it must be upon the terms of my position the practice of the Church giving bounds to the sense of the Scripture I can therefore safely agree with the Constitutions of the Apostles with S. Cyprian and Leo and whosoever else teaches that it is not safe for the people to assure their consciences upon the credit of their Pastors But it is because I suppose the Unity of the Church provided by God for a ground upon which the people may reasonably presume when they are to adhere to their Pastors when not To wit when they are owned not when they are disowned by the Unity of the Church For though this provision becomes uneffectual when this Unity is dissolved yet ought not that to be an argument that the goodnesse of God never made that provision which the malice of man may defeat But that whosoever concurrs to maintain the division concurrs to defeat that provision which God hath made As safely do I agree with all them who agree that whatsoever is taught in Christianity is to be proved by the Scriptures For if it belong to the Rule of Faith it is intended by the Scriptures though that intent is evidenced by the Tradition of the Church If to the Lawes of the Church the authority of it comes from the Scriptures though the evidence of it may depend upon common sense which the practice of the Church may convince If over and above both it is not receivable if not contained in the Scriptures And in this regard whosoever maintains the whole Scripture to be the Rule of Faith is throughly justified by all those testimonies that have been alleged to that purpose For though it be not necessary to the salvation of all Christians to understand the meaning of all the Scriptures yet what Scripture soever a man attains to understand is as much a Rule to his Faith as that which a man cannot be saved if hee understand not the sense of it whether in and by the Scripture or without it And though a man may be obliged to believe that which is not in the Scripture to have been instituted by the Apostles yet is he not obliged to observe it but upon that reason which the Scripture delivereth And upon these terms is the whole Scripture a Rule of Faith from which as nothing is to be taken away so is nothing to be added to it as the saying of S. Chrysostome in Phil. II. Hom. XII requireth And the saying of S. Basil in Esa II. and Ascet Reg. I. condemning all that is done without Scripture takes place upon no other terms than these Not as Cartwright and our Puritanes after him imagine that a man is to have a text of Scripture specifying every thing which hee doth for his warrant For as it is in it self ridiculous to imagine that all cases which fall out can be ruled by expresse text of Scripture our Christianity being concerned infinite wayes of which it is evident that the Scripture had no occasion to speak So if the words of the Scripture be lodged in a heart where the work of them dwelleth not a thing which wee see too possible to come to passe it is the ready way to make the Word of God a color for all unrighteousnesse not onely to others but to the very heart of him who hath that cloke for it It is therefore enough that the reason of every thing which a Christian doth is to be derived from that doctrine which the Scripture declaeth And where a man proceedeth to do that for which hee hath not such a reason so grounded as reasonable men use to go by then cometh that to passe which S. Basil chargeth Ascet Reg. LXXX That What is not of faith is sin It is true according to that sense which hitherto I have used after many Church Writers the Rule of Faith extendeth not to all the Scriptures but onely to that which it is necessary to salvation to believe and to know Which every man knowes that all the Scripture is not For though it be necessary to salvation to believe that all the Scripture is true yet is it not necessary to salvation to know all that the Scripture containeth And the reason why I use it in this sense is to distinguish those things contained in the Scriptures which Tradition extendeth to from those to which it extendeth not For upon these terms is the sense of them limitable to the common Faith But I quarel not therefore the opinion of them that maintaine the whole Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith acknowledging that whatsoever it containeth is necessarily to be believed by all that come to understand it And whatsoever it containeth not though the Scripture alone obligeth not to believe the truth of it is not necessarily to be observed for any other reason but that which the Scripture declareth As for S. Basil making it apostasy to bring that which is not written into the Faith It is a thing well known that the Arians were charged by the Church for bringing in words that were not in the Scriptures saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a time when Christ was not And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That hee was made of nothing On the other side after the Council of Nicaea the Arians charged the Church for bringing in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same substance Where then lay the difference between the Inndelity of the Arians and the Faith of the Church Theodoret showes it Hist Eccles I. 8. out of Athanasius de Actis Concil Niceni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith hee They were condemned by written words piously understood But how appears this piety For I suppose the Arians would not have granted it Hee addeth that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had been used by the Fathers which had it been inconsistent with the sense of the Church could not have been indured in a mater concerning the Rule of Faith whereas their terms were contrary to that which is found in the Scriptures Now S. Basil acknowledgeth that hee had elsewhere dealing with Hereticks used terms not found in the Scriptures to exclude their sense contrary to the Scriptures as you shall finde by the Authors alleged that the Council of Nicaea had done but to those who desired information with a single heart hee resolves to rest content with the Scriptures The terms whereof his meaning is that the Hereticks did not rest content with because they had a minde to depart from the Faith Upon the same terms Tertullian pronounces the Wo that belongs to them which adde to Gods Word upon Hermogenes because his error concerned the Article of our Creed that God made heaven and earth And S. Austine presumes the reason why there is no clear Scripture for the original of the soul to be because hee presumes that it concerns not the substance of Faith Besides these Observations some of those passages which are alleged may concern Christianity rather than the Scriptures
would not I agree with the Law that it is good But it is not I that do it but sinne that dwelleth in me And this law in his members warring against the Law of his mind he sayes lead him captive to the Law of sin in his members so that he cries out Miserable man that I am who shall deliver me from the body of this death Whereunto is added the authority of S. Augustine pressing this exhortation so hard that it serves for an aspersion of Pelagius his heresy for a man not to allow it Though S. Augustine is not alone in it Methodius against Origen in Epiphanius writing against his heresy S. Gregory Nazianzene and others perhaps among the Fathers follow the same sense But the aspersion is too abusive For I have showed that the Tradition of the Church declared by the records of the Fathers extendeth not to the exposition of particular Scriptures but to give bounds within which the Scriptures are to be understood Wherefore had S. Augustine and his party truly expounded this Scripture yet ought it not to be a mark of Plagianisme to maintaine another exposition without supposing any part of Pelagius his heresie But if they consider further that S. Augustine acknowledges no more then the motions of concupiscence which are alive in the regenerate to divert the rigor of their intentions from the course of Christianity not the committing of any sinne that layeth wast a good conscience to be consistent with the state of grace they will have little joy of S. Augustines exposition of this place For what is that to the murther and adulteries of David to the apostrasy of S. Peter to the Idolatries of Solomon Or what consequence is it because concupiscence is alive in Christians that are at peace with God untill death that therefore David S. Peter and Solomon were at peace with God before they had washed away those sinnes by repentance Wherefore I must utterly discharge S. Augustine and those of his sense of having said any thing prejudiciall to Christianity by expounding S. Paul according to it The question that remaineth will be how S. Paul can call himselfe carnall and sold under sinne how he can say I like not that which I doe For I doe not what I would but what I hate And to will is present with me but how to doe that which is good I find not And I find a Law by which when I would doe well evill is at hand to me And that this Law in my members warring against the Law of my mind leades mee captive to the Law of sinne that is in my members And wretched man that I am who will deliver me from the body of this death The question I say will be how all this can be said of him of whome it followes Rom. VIII 1 2 5-8 There is therefore now no damnation for those in Christ Jesus that walke not after the flesh but after the spirit For the Law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath freed me from the Law of sinne and of death For they that are according to the flesh mind the thinges of the flesh They that are according to the Spirit the things of the spirit For the sense of the flesh is death but the sense of the spirit life and peace Because the sense of the flesh is enemy to God for it is not nor can be subject to the Law of God Neither can they that are in the flesh please God For if these things cannot be said of the same man at the same time it remains that though we allow S. Augustine and those of his sense that a Christian falls continually into sinne and by continuall offices of Christianity comes cleare of it yet when he willfully runnes into that sin which he cannot but know that it cannot stand with his Christianity he cannot be of that number for whom S. Paul sayes there is no condemnation in Christ Jesus that walke not after the flesh but after the Spirit And therefore for the true meaning of the Scripture in hand it will be requisite to have recourse to that figure of speach whereby S. Paul himselfe declareth that he speakes that of himselfe which he would have understood of others meerely for the a voiding of offense 1 Cor. IV. 6. So is it no mervaile if to make those that were zealous of the Law beleeve that they could not be saved but by Christianity he whom they took for an Apostle show it in his owne case before he was a Christian saying Is the Law sinne Nay I had not knowne sinne but by the Law Rom. VII 7 I have showed you how Grotius hath understood him to speak of himselfe in the person of an Israelite comparing himselfe considered as having received the Law and under the Law with himselfe before he received it If any man think this consideration to farre fetched for S. Paul to propose to those zealous of the Law that he writes to He may understand him to speake in the person of one of them to whome the Gospell had been proposed and thereby conviction of the spirituall sense of the Law which therefore the concupiscence which we are borne with cannot but make great difficulty to imbrace according to the premises For seing the Scribes and Pharises having received the Tradition of the world to come in opposition to the Sadduces had prevailed with the body of that people to believe that the outward observation of the law according to the letter was the means to bring them to the rewards of it It is no mervaile if S. Paul in the person of one so reduced say I had not known concupiscence had I not found the Law to say Thou shalt not covet For he that understood not the Law of God to prohibit the inward motions of concupiscence till by the preaching of Christianity he learned that to be the intent of the precept may very well say that he knew not concupiscence but by the Law so preached By that same reason might he say as it followeth Without the Law sinne is dead But I was once alive without the Law To wit when he thought himself in the way to life under the doctrine of the Pharisees But when the commandment came to be declared to him in that sense which the salvation tendred by the Gospel requireth it s no marvaile if sinne that was in him and concupiscence of it revived and he was discovered to be dead in sinne as not yeelding to the cure of it But that the commandment which was given for life became unto his death because sinne taking occasion by it deceived and slew him All this takes place in that Pharisee who being perswaded by the Pharisees that by not contriving to take away his neighbors wife and goods he stood qualifyed for the world to come now coming to know by the preaching of the Gospell the restraint of inward concupiscence is commanded by it found himself by meanes of the
CHAP. IX The Keyes of the Church given to the Apostles and exercised by excommunication under the Apostles The ground thereof is that profession which all that are baptized are to make That Penance and abatâ—ment of Penance hath been in force ever since and under the Apostles In particular of excluding Hereticks CHAP. X. Evidence of the Apostles act from the effect of it in preserving the Vnity of the Church Of the businesse of Marcion and Montanus That about keeping Easter That of the Novatians of rebaptizing Hereticks of Paulus Samosatenus of Dionysius Alexandrinus and Arius Of communicatory leters and the intercourse of the Church under and after the Apostles CHAP. XI Upon what grounds the first book de Synedriis holds that the Church cannot excommunicate Before the law there was no such Power nor by it Christians went for Jewes under the Apostles His sense of some Scriptures What the Leviathan saith in generall concerning the Power of the Church Both suppose that Ecclesiasticall Power includeth Temporall which is not true Of the Oxford Doctors Paraenesis CHAP. XII That the Law expresly covenanted for the Land of Promise A great Objection against this from the Great precept of the Law The hope of the world to come under the Law and the obedience which it required was grounded upon reason from the true God the tradition of the Fathers and the Doctrine of the Prophets The Love of God above all by the Law extendeth no further than he precepts of the Law the lâ—ve of our Neighbor onely to Jews Of the Ceremonial Judicial and Moral Law CHAP. XIII That the Law tendereth no other promise but that of the Land of Canaan How the Resurrection is signified by the Prophets Expresse texts of the Apostles Their Arguments and the Arguments of our Lord do suppose the mystical sense of the Scriptures That this sense is to be made good throughout the Scripture wheresoever the ground of it takes place Christianity well grounded supposing this What parts of Scripture may be questionable whether they have a mysticall sense or not The sayings and doings of our Lord have it As also those passages of the Old Testament which are fulfilled by the same The sense of the Fathers CHAP. XIV The Leviathans opinion that Christ came to restore that Kingdome of God which the Jewes cast off when they rejected Sâ—muel It overthroweth the foundation of Christianity The true Government of Gods ancient people The name of the Church in the New Testament cannot signifie the Synagogue Nor any Christian State CHAP. XV. How the Power of the Church is founded upon the Law The Power of the Kingdome Priesthood Prophets and Rulers of that people all of divine right How farre these qualities and the powers of them are to continue in the Church The sense of the Fathers in this point That the acts of S. Paul and the rest of the Apostles were nâ—t of force by virtue of the Law What Ecclesiastical Power should have been among the Jewes in case they had received the Gospel and so the state had stood CHAP. XVI The Church founded upon the Power given the Apostles What is the subject mater of Church Lawes The Right of the Church to Tythes and Oblations is not grounded upon the Law though evidenced by it and by practice of the Patriarchs Evidence of the Apostles Order in the Scriptures The Church of Jerusalem held not community of Goods The original practice of the Church CHAP. XVII The Power of Excommunication in the Church is not founded in the Law What argument there is of it in the Old Testament The allegorical sense thereof is argumentative It was not necessary that the Christians should incurre persecution for using the Power of the Keyes and not by virtue of the Law CHAP. XVIII The difference between S. Pauls anathema and that of the Jews It is not necessary that the Christians anathema should signifie cursing That the incestuous person at Corinth was Excommunicated by S. Paul Jurisdiction of the Church Telling the Church binding and loosing holding him that is bound for a Heathen or a Publicanâ— signifie the same The coherence of our Lords discourse Of Excommunication and Indulgence by private persons in the Ancient Church That Excommunication and the Power of the Church could not come in force by the voluntary consent of the first Christians How it may be said to be voluntary Of the confederacy of the primitive Christians CHAP XIX That Power which was in Churches under the Apostles can never be in any Christian Soveraign The dâ—fference between the Church and the Synagogue in that regard The interest of Seculâ—r Power in determining maters of faith presuppâ—seâ—h the Socieâ—y of the Church and the act of it No man can be bound to profâ—sse tâ—e contrary of that which he believeth Every man is bound to professe thâ—t Christianity which hee believeth The Church is the chiefe Teacher of Christianity through Christendom as the Soveraign of Civil Peace thorough his Dominions Why the Church is to decide maters of Faith rather then the State neither being infallible 146 CHAP. XX. The rest of the Oxford Doctors pretense The Power of binding and loosing supposeth not onely the Preaching of the Gospel but the outward act of Faith Christians are not at liberty to cast themselves in what formes of Churches the Law of Nature alloweth They are Judges in chief for themselvss in mater of Religion supposing the Catholick Church not otherwise Secular Power cannâ—t punish for Relâ—gion but supposing the act of the Church nor do any act to inforce Religion unlâ—sse the Church determine the mater of it 151 CHAP. XXI How the Tradition of the Church limits the interpretation of Scriptures How the declaration of the Church becomes a reasonable marke of Heresie That which is not found in the Scriptures may have been delivered by the Apostles Some things delivered by the Apostles and recorded in the Scriptures may not oblige S. Austines Rule of Apostolical Traditions 159 CHAP. XXII The Authority of the Fathers is not grounded upon any presumption of their Learning or Holinesse How farr they challenge the credit of Historical truth The pre-eminence of the Primitive The presumption that is grounded upon their ranks and qualities in the Church Of Arnobius Lactantius Tertulliâ—n Origen Clemens and the approbation of Posterity 165 CHAP. XXIII Two iâ—stances against the premises besides the obâ—ection concerning the beginning of Antichrist under the Apostles The General answer to it The seven Trumpeâ—s in the Apocalypse fore-tell the destruction of the Jewes The seven Vials the plagues inflicted upon the Empire for the ten persecutions The correspondence of Daniels Prophesie inferreth the same Neither S. Pauls Prophesie nor S. Johns concerneth any Christian Neither the opinion of the Chiliasts nor the the giving of the Eucharist to Infants new Baptized Catholick 169 CHAP. XXIV Two sorts of means to resolve whatsoever is resolvable conceâ—rning the Scripture Vpon what terms the Church may or
is to determine controversies of Faith And what obligation that determination produceth Traditions of the Apostles oblige the present Church as the reasons of them continue or not Instances in our Lords Passeover and Eucharist Penance under the Apostles and afterwards S. Pauls vail eaâ—ing blood and things offered to Idols The power of the Church in limiting these Traditions 178 CHAP. XXV The power of the Church in limiting even the Traditions of the Apostles Not every abuse of this power a sâ—fficient warrant for particular Churches to reforme themselves Heresie consists in denying something necessary to salvation to be believed Schism in departing from the unity of the Church whether upon that or any other cause Implicite Faith no virtue but the effect of it may be the work of Christian charity p. 163 CHAP. XXVI What is to add to Gods Law What to adde to the Apocalypse S. Pauls Anathema The Beraeans S. Johns Gospel sufficient to make one believe and the Scriptures the man of God perfect How the Law giveth light and Christians are taught by God How Idolatry is said not to be commanded by God 168 CHAP. XXVII Why it was death to transgress the determinations of the Jewes Consistory and what power this argueth in the Church A difference between the authority of the Apostles and that of the Church The being of the Church to the worlds end with power of the Keyes makes it not infallible Obedience to Superiours and the Pillar of truth inferre it not 175 CHAP. XXXI The Fathers acknowledge the sufficiencie 〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—rnesse of the Scriptures as the Traditions of the Church They are to be reconciled by limiting the termes which they use The limitations of those sayings which make all Christian truth to be contained in the Scriptures Of those which make the authority of the Church the ground of Faith 181 CHAP. XXXII Answer to an Objection that choice of Religion becomes difficult upon these terms This resolution is for the Interest of the Reformation Those that make the Church Infallible cannot those that make the Scriptures â—â—ear â—nd sufficient may own Tradition for evidence to determine the meaning of the Scriptures and controversies of Faith The Interest of the Church of England The pretense of Rushworthes Dialogues that we have no unquestionable Scripture and that tâ—e Tradition of the Church never changes 192 CHAP. XXXI That the Scriptures which wee have are unquestionable That mistakes in Copying are not considerable to the sense and effect of them The meaning of the Hebrew and Greek even of the Prophets determinable to the deciding of Controversies How Religion delivered by Tradition becomes subject to be corrupted 198 CHAP. XXXIV The dispute concerning the Canon of Scripture and the translations thereof in two Questions There can be no Tradition for those books that were written since Prophesie ceased Wherein the excellence of them above other books lies The chiâ—fe objections against them are questionâ—ble In those parcels of the New Testament that have been questioned the case is not the same The sense of the Church 207 CHAP. XXXIII Onely the Originall Copy can be Authentick But the truth thereof may as well be found in the translations of the Old Testament as in the Jewes Copies The Jewes have not falsified them of malice The points come neither from Moses nor Esdras but from the Talmud Iewes 218 CHAP. XXXIV Of the ancientest Translations of the Bible into Greek first With the Authors and authority of the same Then into the Chaldee Syriack and Latine Exceptions against the Greek and the Samaritane Pentateuch They are helps never thelesse to assure the true reading of the Scriptures though with other Copies whether Jewish or Christian Though the Vulgar Latine were better than the present Greek yet must both depend upon the Original Greek of the New Testament No danger to Christianity by the differences remaining in the Bible 224 The CONTENTS of the second Book CHAP. I. TWo parts of that which remains How the dispute concerning the Holy Trinity with Socinus belongs to the first The Question of justification by Faith alone The Opinion of Socinus concerning the whole Covenant of Grace The opinion of those who make justifying Faith the knowledge of a mans Predestination opposite to it in the other extream The difference between it and that of the Antinomians That there are mean Opinions p. 1 CHAP. II. Evidence what is the condition of the Covenant of Grace The contract of Baptism The promise of the Holy Ghost annexed to Christs not to Johns Baptism Those are made Christs Disciples as Christians that take up his Cross in Baptism The effects of Baptism according to the Apostles 5 CHAP. III. The exhortations of the Apostles that are drawn from the patterns of the Old Testament suppose the same How the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament are the same how not the same How the new Testament and the New Covenant are both one The free-will of man acteth the same part in dealing about the New-Covenant as about the Old The Gospel a Law 12 CHAP. IV. The consent of the whole Church evidenced by the custome of catechising By the opinion thereof concerning the salvation of those that delayed their Baptism By the rites and Ceremonies of Baptism Why no Penance for sins before but after Baptism The doctrine of the Church of England evident in this case 17 CHAP. V. The Preaching of our Lord and his Apostles evidenceth that some act of Mans free choice is the condition which it requireth The correspondence between the Old and New Testament inferreth the same So do the errors of Socinians and Antinomians concerning the necessity of Baptism Objections deferred 23 CHAP. VI. Justifying faith sometimes consists in believing the truth Sometimes in trust in God grounded upon the truth Sometimes in Christianity that is in imbracing and professing it And that in the Fathers as well as in the Scriptures Of the informed and formed Faith of the Schools 30 CHAP. VII The last signification of Faith is properly justifying Faith The first by a Metonymy of the cause The second of the effect Those that are not justified do truly believe The trust of a Christian presupposeth him to be justified All the promises of the Gospel become due at once by the Covenant of Grace That to believe that we are Elect or justified is not justifying faith 37 CHAP. VIII The objection from S. Paul We are not justifyed by the Law nor by Works but by Grace and by Faith Not meant of the Gospel and the works that suppose it The question that S. Paul speakes to is of the Law of Moses and the workes of it He sets those workes in the same rank with the works of the Gentiles by the light of nature The civil and outward works of the Law may be done by Gentiles How the Law is a Pedagogue to Christ 43 CHAP. IX Of the Faith and Justification of Abraham and the Patriarkes according to the Apostles
the Church to be the onely infallible Judge of all Controversies of Faith necessarily suppose that the Church is by Gods appointment that is Jure divino a Corporation Society or Body of men visible though not Civil because standing upon Gods will revealed in order to the happinesse of the world to come In which Society because in no Society all that are Interessed can act for themselvs it behooveth that there be a publick Authority vested in some persons or Bodies the Act whereof may oblige the whole And thus it may and must be understood that the Church is maintained to be Judge in Controversies of Faith by the definitive sentence of those that have authority to oblige the Body Whether Pope or Council wee dispute not here or what else may be imagined For that as all other Controversies in Religion is to be decided by the resolution of the point now in hand what is the means to determine by reason all such differences Which if it could not be decided without supposing whose authority is to tye the Church there could be no end of differences in the Church whatsoever there will be Here is then an opinion famous enough that the Church is indowed with a gift of Infallability by virtue whereof whatsoever sentence is passed by them that are authorized on behalf of the Church becomes matter of Faith and obliges all men to receive it by the same reason for which they receive the Christian Faith Now they who in opposition to this opinion do maintain the Scriptures to be the onely Judge in Controversies of Faith do involve in this opposition an equivocation manifest enough For it is manifest that their intent is to render a reason by this position why they submit not to that sentence which condemneth their positions in the name of the Church To wit because it is contrary to the Scriptures And further why they with-draw themselves from the communion of that Church which condemneth them and joyn in communion grounded upon the profession of the positions condemned maintaining themselves thereupon to be the true Church of God and those that condemne them the corrupt and counterfeit Whereby it appeareth that in effect they do maintain that there is no Judge provided by God to be visible in his Church with the gift of Infallible But that they are themselves and ought to be Judges to condemne all sentences given against the Scripture by any authority established in the Church By which means the Scripture becomes no more the Judge but the Rule or the Law by which men are to judge Whether they are to stand to such sentences as are given in the name of the Church or not Now if the Scripture be the Law or the Rule by which Controversies of Faith are to be judged there will be no pretense to exclude any means that may serve as evidence to clear the meaning of it And therefore there will be no cause why the Tradition of the Church should not be joyned with the Scripture in deciding Controversies of Faith Not disputing hitherto whether or no it contain any thing that the Scripture containeth not to clear and to determine the sense of the Scripture Whereas they that maintain the sentence of the present Church to be the reason of believing can no way resolve their belief into the Tradition of the Catholick Church Because that supposes only the act of our Lord and his Apostles delivering to the Church that which it holdeth Which who so supposeth can allege no other reason why hee believeth And therefore the sentence of the present Church cannot be the reason why any man should believe that which there was reason from the beginning to believe without it They who to exclude the Tradition of the Church state this position upon these terms That all things necessary to salvation are clearly contained in the Scriptures pretending to limit the generality of the question put it upon an issue not to be tryed till wee have resolved what means there is to determine the meaning of the Scripture For to be necessary to salvation is to be true and something more So that nothing can appear necessary to salvation till it can appear to be true Nor appear to be true untill it can be resolved what means there is to distinguish between true and false Besides how unlimited this limitation is may appear by this Because whatsoever is clear is said to be clear in relation to some sight And there is so much difference between the sight of several Christians that nothing can be said to be clear to all because it is clear to some And that which is not clear to all whose salvation is concerned in it what availes it those to whom it is not clear Now I suppose those that advance these termes will not grant that nothing is necessary to salvation that may be questioned by an argument out of the Scripture which all Christians cannot answer Knowing that such things as themselvs hold necessary to salvation may be assalted by such reasons out of the Scripture as they do not think all Christians fit to resolve Besides they do not pretend that all things necessary to salvation are clear in the Scripture of themselvs but by consequence of reason which may make them clear Now hee that would draw true consequences from the Scripture had need be well informed of the mater of that Scripture which hee drawes into consequence And to that information how can it appear that any thing is more necessary than the Tradition of the Church Therefore though I say not yet whether it be true or false that all things necessary to salvation are clearly contained in the Scriptures yet at the present I say that this is not the prime truth which must give a reason of all that followes upon it but demands a reason to be given for it by those principles upon which the resolution of all maters of Faith depends All this while wee agree upon the supposition that the Church is a Society of men subsisting by Gods revealed will distinct from all other Societies Because as I said those that have departed from the Church of Rome have hitherto pretended their own communion to be the true Church For if it be said that they do not or scarce ever did agree in communion one with another so that they can pretend to constitute all one Church That is not because they do not think that they ought all to constitute one Church but because they agree not upon the conditions Each part thinking that the other doth not believe as those whom they may communicate with ought to believe But this is now manifestly contradicted by two opinions among us though the one can be no â—ect the other as yet appears not to be one The first is that of them that think themselves above Ordinances the Communion of the Church onely obliging proficients and every perfect Christian being to himself a Church Of these
mentioning the Devil and his Angels nor of that not mentioning the creation of Angels The knowledge then requisite to save a Christian containeth the Apostasy of the evil Angels whether it be in the Creed or not because neither the Creed as it is nor Baptisme in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost can be understood to have any sense without supposing it And therefore Irenaeus I. 2. could not deliver this Rule without mentioning the Devil and his Angels though I intend not thereupon to argue that it was contained in the words of the Creed at that time By S. Cyrils Catechises you shall understand that those who pretended to Baptisme at Easter were to be instructed in the sense and grounds of their Creed during the Lent And S. Augustine in his book de Catechizandis rudibus where hee acquaints his friend that had writ to him about something of that office with the form that hee was wont to use instructs him to begin with the beginning of Genesis and setting forth what course God had taken with mankinde before and under the Law to bring down his discourse to the coming of Christ and from thence to his second coming to Judgment Which is to the very same purpose onely taking opportunity to mixe the motives of Faith which the Old Testament containeth with the mater of Faith which the New Testament requireth Whatsoever then is said of the Rule of Faith in the writings of the Fathers is to be understood of the Creed Whereof though it be not maintained that the words which Pretenders were required to render by heart were the same yet the substance of it the reasons and grounds which make every point necessary to be believed were alwaies the same in all Churches and remaine unchangeable I would not have any hereupon to think that the mater of this Rule is not in my conceit contained in the Scriptures For I finde S. Cyril Catech. V. protesting that it containes nothing but that which concerned our salvation the most selected out of the Scriptures And therefore in other places he tenders his Scholars evidence out of the Scriptures and wishes them not to believe that whereof there is no such evidence And to the same effect Eucherius in Symb. Hom. I. Paschasius de Sp. S. in Praef. and after them Thomas Aquinas secunda II. Quest I. Art IX all agree that the form of the Creed was made up out of the Scriptures Giving such reasons as no reasonable Christian can refuse Not onely because all they whose salvation is concerned have not leisure to study the Scriptures but because they that have cannot easily or safely discern wherein the substance of Faith upon the profession whereof our salvation depends consisteth Supposing that they were able to discern between true and false in the meaning of the Scriptures To which I will adde onely that which Tâ—rtullian and others of the Fathers observe of the ancient Hereticks that their fashion was to take occasion upon one or two texts to overthrow and deny the main substance and scope of the whole Scriptures Which whether it be seen in the Sects of our time or not I will not say here because I will not take any thing for granted which I have not yet principles to prove but supposing it onely a thing possible I will think I give a sufficient reason why God should provide Tradition as well as Scripture to bound the sense of it As S. Cyril also cautioneth in the place aforenamed where hee so liberally acknowledgeth the Creed to be taken out of the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For saith hee the Faith was not framed as it pleased men but the most substantial maters collected out of the Scripture do make up one doctrine of the Faith For I beseech you what had they whosoever they were that first framed the Creed but Tradition whereby to distinguish that which is substantial from that which is not Heare Origen in the Preface to his books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cùm multi sum qui sentire se putent quae Christi sunt nonnulii eorum diversa à prioribus sentiant servetur verò Ecclesiastica praedicatio per successionis ordinem ab Apostolis tradita usque ad praesens in Ecclesiis permanens Illa sola credenda est veritas quae in nullo ab Ecclesiasticâ discordat traditione Illud tamen scire opor tet quoniam sancti Apostoli fidem Christi praedicantes de quibusdam quidem quaecunque necessaria crediderunt omnibus credentibus etiam his qui erga inquisitionem divinae scientiae pigriores videbantur manifestissimê tradiderunt Rationem scilicet assertionis relinquentes eis inquirendam qui Spiritûs dona excellentia praecipuè sermonis sapientiae scientiae per ipsum Spiritum Sanctum percipere merebantur De aliis verò dixerunt quidem quia sint quomodo autem aut unde sint siluerunt profectò ut studiosiores quoque l. quique ex posteris suis amatores sapientiae scientiae exercitium habere possent in quo ingenii sui fructum ostendere valerent Hi videlicet qui dignos se capaces sapientiae praepararent Species verò eorum quae per praedicationem Apostolicam manifestè traduntur hae sunt There being many that think their sense to be Christian and yet the sense of some differs from their predecessors But that which the Church preaches as delivered by order of succession from the Apostles being preserved and remaining the same in the Churches That onely is to be believed for truth which nothing differs from the Tradition of the Church This notwithstanding wee must know That the holy Apostles preaching the Faith of Christ delivered some things as many as they held necessary most manifestly to all believers even those whom they found the duller in the search of divine knowledge Leaving the reason why they affirmed them to the search of those that goe to receive the eminent gifts of the Holy Ghost especially of utterance wisedom and knowledge by the Holy Ghost Of other things they said that they are but how or whereupon they are they said not Forsooth that the more studious of their Successors loving wisedom and knowledge might have some exercise wherein to show the fruit of their wit To wit those that should prepare themselves to be worthy and capable of wisedom Now the particulars of that which is manifestly delivered by the preaching of the Apostles are these Which hee proceedeth to set down But Vincentius Lerinensis hath writ a Discourse on purpose to show that this Rule of Faith being delivered by succession to the principal as S. Paul requires Timothy to do and by them to those that were baptized was the ground upon which all Heresies attempting upon the Faith were condemned So that so many Heresies as historical truth will evidence to have been excluded the Church from the Apostles time for mater of belief so many convictions of this Rule Which
every Instrument of a contract contain every thing that is in force by the said contract Surely it is a thing so difficult to contain in writing every thing that a contract intends that many times if witnesses were not alive other whiles if general Lawes did not determine the intent of words in fine if there were nothing to help the tenor of such Instruments things contracted would hardly sort to effect Consider now what is alleged on the other side how resolutely how generally the Tradition both of the Rule of Faith and of Lawes to the Church is acknowledged even by those witnesses whose sayings are alleged to argue the sufficience perfection and evidence of the Scriptures Is it civil is it reasonable to say that the Writers of the Christian Church make it their businesse to contradict themselves which no Scholar will admit either Infidels Pagans Jewes Mahumetans or Hereticks to do Is it not easie to save them from contradicting themselves by saying that Tradition of Faith containeth nothing that is not in the Scriptures but limits the meaning of that which they contain Tradition of Lawes may contain that which is not in the Scriptures for the species of fact but is derived from the Scripture for the authority from whence it proceeds Or is it possible by any other means reasonably to save them from contradicting themselves These generals premised freely may wee make our approaches to the particulars and by considering the circumstance of the places where they lye make our selves consident to finde some limitation restraining the generality of their words to make them agree as well with my position as with themselves For example Epiphanius Haer. LXXVI Irenaeus II. 46. III. 15. Athanasius Dispcum Ario say all is clear in the Scriptures Meaning that the sense of the Church is clearly the sense of the Scriptures in the points questioned But not to them who exclude that Tradition which themselves include and presuppose Observe again that the perspicuity of the Scriptures is not limited to things necessary to salvation in all that hath been alleged but once in S. Austine Epist III. and observe withall that the knowledg of things necessary proceeds upon supposition of the Rule of Faith acknowledged and received from the Church in the Catechizing of those that were baptized Not determined by every ones sense of the Scriptures It is therefore easily granted that the Scriptures were made for all sorts of people that they might profit by them Alwaies provided that they bring with them the Faith of the Catholick Church for the Rule within the bounds whereof they may profit by reading them otherwise they may and they may not And therefore those sayings which were alleged to prove them obscure convincing that they are not clear to all understandings because they require study and search and digging do necessarily leave him that comes without his Rule not onely in doubt of finding the truth but in danger of taking error for it Upon the like supposition S. Austine affirms de Vtilitate credendi VI. that any man may finde enough in the Old Testament that seeks as he ought For to seek humbly and devoutely is the same thing for him that is no Christian For the Manichees to whom S. Austine recommends the Old Testament in this place were Christians no further than the name as it is for him that is a Christian to seek like a Christian that is having before his eyes the Faith of the Church And this is that which S. Austine means that hee who is no Christian so seeking may finde enough to make him a Christian That is as much as hee is to expect from the Old Testament And this supposition is exprest by Origen contra Celsum VII when hee sayes that the unlearned may study the Scriptures with profit after their entrance made For this entrance is the Rule of Faith which they were taught when they were baptized And the Catechism of that time containing as well the motives as the mater of Faith appears to the unlearned the way into the deep that is the mystical sense of the Scripture Upon the same terms may wee proceed to grant all that is alleged to show that which is not contained in the Scriptures not to be receivable in point of Christian truth For having showed that the Rule of Faith is wholly contained in the Scriptures And nothing contained in the records of Church Writers to be unquestionable but the Rule and Tradition of Faith Whatsoever further intelligence and information can be pretended either tending to establish the same or by consequence of reason to flow from it if it cannot be pretended to come from Tradition because there is no Tradition of the Church concerning that wherein the Church agrees not either it must come from the Scripture or by the like revelation as the Scriptures which no Church Writer pretends to have For as for that which by consequence of reason is derived from those things which the Scripture expresseth Seeing the words of the Scripture is not the word of God but the sense and meaning of them it were a thing very impertinent to question whether or no that be contained in the Scripture which the true sense of the Scripture by due consequence of argument imports But if the question be of Lawes delivered the Church by the Apostles having showed that there may sufficient evidence be made of such though not recorded in the Scriptures there can no presumption be made being not found in the Scriptures that therefore a Law was not first brought into the Church by the Apostles And yet it remains grounded upon the Scriptures in point of righâ— because the authority by which it was brought into the Church is either established or attested by the Scriptures Mater of fact being competently evidenced by other historical truth besides And upon these terms wee may proceed to acknowledg the goodness of an argument drawn negatively from the Scriptures that is to say inferring this is not in the Scriptures therefore not true Doth my position then oblige mee to deny Irenaeus affirming III. that the Apostles writ the same that they preached Or S. Austine in Psalmum XXI de Vnitate Ecclesiae cap. V. and Optatus V. tying the Donatists to be tried by the Scriptures Both parties pretending to be children of God are to be tryed by their Fathers Will that is by the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament But if there shall fall out any difference about the intent of their Fathers Will the meaning of the Old and New Testament shall I think that is said in vain which is alleged on the other side out of the same S. Austine contra Cresconium I. 33. that if a man would not erre in that point hee is to advise with the Church which the Scripture evidenceth For the question being about the rebaptizing of Hereticks that is about a Law of the Church if you will have S. Austine agree with S. Austine
hand that the nature of that faith to which the Scriptures of the Apostles and the most ancient Fathers of the Church ascribe remission of sins and that righteousnesse which the Gospel holdeth forth together with other promises of the same is no way declared by this resolution but darkned For it is manifestly requisite for a due account of the sense as well of the most ancient Fathers as of the Scriptures that the nature of faith be understood to consist in that to which the said promises may duely be ascribed which in both are so oft so plainly and so properly ascribed to faith not to any thing which may stand with it or necessarily follow it Now though no man can resolve to professe Christianity without true love to God above all things yet the Scriptures of the New Testament plentifully shew that the holy Ghost the Spirit of love is not given to reside habitually with any but those that are baptized and so become Christians however necessary the actuall assistance of the same holy Ghost is to go before and to induce them to become Christians by undertaking what that profession requires Therefore it will be necessary to distinguish not onely the faith but the love but the hope the fear the trust in God and all other graces begun in him that beginneth to believe the Gospel to be true but is yet not resolved to undergo the profession of it and the condition which it supposes From the same as they are in him who upon such resolution is become a Christian And if any man upon this distinction will say that the faith which he believed with afore is faith without forme but formed afterwards he shall easily have me to concurre with him in it Alwayes provided that whatsoever it is the Scripture attributes the procuring of the promises of the Gospel to that be understood to belong to the nature of that faith which alone justifies according to the Scriptures CHAP. VII The last signification of Faith is properly justifying Faith The first by a Metonymy of the cause The second of the effect Those that are not justified doe truly believe The trust of a Christian presupposeth him to be justified All the promises of the Gospel become due at once by the Covenant of Grace That to believe that we are Elect or Justified is not Justifying Faith FOR now it is time to draw the argument which I purposed at first from these premises and to say That the name of faith by the effects which by virtue of the Gospel promises it produceth being attributed first to the bare belief of the Gospel secondly to that trust which a Christian enters into by being Baptized and lastly to that trust in God through Christ which Christianity warranteth And the second of these naturally presupposing the first as the third both of them the reason can be no other then this Because the middle is that which entitleth Christians to the promise of the Gospel in respect whereof both the name of Faith and the effects of these promises are duly and reasonably ascribed both to that which it supposeth and to that which it produceth both to the cause and to the effect of it For in all manner of language it is as necessary to use that change of words and the sense of them which is called Metonymy by Humanists and by some Philosophers and Divines of the Schooles denominatio ab extrinseco as it is impossible for any man to expresse his minde without that change of speech which they call a Trope in any manner of Language It is not to be imagined that those fashions of speech are onely used for ornament and elegance of language The Humanists themselves having taught us that they are as our clothes as well to cover nakednesse as for comelynesse For as long as the conceits of the minde may be infinitely more then the words that have ben used it will be absolutely necessary to straine the use of customary speech as the conceit is not customary which we desire to expresse It will not therefore be strange that the name of faith should be used to signifie three conceptions distinct but depending one on the other so long as there are more conceptions then words It will not be strange that the effects of that trust which a man entreth into by undertaking the profession of a Christian should be attributed both to that Faith which believeth the Gospel to be true being a thing necessarily presupposed to induce a man to undertake that ingagement and to that confidence which a Christian hath in God through Christ being a thing necessarily insuing upon the undertaking of it with a sincere and effectuall purpose But this would be strange and no just reason to be given for it were it not granted that the second to wit that sincere undertaking the trust of a Christian is that which really intitleth him to the promises of the Gospel For is it not manifest to all Christians that there are too many in the world whom we cannot imagine to have any due title to those promises and yet do really and verily believe the faith of Christ to be true and Him and His Apostles sent from God to preach it If therefore we will have these Scriptures which ascribe the promises of the Gospel to believing the truth of it to be true we must understand them by way of Metonymy to be attributed to it as of right belonging to the consequence which it is naturally apt to produce Nor is there any reason that convinceth me in this point more then that which Socinus giveth why justification should be attributed to that act of faith alone whereby a man believes the Gospel to be true His reason is because he that throughly believes the true God and his providence which will bring all mens doings to judgement and render them their due reward of life or death that believes our Lord Christ truly tendereth everlasting happinesse to all that take his yoke upon them and draw in it as long as they live must needs stand convict that he is to proceed accordingly I say no lesse And I say that the preaching of the Gospel tenders motives sufficient to convict all the world of so much But I say further that so long as notwithstanding sufficient conviction tendered notwithstanding a mans faith engaged and his own sentence past against himself if he faile we see men either not embrace Christianity or not performe it having imbraced it So long right to Gods Promises cannot be ascribed to this belief though in reason whosoever is convict of the truth cannot deny but he ought to engage in Christianity and hold it The reason is because we see men not alwayes do that which resonably they ought to do And therefore it is not enough to have submitted to conviction what we ought to do And the promises of the Gospel are not properly ascribed to the belief of those truths which convince men
God which it restraines in these words to the Father from any that by the sense of him that speaks them can be understood to be included in it And that the sense of our Lord may be notwithstanding this onely to include the Sonne in the property of this attribute the true God I go no further then the sense of all Christians who all affirme the father to be the onely true God but believe the Sonne to be the same onely true God neverthelesse And that this is his sense I referre my self to the titles attributes workes and worship of the onely true God challenged hitherto from his words And this sense the words of S. John the meaning whereof according to the ordinary reading I have shewed before not to advantage Socinus seem to intend according to the true reading which the Vulgar Latine justified by the Marques of Velez his Spanish Copies as you may by the readings added to the Great Bible preserveth We know that the Sâ—nne of God is come and hath given us understanding to know the true one Et sumus in vero filius ejus Jesu Christo And we are in his true Sonne Jesus Christ This is the true God and eternall life Whereas it is ordinarily read And we are in the true One in his Sonne Christ Or Through his Sonne Jesus Christ 1 John V. 20. For it seemeth that the Apostle folding up both attributes of the True one that is as it followeth the True God and the True Sonne of God in our Lord Christ pointeth at the words of our Lord recorded by himself alone John XVII 3. This is eternall life to know thee the onely true God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ Challenging for him that he is no more to be excluded from the Title of onely true God then from that of author of eternall Life If it be said This cannot be Because there would be then more then one onely true God The answer is ready that this is not an argument from the force of these words that this cannot be the sense of them But from the light of reason that this sense cannot be true I know it is a trick that Crellius puts upon the Reader throughout his first Book de Deo Trino Vno that the sense of the Church is not the sense of the Scriptures because it contradicteth the evidence of natures light But when the sense of the Scripture is in question the dictate of reason concerning the truth of the matter is to be set aside that it may be judged without anticipation of prejudice from evidence planted in the very words of it And this is the answer to the rest of those texts that have the like exclusive but not in so strong terms as this Now when our Lord saith Of that day and hour knoweth not the Sonne I know S. Hilary laboureth very eloquently to shew that he meanes no more then that he had not commission to declare it But this would make the sense of our Lord to be the sense of those men who when they are asked that which they hold unfit to declare and yet would not seem to refuse the civility of declaring it do answer that they know not to wit so as to hold it fit to be told I will not tye my self to maintaine this reservation fit for our Saviour to use Especially where no circumstance of the case or the discourse appeares to intimate such a meaning to them whom he discourseth with When he said in the Comoedy Tu nescis id quod scis Dromo si sapias If thou beest wise thou knowest not what thou knowest Every man understands his meaning to be thou wilt not declare it Whether when the Messias saith I know not the day of judgement Men would conceive that he meant no more then this That he is not to declare it seems to be very questionable I can by no meanes comprehend how it can be prejudiciall to the Faith to say that the humane soul of Christ the knowledge whereof is necessarily limitted to the capacity of a creature and knowes things above nature by voluntary revelation of the Word and Spirit which knowes whatsoever is in God 1 Cor. II. 10 11. should be ignorant of something that is to come Luke II. 40 52. It is said The child grew and waxed strong in Spirit growing full of wisdome and the grace of God was upon it And Jesus improved in wisdome and stature and grace with God and men Shall I go and say that he seemed thus to grow as boyes in the Schools when they cannot answer texts of Aristotle that he speakes there in the sense of the ancient Philosophers The Schoole Doctors will have our Lords humane soul to have known all from the moment that he was conceived and think him not â—ound in the Faith that doubts of it But if onely originall Tradition be matter of Faith according to the Principle that is setled the meaning of particular texts of Scripture cannot be such Especially when it is evident that such a meaning is not necessarily consequent to that which is matter of Faith And if you look but upon the sayings of the Fathers that are alledged by the learned Jesuite Petavius 1 De Trinitate III. 5-11 You shall easily perceive how truly it is said by Leontius de Sectis pag. 546. Speaking of the Agnoâ—tae who were a Sect of Eutychians which held that our Lord knowes not all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But we say that we are not to stand stifly upon these things Therefore neither did the Synod of Calcedon trouble is about any such position as this Yet it is to be known that many of the Fathers even almost all say that he was ignorant Certainly Irenaeus and Athanasius if narrowly examined demand no more but that he is ignorant of nothing according to his Godhead So that it is so farre from being matter of Faith that it is not in the Church ever to make it so whatsoever the Church may do to oblige the members of it not to declare their judgment to the scandale of others in a point so obscure Now the words of S. Paul do manifestly distinguish between our Lord Christ and all Creatures insisting thus Who is the Image of the invisible God the first born of the whole Creature For in him were all things created whether in Heaven or on Earth Surely he in whom as by whom all things are sayd to have been made is not intended to be comprised in the number of things made by being called the first born of the whole Creature And therefore I conceive the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the compound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to signifie according to the Hebrew not first but before We have eminent examples in the Gospels John I. 15. the Baptist sayth of our Lord Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because he was before me Our Lord. John XV. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The world
in the judgement of many that think themselves the most refined Christians that they allow it not that common sense in managing the businesse of Christianity which they must needs allow Jews Pagans Mahometans in faithfully serving their own faithlesse suppositions and which all experience shows us that it serves all mankind to what purpose soever it is imployed and that notwithstanding so great a triall of it as the governing of so great a Body as the Church is in unity so farre and so long as this Unity hath prevailed it is therefore necessary to give a reason why the Church so used them Which supposing the premises it will be as easie as it is necessary for me to give and that more sufficient if I mistake not then can possibly be given not supposing the same For if the secret of the resurrection the general judgement and the World to come if the mystery of the Holy Triniâ—y consisting in the Word or Wisdome and Spirit of God if the inward and spiritual service of God in truth of heart be more clearly opened in them by the work of Providence dispensing the effect of Canonicall Scripture by the occurrences of time then in the Law and the Prophets themselves which I have showed both that so it is and why so it is from the ground of the difference between the Old and the New Testament then I suppose there is sufficient reason why those who admit the Old Testament to be made for common edification in the Church should not put any question concerning those Scriptures Those new lights among us who do not allow the Psalter to be pertinently and reasonably imployed for the publick service of God upon all occasions as the Church hath alwaies imployed it may assure us that they understand not why the Scriptures of the Old Testament are read in the Church because they understand not the correspondence between the Old and the New Testament in the understanding whereof the edification of the Church by the Scriptures of the Old Testament consisteth There may be offence taken at divers things in these Scriptures I deny not But there may be offence taken in like maner at divers things in the Canonicall Scriptures of the Old Testament The humility of Christians requires them edifying themselves in that which they understand in the Scriptures according to our common Christianity in the rest which they understand not to refer themselves to their Superiours The Church understood well enough this difference and this correspondence to be discovered by these writings as the time required when it appointed Learners to read them And though I stand not upon terms yet I conceive they are more properly called Ecclesiastical because the Church hath imployed them to be read in the Church then Apocryphal according to the use of that word in the Church to signifie such writings as the Church suspecteth and therefore alloweth not to be read whither in publick or in private Whereupon I conceive also that the term of Canonical Scripture hath and ought to have two senses one when we speak of the Jews Canon in the Old Testament another when we speak of the Canon of the Church For seeing the Tradition of the Synagogue is perfect evidence what Scriptures of the old Testament are to be received as inspired by God the word Canon in that case may well signifie the Rule of our Faith or maners But because the Church cannot pretend to create that evidence originally but onely to transmit what she receiveth from the Synagogue Pretending neverthelesse to give a Rule what shall be read for the edification of the Church the word Canon therefore in that case will signifie onely the list or Catalogue of Scriptures which the Church appoints to be read in the Church which seems to reconcile the diverse accounts extant in severall Records of the Church CHAP. XXIII The consideration of the Eucharist prescribed by Tradition for the mater of it Lords Prayer prescribed in all services The mater of Prayers for all estates prescribed The form of Baptism necessary to be prescribed The same reason holdeth in the forms of other Offices IN the next place I do maintain that the Order of celebrating the Eucharist and the Prayer which it was was from the beginning solemnized with were from the beginning prescribed the Church by unwritten custome that is by Tradition from the Apoâ—â—les containing though not so many words that it was not lawful to use more or lesse for these were always occasions for celebrating the Eucharist emergent which must be intimated in fewer or more words in the celebrating of it yet the mater and substance of the Consecration of it together with the mater and substance of the necessities of the Church for which it was offered that is to say for which the Church was and is to pray at the celebration of it as hoping to obtain them by the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross which it representeth as received from the beginning was every were known to be the same This I inferr from that which I have said in the Book afore quoted of those Texts of S. Paul where those Prayers of the Church which the Eucharist is consecrated with are called Eucharistia or Thanksgiving if not rather the thanksgiving because it was a certain form of Thanksgiving well known to all Christians by that name from whence the Sacrament â—o consecrated was also so called from the time that our Lord hâ—ing blessed or given thanks to the Father over the Elements had said This is my body this is my blood and order is given that at the celebration thereof Prayers be made for the necessities of the Church and of all people 1 Cor. XIV 25. 26. 1 Tiâ—â— II. 1-8 Together with those passages of primitive antiquity from whence it appeareth there that the form of consecrating the Eucharist used and known generally in the Church is called Eucharistia and that the custome of interceding for all the necessities of the Church and for the reducing of unbelievers to the same is and hath been taken up and ever frequented by the Church in obedience to and prosecution of the said precept of the Apostles This observation might perhaps be thought too obscure evidence â—o bring to light a point of this consequence were it not justified by all that I produced afore to show that the Eucharist is consecrated by the Prayers of the Church which celebrateth it upon the faith of our Lords institution and promise For the mater of these Prayers tending to a certain purpose that the Elements may become the Body and Blood of Christ and convay his Spirit to those who receive them with living faith the Consecration which is the effect of them requires that the form of them be prescript and certain though not in number of words yet in sense in tent and substance And this by the evidence there produced may appear to have been maintained from the beginning by Tradition in
such thing as a Councill according to the supposition of the congregations And therefore in the acts of Counciles which are the Lawes whereby the Church is to be ruled the people can have no further satisfaction then to see them openly debated under the knowledge of the people Indeed the interest of Soveraigne powers in Church maters which I allow not onely in order to the publicke peace but as they are members of the Catholicke Church and so trusted with the protection of all that is Catholicke in behalf of the people gives them that power over the acts of Counciles which by and by I shal declare Which though grounded upon another account and belonging to them in an other quality then that which the constitution of the Church createth is notwithstanding provided by God to secure his people of their Christianity together with the unity of the Church But the suffrage of the people of every Church that is their acknowledgment that they know no exception against the persons in nomination for Bishops or other orders of the Church as it agreeth with the proceedings of the Apostles and primative Church so must it needs be a most powerfull meanes to maintaine that strict bond of love and reverence between the Clergy and the people in the recovery whereof the unity of the Church consisteth And supposing publick penance retrived without which it is in vaine to pretend Reformation in the Church there can be no stronger meanes to maintaine Christianity in effect then the satisfaction of the people though not in the measure of penance to be injoyned yet in the performing of it Alwaies provided that this interest of the people be grounded upon no other presumption that any man is the child of God or in the state of Grace and indowed with Gods spirit then that which the law of the Church whereby he injoyes communion which the Church createth For this presumption must needs be stronger concerning the Clergy by their estate then it can be concerning the people Because by their estate they are to be the choice of the people And though as all morall qualities are subject to many exceptions some of the people may be better Christians then some of the Clergy yet a legall presumption that any of them is so must needs be destructive to the Unity of the Church But no disorder in religion can be so great as to justifie the obdurate resolution of the Church of Rome to withdraw the scriptures from the people There is nothing more manifest then that the lamentable distractions which we are under have proceeded from the presumption of particular Christians up on their understanding in the scriptures proceeding to think their quality capable of reforming the Church Onely those that can have joy of so much mischief to our common Christianity can thinke otherwise But I am not therefore induced to thinke our Christianity any other then the Christianity of those whom our Lord whom S. Paul and other Apostles and Prophets exhort and incourage to the study of the scriptures Whom S. Chrysostome and others of the Fathers so earnestly deale with to make it their businesse All the offense consists in this that private Christians observe not the bounds of that which is Catholike when they come to read the scriptures For if they be not content to confine the sense of all they read within that rule of faith in which the whole Church agreeth because they understand not how they stand together If they thinke the Lawes of the whole Church can command things contrary to that which God by scripture commandeth It is no marvaile they should proceed to make that which they think they see in the Scripures though indeed they see it not a Law to the Church For they think it is Gods will that ties them to it But if the Church be the Church as I have showed it is then was the Scripture never given private Christians to make them Judges what all Christians are bound to believe what the Church is to injoine the Church for the condition of communion with the Church If any man object the inconvenience that it appeareth not who or where that Church is and so we are confined to those boundes that cannot appeare This inconvenince is the clearest evidence that I can produce for the Catholike Church For unlesse we grant this inconvenience to come by Gods institution and appointment we must confesse the unity of the Church to be Gods appointment because the dissolution thereof produceth this inconvenience For were the unity of the Church in being I could easily send any man to the Catholike Church by sending him to his owne Church Which by holding communion with the whole Church must needs stand distinguished from those which hold it not though under the name of Churches And he who resorts to the Church for resolution in the Scriptures supposes that he is not to break from the Church for that wherein the whole Church is not agreed Now that the unity of the Church is broken in pieces it remaines no more visible to common sense what it is wherein the whole Church agrees as the condition for comunion with it But the meanes to make it appear againe having disappeared through disunion in the Church is that discourse of reason which proceeds upon supposition of visible unity established by God in the Church And the meanes to make it appear againe to common sense is the restoring of that unity in the Church by the interruption whereof it disappeareth Then shall the edification of particular Christians in our common Christianity proceed without interruption by meanes of the Scriptures every one supposing that his edification in the common Christianity dependeth not upon the knowledge of those things wherein the Church agreeth not but of those things wherein it agreeth In the mean time it remaineth that offenses proceed to be infinite and endlesse because men giving no bounds to their studies in the Scriptures imagine the edification of the Church to consist in that wherein themselves not regarding the consent of the Church have placed their own edification in the Scriptures CHAP. XXXII How great the Power of the Church and the effect of it is The right of judging the causes of Christians câ—aseth when it is protected by the State An Objection If Ecclâ—siasticall Power were from God Secular Power could not limit the use of it Ground for the Interest of the State in Church matters The inconsequence of the argument The concurrence of both Interests to the Law of the Church The Interest of the State in the indowment of the Church Concurrence of both in matrimoniall causes and Ordinations Temporall penalties upon Excommunication from the State No Soveraigne subject to the greater Excommunication but to the lesse The Rights of the Jewes State and of Christian Powers in Religion partly the same partly not The infinite Power of the Pope not founded upon acts of Episcopacy but upon the Secular Powers
our sinnes imputable to Christ nor his sufferings to us formally and personally but as the meritorious causes which satisfaction answerâ—â—h The effect of it the Covenant of Grace as well as helpe to perform it The Fathers saved by the Faith of Christ to come The Gospel a new Law The prâ—perâ—y of satisfaction and punishment in Christs sufferings Of the sense of the Catholick Church 245 CHAP. XXX God might have reconciled man to himselfe without the coming of Christ The promise of â—â—â— Gâ—spel dâ—pend as well upon his active as passive obedience Christ need 〈…〉 pâ—iâ—â—s that we might not The opinion that maketh justiâ—â—â—g 〈…〉 â—rust in God not true Yet not prejudicial to the Faith The dâ—câ—â—â— of the Council of Trent and the doctrine of the Schoole how it is not preâ—udicial to the Faith As also that of Socinus 254 CHAP. XXXI The state of the question concerning the perseverance of those that are once justified Of three senses one true one inconsistent wiâ—h the faith the third neither true nor yet destructive to the Faith Evidence from â—â—â— writings of the Apostles From the Old Testament The grace of Proâ—heâ—â—e when it presupposeth sanctifying grace Answer to some texts and of S. Pauls mâ—aâ—â—ng in the VII of the Romans Of the Polygamy of the Fathers What assurance of Grace Christians may have The Tradition of the Church 266 CHAP. XXXII How the fulfilling of Gods Law is possible how impossible for a Christian Of the difference between mortall and veniall sinne What love of God and of our neighbour was necessary under the Old Testament Whether the Sermon in the Mount correct the false interpretation of the â—ewes or inhanse the obligatin of the Law Of the difference between matter of Precept and matter of Counsail and the Perfection of Christians 285 CHAP. XXXIII Whether any workes of Christians be satisfactory for sinne and meritorious of heaven or not The recovery of Gods grace for a Christian fallen from it a worke of labour and time The necessity and essicacy of Penance to that purpose according to the Scriptures and the practice of the Church Merit by virtue of Gods promise necessary The Catholick Church agrees in it the present Church of Rome allowes merit of justice 300 The CONTENTS of the third Book CHAP. I. THe Society of the Church founded upon the duty of communicating in the Offices of Gods service The Sacrament of the Eucharist among those Offices proper to Christianity What opinions concerning the presence of Christs body and Blood in the Eucharist are on foot page 1 CHAP. II. That the Natural substance of the Elements remaines in the Sacrament That the Body and Blood of Christ is neverthâ—lâ—sse present in the same when it is received noâ— by the receiving of it The eating of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Câ—â—sâ— necessarily requireth the same This causes no contradâ—ction nor improperty â—â— the words of our Lord. 3 CHAP. III. That the presence of Christs body in the Eucharist depends not upon the living 〈◊〉 of him that receives but upon the true profession of Christianity in the 〈◊〉 thâ—â— câ—lâ—brates The Scâ—iâ—tureâ— that are alleged for the dependence of 〈◊〉 the communication of the properties They conclude not the sense of them b◠〈◊〉 â—â—ey are alleged How the Scripture confineth the flesh of Christ to the 〈◊〉 16 CHAP. IV. The opinion which maketh the Consecration to be done by rehearsing the operative words That our Lord consecrated by Thanksgiving The Form of it in all Lâ—â—urgies together with the consent of the Fathers Evidence that there is â—o Tradition of the Church for the abolishing of the Elements 23 CHAP. V. It cannot be proved by the Old Testament that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice How by the New Testament it may be so accounted Four reasons thereof depending upon the nature of Justifying Faith premised The consent of the Catholick Church The concurrence of the Church of England to the premises 38 CHAP. VI. The reason of the Order by which I proceed brings me to the Baptism of Infants in the next place The power of the Keyes seen in granting Baptism as well as in communicating the Eucharist Why Socinians make Baptism indifferent Why Antinomians make it a mistake to Baptize The grounds upon which I shake off both With answer to some objections 53 CHAP. VII The ground of Baptizing Infants Originall sinne though not instituted till Christ rose again No other cure for it Infants of Christians may be Disciplâ—â— are holy The effect of Circumcision under the Law inferreth the effect of Baptism under the Gospel 58 CHAP. VIII What is alledged to impeach Tradition for Baptizing Infants Proves not that any could be saved regularly who dyed unbaptized but that baptizing at years was a strong means to make good Christians Why the Church now Baptize What becomes of Infants dying unbaptized unanswerable What those Infants get who dye baptized â—5 CHAP. IX What controversie the Reformation hath with the Church of Rome about Penance Inward repentance that is sincere obtaineth pardon alone Remission of 〈◊〉 by the Gospel onely The condition of it by the Ministry of the Church What the power of binding and loosing contains more then Preaching or taking away offences Sinne may be pardoned without the use of it Wherein the necessity of using it lyeth 73 CHAP. X. The Sâ—cts of the Montanists Novatians Donatists and Meletians evidence the cure of sinne by Penance to be a Tradition of the Apostles So doâ—h the agreement of primitive practice with their writings Indulgence of regular Penance from the Apostles Confession of secret sinnes in the primitive Church That no sinne can be cured withoâ—â— the Keyes of the Church there is no Tradition from the Apostles The necessity of confessing secret sinnes whereupon it stands 86 CHAP. IX Penance is not required to redeem the debt of temporall punishment when the sinne is pardoned What assuraâ—ce of forgivenesse the law of auricular Confession as it is used in the Church of Rome procureth Of injoyning Penance after absolution performed Setting aside abuses the Law is agreeable to Gods Of the order taken by the Church of England 98 CHAP. XI The Unction of the sick pretendeth onely boaily health upon supposition of the cure of sinne by the Keyes of the Church Objections answered The Tradition of the Church evidenceth the same 106 CHAP. XII The ground of the Right of the Church in Matrimoniall causes Mariage of one with one iâ—solubly is a Law of Christianity The Law of Moses not injoyning it The Law of the Empire not aiming at the ground of it Evidence from the primitive practice of the Church 114 CHAP. XIV Scripture alledged to prove the bond of Mariage insoluble in case of adultery uneffectual S. Paul and our Lord speak both to one purpose according to S. Jerome and S. Austine The contrary opinion more reasonable and more general in the Church Why the Church may restrain the innocent party from marying again The
Church in time perhaps they may declare I have not hitherto understood Shall I say there is not sufficient argument for the sense of the Church in the Gospels It is no part of my meaning Shall I therefore say it is clear of it selfe in the Gospels that is to say by the sayings and doings of our Lord recorded in the Gospels Doth not our Lord plainly make himself equal to the Father John V. 17-23 Doth hee not answer again being questioned for this John X. 33 34 35. by the words of David spoken of meer men Psal LXXXIII 6. I have said yee are Gods Doth hee not say plainly again My Father is greater than I John XIV 28 Which things as it is plain by argument that they may stand with the sense of the Church so that those arguments are plain of themselves to all understandings is as much as to say That a seeming contradiction argues an intent in our Lord that all men should see the resolution of it Again that all that will be saved by our Lord Christ must take up his Crosse and professe him to the death is plaine by the Gospels But so long as the Disciples might and did believe that they should raigne with our Lord in his Kingdome over that people which should destroy their enemies was the intent of suffering death for Christ to raign with him in heaven plaine by the Gospels That the Law should stand for ever is it not plainly delivered by our Lord in the Gospel and is it not as plainly of the necessity of salvation to believe that wee are saved by the Gospel and not by the Law I appeal to S. Pauls Epistles Though I dispute not whether this be abrogating the Law as Divines commonly speak or derogating from it Certainly though I know not whether the Socinians would be content with the Leviathan that no thing be thought necessary to salvation to be believed but that our Lord is the Christ Yet I know they would be astonished to hear that hee who believes that and lives according to the Lawes of his Soveraign hath done the duty of a Christian and may challenge his share in the kingdome of heaven for it But this I must not dispute further in this place Onely here I must answer his reasons out of the Scripture and show you upon what a weak pinne hee hath hung all this waight Christ is the foundation 1 Cor. III. 11. Mat. XVI 18. which all the Gospels pretend to induce us to believe John XX. 31. as also the exhortations of the Apostles Acts XVII 2 3 6. by this the good thief was saved believing onely our Lord anointed by God to his Kingdome Luke XXIII 42. Everlasting life is to be had by believing this and the Scripture because it witnesseth this John V. 39. and XVII 3. XI 26 27. Which is all blown away with this breath That hee that admits our Lord to be the Christ cannot refuse any part of his doctrine And therefore salvation is justly imputed to that which whoso receiveth shall be bound to admit and undergo whatsoever his salvation requireth This is eternal life to know thee the onely God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ John XVII 3. These things are written that yee may believe that Jesus is the Christ and that believing yee may have life John XX. 31. How have life believing Because hee that believes will be baptized and hee that is baptized must undertake to live as Christ teacheth professing to believe in the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost which believing in Christ coming from the Father to send the Holy Ghost implieth And therefore the Eunuch Acts VIII 36 37. is baptized upon this Faith as others into it Acts II. 38. VIII 16. XIX 5. The belief of the Creation of the world of Providence the Resurrection and Judgment to come not being introduced by Christianity but found in force among the Jewes when our Lord came So that limitation by which the Leviathan inlargeth his sense of that which the believing of our Lord to be the Christ implieth is not worth a straw It is not onely necessary to salvation to believe all that the Messias was to be or to do to be verified and to have been done by our Lord Jesus Unlesse we believe that wee are to believe and to do whatsoever hee taught us to believe and to do And that as I have showed is not determinable by any means but that which Christ by himself or by his Apostles hath provided us neither whether so or not and much lesse whether necessary to salvation or not That which hath been alleged to show That the substance of Christianity necessary to the salvation of all under the Gospel is not clearly contained in the Old Testament nor in the sayings and doings of our Lord related by the Evangelists Holds not in the writings of the Apostles For being directed to Christians already reduced into Churches constituted upon supposition of the knowledge and profession of Christianity there is no reason why they should be sparing in declaring the truth of it to those to whom they write True it is and evident by their writings that they used great reservation in declaring to those that were of Jewes become Christians the discharge of their obligation to Moses Law But whatsoever their proceeding was in that case not onely the reason of the truth but also the reason of that proceeding is clearly declared by their writings But if all their writings suppose in them to whom they write knowledge sufficient for the salvation of all Christians and none of them pretend to lay down the summe and substance of that whereof the salvation of all Christians requireth the knowledge evident it is that the perfection of none of them nor the whole Scriptures consisting of them and those which wee have spoken of hitherto requireth that they clearly contain all that is necessary to the salvation of all Christians For the Perfection of every writing consisteth in the sufficience of it for the purpose to which it is intended If therefore the occasions of the Apostles writings and so the purpose of them evidently express not an intent to lay down clearly to all understandings the whole substance of that which is sufficient to render all Christians capable of salvation as evidently neither any nor all of them do then neither doth the perfection not sufficience nor clearnesse of the Apostles writings require that all things necessary to the salvation of all be clear in them to all understandings For let no man object That they were all of them necessary to the salvation of all or most of them to whom they were sent Unless it could be said That whatsoever was necessary to the salvation of those to whom the Apostles writ is necessary to the salvation of all Christians Which so long as there is a difference between necessity of means and necessity of precept That is between that which is necessary to the common
rather here to prevent the objection that may be made that I ground my selfe upon the authority of men when I allege the testimonies of Church Writers For those that may abuse themselves with such a fond imagination as this are to consider that I claime as yet no other credit not onely for Tertullian who after hee turned Montanist was not of the Church but for the Fathers of the Church but that which common sense allowes men of common sense in witnessing maters of historical truth To wit that they who published writings that are come to posterity would not have alleged things for true which every man might see to be false in point of fact Because by so doing common sense must needs tell them that they must of necessity utterly discredit the cause which they meant to promote As in the case in hand If wee say that Tertullian being a Montanist alleged against the Church things so notoriously false that all the world might see and know them to be false wee refuse him the credit of a man in his right senses For what were hee but a mad man that would tell the Church that such or such Customes you know are practised among Christians knowing that they were not practised by the Catholick Church though they might be among the Montanists Therefore though I put a great deal of difference between the authority of Tertullian and S. Basil in regulating the Church yet in witneshng mater of fact I can ascribe no more to S. Basils testimony in his book de Sp. S. cap. XXVII than I do to this of Tertullian His words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of things decreed and preached that are kept in the Church some wee have from written doctrine some wee have received as delivered in secret down to us from the Tradition of the Apostles both of the same force to godlinesse And this will no man contradict that hath but a little experience in the rules of the Church For if wee go about to refuse unwritten customes as of no great effect wee shall unawares wound the Gospel in the dangerous part or rather turn the Faith preached into a bare name As first to mention the first and commonest Who taught us by writing to mark with the figure of the Crosse those that have hoped in the name of our Lord Christ Jesus What Scripture taught us to turn to the East when wee pray Which of the Saints left us by writing the words of invocation upon discovering the bread of Thanksgiving and the cup of Blessing For wee are not content with those which the Apostle or the Gospel mentions but promote and inferre others as of great force toward the Sacrament which wee have received by unwritten doctrine Wee also blesse the water of Baptisme and the oile of anointing and besides the man himself that is baptized from what Scripture and not from silent and secret Tradition And indeed what written word taught the very anointing of oile And that a man is drenched thrice whence comes it And other things about Baptisme renouncing Satan and his Angels from what Scripture come they And not from this unpublished and secret doctrine I will not here dispute the saying of S. Basil that these orders are of the same force toward Christian piety as the Scriptures And that Christianity would be but a bare name were it not for these unwritten customes how the truth of it holds Nay it were easie to instance against him as well as against Tertullian that among the particulars which they name there are those which never were in force through the whole Church but onely in some parts of it My present purpose demands onely this that Christians had rules which they observed for Lawes in the exercise of their communion And therefore by the intent of those who inforced those rules do constitute a Society or Corporation by the name of the Church Which Corporation Tertullian whether a Montanist or not when hee writ the book which I quote claimeth to belong to in reckoning himself among those that observed the Rules of the Catholick Church If wee suppose the Church to be one Body consisting of all Churches which are all of them several Bodies it will be not onely reasonable but absolutely necessary by consequence to grant that some orders there must be which shall have the force of the whole others onely in some parts of it And though S. Basil or Tertullian mistake local customes for general yet had there not alwaies been a Body capable of being tied by general customes there had been no room for this mistake No prejudice shall hinder mee to name here the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles Not as if I meant to maintain that the writings so called were indeed penned by them But because they contain such limitations of customes delivered the Church by the Apostles as were received and in use at such times and in such parts of the Church where those who penned those writings writ For though I should grant that those limitations are not agreeable to that which was brought in by the Apostles no man would be so ridiculous as to demand that there were never any orders or customes delivered the Church by the Apostles which succeeding times did limit otherwise The book of Canons which was acknowledged by the representatives of the whole Church in the Council of Chalcedon if it be survayed shall be found to contain onely particular limitations of general orders held by the Church before those Canons were made by the several Councils either the same with those in the Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles or differing onely according to several times and places For wee have yet extant a book of Canons made out of the Africane Councils containing the like limitations of the same customes and orders which though not the same yet served to preserve the Churches of Africk in unity with the rest of the Church This Code wee finde added to the former by Dionysius Exâ—guus in his translation of the Canons together with the Canons of the Council at Sardica And Cassiodore who lived the same time with Dionysius affirmes that this collection was in use in the Church of Rome at that time Divin lect cap. XXIII But there is extant a later Collection of Canons under the title of the Church of Rome consisting of the same Canons together with some of the Rescripts of Popes which were come into use and authority in the Western Church at such time as the said Collection was made Of the same Canons consisteth another Greek collection printed by du Tillet and commented by Balsamon which addeth hereunto the Canons of the sixth and seventh Synod in use in the Greek Church but not acknowledged by the Latine Where instead thereof the collections of Martinus Braccarensis and Isidorus Mercator of Burchardns Bishop of Wormes and Ives of Chartres where last of all the collection of Gratiane the Dominican Monk was in
in Horeb. Then repeating the summe of what they had seen since their coming out of Aegypt as to move them to imbrace Gods Covenant Wherefore saith hee yee shall observe the termes of this Covenant and do them that yee may prosper in whatsoever you do And so contesting the whole Assembly that they and their posterity must by transgressing come under the curse which it is inacted with thus expresses the summe of it That hee may settle thee to himself for a people and hee be thy God as hee hath said to thee and as hee hath sworn to Abraham Isaac and Jacob thy Fathers To whom hee had expresly sworn to give the Land of Promise and therefore so determined the expresse sense and intent of being their God For to expound what it means for them to have God for their God and hee them for his people it followes that if any of them return from the Lord to the Gods of the Aegyptians and other Nations they shall incurre the curse which the Covenant is inacted with that the Land being turned into salt and brimstone shall not be to be sown nor spring nor grasse grow but be like Sodome and Gomorra and Seboim which the Lord overthrew in his wrath Hereupon hee begins the XXX Chapter thus And it shall come to passe that when all these things are lefallen tâ—â—e and thou shalt call them to minde among all Nations to which God shall have driven thee and return to the Lord thy God And the rest whereby God promises that hee will be intreated of his people and turn the said curses from them upon their enemies Remitting plainly him that will understand what those are to that which went afore from cap. XXVI 16 XXVII XXVIII XXIX which hee that will peruse may trust his own senses whether they speak of life everlasting or of the Land of Promise And indeed the whole book of Deuteronomy containing nothing else but the repetition and continuation of what was most necessary to introduce and perswâ—de this renewing of the Covenant whether wee judge of the premises by the conclusion or of the conclusion by the premises wee shall â—inde no more thâ—n what I have said Now the whole XXV of Leviticus being nothing else but an exhortation and warning to keep the Law propounded before the camp removed from Mount Sinai as you have it XXVI 46 Had any such thing as eternal life been covenanted for of necessity the arguments there used must have been drawn from thence But you shall finde no more than concernes the Land of Promise The effect of this reason is not to argue a negative from Scripture That is to say this is not recorded in the Scripture not in this or that part of the Scripture therefore not true But to argue from the common reason of all men and the visible nature of the businesse then in hand that what was not then expressed for a condition of that Covenant which is related to have been struck between God and the Israelites cannot be presumed to have been an expresse condition of it For by interpretation from not onely the conversation of the Fathers but the doctrine of the Prophets and the preaching of the Gospel I grant that it is the principal intent which the Law intimateth though not expresseth One particular precept of the Law I must not omit It is that of Lev. V. 1-5 which appointeth the same sacrifice to be offered for legal uncleannesse as for perjury Now it is to be considered that legal uncleannesse is not a thing forbidden by the Law but is contracted by observing the Law as Tobits uncleannesse which made him lye out of the house and occasioned his blindenesse by burying the dead Tobit III. 11. being indeed an outward accident coming to passe without any inclination of mans will to it and therefore not imputable If therefore the same means of expiating that which is not forbidden by the Law expiate such a sin as perjury let any man understand how by this Law expiation is made for the guilt of perjury whereby every Christian believes hee becomes lyable to everlasting death when by the same expiation is made not for sinne but for a legal incapacity of conversing with Gods people or coming to the Tabernacle Another is that of Prayer negatively For who will believe that the spiritual reward of everlasting life is promised by the Covenant of the Law which does not so much as command the spiritual service of Prayer as the Jewes themselves observe Maimoni in the beginning of the Titles of Prayer and Blessings that Prayer is commanded onely by the precept of the Law Deut. VI. 13. X. 20. Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and serve him The Lord thy God shalt thou fear and him serve And those Blessings in which so much of their Religion consists onely by Deut. VIII 10. And when thou hast eaten and art full then shalt thou blesse the Lord thy God for the good Land which hee hath given thee Out of these texts their Elders they say have taken occasion to prescribe the kindes and measure and circumstances of their Prayers and Blessings And truly when there is so much in the Law of their Festivals and Sabbaths and Sacrifices and so little of the spiritual duties which God is to be served with and was served with even under the Law It is impossible to give a reason of it unlesse wee say that as the Gospel was yet to be a secret to the spiritual service of God which under it was to be required was not under the Law to be covenanted for that is expressed And here I am not to forget the Sect of Sadducees which though it denyed the reward after death yet notwithstanding was not onely tolerated among the Jewes but also in such Power that I have showed in another place that during the time mentioned by the Acts of the Apostles it had authority in all publick maters of the Nation under the Romanes For if they that denied the Resurrection expresly renounced the Law by renouncing the expresse condition of it it will be impossible to say how they that renounced the Law should manage that Power of governing their own people by the Law which was reserved to the Nation by the Romanes Indeed when Idolatry prevailed the precepts which punished that sinne by death of necessity were superâ—eded for the time But when after the Captivity some denied the life to come others expected it from the literal and carnal observation of the Law both maintaining themselves under the Law and by it it might be signified by the Law as our Savior proves the Resurrection Mat. XXII 23. Mar. XII 18. Luc. XX. 27. but had it been covenanted for impudence would not have had wherewith to maintaine the contrary acknowledging the Law And therefore I agree that when our Lord sayes Search the Scriptures for in them yee think yee have eternal life John V. 39. This think is a term of abatement
in the first book de Synedriis p. 214. acknowledges that it is not in use among the Jewes And the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel requires that those things which are prophesied in the Old Testament concerning the coming of God be understood to be completed in the second coming of Christ According to that of S. Paul Rom. XIV 10 11. Wee shall all be presented before the Judgment seat of Christ as it is written As I live saith the Lord To mee shall every knee bow and every tongue shall give glory to God Where that which the Prophet had said of the appearance of God in former judgments concerning his people Esa XLV 23. that the Apostle affirmeth to be fulfilled in the coming of our Lord Christ to judgment Therefore when S. Paul sayes Let him be anathema maranatha hee means let him expect vengeance at the second coming of Christ At which S. Jude sayes that the Prophesie of Enoch against the old world shall be accomplished upon those that hee writes against For how can hee say otherwise Enoch prophesied against these And can it be thought that a Jewish Excommunication can proceed upon supposition of the coming of our Lord Christ to judgment That were as much a jest as that of the History of Don Quixote where hee saith That the original Historian in the Arabick being a Mahumetane protests the truth of it upon the faith of a good Christian So when S. Paul saith again Rom. IX 3. I my self could wish to be anathema from Christ for my brethren my kindred according to the flesh I will not dispute that ingenious interpretation of Grotius which this Learned person with others allows That hee wishes in stead of an Apostle and Chief in the Church to be counted a man unfit for any Christian to converse with For it punctually agrees with S. Pauls stile 1 Cor. XII 12. For as the body is one and hath many members and all the members of the body being many are one body so is Christ That is to say the Church And so Gal. III. 27. Wee are baptized into Christ because into the Church But admitting this interpretation how can it be imagined to signifie a Jewish Excommunication that cuts of a Christian from the Church Hee that is put out of the Synagogue in as much as hee is put out of it is made Anathema to Moses not to Christ That is hee is cut off from the privileges of a Jew from the hope of returning into the Land of Promise and freedom in it from the yoke of forrain Nations Not from the hope of life everlasting which they indeed promise themselves by the Law of Moses but Christians know they cannot have unlesse they renounce the holding of it from the Law of Moses And therefore S. Paul when hee bids Anathema to whosoever shall preach another Gospel than that which hee had preached Gal. I. 8 9. must needs mean the same as a Christian which hee signifies to be meant by him that calleth Jesus anathema 1 Cor. XII 3. Hee that calleth Jesus anathema defieth him as rejected by God Anathema indeed signifieth that which is consecrated to God But it answers the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in Levit. XXVIII because consecration was a profession of abandoning for ever that which was consecrated implying a curse upon all that should lay hands on it to any other use And when the Jewes said to their Fathers or Mothers Be it Korban whatsoever thou mayest be the better for of mine They cursed themselves if ever their Father or Mother were the better for any goods of theirs as much as if they should give them things consecrated to eat or to drink Supposing that if they did so no man was to touch or come near them more than consecrated things So when God made Jericho anathema or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whatsoever was not for the use of Gods service was to be destroyed whatsoever might be for his service hee that laid hands on it to any other use became himself of the condition of that which was not for Gods service And such the Apostle professeth to hold him whosoever should preach any other Gospel besides that which hee had preached For I must not allow that the Church when it excommunicateth or the Apostle when hee biddeth anathema intendeth to curse that is to say to pray to God actually to bring those curses upon them which they are liable to Though I confesse this is not the place to dispute such a question because the resolution of it will suppose something which can neither be proved nor supposed without proof in this place where my purpose is to settle the Principles of Christian Truth by which Principles this is to be resolved It shall be enough to say here that it is evident that the Greek Church following an order or sentence of S. John Chrysostomes doth for the most part insist that Christians are not to curse Christians Whatsoever be the practice of the Church of Rome in the Bull of Maundy Thursday at this time And yet the very present practice of that Church doth not seem necessarily to import praying for Gods vengeance upon Hereticks and others who are then cursed Because it is their custome to pray for their conversion the very next day that is on Good Friday Therefore it may very well seem that all their Solemnities of cursing do not amount to signifie that the Church prayes for mischief upon them whom they declare to be accursed but by these solemnities expresse how they would have them esteemed by Christians Though by that corruption of Christian charity which time hath brought to passe it be now generally understood no otherwise than as a Prayer for Gods vengeance And there may be great reason to think that the ancient Fathers and Councils did not pronounce anathema against Hereticks in any other sense or to any other purpose Nay the words of Vincentius Lirinensis which I quoted afore make it most evident that the ancient Christians understood nothing else by Anathema when hee expounds S. Paul Gal. I. 8 9. Anathema sit inquit Id est separatus segregatus exclusus nè unius ovis dirum contagium innoxium gregem Christi venenatâ permistione contaminet Let him be anathema saith hee That is let him be severed set aside shut out least the direfull contagion of one sheep with any mixture of venene stain the innocent flock of Christ Which is enough to show that therefore it ought not to have been put into the definition of that Excommunication which is pretended to be made by the Power of the Church that it containeth a curse or curses against them on whom it is inflicted as you shall finde the first book de Synedriis doth in the place quoted afore Because those that agree in challenging that right for the Church do not appear to agree in that point And this will serve for an argument of difference between
for God which are sacrificing burning incense pouring out drink-offerings and adoration But others there are by doing which a man cannot be concluded to worship any thing but God till he do it in that way and fashion as is one by those that professe to worship it for God If it be said that these are Jews which allow Traditions but that there is another sort of Jews called Scripturaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which admit nothing but the leter of the Scriptures I answer that those also who admit onely the Text of Scripture and pretend to determine all controversies about the Law by consequences to be drawn from it could never come to agreement among themselves what consequence should take place and what not did they not acknowledge some publick persons whose determinations the whole body of them submitteth to the consequences which they derive their observations by from the leter of the Law being so ridiculously insufficient that they could not satisfie the meanest understandings otherwise as may appear by those which the Talmudists alledge for their constitutions Which being no lesse ridiculous then the traditions which they alledge incredible would be both to no effect did not the publick power of the Nation which while the Law stood was of force by it but now it is void ought to cease put all pretenses beyond dispute And for that which is alledged out of the Apocalyps which in sound of words seems to import some such thing concerning the vvhole book of the Scriptures as these Texts of Moses import concerning the Lavv I shall desire the understanding Reader but to consider that protestation vvhereby Irenaeus conjures all that should copy his Book to collate it vvell vvith the Original that they might be sure neither to adde to it nor take from it as Eusebius relateth out of his Book de Ogdoade against the Valentinians Eccl. First V. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I adjure thee that shalt copy out this Book by our Lord â—esus Christ and by his glorious presence when he comes to judge the quick and dead to collate what thou hast transcribed and correct it by this Copy whence thou hast transcribed it with care and likewise to transcribe this adsuration and puâ—â—it in the Copy Setting aside this adjuration what is the difference between S. Iohns charge and the matter of it And finding the words of S. Iohn to import neither more nor lesse to tell me what he thinks of this argument S. Iohn protesteth in the conclusion of his Revelation that who so shall adde any thing to the true and authentick Copy of these Prophesies to him shall be added the plagues written it who so taketh from it from him shall be taken his share in the Book of life and the holy City and the good things written in that Book Therefore all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are contained in the Scriptures clearly to all understandings But strain the consequence of this Text beyond the words of it which concern onely the words of the prophesie of this Book that is the Apocalyps if you please and take it for a seal to the whole Bible forbidding to take any thing from or to adde any thing to it for some of the Ancients have so argued from it shall he that addeth the true sense to or taketh false glosses from the Bible by force of that evidence which the Tradition of the Church createth be thought therefore to adde to the Word of God or to take from it Then did God provide that his own Law should be violated by his own Law when having forbidden to adde or to take from Moses Law he provided a power to limit or to extend both the sense and practise of it and that under pain of death to all that refractarily should resist it Now I demand of them that shall alledge S. Pauls Anathema against him that should preach any other Gospel then what he had preached to the Galatians against the position that I maintain whether he do believe that the Galatians had then the New Testament consisting of the four Gospels and other Apostolicall Scriptures or whether he can maintain that they had any part of it For if this cannot as is evident that it cannot be affirmed then of necessity S. Paul speaks of the Gospel not as we have it written in the Books of the New Testament but as they had received it from the preaching of S. Paul by word of mouth which being common to all Christians unlesse we question whether all the Apostles preached the same Gospell cannot be thought to destroy either the being of the Catholick Church or the saith which it supposeth or the power wherein it consisteth and the Authority of those acts which have voluntarily proceeded from it As for the Beraeans that examined even the doctrine of S. Paul by the Scriptures is it a wonder that they should not take S. Paul for an Apostle of Jesus Christ upon his own word but should demand of him to show by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ that so they might be induced to believe him sent to preach the Gospel of Christ Therefore when they were become Christians we must believe that they understood themselves and S. Paul better then to call his doctrine under examinarion or to dispute with him about the meaning of the Scriptures which he should alledge which our illuminati which take this for an argument must consequently do because they value not in S. Paul the commission of an Apostle but the presumption they have that the Holy Ghost moved him to write the Scriptures which he hath left us though they have nothing to alledge for it but the general commission of an Apostle To the words of the Evangelist Ioh. XX. 30. 31. I answer that he speaks onely of his own Gospel And that the things written in that Gospel are sufficient to induce a man to believe that believing he may have life But that is not sufficient to inferre that therefore all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians are clearly expressed either in S. Iohns Gospel or in the whole Scripture because he that is induced by the things there written to belive the truth of Christianity may seek further instruction in the substance thereof that he may attain unto life by imbracing the same So S. Iohn saith not that a man hath life by believing what is there but what by knowing it he cometh to believe As for those words of S. Paul 1 Tim. III. 16. 17. I confidently believe that S. Paul speaketh onely of the Books of the Old Testament then before the writings of the Apostles were gathered into that body which now is the New Testament known by the name of the Scriptures Being well assured that no evidence can be made to the contrary because of those alone it could be demanded that they should bear witnesse to that which the Apostles preached and taught There being no
as they pretended to do thence calling themselves Gnosticks may be convinced by that evidence which the consent of all Churches in the same Faith tenders common sense for the Tradition of the Apostles Which saith hee wee must have stuck to had they left us nought in writing as those Christians then did which had not the use of leters Epiphanius Haer. LXI 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All Gods words do not need allegory but are to be understood as they are But they need consideration to know the force of each mater Tradition also is to be used For all is not to be had from Gods Sriptures For the Holy Apostles delivered some things in writing others by Tradition as the Apostle saith So Haer. LV. LXXV S. Jerome advers Lucif Multa quae per Traditionem in Ecclesiis observantur auctoritatem sibi scriptae Legis usurpà runt Orthod Non quidem abnuo hanc esse Ecclesiasticam consuetudinem Sed quale est ut Leges Ecclesiae ad haeresim transferas Many things that are observed in the Churches by Tradition have usurped to themselves the authority of written Law The Orthodox party answers I deny not the custome of the Church to be such But what a business is it that you transform the Lawes of the Church into Heresie S. Austine Epist CXVIII Illa autem quae non scripta sed tradita custodimus quae quidem toto terrarum orbe servantur dantur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenariis Conciliis quorum est in Ecclesiâ saluberrima auctoritas commendata atque statuta retineri But those things which wee observe though not written but delivered being observed all over the world wee are given to understand that they are held as recommended and setled either by the Apostles themselves or by General Councils the authority whereof is very wholesom in the Church To the same purpose de Bapt. contra Donat. II 7. IV. 6 24. V. 23. de Vnitate Ecclesiae XIX contra Cresconiam I. 31 32 33. The supposed Dionysius the Areopagite Eccles Hierarchiae cap. I. mentioneth that instruction which the Apostles delivered without writing as a witnesse of the Church though not as a Scholar of the Apostles And Eusebius de demonstr Evang. I. 8. acknowledgeth written Lawes of the Apostles Concilium Gangrense in fine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And wee desire in summe that all things delivered by the Scriptures of God and the Traditions of the Apostles be observed in the Church And Greg. Nazianzene Orat. I. advers Jul. referrs those Ordinances which I quoted out of him afore to the Apostles as Authors of them Some sayings of the Fathers are also alleged to show that they held the Scriptures obscure Origen in Levit. Hom. V. allegorizeth the Law of burning some part of the peace-offerings to signifie that some things in the Scriptures are reserved to Gods knowledg least wee understand them otherwise than truth requires The same saith Irenaeus II. 47. even in the world to come that man may alwayes learn but God alwayes teach the maters of God S. Chrysostome in Joan. Hom. XL. observes that our Lord bids Search the Scriptures By digging as for mines or treasure So if they may be understood with searching yet it followeth not that every one is able to take that course in searching them that is requisite And Opus imperfectum in Mat. Hom. XLIV Ergò non sunt Scriptnrae clausae Sed obscurae quidem ut cum labore inveniantur non autem clausae ut nullo modo inveniantur Therefore the Scriptures are not shut Dark indeed they are so that they are found with pains But not shut so as by no means to be found Adding that as it is for the praise of them that finde them that they sought so for the condemnation of them that seek not that they understand them not S. Jerome ad Algasiam Quaest VIII Omnis Epistola ad Romanos miris obscuritatibus involuta est The whole Epistle to the Romanes is involved with marvellous darkness Epist ad Paulinum Hoc autem velamen non solùm in facie Moysi sed in Evangelistis Apostolis positum est This vail is not onely in Moses face but upon the Evangelists and Apostles And Nisi aperta fuerint universa quae scripta sunt ab eo qui habet clavem David qui aperit nemo claudit qui claudit nemo aperit nullo alio reserante pandentur Unless all things that are written be opened by him who hath the Key of David who opens and no man shuts who shuts and no man opens no man else will unlock and lay them forth Before him Origen in Exodum Hom. XII is afraid that the Evangelists and Apostles as well as the Prophets will prove not onely vailed but sealed to us as the Prophet saith unlesse wee both study and pray that the Lamb of the Tribe of Juda may open us the Seals of it Here I will advise the parties to consider how they can advantage themselves by those sayings of the Fathers which contain not the terms of that position which they do nothing unlesse they inforce Allege they what they can allege out of the Fathers to show that they acknowledg the Scriptures both sufficient and perspicuous I shall not be troubled at it but shall willingly concurr to acknowledg the same I acknowledg the Scriptures to be an Instrument of God though a Moral Instrument And I shall have a care not to acknowledg that God ever provided or used au Instrument that would not serve his turn Instrumentum Vetus Novum is a term in every mans mouth to signifie the Old and New Testament But there are Natural Instruments and there are Moral Instruments I say not that there is no third kind of Instruments for it may be there are Artificial Instruments of a several nature from both but my present purâ—ose obliges mee not to consider that difference When the substance or frame of the Instrument inables it to serve him that imployes it well may it be called a Natural Instrument as the parts of mans body or other creatures which execute the operations of the soul When neither the substance nor frame of the thing which that substance produces concurrs to the work to the which it is Instrumental but it is done meerly by the consent of mans will the reason is the same of Gods will if it be an Instrument between man and God then is it great reason why it should be called a Moral Instrument because the force of it lyes in the maners of those who use it to testifie those acts which they do not mean to transgresse Such as all civil records are in regard of the effect of those contracts or deeds which they come to witnesse The Old and New Testament are the records of two several Treaties or Contracts if you please that have passed between God and Man And therefore authentick because the writings of those who contracted those Treaties But does
is held and practised convincing where the truth is and on which side especially if wee content our selves with what is probable from it expecting from Tradition what is definite and certain For supposing so great a Congregation as the Church to take this for the ground of their Faith that nothing is to be believed for revealed truth but what they have received from hand to hand from the Apostles it must be granted First that they had the same perswasion from the beginning Because having never declared to their successors what are the particulars they are to receive either they had from the beginning this principle to distinguish mater of faith from that which is not or could never introduce it without grosse imposture And besides that holding this perswasion they could never admit any thing as received from their Fore-fathers which was not so indeed Because whole Nations can never agree so to deceive in a mater subject to sense as to say that they received this or that from their Fore-fathers when they did not the reason being the same in all ages since Christ as in our own For the Christian Faith being so repeated so inculcated by the preaching of the Apostles how long soever wee suppose the remembrance of their doctrine to have remained certain in the Church so long wee may inferre that age which had this certain remembrance must convey it as certain in a sensible distance of time and by the means of such distances that it must needs come no lesse certain to us Neither can any breach have been made upon the Faith without contesting the common principle of Tradition in the first place and secondly the consequence and correspondence which the Articles of Christianity have one with another by means whereof hee that questioneth one must needs by consequence prejudice others And Religion being a bond by observing which people are perswaded they shall attain happinesse the same motives to enter into this bond in general the same grounds of embracing Christianity in particular remaining how should wee imagine any part of it should be either lost or changed which necessarily must concurre to the effect of the whole For being dispersed as from the beginning it hath been over so many Nations whose authority can be a sufficient reason to perswade them all that which hee sayes to have been received from the Apostles not that which they were possessed of afore Who is able to move them with hopes and fears answerable to those which wrought them to imbrace it either to silence or to change it And yet so long as it can appear that the contrary was received so long time must the change require to prevaile and so much more to leave the truth forgot and yet subject to be evidenced by any Records that may remain So that there is no appearance that the principles producing such a change should so long time prevail as those motives that first evidenced the truth And further upon all this appearance in point of fact it is argued à priori and as it were in point of Right That God having provided so many possibilities to make the preservation of Christianity so easie the effect must needs have followed lest the means should have been provided in vain if no effect should insue All possibility being to no purpose when no effect followes and no effect but this answering the means that render it so possible CHAP. XXXI That the Scriptures which wee have are unquestionable That mistakes in Copying are not considerable to the sense and effect of them The meaning of the Hebrew and Greek even of the Prophets determinable to the deciding of Controversies How Religion delivered by Tradition becomes subject to be corrupted THis is the summe of this new account which to my understanding maintains the Infallibility of the present Church upon as high terms as those that resolve the reason of their Faith into it and yet not upon any gift of Infallibility intailed upon any visible act of any persons however qualified on behalf of the Church but upon a pretense of evidence made to common sense that those who acknowledge Tradition cannot receive any thing not onely which they believe to be but which is indeed inconsistent with it Wherein I shall protest in the first place that I have nothing to do with the terms of great error or Christianity so as to say here that either Christianity which hee calleth Christs Law or any part of it either hath been or may be renounced by them that pretend to admit nothing as revealed truth but what they believe was received from the Apostles and that so great an error as this may have crept into the Church For the present purpose being general to try how any thing in debate may be tryed whether agreeable to the Faith or not I should count it a great impertinence and the ruine of all that I design to infer upon sufficient principles which I pretend those which I reject not to be to be ingaged to show how great any error may be before I have a ground to inferre whether it be an error or not But if I may proceed to settle such a ground I shall make no doubt to convince all that remain convict of the truth thereof how great the error is which it convicteth It shall therefore suffice mee for the present to state the opposition which I make to this pretense upon these termes That the common sense of all Christians determineth those who pretend to admit nothing as of Faith but what they receive from our Lord and his Apostles to be subject neverthelesse under that pretense to receive things really inconsistent with it and which may be discerned so to be by the means which wee have to decide such questions The Scriptures interpreted by the Original and Catholick Tradition of the Church The evidence of this position necessarily consists in that which is to be said for Scripture and Tradition joyntly as the onely sufficient means to evidence Christian truths that is to say that having showed the arguments made against Scripture alone and for Tradition alone to be ineffectual and void That which remains for the truth will be this that the Scripture with Tradition to determine the meaning of it do both together make a sufficient means to determine the truth of any thing questioned concerning Christianity I say then in behalf of the Scripture which this plea so undervalueth as not to acknowledge any such thing but in favour to them whom they dispute with that it is a mervail to see how the greater difference with common enemies is forgot upon lesse quarrels among our selves For if there be any such men as Atheists that deny the beginning of the world and the marks of Gods providence expressed in the government of it as I would there were none I demand how they could be more gratified than by making it beleeved that we are no more tied to beleeve Moses writings
that we have to come from God than we please For if it be fifteen or sixteen to one that the words which we have are not from God what respect can oblige us to do more And would Pagans and Idolaters think themselves lesse bound to us if we could perswade them that whatsoever is pretended in Scripture of a Covenant made by God with Abraham and his posterity to acknowledge and worship him alone for the true God may be denied so farre as by saying that no man can say we have any Record of it As for the Jews what a favour were it to them to quit them all that can be alleged against them out of Moses and the Prophets by saying That we cannot be assured that it is their writing For if it be said that whatsoever the Church hath interest to use against Atheists Pagans and Jews will be admitted upon Tradition having renounced Scripture can it be imagined that having granted that the whole narration upon which Christianity steppeth in may have been counterfeited in writing any man can undertake to show the truth of the same unquestionable by word of mouth Surely it may well astonish a man void of prejudice to see it so carefully alleged how many ambiguities and equivocations necessarily fall out in expressing mens mindes by writing never considering that the same may fall out in whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth so much more uncureably as a man writes upon more deliberation than hee speaks and posterity can affirm with more confidence that which is delivered by writing to have been said than that which is onely so reported For let common sense judg by what is usually done by men for the preserving of evidence concerning their estates whether it be more effectual to have it in writing or onely by word of mouth For whatsoever can be pretended to come by Tradition from the Apostles must first have been delivered in the Ebrew language at least that language which they spake and was so near the Ebrew of the Old Testament that in the New Testament it is called by that name Thence being turned into Greek or Latine it must have come afterwards into the now vulgar languages of Christendom Neither can any man imagine how the profession of Christians should be conveyed by Tradition and not by word of mouth Where though they that heard the Apostles certainly understood their meaning which there can be no question of when the intent is familiarly to teach it yet the terms wherein it was delivered not remaining upon record as much difference may creep in as there may be difference in several mens apprehensions saving that which the communion of the Church determineth And will any common sense allow that the meaning thereof shall be more certain than the words are more certain than the meaning of written words which are certain though obscure and yet not without competent means to bring the intent of them to light But I must not preferr any thing of this nature before any thing wee have in the Scriptures so long as both sides acknowledg it I demand then whether the precept of the Law which injoyned the Israelites to teach it their children concerned the written Law or not The Prophet David Psalm LXXVIII 1-8 shewes the practice of it and so do other passages of the Old Testament and surely there can be no doubt made that Moses himself did deliver and inculcate the sense of the precepts to his hearers But will any common sense allow that hee forgot his text when hee expounded the meaning of it Our Lord commands the Jews to search the Scriptures hee remits Dives in the Parable to Moses and the Prophets S. Paul presses that all things that are written are written for our learning that wee through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope That all Scripture inspired from God is profitable and a great deal more to the same effect and shall wee open the mouth of Atheism with an answer that this concerns not us who no way stand convict that wee have the words of Moses and the Prophets of our Lord and his Apostles Let this therefore passe for a desperate attempt of making a breach for Atheism Heathenism Judaism to enter in provided that the Reformation should have nothing to say against the Church of Rome But let it be demanded whether any of those that writ for the Church against Heresies were masters of the common sense of men or not And let it be demanded when they alleged the Scriptures against them whether they thought the meaning of them determinable or not It is true Tertullian prescribed against Hereticks that the Church was not tied to dispute with them out of the Scriptures and certainly had just reason so to do Because though they admitted the Apostles to have Gods Spirit yet they admitted not that Spirit to have declared to them the bottom of the truth as to themselves and therefore made use of the Scriptures as the Alcoran doth so farre onely as they agreed with the Traditions of their own Masters whom they supposed to have the falnesse of the truth Whereas it is manifest that Christianity admits no dispute from the Scriptures but from them that acknowledg no gifts of Gods Spirit that suppose not Christianity and the Scriptures Therefore those that disputed against the Heresies that grew up afterwards and acknowledged no revelation but that which had brought on Christianity what did they dispute upon For evidently they neither had nor used that prescription which Tertullian insisted upon against his Hereticks But as Tertullian might though not bound to so much use the Scriptures against such Hereticks as well as against Jews and Infidels did they who succeeded onely use it against succeeding Heresies that own no further revelation than that which Scripture came with not as necessity but to show the advantage they had for this they must do if nothing but probability is to be had from the Scriptures but the peremptory truth is without Scripture evident in the determination of the present Church which was first visible in ejecting Hereticks Certainly such a breach upon common sense cannot be admitted as for them that have evidence for the truth to compromise it to a dispute of probabilities Here therefore I do appeal to the common sense of all men that see how all the disputes that have been made from the beginning for the Faith against Heresies do consist of Scriptures drawn into consequence against them though in behalf of that which they professed to hold from the Apostles whether all this pains was taken to show what was probable or what was true upon the evidence of the true sense of Scripture falling within the compasse of that which they held from the Apostles The ground then of that account which pretends that wee have no Scripture is very frivolous For if common sense be valued by the experience of those that handle written Copies not by
translations those especially which are the most ancient by those who understand them is duely esteemed a help to that end and not a hinderance For as the turning of them into so many Languages prevents all errors of Copiers and assures the true reading so the comparing of the translations with the original showing how it was understood anciently by those who were better and nearer acquainted with the mater of them than wee are who must have it from them makes up a commentary of the meaning of the same and how farr it extends I do therefore here appeal to the common sense of all them that have been at charge or at pains to procure and compasse the Edition of all translations of the Bible especially the ancient in particular the Spanish Anwerpe and Paris which it is hoped is now improved to the same purpose here at London and do challenge all men to say first whether the designe be commendable or not then whether it can be commendable if it contribute not to preserve the true reading to determine the true meaning of the Scriptures As for that which I conceive I have sufficiently insisted upon in behalf of the truth that the writings of the Apostles presuppose a Rule of Faith received by those to whom they addresse together with certain Rules limiting their communion in the service of God upon supposition of that Rule I am here to claim the effect of it that the sense of the Scripture is to be limited to that which common sense may discover by the records of the Church to have been the sense and intent of the same But that this should argue an intent in God not to have given the Scriptures to determine debates that might arise among Christians concerning the common faith and that upon onely the visible profession of the Church all arguments to the contrary from the Scriptures all clamors of conscience are to be silenced without reconciling them to the primitive Faith and practice of the Church to which it is evident that if the Church be not wanting to their duty they are reconcileable this is that which I must and do proclaim to be utterly brutish and unreasonable And therefore to proceed to the next point I grant and insist that nothing but that which is received from our Lord Christ his Apostles can by any means seem receivable to any Christian But whereas it may be received either by writing alone or by word of mouth alone or by both I say that the receiving of Christianity by word of mouth alone cannot be pretended the power of the Church to create articles of Faith which was never heard of till the quarel with Luther was on foot being excluded but supposing it evident to common sense that the act of the present Church is the act of the Catholick Church from the Apostles Which so farr as I know was never heard of till Rushworths Dialog ues came forth The Christianity that was from the beginning received by word of mouth consists in the profession of believing a certain Rule of Faith and undertaking a certaine Rule of life as the Law and condition whereby all Christians hope to attain everlasting life Besides all Christians being upon this profession admitted to communicate with the Church in the service of God acicording to such Rules as determine the circumstances thereof first brought in by the Apostles These Rules may also be said to be received by word of mouth because the practice of them holds by custome from age to age though the expresse knowledg and profession of them is not the means to save particular Christians further than it is the means to maintain the service of God in the unity of his Church which is the means of it Here are then two heads of things received by word of mouth which hee that will speak expresly in this point must distinguish And according to this distinction I say that onely the Rule of Faith which is the Law of attaining everlasting life and the communion of the Church is delivered by word of mouth though when I say so I understand that the true intent and meaning thereof and what it importeth to common sense cannot be excluded Besides which there is of necessity infinite mater of discourse concerning things consequent or impertinent or repugnant to the same some whereof obtaining credit in some times and some parts of Christendom comes by tradition of word of mouth neverthelesse to other ages and places which therefore do truly bear the name of Tradition Though not as delivered from the beginning by the Apostles further then as by them the means is delivered whereby it may appear which of them is consequent which of them repugnant which of them impertinent to that which they have delivered indeed As concerning the Laws of the Church so certain and so manifest as it is that there were Rules delivered by the Apostles to have the force of Law in directing the communion of Christians in the publick service of God to the Unity of the Church So certain and manifest is it First that the same Laws are not capable to regulate the communion of the Church in all estates of it which the change of times should produce And yet secondly that whatsoever should be changed or taken away or added to the same ought to tend to the same intent which it is visible those of the Apostles did purpose Let any understanding that is capable but consider the difference that needs must arise by the Secular Power undertaking the protection of Christianity between the Church afore and the Church afterwards If hee say the same Laws will serve to maintain the communion of the Church in both estates supposing the society thereof to be the same upon the premises I shall then confesse that it is to no purpose to appeal to any discourse of reason in this whole dispute I say further that among those who professe that nothing ought to be received for revealed truth but that which was first delivered by our Lord and his Apostles nothing ought to have the force of Law but that which tendeth to the same purpose with that which they inacted Nothing hindreth things to be received into belief and practice that are really not onely impertinent to but inconsistent with that which indeed they have delivered to us The appeal is to common sense therefore let discourse and experience satisfie common sense Religion indeed is a bond by the condition whereof wee perswade our selves of peace with God of attaining the good and avoyding the ill which belongs to those that are so or otherwise And thus farre it is certain that Religion is a thing bred in mans nature which it is impossible for him to shake off or renounce But is it impossible for him to become perswaded hereof upon undue terms Whence then comes all false Religion whether of Jews or Pagans For we shall not need here to consider Mahumetanes whose Religion supposeth
Christianity as the corruption of it Surely he that considers not amiss will finde that it was a great ease to them that were convinced to acknowledg a God above them to imagine the name and honor of this God to rest in something of their own choice or devising which being set up by themselves reason would they should hope to please and have propitious by such obedience and service as they could allow Correspondently God having given the Jewes a Law of such precepts as might be outwardly performed without inward obedience whosoever believe the most difficult point of Gods service to be the submission of the heart will finde it a gain that hee can perswade himself of Gods peace without it whatsoever trouble whatsoever cost hee be at for that perswasion otherwise If then there be in mans nature a principle of Paganism and Judaism notwithstanding that men cannot be at quiet till by imbracing a religion they think they are at peace with God Is it a strange thing that they who have attained the truth of Christianity should entertain a perswasion of peace with God upoâ— terms really inconsequent to or inconsistent with the true intent of it Surely if wee reflect upon the motives of it and the motives of them it cannot seem strange I have said and it is manifest that the nature of Christianity though sufficient yet were purposely provided not to be constraining that the effect of them might be the trial of those dispositions that should be moved therewith And is it a mervail that means to perswade those that have received Christianity that things inconsistent with that which was first delivered are indeed consequent to the same should be left among those that professe that they ought to receive nothing but what was first delivered by our Lord and his Apostles I say nothing now of renouncing Christianity while men professe this for I confesse and insist that while men do believe that there is a society of men visible by the name of the Church it will not be possible for them to forget their whole Christianity or to imbrace the contrary of it But I say that notwithstanding the profession of receiving Christianity from our Lord and his Apostles the present Church may admit Lawes whether of belief or of Communion inconsistent with that which they received at first I allege further that so long as all parts of the Church held free intercourse and correspondence with one another it was a thing either difficult or altogether impossible to bring such things either into the perswasion or practice of all parts of it according to the difficulty of bringing so great a body to agree in any thing against which any part might protest with effect And this held not onely before the Church was ingraffed into the State of the Romano Empire but also so long after as this accessory help of Christianity did not obscure and in the end extinguish the original intercourse and correspondence of the Church For then it grew both possible and easie for them who had the Secular Power on their side to make that which the authority thereof was imployed to maintain to passe for Tradition in the Church Seeing it is manifest that in the ordinary language of Church Writers Tradition signifies no lesse that which the Church delivers to succeeding ages than that which it received from the Apostles Adde hereunto the opinion of the authority of the Church truly pretended originally within the true bounds but by neglecting the due bounds of the truth of Christianity which it supposeth infinitely extended to all States which Powermay have interest to introduce For if it be not impossible to perswade those who know they have received their Christianity upon motives provided by God to convince the judgments and consciences of all that see them to imbrace those things to which the witnesse of them may be applyed that they are to imbrace whatsoever either the expresse act or the silent practice of the Church inforces whether the motives of Faith be applicable to them or not Then is it not impossible to perswade them any thing which this Power shall think to be for their Interest to perswade For no mans Interest it can be to go about to perswade the world that expresse contradictories are both true at once And if it were not impossible that the imaginations of most of them that dispute Controversies for the Church of Rome should be so imbroyled with the equivocation of this word Church as not to distinguish the Infallible authority thereof as a multitude of men not to be deceived in testifying the truth from the authority of it as a Body constituted upon supposition of the same Shall it not be easie for those who can obtain a reputation of the World that their act is to oblige the whole Church to obtain of the same to make no difference between that which is presently decreed and that which was originally delivered by the Apostles The said difference remaining disputable not onely by any text of Scripture but by any record of historical truth testifying the contrary to have passed for truth in any other age or part of the Church Upon these premises I do appeal to the common sense of all men to judge whether the Church professing to hold nothing but by Tradition from the Apostles may not be induced to admit that as received from the Apostles which indeed never was delivered by the Apostles For when the Socinians pretend that the Faith of the Trinity of the Incarnation and Satisfaction of our Lord Christ not being delivered by the Apostles in their writings crept into the Church as soon as they were dead they still maintain that nothing is to be admitted but what comes from our Lord and his Apostles But upon their supposition that Antichrist came into the Church as soon as they were dead are obliged to renounce all that can be pretended to come by Tradition and in that very next age Which I yield and insist that whosoever shall consider the intercourse and correspondence visibly establisht by the Apostles between all parts of the Church shall easily perceive to be a contradiction to common sense But when so much difference is visible between the State of the Church in several ages and what change hath succeeded in things manifest to inferre what may have succeeded in things disputable Hee must have his minde well and thoroughly possessed with prejudice to the utter renouncing of common sense that can indure a demand so contrary to all appearance to be imposed upon his common sense The same I say to the other demands of certain and sensible distances of time which they that see the end of may be certainly assured what was received at the beginning of them and so by mean distances this age what was held by the Apostles Of the like time for blotting out the remembrance of the truth as for introducing falshood For it is evidently true that
forgive our brethren their offences against us Mat. VI. 14. 15. Our Lord rendring a reason why he had taught his disciples to pray Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespasse against us For if it forgive men their sinnes your heavenly Father will forgive you also But if you forgive not men their Transgressions neither will your Father forgive your Transgressions And the Apostle James II. 13. to the same purpose Judgement shall be without mercy to him that sheweth not mercy And the foote of our Saviours Parable Mat. XVIII 35. So also shall your bravenly Father do to you if from your hearts yee forgive not every one his Brother their transgressions So Mar. XI 25. 26. And Luc. VI. 37. 38. Judge not and yee shall not be judged condemn not and ye shall not be condemned pardon and ye shall be pardoned give and there shall be given to you good measure crouded and shaken and runing over shall be given into your bosome for the measure that ye mete with shall be measured to you againe And againe Luk. XI 41. But give Almes according to your power and all things shall be cleane to you So Solomen Prov. XVI 6. By mercy and truth shall inquity be expiated And Daniell to Nebuchodonosor Dan. III. 5. Redeeme thy sins by righteousnesse or Almes deeds and thy iniquity by shewing compassion upon the afflicted For the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can signifie nothing but Redeem in the Caldee though there is a figure of speech in the Prophets Language intending redeem thy self from thy sinnes as I shall have occasion to say in another place and therefore t is in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And from hence come those sayings Tobit IV. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And againe Tob. XII 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Almes delivereth from death and suffereth not to enter into darknesse And Almes delivereth from death and purgeth away all sinne And Ecclus. III. 33. Water quencheth flaming fire and with almes shall he make prepitiation for sinnes And XXIX 15. Shut up almes in thy store houses and they will deliver thee from all afflictions And the words of the Apostle are plainest in this sense I Pet. IV. 8. Charity shall cover a many sinnes The Prophet also to the same purpose Isa I. 17. For they that make that filth which alone justifieth not to include or presuppose that condition to which Baptisme tieth Christians must needs crucifie themselves and set the Scriptures upon the rack to finde another meaning for them then the words bear By which that which God hath made due without and before any condition may turely be said to be given in consideration of it Which reason and the common sense of all men abhors But supposing that faith which onely justifieth to include the profession of undertaking Christianity as the condition upon which the promises of the Gospel are to be expected So certaine as it is that this will not be due if the condition be not fulfilled so necessary and so proper it will be to say That whatsoever that condition includeth is the consideration upon which the promise cometh though not by virtue of the thing done but by virtue of Gods tender and the Covenant of Grace and the promise which it containeth and the free goodnesse of God which first moved him to tender that promise And therefore you shall find those that suppose it not alwayes tormenting themselves to force upon the Scriptures such a meaning as the words of them doe not beare And in the last place concerning the consent of the Church though the Fathers are free in acknowledging with S. Paul justification by faith alone yet notwithstanding they are on the other side so copious in attributing the promises of the Gospel to the good workes of Christians that it may truly be said there is never a one of them from whom sufficient authority is not to be had for evidence thereof Which will amount to a tradition of the whole Church in this point In particular S. Augustine to whom appeal is wont to be made in all parts of that dispute which relateth to the Heresie of Pelagius hath so clearly and so copiously delivered the answer which I maintaine to those texts of S. Paul where he denieth that Christians are justified by the workes of the Law that those that challenge him in other points of this dispute concerning the Covenant of Grace doe not pretend to be of his mind in this Though the ground of this answer consisting in the twofold sense of the Law deserved as I conceive to be further cleared even after S. Augustine and the rest of ancient Church-writers I would therefore have the reader here to understand that I account all the rest of this second book to be nothing else but the resolution of those difficulties the answer to those objections and demandes which arise upon the determination here advanced The chief of them is that which followes in the next place How the promises of the Gospel can be said to be the effects of Gods free grace requiring our Christianity as the condition upon which they become due and not otherwise But there are also others concerning the possibility of fulfulling Gods Law by the new obedience of Christians concerning the goodnesse and perfection of it concerning the force and effect of good workes either in making satisfaction for sinne or in meriting life everlasting Which I shall allow that consideration in due time which the model of this abridgement will bear As for the sense of the Fathers evidencing the Tradition of the Church I am yet to learn that there ever was any exception alledged to infringe the consent of the Church in the necessity of good workes to the obtaining of salvation for Christians But onely the case of those who being taken away by death upon professing Christianity have not time to bring forth the fruits of it And how good workes can be the necessary meanes to procure the salvation of Christians but by virtue of that Law or condition for obtaining salvation which the Gospel now expresly enacteth and alwaies did covertly effectuate no sense of man comprehendeth For that the ancient Church agreeth in allowing the force of satisfaction for sinne to workes of Penance of Merit for the world to come to workes done in the state of Grace none of the Reformation which either disowneth or excuseth it for so doing according to the respect they have for it can make questionable And therefore though this be not the place to justifie the ancient Church in these particulars yet this is evident that those who maintaine more then my position requires do agree in that which it containes I shall therefore content my selfe for the present with producing some speciall passages of the Fathers expressing in my opinion the markes of my position and the reasons whereupon it proceeds As limiting the position between faith and workes in the matter of justifying
That they were in being during the Apostles time Where and when the Haeresie of Cerinthus prevailed and that they were Gnosticks The beginning of the Encratites under the Apostles It is evident that one God in Trinity was then glorified among the Christians by the Fullnesse of the Godhead which they introduced in stead of it I Should have propounded that evidence for originall sinne which is drawn from the necessity of the Grace of Christ before that which is drawn from the Old Testament had it not been for that exception which the Socinians make to it by questioning the state of our Lord Christ before his coming in the flesh In regard whereof I hold it the shortest course to void this issue first and then see what witnesse the necessity of the Grace of Christ renders to originall sinne And because that Tradition of historicall truth which remaines in the records of the Church evidences that meaning of the Apostles writings which I shall advance I shall not make difficulty to propound in the first place some things upon undeniable record in the Fathers that may serve to argue the intent of the Apostles in this point I say then that it is a thing undeniable to common sense that what time the Apostles writ there were divers Hereses in being whether openly divided from the church or lurking within it under the common profession to get opportunity to pervert the simple and in fine to withdraw them from the Church The first whereof was that of Simon Magus who being discovered by the Apostles to have onely counterseited himselfe a Christian to get the power of doing those miracles which the Apostles did that he might draw followers after himselfe fell away from Christianity to declare himselfe among the Samaritanes who expected the Messias no lesse then the true Jewes to be the Christ whom the Apostles preached our Lord Jesus to be But withall it is certaine that he taught his disciples that he alone could reveale unto them God whom their Fathers knew not for that the world had been at first made by Angels in opposition to him who also gave the Law and brought in among men the difference between good and bad which he by that knowledge of God which he professed undertook to teach how men should become free from and by this freedome attaine the fellowship of God in the world to come It cannot then be said that the author of this heresie continued any longer in the Church because when S. Peter saies to him Acts VIII 22. 23. Repent thee of this thy malice and beseech God if perhaps this devise of thy heart may be forgiven thee For I see thou art in the gall of bitternesse and the bond of unrighteousnesse Though he answer Pray ye to the Lord for me that none of the things which you have said come upon me For we find not that his after behaviour deserved that he should be admitted to penance and reconcilement with the Church And when he declared himself to be the Christ as did after him his disciple Menander witnesse Irenâ—us Epiphanius and Theodoret when he being dead and gone his pretense appeared vaine then was he of necessity at defiance with the Church and all Christians But this must be said which upon the faith of historicall truth is averred by the same witnesses that of him and the seeds of his doctrine came afterwards many Sects the authors whereof not pretending themselves to be the Christ pretended all to make known God otherwise unknowne to their disciples and by that knowledge to save them in the world to come through abandoning them to all licentiousnesse in this Which sects were therefore called by the common name of Gnosticks or knowers though there was one of those Sects which had no other particular name besides Among these one was set up by Nicolas one of the seven Acts VI. 5. Or at least under his name For though some in Clemens Alexandrinus seem to hold him an holy man yet no man doubts that there was a sect of Gnosticks which either because raised by him or by others upon mistake of some things that he had taught bore his name Which though it be not requisite here to decide yet it is evident by S. John Apoc. II. 6. that then the Sect was on foot And though we dispute not the time when Basâ—lides at Alexandria Saturninus at Antiochia Valentine at Rome or in Cyprus and Aegypt Carpocrates Marke the Magician or others set up so as to affirme that they were in being when the Apostles writ yet it is evident that under the Apostles there were such as counterfeited themselves Christians with an intent to withdraw the simple sort of Christians to this doctrine which these Fathers of Hereticks in their severall times were the heads of whosoever then set them on work I will use but two arguments to evidence this The first is the common infection which they brought in every where of eating things sacrificed to Idols that is to say of worshipping Idols For the feasts and entertainments of Idolaters consisting of those things which had been sacrificed to their Idols to feast with them was to communicate in their Idolatries This cannot be more evident then it is evident by S. Paul 1 Cor. X. 7. Nor be ye Idolaters as some of them were as it is written The people sate down to eat and drink and rose up to play The Idolatry of the Israrlits consisting in the feast as well as in their sacrifices And by Moses Exod. XXXIV 15 16. Least thou make a league with the inhabitants of the Land and they go a whoring after their gods and sacrifice to their gods and invite thee and thou cat of their sacrifices And thou take of their daughters to thy sons and their daughters go a whoring after their gods and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods Which you see how punctually it came to passe in the businesse of Baal Peor Num. XXV Now it is manifest by the most ancient Writers of the Church Justine the Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus Irenâ—us Tertulliane Origen that the Gnosticks did generally communicate in the Idolatries of the Gentiles whose testimonies have been produced by Doctor H. Hammond in divers of his writings And the reason is plaine by that old observation That the gods of the heathens are good fellows but the true God onely a jealous God That is to say That false gods never grutched one another the worship of God because all set up by the devil to whose service that worship redounded For the Gnosticks being themselves Idolaters and Magicians it is no marvaile that they communicated as freely in the Idolatries of the Gentiles as they in one anothers Idolatries But it is no lesse manifest that these Heresies which the Apostles writ against agreed all in teaching to eat things sacrificed to Idols and to communicate with Idolaters For the way of Balaam in which they are by the Apostles charged to go
not believe him when he tells them heavenly things Because none of them have been in heaven as the Sonne of man who being come from heaven notwithstanding remaines in heaven Whether he mean onely That having been there in heaven and learnt the effect of his commission and being still there in heart as all Christians are he can tell them things from heaven which they will not believe Or that having been in heaven and not having forsaken it for his coming into the World he knowes the truth of all that he witnesses here by seeing the counsailes of God there even while he is here And that these are those things which he hath seen in his Fathers house to wit those counsailes which the Father out of his love to him had made him acquainted with and taught him to execute even as they had learnt in the devils shop their Father to execute his designes For can any man imagine that his being onely born of the Virgine by the power of God which is they say the holy Ghost is a sufficient reason why God should not onely shew him what he meant to do for our salvation but joyne him with himself in the work and that honour for it whereof no Angel that is the highest creature is capeable Or that all this is such an expression as manhood can bear of that participation of Gods counsailes which the Word having been acquainted with from everlasting was no stranger to while being in the World he was executing the same Surely when our Lord sayes that he is to leave the world to go back to the Father he declares an intent to abide in heaven for everlasting Therefore when he saies he came forth from the Father to come into the world To understand onely that he left the private life he had lived afore he began to preach to appear publickly to the World in his Office might justly be accounted a piece of frenzy if there were not haeresy in it The opposition between heaven where the Father is and the world being so manifest in the words that nothing but the vaine glory of maintaining a party could cause it to be overseen If these things be true we shall not need to go farre for the sense of our Lords words John XVII 5. And now glorify thou me O Father with that glory which I had with thee before the foundation of the World Because we see how many times in this Gospel by being with the Father our Saviour expresseth not his being in heaven when the Baptist began to preach but his being in heaven from the beginning of the World till he was born upon earth For can any doubt be made that the glory which he had with the Father from the beginning is that which he was to be exalted to at his rising againe As for that answer of his to the Jews that demanded of him having said Abraham your Father desired to see my day and saw it and rejoyced Thou art not yet fifty years old and hast thou seen Abraham To which Jesus answered and said Verily verily I say unto you before Abraham was I am John VIII 56 57 58. I perceive the World is ashamed to hear what Socinus is not ashamed to answer That the sense of the words is and so they ought to be translated Before Abraham become Abraham Or before he become Abraham I am Meaning that here you see me before the calling of the Gentiles whereby the Prophesie of Abrahams name Father of a great people is fulfilled For the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make both the name of Abraham to go before the Verbe in sense and the verb to signifie the time past So that there must have been another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as this that goes afore and if there had been so it must have been translated before Abraham was Abraham or before he was Abraham not before he become Abraham But for our Lord to say before Abraham was I am to wit in the purpose of God is no lesse impertinent to their question then to say I am here before the calling of the Gentiles And to imagine that our Lord would give an answer utterly impertinent to their question I know not how it can stand with his profession though not to declare all that truth which for the present they were not able to beare may well stand with it CHAP. XIV The Name of God not ascribed to Christ for the like reason as to creatures The reasons why the Socinians worship Christ as God do confute their limitations Christ not God by virtue of his rising againe He is the Great God with S. Paul the true God with S. John the onely Lord with S. Jude Other Scriptures Of the forme of God and of a servant in S. Paul BUT the Apostle adds still more and goes forwards saying And the Word was God Though here the Socinians thinke they have enough to plead when they can say that the name of God which is here used is not proper to signify God himself which the name of four letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so signifyeth in the Old Testament that it is never attributed to any creature but by abuse That is to say as imployed to expresse the sense of such men as believe not in the true God alone but attribute his honour to some of his creatures For it is very well known and granted on all hands that the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here translateth is attributed first to Gods Angels then to Gods ministers in governing his People The reason whereof I take to be this that having entred into covenant with God to have him for their soveraigne and to live by his Lawes they must needs be bound to acknowledge and to honour those who had commission from him whether immediately or mediately to govern his people by the said Lawes in stead of God himself as deputies Commissioners or Ambassadors represent the persons of those Soveraigns from whom they come This I suppose is a generall reason why this name of God in the Old Testament is communicated to the Governours of Gods people which the Socinians cannot with any reason refuse Neither can I imagine how it should be more evidently justified then by that of God to Moses Exod. VII 1. Behold I have made thee Pharaohs God and Aaron thy brother shall be thy Prophet For Aaron is made Moses his Prophet to publish his Orders to Pharaâ—h because he was a man of a ready tongue which Moses was not Exod. IV. 14 15 16. Prophet being no more then Interpreter or Truchman as Onkelâ—s translates it And therefore Moses is called also here Aarons God because he was to give the Orders which Aaron was to publish But Pharaohs God as Ruler and Prince over Pharaoh who was Ruler and Prinâ—â— of all Egypt as to those things which God should by him command Pharaoh to
do I suppose then that we cannot come to a more peremptory issue with the Socinians then by putting to triall whether this name of God be attributed to our Lord Christ to signify such a quality as is incompetible to a creature noâ— that be more peremptorily tried then by evidencing what is the honour and esteem which the name of God importeth in our Lord Christ and in Gods creatures For seeing that honour inwardly is nothing else but the esteem which a reasonable creature beareth in mind of that which it honoureth outwardly the signs of that esteem And seeing the distance between the nature of God and that of the creature is so unvaluable that it is impossible that he who believeth that there is that which deserveth the name of God should ever imagine that there is more then one It must remaine no lesse impossible that whosoever takes God for God should ever take any creature of never so great eminence for the same Indeed that inward honour which I found in the esteem of the minde is a thing of a finite and moderate nature whether it represent God or his creature the understanding in which it is not being capable of any thing that is not proportionable to it Which notwithstanding nothing hinders a finite conceit in the mind of a creature to represent an infinite perfection in that which it representeth if any true conceit of God can be found in any of his understanding creatures It is then manifest that I say not among the Socinians but among those who upon misunderstanding the grounds of Reformation have fallen away from the most holy Faith of the Church concerning the ever blessed Trinity there hath fallen a difference whether our Lord Christ is to be worshipped as God or not Socinus being now in appearance the head of that party which would have it so And therefore I shall not much need to dispute that but onely for satisfaction of the reader repeat some of those texts of Scripture which they seem to have stopped the mouthes of their adversaries with For when the Apostle saith Heb. I. 6. When he bringeth his onely begotten Sonne into the World he saith And let all the Angels of God worship him Supposeth he not that men should do that which Angels by Gods authority do And our Lord discourses John V. 22 23. that God hath given the power of judging to the Sonne That all may hanour the Sonne as the Father He that honoureth not the Sonne honoureth not the Father that sent him And This is that will of God the knowledge whereof moves Angels and men to fall down before the Lamb that was slaine and give him honour and glory Apoc. V. 8-13 Nor can any Christian deny that he was worshipped in any other sense or quality either by the blind man whom he had restored to sight John IX 39. or by others whom we find to be accepted of him as those who had been well instructed of him and by him in that which they owed him Luke XVII 5. Lord increase our Faith Mar. IX 24. Lord uphold my unbelief Mat. XX. 30. Have mercy upon us O Lord thou Sonne of David Luke XVII 13. Jesu Master have mercy upon us And Lord save us we perish Therefore our Lord saith to the Angel of Laodicea Apoc. III. 18. I advise thee to buy of me gold tried from the fire For what should he buy it with but the worship of God by prayers And the Apostle Heb. IV. 14 15. We have not an high Priest that cannot compassionate our infirmities but who was tempted in all things like us without sin Let us therefore go to the Throne of his grace that we may obtaine mercy and find grace for help in time Againe S. Paul Rom. X. 12 13. The same Lord is rich to all that call on him For whosâ— shall call upon the Name of the Lord shall be saved For that the worship of the onely true God goes with the name of the Lord ascribed to the Lord Jesus in the New Testament no question can be made So saith S. Luke of the first of Martyrs Acts VII 59 60. And they stâ—ned Stephen praying and saying Lord Jesu receive my Spirit And kneeling he cried with a loud voice saying Lord lay not this sinne to their charge Every Christian can tell by what he does whom Stephen calls Lord. And that is enough to shew how ridiculous they make themselves who when S. Stephen saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would have it understood that he calls upon the Lord of Jesus not upon the Lord Jesus For when S. Stephen offers to Christ the same prayer which Christ had offered to the Father and David to God Luke XXIII 46. Psal XXXI 6. Is it not the same honour whereof God alone is capable For they that should say that S. Stephen prayed this not because all Christians are to pray so but because he saw our Lord Christ at the right hand of God Should make that which would have been Idolatry otherwise to become acceptable service to God upon an accident depending on the free will of God And what else did S. Paul when he said 2 Cor. XII 8 9. Therefore besought I God thrice that it might depart from me But he said to me My Grace is sufficient for thee For my power is effectuall through weaknesse Most willingly therefore will I glory in my weaknesse that the power of God may dwell in me And S. John when he prayes Come Lord Jesus Apoc. XXII 20. prayes to him whose coming he desires that is whose strength is effectuall through weaknesse And whom else prayes S. Paul to when he saies 1 Thes III. 11 12. But God who is our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ prosper our Journey to you And 2 Thes II. 16. Our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father who hath loved us and given everlasting comfort and good hope through grace comfort your hearts and strengthen you in every good word and work For there being here no difference between the worship tendered to God and to Christ I must needs infer that it is the same which S. Paul signifies when he intitles his Epistle to all that call upon the name of the common Lord 1 Cor. I. 2. It is true they that alledge all these arguments doe likewise caution that this worship and these prayers which are tendered to God absolutely are tendered to Christ with limitation of some certaine circumstances which being supposed it becomes due to Christ being alwayes due to God But if the difference between God and his creature be not acknowledged it is impossible Christianity should stand If the difference between the worship due to God and to his creature be not acknowledged it is impossible the difference between God and his creature should stand Because worship is nothing else but the acknowledgement of this difference Therefore where the worship of God is tendered to his creature either the creature is made an Idol
vvhich is the proper signification of the Greek vvord here used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense vvith the Latine create liberos as I sayd I know how much dispute there is that our Lord when he sayth The Father is greater then I is to be understood of his humane nature VVhich to me I confesse seems very hard that our Saviour should tell his Disciples for their comfort that God is greater then man and that therefore they ought to be comforted because he was going to God And having alwaies given this reason vvhy the eternall VVord of God was imployed in redeeming mankind because it came from God from everlasting I find that the priviledge of being the fountain of the Godhead vvhich is of necessity proper to the Father alone importeth that which the Sonne and the holy Ghost cannot have Not as if they had not the Godhead which is the same in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost But because they have it not from themselves and that it is necessarily more to give then to receive Whereupon it cannot be denied that the Sonne and the holy Ghost though honoured with the titles works attributes and worship of God are neverthelesse expressed and signified by the Scriptures as depending upon the Father and as something of his namely his Sonne and his Spirit though the same God also neverthelesse And this is without doubt the true answer to most of what Crellius brings in the second part of his first book De Deo that our Lord came not from himself nor to do his own will or to seek his own glory that he that believeth in him believeth not in him but in the Father that sent him John XII 4â— that he was called of God as Aaron Heb. V. 4. 5. that he received instruction from the Father that he prays to him that his words and workes are not his own but his Fathers and much more containing one and the very same difficulty which is assoiled by saying That wheresoever the weaknesse of his humane nature is not signified by the importance of what is said the rest is to be referred to the commission which he undertook to execute in our flesh which Commission supposes his coming from the Father of everlasting as the ground and reason of his undertaking of it This is that which the Prophet David signifieth Psalm XL. 7 8 9. Sacrifice and meat offering thou desirest none mine ears hast thou bored Which the Apostle Heb X. 9. quotes thus A body hast thou fitted for me The taking of our flesh being his giving up of himself for a servant to do Gods message in it as the servant that had his ear bored was to be free no more Exod. XXI 5. Burnt offering and sacrifice for sinne thou acceptest not Then said I loe I come To do thy will O God written of me in the voâ—lume of the Book is my desire yea thy Law is within my heart For his freedome in undertaking this commission as it supposeth a ground why it should be tendered so it importeth that obedience which God rewardeth And this is the cause why our Saviour tells his disciples If you loved me you would be glad that I go to my Father because the Father â—â— greater then I For if the Commission came from him then is he to performe all that the execution thereof inferreth That is to exalt our Lord to that estate which his disciples would be glad of if they knew what it were Nor let any man think that there is any danger of Arrius his heresie in all this I confesse the reasons I have advanced against Socinus do not formally destroy the pretense of the Arrians And the reason is because I find that I cannot kill those two birds with one stone Nor make the reasons that I advance to evidence the meaning of these Scriptures which are in question not to be that which Socinus would have to reach so farre as expresly and formally to destroy that sense which Arrius pretendeth I am confident that who will take the paines to consider that the Word was in the beginning when all was made shall have no ground to say that there was another beginning before the beginning of all things when that Word was made That this word was with God at the beginning as his bosome counseller Shall not sâ—y when God wanted his counsell That this Word was God Shall not say that any Christian is to count that God which is made of nothing That all things were made by it That any thing was made by that which is not God That the glory thereof in our flesh is the glory of the onely begotten Sonne of the Father shall make any difference between the honour of the Father and the honour of the Sonne And so I count it enough that the sense of the Scriptures here pleaded hath in it enough to resist the Arians with though this resistance be not here expressed But thus much is evident that as the Latine Fathers especially since S. Augustine have understood these words to be meant of our Lord Christ according to his humane nature so the Greek Fathers have understood them to be true even according to the divine nature upon that reason which I have declared And S. Hilary of the Latine Church though afore S. Augustine expresseth the reason which I have alledged ab authoritate originis because the priviledge of being Author and originall in respect of the Sonne and holy Ghost is that which they in respect of the Father can have nothing to countervail And this I say because I am perswaded that it is a consideration necessary to the maintaining and evidencing of the Tradition of the Church in this point For those that understand the state of this dispute must needs know that the most ancient writers of the Church Justine the Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian Origen and the rest that were before the Council of Nicaea do speak of the Sonne of God as of the Minister and workman to execute the counsels of God in making and governing of the World And therefore are spoken of by very learned men of these times enemies enough to those Heresies as men to be suspected in the sincerity of the Christiane Faith A thing not to be marvailed at in those that believe the expresse act and decree of the present Church to be the reason and ground of believing For upon that account what hinders that to become matter of Faith being decreed by those which are enabled on behalf of the Church which was not matter of Faith an hour before But those that draw the reason why they believe from the evidence which the society communion of the church tender to common sense that nothing could be refused by the whole body thereof but that which appeared to all contrary to that which all have received from the beginning will count it a violent abuse to all reason to make the Christiane Faith larger
in the stream then it was in the fountaine And therefore though the terms of the Scripture agreeing with those which the most ancient Fathers of the Church use may justly authorize and bring into use those expressions which have not been usuall upon a due understanding of the intent to which they are used yet is there no power in the Church to render those terms which have passed for Christian and Catholick in the Primitive times of the Church suspected of Heresie in these times Origen is strongly charged by the ancient times in particular by Epiphanius as the Seminary of the Arians And that the Arians might not have advantage by many of his sayings were too much to undertake and that which my businesse no way requires The Socinians have made their advantages of Erasmus his writings And is any man so silly as to imagine that Erasmus was therefore of Socinus his Faith Have they not made the like use of Maldonate and his Commentaries upon the Gospels And is there any appearance that his meaning should be that of Socinus I will not therefore deny that the Cardinall du Perron in his answer to King James pag. 633. does acknowledge that Arius were able to maintaine himself within compasse of Tradition were he to be tried by the Fathers before the Council of Nicaea But I give the Reader notice that this is the consequence and the interest of that position which deriveth Tradition of Faith from an expresse act of the present Church supposing the matter of it not to have been of force and effectually acknowledged in all ages of the Church Which if it were true in this case then could no man be obliged to believe the Trinity as matter of Faith Though it might remaine questionable whether or no a man may be obliged to conform to it as consistent with the Faith and not to scandalize the unity of the Church by rejecting the act and decree of it according to the Position setled in the first book I will further acknowledge that I have seen an answer to Crellius the Socinians book de Deo by one Botsaccus now of Danzick I take it in the end whereof I find a number of exceptions made by the Socinians in their writings which I have not seen against the Faith of all that writ before Constantine in particular as inconsistent with that of Nicaea the particulars whereof because I have not seen the books and therefore cannot presume to answer particularly I could not here repeate would the model of my book give leave In general whosoever will take the paines to peruse that which is there alledged shall perceive First that those who alledge them fall out among themselves perpetually sometimes and for some sayings challenging Tertulliane for example or Clement or Origen for one of them that believe not the Trinity otherwise disowning them as those that helped to introduce the Faith of it But no where remembring themselves concerned to make good that which they maintaine out of the words of Hegesippus in Eusebius that the Faith of the whole Church was defloured presently upon the death of the Apostles and to shew that such a change did indeed come to passe in the Faith of the holy Trinity Secondly that there is no more difficulty in reducing the sense of their sayings there questioned to the sense of the Church after the Councile of Nicaea then in reducing the sense of Athanasius when he alloweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be understood of the proceeding of the Sonne from the Father of everlasting Or the sense of all these Fathers that understood the Father is greater then I of the priviledge of the originall and author which the Father of necessity hath personally above the Sonne and the holy Ghost the Godhead being one and the same to the same sense One passage of Tertulliane I have thought worth the clearing because it seems to containe a remarkable conceit of his in expounding the words of Solomon in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the sense of the Church so many years before Arius built his heresie in a manner upon it The words are in his book contra Hermogenem Cap. III. Quia pater Deus est judex deus est non tamen ideo Pater semper judex semper quia Deus semper Nam nec Pater potuit esse ante Flium nec judex ante delictum Fuit autem tempus cum delictum filius non fuit quod judicem qui patrem Dominuâ— facâ—reâ— For God also is Father and God is judge and yet not alwayes Father and judge because alwayes God For neither could he be Father before a Sonne nor judge before sinne But there was a time when neither sinne was to make God a judge nor Sonne to make God a Father He that reads this onely would think at a blush that it is the very marke of Arius his haerâ—sie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was a time when the Son was not But the answer is in his book contra Praxeam Cap. V. Ante omnia enim Deus erat solus ipse sibi mundus locus omnia Solus autem quia nihil aliud extrinsecus prâ—ter illum Caeterum ne tunc quideâ— solus Habebat enim secum quam habebat in semetipso Rationem suam scilicet Rationalis enim Deus ratio in ipso prius ita in ipso omnia Quâ— ratio sensus ipsius est Hanc Graeci 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicunt quâ— vocabulâ— sermonem etiam appellamus Ideâ—que in usu est nostrorum per simplicitatem interpretationis Sermonem dicere in primordio apud Deum fuisse cum magis rationem competat antiquiorem â—aberi quia non sermonalis a principio sed rationalis Dâ—us etiam ante principium Et quia ipse quoque sermo ratione consistens priorem eam ut substantiam suâ—m â—stendat Tamen sic nihil interest Nam â—tsi Deus nondum sermonem suum miserat proinde â—um cum ipsa in ipsa ratione intra semetipsum habebat â—acite cogitando disputandâ— secum quae per sermonem mox erat dicturus Cum ratione enim sua cogitans atque disponens sermonem eam efficiebat quâ—m sermone tractabat For before all things God was alone to himself both World and place and all But alone because without there was nothing besides him otherwise even then not alone For he had with him that which he had in him his reason forsooth For God is reasonable and reason was in him before and so all things This reason is his sense This the Greek calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which name also we call speech Therefore our people use for one translation to say that speech was in the beginning with God Whereas it is more pertinent that reason should be counted more ancient because God spokâ— it from the beginning but had reason even before the beginning And
because speech it self standing upon reason shews it to be the former as that whereupon it standeth But even so it maters not For though God had not yet sent forth his speech he had it no lesse within himself with and within his very reason silently thinking and disposing with himself those things which he was to utter by speech Further Cap. VI. VII Nam ut primum Deus voluit ea quae cum Sophia ratione sermone disposuerat intrase in substantias species sâ—as edere ipsum primum protulit sermonem habentem intra se individuas suas rationem sapientiam ut per ipsum â—ierent universa per quem erant cogitata disposita imo facta jam quantum in Deisensu Hoc enim eis deerat ut coram quoque in suis speciâ—bus substantiis cognoscerentur tenerentur Tunc igitur etiam ipse sâ—rmâ— speciem ornatum suum sumit sonum vocem cum dicit Deus Fiat Lux. Hâ—c est nativitas perfecta sermonis dum ex Deo procedit conditus ab â—o primum ad cogitatum in nomine Sophiae Dominus condidit me initium viarum dehinc generatus ad effectum cum pararet coelum aderam ei siâ—â—l exinde â—um patrem sibi faciens de quo procedendo filius factus est primogenitus ut ante omnia genitus unigenitus ut solus ex Deo genitus proprie de vulvâ— cordis ipsius secundum quod Pater ipse testatur Eructavit cor meum sermonem optimum Ad quem deinceps gaudens proinde gaâ—deâ—tem in persona illiâ—â— Filius meus es tu ego hodie genui te ante Luciferum genui te Sic filius ex sua persona profitetur Patrem in nomine Sophiae dominus condidit me initium viarum in opera sua For as soon as God pleased to put forth into their own substances and kinds those things which he had ordered within himself with the reason and speech of wisdom the first he brought forth was speech having in it reason and wisdom from which it is unseparable that all things might be made by that whereby they had been devised and disposed nay made aleready as to the sense of God For they wanted onely this to be known and had in their own kindes and substances Then therefore even Gods speech it self assumed his own kinde and dresse sound and voice when God said Let there be Light This is the perfect birth of speech as it proceedeth from God First made by him for a thought devised by him under the name of Wisdome the Lord made me the beginning of his wayes then ingendered to effect I was together with him when he prepared the heavens thenceforth making him his Father for I read Patrem sibi faciens not Pâ—câ—m as I find it promised by proceeding from whom he became a Sonne firstborn as born before all things and onely as alone ingendered by God from the proper womb of his heart according as the Father himself also witnesseth My heart hath uttered an excellent speech To whom rejoycing according as he rejoyceth in the Fathers person he saith Thou art my Sonne this day have I begotten thee And before the morning starre have I ingendred thee As the Sonne also in his person professeth the Father under the name of Wisdome The Lord made me the beginning of wayes unto his works All this if it be understood as becometh God will containe nothing prejudiciall to the Faith of Gods Church whether it containe the true sense of the Scriptures or not through sound and voice and speech and thought or devise if they be understood as they signify in Gods creatures are inconsistent with his excellence But so farre it will be from Arius his heresie as to answer the very ground of it by saying That the Word or reason or Wisdome of God which incaâ—nate is our Lord Christ was from everlasting in God but not under the notion quality or attribute of Sonne till the making of the World And that as Tertulliane said in the place from whence the objection is quoted accidentis rei mentio the mention of an accessory to wit the declaration of Gods will to make the World gave him the denomination of Son which he bore not afore according to Tertulliane whether he hit the true sense of the Scripture in it or onely indeavour so to do though alwayes the same from everlasting The answer to this difficult passage of Tertulliane may serve for another contra Praxeam Cap. II. unicum Deum non alias putat credendum quam si ipsum eundemque Patrem Filium Spiritum dicat Quasi non sic quoquc unus sit omnia dum ex uno omnia per substantiâ— scilicet unitatem nihilominus custodiatur aeconomiae sacramentum quae unitatem in trinitatem disponit tres dividens Patrem Filium Spiritum Sanctum Tres autem not sâ—aâ—â— sed gradu non substantia sed forma nec potestate sed specie Vnius autem status unius substantiae unius potestatis quia unus Deus ex quâ— gradus isti formae species in nomine Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti deputantur He thinkes he is not otherwise to believe one God then saying that the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost are all one As if one were not all as well if all proceed from one By unity of substance forsooth preserving neverthelesse the mystery of that distribution which disposeth the Vnity into a Trinity ordering three the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost But not three for state but for rank not for substance but for forme not for power but for specialty But of one state one substance one power because one God from whom those ranks and formes and specialties are understood These words non statu sed gradu both Cardinal Bellarmine and Valentia meeting in a passage of Bullinger not naming his author have charged with Arianisme being indeed Tertuallians words manifestly expressing the Unity of the Godhead the substance state and power of it in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost by their personall properties characters or notions in the terms of gradus formae species rankes formes and specialties no other being then in use In like sort Ignatius according to the true Copies saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Goa was born Epist ad Ephes he calls him there Son of God and Son of man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God manifest as man He calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The eternall Word that came not forth from silence Epist ad Magnes Athanasius de Synodis quotes out of him We have one Physitian bodily and incorporeal ingendred and not ingendred God in man Justine calleth him the word of God indistinct from him in virtue and Power and â—â—caranate He makes him the Lord of hosts and the King of Glory He expresseth his procession by light kindled from light and fire from fire
Irenaeus expresly maintaineth him one and the same God with the Father and true God and his generation ineffable without beginning and from everlasting Clemens makes him God â—quall to God as his Sonne Origen not in any work now extant that may be questioned but as he is alledged by Athanasius de decretis Synodi Niceâ—ae saies of him that if there be any image of God who is invisible that image must also be invisible with a great deal more to the same purpose where he also quotes Theognostus in secundo hypopseon affirming the same at large to set aside those that are questioned And shall we not think our selves obliged so to understand their words which the importunity of Heresies have made questionable that they may consist and agree with those which remaine unquestionable Especially all of them agreeing in this That the world was made and is governed by Christ And that the whole dispensation of God tending to the salvation of mankinde whether before the Law or under the Law as well as since his appearing in the flesh was executed by him as a preface and prologue to his coming in the flesh a supposition which all seem to ground themselves upon especially against the Jewes in giving account of our common Christianity That our Faith is in the Father Sonne and holy Ghost That we are to glorifie to worship and to be baptized in the Name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost And in counting all Hereticks that denied it For communion with the Church not communicating with those who believe it not because they believe it not is an evidence which no words of doubtfull construction can obscure in the judgement of any man that is reasonable Nay among the very heathen that have made any mention of the Christian Faith doth not Plinies Epistle concerning the Christians acknowledge that they sung hymns to Christ as to God Doth not Lucian in his Philopatris manifestly expresse the Faith of the Trinity as the cognizance of Christians at that time hath it not appeared by these inventions wherewith the Gnosticks sophisticated it that the Fulness of the Godhead consists in the Trinity according to the Christian Faith as according to the severall Sects of them in their severall inventions That the Christians honoured and worshipped the blessed Trinity as those Sects did those imaginatitions of their own which they call the Fullnesse of the Godhead When Ebion Cerinthus Artemon Theodorus and after them Sabellius Noetus Praxâ—as and Paâ—lus Samosatenus were disowned by the whole Church and excluded the communion of all Christians did not all Churches that agreed in refusing them find themselves possessed of a contrary Faith as the reason for which they were refused Were all Christians out of their simplicity cunning enough to assoile all the reasons whereby these and Arius to boot did or might argue their pretenses from texts of Scripture Or did they think themselves bound to rest in the visible consent of the whole Church whether they were able to do that or not In fine the learned Jesuite Petavius in the Preface to his books de Trinitate and the beginning of the first as he hath evidently shewed that the substance of the faith of the Trinity is acknowledged by these ancient Christians some of whose words seem to disparage the Godhead of our Lord Christ So he indeavoureth to shew that they did it out of a desire to reconcile the faith with the doctrine of Plato and his followers If his opinion be admitted there will remaine evidence enough for the Tradition of Faith even in their writings whose skill in the Scriptures goes not the right way to maintaine it The plain song will be good musick though the descant transgresse Though for my part having seen what he hath said I repent me not of that which I had conceived out of Tertullianâ— That out of a desire to reconcile the creation of wisdome in the Proverbs according to the Greek not the doctrine of Plato with the rule of Faith they conceived this a supposition fit to do it That by Gods proceeding to create the World his mind or wisdome which incarnate is our Lord Christ attained not the essence and being which it had in God from everlasting but the denomination and quality of his Word and Sonne For you shall find there that most of them concurre in the speculations of Tertulliane Whereby you may see that this learned Jesuite is not agreed with the Cardinall du Perron to deny the reason why we hold the Faith of the holy Trinity originally from the decree of the Council of Nicâ—a and from that authority of the Church which maintaineth it But from the reason whereupon that decree was grounded and made That is from the meaning of the Scriptures expressed and limited by the Tradition of the Church And therefore not burthening my self here with the expounding of all those passages of their writings before Arius which may seem to derogate from the Tradition of the Church in that point I shall referre the Reader to those things whereby he showeth that they do unanimously concurre in maintaining the same Faith For if there be amongst them that have had speculations tending to reconcile some Scriptures to it which are not onely ill grounded as I dispute not but this of Tertulliane is but also prejudiciall to the Faith as some of Origens whom I have mentioned already That this is to be imputed to the inconsequence of their severall discourses not to any difference in their common Faith I remit you to that which he hath said to judge Onely whereas he de Trinitate II. 2. hath given you a full account of those Fathers which expound the words of our Lord The Father is greater then I to be meant of his Godhead which I have onely named in gross I will advise you again hereupon that many things which are said of the Sonne as inferior to the Father as when he is said to Minister unto the Father in creating the World may be imputed not to any inequality in that Godhead which is the same in all the Trinity but unto the manner of having it the Father originally as the Fountaine the Sonne and the holy Ghost as from him wherein the difference of the persons consisteth To the same Petavius de Trinitate VIII 2. I remit them that would be satisfied of the sense of the Fathers in that which I alledged for the reason why our Lord is called the Word by S. John To wit that the intercourse between God and man after the fall was executed and managed by his Ministry Not because I think this name of the Word unfit to signifiy the originall proceeding of the Sonne from the Father much lesse his concurrence in and to the creation of all things But because believing as I do that the mystery of the Trinity is revealed by the coming of our Lord I find great reason to conceive that his Apostle intended thereby to intimate
that the godly of the Old Testament were reconciled to God by the meanes of his Word and Spirit howsoever they understood that which is signified by these Titles I know the Arians made their advantage of that which Justine and others had said That God imployed his Sonne to man because he was himself invisible To say thereupon that the Father onely is invisible and incomprehensible even by the Sonne And that S. Austine thereupon counts it rashnesse to say that all the intercourse between God and man was ministred by the Sonne the Father and the holy Ghost not appearing at all in any of these Revelations That Dionysius acknowledgeth that all of them Athanasius that some of them were done by the Ministery of Angels The testomonies whereof you may find collected there And truly that God the Father was not revealed by these apparitions were a thing utterly unreasonable to imagine That Gods Angels did attend upon his Sonne in those messages wherein some one of them caries the proper Name of God is a thing which the Scriptures alledged afore will necessarily require But that whereâ—oever God deales with man by the Ministry of an Angel to whom the proper name and honour of God is attributed there the Sonne of God came to do Gods Word to man for a preface to his coming in the flesh And that whosoever received this word from God was withall possessed by his Spirit as I see it is very agreeable to the Scripture so I find no reason valuable why I should repent me to have said it I know that Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria hath been alledged for an authority that interrupteth the Tradition of the Church in the matter of the Trinity And I acknowledge S. Basils judgement comparing him with one who dressing plants and finding one that growes awry bends it so without measure that he sets it as much awry on the other side For writing against Sabellius and not content to settle the difference of the persons he saies that through heat of contention he let fall words that signified also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 difference of nature inferiority of Power and diversity of glory Epist XLI Whereof though I intend not to question any part I will say neverthelesse as I have alleged this passage of Dionysius in evidence for the unity of the Church so here that I desire no better evidence for the Rule of Faith which the same presupposeth Suppose for the present the sense of Dionysius to be questionable as it was to these Bishops of Pentapolis his Suffraganes who finding themselves offended at that which he had written gave information of it to Dionysius then Bishop of Rome and to his Synode which Athanasius de Synodis Arim. Seleuciae expresly nominateth Can there be a greater argument that the communion of the Church stood grounded upon the profession of that Faith which he seemed to transgresse then the concurrence of Rome and the Churches that resorted to Rome with those which resorted to Alexandria in that Faith which he seemed to transgresse Certainly the agreement of all Christians in admitting the Scriptures at this day is not able to produce the like And therefore granting the writings of Dionysius to have been an attempt upon the Faith the opposition that was so warmly made assures us that doctrine which the authority of a Bishop of Alexandria could not give passeport to was inconsistent with the Rule in force For the Satisfaction which he tendred in the Letter recorded by Athanasius shewes what the sense of the Church was for satisfaction whereof he was forced to write And therefore I may safely and do acknowledge some of his words to be more offensive then it can be fit for me to excuse Though his own leter alledges the similitudes of a plant and the shoot of it of a well and the stream flowing from it which the Church since Arius hath always used to make it understood Which may seem to render him reconcileable to the Faith of Nicaea by understanding the difference which he signifieth to consist not in the Godhead which may be understood to be the same in the fountain as in the stream but in the rank and manner of having it necessarily rendring that which proceedeth in that regard inferior to that from whence it proceedeth I know it is said againe that the Council of LXXX Bishops that condemned Samosatenus at Antiochia in their Epistle alledged there by Athanasius do say that the Sonne is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same substance with the Father And that it is said that the two parts of a contradiction may as well be reconciled as this with the Faith of Nicaea But with what judgement let S. Hilary speake Libro de Synodis Male intelligitur homousion Quid ad me bene intelligentem Male homousion Samosateâ—s confessus est Sed nunquid melius Ariani negarunt Octagiâ—ta Episcopi olim respuerunt Sed trecenti decâ—m octo nuper receperunt The homousion is wrong understood What is that to me that understand it right Samosatenus acknowledged it wrong Were the Arians more in the right in denying it Fourscore Bishops resused it long since Three hundred and eighteen have received it of late This had been enough to make a reasonable man suspect an equivocation in the businesse But Athanasius would have told him wherein it consisted and how and in what sense Samosatenus maintained it His argument was If our Lord Christ were not made God of man which first he had been made then must he be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same substance with the Father and so there shall be three substances one principall that of the Father two proceeding from him of the Son and holy Ghost And shall not all that imbrace the Creed of Nicaea disdaine Consubstantiality in this sense Which plainly makes the Father Sonne and holy Ghost of the same substance no otherwise then three men are said to be of one substance I know Gregory of Nâ—oâ—aesarea might have been further alledged out of S. Basil Epist LXIV Where he acknowledgeth him to have called the Father and the Sonne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the Sonne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But this in a discourse written to Aelian a Pagan to convert him to Christianity and at the bottom consisting of nothing but equivocation of terms He allowing himself to term the Sonne the creature and make of the Father whom the Greek Fathers commonly call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the cause of the Sonne And to call them two in notion but one for hypostasis because he takes hypostasis for substance and notion for that Character which distinguisheth between persons which in the now terms of the Schoole are said to be known and discerned by their notions But I will go no further in Origens behalf or in behalf of any Scholar of Origens If he have left that which necessarily imports an ill sense whereof his Scholars Dionysius or
Gregory of Nâ—oâ—aesarea may perhaps relish either it was not publickly taken notice of when it was published or passed over in silence for the present in respect of his merit toward the Church As it must be said of his opinion concerning souls flitting into new bodies As for Euseb of Caesarea and the author of the Constitutions which are both charged in this point Eusebius living in the time when the consent of the Church over-ruled the contrary rather evidenceth then interrupteth that Tradition which condemneth him if he agree not with it But the author of the Constitutions is not known at what time he lived to write in the name of Clemens the Apostles Scholar that which for his part he thought most likely to come from the Apostles Whether or no he might think it became him writing in that name to use such terms as he found the ancientest Church-Writers use before the businesse of Arius Whether or no he might mistake himself in doing so I will not dispute But being hard to believe that he writ till the heresie of Arius and Eâ—nâ—mâ—us was down As I can give my self no good reason why he should bring in Arius under the habit of the Apostles so I see the suspicion which he hath contracted in a manner as ancient as the credit of his book in the Church After all this if any man marvail that Alexander Bishop of Alexandria should think so slightly of Arius his opinion as in debating it sometimes to side with him sometimes with his adversaries according to Sozomenus Eccles Hist I. 15. Let him consider that the Ecclesiasticall Historians informe us that the difference of Arius was commenced at a Consistory That is at a meeting of the Clergy to debate the businesse Onely Sozomenus that there had been divers meetings about it In which Alexander had not declared himself but spoken sometimes on this side and sometimes on that Not because there is any appearance in the story that Arius himself could have construed his procedings as if he had been doubtfull which side to choose But because any wise man in his place would have thought it the way to preserve his authority over Arius by not declaring himself party against him till he appeared untractable by that reason which his authority must inforce when it self would not serve the turn As for the great Constantine who in his Leter to the Church of Alexandria declareth many times that the question concerned not the substance of Faith It must be said that being no Christian as yet nor catechized in the Faith his information failed either in matter of fact reporting the position of Arius in such terms as might bear a good construction in which what latitude there is it may appear by the premises or in point of right making that not to concern the substance of Faith which indeed doth For those terms in which all the Ecclesiastical Histories agree that the debate was stated are such as indeed do concern the substance of Faith Neither is there any mark in the writings of the Fathers before this time upon which it can be said that any of them thought that there was a time when the Word of God which being incarnate in our Lord Christ was not but was made by God of nothing after that time Which are the characters that distinguish the heresie of Arius Set aside then the Constitutions Eusebius Origen and his Scholar Dionysius as questionable in point of fact or as granted that the sense of their words is not reconcileable with the Faith in point of right the retraction of Dionysius makes as much more for the Faith then his misprision condemned by Gennadius de Dogm Eccl. Cap. IV. and Facundus X. 5. against it as the rejecting of Sabellius makes more for the same then the doubtfull words of Gregory of Nâ—ocaesarea against That which is to be said thereupon is that there can be therefore no reason to blame the Councill of Nicaea for adding to the Creed the terme of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to oblige the Arians to the sense of the Church S. Athanasius in his Treatise de Actis Conc. Nicen. hath shewed us that it was introduced to cut off those equivocations whereby they ought to cover their owne sense under those other words which were propounded as capeable of the Catholick sense He that will say that this course ought not to have been held or that having taken effect it ought not to have been retained may as well say that the faith of Christ or the Unity of Gods service in that faith is not to be preserved For being once questioned therâ— must be a Rule and a mark to discern Christians from Hereticks I observe therefoâ—e likewise that the troubles which Arius occasioned in the Church never came to an end till the word person in Latine and hypostasis in Greek was admitted in opposition to the word essence or nature included in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Council of Nicaea had introduced into the Creed that the difference between the Church and Arius might be stated upon the expresse terms of three persons and one nature For it is evident by S. Jerome Epist LVII that the terme of hypostasis for person was not then received who writes to Pope Damasus to be authorized by him whether to admit or to refuse it But as after that time we hear no further question of the term so under the Emperor Gratiane and Pope Damasus we find the dispute extinguished But I say neverthelesse that there is no cause therefore to imagine that the sense of the Church and the faith thereof hath received any change by the use of new terms which the necessity of preventing Hereticks hath obliged the Church to introduce And I say as the others said that the importance and consequence of the said new terms ought to be reduced to that force which the sense of the Church according to the Scriptures alloweth or rather prescribeth And that whosoever shall take upon him under pretense of the most unquestionable decrees that any age of the Church hath produced to prescribe against that sense which the primitive records of the Church do inforce in so doing sets up the authority of that present Church against the Tradition of the Catholick And after all this shall the Socinians be admitted to alledge that S. Hilary quittâ—th a doubt whether the holy Ghost is to be called God or not Surely the Socinians cannot be admitted to alledge this unlesse they will be content to submit to S. Hilary in the whole businesse Nay unlesse they will stand to the Church to which S. Hilary stands But for those that are not Socinians and would be satisfied I will not use that wretched answer of Erasmus in that excellent preface to S. Hilarys works That the Church hath since decreed otherwise As if there were not a reason why the Church so decreed or as if he were not bound to render that reason
not did so order the meanes by which this obedience was effected or not that he might know that it would or would not come to passe And this preaching of the Gospel and the meanes and consequence of it being granted in consideration of Christ that the reason why such meanes was requisite is to be drawn from the fall of Adam and the corruption of mans nature by it And to this sense seeme the words of our Lord to belong John X. 28 29. I give my sheep eternal life nor shall they ever perish nor any man snatch them out of my hand My Father who gave me them is greatest of all nor can any man snatch them out of my Fathers hand Although it seems that he inlargeth the same sense to another effect John XVII 6 -12 I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou gavest me out of the world Thine they were and me thou gavest them and they have kept thy Word Now know they that whatsoever thou gavest me is from thee For the words that thou gavest me have I given them and they have received them and know of a truth that I am come forth from thee and thou hast sent me I ask for them I ask not for the world but for those that thou hast given me for they are thine And all mine are thine and thine mine and I am glorified in them And I am no more in the world but they are in the world and I come to thee Holy Father keep them in thy Name whom thou hast given me that they may be one as we When I was with them in the World I kept them in thy name These whom â—hou gavest me I kept nor is any of them lost but the Son of perdition that the Scripture may be fulfilled For afterwards it is said that our Lord spake to those that apprehended him to let his disciples go That the word which he had said might be fulfilled I have lost none of those whom thou gavest me John XVIII 9. But all this will not serve to make us believe that his then disciples alone were the men that the Father gave to Christ he having said expresly afterwards John XVII 20. I ask not for these alone but for those that shall believe in me through their word For this showes that he prayes for his then disciples in the common quality of disciples that is of Christians having other prayers to make for the world that is for those that were not As we see by and by John XVII 21. and Luke XXIII 34. But in that he saith so often that the Father had given them him from whose appointment the sufferings of Christ the power which he is advanced to the successe of the Gospel which he publisheth dependeth In that regard I conceive the helps of Gods grace by the second Adam whereby the breach made by the first is repaired necessarily to be implied in Gods giving unto our Lord Christ his disciples And of this sense much there is expressed by S. Paul Ephes I. 3. 11. Blessed God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ that hath blessed us with every spirituall blessing in the heavens through Christ As he chose us in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and blamelesse before him in love Having foreappointed us to adoption to himself through Jesus Christ according to the good pleasure of his will To the praise of his glorious grace whereby he made us acceptable in the beloved Through whom we have redemption by his blood even the remission of â—â—nnes according to the riches of his grace which hath abounded to us in all wisdome and prudence Having made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure which he purposed in himself at the dispensation of the fullnesse of times to restore all things both in heaven and in earth through Christ in whom also we have received our lots appoinâ—ed according to the purpose of him that effects all things according to the counsel of his will For not to insist upon the force of those terms and phrases which Saint Paul uses whatsoever blessings it may be said S. Paul hereby signifies to have been appointed to the Ephesians from everlasting as Christians I suppose it cannot be denied that he presupposes that they were also appointed from everlasting to be Christians to whom by so being those blessings should become due And all this so many times and so manifestly said to have been appointed in Christ or by Christ or through Christ that it cannot be questioned that not onely the Gospell by which they were brought to that estate but also the meanes that inforce it and the consequences whereby it takes effect all depend upon Christ and the consideration of his coming to destroy the works of the devil in our first parents CHAP. XIX Evidences of the same in the Old Testament Of Gods help in getting the Land of Promise and renewing the Covenant And that for Christs sake That Christianity cannot stand without acknowledging the grace of Christ The Tradition of the Church In the Baptisme of Infants In the Prayers of the Church In the decrees against Pelagius and other records of the Church IT remaineth now that I shew how the same truth is signified to us in the Old Testament whereof I will point out three sorts of passages tending to prove it and when they are put together making full evidence of it The first is of those wherein it is acknowledged that the inheritance of the Land of Promise is not to be ascribed to any merit or force of their own but to the goodnesse and assistance of God Then which nothing can be produced out of the New Testament more effectuall to shew that whatsoever tends to bring Christians to the kingdom of heaven is to be ascribed to the grace of God There being the same correspondence between the helps of spirituall Grace whereby Christians overcome their spirituall enemies and the help of God whereby the Israelites overcame the seven nations as between the kingdom of heaven and the land of Promise And therefore all those promises whereby God assures them of deliverance from their enemies and maintenance in the possession thereof all acknowledgements of Gods free gift whereby they held that inheritance argue no lesse concerning those helps whereby the children of the Church answering to the land of Canaan here are inabled to continue true spirituall members thereof and to attain the land of promise that is above I shall not need to produce many particulars of this nature whereof all the Old Testament affordeth good store That of Moses Deut. IX 3-8 I must not forget where assuring them of God to go along with them he warns them not to ascribe that favour to their one righteousnesse though he acknowledgeth that God imployes them to punish the seven nations but to his covenant with their Fathers And that God enabled them to cast
work of our Christianity and therefore to every part of it and by consequence that this grace is not given us in consideration of any thing that we are able to do towards the obliging of God to bestow it upon us But I will not take upon me to inflame this abridgment with rehearsal of the testimonies of Church Writers that went afore Pelagius in both these points The testimonies of Fathers that went afore him which S. Augustine hath produced are enough to put those to silence which would have originall sin to be a devise of his But Vossius in his History of the Pelagians having comprised as well these as the rest concerning originall sin libro 11. parte 1. Thes VI. and those which concern the necessity of Grace libro III. parte I. Thes I. II. it will not be to the purpose to do any part of that which hath been sufficiently done already over again To me indeed it seems very considerable that Pelagius acknowledging for Grace first free Will and the Law which teacheth the difference between good and bad after that for the Grace of Christ his doctrine and example first then the illumination of the mind by the Holy Ghost Yet alwaies maintained that man without the help of Grace is able to love God above all to keep his Commandments and resist the greatest temptations to the contrary And in all these points was condemned by the Church as you may see there libro III. parte II. Thes I-VIII For certainly there is a vast difference between the doctrine of Gods Laws absolutely necessary to the doing of his Will even for Adam in the state of innocency and the preaching of the Gospell convincing mankind that they are under Gods wrath by sin tendering pardon to them that imbrace it assuring of everlasting life or death according as they observe the profession of it and shewing the way by our Lords example All which the Scriptures ascribe to the coming of Christ as granted in consideration of it How much more when he granteth the illumination of the Holy Ghost to shew what is to be done must he needs transgress his own position which saith that there is no difference between that state in which we are born and that which Adam was made saving his example but the difference between a man and a Babe For were we born as Adam was made what needed Christ to have purchased by his death the gift of the Holy Ghost to enlighten us inwardly in doing that which without it man is born able to do And having granted the reasons and motives upon which Christians act as Christians to be shewed them both outwardly and inwardly by the Grace of Christ to deny the necessity of the sayd Grace to the acts which proceed from the same can have no excuse but one that Christ came only to evidence the truth of his message leaving the embracing or rejecting of it to every mans choyce Which to maintain if Socinus was fain to make our Lord Christ a meer man that there might be no more in his rising after death then a miracle to assure it Pelagius acknwledging the Trinity will be streightned by S. Pauls consequence If righteousnesse come by the Law then is Christ dead in vain supposing the death of Christ to bring that help of Grace which a miracle by evidencing the truth of the Gospel doth not And seeing God could not be moved by any thing that man could do to give our Lord Christ and the helps which his coming bringeth with it there will be no more left for Pelagius to say But that these helps are not granted of Grace but received by the works which men prevent it with The foundation therefore of the Christian Faith consisting in Gods-sending our Lord Christ of his pure free grace by vertue whereof all the effects of it are works of the same Grace Necessary it was that Pelagius should be condemned for the denying of the necessity of Grace to all acts of Christianity and for affirming that Grace is given according to mans merits as you see there Thesi IX XI that he was Both upon the doctrine of S. Paul premised afore that God was not moved by the works either of Jews or Gentiles to send them those helpes to salvation which the Gospel tendreth Nevertheless the preaching of the Gospel and all the help which it bringeth toward the imbracing of it is no less the Grace of Christ because Pelagius was forced for the better colouring of his Heresie to acknowledge it Onely it is not therefore to be sayd that it is all the help which the Grace of God by Christ furnisheth toward that salvation which Christianity tendreth But to be left to further dispute what further help is granted by God before and without any consideration of mans merit to bring to effect those acts in which the discharge of our Christianity consisteth Excluding therefore the pretense of Pelagius that Moses before the godly Fathers pleased God by the meer strength of nature and that salvation was to be had under the Law by the same Besides the good works of the Gentiles wherewith God was pleased according to Pelagius whom the Church condemned in this Article also as you may see there Thes X. And truly Pelagius acknowledging the Gospel to be no more then the declaration of that Will of God by which man is to be saved after Christ as the Law before Christ utterly overthroweth the plea of the Church derived from the Apostles that the Fathers were saved by faith before and under the Law that the New Testament was in force under the Old by vertue of that commerce which God by his word which afterwards being incarnate was our Lord Christ held with the Fathers His Spirit as naturally planted in the word going along to procure the efficacy of it Whereas Socinus though he acknowledgeth the difference between the literal and mystical sense of the Law yet making our Lord Christ a meer man the vertue of whose death could not extend to the salvation of those who lived afore his coming destroyeth the ground of that which he acknowledgeth This supposition that Christianity is more ancient then Judaâ—sme being necessary to the maintaining of the Church against the Synago ue Which is verified by Gods designing of a Church for the spouse of his Sonne before the Fall figured by the marriage between Adam and Eve according to S. Paul Ephes V. 22-33 But presently after the Fall that Word which being incarnate in our Lord Christ having declared enmity betwen the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent saying It shall break thy head and thou shalt bruise the heel of it The first Adam became the figure of the second according to the same S. Paul Rom. V. 14. Whereupon the Spirit of the second Adam in those Preachers of righteousnesse to whom the Word of God came in that Angel whom the Fathers worshipped for God strove form
to the intrinsecall value of the workes which freewill alone doth but to the promise annexed by God to the works which freewill by the help of Grace purchased by Christ produceth It was no marvaile indeed that they who had overseen the actuall helps of Grace should a scribe the merit of habituall grace so the language of that time spoke to the act of freewill in beginning to believe that is to be a Christian as not depending upon that operation of grace which themselves supposed though they oversaw it But it were ridiculous to think that he who by the preaching of the Gospel and the reasons which it letteth forth why men are to be Christians is effectually moved to become a Christian is not to impute his being so to that grace which preventeth him with those reasons How much more when those reasons are acknowledged to be the instrument whereby the Holy Ghost worketh a mans conversion at the first or his perseverance at the last is it necessary to impute it to the grace of Christ that is to those helps which God in regard to Christs death preventeth us with Surely should grace immediately determin the wil to it the effects that should be imputable to grace would be the same neither the cov of grace nor the experience of common sense remaining the same which wil not allow such a chang in a mans life as becoming a good christian of an enemy to Christs Crosse to succeed without an express change in the wil upon reasons convincing the judgement that this world is to be set behind the world to com It is now to be acknowledged that S. Austine writing against these mens positions as they were revealed to him by the letters of Prosper and Hilary his book now extant de Praedestinatione sanctorum de dono Perseverantiae hath determined the reason why one man is converted and persevereth unto death an other not to consist in nothing that can resolve into any act of mans will but ends in Gods free appointment That Pope Celestinus writing to the Bishops of Gaule upon the sollicitation of the same Prosper and Hilary in recommendation of S. Austines dostrine then so much questioned in those parts determines not onely the sufficience but the efficacy of the meanes of Grace to come from Gods Grace That the second councile of Orange determining the same in divers particulares concerning the conversion of man to become a true Christian concerning his perseverance to the end in that estate hath onely determined that by the helpe and assistance of Christ and the grace received in Baptisme a Christian may if he will faithfully labour fullfill whatsoever his salvation requireth Is there any thing in all this to signifie that a mans will before he determine is determined by God to imbrace Christianity and persevere in it to the end or not That every man is determined to everlasting glory or paine without consideration of those deeds of his for which at the last he shall be sentenced to it and either suffer or injoy it Here I must have recourse againe to Vossius his Collections finding them sufficient and my model not allowing me to say more Whether no helpe of Grace but that which takes effect be sufficient That is whether men refuse Christianity or faile of performing it because they could not imbrace and persevere in it or because they would not when they might let him that shall have perused what he hath collected in the second part of this seventh book say as to the perswasion of the whole Church Whether God would have all men to be saved and hath appointed the death of our Lord Christ to that intent let him that shall have perused the first part of the same Thesi II. III. give sentence what the Church hath allwaies believed No lesse manifest is it by that which he saith there parte II. thesi II. Parte III. thes I. II. that there is no reason to be given why any man sinneth or is damned because God would have it so On the contrary that the reason why a man is not saved to whom the Gospell is tendred is because he refuseth it which God for his part tendreth to all mankind In fine that the Catholike Church from the beginning believed no more then that those who should believe and persevere to the end good Christians were appointed by God to be saved Understanding this to be don by vertue of Gods Grace for which no reason can be rendred from any thing that a man can doe as preventing all his indeavours I acknowledg to appeare by that which he hath said Lib. VI. thes VIII When therefore S. Austine maintainneth as I have acknowledged that he doth mainetaine that the reason why one man is converted and perseveres unto death another not resolves into Gods meere appointment I will not dispute whether this be more then the whole Church delivereth for that which it is necessary to salvation to believe It is enough for me to maintaine that it seemeth to follow by good consequence of the best reasons that I can see from that sense of our Lord and his Apostles doctrine which the Church hath alwaies taught Which will allow me to maintaine as well the predetermination of the will as absolut predestination to glory and paine to be inconsistent as with the Covenant of Grace so with the Tradition of the Church I find that Gennadius being manifestly one of those in Gaule that contradicted some thing of S. Austines doctrine by his commending of Faustus and Cassiane and censuring not onely Prosper who confuted Cassianus but even S. Austine in his booke of Eclesiasticall writers in a certaine addition to that list of heresies which S. Jerom hath made reckoneth them in the list of the Heretickes condemned by the Church who teach absolute Predestination under the name of Predestinatians After him not onely Hincmarus of Rheims condemning Gotescalcus a Monk of his Province for maintayning it being transmitted to him by Rabanus of Ments who in a Synod there had condemned him for the same hath supposed it condemned for an heresy by the ancient Church but also before Hincmarus Arnobius that hath expounded the Psalms called Arnobius the younger by some and a certaine continuation of S. Hieromes Cronicle under the the name of Tiro Prosper the one contradicteth them the later mentions that they had their beginning from S. Austins writings Sirmondus also the learned Jesuite hath published a peece so ancient that pretending to make a list of Heresies it goeth no further then Nestorius reckoning next after him the Predestinatians as those who derived themselves from S. Austines doctrine To which it is well enough knowne what opposition is now made by them who believe not that there ever was any such Heresy but that the adversaries of S. Austine in Gaule do pretend that such a Sect did indeed rise upon misunderstanding his Doctrine And certainely there are properly no Heretickes
XI 50. 51. 52. But in what sense doe Christians find it true Surely no man that ever prayed to God in Christs name need to be told it It is requisite therefore that we have recourse to the consideration of those thinges which the Scripture uses to joyne with the mention of Christs dying for us if we will rightly determine the meaning of it And so having premised the consideration of a sacrifice upon which our sinnes were charged of our ransome by the price of it of reconciliation and propitiation for sinne obtained for us by it we must conclude that when the Scripture speakes of Christs death for us the meaning of it cannot be satisfyed by granting that he died to move us to be Christians CHAP. XXIX The grant of Grace in consideration of Christ supposes satisfaction made by him for sinne Neither our sinnes imputable to Christ nor his sufferings to us formally and personally but as the meritorious causes which satisfaction answereth The effect of it the Covenant of Grace as well as help to performe it The Fathers saved by the Faith of Christ to come The Gospel a new Law The property of Satisfaction and Punishment in Christs sufferings Of the sense of the Catholike Church THere remaines one argument from the premises where I concluded that effectuall Grace is appointed from everlasting and therefore granted in time in consideration of Christ and his merits according to S. Paul Ephes I. 3-6 For if this grace be granted in consideration of Christ and life everlasting appointed from everlasting and granted in time in consideration of that quality which this grace effâ—cteth it cannot in reason be avoided that remission of sinne and life everlasting is granted here in right and title and in effect in the world to come in consideration of that quality which the effectuall helps of Grace of their own nature tend to produce which they are appointed by God to produce and which really and in effect thus are produced being granted by God in consideration of Christs obedience But why should I be so solicitous to restore all those Scriptures to their true meaning which they have set upon the rack to make them speak a false having such evidence of reason that by this position they make the death of Christ voide and needlesse even in their owne judgement For though if they should say that Christ came onely to show those workes that migh be sufficient to make his Gospell credible and give us good example I could not say that the death of Christ were to no end Yet would they say that it were to no competent end complaining as they do how much they are wronged when they are understood to acknowledge no further end of his coming But when they say that he died to induce men to be Christians by inacting the Covenant of Grace that is assuring them that God will stand to it on his part and that according to the example of Christ bearing his Crosse they shall attaine his glory I demand how all this can be more assurance then every man hath that is peremâ—orily assured otherwise as no man doubts but competently it may be assured otherwise that the Gospell of Christ is Gods message For when sufficient evidence is once made and a man is convinced to beleeve that God promises remission of sinnes and everlasting life to them that imbrace it can he that beleives God to be God remaine any more doubtfull of the truth of his promise To Pharao and to his people it was necessary that the wonders of God should be repeated till they stood convict that there was no God else which they beleived not afore But to them that admit the God of Israel to be the onely true God being convict that the Gospell is his promise is any further assurance requisite that he will stand to it who were not God if he should not stand to it when they say that Christ died to the end that being advanced to be God he might be able to bring his promises to effect I referre my selfe to the sense of any man that is able to thinke of God with due reverence whether it be possible to imagine that a meere man having made promises to mankind in Gods name can live with God to see Gods promises frustrate And by consequence whether it can appeare necessary that our Lord Christ should be advanced to be God that he might be able in his owne person to fullfill the promises which he had made us in his Fathers Name I referre my selfe to that which I have said to show the word of God which took the flesh of man from the Virgine to be God from everlasting as the Sonne of God and his everlasting wisâ—ome and image And therefore not advanced to be God in consideration of his obedience But that having condescended to that state which his obedience in doing his fathers message and testifying the truth thereof required the Sonne of God incarnate was advanced in our flesh by the appointment of God in reward of his obedience to the privilege of sending the Holy Ghost to make his Gospell effectuall to convert the nations to Christianity that by them he might be acknowledged and glorified for that which he was from everlasting So that the end of his coming being to obtaine that grace by which the world might be converted to Christianity and being converted obtaine remission of sinnes and life everlasting for it and neither of these purposes admitted by Socinus we may well say to him as S. Paul sayes to the Jews Gal. II 21. If righteousnesse be by the Law then is Christ deade in vaine So if righteousnesse came as Socinus would have it then is Christ deade to no purpose Because all that he requires might have been as well effected without it Whereas a due valuable consideration in regard whereof the converting grace of the Holy Ghost and remission of sinnes and life everlasting in consideration of the effect thereof should be granted could not have been had without it It is strange to be observed how litle Socinus hath to produce out of the scriptures to prove a position of such consequence as this All his businesse in a maner being to draw those texts which heitherto have been understood in the sense of the Church to his intent I can for the present recall no more then those frequent passages of the Apostles especially S. Paul whereby they affirme the righteousnesse and salvation of Christians to come by the meere grace of God and our Lord Christ Which I need not here repeate no wayes apprehending the infernce That it cannot be said to come from the meere grace of God if I suppose the consideration of Christs obedience and sufferinges as the purchase of it It is true in the wordes of the Prophet Jeremy XXXI 34-34 alleged by the Apostle Ebr. VIII 8-12 to be meant of the Gospell we find a promise of God to pardon the sinnes of his
I would not have you ignorant brethren that our Fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the Sea and all were baptized unto Moses in the cloude and in the Sea and all eate the same spirituall meate and all drank the same spirituall drink For they all drank of the spirituall rock that followed them Now the rock was Christ They that entred into a Covenant of workes to obtaine the Land of promise as I have showed they did entred not expressely into a Covenant of Faith in Christ for obtaining the world to come No more then being baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the Sea as he sayes here they were that is into his goverment into the observation of the Lawes he should give in hope of the promises he should give they can be said to have been baptized expressely into Christ and that profession which his promises require Wherefore when he saith that the rock was Christ his meaning is not immediately and to those that rested in this temporall Covenant of workes But as the Manna was Christ and Moses was Christ by the meanes of that faith which God then received at their hands to wit the assurance of everlasting happinesse for them who under this calling should tender God the spirituall obedience of the inward man upon those grounds which his temperall goodnesse the tradition of their Fathers and the instruction of their Prophets afforded at that time Now I appeale to the sense of all men how those can be said to have that interest in Christ which I have showed that Christians have and therefore upon the same ground if there were no consideration of Christ in the blessings of Christ which they injoyed Wherefore when S. Paul proceeds hereupon to exhort them not to tempt Christ as some of them tempted we must not understand that he forbids us to tempt Christ as they tempted God But that they also tempted Christ who went along with them in that Angel in whom the name of God and his word was as I said afore So when the Apostle saith that Moses counted the reproch of Christ greater riches then the treasures of Aegypt for he looked at the recempense of reward Ebr. XI 26 when putting them in mind to follow their teachers considering the end which they had attained and Moses aimed at he addeth Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and to day and for everlasting Ebr. XIII 8. when S. Peter sayes that the Prophets who foretold the Gospell searched against what time the Spirit of Christ that was in them declared and testified before hand the sufferings of Christ and the glorious things that followed 1 Pet. I. 10. when S. Paul saith that all Gods promises are yea and Amen in Christ 2 Cor. I. 20. me thinkes it is strange that a Christian should imagine that there was no confideration of Christ in these promises under which they ranne the race of Christians Nor could S. Paul say As by Adam all dy so by Christ shall all be made alive 1 Cor. XV. 22 Nor could the comparison hold betweene the first and second Adam which he makes Rom. V. 12-19 if that life which I have showed how Christ restores Christians to were given to the Fathers before Christ without confideration of Christ Nor could the Apostle otherwise say That Christ is the mediator of a New Covenant that dâ—â—th coming for the ransome of those transgressions that were under the Old they that are called may receive the promise of an everlasting inheritance Ebr. IX 15. but because those sinnes which were redeemed onely to a temporall effect by the sacrifices of the Old Law as also those which were not redeemed at all by any as I said were by the sacrifice of Christ redeemed to the purchase of the world to come Which is that which S. Paul tells the Jewes Acts XIII 29. that through Christ every one that beleeveth is justifiyed from all thinges which they could not be justified of by the Law of Moses For as the Law did not expiate capitall offenses so it expiated none but to the effect of a civil promise And though we construe the wordes of S. John Apoc. XIII 8. whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lambe slaine from the foundation of the world out of the same sense repeated Apoc. XIII 8. Not that the Lambe was slaine from the foundation of the world but that their names were written in his book from the foundation of the world yet in as much as it is called the book of the Lambe that was foreknown from the foundation of the world 1 Pet. I. 19. when Moses demands not to be written in Gods book or when mention is made of it in the New Testament it must be the book of Christ in the mysticall sense And when S. Paul sayes that Christ gave himselfe a ransome for all A testimony for due time What can he meane but that though he gave himselfe for all yet this was not to be testified till the proper time of preaching the Gospell And what is this but that though this is testified onely by the preaching of the Gospell yet he was a ransome for all Which reason suffers not the same terme all Ebr. II. 9. Rom. III. 23. to be restrained from that generality which it naturally signifies Lastly when the Apostle argues that if Christ should offer himselfe more then once that he might more then once enter into the Holy of Holies he must have suffered oft from the foundation of the world that is before the end of the world in which he came indeed Ebr. IX 25. 26. he must needs suppose that he suffered for all that were saved before the Gospell For what pretense can there be that he should suffer for sinnes under the Gospell before the Gospell more then that the High Priest before the Law should expiate those sinnes which were committed against the Law by entring into the Holy of Holies And here you may see that I intend not to affirme that all that were saved under the Law though in consideration of Christ did know in what consideration Christ should be their salvation as Christians under the Gospell doe But to referre my selfe to the determination of S. Augustine and other Fathers and Docters of the Church that they understood it in their Elders and Superiors the Prophets of God and their disciples the Judges of Israell who were also Prophets and the Fathers of severall ages of whom you read Ebrews XI who being acquainted with the secret of Gods purpose were to acquaint the people with it so sparingly and by such degrees as the secret wisdome of God had appointed These things thus premised I do acknowledge and challenge the act of God in dispensing in the execution of his originall Law and bringing the Gospel into effect in stead of it not to be the act of a private person remitting this particular interest in the punishment of those sinnes whereby
it willingly I have a reward if unwillingly a stewardship I am trusted with What is then my reward That I bestow the preaching of Christs Gospel without charge So as not to use my right in preaching it 1 Cor. IX 15-18 The necessity of preaching the Gospell stands in opposition to the preaching of it freely which is therefore a matter of free choice The woe to S. Paul is for not preaching the Gospell therefore not for not preaching it for nothing Wherefore the reward he meanes when he saith what is my reward that is wherein lies my claime my plea or my preâ—ense to it is not that which the Gospel covenants for with all Christians For that S. Paul was not to faile of though he preached not for nothing Seneca saith that a slave may oblige his Master by doing not onely what he commands but what he knowes will please him though he command it not Such are not those whom our Lord speakes to Luke XVII 6-10 So ye also when ye have done all things that are commanded you say we are unprofitable servants we have done what we were indebted to do Ye that have faith as a graine of mustard seed that is a small seed of Christianity to whom the parable there is proposed For it speaketh of those who sit down when their master hath supped whereas there are others that must sit down with their master Luke XXII 30. others that shall sit down as soon as he comes and himself wait on them Luke XII 37. And therefore there are servants of God under the Gospel that fail not of their wages but oblige not their Masters goodnesse without promise Above these wages is the reward which S. Paul meanes which though he pretend not by discharging his trust so cheerfully as to preach the Gospel for nothing which God commanded him not he may neverthelesse obtaine his wages by giving a just account of his office Therefore the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when he saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not abusing but fully using as in Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He used not the gift aright And in S. Paul 1 Cor. VII 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that use this world as not freely using it Not as not abusing it Though it hath been so translated because the rest of the opposites before runne in the like correspondence They that have wives as having none those that weep as not weeping those that rejoyce as not rejoycing those that buy as not possessing So those that use this world as not using or not freely using it And in the Latine Saint Hierome Quâ—st Hebr in Gen. Sancti Apostoli his fere testimoniis abutuntur quae jam fuerant in gentibus divulgata The holy Apostles use I suppose no man will say Saint Herome meant that they abuse those testimonies which had been already divulged among the Gentiles And in Plautus and the civile law abuti is to spend which is the full use of things that may be spent For seeing Saint Paul in the beginning of the Chapter challengeth that he might have done otherwise as well as the rest of the Apostles either he might have done otherwise without sin or he had not that right in point of conscience to God which he saith they used without sinne If then the law of God determine not a man to abstaine from marriage to abandon the world and riches of the world which he hath just title to and yet this may be done to oblige God in point of goodnesse not in point of promise what is Saint Augustineâ— fault in saying of Saint Paul voluit S. Paulus ex Evangelio victum sibi quaerere Quod maluit operari amplius erogabat Saint Paul might have got his living by preaching the Gospel In that he choosed to work he laid out more in Gods service For this is not to say that the love of God for which he did it is not commanded but that he was not commanded to exercise that love in forbearing his due Therefore if any man shall teach the precepts of loving God above all and all for God and of mortifying the first motions of concupiscence together with the particulars unto which our Lords Sermon in the Mount brancheth those generalls to prescribe workes of superâ—rogation and maters not of precept but of counsaile as too many have been allowed I say not injoyned to do in the Church of Rome worthily in that regard is this professed in the Church of England to be a blasphemous doctrine Neither can it appear that the ancient Fathers ever intended any such sense by it who notwithstanding all with one voice agree in the difference between mater of precept and matter of counsell under the Gospel which difference Doctor Field in his learned work of the Church having acknowledged in the Church of England no man can justly charge me with novelty in maintaining of it Now though the perfection of Christianity consist as hath been showed in loving God above all and all for God or in resolving to do all in respect of Gods will and for his service Yet is not this perfection perfectly to be obtained during this life The reason is manifest Because it is not morally possible that the work of it should not be interrupted by original concupiscence the mortification whereof which proceeds by degrees is that perfection which a Christian arriveth at whatsoever he aime at Saint Paul had gone as farre as another man when he said Phil. III. 13 14 15. Brethren I count not my self to have seized Onely forgetting that which is behind and stretching at that which is before according to the mark I drive to the prize of the heavenly calling of God by Christ Jesus As many therefore as are perfect let us be so minded And 1 Cor. III. 18. We all looking as in a glasse upon the glory of God with bare face are changed after the same image from glory to glory as by the Spirit of the Lord To wit by the same degrees as the mortification of our own concupiscence makes room for Gods Spirit And therefore he saith again of himself 1 Cor. IX 26. I therefore so runne as not without appearance of going forwards so fight not as beating the aire But I cuffe and inslave my body least having preached to others I my selfe become reprobate Notwithstanding the law of Christianity which the Gospel preacheth supposing this concupâ—scence and providing a right of reestablishment into Gods grace for all that being cast down in this course shall returne by repentance manifest it is that though we are not saved by fulfilling the originall rule of that righteousnesse to which the creation of our nature on Gods behalf obligeth us Yet by undertaking and pursuing that perfection which the profession of Christianity importeth provided that we persevere in pursuing it unto the end though sometimes this pursuit consist in turning from those sinnes by which we had started aside Now the law of
assure us of the necessity and efficacy of the works of humiliation and mortification for sinne in appeasing the wrath and recovering the favour of God in obtaining forgivenesse of sinne and restoring to the state of Grace which the ancient Church calleth satisfying for sinne By the same meanes it remaines manifest that these satisfactions are neither injoyned grievous sinners by the Scriptures nor notorious sinners by the Church out of any intent of extinguishing a debt of temporal punishment remaining after the sinne is pardoned That God when he gave the Gospell might have reserved a debt of temporall punishment upon them whose sinne he pardoneth by virtue of it I question not That he hath reserved it can never be proved the penalties which he exerciseth his children with being rather chastisements of love then revenges of wrath That this debt if not extinguished here by satisfaction injoyned in Penance remaines for Purgatory in the world to come I cannot here dispuâ—â— not having yet considered the effect of the keyes of the Church in Penance And therefore for the ground of it which must come from hence I shall conclude according to the premises That the condition which the Gospel requireth to bring a man to the state of Gods grace for remission of sinnes and right to everlasting life in point of conscience as to God as well as in point of profession as to the Church is presupposed to every mans being a Christian and a member of the Church With this difference indeed between them that are invited by the Church to be Christians and them who being Christians shall relapse to those finnes which by their Christianity they professe to forsake That to those that are without the cure of sinne is tendered meerly as Physick which the Physitian hath no meanes to constraine a man to take but his own interesse But to those that are within out of that authority and jurisdiction which the Corporation of the Church foundeth The last resolution whereof though it end in the interest of a mans own good which moveth him to professe Christianity yet that profession having ingaged him to be a Christiane by it he standes bound to stand to the judgement of the Church in all things within the authority of it Now if the Church ought to presume that he who is admitted to the communion thereof is qualified for remission of sinne before he be restored to it then cannot a man by being restored to the communion of the Church become qualified for it unlesse it can be said that the absolution of the Church can presuppose that which it effecteth which without a contradiction cannot be said The Church then pardons not sinne otherwise then as by the power of the keyes obliging the relapsed to use that cure which it prescribeth upon presumption of the cure wrought it warranteth pardon as having effected that disposition which qualifieth a man for it So that all the satisfaction that the Church can have that a man is qualified for pardon proceeds upon a presumption that God first is satisfied by the conversion of a sinner to that disposition which he requireth to remission of sin But evidently in consideration of our Lord Christ because by the Gospel whereof he is the subject As for the merit of Christian mens workes in relation to the world to come if it be considered on one hand how many wayes the Scripture declareth that it is impossible for any creature of God to come before hand with him that made it because his allsufficience allowes him not capable of any advantage that he may receive from it on the other hand that by originall concupiscence we are utterly disabled to satisfie for that in which we are come behind hand with God and for the future to satisfy that originall rule of righteousnesse due from man to God which our creation establisheth I shall not need to use many words in a plaine case that by the originall Law of God no man can merit the reward of everlasting life But by the promise of the Gospell God is tied to reward them with it For on the other side it is most evident that the Scriptures as well of the New Testament as of the Old in which I have showed how that salvation which we attaine by the Gospel is intimated that the favour of God and everlasting life is the prize of that gole the crown of that conquest the wage of that good â—ight of Faith which a Christian in this warfare upon earth professeth The Scriptures that containe this sense being every where so expresse and so well known that I conceive I do the Reader an ease in sparing him the paines of reading them here againe after so many canvases But besides the maine point established at the beginning of this Book inforces inevitably all that this resolution imports For if God have by the Gospell imposed upon Christians the condition of new obedience which Christians through his grace by Christ are able to tender him to recompense them with such a reward standes by his free promise ingaged to it in consideration of that new obedience which he requires This is the utmost which the name of merit can inforce understanding it to be grounded upon the promise of God declared by the Gospell which nothing but his own free grace designed through and in consideration of our Lord Christ before all consideration of any new obedience of Christians which wholly dependeth upon the same could ever have moved him to set on foote For having said before that a meritorious cause can have no place in respect of God otherwise then as he designes us good in consideration of good though the good he considers be originally his own gift whereas men are obliged in reason and justice to reward that good which themselves are prevented with originally as to them moving and obliging them to reward it but the merit of heaven never so fully ascribed to the workes of Christians who are obliged to understand it so to be ascribed by virtue of the Covenant of Grace it can be understood to signify no more then a quality which it requireth upon which the reward becomes due by virtue of that promise which requireth it And that this is the sense of the Catholike Church among infinite arguments this is enough to demonstrate Because whereas it is very well known that the Latine Fathers do attribute the stile and virtue of merits and meriting at Gods hands to the workes of Christians in respect to everlasting life the Greek Fathers in whose mouthes the word could not be expressing the same sense in such termes as their own language affords For who ever undertook to show any difference of sense between them those of the Reformation have alwayes maintainâ—d that their sense is the same with the sense of the ancient Church in the mouth of the Fathers For if in their mouth that word can import no prejudice to Christianity neither can it import
any now unlesse the signification thereof be fuâ—ther limited by other terms which being added to it every man will allow may determine a sense utterly prejudiciall to it True it is divers have observed that the word merâ—râ— in good Latine especially of those later ages in which the Fathers writ signifies no more then to attaine compasse or purchase Arguing from thence that the workes of Christians merit heaven in their sense and language no otherwise then because they are the meanes by which we attaine it So Cassander observes that S. Pauls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. I. 13. is by S. Cyprian translated misericordiam merui not intending to say that S. Paul deserved that mercy which he professes to have received of Grace But onely to signify that he found mercy and attained it But though I should grant that this word may signify no more in the language of the Fathers yet the Faith and the sense out of which it is evident that they spake will inforce that it doth signify as much as I say when they speak of our coming to heaven by our workes For having once resolved that the Covenant of Grace renders life everlasting due by Gods promise to those that lâ—ve as at their Baptisme they undertook though not for the worth of their workes yet by the mercy of God in Christ which moved him to tender such a promise he that sayes a man attaines heaven by the meanes of those workes which he lives in like a Christian sayes that those workes of his do merit heaven in the sense that I challenge For as for those that will have the workes of Christians to merit heaven of their own intrinsicke value Of those I have already said that I conceive they do prejudice the Christian â—aith in not allowing the necessity of Gods grace through Christ in accepting the condition which the Gospel requires for such a reward as the intrinsick value of it cannot deserve by Gods originall law For granting those helps of Gods grace in Christ being supernaturall and heavenly to hold proportion and correspondence with the reward of life everlasting which is the same Yet will it not follow that in all regards for the purpose in that the actions which they produce are momentany the reward everlasting which is the consideration S. Paul uses Rom. VIII 18. 1 Cor. VII 17 18. the correspondence will produce an equality of value And though the first principle of them be heavenly and supernaturall which is the help which God for Christs sake allowes yet seeing that it comes not immediately to effect but by the meanes of the faculties of mans soule infected with originall concupiscence it cannot be said that they can demand a reward correspondent to heavenly grace alone when earthly weakness concurres to imbase and allay the value of that which it produceth But as it cannot be denied that the Church of Rome in which that Order which maintainâ—s this extremity hath so great credit allowes this doctrine of merit to be taught yet can it not be said to injoine it Because there have not wanted to this day Doctors of esteem that have alwayes held otherwise Among whom I may very well name Sylvius now or lately Professor of Divinity at Doway who in his Commentaries upon the second part of Thomas Aquinas his Summe expounds that meritum de condigno which the Schoole attributes to the workes of Christians to be grounded in dignatione Dei because God vouchsafes and daignes to accept them whose they are as worthy of the reward expressing also the promise of the Gospell whereby this condescension of God is declared The Schoole Doctors found out the termes of meritum ex congruo ex condigno merit of congâ—uity and condignity Some of them because they thought That the workes of meer nature deserve supernaturall grace in regard that it is fit that God should reward him that doth his best with it That works done in the state of Grace are worth the Glory of the world to come But as the former part of the position which is planted upon these terms is rejected by many So they who onely acknowledge meritum congrui in workes done in the state of grace that is to say that it is fit for God to reward them with his kingdome say no more then that it was fit for God to promise such a reward Which whoso denieth must say that God hath promised that which it was unfit for him to promise And if the dignity of our works in respect of the reward may have this tolerable sense because God daignes and vouchsafes it The Councill of Trent which hath inacted no reason why they are to be counted merits can neither bear out these high opinions nor be said to prejudice the Faith in this point For The kingdom of God is not in word but in power if S. Paul say true And therefore though I affect not the terme of merit which divers of the Reformation do not reject Yet can I not think it so far from the truth so prejudiciall to the faith as the peevish opinions of those that allow not good workes necessary to salvation but as signes of Faith For that which necessarily comes in consideration with God in bestowing the reward which the condition he contracteth for must necessarily do though it cannot have the nature of merit because the Covenant it self is granted meerly of Grace in consideration of Christs death yet it is of necessity to be reduced to the nature and kind of the meritorious cause Nor can the glory of God or the merit of Christ be obscured by any consideration of our works that is grounded upon the merit of our Lord Christ and expresseth the tincture of his bloud The end of the Second Book Laus Deo OF THE LAWES OF The Church The Third BOOK CHAP. I. The Society of the Church founded upon the duty of communicating in the Offices of Gods Service The Sacrament of the Eucharist among those Offices proper to Christianity What opinions concerning the presence of Christs Body and Blood in the Eucharist are on foot IF God had onely appointed the Profession of Christianity to be the condition qualifying for the world to come leaving to every mans judgment to determine what that Christianity is and wherein it consists which it is necessary to salvation hee professe and what that conversation is which his salvation requireth There had been no cause why I should go any further in this Dispute But having showed that God hath appointed the Sacrament of Baptisme to be a necessary means to salvation limiting thereby the profession of Christianity which hee requireth to be deposited and consigned in the hands of his Church whom hee hath trusted for the maintaining and propagating of it I have thereby showed that hee hath appointed all Christians to live in the Communion of the Church The effect of Baptisme being to admit unto full Communion in those Offices wherewith God is
Epist IX ad Probum Statuimus fide Catholica suffragante illud esse conjugium quod primitus erat divina gratia fundatum Conventumque secundaemulieris priore superstite nec divortio ejectâ nullo pacto posse esse legitimum We decree the Catholick faith voting for it that to be mariage which first was founded upon Gods grace that was first made according to Christianity and that the wedding of a second wife leaving the first can by no means be lawful Which exception could possibly signifie nothing if in no case not of adultery a second could be maried while the first is alive And in the West Chromatius of Aquileia in Mat. V. as well as in the East Asterius Homil. an liceat dimittere uxorem the first damns him that shall mary again excepting adultery The second would have his hearers perswaded that nothing but death or adultery dissolves mariage But do I therefore say that the Church cannot forbid the innocent party to mary again or is bound by Gods law to allow it All Ecclesiastical Law being nothing but the restraining of that which Gods Law hath left indefinite And the inconveniences being both visible and horrible I conceive I am duly informed that George late Arch-bishop of Canterbury was satisfied in the proceeding of the High Commission Court to tie them that are divorced from marying again upon experience of adultery designed upon collusion to free the parties from wedlock having been formerly tender in imposing that charge The Greek Church may beter avoid such inconveniences not being tied to any Law of the Land but the tempering of the Canons remaining in the Governors of the Church But they that would not have the Lawes of the Church and the justice of the Land became Stales and pandars to such vilanies must either make adultery death and so take away the dispute or revive publick Penance and so take away the infamy of his bed and the taint of his issue that shall be reconciled to an Adulteresse or lastly bear with that inconvenience which the casualties of the world may oblige any man to which is to propose the chastity of single life in stead of the chastity of wedlock when the security of a mans conscience and the offence of the Church allows it not But though this in regard of the intricacies of the question and the inconveniences evident to practice may remain in the power of the Church yet can it never come within the power of the Church to determine that it is prejudiciall to the Christian faith to do so as by Gods Law And the Church that erres not in prohibiting mariage upon divorce for adultery will erre in determining for mater of faith that Gods law prohibites it so long as such reasons from the Scriptures are not silenced by any Tradition of the whole Church It is easie to see by S. Augustine de adulterini conjugiis II. 5-12 that publick Penance was the means to restore an adulteresse to the same reputation among Christians which an adulteresse that turned Christian must needs recover among Christians And that is the reason why the Canon of Arles orders that young Christians be advised not to mary again that their wives may be recovered of their adultery by Penance and so their mariage re-estated I see also that Justiniane Nov. CXVII hath taken order that women excessive in incontinence be delivered to the Bishop of the City to be put into a Monastery there to do Penance during life And supposing adultery to be death according to Moses Law the inconvenience ceaseth If the Civil Law inable not the Church to avoid the scandall of this collusion it is no marvail that the Church is constrained to impose upon the innocent more then Gods law requires to avoid that scandall which Gods law makes the greater inconvenience And thus having showed you that S. Austines interpretation of fornication is not true I have into the bargain showed you that it cannot serve to prove divorce upon other causes besides adultery and so the insolubility of mariage excepting our Saviours exception is as firmly proved as the consent of the Church can prove any thing in Christianity I know Origen argues that poysoning killing children robbing the house may be as destructive to the Society of Wedlock as Adultery And he thereupon seems to inferre that our Saviour excepts adultery onely for instance intending all causes equally destructive to wedlock as Grotius who follows his sense seems to limit it But Origens opinion will not interrupt the Tradition of the Church unlesse it could appear to have come into practice sometime in some part of the Church Neither would it serve his turn that would have those divorces which the secular Power allowes to extend to marying again For Origen never intended that his own opinion should bind but that it is in the power of the Church to void mariages upon other causes For he saith he knew some Governours of Churches suffer a woman to mary her former husband living Praeter Scripturam besides the Scripture And that as Moses permitted divorce to avoid a greater mischiefe But I may question whether they thought that against the Scripture which Origen thought to be against the Scripture And in the mean time as I do not see what breach his report can make upon the Tradition of the Church so it is plain the Power of the Church and not the secular did that which he reports And truly what the testimony of S. Austine extending that Adultery upon which our Saviour grants divorce to all mortall sinne but confining him that is so divorced not to mary another can avail him that would intitle the secular Power to create causes of divorce to the effect of marying again let all reason and conscience judge I shall conclude my argument Exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis An exception settles the rule in all that is not excepted Either our Saviour intended that who had put away a Yoke-fellow for adultery should mary again or not If so he hath forbidden marying again upon other causes If not much more For though upon adultery he hath forbidden to mary again And thus is the Power of the Church in Matrimoniall causes founded upon the Law which our Lord Christ hath confined all Christians to of marying one to one and indissolubly whither without exception or excepting adultery For seeing that of necessity many questions must arise upon the execution of such a Law and that Civil Power may as well be enemy to Christianity as not and that as well professing to maintain it as professing to persecute it to say that God hath left the Consciences of Christians to be secured by the Civil Power submitting to what it determines is to say that under the Gospell God hath not made the observing of his lawes the condition of obtaining his promises This is that power which Tertulliane in several places expresly voucheth de Pudicitiâ cap. IV. Penes nos speaking
the carnal rest of the Jewes is a figure of the spiritual rest of Christians in grace here in glory in the world to come And therefore when he is afraid least he should have laboured in vain upon the Galatians IV. 10. because they observed days and moneths years when he teacheth the Colossians II. 16. not to be over-ruled in the mater of new Moons or Sabbath When he sheweth the Romanes XIV 5. that they who esteemed on one day before another were weak Christians He did not mean to remove the obligation of the seventh day upon the first but to show that Christians may as well think themselves bound in conscience to be circumcised as to be under the precept of the Sabbath And let me understand how we can be bound by the precept of the Sabbath and not be bound to that measure of rest which the precept of the Sabbath limiteth For the constitution which the Jews go by this day is so grounded in the Text that it is not possible to imagine that ever it was practised otherwise the leter of the Law manifestly distinguishing between worke and servile workâ— and permitting the dressing of meat upon the first and last dayes of the Passovâ—r Pentecost and the feast of Tabernacles but forbidding servile work that is to say such work as slâ—ves were imployed about for their Masters advantage but upon the Sabbath and day of atonement forbidding all work that is not onely servile work but the dressing of meat upon those days whereupon comes the express prohibition of kindling fire on the Sabbath not for the time that they lived in the wildernesse but as the Law expresseth in all their habitations Ex. XII 16. XXXV 30. XVI 23. Levit. XXIII 3. 7 8 21 25 28. Numb XXIX 1 7. And therefore Deut. XVI 8. where for brevities sake he saith of the Passover No worke shall be done in it The Greek adds out of Exodus and Leviticus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Besides what shall be dressed for meat And therefore when our Lord goes to dâ—ne with a Pharisee Luc. XIV 1. it is no marvail that he is invited upon a Festivall on which they hold themselves still bound to eat the best meat and drink the best wine and put on the clothes they have But he knew his entertainment must be upon meats dreâ—t the day before And therefore he not onely reproveth the hypocrisy of the Pharisees who for their own profit to draw their Oxe or their Ass out of the pit could bâ—lâ— it and in a charitable cause of healing a man stood upon it But further he showes it to be a meer positive precept of the Law when by the right of a Prophet he commandeth the lame man whom he had cured to cary away his bed upon the Sabbath Joh. V. 10. the Prophet of the old Law having forbidding to cary any burthen upon the Sabbath Jer. XVII 21. 22. And the reason my Father still worketh and so do I worke inâ—erreth that as the rest of God was not from bodily labour so neither is it the rest from bodily labour which he or his Gospel intendeth I conclude therefore that which will seem strange to unskilful people That the onely thing commanded by the leter of the fourth Commandement is to rest from bodily labour upon the seventh day of the week on which God rested from whence it is called the Sabbath But by the mysticall sense of it under the New Testament to rest from our own works of sinne here that we may attain to the rest of God in the world to come And I cannot see how a more evident argument can be expected for this then the extending of the precept to cattel and strangers not onely to children who otherwise are not under the precept For strangers in the Law that is those that worshipped the true God alone but were not circumcised who are therefore alwayes translated Conuerts in the Syriack to wit from Idols were onely tyed to seven precepts which all the Sons of Noe had received from him Whereof that of the Sabbath was none And therefore it is not they that are commanded to rest but Gods people are commanded that they shall not work as they are commanded that their Cattel shall not work I know there is a strong Argument against this in vulgar esteem which to me makes no difficulty at all that they are commanded to sanctifie or keep holy the Sabbath But he that admits the true difference between the Law and the Gospel must admit a legall as well as a spirituall holinesse And I would know what holinesse there is in offering a brute beast to God in sacrifice that is not in sitting still on the seventh day Both being stamped with Gods command and the rest of the Body signifying the rest of the soul from sinne which is very holy as the sacrifice is holy because it signifieth the holinesse of our Lord Christ or of them whom he sanctifieth The Apostle teacheth us thus to distinguish when he saith Heb. IX 11. If the blood of Bulls and Goats and the ashes of a red cow sprinkling the purified sanctifieth to the purity of the flesh For the holiness it procureth is but the capacity of free conversation amongst the people of the true God as to the leter of the Law And bodily rest upon the Sabbath is a full profession of the true God which made heaven and earth and brought his people out of Egypt I do not deny that the service of God was commanded by the Law upon the Sabbath But not by this precept You have an order for publick Assemblies on the Sabbath as well as on other Festivals Levit. XXIII you have an order for what sacrifices should be offered on each of them Num. XXVIII But had the Law gone no further then the fourth Commandment the Jews had not been tied to those precepts I acknowledge further that they were bound to serve God with other offices such as are common to them and us both upon the Sabbath as upon other Festivals when they had Synagogues or means to assemble themselves otherwise as Abenezra observes out of 2 King IV. 23. For had it not been the custome to resorâ— to the Prophets at the Festivals he would not have said Why wilt thou go to the Prophet It is neither new Moon nor Sabbath And the order for this which we see by the acts of the Apostles and the Gospels as well as by the Jews Constitutions no man will deny to have obliged them by virtue of the Law But not by the leter of it which had it been precisely followed the objection of Origen and other of the Fathers must have taken place and no man must have stirred out of the place where he should be found at the coming in of the Sabbath But in regard there was alwayes in that people a sense of that spiritual service of God which these carnal precepts tended to therefore was there provided a power
Hereticks Of those whose Baptism S. Cyprian excepts against Epist ad Jubaianum it is manifest that the Church voiding the baptism of the Samosatenians by the Canon of Nicaea the baptism of other Hereticks by the Canons of Arles and Laodicea must needs make void the baptisms of the greatest part being evidently further removed from the truth which Christianity professeth than those whose baptism the said Canons disallow And though it is admitted according to the dictates of the School that these words I baptize thee in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost contain a sufficient form of this Sacrament Yet that holdeth upon supposition that they who use it do admit the true sense of this word I baptize intending thereby to make him a Christian that is to oblige him to the profession of Christianity whom they baptize Which what reason can any man have to presume of in behalf of those who renounce their baptism once received in the Church of England to be baptized again For all reason of charitable presumptions ceaseth in respect of those who root up the ground thereof by Schism and by departing from the Unity of the Church And besides that wee do not see them declare any profession at all according to which they oblige themselves either to believe or live which is reason enough to oblige others not to take them for Christians not demanding to be taken for Christians by professing themselves Christians wee see the world over-spread with the vermine of the Enthusiasts who accepting of the Scriptures for Gods word upon a perswasion of the dictate of Gods Spirit not supposing the reason for which they are Christians do consequently believe as much in the dictates of the same that are not grounded upon the Word of God as upon those that are So that the imbracing of the Scriptures makes them no more Christians than Mahomets acknowledging Moses and Christ in the Alcoran makes him a Christian For whosoever is perswaded that hee hath the Spirit of God not supposing that it is given him in consideration that hee professeth Christianity supposing therefore the truth thereof in order of reason before hee receive the Spirit may as well as Mahomet in the Alcoran frame both the Old and New Testament to whatsoever sense his imagination which hee takes for Gods Spirit shall dictate This reason why it is necessary to follow the forms which the Church prescribes is more constraining in celebrating the Sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist as more nearly concerning the Christianity and salvation of Christians But yet it takes place also in the rest of those Offices whereby the Church pretends to conduct particular Christians in the way to life everlasting Hee that supposes that which I have proved how necessary it is that every sheep of the flock should acknowledg the common Pastor of his Church that the Pastor should acknowledg his flock upon notice of that Christianity which every one of them in particular professeth though hee may acknowledg that originally there is no cause why every Bishop should not prescribe himself the form of it in his own Church yet supposing that experience hath made it appear requisite for the preservation of Unity by Uniformity that the same form should be used must needs finde it requisite that it be prescribed by a Synod greater or less At such time as publick Penance was practiced in the Church when the Penitents were dismissed before the Eucharist with the Blessing and Prayers of the Church can it seem reasonable to any man that any Prayers should be used in celebrating an action of that consequence but those which the like authority prescribeth So much the more if it be found requisite that the practice of private Penance and of the inner Court of the Conscience be maintained in the Church For how should it be fit that every Priest that is trusted with the Power of the Keyes in this Court should exercice it in that form which his private fansy shall dictate Of Ordinations I say the same as of Confirmations Of the Visitation of the Sick and of Mariage as of Penance Onely considering that it is not likely that the reason whereupon the celebration of Mariage is an Office of the Church deriving from those limitations which the precept of our Lord hath fastned upon the Mariage of Christians should be so well understood by all that are to solemnize Matrimony as to do their Office both so as the validity of the contract and so as the performance of that Office which the parties undertake doth require In fine having showed that the Service of God upon the Regular Hours of the day is a Custom both grounded upon the Scripture and tending to the maintenance and advancement of Christian Piety It remains that I say that the form and measure of that devotion which all estates are to offer to God at those hours cannot otherwise be limited to the edification of all than by the determination of the Church They that please themselves with that monstrous imagination that no Christian is to be taught what or how to pray till hee finde himself inabled by the Spirit of God moving him to pray will easily finde that they can never induce the greater part of Christians to think themselves capable of discharging themselves to God in so high an Office as the sense of their Christianity requires They that observe the performance of those who take it upon them shall finde them sacrifice to God that which his Law forbiddeth the mater of their Prayers not consisting with our common Christianity For of a truth it is utterly unreasonable to imagine that God should grant inspirations of the Holy Ghost for such purposes as our common Christianity furnisheth And therefore the consequences of so false a presumption must be either ridiculous or pernicious Now if any man say that hee admits not the premises upon which I inferr these consequences it remaines that the dispute rest upon those premises and come not to these consequences Onely let him take notice that I have showed him the true consequences of my own premises which hee must reprove as inconsistent with Christianity if hee take upon him to blame the premises for any fault that hee findeth with their true consequences And to say truth as the substance and mater of Christianity is concerned in all these Offices though in some more in some less and by consequence in the form of celebrating them So the Unity of the Church is generally concerned in the form of celebrating them all in as much as any difference insisted upon as necessary and not so admitted by others is in point of fact a just occasion of division in the Church And therefore all little disputes of these particulars necessarily resort to the general Whether God hath commanded the Unity of the Church in the external communion of the members thereof or not Which having concluded by the premises I conceive I have founded
VII 47-50 He showeth plainly that the vulgar conceit of the Jewes came farre short of the doctrine of the Prophets in this point and that this was then a great hinderance to the Jewes Christianity which vulgarly publisheth that which onely the worshippers of God in Spirit and truth understood under the Law As Barnabas also in that Epistle which the ancientest of the Fathers have acknowledged and is lately set forth declareth Now for the text of the Judges concerning that which the Jewes call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Idol of Micah Is it to be considered that there may be and are two opinions concerning the true sense and intent of the second commandment where it saith Thou shalt not make to thy self any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or carved image the likenesse of any thing For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the originall of it signifying all carved work it may be thought that God intends by these words to prohibite all use of carved work among his people Not as if the making of a carved image were idolatry but to avoid the occasions of idolatry which as I have said that art though it introduced not yet it increased And therefore it followeth For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God For jealousie forbids as well the meanes of adultery as adultery But if we suppose the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 extended by use beyond the original of it it may import onely such statues as are made to represent a godhead imagined afore And then the letter of the precept forbids no more then to make any carved work for the image of God According to the first sense the making of the Cherubims over the Ark falls within the precept And is to be taken for a dispensation of the Lawgiver in the matter of a positive precept which his own act onely rendered unlawfull But according to the later being not included in the matter of the precept there needs no exception to render it lawfull The same is to be said of the brazen serpent Whether of these opinions is true I need not here dispute Onely as I began to say afore I say further that during the time that high places were licensed it can be no inconvenience to grant that there was the like furniture provided for the service of God there to that which was prescribed in the Tabernacle For upon what ground that People thought it commanded by God there in which there could be no just occasion of idolatry upon the like ground and to the like purpose it might be taken up in the high places Though that reason which had moved God to prohibit high places after the place of his worship should be setled Levit. XVII 5. 7. might alwayes indanger them to go astray as the story of Gideon showes For though so long as they understood the ground upon which and the intent to which they were used they remained secure yet forgetting it by the deceitfullnesse of error they were subject to be seduced The fact of Micah then hath two of these handles which Epictetus his manuall mentions It may be taken as if he meant onely to make an high place for the service of the onely true God according to the Law the carved work which he furnished it with being onely in stead of the furniture of the Tabernacle Which is the case of Gideon as I stated it afore For when the Prophet Osee threatens the ten tribes that they shall dwell a long time without Ephod or Teraphim He does not mean it for a punishment that they should be restrained of the idolatry which they practised to the Calves But he signifieth that the Cherubim of the Temple where they ought to have served God and where it would be the blessing of that promise which the Law tendereth to serve God have the name of Teraphim common to them with the Calves Though those the objects of idolatry these the instruments of Gods service For on the other side the fact of Micah may be so taken as if he intended to set up a carved image of an imaginary Godhead to be worshipped for the onely true God And this intent seems to me the more probable of the two For there stands upon it the mark of a thing done against Gods Law Judg. XVII 6. In that day there was no king in Israel every man did what seemed right in his own eyes Which of the case of Gideon originally could not have been said And besides That Micah could not have any of the Tribe of Levi to minister in this high place but was faine to take his sonne in the mean time till he lighted upon a wandering Levite whose necessity might debauch him to any imployment This also seems an argument that his house of gods which he furnished with Ephod and Teraphim Judg. XVII 5. was erected to false gods For that his mother had consecrated her money to the incommunicable name of God v. 2. is easily answered by the same that hath been said to the cases of Aaron and Jeroboam But my opinion remaines never a whit prejudiced though these arguments seem insufficient and though it be said that the worship of the true God was that which Micah hereby intended For still the same alternative will have recourse which takes place in Jeroboams case Either his intent was the service of the true God and then though we suppose that he sinned against the precept of the Law Levit. XVII 5. yet he sinned not the sinne of idolatry Or his intent was the service of some imaginary Godhead and then he committed idolatry according to my opinion notwitststanding that he used the name of the onely true God in the businesse As for that which is objected that according to this opinion there would be no sufficient reason for that difference which the Scripture maketh between the sinne of Jeroboam which made Israel to sinne and the idolatries of Ahab and of the house of Omri and those wherein Manasses followed the Amorites How much he is deceived that thus reasons may easily appear to him that compares those murders those uncleannesses those horrible vilanies which the devil had seduced the Gentiles to under the pretense of Gods worship and for the discharge of that obligation which the sense of Religion binds all men with That compares these I say with the service of a false God but otherwise according to the same rites and ceremonies which the Law commands the true God to be served with Nor shall I need to say any thing to that which remaines either what interest Jeroboam could have to cary the people to the worship of any other then the true God who was to count his turn served if they went not up to Jerusalem Or how either he or they who conformed to his command could by onely so doing blot out of their mindes that opinion of the true God which they had suckt in with their milke and
in opposition to the flesh seeing the soules of the Fatherâ— which by the dispensation of the Law appeared not freed from the Devin wâ—re indeed free by the Gospel uâ—der the Law it is no marvaile that â—ur Lord Christ represents his soule as in the power oâ— those who had the power oâ— death who â—aith This is your time and the time of the powers of darkenesse Doâ—h S. Paul make any more oâ— thâ—s text Heare his words Actâ— Xâ—Iâ— 34-37 That he raised him from the dead no more to returne to corruptioâ— thus he saith I will give you the sure meâ—cies of David Wherefore he saith also in an other Psalm Thou shall no suffer thine holy one to see corruption For David having served the counsaile of God in his generation fell asleep and was added to his Fathers and saw corruption But he whom God raised â—â—w no corruption He argues the mysticall sense in our Lord Christ 〈◊〉 the literall sense in David was come to nothing by his death but how the mysticall sense in our Lord Christ By his triumphing in Hell or by rising againe Therefore S. Paul againe Rom. X 6-9 thus wrâ—steth the words of Moses out of the Jewes hands to the establishing of the Gospel upon supposition that the law is the figure of it Say not in thy heart who shall goe up into heaven as Moses Deut. XXX 12. faith The Law is not in heaven that thou shouldest say would to God some body would bring it us from heaven that we might heare and doe it So saith he of the Gospel thou needest not say would to God some body would go up into heaven To wit to bring downe Christ Or who shall goe downe into the deep as Moses addeth The Law is not beyond sea that that thou needest say would to God some body would goe beyond sea and bring it us that we might heare and doe it So thou needst not say would to God some body would goe downe into the deep To wit to bring Christ up from the dead But what saith it The Law correspondent to the Gospell The word is neere in thy mouth and in thy heart That is the word of Faith which wee preach That if thou prâ—fesse with thy mouth the Lord Jesus believing with thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved Here it is plaine the deepe is not named for the place of the damned but for that place or for that state out of which it was hard to recover Christ supposing him dead As it was hard to bring the law from beyond the seas The deep I deny not represents to us the place of the damned Luke VIII 31. as also the parts that are under the earth Phi. II. 10. Apoc. V. 13. may comprehend also the dead Therefore the deep signifies the place of the damned not necessarily as here but because the speech is of the region of Devils of the sealing up of the devill in the deep Just as I said of the grave the pit and the place under the earth that when the scripture speakes of the Giants of the enemieâ— of Gods people of Davids enemies in Gods people it signifies either the place or at least the state of the damned which the Old Testament must needs acknowledg acknowledging the happinesse of Gods people Psalme IX 18. Proverbs V. 8 VII 27. IX 18. And so went Corah and his complices quick into Hell Num. XVI 30 33. So Psalme LV. 24. LXIII 10. The proper place of the dâ—mned spirits seemeth to be properly called by S. Peter Tartara when he saies that God delivered them to be kept for judgement 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in chaines of darkenesse being cast downe into Tartara or Hell 1. Peter II. 4. Now the state of death brings not Christian soules into Hell unlâ—sse wee suppose that the place of good souls under the Law which supposition I have destroyed Therefore the bringing of Christ from the deep is done by raising him again So quoting David againe Ephes IV. 8 9 10. Therefore he saith Psa LXVIII 17. Going upon high he led captivity captive and gave men gifts Now that he ascended what is it but that he first descended into the lower paâ—ts of the Earth He that descended is the same that ascended far above all things to fill or fulfill all things The Psalme speakes of the Arke going up into the Tabernacle or Temple figuring the going up of our Lord to the right hand of God as Psalme XXIV 6-10 XLVII 5. The going up of the Arke was Gods triumph over the Idolatrous nations whom he cast out of the Land of promise giving gifts to his people in it The going up of our Lord Christ S. Paul saies implies that he had come downe before into the lower pâ—rt of the Eearth Either in respect of mount Sinai upon which the Psalme describes God with that attendance which the aâ—ke the Cherubines thereof signifie his host of Angels in the words just afore Or we may well understand the lower parts of the earth to signifie by the figure of apposition the earth that is below as flumen Rheni Vrbs Patavii signifie the river Rhine and the City Padna For we have a peremptory instance in Psa CXXXIX 15 where David saith that he was fashioned in the lower parts of the earth speaking of his mothers wombe therefore meaning the earth below The ascension therefore of Christ pretending to fill rather then fulfill all with his graces of which he proceeds to speake requires no descent into hell which he pretends not to fill with his Graces If the resurrection ascension of Christ satisfie these texts so that they require no further descent then into the state of deaâ—h supposing what I said before of the soules of the fathers under the Old Testament I must needs conclude that the body of Christ being buryed his soule went with the good theifes soule into Paradise or the bosome of Abraham where the soules of the Fathers were refreshed of their travells till the first and then the second comming of our Lord. Paradise we know was the place of mans happniesse wherein he was created whence having sinned he was shut out In our Lords time Gods people it is plaine understood well enough the state of the righteous soules in the other world You have seene it out of those boâ—kes which we call Apocrypha Supposing the place unknown as indeed it is how could it be more properly signified then by the name of Paradise opening unto us the whole allegory by which the happinesse which wee seeke to recover by the covâ—nant of grâ—ce was expressed to us by God first in the Land of promise secondly in the Church after in the heavens after the redemption of our bodies The true Land of promise to which the Gospell and the Church secretly taught and built under the Law introduceth us because the Law cannot is that Paradise to which Christ restoreth Adam that was
breedeth purgeth away the love of the creature And it may be thought that the examination of the conscience the conviction of sinne the remorse and shame of so many disloyalties the feare of the Judge and in fine the strictnesse of the judgement is the fire which Saint Paul sayes shall try every mans work as the fire which burns up the world shall their bodies and sever the dregs and drosse of them to the Devil and his Angels from whom they came with the dregs and drosse of the world which divines say shall be conveyed to Hell as the â—inke of it But hereupon the Apostle when he sayes Ye are come to the spirits of just men made perfect Hebrews XII 23. may be understood that they are thus perfected supposing him to speake of the generall judgement to come to passe then straight as the destruction of Jerusalem did and that therefore he saith Ye are come But he may be also understood to say that they are perfected by Christianity in comparison of Judaisme as our Lord saith Be ye perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect And as he saith that the least in the kingdome of heaven is greater then John the Baptist Whereas if we understand him to say Ye are come to the Spirits of just men perfected between the departure and the day of judgement we make him to say that which is no where else either said or intimated by the Scripture And that is it which distinguisheth my opinion from the position of Purgatory or rather the doctrine of the scriptures from the decree of the Councils of Florence and Trent For will the present Church of Rome be content with such an estate of soules as no man can be helped out of What were Purgatory worth if men were perswaded that there is no meanes to translate their soules out of the flames thereof into heaven before the generall judgement Or what were Christianity the worse if all were perswaded that those soules which wee speake of all this while need their friends prayers to help them through this middle estate and especially through the dreadfull tryall of the day of judgement Surely thus much the worse that men must of necessity keep a better account of their steps here and take a better care to cleare themselves of the sins which they commit that they may passe it with the more joy and cherefullnesse Well may they part with the drosse and stubble of the immediate imputation of Christs merits sufferings which they have built upon the foundation of the remission of sins and everlasting life in consideration of the same but upon condition of Christanity upon these termes here rather then part with it at their charge then if perhaps they have not failed of the foundation by the meanes of it And upon these termes I am not troubled at the words of our Lord Mat. XII 32. Who shall speake a word against the Son of man it shall be remitted him But who shall speake against the Holy Ghost it shall never be remitted him neither in this world nor in the world to come For as for mine owne part I finde the force of the words well enough satisfied taking it onely for a fashion of speech signifying onely that that sin could by no meanes be pardoned no not in the world to come not supposing that the world to come hath meanes to pardon so great sins as this world hath no meanes to doe I confesse according to my opinion there is in some sort pardon for sins in the other world though absolutely there is not because there is none but in vertue of the covenant of Grace the termes whereof onely take place in this world though the effect thereof extend to the world to come For after departure in the state of Grace for a man to know that there is no more danger of failing of everlasting life is absolutely that which the greatest Saints of this world could never attaine to Though some effects of sin stick to those that are so assured between death and the day of judgement in respect to which he who is absolutely said to be pardoned because in no danger of forfeiting it may be said so far not to be pardoned as the continuance of those effects imports But there is nothing in my opinion to signifie that there is meanes of obtaining pardon for those sins in the next world which there is no meanes to obtain pardon for in this Which this saying of our Lord at the foote of the letter signifies And therefore I for my part can very well rest satisfied with this sense taking the inlarging of it by mentioning the world to come for an elegance which common speech beareth and that of our Lord frequenteth But if any man thinke I respect not the Fathers that have expounded it to the sense which I refuse not the rule of faith being safe let every man injoy his opinion in it Of the figure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Grotius observes in the words in the world to come whereby it shall not be for given him in the world to come signifyes He shall be soundly punished for it in the world to come let them who are capable see him discourse learnedly in his Anotations upon this place As little am I troubled at that other text of the Gospell Mat. V. 26. Luke Xâ—I 58. Thou shalt not come forth till thou hast paid the utmost farthing For I can easily grant that the taking away of those effects of sin which remaine in those that dy in grace according to my opinion may be said to come by paying the utmost farthing But I need not grant that he who saies thou shalt not come forth till thou hast paid the utmost farthing saies Thou mayest come forth by paying the utmost farthing For the condition of paying the utmost farthing will be unpossible if wee understand the prison to be the Lake of the damned which the executioner mentioned afore requires In S. Luke for a Preface to the Parable Why doe yee not judge what is right from your soules saith our Lord That is why doe ye not judge what ye are to doe in the mater of my Gospell by that which you use to doe in worldly matters If you be liable to an action you find it best to compound it before the judge give sentence and grant execution upon it For then you must stand to the extremity of the Law The preaching of the gospell showes that the Law oâ— God hath an Action against you which you may take up by becoming Christians and yet you will not doe it In S. Mathew it followes upon the precept of being reconciled to a mans brother which showes that God accepts not that sacrifice which is not offered in charity But it cannot signifie lesse then in S. Luke That our Lord upon that occasion puts all in mind to be reconciled to God because there is no redemption if he grant execution
either from Hethen writers or from the Scriptures There being nothing under the earth but that which answereth this Hemispere above the earth Which clause is added to meete with one opinion of the Gentiles that the lower hemispere is the place of soules and the torments of Hell which they call Tartara as much beneath it as heaven is above this Onely here it must be provided that the gulfe be not forgotten which our Lord fixeth between Abrahams bosome and the place of torments Dionysius Eccles Hierarch Cap. II. seemeth to agree with Gregory Nyssenâ— and so doe others whom unlesse you distinguish thus you wil not find to speak things consequent to themselvs And I am much confirmed in it first by the difference of opinions among the fathers concerning Samuels soul Which we as there be enough of them that cannot indure to yeild it to have been in the devils power to raise so are they by that meanes obliged to maintaine the rest of the Fathers souls with Samuels to have gon into Abrahams bosom with Lazarus Secondly by their agreement in acknowledging that Paradise which was shut upon man for the sinne of Adam is opened by the death of Christ to receive the righteous For to conceive that they understood this of that Paradise which Adam was expulsed would be to make them too childish But understanding it of that estate which that Paradise signified you have Saint Basil assigning Paradise to Lazarus de Jejunio Hom. I. Besides another Homily intitled to Zeno Bishop of Verona Nay you have expresly in Philo Carpathius upon Cant. VI. 2. My love is gone into his garden Or his Paradise Tunc enim Paradisum triumphator ingressus est cum ad inferos penetravit Then did he enter Paradise in triumph when he pierced into hell Making the beds of spices there to be the souls of the Fathers to whom our Lord conducted the good thiefe And Olympiodorus upon Cant. III. saith that some make Paradise under the earth and that there Dives saw Lazarus Others in heaven Whereas the letter of the Scripture placeth it upon the earth But howsoever that the righteous are both in joy and peace and also in Paradise Thinges not to be reconciled not distinguishing as I do Lastly the reason of Faith setleth me upon this ground The reason of Faith I say not the rule of Faith For I do not say that any part of the dispute belongs to that which the salvation of all Christians necessarily requireth them to believe He who understandeth that himself is saved by imbracing Christianity and living according to it I do not understand why he should be damned because he understood not by what meanes the Fathers afore Christ were saved provided he deny not their salvation to the disparagement of Christianity whereof they were the forerunners And this is the case of Hermes and Justine and Clemens and if there were any others who thought that the Fathers or the Philosophers were saved by believing in Christ at his descent into hell meerly because they understood not the ground of that difference between the litterall and mysticall sense of the Old Testament which I have said Indeed in regard it is by consequence destructive to Christianity that the Fathers should have attained salvation any wayes but as Christians in that regard I answer the position is by consequence prejudiciall to Christianity But because by that consequence which the most censorious of the error do not owne and not owning necessarily incurre some other inconvenience to Christianity I say not that they destroy the common faith who hold it but that they destroy the true reason of it which subsisteth not unlesse we grant that the Fathers obtained salvation by Christ Nor that unlesse we grant that they came not under the Devils Power by death who died qualified for salvation as that time required There remaines no question what company the soul of Christ was with for the time that it remained parted from the body nor how the descent thereof to Hell is to be understood supposing the premises The Tradition of the descent of Christs soul into hell can by no meanes be parted from the Tradition of an intent to visite the soules of the Fathers That supposes that the soules of the Fathers were disposed of under the earth whether in the intrails of the earth or in the hemisphere below us as the Heathen did imagine And infers that the intent of it was to redeem them out of the devils hands to go with our Lord Christ into his kingdome Could this be maintained to be the Tradition of the Church I might be straitned by the Tradition of the Church But as I have showed it to be by consequence prejudiciall to the Faith So I have showed that there is no Tradition of the Church for the disposing of all soules before Christ under the earth whether in the devils hands or otherwise Nor for the translating of any soule from under the earth to heaven with Christ and by Christ But for the continuance of all in those unknown lodgings where they are disposed at their death till the day of judgement whether before or after Christ Though the Latine hath no name to signify them but inferi or infernum necessarily signifying as to the originall of the word the parts beneath the earth There is therefore no question to be made as to the Tradition of the Church that the soule of Christ parting with the body went to the soules of the Fathers which the Gospell represents us in Abrahams bosom whether the death of Christ removing the debt of sin which shut Paradise upon Adam make that place known to us by the name of Paradise to which our Lord inducted the good thiefe Or whether the Jewes had used that name for the place to which they believed the soules of the righteous do go But there is therefore no Tradition remaining of the descent of Christs soul into hell to rescue the soules of the Fathers out of the Verge of Hell commonly called Limbus Patrum to go with him into his kingdome True it is which Irenaeus saith and the Tradition of the Church will justify it that our Lord Christ was to undergo the condition of the dead for the redemption of mankind And therefore the separation of his humane soul from the body was really the condition in consideration whereof we are freed from the dominion of death True it is that this dominion of death is signified in the Old Test by the returning of Adam to the earth of which he was made And that the grave is an earnest of the second death in all those that belong not to the N. Test while the Old was in force Therefore that our L. Christ was to undergo the condition common to mankinde to which the first Adam was accursed is a part of our common faith Because the curse was to be voided by his undergoing of it Accordingly therefore you shall find by the
the same effect there is no cause why he should be excused of Idolatry for his paines But withall he cannot be excused of contradicting himselfe as grossely as he that maintaines those Saints or Angels to be that one true God whom he acknowledges not to be that God but his creatures If there be reason to presume that they who acknowledge Saints or Angels their Mediators Intercessors or advocates to God intend to commit Idolatry by contradicting themselves thus grossely there may be reason to thinke that they count them their Mediators Intercessors or Advocates to God to that effect to which Christ alone is our Mediator Intercessor or Advocate But if whosoever is accepted to pray for an other is necessarily by so doing his Mediator Intecessor or Advocate to him with whom he is admitted to deal on his behalfe by his prayers then will it be necessary to limite the worke of mediation to that effect which may be allowed to the intercession of the Saints or Angels for us if we will have them to be to purpose Certainely neither could Iob intercede for his friends nor Samuel for the Israelites nor Abraham for Abimelech or Pharao nor any of Gods Prophets for any that had or were to have recourse to them for that purpose but they must be by so doing Mediators intercessors and Advocates for them with God For neither can the mediation of Saints or Angels nor of any prophet or other that can be persumed to have favour with God be to any effect but that which the termes of that reconciliation which our Lord Christ hath purchased for us doe settle or allow But he that saith the Saints and Angels pray for us saith not that we are to pray to Saints or Angels nor can be say it without Idolatry intending that we are to do that to them which they do to God for us On the other side though that which we doe to them and that which they doe to God be both called praying yet it wil be very difficult for him that really and actually apprehendeth all Saints and Angels to be Gods creatures to render both the same honour though supposing not granting the same Christianity to injoyn both But to come to particulars I will distinguish three sorts of prayers to Saints wheâ—her taught or allowed to be taught in the Church of Rome The first is of those that are made to God but to desire his blessings by and through the merits and intercession of his Saints I cannot give so fit an example as out of the Canon of the Masse which all the Westerne Churches of that communion do now use There it is said communicantes memoriam venerantes omnium Sanctorum tuorum quorum meritis precibusque concedas ut in omnibus protectionis tuae muniamur auxilio Communicating in and reverencing the memory of such and such and of all thy Saints by whose merit and prayer grant that in all things we may be guarded by thy protection and helpe There is also a short prayer for the Priest to say when he comes to the Altar as he findes opportunity Oramus te Domine per merita sanctorum tuorum quorum reliquia hic sunt omnium sanctorum ut indulgere digneris omnia peccata mea We pray thee Lord by the merits of the Saints whose reliques are here and all Saints that thou wouldest vouchsafe to release me all my sins And on the first Sunday in Advent mentioning the Blessed Virgin they pray Vt qui vere eam matrem Dei credimus ejus apud te intercessionibus adjuvemur That we who believe her truely the mother of God may be helped by her intercessions with thee The second is that which their Litanies containe which though I doe not undertake to know how they are used or how they ought to be used by particular Christians that is how far voluntary how far obligatory yet the forme of them is manifest that whereas you have in them sometimes Lord have mercy upon us Christ have mercy upon us Holy Trinity one God have mercy upon us You have much oftner the Blessed Virgine repeated again and againe under a number of her attributes you have also all the Saints and Angels or such as the present occasion pretends for the object of the devotion which a man tenders named and spoken to with Ora pronobis that is Pray for us The blessed virgine some saie with te rogamus audi nos We beseech thee to heare us One thing I must not forget to observe that the prayers which follow those Litanies are almost alwaies of the first kind That is to say addressed directly to God but mentioning the intercession of Saints or Angels for the meanes to obtain our prayers at his hands The third is when they desire immediately of them the same blessings spirituall and temporall which all Christians desire of God There is a Psalter to be seen with the Name of God changed every where into the Name of the blessed Virgine There is a book of devotion in French with this title Moyen de bien seruir prier adorer la Vierge Marie The way well to serve pray to and adore the blessed Virgine There are divers forms of prayer as well as excessive speeches concerning her especially and other Saints quoted in the Answer to the Jesuites Challenge pag. 330-345 Of those then the first kind seems to me utterly agreeable with Christianity importing onely the exercise of that Communion which all members of Gods Church hold with all members of it ordained by God for the meanes to obtaine for one another the Grace which the obedience of our Lord Jesus Christ hath purchased for us without difference whether dead or alive Because we stand assured that they have the same affection for us dead or alive so farre as they know us and our estate and are obliged to desire and esteem their prayers for us as for all the members of Christs mysticall body Neither is it in reason conceivable that all Christians from the beginning should make them the occasion of their devotions as I said out of any consideration but this For as concerning the terme of merit perpetually frequented in these prayers it hath been alwawes maintained by those of the Reformation that it is not used by the Latine Fathers in any other sense then that which they allow Therefore the Canon of the Masse and probably other prayers which are still in use being more ancient then the greatest part of the Latine Fathers there is no reason to make any diffficulty of admitting it in that sense the ground whereof I have maintained in the second Book The third taking them at the foot of the leter and valuing the intent of those that use them by nothing but the words of them are meer Idolatries as desiring of the creature that which God onely gives which is the worship of the creature for the Creator God blessed for evermore And were we bound to make
therefore how shall it appeare to signify here any more then him that pretends to be the Christ For it is evident that Saint John both there and 1 John IV. 3. speakes of his own time As for the Revelation neither is it any where said that it prophesieth any thing of Antichrist nor will it be proved that it saith any thing of the Pope Much of it being a Prophesie hath been expounded to all appearance of something like the Pope though with violence enough All of it without Prophesying what shall come to passe could never be expounded to that purpose and it is not strange that so great a foundation should be laid upon the event of an obscure Scripture such as all Prophesies are to be conjectured by that which we think we see come to passe For I referre to judgement how much more appearance there is that it intendeth the vengeance of God upon the Pagan Empire of Rome for persecuting Christianity both in the Text and composure of the prophesie and in the pretense of tendring and addressing it Nor is there any thing more effectuall to prove the same then the Idolatries which it specifies that the Christians chused rather to lay down their lives then commit True it is no man can warrant that by praying to Saints for the same things that we pray to God for and by the worship of Images Idolatry may not come in at the back door to the Church of Rome which Christianity shuts out at the great Gate But if it do the difference will be visible between that and the Idolatry of Pagans that professe variety of imaginary deities by those circumstances which in the Apocalypse expresly describe the Idolatries of the Heathen Empire of Rome And therefore I am forced utterly to discharge the Church of Rome of this imputation and to resolve that the Pope can no more be Antichrist then he that holds by professing our Lord to be the Christ and to honour him for God as the Christ is honoured by Christians can himself pretend to be the Christ Nay though I sincerely blame the imposing of new articles upon the faith of Christians and that of positions which I maintaine not to be true yet I must and do freely professe that I find no positinecessary to salvation prohibited none destructive to salvtion injoyned to be believed by it And therefore must I necessarily accept it for a true Church as in the Church of England I have alwaies known it accepted seeing there can no question be made that it continueth the same visible body by the succession of Pastors and Lawes the present customes in force being visibly the corruption of those which the Church had from the beginning that first was founded by the Apostles For the Idolatries which I grant to be possible though not necessary to be found in it by the ignorance and carnall affections of particulars not by command of the Church or the Lawes of it I do not admit to destroy the salvation of those who living in the comunion thereof are not guilty of the like There remaines therefore in the present Church of Rome the profession of all that truth which it is necessary to the salvation of all Christians to believe either in point of faith or maners Very much darkned indeed by inhansing of positions either of a doubtful sense or absolutely false to the ranck and degree of matters of Faith But much more overwhelmed and choaked with a deal of rubbish opinions traditions customes and ceremonies allowed indeed but no way injoyned which make that noise in the publick profession and create so much businesse in the practice of Religion among them that it is a thing very difficult for simple Christians to discerne the pearl the seed and the leaven of the Gospel buried in the earth and the dough of popular doctrines and observations so as to imbrace it with that affection of faith and love which the price of it requires But if it be true as I said afore that no man is obliged to commit those Idolatries that are possible to be committed in that communion it will not be impossible for a discerning Christian to passe through that multitude of doctrines and observations the businesse whereof being meerly circumstantiall to Christianity allows not that zeale and affection to be exercised upon the principall as is spent upon the accessory without superstition and will-worship in placing the service of God in the huske and not in the kernell or promising himself the favour of God upon considerations impertinent to Christianity As for the halfe Sacrament the service in an unknown language the barring the people from the Scrptures and other Lawes manifestly intercepting the meanes of salvatian which God hath allowed his people by the Church It seems very reasonable to say that the fault is not the fault of particular Christians who may and perhaps do many times wish that the matter were otherwise But that the Church being a Society concluding all by the act of those who conclude it there is no cause to imagine that God will impute to the guilt and damnation of those who could not help it that which they are sufferes in and not actors Nay t is much to be feared that the authors themselves of such hard Lawes and those who maintaine them will have a strong plea for themselves at the day of judgement in the unreasonablenesse of their adversaries That it is true all reason required that the meanes of salvation provided by God should be ministred by the Church But finding the pretense of Reformation without other ground than that sense of the Scriptures which every man may imagine and therefore without other bounds and measure then that which imagination for which there are no bounds fixeth They thought it necessary so to carry matters as never to acknowledge that the Church ever erred in any decree or Law that it hath made Least the same error might be thought to take place in the substance of Christianity and the Reformation of the Church to consist in the renouncing of it Which we see come to passe in the Heresy of Socinus And that finding the Unity of the Church which they were trusted with absolurely necessary to the maintenance of the common Christianity whereby salvation is possible to be had though more difficult by denying those helps to salvation which such Lawes intercept They thought themselves tied for the good of the whole not to give way to Laws tending so apparently to the salvation of particular Christians On the other side supposing the premises there remaine no pretense that either Congregations or Presbyteries can be Churches as founded meerly upon humane usurpation which is Schisme not upon divine institution which ordereth all Churches to be fit to constitute one Church which is the whole I need not say that there can be no pretense for any authority visibly convayed to them by those which set them up having it in themselves before I