another will by no means excuse neglect of it this were to sin because another sins to despise an Ordinance because another prophanes it when one came without a wedding garment no invited guest for his sake did keep from the wedding Fourthly No one Communicant is bound to examine what all are that are his fellow-Communicants there is neither expresse command for it nor yet reason to evince it each man is bound to see himself arrayed as he ought and not to find fault in others addresses Let a man examine himself and so let him eat though he be to admonish as his brothers visible sin gives him occasion Fifthly The penalty of him that comes unworthily reaches his own self that comes in his unworthinesse and extends no further Legal uncleannesse defiled the man that was personally unclean and not his neighbour so it is here He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself c. Sixthly If one mans sin this way do defile another the sin of one Communicant doth defile all other Communicants then it must be either from the nature of sin thus to defile all in so near Communion or from the nature of the Ordinance thus to be defiled to all when one in defilement comes to it or from some positive precept forbidding all to come when any that is unclean is there I doubt not but this is a sufficient enumeration But 1. It is not of the nature of sin thus to defile all in such communion then it would every where thus defile wheresoever any have society or do accompany together Then the chief Priests had done well to keep out of the Judgment-Hall that they might be clean to keep the Passeover John 18.28 and the Pharisees to wash when they came from Market 2. It is not of the nature of the Ordinance to be thus defiled to all It is not so in other Ordinances Cain's offering defiled not Abels nor did Hophni and Phinehas in their offerings defile Elkanah and Hannah when they offered 3. Nor yet is there any positive precept forbidding a cleansed soul upon the account of the uncleannesse of another to come to this Table Seventhly If one mans presence in this way defile another then it is either his simple presence such a ones being there in his infection or else a willing and witting presence with such a one If simple presence do defile then there is no man that can be secure The closest hypocrite that creeps in unawares would be the undoing of all when Christ said Ye are clean but not all Joh 13.10 according to this opinion it had been a contradiction the uncleannesse of one had been the defilement of all Neither is it willing or witting presence that can in this way defile then it must be in every single mans power to determine him to be such and exclude him thence or else of necessity exclude himself When the Eldership hath judged and received according to the general way of Reformed Churches or the plurality of votes of believers as it is with men of the Congregational way he must make an after-search a further scrutiny he that one judges fit that most judge fit some will judge unworthy and upon that account must shut themselves out of Communion Men of such principles must everlastingly avoid all Church-fellowship or act against their principles and we need not to speak it it is too plainly visible what manner of persons men of such high pretences have in their Congregations There are multitudes of Arguments heaped to nourish this scruple but I shall not further trouble the Reader there is nothing I think can be said but that which here hath been spoke will afford a sufficient answer CHAP. IX The being of Sacraments depends upon their use Another Position yet followes from the words The being of Sacraments depends upon their use they are no Sacraments to those that do not partake of them This is grounded upon this act of Abraham appointed of God and accordingly done by him The being of Sacraments consists in their use He received the sign of Circumcision All that he did was in obedience of the Divine Commandment Gen. 17.11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin and it shall be a token of the Covenant betwixt me and you It was not the foreskin but the foreskin cut off that was the token of the Covenant So also in that of the Passeover Israel had a command from God to take every man a lamb and to eat the flesh rost with fire and unleavened bread and with bitter herbs ye shall eat it Exod. 12.3 8. It is not barely the Lamb but eaten in the way that God prescribed that made the Sacrament In Baptisme the command is Baptize them in the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost It is not water that makes up Baptisme but water applyed to the subject or the subject to the water In the Lords Supper there is bread and wine in their significancy held out not for bare sight but a Command is added Take eat drink ye all of this bread and wine makes not up the Sacrament without breaking giving taking and eating In those Sacraments extraordinary The Sea was no Sacrament but Israels passage through it The Cloud was no Sacrament but Israels guidance by it or the cloud guiding Israel and Israel following after it Neither was the Manna a Sacrament or the rock considered in themselves but the Manna eaten the water of the rock drunk by the Israelites Even the fictious Sacraments of the Church of Rome consist in their use Their Order is no Sacrament where there is none Ordained and Marriage is no Sacrament where none are married Their Chrisme in confirmation oyl in extream unction not applyed are of no use or efficacy This is plain in Reason Arguments to â—vince it First The being of Sacraments depends on their institution Take away their institution and they have no being at all But the institution leads us not barely to an element but prescribes the use not onely to a sign but the application of it not onely to water but to be baptized with water not onely to bread and wine but the eating of bread drinking of wine and the beholding of both Secondly the being of Sacraments depends upon the relation of the sign to the thing signified with the analogy and proportion that is held between them This is plain Take away such relation and the element is a common element and not a Sacrament set aside the consideration of the blood and Spirit of Christ and water is an element for common use to take away the filth of the flesh but for removal neither of the guilt nor filth of sin Take away the consideration of the body and blood of Christ and bread may strengthen nature but not nourish the soul But the relation is not barely in the signs or elements but in their applications to the subject water
known There have been transubstantiations but those were never hidden Moses his rod was turned into a Serpent and it was seen to be a Serpent so that Moses on sight fled from it Exod. 4.3 It was turned again into a rod and known to be a rod vers 4. Christ turnes water into wine Joh. 2.9 that was not judged to be still water or called by that name but by the taste known to be of the most precious wine vers 10. But our senses having thus deceived us and made us believe that there is still bread and wine when by miracle bread and wine is gone where shall we find any Word to ground our faith to believe this delusion The words of the institution or nothing must carry it This is my body this Cup is my blood in the New Testament But such an interpretation 1. Destroyes the outward sign and makes it no Sacrament 2. Makes the speech wholly not Sacramental No Sacramental speech can be proper and we have enough from out adversaries to excuse our faith from the acknowledgement of any such a change If we look no further then three testimonies quoted by learned Mr. Gataker from three Romish Cardinals in his discourse of transubstantiation Pag. 2. 3. Cardinal Bellarmine saith he granteth that these words This is my body may imply either such a real change of the bread as the Catholiques hold or such a figurative change as the Calvinists hold but will not bear that sense that the Lutherans give it And Cardinal Cajetan acknowledgeth and freely confesseth that there appeareth not any thing out of the Gospel that may enforce us to understand those words This is my body properly And he addeth that nothing in the text hindreth but that those words may as well be taken in a metaphorical sense as those words of the Apostle the Rock was Christ and that the words of either proposition may well be true though the thing there spoken be not understood in a proper sense but in a metaphorical sense onely And he further q saith he finds alleadged out of Bishop Fisher whom Bellar. lib. de Scriptor Ecclesiast Pag. 209. makes both a Cardinal and a Martyr that there is not one word in St. Matthewes Gospel from which the true presence of Christs flesh and blood in our Masse may be proved out of Scripture it cannot be proved And being traduced for this quotation by an adversary as taking king it out of a nameless Author ignorant and unsincere in his assertions In his defence of the said discourse Pag. 44. he tells his adversary that his Author whom he thus brands as ignorant and unsincere is Bishop Andrewes in his answer to the Apology of Card. Bellar. against King James his admonitory preface Chap. 1. and I find Musculus in his common places de Coena Domin Pag. 365. quoting the same words out of the same Author and much more to the same purpose He that would be further furnished against this monster of transubstantiation in our own language let him read the fore-mentioned discourse of Mr. Gatakers together with the defence as also Bishop Mortons his Treatise divided into eight parts of the institution of the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ Gods goodnesse seen in his condescension to our weaknesse Thirdly We may see the goodness of God in this way of condescension by earthly things carnal sensible and suitable to our natures to help our understandings and strengthen our faith in things heavenly If we were meer incorporeal substances and had spirits not shut up and imprisoned in bodies then saith Chrysostome we should have had spirituall things in an answerable way nakedly in themselves held out unto us then Parables had not been used nor similitudes borrowed nor Sacramental signs instituted But having souls affixt to bodies that which our spirits should learn these things of earth are imployed of God to teach God looked not at himself when he chose this method It is farre below him to fill up his sacred Oracles with these things but at our imbecillity In case he should speak as God that is in a language answering the Majestie of God we must be as gods to comprehend his words and understand his speech but dealing with us that have bodies made up of earth and minds over eagerly addicted to earth he is pleased in his transactions not to deal if I may so say as God but as with man seeking glory onely in manifestation of his goodness and tender regard of our weakness Christ saw a necessity of this way of dealing not onely as God by his omniscience but as man by his practical experience He taught Nicodemus the nature of regeneration by similitudes borrowed from water and from the wind Except a man be borne of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God The wind bloweth where it listeth and thou hearest the sound thereof but canst not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth So is every one that is born of the Spirit Joh. 3.5 8. Notwithstanding all this endeavour of Christ to cleare this truth Nicodemus still remaines ignorant he answers and saies to Christ How can these things be Christ after a sharp reproof ver 10. Art thou a master in Israel and knowest not these things not onely a Scholar but a Teacher and that not in any place of darknesse but in Israel that valley of vision addes ver 12. If I have told you earthly things and ye beleeve not how shall ye beleeve if I tell you of heavenly things Christ had not read a Lecture to Nicodemus of the water or of the wind neither had Nicodemus questioned either of those assertions The wind bloweth where it listeth thou knowest not whence it comes nor whither it goes that he should on this account charge Nicedemus with not beleeving doctrine of this kind But the meaning is If I speak of regeneration by earthly similitudes and expressions obvious to the senses and you are not able to apprehend and understand them how then if I speak to you of heavenly things in an heavenly manner without any such sensible representation at all would you then understand This interpretation of these words Maldonate doth give notwithstanding Bullinger Decad. 5 Ser. 6. had gone before him in it Ravanellus in his Thesaurus and Mr. Burges in his Ser. 35. pag. 211. give the same In which we see our need of help this way and the singular condescension of Christ Jesus in dealing this way for our help which place in my thoughts serves to cleere that speech of the Evangelist Mar. 4.33 And with many such parables spake he the word unto them as they were able to beare it many are there reckoned up and more by Matthew Matth. 13. many more perhaps were uttered then either Matthew or Mark relate as they were able to bear saith the text according to their capacities say the larger Annotations And so Jansenius upon the words
the Disciples of Christ for discovery of a Disciple in the former sense by their affections to him and suffering of affliction for him are of singular use Christ himself hath gone before us in it But upon the notation of the word because Christ gave the Bread and Cup to Disciples to make the subject of that Sacrament to be onely those that reach these markes is besides the holy Ghosts intention All outward Ordinances are for the Church in fieri and not onely in facto for the bringing of it on to Christ I should desire to know where any outward sensible Ordinance is made or how in reason and according to Scripture it can be made the proper peculiar right of invisible members SECT XI Proposition 9 THe Sacrament of the Supper no more then other Ordinances is not limited to those that have received a new life in Christ by the Spirit that are actually regenerate and in grace The Lords Supper is not limited to those that have received a new life by the Spirit others as they may be admitted without sin so they are in a capacity and possbility to receive benefit from it This I am not ignorant that some will question But let these consider before they censure First That it is an external Ordinance as hath been said Arguments a priviledge of the Church as visible put into the hands of those for edification that are not able to discern men of spiritual life and invisible interest And though there be characteristicall differnces whereby a man in grace and he that is short of it may be distinguished whereby all bad ground at the best may be differenced from that which is good yet they are such whereby a man is to make trial of himself onely they are Spirit-works and none knowes them in any man save the Spirit that is in him and therefore no marks for any others cognizance For a Minister of Christ to dispence by command the Sacrament to many when he knowes that it is of possible use and benefit to some few unto these it is food and nourishment unto life unto the others as Rats-bane Poyson and onely for death is such a snare that may hold him in his administration in all horror and amazement A fad dilemma either to lay aside an Ordinance of Christ and so never come up in his place to the whole of his duty or else to deliver to them that which will inevitably be the ruine and destruction of so many of them I know no possible way that can be supposed or so much as pretended for avoidance but in the Name of Christ to give warning to all in whom this new life by the Spirit is not to abstain every man and woman not actually regenerate on their peril to keep off Let them say some know their danger in the highest terms that can be uttered and then if they come their blood is on their own heads and the Minister of Christ hath by this means delivered his soul But to this I have three things to say 1. That it is as I suppose without all Scripture-precedent to warn men upon account of want of a new life by the Spirit wholly to keep off from this or any other Ordinance of Christ I know we must warn men of their sin and the judgement hanging over their heads for sin in which let it be our prayer that we may be more faithful but that we should warn men upon this account upon this very ground to hold off from all addresse to Ordinances I have not learnt 2. I say this doth presuppose that which is wont to be denyed unregenerate men to be in a capacity to examine themselves respective to this Ordinance How can we warn them upon want of justifying faith and the saving work of repentance to hold back when they are in an incapacity upon trial to find themselves thus wanting 3. Shall we not hereby pluck the thorne out of our own sides and as much as in us lyes thrust it into the sides of many of our hungry thirsty and poor in spirit people How many may we suppose are in grace through a work happily begun on their souls yet for several reasons are not able to see this grace or reach to any discovery of it Sometimes by reason of the infancy of the work upon their hearts being yet babes or rather embryo's in grace The first that appears upon light received is an army of lusts and potent corruptions as we know Paul sets it out This cloudes for present any other weak work that as yet in present is wrought In this time Satan is not wanting he did not shew so much artifice before to lessen their sin but he now makes use of as much to aggravate it and as he was industrious before to seduce now he is as busie to accuse He led the incestuous man to incontinency 1 Cor. 7.4 And we know Paul feares least upon continuance of the Church-censure he would gain advantage to swallow him up in overmuch sorrow 2 Cor. 2.8 11. These perhaps as yet are not able to give an account of the nature of faith and repentance or their genuine fruits much lesse are they able by a reflex act to conclude the truth of them in their souls Sometimes by reason of some sharpe conflict of temptation being under the shock and assault of it and therefore whatsoever they have seen of grace heretofore or the favour of God now it is under a cloud which I believe was Pauls case when a messenger of Satan was sent to buffet him and a thorne in the flesh given him seeing it is put in opposition to the abundance of revelations that he had being taken up into the third heavens 2 Cor. 12. and therefore had need of Ordinances for support Sometimes on a soyle received by temptation of which his own heart and not the Church is witnesse and therefore is at a losse of the joy of his salvation and stands in need of strength for recovery Sometimes by over-much sloath and rust contracted on his graces through negligence which is supposed to be the case of the spouse indulging her self too much in carnal ease Cant. 5.2 I have put off my coat how shall I put it on I have washed my feet how shall I defile them Sometimes God out of prerogative withdrawing the rayes of his Spirit and refusing to testifie with our spirits in which case the soul that is most upright with God and sincere in his feare walks in darknesse and sees no light in which there is need of all communications from God and attendance upon him in Ordinances When these shall hear all in whom the work of grace is not in truth thus warned to keep back and told of the high danger of approaching to this Table in such away aggravated will not they put in their name and say their souls are now spoke to They must therefore absent themselves and so the smoaking flax is quenched
heart so in the Sacrament he preacheth to the eye and by the eye conveyeth himself into the heart And therefore it is well called a visible Sermon What can be more plain then this to set the out the power of the Sacrament to soul contrition true humiliation and mortification Too many that professe Faith have their hearts lift up and live not by faith Here is a way to bring them down when they see sin to be of such a provoking nature that onely the sufferings of the Sonne of God are able to satisfie that their demerit doth put him upon a necessity of all these woes These are certainly heart melting considerations If it be yet objected that the Provincial Assembly at London speak to their own communicants whom they suppose to be in grace To this I reply that in case that should fail and some at least should have their predominant lusts lurking and treachery against the Covenant as in Judas against Christ harboured it can be of no danger to say that here is a means to work them on to humiliation and brokennesse of spirit 2. If any yet say that their thoughts are otherwise of this Sacrament I answer their words best speak their thoughts and we see what they say The very breaking of the bread say they understandingly looked upon is a forcible Argument to break your hearts and the breaking of the bread may be looked upon understandingly by an unsanctified man if there be truth in their Propositions as I doubt not but they are most true then my Conclusion is true likewise We may make up if you please this part of the Argument thus A sin aggravating ordinance is an heart breaking and soul humbling ordinance But the Sacrament of the Lords supper is a sinne aggravating ordinance Therefore it is an heart breaking and soul humbling ordinance For the other branch of the Assumption that this ordinance is the holding out of the pardon of sin needs no proof This is my blood in the New Testament shed for you and for many for the remission of sinne Matth. 26. Fifthly That which is annext to the Word to second it in that very thing which works the soul unto conversion to good may bring the person of Covenant interest up to the termes of the Covenant may work one of profession of faith onely unto faith saving and justifying This none can deny being added to the Word as it 's second in such a work it well may have an hand in the working of it But the Sacrament is annext to the Word to second it in that very thing which works the soul unto conversion to God The Assumption is manifest If we consider what the Word does for conversion and the whole in which the energy and power of it as an Ordinance is exercised then we shall soon see that this Sacrament is added as a second in that work The Word converts in holding out sin in its defilements and danger in the discovery of the loathsome nature of it and the cursed effects that follow upon it together with Christ in the promises to save from it I know no other way that the Word hath to bring a soul in sin to God but in setting forth the lost and undone condition of it and so to bring to conviction compunction and enquiry what to do and then to make tender of Christ In this method souls as we find on record have been brought home to God of which there might be frequent instances Now that this Sacrament is added to the Word for further discovery of sin in the defilement and danger to hold out Christ in his death taking away sin need not to be proved It is true that the first detection of sin is by the rule of the Law and therefore the Apostle sayes By the Law is the knowledge of sin In case the question be put whether this or that act be sin then neither the tender of Christ in the Gospel nor yet the Sacrament can have any hand in the determination of it but they both serve for the aggravation of sin to lay it open in the dimensions and danger of it Sin is no where so seen in its height as in the sorrowes and sufferings of Christ as is by all affirmed and these sufferings we know the Word holds out for conversion from sin And the visible Word of the Sacrament seconds the Word in this very thing to set out Christs death to lay before our eyes Christ broken for us both for the aggravation of sin and for the pardon of it Thus if you please you may put the argument If the Sacrament doth the same thing as the Word doth in conversion then the Sacrament cannot be denyed to have an hand in conversion But the Sacrament as we see does the same thing as the Word it serves to the heightning of sin and the setting out of the pardon of sin Therefore it followes that the Sacrament may have an hand in conversion Sixthly That which by frequent experience we see the Sacrament works toward and for ought we are able to judge works unto that we may well conclude it is designed and appointed of God to work This cannot fairly be denyed yet if any think that this of it self is not of full strength seeing our experience may deceive us we may conceive what is not Let these then joyn to it what hath been already said This experience added to so much evidence of reason I doubt not but will be found to have strength in it And I put it for their sakes that say Let any give instance of any man or woman that hath at any time been converted by the Sacrament And that there are frequent experiences of the Sacraments working towards this thing is plain How frequent is it with men to have affrightings soul-shakings tremblings strong present resolutions against sin upon their approach to this Ordinance being convinced of it to be a duty that they ought to go to it How mightily are their spirits often affected in it If we make that an argument of the power of the Word towards wicked men in the affrighting and astonishment of them in the terrifying and amazement stopping for present their full swinge in sin and wickednesse as we know it is ordinarily with those that set out the power of the Word see Dr. Reynolds on Psal 110. pag. 150. why then should we not make the same effects that we see ordinarily produced by the Sacrament to be evidences of the like power in the Sacrament And as we read of an Ahab a Felix a Zedekiah an Herod thus startled by the Word so we may see and know such as these alike startled and affected at the Sacrament Superstition perhaps works it in some But we find the work in others in whom such superstition hath no place It can be no other then the Majestie of the Ordinance the high aggravation of sin and the glory of Christ set out in it All this
beares no relation to the cleansing of sin but washing with water and bread and wine no relation to the setting forth of the Lords death remembrance of him or life by him but the breaking eating and drinking Thirdly That which being removed nulls a Sacrament that is necessary to the being of Sacraments This is plain Nothing can destroy being but the want of that which is necessary to being But the removal or taking away of the use nulls and destroyes the bring of Sacraments Let not the foreskin be cut off nor the Lamb rosted and eaten the water not be applyed to the person nor bread and wine eaten and drunken there is no Sacrament therefore the use of Sacraments gives being to them Fourthly All benefit of and in the thing signified consists in the application therefore the Sacraments for their being use and benefit consist in their application likewise The consequence is grounded upon the analogy that is between the sign and the thing signified The antecedent is clear the blood of Christ the sufferings of Christ not brought home to the soul and interest obtained by application doth not benefit or profit Fifthly That which enters the definition of a Sacrament is of the being of it This none can deny But the use or office of a Sacrament enters the definition of it Ergo. The Apostle defines it to be a sign and seal which plainly speaks not the nature but the use of Sacramental elements Here is no Conroversie in this thing among parties save with the Church of Rome neither is there any with them save in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper They confesse that the being of Baptisme doth so consist in the use that without it it is no Sacrament Onely the Lords Supper for Transubstantiations sake though never used is still a Sacrament when they reserve it in a box carry it about for pomp hold it up for worship it is still a Sacrament The body of Christ is still there and if a mouse falls upon it the mouse receives a Sacrament knawes upon Christs flesh But when worms breed in it as they may by their own confession they are hard put to it They cannot breed upon accidents the shape the colour of bread cannot give being to worms And to say that the substance which remains there which is the flesh of Christ breeds them is no low blasphemy The generation of one is the corruption of another and God will not suffer his holy One to see corruption I remember an answer to this great difficulty when I first read Philosophy out of Conimbricenses Physicks That learned Society did determine that God by miracle did create matter and laid it by the consecrate host and that did putrifie and not the consecrated bread and so Worms were generated They sure believe that it is an easie thing to put God upon miracles Against this permanency of this Sacrament out of the use of it we say First If the use of this be instituted The Sacrament of the Lords Supper equally transient with Baptisme as well as the use of Baptisme and given in command then this Sacrament consists in the use as well as Baptisme This cannot be denyed for the institution and Comman of Christ must equally lead us in both But in the Lords Supper as well as in Baptisme the use is within the institution and given in Command by Christ Therefore this Sacrament of the Lords Supper consists in the use as well as that of Baptisme Whereas Bellarmine replyes to this that Christ commanded the bread to be eaten but not presently after consecration therefore to delay eating is not against the institution To this we answer 1. Neither did he command water as soon as set apart for Baptisme to be applyed to the party to be baptized yet till it be applyed the party is not baptized water is no Sacrament and so the bread and wine in that interim still applyed still wants the nature of a Sacrament 2. He did command it then to be eaten by Bellarmin's confession though not instantly to be eaten and he gave the like command of the cup as of the bread yea with more exactnesse a note of universality added Drink ye all of it yet their Laity have a Sacrament and never drink of it 3. That which the Apostles did that Christ enjoyned as Amesius well replyes they understood Christs intimation as well as the most nimble-headed Jesuites but they did not reserve it but did eat it Secondly If there be no footsteps in all the holy Scriptures of any other way of dealing with the elements of the Lords Supper then the eating and drinking of them then according to the institution they must be eaten and drunken But there is no footstep there of any other dealing with the Sacrament then eating and drinking Therefore according to the institution it is not to be reserved but to be eaten and drunk Indeed Chamier quotes Croquet replying that some of the Ancient have said that Judas took one part of the Sacrament and reserved the other for scorn but this may be well reckoned among others of like nature in their Legends And I would advise all those that believe it if they be ambitious to be disciples of Judas to follow it Thirdly The promise in this Sacrament is not to be divided from the precept by any that will expect a blessing But where the promise is This is my body this is my blood in the New Testament in the institution There is a precept Take eat Drinke ye all of this therefore they must eat and drink that will have benefit in the promise It would little I suppose please the Reader to hear Bellarmine Suarez and other Jesuits to exempt this Sacrament from the common nature of Sacraments and to make it permanent when the other as they speak are transeunt Thomas Aquinas Part 3. Quaest 73. art 1. resp ad 3. makes this difference between the Eucharist and other Sacraments This Sacrament is perfected saith he in the consecration of the matter other Sacraments are perfected in the application of the matter to the person to be sanctified Suarez disp 42. Sect. 4. quotes it with approbation and Scotus in quanto Dist 8. quaest 1. as he is quoted by Amesius All the Sacraments except the Eucharist consist in their use so that in them the Sacrament and the receiving of the Sacrament is the same He that pleases may read Bellar. Arguments lib. 4. de Eucharistia Cap. 2 3 4. Suarez in the place named with Whitakers Amesius Vorstius in 3. Tom. Bellar. Thes 9. pag. 406. Chamier against them both with others of that party de Eucharistia lib. 7. cap. 4 c. I shall desire to take up the Reader with that which I judge more necessary Gerard in his Common places Cap. 4. de Sacramentis makes it his businesse to find out the Genus in the definition of a Sacrament in which the general form of Sacraments he sayes is to be
condescend to our weaknesse to answer what infirmity can expect or feeblenesse crave We might think that Gideon was exceeding bold with God to ask a double sign for the strengthening of his faith in the promise of God to save Israel by his hand yet we see God is pleased to gratify him Judg 6.39 40. yet God deales more abundantly with us not onely in a double but a multiplied confirmation to make good every truth which he hath been pleased to manifest And as he teacheth us by similitudes drawn from earthly things as we see in the Prophets and parables from our Saviours mouth so also to speak to our eyes in these signes and seales ratifying and confirming heavenly things unto us Those great mercies which no thought can reach are set out in so obvious a way that every eye doth behold and see That water which we employ for our common use and among other necessary services cleanses all filth that cleaves to us serves to set out that great mystery of the blood and Spirit of Christ taking away both guilt and filth of sin The bread which we have at our table the wine which we drink for our food and repast that sets out both the attonement and divine nourishment which our soules find in the flesh and blood of Christ crucified and dying for us There is abundant weaknesse and tottering in our faith that needs in this manner to be strengthened Abundance of sweet mercies in our God that will vouchsafe this to strengthen and support us Secondly If Christ thus condescends to our weaknesse Christs compassion towards us should move us to compassionate our selves in making provision of these helps let us learn to have compassion of our selves and not neglect or despise so great favours If Christ had judged us to have been of strength he had never tendred us this crutch and when he sees that we need it and therefore hath provided it let us see that we do not reject or despise it Is it not to imitate Ahaz in his obstinacy who when he could not believe the promise that God would deliver him and his people from the combined power of Israel and Syria that were then before Jerusalem and having a sign tendred him of God either in the depth beneath or the height above for his assurance in the thing he answers he will not desire a sign Isa 7.11 12. he will rather dwell in his unbelief and perish As that sign was to that promise so all Sacraments are to Gods great promise He that casts away Sacraments indulges unbelief and we may well fear that he shall dwell in it to destruction CHAP. XI SECT I. The whole of the work of Sacraments is by way of sign and seal THe next observation followes The whole office and use of Sacraments All that the Sacraments work on the soules of receivers is by way of sign and seal They have no immediate effects for the working of any inward graces or priviledges but as our understanding is exercised by them as Indicative signes and our faith as ratifications and seales of the promises The text that we have under our hand is abundantly full to his purpose Scarce any text holds out a truth I may say more clear and full then this text doth that which is here delivered if we take in the context with it The Context opened to which the copulative And leads The Apostle having in the former Chapter delivered the doctrine of justification by faith goes on here to make it good by the Example of Abraham and his argument rendred in syllogistical form appears to be this As Abraham the father of the faithful was justified so must all the faithful This is taken for granted as needing no proof But Abraham the father of the faithful was justified not by works but by faith The Assumption consists of two parts and the Apostle proves both 1. The negative that he was not justified by works this he proves by two arguments 1. If he were justified by works then he hath whereof to glory ver 2. But he hath not whereof to glory before God Ergo he was not justified by works 2. If he were justified by works the reward were reckoned not of grace but of debt ver 4. But the reward is not of debt but of grace Ergo. Which he further confirmes by the testimony of David describing the blessednesse of man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works saying Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sinnes are covered Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin ver 7 8. As David describes blessednesse that way man is blessed But David describes it to be by imputation of righteousnesse and not by works Ergo. The affirmative that Abraham was justified by faith he proves by a full testimony of Scripture Gen. 15.6 He believed in the Lord and he counted it to for him for righteousnesse Now it might be objected that this justification of Abraham and blessednesse that David speaks of was nothing to the Gentiles uncircumcised but to the Jewes in the state of Circumcision and so Circumcision may yet have an hand in justitification This the Apostle denies ver 10. and proves the contrary by the time of Abrahams justification which was in uncircumcision not in Circumcision If Abraham were justified in uncircumcision then Circumcision hath no hand in justification But Abraham was justified in uncircumcision Ergo But then the greatest question is to what end or purpose he was circumcised having already that righteousnesse which doth justify what needs more Circumcision then might have been let alone The Apostle answers that he was circumcised on a twofold account for a double reason The first is in reference to his own estate in faith which equally concerns all in his state of believing He received the sign of Circumcision a seal of the faith which he had being yet uncircumcised The second in reference to the whole Church that he might be the Father of all that believe in Circumcision or in uncircumcision so that we have both the Apostles authority and his argumentative discourse for confirmation of our point That the work and efficacy of Sacraments is by way of sign and seal We shall find Peter giving his vote with Paul in this thing where he enters a dispute about Baptisme as Paul here doth about Circumcision as you may find 1 Pet. 3.20 21. having mentioned Gods long suffering towards disobedient ones in the daies of Noah while the Ark was a preparing he saies Few that is eight soules were saved by water That element which as an executioner of divine vengeance destroyed the world of the ungodly as an instrument in the hand of God preserved Noah and his family It destroyed the world by overwhelming of them as after it did Pharaoh and his host It saved Noah and his household by keeping the Ark above trees rocks mountaines buildings or whatsoever might have been
afterwards perish through unbelief and impenitence Therefore faith charity and other Spiritual qualities wrought by the Spirit in the regenerate are sometimes lost And having delivered himself thus in the negative that Baptisme works not these graces or habits in infants His first proposition in the affirmative tending to shew what Baptisme does work is w Omnes infantes baptizati ab Originalis peccati reatu absolvuntur That all baptized infants are acquitted from the guilt of original sin for which opinion many Fathers and Schoolmen are quoted by him as they were for the former So that I think the first part of my position is fully made good that the most eminent that ever have appeared for this power of Sacraments to conferre grace on the receivers either utterly deny or else doubtfully hold that Baptisme works any real change in infants but onely that which is relative and that it conferres not habits but onely priviledges on Infants baptized For the other part of the position that the Scriptures which these bring for proof of this power of Baptisme almost all speak of such a change that is real not relative of habits and not of priviledges The proof is easy What those Scriptures are which by them are produced in this Controversy may be seen in the former position and that almost all of them speak of a real change not barely that which is relative is evident The alone Old Testament text that I can find is Deut. 30.6 with Jer. 9.25 where circumcision of the heart is mentioned which texts as they can hardly be interpreted to speak at all of the Sacrament of Circumcision in the outward rite so it is certain that a real change is spoken to by Moses in Deuteronomy and by the Prophet also complained of to be wanting Reverend Dr. Ward yields that Spiritual Circumcision of the heart is there meant but he saith that by this Spiritual Circumcision the remission of original guilt is understood To which x Cordis circumcisione peccatorum remissionem denotari ut credam nihil adhuc quod suadeat video quod cogat multo minus Certe si quis verba illa Deut. 10.16 Circumcidite ergo praeputium cordis vestri aut illâ—d etiam Jer. 44. Circumcidimini sive circumcidite vos Jehovae exposuerit Remittite vobis peccata vestra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pute 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mr. Gataker replies that he sees nothing that can perswade much lesse force him to believe any such thing Adding that If any should expound Deut. 10.16 Circumcise the forskin of your heart or Jer. 44. Circumcise your selves to the Lord to be as much as forgive your own sins it would be thought strange Disceptatio pag. 147. yea he makes the contrary plainly to appear As for those texts Titus 3.5 1 Corinthians 6.11 Ephesians 5.25 26. they speak all to the same thing In every one of them a real habitual change is mentioned Acts 2.38 Remission of sinnes is indeed mentioned and very probably Acts. 22.16 But in what sense to be understood I have shewed in the last place so that I think there is so much yielded and so little proved by the eminent advocates in this cause that according to Scripture there is any such causality in Baptisme for the pardon of sinne in every Infant that is presented to that ordinance and received that even upon this account it is justly to be susspected Besides that the blood of Christ and his Spirit are not onely distinguished by them but divided The vertue of his blood is ascribed to those that have no portion in his Spirit as though that Christ came both by water and blood unto some and by blood onely unto others SECT III. Objections against the former doctrine Obj. 1 HEre it is objected Where the blood of Christ on Gods part is offered and applyed for pardon of the guilt of sin and no impediment put on his part that receives it there the guilt of sin is remitted But in the Baptism of Infants the blood of Christ on Gods part is offered and applyed and no impediment put by him that receives it Ergo in the Baptisme of Infants the guilt of sin is remitted Answ 1 Answ 1. This Argument will hold with equal strength for proof of that which these deny as for that which they would assert Where the Spirit of Christ is offered on Gods part and applyed for regeneration and true sanctification and no impediment put by him that doth receive it there regeneration sanctification and all other gracious habits are wrought But in the Baptisme of Infants the Spirit of Christ is thus offered and applyed and no impediment is put Ergo. The Major in this syllogisme can be no more denyed then in the former The Spirit of Christ is as efficacious for regeneration as his blood for pardon It were over-much boldnesse to put any difference between them And for the Assumption none can deny but the Spirit is as well applyed in Baptisme as blood either then both must hold or both must be denyed 2. I utterly deny that the blood and Spirit of Christ that either Answ 2 blood or Spirit are thus applyed in Baptisme In case of such application they would produce their effects above and against all resistance there is no vain application of either of these to any person If the Spirit of Christ had been in Baptisme applyed to Simon Magus it would so have seazed upon him and wrought in him that Peter would not have addressed himself to him in that language which he heard from him and so I may say of the blood of Christ such an application of it to his soul would have had that effect that Peter would have said to him in the words of the Seraphim to Isaiah when he had applyed the coal from the Altar to his mouth Thine iniquity is taken away and thy sin is purged and not as he did that thou art in the gall of bitternesse and the bond of iniquity The blood of Christ upon the soul of an Infant or man of years must needs be as efficacious as a coal from the Altar on Isaiah's lips Universal redemption we know is asserted by these Authors though it be with such limits as not to close with Arminians but to remain their opposite If now there be not onely impetration of the merit of Christ but also application in that latitude as Baptisme is administred I know nothing that can stand in the way of salvation of all those that are baptized He that would see the consent of modern Writers of the most eminent note in the denyal of this proposition let him consult learned Mr. Gataker Discep pap 6 c. whereby his industrious pains after his manner many are multiplied Danaeus leads the way He is deceived saith he that thinks that Christ and his benefits are applyed by the sign of water which is onely the seal of such application 3. According to these principles laid by these
worthily be rank'd in the first place amongst those that you thus honour As soon as he enters upon the dispute of justifying faith in answer to Bellarmines first question What that faith is that is required to justification he sayes in the name of Protestants (a) Hoc ipsum vel imperitè vel sophistice in quaestionem vocatur Nam 1. Multa ad justificationem requiruntur quae non justificant 2. Non tam quaeritur quae aut quid fides quae justificat quam quae sit ratio quâ propriè dicitur justificare This is either unskilfully or sophistically put to the question giving in his reasons 1. Saith he There are many things required to justification which do not justifie 2. It is not so much enquir'd into what that faith is which do's justifie as in what notion it is that it is said to justifie And giving answer to farther words of Bellarmine he saith in the same page that (b) Observandum est nos non restringere fidem illam quae justificat sed tantum quà justificat ad promissionem misericordiae Arguments evincing that faith in the blood of Christ only justifies Protestants do not restrain the faith which justifies but faith as it justifies to the promise of mercy Much more may be seen in this Author in his next Chapter Sect. 1. Sect. 8. which I leave to the Reader to consult at pleasure And together with it that which may be seen largely in Chemnitius enquiring into the proper object of justifying faith in his Examen Concil Trident mihi pag. 159. under this head Quid verè propriè sit fides justificans quo sensu scriptura velit intelligi quando pronunciat impium fide justificari I shall here take the boldness to give in my arguments to make good that faith in Christ quà Lord doth not justifie 1. That which the types under the Law appointed for attonement and expiation lead us unto in Christ our faith must eye for attonement expiation and reconciliation This cannot be denied These Levitical types lead us doubtless to a right object being School-masters to lead us unto Christ and shaddows whereof he is the substance As also to that office in him who is the object of faith that serves for this work But these types lead us unto Christ in his Priestly office for the most part as Sacrificing sometimes as interceding John 1.29 2 Cor. 5.21 1 Pet. 1.18 A great part of the Epistle to the Hebrews is a proof of it 2. That which the Sacraments under the Gospel setting forth Christ for pardon of sin lead us unto That our faith must eye for Reconciliation Pardon and Justification This is clear Christ in his own instituted ordinances will not misguide us But these lead us to Christ suffering dying for the pardon of sin Mat. 26.28 This is my blood in the new Testament shed for you and for many for the remission of sins Here is a confirmation of both these arguments in one The types of the Law and the Sacrament of the Lords Supper lead both of them to his blood for this reason of attonement and forgiveness There was an old Testament enjoyn'd of God in which the people in convenant were sprinkled with blood Exod. 24.1 c. commented upon by the Apostle Heb. 9.20 c. That blood and this cup lead to Christs blood for forgiveness and in them the death of Christ is remembred A broken bleeding dying Christ in the Lords Supper is received 3. As the Spirit of God guides faith so it must go to Christ for propitiation and attonement This needs no proof The Holy Ghost is the best leader But the Holy Ghost guides our faith to go to the blood of Christ for attonement whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood Ro. 3.25 It is blood is our propitiatory or mercy seat We are justified by his blood Rom. 5.9 And faith is our way of interest and thither the Spirit of God by the Apostle leads our faith as we see in the words mentioned I am checkt indeed by you because I say through faith in his blood not faith in his command quo jure nescio say you My reason or warranty is because I durst not adde to the Apostles directory when he leads us one way I dare look no other If he had intended to have led us to Christ as a propitiation without further direction under what notion our faith should have look'd upon him It had been enough to have said that he is our propitiation but distinctly pointing out his blood and faith in his blood I think I have warrant sufficient to lead souls hither and only hither especially seeing I find him still in the same language Rom. 5.8 9. God commendeth his love towards us in that while we were yet sinners Christ dyed for us much more then being now justified by his blood we shall be saved from wrath through him In whom we have redemption through his blood even the forgiveness of our sins Ephes 1.7 The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin 1 John 1.7 For as much as ye know that we were redeemed with the precious blood of Christ as a Lamb without blemish You demand Will you exclude his obedience resurrection intercession To which I only say I marvail at the question If I exclude these I shall exclude his blood His shedding of blood was in obedience John 10.18 Phil. 2.8 His resurrection was his freedom from the bonds of death and an evidence of our discharge by blood His intercession is founded on his blood He intercedes not as we by bare petition but merit He presents his blood as our high Priest in the holy of holies You tell me further that the thing I had to prove was not the exclusion of faith in his commands but of faith in Christ as Lord and teacher I can no more distinguish Lord and command then I can blood and sacrifice it being the office of a Lord to rule as of blood to make attonement You yet tell me It was fittest for Paul to say by faith in his blood because he intends to connote both what we are justified by ex parte Christi and what we are justified by ex parte nostri but the former principally To this I say If this were fittest for Paul then it is unfit for any to come in with animadversions and tell us of any other thing either ex parte Christi or ex parte nostri for justification I pray you rest here and we are well agreed Here is Christs Priestly office on his part alone and I am resolved to look no further 4. Our faith must look upon Christ so as to obtain righteousness by him by vertue of which we may appear before God as righteous But it is by his obedience as a Servant that we obtain righteousness and stand before the Lord as righteous Rom. 15.19 By the obedience of
to tell him that the Religion of the Calvinists was most near to that of Mahomet And having ended his request the said Bashaw answered I see that you Calvinists and we are like to be shortly one Save only that leaving the drinking of water to us you willl keep your selves to wine and be drunk with it Charges of this nature Lutherans and Calvinists were wont still to hear but divine providence through grace hath so ordered that these Calumnies as with a beam of the Sun have been dispelled The holy lives of those that appeared for this doctrine hath been an abundant reall comfutation Not to look beyond the seas where we might be furnished with severall instances let Jewel Grindall Pilkington Raynolds Fulk Whitaker Perkins Fox Greenewood Dod Hilderson Pemble Ball and many others with their Followers witnesse In so much that by degrees shame hath caused them to forbear this Language And as for those who of latter times have receded from this doctrine of this supposed danger as Mountague and his followers as may be seen in his Gagg and Appeal whether their lives and zeal for the Gospel did at all outstrip those already mentioned whose supposed errors in doctrine they went about to correct I leave to all of impartiall judgement to witness How great a trouble is it then to have this by a man of your name and reputation now revived For that experience of yours of which we have already heard and you further enlarge The assertion that faith in Christ's blood is the only justifying act acquit from danger in your affirming that you never met with the most rebellious wretch except now and then one under terrors but when they have sinn'd their worst they still think to be saved because they believe and what is their believing why they believe that Christ died for them and therefore God will forgive them and they trust for pardon and salvation from Christ's death and Gods mercy To this I answer Though I do not in any other thing appear in competition with you yet here I may say my experience hath been of a longer standing then yours yet I can say it answers not that which you here mention When I have to deal with such that you name if they look out of themselves at all it is usually to Gods mercy He is say they a mercifull God and at what time soever a sinner repenteth from the bottom of his heart he is ready to receive and so relying on Gods mercy they will take their time for their return Which is answered also as is evident in the experience of others Read Practical Treatises and publish'd Sermons and see whether this plea be not commonly spoken to Ordinarily their answer is that their good doings their Prayers and Repentance must save them Few comparatively will have Christ in their mouths till he be put into their heads And if they hit upon faith as sometimes they will they yet know not how to terminate it on Christ's blood It is only a good belief that God will not deal so with them Such a faith the Plain mans path-way to heaven out of much experience of such mens answers doth notably decipher It is a rare thing to meet with one that will argue as you would put it into their mouths viz. He that hath the only justifying act of faith is justified But that have I For I accept of Christ to forgive and justifie me by his blood Therefore I am justified But in case any shall thus reason you say you are not able to answer and I shall not presume to be your teacher But me thinks you might deign to learn of Mr. Gataker and tell such a disputant that it is not every thing that bears the name of faith that is an acceptation of Christ to justification You may acquaint him that there is a true and sincere faith and that there is a false and counterfeit faith and that it is not enough for justification to say that a man hath faith but soundly and sincerely to believe If he say that his faith is not dissembled but sincere put him upon that which Mr. Gataker sayes is Saint James his way of tryall If he will have faith to justifie his person let works then justifie his faith There is life in that faith that takes Christ's blood for justification and that faith that hath life to take hath life also to work Where a receiving or taking faith is there Christ is and where Christ is the soul can do all things through Christ that strengthens So thaâ— if the man be such as you speak his faith is cast at the first sight and evidenced to be no better then counterfeit and is no medium to justification He may talk that Christ is his but it is clear that it is on a crackt title and his faith being no better then you say had he all the Logick in the world here he must be non pluss'd And here I would willingly learn how you will convince such a man of whom you here speak upon your own principles If he shall argue He that hath the onely justifying act of faith is justified but that have I for I take Christ as my Saviour and Soveraign Lord Ergo. Seeing there are many that profess to take Christ for a Lord as well as a Saviour that must never enter into the kingdome of heaven Mat. 7.21 If they do not spit at Christ and defie him they perswade themselves that they serve him A service of Jesus Christ with their own most favourable and easie comment upon it they doubt not will save them And I know no viler persons in the world then those that say that they love and serve Christ with all their heart and that their good works and serving of God must keep them from hell and damnation As I once heard a man stark drunk on a Lords-day profess that fall back fall edge he would never leave serving God whilst he lived These if they may be believed have as good an heart to God as he that is most precise in all the world And if they be wanting in that acuteness of Logick that you before mention they may be wel holpen out of your principles which they may find anon thus to reason He that fals short of the precepts of the Law and requisites in the Gospel may yet be justified and saved if he answers to the conditions of the Gospel-covenant But thus do I although I come not is to the precepts of the Law not to what is required in the Gospel yet I answer to the conditions of it for according to you these come short both of the commands of the Law and the precepts of the Gospell Though they do not all that is commanded them neither in Law nor Gospell yet they hope they do that which will save them They have their faults they confess and who say they is free Few dayes pass over their heads but they say God
oppose it to works and not to other sects giving clear instances 2. They object That in the use of this particle sole the Fathers exclude all works going before Faith and Regeneration and denying only that the works of Infidels and unregenerate do justifie This Rule Franc. à Sanctae â— Clara doth produce out of Casalius but plainely enough signifies that it will not satisfie This Chemnitius also overthrowes by severall cleare testimonies out Origen and Ambrose 3. They object That by the particle sole the Fathers do exclude ceremoniall works and not all works which indeed is unworthy of answere the Law of Ceremonies being antiquated before their daies 4. Seeing none of these will hold Franc. à Sancta Clara produceth another Rule out of Aquinas Quando aliquod commune multis tribuitur specialiter alicui illud provenit aut quia in illo excellentissimè reperitur aut quia primò reperitur in Quaest de veritate Quaest 14. artic 5. ad 12. When any thing that is common to many is attributed specially to one that comes to passe either because it is most eminent or because it is first in it which Rule might serve with some reason as applyed to this purpose for answer both to Scripture-texts and testimonies of Fathers in case they only said that we are Justified by Faith But when the Scripture doth not barely give it to Faith but denies it to works and the Fathers do not only say that Faith Justifies but that Faith only Justifies and particularly exclude works this Rule therefore can do nothing here So that I conclude that Faith hath its office in Justification which other graces have not which is not by you denied And that this office is ascribed to Faith in words implying an instrumentality as in Scriptures so in the Fathers an no other office peculiar can be found for it according to your Confession therefore according to Scriptures and Fathers it Justifies as an instrument Before I go off this head let me mind you of that of Dr. Prideaux which you may find Lect. 5. de Justific Pag. 146. * Arminio minimè placuit ait ejus inter pres Corvinus quod fides dicitur instrumentalis Justificationis nostrae causa Bonâ igitur fide dic Armini pro tuo acumine qua ratione fides Justificat It did not saith he please Arminius as his interpreter Corvinus says that Faith should be called the instrumentall cause of our Justification Whereupon he addresses himself to him Tell us in good earnest O Arminius how it Justifies May not I put the same question to you He speaks for Arminius oâ—t of an Epistle of his to Hippolitus à Collibus the Palsgrave's Ambassadour The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 credere hoe est actum fidei dicit imputari in justitiam idque proprio sensu non Metonymicè quatenus objectum apprehendit in Ep. ad Hippolitum à Collibus principis Palatini legatum i. e. the act of Faith is imputed for Righteousnesse and that in a proper not a Metonymicall sense as it apprehends the object which he there refutes But it will not serve you to answer thus For with you works justifie and yet you confesse that Faith hath its peculiar way and prerogative which agrees not to works in Justification We must either then yeeld that it Justifies as an instrument or shut it quite out from the office of Justification or plainely confesse we know not what office it hath in this work notwithstanding Scripture speaks so much of it and still in those words which in mens common Language denote an instrument The second That Faith in Christ quâ Lord is not the Justifying act is with you as the former a notorious novelty and comes within the same Challenge And if the Contention be alone about the termes in case it be yeelded what would you be advantaged Seeing I doubt not but we may say that it was never in Terminis by the Ancients put to the question and so you in affirming that Faith in Christ quâ Lord is the Justifying act are in as notorious a novelty as we on the other hand in denying it you can no more find the one in the Ancients then your adversaries can find the other But if the question be about the thing it self I doubt not but many testimonies may be easily produced In order to which the state of the question as it is laid down between Protestants and their adversaries is to be looked into which is Whether the whole word of God be the object of Justifying Faith or the speciall promises of mercy in Christ Thus Bellarmine states it Lib. 1. de Justificatione cap. 4. and saith that the Heretiques restrain it to the promise of speciall mercy but Catholiques will have the object of Faith to be as large as the whole word of God Here Protestants yield somewhat to Bellarmine somewhat they deny They yield that the Faith which Justifies looks upon the whole word of God as its object that it believes the History of the Creation the narrative of the years of Mathusaleh the floud of Noah that it acknowledges the equity of all Gods Commands and a necessity of obedience but not as Justifying We willingly grant that Justifying Faith is an obedientiall affiance yet it is the affiance and noâ— the obedience nor yet the assent to truths formerly mentioned or the like that acts in Justification Your self say that obedience is only the modification of Faith in the first act of Justification and the reforming party of Protestant Divines say the same in the consummation of it Now that these promises of speciall mercy or the blood of Christ held out in the free promises is the speciall object of Faith in this act of Justification and that it justifies as it applies such promises and doth interest the Soul in this blood may I suppose be made good by diverse testimonies Let that of Ambrose be consulted Lib. 1. Cap. 6. de Jacobo vitâ beatâ Non habeo unde gloriari in operibus meis possum non habeo unde me jactem ideo gloriabor in Christro Non gloriabor quia justus sum sed gloriabor quia redemptus sum Gloriabor non quia vacuus peccati sum sed quia remissa sunt peccata Non gloriabor quia profui neque quia profuit mihi quisquam sed quia pro me advocatus apud patrem Christus est sed quia pro me Christi sanguis effusus est Facta est mihi culpa mea merces redemptionis per quam mihi Christus advenit Propter me Christus mortem gustavit fructuosior culpa quam innocentia Innocentia arrogantem me fecerat culpa subjectum reddidit And that of Gregory in Ezek. Hom. 7. Justus igitur advocatus noster justos nos defendet in judicio quia nos ispos cognoscimus accusamus injustos Non ergo infletibus non in actibus nostris
8 The Apostles definition Rom. 4 11 Vindicated Page 33 34 A full definition thence laid down Page 36 The sign and thing signifiâ—d in every Sacrament are Analogically one Page 49 50 No Sacrament without a promise preceding Page 56 Sacraments The distribution of them Page 9 God not tyed to Sacraments Page 30 31 They are standing Ordinances Page 294 Reasons evincing it Page 295 296 When they are dispensed they may not without weighty reasons be omitted Page 306 The being of them consists in their usâ— Page 317 c. Arguments evincing it ib. The Sacrament of the Supper not exempted Page 119 Reasons given ibid. c. Sacraments have respect both to the change of of our nature and the removall of our guilt Page 368 We are to look for no more from Sacraments then God hath put into them Page 405 As the word teacheth by the ear so Sacraments by the help of the word teach by the eye Page 413 Men professing relation to God may see in Sacraments further engagements and provocations to holiness ibid. Sacraments are necessary means of faiths nourishment Page 508 Sacraments are seales entrusted in the hand of men Page 192 c. Sacraments seal the promise of the Gospell condionally Page 194 Gospell Sacraments lead us unto Christ in his priestly office Page 567 All Sacraments from the fall substantially one Page 424 426 Sacramentall Gods condescension in sacramentall signes Page 52 53 Sacramentall signes must be explained Page 56 Mens aptness to delude themselves in Sacramentall privileges Page 405 All ages have over-highly advanced Sacramental privileges Page 406 Sacraments Covenant All interested in Sacraments must come up to the terms of the Covenant Page 280 Sacraments annexed te the Covenant of works were without relation to Christ Page 10 11 That righteousness which the Covenant requires the Sacraments appendant to it seal Page 413 Sacraments are ever suitable to Covenants Page 413 All Sacraments must answer to the Covenant to which they are annexed Page 6 Sacraments without spirituall profit to them that live in breach of Covenant Page 18 A Covenant falling Sacraments that are annexed fall with it Page 18 c. Sacraments under the Old and New Covenant one and the same Page 25 The Covenant people of God the adequat subject of Sacraments Page 74 All interest in Sacraments is upon the account of the Covenant Page 75 c. Sacraments Number The way to find out the number of Sacraments Page 514 No express Scripture to determine their number Page 515 Two onely standing ordinances in the Old Testament of the nature of Sacraments ibid. Five suppositious Sacrments of Rome examined Page 528 Sacrifices Whether of the dictates of nature Page 21 Not Sacraments Page 529 How far Sacramentall ibid. How they differ from Sacraments ibid. Saint A title in Scripture not proper in the justified Page 149 Sanctification The Spirit of God and not man is to have the denomination in it Page 452 Satisfaction How Christs satisfaction to God for us is received by us Page 457 Sathan His imitation of God in the wayes of his worship Page 20 Sea Israels passage through it of the nature of a Sacrament Page 525 No standing Sacrament Page 526 Seales Various acceptation of the word Page 326 Severall use of a Seal Page 327 For secrecy ibid. For warranty ibid. For distinction ibid. For security ibid. For ratification ib. c. Seal of the Covenant and the Seal of the Spirit not of equall latitude Page 141 Seals Sacraments Sacraments are Seales Page 326 Serving for ratification of promises Page 328 Objections answered ibid. c. The whole use and office of Sacraments is by way of signe and seal Page 352 Reasons confirming it Page 354 355 Humane authorities produced Page 356 Variety of opinions about the working of Sacraments Page 359 c. Propositions tending to cleer the truth Page 363 Texts of Scripture brought by those that would raise the work of Sacraments higher of two sorts Page 372 1. Such where no Sacrament is mentioned ib. 2. Such where faith is required to the attainment of the effect Page 376 Objections answered Page 380 Sermon Formally so called not essentiall to a Sacrament Page 61 Whether the word which gives being to Sacraments be concionatorium or consecratorium Page 57. c. Scripture Must not be left to hunt after humane authorities Page 111 Scripture order of words no foundation for arguments Page 170 Scripture characters of men in grace are laid down for men to try themselves by Page 189 Signe What it is Page 38 c. Severall kinds of Signes Page 39 Naturall ibid. Prodigious Page 41 c. By institution Page 42 Rules for the right understanding of naturall signes Page 39 Remote causes are no signes ibid. Partiall causes are no signes Page 40 Natural signes when causes work unavoidably Page 41 Sacramentall signes Sacraments are signes Page 38 Sacraments are to be defined as signes Page 321 Objections answered ibid. c. Sacramentall signes Their properties Page 43 Externall and sensible ibid. Visible Page 43 44 Analogicall Page 45 Rituall Page 46 Distinguishing Page 46 47 65 c. Congregating Page 47 48 Engaging ibid. Remembrancing ibid. 49 Ratifying Page 49 Gods condescension in Sacramental signes Page 52 53 Sacramentall signes must be explained Page 56 Sin All sins are not Spirit-grieving sins Page 392 Notable sins in regenerate persons followed with many dangers Page 394 They cloud assurance of glory ibid. They bring an inaptitude on the soul to enter into glory Page 395 They bring under wrath and displeasure though they work not into a state of wrath Page 396 They are such an obstruction in the way of bliss that they bring a necessity on the soul to come in by repentance Page 397 Rules to discern the nature and quality of sins Page 399 The more of light the less of weakness and the crime more hainous ibid. The less of temptation the more of sin and the less of weakness ibid. c. The more of deliberation and conviction the more of sin Page 400 The more opportunity for duty the greater the neglect Page 401 Severall sorts of sins that are Covenant forfeitures Page 402 c. Sincerity Of heart in covenanting not of the essence and being of a Covenant Page 131 Spirit The seal of the Covenant and the seal of the Spirit not of equall latitude Page 141 Bloud and Spirit way be distinguished but must not be divided Page 367 The acts of the Spirit in a believing soul are ascribed to faith Page 463 The Spirit works not in us respective to Salvation after faith is implanted without us ibid. The Spirit hath a further hand in justification or pardon of sin then alone by enditing the Gospell Page 483 Scriptures and humane authorities produced for it ibid. The Spirit of God and not man is to have the denomination in Sanctification Page 452 Lords Supper A privilege of the Church visible Page 187 It is not limited to