at all of mans devising Neither do I see how the argument should not hold in the Participation of that Sacrament as well as Consecration viz that as consecration in one Kind only maketh not a Sacrament so communication in one Kind where both are in being should be receiving the Sacrament For the natures of things as Aristotle hath it are like numbers which with the addition or Substraction of one change their kind We do not make Bread of the Nature of Wine or on the contrary but we make them both equally of the nature of that Sacrament which by Christs own Institution was an Aggregate thing constituted of both and therefore to withdraw or deny one is in effect to deny both And the Evasion to salve this is both ridiculous and prophane which saith The blood is contained in the Body of Christ and therefore in taking one both are received But 't is nothing so For the Blood of Christ in the Sacrament is no more contained in the Body than the Body in the blood And besides we say that he who not at all receives the Cup cannot at all receive the signified body of Christ but only the signifying Again How can this assertion consist with the opinion of an Incruent Sacrifice For either the Sacramental Body of Christ hath Blood in it or it hath not If it hath then is it a Bloody and not Incruent Sacrifice For I think there is no ground for a man to say a Sacrifice was called Bloody or Cruent because only Blood was shed before it was Sacrificed and not because even at that time it contained blood in it For Cruent and Incruent are the same in the Law from whence the Gospel borrows this Phrase as Animate and Inanimate Sacrifices If it hath not how can it be said to have the blood
us but nothing could suffice to lay aside the proper cerimonies used at the Institution or form of it but such an opinion as that of Transubstantiation â—ellarmin It now sufficing according to moderner Judgments that the several Wafers now in use were all one when they came first from mill and are broken by the Teeth in actually receiving them whereas Christ represented the unity of his mystical Members and Fraction of his Natural Body by the Forms set before his Disciples the better to affect our hearts and quicken our devotion To the same end in Ancienter though not first dayes of Christianity there was an Elevation of the Mysteries made by the Priest to shew only how Christ was Lifted up on the Cross for our sins but upon the doctrine and perswasion of transubstantiation this was corrupted and perverted to the drawing people to a direct Adoration terminated in the Visible objects and not as was anciently used from that Action to take an occasion of worshipping Christ himself with a seqestration of their mind from their senses To this likewise pertains the Grosser devotion for many hundred years impractised and unknown to Christians that not only Adoration to God and Christ should be made by all who approched as Communicants to these Holy Mysteries but that the Host should be on purpose publickly exposed to the view of all enterers into the Church where it is with an injunction to exhibit all devout and divine worship to it which invention the Fathers and all Christian Churches were holy ignorant of for many hundred years and never was there so much as a Feast of Corpus Cristi till Urbane the Fourth instituted one about the year 1263. And the Adoration of the Host as Christ himself much later But if such an opinion had been of any tolerable Antiquity in the Church how could it be avoided but such direct and open Adoraâ—ion should have been given much more early it being a most ancient Principle of Christian Faith that Christ was God and of common humane reason that God is to be worshipped And yet no mention made of such Adorations as are of late introduced and required which is an argument they never believed as now the Romanists do for had they they must have necessarily done as they do But a stop must be put to this luxuriant Subject to keep our selves in the Limits presribed to our selves and here let it be Only having hitherto spoken of the Preparatories to Christian Faith the nature Kinds Acts effects and Lastly subject which is the Church and of this again in its Political and Mystical Capacity and Power which consists in the due Administration of the Sacraments as well Properly as Improperly and Equivocally so called It remains now to conclude and Crown the present doctrine of the Church with that which is most contrary of all things to the Nature of a Visible Church and that is Schism For by this unnatural state the true Nature of the Church is more illustrated and the Unitie of it by the explication of this Separation and Dis-union called Schism CHAP. XLVII The Conclusion of the Treatise of the subject of Christian Faith the Church by the treating of Schism contrary to the Visible Church Departure from the Faith real Schism not formal as to the outward form Of the state of Separation or Schism Of separation of Persons Coordinate and Subordinate Of Formal and Vertual Schism All Heresie vertually Schism not formally Separation from an Heretical Society no Schism From Societies not Heretical Schism Heretical Doctrine or Discipline justifie â—eparation How separation from a true Church is Schism and how not In what sense we call the Roman Church a true Church Some instances of Heretical Errours in the Roman Church Of the Guilt of Schism Of the notorious guilt of English Sectaries The folly of their Vindications That the Case of them and us is altogether different from that of us and the Church of Rome Not lawful to separate from the Vniversal Church VVHile we treat of the Church it must be alwaies remembred that we intend not to speak of the Invisible Church as it is taken for a select number supposed to belong intimately and inseparably to Christs invisible Body of which no knowledg or account can be had but by sensible outward things but we altogether enquire of the Visible Church which though it be not alwaies Actually seen or discerned from other Societies especially pretending to be Churches of Christ yet must alwaies be Visible though not conspicious And it would be a gross mistake in any so to judge of the Church Visible and Invisible as of distinct Churches or necessarily distinct parts of the same Church because the same persons may at the same time be of the Visible and Invisible Church This distinction then is to be allowed no farther than as it insinuates to us the Several States of the Members of the same Church the Church in nature being but One according to several testimonies of Holy-Writt and the very nature of all Communities and much more of the Church which is to be an Aggregate Body consisting of many parts by no natural Bond or influence united together but by divine Falsae Professionis Imagine utimur si cujus nomine gloriamur ejus instituta non sequimur Leo. Mag. Serm. 5. de Jejun 7. Mensis and Spiritual Which is manifested by certain outward Acts which renders and denominates such a society of Men Visible as a Church of Christ These Acts are principally two The profession and declaration in word or writing of the true Faith and the Exercise of those Graces and workes which that Faith requires in Religious worship and Obedience That and in what degree of necessitie this Church must be One as well as Visible is before declared and here only repeated to give light to the nature of Schisme now to be explained For to omit the Criticismes and various acceptations of the word Schism as not necessarie we shall proceed by degrees to shew these two things concerning it The Nature and Guilt of it For the Nature of Schism it doth appear from the Unitie and conjunction of Christs Body of the Church consisting in two things Communion with Christ the Head and mutual Communion of the members one with another the contrary to this must needs be Discommunion and Separation But there being two parts in Communion a Material or the things in which men communicate as faith it selfe and the substantial Part of Christian worship And a Formal the Actual outward exercise of this The First of these though it be really yet is not formally Schism as may appear more fully by and by because all Schism doth suppose some agreement with and Relation to that One Body the Church but where the foundation of such Relation is destroyed there the whole perishes And therefore a division from the Faith of Christs bodie the Church being either Total and that again either Negatively when
a man never was inserted into that Stock is more properly called Atheism or Heathenism or Privative and then is called Apostasie which is a professed renunciation of the Faith once received Or this Division is Partial and so it takes the name of Heresie upon it Schism then must needs be an outward Separation from the Communion of the Church But when we say Schism is a Separation we do not mean so strictly as if it consisted in the Act of Separating so much as the State For we do not call any man a Schismatique who sometimes refuses to communicate with the Church in its outward worship though that done wilfully is a direct way to it as all frequented Actions do at length terminate in habits of the same Nature but it is rather a State of separation and of Dissolution of the continuitie of Church in a moral or divine sense not natural which we seek into at present This Separate State then being a Relation of Opposition as the other was of Conjunction the Term denominating and signallizing both is to be enquired unto And that is insinuated alreadie and must needs be the Church and that as that is united unto Christ or the true Church For there is no separation from that which really is not though it may seem to be It must therefore be a true Church from whence Schismatical separation is made So far do they confute and confound themselves who excuse their Schismaticalness from that which principally constitutes Schism and Schismaticks viz. an acknowledgement of that to be a true Church from which they divide themselves and separate Again We are to note that Separation is either of Persons and Churches in Co-ordination or subordination according to that excellent and ancient distinction of Optatus saying It is one thing for a Bishop to communicate Optatus Mileviâ—â—â— Cont. Parmen Lib. 3. Aldâ— with a Bishop and another for a Lay man or the Inferiour Clergy to communicate with the Bishop And this because what may perhaps justifie a Non-communion with Co-ordinate Persons or Churches which have no autority one over another wil not excuse Subordinate Persons or Churches owing obedience to their Superiours from Schism From whence it is manifest that though all Schism be a Separation yet all Separation is not a Schism And though there may be many and just causes for a Separation there can be no cause to justifie a Schism For Schism is in its nature A studious Separation or State Separate against Christian Charity upon no sufficient Cause or grounds It must be affected or Studious because if upon necessity or involuntary the Diâ—junction of Churches is rather a punishment than a sin and an Infelicity rather than Iniquity as in the dayes of Anastatius the Emperour as Evagrius relates it Who so violently persecuted the Catholick Church in behalfe of the Eutychian Evagrius Hist Eccl. L. C. 30. Heresie that it was crumbled as it were into several parcels And the Governours could not communicate one with another but the Eastern and Western and African Churches were broke asunder Which farther shews that all Criminal Separation which we make Synonimous with Schism must likewise be an Act proceeding from the persons to separated and not the Act of another For no man can make another a Schismatick any more than he can make him a Lyar or a drunkard without his consent For if the Governours of one Church expeâ— out of Communion another upon no just grounds the Church thus separated is not the Schismatick but the other as appears from the words of Firmilianus Bishop of Cappadocia in St Cyprian concerning Pope Stephen advising him he should noâ— be too busie or presumptious in separating others lest he thereby separated himself so that if the Schism had broke out upon no good grounds he who was the Architect of it Separated himself as all others do and it is impossible any man should make though he may declare another a Schismatique any more than he can make him erre without his consent or be uncharitable Yet do they err also that from hence conclude that the Formal reason of Schism consists in Separating a mans self for it is rather the material Cause than formal The formal Cause being as in all other things the very Constitution it self with unreasonableness and uncharitableness No man can make another involuntarily an Heretick And therefore no man can make another a Schismatick All the Guilt redounding to the Agent noâ— Patient in such cases So that it is scarce worth the Enquiring Who began the breach of unity as it outwardly appears but who is actually and Really First divided from Christs Church For they surely are the proper Schismaticks though the name may stick closer to others To understand this we may consider that there is a Vertual Schism and a Formal Schism A Vertual Schism I call real division from Christs Church though it comes not to an open opposition to it or Defiance of it so that where ever is any heresie or considerable Errour nourished or maintained in a Church there is to be found a Schismatick also in reality though not in formality the reason hereof is well expressed by and may best come from the hand of an Adversary to u thus judiciously enquiring It is demanded first saith he Whether Schismaticks be Hereticks Answer The Common opinion Azâ—rius Inst Moral Tom. 1. Lib. 3. C. 20. of the Interpreters of the Canon Law and of the Summists is that the Heretick differs from the Schismatick in that Every Heretick is a Schismatick but not on the contrary Which they prove because the term Shismatick signifies Division But every Heretick turns away separates divides himself from the Church This is very plain and reasonable and so is the consequence from hence That where the Body is so corrupt as to be really infected with notorious errors there it is really so far as it is erroneous separated from the true Church and where it is so far separated from the true Church so far it is Schismatical And when a Church is thus far really Schismatical little or no Scruple is to be made of an outward Separation neither can a guilt be affixed unto it And on the other side if no such real separation and antecedent Guilt can be found in a Church in vain do diverse betake themselves to that specious Shift and evasion that they were cast out and went not out willingly from a Church and that they are willing to return but are not suffered For undoubtedly the very supposition is insincere and faulty that they forsook not the Church before they were ejected And the expulsion followed separation and dissention from it and was not rather the Effect than Cause of them as are all excommunications rightly used For to those that pretend they were turned out do not the doors stand open to receive them and that with thanks if they please to re-enter and re-unite themselves What do they here
not say to extenuate I know not what unkindness or perhaps incivility we were driven out from such communion and went not out of our selves but may declare Franckly We voluntarily chose to relinquish such communion so condition'd Now such errours we may well charge the Church of Rome with even while we hold it to be a true Church in the sense above expressed viz. Essentially true but not Integrally For so a Monstrous man may beget a truly natural son and out of the Loyns of the Corrupt Church of Rome may proceed a Perfect Church And he that holds that a man may even now when it is much more definitive and express in its errours then itwas about sevenscore years ago when it met first with that Opposition which it could never master as yet be saved in the Church of Rome may hold there are many damnable errours in it which in their nature do damn yet do not alwayes actually damn as is said And this doth altogether vindicate such Churches as directly leave them provided they leave such their errours only and not extravagantly hurry themselves into contrary errours out of detestation to theirs And this doth lay a necessity upon such as communicate with them to desert them and a much greater upon such as are at present alienated from them to preserve themselves from such imminent dangers though not infallibly destroying the soul Now if it be here demanded as I know necessarily it must and will be that to make this high charge probable we give some instances of such their errours and Schismaticalness though I might well decline that so great and Schismaticalness though I might well decline that so great and copious a subject in this transient and compendious discourse referring them to what hath been sufficiently written though some have I confess Est sâ—lus in Orle 〈◊〉 Chaâ—actâ—â—â—s Episcâ—â—us suique â—â—dimis pâ—incipium â—â—nis Anasiatius Germonius D Indultis Apesiolicis Praefat. §. Episeopus Vide etiam â—etrum Gregorium Syntagm L. 15. C. 3. quid tribuitur Popâ— supra Conciliis â—rincipilus weakely and inconsiderately over-acted to this purpose yet I shall not absolutely without this general touch leave the matter so reducing their Errours to these two Heads Schismatical Doctrines and Heretical And this alone I look on as a most Schismatical dogm next to heresie and which alone suffices to justifie the separation of all other Churches from that of Rome viz. That they maintain if not in express termes which somedo who perhaps will not be acknowledged when they are pinched hard to speak the sense of the Church in reallity That the Pope or See of Rome hath arbitrary power of himself to Judge and Censure all Churches and to institute or Cassate Lawes for the universal Church and that he cannot be a Schismatick There is nothing more fundamental in the Lawes and Traditions of the Catholick Church than that no one of the Patriarchs should presume to form or oblige the Catholick Church by their single and private Canons and Decrees without the consent and concurrence of his Brethren neither can any meeting deserve the name of a General Council wherein their sentence is not heard or received But there is nothing more notorious than the Bishop of Rome's invasion of a sole Right to Govern the whole Church of which he hath been often soundly charged by the eminentest of the Later of the Greek Bishops Nilus Thessalo nicensis though their complaint hath generally been received no otherwise than with a deafear or an insolent stomach and contempt of the Sacred Canons of the Church as might be made appear by several instances were this a proper opportunity so to do Neither do I know how they of Rome can exempt themselves from apparent Schisme upon the account which Balsome urgeth against them viz. That the Popes have separated and are divided Balsam Resp 1. Jurts Graeco Rom. L. 6. pag. 370. from the Four other Patriarchs Will they say they are Schismaticks and Hereticks It is no more then they will pay them with again And 't is no harder matter to prove one than the other But if Four of the Patriarchs of the Church may be Hereticks and Schismaticks and so continue for many hundered years together What becomes of that argument for the true Church taken from the Universality of its Profession For putting the Case that those of the Roman Communion were equal yea Superior in extent of Ground and number of professers which is hardly to be granted yet being apparently inferiour in the number of Patriarchs they cannot pretend universality unless they beg the question as too often and importunately they do that the Roman See is the only Standard to weigh and Conclude all Ecclesiastical controversies and quarrels This is as we said such a fundamental Errour in the outward Politie and Discipline of the Church that it alone might justifie a Separation from such a Monster I shall give but one instance and that of one Man expressing the sense of Vid. Aus Barbossam de Officio Potestate Episc Par. 3. Allegat 57. num 3 4 5 6 7. the Church of Rome though some will have it called The Court of Rome only concerning the Popes Power He the Pope is the Universal Bishop of the Church He hath the whole World for his Diocess He is the Bishop of Bishops The Ordinarie of Ordinaries In things concerning Benesices he hath free and absolute power All Benesices in respect of this Holy Prelate are manual and he may use absolute power in them But to this adding such to us manifest errours and corruptions in Faith and practise as have been introduced into that Church there can be no just Scruple made of Separating and to profess so much without mincing the matter by certain fine evasions which strictly enquired into will no more satisfie than down-right dealing which chargeth them with such heretical-Dogmes which contrary to Charity as well as Verity require Separation Of the many of which that of Transubstantiation may claim the first place together with its long Train of Gross abuses and Errours following upon and flowing from it For though I know diverse Learned men of our Church do look upon it as a very absurd falsity in matter of Fact rather then of Faith yet if it be considered as reduced to Propositions invented and strenuously asserted to maintain that Errour in fact it putteth on the nature of Heresie too To say that Christ had but one hand is not an Heresie of it self but a notorious non-truth in matter of Fact But so to defend this opinion as thereby to deny Christ to have been of the same nature with us amounts to Heresie Granting likewise that not only Christs Natural Body is in that Sacrament but it is that very thing which after Consecration appeares though not as it appears to our senses is but a fowl absurdity and errour in point of Fact Yet when it
is so defended as to call in question the truth of Christs divine nature and to commend and command the direct worship of those objects so mistaken then certainly it is Heresie and somewhat more And so their doctrine of Communicating in one Kind contrary to all the mention we have of celebrating the Eucharist in the Scriptures and those deserving the name of Fathers in the Church may rightly be termed Heretical when it shall be drawn into such a Proposition as this as of necessity it must viz. That it is of equal vertue and use to receive the Sacrament in one kind alone as both Kinds whereas only to deny the use of it is no more than an unjust and sacrilegious piece of Tyranny over the Laicks To these it were easie to add more of like natures as sufficient Grounds to leave such a Church as maintains them But for those who are not in Episcopal nor yet so much as Metropolitan subordination and subjection to that Church but only Patriarchal which obliges cheifly if not only to a recognition of a Remote Right of Order and Principle of unity when the Church is united in bringing them to Councels and keeping them to those Laws which are prescribed by General Consent of the Church and this not originally by first planting and forming a Christian Church in a Nation but restoring and augmenting it the case is yet more plain that it is free for such Churches to relinquish communion of any Church subject to less Errours than are properly called Heresies But for persons educated in a Church and thereby subject to it and owing Canonical obedience not only as they most weakly and wickedly imagine to the Rule of Faith therein asserted and maintained but to the Rule of Unity and Communion outward for such I say to divide from that Church which hath not by falling into notorious Heresies or Idolatrous practices first fallen from Christian Faith is to profess Schism For to alledg that they would incorporate with the Church if certain things which may possibly be parted with without destroying the Faith at least immediately were granted to them is to demand that their Superiors should bow to them rather than they to their Superiors and in effect to make the condition of their obedience and uniting with the Church to be this That first the Church should be of their Religion the difference between them consisting in things in their own nature mutable For though Faith consisteth in those things which are judged necessary in themselves to be received Yet Religion is made up as well of the manner of serving God as the material grounds of it And therefore it is according to the manner of their treaties of peace in other Cases to require the thing in debate to be granted them before they will bear of a commodation or reconciliation This senseless Charity is that of most Desperate Schismaticks Yet not absolutely to despair of reducing some few of them and much less of preventing the like ruine of souls in others we shall now conclude with a few words concerning the Second thing in the beginning of this Point viz. The guilt of Schism Supposing then what is above said that Schism is a Causeless Separation from the Church of Christ meaning by Causeless not want of all reasons or causes but Sufficient as are errours now mention'd in Faith we farther understand by Separation not that of the inward and hidden man but outward and Visible answerable to that we have called and acknowledged to be properly called a Church i. e. Visible For possible we grant it is what we do scarce believe to be actually true though we hear such things sometimes spoken that dissenters may have a tolerable good opinion of a Church as that it is a true Church in their private senses they may pretend some general kindness and Charity to the Members of it Nay they may hold it no grievous sin to communicate with it for some persons especially and yet for all this be rank Schismaticks For Schismatizing in its remoter Cause may spring from evil opinions and dispositions of the inward man but its formality is altogether in outward profession of averseness separation and opposition to a Church This is it which hath raised so much just clamour of the Ancient and even of those very modern Persons who stomach nothing more than to be reduced to their own general Rules and have worthily brandished their swords and pens to bring people to the unity of that Cause which never was the true Faith and to that Visible Company which never was a Church and yet cannot understand their own language nor receive their own reasons and arguments in Cases infinitely more capable of such vindications than the Party they created and asserted Herein surely they have exceeded all other Factions in immodesty and undauntedness that whereas those have been very scrupulous and sparing in delivering doctrines of coercion and constraint to unity and therefore may though with no reason with some little colour stand out against Unity and oppose all Coaction thereunto They of the Presbyterian Sect have preach'd spoken and written so much and expresly against Schism and the Liberty which tends necessarily to it that it is beyond not only reason but admiration they should neither be affected with what other men have said against them nor what they have unanswerably said against themselves but proceed no otherwise than brutishly to hold their Conclusion and stick to their invet eraâ—e errours as if they could find no Church to unite to or had no souls to save or did not even according to their own principles run the apparent hazard of loosing them by that sin which they confess is one of the Greatest Size viz unnecessary division And unnecessary division themselves call what is not for to avoid Idolatrous practises or Heretical errours and yet in their Apologies for themselves alledge none but frivolous instances tending as they judge to Superstition wherein they prove themselves much more superstitious by such religious opposition as they make against them and deeply concerning their best Consciences than they possibly can be who for order sake solemness of worship and conformity to the ancient Customs of Christs Church and to avoid offence unto other Churches sticking inseparably unto them retain rather than invent such adjuncts to Divine Religion It is hard to search out any new Topick from whence to draw out reasons against this hainous sin of Schismatizing wherein I am not prevented by them disputing upon the false suppositions that they at any time were a Church and if they had been that they who opposed them could be said to Divide Schismatically from them of whose communion they never were nor ever were obliged to be They are therefore with others to consider How solemn and severe a command of Christ they slight and contemn who divide from a Church without more weighty exceptions than hitherto have been offered by them or heard
it implies as much as to say Give us but our demands and then we will be quiet by which Rule no man should defend his own right in lesser matters which to part with perhaps would not utterly undo him but he must be lookt on as accessary to and guilty of his own destruction if the Invader shall have power enough to bring it upon him because he will not peaceably satisfie his unjust desires A man may be and our Saviour in the Gospel saith expresly Luk. 16. 10. is unjust in the least as well as in much And so undoubtedly are they who having no Autority but what they frame to themselves shall by violence and aggressions attempt to extort the least thing belonging of right to another though haply better spar'd than kept For it is a Case of Justice rather than Christianity In justice and common equity the inferiour members of a Church and state owe obedience to their Superiours in all things not contrary to the Law of God the Church or the Nation but at most they can claim such things that are as they say indifferent to be granted them out of Courtesie or Charity only And whoever was so wilfully stupid as not to perceive that Injustice is much more a sin than Uncharitableness and so whatever mischief or guilt shall fall out in such contentions must necessarily light upon the heads of the unjust Aggressour and not indiscreet Resister were it indiscretion to withstand to deny such bold and insolent demanders or uncharitableness both which are denied in the present Case For there can be nothing more unjust on the one side and unwise on the other than so rudely and unrighteously to require of another all that may be granted or to grant all such things as are so demanded And if they urge still The peace of the Church to require such concessions I shall answer Let them first as all good Christians ought to do observe the Peace of Nature and the Peace of Nations which is not to offer violence nor to be unjust nor to go out of their Rank and Order but with good Autority and then take care for the Peace of the Church But what can be more absurd than that men should break the Peace of Nations and Nature it self yea the Law of God and Scriptures which require to obey all that are in autority over us as well Ecclesiastically as Civilly and then so much as to mention the Peace of the Church especially calling that only the Peace of the Church which puts them into quiet possession of their desires But to this we add that it is also very false which is here supposed to be true For there is nothing more manifest than that with diverse things of indifferent nature they mix many things of indispensable use to a Church and such is that so much reproached and derided Hierarchie which all the earth sees they have made it their business to Destroy utterly And when we plainly see as we do that those things in nature indifferent are demanded chiefly as an introduction to a farther abolition of things we hold necessary we hold them no longer indifferent nor can we in common prudence or Christianity part with them to such person any more than we can in a neighbourly manner lend away an Ax or Hammer when we are assured they will be made use of to break open our houses and spoil us though we know they may possibly be made use of to other purposes The Second Obstacle rather than Objection cast in our way is the parity of their Case with the Church of England with that of the Church of England with the Roman wherein whether they show more Spite or Policy may be a question Their Policy imitates them who finding the war to lie heavy upon them at their own doors contrive by all means possible to translate it into another Country as was particularly seen in Hindersons Letter to his late Sacred Majesty who finding the ability of his pen and weight of his discourses advised him rather to turn himself against the common enemy the Papist And thus these men would needs oblige us to make our quarrel good against the Romanists that they may be the les molested in the pursuance of their most Schismatical designs against the Church in which they were educated And this being discovered we might well excuse ourselves from such a task as they would set us But this we have before resolved in good part and had we not might and shall in a very few words dispatch as somewhat out of its proper place We grant then there is a Schism between us and the Romanists And we grant that there can be no cause to be Schismaticks though for a Separation there may and that they are truly Schismaticks who have ministred just Cause of Separation Some we know out of an ancient Father have urged against us That there can be no cause to divide the Church which is true in two senses only First when that Church is not before really divided from other Churches of unquestion'd integrity Realy I say by deserting some considerable point of Faith or introducing some unchristian manner of worship though not Openly and Formally as hath been said Again it is true only in such junctures as the Father spake those words in which was an apt and orthodox agreement within itself both in Faith and manners in such Cases there can be no cause to divide the Church as did the Novatians and Donatists But it was never his purpose to say that no case could happen in which it was not lawful for one Church to leave the Communion of another when it was so often done So still the point is wholly whether cause was given or not and not whether such outward and wilful Separation was made For undoubtedly however some would mince the matter Separate we did and that wilfully from the Church of Rome and chose rather than were forced to go out And upon those very grounds we still stand out and refuse to return The gross corruptions there maintained and not lurking and the fear of the loss of our souls in there continuing and much more thither returning What those are hath been even now touched and we here add that notwithstanding 't is confessed such senses are found of their doctrine and superstitious worship in some private authors amongst them which they offer at first to them they would seduce which may put persons into a possibility of their continuing without incurring damnation yet the Publick autority of that Church which I suppose they will call their Church having evermore of late years censur'd purged and expunged such more tollerable constructions and appeared for the most harsh and uncatholick there can be no great regard had to the fairer opinions Again it is not sufficient that a Church hath a true sense of Christian Faith if it alloweth and commendeth a false and a wicked sense 'T is little to the
purpose or to their advantage to say for instance sake as the more sober especially when they would gain upon the good opinion of men That Images may be worshipped relatively and as instruments to devotion and helps but when there are found and generally known to be such doctrines as teach a veneration of Images for their own sakes and directly and that with the same sort of worship that the things they represent are capable of though perhaps they upon a pinch can insert a distinction which neither can be understood nor profit such a doctrine as this known to be delivered by the Principal Doctors of their Churches and maintain'd not being condemned by that Church however not generally embraced may subject a Church to a censure of Heresie and Idolatry of both and so in other things whereof tolerable senses are given in the Church of Rome or else they could not be said so much as to be a Church at all but intolerable and Heretical are also uncondemned and so are no true Church and so may be separated from without Schism but not without peril of damnation united to And do not our brethren for such they were before they professed Schism and I hope may be after they have renounced it see now plainly enough the vaniâ—y and spitefulness of their Evasion Are not the Cases infinitely different and that in their own eyes Hear they what Perkins saith to our and their purpose So long as a Church Perkins on Gal. C. 5. V. 20. or people do not Separate from Christ we may not separate from them 2 Pro. 24. 21. Fear the King and meddle not with them that vary i. e make alterations against the Laws of God and the King Indeed Subjects may signifie what is good for the State and what is amiss but to make any alteration in the State either Civil or Ecclesiastical belongs to the Supream Magistrate And â—n another place the same Author hath these words Great therefore is the rashness Id. Galat 1. V. 2. and want of moderation in many that have been of us that condemn our Church for no Church without sufficient conviction going before If they say we have been admonished by books published I say again these be grosser faults in some of those books than any of the faults that they reprove in the Church of England and therefore the books are not â—it to convince especially a Church Thus we see how the cases in the matter difier And no less may we see the difference in the manner For 't is apparent that Schismaticks against the Church of England never had any Legal autority to warrant their vile and Scandalous practices but were forced to give names to things uncapable of them to excuse themselves or else by an unnatural course to entitle the People to a Power Supream who have none at all but what is given them from another fountain neither did the people concurr with such misdemeaners as was pretended they did But thirdly another difference is to be noted from the Rights of a Patriarchal Power over a Provincial Church not properly of its Diocess and that of a Metropolitan with his Suffragans over the members of the Church which they altogether make For according to the constitutions of the Church though a Patriarchs Power was Intensively equal to Episcopal over his proper and immediate Diocess and Extensively much greater than the Metropolitans or Bishops in relation to other Diocesses yet was it never so Intensive i. e. so particular and great in those Bishops Diocesses over which he had only an Order of Unity rather than Intrinsick power to dispose matters therein though in process of time this also was invaded much by him and might be recovered to the proper Bishop by the Laws of the Church But the Bishops of this Church had the sole and immediate disposing of the affairs of it and nothing could be concluded without obligation of obedience out of Conscience without their Concurrence as desparately as Schismaticks then did and still do rage at this truth But then as Hinderson saith with others They would never reform themselves It is very likely so meaning as they would have them but that not to the better Rule of the Ancient Churches and the Scriptures is more than they knew or would acknowledg when they saw because still they would have done otherwise and invented a new Rule of their own But seeing the grounds and Cause of separation are they upon which the Guilt of Schism is avoided or contracted according to the nature of them and obscure and difficult and tedious is the method leading to the tryal of the sufficiency of them to justifie a Separation therefore it were well contrived if as in the search of a true Church they may being very long and uncertain and grievous to most proceeding upon the points of Faith and Parts of worship themselves certain infaâ—lible obvious and plain Characters could be produced to convince the Schism and distinguish it from simple and innocent Separation A Fair attempt to which hath been made by Austin who dispuâ—ing against the Donatists denies that any man can separate from the Universal Church innocently So that although it should be doubtful as most things are managed by Learned Partisans whether considering the grounds of Separation in themselves the Separation be Schismatical or lawful and laudable yet by such an outward Characteristick it might be competently discerned And so farmust I needs comply with that Judicious and Holy Father and such as urge this out of him against us as to yield it a most probable outward Note of Schism for any man or number of men not a Church but in Fieri as they speak only and in breeding to divide from the Universal Church not only as comprehending all Ages but of any one Age the weight and evidence of which Concession will appear from the esteem of the Church Catholick and the wrath and extent of Christs promises to preserve it in All truth For this is certain That Christ directed his promises and restrained them to no one time or Age. And it is not probable there should be such an Intercession or intermission of Faith or Christianity that the universal Church should mortally err in any one thing necessary to salvation nay though we take it not in such a large sense as sometimes it is wont to be used for all individual persons in it as well as Churches of which the whole is constituted And therefore to desert the communion of all Churches not of persons for this is scarce to be supposed to happen at any time doth argue shrewdly That the separation hath much of Schism in it without examination of particular grounds which are pretended sufficient For it will be said That it ought not to be supposed that Christ should deliver over his whole Church to such heretical errours which only can exempt a Separation from Schism From such notorious suspicions as these we
be made apparent in how many and great things they have degenerated in their Doctrine and Worship since it pleased God to withdraw his holy Spirit from that Church upon their rejecting of the true Messias sent them and to translate it to the Church of the Gentiles And no wonder that they who observe not that now should argue against it as a thing not to be done and moreover deny that ever it was believed or practised by their Forefathers for there remains no other way to excuse themselves in their present error but to maintain that it was never otherwise held This is a common evasion of all Hereticks and Sectaries But that the Scriptures of the Old Testament contained this Doctrine in substance though the more perspicuous and glorious manifestation of the same was reserved for the New is not to be denied especially if we consider how that many of their own Doctors and Rabbies have so interpreted the same And some have admired the Hebrew Language as the holy Tongue not so much as some of moderner standing amongst them have given out because of the neat and modest expression of things of impure and obscene nature for it is very plain that the most obscene things are there as broadly and manifestly expressed as elsewhere but from the matter which it treats of generally very divine and particularly from the nature of that Tongue in every word of which being a Radix or original the Mystery of the Trinity is implied in that it consists but of three principal Letters which Letters make but one word But there are more sure words of Prophesie than they and such are these together with the Comment and approbation of the Chaldee Paraphrast Gen. 3. v. 8. it is said They heard the voice of the Gen 3. 8. Lord God walking in the Garden which words Onkelos renders thus And they heard the voice of the Word of the Lord God where we see that Voice and Word are distinguished the one being taken for the Word spoken the other for the Word subsisting or personal And again v. 22. where the Hebrew hath And the Lord God said c. Jonathans or as some more properly the Hierusalem Targum hath The Word of the Lord said And the same Hierusalem Targum on Deuteronomy the 33. 7. hath The Word of the voice of the Lord heard Judah where the Original and other Translations have Hear Lord or receive Lord the voice of Judah And so in other places which doth argue a Personality ascribed unto the Word of God Which doth farther appear for that the action of Creation extending the Heavens and Repenting is attributed unto the Word of God But I leave the asserting of the Mystery of the Trinity from the Scriptures of the Old Testament interpreted by the learnedst and most renowned of the Jewish Doctors to such who have made it their design to convince them from testimonies of their own Authors as Petrus Galatinus and more exactly Josephus de Voisin in his Comments on Prigro Christianae Fidei and especially de Trinitate I shall only add here that memorable passage in Bibliander out of the Jewish Rabbies upon that place in Bibliander de Paschate Israel Gen. 28. 11. Gen. 28. And he lighted upon a certain place and tarried there all night because the Sun was set and he took of the stones of the place and put them for his pillows and lay down in that place to sleep Where some Rabbies saith Bibliander do understand that he took two stones but others as Rabbi Nechemias that he took three and in this manner prayed to God If God shall write his Name upon me as he did his Name upon mine Ancestors let all these become one and he found them all one By which type of the stone they give to understand God to be the Original of all things for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in Hebrew is a stone implies in a mystery the Trinity for in Aben Ab intimates the Father Ben signifies the Son and ◠or N. Neshanna or Spirit Thus they Which their interpretation whether it hath not more of wit than solid Argument I am not here to determine it sufficing our present purpose to shew that the Doctrine of the Trinity is no invention of Christians as moderner Jews vainly give out for if their forefathers mention the same though their grounds may not be of the soundest it argues they knew and received it Other Texts from the Old Testament implying this Mystery are chiefly these 2 Sam. 23. 2. Isa 48. 16 17. and chap. 61. 1. and chap. 63. 9. Psal 33. 6. compared with Joh. 11. 1 2 3. Haggai 2. 5. compared with Gen. 1. 26. Isa 6 3 c. Concerning all which it is to be observed First That it is not to be expected the testimonies of the Old Testament whose design it was to deliver all things more covertly and obscurely should be altogether so literally and expresly taken as that none other may be found as proper as that sence given by Christians but it may suffice that an apt accommodation may be made to the confirmation of our Faith and that by the chief enemies to it Secondly That the Tradition of the Jewish Church differed from the historical or literal sence Hence our Saviour Christ proves the Messias to be God out of Psalm 110. v. 1. The Lord said Psal 110. Matth. 22. 42. unto c. arguing to this effect He who was greater than David himself from whom the Messias should come must needs be God David calling him in Spirit Lord but David in Spirit calls the Messias his Lord whereas David being himself absolute Soveraign had no mortal greater than he therefore he must be God This was then generally received amongst the wisest of them That the Messias was there intended though the words might be capable of a more literal sence And the like may we judge of the Arguments of St. Paul drawn out of the Old Testament to confirm the Doctrine of the New and particularly this for it is confessed that he bringeth many proofs as do also the other sacred Pen-men out of the Books of the Old Testament which have a literal sence much differing from that purpose to which they are alledged But it is certain that the ancient Jews did maintain two sences a Literal and a Mystical and that St. Paul being educated in the prime Traditions and Mysteries of their Divinity used them according to the known sence of the learned For otherwise it had been as easie then for the Jews to have put in their exceptions against his Doctrine as now it is for Jews to cavil at them But besides the Autority of the Old Testament principally to be used against Jews the Autority of the New must be enforced against the Heresies of Christians against this great Mystery Go ye saith Christ in St. Matthew and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father Matth.
fishes some were taken in one haven and some in another and eaten of others And again these men that have eaten these fishes which devour'd the man happen to dye in other Countries and that perhaps devoured by wild beasts Such a confusion and dissipation being made how shall that man rise again Who is he that reduces the dust again But why O man dost thou thus speak and patches a long train of tales together and offerest it as insoluble For answer me What if that man doth not go to Sea and be not drownd If no fish eat him nor the fish be afterward eaten of infinite men but that he be laid decently in his Coffin and neither worms nor any thing else molest him How shall that dust and ashes be compacted together again Whence shall that body flourish again Is not this unanswerable If they be Greeks Heathens who doubt of these things We can answer a thousand things But what Because there are some amongst them who put souls into Plants and Fruit-trees and Doggs Tell me which is easier for a soul to recover its own body or another Again there are others who says that fire shall catch them that their garments shall arise and their shooes and no body laughs at them And some introduce Atomes But we have nothing to say to them But to Believers if we may call them believers who thus doubt we shall say with the Apostle All life is subject to corruption all plants all seeds Seest thou not c. Here that eloquent Father expatiates in the mysteries and subtilties of nature shewing how little we understand of them and concludes this point thus But these things humane reason is to seek in But when God works all things yield to him In another place he doubts whether he be an Infidel or Christian who calls in question the Resurrection and the reason hereof is because as the power of God is infinite so infinite wayes there are for his infinite wisdome to bring to pass his own pleasure and to make good his words in which he hath caused his servants to trust CHAP. XIX Of the most perfect effect of Christs Mediation in the Salvation of Man Several senses of Salvation noted That Salvation is immediately after death to them that truly dye in Christ And that there is no grounds in Antiquities or Scripture for that midde state called Purgatory the Proofs answered Of the Consequent of Roman Purgatory Indulgences the novelty groundlesness and gross abuse of them The Conclusion of the first Part of this Introduction SAint Paul where he disputes the manner of Gods free Election of his people to the grace of the Gospel doth also declare unto us the end of such Election to be another Election and that to glory as in these words That he might make known the riches of his glory Rom. 9. 23. of Grace on the vessels of mercy which he had before prepared unto glory This is yet more fully expressed by St. Peter in this order Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again to a lively hope by the Resurrection 1 Pet. 1. 3. of Jesus Christ from the dead To an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that fadeth not away reserved in heaven for you who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time But before we engage far in this subject of Salvation it is requisite we observe a twofold Salvation frequently mentioned and promised in Scripture A Temporal and Eternal For herein common mistakes have surprised many who willing to amplifie and extend all the promises of Gods deliverance equally to us of this last Age of the Church and to them of the former and Apostolical do willingly interpret many places of Scripture peculiar to them as concerning us to which cannot be literally done though figuratively it may For the Church of Christ being in those first Ages in continual conflicts with her enemies Jewish and Gentile and most violent persecntions harrassing and wasting the tender body of the Infant-Church many weak Christians were of desponding minds and looked upon the same as Job upon natural man as having a short time to live and full of sorrows Which moved the Apostolical Writers to confirm the Hope and Faith of them by the assurances of deliverances and salvation And none can deny this to be the literal meaning of St. Paul in his eighth Chapter to the Romans from whence so many draw an Argument to prove the innumerable purpose of God towards particular persons in predestinating and electing and glorifying them when upon faithful examination nothing more was primarily intended then assurance of Gods temporal preservation of the Church and making it outwardly glorious in despight of all its adversaries so that none should separate the flook of Christ so far from the love of Christ by persecution tribulation distress or famine or nakedness or peril or sword but that at length it should be more than conquerer through him that loved it And that neither death nor life nor angels nor principalities nor things present nor things to come c. should cause God to forsake it And no other is the meaning of the same Apostle in his thirteenth Chapter to the Romans where he saith And that knowing the time that now it is high Rom. 13. 11. time for us to awake out of sleep for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed i. e. having continued thus long in the faith the time now draweth near we should be secured and saved from our enemies And the Salvation to be revealed in the last times spoken of by St. Peter was the Deliverance which at last should be manifested to the Church in constant expectation of which they were kept by Faith and confidence of Gods mercy And if we shall consult the Apocalypse we shall scarce find the word Salvation used in any other sense then that of temporal deliverance Rev. 7. 10. 12 10. 19 1. of Gods Church But withal most certain it is that by Salvation is very often indended by Gods word the deliverance from the miseries of sin and suffering in this world into a state of such perfect bliss as man is capable of in which sense St. Paul saith The Gospel is the power of God unto Rom. 1. 16. salvation And that with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation which salvation was in those dayes the destruction of them that confessed Christ For St. Paul to animate the weak Believers to a stout and resolute profession of Christ against the terrors of death threatning those that were known to be Christians tells them that if they so boldly confessed Christ with their mouth as to dye in that profession they should be saved And when St. Paul advises the Philippians to work out their salvation Phil. 2. 12. with fear and trembling he means without
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
of grace Now every child of God though he hath an honest heart hath not these gifts And therefore in want of them may lawfully use a Set form of prayers as a man that hath a weak back or a lame legg may lean upon a Crutch This is the meaning and very expression of the modern Puritan when he is in the best humour and would be more generous than ordinary in his concessions For which we requite him saying That it was never lawful nor is lawful at this day for any Minister in publick service to bring in his own conceived prayers besides the intention of the Church And that Thomas Cartwright who at Hartford was the first that dar'd to do so to the offense of both the Queen and Church then did very wickedly and none that imitated him though men no enemies otherwise to the Church did well unless upon a perswasion of an implicit consent of the Church through tract of time But if memory utterance knowledge to which some that have ridiculously written upon the subject of conceiving prayers as if they would teach the Spirit how to speak do adde Fansie and Industry be required how comes this gift to be owing to the Spirit more than Demosthenes his Orations of whom Plutarch writes what great pains he took with himself to pronounce well and to compose aright But let us hear Perkins a little farther answering an Objection It is alledged that Set forms of Prayer do limit and bind the Holy Ghost Answer If Perkins ubi supra we had a perfect measure of Grace it were somewhat but the Graces of God are weak and small in us This is no binding of the Holy Ghost but an helping of the Spirit which is weak in us by a Crutch to lean on It had been much more reverently spoken if it had been said An helping us in whom the Spirit is than the weak and lame Spirit in us It had been much more soundly answered to deny the supposition both of the Spirit and the gift thereof in men praying extempore and by consequence clear'd all fears and suspicions of injuring the Spirit at all Why do they so weakly and lamely take that for granted that the Spirit informs men generally to such ends and nothing wants a Crutch or Staff to support it more than that We deny it we deny it And wonder how they will go about the making it credible But we deny the fact that so it is and not the possibility that so it may be or that the Spirit is able to do such wonderful things Nay we deny they are such wonderful things as are pretended or any more than for a very simple man to become an excellent workman in a curious craft by applying his wits and labours to the mysteries of it And seeing they talk so often at this day of Crutches and Stilts making all creeples and lame in Christianity who cannot or out of humility and obedience to the Discipline which justly interdicts such pretended abilities will not vaunt what they can do they should do well to procure Stilts and Crutches for such halting and weak reasons as these are to make men insolent Here they are wont to come forth with their ill applyed distinction of Gifts and Graces of prayer and tell us that the gift of prayer is to be sought after whereby we edifie the Church as well as the Grace whereby we edifie our selves To which I answer by denying still what they take for granted viz. that such presumed gifts are necessary to the edification of a Church I grant indeed that the Church was at first setled by gifts or I should rather have said founded but continued and edified to this day so I deny I deny as a notorious and pernicious untruth that such is to be the constitution of Churches that they should be managed and maintained by the gifts of men above what by the ordinary industry with Gods blessing may be common to all men Yet more expresly I deny that any Society ought to depend upon any thing extraordinary in men as this gift is cryed up for For that which carries on the mysteries and majesty of Gods worship must be grave sober regular safe and easie even such as they in indignation report children women and Turks may perform and not such as are high staggering uncertain deceitful as are these extraordinary gifts For this barbarous argument is ill grounded supposing that it is more the natural or supernatural parts that qualifie the Ministry than the power of the Keys given which if we may suppose given to such persons we shall declare to be more fit persons to minister in the publick worship of God than such gisted persons I say in the worship of God because there may be much more skill and ability required to the service of God For though preaching and travelling in the conversion of souls to God be to serve God as an act of obedience unto his will it is not as we have often said the proper worship of God as is prayer And to serve God in this manner being an address unto men who must be informed with great skill and industry and then reformed in their lives and conversations by sedulity of Exhortation more is necessary than a commission so to act Moreover to their distinction of gift of prayer and grace we add That we acknowledge no gift of prayer besides the grace of prayer There may be a gift of speaking and that notably with fluencie and readiness and this is vulgarly mistaken and admired for a gift of prayer but it is no such matter For all the gift of prayer as of prayer is nothing but the grace of prayer coming from the truly devout and spiritual heart and not from the operation of the brain as Elocution doth And besides those that have spoken most soberly truly of gifts have determin'd the use of them particularly to the Church and its edification and not to have God for their proper object but God is the object of prayer therefore it is fully compleated in the grace of it which in a larger sense is Gods gift too and is as conspicuous in Set forms as Extemporary But they argue farther in behalf of this manner of prayer That it is a great edification of the people much greater than Set forms which custom hath made ineffectual To which I answer That there is a great deal of truth in what they speak First because not out of Grace or the Spirit but corrupt nature man is much more apt to be affected with variety that is inferiour both in kind and use to constant fare as with a strange monster rather than with a well proportion'd creature to which he hath been accustomed And he that shall pass by in a fools-coat party-colour'd shall have more eyes after him a great many than he that walks in a much more comely costly and grave habit Men therefore should rather correct their judgments and
by the Greater sort who commonly by building themselves large and stately Pews and inclosing what is every poor Christians Freehold as well as the richest and noblest of the parish make it more sacred to the common Christian than any other part of the Church besides For that must be kept under lock and key and if not yet the greatness and power of the person who hath laid that out for himself suffices to deter any ordinary man from making the like use of that as of any other part of the Church lest his secular hand lye heavier upon him than the Ecclesiastical power can or must upon him for such invasion of every parishioners right as well as his So that what it is not lawful for or just to do to the Common for beasts or Town-Green where he lives he makes no scruple at all to do to Gods Peculiar and the Common to Christians As if so be Churches now-a-dayes were of the same nature with new found and possessed Lands in the Indies every man may have what he can enclose and fense in for himself and his friends only Whereas this should be well understood by every good Christian that hath the fear of God as a Christian ought before his eyes that the poorest person that takes collection in the parish hath as much reason and right to erect places in the Church to themselves and to possess themselves of any part of it as the rich but that it is not so much in his power And doth any man think he hath a good Right because he can do it That we can do saith the Law which we can Idpossumus qued sure possumus lawfully do But that we can lawfully do which the Common Law doth not interdict alwayes For the Common Law whether because it concerns altogether men in their civil capacities and proprieties such as this is not or whether it hath not heretofore been such a Dragg to enclose all it could lay hold on without consideration of other Courts Ecclesiastical which were alwayes received in all Christian Commonwealths but left many things to the decision of the more peculiar Laws made in behalf of Churches and Ecclesiastical Cases hath made no provision at all for the securing of the Rights of the Church or Christians thereunto belonging I mean in their Capacities properly Ecclesiastical so that scarce any remedy can be obtain'd from thence if a man shall steal any thing off the very body of the Church it self And can any man that hath any sense of Religion take sanctuary or protection from that in defense of his violation of Christians Rights and think all well done that is not punishable by that Law and lawful that it doth not interdict For by the same reason a man may inclose to himself a third part or more of the Church But they will modestly say that were unreasonable and I will boldly say so is the other and especially where when the Authours of such Fabricks making no use of them themselves shall deny the use of them to others case so requiring But that which is yet more intolerable is That the power and purse of the Great man who is alwayes to remember that the poorest man in the parish hath as much Law and Right on his side to shut him out as he hath to exclude and over-top the poor in his building should enable and embolden him so far as to take a considerable part of Gods sanctuary and inclose that from all use and access to lay the bones of his Family in and wholly to alienate it from all Divine Services and dedicate it only to corruption and with impudent Sacriledge to erect many Monuments and Tombs in a Canton they have usurped to themselves which being as is said no less lawful for any man than for one man instead of Christians in time we should have a Church filled with Sepulchres of the dead And when this is once done to endeavour a redress of such sacrilegious invasions of Gods and good Christians Rights is to expose Gods servants to not only the obloquy power and mischief of too potent an Adversary but to the dammage of Common Law which though it can give no right so to do yet will certainly defend the wrong-doer if he can plead custom But I have often thought that God in this last Age hath done himself Justice against such Families as have been guilty of such prophane usurpations in that he hath stirred up a barbarous Sect of Christians of late and let them justly into Churches like Goths and Vandals to break to pieces pull down and raze the scandalous monuments of many Churches erected to the honour of Man and dishonour of God At first all dead Bodies were lookt upon by the Heathens themselves as unclean and unworthy to be buried within the walls of their City Lycurgus was the first that suffered Corps to be interr'd in the City and that Plutarch in vita Lycurg Eutropius Lib. 8. Cicero de Legibus l. 2. near the Temples in Lacaedemon saith Plutarch The first of all Roman Emperours and much more of the inferiour people that was buried within the City was Trajane the Emperour which was prohibited by a Law of the twelve Tables as Cicero witnesseth And St. Vedastus was wont to say That the dead should not be buried within the walls of a City which was a place for the living and not for the dead as Alcuinus in his life writes And it is certain no Christians at all were buried in Churches for many hundred years but certain proper Cemateries or Dormitories were allotted for that purpose remote from Churches Pope Nicholas the first about the year 867 was thought to be preferred to be buried before the Church doors of St. Peter saith Nauclere And the same Nauclere writeth how Nauclerus Vol. 3. p. 64. ibid. p. 94. that about the year 983 Otho the third Emperour was buried at the Threshold of St. Peter at Rome And when they had brought dead bodies to the Church door they soon presumed to bring them in and found a reason so to do because the bodies of true Believers and holy Servants of God were not to be looked on as unclean or unworthy of so sacred a place because they had been themselves Temples of the Holy Ghost and were to be rennited again to their blessed spirits in heaven And not only so but the nearer the Altar always the better mistaking that place in the Apocalypse I saw under the Altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God and Rev. 6. 9. for the testimony which they held collecting from hence that for Martyrs and holy persons that was the properest place to be buried in And the Cannon Law surely misguided by such a vain perswasion hath decreed it necessary to the Consecration of a Church that there be the body or at least some Relique of a Saint there posited But more reasonably doth it erre when it
a good while after So that the same difficulty is in reference to the Sabbath and it and is thus solved by Calvin himself That there were certain previous injunctions given Calvin Harmon in Pent. particularly and more rudely by God concerning the observation of certain Rites before that more exact delivery of them by God to Moses on Mount Sinai And as alwayes a day or time was allotted so likewise some special place separated from common uses as that called here the Tabernacle to the service of God For had there been any proper weakly day appointed by God before Moses surely we should have found some little mention thereof in the History of Moses from the Creation to his days but not a word of any such thing do we find to that purpose CHAP. XIII Of the Institution of the Lords Day That it was in part of Apostolical and partly Ecclesiastical Tradition Festival Days and Fasting derived unto us from the same Fountain and accordingly to be observed upon the like grounds Private Prayers in Families to the neglect of the Publique Worship unacceptable to God Of the Obligation all Priests have to pray daily according to their Office Of the Abuse of Holy days in the Number and unjustifiable occasions of them Of the Seven Hours of Prayer approved by the Ancient Church and our First Reformers Mr. Prinne's Cavils against Canonical Hours refuted THAT the Institution of the Lords day hath no known foundation from the Command of God or Christ may be collected from what is said But that the Apostles and Church Apostolical did by their example and practice commend it to following generations of Christians I acknowledge most true But still there remains a knot to be untied about the force of that Constitution whether it was only of Custom or Precept or all the Obligation proceeded from the decrees of the Church after the Apostles For direct Precept we find little or no Grounds in Scripture For Practice Apostolical and Custom upon that descending to posterity also the accession of the Laws Ecclesiastical and Imperial we make no scruple to acknowledge them to be very solemn and obligatory upon all good Christians But seeing all things practis'd by the Apostles are not Obligatory it will be worth the enquiry under what Capacity they so acted whether as Apostles or as Governors of the Church in such a large sense as might be communicable to their successours That it was not meerly and precisely an Apostolical Act to establish such a Festival seems to appear from the grounds found in the Law of Nature moving men to celebrate a day to God again that the first day of the week being the day of our Lord and Saviours Resurrection seems to be no other than Common Ecclesiastical Prudence as that which agreeth most with the End it self viz. The due commemoration of Christs resurrection on that day but that Christ should be so Commemorated and God so glorified seems to me to be specially Apostolical and so Divine that it is not alterable by the Counsel or Decrees of the Church any time after from whence may conveniently be reconciled the opposite opinions of both School-men and Canonists some of whom have asserted the divine Right of the Lords day and others the Ecclesiastical or Canonical only For that a day be Festivally observed to God is Natural that on such a Festival or Thanksgiving day Christ should be magnified and God praised is Apostolical but that on the First day of the week Christian Prudence and the necessary power of the Church may seem to suffice Which appeareth from the manner of celebrating the Christian Sabbath which hath been always left to the Authority and wisdom of the Church varying according to occasions given For that Christians very anciently met to treat of divine matters to communicate to celebrate the Eucharist and to sing Psalms Hymns and Spiritual Songs Justine Justin Apol. 2. Tertul. Apologer Martyr and Tertullian and the famous Epistle of Pliny witness And to this end they had a vacation from all worldly servile matters as many proofs of Antiquity demonstrate And for the dignity of this day it was that on it and none other Bishops were to be consecrated by the constitution of Leo 1. And what are the Prerogatives of this First Leo 1. Distinct 75. c. 1. Quod die c. day of the week are explained at large by the Ancient Fathers and Councils here not to be rehearsed From this Fountain of Ecclesiastical power resident in the Church springeth the Act of instituting other days to the Glory and Praise of God of two sorts viz. days of Humiliation and Exultation or joy For it is certain that after it was agreed upon that Christs Resurrection should be weekly celebrated it was consented to also that a Yearly Thanksgiving should be kept for the same which was the Christians Passover and our Easter day is immemorially practised and without interruption derived to this present age And therefore as well because it is the greatest matter of joy that at any time befell the Church of Christ as because it regulateth other principal Feasts and Fasts of the Church as lastly because thence is plainly inferred a power in the Church of ordaining Feasts and Fasts to the worship of God it is called by the Ancient The Mother of Feasts And surely upon this the Fathers of the Church produced many other Daughter-Feasts not all in a year nor an age but according to their power to maintain and defend them which was very difficult for them to do as becomed under Gentile persecution who were most severe against such Celebrities instituted by Christians to the overthrow and contempt of Gentile worship which according to the Light of nature consisted much in this as Seneca Legum Conditores Festùm instruerunt dies ut ad hilaritatem homines cogerent c. Seneca de Tranquil Aninai c. 15. hath said in these words The Founders of Laws ordained Festival days to the end that men might meet publiquely in Jollity puting some moderation to Labours as necessary for them These Gentile Institutions prevailing not only to Idololatrical service but corruption of manners contrary to nature it self The Ancient Fathers of the Church knew no better Antidote against such poison than to introduce Christian Festivals whereby all the natural and Civil benefit of Vacation from Labours friendly conversation and such like might be enjoyed and due worship and praise be given unto God in Christ Jesus And therefore Theodoret. Serm. 7. de Sacrificiis Theodoret with other Fathers is not ashamed to profess as a very laudable and religious occasion of Christian Feasts That they succeeded the Idolatrous and lewd Feasts of the Gentiles which some but in vain would turn against the use of them But they stand upon surer foundations than to be blown down with the wind of vain doctrines blustering against them For First as is said Nature it self directs to them
in that greatest of all sins and hardens our hearts against repentance and amendment because at the most and worst we are certified it is but Material Idolatry and material Idolatry is the least of all sins if we mean well And thus have we seen what havock is made with Idolatry and whereas my perhaps private opinion is this that God hath made that generally most easie and obvious unto us which is most necessary to be done or avoided by us and Idolatry is the greatest of all sins next to Atheism and therefore should be most easie to be judged of and apprehended such and so many have been of late the subtilâ—ies and devises of men that now it is one of the hardest things to know what is Idolatry and when it is committed and that amongst Christians too the first principle of whose Religion is the worship of the only true God in Christ Jesus True it is That it is assented unto generally by Christians on all sides almost that it is Idolatry to worship any thing as God which is not but we are little the nearer for this because it is made so doubtful and difficult to judg what is divine and proper worship And secondly when we intend such worship to a false God which happens to be given For upon supposal that we do worship a false Deity yet if we intend to worship only the true all is well and safe But then if it be doubted as well it may seeing all men naturally desire and intend to worship the true God how there should be any Idolaters in the world or any such sin as Idolatry This difficulty hath much perplexed the Patrons of Formal and Material Idolatry For the Heathens themselves could scarce if such a distinction may be allowed be convinced of the one and Christians may easily be convinced of the other For I see nothing of consequence replied to the instances of the learned amongst the reformed whereby it doth plainly appear That the wiser Heathens and if we go no further our turn is served did not ony as all men intend to worship the true God but in their writings and minds Gage Histor West Indies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod Hâ—retic Fab. l. 5. 3. dâ—d reduce all those various Gods to one And though they worshipped Images of Gods they declared they did it not for the Image sake but for Gods sake and for their own sake that they might by means of them obtain favor of the God they worshipped ultimately A modern instance we have in the Spaniards conversiâ—g with and converting the West Indians They were very zealous as a late rude Historian hath delivered against the mâ—â—â—trous worshipped Idols by the Indians and broke them to pieces as well they might with great indignation and severe menaces against the servers of them accusing them of gross Idolatry and stupidity in worshipping such foul objects to the contempt and dishonor of the true God To this some of the freest and wisest answered You worship Images as well as we do you not Yes said the Christians but we do not so worship the Image but we worship the true God besides knowing very well that those things before us are not God And so do we replied the Heathens We know very well that this we see is not God himself but we worship our God by this and have found by experience that he answers us by this as well as yours What those Christians did answer this is not said neither could they say any thing whereby they should excuse themselves and justly accuse others that shall so defend and explain themselves of Idolatry Therefore of late hath a very grave and learned person pitch'd upon an unheard of opinion concerning this to salve the reputation of Christians labouring under this grand imputation which is this That there is no Idolatry but where more Gods than one are worshipped The ground and motive to which opinion is this because he that worships more than one God must inevitably worship a false God because there is but one True God The inclusive part of which opinion and argument viz. That without all excuse such are Idolaters I readily grant but not the exclusive That only such and no others are And my reasons are these First because none of the Christian Fathers of old ever framed or received such a Restriction of Idolatry and that they did not I need no better argument than may be taken from the learned Author himself of this opinion For being so throughly verst in antiquity as he was some suffrage of the Fathers some record of the Church must needs have fallen into his hands and so undoubtedly would have fallen from his pen confirming his opinion but none we find produced Secondly I see no reason of departing without greater necessity than hath appeared as yet from the consonant judgment hitherto of the Church of England which though it hath not in a formal decree declared this point yet so far as her opinion doth appear in the writings of the Principal of the Church it is to the opposing of that sence of Idolatry as hath in part been shown by others and make no doubt but might further by the same hand as he affirmeth finding it not difficult to do it my self Thirdly They for relief of whom surely this opinion was chiefly thought of and asserted will not own the invention For though they like nothing more and alledg nothing oftner to retuod the force of our arguments proving them Idolatrous than the judgment of so learned a man as he against us and in defense of themselves yet they certainly disliking the Premises upon which such a conclusion is inferred and sticking only to the Conclusion viz. That they are not guilty of Idolatry can take no more shelter from thence or benefit than can he that denies the Conclusion and grants the Premises For I would thus expostulate first with the Author Whether if Intention directed rightly doth not excuse from Idolatry the Romanists may not be said to be Idolatrous I make no question but he that holds as he doth that there is no transubstantiation would grant they were upon such a supposition Again I would demand whether if this ground be false which is supposed as true by him That all Idolatry implys a plurality of Gods worshipped He that worships one false God may not be said to be an Idolater I see no reason to doubt but he that held there was any such thing in the world would and must yield to the Affirmative viz. That it is supposing that there is Idolatry not consisting in more Gods than one Now the Papists do certainly not only suppose but hold that Idolatry may be committed in worshiping one God who is falsly so called and therefore though according to his single Hypothesis they may defend themselves yet neither according to their own grounds nor ours Fourthly The ground of that his supposition is not to be allowed For this
Negatively not to believe them and Privatively or contrarily to believe The state of Nature and of the Jews might be such before Christ as not to have the true and clear notion of Christ as the Son of God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Chrysost ad Judaizantes Serm. 27. Tom. 6. pag. 369. of the Trinity and yet not to oppose or directly deny it as Jews and Turks at this day For they have now a contrary Faith unto these and therefore how they can be excused from Idolatry according to the favorablest staters of Idolaters here now mentioned I cannot see For they who worship God as he is not but as he is framed by such mens wits are a kind of Idolaters But Christian Faith teaches us that to God it is essential to be Three in One and One in Three which is by all but Christians I mean Turks and Jews absolutely denyed And therefore Chrysostom denyes the Jews worship God This likewise prosecuted gives us no small help towards the resolution of that doubt and reconciling of that contrariety which seemeth to have been the main motive to the entertaining a new notion of Idolatry and clearing thereby the Church of Rome from that foul and mortal Imputation For it being generally granted that the Church of Rome is a true Church it must of force be denied that it is Idolatrous because Idolatry is inconsistent with the Nature of a true Church and destroyeth the Faith in the very foundation To which argument very pressing I confess I offer this Reply First calling to mind the distinction heretofore laid down of a true Church either in the Integral Parts of Christian Doctrine or Essential We deny the Romane Church to hold all the Integral Parts of the body of Faith and so not a true Church We hold also that it retaineth the Essentials and so may be termed a true Church Again of Essential or Fundamental points of Faith we distinguish the Abstract sense and the Concrete sense And affirm that although in the Abstract sense or Proposition the Church of Rome is in many points free from Idolatry yet taking their doctrines concretely with their practise interpreting them they are certainly Idolatrous But a Church is chiefly to be judged by the article in iâ— self and not in the unnatural sense appearing in particular practises The Church of Rome holds That the true God alone is to be worshipped But if the Sons of that Church notwithstanding worship somewhat besides God this is a corruption in Fact and not in Faith And perhaps the Church being an Abstract Body from single Persons and the Faith from single Practise the particular errors which are committed there not flowing necessarily from that general Principle may not be charged but in a vulgar sense upon the Church But yet be it so that the Churches determinations should not oblige men necessarily to Idolatry the Idolatrous Practises of so many in the worshiping of the Host Agnus Dei Images and Saints and Angels permitted and countenanced in that Church were sufficient ground of separation from that Church without Schismaticalness But secondly we are bound here to distinguish of Idolatry which as may appear by what is said admitteth of diverse senses and acceptations and degrees For there is an Idolatry which hath quite another object both real and formal from the true divine object of worship and that cannot stand with Christianity And there may be an Idolatry which errs only in the real Object but retaineth the Formal Object of Worship The real Object is the thing Qui ad Idol latriam develvitm non plené nec integâ—è prophams officitur misi negaverit Chrisâ—um Ruffin Invectivá 2. in Hieron Christians in their Apostafie neither did nor were to make an absolute Apostasie from God the Father and Christ but in outward profession still to acknowledg them and to be called Christians c. Med Apost p. 66 67. Gen. 20. 1 Tim. 1. 13. it self to which an Act is directed The Formal Object is the thing under such a Form or Consideration Now though the romanists do err as certainly they do in the real Object of worship they profess they own and retain the true formal reason of Worship in that they designall to the honor of the true God and Christ and lay that down as a Reason of their worshiping that Object For if that be true which Ruffinus and Mr. Mede affirm as I conceive it is That those Christians who in Persecution fell away to Gentile Idolatry became not thereby wholly prophane unless at the same time they denyed Christ much more is it true that they who profess and intend as they say ultimately the honor of Christ in their outward Idolatry are to be looked upon as belonging Radically to Christs Church The sum therefore of our opinion is this That we really believe the Romane Church to be Idolatrous but not to cease thereby to be Christian unless it declared against Christ And we believe that more refined sense of Idolatry to be damnable in it self but whether by general deprecation of all Sins known and unknown as also that they as they profess do it with Abimelech in the integrity of their heart and with St. Paul fighting against Christ Ignorantly they may not find mercy is hard to determine but t is easie to determine them to be in the way of damnation who shall fall wilfully after better education and information into those heinous practises But if they should urge this argument so strongly to me that I must be forced to that which as yet I am not sensible or viz. either to deny the Romane Church to be a true Church or to deny it to be guilty of Idolatry I should soon choose to deny the Church of Rome to be a true Church of Christ especially since the late corrupt decisions of what was ambiguous before and capable of a fair interpretation for the worst than Ego hoc arbitror quòd non pallut nomen Domini nist ille qui visus est homini ejus credere quomedo tollit membra Christi facit membra meretricis qui prius Christo credit sie ille poliuit nomen Domini qui prius nominis ejus fidem susceperit Hieron in c. 43. Ezech. deny that to be Idolatry which the principal of their Doctors have taught and the generality of the People do constantly practise For what doth it avail them to confront those foul and notorious dogmes alledged cut of their prime Writers making for plain Idolatry or the instances of gross practises with showing some tolerable sense quite antiquated which such Facts may be done in Whenas first they can give not so much reason why the moderate and favourable construction made should be the sense of their Church as may be given why it is Secondly if it were not so that some remained in that Church to buoy up in some manner the sinking Faith and stand up for the
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
There is no necessity of this and yet may be unlawful by vertue of that Precept For saith he nothing void of Reason is capable of adoration that is Veneration external nor worship that is Internal Veneration And when he saith If a man kiss the Crucifix without superstition he offendeth not but as the Case standeth now a dayes and as worship is described by Romish Authors and as they expound the definitions of their Councils upon this subject it cannot be done without superstition And himself seems to be of my mind in these words following That Images should be in Churches no human order requires And as it is easier it is safer also to take away all Images out of Churches than to prevail that no excess should be committed nor superstition mingled therewith And how dull and damnable superstition is constantly committed yea publiquely tolerated yea countenanced and encouraged in the use of Images I could easily and undeniably evidence were it my business For however I am not ignorant there is a warier and soberer sense given of the use of Images yet this is chiefly in the ears of such as will not be gained to them but by drawing the sense current of that Church with Azor. Instiâ— Mor. l. 9. c. 6. Thomas Sum. Par. 3. Quaest 25. artic 3. a fairer face but this we find in their writings It is the common opinion of Divines Imagines in eodem honore c. That the Image is to be worshipped and honoured with the same worship and honor wherewith the thing it self is to be worshipped And he that sayes this should know the mind of that Church as well as any other and the rather because he hath many of the same mind with himself Thomas the Great leading them But I had almost forgotten the mad or merry conceit of Baronius to Baron Ann. 34. §. 275. draw Image worship from Gods own institution He says God appointed the use of Images by Peters shadow whereby he cured sick persons I marvel much seeing such great use might be made of it that among so many rare and curious Reliques of Saints retrived or secured perpetually by the Church of Rome they could never happen upon a limb of the shadow of St. Peter whereby sick folk were cured to be shown for Images and worshipped For until that I shall not trouble my self to answer Baronius his argument for them and then I wil profess I cannot Now for the ancient use of Images it is certain out of St. Austin quoting Aug. Civit. Dei. Varro to that purpose that the Heathen Romans had no Images which they worshipped for the space of an hundred and seventy years and that Varro's opinion was that the Gods were more purely worshipped before the use of Images was introduced then afterwards And it is evident that until Origens dayes Christians made no religious use of Images And Origen cont Celsum l. 5. p. 255. l. 7. p. 374. See Fox Act Mon. Vol. 3. p 464. in Gregory the Great his dayes who commended Images in some sense they were prohibited and that by himself as objects of worship though not as helps which Bishop Latimer approved in this manner Images of Saints are called Saints and so are not to be worshipped taking worshipping of them for praying to them For they are neither Mediators by way of Redemption nor yet of Intercession And yet they may be well used when they may be applyed to that use they were first ordained for to be Laymens books for remembrance of heavenly things About the year 700 unto the year 800 of Christ many and bitter contentions arose amongst the Grecians concerning the use of Images then receiving another construction than former ages approved of Many turns happened for and against them till at length that ambitious and unnatural Beast Irene who put out her own son Constantines eyes for standing up for his right upon which he died and then to fortifie her self took in with the Popes Faction of the West and calling that numerous but sacrilegious Synod called the second of Nice concluded the point for ever â—fter and so grosly That Charles the Emperor in a Synod of the West-Bishops when the Popes Legates were also present condemned their decisions about Images Which hath so galled the greatest defenders of them that it is a pitiful thing to see what shifts and evasions directly false in themselves and contradictory one to another are invented by them The most current is that the Synod of Francfort mistook the meaning of them at Nice and this surely for no good end is received by some of the Reformation as Grotius who was the first that was not of that Church who could flatter the Church of Rome so far as to accept that answer for good Another of our Church of no less knowledg in divinity hath since him I cannot say from him owned that excuse but by their leaves upon very ill advice and no sufficient grounds at all as I could make appear but there needs nothing more though much more might be said than the Incredibleness of the thing it self that so many of them should not be able to understand the meaning of that Synod of Nice which spake plain enough that they worshipped the Image not for its own matter and form but for its sake which it represented But neither did this Synod decree so grosly as is commonly taught and practised by the Church of Rome which though diverse in it of late dayes do condemn for Idolatrous in that point some of late among us would have spared for no other reason than that by all means and as it should seem in all senses they must be maintained a true Church the latter of which is as stoutly denyed as affirmed and more easily proved And that from another head viz. Their opinion and use of Reliques Concerning which We as Dr. Rainolds hath observed all agree that honor Rainold de Roman Eccles Idolat l. 1 c. 9. §. 1. is due unto the bodies of Saints yea even the Calvinists and this especially in decent interrment of them And upon certain and well grounded information of any Relique of Saints or Martyrs Body sound with all civil respect we commit it to its proper place or reserve it in much esteem But what that esteem ought to be may be and much is controverted This the Church of Rome saith conformable to their doctrine of Images that the supposed Parts of Saints are no less to be worshipped then the Saints to whom they belong and that any Part of Christs garment and especially his Cross is capable of divine worship as that which received we know not what divine vertue from thence And lastly that the blood of Christ shown in many places and believed to be such is to be adored with the same worship that Christ himself is And here we may convict them of flat Idolatry out of their own confessions supposing this to be Idolatry
Christians to such sort of Meats as are now allowed For it was rather her act of Grace and Lenity to remit the one half of that ancient Severity commonly submitted unto in the earlier days of Christian Religion And who but ignorant and ill natur'd and nurtur'd children could turn her Lenity into Tyranny and make her curtesie a matter of calumny Nay which hath more disingenuity and absurdity while they fret and complain grievously that the Yoke as it is lyes too heavy upon them and presses them too hard to invert their spite and malice against it by arguing from the lightness and contemptibleness of such Fastings as consists only in abstinence from flesh saying It is no Fast which abstains not absolutely from all Meat This were indeed somewhat to the purpose if so be that the Church did at the same time command any man to eat fish or so much as hearbs or bread when she forbids flesh to be eaten Or that they who were able and did wholly abstain from Meats at such seasons did not more fulfill the intention of the Church then they who took the liberty left them of eating in some manner What temper and spirit do these men discover to themselves to be of who are alwayes in readiness to charge their Superiours either with folly or tyranny or impiety upon the same occasion and never been able to prove any one them Scotus and Biel Scotus lib. 4. Distinct 8. Biel Lect. 8. in Canon Missae after him distinguish of a Fast of Nature which is a total abstinence from all eating and drinking and of a Fast of the Church when a man eats but once a day and that according to the precept and mind of the Church Now if the Church hath invented a favourable distinction and sense to gratifie murmurers at the rigour of her Laws do they not requite her ingenuously who turn that also to her reproach Nay if another distinction be found which makes a Fast a Toto a Tanto and a Tali from the Whole from the Quantity and from the Quality of the Meats eaten hereby willing to condescend and bring down her Rules so low that all men may have somewhat to exercise themselves in according to their ability in the graces of Abstinence and Obedience who but such whose Religion impels them to be the worse for good usage and resolve to hear of nothing but their own inventions would clamour against their Governours for such moderation But when they are disappointed in their arguments and expectations to reduce all men and things to their own model their last Effort is to humble this kind of Fasting into a civil Constitution only and for a civil End according as an Act of Parliament misconstrued as hath more plainly and fully been declared by others hath misled them conceiving that the Fastings of our Church tend only to the encrease of Navigation or are intended for the good of beasts not of men But what hinders that the Church may have one end in her decrees and the Common-wealth another and that which the Church designed for the exercise of Christian vertues may be embraced by Secular Politicians to promote Secular benefits to the Publick Nothing is so manifest to him that knows any thing in Church History as that such a reason was never dreamt of by the Propounders of such Fastings in our Church nor in any part of the Christian world before that Act. And if the words of that Act were intended for an ease to the tender Consciences as those of dissenters are mis-called and to draw them by little and little upon consideration of Civil ends which they less hated than the Ecclesiastical to some good order and submission this is not to be drawn to a perpetual Rule nor made the only universal end of such a Constitution For the Church still keeps to the most ancient and general sense received amongst Christians A third Precept of the Church is The Observation of the Ecclesiastical Canon 6. Preface of Ceremonies c. Customs and Ceremonies of the Church and that without frowardness and contradiction as appears from her Canons and the Preface before the Common-Prayer Of which obligation that which we have before spoken of the Power of the Church and even now of Fasting may here be applyed and suffice A fourth Precept is Constantly to repair to the Publick Service of the Preface to the Book of Common-Prayer Church for Mattens and Evening Song with other holy Offices at times appointed unless there be a just and unfeigned cause to the contrary And this we have before also treated of extending it to the worship of God in his House especially when there is an assembly of Christian people together to that purpose though there be no Sermon and also to the humbling a mans self and putting up his private Devotions there alone when occasion and opportunity shall be offered so to do according to the most ancient and godly custom of good Christians ever since there were Temples built for Gods Service For the disuse of which excellent acts not the least reason hath been or can be alledged by those that would be thought to be the only Rule of Reformation which we have not sufficiently refuted before Lastly To receive the blessed Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ Second Exhortation to be read before the Communion with frequent Devotion but at least Thrice a year whereof Easter is to be one And in order hereunto as occasion shall be to open our souls by due Confession and disburden and quiet our troubled Consciences by some learned and discreet Minister of God from whom Ghostly counsel and comfort may be received with the benefit of Absolution Of the use of which we have also before spoken where we shewed that such Confession was not of such absolute Divine Right either of Precept or Means that Salvation could not be otherwise obtain'd but as an Ecclesiastical Expedient very effectual as well for the bringing Impenitent sinners to repentance as for the due restoring of them that are Penitent to a comfortable assurance of Gods favour towards them and direction and encouragement in holy living which the foul abuses in those Churches where it is excessively magnified should by no means abolish For besides them above noted doubtless it is no mean abuse to make that which undoubtedly should be an act of Judgment in Gods Minister discerning between the hopeful state of some and desperate of others and accordingly suspending or applying the Free Grace of the Gospel and the Power left by Christ to his Church an act of custom formality and course or perhaps common civility which kind of rashness and profuseness the ancient Churches were altogether ignorant of When grievous offenders against God and the Church had fallen justly under the censures of the Church it was permitted to absolve them at the point of death so far as concerned their restitution to the Communion of
here also as 1 John 4. 16. God is love and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God and God in him and Love is the fulfilling of the Law saith St. Paul And the particular consequents and effects of Love are outward bounty towards Gods Worship and Service towards his Servants and faithful Children Zeal for the spiritual as well as temporal good of our Neighbour and for the general glory of God and the propagation of the true Faith Defence of the Church Reverence and Respect to his Officers and Ministers Perseverance in well-doing Constancy in the true Faith even to suffering of reproaches displeasures contempts indignities and to suffer joyfully the Hebr. 10. 34. spoiling of our Goods and cheerfully the loss of our lives by holy Martyrdome for the love we bear to God in Christ For as St. John saith Perfect 1 John 4. 18. love casteth out fear because fear hath torment he that seareth therefore is not made perfect in love that is Love is of such a powerful nature that where it is truly there it overcometh all oppositions and difficulties which are apt to assail it and fears nothing that may stand in its way between Christ and it or its duty and God Now the contrary Vices to these forbidden when it is said Thou shalt have no other Gods but me are Atheism and contempt of all Divine Power Disbelief affected Ignorance of the true God and his Worship or Superstition in multiplying Gods either of equal or inferiour order to God Confederacies with the Devil consulting with him or any pretending to derive their art or skill from Evil Spirits Seeking to any such for remedy or relief in losses or sicknesses or any such like distresses And if any shall say They can find no other remedâ—es from some heavy Evils they are to consider the excellent advice and exhortation of St. Chrysostome to persevere notwithstanding in that condition it hath pleased God to bring them to and so patiently resisting the temptation of such unlawful deliverance they shall both suffer and be crown'd as Martyrs For such were some of those Martyrs mentioned by St. Paul Not accepting deliverance Again Carnal Hebr. 11. 35. Security Despair of Gods Grace and Mercy by Impenitence Worldly mindedness or any covetousness of the Creature or the comforts of it above God which is Idolatry But more literally Any more than Civil and Coloss 3. 5. Humane Worship given to any Creature whatever though with real intentions to worship the true God only when there are competent advises and means to discern the mistake Now what are competent notices is to be judged from the common Rule to other errours as well as that of Idolatry And therefore the modern Invention of Hyperdoulia or service above that ordinarily competible to Creatures is a manifest piece of Superstition and that Idolatroas it being not found out yet by the wit of man to put any mean between Divine worship and Civil For if by Hyperdoulia they mean a higher and nobler act of Service than is given to other blessed Spirits besides the Virgin Mary they must either mean Nobler and Higher in Kind or Degree But there is no Kind betwixt that proper to God which we call Divine and that communicable to Creatures which we call Civil and Religious not for the acts sake whereby they are honoured by us but for the ground and occasion of that act viz. their Religion or Holiness And if they mean Higher degrees of worship of the same kind then do they speak most absurdly and obscurely because nothing can receive such degrees as to denominate it above its nature And besides degrees have respect not to the very thing it self but to the quality of it No man can say water is cold above cold or fire is hot above the nature of heat So can no man with sense if he means honestly say Doulia is to be above Doulia or worship above worship but must say above such a proportion or degree of worshâ—p But the first is absurdly and the second wickedly said for where such a general licence of service is allowed and given without any limits set stinting and bounding the same who there can stay his devotion from running out to extremity and all excess Hyperdoulia therefore or as I may render it Super service doth naturally lead men to Idolatry and that before they are aware For if it be demanded What mean you by this Super-service Have they found out as yet any other description than that most ridiculous of defining a thing by it self telling us Super-service is that to be given to the Virgin Mary properly and it being altogether as obscure what is that reverence due to the Virgin Mary properly How should we serve or worship her otherwise than we do other Saints or Angels have they at all explained themselves otherwise than by this Hyperdoulia or Super-service this say they is due to her but what this is we are as far to seek as at the very first Only we are sure of this that by the term it self we may give her most properly Divine Worship and be born out by that word For it manifestly implyes somewhat exhibited above other Creatures but nothing at all of the inferiourness of that service to that given to God And therefore I see no reason to doubt but this vile invention doth commonly end in Idolatry and that against the first Commandment Let us now proceed to the Second The Second Precept in the Decalogue is Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image nor the likeness of any thing c. The true meaning of §. II. which can have or need no better exposition than the general practise of the Popish Churches For being resolved to hold to their corrupt way of making the Image of God contrary to their Forefathers who alwayes abhorred all representation of God whether by Picture or Statue and to their gross sense of giving reverence to that and others of Saints and Angels have laid this Precept aside as being certainly inwardly convicted that it makes against them as men are apt to turn those Servants or Children out of doors who will not be kept in good order or ruled by them or wicked Subjects who turn their Soveraign out of his Place his Throne because he will not rule as they would have him yet still perhaps will allow him the title of King under confinement This Commandment is not by them wholly cancell'd and rased out of Scripture but it is kept under restraint lest it should reduce Christians to its due Obedience They say It is the same in effect with the first and contained in it If so why they do they not suffer it to speak and to bear its part in their Religious Books as well as the other If it be not why do they deny it its proper place and use Surely their reason at hand we cannot but accept as good and reasonable viz. It may
give offense to the people contrary to the use of that Church And why so It it not because their doctrine and practise are quite contrary to it Is it not because the native sense of those words is so manifest and obvious that they would certainly understand them aright could they be suffered to come to the true knowledge of them And this is the scandal and offence would be given them And in the Reign of Henry the Eighth of England who opened the Hatches a little whereby men were kept in hold from discerning the clear light above and about them when they could no longer conceal the Second Commandment from the people but it must appear in its own entireness in the English tongue Gardiner and other Romanists would have added for safety sake their own gloss to the Word of God viz. to Thou shalt not make to thy self any graven Image nor the likeness Antiquit. Brittan 1 ag 338. of any thing c. with that intent to give to them Divine Worship Which sufficiently betrayes the guilt to which they are conscious in their false dealing with this Precept and the common people about it But neither of these being likely to take effect a more effectual and bold coarse is invented and defended That this Commandment was Ceremonial and Judicial and Temporary only ordained to prevent the Jews from falling into Idolatry to which they were so prone 'T is true they were so prone then to Idolatry and however they are now-a-dayes more than enough averse from it yet would they at this day be as prone as ever were but the liberty given of the use of Images in the sense of the Roman Church This they have found by experience of their Forefathers and others of succeeding Generations and therefore hold it safest and best to set a less Superstition to keep at a distance a far greater and to make a scruple of all use of images which can scarce amount to the nature of sin at all though it may of folly to secure themselves from the contagion of the other extream in the superstitious use of them It is controverted between the ancient Hebrew Doctours of which you Petavius Theolog. Dogmati To. 4. l. 15. cap. 6. Grotius Exposst Decal may read Petavius and Grotius whether Gods intent it was here wholly to deny the Jews the use of Images as Philo and Josephus suppose or the use only in a Divine manner as others this later Opinion is chosen by Petavius and the Adversaries to the Iconoclasts or Image-breakers But my opinion is First That all Jews concur in this and all Christians not led by the nose by the Pope of Rome that to make the Image of God at all under what pretence soever is absolutely forbidden And therefore I wonder more at Gerson than at them who lived with and after him that he should endeavour to excuse the Latin Church thus Before the Incarnation when the Law was given there appeared no Image of the Incorporeal God either in wood Gerson To. 2. De 10 Praecept in Praec 1. or stone because the Image of a Spirit cannot be made And therefore all Images were then to be rejected but because that may be now done since the Incarnation of the Son of God therefore from that time it is allowed to be done by him who might dispense Thus he And how weakly who may not see First Why could not the Image of God be made as well before the Incarnation as after And why might not the Image of the Son of God be made before he was Incarnate therebeing some knowledge of the same as we may well suppose amongst the Jews before the Incarnation and some Umbrages and Representations of it in Apparitions made to the ancient Patriarchs without the view of his Colour Stature and Lineaments as well as after when we have certainly lost the truest form of Christ and go by guess and uncertain tradition Again could not there be drawn the Image of a Spirit before Christ and can there now I would fain see how where or by whom What Because Christ who is a Spirit who is God may be drawn according to his Humane nature may be also according to his Divine The Divine Person may indeed but the Divine Nature can no more now than before be resembled and that Deity only by concomitance and implication and not in form at all When the Image of a Man is made the Image of him is made who hath a spiritual and divine Soul but the Image of his Soul is not at all made and much less is the Image of God made unless metonymically as Man is said to be the Image of God when Christ is figured unto us But could this be which neither can nor ought to be what warrant at all can it be to make the Image of God in contradiction to Christ as is pleaded for and usual among Roman Catholicks when they upon a vile fansie occasioned from a vision in Daniel make God the Father like a decâ—epit old man well clothed indeed and most like to the Picture of Winter we have seen but that he wants a pan of coals by him to warm his old and cold fingers over and as it were his Grandchild standing by him Could not all this foul daubing of the Deity have been made before Chrusts Incarnation Or ought it in any sober mans judgment to be made now Lastly because they speak of some special Dispensation to do this now which was never allowed formerly let them be so ingenuous and courâ—eous to show us if not the Original lest they should be cousened of it the Copy or but one word of it and it will satisfie us otherwise we think they have said much more already than they needed For we should have been as well satisfied altogether if they had said only It ought to be so as to give such a Reason which is as incredible as the thing it self viz. that It is dispensed with now under the Gospel Nay in that they say it is dispensed with under the Gospel they impty it was more than Mosaical and Ceremonial under the Law because Rites and Ceremonies are not so much dispensed with as directly abolished and destroyed Secondly I hold it absolutely forbidden the Jews by the same Law to make use of any Images in the worship of God though not to that degree as to worship them but only By them and that for fear of Idolatry and if not in passing by or neglecting God himself and directing and fixing the mind and heart on the visible Object yet by help of that For that contradicts the mind of God as may appear by the whole Body of Gods worship and every part thereof instituted by himself without the least insinuation of such manner of worship Nay it is very strange what Erasmus hath observed That though indeed in practice it hath been connived at yea Nam ut Imagines sint in Templis â—ulla
praecipit vel humana Constitutio Et ut facilius ita tutius quâ—que est omnes Imagines è templis submovere qudâ—n impâ—trare uc nec modus praetereâ—â—ur nec admiscedtur superscitio Eratm in Symb. Decalog Cateches 6. commended yet have not men dared as yet by any direct Precept to command the use of Images at all in Churches For that Images should be in Churches saith Erasmus no Constitution so much as humane requireth And as is is more easie so is it more safe to withdraw all Images out of Churches then to prevail that the Mean should not be exceeded nor Superstition mingled therewith Thirdly If that Rule of Explication holds good viz. that in the Decalogue where a sin is forbidden there the occasion leading thereunto is also forbidden I make no doubt but to worship the Creatour or any Creature by an Image is also here forbidden as Idolatrous though perhaps not Idolatry absolute And contrary to the current sense and distinction of modern Romanists concerning Material and Formal Idolatry of which we have before spoken denying an errour about the Object to be Formal Idolatry provided the intention be directed to the only true object of worship God we may more safely and properly call this outward visible adoration given to outward objects or at least seeming to be given to them Formal Idolatry than Material because there is nothing wanting to common sense which might make and denominate it Idolatry and this to have the Formalities of Idolatry but if they take Formal for the intrinsick specification of a thing then it is a Contradiction and Nonsense to say or suppose that there can be any Idolatry not Formal as to imagine any thing can be without its form or that which is absolutely necessary to make it what it is Furthermore this worshipping of God by any thing made is forbidden by this command if not as simply and immediately unlawful in it self yet under the head of Scandal unjustly and unnecessarily given For in this Case it will no more if so much as excuse a man from the just suspicion of Idolatry that he upon occasion declares he does not worship the thing before which he worships than it could do them of whom St. Paul to the 1 Cor. 8. 4. Corinthians speaks who sat in the Idols Temple being Christians and knowing an Idol was as much as nothing in the world and a man having so much Faith and Knowledge might do as he please in neglect and contempt of that but St. Paul could not be put off so but knowing and taking for v. 7. 10 11. granted that some did eat before an Idol with a conscience and sense of an Idol as it were adjured such presumers under the terrour of being accessary to the ruin of their brothers Souls not to have to do with them So what if it be true as most true it is a man may worship God or Saints before an Image and have a right intention and pure conscience towards God is it not also as true that he may have an erroneous and idolatrous intention Nay are not the Evidences and Presumptions much more clear and strong that his intention is corrupt then that it is pure Can flesh and bloud put any difference between the visible act of him that doth worship an Image directly and properly and of him that doth not Is not this then scandalous to sin So that we may reasonably conclude this Command to stretch it self to forbid all worship by Images and especially in publick where there is more danger to others though not under the same guilt or penalty as flat idolizing of any thing besides God For in that it is said Thou shalt not bow down to them is plainly forbidden external reverence to or before them in any way of Religious worship In that it is said Nor worship them is expressed the internal act and forbidden And thus far of the more literal sense of this Precept the more remote and reductive sense as I may call it is to interdict all worshipping of Imaginations or vain opinions which are certain Idols of the mind as the other are of the outward senses And thus Hierom upon the Prophet Esay Hieron in Isaiam c. 40. tropically applies his words To whom will ye liken the Lord c. We may say that Arch-hereticks are here rebuked who make sundry Idols out of their own heart c. And again upon the same Prophet afterward Quicquid Id. in Isaiam c. 44. v. 15 16. de Idolis dictum est potest referri ad haereseon Principes c. Whatever the Prophet speaks of Idols may be referred to the Ringleaders of Hereticks who dexterously frame out of their own hearts certain images of their opinions and of a lye and worship them knowing that they made them themselves And think it not sufficient to keep them to themselves unless they seduce other simpler folk with the adoration of them Against this little noted but most frequently practised Idolatry we have an excellent Sermon of a Reverend Bishop Andrews Sermon of worshipping Imaginations Sin ulachris phantasmatum suprum sectatores suos omnis error illidit Aug. Expos Ep. ad Rom. Inchoata lib. Prelate long since made and never more need was there then is now to inculcate this when people blinded with the love of their own inventions and opinions of the sense of Scripture run carelesly and rashly into the Idolatry of their own wayes having first consecrated them with an obscure and mistaken Text of Scripture or two and so made them as they think Divine This is condemned in this Commandment as are also all corrupting depraving mis-sensing Gods Holy Word bringing in Sects and Heresies disesteem and abuse of his Sacraments And to name no more to be remiss prophane and negligent in the true Service and Worship of God either by inward aversion or outward absenting themselves without just cause from him in his house and denying him that outward adoration and humiliation which he here forbids us to give any but himself which he surely never would have done had he not set some value on it himself And on the contrary we are required positively here to give all outward as well as inward worship to him as he is in his illimited nature without circumscribing him in our minds or likening him to any corporeal being how excellent soever The second Part of this Commandment gives us the reason of it viz. For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God deterring all men from the violation of the same from the Power Majesty and Justice of him against such contemners of his worship and his word So that as too often it is seen that some fond worldly and covetous Parents will even venture their own necks and damn their souls out of an extream desire to advance their children and to settle them sure and flourishing as they think in the world after them God confounds this their plot
to P. 14â— which they have no just title themselves being out of Christ This is gross enough and dangerous 19. In the Article of our Creed Sitting at the right hand P. 174. of God signifieth the inferiority of the Mediator in respect of the Father This wants a lusty grain of Salt 20. The vow of single Life is a snare or as the noose in the On Gal. 1. v. 7. haltar to strangle the Soul 21. The third Succession is of Doctrine alone and thus our Ministers succeed the Apostles and this is sufficient It is sufficient for the Peoples not Gods Ministers 22. If in Turkie or America or elsewhere the Gospel should be Id Gal p. 196 197. received by the counsel and perswasion of private persons they shall not need to send into Europe for Consecrated Ministers but they have power to choose their own Ministers from within themselves Because where God giveth the word he giveth the power also 23. The Child of God falling into persecution and denying Id. Gal. 1. v. 22. Christ is not guilty to condemnation because c. 24. If as Eusebius saith in his Chronicle Peter sate Bishop of Rome twenty five years then Peter lived in breach of the express commandment of God for so long time because the Jews were his special charge Absurd and untrue 25. We are born Christians if our Parents believe and not P. 235. made so in Baptism 26. The Sacraments are said to apply Christ in that P. 242. they serve to confirm Faith whose office it is to apply c. 27. All the works of Regenerate men are sinful and in the P. 381. rigor of justice deserve damnation Well therefore may he say this of unregenerate men but neither is it true so far of one or other but the not doing of such good works is much more damnable It is true properly that they do not of themselves save but not so that they damn 28. There be three parts of Penance Contrition of heart Id. Papist cannot go beyond a reprobate p. 396. Confession of the mouth Satisfaction in the deed All these three Judas performed 29. As long as a man hath his Conscience to accuse him of Ibid. sin before God he is in a state of Damnation as St. John saith 1 Ep. 2. 10. St. John saith not so 30. The Church of Rome teacheth that Original Sin is done Ib. p. 397. Advertisement to the Roman Church p. 622. Vol. 1. away in Baptism This is called a damnable Error as if only the Ch. of Rome held so and it were not unanimously held by the Fathers 31. That we believe the Catholick Church it follows that the Catholick Church is invisible 32. We esteem of Repentance only as a fruit of Faith and Reform Catholick p. 615. the effect or efficacy of it is to testifie the Remission of our sins and our reconciliation before God 33. There is a twofold conversion Passive and Active Ib. p. 613. 614. Passive is an Action of God whereby he converteth man being yet unconverted These are the Heterodox Dogmes which Mr. Perkins suckt in from Calvins Divinity upon whose sleeve he seem'd to have pin'd his faith notwithstanding Scripture is so vehemently pretended which will warrant none of them And by these credulously assented to and preached contrary to the mind of our Church by vulgar and lazie Divines who would take no care or pains to look into the Scriptures or the Doctrine of the Ancient Church but through such mens Spectacles have diversity of opinions been bred in the common peoples mind to their dislike of their Governours and at last such a rupture as hath wasted and almost consumed us But here I am to give the curious Reader notice least I may seem to mis-report any thing quoted out of Mr. Perkins according to the pages that upon examining them and comparing them on this occasion I find what I took no notice of at first reading of his Works that I followed two several Editions of his Works in Folio the one of the year 1626 and the other of the year 1631 which not having by me I could not rectifie but doubt not but they are to be found in one of them And now because I perceive the Papists triumph when they can find such blemishes in our Church and charge it with all these and such like which they may find among dissenters I shall set down likewise their principal accusations as I find them collected and summ'd up by Fitz-Simons Henricus Fitzsimon Brittannomachia minist l. 2 c. 3. and the rather because he professes to have taken them out of a much more wise and learned Adversary to us then himself Alanus Copus otherwise called Nicolas Harpsfield and they are these following 1. The first Error he layes to our charge is that we hold There are only two Sacraments This we stand to as commonly explained by our Church 2. Infants belong to the people of God before they are Baptized This indeed is the opinion of Sectaries which Perkins before cited might have led them into but not of our Church nor the Ancient Church as may appear most evidently from the testimony of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. Haerer Fab. l. 5. c. 28. Theodoret who in the behalf of the Catholick Church absolutely disowns unbaptized persons as Sons of God though they believed and embraced the Catholick Doctrine telling us that the Church would by no means suffer such to say the Lords Prayer accounting it an horrible thing for any to call God Father before he was baptized speaking thus This Prayer we teach not such who are not initiated but such as are partakers of that Mystery For none that are not initiated into that Mystery dares say Our Father which art in Heaven c. not having received that Grace of Adoption 3. The true Body of Christ is not in the Eucharist nor any thing but the substance of Bread Sure this fierce Accuser forgets himself Do we not also hold the substance of Wine remains in the Eucharist as well as that of bread Nay do we not profess * Christs Church Câ—techism Body and Bloud are verily and indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lords Supper And can they there be received unless they be there but the art of such rampant ignorant and malicious Factors for the Roman Church ever consisted principally in wilful bungling and by false stating of the differences between us and them to beguile the weak and unwary 4. That the Communion under both kinds is necessary It is as necessary under both as under one The contrary is the Sacrilegious Error of the Romanists 5. A Priest may not communicate alone Another grievous Error that we cannot indure Non-sense nor to see Christs institution bafled by such a ridiculous Communion unknown to Antiquity 6. It is unlawful to reserve or elevate the Eucharist Not simply as the Ancient Church did
oppressed truth they could in no tolerable sense be called a Church at all But by reason of that small struggling for Life in that Church they may be termed a Church out of Charity at least if not verity For Charity believeth all things CHAP. XV. Of Idolatry in the Romish Church in particular viz. In worshipping Saints Angels Reliques and especially the supposed blood of Christ No good foundation in Antiquity or the Scriptures for the said Worship FROM what hath passed may we with greater expedition conclude what remains of the Object of Worship and the superstition even to Idolatry committed in worshipping of Saints and Angels not only in themselves but Reliques For certainly Prayer to them or invocation of them is a proper Act of adoration no man doubts it And therefore see in what degree men pray to them they worship them as likewise what outward honor they give them or their Remains or Images And for the Spirits of just men made perfect as also their Reliques really such we allow due respect proper for such Objects But for the Images of Saints we know none proper to them as not at all belonging to them no part of them bearing no relation to them but as it shall please vain men to appoint it Yet though we hold no reverence at all is due to the Image of Saints or Angels for their own sakes or for the sakes of them they represent yet also hold we it unlawful to offer any indignity to them unless constrained from the abuses and superstitions used toward them which when they arrive at that height as to be made objects mediate or immediate of religious worship may lawfully suffer the same fate with the brazen Serpent in Hezechiah's dayes But first of Invocation of Saints in any sense How can we sufficiently wonder at the uncertainty yea contradiction of the greatest Patrons of it Whereof not only some affirm and some deny but the same Persons sometimes affirm and sometimes deny any such thing to be required or mentioned in Scripture Pighius and Cope give their reason why Saints were not worshipped under the Old Testament to be because they were not then partakers of the beautiful Vision as afterward Bellar. de Batitud Sanct. l. 1. c. 19. And this reason gives Bellarmin likewise yet for all that presums to alledg the words of Jacob Gen. 48. very ridiculously First because he confessed the Old Testament afforded no Presidents or Precepts for it Secondly because those words have quite another Sense than that he would draw them to I shall therefore cut off all that may be answered to the frivolous allegation of Scripture in that behalf as duly examined making more suspected of error than point than confirming it so very violent is the use of them And enquire rather first about the manner and then the reason and lastly the Authority or Tradition for this very briefly Of the three several distinct wayes wherein we are said to pray unto Saints one is not to pray to Saints at all but unto God For the first named by learned men which is to pray to God that upon intuition or consideration of Saints worth or prayers or intercession he would hear us doth not make Saints at all the Object of our prayers but the subject or matter of them which whether convenient to be used or not is besides our present question and belonging to another place and therefore may well be passed over and rather granted to be lawful and useful than disputed For certainly he that petitions a King to grant him any thing for such a Favorites sake who is about him and is his friend doth not thereby petition such a Courtier himself And this may be proved out of the ancient offices of the Church A second way is when we directly pray to them but not Particularly supposing they should either particularly understand all that we do or beg but by a general Petition desiring that they would pray for us A Third way is when we desire of Saints and Angels such things as are proper only to God to give us As if we should pray unto them to forgive us our sins to give us grace of mind and health of Body But these two do not seem to be distinct kinds but only differing in extent and matter For in the first a man doth make the matter of his request that they would promote that request which tendeth principally to God and ultimately In the second that they would procure to them the things prayed for which two differ in degrees not kind of Invocation Again they are wont here also to distinguish of Civil worship and religious And of Religious worship again into Divine proper and improper As for the former I see no reason how common soever it is to grant any such thing to Saints or Angels seeing all the ground of civil reverence given from one to another as in profession of our service honor and obedience to our Parent Masters or Governors wholly dependeth upon our civil and visible communion with them and civil Acts passing from one to another which communion or relation is extinguished quite by their natural death and departure out of this world as appeareth in the most intimate of all relations between men in this world which is that of Man and Wife which Nature Reason and the Scripture teach us to be as free as if they had never met together or known one another after the decease of either And surely all civil relations being founded on flesh and blood or Nature the foundation taken away must also cease and come to nothing Should a subject ask a Petition of his Soveraign that were alive but some hundred miles distant or out of hearing or of whose capacity to hear his prayers he had no competent assurance I cannot tell what more to call it but I am sure it were very absurd and ridiculous Now whether the communion of Saints and Angels which generally is no more than mystical and not at all civil or natural with us be such as doth not wholly render them unsensible of our Acts though directed to them here I at present determine not but this I may say that the bond of civil communion is quite broke between us and them and therefore are all Acts of that nature vain and groundless So that I may pray any Christian brother to pray for me here while we hold both civil and religious communion together but thiâ— being built upon that ceaseth together with that and becoms no longer of a mixt nature partly religious and partly natural or civil but purely Mystical and not to be exercised by such mixt acts as Invocation or outward veneration there being no known intercourse or reciprocation civil between us Therefore of necessity whoever maintains worship to be given to Saints must ascribe and defend divine worship to them and so in express terms we find them to do however they please to mollifie and extenuate