Christ how farre it is declared to us by the Scriptures and original Tradition of the Church Knowing neverthelesse that this being resolved the rest of the controversie concerning the holy Trinity necessarily falls to the ground of it self as having nothing whereupon to subsist when the everlasting Godhead of Christ is once maintained afore Now the ready way that I can think of to go through so great a dispute as briefly as is possible is to take in hand first the point of originall sinne in which the dispute between Pelagius and Socinus on the one side and the Church on the other side is grounded For therefore I hope it will appear the shortest way to dispatch the whole dispute because that being decided together with that which dependeth upon it as incident to it concerning the state of our Lord Christ before his coming in the flesh the rest will appear to consist either in controversies of Divines or in mistakes and disputes about words I begin with S. Paul because he it is who having laid forth the necessity of Christianity to the salvation as well of Jewes as of Gentiles in the beginning of his Epistle to the Romanes and in the fourth chapter by the Example of Abraham confirmed the same Or if you please answered the objection concerning the salvation of the Fathers before and under the Law proceeds in the fifth Chapter to lay forth both the ground upon which it is effectuall which is the death of Christ and the ground upon which it was necessary which is the sinne of Adam Thus then saith S. Paul Rom. V. 12 13 14. Therefore as by one man sinne entered into the world and death by sinne and so death passed upon all in whome all sinned For untill the Law sinne was in the world Now sinne is not imputed where there is no Law And yet death raigned from Adam until Moses even upon them that had not sinned after the likenesse of Adams transgression who is the figure of him that is to come It is said that the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are to be translated in asmuch as all had sinned To signifie that Spirituall death came after Adam upon all that had sinned as Adam did inasmuch as they had sinned For as for bodily death they believe not no more then Pelagius that it was the punishment of Adams sinne but the condition of mans birth Onely the troubles the cares the sorrowes by which men come to their graves these as they acknowledge to be consequences as of Adams sinne so of all those sinnes whereby men follow and imitate Adam so they think to be meant by the sentence In the day wherein thou eatest thereof shalt thou die the death But this is no lesse then to deny the literall sense of the Scripture which the Church hath received for one of Origens errors in the interpretation of the beginning of Genesis What is it else to say That Adam was liable to bodily death by nature but to spiritual death by sinne For it is manifest by the premises that through all the Old Testament the second death is no otherwise preached then under the figure of the first death and that by virtue of the ground laid from the beginning that the Covenant of Grace which tendreth life and death everlasting was onely intimated under the Covenant of nature which the Law only received and limited to the happiness of the land of promise as to the Israelits tendring expresly only blessings and mercies of this life to the civil and outward obedience of Gods commandments And can it be imagined that in the very first tender that God made to man of life in consideration of obedience and death of disobedience this life and this death must be understood to be the second when the obedience was onely in abstaining from the forbidden fruit What was then that fruit of the tree of Life by eating whereof they might have preserved themselves from death I aske not what it signified but what it was For all reason will require admitting the premises that it signified that whereby the soul escapes spirituall death But the same reason will inforce that it must be the fruit of a tree which so long as they eat not of the tree of knowledge they were licensed to eat to preserve them from bodily death Neither is there any difficulty in that they aske How all the posterity of Adam should have come by the fruit of that tree that grew no where but in the garden of Eden For I suppose it had been as easie to have planted all parts of the world with the same tree as with the posterity of Adam had he continued in obedience Who being not driven out of Eden as upon his disobedience but sending his posterity to do that in the rest of the world which he did there had made all the world Eden by placing the Paradise of God wheresoever innocence dwelt In this case I see not why any man should take care for the tree of Life that no posterity of Adam might die No more then what should become of that innocent posterity which when it had so planted the World the counsel of God concerning the propagation of man kind may well be thought to have been come to ripenesse The Socinians indeed do alledge Josephus who speaking of the tree of life doth not say that it should have made man immortall but onely that it should have made him live to very great yeares But that is of no consequence In regard that it is not expressed in the Scripture that God would have had man live everlastingly upon the earth had he lived in obedience For supposing that it was a question among the Pharisees to which sect it appeares Josephus inclined most whether so or whether God would translate them to a heavenly life after a time of obedience here which to the Pharisees that acknowledge the resurrection and the world to come must needs seem credible enough it is no marvaile that Josephus should say That by virtue of the tree of life they had lived to a very great age though in case not translated they might as well have lived alwayes by virtue of it But let us hear S. Paul 1 Cor. XV. 21 22. For since by man came death by man also came the resurrection of the dead For as by Adam all died so by Christ shall all be made alive Is there any rising from bodily death but by Christ I say not any rising in the quality of those in whom the Spirit of Christ dwelleth of whom S. Paul saith that He who raised Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortall bodies through his Spirit dwelling in you Rom. VIII 11. But setting aside this quality it is the coming of Christ and his trump that raiseth againe even those that shall rise to judgement And can it for all this be doubted whether that life was lost by Adams fall which the rising of Christ shall
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
then if nothing were revealed CHAP. XVIII The necessity of the grace of Christ is the evidence of originall sinne How the exaltation of our Lord depends upon his humiliation and the grace of Christ upon that All the work of Christianity is ascribed to the grace of Christ Gods predestination manifesteth the same THese things thus premised the evidence which I make for originall sinne from the grace of Christ as for the grace of Christ from originall sinne consists in this proposition That not onely the preaching of the Gospel but also the effect of it in converting us both to the profession and conversation of Christians is granted in consideration of the obedience of Christ for the cure of that wound which the disobedience of Adam made Here I must note that the conversation of Christians as it requireth and presupposeth the profession of Christianity so it comprehendeth all parts and offices of a mans life to be guided and lead according to that will and law of God which his word declareth So that to prove my intent it will be requisite to shew that it is through those helps which the grace of God by Christ that is in consideration of his obedience and sufferings furnisheth that any part of a mans duty is discharged like a Christian Which otherwise would have been imployed to the satisfaction of those inclinations which the corruption of mans nature by the fall of Adam hath brought forth This to do I will begin as afore with the Epistle to the Romanes In the beginning whereof S. Paul having proved that which Pelagius and Socinus both allow that there is no salvation without Christianity and coming to render a reason for the necessity thereof from those things which I pressed afore concerning the disobedience of Adam proceeds to maintain it by the antithesis of Christs obedience thus Rom. V. 15-19 having begun to say that Adam is the figure of him that was to come But the grace is not as the transgression For if by one mans transgression many are dead much more hath the grace of God and gift through the grace of one man Jesus Christ abounded to many Nor is the gift as that which came by one that sinned For judgement came of one to condemnation but the free gift is of many transgressions to righteousnesse For if by one mans transgression death reigned through one much more shall they who receive the abundance of the grace and the gift of righteousnesse reign in life through one Jesus Christ Therefore as by the transgression of one the matter proceeded to condemnation upon all so by the righteousnesse of one to justification of life For as by the disobedience of one many were made sinners so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous Here whosoever acknowledgeth that righteousnesse comes by Christ which the free gift that brings from many transgressions to righteousnesse and the abundance of the grace and gift of righteousnesse unto life manifestly argues can neither refuse the contrary unrighteousnesse which causeth condemnation and death to come from Adams sin nor yet the grace which voids it called by S. Paul the gift which comes through the grace of one man Jesus Christ that is that grace which he hath obtained with God to be granted in consideration of Christ through whom the Apostle saies they that receive the gift of righteousnesse shall raign in life For how shall they raign in life through him and through the gift of righteousnesse but that through him they receive the gift of righteousnesse Therefore S. Paul lamenting afterwards the conflict between sinne and grace Rom. VII 22 -25 I am content with the Law of God according to the inward man But I see another Law in my members warring with the Law of my mind and captivating me to the Law of sinne that is in my members Wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from the body of this death I thank God through our Lord Jesus Christ To wit because from God in consideration of J. Christ and his obedience and not onely through the doctrine which he taught he had help to overcome in so great a conflict Wherefore it followeth immediately Rom. VIII 1-4 There is therefore now no more condemnation for them that are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit For the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath freed me from the Law of sinne and death For whereas the inability of the Law was weake through the flesh God sending his Sonne in the likenesse of sinnefull flesh and for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh that the righteousnesse of the Law might be fulfilled in us that walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit Whether you understand the Law of the Spirit of Life or Life to come in by or through Christ Jesus if we be freed from the Law of sin and death by Christ then by the helps God gives in consideration of his obedience For how is sin condemned in the flesh but because it is executed And how executed but because we are inabled to put it to death And how by Christs death but by the helps which God grants in consideration of it Therefore it followeth a little after If man have not the Spirit of Christ he is not his But if Christ be in you the body is dead indeed because of sinne but the Spirit is life because of righteousnesse But if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwell in you he that raised Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortall bodies through his spirit that dwelleth in you That Spirit which makes righteousnesse a Law to us by Christ shall raise againe these mortall bodies which shall be destroyed because of sinne So as our rising from death is purchased by the resurrection of Christ so our rising from sin by his death which purchased his rising againe For consider what S. Paul writes againe of our Lord Christ Phil. II. 5-11 For Let that sense be in you that was also in Christ Jesus who being in the forme of God made it no occasion of pride that he was equal with God But emptied himself taking the forme of a servant becoming in the likenesse of man and being found in habit as a man humbled himself becoming obedient unto death even the death of the Crosse Therefore God also hath overexalted him and given him the name that is above every name that at the name of Jesus every knee should how of things in heaven and on earth and under the earth and every tongue confesse to the glory of God the Father that Jesus Christ is the Lord. Where seeing iâ— is manifest by the premises that our humbling of our selves is with God the consideration upon which he promises to exalt us being as hath appeared the condition of the Covenant of Grace it cannot be denied that the humiliation of Christ was the consideration for which he was
but as it was revealed to them by the said Angels from whom Tertulliane saith they pretended to have received those doctrines which they imposed upon the Collossians though according to the Law of Moses And this is the ground of those things which S. Paul discourses as well against legall observations as against the worship of angels Col. II. 16. which if you will survay what Crotius hath noted upon that place and upon 1 Tim. IV. 1-5 you shall finde to be directly opposed to the doctrines of those Heresies which had their beginning even during the Apostles times So that the reason why he saith that They hold not the head from whom the whole body furnished and compacted by joints and bands groweth the growth of God Col. II. 19. is because they would not have the Angels and the World to be his work which therefore S. Paul must be understood to oppose And truly when they grant the passage of the Psalme noted by the Apostle and repeated before Heb. I. 10. Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth to belong to Christ where it speaketh of changing the world but to God where it speakes of making the world there being no difference imaginable between the making and the changing of it what reason can be imagined why all and the proper name of God with all should not be said of Christ Thus much at least our Lord not onely sayes but argues John V. 19 That God hath given him such workes to do as himself doth to raise the dead for example and to judge both quick and dead that all men might honour him as they do the Father which is neither more nor lesse then to esteem him neither more nor lesse And in the place afore named resuming and reinferring his claime of being equall to God which to divert the fury of the Jewes he had seemed a little to wave John X. 37 38. If I do not the works of my Father believe me not but if I do them though ye believe not me believe the workes That you may know that my Father is in me and I in him Where you may see that by the miracles which our Saviour shewed them having obliged them to believe that he was a Prophet come from God and by consequence that whatsoever he came to teach them is true By the works which he foretold of his sitting down at the right hand of God sending the H. Ghost calling the Gentiles raising the dead and judging both quick and dead he obligeth those that believe him to be Christ to believe him to be God being such things as none but God can do Now when S. John saies further And the Word was made flesh and dwelt amongst us And we saw his glory as the glory of the only begotten son of God full of grace and truth It is not to be denied that the name of flesh intimateh the weaknesse of that meane estate in the which it pleased Christ to come But that implying this it should not expresse his being man is a thing which the bare name of flesh will not indure The people of God onely being acquainted with spirituall and invisible substances in opposition to which man being called flesh or flesh and blood the weaknesse of his nature must by consequence be implied the nature it self being directly understood and expressed Wherefore when the Apostle saith John IV. 2 3. Every Spirit that acknowledgeth Jesus who is come in the flesh to be Christ is of God And every spirit that acknowledgeth not Jesus Christ that is come in the flesh to be Christ is not of God It is manifest that he speakes of those heresies which would have the Christ to be something else then the man Jesus belonging to the fullnesse of the Godhead whether it came upon the man Jesus to leave him againe according to Cerinthus during the time of the Apostles and Valentine and others afterwards or whether it never appeared in the person of a man in the World For I have made it manifest before that these were the Doctrines of those Haeresies wherof he gives them warning Besides we must here recall all the reasons that have been used to shew that S. John in the premises speaks of the state of the Word before the birth of our Lord and not before his appearing to Preach By which it will appear that we shall not need to dispute with Socinus about the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether it may at any time or whether here it may or must signifie was or became The consequence of the Text necessarily inferring that when S. John sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his meaning is not that this Word was a mean man but that the Word became man which it was not afore And therefore for S. Johns meaning we must look to the opposition between the Flesh and the Spirit so often expressed and signified to be in our Lord Christ by the Apostles S. Paul speaking of the Fathers Rom. IX 5. Of whom sayth he is Christ according to the flesh who is God blessed for evermore Intimating that he is another way according to the Spirit That way he expresseth Rom. I. 3. saying that Christ who came of the Seed of David according to the flesh is declaâ—ed or as the Syriack translates it known to he the Son of God according to the Spirit of Holinesse by rising from the dead Whereupon another Apostle sayes 1 Pet. III. 18. that he was put to death in the flesh but quickned in or by the Spirit Or as S Paul again 2 Cor. XIII 4. Crucified out of weakness but alive out of the power of God For in all these speeches as the flesh and the weakness thereof signifies the manhood so the Spirit the Godhead For in the Gospells sometimes he professeth to do miracles and cast out Devils by the power of God sometimes by the Holy Ghost Mar. VI. 5. IX 39. Luke IV. 36. V. 17. VI. 19. Where we hear what the Sinne against the Holy Ghost in the Gospell is Namely for those that stood so plentifully convict that these works were done by the power of God in him to say that they were done by the Prince of Devils For vvhen the Baptist sayth John III. 34. He whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God For God giveth him not the Spirit by measure He maketh the difference plain enough between the fulness of the Spirit dwelling in Christ vvhich is the Godhead of the Word incarnate never to be parted from the Manhood of Christ and that measure of it by vvhich the Prophets spake for the time that they vvere inspired As S. Paul sayes of the Church that grace is given it according to the measure of Christs gift Ephes IV. 7. Wherefore the Apostle having observed afore that Melchisedeck is called a Priest not according to the commandment of a carnall Law but according to the virtue of indissoluble Life Heb. VII 16.
impose upon all their Divines a necessity to maintain that there is no trope in the words This is my cup of the New Testament which so many of their Predecessors had granted because it could not be denied Which being granted must needs take place in This is my body by necessary consequence And surely the common principles of Grammar and Rhetorick will inforce it when they inform us that tropes are used as cloaths are either for necessity because there are more things much more conceptions than words to signifie them For thereupon necessity constrains to turn a word to signifie that which it was not at first intended to signifie and that is a trope Or for ornament to expresse a mans mind with more elegance Compare then our ordinary way of expressing the conceptions of the mind by words which is common to all Languages which our ordinary way of expressing the objects thereof to our minds by the said conceptions If a word be diverted to signifie that conception which it was not first imposed to signifie because there was no other at hand imposed to signifie the present conceit Logick and Grammar will make this a Trope though Rhetorick do not because it was not used for ornament but for the necessary clothing of a mans mind in terms intelligible The trial whereof is if the subject you speak of cannot truly be said to be the thing which is attributed to it As the bread and wine which our Lord blessed cannot be said to be his body and bloud For if the subject mater signified by the Scripture elsewhere require that the body and bloud of Christ be thought present then is the property of the terms to be abated so as they may serve to signifie that presence Voiding all dispute concerning the signification of words which those that hold Transubstantiation could never nor never will agree upon among themselves because it stands upon terms of art the use whereof no mans conceit can over-rule that which the necessity of our common Faith requireth being once secured as here For the reason being rendred why the Eucharist was instituted and why it is to be frequented notwithstanding that the Body and Bloud of Christ may always be eaten and drunk by a living Faith to wit because the reviving of our Christianity by receiving the Sacrament reviveth the promise of Christs body and bloud being the means to convay his Spirit it will not concern the purpose thereof that it should be present by Transubstantiation abolishing the nature of the Elements For though it hath been boldly said by those who dispute controversies That the body of Christ is really and substantially resident in and united to our bodies That Grace and Charity cooled by sinne are inflamed in the Soul by the body of Christ immediately touching our bodies That the seed of our resurrection is thereby sowed in our mortal bodies First none of this is true unlesse you understand it with the same abatement That the body of Christ received in the Sacrament by the body of him whose Soul hath living Faith in Christ is the seed of the life of grace and glory both to his soul and body Because otherwise a dead faith should receive the same Secondly none of this would hold if Transubstantiation be true because rendring the body of Christ invisibly present no mans body whatsoever can immediately touch it And therefore it is no marvel that so many excellent School Doctors have acknowledged that setting the sense of the Church aside of which I will say what shall be requisite by and by Transubstantiation cannot be concluded from the Scriptures Whose judgements I carry along with mee for the complement of that prejudice which I advance toward the right understanding of the sense of the Church To wit that whatsoever the present Church may have determined the Catholick Church did never understand that which the Scripture necessarily signifieth not Now let us see what our Lord sayes to his Disciples being scandalized at those things which I showed you that hee taught them in the Synagogue at Capernaum of attaining everlasting life by eating his flesh John VI. 58-63 Is this it which scandalizeth you saith hee What then if you see the Son of man ascend where hee was afore It is the Spirit that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing The words that I speak to you are Spirit and Life The spiritual sense in which hee commandeth them to eat and drink his flesh and bloud is grounded upon that difference between the promises of the Law and the Gospel which I settled in the beginning For by virtue thereof that Manna which maintained them in the Desert till they died is the figure of his body and bloud that maintains us not to dye Whereupon S. Paul saith 1 Cor. III. 6. The Spirit quickeneth but the Leter killeth Not onely because the Law covenants nor for the world to come But also because it was no further the means to procure that righteousnesse which giveth life then the Spirit of Christ was intimated and furnished under the dispensation of it Whereupon S. Paul argues that the Jews have as much need of Christ as the Gentiles because the Law is not able to bring corrupt nature to righteousnesse Wherefore the reason why they were scandalized at this doctrine of our Lords was not meerly because it was difficult to understand hee having so plentifully expressed his meaning and inculcated it by often beating the same discourse there and otherwise made the condition of his Gospel intelligible to his Disciples but because it was hard to undergo importing the taking up of his Crosse as I have said For it is evident by common experience in the world how men find or how they plead their minds to be obstructed in the understanding of those spiritual maters which if they should grant their understandings to be convinced of there were no plea left them why they should not conform their lives and conversations to that light which themselves confesse they have received So that the scandal was the same that the rich man in the Gospel took when hee was told that besides keeping Gods Commandments one thing was wanting to part with all hee had and take up Christs Crosse to wit for the observing of his Commandments And this scandal hee intends to take away when hee referres them to his ascension into Heaven because then and from thence they were to expect the Holy Ghost to inable them to do that which the eating and drinking of his flesh and bloud signifieth spiritually And his words hee therefore calleth Spirit and Life because they are the means to bring unto the communion of his Spirit wherein spiritual and everlasting life consisteth So that the flesh of Christ being exalted to the right hand of God and his Spirit which first made it self an habitation in his flesh being sent down to make him an habitation in the hearts of his people those who upon faithful consideration of
God delivered to the Church by the Apostles commanding them so to live For that which was as difficult as impossible to have been introduced without conviction of the will of God as the rest of Christianity of necessity must go for a part of it But that in such variety of mens fannies reasons and inclinations the Church consisting from the beginning of all Nations and dispersed all over the world should of their own inclination not swayed by any information of Gods will received with Christianity agree in the same Lawes and Rulers submitting to the exercise of the same Power upon themselves is as impossible as that the world should consist of the casual concurse of atomes according to Democritus and Epicurus The name of the Church without peradventure was first used to signifie the whole body of Gods people in the Wildernesse when they might be and were called together and assembled upon their common occasions which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies After which time the people continuing still one and the same by virtue of the same Lawes then received and the Powers placed in their Ruler Not onely the whole people but such parts of it as resorted to the same Government have still born and do bear the same name The Synagogue of Libertines Cyrenaeans Alexandrians Cilicians and Asians by example Acts VI. 9. which name first belongs to the respective Bodies of Jewes that subsisted at Rome Cyrene or Alexandria in Cilicia or Asia And consequently by Metonymy to the Places where such of those Bodies as chanced to be at Jerusalem might assemble themselves And to so many of those Bodies as being at Jerusalem did assemble at those Places Now no Christian can doubt that the Body of Christians succeeds in the stead of Gods ancient people And therefore the name of Gods Church when it stands without limitation signifies no lesse As when our Lord saith Mat. XVI 18. Vpon this rock will I found my Church Whatsoever the Disciples then conceived the Church should be our Lord that knew all by the name of it meant all that duly beares the name And therefore when hee saith once again Mat. XVIII 17. Tell it to the Church It is strange there should be Christians that should think hee means the Jewes and their Rulers And that the precept concernes Christians no longer now they have left the Jewes Though it is true a man cannot tell his cause to the whole Church but to that part of it to which hee can resort which is called by the name of the Whole as I said even now of the Synagogue S. Paul to the Colossians II. 24 25. calling the Church the Body of Christ saith That hee by the dispensation of God towards them which hee is trusted with is become the minister of the Church to wit as Angels are ministers of the Church because ministers of God towards it And therefore minister of the whole Church which is the Body of Christ not of any particular Church as if an Apostle could be bound to execute his office according to the discretion of any Church which for Gods cause hee attends As all Ministers are bound to execute their Office according to the will of them whose Ministers they are It is therefore the whole Church in which God hath set Apostles Evangelists Prophets and the use of the Graces rehearsed 1 Cor. XII 28. Eph. IV. 11. Because the Office of these Graces can by no means be confined either to any particular Church or to any part of the whole Church The name of the Church signifies the same thing again Eph. I. 22. III. 21. V. 23-32 While all Christendome was contained in the Church at Jerusalem the name of the Church is so used Acts II. 47. V. 11. VIII 1 3. that it is no mater whether wee understand by it the whole Church or the Church of Jerusalem The reason Because all right and power that can at any time be found vested in the whole Church was then as fully in the Church at Jerusalem as it can be at any time in the whole Church though in respect of a Body never so much greater than it As a childe is as much a man the day of his birth as the day of his death and a tree as much as a tree when it growes one as when it is come to the height But Christianity being propagated among Jewes and Gentiles as wee reade of the Churches of Judaea Samaria and Galilee Acts IX 31. and must needs understand the Epistles to the Ebrewes to have been written to Churches consisting onely of Ebrewes as those of S. Peter and that of S. James which mentions the Elders of the Church James V. 14. So the Churches of the Gentiles in S. Paul Rom. XVI 4. wee easily understand to be the Churches of Asia 1 Cor. XVI 9. Apoc. I. 11. the Churches of Galâ—â—ia 1 Cor. XVI 1. the Churches of Macedonia 2 Cor. VIII 1. and the rest that were visible in S. Paâ—ls time Now suppose for the present that these Churches mentioned by the Apostles were no more than so many Congregations as our Independents would have it Seeing they deny not so many Churches to be so many Bodies what reason can they give why the name of the Church when it stands for the whole Church should not signifie the like There is a prerogative attributed to the whole Church by S. Paul 1 Tim. III. 25. when hee calls it the base and pillar of Truth For that this should be said of any particular Church it were too ridiculous to imagine Can the Church bear this attribute if it be not capable of doing any act that may verifie it And if it be not a Body what act can it do In fine the correspondence between Gods ancient people and his new Israel according to his Spirit seems to require That as the Religion of the Jewes and not any Civil Power of the Nation makes them all one Body at this day in point of fact by sufferance of Soveraignes because they were once so in point of right So the Religion of Christians should make them one Body in point of right how many Bodies soever they are burst into in point of fact by their own wantonnesse For the Independents exception which I spoke of can be of no force unlesse they will make it appear that all those Churches that are mentioned in the writings of the Apostles did assemble in one place Not that if this could be made to appear they had done their businesse But because if it do not appear their plea is peremptorily barred Wee reade then of M M M soules added in one day to CXX of the Church at Jerusalem Acts I. 15. II. 41. To these were added or with these they became VM Acts IV. 4. To whom were added multitudes of men and women Acts II. 47. V. 14. These assembled daily in private to serve God as Christians as well as in
have reason that observe the terms of the Law Deut. XXI 5. every cause and every plague shall be according to their mouth inferring that all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which wee may translate doctrines but must understand that which the Greek calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or decrees must come out of their mouth Siphri 243. Pesicta Zoterta fol. 91. col 4. and instanding in the causes to be purged by the ashes of the Red Cow Num. XIX not as if none could sprinkle those ashes but a Priest which is otherwise ruled by Num. XIX 17. to be any man that was clean but because they could not be burnt but by a Priest Num. XIX 3. which is by their Law any Priest Maimoni in that Title I. 11 12. and because part of them was set aside for Priests to purifie with as another part for other Israelites Maim III. 4. So in the causes concerning Wives questioned by their Husbands being jealous by the Law of Num. V. 15. the causes of murther for which an Heifer was to be killed by breaking her neck Deut. XXI 5. And in the plagues of men houses and clothes Deut. XXIV 8. none of which could be decided without a Priest In this regard it seems to mee the Prophet sayes The Priests lips shall preserve knowledge and they shall require the Law at his mouth for hee is the messenger of the Lord of Hosts Mal. II. 7. and in termes Deut. XXX 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They shall teach Jacob thy Judgments and Israel thy Lawes According to the other Law Deut. XVII 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 According to the doctrines that they shall teach thee Another Power in that people is that of Prophets which seemeth to be founded upon the Law of Deut. XVIII 20 21 22. where having commanded that the Prophet which should succeed Moses be obeyed as Moses the Law proceedeth to charge them to put to death whosoever should prophesie in the name of strange Gods And then giving a rule whereby to discern between a true and a false Prophet seems to intimate the authority of Prophets Which was so very great in that people that the Kings themselves were to obey them so long as they had the reputation of true Prophets whereupon wee see how they reprove them Elias Ahab 1 Kings XVIII 17. Elisha the King of Israel 2 Kings VI. 33. John Baptist and our Lord Christ Herod Mat. XIV 4. Luc. XIII 32. though when their reputation could by faction be questioned â—o often were they questioned condemned and killed for the messages they brought in Gods name as the Apostle saith Heb. XI 37. and as it befell our Lord Christ Nay further that when they taught that any particular Law should cease for the time they were to be obeyed as Elias commanded to offer sacrifice in another place than at Jerusalem 1 Kings XVIII 17. contrary to the Law of Levit. XV. 2-9 the Temple being then on foot Whereby it appeareth that the Prophets had their authority immediately from God not depending so much as upon his Law further than as the acknowledgment of the authority of it to come from God was a necessary condition to the receiving of them for Prophets as I said asore Seeing the mater thereof might cease to oblige if they should declare the will of God to be such The Commonwealth then of Israel subsisting by divine right that is by the appointment of God giving them freedome and the command of themselves upon condition of undertaking the Law not onely the Kingdom which is the form of Government limited by the Soveraigne Power placed in one person whether by the permission of God or his appointment together with the Ministers thereof Judges and Magistrates and Officers but also the Priestly and Prophetical Office must be understood to stand by the same title As for the Church which wee have seen to be the spiritual Israel of God and maintain to be one visible body by virtue of undertaking the Covenant of Grace which the Gospel tendreth It is manifest that the King thereof is the Lord Christ who professeth not to govern it by his bodily presence but by the Law of his Word and by the invisible presence of his Spirit which was to commence upon his departure That being here hee appointed XII Apostles as Patriarchs thereof under him as the XII Princes of the Tribes were under Moses and LXX Disciples or Apostles of an inferior rank under himself also as they under Moses But for the dispatch of such businesse concerning his Kingdom as that which neither the Captains of Thousands and Hundreds who were ordained Judges before the LXX were ordained to assist Moses neither after them the Judges of particular Cities that succeeded them could decide And shall wee not conclude all this correspondence to be as competent an argument as wee are to expect for the New Testament in the Old for the constitution of the Church in the institution of the Synagogue To wit that seeing wee see God hath appointed our Lord Christ hee his XII Apostles and LXX Disciples his ministers in governing of it that hee intended it a visible body to which the visible right of governing the same might be conveyed by the reasonable voluntary act of those in whom placing the power hee must needs place the right of propagating the same in his own absence One point indeed of difference there is wherein wee should abuse our selves too much to seek for any correspondence between the Synagogue and the Church For wee suppose the intent of God to have been that the Law should oblige one people but the Gospel all that are to attain salvation out of all people so that there is no particular seat of Gods worship according to the Gospel to which all Christians are bound to resort as Jerusalem was the seat of Gods worship which all Jewes were to resort to And wee suppose our Lord Christ to be in heaven where the Princes of Israel and the LXX Elders cannot be present to assist him with their ministery Therefore wee cannot imagine that hee appointed his LXX Disciples for a standing Assembly as under the Law But to be dispersed all over the world where Christian people should be though united by the same Rule which all should follow for the preserving of Christendom in unity Let no man therefore any more imagine that the title by which any Power is held or pretended to be held in the Church can be derived from that right which the Priesthood held under the Law So as from thence to inferre that the Power which the Priesthood had not under the Law is not under the Gospel to be ascribed unto the Church as it is the Church For I do of my own accord allege that seeing the Priesthood was purely ceremonial to figure that expiation of sin which Christ should bring to passe and therefore to expire when it was brought to passe it is not possible to imagine that any right
and sufficient means had been given to certifie common sense how to proceed I know the good Father S. Irenaeus was made to believe that the Scriptures were quite lost during the Captivity of Babylonia and that the Copies wee have contain onely that which Esdras by inspiration of Gods Spirit writ anew for the books of the Old Testament I doubt not there are enow that finde this unreasonable which cannot hear without a great grain of jealousie that Esdras supposing him the man that made up and consigned the Body of the Old Testament to the Synagogue should deliver any thing but upon such credit that if any syllable of it should be admitted questionable the Law of God it self must become questionable To wit because Esdras is supposed to have been indowed with Gods Spirit though it cannot be supposed to what purpose For otherwise why should it seem so dangerous to believe that there are faults in the reading of the Jews Copies of the Old Testament which wee use That excellent Humanist Joseph Scaliger hath maintained that there are corrupt readings in the Copies that wee use more ancient than Esdras Ludovicus Capellus at this day maintaineth that the Ebrew Copies may be mended not onely by other texts of the Old and New Testament but by the Translations which have been made before those corruptions might prevail I can neither pretend here to maintain nor to destroy that which either of them hath said I will say further to the same purpose The Syriack of the Old Testament which is a translation made by Christians out of the Original Ebrew seemeth to have followed another reading than that which wee finde in our Ebrew Copies and that many times considerable I will give you a few instances Gen. II. 2. It hath been thought so strange that God should finish the work that hee had made upon the seventh day who is said elsewhere to have made heaven and earth in six dayes That the Jews have reported that the Greek translates it the sixt day least the Gentiles should stumble at it But when wee see the Samaritane and the Syriack follow the Greek shall not the credit of them balance the credit of the Ebrew Copies Gen. XLIII 28. wee are brought in that hee may roule himself upon us or fall upon us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is read many times in the sense of casting down a mans self prostrate That it can signifie simply falling I do not believe any Ebrew can justifie Reade but with the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 changing onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the sense will be as proper as the Ebrew to put tricks upon us Num. XXXI 28-47 according to the Ebrew the spoil being divided in two the army are commanded to consecrate one of five hundred to God the Congregation one of fifty In the Syriack both one of fifty And the numbers specified afterwards differ accordingly Now whereas these are consecrated to God as the first-fruits of the spoil it is manifest that one of fifty was the legal rate of first-fruits which any man might exceed but no man was to go lesse As S. Jerome upon Ezekiel agreeing with the Talmud witnesseth Which is the reason why I must account this reading considerable notwithstanding the Ebrew 1 Sam. XVII 12. And the man went among men for an old man in the dayes of Saul Translate And the man in the dayes of Saul was old and stricken in years Reading with the Syriack 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not with the Ebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And then let any man that understands Ebrew and sense tell mee which is the more proper Ebrew which is the more proper sense 2 Kings X. I. Jehu writ and sent leters to Samaria to the Princes of Jezreel the Elders and to those that brought up Ahabs children Here is a great question which all that maintain the Ebrew to be without fault will have much ado to answer How should Ahab sending to Samaria send to the Elders of Jezreel And the Syriack assoils it not according to the Paris Copy But in the readings of the Great Bible it is noted that our Copies reade it not And truly hee that would say that wee are to reade the Elders of Israel for the Elders of Jezreel might have much to say for himself But that the Elders of Samaria should be the Elders of Jezreel cannot be reasonable 2 Kings XVIII 27. Rabshakeh said unto them Hath my master sent mee to speak these words to thy master and to thee or to the men that sit upon the wall that they may eat their dung and drink their piss with you So wee reade it But in conscience were it not farr better sense to reade it with the Syriack That they may not eat their dung and drink their piss with you For how could hee have said a fitter reason to make the people mutiny then by telling them that his master had sent them that good counsail that they might not by standing out the siege be put to eat their own dung and drink their own piss with Ezekiah and his Counsail I might have brought more than these but it is a work by it self for him that would try what that Translation would afford and this may serve for an Essay And therefore to mee it seemeth farr safer to yield that it may be so than utterly to ruine the credit of Gods Law in the opinion of those men who being told that no tittle thereof can be questionable without granting that it came not from God do neverthelesse finde sensible reason to doubt of the reading of some passage This being said in the next place I shall as freely professe that I finde no reason in the world to suspect that the Ebrew Copies which wee now have from the Synagogue are maliciously corrupted and falsified by the Jews I grant that precious Saint of God Justine the Martyr did so believe and so charges them Dial. cum Tryphone and Eusebius Eccl. Hist IV. 18. is bold to pronounce that the Jews were convinced by him in this point But without disparagement to the great merit wherewith that blessed Martyr hath obliged Christs Church it may and must be yielded which I said before that a person so curious in all things which hee could inquire out tending to the advantage of Christianity hath suffered himself to be imposed upon in divers particulars of historical truth concerning that purpose And that this is one of them I shall for proof need no more but to send them to the place and desire them to consider whether those passages which hee alleges to have been falsified by the Jews were indeed so read as hee recites them in the true Greek Copies of the Old Testament at that time Or whether hee was imposed upon to believe that they were true Copies which reade them as hee does though indeed they were not Neither do I finde that the Christians after him have
of penance failing of that which they had undertaken by it What is reformation in the Church and what is not is the subject of this present dispute therefore I cannot here grant that which some of the reformation may have done to be well done Otherwise I am secure no man will choke me with naming a Church that had no discipline of penance But that so it was I refer my self to that which I have said in the first book I demand here what is the ground and reason that so it must be For supposing the Keys of Gods Kingdom exercised in the first place in limiting the terms upon which baptisme is granted not in ministring of it Of necessity it followeth that in the second place it be seen and exercised in limiting the terms upon which those that have failed of that which they undertook at their Baptism may be restored to the visible communion of the Church upon presumption that they are restored to the invisible communion of those promises which the Gospel tendreth Not supposing this there is no reason why it should signifie any more than a scene acted upon a stage as it is taken to signifie by those who understand not this Lastly I will mention here the expresse Doctrine of the Church of England in the beginning of the Catechism declaring three things to have been undertaken in behalfe of him that is baptized That he shall forsake the Devil and all his works the pomp and vanities of this world and the evil desires of the flesh and not to be seduced by him either from believing the faith of Christ or from keeping Gods Commandements And again in the admonition to the Sureties after Baptism you must remember that it is your parts and duties to see that these Infants be taught so soon as they shall be able to learn what a solemn vow promise and profession they have made by you For all that come to Christianity believing what promises they get right to by it and being admitted to it uppon those terms there can remain no question upon what terms they attain the said promises Nor can or ought any Doctrine of that Church to what purpose soever cautioned be interpreted to the prejudice of that wherein the salvation of all consisteth But further in the Introduction to the Office of Baptism For asmuch as all men are conceived and born in sin and that our Saviour Christ saith None can enter into the Kingdome of God except he be regenerate and born anew of water and of the Holy Ghost I beseech you to call upon God that these children may be baptized with water and the Holy Ghost and received into Christs holy Church and be made lively members of the same Proceeding to pray That they comming to thy holy baptisme may receive remission of their sins by their spirituall regeneration In the exhortation after the Gospel Doubt ye not therefore but earnestly believe that he will likewise favourably receive these present Infants that he will imbrace them with the arms of his mercie that he will give unto them the blessing of eternall life and make them partakers of his everlasting Kingdome Again Ye have heard also that our L. Jesus Christ hath promised in his Gospel to grant all these things that ye have praied for And after the Sacrament Seeing now that these children be regenerate and graffed in the bodie of Christs congregation And again We yield thee heartie thanks that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this Infant with thy holy Spirit to receive him for thine own child by adoption and to incorporate him into thy holy Congregation All this can leave no doubt of the communion of the Church of England with the whole Church in this point so nearly concerning the salvation of all Christians CHAP. V. The Preaching of our Lord and his Apostles evidenceth that some act of Mans free choice is the condition which it requireth The correspondence betwen the Old and New Testament inferreth the same So do the errors of Socinians and Antinomians concerning the necessity of Baptism Objections deferred THe whole tenor of the Scripture would afford matter of Argument to inforce this consequence But it shall be enough to have thus far pointed out the ground upon which the meaning of the rest is to proceed The reasons of this position from the principles of Christianity can be no other than those which have been touched upon occasion of treating the passages of Scripture hitherto alledged Yet to make the consequence still more evident I will here repeat first the consideration of Gods sending our Lord Christ to show the world sufficient motives why they should imbrace his Gospel as well as to teach them what it is and wherein it consisteth I will not here insist upon any supposition of the clear sufficience of the Scriptures or the necessity of Tradition besides the Scriptures But I will appeal to the common sense of all men to judge whether it be within the compass of reason that our Lord Christ should come to preach and to exhort men to acknowledge him to be come from God and to take up his Cross should show them reasons to believe that all which he preached is true that so they might be perswaded willingly to follow him Should give certain proofs of his rising again from death to inforce the same If men have no will no choice no freedom to do what he requires them or not to do it whether in other things they have it or not The same to be said of his Apostles and Disciples who were strange Creatures to expose their lives for a Warrant of the truth of what they said if they had not willingly and freely imbraced that profession themselves which they pretended to induce the world with the like freedome of choice to imbrace Thus far then we are assured by common sense that the condition required by the Covenant of Grace on our part must be some act of mans free choice the doing whereof at Gods demand must qualifie us for those promises which it tenders But this is not all that may appeare to common reason by the proceeding of our Lord and his Apostles The preaching of the Gospel-premises for a supposition upon which it proceedeth That mankind are become enemies unto God through sin and subjects of his wrath Proposing therepon the termes upon which they may be reconciled to God and intitled presently to and in due time possessed of everlasting happiness Suppose these terms purchased by the satisfaction of Christ though not granting it because all that call themselves Christians in the West do not is it possible to imagine that they who declare all mankind to be Gods enemies for sinne should have commission to declare them heires of his Kingdome not supposing them turned from sin to that righteousnesse which shall be as universally according to Gods will as their sin is against it As on the contrary supposing this do you not suppose
are justified before God But the inward and Spirituall observation of them at least the purpose and intention of it as it depends upon the grace of Christ which the Gospel publisheth so must it necessarily be included in that faith which in opposition to the works of the Law qualifies Christians for those promises which the Gospel tendereth But that which must remove all doubt of the Apostles meaning in this point must be the removing that difficulty which held the Jewes then and still holds them in the opinion of obtaining righteousnesse and salvation by the Law For certainely could S. Paul have perswaded them that the ancient Fathers from the beginning of whose salvation theyh could not doubt though under the Law yet obtained not salvation by the law but by the Gospel it had been an easie thing for him to have perswaded them to it The Apostles intent therefore is to perswade them to that which because it was hard to perswade them to therefore they continued Jewes and refused to become Christians Now let us suppose that which I have premised that the Law expressely covenanteth onely for the worldly happinesse of that people in the land of promise requiring in lieu of it onely the outward and civil observation of the law But the summe of that outward observation thereof which is expressely covenanted for consisting in the worship of one God whose providence in the particular actions of his creatures it presupposeth maintaining also a Tradition of the immortality of mans soul and of bringing all mens actions to account shall not all that are born under this Law stand necessarily convict that they owe this God that inward and spirituall obedience wherein his worship in Spirit and truth consisteth And seeing the same God tenders them terms of that reconcilement and friendship which maintaines them in that state of this world whereby they may be able and fit to render him such inward and spirituall obedience punctually making good the same to them Have they not reason enough to conclude that they shall not faile of his favour and grace so long as they proceed in a course of such obedience How much more having the examples of the ancient Fathers the doctrine which they delivered by word of mouth the instructions of the Prophets whom God raised up from time to time to assure them that this was that principall intent of Gods law though it made the least noise in it how much more I say must they needs stand convict both of their own obligation to tender God this obedience and also that tendring it they could not faile of Gods favour toward them even as to the life to come Though this cannot be said to be the Gospel of Christ because it containeth not the dispensation of his life in the flesh nor the expresse tender of the life to come in consideration of the profession of his Name and of living according to his doctrine Yet if it be truly said that the Gospel is implied and vailed in the Law either this signifies nothing or this is the thing that it signifies For upon this ground it is manifest that there was alwayes a twofold sense and effect of Moses Law and by consequence a twofold law By virtue of which difference whereas it is said Heb. VII 16. That the legall Priesthood stood by the law of a carnall precept And the precepts thereof are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I said afore And the blood of bulls and of goats and the ashes of the red heifer are said to sanctifie to the cleansing of the flesh Heb. IX 10. 13. On the other side S. Paul saith that the Law is spirituall and that the commandment was given to life and therefore discovers concupiscence to be sinne Rom. VII 7 10 14. And S. Steven saith to his people of Moses that he received living oracles to give unto us Acts VII 38. And S. Paul of himself and his fellow Apostles delivering the doctrine of the Gospel Which things we speak saith he not with words taught by mans wisdome but taught by the holy Ghost comparing spiritual things with spiritual things 1 Cor. II. 13. that is the spiritual things which the Gospel expresseth with the same spiritual things implied by the law As I shewed afore that the same S. Pauls meaning is that the man of God is perfectly furnished to every good work when he is able to make the Scriptures of the Old Testament usefull to instruct reprove teach and comfort Christians in Christianity 2 Tim. III. 16 17. And truly whatsoever is said in the writings of the Apostles or the sayings of our Lord Christ supposing the difference between that which is Spirituall and that which is carnall or literall in the Scriptures must be expounded upon this ground of the Apostle that all the promises of God are yea in Christ and in him amen as S. Paul saith 2 Cor. I. 20. That is to say that the temporall promises of Moses law were intended for and fulfilled in the eternall promises of Christs Gospel For upon this ground there is a Jew according to the letter and a Jew according to the Spirit that is a Christian Rom. II. 28 29. There are sons according to the flesh and sons according to promise Rom. IX 8. and he that was born of the bondmaide was born according to the flesh and persecuted him that was born of the free woman according to the Spirit Gal. IV. 23. 29. For this reason it is said That the Fathers all eat the same spirituall meat and drank the same spirituall drink as we Christians do For they drank of the spirituall rock that followed them which rock was Christ 1 Cor. X. 3 4. Because as Christianity was intended by the law so was Christ by the figures of the law neither is there any other reason to be given why the letter killeth but the Spirit quickneth as S. Paul affirmeth 2 Cor. III. 6. but this Because as the law in the literall sense provides no remedy for those that fall into Capitall crimes but leaves them to the justice of the law So the Spirituall sense of it was not available to bring men to life though available to convict them of sinne So that the Jews whom S. Paul pursueth as guilty of sinne by the conviction of the law stand noverthelesse convict that they were never able however convict of sin to attain righteousnesse by the help of it alone and therfore that they are no lesse obliged to have recourse to the Gospel and to imbrace Christianity then the Gentiles themselves who had no other pretense to avoid the judgement of God which the Gospel publisheth This is the intent of S. Paul in the first chapters of his Epistle to the Romanes which he recapitulates in this generall inference Rom. III. 9. We have pleaded before that Jewes and Gentiles both are under sinne And againe Rom. XI 32. God hath shut up all under disobedience that he might have
the Godhead is said to dwell bodily in the Sonne it is to be understood that the holy Ghost also dwells in him without measure which with the Father makes up that fullnesse that S. Paul understands in opposition to those which the heresies preached For as it is plaine that the Valentinians worshipped their thirty Aeones or intellectual worlds so it is certain that the rest of their Sects worshipped that fullnesse which they preached Nay those that held the world to be made by Angels that fell away from the fullnesse worshipped also those Angels which the Christians call devils as the heathen did and all Magicians do as all ages witnesse This also is the reason why S. Paul saith further that the fullnesse of the Godhead dwelleth in Christ bodily because in the Temple and Sanctuary and Ark of the Covenant and Sacrifices and Ceremonies of that people all pledges of Gods presence it is certaine to Christians that the fullnesse of the Godhead dwelt as the body in the shadow equally correspondent to it For so I shewed you afore that the ark of the Covenant which in the XXIV Psalme is called the Lord of glory is by the Apostle said to be our Lord Christ But this reason is imployed by S. Paul to make opposition against them who pretended the Law to be given by those Angels the worship of whom together with the observation of the Law or at least of such precepts thereof as they might pretend the said Angels to have revealed to them they undertook to revive that by this counterfeit Christianity they might avoid that persecution which the Jewes out of their zeal for the Law brought upon true Christians For if it were the fulnesse of the Godhead which dwelt figuratively in the ark of the Covenant as now bodily in the flesh of Christ then were not those Angels authors of the Law nor the observations thereof to be renewed together with the worship of those Angels And therefore it is not to be omitted that when S. Paul addes And ye are filled through him who is the head of all principality and power Through whom ye are also circumcised with that circumcision which is done without hands by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh through the circumcision of Christ He withdraweth them from the observations of the Law by declaring that the intent of them is fulfilled in good Christians from the fullnesse of the Spirit that is of the Godhead that dwelt in Christ Which is that which S. John intendeth when he saith That we saw his glory as of the onely begotten Son of God full of grace and truth That is to say Of that grace which contained the truth of those figures and shadows As it followeth by and by Of his fulnesse we all have received and grace for grace Because the Law was given by Moses but grace and peace came by Jesus Christ For the Grace of the Gospel of Christ as it comes in stead of the grace of Moses Law and both from the fullnesse of Christ which as I said afore was resident for the time in that Angel that delivered the Law to Moses in Gods Name In fine so manifest are those words that Grotius himself who otherwise in expounding this Epistle hath warped to the Socinians could not forbear to avow the bodily dwelling of the fullnesse of the Godhead in Christ to signify that which the Church calls the hypostaticall union of the natures Here I argue that when S. Paul saith Phil. II. 6 7. that our Lord being in the form of God emptied himself taking the form of a slave this emptinesse which he took is directly opposed by S. Paul to that fullnesse of the Godhead which he had and dissembled by the emptinesse of that state which he assumed For here it is much to be observed that as S. Paul affirmeth the fullnesse of the Godhead to dwell bodily in Christ because the holy Ghost is understood alwayes to be resident in the Word incarnate So by the same reason the Father also is contained in the Sonne as the Sonne in the Father likewise God the Father being so called in the New Testament where the Sonne is revealed in respect of the Sonne who revealed it and whom it revealeth And that in opposition to that fullness from which each of the aforesaid Sects pretended the Revelation of the Father otherwise unknown It is not therefore to be doubted that our Lord when he saies as many times in the Gospel he does John X 38. For my works sake believe that the Father is in me and I in him XIV 7-11 If ye had known me ye would have known my Father also And henceforth ye know him and have seen him Philip saith unto him Lord shew us the Father and it shall suffice us Jesus saith to him So long am I with you and knowest thou not me Philip he that hath seen me hath seen the Father and how sayest thou shew us the Father Believest thou not that I am in the Father and the Father in me the words that I speak to you I speak not of my self but the Father that abideth in me he doth the works Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me If not believe me for the very works sake I say it must not it cannot be doubted that our Lord meanes by these words not that he said nothing did nothing but by commission from God which every Prophet could say so farre as a Prophet And the Jews need not to have taken up stones to throw at him when he said John X. 10. I and the Father are one had he meant no more but that it was his Fathers will which he declared But of necessity these sayings must import that as the Word containeth the Holy Ghost and is contained in it So is the Son contained in the Father and the Father in the Son who revealeth him as the Gnosticks hereupon took occasion to pretend that the unknown Father was contained in that Fulness by which the severall Sects of them pretended that he was made known And therefore when S. John saith That the glory of our Lord was seen to be the glory of the onely begotten Son of God though it be granted that the title of onely begotten implyeth and insinuateth by way of elegancy dearly beloved because every onely Son is so as you may see it shewd by testimonies both of the Scripturs and other writers in Grotius yet if this be the reason of that elegance in the word the ground of it therefore cannot be denied And so the question will have recourse why the only begotten Son and if not because conceived by the Holy Ghost then because in him dwelleth bodily the fulness of the Godhead To which sense the words of the Apostle John I. 18. are very pertinent No man hath seen God at any time The onely begotten Son that is in the bosome of the Father he hath declared him Hear
Whatsoever my Father giveth me shall come to me And No man can come to me unlesse my Father that sent me draw him And the Apostle 1 John VI. 19. We love him because he loved us first Heb. XII 2. Every good and perfect gift is from above and cometh down from the Father of lights with whom is no change or shadow of turning Gal. VI. 3. If any man think himself something being nothing he deceives himself Heb. XIII 22. God make you of one mind in every good work to do his will working in you that which is acceptable before him through Jesus Christ To wit by the meanes of his Spirit 2 Tim. â— 9 10. It is God that hath saved us and called us with an holy calling not according to our works but his owâ— purpose and grace given us through Christ Jesus before eternall times but now manifested by the appearance of our Saviour Jesus Christ having abolished death but shined forth life and incorruption by the Gospel The abolishing of death and the declaration of eternall life wherein the calling of men to Christianity consists together with the saving of us which is effected by meanes of the Sonne how these things come by Christ we learn from his words John XII 24 31 32 33. Verily verily I say unto you If a graine of wheat fall not into the earth and dy it remaineth alone But if it dy it beareth much fruit And Now is the judgement of this world Now shall the prince of this world be cast forth And I when I am lifted uâ— from the earth will draw all men to me This he said signifying what death he should dy But signifying also what should be the force and effect of that death Then those Scriptures which make charity to be the gift of God and of the holy Ghost John IV. 7. Rom. V. 5. 1 Cor. XII 31. XIII 1. Gal. V. 22. which holy Ghost our Lord Christ by his death hath obtained for us as afore Unto all which I will adde in the last place those which speake of the predestination of God as it signifies no more then the preparation of that grace from everlasting whereby we are saved in time S. Paul indeed when he excludes the presumption which the Jews had of being saved by the Law as the Fathers they thought were distinguishing between the seed of Abraham according to the flesh and according to promise Rom. IX 6-13 which promise he supposes to be the forerunner of Christs Gospel Manifestly declares no more then the question which he is there engaged in requires him to declare To wit that they were not saved by virtue of the Law but by virtue of that Grace which now the Gospel openly tendereth So that Israel and Esau holding the figure of the Jews that expected to be saved by the works of the Law Isaac and Jacob consequently answer the Christians who expect salvation not by their birth but by Gods promise not by works but by him that calleth To wit to the said promise Whereby it appeareth that the words of the Prophet which he alledgeth Jacob have I loved and Esau have I hated signify no more according to the spirituall sense of the Old Testament which the New Testament yeildeth but the accepting of the Church in stead of the Synagogue of the Christians in stead of the Jews And that this is the purpose of God according to choice which S. Paul speakes of immediately afore In as much as God purposed from the beginning when first he took the seed of Abraham from among the Nations to place his name among them that his choice ones of Isaacs posterity as well as Abrahams should be those that bore the figure of the Christian Church promised afore and born upon the promise that they should be beloved All this being granted which I count most true and undeniable notwithstanding the purpose of God according to choice as it expresses a declaration of receiving the Church in stead of the Synagogue so it implies and presupposes a purpose of God to make and to build Christs mysticall body which is the Church upon which purpose of God all those prophesies are grounded whereby God foretelleth of his new people Israel according to the Spirit which Christians know to be those children which he raised up to Abraham out of the stones For we cannot think so slightly of Gods providence that by foretelling this secret he obliges himself onely to finde sufficient meanes to convert men to Christianity But also those which should take effect and bring to passe the conversion of the World to Christianity by the Gospel of Christ Seeing then that the Church is nothing but the souls whereof it consisteth and that the foreknowing and the foretelling of the Church which Christians believe to be fulfilled consisteth in foreknowing and foretelling the conversion of those persons who have constituted and shall constitute the number of believers from the preaching of Christianity til the worlds end It followeth that this purpose of God according to election can no way stand without an intent of God to bring the said election that is this multitude of Gods choice ones to Christianity whether by the preaching of the Gospel or by the helps which depend thereupon as it depends upon Christs death And this is most manifest by S. Pauls answer to an objection which followes upon his conclusion of this point That if God hath mercy upon whom he pleaseth and pardons whom he pleaseth he has no cause to complaine of any man to wit of the Jews who believe not because no man can resist his will That is to say because he is able to convert them if he please Which inference S. Paul not denying that God could convert the unbelieving Jews if he pleased thus avoideth Nay O man who art thou that disputest with God shall the pot say to the potter Why hast thou made me thus and afore What shall we say then Is there injustice with God God forbid For he saith to Moses I will have mercy on whom I have mercy and I will have compassion on whom I compassionate So it is not in the willing nor in the running but in God that shewes mercy Rom IX 18 19 20. 15 16. Where it is plaine that S. Paul no way denies the truth of the assumption That God may if he please imploy such meanes as shall make any man a Christian How he avoides the consequence is another matter and not belonging to this dispute inasmuch as it is manifest to all that understand learning that it is one thing to prove a truth another to clear the objections that ly against it That I shall indeavour to do before I leave the businesse In this I shall think thus much evidenced by the premises that God who knew from the beginning of the sending of Christ and inabling his Apostles and their successors of the Church to convict the world of it who should obey the Gospel and who
uprightnesse of Adams posterity upon the condition of his obedience when as it is evident enough that it was in his power to have done otherwise And this account being rendred it will be easie to say why Eve found not the effect of her transgression before Adam had eaten the forbidden fruit To wit Not because she should never have found any had not he sinned But because the effects of it do not necessarily follow instantly at all times and in all things and that in tempting Adam which was the next thing she did they did instantly appear As for the great difficulty how the spirituall substance of the soul should receive a taint from the carnall concupiscence whereby it cometh to be united to the body I will here challenge the benefit of that principle which I have once established That which once was not matter of Faith can never by processe of time or any act the Church can do become matter of Faith Though we may become more obliged to believe it not by the generall obligation of Christianity but by having studied the reasons by which it is deduced from the principles of Faith Besides that light of reason which Faith presupposeth And by the same reason the Church may justly injoyne it to be received â—hat is to say not openly contradicted For such is the matter of the propagation of mans soul whether by transplanting as part of the Fathers hold or by immediate existence from God in the body which nature prepareth for it Which having been manifestly disputable in S. Augustines time I hold it very consequent to that which I have done in the point of the Trinity whether it may be made evident to reason or not to leave it without producing any mans reason by which I pretend to maintaine that it is either traâ—uced or created A wayes supposing that no reason can be receivable which provideth not for the immortality of it which no man questions Lastly it is manifest that actuall sinne â—s first called by the name of sinne because first subject to sense but so that the displeasure of God and by consequence the name of sinne is no lesse reall against habituall sinnes So I will confesse further as afore of the terms of essence and person in the mystery of the blessed Trinity that they were brought into the Church to prevent the malice of hereticks and to settle a right understanding in that which was necessary to be received by Christians So now that the terme of Original sinne was first brought in by S. Augustine and the Church of his time to expresse that ground upon which the Church had from the beginning maintained the grace of our Lord Christ and the necessity of it But that thâ—s ground is not to be maintained unlesse we acknowledge besides those habits of sinne which we contract an habituall inclination to sinne bred in our nature from the fall of Adam which may be called sinne in regard of the likenesse and correspondence of it to and with other inclinations to sinne contracted by custome Having thus set aside this opinion before I come to decide the difficulty proposed I hold it necessary to debate that which both parts seem to take for granted neither of them having expressed any reason to oblige us so to take it That is whether Adam were created to supernaturall happinesse which is that which Christians now expect in the presence of God for everlasting and therefore indowed with those graces which might make him capable of it Or onely in a state of naturall happinesse consisting in the content of this life onely and supposing perfect obedience to God in the course of it Were it but for the the repute I have of Grotius for his skill in the Scriptures who in one of his Annotations upon Cassander hath declared this opinion for part of his judgement I should count it worth the debating But I have found it further maintained by reasons which seem to me considerable and no way prejudiciall to the Faith Which notwithstanding I do not intend to propose for mine own ingaging my self to maintaine this but to confront with the reasons brought for it what I find reasonable to be said on the other side that in a nice and obscure point the discreet reader may chuse what he shall think most fit to allow Now all the argument that can be drawn into consequence on either side arising from the relation of Moses compared with such texts of the New Testament as may give light to it It is first argued That seeing God first framed man of the dust of the earth and breathed into him the breath of life and man became a living soule It seemeth evident that he was made in a state of naturall life onely S. Paul having said in comparing him with Christ 1 Cor. XV. 45. So also it is written The first man Adam became a living soul The last Adam became a quickning Spirit Meaning to say That as Moses saith that Adam became a living soul So not that Moses saith but that Christians may say that Christ is become a quickning Spirit For hereupon it followes in S. Paul that as that which is spirituall was to follow so that which is naturall or animall was to go before But to this on behalf of the other part me thinks it may be said That Moses as all the Old Testament speakes onely of the state of our naturall life but intends by the correspondence between materiall and spiritual things as the figure and that which it figures to signify to us that which belongs to that spirituall life which the Gospel introduces Of which intent all that I have produced to settle that difference between the litterall and mysticall sense of the Old Testament is evidence So that Gods breathing the breath of life into mans nostrills is the figure of his breathing the spirituall life of Grace into the soul which divers ancient Fathers of the Church have understood to be signified by the same words and that according to the true ground and rule of expounding the Scripture if they suppose the breath of naturall life signified first by the same words to be inspired as a figure of the spirituall life of grace To which agrees well enough that which followes That man became a living soul in correspondence to the second Adam who is become a quickning Spirit according to S. Paul For Christ is become a quickning Spirit because he shall raise the mortall bodies of those in whom his Spirit dwelt here But Adam though we suppose him to be made a living soul in respect of the life of Grace yet had that life from the Spirit of Grace the fullnesse whereof dwelt in Christ On the other side it is argued that seeing man was made in the image of God and his likenesse Gen. I. 26 27. IX 6. and that the image of God consists in that righteousnesse and true holinesse to which Christians are regenerated by grace Ephes IV.
himselfe in heaven immortall upon his resurrection free from the punishments of sinne which he had upon him here on earth you have seene that the everlasting Spirit is the Godhead of Christ And had the apostle meant the presentation which is now in doing he would have spoken in the time past 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he that considers that all sacrifices were visited before they were killed whether legall or blemished which is called in one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must beleive that he is called here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as found spotlesse and so fit to be slaine And does he not make the death of Christ the Sacrifice when he makes the New Covenant in correspondence to the Old to be inacted by it It is true the same Apostle Ebr. IX 2 -6. showing the highest heavens to be the Holy of Holies where the Priest-hood of Christ is exercised addes That if he were upon earth he should not be a Priest there being other Priests to offer gifts according to the Law But this is onely to say that his Priest-hoode is not earthly who hath caried his owne bloude into the heavenly Tabernacle not medling with the sonnes of Levi or theire office For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is according to the Ebrew which for want of composition expresses adjectives by praepositions for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If â—e were upon earth signifies if he were an earthly Priest as those of the Leviticall Priesthood It is true he was to learne compassion for us by his sufferinges here Ebr. II. 17 18. V. 1 7 8. but might he not as well as other high Priests learn that compassion by sacrificing himself for us here which he hath for us to the end of all things In fine every sacrifice is a sacrifice from the time that it is consecrated to God as the Paschal Lamb from the tenth day of the moneth Ex. XII 2. thence it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 due and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a gift Or let any Jew say if it might not many ways become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reprobate before it came into the Holy of Holies because a sacrifice or Offering before And was not Christ consecrated when he was the Lamb of God Of himself he saies John XVII 19. For their sakes do I sanctify my self To wit to be a spotleâ—â—e sacrifice This is therefore no exception to the generall argument the force whereof consisteth in this That seeing it cannot be denied that the inheritance of the Land of Promise and each mans share in the goods and and rights of it is assigned the Jewes in consideration of their sacrifices to wit as the condition of that Covenant by which they were prescribed It must not be doubted that the inheritance of the kingdome of heaven is assigned to Christians by the Covenant of Grace in consideration of the obedience and sufferings of Christ which they figure But this is still more evident by the termes of ransome and price and buying attributed to the sacrifice of Christ The heathen had sacrifices that they called Lustralia and lustrare signifies to expiate among the Romanâ—s to wit By paying a price For Ennius translating into Latine a Greek Tragedy called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of Homer where he speakes of Priamus ransoming Hectors corpes from Achilles intituled it Hectoris lustra Therefore it is the Latine of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies deliverance by paying a ransome In the words of the Prophet Daniel III. 57. IV. 24. Redeem thy sinnes by repentance and thy misdeeds by having mercy on the afflicted Many blame the vulgar Latine and would translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 breake off But the words of Solomon Prov. XVI 6. By mercy and truth iniquity is redeemed showe that it is truly translated And having showed afore that such considerations do qualify us for remission of sinnes I may well argue from hence that the terme of ransome imports the consideration for which it is bestowed Wherefore let the sweet smelling sacrifice of Christ Ephes V. 2. be understood in the same notion as the good workes of Christians are called a sweet savour Phil. IV. 18. Ebr. XIII 16. Seeing Socinus will have it so Provided that it be understood that the sacrifice of Christ is accepted to purchase mankind the right of coming out of sinne into everlasting life the sacrifices of Christians to the quallifying of their persons for the benefit of the same To the same sense Prov. XIII 8. The ransome of a mans life is his wealth For literally a mans wealth is the saving of his life with the world that spares a mans life in consideration of his wealth or sets not upon him in regard of it which the Psalmist saith God does not Psal XLIX 6 7 8. mystically it is the same that Solomon said in the place afore quoted But when Solomon saith Prov. XXI 18. The wicked is a ransom for the upright and the sinner comes instead of the righteous And the Prophet Esa XLIII 3. I have given Egypt for thy ransom Cush and Seba instead of thee God signifyeth by a Parable that having imployed Sennacherib to execute his judgements upon those nations he had given him the Aegyptians and Aethiopians that he might spare the Israelites So he paies him his hier which discharges his own people of that which they had suffered otherwise So in the words of Otho Tacit. Hist IV. Hunc animum hanc virtutem vestram ultra periculis objicere nimis grande vitae meae pretium duco I hold it too great a price for my life to cast this courage and valour of yours any more upon dangers It is manifest that a ransome or price imports the consideration of that for which it is laid out The blood of his soludiers for their Generalls life And shall it be otherwise when the Apostle saith that Christs death intercedes for the redemption of those transgressions that remained under the Old Testament Ebr. IX 15 when S. Paul saith that the man Christ Jesus gave himself a ransome for all to be witnessed in due time 1 Tim. II. 5 6 When our Lord saith the same Mat. XX. 28. Mat. X. 45 and S. Paul againe 1 Cor. VI. 20. Ye are bought with a price glorify therefore God with your body and with your Spirit which are Gods And againe 1 Cor. VII 23. Ye are bought with a price Be not servants of men And of Christ Titus II. 14. Who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purify to himself a peculiar people zealous of good works The same Apoc. V. â— Rom. III. 24. Gal. III. 13. Ephes I. 7. Acts XX. 28. Where I must needs call it meer impudence in Socinus to say that God redeemed his Church by his own bloud because Christs blood which it was redeemed with was as Christ Gods own It is not here to be denied that these terms may by figure of
would not I agree with the Law that it is good But it is not I that do it but sinne that dwelleth in me And this law in his members warring against the Law of his mind he sayes lead him captive to the Law of sin in his members so that he cries out Miserable man that I am who shall deliver me from the body of this death Whereunto is added the authority of S. Augustine pressing this exhortation so hard that it serves for an aspersion of Pelagius his heresy for a man not to allow it Though S. Augustine is not alone in it Methodius against Origen in Epiphanius writing against his heresy S. Gregory Nazianzene and others perhaps among the Fathers follow the same sense But the aspersion is too abusive For I have showed that the Tradition of the Church declared by the records of the Fathers extendeth not to the exposition of particular Scriptures but to give bounds within which the Scriptures are to be understood Wherefore had S. Augustine and his party truly expounded this Scripture yet ought it not to be a mark of Plagianisme to maintaine another exposition without supposing any part of Pelagius his heresie But if they consider further that S. Augustine acknowledges no more then the motions of concupiscence which are alive in the regenerate to divert the rigor of their intentions from the course of Christianity not the committing of any sinne that layeth wast a good conscience to be consistent with the state of grace they will have little joy of S. Augustines exposition of this place For what is that to the murther and adulteries of David to the apostrasy of S. Peter to the Idolatries of Solomon Or what consequence is it because concupiscence is alive in Christians that are at peace with God untill death that therefore David S. Peter and Solomon were at peace with God before they had washed away those sinnes by repentance Wherefore I must utterly discharge S. Augustine and those of his sense of having said any thing prejudiciall to Christianity by expounding S. Paul according to it The question that remaineth will be how S. Paul can call himselfe carnall and sold under sinne how he can say I like not that which I doe For I doe not what I would but what I hate And to will is present with me but how to doe that which is good I find not And I find a Law by which when I would doe well evill is at hand to me And that this Law in my members warring against the Law of my mind leades mee captive to the Law of sinne that is in my members And wretched man that I am who will deliver me from the body of this death The question I say will be how all this can be said of him of whome it followes Rom. VIII 1 2 5-8 There is therefore now no damnation for those in Christ Jesus that walke not after the flesh but after the spirit For the Law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath freed me from the Law of sinne and of death For they that are according to the flesh mind the thinges of the flesh They that are according to the Spirit the things of the spirit For the sense of the flesh is death but the sense of the spirit life and peace Because the sense of the flesh is enemy to God for it is not nor can be subject to the Law of God Neither can they that are in the flesh please God For if these things cannot be said of the same man at the same time it remains that though we allow S. Augustine and those of his sense that a Christian falls continually into sinne and by continuall offices of Christianity comes cleare of it yet when he willfully runnes into that sin which he cannot but know that it cannot stand with his Christianity he cannot be of that number for whom S. Paul sayes there is no condemnation in Christ Jesus that walke not after the flesh but after the Spirit And therefore for the true meaning of the Scripture in hand it will be requisite to have recourse to that figure of speach whereby S. Paul himselfe declareth that he speakes that of himselfe which he would have understood of others meerely for the a voiding of offense 1 Cor. IV. 6. So is it no mervaile if to make those that were zealous of the Law beleeve that they could not be saved but by Christianity he whom they took for an Apostle show it in his owne case before he was a Christian saying Is the Law sinne Nay I had not knowne sinne but by the Law Rom. VII 7 I have showed you how Grotius hath understood him to speak of himselfe in the person of an Israelite comparing himselfe considered as having received the Law and under the Law with himselfe before he received it If any man think this consideration to farre fetched for S. Paul to propose to those zealous of the Law that he writes to He may understand him to speake in the person of one of them to whome the Gospell had been proposed and thereby conviction of the spirituall sense of the Law which therefore the concupiscence which we are borne with cannot but make great difficulty to imbrace according to the premises For seing the Scribes and Pharises having received the Tradition of the world to come in opposition to the Sadduces had prevailed with the body of that people to believe that the outward observation of the law according to the letter was the means to bring them to the rewards of it It is no mervaile if S. Paul in the person of one so reduced say I had not known concupiscence had I not found the Law to say Thou shalt not covet For he that understood not the Law of God to prohibit the inward motions of concupiscence till by the preaching of Christianity he learned that to be the intent of the precept may very well say that he knew not concupiscence but by the Law so preached By that same reason might he say as it followeth Without the Law sinne is dead But I was once alive without the Law To wit when he thought himself in the way to life under the doctrine of the Pharisees But when the commandment came to be declared to him in that sense which the salvation tendred by the Gospel requireth it s no marvaile if sinne that was in him and concupiscence of it revived and he was discovered to be dead in sinne as not yeelding to the cure of it But that the commandment which was given for life became unto his death because sinne taking occasion by it deceived and slew him All this takes place in that Pharisee who being perswaded by the Pharisees that by not contriving to take away his neighbors wife and goods he stood qualifyed for the world to come now coming to know by the preaching of the Gospell the restraint of inward concupiscence is commanded by it found himself by meanes of the
as our Lord was when hee spoke the words that I indeavor to clear When therefore the properties of the divine nature are attributed to the Manhood of our Lord supposing as all good Christians do that neither natures nor properties are confounded what can wee say but this That by such attributions as these in the Language of his Prophets the Apostles God would have us understand a supernatural conjunction and union of two natures in one person of our Lord And what shall wee then say when the name of Christs body and bloud is attributed to the bread and wine of the Eucharist but that God would have us understand a supernatural conjunction and union between the body and bloud of Christ and the said bread and wine whereby they become as truly the instrument of conveying Gods Spirit to them who receive as they ought as the same Spirit was alwaies in his natural body and bloud For it maters not that the union of the two natures is indissoluble that of Christs body and bloud onely in order to the use of the elements that is speaking properly from the consecration to the receiving The reason of both unions being the same that makes both supernatural to wit the will of God passed upon both and understood by the Scriptures to be passed upon both though to several effects and purposes Therefore I am no way singular in this sense All they of the Confession of Auspurg do maintain it before mee and think it enough to say that it is an unusual or extraordinary maner of speech when one thing is said to be another of a several kinde and nature but which the unusual and extraordinary case that is signified both expounds and justifies They indeed maintain another reason of this presence and therefore another maner of it For if by virtue of the hypostatical union the omnipresence of the God-head is communicated to the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist then is the flesh and bloud of Christ there not onely mystically but bodily But if supposing both the elements and the flesh and bloud of Christ bodily present it may neverthelesse truly be said This is my flesh This is my bloud How much more if as I say the elements onely be there bodily but the flesh and bloud of Christ onely mystically and spiritually And therefore I finde it reasonable for mee to argue that the sense of so many men both learned and others understanding the words of our Lord in this sense ought to convince any man that it is not against common sense and therefore tending so much to make good the words of our Lord and the holy Scripture it not to be let go I do not intend neverthelesse hereby to grant that the sense of these words This is my body this is my bloud for This is the signe of my body and bloud is a true sense because abundance of learned as well as ordinary people take it so to be But well and good that it might have been maintained to be the true sense of them had no more been expressed by the Scripture in that businesse For then I suppose the sense of the Church of which I say nothing as yâ—t could not have evidenced so much more as I have deduced by consequence from the rest of the Scripture But the mystical presence of the Body and Bloud of Christ in the Eucharist being further deduced from the Scripture by good consequence I conceive the common understanding of all those men who granting that do not grâ—nt the Elements to be abolished sufficient ground for mee that the signification of these words This is my body this is my bloud inforceth it not Whereas on the other side the substance of the Elements is not distinguishable by common sense from their accidents for whether the quantity and the mater be all one or not whether beside the mater and accidents which the quantity is invested with a substantial form berequisite is yet disputable among Philosophers And therefore no reason can presume that the Apostles to whom these words were spoken did understand This of which our Lord speaks to signifie the sensible accidents of bread an swine severed from the material substance of the same I may therefore very well undertake to say that this sense of the words is more proper than conceiving the substance of bread and wine to be abolished the effect of grace to the Church remaining the same For the property of speech is not to be judged by the signification of a single word but by the tenor of the speech wherein it stands and the intent of him that speaks declared by his actions and the viâ—ible circumstances of the same Now our Lord having taught those to whom this was spoken that the eating of his flesh and drinking of his bloud is done by living faith must be supposed by appointing this Sacrament tendring his flesh to eat and his bloud to drink to limit and determine an office in the doing whereof his flesh and bloud is either eaten and drunk or crucified according to the premises If then the eating and drinking of his flesh and bloud out of the Sacrament be meerly spiritual by living faith shall not the presence thereof in the Sacrament be according Shall it not be enough that they are mystically present in the Sacrament to be spiritually eaten by them that receive them with living faith to be crucified of them that do not Is it any way pertinent to the spiritual eating of them that they are bodily present Is it not far more proper to that which our Lord was about tending without question to the spiritual union which hee seeks with his Church that hee should be understood to promise the mystical than the bodily presence of them in the Sacrament which is nothing else than a Mystery by the proper signification and intent of it I grant an abatement of that which the terms of body and bloud were originally imposed to signifie being without question that which is visible and subject to sense But if the nature of the action which our Lord was about of the subject which his words expresse be such as requires this abatement then cannot the original sense of these words be so proper for this place as this abatement Here I will observe that the Council of Trent it self Sess XIII cap. I. speaketh so warily in this mater as not to exclude all maner of tropes from the right sense of these words saying Indignissimum sanè flagitium est ea à quibusdam contentiosis pravis hominibus ad sictitia imaginarios trapos quibus veritas caernis sanguinis Christi negatur contra universum Ecclesiâ— sensum detorqueri It is indeed a very great indignity that they are by some contentious and perverse persons wrested aside to contrived and imaginary tropes whereby the truth of Christs flesh and bloud is denied contrary to the whole sense of the Church They were wiser than to
his Crosse faithfully resolve to undertake it do by the Spirit eat his flesh and drink his bloud Therefore when in correspondence hereunto hee pretends to institute the Sacrament of the Eucharist that they who eat his flesh and drink his bloud in that Sacrament may eat and drink the same spiritually as unlesse they crucifie him again they cannot chuse but do it behoves indeed that hee procure the flesh and bloud of Christ to be there by the operation of that Spirit which framed them for an habitation to it self in the womb of the Virgin that so the receiving of his flesh and bloud may be the means of conveying his Spirit But how is it requisite that they be there in bodily substance as if the mystical presence of them were not a sufficient means to convey his Spirit which we see is conveyed by the meer spiritual consideration and resolution of a lively and effectual faith S. Paul writes thus to the Corinthians I would not that you should be ignorant Brethren how that all our Fathers did eat the same spiritual meat and did all drink the same spiritual drink For they drank of the spiritual rock that went with them Now that rock was Christ 1 Cor. X. 1 3 4. The meat and drink of the Fathers in the wilderness can no otherwise be understood to be spiritual then as I have proved the Law of Moses to be spiritual That is as intimating spiritual promises it intimates a contract for spiritual obedience So S. Pauls argument holds If they who were sustained by God in their travel to the Land of Promise not keeping their Covenant with God fell in the wildernesse Then shall it not serve our turn that being baptized wee are fed by the Eucharist to everlasting life if wee perform not that which by our Baptism wee undertake The Rock then and the Mâ—nnâ— were spiritual meat and drink because they signified the flesh and the bloud of Christ crucified for us Which who so believes as thereupon to undertake Christianity our Lord when hee had not yet instituted the Eucharist promiseth that hee shall be nourished by his flesh and bloud to life everlasting The effect of which promise all Christians find that by the assistance of his Spirit overcome the world in approving themselves Christians When our Lord annexed the promise of his Spirit to his Baptisme and Eucharist by instituting those Sacraments hee tied the spiritual eating and drinking of his body and bloud to the Sacramental in respect of all them whom the affirmative Precepts of using those Sacraments should oblige Christ then was the food and the drink of them who attained Salvation under Moses Law because by the faith of Christ to be crucified they were saved as wee by the faith of Christ crucified But to follow God in hope of Salvation by Christ to come is not the same as to undertake that Christianity which by his coming hee hath taught us The signs of good things to coâ—â—â—ed onely those that were led by the promise of them The rest found by them onely the nourishment of their bodies in their travel to the Land of promise But when our Lord having promised his flesh and bloud for food to those Souls that should conform themselves to his Crosse instituteth the Eucharist and confineth the spiritual eating and drinking of his flesh and bloud to it so far as the precept thereof obligeth Shall hee not be understood to promise his body and bloud by that Sacrament without which hee will not grant it to those that are tied to the Sacrament and neglect it The presence of his body and bloud in the Sacrament is that which makes good the promise of his body and bloud made before the instituting of the Sacrament to them who are obliged to use the Sacrament by the institution of it CHAP. III. That the presence of Christs body in the Eucharist depends not upon the living Faith of him that receives but upon the true profession of Christianity in the Church that celebrates The Scriptures that are alleged for the dependence of it upon the communication of the properties They conclude not the sense of them by whom they are alleged How the Scripture confineth the flesh of Christ to the Heavens IF these things be true it will be requisite that wee acknowledge a change to be wrought in the Elements by the consecration of them into the Sacrament For how should they come to be that which they were not before to wit the body and bloud of Christ without any change And in regard of this change the Elements are no more called by the name of their nature and kind after the consecration but by the name of that which they are become Not as if the substance thereof were abolished but because it remains no more considerable to Christians who do not nor are to look upon this Sacrament with any account of what it may be to the nourishment of their bodies by the nature of the Elements but what it may be to the nourishment of their Souls by the Spirit of God assisting in and with his flesh mystically present in it But this change consisting in the assistance of the Holy Ghost which makes the Elements in which it dwells the body and bloud of Christ it is not necessary that wee acknowledge the bodily substance of them to be any way abolished Nay as I am perswaded that the presence of Christ in the Eucharist cannot be better expressed than by that term which the Council of Trent useth calling it a Sacrament and saying that the flesh and bloud of Christ is Sacramentally there So there is nothing more demonstrative to mee that no such thing as the abolishing of the Elements is revealed by the Scriptures than that the sense of them is so fully satisfied by this term So that the anathema which it decreeth against them that do not believe them to be abolished can by no means be grounded upon the Scriptures Nor do I think the term any lesse fit or serviceable because it serves them to signifie the Local presence of Christs body and bloud under the dimensions of the Elements the substance of them being gone For I shall not be obliged to grant that the Sacrament of Christs body and blood can properly be understood supposing the sign and the thing signified to be both the same subject the dimensions of the Elements being become the dimensions of Christs body and bloud and by the means of them all the bodily accidents of the Elements subsisting in the same And therefore the Sacramental presence of Christs body and bloud cannot properly be maintained unlesse acknowledging the true being and presence of the thing signified wee acknowledge also the sign to remain But if a man demand further how I understand the body and bloud of Christ to be present in or with or under the Elements when I say they are in and with and under them as in and with and under a
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
and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist is a very great miracle taking that to be miraculous which requires the infinite power of God to effect it not that which contains a visible effect thereof apt to bear witnesse to that truth which it is done to confirm I must remit you to that which hath been already said to judge whether the miracle consist in abolishing the substance of the Elements and substituting the body and bloud of Christ in their stead Or in placing the substance of Christs body and bloud under the same dimensions in which the substance of the Elements subsisteth Or rather then either of both that it be enough to ingage the infinite power of God that by his Spirit hee tendreth the flesh and bloud of Christ so Sacramentally present in the Elements that whoso receiveth them faithfully thereby communicates as truly in the Spirit of God according to his Spirit as according to his body hee communicates Sacramentally in his body and bloud Here is the place for mee to allege those Scriptures which inform us of the true nature and properties of the flesh and bloud of Christ remaining in his body even now that it is glorified For if in the proper dimensions thereof hee parted from his Disciples and went was carried or lifted and taken up into heaven Acts I. 2 9 10. 1 Pet. III. 22. Luke XXIV 50 51. Mark XVI 19. If in the same visible form and dimensions hee shall come again to judgement Acts I. 11. 1 Thes IV. 16. if the Heavens must receive him till that time for sure no man will be much tempted with that frivolous conceit that S. Peters words Acts III. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are to be construed whom it behoveth to contain the Heavens but whom it behoveth that the Heavens contain Unlesse it could appear how S. Peter should understand the body of Christ to contain the heavens not the heavens it sitting at Gods right han◠till his Enemies be made his foot-stool Psal CX 1. if to that purpose hee leave the world John XVI 28. no more to be in it XVII 11. so that wee shall have him no more with us Mat. XXVI 11. it behoveth us to understand how wee are informed that the promise of his body and bloud in the Eucharist imports an exception to so many declarations before wee believe it Indeed there is no place of Gods right hand by sitting down at which wee may say that our Lords body becomes confined to the said place But seeing the flesh of Christ is taken up into Heaven to sit down at Gods right hand Though by his sitting down at Gods right hand wee understand the man Christ to be put into the exercise of that divine power and command which his Mediators Office requires Yet his body wee must understand to be confined to that place where the Majesty of God appears to those that attend upon his Throne Neither shall the appearing of Christ to S. Paul Acts XXIII 11. be any exception to this appointment Hee that would insist indeed that the body of Christ stood over Paul in the Castle where then hee lodged must say that it left Heaven for that purpose For that is the miracle which the Text expresseth that hee was there whose ascent into Heaven it had reported afore But seeing the very body of Christ might in a vision of Prophesie appear to Paul in the Spirit without any contravention to that determination which the Scripture otherwise had expressed Were it not madnesse to go about to limit the sense and effect of it upon pretense of a promise altogether impertinent to the occasion in hand and every whit as properly to be understood without so limiting the sense of it This is all the argument that I pretend to maintain upon this consideration Knowing well enough that it is said indeed that the flesh of Christ remaining in Heaven in the proper dimensions thereof which the Exaltation allowes nothing hinders the same to be present under the dimensions of the Elements whether the substance of them be there which Consubstantiation allowes or whether they be abolished as Transubstantiation requires Which hee that would contradict must enter here into a Philosophical dispute whether or no the infinite power of God can bring to passe either or neither of these effects That is to say whether it imply a contradiction that the body and bloud of Christ which is as sure in Heaven as the faith of Christ is sure should at the same time be present in the Sacrament of the Eucharist under the dimensions of the Elements whether wee suppose the substance of them to be abolished or to remain present This dispute I am resolved not to touch at this time Partly for that reason which I have alleged upon other occasions Because I desire to discharge this Book being written in our mother tongue of all Philosophical disputes tending rather to puzzle than to edifie the main of those that speak English Partly for a reason peculiar to this point because it hath been argued that if wee deny Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation as contradictory to reason there can be no cause why wee should cleave to the Faith of the Trinity which every man sees to be no lesse contradictory to humane reason than either of both For though I do no ways admit this consequence because it is evident that the nature of bodily substance is far better comprehended by mans understanding than the incomprehensible nature of God which it is impossible to apprehend any thing of but under the resemblance of something belonging to sensible substance yet I am willing to go to issue without drawing this dispute into consequence referring to judgment whether the evidence for Consubstantiation or Transubstantiation be such as for the holy Trinity out of the Scriptures That is to say whether the presence of the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist is so to be understood as to void the confining of them to those dimensions which the Scripture allowes them in Heaven And this as necessarily by the Scripture as the Scripture necessarily obligeth to believe the Holy Trinity When as it may be more properly to the nature of the businesse understood mystically as in a Sacrament intended to convey the communion of his Spirit In the mean time allowing any man that submits his reason to all that Christianity imports the sober use of it in disputing whether the presence of the flesh and bloud of Christ in the Eucharist as Consubstantiation or as Transubstantiation requires be contradictory to the evidence of reason or not CHAP. IV. The opinion which maketh the Consecration to be done by rehearsing the operative words That our Lord consecrated by Thanksgiving The Form of it in all Liturgies together with the consent of the Fathers Evidence that there is no Tradition of the Church for the abolishing of the Elements COming now to consider wherein the Consecration of the Eucharist consists I find
S. Gregory saith Scholasticus composed whether hee mean a man of that name or as I conceive some Doctor that professed the Scriptures if S. Gregory should tell mee that some other form to the same effect was not in use I could not believe him believing the premises The substance and effect whereof under the name of Eucharistia or the Thanks-giving is that which the Church from the beginning consecrated the Eucharist with by the appointment of our Lord and according to the practice of his Apostles So Rabanus de Institutione Clericorum I. 32. affirms that the whole Church consecrates with Blessing and Thanksgiving the Apostles having taught them to do that which our Lord had done Walafridus Strabus de Rebus Ecclesiasticis cap. XXII relates two several opinions concerning this businesse as it appears by his discourse Et relatio majorum est ità primis temporibus Missas fieri solitas sicut modò in Parasceve Paschae in quo die apud Romanos Missae non aguntur communicationem facere solemus Id est praemissâ— Oratione Dominicà sicut ipse Dominus noster praecepti commemoratione passionis adhibitâ eos Corpori Dominico communicâsse Sanguini quos ratio permittebat And there is a relation of our Predecessors that in the first times Masse was done as now on Good Friday on which day Masse is not said at Rome the communion is wont to be made That is that the Lords Prayer premised and the commemoration of his death applyed those whom reason allowed did communicate in the Body and Bloud of our Lord. The practice of the Church of Rome here mentioned is that which still continues not to consecrate the Eucharist either on Good Friday or the Saturday following For then Masse is said so late that it belongs to Easter day And on Maundy Thursday the Eucharist is consecrated and reserved to be received on Good Friday That any commemoration of Christs death is made at the receiving of it as Rabanus saith I finde not This is certain that no man imagines that the Eucharist is consecrated by any thing that is said or done at the receiving of it but at the Masse on the day before And this in the Greek Church is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Liturgy of the elements that were consecrated afore Which they use on other days besides Therefore this opinion that the Apostles should celebrate so would import that they celebrated the Eucharist without consecrating of it That is that they never appointed how it should be consecrated Which neither Rabanus nor any of these whose opinion he relates can maintain Nor supposing the premises is it tenable And therefore I take the true meaning of S. Gregories words to be laid down in another opinion related afore by Rabanus Quod nunc agimus multiplici orationum cantilenarum consecrationum officio totum hoc Apostoli post eos proximi ut creditur orationibus commemoratione passionis dominica faciebant simpliciter That which wee act by an Office compounded of many and divers Prayers Psalms and Consecrations all that the Apostles and the next after them did plainly with prayers and the commemoration of our Lords passion as it is thought For the consecration may well be understood to be made plainly by prayer with commemoration of our Lords passion in opposition to that solemnity of Lessons Psalms and Prayers which at the more solemn occasions of the Church it was afterwards celebrated with Though wee suppose it to conclude alwaies with the Lords Prayer as S. Gregory requires And herewith the words of S. Gregory seeâ— to agree when hee â—aith Vt ad ipsam â—solummâ—do orationem To consecrate at or with it alone not by it alone But if this opinion cannot passe having indeed no constraining evidence but that S. Gregories words will needs require that they conâ—ecrated the Eucharist by the Lords Prayer alone I will will then â—ay that the Apostles understood the petition of our dayly bread as S. Cyprian upon the Lords Prayer doth To wit of the breâ—d and drink of the Eucharist daily celebrated and received For supposing this intent and meaning there is nothing pretended to be done by the consecration which that Petition signifieth not Praying that God will give us this day the dayly food of our â—ouls by the elements presently provided for that purpose And all this will no way prejudice that which hath been said of the mater and form of the consecration derived by Tradition from the Apostles to be frequented at more solemn occaâ—â—ons of Christian Assemblies For that Assembly which believing that Christians are justified by undertaking to professe the Faith and to live according to it and that our Lord hath left us his body and bloud of the Eucharist to convey the Holy Ghost to our â—ouls that they may be able to perform what they undertake should pray the Lords Prayer over the Elements proposed with that intent I cannot doubt of their receiving the Body and bloud of Christ Provided that where the occasion will bear more solemnity the Order of the Church received from the Apostles be not neglected Whereas supposing Christians to believe that they are justified by believing that they are justified or predestinate in consideration onely of Christs sufferings and that the Eucharist is instituted onely for a signe to confirm this Faith Though they should regularly use that form of consecration which I maintain to come by Tradition from the Apostles I would not therefore grant that they should either consecrate the Eucharist or could receive the Body and bloud of Christ by it Sacrilege they must commit in abusing Gods ordinances to that intent for which hee never appointed it but Sacrament there would be none further then their own imagination And upon these premises I am content to go to issue as concerning the sense of the Catholick Church in this point If it can any way be showed that the Church did ever pray that the flesh and bloud might be substituted instead of the elements under the accidents of them then I am content that this be counted henceforth the Sacramental presence of them in the Eucharist But if the Church onely pray that the Spirit of God coming down upon the Elements may make them the body and bloud of Christ so that they which received them may be filled with the grace of his Spirit Then is it not the sense of the Catholick Church that can oblige any man to believe the abolishing of the Elements in their bodily substance because supposing that they remain they may neverthelâ—sse become the Instrument of Gods Spirit to convey the operation thereof to them that are disposed to receive it no otherwise than his flesh and bloud conveyed the efficacy thereof upon earth And that I suppose is reason enough to call it the body and bloud of Christ Sacramentally that is to say as in the Sacrament of the Eucharist It is not here to be denied that
expresly that it was wine which our Lord calls his bloud And that the wine of the Chalice to wit already consecrated demonstrates his bloud In his Epistle against those who consecrated in water alone The Council of Nicaea calls it Bread which the eye of Faith discerns to be the Lamb of God S. Hilary will have us truly to receive the body and bloud of Christ as Justine saith that our bodies are nourished by it but hee adds in Sacramento to signifie the abatement which I speak of that is mystically and as in a Sacrament S. Cyril when hee saith wee are not to look upon the Elements as plain or bare or simple bread and wine saith that wee may look upon it as Bread and wine though that is not it which profits him that worthily receives it as Origen said There are a great many more that have named and described the Elements after consecration by the name of their nature and substance and say that the bread and the wine become and are the body and bloud of Christ Ignatius Epist ad Philadelph Irenâ—us V. 2. Clemens Strom. I. Paedag. II. 2. Tatian before Irenaeus in Diatessaron Constitutiones Apostol VIII 12. Tertullian de Oratione cap. VI. contra Marcionem IV. 40. III. 19. Gregory Nyssene de Baptismo Origen contra Celsum VIII Athanasius in Synopsi Eusebius in Parallelis Damasceni S. Cyril Catech. Mystag I. III. Macarius Hom. XXVII Gaudentius Brixiensis in Exodum Serm. II. S. Austine de Civitate Dei XVII 5. de diversis Serm. XLIV cap. XXVIII Sermone LXXXIIII Sermone LXXXVII Sermone ad Baptizatos S. Jer. in Esaiae LXVI lib. ult in Jeremiae XXXI lib. VI. Isidore de Offic. Eccles I. 18. In fine the Canon of the Masse it self prayes that the Holy Ghosts coming down may make this Bread and this Cup the Body and Bloud of Christ And certainly the Romane Masse expresses a manifest abatement of the common and usual sense of the body and bloud of Christ unto that sense which is proper to the intent and subject of them who speak of this Sacrament when the Church in the consecration prayes ut nobis corpus fiat Dilectissimi Filii tui Domini nostri Jesu Christi That they may become the Body and bloud of thy most dearly beloved Son our Lord Christ Jesus to us No man that understands Latine and sense will say it is the same thing for the Elements to become the body and bloud of Christ as to become the body and bloud of Christ to those that receive which imports no more than thaâ— which I have said And yet there is no more said in those Liturgies which pray that the Spirit of God may make them the flesh and bloud of Christ to this intent and effect that those which received them may be filled with the grace of his Spirit For the expression of this effect and intent limits the common signification of the words to that which is proper to this action of the Eucharist as I have delivered it In the words of S. Ambrose de iis qui initiantur myst cap. XI ante consecrationem alia species nominatur post consecrationem caro sanguis Christi appellatur Before the consecration it is named another kinde After the consecration it is called the flesh and bloud of Christ No man that understands Latine can conceive the word species to signifie the outward appearance but the substance and nature of those kindes For so wee call outlandish kindes spices not the appearance of their outward accidents And in the Romane Laws species an non are the kindes that are stored up for men cannot live upon the outward accidents of them Therefore when S. Austine saith That the Eucharist consists of two things visibili elementorum specie invisibili D. N. J. C. carne sanguine hee means that it consists of the nature and substance of the elements which is visible as of the body and bloud of our Lord Christ which are invisible Again when S. Ambrose sayes that they are called the Body and Bloud of Christ hee signifies that abatement in the property of his words that requires not the absence of the elements As when S. Austine sayes in Gratian de Consecratione distinct II. Can. Hoc est Coelestis panis qui est caro Christi suo modo vocatur corpus Christi cùm reverà sit Sacramentum corporis Christi That heavenly bread which is the flesh of Christ is after the maner of it called the body of Christ whereas it is indeed the Sacrament of the body of Christ The same abatement it is that S. Cyril afore Catech. Myst IV. the Council of Nicâ—a Victor Antioch in Marci XIV 22. and Theodoret Dial. III. signifie when they will us not to consider the elements but the things which they signifie For does hee that wills us not to consider the bread and wine intend to say that there is no such thing there Or that our interest lies not in them but in the body and bloud of Christ which they â—ender us well and good So said Origen afore The same abatement is signified evidently by abundance of their sayings importing them to be called the body and bloud of Christ as types or antitypes for type and antitype differ not but as relative and correlative that is figures symboles images similitudes representations paterns pledges and riddles in fine as figures or sacraments of the same Not as if they contained not the thing signified which I have already settled but because the heavenly grace hinders not nor destroyes the earthly nature This language then is used by S. Gregory Nazianzene Orat. XLII calling the Passeover a more obscure Type of a Type By Ephrem de inscrutabili naturâ Dei By Theodoret Dial. I. II. III. By the Constitutions of the Apostles V. 13. VI. 29. VII 26. By S. Basils Liturgy By Gregory Nazianzene again in Gorgoniam By Eusebius de demonstrat Evang. I. 10. V. 3. VIII 1. By S. Chrysostome in Mat. Homil. LXXXII By Palladius in the life of S. Chrysostome Chap. VII VIII IX By Victor in Marci XIV By Dionysius Eccles Hierarch cap. III. By Origen in Mat. Hom. XXXV By Pope Gelasius de duabus naturis Christi By S. Ambrose de iis qui initiantur mysteriis cap. IX de Sacramentis IV. 4. VI. 1. By Tertulliane contra Marc. III. 19. IV. 14 40. By S. Austine contra Adimantum cap. XII in Psalmum III. Epist CLXIII de Trinitate III. 4. By Facundus Bishop of Hermiana in Africk pro tribus capitulis IX ult And truly the ancient Christians when they made a scrâ—ple of receiving the Eucharist when they were to fast least they should break their fast by receiving it as wee understand by Tertullian de Oratione cap. XIV must needs understand the nature of bread and wine to remain unlesse they thought they could break their fast upon the accidents of them Nor would it have been a custome in some
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
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
incursions of Satan upon such persons then visible and so I understood it afore But I must not therefore omit that sense of these words which the ancient Church frequeneth understanding this destruction to be the mortification of the flesh by works of Penance For this is that sense which Tertullian then a Moâ—tanist labours to confute but Origen in Levit. Hom. XXIV Pacianus Paraenesi ad Paenitenâ—iam S. Basil ad Aâ—philochium C. VII S. Ambrose de Paenitentià I. 12. S. Austine de fide operibus cap. XXVI suppose and use Neither is it any way inconsequent that the excommunicate believing themselves to come thereby under the power of Satan should betake themselves to those demonstrations of humiliation and mortification whereby the Church might be moved to admit them to the means of their reconcilement And in this there is more then preaching the Gospel or taking away offence There is authority obliging to use the cure and granting reconciliation upon the same Again when S. Paul saith to them again 2 Cor. XII 20. 21. I am afraid least when I come I find you not such as I would and be found of you such as you would not least there be strifes envies animosities conâ—enâ—ions back-bitings whisporings inflasions commotions Least when I come to you again God humble me in regard of you and I mourn for many that have sinned afore and have not repented of the uncleanesse and whoredome and wantonnesse which they have done How should S. Paul be humbled in regard of or mourn for many of them but in regard of the necessity which he feareth to find of putting them out of the Church or to penance in case they adhere to the Church And if by appearance and demonstration of their repentance S. Paul was to be moved not to do this is it not evident that this is the means which he imployes to procure repentance and assure pardon by discharging them of it I do here repetâ— that which I said afore to show that it is the Apostles intent Heb. VI. 4. 5 6. X. 26 27. XII 15. 16 17. to deterre them from falling away from Christianity to Judaism for fear of persecution from the Jews by puting them out of hope of being readmitted to the communion of the Church Not as pronouncing sentence of damnâ—tion against them but as demonstrating it so difficult to be presumed upon in behalfe of him that had once violated the profession of Christianity that the Church was not to become the warrant for it If this be the case of those whose interest in the promises of the Gospel the Church warrants not then the warrant of the Church either in pronouncing sentence of absolution formally or in admitting really unto the communion of the Eucharist proceeds oâ— ought to proceed upon supposition of that disposition which qualifies for pardon wrought in the penitent by the censure of the Church And that this is the case I have further inferred from the words of the Apostle 1 Joh. V. 16. 17. If a man see his Brother sinne a sin â—â—t to death he shall pray and life shall be given to them that sinne not to death There is a sinne to death I say not that ye pray for it All unrighteousnesse is sinne But there is a sinne not to death For seeing it is manifest that the Church is to pray for all sinners be they never so great enemies to the Church it cannot be understood that absolutely the Church is not to pray for the sinne to death but that as he forbiddeth not so he obligeth not the Church to pray for the sinne unto death those prayers which tend to reconcile the sinner to the Church upon supposition and for a warrant of the reconcilement thereof with God If this seem not to agree with the words because S. John seems to speak to particular persons and not to the body of the Church when he sayes If any man see lâ—t him ask Let him consider the words of anoâ—her Apostle James V. 14. 15 16 For when he promiseth forgivenesse of sinnes to him that shall call for the Priests of the Church and they pray over him Adding immediately Confessâ— your sinnes to one another and pray for one another that ye may be healed It is necessary that we make good a reason why this admonition follows upon that which went before Why the Apostle having taken order for the cure of their sinnes who are here ordered to send for the Priests of the Churâ—h proceeds to say Confesse your sinnes to one another Namely because the way of curing sinne is the â—ame when a man confesses his sinne to a Brother that is a private Christian and when hâ— submits it to the authority of the Church For as here the Apoâ—tle maketh the means of obtaining pardon to consist in the prayers of the Priests in whom the authority of the Church resteth â—o there in the prayers of one Christian for another that confesses his sinne to him And hâ—reupon it is necessarily to be presumed both that the Apostle means that the Priests of the Church impose upon him that course of câ—re which his sinne requireth in case he survive And also that a private Christian by his advice reduce his Brother to use the same means Otherwise to what purpose should the one or the other declare his sinne seeing he might be prayed for at large without declaring the same It is therefore no marvail that the words of S. John manifestly concerning particular Christians should extend to the Keyes of the Church and the publick office thereof For though in the beginning when he saith If a man see his Brother sinne a sin not to death he addresseth onely to particular Christians yet the â—nd there is a sinne unto death I say not that ye pray for it manifestly addresseth to the Body of the Church implying that it is to be acquainted therewith by him that sees this if the case require it Whereupon S. Paul thus exhorteth Gal. VI. 1. Brethren if a man be overtaken in any transgression ye that are spiritual restore such a one with the spirit of meeknesse considering your selves least ye also be tempted Here the title of spiritual may extend to particular Christians But there is a presumption concerning publick persons in the Church that they are such because it is the opinion that they are such which qualifies them to be made publick persons in the Church Now when he speaks to the brethren in generall to do this he showes that it may concern the Body of the Church as well as particular Christans But when he speaks of the spirit of meeknesse it is manifest that the intent of his speech concerns those Penances which were imposed upon sinners for trial of their convesions in which he requires that meeknesse which the consideration of a mans own meeknesse recommends And therefore the same thing is taught by S. Iames by and by after the words afore quoted James V. 19. 20.
in the judgement of many that think themselves the most refined Christians that they allow it not that common sense in managing the businesse of Christianity which they must needs allow Jews Pagans Mahometans in faithfully serving their own faithlesse suppositions and which all experience shows us that it serves all mankind to what purpose soever it is imployed and that notwithstanding so great a triall of it as the governing of so great a Body as the Church is in unity so farre and so long as this Unity hath prevailed it is therefore necessary to give a reason why the Church so used them Which supposing the premises it will be as easie as it is necessary for me to give and that more sufficient if I mistake not then can possibly be given not supposing the same For if the secret of the resurrection the general judgement and the World to come if the mystery of the Holy Triniâ—y consisting in the Word or Wisdome and Spirit of God if the inward and spiritual service of God in truth of heart be more clearly opened in them by the work of Providence dispensing the effect of Canonicall Scripture by the occurrences of time then in the Law and the Prophets themselves which I have showed both that so it is and why so it is from the ground of the difference between the Old and the New Testament then I suppose there is sufficient reason why those who admit the Old Testament to be made for common edification in the Church should not put any question concerning those Scriptures Those new lights among us who do not allow the Psalter to be pertinently and reasonably imployed for the publick service of God upon all occasions as the Church hath alwaies imployed it may assure us that they understand not why the Scriptures of the Old Testament are read in the Church because they understand not the correspondence between the Old and the New Testament in the understanding whereof the edification of the Church by the Scriptures of the Old Testament consisteth There may be offence taken at divers things in these Scriptures I deny not But there may be offence taken in like maner at divers things in the Canonicall Scriptures of the Old Testament The humility of Christians requires them edifying themselves in that which they understand in the Scriptures according to our common Christianity in the rest which they understand not to refer themselves to their Superiours The Church understood well enough this difference and this correspondence to be discovered by these writings as the time required when it appointed Learners to read them And though I stand not upon terms yet I conceive they are more properly called Ecclesiastical because the Church hath imployed them to be read in the Church then Apocryphal according to the use of that word in the Church to signifie such writings as the Church suspecteth and therefore alloweth not to be read whither in publick or in private Whereupon I conceive also that the term of Canonical Scripture hath and ought to have two senses one when we speak of the Jews Canon in the Old Testament another when we speak of the Canon of the Church For seeing the Tradition of the Synagogue is perfect evidence what Scriptures of the old Testament are to be received as inspired by God the word Canon in that case may well signifie the Rule of our Faith or maners But because the Church cannot pretend to create that evidence originally but onely to transmit what she receiveth from the Synagogue Pretending neverthelesse to give a Rule what shall be read for the edification of the Church the word Canon therefore in that case will signifie onely the list or Catalogue of Scriptures which the Church appoints to be read in the Church which seems to reconcile the diverse accounts extant in severall Records of the Church CHAP. XXIII The consideration of the Eucharist prescribed by Tradition for the mater of it Lords Prayer prescribed in all services The mater of Prayers for all estates prescribed The form of Baptism necessary to be prescribed The same reason holdeth in the forms of other Offices IN the next place I do maintain that the Order of celebrating the Eucharist and the Prayer which it was was from the beginning solemnized with were from the beginning prescribed the Church by unwritten custome that is by Tradition from the Apoâ—â—les containing though not so many words that it was not lawful to use more or lesse for these were always occasions for celebrating the Eucharist emergent which must be intimated in fewer or more words in the celebrating of it yet the mater and substance of the Consecration of it together with the mater and substance of the necessities of the Church for which it was offered that is to say for which the Church was and is to pray at the celebration of it as hoping to obtain them by the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross which it representeth as received from the beginning was every were known to be the same This I inferr from that which I have said in the Book afore quoted of those Texts of S. Paul where those Prayers of the Church which the Eucharist is consecrated with are called Eucharistia or Thanksgiving if not rather the thanksgiving because it was a certain form of Thanksgiving well known to all Christians by that name from whence the Sacrament â—o consecrated was also so called from the time that our Lord hâ—ing blessed or given thanks to the Father over the Elements had said This is my body this is my blood and order is given that at the celebration thereof Prayers be made for the necessities of the Church and of all people 1 Cor. XIV 25. 26. 1 Tiâ—â— II. 1-8 Together with those passages of primitive antiquity from whence it appeareth there that the form of consecrating the Eucharist used and known generally in the Church is called Eucharistia and that the custome of interceding for all the necessities of the Church and for the reducing of unbelievers to the same is and hath been taken up and ever frequented by the Church in obedience to and prosecution of the said precept of the Apostles This observation might perhaps be thought too obscure evidence â—o bring to light a point of this consequence were it not justified by all that I produced afore to show that the Eucharist is consecrated by the Prayers of the Church which celebrateth it upon the faith of our Lords institution and promise For the mater of these Prayers tending to a certain purpose that the Elements may become the Body and Blood of Christ and convay his Spirit to those who receive them with living faith the Consecration which is the effect of them requires that the form of them be prescript and certain though not in number of words yet in sense in tent and substance And this by the evidence there produced may appear to have been maintained from the beginning by Tradition in
a prejudice peremptorily over-ruling all the pety exceptions that our time hath produced to dissolve this Unity which ought to have been preferred before them had they been just and true as none of them proveth CHAP. XXIV The Service of God to be prescribed in a known Language No pretense that the Latine is now understood The means to preserve Unity in the Church notwithstanding The true reason of a Sacrifice inforceth Communion in the Eucharist What occasions may dispense in it Communion in both kindes commanded the People Objections answered Who is chargeable with the abuse I Would now make one Controversie more how much soever I pretend to abate Controversies than hitherto hath been disputed between the Reformation and the Church of Rome because though wee hear not of it in our books of Controversies yet in deed and in practice it is the most visible difference between the exercice of Religion in the two professions that you can name For what is it that men go to Church for but to hear a Sermon on one side and to hear a Mass on the other side And yet among so many books of Controversies who hath disputed whether a man is rather to go to Church to hear a Sermon or not to hear a Mass but to receive the Eucharist This is the reason indeed why I dispute not this Controversie because the Mass should be the Eucharist but by abuses crept in by length of time is become something else untill I can state the question upon such terms as may make the reason of Reformation visible Whether the celebration of the Eucharist is to be done in a Language which the people for the most part understand not in Latine as the Mass supposing the most part understand it not is first to be setled before wee inquire what it is that Christians chiefly assemble themselves for Though the question concerns not the Eucharist any more than the other offices of Gods publick Service onely as the Eucharist if it prove the principal of them is principally concerned in it I am then to confesse in the beginning that those of the Church of Rome have a strong and weighty objection against mee why they ought not to give way that the Service of the Church though in a form preseribed by the Church as I require should be celebrated in the Vulgar Languages which every people understand The objection is drawn from that which wee have seen come to pass For the Service of the Church the form and terms of it being submitted to the construction of every one because in English hath given occasion to people utterly unable to judg either how agreeable maters excepted against are to Christianity or how necessary the form to the preservation of unity in the Church first to desire a change then to seek it in a way of fact though by dissolving the Unity of this Church For hee that maintains as I do that whatsoever defects the form established may have are not of waight to perswade a change in case of danger to Unity And secondly that those who have attempted the change have not had either the lot or the skill to light upon the true defects of it but to change for the worse in all things considerable must needs affirm that otherwise they could never have had the means to possess mens fansies with those appearances of reason for it which have made them think themselves wise enough to undertake so great a change And truly there is nothing so dangerous to Christianity as a superficial skill in the Scriptures and maters of the Church Which may move them that are puffed up with it to attempt that for the best which it cannot inable them for to see that so it is indeed Whereas they who hold no opinion in maters above their capacity because concerning the state of the whole are at better leisure to seek their salvation by making their benefit of the order provided Seeing then it cannot be denied that the benefit of having the Service of God prescribed by the Church in our Vulgar English hath occasioned so great a mischief as the destruction of it it seems the Church of Rome hath reason to refuse children edge tools to cut themselves with in not giving way to the publick Service of God in the Vulgar Languages Unless it could be maintained that no form ought to be prescribed which is all one as to say that there ought to be no Church in as much as there can be no Unity in the Faith of Christ and the Service of God according to the same otherwise Now that you may judg what effect this objection ought to have wee must remember S. Pauls dispute upon another occasion indeed but from the same grounds and reasons which are to be alleged for the edification of the Church in our case God had stirred up many Prophets in the Church of Corinth together with those who celebrated the mysteries of Christianity in unknown Languages and others that could interpret the same in the Vulgar partly out of an intent to manifest to the Gentiles and Jews his own presence in his Church including and presupposing the truth of Christianity but partly also for the instruction of the people novices in Christianity for a great part in the truth of it and for the celebration of those Offices wherewith hee is to be served by his Church It came to pass that divers puffed up with the conceit of Gods using them to demonstrate his presence among his people took upon them to bring forth those things which the Spirit of God moved them to speak in unknown Languages at the publick assemblies of the Church Who might indeed admire the work of God but could neither improve their knowledg in his truth nor exercice their devotion in his praises or those prayers to him which were uttered in an unknown Language This is that which the Apostle disputeth against throughout the fourteenth Chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians making express mention of Prayers Blessings which I have showed to be the consecration of the Eucharist and Psalms ver 14-17-26 and concluding v. 27 28. that no man speak any thing in the Church though it be that doctrine those prayers or praises of God which his own Spirit suggesteth unless there be some body present that can interpret Which what case can there fall out for the Church which it reacheth not For you see S. Paul excludeth out of the Church even the dictates of Gods Spirit evidencing his presence in the Church by miraculous operations unless they may be interpreted for the edification and direction of the Church What can hee then admit for the Service of God in the name of his Church or for the instruction thereof which it can neither be instructed by nor offer unto him for his service Nay what cause can there be why the Church should meet according to S. Paul if there be nothing done that is understood What
supposing that difference between the Law and the Gospell which I have setled in the first book they may advance in the knowledg of Christianity by the preaching of those who understand it But not distinguishing that which is necessary from that which is not necessary by supposing that which is necessary they may heare Sermons all their life long and not know wherein their salvavation consists a thing found by experience when there was a Rule of doctrine agreeable to the Scriptures and not knowing the ground there laid forth upon which the Old Testament beares witnesse to the New they may gaine nothing by hearing sermons all theire life long but mere dissatisfaction in the grounds of our common Christianity Whereas going into the scriptures with those two principles and the humility of Christians they may teach themselves that edification which they ought not to expect from those that acknowledg them not As for the present order which suppresseth all Assemblies for the service of God when there is no Preaching It is manifest that I will not say no understanding no eloquence but no lungs or voice For of a truth this order makes the service of God a worke rather of the lungs and of the voice then of any thing else can furnish entertainement for the assemblies of the church with that which is worth the hearing so oft as it is fit for the people of God to assemble for his service This makes the businesse for which the greatest part now goes to Church to be no more the service of God but to get mater of discourse or debate for the Sabbath as they call it how well the man preached or how well he prayed For whereas they were wont to object against the Church that it was not praying but reading prayers which was ministred to the Church as if attention of mind devotion of spirit could not aswel go a long with him that reades as with him that is to study what to say when he praies now the censures that passe upon mens prayers do shew that the hearers minds cannot be imployed in praying when they are taken up with judging how well the prayer they heare is made Much more justly may the same be said if it be considered how a man is obliged to discerne what the mater of the prayer is whether it be from blasphemy Heresy Slander Rebellion or not least before he be aware he joine in such horible crimes by saying Amen to their prayer which he is no otherway secured to be free from the same Now it may be considered that the prayers which usher sermons in out by the order of the church of England but by the faction that destroyeth it though they exclude the service of God out of the Church upon pretense of praying as the spirit indites yet are indeed no lesse provided aforehand then the prayers of the Church 〈◊〉 a little from time to time as occasion may require to make the people believe that they are ex tempore dictates of the spirit So that the change which many men call reformation consists in this that the peoples devotions are now confined to that which every one that dare mount the Pulpit dare say instead of that which the Church upon mature deliberation had appointed to be said But if it be thus in prayers which are alwaies for substance the same what shal we say of Sermons the substance whereof changeth according to the compasse of the Scripture and all the points of it which the texts upon which men take their rise occasion them to intreat experience in the decay of that reverence devotion which the publick service of God is to be performed with may easily point a man of common understanding to the sourse of it in those false weak suppositions upon which the order or rather the disorder of the present chang standeth Instead whereof therefore acknowledging that there was just cause at the time of the Reformation to complain upon the want of Preaching and instruction of the people I do and am to maintaine that there was never any pretense that the communion of the Eucharist and the service of God that it is to be celebrated with ought to give way and to be excluded the assemblies of christians to bring in that rule which is now in effect a cheife point of the chang that is made with us that without preaching no assembly for Gods service And thereupon though I desire that the more solem service of God when the Eucharist is celebrated may have a sermon for part of it as I have showed both by the Scriptures and by the primative practice of the Church that the use was under the Apostles and in the next ages yet that the order prescribed by the Church of England for the celebrating of the same when and where there is not meanes for a Sermon such as ought to be had is not to be deserted upon any pretense of frequenting Sermons As for more oridinary occasions of assembling for the service of God having proved afore that they ought to be frequented for the celebrating of other Offices of Gods service besides preaching I take it for proved that the order prescribed by the Church of England for the celebrating of Gods service upon such occasions is no way to be deserted but meanes to be sought for the frequenting of it Acknowledging with all the zeale and the joy which S. Paul expresseth for the further edification of those Churches to whom he directeth his Epistles in that Christianity which they had received 1 Cor. I. 5 6 7. Eph. I. 17. 18. Phil. I. 9 Col I. 9. Rom. I. 11. 12. as a strong motive to the Church to procure preaching as frequent as it can be procured and maintained without these offenses That the same S. Paul incourageth directeth frequent ample use of these miraculous graces which God granted the Churches of that time unto that purpose 1. Cor. XIV 1-31 Eph. IV. 7-16 But supposing alwaies the Spirits of the Prophets to be subject to the Prophets because God is not the God of unquietnesse but of peace as in all Churches of the Saints 1 Cor. IV. 32 33. And that there is one body and one spirit even as we are called in one hope of our calling the unity of which spirit is to be preserved in the bond of Peace Eph. IV. 3 4. By vertue of that Order which God had setled in his Church for preserving unity in it declaring his meaning by bestowing the most Eminent Graces upon the most eminent persons of his Apostles by meanes whereof the spirits even of Prophets became subject to greater Prophets for avoiding of unquietnesse and preserving of peace as S. Paul further declareth when he addeth by and by 1. Cor. XIV 36. 37. What came the word of God out from you or came it to you onely if any man think himselfe a Prophet or spirituall let him acknowledg the things I write
which our first parents lost by rebelling against God They could not use so fit a terme to expresse the rest and happinesse of blessed spirits in the world to come as by calling the place of it Paradise But that the place of this rest was the third heavens before the sitting down of our Lord Christ at the right hand of his Father I am yet to learn that there is any syllable or tittle in the holy Scripture to signify that the people of God understood at such time as our Lord delivered this Parable So that there can possibly be no reasonable presumption that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here used not in reference to the body which goes to corruption in the grave but to the soul or spirit should signify the same with Gehenna in opposition to Abrahams bosome Neither the originall signification of the word nor the circumstance of the parable nor any opinion received then among Gods people so limiting the signification of it But that the bosome of Abraham should signify the place of rest which God had appointed for the righteous the reason is plaine The hospitality of Abraham being renowned in the Scripture and the happinesse of the world to come being usually represented to the people of God at that time under the resemblance of a Feast whereof Abraham is made the Master when his bosome is made the place to receive and refresh Lazarus There is therefore no reason why the bosome of Abraham and Paradise should not signify the same state or the same place to the apprehension of Gods people at that time But there is also no reason why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Parable should not extend to comprehend both Gehenna and Paradise in the sense of those to whom our Lord addresses this Parable For neither is it any way necessary when the good thief prayes Lord remember me when thou comest into thy kingdome And our Lord answers To day shalt thou be with me in Paradise Luke XXIII 42 43. that Paradise should here be understood to signify the third heavens the way into which was not yet laid open standing the first Tabernacle saith the Apostle Ebr. IX 8. And againe Which new and living way our Lord Jesus hath dedicated or hanseled for us through the vaile that is his flesh unlesse we abuse our selues with an imagination that words can signifie things which could not be aprehended on t of them by those to whom they were said For as for S. Paul who was ravished into the third heavens that is into paradise 1 Cor. XIV 3 4. I conceive I need not insist upon an exception which there is no issue to try To wit that S. Paul speakes of severall raptures one into the third heavens the other into Paradise For to speake freely it seems no more then reason to grant that S. Paul was ravished to the presence of our Lord Christ But I must needs insist that the word Paradise could not signifie the same thing to S. Paul after the Ascension of our Lord as to the hearers of our Lord afore it As for the words of the same S. Paul having a desire to depart and to be with Christ Phi. I. 23. whether they do confine the spirit of S. Paul departed to the place of our Lord Christs bodily presence in the third heavens I will not conclude till I have considered more of those scriptures which may concerne the same purpose And indeed the Apocalypse as it is the last of the new Testament so seemeth to declare more in this mater then all the rest of it before had done For when upon the opening of the fift seale Apoc. VI. 9 10 11. the soules of Martyrs having demanded vengeance upon their persecutors were cloathed with long white robes and bidden to expect the fulfilling of their numbers And after that the CXLIVM of the XII tribes that were to be preserved from the said vengeance were sealed It followeth Apoc. VII 9. 14. After that I looked and behold a great multitude whom no man could number of every nation and tribe and people and language standing before the Throne and before the Lambe and cloathed in long white robes with Pâ—lmes in their hands And to show who they were These be they who come out of the great tribulation and have washed their robes and have blanched their robes in the bloud of the lambe Therefore they are before the throne of God and serve him day and night in his Temple and he that sitteth upon the Throne overshadoweth them They shall not hunger nor thirst nor shall the sun fall on them nor any heate For the Lambe that is in the midst of the Thorne feedeth them and guidâ—th them to living wells of water and God wipes away all teares from their eyes Here you have the soules of the Martyrs before the throne of God over shadowed by him that sitteth on the Throne who wipeth away all teares from their eyes And again Apoc. XIV 1-5 where the CXLIVM that were sealed appear again upon mount Sion and the voice of harpers is heard singing to their harps a new song before the throne and before the foure living creatures and Elders which no man but the sealed could learne It followeth These are they that have not been defiled with women for they are Virgins These are they that followe the Lambe whithersoever he goeth These are redeemed from among men as first fruits to God and to the Lambe Nor was any deceite found in their mouthes For they are unspotted before the Throne of God Here CXLIVM appeare upon mount Sion hearing onely the song which the harpers sing to their harps And therefore those that were not defiled with women that followe the Lamb whithersoever he goeth that are unspotted before the thâ—one of God are the harpers not those that were sealed The same Martyrs soules that appeared before in long white robes with Palmes in their hands now appeare singing the song of triumph to their harps For so it followeth v. 13. after denouncing the the fall of Babilon and vengeance of God upon those that worship the Beast I heard a voice from heaven say to me Write Blessed are the dead that from henceforth dye in the Lord. Even so saith the spirit for they rest from their labour and their works goe along with them Well might Tertullian restraine this to Martyrs for the consequence of the text mightiâ—y inforceth it The Lambe indeed is seen on mount Sion with those that are sealed But it is never said that they are before the Throne but onely they who appeare in Heaven that is the Martyrs whose song of tryumph they heare and learne which needed not have been said if they were represented as of one company And perhaps it is said that they follow the Lamb whither soever he goes Because they followed him to his Crosse suffering that death for him which he had suffered for us And that they are Virgines Because not stayned
with the pollution of false Gods For truly when it is said that guile was not found in their month We cannot understand any thing more proper then the profession of the Christian Faith forwhich they dyed For of whom can it be more properly said that guile was not found in his mouth then of him that dies rather then transgresse that vvhich he undertook at his Baptisme to professe the name of Christ unto death He that likes not this vvill be obliged to grant that virgins also have the state of Martyrs by this Prophesy For besides all that hath been said to shovv that in all this prophesy save the XXIV none but Martyrs appear in heaven before Gods Throne unlesse vve say that here Virgins also are seene among the Martyrs vvhenas in the beginning of the VII Chapter order is taken for the sealing of those that should escape the vengeance of God in Judaea being Christians and servants of God who in the beginning of the fourteenth appeare againe with the lamb upon mount Sion But the Martyrs soules appeare in heaven before the Throne both in the fift and in the seventh besides what I argue here by consequence drawne from the meaning of the foureteenth it would be a thing incons quent to the text and grain of the Prophesy to say that the servants of God who are preserved by the name of God sealed on their foreheads Apoc. XIV 1. VII 3. from that destruction which involves the persecutors of Christianity should appeare in the same company ranck with the Martyrs Among whom are those that are slaine in the City of Jerusalem Ap. XI 7 8 9. of a several condition from those that are preserved alive Compare wee here with the doctrin of S. Paul 2. Cor. V. 1-4 For we know that if this earthly house of our Tabernacle be dissolved we have a building from God a house not made with hands eternall in the heavens And for this we groan desiring that our dwelling from heaven be vested upon us If so be we shall not be found naked having put it upon us For wee that are in the tabernacle groane as grieved not because we desire to be stripped but to be invested that the mortall may be swallowed up of life The whole text of this discourse manifestly imports that S. Paul expects the resurrection as the accomplishment of his hopeâ— not groaning for the day of his death to have his soule stripped from his body but to have it invested with a heavenly tabernacle made by God his glorified body which bringeth life that swalloweth up the mortality of this As also he saith Rom. VIII 23. That we who have the first fruits of the spirit groane within our selves expecting the adoption even the redemption of our body Where the resurrection is the adoption of those who rise againe to be Sons of God according to the word of our Lord Luke XX. 36. For neither can they dye any more for they are equall to Angels And being children of the resurrection are children of God It is true it appeares by S. Paul that he was no further certified as then of the counsaill of God then to make it a question whether he and the Christians of his time should be found alive by the Lord Christ at his coming to judgement For therefore he saies with an if If we shall not be found naked of our bodies when we put on glorious bodies Though he had said afore that if this body be dissolved we shall have a heavenly body for it And so 1 Cor. XV. 57. The dead shall rise incorruptible and we shall be changed And 1 Tim. IV. 15. 17. We that are left alive unto the comming of the Lord shall not prevent those that are falne asleep Againe We that are left alive shall be ravished with them in the clouds into the ayre to meet the Lord And so shall be alwaies with the Lord. So that the thousand yeares which it is revealed to S. Iohn that the Church shall indure after the fall of Babylon and the judgement exercised upon the whore Apoc. XX. is a further revelation of Gods will and pleasure for the subsistance of Christianity with the world how much soever he hath determined it shall indure more then he hath there declared But notwithstanding seeing that S. Paul though uncertaine thereof suspends the accomplishment of his and our happinesse upon the resurrection Most manifest it is that the stripping of our bodies by death is not the terme of Gods promise according to S. Paul Wherefore when it folowes Having therefore alwaies confidence and knowing that dwilling in the body wee are â—ilgrims from God for we walke by faith not by sight we desire with confiderce rather to travell out of the body and to dwell with God Supposing that S. Paul expected this change by Christs second coming before he died he contradicts not himselfe when he refers it to the resurrection which if we think that he assignes it unto the meane time wee make him to do Therefore S. Iohn 1 Epistle III. 2. Beloved we are now the Children of God But it is not yet manifest what wee shall be Yet wee know that when he or it is made manifest we shall be like him for wee shall see him as he is Sons of God because Sons of the resurrection we saw before in our Lords words Sons of God because adopted to his spirit wee have here in S. Iohn But as S. Paul made our adoption to be the redemption of the body so Eph VI. 30. Grieve not the holy spirit of God saith he by whom yee are sealed to the day of redemption And â— 14 speaking of the same spirit Who is the earnest of our inheritance untill the redemption of the purchase As our Lord saith also Luke XX. 28. Lift up your heades for your redemption draweth nigh speaking of his second coming If therefore neither our adoption and redemption nor Gods purchase be compleat before we rise againe whether wee read in S. Iohn When he shall be made manifest or when it shall be made manifest what we shall be the resurrection is the time For if wee be not like Angels till the resurrection as our Lord saies much lesse like God or like our Lord Christ as S. Iohn sayes As for the terme of seeing God upon which the School Doctors have stated the controversy of the Saints happinesse in the meane time It is a thing evident enough that the speech is borrowed from the comparison between Moses and other Prophets Num. XII 6 7 8. Where God saith he will deale with other prophets by a vision or a dreame but with Moses face to face And yet S. Paule 1. Cor. XIII 12. comparing the knowledge of God by faith with the knowledge of God by sight Wee see now by a glasse in a riddle but then face to face Now wee know in part then shall I know as I am knowne Which S. â—ohn calls as he is for sure
breedeth purgeth away the love of the creature And it may be thought that the examination of the conscience the conviction of sinne the remorse and shame of so many disloyalties the feare of the Judge and in fine the strictnesse of the judgement is the fire which Saint Paul sayes shall try every mans work as the fire which burns up the world shall their bodies and sever the dregs and drosse of them to the Devil and his Angels from whom they came with the dregs and drosse of the world which divines say shall be conveyed to Hell as the â—inke of it But hereupon the Apostle when he sayes Ye are come to the spirits of just men made perfect Hebrews XII 23. may be understood that they are thus perfected supposing him to speake of the generall judgement to come to passe then straight as the destruction of Jerusalem did and that therefore he saith Ye are come But he may be also understood to say that they are perfected by Christianity in comparison of Judaisme as our Lord saith Be ye perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect And as he saith that the least in the kingdome of heaven is greater then John the Baptist Whereas if we understand him to say Ye are come to the Spirits of just men perfected between the departure and the day of judgement we make him to say that which is no where else either said or intimated by the Scripture And that is it which distinguisheth my opinion from the position of Purgatory or rather the doctrine of the scriptures from the decree of the Councils of Florence and Trent For will the present Church of Rome be content with such an estate of soules as no man can be helped out of What were Purgatory worth if men were perswaded that there is no meanes to translate their soules out of the flames thereof into heaven before the generall judgement Or what were Christianity the worse if all were perswaded that those soules which wee speake of all this while need their friends prayers to help them through this middle estate and especially through the dreadfull tryall of the day of judgement Surely thus much the worse that men must of necessity keep a better account of their steps here and take a better care to cleare themselves of the sins which they commit that they may passe it with the more joy and cherefullnesse Well may they part with the drosse and stubble of the immediate imputation of Christs merits sufferings which they have built upon the foundation of the remission of sins and everlasting life in consideration of the same but upon condition of Christanity upon these termes here rather then part with it at their charge then if perhaps they have not failed of the foundation by the meanes of it And upon these termes I am not troubled at the words of our Lord Mat. XII 32. Who shall speake a word against the Son of man it shall be remitted him But who shall speake against the Holy Ghost it shall never be remitted him neither in this world nor in the world to come For as for mine owne part I finde the force of the words well enough satisfied taking it onely for a fashion of speech signifying onely that that sin could by no meanes be pardoned no not in the world to come not supposing that the world to come hath meanes to pardon so great sins as this world hath no meanes to doe I confesse according to my opinion there is in some sort pardon for sins in the other world though absolutely there is not because there is none but in vertue of the covenant of Grace the termes whereof onely take place in this world though the effect thereof extend to the world to come For after departure in the state of Grace for a man to know that there is no more danger of failing of everlasting life is absolutely that which the greatest Saints of this world could never attaine to Though some effects of sin stick to those that are so assured between death and the day of judgement in respect to which he who is absolutely said to be pardoned because in no danger of forfeiting it may be said so far not to be pardoned as the continuance of those effects imports But there is nothing in my opinion to signifie that there is meanes of obtaining pardon for those sins in the next world which there is no meanes to obtain pardon for in this Which this saying of our Lord at the foote of the letter signifies And therefore I for my part can very well rest satisfied with this sense taking the inlarging of it by mentioning the world to come for an elegance which common speech beareth and that of our Lord frequenteth But if any man thinke I respect not the Fathers that have expounded it to the sense which I refuse not the rule of faith being safe let every man injoy his opinion in it Of the figure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Grotius observes in the words in the world to come whereby it shall not be for given him in the world to come signifyes He shall be soundly punished for it in the world to come let them who are capable see him discourse learnedly in his Anotations upon this place As little am I troubled at that other text of the Gospell Mat. V. 26. Luke Xâ—I 58. Thou shalt not come forth till thou hast paid the utmost farthing For I can easily grant that the taking away of those effects of sin which remaine in those that dy in grace according to my opinion may be said to come by paying the utmost farthing But I need not grant that he who saies thou shalt not come forth till thou hast paid the utmost farthing saies Thou mayest come forth by paying the utmost farthing For the condition of paying the utmost farthing will be unpossible if wee understand the prison to be the Lake of the damned which the executioner mentioned afore requires In S. Luke for a Preface to the Parable Why doe yee not judge what is right from your soules saith our Lord That is why doe ye not judge what ye are to doe in the mater of my Gospell by that which you use to doe in worldly matters If you be liable to an action you find it best to compound it before the judge give sentence and grant execution upon it For then you must stand to the extremity of the Law The preaching of the gospell showes that the Law oâ— God hath an Action against you which you may take up by becoming Christians and yet you will not doe it In S. Mathew it followes upon the precept of being reconciled to a mans brother which showes that God accepts not that sacrifice which is not offered in charity But it cannot signifie lesse then in S. Luke That our Lord upon that occasion puts all in mind to be reconciled to God because there is no redemption if he grant execution
be counted Sacraments for the same reason and in the same nature and kind for which any thing else is or can be counted a Sacrament No not though they may all in their proper sense be truly called Sacraments of the Church because the dispensing of them all is trusted with the Church For Baptisme by the premises enters a man into the Covenant of Grace as the visible solemnity whereby it is contracted with the Church in behalfe of God which unlesse in case of peremptory necessity cannot be invisibly contracted So it intitleth to all the promises which the Gospel pretendeth And so also doth the Eucharist being the visible ceremony which God hath appointed for the renewing of it and of our profession to stand in it and to expect the promises which the Gospel pretendeth upon supposition of the condition which it requireth not otherwise And truly the flesh and bloud of Christ mystically received by our bodies necessarily importeth his spirit received by our soules supposing them qualified as the Gospel requireth and in and by the Spirit whatsoever is requisite to inable a Christian to performe his race here or to assure him of his reward in the world to come And yet the necessity thereof not so undispensable but that supposing a man cannot obtaine the communion thereof from the Church but by violating that Christianity which it sealeth neither can a man obtaine it by the Sacrament nor without the Sacrament need he faile of it that is standing to his Christianity as well in all other things as in not transgressing his Christianity for communion in the Eucharist with the Church And this is the case of those which are unjustly excommunicate Seeing in matters indifferent he that yeilds not to the Church that is to them who have the just power to conclude the Church when they judge it for the common good for him to do that which otherwise he is not obliged to do must needs seem justly excommunicable So these two Sacraments have the promise of grace absolutely so called that is of all the grace which the Gospel promiseth which it is to be acknowledged and maintained that no other of those actions that are or may be called Sacraments of the Church doth or can doe upon the like terms as they doe For of a truth it is granted that both these Sacraments are actions and consist in the action whereby they are either prepared or used though with so much difference between the two For Baptisme is of necessity an action that passes with the doing of it Whereas in the Eucharist there is one thing done in the preparing another in the using of it insomuch that the effect of consecrating it which I suppose here to be signified in the Scriptures as well as the most ancient of the Fathers by the name of Eucharistia or Thanksgiving remaines upon the thing consecrated so that the bread and the wine over which God was praised and thanked are metonymically called the Eucharist And yet in regard the consecration in reason tends to the use of receiving it and that the Church is not trusted or inabled to do it with effect but to that intent the totall of both is necessarily understood by the name of that Sacrament For supposing the ancient Church might have cause to allow the use of receiving this Sacrament to them who were not present in body though in spirit at the celebrating of it which I for my part in point of charity find my self bound to suppose even when I am not able to alledge any reason why my self would have done the same in the same case So long as by reasonable construction which the practice of the Church alloweth or groundeth the consecration tendeth to the use of receiving it is reasonably called the Sacrament or the Eucharist in order to that use If it be consecrated to any other intent either expressed or inforced by construction of reason upon the practise of the Church such practice bordering upon sacriledge in the abuse of the Sacrament the Church hath nothing to do to answer for it Nor is it my meaning that the Sacrament of Baptisme or the Eucharist doth or can consist in the outward action of washing of the body or of praying over the elements and reciting the Institution of our Lord. It is true the very bodily action were able in a great part to interpret the intent of doing it to those who are already Christians and know what Christianity requireth But seeing that can never be enough much lesse allwayes It is necessary that the intent be declared by certain words signifiying it But these words with the bodily action which they interpret will by this discourse concurre to make but one part of the Sacrament which containing the solemnizing of the Covenant of Grace will necessarily containe that which all this signifieth of invisible and spirituall grace conveighed to those who are qualified for it by that which is said and done in virtue of Gods promise He that will speak properly of these two Sacraments must make the matter of them to consist in one of these two parts The form of them being not the signification which is the same in all ceremonies but the promise which tieth to them the whole effect of the Covenant of Grace to which purpose it were well if the world would understand them to be seals of it This createth a vast difference between these two and any of the rest which are called Sacraments Which whether the Councile of Trent sufficiently expresse by providing an Anathema for those who shall say that the seven Sacraments are so equall one to the other that none is more worthy then another Sess VII Can. III. or not let them look to it I dispute not Thus much we see a difference is hereby acknowledged But the difference is vast in this regard that whereas both these Sacraments take effect in consideration of every particular mans Christianity and the promises annexed to that end the rest all of them take effect in consideration of the Communion of the Church and that which it is able to contribute towards the effect of Grace Which necessarily consists in that which the Church is able to contribute toward the effecting of that disposition which qualifieth for it So whereas these two immediately bring forth Gods grace as instruments of his promise by his appointment the rest must obtaine it by the meanes of Gods Church and the blessing annexed to communion with it He that believeth not Gods Church in the nature of a Society grounded upon profession of the true faith and consisting in that communion which separateth it not from the whole may promise himself the benefit of his Baptisme and of the Eucharist whomsoever he communicateth with professing himself a Christiane He who believeth every Church to be a part of the whole Church as he must acknowledge it requisite to the effect of Baptisme and the Eucharist that they be ministred neither
you say something more to limit the ground upon which they may be no lesse What limitation I would adde is plain by the premises The preaching of that Word and that ministring of the Sacraments which the Tradition of the whole Church confineth the sense of the Scriptures to intend is the onely mark of the Church that can be visible For I suppose preaching twice a Sunday is not if a man be left free to preach what he will onely professing to beleeve the Bible which what Heresy disowneth and to make what he thinks good of it And yet how is the generality of people provided for otherwise unlesse it be because they have preachers that are counted godly men by those whom what warrants to be godly men themselves In the mean time is it not evident that Preachers and people are overspread with a damnable heresy of Antinomians and Enthusiasts formerly when Puritanes were not divided from the Church of England called Etonists and Grindeltons according to severall Countries These believe so to be saved by the free Grace of God by which our Lord died for the Elect that by the revelation thereof which is justifying Faith all their sinnes past present and to come are remitted So that to repent of sinne or to contend against it is the renouncing of Gods free Grace and saving Faith How much might be alledged to show how all is now overspread with it The Book called Animadversions upon a Petition out of Wales shall serve to speak the sense of them who call themselves the godly party as speaking to them in Body Thus it speaks pag. 36. Look through your vail of duties profession and ordinances and try your heart with what spirit of love obedience and truth you are in your work And whether will you stand to this judgement Or rather that God should judge you according to grace to the name and nature of Christ written upon you and in you Sure the great Judge will thus judge us at last by his great judgement or last judgement Not by the outward conversation nor inward intention but finally by his eternall Election according to the Book of Life This just afore he calleth the seed of Christ and his righteousnesse in a Christian And pag. 38. When we are inraged we let fly at mens principles being not satisfied to rebuke mens actions opinions and workes but would be avenged of their Principles too As if we would kill them at the very hart pull them up by the Rootes and leave them in an uncurable condition rotten in their Principles But Principles ly deeper then the heart and are indeed Christ who is the Principle and beginning of all things who though heart fail and flesh faile yet he abides the root of all Shall he pretend to be a Christian that professes this Shall any pretend to be a Church that spue it not out Let heaven and earth judge whether poor soules are otherwise to be secured of the Word then by two sermons a Sunday when the sense of the Godly is claimed to consist in a position so peremptorily destructive to salvation as this It will be said perhaps that now the Ministers of the Congregations have subscribed the confession of the Assembly But alas the covering is too short When a Bishop in the Catholick Church subscribed a Councile there was just presumption that no man under his authority could be seduced from the Faith subscribed Because no man communicated with the Catholick Church but by communicating with him that had subscribed it Who shall warrant that the godly who have this sense not liable to any authority in the Church shall stand to the subscriptions of those Ministers or to the authority of the Assembly pretended by the Presbyteries If they would declare themselves tied so to do who shall warrant that there is not a salvo for it in the Confession which they subscribe If there were not why should any difficulty be made to spue out that position which is the seed of it That justifying Faith consisteth in believing that a man is of the number of the Elect for whom Christ died excluding others Why that which is the fruit of it That they who transgresse the Covenant of Baptisme come not under the state of sin and damnation come not from under the state of Grace Why but because a back-door must be left for them that draw the true conclusion from their own premises reserving themselves the liberty to deny the conclusion admitting the premises It is not then a confession of faith that will make the Word that is preached a mark of the Church without some mark visible to common sense warranting that confession of Faith As for the Sacraments no Church no Sacraments If they suppose that ground upon which that intent to which the whole Church hath used them there is no further cause of division in the Church for that secures the rule of Faith If not they are no Sacraments but by equivocation of words they are sacriledges in profaning Gods Ordinances The Sacrament of Baptisme because the necessary meanes of salvation is admitted for good when ministred by those who are not of the Church but alwaies void of the effect of grace To which it reviveth so soone as the true Faith is professed in the unity of the Church If a Sacrament be a visible signe of invisible grace that baptisme is no baptisme which signifieth the grace it should effect but indeed effecteth not Such is that Baptisme which is used to seale a Covenant of Grace without the condition of Christianity a Covenant that is not the Covenant of two parties but the promise of one Whence comes the humor of rebaptizing but to be discharged of that Christianity which the baptisme of the Church of England exacteth Why do they refuse Baptisme in New England to all that refuse to enter into the Covenant of Congregations How comes it more necessary to salvation to be of a Congregation then to be Baptized and made a Christian Is it not because it is thought that salvation is to be had without that profession of Christianity which the Sacrament of Baptisme sealeth That it is not to be had without renouncing it Upon these termes those that are denied Baptisme by the Congregations because they are not of the Congregations are denied salvation as much as in them lies but not indeed and in truth For the necessity of baptisme supposing a profession of the Catholicke Church they perish not by refusing it who will not have it by renouncing the Catholicke Church that is by covenanting themselves into Congregations They that are so affected must know that they have authority of themselves to baptize to effect which no Congregation in New England is able to do If the Sacrament of the Eucharist seale that Covenant of Grace which conditioneth not for Christianity it is no sacrament but by equivocation of words Where that conditionall is doubtfull or voide there is no security
for poor soules that they receive the Sacrament of the Eucharist They who depart from the Church that they may minister the Sacraments on such grounds and to such effects as the Church allowes not incurre the nullities and sacriledges which departing from the Church inferreth But if beside the Faith of the Church the authority of the Church be supposed to the effect of the Sacraments how shall the Sacraments be Sacraments though ministred upon profession of the true Faith where no authority of the Church can be pretended for the ministring of them Or where it can onely be pretended but is indeed usurped and void Posterity will never forget that there are in a Land inhabited by Christians called England Country Parishes in which the Sacraments have not been ministred for so many years as the order of the Church of England hath been superseded by the late warre If the Word and Sacraments be the marks of the Church what pretense for a Church where there is indeed a pretense of the Word though no presumption that it is Gods but of Sacraments not so much as a pretense What hath the rest of England deserved of the Congregations or of the Presbyteries that they should be left destitute of the meanes of salvation because they cannot see reason to be of Congregations or Presbyteries Lay men preach and Lay men go to Church to hear them preach because they cannot preach themselves at home to their families The horror of profaning the Sacraments of the Church by Sacriledge is yet alive to make them tremble still at usurping to celebrate the Sacrament of the Eucharist But will those Lay men that preach answer for the Lay mens soules to whom they preach that they have sufficient means of salvation by hearing them preach being of no Church that might answer that it is Gods Word which they preach ministring no Sacraments for a mark of the Church Is it possible a Christian should hold himself able to preach who holds not himself able to baptize Or is it the appetite of devouring consecrated goods that insnares men to preach who when it comes to baptizing had rather let innocent soules perish then own the authority of the Church which inables every Christian to baptize in case of necessity because they know they usurp the office of preaching without authority from the Church It is I that have said that a Lay man may be authorized to preach by the Church And I believe still I said true in it But shall I therefore answer for him that preacheth without authority from the Church Should he preach by authority from the Church there were presumption for his hearers that it is the Word of God which the Church authorizeth When he preacheth without authority from the Church shall he not answer for the soules whom he warrants salvation by his preaching without Church or Word or Sacraments But these are not the Godly Those that know themselves such are thereby authorized to retire themselves into Congregations that they may injoy the purity of the Ordinances It is then mens Godlinesse that inables them to forsake the Church and betake themselves into Congregations And indeed I know an Oxford Doctor who to prove himselfe no Schismaticke for it hath alledged that he can be no Schismatick because he knowes himself to be Godly and to have Gods Spirit I deny not that he hath alledged other reasons why he is no Schismaticke the ground whereof I considered afore But what Quaker could not have alledged the Spirit of God as well as he And did not he who pretends himself Christ alledge reasons for it as well as pretend the Spirit A nice mistake it is to imagine that a Christian is to accept the Scriptures for the Word of God because the Spirit of God assures him that so they are For of a truth untill the Spirit of God move him to be a Christian he accepteth them not for such When it doth he is moved so to accept them by the Spirit of God as by the effective cause But for reasons which though contained in the Scriptures yet were they not visibly true before a man can accept the Scriptures for the Word of God he could never so accept them by Gods Spirit Unlesse we can imagine the virtue of Gods Spirit not to depend upon the preaching of his Gospel which I suppose onely Enthusiasts do imagine Nor doth the Spirit of God distinguish to any Christian the Apochrypha from Canonicall Scripture but by such meanes as may make the difference visible No more doth it assure him that he is a good Christian but upon the knowledge of such resolutions and actions wherein Christianity consisteth If it be requisite to make a man no Schismatick that it be not his own fault that he is not of the Catholicke Church If he perswade himselfe upon unsufficient reasons that there is no such thing by Gods Law as the visible body of a Catholick Church Just it is with God to leave such a one to thinke it Gods Spirit that assures him a godly man being a Schismatick It is not therefore supposition of invisible godlinesse that can priviledge men to withdraw themselves from the Church into Congregations supposing such a thing as a Catholicke Church The purity being invisible but the barre to it separation from Gods Church visible the Ordinances for which they separate will remaine their own Ordinances not Gods The Presbyterians sometimes pleade their Ordination in the Church of England for the authority by which they ordaine others against the Church of England to doe that which they received authority from the Church of England to doe provided that according to the order of it A thing so ridiculously senselesse that common reason refuseth it Can any State any society doe an act bâ— virtue whereof there shall be right and authority to destroy it Can the Ordination of the Church of England proceeding upon supposition of a solemne promise before God and his Church to execute the ministery a man receiveth according to the Order of it inable him to doe that which he was never ordained to doe Shall he by failing of his promise by the act of that power which supposed his promise receive authority to destroy it Then let a man obtaine the kingdome of heaven by transgressing that Christianity by the undertaking whereof he obtained right to it They are therefore meere Congregations voluntarily constituted by the will of those all whose acts even in the sphere of their ministery once received are become voide by theire failing of that promise in consideration whereof they were promoted to it Voide I say not of the crime of Sacrilege towards God which the usurpation of Core constituteth but of the effect of Grace towardes his people For the like voluntary combining of them into Presbyteries and Synodes createth but the same equivocation of wordes when they are called Churches to signify that which is visible by their usurpation in point of fact