the maintenance of no necessity of grace because no originall sinne to deny Christ to be God incarnate that so the grace of God which the Covenant of Grace pretendeth may consist in Gods sending it not in Christs purchasing those helps whereby it is received and observed Which had Pelagius seen how consequent it is to his saying he who held the true faith of the holy Trinity would probably never have proceeded to deny the grace of Christ For would they have the Son of God born into the world and suffer death upon the Crosse on purpose to testifie the Gospel to be Gods message As if the Law had not been received before without it being recommended by such miraculous works of God that the Jews think there cannot be the like motives to believe that it is abrogated by Christianity Be their belief false sure we are Gods arme was not shortned to have no meanes in store to verify his Gospel but the death of his Sonne that he might rise againe to witnesse it For that it should be done to assure them who are perswaded that the Gospel is Gods message of the performance thereof on Gods part is rather a blasphemy then a reason In as much as he who doubts whether God will perform what he doubts not that he hath tied himself to by Covenant believes not God to be God And that we should be better assured of Christs protection because God hath freely bestowed upon him the honour and power of God then because he brought it in time into our flesh which he had from everlasting is a reason which no man can comprehend to be reasonable For whatsoever Grace comes to us by Christ the more originally and inseparably that it belongs to him the better it is assured upon us But one thing I demand of Pelagius aswell as of Socinus For as Socinus expresly grants the habituall grace of the holy Ghost to true Christians as necessary to inable them in performing what they undertake by their Christianity so I suppose Pelagius had the question been put to him would not have refused it I demand then whether a man in reason be more able to do the office of a Christian having undertaken it or to undertake it to wit sincerely while he is free from the ingagement of it That is whether a mans will be able inwardly to resolve without any help of Gods Spirit to do that which without the help of Gods Spirit he cannot performe I suppose the inward act according to all Divines and Philosophers amounts to one and the same in esteem with the outward and the beginning most difficult of all when the proposition of Christianity is most strange For a resolution upon mature debate of reason as in such a case and an engagement upon profession thereof is a meanes powerfull enough to carry a man to undergoe as much hardship as Christianity requires in a thing neither profitable nor pleasant If therefore to the performance of Christianity the assistance of Gods Spirit is requisite then because our nature is averse then much more to resolve us to it Whereby it appears that the same gift of the holy Ghost which being purchased by the obedience of Christ inabled the Apostles to do those things and say those words by which the world stands convict of the necessity of Christianity the same it is that effects the conviction of those who imbrace it and dwelling with them inables them to live in it according to the promise of God to his ancient people Esay LVIII 20. And as for me this is my Covenant with them saith the Lord My Spirit which is upon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor thy seeds mouth nor thy seeds seeds mouth from this time for evermore With the like brevity will I plead the Tradition of the Church concerning the Grace of Christ evidencing the same by three particulars The first whereof shall be of the Baptisme of Infants which as there can be no reason for uâ—lesse we believe originall sinne So I do challenge that it could not have come to be a Law to the Church had not the Faith of the Church from the Apostles time supposed originall sinne First negatively from the proceeding of Pelagius He first a Monk in Britaine and traveling thence along to Rome afterwards either by himself or by his agent Coelestius to Constantinople and Carthage through Asia the lesse and Affrick the East Egypt and Palestine and not finding in all this vast compasse any Church in which it had not been accustomed to baptize infants shall any man be now so madde as to imagine that this can be discovered to have been taken up upon misprision or abuse the custome of the Church having been otherwise afore It is time that the mindes of men that are possest of their senses should be imployed about things within the compasse of reason and not to perswade themselves that they see what cannot be because they cannot answer all arguments that may be made against that which is and is to be seen Could Pelagius have found any footing to deny it he was not such an Idiot as to suffer himself at every turn to be choked by the Catholicks objecting the baptisme of Infants every where received in the Church who might easily have put them to silence by saying it was not an originall Catholick practise of the whole Church but the mistake that of some men which had prevailed by faction in some times and parts of the Church as I pretend hereby to maintaine the Reformation against the present Church of Rome Since that ingenious and learned heretick nor any of his complices hath been found to use this plea all men that intend not to renounce their common sense will justify me if I challenge positively S. Austines Rule in a particular of such moment as this is That seeing it is manifest that it was a law to the whole Church that Infants should be Baptized and that there can be assigned no originall of it from any expresse act of the Church in Councill or otherwise it is therby evident that it comes from the order of the Apostles The reason is the unity of the Church the principle upon which all this proceeds whereby it appeares that it is utterly impossible that a point of such importance to Christianity could have been admitted over all the world where Christians were without any opposition or faction to overcome the same had it not from the beginning been acknowledged to proceed from the common principle from which all Ecclesiasticall Law is derived to wit from the authority of our Lords Apostles the founders of the Church It is not my intent hereby to say that the Apostles order was that all should be baptized Infants whose parents were Christians afore Against which I find reasons alledged in Tertullianes book de Baptismo which I cannot deny to be considerable But that no
of Christianity on our part under the title of the Spirit of patefaction as you may see by Volkelius Instit III. 14. Signifying hereby as it seemeth that conviction which the Spirit of God tendereth by the motives of Christianity to manifest the truth of the Gospel preventing the will with help to inable it but not effecting either the outward act or the inward resolution to do it as you may see S. Augustine distinguish upon his own words related out of his Bookes of free will De Gratia Christi I. 41. This I here lay forth on purpose to shew that I cannot come cleare of that which I have undertaken to resolve concerning the Covenant of Grace nor any man be satisfied in the difficulties that concern it without taking in hand the whole dispute concerning the free will of man and the free Grace of God For having by the premises shewed that the condition which the Covenant of Grace requires on our part is an act of free will Though such an act as compriseth the ingagement of a mans whole life to Gods service Unlesse it appeare that the grace of the holy Ghost which God found requisite for the performance of Christianity can never be ascribed to the free will of man as due to the right useof it it will not sufficiently appear how the Gospel may be called the Covenant of Grace But before I go further I must not omit to observe a great difference between Socinus and Pelagius and how that difference seems to reflect upon the present dispute For Socinus first had conceived such disgust as I said of that predestination which appoints men to life meerly in consideration of the obedience of Christ as their own for whom it was appointed Then considered well that free will serves not so long as the helps whereby we are inabled to imbrace Christ and to persevere in Christianity may be attributed to the obedience of as assigned by God to the consideration and recognizance of it And therefore found it the onely clear course of establishing that force of freewil that he had imagined without consulting the proceediugs of the Church against Pelagius to say That the merits and sufferings of Christ were not valuable for such a purchase as being a meer man from his birth onely that he was conceived not by the way of humane generation but by the holy Ghost of the blessed Virgine And that afterwards being thirty yeares of age or thereabouts according to the time that John the Baptist began to preach he was taken up into heaven to God and there made acquainted with his message of the Gospel to mankinde which he undertaking upon the perill of all the hardship which he was to indure at the Jewes hands for it it pleased God to advance him for his obedience though due as to God from his creature to be God to the true power and worship of God though in dependance upon himself originally God For the obedience of Christ being thus over rewarded in his own person it remaineth that the gift of the holy Ghost howsoever requisite to the performance of Christianity be ascribed to the meer goodnesse of God which moved him to propose the promise thereof to those who should imbrace the Gospel as a recompense for so doing not as any grace of Christ that is any help of grace given in consideration of Christ resolving a man to imbrace it It cannot be said that Pelagius had any hand in this part of Socinus his Heresie who could not have been heard in the Church at that time had he once advanced any such ground as this though so pertinent to his position as you see by Socinus But as Pelagius thought of no such thing when he began first to dispute against the grace of Christ so can it not be said that his followers never thought of having recourse to this plea as the onely clear ground for their position to stand upon could it be made good But for the truth hereof there being no cause why I should swell this Book with those things that have been said already I will remit the reader to Jansenius his August where he shall find what remaines in the records of the Church how the Pelagians went about to joyne with the Nestorians and to make our Lord Christ to have purchased his Godhead by the actions and behavoiur of his humane nature and how in this regard they remaine involved in the condemnation of Nestorius at the council of Ephesus Though whereas the beginning of this error is there ascribed to Origen it is easie to observe a vast difference between this pretense and that conceit which is found at present in his books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but whether resolutely deliverd by him may be questioned that the humane soul of Christ was chosen by God for the word to be incarnate in in consideration of that which it had done in the other world For this supposes the Godhead of Christ before his incarnation and the truth of it which Socinus his opinion to which these relations make the Pelagians to have inclined destroyeth And so it is manifest that according to Socinus there can be no such thing as the Grace of Christ according to Pelagius there is not But that which is common to both proceeds upon a supposition common to both That man is presently in the same state of free will in which he was created that the fall of our first parents did no harme to their posterity neither can their children that are baptized be baptized into the remission of sinne when they have none of their own Though for Socinus his part he laughs at the baptizing of infants who allowes the baptizing of men that have sinned themselves but as a ceremony of indifference which Pelagius though he be content to allow and require yet not to the purpose of remission of sinne in infants Now the Church of God in which the Baptisme of infants hath been practised ever since the times of the Apostles alwayes understood the Gentiles that had been left to themselves to fall away to the worship of Idols to be wholy under the power of Satan by virtue of that advantage which he had of our forefathers And the Jewes who had retired themselves to the worship of one true God so little able by that Law to withdraw themselves from under sin that few of them were vouchsafed Gods Spirit acknowledging therefore all this to proceed from the leaven of the first sinne they acknowledged the necessity of Christs coming for the cure of it the sufficience of the cure in his Godhead from everlasting and the obedience of our flesh wherein it was incarnate This being the state of the dispute it appeareth that the intent which I propose obligeth me not to dispatch without maintaining the eternall Godhead of our Lord Christ Though not so as to consider the whole controversie of the holy Trinity but onely that of the person and natures of
thence forth to recover man from the labor of sinne to which when he became mortall he was condemned to Paradise from whence he had been expulsed And therefore our Lord Christ according to S. Peter 1 Pet. IV. 18 19 20. going out of the world by that Spirit whereby he was made alive when he had been put to death in the flesh to wit speaking in his Apostles preached to the Spirits in prison that had been disobedient in the days of Noe Converting the Gentiles by the gift of his Spirit granted upon his sufferings who had refused the same in Noe the Preacher of righteousnesse 1 Pet. II. 5. When God said My Spirit shall no more strive with man Gen VI. 2. For the pilgrimage of the Patriarchs the Promise of the Land of Canaan the Law given by Moses was all but the further limitation and rule of that outward and civile conversation under which the traffique of Christianity was then driven by Prophets who spake by Gods Spirit This Reason Socinus being obliged to miskenne by making our Lord Christ a meer man cannot give that account of the grace of Christ before his coming which the Church doth Acquiting thereby my position That the Law covenanteth expresly onely for the Land of Promise of all suspicion of compliance with his intentions By this you see that Pelagius and Socinus both are carried out of the way of Christianity because they will not acknowledge the decay of mankind by the fall of Adam and the coming of Christ to repair it But those of Marseilles and the parts adjoyning in France that formalized themselves against S. Augustines doctrine of Predestination and effectuall Grace freely and heartily acknowledging Originall sin seem to have justified only upon the true interest of Christianity in that free will which the Covenant of Grace necessarily supposeth though mistaking their way out of humane frailty they failed of the truth though they parted with Pelagius They made faith or at least the beginning of faith and of will to beleive to repent and to turn unto God the work of free will in consideration whereof God though no way tied so to do grants the help of his Grace and Spirit to performe the race of faith Most truly maintaining according to that vvhich hath been professed in the beginning of this book that the act of true Faith is an act of mans free will which God rewardeth with his free Grace To wit with the habituall gift of his spirit inabling true believers to go through with that Faith which thereby they undertake as I have shewed you both these elsewhere Most expresly acknowledging the preaching of the Gospel going before in which whatsoever help the coming of our Lord Chirst hath furnished to move and winne the world to believe is involved But miskenning the grace of the Gospel granted by God in consideration of his obedience to make him a Church that might honour him for it If Pelagius acknowledged no more in the coming of Christ then to make his message appear to be true so that the imbracing of it might oblige God to grant his grace by preventing it with an act of free will complying with it The reason was not because this very tender being the purchase of our Lord Christs free obedience could be subject to any merit of man But because he was engaged to maintaine that we are borne in the same estate in which Adam was made needing nothing but Gods declaration of his will and pleasure towards the fulfilling of it But for them who acknowledge the decay of our nature by the fall of Adam and the coming of our Lord to repair the breaches of it to ascribe the grace which God furnisheth those that believe with for the performing of that which by believing they undertake to the act of freewill in believing which themselves acknowledge to be prevented by so many effects of Christs coming as the preaching of his Gospel necessarily involveth and which the Scriptures so openly acknowledge to be prevented by the Grace of his Spirit purchased by his sufferings must needs argue a great deal of difficulty in the question which the worse divines they appear must needs justifie them to be much the better Christians And indeed there is great cause to excuse them as farre as reason will give leave in a case wherein the Fathers that went afore Pelagius seem to be ingaged with them For it is ordinary enough to read them exhorting to lay out the indeavovrs of free will expecting the assistance of Gods Grace to the accomplishment of that which a man purposes And besides S. Augustine who acknowledges that before the contest with Pelagius he did think faith to be the act of free will which God blesseth with Grace to do as he professeth It cannot be denied that S. Jerome so great an enemy to the Pelagians with some others have expressed that which amounts to it But it is true on the other side that the same Fathers do frequently acknowledge the beginning as well as the accomplishment of our salvation to the grace of God Which is not onely an obligation so to expound their sayings when they set free will before grace as supposing the cure thereof begunne by Grace But also a presumption that those who expresse not the like caution are no otherwise to be understood Especially supposing expresly the motives of faith provided by the holy Ghost granted in consideration of our Lords sufferings in virtue whereof the resolution which is taken for the best must of necessity proceed though by the operation of the same Spirit whereby they are advanced and furnished It is therefore no doubt a commendable thing to excuse the writings of that excellent person John Casiane so farre as the common Faith will give leave as you may see the learned Vossius doth as speaking ambiguously in setting grace before free will sometimes as well as other whiles free will before Grace For Faustus his book De libero arbitrio I cannot say the same though I must needs have that respect for his Christian qualities which the commendations that I read of him in Sidoius Apollinaris deserve For besides that the stile of it is generally such as seems to make free will the umpire between the motions of grace and of sinne which ascribes the ability of well doing to God but the act to our selves that the Fathers under the Law of nature were saved by free will he delivers expresly with Pelagius An oversight grosse enough in any man that shall have considered upon what terms Christianity is to be justified against the Jews out of the Old Testament There is therefore appearance enough that the II Council of Orange which finally decreed against the heresie of Pelagius was held expresly to remove the offenses which that book had made And evidence enough that the articles of it are justified by the tradition of the whole Church For those prayers of the Church that way and subject of
words of S. Augustine contra Epistolam fundamenti cap. V. which alwaies have a place in this dispute though I can as yet admit S. Augustine no otherwise than as a particular Christian and his saying as a presumption that hee hath said no more than any Christian would have said in the common cause of all Christians against the Manichees Ego Evangelio non crederem saith hee nisi me Ecclesiae Catholicae moveret authoritas I would not believe or have believed the Gospel had not the authority of the Catholick Church moved mee For some men have imployed a great deal of learning to show that moveret stands for movisset as in many other places both of S. Augustine and of other Africane Writers And without doubt they have showed it past contradiction and I would make no doubt to show the like in S. Hierome Sidonius and other Writers of the decaying ages of the Latine tongue as well as in the Africane Writers if it were any thing to the purpose For is not the Question manifestly what it is that obligeth that man to believe who as yet believeth not Is it not the same reason that obliges him to become and to be a Christian Therefore whether moveret or movisset all is one The Question is whether the authority of the Church as a Corporation that is of those persons who are able to oblige the Church would have moved S. Austine to believe the Gospel because they held it to be true Or the credit of the Church as of so many men of common sense attesting the truth of those reasons which the Gospel tenders why wee ought to believe What is it then that obliged S. Austine to the Church The consent of people and nations that authority which miracles had begun which hope had nourished charity increased succession of time settled from S. Peter to the present the name and title of Catholick so visible that no Heretick durst show a man the way to his Church demanding the way to the Catholick So hee expresseth it cap. 111. And what is this in English but the conversion of the Gentiles foretold by the Prophets attested by God and visibly settled in the Unity of the Church Whereupon hee may boldly affirm as hee doth afterwards that if there were any word in the Gospel manifestly witnessing Manes to be the Apostle of Christ hee would not believe the Gospel any more For if the reason for which hee had once believed the Church that the Gospel is true because hee saw it verified in the being of the Church should be supposed false there could remain no reason to oblige us to take the Gospel for true All that remaines for the Church in the nature and quality of a Corporation by this account will be this That it is more discretion for him that is in doubt of the truth of Christianity to take the reason of it from the Church that is from those whom the Church trusteth to give it than from particular Christians who can by no means be presumed to understand it so well as they may do For otherwise supposing a particular Christian sets forth the same reasons which the Church does how can any man not be bound to follow him that is bound to follow the Church So that the reasons which both allege being contained in the Scriptures the Church is no more in comparison of the Scriptures than the Samaritane in comparison of our Lord himself when her fellow-citizens tell her John IV. 12. Wee believe no more for thy saying For wee our selves have heard and know that this is of a truth the Saviour of the World the Christ For the reasons for which our Lord himself tells us that wee are to believe are contained in the Scriptures But by the premises it will be most manifest that the same Circle in discourse is committed by them who resolve the reason why they believe into the dictate of the Spirit as into the decree of the Church For the question is not now of the effective cause whether or no in that nature a man is able to imbrace the true Faith without the assistance of Gods Spirit or not Which ought here to remain questionable because it is to be tried upon the grounds upon which here wee are seeking And therefore that Faith which is grounded upon revelation from God and competent evidence of the same is to be counted divine supernatural Faith without granting whatsoever wee may suppose any supernatural operation of Gods Spirit to work it in the nature of an effective cause which must remain questionable supposing the reason why wee believe the Scriptures But in the nature of an object presenting unto the understanding the reason why we are to believe it is manifest by the premises that no man can know that hee hath Gods Spirit that knoweth not the truth of the Scriptures If therefore hee allege that hee knowes the Scriptures to be true because Gods Spirit saith so to his Spirit hee allegeth for a reason that which hee could not know but supposing that for granted which hee pretendeth to prove To wit That the dictate of his own Spirit is from Gods Spirit Indeed when the motives of Faith proceed from Gods Spirit in Moses and the Prophets in our Lord and his Apostles witnessing by the works which they do their Commission as well as their message who can deny that this is the light of Gods Spirit Again when wee govern our doings by that which wee believe and not by that which wee see who will deny that this is the light of Faith and of Gods Spirit But both these considerations take place though wee suppose the mater of Faith to remain obscure in it self though to us evidently credible for the reasons God showes us to believe that hee saith it If any man seek in the mater of Faith any evidence to assure the conscience in the nature of an object or reason why wee are to believe that is not derived from the motives of Faith outwardly attesting Gods act of revealing it hee falls into the same inconvenience with those who believe their Christianity because the Church commends it and again the Church because Christianity commends it As for that monstrous imagination that the Scripture is not Law to oblige any man in justice to believe it before the Secular Powers give it force over their subjects Supposing for the present that which I said before that it is all one question whether Christianity or whether the Scriptures oblige us as Law or not Let mee demand whether our Lord Christ and his Apostles have showed us sufficient reasons to convince us that wee are bound to believe and become Christians If not why are wee Christians If so can wee be obliged and no Law to oblige us supposing for the present though not granting because it is not true that by refusing Christianity sufficiently proposed a man comes not under sin but onely comes not from under it but
of the Languages and of Historical truth to the text of the Scripture And many things more may be cleared by applying the light of reason void of partiality and prejudice to draw the truth so cleared into consequence No part of all this can be said to be held upon any decree of the Church Because no part of the evidence supposes the Church in the nature and quality of a Corporation the constitution whereof inableth some persons to oblige the whole Because there are maters in question concerning our common Christianity and the sense of the Scriptures upon which the great mischief of diviâ—â—on is fallen out in the Church it is thought a plausible plea to say that the decree of the present Church supposing the foundation of the Church in that nature and the power given to every part in behalf of the whole of which no evidence can be made not supposing all that for truth which I have said obligeth all Christians to believe as much as the Scriptures supposing them to be the Word of God can do Which they that affirm do not consider that it must first be evident to all that are to be obliged Both that the Church is so founded and whoâ—e Act it is and how that Act must be done which must oblige it Seeing then that the Scriptures are admitted on all sides to be the Word of God let us see whether it be as evident as the Scriptures that the act of the Pope or of a General Council or both oblige the Church to believe the truth of that which they decree as much as the Scriptures I know there are texts of Scripture alleged First concerning the Apostles and Disciples Mat. X. 14 15 40. Luke IX 5. X. 10 11 16. where those that refuse them are in worse estate than Sodom and Gomorrha And Hee that heareth you heareth mee Hee that neglecteth you neglecteth mee Mat. XXVIII 19 20. Go make all Nations Disciples teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you and behold I am with you to the worlds end 1 Thess II. 13. Yee received the Gospel of us not as the word of man but as it is indeed the word of God Then concerning S. Peter as predecessor of all Popes Mat. XVI 18 19. Vpon this rock will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it And I will give thee the keyes of the Kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever thou loosest on earth shall be loosed in heaven Luke XXII 32. I have prayed for thee that thy Faith fail not and thou once converted strengthen thy brethren John XXI 15 16 17. Simon son of Jonas lovest thou mee Feed my lambs feed my sheep Again concerning the Church and Councils Mat. XVIII 17-20 If hee heare them not tell the Church If hee hear not the Church let him be to thee as a Heathen or a Publican Verily I say unto you whatsoever yee binde on earth shall be bound in heaven whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Again I say unto you If two of you agree on earth upon any thing to ask it it shall be done them from my Father in heaven For where two or three are assembled in my name there am I in the midst of them John XVI 13. The Spirit of truth shall lead you into all truth Acts XV. 28. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us 1 Tim. III. 15. That thou mayest know now it behoveth to converse in the house of God which is the Churchof God the pillar and establishment of the truth You have further the exhortations of the Apostles 1 Thess V. 12 13. Now I beseech you brethren to know them which labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you And esteem them more than abundantly in love for their works sake Heb. XIII 7 17. Bee obedient and give way to your Rulers for they watch for your souls as those that must give account That they may do it joyfully and not groaning Which is not for your profit And afore Rememeer your Rulers which have spoken to you the Word of God And considering the issue of their conversation imitate their Faith Those that spoke unto them the Word of God are the Apostles or their companions and deputies whom hee commandeth them to obey no otherwise than those who presently watched over them after their death In the Old Testament likewise Deut. XVII 5-12 Hee that obeyeth not the determination of the Court that was to sit before the Ark is adjudged to death Therefore Hag. II. 12. Thus saith the Lord the God of Hosts Ask the Priests concerning the Law Mal. II. 7. The Priests lips shall preserve knowledge and the Law shall they require at his mouth For hee is the messenger of the Lord of Hosts The answers of the Priests resolved into the decrees of the said Court therefore they are unquestionable And this Power established by the Law our Lord acknowledging the Law allowes Mat. XXIII 2. The Scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses chair whatsoever therefore they command you that do But according to their works do not This is that which is alleged out of the Scriptures for that Infallibility which is challenged for the Church If I have left any thing behinde it will prove as ineffectual as the rest In all which there are so many considerations appear why the sense of them should be limited on this side or extended beyond the body of the Church that it is evident they cannot serve for evidence to ground the Infallibility of it For is it not evident that the neglect of the Apostles in questioning their doctrine redounds upon our Lord who by sending them stamps on them the marks of his Fathers authority which hee is trusted with Not so the Church For who can say that God gives any testimony to the lie which it telleth seeing Christianity is supposed the Infallibility thereof remaining questionable Is it not evident that God is with his Chu ch not as a Corporation but as the collection of many good Christians Supposing that those who have power to teach the Church by the constitution thereof teach lies and yet all are not carried away with their doctrine but believe Gods truth so farre as the necessity of their salvation requires If there were any contradiction in this supposition how could it be maintained in the Church of Rome that so it shall be when Antichrist comes as many do maintain Besides is it as evident as Christianity or the Scriptures that this promise is not conditional and to have effect supposing both the teaching and the following of that which our Lord lud taught and nothing else Surely if those that refuse the Gospel be in a worse state than those of Sodom and Gomorrha it followeth not yet that all that refuse to hear the Church without the Gospel are so For the truth of the Gospel
that hee hath any end but himself nor that hee doth any thing to any other end than to exercise and declare his own perfections If hee do sundry things which of their nature have necessarily such an end as they attain not it is to be said that Gods end never fails in so much as by failing of the end to which they were made they become the subject of some other part of that providence wherein his perfections are exercised and declared Seeing then that all Controversies concerning the Faith have visibly their original from some passages of Scripture which being presupposed true before the foundation of the Church ought to be acknowledged but cannot be constituted by it And seeing that no man that out of the conscience of a Christian hath imbraced all that is written can deny that which hee may have cause to believe to be the sense of the least part of the Scripture without ground to take away that belief It remains that the way to abate Controversies is to rest content with the means that God hath left us to determine the sense of the Scripture not undertaking to tye men further to it than the applying of those means will inferre And truly to imagine that the authority of the Church or the dictate of Gods Spirit should satisfie doubts of that nature without showing the means by which other records of learning are understood and so resolving those doubts which the Scriptures necessarily raise in all them that believe them to be true and the word of God is more than huge cart-loads of Commentaries upon the Scriptures have have been able to do Which being written upon supposition of certain determinations pretended by the Church or certain positions which tending to reform abuses in the Church were taken for testified by Gods Spirit have produced no effect but an utter despair of coming to resolution or at least acknowledgment of resolution in the sense of the Scriptures Whereas let men capable of understanding and managing the means heretofore mentioned think themselves free as indeed they ought to be of all prejudices which the partialities on foot in the Church may have prepossessed them with and come to determine the meaning thereof by the means so prescribed and within those bounds which the consent of the Church acknowledges They shall no sooner discern how the primitive Christianity which we have from the Apostles becomes propagated to us but they shall no less clearly discern the same in their writings And if God have so great a blessing for Christendom as the grace to look upon what hath been written with this freedom there hath been so much of the meaning of the Scripture already discovered by those that have laid aside such prejudices and so much of it is in the way to be discovered every day if the means be pursued as is well to be hoped will and may make partizans think upon the reason they have to maintain partialities in the Church If God have not this blessing in store for Christendom it remains that without or against all satisfaction of conscience concerning the truth of contrary pretenses men give themselves up to follow and professe that which the protection of secular Power shall show them means to live and thrive by In which condition whether there be more of Atheism or of Christianity I leave to him who alone sees all mens hearts to judge 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 chief objections against them are questionable In those parcels of the New Testament that have been questioned the case is not the same The sense of the Church HAving thus resolved the main point in doubt it cannot be denied notwithstanding that there are some parts or appertenances of the Question that remain as yet undecided For as long as it is onely said that the Scripture interpreted by the consent of the Church is a sufficient mean to determine any thing controverted in mater of Christian truth there is nothing said till it appear what these Scriptures are and in what records they are contained And truly it is plain that there remains a controversie concerning the credit of some part of those writings which have been indifferently copied and printed for the Old Testament commonly marked in our English Bibles by the title of Apocrypha And no lesse concerning the credit of the Copies wherein they are recorded For though it is certain and evident that the Old Testament hath been derived from the Ebrew the New from the Greek in which at first they were delivered to the Church Yet seeing it appeareth not of it self impossible such changes may have succeeded in the Copies that the Copies which the Jews now use of the Old Testament are further from that which was first delivered than the Vulgar Latine as also the Copies of the Greek Testament now extant It is a very plain case that this doubt remaining it is not yet resolved what are the principles what the means to determine the truth in maters questionable concerning Christianity I must further distinguish two questions that may be made in both these points before I go further For it is evidently one thing to demand whether those writings which I said remain questionable are to be counted part of the Old Testament or not Another whether they are to be read by Christians either for particular information or for publick edification at the assemblies of the Church And likewise as concerning the other point it is one thing to demand what Copy is to be held for authentick another thing to dispute how every Copy is to be used and frequented in the Church To wit whether translations in mother languages are to be had and into what credit they are to be received For it is manifest that the one sense of both questions demands what the body of the Church either may do or ought to do in proposing or prohibiting the said writings or Copies to be used by the members thereof for their edification in Christian piety But the other what credit they have in themselves upon such grounds as are in nature and reason more ancient than the authority of the Church and which the being and constitution thereof presupposeth And as manifest as it is that these are two questions so manifest must it needs remain that the one of them to wit that which concerns the authority of the Church and the effect of it does not belong to this place nor come to be decided but upon supposition of all the means God hath given his Church to be resolved of any truth that becomes questionable As for the other part of both questions though it hath been and may be among them that will not understand the difference between principles and conclusions because it is for
God in Spirit and truth which the Gospel requireth is so plentifully preached in all those writings which wee call Apocrypha Whereas in our Saviors and his Apostles time and much more afterwards they promised themselves the kingdome of heaven upon the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees That is upon the outward and carnal observation of Moses Law and preciseness in all those little niceties which their Masters had fensed it with For it is no mervail that they who under persecution promised themselves a part in the resurrection of the righteous cleaving to God and his Law should finde themselves tyed to that obedience in spirit and truth which God who is a Spirit sees and allows But lesse mervail it is that having attained the carnal promises of the Law in the possession of the Land of Promise they should fall away from the like zeal and yet promise themselves the world to come upon that form of godliness which they observed being destitute of the force and power of it As an argument that this consideration is well grounded and true I will here adde the authority and practice of the primitive Church prescribing these books to be read by the Catechumeni or those that professed to believe the truth of Christianity and offered themselves to be instructed in the mater of it in order to Baptism and being made Christians For seeing these might be as well Jews as Gentiles this signifies that the doctrine of them was held by the Church a fit instruction towards Christianity even for those that were already acquainted with the doctrine of the Prophets S. Athanasius then in Synopsi testifieth that these books were read to the Catechumeni To the same purpose it is read in the Constitutions of the Apostles though the place is not at hand at present And that which the last Canon of the Apostles prescribes that besides the Canonical Scriptures the book of Ecclesiasticus be read by the youth seems to tend to the same purpose To the same purpose Dionysius de div Nom. cap. IV. calls the Book of Wisedom an Introduction to the divine Oracles But let no man think to inferr that the Apostles took these Books for Scripture inspired by God because I grant that they borrowed from them in their writings Origen hath met with this objection Prol. in Cant. where hee observeth That the Apostles have borrowed some things out of Apocryphal Scriptures as S. Jude out of the books of Enoch and the departure of Moses and yet addes that wee are not to give way to the reading of them because wee must not transgresse the bounds which our Fathers have fixed Where you see hee distinguisheth those books which the Church did not allow to be read under the name of Apocrypha from those which it did allow to be read and are therefore more properly called Ecclesiastical Scriptures which name hath particularly stuck by way of excellence upon the Wisedom of the son of Sirach though I contend not about names when wee call them Apocrypha because I see that S. Jerome hath sometimes done it And if S. Paul have alleged Aratus Menander and Epimenides heathen Poets hee did not thereby intend to allow the authors but the mater which hee allegeth If these things be so I shall not desire to abridg any mans liberty from arguing against the mater of these Books to prove them not inspired by God because not agreeing with those which wee know and agree to have been inspired by God But I shall warn them that take upon them thus to argue first to look about them that they bring not the unquestionable parts of Scripture into an undue suspicion for agreeing in something for which they have conceived a prejudice that these Books are not to be received The design of Judith and her proceeding in the execution of it is charged not to agree with Christianity neither is it my purpose here to maintain that it doth But I am more than afraid that those who object this do not know how to distinguish it from the fact of Jaell the wife of Heber the Kenite in the book of Judges which the Spirit of God in Deborah the Prophetesse so highly extolleth The like is to be said of the like passages questioned in the book of Tobit and the Maccabees and namely the fact of Razias killing himself least hee should fall into the hands of persecutors which seemeth to be related with much approbation 2 Mac. XIV 41-46 For to distinguish this fact from Samsons it will not serve the turn to say that Samson did it by inspiration of Gods Spirit supposing afore that it was contrary to Gods declared Law to do it The difficulty being greater in saying that the declared Law of God is violated by the motion of Gods Spirit when as the Spirit of God is not granted to any man but upon supposition of acknowledging Gods declared Law For howsoever Saul or Caiaphas or Balaam may be moved by the Spirit of God to speak such things as by the Scriptures inspired by God wee learn that they did speak Yet that God should imploy upon his own Commission as the Judges of whom it is said that the Spirit of God came upon them were manifestly imployed by God whom hee favored not is a thing which cannot agree with the presumption which all Christians have of the salvation of the Fathers As for the passage of Eccles XLVI 23. which seems to say that it was the soul of Samuel the Prophet and not an evil Spirit assuming his habit that foretold the death of Saul I do not understand why all this may not be said according to appearance not according to truth For it will still make for the honor of Samuel that the King whatsoever opinion hee had of this means of fore-knowledg should desire to see Samuel as him whom in his life time hee found so unquestionable But if it be said that this cannot satisfie the leter of the Scripture yet can it not be said that as Saul a wicked man did believe that hee might see Samuel so a good man at that time might not have the same Being then no part of the truth which true piety obliged all men to acknowledg In the book of Tobit there are several things besides questionable But they that imagine conjuring in the liver of a fish to drive away an unclean Spirit do not consider those exorcisms whereby it is evident both by the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles besides divers of the most ancient Fathers of the Church that the Jews both in our Lords times and after did cast out unclean Spirits For what force could they have but from the appointment of God from whom at first they were delivered for a testimony of his residence among his people Which makes me stick to condemn that relation of the Jews in the Talmud extant also in Suidas that there were admirable remedies delivered by Solomon which hee caused to be writ upon
the walls of the Temple though they commend King Ezekias for causing them to be done out when it appeared that the virtue of them was such that the people forgot their recourse to and dependence upon God because they knew so ready help elsewhere And truly it is nothing strange to mee that the Jews living under the Persian Empire and seeing that there were seven chief Princes which had the great credit in it next the King the successors of the seven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is those seven that killed him that usurped after the death of Cambyses as sometimes I have conceived who having the privilege of perpetual accesse to the King as Herodotus testifieth are therefore said to see the Kings face Esther I. 10 14 Esther VII 14. I say it seems not strange that expressing and thinking of God as of a great Prince as doth the whole Scripture speaking in those terms that men are most apt to conceive they should attribute unto him the like attendance of seven Angels as his principal Ministers the book de Mundo under Aristotles name comparing him also with the King of Persia And yet I will not grant that the seven Spirits before the Throne of God in the Revelation I. 4. IV. 5. V. 6. are those seven Angels because there are seven virtues of Gods Spirit recounted in Esay XI 2 3. which the seven Spirits before Gods Throne may well serve to express The seven Angels that blow the seven Trumpâ—ts Revel VIII 2. being onely that number of Angels whether the principal of Gods Ministers or not who appear seven to represent the plagues of the Trumpets and Vials in seven as the seals of the Book afore Neither is there any hope or fear that any mater of historical truth can be discovered in them which may justly charge them with imposture as if the authors of them could be thought ignorant of the state of Gods people living as they did so high in time In vain it is to imagine that when Judith VIII 6. is said to have kept not onely the Sabbaths New-moons and Festivals of the Law but also the dayes afore which by the Talmud Doctors wee know were afterwards in use among the dispersions of the Jews Hee who writ this book forges when hee sayes they were so anciently in use For either hee must prophesie or they must have been in use when the book was writ And whether in use or not when the story is said to have come to passe will be of no consequence to him that believes it to be of no consequence whether a Parable or not As for the pretense of superstition which the credit thereof may be said thereby to maintain if it be no superstition for the people to whom our Lord preached to observe all that the Scribes and Pharisees injoyned them because they sate in Moses his chair much lesse shall it be superstition for Judith or for those that lived when the book of Judith was penned to have served God two dayes by the appointment of those that sate in Moses chair when as Gods Law named but one And so when the history of Susanna saith that the Jews were allowed in their dispersions to judge maters of life and death among themselves though this perhaps was otherwise under the Chaldeans and that hee who penned it mistook in that circumstance yet justly and certainly might it have been presumed though Origen had never interposed to justifie a thing which upon better because ancienteâ— credit of this author had been justified before that such a power had been exercised at some times by the Jewes in their dispersions Before I go further it will be requisite to answer an objection which I must confess to be material but withall apprehended for more dangerous than it need To wit that some part now received for Scripture of the New Testament the Epistle to the Ebrews and that of S. James by name the Revelation of S. John and some other small pieces have been sometimes questioned and since are received in that nature And what then should hindet those books that sometimes have been questioned whether of the Old Testament or not to be now received for such upon the decree of the Council of Trent I say then that is manifest to him that will take the pains to consider it that the writings of the Apostles were first deposited with those parts of the Church upon occasion and for use whereof they were first penned As for the purpose their Epistles with those Churches to which they were sent where Tertullian in his prescription against Hereticks testifies that the authenticks and originals of them were extant and the Revelation of S. John with the seven Churches Neiâ—her is it to be imagined that the Collection which now wee call the New Testament was then any where extant Nay it is manifest by the beginning of S. Luke there went about certain Gospels which Origen and S. Ambrose upon that place following him sayes were afterwards disallowed Adding that the gift of discerning Spirits mentioned by S. Paul 1 Cor. X. 10. was then extant in the Church as in the Synagogue when it was to be discerned whether true Prophets or not that the Church might rest assured of the writings of those whose commission had been so verified It is therefore reasonable to think that those writings that had been received by some Churches upon the credit of their Authors known to have been inspired by the Holy Ghost gave others an umbrage of something not agreeable with Christianity as the Epistle to the Ebrews of refusing Penance the Revelation of the Kingdom of a thousand years when they came first to know them which from the beginning they had not done much lesse the doubt whether inspired by God or not Neither is the case otherwise excepting terms of scorn which may have been used either in Luthers refusing S. James his Epistle or when the Epistle to the Ebrews is questioned by Erasmus or Cardinal Cajetane as that of S. Jude of late by Salmasius But there is alwayes means to redresse any part of the Church or any Doctor of it in any such mistake so long as there remains means to certifie them from what hand they have been received to wit from persons in whom the Church was certified that the Holy Ghost spoke Which being certified reason would that not onely particular persons but Churches lay down their jealousies by understanding such words as cause jealousies so as they may best agree with the common Christianity But what is all this to the writings of those who can by no means be supposed to have written by the Holy Ghost Shall any act any decree of the Church create them the credit of writings inspired by Gods Spirit which before that act they had not And therefore the case is not the same which the writings which we know never could nor can be received standing the evidence that no evidence can ever be made
for the waters are come in even unto my soul And Let not the water-stood drown me neither let the deep swallow me up And let not the pit shut her mouth upon me And XLII 9. One deep calleth another because of the noise of thy water-pipes All thy waves and billows are gone over me Whereupon S. Paul Romans VI. 3 4 5 Know ye not that as many as have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into his death We are therefore buried with him by baptism into death that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father so we should also walk in newnesse of life For if we have been planted into the like death of his then shall we be also into the like of his rising again For when he saith again Rom. X. 7. Who shall go down into the deep to wit to bring up Christ from the dead He sheweth plainly that by the waters of the deep he understands death whereby I suppose it appears sufficiently that the water of Baptism not the fire of the Holy Ghost is the antitype to the waters of the deluge Besides the Baptism of the Holy Ghost is not called Baptism but by resemblance of the fire thereof infusing it self into all the soul as the whole body is drenched in the waters of baptism Therefore it is not called absolutely Baptism but with an addition abating the property of the sense the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and fire Therefore where the term Baptism stands without this addition or any circumstance signifying the same it cannot be understood Again the interrogating of a good conscience 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies as all men of learning agree metonymically or by Synecdoche the answer or rather the stipulation consisting of the interrogatories of Baptism and the answer returned by him that is baptized undertaking to believe and to live like a Christian For it is manifest that it Fath been alwayes the custom in the Church of God as still in the Church of England which S. Peter here shews that it comes down from the Apostles to exact of him that is baptized a solemn vow promise or contract to stand to that which he undertaketh And this it is which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifies whereof he that doubts may see enough in Grotius his Annotations to make him ashamed to doubt any more When therefore S. Peter saith that Baptism saveth us not the doing away the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience towards God he does not intend to distinguish the Baptism of water from the Baptism of the Holy Ghost in opposition to the same But to distinguish in the Baptism of water the bodily act of cleansing the flesh from the reasonable act of professing Christianity which being done out of a good conscience towards God he saith saveth us And that by the resurrection of Jesus Christ By vertue whereof S. Paul also saith that if we planted into the like death to Christs death we shall also be planted into the like resurrection of Christs Supposing that whosoever is baptized takes upon him the profession of Christs Crosse that is the bearing of it when his Christianity cals him to it For when our Lord saith in the Gospel I have a Baptism to be baptized with and how am I straitned till it be accomplished Luk. XII 50. And again to the sons of Zebedee Mat. XX 22. Are ye able to be baptized with the Baptism which I shall be baptized with He shews sufficiently that his Baptism is his Crosse In consideration whereof that is of undertaking to bear it out of a good conscience as Christ was raised from death to life again by the Spirit of Holinesse which dwelt in him without measure So those that are planted into the likenesse of Christs death in Baptism are promised the Grace of Gods Spirit to dwell in them and to raise them from sin here to the life of Grace and from death hereafter to the life of Glory in the world to come as I shewed you in the first Book So that S. Pauls argument proceeds not upon consideration of the Ceremony of Baptism and the naturall resemblance it hath with the duty of a Christian to rise from sin because he professes to die to it For that were to think that the Apostles have but weak argumens to inforce the obligation of Christianity with when this prime one is made to signifie no more then an indecorisne impertinence or inconsequence in signifying and professing that by our Baptism which by our lives we perform not But maketh Baptism the protestation of a solemn vow and promise to God and men and Angels to live for the future as the profession of Christians importeth And is it possible to show man overtaken in sin a more valuable consideration to expect salvation upon and therefore a stronger means to inforce the performance of what he hath undertaken then his own ingagement upon such a consideration as that We are therefore baptized with Christ unto death because we have undertaken upon our Baptism to mortifie our selves to the world that we may live to Gods service And upon that condition we promise our selves that we shall be raised from the dead again though by vertue of Christs rising again Being buried with him in Baptism wherein ye are also risen with him by faith of the effectuall working of God which raised him from the dead saith S. Paul Col. II. 12. For by obliging our selves to the profession of Christianity from a good heart and clear conscience we obtain the promise of the Holy Ghost whereby God effecteth the raising of us to a new life of righteousnesse necessarily consequent to the mortifying of sinne Besides these how many and how excellent effects are attributed to Baptism in the writings of the Apostles which without S. Peters distinction might seem strange that they should depend upon the clensing of the flesh but that they should by Gods appointment depend upon that ingagement whereby we give our selvs up to Christ for the future according to his distinction not at all For that this ingagement should not be effectuall till consigned unto the Church at Baptism cannot seem strange to him that believes the Catholick Church to be as I have shewed a corporation founded for the maintenance and exercise of that Christianity to which we ingage our selves by Baptism When the Jewes were pricked in heart to see our Lord whom they had crucified to be risen again and asked the Apostles Men and Brethren What shall we doe Acts II. 37 38. Peter saith unto them Repent and be baptized every one of you unto remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost Which if it depend upon Baptism what promise of the Gospel is there that does not To the same purpose Heb. VI. 6. It is impossible for them that have once been inlightned and tasted the heavenly gift and become partakers
holy Ghost though they presuppose not in themselves the profession of that true Christianity which the Catholike Church teacheth and whether baptized or not Whether supposing themselves praedestinate to life from everlasting upon the dictate of the same Spirit or justified by that faith which consisteth in revealing to them their praedestination from everlasting Alwayes supposing they have the Spirit in consideration of the merits and satisfaction of Christ without supposing the truth of that Christianity which they professe as a condition required by God in them whom he gives his Spirit But the opinion of the Socinians having in detestation this unchristian as well as unreasonable Principle acknowledgeth the gift of the holy Ghost to be granted by God to those who believing our Lord Jesus to be the Christ resolve to live according to all that he hath taught but denieth any consideration of the merits and satisfaction of Christ either in his sending the Gospel or in his giving the holy Ghost to enable a man to perform that which it requireth Onely acknowledging the free grace of God in sending those terms of reconcilement which the Gospel importeth and the free choice of man in accepting or refusing the same But upon the accepting or refusing of them concluding the promises of the Gospel to be necessarily due And therefore presuming that it is altogether unreasonable to make them still to depend upon an outward ceremony of Baptisme by water the consideration upon which they are tendered being already performed And therefore construing the proceeding of the Apostles and the Scriptures wherein they are mentioned upon such presumptions as these they conclude the reason and intent of the Baptisme which they gave according to the Commission of our Lord to be particular to the condition of those who being Jews or Gentiles before were thereby to acknowledge their uncleannesse in that estate and to professe a contrary course for the future So that the reason ceasing why they did Baptize the obligation also of their Baptisme must necessarily cease But in this great distance between the grounds upon which these extream opinions inferre the indifference of Baptisme it is easie to observe something common to both Namely that neither of them acknowledgeth any Catholike Church or any presumption of the visible unity thereof limiting that part of the Doctrine taught by the Scriptures which it is necessary to the salvation of all Christians that they professe as received from hand to hand by the Churches of the Apostles founding to be exacted of them whom they Baptize into themselves For this being set aside why should not Enthusiasts perswade themselves that they have the Spirit of God and a title to all the promises of the Gospel depending upon it by Christ if the Socinians can perswade themselves that they may have it by the meer act of their free will accepting the tender of the Gospel by believing that our Lord is the Christ and resolving to live as he hath taught without any consideration of his merits and sufferings Both being perswaded that for their salvation they are to make what they can of the Scriptures without any regard to the Church for securing the intent and meaning of it What shall hinder them indeed supposing the way plained to them both by admitting the necessity of Baptisme to be such that all the effects and consequences thereof may be thought to be had and obtained before and without it Certainly the waving of those grounds upon which the necessity of Baptisme may appear to be consistent with the undoubted efficacy of that Christianity which the heart onely feeleth is the breach that hath made a gap for these Heresies to enter into Gods Church For if no man can be thought to have right to be baptized that hath not true and living Faith which true and living faith alone qualifies any man for Remission of sins and salvation whether it consist in believing that our Lord Jesus is the Christ because he who believes that is obliged to live as he teacheth the Scriptures according to the Socinians Or in believing that we are praedestinate to life in regard of our Lord Christ dying for us according to the Enthusiasts what remaineth for Baptisme to procure that is not assured already before a man be Baptized And therefore I conceive I demand nothing but reason For all the gaine that I demand from all this is no more but that it be freely acknowledged that justification by faith alone and that faith which alone justifieth be not so understood as to make the promises of the Gospel due before Baptisme to which the Scripture interpreted by the consent and practice of the whole Church testifieth that Baptisme concurreth A thing which can by no means be obtained but by placing that faith which alone justifieth aswell in the outward act of professing as in the inward act of believing This profession containing an expresse promise or vow to God whereby we undertake to live as those who believe the Gospel of Christ are by Gods Law to live And that promise or vow to be celebrated and solemnized by the Sacrament of Baptisme appointed by our Lord Christ to that purpose For seeing the professing of Christianity and not the believing of it is that which brings upon the Church that persecution which the Crosse of Christ the mark of a disciple signifies neither can it be reasonable that God should allow the promises of the Gospel to any quality that includeth it not nor unreasonable that he should make them depend upon it And seing it is not the profession of any thing that a man may call Christianity though perhaps grounded upon an imagination that he hath learned it from the Scriptures which God accepteth whatsoever a man may suffer for the maintenance and affirmation of it but of that which himself sent our Lord Christ to preach It is no marvel if God who esteemeth nothing but for that affection of the heart wherewith it is done should notwithstanding accept no disposition of the heart towards the profession of Christianity but that which is executed and solemnized by such an outward ceremony as himself hath limited his disciples their successors to celebrate it with For supposing that God hath founded the unity of his Church upon supposition of professing that Christianity which he gave his Apostles Commission to preach consisting in the visible communion of those offices which God is served with by Christians it will be evident why God who esteemeth the heart alone hath not allowed the promises of his Gospel to any but those who professe Christianity by being admitted to Baptisme by the Church Because as it is not any beliefe or resolution that may be called Christianity but that which the Church hath received from the Lord and his Apostles that qualifies a man for those promises which God tenders by the Covenant of Grace So it is not the profession of any beliefe or resolution that qualifies a
thus proceedeth Heb. IX 13 14. For if the blood of Bulls and Goats and the ashes of an Heifer sprinkled sanctify the polluted to the purifying of the flesh how much more shall the blood of Christ who through the everlasting spirit offered himself to God blamelesse cleanse our conscience from dead works to serve the living God For though the Soul of Christ raised from the dead have immortality which is life indissoluable yet it hath not the virtue of it which is to be ascribed to the Spirit which raised him from the dead as vvell as us according to S. Paul Rom. VIII 10. 11. If Christ be in you though the body be dead because of sin yet the Spirit is life because of righteousness But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you he that raised Iesus from the dead shall quicken your mortall bodies also through his Spirit that dwelleth in you And whether the cleansing of sin can be ascribed to any gift bestowed upon the humane Soule of Christ as here they vvould have it ascribed to the immortality thereof let all the World judge I deny not indeed that Christ offers the Sacrifice of himself to the Father in the Heaven of Heavens as the Priest offered him the blood of those Sacrifices which were burnt without the Camp in that Holy of Holies But if I should deny that he offered himself to God vvhen he vvas crucified I might as vvell deny that the Priests offered therein Sacrifices to God when they killed them at the Altar and burnt them upon it So manifest so certain it is that the eternall Spirit by virtue whereof the blood of Christ being offered cleanseth sin was in Christ before his rising again And this is that which S. Paul saith 1 Tim. III. 16. And without crontroversie Great is the mystery of Godliness God was manifested in the Flesh justified in the Spirit preached to the Gentiles seen of Angels believed of the World taken up into Glory It is sayd indeed that the Syriack the Vulgar Latine the Arabick and the Commentaries under S. Ambrose his name all want 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here and understand S. Paul to speak of the Gospel all the while And that the Gospel being sayd to be preached before it is sayd to be taken up into Glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be no more then that it is exalted and glorified As if the order of the words did inforce that which is first sayd to have been first done or as if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not signifie the taking of him up to God but the making of the Gospel famous Such violence will a prejudicate supposition offer even to Gods words rather then to quit an argument For to what sense can the Gospel be sayd to be manifested in the flesh because preached by the man Christ And suppose it may be sayd to be justified by the Spirit as Wisdome is justified by the Children of Wisdome Mat. XI 9. Luke VII 35. how much more proper is it to understand that God who appeared in the flesh should be sayd to be justified so to be in or by the Spirit the Works whereof shewed him so to be as afore Neither shall we need to make any greater doubt of the reading of those vvords of S. Paul Acts XX. 28. Look therefore to your selves and to the whole Flock ever which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bishops to feed the Church of God which he hath gotten with his blood Though the written Copy at S. James and the Syriack read here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because that the Church over which the Holy Ghost makes Bishops it bought with the blood of Christ is the same with that of the Apostle afore that the blood of Christ offered by the eternall Spirit cleanseth sin Neither is it so easie to avoyd the words of the Apostle Heb. XI 16. as some imagine For he took not Angels but the Seed of Abraham he took Suppose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be to challenge which is done by laying hands on that which we challenge Is the ground therefore void upon which he challenges these to life as his own that through feare of death were in bondage does not the whole Epistle argue that this is done by the offering of our flesh saith he not expresly that it behoved him to become like his Brethren in all things and that he is not ashamed to call them Brethren because he that sanctifieth and those who are sanctified are all of one Heb. XI 11. 14. 17. does Christ vindicate mankind or the Seed of Abraham For though this is written to the Hebrews alone yet it was written at such time as all christians understood that it belongs no less to the Gentiles Wherfore it is manifest that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which might seem to signifie Christs challenging mankind or vindicating them into freedome from death as well here as elswhere is restrained by the Text and consequence of the Apostles discourse to signifie the assuming of mans nature by the means whereof he won mankind into freedome and maintains it in the same In fine when the Apostle sayth 1 Pet. I. 11. That the ancient Prophets did search against what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ that was in them did declare and profess the sufferings to come upon Christ and the glories following the same He sheweth plainly that the same Spirit by which they spake by fits dwelt in the flesh of Christ for ever having once assumed it Of which Spirit the Evangelist sayth Marke XI 8. That Jesus knew by the Spirit how the Pharises reasoned of him within themselves For as I sayd afore that when it is sayd in the Old Testament that the word of God came to this or that Prophet an Angel appeared unto him speaking in the person of God vvho vvas therefore vvorshiped as God because the Word of God for vvhich being incarnate our Lord Jesus is for ever to be Worshiped as God vvas in that Angel at the present for that Service So I must further note here that upon such Word of God coming to a Prophet he became inspired that is possessed and acted by the Spirit of God for the time of that Service vvhich God by such a message imployed him about Not that all Prophets did receive such Word by such message from God before they spake those things which we believe still they spake by the Spirit of God For there is a great deal of appearance in the Scripture for that which the Jewes doctors deliver unto us Abarbanel by name alleging Maimoni for his saying upon Numb XI that there are inferior degrees of Prophesie which comes not by apparitions in which a man saw one that spake to him in Gods Name but sometimes meerly by inspiration of Gods Spirit inwardly moving either to act or to speak as
produceth the other freedome from bondage either to sin or righteousnesse Not that this state of proficience requires actual indifference which supposeth so great an inclination biasse as that of inbred concupiscence Not determining the will to any action or object but the acts thereof to those taints which the want of a due end right reason and therefore of just measure in a mans desire necessarily inferreth But because in passing from the bondage of sin to the love of righteousnesse it is necessary that a man go through an instance of indifference wherein his resolution shall balance betweene the love of true good and that which is counterfeit It is therefore to be acknowledged that in the state of innocence there had needed no other helpe then the knowledge of Gods will to inable men to performe whatsoever he should require Of the spheare of nature supposing Adam instituted and called onely to the uprightnesse and happinesse of this life or supernaturall supposing him instituted and called to the world to come For where no immoderate inclination of the sensuall appetite created any difficulty what should hinder the prosecution of a reason so unquestionable as the will of God is But is not therefore the knowledge of Gods will revealed by the gospell under reasons convincing man of his obligation to doe it upon the account of his utter misery or perfect happinesse the grace of Christ Knowing by the scriptures alleged before that the means of it are purchased by his crosse that where the reason is so convinced there cannot want motives sufficient to incline the will to make choice Not that I think those reasons not being necessary but onely sufficient would take place were they not managed by Gods spirit Whether for the dificulty of supernatural actions or for the contrary biasse of inbred concupiscence But because in the nature of a sufficient helpe they do actually inable a man to make choice though in regard of the difficulties which contrary inclinations create is is most certaine they would prove addle and void of effect were they not conducted by the grace of God which is called effectuall for the event of it Not that the nature of those helps which prevaile is any other then the nature of those which overcome not which I may well affirme if Jansenius though to the prejudice of his opinion can not deny it but because they are by the worke of providence presented in severall circumstances to severall dispositions and inclinations whether of Gods mere will and pleasure as he is Lord of all things or upon reason of reward or punishment in maters wherein he hath declared himself by the Covenant of Grace So that the same reasons and motives which in some prove void and frustrate coming to effect and reaching and attaining to the very doing of the work which they inable a man to doe it cannot â—e said according to this position of mine that God by the grace of Christ onely inableth to do what he requireth the will of man making the difference between him that doth it and him that doth it not but the very act as well as the ability of doing is duely ascribed to the worke of Gods Grace according to the articles agreed by the Church against Pelagius And this not onely under the Gospell but even under the Law For though I showed you in the first book that the law expressely tenders onely the promise of temporall happinesse in holding the land of Canaan for the reward of the outward and carnall observations thereof Yet I showed you also that in the meane time there was an other traffick in driving under hand between God and his people for the happinesse of the world to come upon their obedience to his Law for such reasons and to such an end and with such measures as he requireth Therefore The Law is spirituall according to S. Paul Rom VII 14. and a grace according to S. Iohn I. 16 17. When he saith Of his fulnesse wee have all received and grace for grace For the Law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ The grace of the Gospell instead of the grace of the Law And S. Paul againe speaketh of the things which are granted us by the Gospell not in wâ—rds taught by mans wisdome but by the Holy Ghost comparing spirituall things with spirituall things 1. Cor. II. 13. Signifying that he taught the Gospell out of the Law comparing the spirituall things of the Gospell as signified by the Law to the same spirituall things as revealed by Christ And againe when he saith Rom. I. 17. The righteousnesse of God is revealed in the Gospell from faith to faith His meaning is proceeding to the faith of Christ from that which was under the Law True iâ— is indeed and I acknowledge that this spirituall sense of the Law was not to be discovered in the Law nor was discovered under it without the revelation of Gods spirit that placed it there to his friends the Prophets and by them to their disciples and followers But the office of those Prophets being to call the people to the spirituall service of God obedience to his Law out of love which was the intent for which his spirit strove with them as with those before the floud Gen. VI. 2. Whereupon Noe is called the preacher of righteousnesse 2. Peter II. 5. it followes of necessity that there was meanes for them to learne to practice true righteousnesse seeing they are charged for resisting the spirit of God calling them to it S Steven in the seventh of the Acts insisteth not in convincing the Jewes of the truth of Christianity supposing it done by that which had passed but inferrs by all that long speech clearely this That as the Israelite refused Moses for a judge between him and the Israelite whom he wronged as the people were rebellious to him in the wildernesse and turned back in their hearts to Egypt so were they to the prophet whom Moses had foretold concluding therefore Ye stifnecked and uncircumcised in hearts and eares ye doe alwaies resisty the Holy Ghost as your fathers so you also Which of the prophets did not your fathers persecute Killing those that foretold of the coming of that righteous one of whom you are now become the traytors and murtherers And our Lord when he telleth them that by honouring the memories of the Prophets and persecuting the Prophets and wise and Scribes Apostles whom he was sending them they owned themselves heires of them that killed the Prophets Mat. XXIII 29 37. showeth that the case was the same with the Prophets of old as with himselfe and his Apostles And whatsoever we read in the old Testament of the grace of God to that people in granting them his spirit or of their ungraciousnesse in resisting the same serves to prove the same purpose It is truly said indeed in rendring the reason why our Lord Christ came not till towards
stand obliged to second the same with means sufficient to bring them to everlasting happinesse For the beginning of the worke being acknowledged to require Gods preventing Grace it cannot be said that those who are supposed to be thus saved are saved by works and not by grace or that in their regard Christ is dead in vaine the said helps being granted in consideration of Christs death But though it may without prejudice to christanity be said that God may dispense the helps of that grace which Christs death hath purchased besides and without the preaching of the Gospell yet can it not be said during the Gospell that any man attaineth the kingdom of heaven which Christianty promiseth but by it Now to be saved by the Gospell requires the profession of the faith and that the Sacrament of Baptisme at least in resolution and purpose So that whether among those nations where the gospell is not preached any man be saved by this way is a thing visible to be tried by examining whom this case hath been knowne to have become a Christian Of which I assure my selfe there will be found so few instances of historical truth that a discreet man will have no pleasure to introduce a position so neerely concerning the intent of Christs coming wherof there can so little effect appear For supposing instances might be alleaged to make the mater questionable how farr would they be from rendring a reason of that vast difference that is visible between the proceeding of God towards the salvation of those that are borne within the Pale of the Church and those that live and dye without hearing of christianity The one being so prevented with the knowledg of what they are to doe to be saved that they shall have much a do so to neglect it as to flatter their own concupiscence with any color of an excuse Whereas the other whatsoever conviction we may imagine them to have of one true God of an account to be made for all that wee doe of the guilt of sin which they are under without the Gospell it will be impossible to reduce the reason of the difficulties they are under more then the former to an equall desire in God of saving all together with the difference of mens complyance with the helps of Grace which it produceth And therefore considering the antecedent will of God is not absolutly Gods will but with a terme of abatement reserving the condition upon which it proceedeth I conceive it requisite as I have don to limit the signification thereof to those effects which we see God being to passe by vertue of it The utmost whereof being the provâ—dâ—ng of means for the preaching of the Gospell it is neverthelesse no prejudice to it that the Apostles are forbidden by the spâ—rit to preach in Bithynia or Asia Acts XVâ— 6 7. not because God would not have them to be saved or because the Macedonians by their works had obliged him to set them aside for their sakes who could have provided for both But for reasons knowne to himselfe alone and not reducible to any thing that appeares to us Especially considering the câ—se of infants dying before Baptisme in whose workes it is manifest there can be no ground of difference For to say that by the universality of that Grace which God declareth by Christ wee are to believe that they are all saved as many as live not to transgresse the Covenant of grace would be a novelty never heard of in the Catholike Church of Christ tending to unâ—ermine the foundation of our common salvation laid by our Lord â—o Nicodâ—mus Vnlâ—sse ye bâ— born againe of water and of the Holy Ghost ye cannot enter into the Kingdome of God For how should the generall tender of the Gospell intitle infants to the benefit thereof because they never transgressed that in which they were never estated It were in vaine then to looke about the scripture for examples to justifie any part of this position The widow of Sarepta to whom Elias was sent Naaman the Syrian who was sent to Eliseus Cyâ—us whom many supposed to have worshipped the onely God because in the end of the Chronicâ—es and beginning of Esdras he saith the God of heaven hath given me all the Kingdoms of the earth because the Prophet Esay makes him a figure of the Messias as the Kings of Gods people were for the freedom which they attained by his government the Centurion Cornelius to whom S. Peter was sen with the Gospell are all of one case which is the case of thâ—se strangers who living in the common-wealth of Israel though not circumcised yet woâ—shiped the onely true God under those lawes which the Jews tell us were delivered by God to Noe and by him to all his posterity and so were capable of thaâ— salvation which the Israelites had the meanes of under the Law though themselves not under it But neither have we evidence that their works under the light of nature obliged God to call them to the priviledg of stâ—angers in the hâ— use of Israel nor can the workes of Cornelius be taken for the workes of corrupt nature being in the state of Gods grace which was manifested under the Law and therefore prevented with those meanes of salvation which become necessary under the Gospell to the salvation which it tendreth So far are we from finding in them any argument of a Law obliging God to grant them those helps in consideration of their works don in the state of corrupt nature And therefore whatsoever examples we may find of this nature under Christianity they are to be referred to the free grace of God which as sometimes it may come to those of best conversation according to nature to whom the words oâ— our Lord To him that hath shall be given may be applied without prejudice to Christianity Math. XXV 19. Luk XIX 26. So also it fails not to call those who for their present state are most strangers to christianity that it may appeare that no Rule ties God but that free grace which his own secret wisdom dispenseth And truly those good works which corupt nature produceth necessarily depend upon those circumstances in which Gods proâ—â—dence placeth one man and not an other though both in the state of meere nature So that the one shall not be able to do that which is reasonable without overcoming those difficulties to which the other is not lyable In which regard it hath been said that the Heroick acts of the Heâ—hen may be attributed to the spirit of God moving them though not as granted in consideration of Christ but as conducting the whoâ—e worke of providence So little cause there is to imagine that the consideration of them should oblige God to grant those helps of grace the ground whereof is the obedience of Christ and the end the happinesse of the world to come CHAP. XXVI Predestination to grace absolute to glory respective Purpose of denying effectuall Grace
easy to wipe it off with S. Pauls argument as any of those vaine words that were advanced in his time For if for those thinges the wrath of God cometh upon Gentiles that are darknesse much more upon them who being become light have a share in the works of darknesse if S. Pauls argument be good And whatsoever induces a man to beleeve otherwise belonges to those vaine words which S. Paul forbids them to be deceived with The prophesy of Ezekiel must needes have a roome here which in order to induce the backsliding Israelites to repentance protests that God judgeth the righteous that turneth from his righteousnesse and the sinner that turneth from his sinne not according to the righteousnesse or to the sinne from which but according to that to which they turne Ezek. XVIII 5 For to say that the Prophet of God speaking in Gods name of the esteeme and reward which God hath for righteous and unrighteous speakes onely of that which seemes righteousnesse and unrighteousnesse to the world or which an hypocrite cousens himselfe to thinke such is such an open scorne to Gods word as cannot be maintained but by taking righteousnesse to signify unrighteousnesse and turning for not turning but continuing in that wickednesse which was at the heart when he professed otherwise Which is nothing else but to demand of us to renounce our senses and the reason common to all men together with the signification of these wordes whereby God deales with us in the same sense as we among our selves to make good a prejudice so prejudiciall to Christianity And what shall we doe with those examples and instances of holy men recorded in holy Scripture to have fallen from Gods grace into his displeasure beginning with our first parents Adam and Eve whom no man doubteth to have beene created in the state of Gods grace that will not have theire fall redound upon Gods account For if it be said that this is a difference between the Covenant of workes first set on foote with our first parents in Paradise and the Covenant of grace tenderd by our Lord Christ It is said indeed but it cannot be maintained without destroying all that hath been premised of the Covenant of Grace and the condition of the same Which though it take place under the Covenant of workes which is supposed forfeite to restore mankind to the hope of a heavenly reward upon conditions proportionable to theire present weaknesse hath notwithstanding appeared to be tendred to their free choice as containing conditions by transgressing whereof they forfeite as much as Adam could doe The examples of Saul and Solomon and David and S. Peter have in them indeed some difference one from another but is there any of them that imports not the state of damnation after the state of grace S. Peter it is plaine forfeits the condition of professing Christ whom he that denieth if our Lord say true in the Gospell Luke XII 8. 9. shall himselfe be denied at the generall judgment and can we imagine his teares to have been shedde without sense of this forfeite Wherefore whatsoever seedes of grace remained in him to move him to repentance as soone as he was become sensible of his estate it is manifest that he had lost the state of grace which he laboureth to recover by repentance I will not examine how much longer David lay in his sinnes then S. Peter before the Prophet Nathan brought him to the sense of them It is enough that he prayes so for pardon as no man could doe for that which he thought he had afâ—ore He prayes also for the restoring of Gods Spirit to him againe Psal LI. 10. 11. 12. Make me a clean heart O God and renew a right Spirit within me Cast me not away from thy presence and take not thine holy Spirit from me O give me the comfort of thine helpe againe and stablish me with thy free Spirit For that which he prayes God not to take away he acknowleges to be forfeite So that it is but of reason that he further desires that it be restored him rather then continued Some thinke they avoide this by understanding onely the Spirit of Prophesy to be his desire not wanting the Spirit of regeneration whereby he desires it Which in the case of David no way takes place without offering violence to the words And I have sufficiently advised that by the helpe of Gods Spirit granted out of that grace which preventeth the Covenant of grace and that state of grace which dependeth upon the undertaking of it a man is inabled to desire the gift of Gods Spirit to dwell in him according to that which the Covenant of Grace promiseth As for Saul and Solomon both of them indowed with Gods Spirit the one of them must not be understood ever to have been in the state of grace the other to have ever fallen from it For it is alleged that Balaam and Caiaphas prophesied and our Lord shall say to those that had prophesied and cast out devils and done miracles in his Name I never knew you Mat. VIII 22. 23. But S. Paules words would be considered concerning his Apostles office 2 Cor. III. 4. 5. 6. This confidence we have towards God through Christ Not because we are sufficient of our selves to thinke any thing as of our selves but our sufficience is of God who hath made us able ministers of the New Testament not of the letter but of the Spirit For if the grace of an Apostle suppose not the grace of a Christian how hath S. Paul confidence to God in the grace of an Apostle given him by God which a Christian obtaineth through Christ Certainly no man spares to argue from these words that we are not able of our selves to think any thing towards the discharge of a Christian mans office as taking it for granted that a good Apostle supposes a good Christian And what an inconvenience were it to grant that God imployes men that are not good upon his messages to mankind giving them the oporation of the Holy Ghost to demonstrate that he sendes them which is sufficient credit for all that they deliver as in his name unlesse we will imagine it no inconvenience that God gives testimony to those whom he would not have to be beleeved As for Balaam it is manifest that he was imployed by unclean Spirits to maintaine men in theire Idolatries by foretelling things to come by their means And that Gods appearing to him to hinder him from cursing his people was upon the same account as Arnobius saith that Magicians did use to find the virtue of Spirits opposite to those unclean Spirits whome they imployed not suffering them to bring to effect those misehevious intentions for which they set them on work And by this means it was that Balaam not being imployed by God is forced to declare that will of God which he would have made voide As for Caiaphas it is not to be imagined that he had any
revelation of that truth which he declareth by the inspiration of Gods Spirit but that God who from the beginning had used the High Preists by Urim and Thummim to declare his direction to that people directed his words so that they might serve to declare that will of his which he had never acquainted him with as a Prophet of his nor could have been acknowledge for that will which God intended to declare by him had not S. John by the Spirit of God declared Gods intent in so directing his words Wherefore when God changed Saâ—les heart at his parting with Samuel and sent his spirit upon him straight wayes 1 Sam. X. 9. 10. it seemes that having liked so well of him as to call him to be Prince of his people he indowed him with the grace of his Spirit for the discharge of that place which onely a good man could rightly discharge Whereupon it followes that the taking away of this Spirit and sending an evill Spirit in steade thereof to torment him are the evidences of his fall from that inward grace which the gift of Gods Spirit presupposed afore Whereby we may judge what the Parable of the uncleane Spirit cast out and returning with seven Spirits worse then himselfe Mat XII 43. 44. 45. Luke XI 24. 25. 26. imports to our purpose though being a Parable I bring it not into consequence The like is to be said of those who having prophesied and done miracles in our Lords name shall not be acknowledged by him at the day of judgement For when he saith I never knew you he speaketh out of the knowledge of God which reaching from one end to the other at the same instant when they had the grace of Prophesy to witnesse their imployment from God foresaw that they would fall away and becoming Apostates retaine no part in the kingdome of heaven which they had preached No mervaile if he take them not for his who he sees are not to be his for everlasting To which purpose the graces of Gods Spirit are promised true Christians Marke XVI 17. Acts II. 38. V. 32. And though Origen hath excellently said that the name of Christ had such power over devils that some times being alleged by evill men it did the deed though rather when out of the sound and genuine disposition of beleivers as those Ebrews who in our Lords time did exorcise Devils as he showes us Mat. XII 25. and as we learne by Justine Martyr Irenaeus Tertulliane and Theophilus of Antiochia produced there by Grotius that so they did till theire time yet the doing of miracles in evidence of the Gospell which they preached alleged by those whome our Lord shall disclaime seemes to import a great deale more then the casting out of devils by naming the name of Christ and therefore to containe the approbation of those men whose imployment from God they seemed to witnesse Here is the place where I will give the true meaning to three or foure Scriptures for so many there are that in opposition to the whole streame of Gods book men will needes produce to reconcile the promises of the Gospell with the present guilt and love of sinne in Christians that have beene overtaken with it Jesus answered and said to the Samaritane woman John IV. 13. 14. 15. Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst againe But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall not thirst for ever but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up to life everlasting The woman said to him Lord give me that water that I may not thirst nor come hither to draw I allow him that hath a mind to it to translate our Lords words shall never thirst For it is plaine the woman understood him as if he had told her of a water which whoso should once drink of should never be a thirst any more as long as he lived But if she failed of his meaning because she understood not that he spake of thirsting in the world to come do not they faile of his meaning who when he saith he that drinks of my water shall not thirst for everlasting understand it to be that he shall never thirst in this world Being so plaine that he shall not thirst in the world to come They make him say He that once tastes of my Grace in him the spring of it shall never dye in this world which is that the woman understood him to say in the literal sense because she understood not that he spake of the world to come He comparing this world with the world to come saith He that drinkes of my water in this world shall not thirst in the world to come Which is to say that he who departs from the Christianity which once he professed in this world does not drink of my water in this world because he comes short of my promise that in him it shall be a well of water springing up to life everlasting I have no reason to be afraid any more of the difficulty of S. Pauls words Rom. VIII 28-39 having showed by evident arguments that the subject of them are they that love God they that are called according to purpose they that he foreknew to be such they that walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit in Christ Jesus For to such I may well allow that all workes for the best because God having foreappointed them to be once conformable to the pattern of his sonne that he might be the first-borne of many calleth them â—o their trialls and finding them faithfull in them justifyeth and glorifyeth them therefore Nor can S. Pauls words signify more supposing when he saith whom he foreknew those he predestinated whom he predestinated those he called whom he called those he justifyed whom he justified those he glorified That he speakes of those whom God foreknew to be qualified as afore then this that knowing them to be such he appointed them to bear Christs Crosse and to inherit his glory for the reward of it Wherefore when it followes What shall we then say to these things If God be with us who can be against us He that spared not his own Sonne but delivered him up for us all how shall he not with him give us all things It is manifest that the quality which S. Paul understandeth in them whom he comprehends when he names us is no other but that which he hath described true Christians by thus farre And therefore when he proceeds Who shall impeach the elect of God It is God that justifieth who shall condemn It is Christ that died or rather that is risen againe who is also at the right hand of God Who also maketh intercession for us It is manifest that this word elect hath no maner of reference to Gods everlasting decree but to the present Christianity of those whom God declareth to account his choice ones his jewels his first fruits out of
have not received any more the Spirit of bondage to fear but ye have received the Spirit of adoption whereby ye cry Abba that is Father For those that are led with the hope of temporall promises as all must necessarily be led under that Law which was established upon such must needs be subject to fear of disgrace with God whensoever their sinnes allowed not those promises to take place So then though they were then partakers of Gods Spirit as the Prophet Ezekiel showes us XXXVI 27. XXXVII 14. XXXIX 20. Yet in as much as it is called the Spirit of feare there is due argument that they were not pertaker of that peace and joy in the holy Ghost which Christians afterwards were moved with to indure all persecution for the maintainance of their profession But the Apostle pointeth us ouâ— further the sourse of this feare Heb. II. 14 15. When he saith that our Lord Christ tooke part â—f flesh and bloud that by death he might abolish him that had the power of death â—ven the devil and discharge all those that through the fear of death were all their life long subject unto bondage For so long as the promises of this life ended in death and the punishments thereof conducted to it they who knew that death came into the world upon the transgression of Adam could not think themselves discharged of Gods wrath so long as they found themselves liable to the debt of it No marvaile then if the Spirit of God were the Spirit of fear in them who saw not as yet the kingdom of death dissolved by the rising of our Lord Christ from the dead Another argument I make from the words of our Lord when the disciples were ready to demand fire from heaven upon those Samaritanes that received them not after the example of Elias Luke IX 52-56 Ye know not what Spirit ye are of saith our Lord For the Son of man came not to destroy but to save mens lives Whereby he declareth that because the Gospel bringeth salvation whereas the Law wrought wrath as S. Paul saith by tendring conviction of sinne without help to overcome it Rom. III. 20. IV. 15. VII 8-11 therefore God requireth under the Gospel of those that are his the Spirit that seeketh onely the good of them from whose hands they receive it not Whereas under the Law even his Prophets revenged themselves of their enemies by vengeance obtained at Gods hands And by this meanes we have an answer for that difficulty otherwise insoluble in our Lords words of John Baptist Mat. XI 11. Verily I say to you there never arose among those that are born of women one greater then John the Baptist But the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater then he For if God under the Law required not of his Prophets that perfection of Charity which the Gospel exacteth of all Christians if in those things which they said and did by Gods Spirit they have not expressed it well may it be said that the least of all those that belong to the Gospel in truth which here is called the kingdom of heaven is in a respect of so great concernment greater then the Prophets of the Old Testament As for the example of Jael the wife of Eber the Kenite who being in league with Jabin and Siâ—era for the good of Gods people knocked him on the head being retired into the protection of her house and is commended for it by the Spirit of God in Deborah the Prophetesse Jud. V. 17-21 VI. 24-28 The instance indeed is difficult enough And they that are so ready to condemne the fact of Judith in cutting off Holefernes by deceit and that by the example of her father Simeon that spoiled and destroyed the men of Shecheâ—â— contrary to covenant Judg. IX 2. Gen. XXXIV 23. are not advised how to come clear of it Suppose there was just cause of hostility between them a daughter of the house being dishonoured by the Prince of that people For among Gods people their chastity was alwayes as highly valued as it was little regarded among Idolaters Suppose that they condescended to be circumcised not for love to the true God but for hope of increasing their own power and riches by bringing the Israelites under their Government as there is appearance enough in the words of Hamor Gen. XXXIV 20 21 22. Yet a league being inacted upon such a pretense the zeal of Simeon and Levi in destroying those that were come under the covering of Gods wings so farre very well figures the zeal of the Jewes in persecuting the Apostles and not allowing the Gentiles any room of salvation by their own onely true God And therefore it is excellently observed by S. Jerome Tradit Hebr. in Genesin that the Scribes were of the tribe of Simeon as the Priests of the tribe of Levi in whom the curse of Jacob by the Spirit of God detesting their fact and prophesying the like to those their successors in the case of our Lord Christ and his Apostles I will divide them in Jacob and scatter them in Israel Gen. XLIX 5 6 7. was evidently fulfilled in the mysticall sense The tribe of Levi for gathering of Tithes and the tribe of Simeon for imployment of Clarkes and Notaries dwelling dispersed through all the tribes as Solomon Jarchi in his glosse upon the place literally expoundeth it But the case of Judeth is the case of a stratageme in professed hostility which whether Christianity allowe or not certainly no Law of nations disallowes And therefore though she propose to her self the zeale of Simeon and Levi for the honour of their people and the successe they had against their enemies yet if we understand her not to commend the meanes by which they brought it to passe to wit by violating the publick faith we shall not find her contradict the Spirit of God which by Jacob condemns them for it As for the â—â—act of Jael it is in vaine to alledge any mysticall sense to justify it as some would do unlesse we can undertake that there was no such thing done in the way of historicall truth which I suppose no man will be so madde as to do And therefore if any man will not believe that the Spirit of God in Deborah extolls onely the temporall benefit which the people of God reâ—ped by that fact of hers for which she was alwayes to be famous amongst them leaving to her self the justification of her conscience Let him seek a better answer But he who transgressing that Charity that is fundamentall in Christianity and therefore without which no Christian can obtaine the Spirit of God shall make her example a motive to that which he cannot justify even in Gods ancient people Though I allow him to mistake Christians for Pagans and Idolaters whose professed enmity to Gods people upon the account of Religion was the ground of that revenge which they were allowed then to pursue them with yet I must not allow him
to be a Christian that teaches that wickednesse which a Jew dare not maintaine Though it be just with God to suffer them that presume of the assistance of Gods Spirit in understanding the Scriptures before they be principled in Christianity which the gift of Gods Spirit to Christians presupposeth to be led unto such wicked imaginations by reading the Scriptures as he suffered those that setting up their Idols in their hearts and putting the stumbling block of their iniquities before their faces came to seek direction from God to be seduced by the Prophets by whom they should come to inquire as the Propheâ— threatneth Ezek. XIV 8 10. As for the fact of David and Husâ—ai in ruining of Absalom 2 Sam. XV. 32-37 XVI 16-19 XVII 5-14 there is the lesse difficulty in it because we are not obliged to maintaine the actions of the Fathers to be without sinne and the Spirit of God doth no where commend it Which also holds in those officious lies wherewith Rebecca and the Midwives of the Israâ—lites and Rahab the harlot seduced Isaak and the King of Egypt and the Rulers of Jericho to the good of Gods people Gen. XXVII Exod. I. 15-21 Jos II. 4 5. because whatsoever were the successe which God blessed them with yet as S. Augustine observes it s no where said that God blessed them for lying but for that love to his people which though joyned with their own weaknesse he then rewarded Though he that well considers the nature of these acts comparing them with these sayings and doings of David and Jeremy of Elias Elizaus and Samson which I have showed the spirit of God alloweth will without doubt find cause to believe that the reason why their acts which were joyned with such infirmities were blessed by God at that time is to be drawn from that measure of knowledge which the meanes allowed by God at that time afforded and the obligation which God required at their hands proportionable to the same From the premises we may proceed to resolve that endlesse dispute concerning the intent of our Lords Sermon in the Mount whether it was to take away those â—alse glosses which the Scribes and Pharisees had put upon the Law of Moses importing that nothing but the overt act of murder adulteries and the like stood prohibited by it or to inlarge it unto a further extent of forbidding the first motions of concupiscence in regard of that further light which the Gospel bringeth For I have showed that the most difficult passage of all which saith Thou shalt love thy neighbour and â—ate thine enemy Mat. V. 43. is according to the practise of the law in David Jeremy Elias and Elizeus which is without question the best interpreter of the law and the extent of it How much more if you translate it as questionlesse the Hebrew will allow us to translate it thou shalt love thine neighbour but mayest hate thine enâ—my For it is manifest that when the fourth Commandment saith Six dayes shalt thou labour and do all that thou hast to do the meaning is no more but this Six â—ayes thou mayest labour to wit as for this commandment So that this clause is nothing else but the consequence of that limitation which the law puts to the precept of loving a mans neighbour as himself understanding his neighbour to be onely an Israelite and teaching to pursue Idolaters with all manner of hatred Now when our Saviour saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his meaning is plain enough Ye have heard that it was said to them of old that is to the Fathers at the giving of the law not ye have heard it said by your Predecessors to wit the Scribes and Pharisees who about some hundred years beforâ— had begun to glosse the law with their Traditions Mat. V. 21 27 33 38 43. The subject matter in all the rest besides that which I have spoken of being alwaies the expresse letter of Moses law no Tradition of the Elders Yet it is not my intent to say that our Lords intent is not to clear the true meaning of the law from the false glosses of the Scribes and Pharisees For I acknwledge a false glosse of theirs upon Moses law which it is the intent not onely of the Sermon in the mount but of all the New Testament to clear I say the Scribes and Pharisees taking advantage of the truth of the world to come which they thought to be covenanted for and not onely intimated as the truth is by Moses law did inferre the reward thereof to be due to the outward and carnall observation of it And this is that false glosse of theirs which as every where else so here especially our Lord cleareth when he saith Vnlesse your righteousnesse exceed the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven Mat. V. 20. But this he doth by clearly inacting that conversation which the Gospel requireth whereof the Fathers of the Old law had onely expressed the rudiments and principles out of that light which the law joyned with the tradition of the Fathers and the doctrine of the Prophets had supplied Though so well accepted by God at that time that he failed not to grant his holy Spirit to them who had attained that measure of righteousnesse And therefore we are to conclude that during the Lâ—w there was a sincerity of righteousnesse consisting in the observation of the precepts thereof not out of any temporall respect or hope of this world but out of the sense of Gods will who searcheth the heart and judgeth the thoughts thereof according to which the Prophets of old and their disciples as Zachary and Elizabeth in the New Testament Luke I. 6. are to be counted perfect and intire in righteousnesse Comparing them forsooth with the Scribes and Pharisees and all their sect who in all ages of that people as I have showed standing so much upon the precise observation of the positive precepts thereof for their own power and advantage grossely failed in all performance where the sincerity of the heart became requâ—site But that when our Saviour saith Be ye perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect Mat. V. 48. It is manifest from the premises that he requireth of Christians that charity towards God and all men for Gods sake or to speak in those terms which I take to be more generall that respect to the will of God and his glory and service in all our doings which he did not covenant for with his ancient people Which point before I conclude that we may the better understand wherein I make this perfection of Christians to consist it will be requisite to resolve whether or no Christians can do more then the law of God requires and whether there are these offices which the law of God commands not but the Gospel onely commends as matters of counsel to those that aime at perfection among Christians not matters of necessity for all
Sacrament mystically I conceive I am excused of any further answer and am not obliged to declare the maner of that which must be mystical when I have said what I can say to declare it Onely I will take leave to tell him that hee will remain neverthelesse obliged to believe the truth both of the sign and of the thing signified and that by virtue of the Sacrament that is of the consecration that makes it a Sacrament not of the faith of him that receives it though I answer not all that hee demands upon the question What the Sacramental presence of the body and bloud of Christ in or with or under the Elements of the Eucharist signifies I would now consider wherein the Consecration of the Eucharist consists that I might thereupon inferre what kind of presence it inforceth But I hold it fit first to set aside those two opinions the one whereof I said ascribeth it to the Faith of them that receive being accidental to the Consecration and not included in it The other to the Hypostatical Union and that communication which it inferreth between the properties of the united natures That which I have already said I suppose is enough to evidence the mystical and spiritual presence of the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Elements as the Sacrament of the same before any man can suppose that spiritual presence of them to the soul which the eating and drinking Christs flesh and bloud spiritually by living Faith importeth Onely that I may once conclude how faith effecteth the Sacramental presence in the Elements as well as the spiritual in the Soul I will distinguish between the outward profession of Christianity which maketh us Members of Gods visible Church and the inward performance or faithful purpose of performing the same which makes a man of that number whom God owns for Heirs of his Kingdome whether you call that number an invisible Church or not And then I say that it is the visible profession of true Christianity which makes the Consecration of the Eucharist effectual to make the body and bloud of Christ Sacramentally present in the Elements of it But that it is the invisible faithfulnesse of the heart in making good or in resolving to make good the said profession which makes the receiving of it effectual to the spiritual eating and drinking of Christs body and bloud For supposing that God hath instituted and founded the Corporation of his Church upon the precept or the privilege of assembling to communicate in the offices of his service according to Christianity Whensoever this office is rendred to God out of that profession which makes men Members of Gods Church there the effect followes as sure as Christianity is true Where otherwise there can be no such assurance But if eating and drinking the body and bloud of Christ in this Sacrament unworthily be the crucifying of Christ again rendring a man guilty of his body and bloud then is not his flesh and bloud spiritually eaten and drunk till living faith make them spiritually present to the Soul which the Consecration maketh Sacramentally present to the body And it is to be noted that no man â—â—n say that this Sacrament represents or tenders and exhibites unto him that receiveth the body and bloud of Christ as all must do that abhorre the irreverence to so great an Ordinance which the opinion that it is but a bare sign of Christ crucified necessarily ingendreth but hee must believe this Unlesse a man will say that that which is not present may be represented that is to say â—â—nâ—râ—d and exhibited presently down upon the place It is not therefore that living faith which hee that receiveth the Eucharist and is present at the consecrating of it may have and may not have that causeth the body and bloud of Christ to be Sacramentally present in the Elements of it But it is the profession of that common Christianity which makes men Members of Gods Church In the unity whereof wheresoever this Sacrament is celebrated without enquiring whether those that are assembled be of the number of those to whom the Kingdome of Heaven belongs thou hast a Legal presumption even towards God that thou receivest the flesh and bloud of Christ in and with the Elements of bread and wine and shalt receive the same spiritually for the food of thy Soul supposing that thou receivest the same with living faith For one part of our common Christianity being this That our Lord Christ instituted this Sacrament with a promise to make by his Spirit the Elements of bread and wine Sacramentally his body and bloud so that his Spirit that made them so dwelling in them as in his natural body should feed them with Christs body and bloud that receive the Sacrament of them with living faith This institution being executed that is the Eucharist being consecrated according to it so sure as Christianity is true so sure the effect follows So that the faith which brings it to effect is the faith of them who believing Gods promises proceed to execute his Ordinances that they may obtain the same Whereas those that would have justifying faith to consist in believing a mans own Salvation or the decree of God perempâ—orily passed upon it and the Sacrament of the Eucharist to be appointed for a sign to confirm this faith which is nothing else but the revelation of this decree are not able to say how the signifying of the eating of Christs body and bloud conduces to such a revelation as this or why any such thing is done which conduceth not to the purpose Besides that having showed wherein justifying faith indeed consists I have by that means made it appear that the Sacramental nourishment of the Soul is the means of the spiritual nourishment of the Soul as well as the resemblance of it Here indeed it will be requisite to take notice of that which may be objected for an inconvenience That God should grant the operation of his Spirit to make the Elements Sacramentally the body and bloud of Christ upon the dead faith of them who receive it to their condemnation in the Sacrament and therefore cannot be said to eat the body and bloud of Christ which is onely the act of living faith without that abatement which the premises have established To wit in the Sacrament But all this if the effect of my saying be throughly considered will appear to be no inconvenience For that the body and bloud of Christ should be Sacramentally present in and under the Elements to be spiritually received of all that meet it with a living faith to condemn those for crucifying Christ again that receive it with a dead faith can it seem any way inconsequent to the Consecration thereof by virtue of the common faith of Christians professing that which is requisite to make true Christians whether by a living oâ— a dead faith Rather must wee be to seek for a reason why hee that â—ateth this bread and drinketh
Christ but that they are thereby made fit to be offered and therefore there must be some other act whereby they are offered in Sacrifice And this they finde in the Canon of the Masse For having rehersed the Institution whereby the parties agree that consecration is done it follows Vnde memores Domine nos servi tui sed plebs tua sancta ejusdem Christi filii tui Domini nostri tam beatae passionis ab inferis resurrectionis sed in coelis gloriosae ascensionis Offerimus praeclarae Majestati tuae de tuis donis ac datis hostiam puram hostiam sanctam hostiam immaculatam Panem sanctum vitae aeternae Calicem salutis perpetuae Supra quae propitio ac sereno vultu respicere digneris Et accepta habere sicut accepta habere dignatus os munera pueri tui justi Abel sacrisicium Patriarchae nostrî Abrahae quod tibi obtulit summus Sacerdos tuus Melchisedech sanctum sacrificium immaculatam hostiam Whereupon wee also thy servants O Lord and holy people mindefull as well of the blessed passion and resurrection from the dead as the glorious ascension into heaven of the same thy Son Christ our Lord Offer to thy excellent Majesty of thy own free gifts a pure sacrifice a holy sacrifice a spotlesse sacrifice the holy Bread of everlasting life and Cup of eternal salvation Vpon which vouchsafe to look with a gracious and clear countenance and accept them as thou deignedst to accept the gifts of thy just childe Abel and the sacrifice of our Patriarch Abraham and that holy sacrifice that spotlesse oblation which thy High Priest Melchisedech offered thee Then follows that which I quoted afore Supplices te rogamus Domine jube haec perferri And this they think to be the offering of the Sacrifice which the consecration exhibiteth onely to be offered at the elevation by these words But the common opinion is offended at this for placing the Sacrifice in that act of the Church which sayes Wee offer to thee in which there is onely a general reason of sacrificing by offering without changing that which is offered And therefore as offering is nothing but dedicating and presenting to the worship of God so that if the substance of the thing be changed in offering it then is it Sacrificing Supposing the substance of the Elements to cease and the body and bloud of Christ to succeed in this doing this opinion places the nature of the Sacrifice For the change of the Elements saith mine Author acknowledgeth Gods power and the dependance uâ—on him of his creature And the body of Christ being under the dimensions of the bread his bloud of the wine Christ is present as sacrificed his flesh and bloud being divided Wherefore that change whereby the Sacrifice is produced sufficeth to the offering of it which is produced as sacrificed The power of God being sufficiently testified by the change though in sacrificing living creatures it is testified by destroying them for Gods service And this hee thinks our Lord signifies when hee saith This is my body which is given for you This is my bloud which shall be poured out for you For to whom but to God seeing hee saith not that is given you But for you And immediately hereupon there is no doubt but it hath the nature of a Sacrifice The offering whereof must consist in that action which is done in the person of Christ as the Consecration they agree is done by using the words of Christ And thus though this Sacrifice by typical and representative of the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse which the parting of his body and bloud signifieth yet is it neverthelesse a true Sacrifice as the Sacrifices which figured Christ to come cease not therefore to be true Sacrifices And from this nature of a Sacrifice hee deriveth the reason why the Table is an Altar the Church a Temple the Minister Sacerdos or one that offereth Sacrifice I have made choice of this Authoâ— because I meet not this difference of opinion among them reported any where else That which I shall say to him will show what wee are to think of others For having maintained that the elements are really changed from ordinary bread and wine into the body and bloud of Christ mystically present as in a Sacrament And that in virtue of the Consecration not by the faith of him that receives I am to admit and maintain whatsoever appears duly consequent to this truth Namely that the Elements so consecrate are truly the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse in as much as the body and bloud of Christ crucified are contained in them not as in a bare sign which a man may take up at his pleasure but as in the means by which God hath promised his Spirit But not properly the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse because that is a thing that consists in action and motion and succession and therefore once done can never be done again because it is a contradiction that that which is done should ever be undone It is therefore enough that the Eucharist is the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse as the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse is represented renewed revived and restored by it and as every representation is said to be the same thing with that which it representeth Taking representing here not for barely signifying but for tendring and exhibiting thereby that which it signifieth On the other side I insist that if sacrificing signifie killing and destroying in the Sacrifices of the Old Testament and the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Crosse it is not enough to make the Eucharist properly a Sacrifice that the Elements are deputed to be worship of God by that change which Transubstantiation importeth and therefore much lesse not supposing any change in their bodily substance For this difference will abâ—te the property of a Sacrifice the truth of it remaining I grant that Gods Power is seen in this change according to the terms already settled For what Power but Gods can make good the promise of tendring the Body and Bloud of Christ as a visible mean to convey his Spirit And hee that goes about to make this change by consecrating the Eucharist must needs be understood to acknowledg this Power of Gods But this is not that acknowledgment which sacrificing importeth but that which every act of Religion implyeth Hee that Sacrificeth acknowledging that which hee sacrificeth with all that hee hath to God to testifie this acknowledgment abandoneth that which hee sacrificeth to be destroyed in testimony of it And therefore the Power of God is not testified in this change as the nature of a Sacrifice requires that it be testified For certainly hee intends not to abandon his interest in Christ that consecrates the Elements into his body and bloud And therefore the consideration of dedicating the Elements to the service of God in this Sacrament makes them properly oblations But the
is admitted to Baptism is likewise invested with a right and due title to the promises of the Gospel remission of sâ—nnes and everlasting life As it may appear to all that hâ—ve contracted with the Church of England in Gods name that continuing in that which they professed and undertook on ttheir part at their Baptism they are â—ssured of no lesse by the Church And therefore this is and ought to be accounted that power of the Keyes by which men are admitted to the House of God which is his Church as S. Paul saith At least that part of it that is seen and exercised in this first office that the Church can minister to a Christian And seeing no man can challenge the priviledge of that communion to which he is admitted upon condition of that profession which Baptism supposed unlesse he proceed to live according to it it cannot seem strange that the same should be thought to be exercised in the celebration of the Eucharist as it is done with a purpose to communicate the Sacrament thereof to those that receive I shall desire any man that counts this sâ—râ—nge to consider that which I quoted even now out of Epiphanius That the Patriarch of the Jews at Tiberias being baptized by the Bishop put a considerable sum of Gold into his hand saying Offer for me For it is written Whatsoever ye bind on â—atrh shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever ye lose on earth shall be losed in heaven For so it follows in Epiphanius And when S. Cyprian blames or forbids offering up the names or offering up the Eucharist in the names of those that had fallen away from the Church in time of persecution till they were reconciled to the Church by Penance doth he not exercise the power of the Keyes in his hands by denying the benefit of those Prayers which the Eucharist is celebrated with to them who had forfeited their right to it by failing of that which by their baptism they undertook As on the other side whosoever the Eucharist is offered for that is whosoever hath a part in those Prayers which it is celebrated with is thereby declared loose by the Church upon supposition that he is indeed what he professes And whatsoever Canons of the Church there are of which there are not a few which take order that the offerings of such or such shall or shall not be received they all proceed upon this suppoâ—â—tion that by the power of the Keys they are to be allowed or refused their part of benefit in the Communion of the Eucharist and the effects of iâ— For not to speak of what is by the corruption of men but what ought to be by the appointment of God it is manifest that the admission of a man to the communion of the Eucharist is an allowance of his Christianity as conâ—ormable to that which Baptism professeth though in no sâ—ate of the Church it is a sufficient and reasonable presumption that a man is indeed and before God intitled to the promises of the Gospel that he is admitted to the communion of the Eucharist by the Church because whatsoever profession the Church can receive may be counâ—erfeit But so that it is to be indeavoured by all means possible for the Church to use that the right of communicating with the Church in the Sacrament of the Eucharist be not allowed any man by the Church but upon such terms and according to such laws that a man being qualified according to them may be really and indeed qualified for those promises which the Gospell tendreth Which being supposed every Christian must of necessity acknowledge how great and eminent a power the Lord hath trusted his Church with in celebrating and giving of the Eucharist when he is convinced to believe that the body and blood of Christ is thereby tendred him though mystically and as in a Sacrament yet so truly that the spirit of Christ is no lesse really present with it to inable the souls of all them that receive it with sincere Christianity then the Sacrament is to their bodies or then the same spirit is present in the flesh and bloud of Christ naturally being in the heavens For suppose that by faith alone without receiving this Sacrament a man is assured of the spirit of Christ as by faith alone understanding faith alone as S. Paul meant it I shall show that he may be assured of it yet if he have determined a visible act to be done to the due performance whereof he hath annexed a promise of the participation of the Spirit of Christ by our Spirit no lesse then of the body â—nd blood of Christ Sacramentally present by our bodies And if he hath made the doing of this a part of the Christianity which under the title of Faith alone inâ—iâ—leth to promises of the Gospell for who can be said to professe Christianity that owneth not such an Ordinâ—nce upon such a promise Then hath he determined and limited the truth of that faith which onely justifieth us at the beginning of every mans Christianity to the Sacrament of Baptism but in the proceeding of the same to that of the Eucharist These being the first Powers of the Church and having resolved from the beginning that the power of the Church extends to the deterâ—ining or limiting of any thing requisite to the communion of the Church the determination or limitation wherof by such an act as ought to have the force of Law to them that are of the Church becomes requisite to the communion of Christians in the offices of Gods service in unity I cannot see any of the controversies whereby we stand now divided that can deserve a place in our consideration before that of the Baptism of Infants For as it is a dispute belonging to the first and originall power of the Church to consider whether it extend so farre as when it is acknowledged that there is no written Law of God to that purpose that it may and justly hath provided that all the Children of Christian Parents be baptized Infants so it will apear to concern their salvation more immediately then other Laws limiting the exercise of the Churches power or the circumstances of exercising those offices of God service which it tendeth to determine can be thought to do But Before I come to dispute this point I will here take notice once more of the Book called the Doctrine of Baptisms one of the fruits of this blessed Reformation commonly attributed to the Master of a Colledge in Cambridge proving by a studied dispute that it was never intended by our Lord Christ and his Apostles that Christians should be Baptized at all That John indeed was sent to baptize with water but that the Baptism of Christ is baptism with the Holy Ghost and fire And so long as the Ceremonies of the Law were not abolished in point of fact though become void in point of right so long also baptism by water was practised by the Apostles as
I come to conclude against the Anabaptists Our Lord saith to Nicodeâ—â—us Joh. III. 3. Verily verily I say unto thee unlesse a man be born again hee cannot seâ— the Kingdom of God And what this new birth is he setteth forth in answering that impertinent question which Nicodemus not understanding him makes how a man should come out of his Mothers belly the second time Verily verily I say unto thee unlesse a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit Here I will grant the Anabaptists that the Sacrament of Baptism is not instituted by these words but by the act of our Lord after his Resurrection when he gives his Apostles their Commission Go make Disciples all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you Mar. XXVIII 18. But for reasons which perhaps they will not thank me for though they be not able to refute As yet when this discourse was held it was not declared to all that took our Lord for a Prophet that he was the Sonne of God Nicodemus himselfe that comes to him as a Prophet saying Master we know thou art a Prophet come from God For no man could do the works that thou dost unlesse God were with him If he go away instructed that the same which obliges him to take our Lord Christ for a Prophet concludes him to be the Christ the Son of God he is beholden to the freedom of our Lord in declaring to him the pretense of his coming by this discourse But for the purpose of sending the Holy Ghost it cannot be imagined that it was declared from the beginning of our Lords preaching who reveals not the intent of his death to his Apostles till he grew towards the time of it The priviledge of sending the Holy Ghost being part of that state to which he was to be exalted rising from death How then can it be imagined that our Lord should from the beginning of his preaching appoint all to be baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost which is the Sacrament of Baptism that makes us Christians Certainly it is not the same thing for John to baptize in the name of him that should come as for the Apostles in the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost Unlesse we think that all the people of God who expected a Messias expected him to be the Son of God which Christians worship our Lord Christ for and they crucified him for pretending to be There is therefore no cause why we should offer that violence to the Scripture Acts XXX 4. 5. John indeed baptized the baptism of repentance saying to the people that they were to believe in him that came after him that is in Christ Jesus And hearing this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus which I showed you is offered by those that would have it to signifie That those who were baptized by Iohn Baptist were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus For other answers that are devised to avoid to clear a Scripture I count them not worth the refuting so evidenâ—ly they force the express sense of the words And among them none more unreasonable thâ—n that which saith that these men were not indeed baptized with the baptism of Iohn though they thought they were And that S. Paul when he sayes John indeed baptized with water saying to the people that they should believe in him that was to come even in Christ Iesus argues and perswades them that they were not indeed baptized with the Baptism of Iohn though they thought they were For of all things in the world could men be deceived to think that they professed that which the Baptism of Iohn must oblige them to professe and did not Nor can it be said with any appearance of truth that Iohn baptizing unto repentance those whom he sends for the means of salvation for the future to him that was to come did baptize in the Name of the Lord Jesus in as much as it is necessary to be said that the Apostles when they baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Acts II. 38. VIII 16. X. 48. did sufficiently intimate the name of the Father whose Son they preached our Lord to be and also of the Holy Ghost whom our Lord had promised to those that are baptized as Irenaeus so long since hath exquisitely cleared the difficulty how they observed their Commission of baptizing in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Baptizing as S. Luke reports in the Name of the Lord Jesus But of Iohn the Baptist it is said Ioh. I. 29-34 That the morrow after he baptized our Lord he declared him to be the man that was to come after him in whose name he had baptized that he knew him not but came to declare him and that by the coming down of the Dove upon him it was revealed to him that he should know our Lord to be the man that came to Baptize with the Holy Ghost Whereby it appeareth that he cannot be thought to have baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus as that importeth as much as baptizing in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost For though it is evident that Iohn knew our Lord when he came to be baptized that he knew him to be in the world from the time that he began to preach and that he should baptize with the Holy Ghost Yet not knowing the man from the time that he began to baptize how could he baptize in his name and as the Son of God that was to give the Holy Ghost before our Lord himselfe had preached and declared upon what terms it was to come I suppose it is easie enough to distinguish between baptizing in the name of Christ and baptizing with an intent of sending them whom he baptized to Christ to be baptized with the Holy Ghost Neither is this to say that Iohns Baptism availed not to remission of sinnes for the time that it was on foot by Gods appointment when as we acknowledge that dispensation of Grace which was intimated and conveyed by the Law to have been the means to bring some to the righteousnesse of faith How much more the twilight of the Gospel under John the Baptist But that before the Covenant of Grace was published by the preaching of our Lord and inacted on Gods part by his death upon the Crosse or rather by raising him from death it was not time to determine that act by which God intended that profession which he requires for the condition of it should be solemnized and celebrated Therefore there came water and blood out of our Lords side upon the Cross to intimate the ground upon which this Sacrament should be in force for the future And if this be the condition
and alwaies have maintained that which you see I dare not affirm but he dares namely that all Infants who dye unbaptized go into everlasting fire It is demanded in the second place what is that regeneration by the Holy Ghost and wherein it consists whereof Infants that are baptized can be thought capable For the wild conceits of those that imagine them to have faith in Christ which without actuall motion of the mind is not require miracles to be wrought of course by baptizing that the effect thereof may come to passe And if the state of Grace which the habituall grace of Gods spirit either supposeth or inferreth is not to be attained but by the resolution of imbracing the covenant of Grace as by all the premises it is not otherwise attended it will be every whit as hard to say what is that habituall Grace that is said to be poured into the souls of Infants that are baptized being nothing else but a facility in doing what the covenant of Grace requireth But if we conceive the regeneration of Infants that are baptized to consist in the habituall assistance of Gods spirit the effects whereof are to appear in making them able to perform that which their Christianity requires at their hands so soon as they shall understand themselves to be obliged by â—it we give reason enough of the effect of their Baptism whither they dye or live and yet become not liable to any inconvenience For supposing the assistance of Gods spirit assigned them by the promise of Baptism to take effect when their bodily instruments inable the soul to act as Christianity requireth if the soul by death come to be discharged of them can any thing be said why originall concupiscence which is the Law of the members should remain any more to impeach the subjection of all faculties to the law of Gods spirit Or will it be any thing strange that when they come to be taught Christianity the same spirit of God should be thought to â—way them to imbrace it of their own choice and not onely in compliance with the will of their Parents yet is this no more then the regeneration of Infants by water and the Holy Ghost importeth that the spirit of God should be habitually present to make those reasons which God hath given to convince the world that they ought to be Christians both discernable to the understanding and waying down the choice whereas those that are converted from being enemies to God that is to say at those yeâ—rs when no man can be converted to God that is not his enemy before though the spirit of God knock at their hearts without striving to cast out the strong man that is within doors and to make a dwelling for it selfe in the heart are possessed by a contrary principle till they yield Gods spirit that entertainment which God requireth If this habituall assistance of Gods spirit by the moral effect of Gods promise not by any natural change in the disposition of that minde which never used reaâ—on to make choice of it can be called habitual grace as for certain it is a grace of God in consideration of our Lord Christ and no lesse habitual then any quality which the soul of man or the faculties thereof can be indowed with I shall not need to quarel the decree of the Council of Vienna which hath determined the giâ—t of habitual grace to be the effect of Baptism in Infants Onely I exprâ—sse more distinctly and to the preventing of the inconveniences mentioned wherein it conâ—isteth But I shall inferre as a consequence of this resolution that we are not to look upon Christians that are baptized in their Infancy as thoâ—e who are all of them necessarily enimies to God before they â—e converted again to become true Christians For though that very age when they come first to years of discretion obliging them to act as Christians be liable to â—o many and so great temptations that few câ—n pass through it without falling away from the profession of Christians yet because it is not incredible that there are many cases in which the Ministry of education blessed by Gods providence as acted by his grace brings it to pass it is by no means to be supposed that all those who are baptized Infants are necessarily to passe through the state of Gods enemies And therefore that as many as come into that state do fall from the state of Gods grace into which they are baptized Which is none of the least demonstrations of that which hath been maintained in due place that the state of Gods grace is as well lost and forfeited as it is to be recovered again by Christians And upon this ground and to this purâ—ose it was that the ancient Church at such time as the solemnity of Baptizing became tied to Easter and Whitsuntide and the young were baptized with the old not absolutely Infants but according to the opinion of Gregory Nazianzene related afore at three or four years of age used to give them alâ—o the Eucharist as soon as they were baptized For the Eucharist being nothing but the confirming and seconding of the covenant of Baptism the reason why they were baptized inferred the giving of them the Eucharist Which reason being rendred by the supposed Dionysius in the end of his Book de Ecclesiasticâ Hierarchia where he tells us that litle ones received the Eucharist as soon as they were baptized as I do here that they might be alwaies from thence forwards in the state of Grace The Eucharist being the Body and Blood of Christ because the means to convey his Spirit may well be judged the means to secure and confirm that promise thereof which Baptism importeth Yet doth not this inferre that since it is become necessary for the Church to baptize all in the state of meere Infants it is not for the best to deferre the communion of the Eucharist till litle ones may know what they do though in my opinion it is deferred farre longer then it ought to be nothing but a disposition positively opposite to Christianity defeating the effect of it which may prevent the said disposition in innocents much lesse that this can be any just ground for division in the Church so that the division which shall be raised upon this ground necessarily renders those who are the cause of it Schismaticks In fine seeing it is excellently said by S. Gregory Nazianzene in sanctum Bapt. Orat. XLII 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That we are to think the force of Baptizing to consist in the Covenant of a second life and purer conversation with God And that the Eucharist is nothing else but the seconding of this Covenant where Baptism in that regard is necessary to salvation there the Eucharist though not necessary as the ancient Church never held it cannot be unlawful Whether expedient or not he that contents himselfe with the practice of the Church for Unities sake will prove the best Christian I
the Church and to make voâ—â— the Laws which settled it they cryed up this position as much as the rest But when it came to order that confusion which they had made themselves they then found it necessary to limit both the mater and form though not the words which the offices of divine service should be celebrated with Which what was it but Plowdens case that for the form of Gods service to be prescribed by themselves it is not only lawful but requisite by the Church altogether abâ—â—inable And indeed those who must needs take upon them to appoint the persons who are to minister to the People must needs take upon them to appoint the form in which it was to be done They who make the one to depend upon the moâ—ion of Gods Spirit must make the other do the like though never able to make evidence of any such motion in any person that ever pretended it And yet is that all that ever hath been alledged so farre as I know for all opinions so new to Gods Church That S. Paul forbiddeth to quench the spirit 1 Thes V. 19. I do not deny that other texts of S. Paul have been alleged who in 1 Cor. XXI XIV discourseth so largely of the use of spiritual graces ordering also how they should be exercised and imployed in the said Church Nor that writting to the Romans VIII 23. 26. 27. he saith That the Spirit which groaneth for the resurrection in those that have the first fruits of it helpeth the infirmities of the Saints not knowing what to pray for as they ought interceding for them with grones unutterable which the searcher of hearts knowing the mind of the Spirit findeth to be made after the will of God But in these sayings there is nothing like a precept much lesse such a one as may seem to oblige the whole Church On the contrary the evidences are so frequent and so palpable in the discourse of S. Paul to the Corinthians that the Graces whereof he speaketh are miraculous Graces such as God then furnished the Church with to evidence the presence of his Spirit in it as well as 〈◊〉 their edification in Christianity assistance in Gods service that it were madnesse to require the Church to sollow the rules which suppose them which now appear no more in the Church And truly with what conscience can he alledge against the Church of Rome that miracles are ceased the grace whereof is ranked by S. Paâ—l with those which tend to the edification of the Church 1 Cor. XII 8. 9 10 28 29 30. who challengeth for himselfe or his fellows the priviledge of those Graces in Gods Church With what conscience can they hear S. Paul say 1 Cor. X. 17. That the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit with And challenge themselves the priviledge of profiting the Church by Teaching or by Praying without any manifestation of the Spirit For are they not challenged every day to make manifest that ever any of them did speak by Gods Spirit and not by the Spirit of this World inspiring the fruits of the flesh by carnal or rather diabolical pride innovating in matters of Faith and destroying the uniformity of Gods service And therefore when S. Paul having said Quench not the Spirit addeth Deipise not Prophesies what hath been alleged what can be alleged why it should not be thought that he repeateth in brief that order which he had declared so largely to the Corinthians that the grace of speaking in unknown languages should not be discountenanced in the Church and so the Spirit extinguished But that Prophesies the grace whereof he there preferreth so farr before it should no way be neglected for it Truly he that saith The manifestation of the spirit is given to all to profit with doth say in effect that the Spirit which groâ—neth for the resurrection in them which have the first fruits that is the prime graces of it makes intercession for the Saints according to God by helping that infirmity of theirs whereby they know not what to pray for of themselves For those who had not alwayes had the Apostles Doctrine sounding in their ears but onely were instructed by them and their fellows so farr as to be fit for Baptism remaining neverthelesse novices in Christianity why should we think them fit to know what to pray for in all occasions Why should we think it strange that God should give the first fruits of his Spirit to profit them with in this case But the faith of Christ with the reasons and consequences thereof being setled and the order of the Church being established as the gift of miracles ceased as well to the bodily health and support of Christians and the Church as to the demonstration of Gods presence and witnesse to the truth of Christianity As the delivering of incorrigible sinners to Satan to the destruction of the flesh by bodily diseases and death ceased when obedience to Gods Church was established so is it no marvail if the Graces of Gods Spirit which profited the Church in teaching them what to pray for should no more be granted when the Church had not onely knowledge but good order established by which those offices might be preformed to the profit and edification of Christians Let them then who find that they can cure the sick by their prayers anoint them with oyl upon that ground and to that purpose Let them who can sing Psalms extempore so as to become the praises of God because S. Paul saith When ye come together every one of you hath a Psalm hath a doctrine hath a tongue hath a revelation hath an interpretation And that may be as well suggested upon the place as afore hand S. Paul saith that if a stranger coming into the Church should hear divers speak in strange languages that which they made not their hearers understand he would say were madd 1 Cor. XIV 23. dotwithstanding that it might appear that they would not speak those languages but by Gods Spirit I will onely demand of them not to abuse and dishonour Gods Spirit by imputing â—nto it those operations which it is not for the honour of God to acknowledge And then tell them that they must be tried by our common Christianity whether that they pretend to say or to do by the same agree with it But further order of Gods service in the Church let us proceed according to the principles premised comparing that which we find extant in the Scriptures with the original and general practice of Gods Church to say That the service of God consisting of his praises the doctrine of the Scriptures read and expounded and the prayers of the Church especially those which the communion of the Eucharist is celebrated with In the first place the Psalms of David that is the Book of Psalms is necessarily by the practice of the whole Church a form of Gods praises determined to the Church Which conclusion as it
oneby the Holy Angels though in the Apocalypse the Martyrs are before the Throne and the Elders sit on seates round about the Throne seeing it cannot be said that they are translated out of the Verge of Hell into the heavens by the resurrection and ascension of Christ who were in happinesse before by the parable of Dives Lazarus I take the chambers or the houses here mentioned to be the bosom of Abraham in the parable Paradise in our Lords promise secret indeed because the script is sparing in imparting unto us the knowledge of the place But such as oblige them earnestly to desire long for the consummation of all things which not only the comparison of the womb in this Apocryphal scripture but the cry of the souls in Apocal. VI. 10. XX. 12 17 20. witnesseth But I must go no further in this point till I have resolved the difficulty of Samuels souls which he that wil needs question whether it were in the deviles hand for a witch to bring up out of the earth or in the bosome of Abraham where ouâ— Saviour placed Lazarus may as well question whether the witch or the Law sent us to the true God To a heathen man that acknowledgeth not the enmity betweene God and the Devil which the scripture establisheâ—h Necromancy that bringeth the likenesse of the dead out of the earth need not goe for a diabolicall art nor those spirits which minister such appositions be counted uncleane spirits But the scripture even of the old testament placing the Giants Gods enemies beneath oblige us to take it for an uncleane spirit that serves an act forbiden by Gods Law by bringing the likenesse of Gods prophet out of the place where Gods enemies goe after death For though Gods friends goe to the dust as concerning their bodies and as concening theire soules the old Testament declares not whither they goe yet hath it no where described them in that company to which Solomon deputeth his foole And our Saviours parable representeth Dives in the flames which burnt Sodom and Gâ—morrhaâ— no otherwise then Solomon quartereth his fool with the Giants that tyranized over the old world or the land of promise Wherefore though I reject not Ecclesiasticus for commending Samuel because he prophesied after his death because at the worst it is not fit to reject a booke of such excellent use for one mistake yet I had rather say that Saul having by his Apostasy declined to the worship of the Devile by Necromancy did thinke it more satisfactory to be answered by Samuel then by any other likenesse that this is indeed for Samuels honour but that otherwise it is no more for Ecclesiasticus to say that Samuel prophesied then for the scripture that Samuel spoke to Saul Who whether he tooke it for Samuel or for an uncleane spirit the scripture would call it no otherwise then the witch whom he submitted to pretended Shee when she saith I see Gods ascend out of the earth though I find it no incongruity that she should pretend the Spirit whom she imployed to be of that number whom the scripture calleth Gods or Gods sonnes yet because it is rather to be thought that she pretended to bring up Samuel indeed it is more convenient to translate it I see a Judge come up out of the earth understanding that by the habit of a Judge in which he appeared she shows him to Saul for Samuel For the observation of the Jews doctors is most true that Elohim signifies the Judges of Gods people These things thus cleared it is manifest that the soule of Christ parted from his body which lay in the grave did not goe into hell to free the Fathers souls out of thâ— Devils hands and to translate â—hem to the full happinesse which wâ—nts only the company of the body as an accessary to complete it But seeing he may be thought to have gon thither to declare the victory of his Crosse to begin that triumph over the Devill and his partie which the Gospell shall accomplish at the generall judgement by the redemption of the Church Let us see what the Scripture teacheth S. Peter Acts. II. 25-35 first affirmes that David spake of Christ when he said Psalme XVI 11 12. Thou shalt not leave my soul in Hell Nor suffer thine holy one to see corruption Thou shalt shâ—w me the path of life thou shalt fill me with the gladnesse of thy presence And proves it because David was dead and buryed and his Seâ—ulchre was seen to thâ—t day Just as he proves afterwards that when David said Psalme CX 2. The â—ord said unto my Lord sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footestool he meant it of Christ because David never went up into the heavens And there is no doubt the opinion of the Jewes at that day bore him out in that exposition because as to this day so then they did expound those texts of the Messias So he had nothing to doe but to show hâ—w true they were of our Lord Jesus That this no way requireth that thâ—y should not be unâ—erstood of David in the literall sense I refer my self to that which hath been â—aid already But what fignifies it in the literall sense that God shâ—wes David thâ— path of life and fills him with the gladnesse of his presence Surely that he pâ—â—serves him alive in his state title of King of Gods people to serve God before the Arke So Hezâ—kias when he was unwilling to dy â— because the living onely praise God â—â—d â—aid What is the signe that I shall goe into the Temple of the Lord. Esa XXXVIII 19 22. So David how many times doth he â—et forth for the comfort of his life that he might come and see God in the Temple Ps XVII 15. XXIV 3. 5. XXVI 6-13 XLII And in a word every where If this be the literall sense of the Psalme what shall iâ— signifie in the mysticall sense supposing our Lord Jesus the Messias and suâ—posing him killed by the Jewes Let S. Peter be judge when he saies thaâ— â—avid knowing as a Prophet that the Messias our Lord Jesus whom ye have slâ—in should come out of his loines foretold of his resurrection that his oule was not left in Hell nor aid his flesh see corruption For is it any way reqâ—isite to the 〈◊〉 of this argument that our Lords humane soule should triumph over thâ— Devile and his party in the entralls of the earth Therefore â—f you accept his souâ—â— to signifie his person as David Psalm XXV 12. His soule himselfe shall lâ—ve at ease and his seed shall inherit the Land thou shalt not leave my soule in Hell will be no more then thou shalt not suffer thine holy one to lee corruption Thou shalt not suffer me to be cut off from thy presence to which I am to present the sacrifice of my Crosse But if you will needs have the soule to signifie that which stands
the Christian Faith The one forfeiteth his interest in Heaven by the inward act of his soul refusing the common faith which saveth all Christians though outwardly holding communion with the Church The other by the inward act of the soul proceeding to the outward act of dissolving the communion of the Church which the common charity of Christians in the first place is to maintain If both these crimes may come under the the common name of Heresie because inward misbelief naturally tendeth to make a sect of such as shall profess to live according to it no marvail if all divisions of the Church be commonly called both Heresies and Schisms whatsoever be the cause upon which they divide If meer schisms that is where the cause is not any thing necessary to the salvation of all to be believed be also Heresie in the Language of the Apostles Neverthelesse there being so much difference between the two crimes and the grounds of them it is necessary to understand setting aside all aequivocation of terms that there is a crime consisting in mis-believing some Article of the faith which if you please may properly be called Heresie And another consisting in dissolving the unity of the Church which is properly called Schism when there is no further pretense for it then some Law which the Church being able to make the other part will rather depart then admit There may divisions in the Church upon pretence of such doctrines as are not necessary to the salvation of all and so no part of the rule of faith but so evidently to be deduced from it and from the rest of the Scriptures that the Church may have cause to determine the same and yet others may choose rather to depart from the Church then suffer the determination thereof to take place Which divisions that memorable observation of S. Jerome seems to call Heresies which said that all Schisms naturally devise to themselves some Heresie that is some doctrine extravagant from the doctrine of the Church that they may seem not to have departed from the Church for nothing Which is very well exemplified by S. Austine in the Donatists But whether such divisions are to be counted Heresies or Schisms both names properly signifying all divisions of the Church and only that crime which consisteth in mis-believing some Articles of faith appropriating the name of Heresie because common use hath given it no peculiar name of its own I leave to him that shall please to determine it Supposing these things it will not be requisite for me to say much to that which hath been published concerning the nature of Schism of late That being to be had onely out of the Scripture it is no where there to be had but in S. Paul to the Corinthians That there was at Corinth when S. Paul writ onely one Congregation of Christians which he calleth the Church of Corinth That therefore there is no crime of schism but in breaking one Congregation into more As for any visible society of the Catholick Church acknowledging the materials men that professe Christianity which he that sees cannot believe to the form which is that unity which is visible he is as great a stranger as if he had never heard of the Creed acknowledging notwithstanding an invisible unity in the common faith and love of Christians upon perswasion whereof he challenges as great freedom from schism as ever any member of the Catholick Church could claim For having showed how a thing which God made visible for many ages may reasonably be expected to be found in the Scriptures I am not to yield to try it by any part of them knowing that whosoever evidenceth a society of the Church by Gods Law evidenceth the crime that consists in the dissolving of it And it were fit we were told how all the Christians in a City where God had much people should sit at one Table or at least sup in one room before we believe that there was then no more Christians at Corinth then could assemble at once Which if I did believe I would notwithstanding alledge Iustine the Martyrs words Apol II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 On the day called Sunday all that dwelt in Cities or in Countries assemble themselves in one And supposing that then there were more Christians in Rome and the Territorie thereof for example for he writes to the Emperour Antoninus then could meet together in one place As Iustine means not when he saies That all in Cities or Countries meet in one that all made one Assembly but met all in common assemblies I would thereupon argue that no more does S. Paul say when he gives these rules to the Corinthians 1 Cor. XI 14. which serve any assembly that there was then but one Congregation at Corinth If in Iustines time if afore if after he can show me any Church of Rome or any City beside Rome that contained not all the Christians of that City and the Territory thereof I will believe that when Clemens writ the Letter lately published from the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth there were no more Christians at Rome or at Corinth then could meet all at once But if in all the Scripture as well as in all the Records of the Church a Church signifie the university of Christians which one City and the Territory thereof containeth it is an affront to common sense for him to deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the Church that is contained in the City and Territory of Rome or Corinth Let the learned Publisher of that Epistle take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there for Inquilinus or Peregrinus in Inmate or Pilgrim because his Greek gave him leave he that hath been showed so plentiful mention of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the subject in question for that which we now call a Diocese can have no reason to see with his eyes but because he is resolved not to use his own For in the very address of Polycarpus his Epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the Church of God dwelling beside Philippi The dative case quite spoils the construction of the words to his sense If the Church of the Philippians dwelt near Philippi then the Christians of the Territory belonged to the Church of the City As for the visible unity of the Catholick Church it was not so easie for me to evidence that which could not be questionable till the difference between Catholick Church and true Church came to be questionable As it is not hard for any Christian to question whither the Church which was Catholick for so many ages ought now to be Catholick or not For till he have destroyed the evidence which this abridgement hath been able to advance and when that is done new evidence will not be wanting so long as the records of the Church are Historically true and men continue possest of common sense it is in vain to alledge the dictate of his own
spirit to show that he is no Schismatick not acknowledging much lesse holding the unity of the Church out of which no man can be accounted otherwise But I marvail most wherein he would have the crime of Schisme acknowledged by S. Paul in that one Text which he would be tried by to consist It is the Law of Nature that inables Christians to â—oyn in a independent Congregation as our other Doctor of Oxford hath told us If a Covenant or League passe between so many Soveraigns in this point consider how difficult it is to charge a Soveraign with breach of League such contracts consisting of many Articles one whereof violated voids the contract At least to the contrary there is no Rule Now the Covenant of a Congregation must suppose all Christianity the violation whereof in any point by any member supported by the rest frees a man of his contract How then shall S. Pauls words take place 1 Cor. XI 19. There must be Heresies that the approved may become manifest among you For if one leave six the Congregation consisting of seven how shall it appear that the six are in the right But in my supposition these petty animosities at Corinth may have been fomented by secret Hereticks as in time I shall show that they were And their indeavour might be to make a party for their Heresie out of other Churches as well as out of that of Corinth and being formed to unite them by the like bond as they saw the Church tied with by the Apostles In this case division is ruinous to Christianity not when the question is whether seven shall meet together or three and four For by this means it may become difficult for particular Christians upon true principles to give sentence for themselves in the matter of differances but easie to miss the truth and to joyn with the enemies of it thinking they serve God in communicating with them by charging themselves with judging of the sense of the Scriptures either in those Laws of the Church which concern not the salvation of particular Christians or in the common faith without those bounds which God hath provided by the Church And upon these terms those that are approved may and do become manifest by the rising of Heresies in the Church That which I shall inferre is this That though there be no such virtue as implicite faith because it is no part of faith no office of that virtue to believe that any thing is true because the Church believes it with that firm adherance to it as we are resolved to stand to that by believing which we hope to be saved yet it is part of the virtue and part of the office of a faithfull man that is a Christian to conform himselfe to the beliefe of all that which the Church lawfully determineth to be believed that is to say not to professe the contrary of it and upon that profession to do any thing towards dissolving the unity of the Church so long as the determination thereof causeth not that corruption of those things which the society of the Church presupposeth as may seem to make the unity thereof uselesse whereof this is not the place to debate when it comes to pass It is sufficient for the present that whatsoever the Church hath power to determine according to the premises that the Church that is all particular Christians are obliged not to believe by the office of faith which is onely exercised in them who can make deductions of conclusions from the principles of faith who necessarily holding the conclusions in consideration meerly of the premises do necessarily believe the conclusions by that virtue of faith which holds the principles but to hold and to conform to and not to scandalize by the office of that charity which is most eminently exercised about that which concerns the common good of all Christians in generall which uothing in the world can so much concern next the common faith as the unity and communion of the Church Thus have I bounded the power of the Church and so showed the reason upon which the right use of it is to proceed I showed afore the ground of that exception which the interest of secular Power in Church matters createth to the due use of it When I shall have showed in the third book what the Law of God hath determined in matters concerding the communion of the Church and by consequence what it leaveth to the Church to determine it will be time to take in hand the same consideration again For the ground of this exception will show how farre it extendeth whereby it will appear that Christian Powers do acknowledge the Church and the power of it to stand by Gods Law even when they limit the exercise of it by virtue of that interest which the law of God alloweth them in Church matters CHAP. XXVI What it is to adde to Gods Law What to adde the Apocalypse S. Pauls Anathema The Beraeans S. Johns Gospel sufficient to make one believe and the Scriptures The man of God perfit How the Law giveth light and Christians are taught by God How Idolatry is said not to be commanded by God IN the beginning of this Book I proposed the chief Texts of Scripture which are usually drawn into consequence to prove either the infallibility of the Church or the sufficience and clearness of the Scriptures Of which I may truly say that they are and have been for these hundred and forty yeares the Theme of a dispute between the Scriptures and the Church for the right of giving Law to the consciences of Christians what communion to chuse that of the Reformation or that of the Church of Rome But with so little success that a discreet man may truly say that the parties do now stand at a bay as it is visible that they do meerly because they are not able to force one another by the arms which they are furnished with the Arguments of either side serving to maintain them against the adversary meerly because the arguments of the other side are insufficient not because either hath either the whole truth or nothing of the truth for it I showed you there that they come short of making good that which they are imployed to prove on this side as well as on that As for my present business which is here to show how the sense of them concurs to the truth which I have established I shall but desire any man of common sense to make an argument from the Text of Moses alledged in the first place and say The people of Israel are forbidden by the Law of Moses to adde any thing to the said Law and to take any thing from it Therefore the Scriptures contain clearly set down to all understandings concerned all things necessary to the salvation of all Christians then to tell me whither he will undertake to make good this consequence of not For if the Law of Moses cannot pretend to contain
Law cousened and slaine as enimy to Christianity which tenders the onely cure of sinne Whereunto the conclusion agrees well enough For when having questioned Miserable man that I am who shall deliver me out of the body of this death He answereth I thank God by Jesus Christ our Lord He seemeth to declare that the Gospel having overtaken him in this estate and discovered him to himself in it the imbracing of it cured him and gave him cause to thank God through our Lord Jesus Christ for his deliverance from it All the rest that followeth between these terms in the discourse of Saint Paul serving for a very lively description of that mans estate who being convinced of the truth of Christianity findeth difficulty in renouncing the pleasures which sinne furnisheth for the obtaining of those promises which the Gospel tendreth There remaineth yet one difficulty concerning the Polygamy of the ancient Fathers before and under the Law which to me hath allways seemed an argument for the truth which I maintaine rather then an objection against it If any soule sensible of the feare of God can imagine that Gods Jewells his choice ones the first fruits of his creatures knowing themselves to be under the Law of having but one wife not to be parted with till death should notwithstanding take many and those many times so qualified as the Law much more Christianity allows not as Jacob two sisters Abraham his neece and so Amram and to outface the Law hold them till death and never come short of Gods favour whose Law they transgresse with bare face as the Scripture speakes let him believe that a Christian living in sinne can be in the state of grace But he that sees the Law to have restrained marying with the neice which he sees practiced afore and sees withall that plurality of wives is not forbidden by the Law for besides wives of an inferior ranke which may be called concubines a captive Deut. XXI 11. and an Ebrew maid sold for a slave Ex. XXI 8. 9. 10. there can be no question in the Law of two wives whereof the one is beloved the other not Deut. XXI 15. besides that the Law restraining the King from having many wives seemes to allow him more then every man hadde and therefore that David might be within compasse of the Law though Solomon trode it under foot I say he that considers these things will be moved to be of opinion that the Pharises interpretation of Levit. XVIII 18. is true and that before that Law there was no prohibition for a man to marry two sisters which is there first introduced and yet with an exception in Deuteronomy in the case of a brother deade without issue which before the Law was also in force as by the story of Judah Gen. XXXVIII doth appeare I will therefore conclude that as the knowledge of God increased by giving the Law so was the posterity of Abraham restrained from more by the Law then the posterity of Noe upon the promises given them had been restrained from after the deluge From whence in all reason it will follow that the posterity of Abraham according to the spirit which is the Church of Christ should be still restrained from more then the posterity of Abraham according to the flesh by the law And so that the Fathers before and under the Law living in Gods grace did not withall live in open violation of Gods Law but that they knew themselves not to be under the Law of one wife to one husband though intended in Paradise by virtue of Gods dispensation in it till Christianity should come For unlesse we presume that not onely all thinges necessary to our salvation but all thinge necessary to the salvation of all men since the world stood are recorded in the Scriptures there can be no reason to presume that they could not understand what Lawes they were under but by those Scriptures which for our salvation have been granted us I argue yet further that it will be impossible for true Christians and good Christians to attaine unto assurance of the state of Grace if it be to be had for them that commit such sinnes as Christianity consists not with And this upon supposition of the premises for the ground of this assurance For without doubt were not some thing in the condition which the Gospell requireth impossible for flesh and blood to bring forth it were not possible for him that imbraceth the Gospell to assure himselfe that he doeth it out of obedience to God not out of those reasons which hypocrites may follow But I having declared afore and maintaining now that no man by the force of flesh and blood that is to say of that inclination to goodnesse which a man is born into the world with is able to profess Christianity out of a resolute and clear intention to stand to it am consequently bound to maintaine that he who soe doeth not onely may but must needes assure himselfe of the favour of God in as much as he cannot but assure himself of that which himselfe doeth For in as much as he knowes what himselfe means and what he does as S. Paul sayes that no man knowes what is in man but the spirit of a man which is in him so sure it is that a mans selfe knowes what he means and what he does as it is sure that another man knowes it not But not allowing nor presupposing this ground of a mans knowledge how shall he know it Shall a man by having a perswasion that he is in the number of Gods elect or by having in himself an assurance of Gods love to the effect of everlasting happinesse be assured that his assurance is well grounded and that he is of that number which is elected to life everlasting As if it were not possible for the temptations of Satan and carnall presumption to possesse a man as much even to this effect as the Spirit of God can do Where is then the effect of Christianity seen if not in limiting such grounds and such termes as he that proceedeth upon shall not faile of that grace of God whereof he assureth himself upon those grounds But he that placeth that faith which alone justifyeth in believing that he who believeth is predestinate to life everlasting Or in the confidence of Gods grace in attaining the same I demand upon what ground he can pretend to distinguish this faith from that which he cannot deny that it may be false For if it be said that the Spirit of God that is in him assureth him that his perswasion is well grounded It is easie for me to say that the question to be cleared that is to say whether it be the Spirit of God that tells him so or not cannot be the evidence to clear it self And therefore that he standeth obliged to bethink himself of some meanes whereupon he may assure himself that it is the Spirit of God not the temptation of Satan or carnall
presumption that assures him to be of the number of those that are predestinate to life everlasting For if any man say that he is assured that the act of his faith which he first conceived when he was first converted from sin to righteousnesse assures him of the grace of God because it was grounded upon that conversion to God which the Gospel requireth I will yeeld him all that But then I will demand of him who presupposeth true conversion to God according to the terms which the Gospel requireth that is to say Joyned with a sincere resolution of living for the future in that conversation that the Gospel prescribeth to be the condition of those promises which the Gospel tendereth I say I will demand of him upon what ground he can perswade himself that having professed Christianity and failed of it he remains in that favour of God which he obtained by professing that Christianity which he performeth not Indeed could it be said that the condition which the Gospel requireth is a thing that God immediately determines man to do without and before any determination of his owne I should not much marvaile that a man who is accepted by God upon such a condition should continue in favour till it come againe and make him hate that sinne for which he forfeited it But having proceeded thus farre in showing that the condition which the Gospel pel requires is no lesse then the totall change of a mans intentions from seeking the world to seek God and that the helps of Grace determine him to this no otherwise then by determining him to choose the better and leave the worse For me to say that waving this determination he remaines possessed of the promises which it produceth would be to say that there is no reason why any man should require repentance as a condition which justifying faith presupposeth And therefore it is very much to be admired that those who would seem truly religious should think it an abridgement to that security and confidence that peace and joy in the holy Ghost that boasting assurance which S. Paul professeth to be the priviledge of true Christians that they cannot maintaine it but upon just assurance that upon their true conversion to God there was just ground for it Nay further that God invites not men to Christianity upon faire termes unlesse he allow it For I demand Is it not an act of infinite mercy in God to set up a standard of confidence to all the world conditionally that they imbrace those termes which he propoundes out of his own meer goodnesse Is it not enough that be allowes them pardon upon condition of repentance That he allowes this to them that have forfeited their repentance never so often by repenting them of their repentance Especially to them who ground themselves upon their repentance as the condition whereupon they obtained his favour can it seem strange that his favour should become void when they repent them of their repentance Some object the case of Caleb and Josua who upon preseverance when theire fellowes fell away are assured of the land of promise to argue that under Christianity by perseverance in it a man may obtaine assurance of salvation such as that which Gods word createth to those who know it to be Gods word as to that which it assureth The difference of the case is this That they had Gods word for their assurance which I must needs have granted in S. Pauls case had I granted that the assurance of salvation which he professeth had been grounded upon a revelation made to him in particular that he should be saved But seeing I have grounded that assurance which he expresseth meerly upon that conscience of the common Christianity which he had I say that supposing Caleb and Joshua to be certaine of their inheritance in the land of promise by virtue of the promise there recorded which nothing hinders to imply that condition of walking according to the Law of God upon which it is made It is enough that the Gospel can assure us of eternall life upon supposition of that disposition of mind upon which S. Paul assures himself of it For if it be said that he who assures a man of Gods grace upon condition of doing what he can to hold it assures nothing seeing it is agreed upon that he which doth no more then he can shall certainely fall from it The answer is easie that nothing can be more injurious then to measure that which man can do when by the grace of God he hath been resolved to Christianity and thereupon hath received of God the promise of the habituall assistance of his Spirit for the performance of that which he hath undartaken upon confidence of Gods assistance by that which no man by meet nature is able to do For these promises being past upon supposition of that weaknesse and perversenesse by nature which they come into the world with it cannot be imagined that man can become void by the meanes of those subreptions and surprises of native concupiscence to which all men are liable Though if a man shall openly transgresse his Christianity in that which he must needs know that it cannot stand with it or if by continued negligence he cast off that regard that he hath professed to it can any reason be imagined why God should continue his favour or the inward effects of it but that which all men have to reconcile the present love of sinne to the promises of the word to come Wherefore though I cannor allow that saying which the Schoole hath allowed in many Doctors Facienti quod in se est Deus largitur gratiam Unlesse it be restrained to him that complies with the helps of preventing Grace whom I am perswaded God will not faile to bring to the state of Grace by following helps of Grace Yet there is another saying of the Schoole which I do utterly allow Deus neminem deserit nisi desertus That God leaves no man that leaves not him first Because it is evident in reason that the promise of the holy Ghost must come to nothing unlesse it may be held upon such conditions as are possible to him that comes to be a Christian with originall concupiscence That is to say so as not to forfeit it upon those surprises and subreptions which morally no man can avoid but upon departure from that which a man upon deliberation had professed afore He that considers how many times God in the Old testament delivers the Israelites from those oppressors to whom he had given them up for their transgressions of his covenant will never believe that upon every thansgression of Christianity he will break with those that sincerely desire to continue in his favour upon condition of it And he that considers that it is not commendable amongst men to break off friendship upon every offence with them whom a man hath entertained it with in matters of privacy and a long time will never