This discourse is to suppose it false and we are to direct our proceedings accordingly And therefore I shall not need to urge with how many fair words and gay pretences this Doctrine is set off apt either to cozen or instruct the conscience of the wisest according as it is true or false respectively But we finde says the Romanist in the History of the Maccabees that the Jews did pray and make offerings for the dead which also appears by other testimonies and by their Form of prayers still extant which they used in the Captivity It is very considerable that since our Blessed Saviour did reprove all the evil Doctrines and Traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees and did argue concerning the dead and the Resurrection against the Sadducees yet he spake no word against this publick practice but left it as he found it which he who came to declare to us all the will of his Father would not have done if it had not been innocent pious and full of charity To which by way of consociation if we adde that Saint Paul did pray for Onesiphorus that the Lord would sheâ— him a mercy in that day that is according to the style of the New Testament the day of Judgement the result will be that although it be probable that Onesiphorus at that time was dead because in his salutations he salutes his houshold without naming him who was the Major domo against his custom of salutations in other places yet besides this the prayer was for such a blessing to him whose demonstration and reception could not be but after death which implies clearly that then there is a need of mercy and by consequence the dead people even to the day of Judgement inclusively are the subject of a misery the object of God's mercy and therefore fit to be commemorated in the duties of our piety and charity and that we are to recommend their condition to God not onely to give them more glory in the re-union but to pity them to such purposes in which they need which because they are not revealed to us in particular it hinders us not in recommending the persons in particular to God's mercy but should rather excite our charity and devotion For it being certain that they have a need of mercy and it being uncertain how great their need is it may concern the prudence of charity to be the more earnest as not knowing the greatness of their necessity 12. And if there should be any uncertainty in these Arguments yet its having been the universal practice of the Church of God in all places and in all Ages till within these hundred years is a very great inducement for any member of the Church to believe that in the first Traditions of Christianity and the Institutions Apostolical there was nothing delivered against this practice but very much to insinuate or enjoyn it because the practice of it was at the first and was universal And if any man shall doubt of this he shews nothing but that he is ignorant of the Records of the Church it being plain in Tertullian and Saint Cyprian who were the eldest Writers of the Latine Church that in their times it was ab antiquo the custom of the Church to pray for the Souls of the faithfull departed in the dreadfull mysteries And it was an Institution Apostolical says one of them and so transmitted to the following Ages of the Church and when once it began upon slight grounds and discontent to be contested against by Aerius the man was presently condemn'd for a Heretick as appears in Epiphanius 13. But I am not to consider the Arguments for the Doctrine itself although the probability and fair pretence of them may help to excuse such persons who upon these or the like grounds do heartily believe it but I am to consider that whether it be true or false there is no manner of malice in it and at the worst it is but a wrong errour upon the right side of charity and concluded against by its Adversaries upon the confidence of such Arguments which possibly are not so probable as the grounds pretended for it 14. And if the same judgement might be made of any more of their Doctrines I think it were better men were not furious in the condemning such Questions which either they understood not upon the grounds of their proper Arguments or at least consider not as subjected in the persons and lessened by circumstances by the innocency of the event or other prudential considerations 15. But the other Article is harder to be judged of and hath made greater stirs in Christendom and hath been dasht at with more impetuous Objections and such as do more trouble the Question of Toleration For if the Doctrine of Transubstantiation be false as upon much evidence we believe it is then it is accused of introducing Idolatry giving Divine worship to a creature adoring of bread and wine and then comes in the precept of God to the Jews that those Prophets who perswaded to Idolatry should be slain 16. But here we must deliberate for it is concerning the lives of men and yet a little deliberation may suffice For Idolatry is a forsaking the true God and giving Divine worship to a creature or to an Idol that is to an imaginary god who hath no foundation in essence or existence and is that kind of superstition which by Divines is called the superstition of an undue object Now it is evident that the object of their adoration that which is represented to them in their minds their thoughts and purposes and by which God principally if not solely takes estimate of humane actions in the blessed Sacrament is the onely true and eternal God hypostatically joyned with his holy Humanity which Humanity they believe actually present under the veil of the Sacramental signs And if they thought him not present they are so far from worshipping the bread in this case that themselves profess it to be Idolatry to doe so which is a demonstration that their soul hath nothing in it that is idololatricall If their confidence and fancy-full Opinion hath engaged them upon so great mistake as without doubt it hath yet the will hath nothing in it but what is a great enemy to Idolatry Et nihil ardet in inferno nisi propria voluntas And although they have done violence to all Philosophy and the reason of man and undone and cancelled the principles of two or three Sciences to bring in this Article yet they have a Divine Revelation whose literal and grammatical sense if that sense were intended would warrant them to doe violence to all the Sciences in the Circle And indeed that Transubstantiation is openly and violently against natural reason is no Argument to make them disbelieve it who believe the mystery of the Trinity in all those niceties of explication which are in the School and which now-a-days pass for the Doctrine of the Church
probability for doing it is a very great crime and of dangerous consequence It was the greatest aggravation of the sin of Ananias and Sapphira 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they did falsly pretend and belye the Holy Spirit which crime besides that it dishonours the Holy Ghost to make him the President of imperfect and illiterate rites the Author of confusion and indeliberate Discourses and the Parent of such productions which a wise person would blush to own it also intitles him to all those Doctrines which either Chance or Design shall expose to the people in such prayers to which they entitle the holy Spirit as the Author and immediate Dictator So that if they please he must not only own their follies but their impieties too and how great disreputation this is to the Spirit of Wisdom of Counsel and of Holiness I wish they may rather understand by Discourse than by Experiment Sect. 37. BUT let us look a little further into the mystery and see what is meant in Scripture by praying with the spirit In what sence the holy Ghost is called the Spirit of Prayer I have already shewn viz. by the same reason as he is the Spirit of faith of prudence of knowledge of understanding and the like because he gives us assistances for the acquiring of these graces and furnishes us with revelations by way of object and instruction But praying with the Spirit hath besides this other sences also in Scripture I find in one place that we then pray with the Spirit when the Holy Ghost does actually excite us to desires and earnest tendencies to the obtaining our holy purpose when he prepares our hearts to pray when he enkindles our desires gives us zeal and devotion charity and fervour spiritual violence and holy importunity This sence is also in the latter part of the objected words of S. Paul Rom. 8. The Spirit it self maketh Intercession for us with groanings And indeed this is truly a praying with the Spirit but this will do our Reverend Brethren of the Assembly little advantage as to the present Question For this Spirit is not a Spirit of utterance not at all clamorous in the ears of the people but cries aloud in the ears of God with groans unutterable so it follows and only He that searcheth the heart he understandeth the meaning of the Spirit This is the Spirit of the Son which God hath sent into our hearts not into our tongues whereby we cry Abba Father Gal. 4.6 And this is the great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for mental prayer which is properly and truly praying by the Spirit Sect. 38. ANOTHER praying with the Spirit I find in that place of St. Paul from whence this expression is taken and commonly used I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the understanding also It is generally supposed that Saint Paul relates here to a special and extraordinary gift of Prayer which was indulg'd to the Primitive Bishops and Priests the Apostles and Rulers of Churches and to some other Persons extraordinarily of being able to compose Prayers pious in the matter prudent in the composure devout in the forms expressive in the language and in short useful to the Church and very apt for devotion and serving to her Religion and necessities I believe that such a gift there was and this indulged as other issues of the Spirit to some persons upon special necessities by singular dispensation as the Spirit knew to be most expedient for the present need and the future instruction This I believe not because I find sufficient testimony that it was so or any evidence from the words now alledged but because it was reasonable it should be so and agreeable to the other proceedings of the Holy Ghost For although we account it an easie matter to make prayers and we have great reason to give thanks to the Holy Ghost for it who hath descended so plentifully upon the Church hath made plentiful revelation of all the publick and private necessities of the world hath taught us how to pray given rules for the manner of address taught us how to distinguish spiritual from carnal things hath represented the vanity of worldly desires the unsatisfyingness of earthly possessions the blessing of being denied our impertinent secular and indiscreet requests and hath done all this at the beginning of Christianity and hath actually stirred up the Apostles and Apostolical men to make so many excellent Forms of Prayer which their Successors did in part retain and in part imitate till the conjunct wisdom of the Church saw her Offices compleat regular and sufficient So that now every man is able to make something of Forms of Prayer for which ability they should do well to pay their Eucharist to the Holy Ghost and not abuse the gift to vanity or schism yet at the first beginning of Christianity till the holy Spirit did fill all things they found no such plenty of Forms of Prayer and it was accounted a matter of so great consideration to make a Form of Prayer that it was thought a fit work for a Prophet or the Founder of an Institution And therefore the Disciples of John asked of him to teach them how to pray and the Disciples of Christ did so too For the Law of Moses had no Rules to instruct the Synagogue how to pray and but that Moses and David and Asaph and some few of the Prophets more left forms of Prayer which the Spirit of God inspired them withall upon great necessities and great mercy to that people they had not known how to have composed an Office for the daily service of the Temple without danger of asking things needless vain or impious such as were the prayers in the Roman Closets that he was a good man that would not own them Et nihil arcano qui roget ore Deos. Pulchra Laverna Da mihi fallere da justum sanctúmque videri Noctem peccatis fraudibus objice nubem But when the Holy Ghost came down in a full breath and a mighty wind he filled the breasts and tongues of men and furnished the first Christians not only with abilities enough to frame excellent devotions for their present Offices but also to become precedents for Liturgie to all Ages of the Church the first being imitated by the second and the second by the third till the Church be setled in peace and the Records transmitted with greater care and preserved with less hazard the Church chose such Forms whose Copies we retain at this day Sect. 39. NOW since it was certain that all ages of the Church would look upon the first Fathers in Christ and Founders of Churches as precedents or Tutors and Guides in all the parts of their Religion and that prayer with its several parts and instances is a great portion of the Religion the Sacraments themselves being instruments of grace and effectual in genere orationis it is very reasonable to think that the Apostolical
restraint Certainly then this pretended restraint is no such formidable thing These men themselves do it by directing all of the matter and much of the manner and Christ himself did it by prescribing both the matter and the words too Sect. 123. SIXTHLY These restraints as they are called or determinations of the Spirit are made by the Spirit himself For I demand when any Assembly of Divines appoint the matter of prayers to all particular Ministers as this hath done is that appointment by the Spirit or no If no then for ought appears this directory not being made by Gods Spirit may be an enemy to it But if this appointment be by the Spirit then the determination and limitation of the Spirit is by the spirit himself and such indeed is every pious and prudent constitution of the Church in matters spiritual Such as was that of St. Paul to the Corinthians when he prescribed orders for publick Prophesying and Interpretation and speaking with Tongues The Spirit of some he so restrained that he bound them to hold their peace he permitted but two or three to speak at one meeting the rest were to keep silence though possibly six or seven might at that time have the spirit Sect. 124. SEVENTHLY Is it not a restraint of the spirit to sing a Psalm in Metre by appointment Clearly as much as appointing Forms of prayer or Eucharist And yet that we see done daily and no scruple made Is not this to be partial in judgment and inconsiderate of what we do Sect. 125. EIGHTHLY And now after all this strife what harm is there in restraining the spirit in the present sence What prohibition What law What reason or revelation is against it What inconvenience in the nature of the thing For can any man be so weak as to imagine a despite is done to the spirit of grace when the gifts given to his Church are used regularly and by order As if prudence were no gift of Gods spirit as if helps in Government and the ordering spiritual matters were none of those graces which Christ when he ascended up on high gave unto men But this whole matter is wholly a stranger to reason and never seen in Scripture Sect. 126. FOR Divinity never knew any other vitious restraining the spirit but either suppressing those holy incitements to vertue and good life which God's Spirit ministers to us externally or internally or else a forbidding by publick authority the Ministers of the Word and Sacraments to speak such truths as God hath commanded and so taking away the liberty of prophesying The first is directly vitious in materia speciali The second is tyrannical and Antichristian And to it persecution of true Religion is to be reduced But as for this pretended limiting or restraining the Spirit viz. by appointing a regular Form of prayer it is so very a Chimaera that it hath no footing or foundation upon any ground where a wise man may build his confidence Sect. 127. NINTHLY But lastly how if the Spirit must be restrained and that by precept Apostolical That calls us to a new account But if it be not true what means Saint Paul by saying The spirits of the Prophets must be subject to the Prophets What greater restraint than subjection If subjected then they must be ruled if ruled then limited prescribed unto and as much under restraint as the spirits of the superiour Prophets shall judge convenient I suppose by this time this Objection will trouble us no more But perhaps another will Sect. 128. FOR Why are not the Ministers to be left as well to their liberty in making their Prayers as their Sermons I answer the Church may if she will but whether she doth well or no let her consider This I am sure there is not the same reason and I fear the experience the world hath already had of it will make demonstration enough of the inconvenience But however the differences are many Sect. 129. FIRST Our Prayers offered up by the Minister are in behalf and in the name of the People and therefore great reason they should know beforehand what is to be presented that if they like not the message they may refuse to communicate especially since people are so divided in their opinions in their hopes and in their faiths it being a duty to refuse communion with those prayers which they think to have in them the matter of sin or doubting Which reason on the other part ceases For the Minister being to speak from God to the people if he speaks what he ought not God can right himself however is not a partner of the sin as in the other case the people possibly may be Sect. 130. SECONDLY It is more fit a liberty be left in Preaching than Praying because the address of our discourses and exhortations are to be made according to the understanding and capacity of the audience their prejudices are to be removed all advantages to be taken and they are to be surprized that way they lie most open But being crafty I caught you saith St. Paul to the Corinthians And discourses and arguments ad hominem upon their particular principles and practises may more move them than the most polite and accurate that do not comply and wind about their fancies and affections St. Paul from the absurd practise of being baptized for the dead made an excellent Argument to convince the Corinthians of the Resurrection But this reason also ceases in our prayers For God understandeth what we say sure enough he hath no prejudices to be removed no infirmities to be wrought upon and a fine figure of Rhetorick a pleasant cadence and a curious expression move not him at all No other twinings and compliances stir him but charity and humility and zeal and importunity which all are things internal and spiritual It was observed by Pliny Deos non tam accuratis adorantium precibus quà m innocentiâ sanctitate laetari gratiorémque existimari qui delubris eorum puram castámque mentem quà m qui meditatum carmen intulerit And therefore of necessity there is to be great variety of discourses to the people and permissions accordingly but not so to God with whom a Deus miserere prevails as soon as the great Office of forty hours not long since invented in the Church of Rome or any other prayers spun out to a length beyond the extension of the office of a Pharisee Sect. 131. THIRDLY I fear it cannot stand with our reverence to God to permit to every spirit a liberty of publick address to him in behalf of the people Indeed he that is not fit to pray is not always fit to preach but it is more safe to be bold with the people than with God if the persons be not so fit In that there may be indiscretion but there may be impiety and irreligion in this The people may better excuse and pardon an indiscretion or a rudeness if any such should happen than
does our faith do the same thing for if we believe him there the want of bodily sight is supplied by the eye of faith and the Spirit is pretended to do no more in this particular and then his presence also will be less necessary because supplied by our own act Add to this That if after Christs ascension into Heaven he still would have been upon Earth in the Eucharist and received properly into our mouths and in all that manner which these men dream how ready it had been and easie to have comforted them who were troubled for want of his bodily presence by telling them Although I go to Heaven yet fear not to be deprived of the presence of my body for you shall have it more than before and much better for I will be with you and in you I was with you in a state of humility and mortality now I will be with you with a daily and mighty miracle I before gave you promises of grace and glory but now I will become to your bodies a seed of immortality And though you will not see me but under a vail yet it is certain I will be there in your Churches in your pixes in your mouths in your stomachs and you shall believe and worship Had not this been a certain clear and proportionable comfort to their complaint and present necessity if any such thing were intended It had been so certain so clear so proportionable that it is more than probable that if it had been true it had not been omitted But that such sacred things as these may not be exposed to contempt by such weak propositions and their trifling consequents the case is plain that Christ being to depart hence sent his holy Spirit in substitution to supply to his Church the office of a Teacher which he on Earth in person was to his Disciples when he went from hence he was to come no more in person and therefore he sent his substitute and therefore to pretend him to be here in person though under a disguise which we see through with the eye of Faith and converse with him by presential adoration of his humanity is in effect to undervalue the real purposes and sence of all the sayings of Christ concerning his departure hence and the deputation of the holy Spirit But for this because it is naturally impossible they have recourse to the Divine Omnipotency God can do it therefore he does But of this I shall give particular account in the Section of Reason as also the other arguments of Scripture I shall reduce to their heads of proper matter SECT X. The doctrine of Transubstantiation is against sense 1. THAT which is one of the firmest pillars upon which all humane notices and upon which all Christian Religion does rely cannot be shaken or if it be all Science and all Religion must be in danger Now beside that all our notices of things proceed from sense and our understanding receives his proper objects by the mediation of material and sensible phantasms and the soul in all her operations during this life is served by the ministeries of the body and the body works upon the soul only by sense besides this S. John hath placed the whole Religion of a Christian upon the certainty and evidence of sense as upon one unmoveable foundation That which was from the beginning which we have seen with our eyes which we have beheld and our hands have handled of the word of life And the life was made manifest and we have seen it and bear witness and declare unto you eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us which we have seen and heard we declare unto you Tertullian in his book de anima uses this very argument against the Marcionites Recita Johannis testationem quod vidimus inquit quod audivimus oculis nostris vidimus manus nostrae contrectaverunt de Sermone vitae Falsa utique testatio si oculorum aurium manuum sensus natura mentitur his testimony was false if eyes and ears and hands be deceived In Nature there is not a greater argument than to have heard and seen and handled Sed quia profundâ non licet luctarier Ratione tecum consulamus proxima Interrogetur ipsa naturalium Simplex sine arte sensuum sententia And by what means can an assent be naturally produced but by those instruments by which God conveys all notices to us that is by seeing and hearing Faith comes by hearing and evidence comes by seeing and if a man in his wits and in his health can be deceived in these things how can we come to believe Corpus enim per se communis deliquat esse Sensus quo nisi prima fides sundata valebit Haud erit occultis de rebus quo referentes Confirmare animi quicquam ratione queamus For if a Man or an Angel declares Gods will to us if we may not trust our hearing we cannot trust him for we know not whether indeed he says what we think he says and if God confirms the proposition by a miracle an ocular demonstration we are never the nearer to the believing him because our eyes are not to be trusted But if feeling also may be abused when a man is in all other capacities perfectly healthy then he must be governed by chance and walk in the dark and live upon shadows and converse with fantasms and illusions as it happens and then at last it will come to be doubted whether there be any such man as himself and whether he be awake when he is awake or not rather then only awake when he himself and all the world thinks him to have been asleep Oculatae sunt nostrae manus credunt quod vident 2. Now then to apply this to the present question in the words of S. Austin Quod ergo vidistis panis est calix quod vobis etiam oculi vestri renunciant That which our eyes have seen that which our hands have handled is bread we feel it taste it see it to be bread and we hear it called bread that very substance which is called the body of our Lord. Shall we now say our eyes are deceived our ears hear a false sound our taste is abused our hands are mistaken It is answered Nay our senses are not mistaken For our senses in health and due circumstances cannot be abused in their proper object but they may be deceived about that which is under the object of their senses they are not deceived in colour and shape and taste and magnitude which are the proper objects of our senses but they may be deceived in substances which are covered by these accidents and so it is not the outward sense so much as the inward sense that is abused For so Abraham when he saw an Angel in the shape of a humane body was not deceived in the shape of a man for there was such a shape
fuit dogma fidei said Scotus it was no Article of Faith and how it can be afterwards since Christ is only the Author and finisher of our Faith and therefore all Faith was delivered from the beginning is a matter of highest danger and consideration But yet this also I shall interpose if it may do any service in the question or help to remove a prejudice from our adversaries who are born up by the authority of that Council That the doctrine of Transubstantiation was not determined by the great Lateran Council The word was first invented by Stephen Bishop of Augustodunum about the year 1100 or a little after in his book De Sacramento Altaris and the word did so please Pope Innocentius III. that he inserted it into one of the 70 Canons which he proposed to the Lateran Council A. D. 1215. which Canons they heard read but determined nothing concerning them as Matthew Paris Platina and Nauclerus witness But they got reputation by being inserted by Gregory IX into his Decretals which yet he did not in the name of the Council but of Innocentius to the Council But the first that ever published these Canons under the name of the Lateran Council was Johannes Cochlaeus A. D. 1538. But the Article was determined at Rome 36 years after that Council by a general Council of 54 Prelates and no more And this was the first authority or countenance it had Stephen christened the Article and gave the name and this Congregation confirmed it SECT XIII Of Adoration of the Sacrament WHEN a proposition goes no further than the head and the tongue it can carry nothing with it but his own appendages viz. to be right or to be wrong and the man to be deceived or not deceived in his judgment But when it hath influence upon practice it puts on a new investiture and is tolerable or intolerable according as it leads to actions good or bad Now in all the questions of Christendom nothing is of greater effect or more material event than this For since by the decree of the Council of Trent they are bound to exhibit to the Sacrament the same worship which they give to the true God either this Sacrament is Jesus Christ or else they are very Idolaters I mean materially such even while in their purposes they decline it I will not quarrel with the words of the decree commanding to give Divine worship to the Sacrament which by the definition of their own Schools is an outward visible sign of an inward Spiritual grace and so they worship the sign and the grace with the worship due to God But that which I insist upon is this That if they be deceived in this difficult question against which there lie such infinite presumptions and evidence of sense and invincible reason and grounds of Scripture * and in which they are condemned by the Primitive Church and by the common principles of all Philosophy and the nature of things * and the analogy of the Sacrament * for which they had no warrant ever till they made one of their own * which themselves so little understand that they know not how to explicate it * nor agree in their own meaning nor cannot tell well what they mean * If I say they be deceived in their own strict Article besides the strict sence of which there are so many ways of verifying the words of Christ upon which all sides do rely then it is certain they commit an act of Idolatry in giving Divine honour to a meer creature which is the image the Sacrament and representment of the body of Christ and at least it is not certain that they are right there are certainly very great probabilities against them which ought to abate their confidence in the Article and though I am perswaded that the arguments against them are unanswerable for if I did not think so then I shall be able to answer them and if I were able to answer I would not seek to perswade others by that which does not perswade me yet all indifferent persons that is all those who will suffer themselves to be determined by some thing besides interest and education must needs say they cannot be certain they are right against whom there are so many arguments that they are in the wrong The Commandment to worship God alone is so express The distance between God and bread dedicated to the service of God is so vast the danger of worshipping that which is not God or of not worshipping that which is God is so formidable that it is infinitely to be presumed that if it had been intended that we should have worshipped the holy Sacrament the holy Scripture would have called it God or Jesus Christ or have bidden us in express terms to have adored it that either by the first as by a reason indicative or by the second as by a reason imperative we might have had sufficient warrant direct or consequent to have paid a Divine worship Now that there is no implicit warrant in the Sacramental words of This is my body I have given very many reasons to evince by proving the words to be Sacramental and figurative Add to this that supposing Christ present in their sences yet as they have ordered the business they have made it superstitious and Idololatrical for they declare that the Divine worship does belong also to the symbols of bread and wine as being one with Christ they are the words of Bellarmine That even the Species also with Christ are to be adored So Suarez which doctrine might upon the supposal of their grounds be excused if as Claudius de Sainctes dreamed they and the body of Christ had but one existence but this themselves admit not of but he is confuted by Suarez But then let it be considered that since those species or accidents are not inherent in the holy body nor have their existence from it but wholly subsist by themselves as they dream since between them and the holy body there is no substantial no personal union it is not imaginable how they can pass Divine worship to those accidents which are not in the body nor the same with the body but by an impossible supposition subsist of themselves and were proper to bread and now not communicable to Christ and yet not commit idolatry especially since the Nestorians were by the Fathers called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or worshippers of a man because they worshipped the humanity of Christ which they supposed not to be personally but habitually united to the Divinity 2. But secondly Suppose that the Article were true in Thesi and that the bread in consecration was changed as they suppose yet it is to be considered that that which is practicable in this Article is yet made as uncertain and dangerous as before For by many defects secret and insensible by many notorious and evident the change may be hindred and the symbols still remain as very bread
seed Must every Bramble every Thistle weed And when each hindrance to the Grain is gone A fruitful crop shall rise of Corn alone When therefore there were so many ways made to the Devil I was willing amongst many others to stop this also and I dare say few Questions in Christendom can say half so much in justification of their own usefulness and necessity I know Madam that they who are of the other side do and will disavow most of these consequences and so do all the World all the evils which their adversaries say do follow from their opinions but yet all the World of men that perceive such evils to follow from a proposition think themselves bound to stop the progression of such opinions from whence they believe such evils may arise If the Church of Rome did believe that all those horrid things were chargeable upon Transubstantiation and upon worshipping of Images which we charge upon the Doctrines I do not doubt but they would as much disown the Propositions as now they do the consequents and yet I do as little doubt but that we do well to disown the first because we espy the latter and though the Man be not yet the doctrines are highly chargeable with the evils that follow it may be the men espy them not yet from the doctrines they do certainly follow and there are not in the World many men who own that which is evil in the pretence but many do such as are dangerous in the effect and this doctrine which I have reproved I take to be one of them Object 4. But if Original sin be not a sin properly why are children baptized And what benefit comes to them by Baptism I answer As much as they need and are capable of and it may as well be asked Why were all the sons of Abraham circumised when in that Covenant there was no remission of sins at all for little things and legal impurities and irregularities there were but there being no sacrifice there but of Beasts whose blood could not take away sin it is certain and plainly taught us in Scripture that no Rite of Moses was expiatory of sins But secondly This Objection can press nothing at all for why was Christ baptized who knew no sin But yet so it behoved him to fulfil all Righteousness 3. Baptism is called regeneration or the new birth and therefore since in Adam Children are born only to a natural life and a natural death and by this they can never arrive at Heaven therefore Infants are baptized because until they be born anew they can never have title to the Promises of Jesus Christ or be heirs of Heaven and co-heirs of Jesus 4. By Bapâ—ism Children are made partakers of the holy Ghost and of the grace of God which I desire to be observed in opposition to the Pelagian Heresie who did suppose Nature to be so perfect that the grace of God was not necessary and that by Nature alone they could go to Heaven which because I affirm to be impossible and that Baptism is therefore necessary because nature is insufficient and Baptism is the great channel of grace there ought to be no envious and ignorant load laid upon my Doctrine as if it complied with the Pelagian against which it is so essentially and so mainly opposed in the main difference of his Doctrine 5. Children are therefore Baptized because if they live they will sin and though their sins are not pardoned before-hand yet in Baptism they are admitted to that state of favour that they are within the Covenant of repentance and Pardon and this is expresly the Doctrine of S. Austin lib. 1. de nupt concup cap. 26. cap. 33. tract 124. in Johan But of this I have already given larger accounts in my Discourse of Baptism Part 2. p. 194. in the Great Exemplar 6. Children are baptized for the Pardon even of Original Sin this may be affirmed truly but yet improperly for so far as it is imputed so far also it is remissible for the evil that is done by Adam is also taken away in Christ and it is imputed to us to very evil purposes as I have already explicated but as it was among the Jews who believed then the sin to be taken away when the evil of punishment is taken off so is Original Sin taken away in Baptism for though the Material part of the evil is not taken away yet the curse in all the sons of God is turned into a blessing and is made an occasion of reward or an entrance to it Now in all this I affirm all that is true and all that is probable for in the same sence as Original stain is a sin so does Baptism bring the Pardon It is a sin metonymically that is because it is the effect of one sin and the cause of many and just so in Baptism it is taken away that it is now the matter of a grace and the opportunity of glory and upon these Accounts the Church Baptizes all her Children Object 5. But to deny Original Sin to be a sin properly and inherently is expresly against the words of S. Paul in the fifth Chapter to the Romans If it be I have done but that it is not I have these things to say 1. If the words be capable of any interpretation and can be permitted to signifie otherwise than is vulgarly pretended I suppose my self to have given reasons sufficient why they ought to be For any interpretation that does violence to right Reason to Religion to Holiness of life and the Divine Attributes of God is therefore to be rejected and another chosen For in all Scriptures all good and all wise men do it 2. The words in question sin and sinner and condemnation are frequently used in Scripture in the lesser sence and sin is taken for the punishment of sin and sin is taken for him who bore the evil of the sin and sin is taken for legal impurity and for him who could not be guilty even for Christ himself as I have proved already and in the like manner sinners is used by the rule of Conjugates and denominatives but it is so also in the case of Bathsheba the Mother of Solomon 3. For the word condemnation it is by the Apostle himself limited to signifie temporal death for when the Apostle says Death passed upon all men in as much as all men have sinned he must mean temporal death for eternal death did not pass upon all men or if he means eternal death he must not mean that it came for Adams sin but in as much as all men have sinned that is upon all those upon whom eternal death did come it came because they also have sinned For if it had come for Adams sin then it had absolutely descended upon all men because from Adam all men descended and therefore all men upon that account were equally guilty as we see all men die naturally 4. The
Apostle here speaks of sin imputed therefore not of sin inherent and if imputed only to such purposes as he here speaks of viz. to temporal death then it is neither a sin properly nor yet imputable to Eternal death so far as is or can be implied by the Apostles words And in this I am not a little confirmed by the discourse of S. Irenaeus to this purpose lib. 3. cap. 35. Propter hoc initio transgressionis Adae c. Therefore in the beginning of Adams transgression as the Scripture tells God did not curse Adam but the Earth in his labours as one of the Ancients saith God removed the curse upon the Earth that it might not abide on man But the condemnation of his sin he received weariness and labour and to eat in the sweat of his brows and to return to dust again and likewise the woman had for her punishment tediousness labours groans sorrows of child-birth and to serve her husband that they might not wholly perish in the curse not yet despise God while they remained without punishment But all the curse run upon the Serpent who seduced them and this our Lord in the Gospel saith to them on his left hand Go ye cursed into everlasting fire which my Father prepared for the Devil and his Angels signifying that not to man in the prime intention was eternal fire prepared but to him who was the seducer but this they also shall justly feel who like them without repentance and departing from them persevere in the works of malice 5. The Apostle says By the disobedience of one many were made sinners By which it appears that we in this have no sin of our own neither is it at all our own formally and inherently for though efficiently it was his and effectively ours as to certain purposes of imputation yet it could not be a sin to us formally because it was Vnius inobedientia the disobedience of one man therefore in no sence could it be properly ours For then it were not Vnius but inobedientia singulorum the disobedience of all men 6. Whensoever another mans sin is imputed to his relative therefore because it is anothers and imputed it can go no further but to effect certain evils to afflict the relative and to punish the cause not formally to denominate the descendant or relative to be a sinner for it is as much a contradiction to say that I am formally by him a sinner as that I did really do his action Now to impute in Scripture signifies to reckon as if he had done it Not to impute is to treat him so as if he had not done it So far then as the imputation is so far we are reckoned as sinners but Adams sin being by the Apostle signified to be imputed but to the condemnation or sentence to a temporal death so far we are sinners in him that is so as that for his sake death was brought upon us And indeed the word imputare to impute does never signifie more nor always so much Imputare verò frequenter ad significationem exprobrantis accedit sed ciâ—râ— reprehensionem says Laurentius Valla It is like an exprobration but short of a reprooâ— so Quintilian Imputas nobis propitios ventos secundum mare ac civitatis opulenâ—ae liberalitatem Thou dost impute that is upbraid to us our prosperous voyages and a calm Sea and the liberality of a rich City Imputare signifies oftentimes the same that computare to reckon or account Nam haec in quartâ non imputantur say the Lawyers they are not imputed that is they are not computed or reckoned Thus Adams sin is imputed to us that is it is put into our reckoning and when we are sick and die we pay our Symbols the portion of evil that is laid upon us and what Marcus said I may say in this case with a little variety Legata in haereditate sive legatum datum sit haeredi sive percipere sive deducere vel retinere passus est ei imputantur The legacy whether it be given or left to the heir whether he may take it or keep it is still imputed to him that is it is within his reckoning But no reason no Scripture no Religion does inforce and no Divine Attribute does permit that we should say that God did so impute Adams sin to his posterity that he did really esteem them to be guilty of Adams sin equally culpable equally hateful For if in this sence it be true that in him we sinned then we sinned as he did that is with the same malice in the same action and then we are as much guilty as he but if we have sinned less then we did not sin in him for to sin in him could not by him be lessened to us for what we did in him we did by him and therefore as much as he did but if God imputed this sin less to us than to him then this imputation supposes it only to be a collateral and indirect account to such purposes as he pleased of which purposes we judge by the analogy of faith by the words of Scripture by the proportion and notices of the Divine Attributes 7. There is nothing in the design or purpose of the Apostle that can or ought to infer any other thing for his purpose is to signifie that by mans sin death entred into the world which the son of Sirach Ecclus. 25.33 expresses thus A muliere factum est initium peccati inde est quod morimur from the woman is the beginning of sin and from her it is that we all die and again Ecclus. 1.24 By the envy of the Devil death came into the world this evil being Universal Christ came to the world and became our head to other purposes even to redeem us from death which he hath begun and will finish and to become to us our Parent in a new birth the Author of a spiritual life and this benefit is of far more efficacy by Christ than the evil could be by Adam and as by Adam we are made sinners so by Christ we are made righteous not just so but so and more and therefore as our being made sinners signifies that by him we die so being by Christ made righteous must at least signifie that by him we live and this is so evident to them who read S. Pauls words Rom. 5. from verse 12. to verse 19. inclusively that I wonder any man should make a farther question concerning them especially since Erasmus and Grotius who are to be reckoned amongst the greatest and the best expositors of Scripture that any age since the Apostles and their immediate successors hath brought forth have so understood and rendred it But Madam that your Honour may read the words and their sence together and see that without violence they signifie what I have said and no more I have here subjoyned a Paraphrase of them in which if I use any violence I can very easily be reproved
authorem antecessorem hoc modo Ecclesiae Apostolicae census suos deferunt c. And when S. Irenaeus had reckoned twelve successions in the Church of Rome from the Apostles nunc duodecimo loco ab Apostolis Episcopatum habet Eleutherius Hâc ordinatione saith he successione ea quae est ab Apostolis in Ecclesiâ traditio veritatis praeconiatio pervenit usque ad nos est plenissima haec ostensio unam eandem vivatricem fidem esse quae in Ecclesiâ ab Apostolis usque nunc sit conservata tradita in veritate So that this succession of Bishops from the Apostles ordination must of it self be a very certain thing when the Church made it a main probation of their faith for the books of Scripture were not all gathered together and generally received as yet Now then since this was a main pillar of their Christianity viz. a constant reception of it from hand to hand as being delivered by the Bishops in every chair till we come to the very Apostles that did ordain them this I say being their proof although it could not be more certain than the thing to be proved which in that case was a Divine revelation yet to them it was more evident as being matter of fact and known almost by evidence of sense and as verily believed by all as it was by any one that himself was baptized both relying upon the report of others Radix Christianae societatis per sedes Apostolorum successiones Episcoporum certâ per orbem propagatione diffunditur saith S. Augustin The very root and foundation of Christian communion is spread all over the world by the successions of Apostles and Bishops And is it not now a madness to say there was no such thing no succession of Bishops in the Churches Apostolical no ordination of Bishops by the Apostles and so as S. Paul's phrase is overthrow the faith of some even of the Primitive Christians that used this argument as a great weapon of offence against the invasion of Hereticks and factious people It is enough for us that we can truly say with S. Irenaeus Habemus annumerare eos qui ab Apostolis instituti sunt Episcopi in Ecclesiis usque ad nos We can reckon those who from the Apostles until now were made Bishops in the Churches and of this we are sure enough if there be any faith in Christians SECT XIX So that Episcopacy is at least an Apostolical Ordinance Of the same Authority with many other points generally believed THE summe is this Although we had not proved the immediate Divine institution of Episcopal power over Presbyters and the whole flock yet Episcopacy is not less than an Apostolical ordinance and delivered to us by the same authority that the observation of the Lords day is For for that in the new Testament we have no precept and nothing but the example of the Primitive Disciples meeting in their Synaxes upon that day and so also they did on the saturday in the Jewish Synagogues but yet however that at Geneva they were once in meditation to have changed it into a Thursday meeting to have shown their Christian liberty we should think strangely of those men that called the Sunday Festival less than an Apostolical ordinance and necessary now to be kept holy with such observances as the Church hath appointed * Baptism of infants is most certainly a holy and charitable ordinance and of ordinary necessity to all that ever cried and yet the Church hath founded this rite upon the tradition of the Apostles and wise men do easily observe that the Anabaptist can by the same probability of Scripture inforce a necessity of communicating infants upon us as we do of baptizing infants upon them if we speak of immediate Divine institution or of practice Apostolical recorded in Scripture and therefore a great Master of Geneva in a book he writ against the Anabaptists was forced to flye to Apostolical traditive ordination and therefore the institution of Bishops must be served first as having fairer plea and clearer evidence in Scripture than the baptizing of infants and yet they that deny this are by the just anathema of the Catholick Church confidently condemned for Hereticks * Of the same consideration are divers other things in Christianity as the Presbyters consecrating the Eucharist for if the Apostles in the first institution did represent the whole Church Clergy and Laity when Christ said Hoc facite do this then why may not every Christian man there represented do that which the Apostles in the name of all were commanded to do If the Apostles did not represent the whole Church why then do all communicate Or what place or intimation of Christ's saying is there in all the four Gospels limiting Hoc facite id est benedicite to the Clergy and extending Hoc facite id est accipite manducate to the Laity This also rests upon the practice Apostolical and traditive interpretation of H. Church and yet cannot be denied that so it ought to be by any man that would not have his Christendom suspected * To these I add the communion of Women the distinction of books Apocryphal from Canonical that such books were written by such Evangelists and Apostles the whole tradition of Scripture it self the Apostles Creed the feast of Easter which amongst all them that cry up the Sunday-Festival for a divine institution must needs prevail as Caput institutionis it being that for which the Sunday is commemorated These and divers others of greater consequence which I dare not specifie for fear of being misunderstood relye but upon equal faith with this of Episcopacy though I should wave all the arguments for immediate Divine ordinance and therefore it is but reasonable it should be ranked amongst the Credenda of Christianity which the Church hath entertained upon the confidence of that which we call the faith of a Christian whose Master is truth it self SECT XX. And was an office of Power and great Authority WHAT their power and eminence was and the appropriates of their office so ordained by the Apostles appears also by the testimonies before alledged the expressions whereof run in these high terms Episcopatus administrandae Ecclesiae in Lino Linus his Bishoprick was the administration of the whole Church Ecclesiae praefuisse was said of him and Clemens they were both Prefects of the Church or Prelates that 's the Church-word Ordinandis apud Cretam Ecclesiis praeficitur so Titus he is set over all the affairs of the new-founded Churches in Crete In celsiori gradu collocatus placed in a higher order or degree so the Bishop of Alexandria chosen ex Presbyteris from amongst the Presbyters Supra omnia Episcopalis apicis so Philo of that Bishoprick The seat of Episcopal height above all things in Christianity These are its honours Its offices these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. To set in order whatsoever he sees
Antioch for a time was governed for all these were Presbyters in the sence that S. Peter and S. John were and the Elders of the Church of Jerusalem * 4. Suppose this had been true in the sence that any body please to imagine yet this not being by any divine Ordinance that Presbyters should by their counsel assist in external regiment of the Church neither by any imitation of Scripture nor by affirmation of S. Hierom it is sufficient to stifle this by that saying of S. Ambrose Postquà m omnibus locis Ecclesiae sunt constitutae officia ordinata aliter composita res est quam coeperat It might be so at first de facto and yet no need to be so neither then nor after For at first Ephesus had no Bishop of its own nor Crete and there was no need for S. Paul had the supra-vision of them and S. John and other of the Apostles but yet afterwards S. Paul did send Bishops thither for when themselves were to go away the power must be concredited to another And if they in their absence before the constituting of a Bishop had intrusted the care of the Church with Presbyters yet it was but in dependance on the Apostles and by substitution not by any ordinary power and it ceased at the presence or command of the Apostle or the sending of a Bishop to reside 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So S. Ignatius being absent from his Church upon a business of being persecuted he writ to his Presbyters Do you feed the Flock amongst you till God shall shew you who shall be your Ruler viz. My Successor No longer Your Commission expires when a Bishop comes * 5. To the conclusion of S. Hierom's discourse viz. That Bishops are not greater than Presbyters by the truth of Divine disposition I answer that this is true in this sence Bishops are not by Divine disposition greater than all those which in Scripture are called Presbyters such as were the Elders in the Councel at Jerusalem such as were they of Antioch such as S. Peter and S. John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all and yet all of them were not Bishops in the present sence that is of a fixt and particular Diocess and Jurisdiction * Secondly S. Hierom's meaning is also true in this sence Bishops by the truth of the Lords disposition are not greater than Presbyters viz. quoad exercitium actûs that is they are not tyed to exercise jurisdiction solely in their own persons but may asciscere sibi Presbyteros in commune consilium they may delegate jurisdiction to the Presbyters and that they did not so but kept the exercise of it only in their own hands in S. Hierome's time this is it which he saith is rather by custom than by Divine dispensation for it was otherwise at first viz. de facto and might be so still there being no Law of God against the delegation of power Episcopal * As for the last words in the Objection Et in communi debere Ecclesiam regere it is an assumentum of S. Hierom's own for all his former discourse was of the identity of Names and common Regiment de facto not de jure and from a fact to conclude with a Deberet is a Non sequitur unless this Debere be understood according to the exigence of the former Arguments that is they ought not by God's Law but in imitation of the practice Apostolical to wit when things are as they were then when the Presbyters are such as then they were they ought for many considerations and in great cases not by the necessity of a precept * And indeed to do him right he so explains himself Et in communi debere Ecclesiam regere imitantes Moysen qui cum haberet in potestate solus praeesse populo Israel septuaginta elegit cum quibus populum judicaret The Presbyters ought to judge in common with the Bishop for the Bishops ought to imitate Moses who might have ruled alone yet was content to take others to him and himself only to rule in chief Thus S. Hierome would have the Bishops do but then he acknowledges the right of sole jurisdiction to be in them and therefore though his counsel perhaps might be good then yet it is necessary at no time and was not followed then and to be sure is needless now For the Arguments which S. Hierome uses to prove this intention what ever it is I have and shall elsewhere produce for they yield many other considerations than this collection of S. Hierome and prove nothing less than the equality of the Offices of Episcopacy and Presbyterate The same thing is per omnia respondent to the parallel place of S. Chrysostom It is needless to repeat either the Objection or Answer * But however this saying of S. Hierome and the parallel of S. Chrysostom is but like an argument against an evident truth which comes forth upon a desperate service and they are sure to be killed by the adverse party or to run upon their own Swords For either they are to be understood in the sences above explicated and then they are impertinent or else they contradict evidence of Scripture and Catholick antiquity and so are false and die within their own trenches I end this argument of tradition Apostolical with that saying of Saint Hierome in the same place Postquam Vnusquisque eos quos baptizabat suos putabat esse non Christi diceretur in populis Ego sum Pauli Ego Apollo Ego autem Cephae in toto orbe decretum est ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris ut schismatum semina tollerentur That is a publick decree issued out in the Apostles times that in all Churches one should be chosen out of the Clergy and set over them viz. to rule and govern the Flock committed to his charge This I say was in the Apostles times even upon the occasion of the Corinthian schism for then they said I am of Paul and I of Apollo and then it was that he that baptized any Catechumens took them for his own not as Christ's Disciples So that it was tempore Apostolorum that this decree was made for in the time of the Apostles S. James and S. Mark and S. Timothy and S. Titus were made Bishops by S. Hieroms express attestation It was also toto orbe decretum so that if it had not been proved to have been an immediate Divine institution yet it could not have gone much less it being as I have proved and as S. Hierom acknowledges Catholick and Apostolick * SECT XXII And all this hath been the Faith and practice of Christendom BE ye followers of me as I am of Christ is an Apostolical precept We have seen how the Apostles have followed Christ how their tradition is consequent of Divine institution Next let us see how the Church hath followed the Apostles as the Apostles have followed Christ. Catholick practice is the next Basis of the
thing could be and not be at the same time then there would be something whose being were not to be Nay Dominicus à Soto affirms expresly that not only things only cannot be done by God which intrinsecally formally and expresly infer two contradictories but those also which the understanding at the first proposal does by his natural light dissent from and can by no means admit because that which is so repugnant to the understanding naturally does suâ naturâ repugnare is impossible in the nature of things and therefore when it is said in S. Luke nothing is impossible with God it is meant Nothing is impossible but that which naturally repugnes to the understanding Now to apply this to the present question Our adversaries do not deny but that in the doctrine of Transubstantiation there are a great many impossibilities which are such naturally and ordinarily but by Divine power they can be done but that they are done they have no warrant but the plain literal sence of the words of Hoc est corpus meum Now this is so far from proving that God does work perpetual miracles to verifie their sence of it that the working of miracles ought to prove that to be the sence of it Now the probation of a proposition by miracles is an open thing clear as thunder and being a matter of sense and consequently more known than the thing which they intend to prove ought not to be proved by that which is the thing in question And therefore to say that God will work a miracle rather than his words should be false is certain but impertinent For concerning the words themselves there is no question and therefore now no more need of miracles to confirm them concerning the meaning of them is the question They say this is the meaning Quest. How do you prove it since there are so many impossibilities in it naturally and ordinarily Answ. Because God said it therefore it is true Resp. Yea that God said the words we doubt not but that his words are to be understood in your sence that I doubt because if I believe your sence I must admit many things ordinarily impossible Answ. Yea but nothing is impossible to God Resp. True nothing that can be done exceeds his power but supposing this absolutely possible yet how does it appear that God will do a miracle to verifie your sence which otherwise cannot be true when without a miracle the words may be true in many other sences Jam dic posthume for it is hard that men by a continual effort and violence should maintain a proposition against reason and his unquestionable maximes thinking it sufficient to oppose against it Gods omnipotency as if the crying out a miracle were a sufficient guard against all absurdity in the world as if the wisdom of God did arm his power against his truth and that it were a fineness of Spirit to be able to believe the two parts of a contradiction and all upon confidence of a miracle which they cannot prove And indeed it were something strange that thousands and thousands of times every day for above 1500 years together the same thing should be done and yet this should be called a miracle that is a daily extraordinary for by this time it would pass into nature and a rule and so become a supernatural natural event an extraregular rule an extraordinary ordinary a perpetual wonder that is a wonder and no wonder and therefore I may infer the proper corollaries of this argument in the words of Scotus whose opinion it was pity it could be overborn by tyranny 1. That the truth of the Eucharist may be saved without Transubstantiation And this I have already proved 2. The substance of bread under the accidents is more a nourishment than the accidents themselves and therefore more represents Christs body in the formality of Spiritual nourishment And indeed that I may add some weight to these words of Scotus which are very true and very reasonable 1. It cannot be told why bread should be chosen for the symbol of the body but because of his nourishing faculty and that the accidents should nourish without substance is like feeding a man with musick and quenching his thirst with a Diagram 2. It is fantastical and mathematical bread not natural which by the doctrine of Transubstantiation is represented on the table and therefore unfit to nourish or to typifie that which can 3. Painted bread might as well be symbolical as the real if the real bread become no bread for then that which remains is nothing but the accidents as colour and dimensions c. But Scotus proceeds 3. That understanding of the words of institution that the substance of bread is not there seems harder to be maintained and to it more inconveniences are consequent than by putting the substance of bread to be there 4. Lastly It is a wonder why in one Article which is not a principal Article of faith such a sence should be affirmed for which faith is exposed to the contempt of all that follow reason and all this is because iâ— Transubstantiation there are many natural and ordinary impossibilities In hâ—c conversione sunt plura difficiliora quà m in creatione said Aquinas There are more difficulties in this conversion of the Sacrament than in the whole Creation 9. But then because we are speaking concerning what may be done by God it ought to be considered that it is rash and impudent to say that the body of Christ cannot by the power of God who can do all things be really in the Sacrament without the natural conversion of bread into him God can make that the body of Christ should be de novo in the Sacrament of the Altar without any change of it self and without the change of any thing into it self yet some change being made about the bread or something else They are the words of Durand Cannot God in any sence make this proposition true This bread is the body of Christ or this is bread and Christs body too If they say he cannot then it is a clear case who it is that denies Gods omnipotency If God can then how will they be able from the words of Scripture to prove Transubstantiation This also would be considered 10. But now concerning impossibilities if it absolutely can be evinc'd that this doctrine of Transubstantiation does affirm contradictions then it is not only an intolerable prejudice against the doctrine as is the ordinary and natural impossibility but it will be absolutely impossible to be true and it derogates from God to affirm such a proposition in religion and much more to adopt it into the body of faith And therefore when S. Paul had quoted that place of Scripture He hath put all things under him he adds It is evident that he is excepted who did put all things under him for if this had not been so understood then he should have been under himself and he
excused by the wronged preserved person the evil accident was taken off by the pious purpose But he that to dishonour his friend throws a glass of wine in his face and says he did it in sport may be judged by his purpose not by his pretence because the pretence can be confuted by the observation of little circumstances and adherencies of the action which yet peradventure cannot legally be proved Alitèr leges alitèr philosophi tollunt astutias leges quatenus tenere manu res possunt philosophi quatenus ratione intelligentiâ Laws regard the great materialities of obedience the real sensible effect But wise men Philosophers and private Judges take in the accounts of accidental moments and incidencies to the action said Cicero But 3. Gods judgment is otherwise yet for he alone can tell the affection and all that which had secret influence into the event and therefore he can judge by what is secret by the purpose and heart which is indeed the only way of doing exact justice From hence it follows that what ought not to dissolve the friendship of man may yet justly dissolve our friendship with God for he takes other measures than men may or can 16. IV. Because offences against God may be avoided but it is not so in our entercourses with men for God hath told us plainly what is our duty what he expects what will please and what will displease him but men are often governed by Chance and that which pleases them to day shall provoke them to morrow and the next day you shall be their enemy for that for which three days ago they paid you thanks 17. V. If men exact little things it becomes their own case for we sin against our brother and need his pardon and therefore Hanc veniam petimúsque damúsque vicissim We give and ask pardon Det ille veniam facilè cui veniâ est opus But we never found iniquity in God or injustice in the most High and therefore he that is innocent may throw a stone at the criminal 18. VI. God hath in the smallest instance left us without excuse for he hath often warned us of small offences * He hath told us their danger He that despiseth little things shall perish by little and little * He hath told us they asperse us with a mighty guilt for he that offends in one Commandment is guilty of all * He hath told us that we are not certainly excused though our conscience do not manifestly accuse us for so S. Paul I am not hereby justified for God is greater than my conscience * He hath threatned loss of Heaven to him that is guilty of the breach of one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though of the least of these Commandments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these which Christ had reckoned in his Sermon where fetters are laid upon thoughts and words shall be called the least in the Kingdom that is he shall be quite shut out for minimus here is as much as nullus minimus vocabitur that is minimi aestimabitur he shall not be esteem'd at all in the accounts of doomsday mercy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the accounts of the Doomsday book where there shall be a discerning of them who shall be glorified from them that are to be punished And this which is one of the severest periods of holy Scripture can by no arts be turned aside from concluding fully in this question Bellarmine says it means only to condemn those who by false doctrines corrupt these severe precepts and teach men as the Pharisees did of old not all those who break them themselves if they teach others to keep them He that breaks one of these and shall teach men so to do so are the words of Christ. But it is a known thing that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is oftentimes used for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that breaks one of these or shall teach others The words were spoken to the persons of the Apostles who were to teach these doctrines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exactly as Christ preach'd them but without peradventure they were also intended to all the Church and the following words and the whole analogy of the adjoyned discourse make it clear to every observing Reader and the words plainly say this He that shall break one of these least Commandments and He that shall teach men so each of them shall be called the least in the Kingdom But 2. why did our blessed Lord so severely threaten those that should teach others to break any of these severe Commandments by false interpretation but only because it was so necessary for all to keep them in the true sence and so fearful a thing to any to break them 3. Those who preach severe doctrines to others and touch them not with one of their fingers are guilty of that which Christ reproved in the Pharisees and themselves shall be cast-aways while they preach to others so that the breaking it by disobedience is damnable as well as the breaking it by false interpretation Odi homines ignavâ operâ philosophâ sententiâ Qui cum sibi semitam non sapiant alteri monstrant viam Indeed it is intolerable to teach men to be vicious but it is a hateful baseness to shew others that way which our selves refuse to walk in Whatever therefore may not be allowed to be taught may not also be done for the people are not to be taught evil because they must not do evil but may the teachers do what they may not teach and what the people may not do or is not the same punishment to them both 4. Now upon these grounds this very gloss which Bellarmine gives being a false interpretation of these words of Christ which are a summary of his whole Sermon and as it were the sanction and establishment of the former and following periods into laws must needs be of infinite danger to the inventer and followers of it for this gloss gives leave to men to break the least of these Commandments some way or other if they do not teach others so to do without being affrighted with fears of Hell but in the mean while this gloss teaches or gives leave to others to break them but allows no false interpretation of them but its own 5. But then it is worse with them who teach others so to do and command all men to teach so and if the Roman Doctors who teach that some breach of these Commandments is not of its own nature and by the divine threatnings exclusive of the transgressors from the Kingdom of God be not in some sence a teaching men so to do then nothing is For when God said to Adam That day thou eatest of the forbidden fruit thou shalt die the Tempter said Nay but ye shall not die and so was author to Adam of committing his sin So when our blessed Saviour hath told us that to break one of these least Commandments is exclusive
and love according to that of S. Austin Poenitentiam certam non facit nisi odium peccati amor Dei. Hatred of sin and the love of God make repentance firm and sure nothing else can do it but this is a work of time but such a work that without it be done our pardon is not perfect 27. Now of this Contrition relying upon motives of pleasure and objects of amability being the noblest principle of action and made up of the love of God and holy things and holy expectations the product is quite differing from that of Attrition or the imperfect repentance for that commencing upon fear or displeasure is only apt to produce a dereliction or quitting of our sin and all the servile affections of frighted or displeased persons But this would not effect an universal obedience which only can be effected by love and the affection of sons which is also the product of those objects which are the incentives of the Divine love and is called Contrition that is a hatred against sin as being an enemy to God and all our hopes of enjoying God whom because this repenting man loves and delights in he also hates whatsoever God hates and is really griev'd for ever having offended so good a God and for having endangered his hopes of dwelling with him whom he so loves and therefore now does the quite contrary 28. Now this is not usually the beginning of repentance but is a great progression in it and it contains in it obedience He that is attrite leaves his sin but he that is contrite obeys God and pursues the interests and acquists of vertue so that Contrition is not only a sorrow for having offended God whom the penitent loves that is but one act or effect of Contrition but Contrition loves God and hates sin it leaves this and adheres to him abstains from evil and does good dies to sin and lives to righteousness and is a state of pardon and acceptable services 29. But then there is a sorrow also proper to it For as this grace comes from the noblest passions and apprehensions so it does operate in the best manner and to the noblest purposes It hates sin upon higher contemplations than he that hates it upon the stock of fear he hates sin as being against God and Religion and right reason that is he is gone farther from sin He hates it for it self Poenitet ô si quid miserorum creditur ulli Poenitet facto torqueor ipse meo Cúmque sit exilium magis est mihi culpa dolori Estque pati poenam quà m meruisse minus That is not only the evil effect to himself but the irregularity and the displeasure to Almighty God are the incentives of his displeasure against sin and because in all these passions and affective motions of the mind there is a sorrow under some shape or other this sorrow or displeasure is that which is a very acceptable signification and act of repentance and yet it is not to be judged of by sense but by reason by the caution and enmity against sin to which this also is to be added 30. That if any man enquires whether or no his hatred against sin proceed from the love of God or no that is whether it be Attrition or Contrition he is only to observe whether he does endeavour heartily and constantly to please God by obedience for this is love that we keep his Commandments and although sometimes we may tell concerning our love as well as concerning our fear yet when the direct principle is not so evident our only way left to try is by the event That is Contrition which makes us to exterminate and mortifie sin and endeavour to keep the Commandments of God For that is sorrow proceeding from love 31. And now it is no wonder if to Contrition pardon be so constantly annexed in all the Discourses of Divines but unless Contrition be thus understood and if a single act of something like it be mistaken for the whole state of this grace we shall be deceived by applying false promises to a real need or true promises to an incompetent and uncapable state of things But when it is thus meant all the sorrows that can come from this principle are signs of life His lachrymis vitam damus miserescimus ultró No man can deny pardon to such penitents nor cease to joy in such tears 32. The summ of the present enquiry is this Contrition is sometimes used for a part of repentance sometimes taken for the whole duty As it is a part so it is that displeasure at sin and hatred of it which is commonly expressed in sorrow but for ever in the leaving of it It is sometimes begun with fear sometimes with shame and sometimes with kindness with thankfulness and love but Love and Obedience are ever at the latter end of it though it were not at the beginning and till then it is called Attrition But when it is taken for the whole duty it self as it is always when it is effective of pardon then the elements of it or parts of the constitution are fides futuri saeculi Judicii fides in promissis passionibus Christi timor Divinae majestatis amor misericordiae dolor pro peccatis spes veniae petitio pro gratiâ Faith in the promises and sufferings of Christ an assent to the Article of the day of Judgment and the world to come with all the consequent perswasions and practices effected on the spirit fear of the Divine Majesty love of his mercy grief for our sins begging for grace hope of pardon and in this sence it is true Cor contritum Deus non despiciet God will never refuse to accept of a heart so contrite SECT IV. Of Confession 33. THE modern Schoolmen make Contrition to include in it a resolution to submit to the Keys of the Church that is that Confession to a Priest is a part of Contrition as Contrition is taken for a part of Repentance for it is incomplete till the Church hath taken notice of it but by submission to the Church Tribunal it is made complete and not only so but that which was but Attrition is now turned into Contrition or perfect Repentance In the examining of this I shall because it is reasonable so to do change their manner of speaking that the inquiry may be more material and intelligible That Contrition does include in it a resolution to submit to the Church Tribunal must either mean that godly sorrow does in its nature include a desire of Confession to a Priest and then the very word confutes the thing or else by Contrition they meaning so much of Repentance as is sufficient to pardon mean also that to submit to the Keys or to confess to a Priest is a necessary or integral part of that Repentance and therefore of Contrition Concerning the other part of their affirmative that Attrition is by the Keys chang'd into Contrition this being
a life of piety and holiness SECT VIII 100. XIV IN the making Confession of our sins let us be most careful to do it so as may most glorifie God and advance the reputation of his wisdom his justice and his mercy For if we consider it in all Judicatories of the world and in all the arts and violences of men which have been used to extort confessions their purposes have been that justice should be done that the publick wisdom and authority should not be dishonoured that publick criminals should not be defended or assisted by publick pity or the voice of the people sharpned against the publick rods and axes by supposing they have smitten the innocent Confession of the crime prevents all these evils and does well serve all these good ends Gnossius haec Rhadamanthus habet durissima regna Castigátque audÃtque dolos subigÃtque fateri So the Heathens did suppose was done in the lower regions The Judge did examine and hear their crimes and crafts and even there compell'd them to confess that the eternal Justice may be publickly acknowledg'd for all the honour that we can do to the Divine attributes is publickly to confess them and make others so to do for so God is pleased to receive honour from us Therefore repentance being a return to God a ceasing to dishonour him any more and a restoring him so far as we can to the honour we depriv'd him of it ought to be done with as much humility and sorrow with as clear glorifications of God and condemnations of our selves as we can To which purpose 101. XV. He that confesseth his sins must do it with all sincerity and simplicity of spirit not to serve ends or to make Religion the minister of design but to destroy our sin to shame and punish our selves to obtain pardon and institution always telling our sad story just as it was in its acting excepting where the manner of it and its nature or circumstances require a veil and then the sin must not be concealed nor yet so represented as to keep the first immodesty alive in him that acted it or to become a new temptation in him that hears it But this last caution is only of use in our confessions to the Minister of holy things for our confession to God as it is to other purposes so must be in other manners but I have already given accounts of this I only add that 102. XVI All our confessions must be accusations of our selves and not of others For if we confess to God then to accuse another may spoil our own duty but it can serve no end for God already knows all that we can say to lessen or to aggravate the sin if we confess to men then to name another or by any way to signifie or reveal him is a direct defamation and unless the naming of the sin do of it self declare the assisting party it is at no hand to be done or to be inquired into But if a man hath committed incest and there is but one person in the world with whom he could commit it in this case the confessing his sin does accuse another but then such a Guide of souls is to be chosen to whom that person is not known but if by this or some other expedient the fame of others be not secured it is best to confess that thing to God only and so much of the sin as may aggravate it to an equal height with its own kind in special may be communicated to him of whom we ask comfort and counsel and institution If to confess to a Priest were a Divine Commandment this caution would have in it some difficulty and much variety but since the practice is recommended to us wholly upon the stock of prudence and great charity the doing it ought not in any sence to be uncharitable to others 103. XVII He that hath injur'd his neighbour must confess to him and he that hath sinn'd against the Church must make amends and confess to the Church when she declares her self to be offended For when a fact is done which cannot naturally be undone the only duty that can remain is to rescind it morally and make it not to be any longer or any more For as our conservation is a continual creation so is the perpetuating of a sin a continuation of its being and actings and therefore to cease from it is the death of the sin for the present and sor the future but to confess it â—o hate it to wish it had never been done is all the possibility that is left to annihilate the act which naturally can never be undone and therefore to all persons that are injur'd to confess the sin must needs be a duty because it is the first part of amends and sometimes all that is left but it is that which God and man requires before they are willing to pardon the offender For until the erring man confesses it does not appear who is innocent and who is guilty or whether the offended person have any thing to forgive And this is the meaning of these preceptive words of S. James Confess your sins one to another that is to the Church who are scandalized and who can forgive and pray for the repenting sinner and confess to him that is injur'd that you may do him right that so you may cease to do wrong that you may make your way for pardon and offer amends This only and all of this is the meaning of the precept 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say the Greek Commentaries upon Acts 19.18 Every faithful man must declare or confess his sins and must stand in separation that he may be reproved and that he may promise he will not do the same again according to that which is said Do thou first declare thy sins that thou mayest be justified nad again A just man in the beginning of his speech is an accuser of himself No man is a true penitent if he refuses or neglects to confess his sins to God in all cases or to his brother if he have injur'd him or to the Church if she be offended or where she requires it for wheresoever a man is bound to repent there he is bound to Confession which is an acknowledgement of the injury and the first instance and publication of repentance In other cases Confession may be of great advantage in these it is a duty 104. XVIII Let no man think it a shame to confess his sin or if he does yet let not that shame deterr him from it There is indeed a shame in confession because nakedness is discovered but there is also a glory in it because there is a cure too there is repentance and amendment This advice is like that which is given to persons giving their lives in a good cause requiring thâ—â— not to be afraid that is not to suffer such a fear as to be hindred from dying For if they suffer a great natural fear and yet in
this sin to be theirs upon whom the condemnation comes I easily subscribe to it but then take in the words of S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by one sin or by the sin of one the curse passed upon all men unto condemnation that is the curse descended from Adam for his sake it was propagated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to a real condemnation viz. when they should sin For though this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the curse of death was threatned only to Adam yet upon Gods being angry with him God resolved it should descend and if men did sin as Adam or if they did sin at all though less than Adam yet the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the curse threatned to him should pass 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto the same actual condemnation which fell upon him that is it should actually bring them under the reign of death But then my Lord I beseech you let it be considered if this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must suppose a punishment for sin for the sin of him his own sin that is so condemn'd as your Lordship proves perfectly out of Ezek. 18. how can it be just that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemnation should pass upon us for Adam's sin that is not for his own sin who is so condemn'd but for the sin of another S. Paul easily resolves the doubt if there had been any The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reign of death passed upon all men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in as much as all men have sinned And now why shall we suppose that we must be guilty of what we did not when without any such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is so much guilt of what we did really and personally Why shall it be that we die only for Adam's sin and not rather as S. Paul expresly affirms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in as much as all men have sinned since by your own argument it cannot be in as much as all men have not sinned this you say cannot be and yet you will not confess this which can be and which S. Paul affirms to have been indeed as if it were not more just and reasonable to say That from Adam the curse descended unto the condemnation of the sins of the world than to say the curse descended without consideration of their sins but a sin must be imagined to make it seem reasonable and just to condemn us Now I submit it to the judgment of all the world which way of arguing is most reasonable and concluding You my Lord in behalf of others argue thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or condemnation cannot pass upon a man for any sin but his own Therefore every man is truly guilty of Adam's sin and that becomes his own Against this I oppose mine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or condemnation cannot pass upon a man for any sin but his own therefore it did not pass upon man for Adam's sin because Adam's sin was Adam's not our own But we all have sinned we have sins of our own therefore for these the curse pass'd from Adam to us To back mine besides that common notices of sense and reason defend it I have the plain words of S. Paul Death passed upon all men for as much as all men have sinned all men that is the generality of mankind all that liv'd till they could sin the others that died before died in their nature not in their sin neither Adam's nor their own save only that Adam brought it in upon them or rather left it to them himself being disrobed of all that which could hinder it Now for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which your Lordship renders clear from sin I am sure no man is so justified in this world as to be clear from sin and if we all be sinners and yet healed as just persons it is certain we are just by imputation only that is Christ imputing our faith and sincere though not unerring obedience to us for righteousness And then the Antithesis must hold thus By Christ comes justification to life as by Adam came the curse or the sin to the condemnation of death But our justification which comes by Christ is by imputation and acceptilation by grace and favour not that we are made really that is legally and perfectly righteous but by imputation of faith and obedience to us as if it were perfect And therefore Adam's sin was but by imputation only to certain purposes not real or proper not formal or inherent For the grace by Christ is more than the sin by Adam if therefore that was not legal and proper but Evangelical and gracious favourable and imputative much more is the sin of Adam in us improperly and by imputation * And truly my Lord I think that no sound Divine of any of our Churches will say that we are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in any other sence not that Christs righteousness is imputed to us without any inherent graces in us but that our imperfect services our true faith and sincere endeavours of obedience are imputed to us for righteousness through Jesus Christ and since it is certainly so I am sure the Antithesis between Christ and Adam can never be salved by making us sinners really by Adam and yet just or righteous by Christ only in acceptation and imputation For then sin should abound more than grace expresly against the honour of our blessed Saviour the glory of our redemption and the words of S. Paul But rather on the contrary is it true That though by Christ we were really and legally made perfectly righteous it follows not that we were made sinners by Adam in the same manner and measure for this similitude of S. Paul ought not to extend to an equality in all things but still the advantage and prerogative the abundance and the excess must be on the part of Grace for if sin does abound grace does much more abound and we do more partake of righteousness by Christ than of sin by Adam Christ and Adam are the several fountains of emanation and are compar'd aequè but not aequaliter Therefore this argument holds redundantly since by Christ we are not made legally righteous but by imputation only much less are we made sinners by Adam This in my sence is so infinitely far from being an objection that it perfectly demonstrates the main question and for my part I mean to relie upon it As for that which your Lordship adds out of Rom. 5.19 That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies sinners not by imitation as the Pelagians dream but sinners really and effectively I shall not need to make any other reply but that 1. I do not approve of that gloss of the Pelagians that in Adam we are made sinners by imitation and much less of that which affirms we are made so properly and formally But made sinners signifies us'd like sinners so as justified signifies healed like just persons In
nor charitable to extend the Gravamen and punishment beyond the instances the Apostles make or their exact parallels But then also it would be remembred that the Apostles speak as fiercely against communion with Fornicatours and all disorders practical as against communion with Hereticks If any man that is called a brother be a Fornicatour or Covetous or an Idolater or a Railer or a Drunkard or an Extortioner with such a one no not to eat I am certain that a drunkard is as contrary to God and lives as contrary to the Laws of Christianity as an Heretick and I am also sure that I know what drunkenness is but I am not sure that such an Opinion is Heresie neither would other men be so sure as they think for if they did consider it aright and observe the infinite deceptions and causes of deceptions in wise men and in most things and in all doubtful Questions and that they did not mistake confidence for certainty But indeed I could not but smile at those jolly Friers two Franciscans offered themselves to the fire to prove Savonarola to be a Heretick but a certain Jacobine offered himself to the fire to prove that Savonarola had true Revelations and was no Heretick in the mean time Savonarola preacht but made no such confident offer nor durst he venture at that new kind of fire Ordeal And put case all four had past through the fire and died in the flames what would that have proved Had he been a Heretick or no Heretick the more or less for the confidence of these zealous Ideots If we mark it a great many Arguments whereon many Sects rely are no better probation then this comes to Confidence is the first and the second and the third part of a very great many of their propositions But now if men would a little turn the Tables and be as zealous for a good life and all the strictest precepts of Christianity which is a Religion the most holy the most reasonable and the most consummate that ever was taught to man as they are for such Propositions in which neither the life nor the ornament of Christianity is concerned we should find that as a consequent of this piety men would be as carefull as they could to find out all Truths and the sence of all Revelations which may concern their duty and where men were miserable and could not yet others that lived good lives too would also be so charitable as not to adde affliction to this misery and both of them are parts of good life To be compassionate and to help to bear one another's burthens not to destroy the weak but to entertain him meekly that 's a precept of charity and to edeavour to find out the whole will of God that also is a part of the obedience the choice and the excellency of Faith and he lives not a good life that does not doe both these But men think they have more reason to be zealous against Heresie then against a vice in manners because Heresie is infectious and dangerous and the principle of much evil Indeed if by an Heresie we mean that which is against an Article of Creed and breaks part of the Covenant made between God and man by the mediation of Jesus Christ I grant it to be a very grievous crime a calling God's veracity into question and a destruction also of good life because upon the Articles of Creed obedience is built and it lives or dies as the effect does by its proper cause for Faith is the moral cause of obedience But then Heresie that is such as this is also a vice and the person criminal and so the sin is to be esteemed in its degrees of malignity and let men be as zealous against it as they can and employ the whole Arsenal of the spiritual armour against it such as this is worse then adultery or murther inasmuch as the Soul is more noble then the Body and a false Doctrine is of greater dissemination and extent then a single act of violence or impurity Adultery or murther is a duel but Heresie truly and indeed such is an unlawful war it slays thousands The losing of Faith is like digging down a foundation all the superstructures of hope and patience and charity fall with it And besides this Heresie of all crimes is the most inexcusable and of least temptation for true Faith is most commonly kept with the least trouble of any grace in the world and Heresie of itself hath not onely no pleasure in it but is a very punishment because Faith as it opposes heretical or false Opinions and distinguishes from charity consists in mere acts of believing which because they are of true Propositions are natural and proportionable to the understanding and more honourable then false But then concerning those things which men now a-days call Heresie they cannot be so formidable as they are represented and if we consider that drunkenness is certainly a damnable sin and that there are more drunkards then Hereticks and that drunkenness is parent of a thousand vices it may better be said of this vice then of most of those opinions which we call Heresies it is infectious and dangerous and the principle of much evil and therefore as fit an object for a pious zeal to contest against as is any of those Opinions which trouble mens ease or reputation for that is the greatest of their malignity But if we consider that Sects are made and Opinions are called Heresies upon interest and the grounds of emolument we shall see that a good life would cure much of this mischief For First the Church of Rome which is the great Dictatrix of dogmatical Resolutions and the declarer of Heresie and calls Heretick more then all the world besides hath made that the rule of Heresie which is the conservatory of interest and the ends of men For to recede from the Doctrine of the Church with them makes Heresie that is to disrepute their Authority and not to obey them not to be their subjects not to give them the empire of our Conscience is the great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Heresie So that with them Heresie is to be esteemed clearly by humane ends not by Divine Rules that is formal Heresie which does materially disserve them And it would make a suspicious man a little inquisitive into their particular Doctrines and when he finds that Indulgences and Jubilees and Purgatories and Masses and Offices for the dead are very profitable that the Doctrine of Primacy of Infallibility of Superiority over Councils of indirect power in temporals are great instruments of secular honour he would be apt enough to think that if the Church of Rome would learn to lay her honour at the feet of the Crucifix and despise the world and prefer Jerusalem before Rome and Heaven above the Lateran that these Opinions would not have in them any native strength to support them against the perpetual assaults of
family for it is said of the Ruler at Capernaum that he believed and all his house Now you may also suppose that in his house were little babes that is likely enough and you may suppose that they did believe too before they could understand but that 's not so likely and then the argument from baptizing of Stephen's houshold may be allowed just as probable But this is unman-like to build upon such slight airy conjectures 25. But Tradition by all means must supply the place of Scripture and there is pretended a Tradition Apostolical that Infants were baptized But at this we are not much moved for we who rely upon the written Word of God as sufficient to establish all true Religion do not value the Allegation of Traditions And however the world goes none of the Reformed Churches can pretend this Argument against this Opinion because they who reject Tradition when 't is against them must not pretend it at all for them But if we should allow the Topick to be good yet how will it be verified For so far as it can yet appear it relies wholly upon the Testimony of Origen for from him Austin had it For as for the testimony pretended out of Justin Martyr it is to no purpose because the book from whence the words are cited is not Justin's who was before Origen and yet he cites Origen Irenaeus But who please may see it sufficiently condemned by Sixtus Senensis Biblioth Sanct. l. 4. verbo Justinus And as for the â—â—stimony of Origen we know nothing of it for every Heretick interessed person did interpolate all his Works so much that we cannot discern which are his which not Now a Tradition Apostolical if it be not consigned with a fuller testimony then of one person whom all after Ages have condemned of many errours will obtain so little reputation amongst those who know that things have upon greater Authority pretended to derive from the Apostles and yet falsely that it will be a great Argument that he is â—redulous weak that shall be determined by so weak probation in matters of so great concernment And the truth of the business is as there was no command of Scripture to oblige children to the susception of it so the necessity of Paedo-baptism was not determined in the Church till in the eighth Age after Christ but in the year 418. in the Milevitan Council a Provincial of Africa there was a Canon made for Paedo-baptism never till then I grant it was practised in Africa before that time they or some of them thought well of it though that be no Argument for us to think so yet none of them did ever before pretend it to be necessary none to have been a precept of the Gospel S. Austin was the first that ever preached it to be absolutely necessary and it was in his heat anger against Pelagius who had warmed chased him so in that question that it made him innovate in other Doctrines possibly of more concernment then this And although this was practised anciently in Africa yet that it was without an opinion of necessity and not often there nor at all in other places we have the testimony of the learned Paedo-baptist Ludovicus Vives who in his Annotations upon Saint Austin De Civit. Dei l. 1. c. 27. affirms neminem nisi adultum antiquitus solere baptizari 26. But besides that the Tradition cannot be proved to be Apostolical we have very good evidence from Antiquity that it was the opinion of the Primitive Church that Infants ought not to be baptized and this is clear in the sixth Canon of the Council of Nâ—ocaesarea The words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sense is this A woman with child may be baptized when she please for her Baptism concerns not the child The reason of the connexion of the parts of that Canon is in the following words Because every one in that confession is to give a demonstration of his own choice and election Meaning plainly that if the Baptism of the mother did also pass upon the child it were not fit for a pregnant woman to receive Baptism because in that Sacrament there being a confession of Faith which confession supposes understanding and free choice it is not reasonable the child should be consigned with such a mysterie since it cannot doe any act of choice or understanding And to this purpose are the words of Balsamon speaking of this Decree and of Infants unborn not to be baptized he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The unborn babe is not to be baptized because he neither is come to light nor can he make choice of the confession that is of the Articles to be confessed in Divine baptism To the same sense are the words of Zonaras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Embryo or unborn babe does then need Baptism when he can chuse The Canon speaks reason and it intimates a practice which was absolutely universal in the Church of interrogating the Catechumens concerning the Articles of Creed Which is one Argument that either they did not admit Infants to Baptism or that they did prevaricate egregiously in asking questions of them who themselves knew were not capable of giving answer But the former was the more probable according to the testimony of Walafridus Stabo Notandum deinde primis temporibus illis solummodo Baptismi gratiam dari solitam qui corporis mentisâ—integritate jam ad hoc pervenerunt ut scire intelligere possent quid emolumenti in Baptismo consequendum quid confitendum atque credendum quid postremò renatis in Christo esset servandum It is to be noted that in those first times the grace of Baptism was wont to be given to those onely who by their integrity of mind and body were arrived to this that they could know and understand what profit was to be had by Baptism what was to be confessed and believ'd in Baptism and what is the duty of them who are born again in Christ. 27. But to supply their incapacity by the answer of a Godfather is but the same unreasonableness acted with a worse circumstance and there is no sensible account can be given of it For that which some imperfectly murmure concerning stipulations civil performed by Tutors in the name of their Pupils is an absolute vanity For what if by positive constitution of the Romans such solennites of Law are required in all stipulations and by indulgence are permitted in the case of a notable benefit accruing to Minors must God be tied and Christian Religion transact her mysteries by proportion and compliance with the Law of the Romans I know God might if he would have appointed Godfathers to give answer in behalf of the Children and to be Fide jussors for them but we cannot find any Authority or ground that he hath and if he had then it is to be supposed he would have given them commission to
it self I can only say what Secundus did to the wise Lupercus Quoties ad fastidium legentium deliciásque respicio intelligo nobis commendationem ex ipsa mediocritate libri petendam I can commend it because it is little and so not very troublesome And if it could have been written according to the worthiness of the Thing treated in it it would deserve so great a Patronage but because it is not it will therefore greatly need it but it can hope for it on no other account but because it is laid at the feet of a Princely Person who is Great and Good and one who not only is bound by Duty but by Choice hath obliged Himself to do advantages to any worthy Instrument of Religion But I have detain'd Your Grace so long in my Address that Your Pardon will be all the Favour which ought to be hop'd for by Your Grace's most Humble and Obliged Servant Jer. Dunensis A DISCOURSE OF CONFIRMATION THE INTRODVCTION NEXT to the Incarnation of the Son of God and the whole Oeconomy of our Redemption wrought by him in an admirable order and Conjugation of glorious Mercies the greatest thing that ever God did to the World is the giving to us the Holy Ghost and possibly this is the Consummation and Perfection of the other For in the work of Redemption Christ indeed made a new World we are wholly a new Creation and we must be so and therefore when S. John began the Narrative of the Gospel he began in a manner and style very like to Moses in his History of the first Creation In the beginning was the Word c. All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made But as in the Creation the Matter was first there were indeed Heavens and Earth and Waters but all this was rude and without form till the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters So it is in the new Creation We are a new Mass redeem'd with the bloud of Christ rescued from an evil portion and made Candidates of Heaven and Immortality but we are but an Embryo in the regeneration until the Spirit of God enlivens us and moves again upon the waters and then every subsequent motion and operation is from the Spirit of God We cannot say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost By him we live in him we walk by his aids we pray by his emotions we desire we breath and sigh and groan by him he helps us in all our infirmities and he gives us all our strengths he reveals mysteries to us and teaches us all our duties he stirs us up to holy desires and he actuates those desires he makes us to will and to do of his good pleasure For the Spirit of God is that in our Spiritual life that a Man's Soul is in his Natural without it we are but a dead and liveless trunk But then as a Man's Soul in proportion to the several Operations of Life obtains several appellatives it is Vegetative and Nutritive Sensitive and Intellective according as it operates So is the Spirit of God He is the Spirit of Regeneration in Baptism of Renovation in Repentance the Spirit of Love and the Spirit of holy Fear the Searcher of the hearts and the Spirit of Discerning the Spirit of Wisdom and the Spirit of Prayer In one mystery he illuminates and in another he feeds us he begins in one and finishes and perfects in another It is the same Spirit working divers Operations For he is all this now reckoned and he is every thing else that is the Principle of Good unto us he is the Beginning and the Progression the Consummation and Perfection of us all and yet every work of his is perfect in its kind and in order to his own designation and from the beginning to the end is Perfection all the way Justifying and Sanctifying Grace is the proper entitative Product in all but it hath divers appellatives and connotations in the several rites and yet even then also because of the identity of the Principle the similitude and general consonancy in the Effect the same appellative is given and the same effect imputed to more than one and yet none of them can be omitted when the great Master of the Family hath blessed it and given it institution Thus S. Dionys calls Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the perfection of the Divine birth and yet the baptized person must receive other mysteries which are more signally perfective 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Confirmation is yet more perfective and is properly the perfection of Baptism By Baptism we are Heirs and are adopted to the inheritance of Sons admitted to the Covenant of Repentance and engag'd to live a good Life yet this is but the solemnity of the Covenant which must pass into after-acts by other influences of the same Divine principle Until we receive the spirit of Obsignation or Confirmation we are but babes in Christ in the meanest sence Infants that can do nothing that cannot speak that cannot resist any violence expos'd to every rudeness and perishing by every Temptation But therefore as God at first appointed us a ministery of a new birth so also hath he given to his Church the consequent Ministery of a new strength The Spirit mov'd a little upon the waters of Baptism and gave us the Principles of Life but in Confirmation he makes us able to move our selves In the first he is the Spirit of Life but in this he is the Spirit of Strength and Motion Baptisma est nativitas Vnguentum verò est nobis actionis instar motûs said Cabasilas In Baptism we are intitled to the inheritance but because we are in our Infancy and minority the Father gives unto his Sons a Tutor a Guardian and a Teacher in Confirmation said Rupertus that as we are baptized into the Death and Resurrection of Christ so in Confirmation we may be renewed in the Inner man and strengthned in all our Holy vows and purposes by the Holy Ghost ministred according to God's Ordinance The Holy Rite of Confirmation is a Divine Ordinance and it produces Divine Effects and is ministred by Divine Persons that is by those whom God hath sanctified and separated to this ministration At first all that were baptiz'd were also confirm'd and ever since all good people that have understood it have been very zealous for it and time was in England even since the first beginnings of the Reformation when Confirmation had been less carefully ministred for about six years when the people had their first opportunities of it restor'd they ran to it in so great numbers that Churches and Church-yards would not hold them insomuch that I have read that the Bishop of Chester was forc'd to impose hands on the people in the Fields and was so oppressed with multitudes that he had almost been trode to death by the people and had died with the throng
if he had not been rescued by the Civil Power But men have too much neglected all the ministeries of Grace and this most especially and have not given themselves to a right understanding of it and so neglected it yet more But because the prejudice which these parts of the Christian Church have suffered for want of it is very great as will appear by enumeration of the many and great Blessings consequent to it I am not without hope that it may be a service acceptable to God and an useful ministery to the Souls of my Charges if by instructing them that know not and exhorting them that know I set forward the practice of this Holy Rite and give reasons why the people ought to love it and to desire it and how they are to understand and practise it and consequently with what dutious affections they are to relate to those persons whom God hath in so special and signal manner made to be for their good and eternal benefit the Ministers of the Spirit and Salvation S. Bernard in the Life of S. Malachias my Predecessor in the See of Down and Connor reports that it was the care of that good Prelate to renew the rite of Confirmation in his Diocese where it had been long neglected and gone into desuetude It being too much our case in Ireland I find the same necessity and am oblig'd to the same procedure for the same reason and in pursuance of so excellent an example Hoc enim est Evangelizare Christum said S. Austin non tantùm docere quae sunt dicenda de Christo sed etiam quae observanda ei qui accedit ad compagem corporis Christi For this is to preach the Gospel not only to teach those things which are to be said of Christ but those also which are to be observed by every one who desires to be confederated into the Society of the Body of Christ which is his Church that is not only the doctrines of good Life but the Mysteries of Godliness and the Rituals of Religion which issue from a Divine fountain are to be declar'd by him who would fully preach the Gospel In order to which performance I shall declare 1. The Divine Original Warranty and Institution of the Holy Rite of Confirmation 2. That this Rite was to be a perpetual and never-ceasing Ministration 3. That it was actually continued and practised by all the succeeding Ages of the purest and Primitive Churches 4. That this Rite was appropriate to the Ministery of Bishops 5. That Prayer and Imposition of the Bishop's hands did make the whole Ritual and though other things were added yet they were not necessary or any thing of the Institution 6. That many great Graces and Blessings were consequent to the worthy reception and due ministration of it 7. I shall add something of the manner of Preparation to it and Reception of it SECT I. Of the Divine Original Warranty and Institution of the Holy Rite of Confirmation IN the Church of Rome they have determin'd Confirmation to be a Sacrament proprii nominis properly and really and yet their Doctors have some of them at least been paulò iniquiores a little unequal and unjust to their proposition insomuch that from themselves we have had the greatest opposition in this Article Bonacina and Henriquez allow the proposition but make the Sacrament to be so unnecessary that a little excuse may justifie the omission and almost neglect of it And Loemelius and Daniel à Jesu and generally the English Jesuits have to serve some ends of their own Family and Order disputed it almost into contempt that by representing it as unnecessary they might do all the ministeries Ecclesiastical in England without the assistance of Bishops their Superiors whom they therefore love not because they are so But the Theological Faculty of Paris have condemn'd their Doctrine as temerarious and savouring of Heresie and in the later Schools have approv'd rather the Doctrine of Gamachaeus Estius Kellison and Bellarmine who indeed do follow the Doctrine of the most Eminent persons in the Ancient School Richard of Armagh Scotus Hugo Cavalli and Gerson the Learned Chancellor of Paris who following the Old Roman order Amalarius and Albinus do all teach Confirmation to be of great and pious Use of Divine Original and to many purposes necessary according to the Doctrine of the Scriptures and the Primitive Church Whether Confirmation be a Sacrament of no is of no use to dispute and if it be disputed it can never be prov'd to be so as Baptism and the Lord's Supper that is as generally necessary to Salvation but though it be no Sacrament it cannot follow that it is not of very great Use and holiness and as a Man is never the less tied to Repentance though it be no Sacrament so neither is he ever the less oblig'd to receive Confirmation though it be as it ought acknowledg'd to be of an Use and Nature inferior to the two Sacraments of Divine direct and immediate institution It is certain that the Fathers in a large Symbolical and general sence call it a Sacrament but mean not the same thing by that word when they apply it to Confirmation as they do when they apply it to Baptism and the Lord's Supper That it is an excellent and Divine Ordinance to purposes Spiritual that it comes from God and ministers in our way to God that is all we are concern'd to inquire after and this I shall endeavour to prove not only against the Jesuits but against all Opponents of what side soever My First Argument from Scripture is what I learn from Optatus and S. Cyril Optatus writing against the Donatists hath these words Christ descended into the water not that in him who is God was any thing that could be made cleaner but that the water was to precede the future Vnction for the initiating and ordaining and fulfilling the mysteries of Baptism He was wash'd when he was in the hands of John then followed the order of the mystery and the Father finish'd what the Son did ask and what the Holy Ghost declar'd The Heavens were open'd God the Father anointed him the Spiritual Vnction presently descended in the likeness of a Dove and sate upon his head and was spred all over him and he was called the Christ when he was the anointed of the Father To whom also lest Imposition of hands should seem to be wanting the voice of God was heard from the cloud saying This is my Son in whom I am well pleased hear ye him That which Optatus says is this that upon and in Christ's person Baptism Confirmation and Ordination were consecrated and first appointed He was Baptized by S. John he was Confirm'd by the Holy Spirit and anointed with Spiritual Unction in order to that great work of obedience to his Father's will and he was Consecrated by the voice of God from Heaven In all things Christ is the Head and the
Imposition of hands and represents it besides in the Expression and Analogy of any sensible thing that Expression drawn into a Ceremony will not improperly signifie the Grace since the Holy Ghost did chuse that for his own expression and representment In Baptism we are said to be buried with Christ. The Church does according to the Analogy of that expression when she immerges the Catechumen in the Font for then she represents the same thing which the Holy Ghost would have to be represented in that Sacrament the Church did but the same thing when she used Chrism in this ministration This I speak in justification of that ancient practice but because there was no command for it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said S. Basil concerning Chrism there is no written word that is of the Ceremony there is not he said it not of the whole Rite of Confirmation therefore though to this we are all bound yet as to the Anointing the Church is at liberty and hath with sufficient authority omitted it in our ministrations In the Liturgy of King Edward the VI. the Bishops used the sign of the Cross upon the Foreheads of them that were to be Confirmed I do not find it since forbidden or revoked by any expression or intimation saving only that it is omitted in our later Offices and therefore it may seem to be permitted to the discretion of the Bishops but yet not to be used unless where it may be for Edification and where it may be by the consent of the Church at least by interpretation concerning which I have nothing else to interpose but that neither this nor any thing else which is not of the nature and institution of the Rite ought to be done by private Authority nor ever at all but according to the Apostle's Rule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whatsoever is decent and whatsoever is according to Order that is to be done and nothing else for Prayer and Imposition of hands for the invocating and giving the Holy Spirit is all that is in the foundation and institution SECT VI. Many great Graces and Blessings are consequent to the worthy Reception and due Ministery of Confirmation IT is of it self enough when it is fully understood what is said in the Acts of the Apostles at the first ministration of this Rite They received the Holy Ghost that is according to the expression of our Blessed Saviour himself to the Apostles when he commanded them in Jerusalem to expect the verification of his glorious promise they were endued with vertue from on high that is with strength to perform their duty which although it is not to be understood exclusively to the other Rites and Ministeries of the Church of Divine appointment yet it is properly and most signally true and as it were in some sence appropriate to this For as Aquinas well discourses the Grace of Christ is not tied to the Sacraments but even this Spiritual strength and vertue from on high can be had without Confirmation as without Baptism Remission of sins may be had and yet we believe one Baptism for the Remission of sins and one Confirmation for the obtaining this vertue from on high this strength of the Spirit But it is so appropriate to it by promise and peculiarity of ministration that as without the Desire of Baptism our sins are not pardon'd so without at least the Desire of Confirmation we cannot receive this vertue from on high which is appointed to descend in the ministery of the Spirit It is true the ministery of the Holy Eucharist is greatly effective to this purpose and therefore in the ages of Martyrs the Bishops were careful to give the people the Holy Communion frequently Vt quos tutos esse contra adversarium volebant munimento Dominicae Saturitatis amarent as S. Cyprian with his Collegues wrote to Cornelius that those whom they would have to be safe against the contentions of their adversaries they should arm them with the guards and defences of the Lord's Fulness But it is to be remembred that the Lord's Supper is for the more perfect Christians and it is for the increase of the Graces receiv'd formerly and therefore it is for Remission of sins and yet is no prejudice to the necessity of Baptism whose proper work is Remission of sins and therefore neither does it makes Confirmation unnecessary for it renews the work of both the precedent Rites and repairs the breaches and adds new Energy and proceeds in the same dispensations and is renewed often whereas the others are but once Excellent therefore are the words of John Gerson the Famous Chancellor of Paris to this purpose It may be said that in one way of speaking Confirmation is necessary and in another it is not Confirmation is not necessary as Baptism and Repentance for without these Salvation cannot be had This Necessity is Absolute but there is a Conditional Necessity Thus if a man would not become weak it is necessary that he eat his meat well And so Confirmation is necessary that the Spiritual life and the health gotten in Baptism may be preserv'd in strength against our spiritual enemies For this is given for strength Hence is that saying of Hugo de S. Victore What does it profit that thou art raised up by Baptism if thou art not able to stand by Confirmation Not that Baptism is not of value unto Salvation without Confirmation but because he who is not Confirmed will easily fall and too readily perish The Spirit of God comes which way he pleases but we are tied to use his own Oeconomy and expect the blessings appointed by his own Ministeries And because to Prayer is promised we shall receive what-ever we ask we may as well omit the receiving the Holy Eucharist pretending that Prayer alone will procure the blessings expected in the other as well I say as omit Confirmation because we hope to be strengthned and receive vertue from on high by the use of the Supper of the Lord. Let us use all the Ministeries of Grace in their season for we know not which shall prosper this or that or whether they shall be both alike good this only we know that the Ministeries which God appoints are the proper seasons and opportunities of Grace This power from on high which is the proper blessing of Confirmation was expressed not only in speaking with Tongues and doing Miracles for much of this they had before they received the Holy Ghost but it was effected in Spiritual and internal strengths they were not only enabled for the service of the Church but were indued with courage and wisdom and Christian fortitude and boldness to confess the Faith of Christ crucified and unity of heart and mind singleness of heart and joy in God when it was for the edification of the Church Miracles were done in Confirmations and S. Bernard in the Life of S. Malachias tells that S. Malchus Bishop of Lismore in Ireland confirmed a
well as the institution it self 201 § 5. Scotus affirmed that the truth of the Eucharist may be saved without Transubstantiation 234 § 11. Some have been poisoned by receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist 249 ss 11. The wine will inebriate after consecration therefore it is not bloud 249 § 11. The Marcossians Valentinians and Marcionites though they denied Christ's having a body yet used the Eucharistical Elements 256 § 12. The Council of Trent binds all its subjects to give to the Sacrament of the Altar the same worship which they give to the true God 267 § 13. To worship the Host is Idolatry 268 § 13. They that worship the Host are many times according to their own doctrine in danger of Idolatry 268 269 § 13. Lewis IX pawned the Host to the Sultan of Egypt upon which they bear it to this day in their Escutcheons 270 § 13. The Primitive Church did excommunicate those that did not receive the Eucharist in both kinds Pref. to Diss. pag. 5. The Council of Constance decreed the half Communion with a non obstante to our Lord's institution 302 c. 1. § 6. Authorities to shew that the half Communion was not in use in the Primitive times 303 c. 1. § 6. Of their worshipping the Host 467. Of Communion in one kind onely 469 470. The word Celebrate when spoken of the Eucharist means the action of the people as well as the Priest 530. The Church of God gave the Chalice to the people for above a thousand years 531. The Roman Churche's consecrating a Wafer is a mere innovation 531 532. The Priest's pardon anciently was nothing but to admit the penitent to the Eucharist 839 n. 54. Of the change that is made in us by it 28. b. The Apostles were confirmed after 30. b. Eusebius His testimony against Transubstantiation 259 260 261 § 12. and 300. and 524. Excommunication Neither the Church nor the Presbyters in it had power to excommunicate before they had a Bishop set over them 82 § 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sometimes it was put to signifie Ecclesiastical repentance 830 n. 34. Exorcisms Their exorcisms have been so bad that the Inquisitors have been fain to put them down 333 § 10. The manner of their casting out Devils by exorcism 334 c. 2. § 10. They give Exorcists distinct ordination 336. Exorcism in the Primitive Church signified nothing but Catechizing 30. b. Ezekiel Chap. 18. v. 3. explained 726 n. 61. F. Faith THE folly of that assertion Credo quia impossibile est when applied to Transubstantiation 231 § 11. To make new Articles of faith that are not in Scripture as the Papists do is condemned by the suffrage of the Fathers Pref. to Diss. pag. 4 5. The Church of Rome adopts uncertain and trifling propositions into their faith 462. The doctrine of the Roman Purgatory was no arricle of faith in Saint Augustine's time 506. What faith is and wherein it consists 941 n. 1. New Articles cannot by the Church be decreed 945 n. 12. Faith is not an act of the understanding onely 949 n. 9. By what circumstances faith becomes moral 950 n. 9. The Romanists keep not faith with hereticks 341. Instances of doctrines that are held by some Romanists to be de fide by others to be not de fide 398. What makes a point to be de fide 399. What it is to be an Article of faith 437. Some things are necessary to be believed that are not articles of faith 437. The Apostles Creed was necessary to be believed not necessitate praecepti but medii 438. No new articles as necessary to be believed ought to be added to the Apostles Creed 438 446. The Pope hath not power to make Articles of faith 446 447. Upon what motives most men imbrace the faith 460. The faith of unlearned men in the Roman Church 461. Fasting It is one of the best Penances 860 n. 114. Father How God punisheth the Father's sin upon the Children 725. God never imputes the Father's sin to the Children so as to inflict eternal punishment but onely temporal 725 n. 56. This God doth onely in punishments of the greatest crimes 725 n. 59. and not often 726 n. 60. but before the Gospel was published 726 n. 62. Fathers When Bellarmine was to answer the authority of some Fathers brought against the Pope's universal Episcopacy he allows not the Fathers to have a vote against the Pope 310 c. 1. § 10. No man but J. S. affirms that the Fathers are infallible 372 373 374. The Fathers stile some hereticks that are not 376. Of what authority the opinion of the Fathers is with some Romanists 376 377. They complained of the dismal troubles in the Church that arose upon enlarging Creeds 441. They reproved pilgrimages 293 496. The Primitive Fathers that practised prayer for the dead thought not of Purgatory 501. They made prayer for those who by the confession of all sides were not then in Purgatory 502 503. The Roman doctrine of Purgatory is directly contrary to the doctrine of the Fathers 512. A Reply to that Answer of the Romanists That the writings of the Fathers do forbid nothing else but picturing the Divine Essence 550 554. In what sense the ancient Fathers taught the doctrine of original sin 761 n. 22. How the Fathers were divided in the question of the beatifick vision of souls before the day of Judgement 1007. The practice of Rome now is against the doctrine of S. Augustine and 217 Bishops and all their Successours for a whole age together in the question of Appeals to Rome 1008. One Father for them the Papists value more then twenty against them in that case how much they despise them 1008. Gross mistakes taught by several Fathers ibid. The writings of the Fathers adulterated of old and by modern practices 1010. particularly by the Indices Expurgatorii 1011. Fear To leave a sin out of fear is not sinful but may be accepted 785 n. 37. Figure Ambiguous and figurative words may be allowed in a Testament humane or Divine 210 § 6. A certain Athenian's enigmatical Testament ibid. The Lamb is said to be the Passeover of which deliverance it was onely the commemorative sign 211 § 6. How many figurative terms there are in the words of institution 211 212 § 6. When the figurative sense is to be chosen in Scripture 213 § 6. Flesh. The law of the flesh in man 781 n. 31. The contention between it and the Conscience no sign of Regeneration 782 n. 32. How to know which prevails in the contention 782 n. 5. Forgiving Forgiving injuries considered as a part or fruit of Repentance 849 n. 83. Free-will How the necessity of Grace is consistent with this doctrine 754 n. 15. That mankind by the fall of Adam did not lose it 874. The folly of that assertion We are free to sin but not to good 874. Liberty of action in natural things is better but in moral things it is a weakness 874. G. Galatians CHap. 5.15